Relation of the Conclusion to the Speech
The conclusion should reflect the purpose of the speech. It should enforce the reason for the delivery of the speech. As it emphasizes the purpose of the speech it should be in the speaker's mind before he begins to plan the development of his remarks. It should be kept constantly in his mind as he delivers his material. A train from Chicago bound for New York is not allowed to turn off on all the switches it meets in its journey.
A speaker who wants to secure from a jury a verdict for damages from a traction company does not discuss presidential candidates. He works towards his conclusion. A legislator who wants votes to pass a bill makes his conclusion and his speech conform to that purpose. In all likelihood, his conclusion plainly asks for the votes he has been proving that his fellow legislators should cast. A school principal pleading with boys to stop gambling knows that his conclusion is going to be a call for a showing of hands to pledge support of his recommendations.
A labor agitator knows that his conclusion is going to be an appeal to a sense of class prejudice, so he speaks with that continually in mind. An efficiency expert in shop management knows that his conclusion is going to enforce the saving in damages for injury by accident if a scheme of safety devices be installed, so he speaks with that conclusion constantly in his mind. In court the prosecuting attorney tells in his introduction exactly what he intends to prove. His conclusion shows that he has proved what he announced.
"No conclusion had been prepared beforehand."
One is tempted to say that the test of a good speech, a well-prepared speech, is its conclusion. How many times one hears a speaker floundering along trying to do something, rambling about, making no impression, not advancing a pace, and then later receives from the unfortunate the confession, "I wanted to stop but I didn't know how to do it."
No conclusion had been prepared beforehand. It is quite as disturbing to hear a speaker pass beyond the place where he could have made a good conclusion. If he realizes this he slips into the state of the first speaker described in this paragraph. If he does not realize when he reaches a good conclusion he talks too long and weakens the effect by stopping on a lower plane than he has already reached. This fault corresponds to the story teller whose book drops in interest at the end. The son of a minister was asked whether his father's sermon the previous Sunday had-not had some good points in it. The boy replied, "Yes, three good points where he should have stopped."