UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES PRACTICAL ARGUMENTATION PRACTICAL ARGUMENTATION BY GEORGE K. PATTER, A.M. Assistant Professor of English and Rhetoric in The Pennsylvania State College IRevieeD NEW YORK THE CENTURY CO. 1920 Copyright, 1909, 1915, by The Century Co. Piiblished, June, 1909 Revised, July, 1Q15 TO FRED LEWIS PATTEE 413*"^ Preface The revised edition of Practical Argumentation is the result of a constant demand on the part of teach- ers of argumentation and debate for new supple- mentary material with which to work. The author has endeavored to satisfy this demand by making a complete revision of all class-room exercises and by introducing in nearly every instance fresh ma- terial to illustrate the various steps in argumenta- tive composition. A few illustrations that have proved to be of especial worth have been retained from the first edition, but all the briefs and most of the extracts from magazine articles and speeches have not appeared before in any text-book. More- over, as in the first edition, these illustrations have been taken largely from contemporary and popular sources. The models are such that students should have no insuperable difficulty in imitating them ; and they have, furthermore, been chosen with the idea of arousing interest. The main body of the book and its fundamental teachings remain practically unchanged. Preface One new feature has been added. In many col- leges there is a growing desire to teach the elements of parliamentary law along w^ith argumentation. For this reason the author has inserted a chapter which explains briefly the kinds of motions that may come before a deliberative assembly. The table of parliamentary motions showing when each motion is in order, what motions are debatable, and what motions require a two-thirds' vote to be carried, should be especially valuable. The purpose of this book is to set forth the prin- ciples of argumentation in such a way that the in- structor will find them teachable and the student will find them interesting and immediately helpful. The book does not place emphasis primarily on debate; rather it makes a general survey of the whole field of argument, both written and spoken. Another aim of the book is to arouse in the stu- dents a desire for information about the important questions of the day. This object is accomplished, the author believes, by the use of stimulating mod- els and a careful selection of subjects for inves- tigation. The student who conscientiously does the work outlined should find himself at the end of the course not only tolerant of opinions that conflict with his own but also capable of arriving at con- clusions based on sound judgment. Preface The author wishes to acknowledge great in- debtedness to his colleagues in the English depart- ment at The Pennsylvania State College, to other writers of text-books on the same subject, and to the publishing houses that have generously per- mitted him to quote freely from their files. Contents PAGE I. Preliminaries 3 II. The Subject 14 III. The Introduction — Persuasion ... 30 IV. '■jk Introduction — Conviction ... 48 V. The Introduction — Brief-Drawing . . 84 VI. The Discussion — Conviction and Persua- sion 102 VII. The Discussion — Brief-Drawing . . . 165 VIII. Methods of Refutation 190 IX. Debate — Some Practical Suggestions . 228 X. The Conclusion 278 Appendix. A. A Written Argument and its Brief . . 290 B. Parliamentary Proceedings .... 326 C. A List of Propositions 340 Index 351 PRACTICAL ARGUMENTA- TION PRACTICAL ARGUMENTA- TION CHAPTER I PRELIMINARIES Argumentation is the art of presenting truth so that others will accept it and act in accordance with it. Debate is a special form of argumentation : it is oral argumentation carried on by opposing sides. A consideration of the service which argumenta- tion performs shows that it is one of the noblest and most useful of arts. By argumentation men over- throw error and discover truth. Courts of law, de- liberative assemblies, and all bodies of people that engage in discussion recognize this fact. Argumen- tation threshes out a problem until the chaf? has blown away, when it is easy to see just what kernels of truth remain and what action ought to be taken. Men of affairs, before entering upon any great enterprise, call in advocates of different systems, and 3 Preliminaries by becoming familiar with arguments from every point of view try to discover what is best. This method of procedure presupposes a difference of opinion and belief among men, and holds that when each one tries to establish his ideas, the truth will remain, and that which is false will be swept away. The field of argumentation includes every kind of discourse that attempts to change man's actions or opinions. Exposition is explanation when only one theory or one interpretation of the facts is possible, or when several theories or several interpretations of facts are explained impartially; when views of truth or of policy conflict, and one course is ex- pounded in opposition to another, the process be- comes argumentation. This art is used not only by professional speakers, but by men of every occupa- tion. The schoolboy pleading for a holiday, the workman seeking employment, the statesman advo- cating a principle of government are all engaged in some form of argumentation. Wherever men meet together, on the street or in the assembly hall, de- bate is certain to arise. Written argument is no less common. Hardly a periodical is published but contains argumentative writing. The fiery editorial that urges voters to the polls, the calm and polisx.^a essay that points out the dangers of organized labor; 4 Preliminaries the scientific treatise that demonstrates the prac- ticability of a sea-level canal on the Isthmus are at- tempts to change existing conditions and ideas, and thus come within the field of argumentation. The practical benefit to be derived from the study and application of the principles of argumentation can hardly be overestimated. The man who wishes to influence the opinions and actions of others, who wishes to become a leader of men in however great or however humble a sphere, must be familiar with this art. The editor, the lawyer, the merchant, the contractor, the laborer — men in every walk of life — depend for their success upon bringing others to believe, in certain instances, as they believe. Every- where men who can point out what is right and best, and can bring others to see it and act upon it, win the day. Another benefit to be obtained from the study of argumentation is the capability of being convinced intelligently. The good arguer is not likely to be carried away by specious arguments or fallacious reasoning. He can weigh every bit of evidence ; he can test the strength and weakness of every statement; he can separate the essential from the unessential; and he can distinguish between ^■-^judice and reason. A master of the art of ar- gumentation can both present his case convincingly 5 Preliminaries to others, and discover the truth in a matter that is presented to him. Argumentation can hardly be considered as a dis- tinct art standing by itself ; it is rather a composite of several arts, deriving its fundamentals from them, and depending upon them for its existence. In the first place, since argumentation is spoken or writ- ten discourse, it belongs to rhetoric, and the rules which govern composition apply to it as strongly as to any other kind of expression. In fact, per- haps rhetorical principles should be observed in argumentation more rigidly than elsewhere, for in the case of narration, description, or exposition, the reader or hearer, in an endeavor to derive pleasure or profit, is seeking the author, while in argumenta- tion it is the author who is trying to force his ideas upon the audience. Hence an argument must con- tain nothing crude or repulsive, but must be attrac- tive in every detail. In the second place, any com- position that attempts to alter beliefs must deal with reasons, and the science of reasoning is logic. There is no need for the student of argumentation to make an exhaustive study of this science, for the good arguer is not obliged to know all the different ways the mind may work; he must, how- ever, know how it should work in order to produce 6 Preliminaries trustworthy results, and to the extent of teaching correct reasoning, argumentation includes logic. In the third place, a study of the emotions belongs to argumentation. According to the definition, argu- mentation aims both at presenting truth and com- pelling action. As action depends to a great extent upon man's emotions, the way to arouse his feelings and passions is a fundamental principle of this art. Argumentation, then, which is commonly clas- sified as the fourth division of rhetoric, consists of two fundamental elements. The part that is based upon logic and depends for its efifectiveness upon pure reasoning is called conviction; the part that consists of an emotional appeal to the people ad- dressed is called persuasion. If the only purpose of argumentation were to demonstrate the truth or falsity of a hypothesis, conviction alone would be sufficient. But its purpose is greater than this: it aims both (i) to convince men that certain ideas are true, and also (2) to persuade them to act in accordance with the truth presented. Neither con- viction nor persuasion can with safety be omitted. An appeal to the intellect alone may demonstrate principles that cannot be refuted ; it may prove be- yond a doubt that certain theories are logical and right, and ought to be accepted. But this sort of 7 Preliminaries argument is likely to leave the person addressed cold and unmoved and unwilling to give up his former ideas and practices. A purely intellectual discourse upon the evils resulting from a high tariff would scarcely cause a life-long protectionist to change his politics. If, however, some emotion such as duty, public spirit, or patriotism were aroused, the desired action might result. Again it frequently happens that before the arguer can make any appeal to the logical faculties of those he wishes to in- fluence, he will first have to use persuasion in order to gain their attention and to arouse their interest either in himself or in his subject. On the other hand, persuasion alone is undoubtedly of even less value than conviction alone. A purely persuasive argument can never be trusted to produce lasting effects. As soon as the emotions have cooled, if no reasonable conviction remains to guide future thought and action, the plea that at first seemed so powerful is likely to be forgotten. The preacher whose sermons are all persuasion may, for a time, have many converts, but it will take something besides emotional ecstasy to keep them " in good and regular standing." The proportion of conviction and persuasion to be used in any argumentative effort depends entirely 8 Preliminaries upon the attending circumstances. If the readers or hearers possess a high degree of inteUigence and education, conviction should predominate; for it is a generally accepted fact that the higher man rises in the scale of civilization, the less he is moved by emotion. A lawyer's argument before a judge con- tains little except reasoning; before a jury persua- sion plays an important part. In the next place, the arguer must consider the attitude of those whom he would move. If they are favorably disposed, he may devote most of his time to reasoning; if they are hostile, he must use more persuasion. Also the correct proportion varies to some extent according to the amount of action desired. In an intercol- legiate debate where Httle or no action is expected to result, persuasion may almost be neglected; but the political speech or editorial that urges men to follow its instructions usually contains at least as much persuasion as conviction. The aspirant for distinction in argumentation should study and acquire certain characteristics com- mon to all good arguers. First of all, he should strive to gain the ability to analyze. No satisfac- tory discussion can ever take place until the contest- ants have picked the question to pieces and discovered just exactly what it means. The man 9 Preliminaries who does not analyze his subject is likely to seize upon ideas that are merely connected with it, and fail to find just what is involved by the question as a whole. The man skilful in argumentation, however, considers each word of the proposition in the light of its definition, and only after much thought and study decides that he has found the real meaning of the question. But the work of analysis does not end here ; every bit of proof con- nected with the case must be analyzed that its value and its relation to the matter in hand may be determined. Many an argument is filled with what its author thought was proof, but what, upon close inspection, turns out to be mere assertion or falla- cious reasoning. These errors are surpassed only by the fault of bringing in as proof that which has no direct bearing at all upon the question at issue. Furthermore, the arguer must analyze not only his own side of the discussion but also the work of his opponent, so that with a full knowledge of what is strong and what is weak he may make his attack to the best advantage. Briefly stated, the process of 4 analysis usually involves several distinct steps: a definition of terms, an explanation of what the ^proposition means as a whole, and the discovery, through an investigation of the beliefs of both sides ID Preliminaries to the controversy, of those points which must be estabHshed or overthrown in order to establish or overthrow the proposition. Next to the abihty to analyze, the most important qualification for an arguer to possess is the faculty of clearly presenting his case. New ideas, new truths are seldom readily accepted, and it is never safe to assume that the hearer or the reader of an argument will laboriously work his way through a mass of obscure reasoning. Absolute clearness of expression is essential. The method of arriving at a conclusion should be so plain that no one can avoid seeing what is proved and how it is proved. Lincoln's great success as a debater was due largely to his clearness of presentation. Especially in the spoken argument must the relation between ideas and their bearing upon the subject be apparent. A reader may, if he has the patience, go over the proof a second time or a third. But the listener does not have this opportunity; he must grasp the argument as it is delivered or not understand it at all. In the third place, the person who would control his fellow men must assume qualities of leadership. Remembering that men can be led, but seldom be driven, he must show his audience how he himself has reached certain conclusions, and then by leading II Preliminaries them along the same paths of reasoning, bring them to the desired destination. If exhortation, counsel, and encouragement are required, they must be at his command. Moreover, a leader who wishes to attract followers must be earnest and enthusiastic. The least touch of insincerity or indifference will ruin all. Unless a salesman really believes in his goods, he seldom achieves much success; unless an arguer sincerely believes in his cause, he cannot make a lasting impression. A brief study of the history of the men who have wielded great influence through the spoken word will reveal that whatever may have been their failings they have at least been sincere. A hypocrite cannot last long as a leader. To ana- lyze ideas, to present them clearly, and as a leader to enforce them enthusiastically and sincerely are necessary qualities for every arguer. A debater should possess additional attainments. He ought to be a ready thinker. The disputant who depends entirely upon a set speech is greatly handicapped. Since it is impossible to tell before- hand just what arguments an opponent will use and what line of attack he will pursue, the man who cannot mass his forces to meet the requirements of the minute Is at great disadvantage. Of course all facts and ideas must be mastered beforehand, but 12 Preliminaries unless one is to be the first speaker, he can most effectually determine during the progress of the debate just what arguments are preferable and what their arrangement should be. A debater must also have some ability as a speaker. He need not be graceful or especially fluent, though these accom- plishments are of service, but he must be forceful. Not only his words, but also his manner must reveal the earnestness and enthusiasm he feels. His argu- ment, clear, irrefutable, and to the point, should go forth in simple, burning words that enter into the hearts and understanding of his hearers. 13 CHAPTER II THE SUBJECT T he subject of an argument must always be a complete though t. The reason for this requirement lies in the fact that an argument can occur only when men have conflicting opinions about a certain thought, and try to prove the truth or falsity of this definite idea. Since a term — a word, phrase, or other combination of words not a complete sen- tence — suggests many ideas, but never stands for one particular idea, it is absurd as a subject to be argued. A debatable subject is always a proposi- tion, a statement in which something is affirmed or denied. It would be impossible to uphold or attack the mere term, "government supervision of rail- roads," for this expression carries with it no specific thought. It may suggest that government super- vision of railroads has been inadequate in the past ; or that government supervision is at present unnec- essary; or that the government is about to assume stricter supervision. The term affords no common 14 The Subject ground on which the contestants would have to meet. If, however, some exact idea were expressed in such a statement as, " Further government super- vision of railroads is necessary for the best interests of the United States," an argument might well follow. Although the subject of an argument must be a complete thought, it does not follow that this proposition is always explicitly stated or formulated in words. The same distinction between subject and title that exists in other kinds of writing is found also in argumentation; the subject is a state- ment of the matter about which the controversy centers ; the title is the name by which the comiposi- tion is known. Sometimes the subject serves as the title, and sometimes the subject is left to be discovered in the body of the work. The title of the speech delivered by Webster in the Senate, January 26, 1830, is " Webster's Reply to Hayne " ; the subject, in the form of a resolution, is found close to the opening sentences : y Resolved, That the Committee on Public Lands be in- structed to inquire and report the quantity of public lands remaining unsold within each State and Territory, and whether it be expedient to limit for a certain period the sales of the public lands to such lands only as have heretofore been offered for sale, and are now subject to entry at the 15 The Subject minimum price. And, also, whether the office of Surveyor- General, and some of the land offices, may not be abolished without detriment to the public interest; or whether it be expedient to adopt measures to hasten the sales and extend more rapidly the surveys of the public lands. The thirteen resolutions offered by Burke form the subject of the argument known by the title, " Burke's Speech on Conciliation with America." An issue of the Outlook contains an article en- titled " Russian Despotism " ; careful reading dis- closes that the subject is this, " The Present Gov- ernment of Russia Has No Right to Exist." In legislative proceedings the subject of argument is found in the form of a bill, or a motion, or a resolution ; in law courts it is embodied in statements called " pleadings," which " set forth with certainty and with truth the matters of fact or of law, the truth or falsity of which must be decided to decide the case." ^ In college debate it is customary to frame the subject in the form of a resolution, and to use this resolution as the title. The generally accepted form is as follows: Resolved, That the United States army should be increased to one million men. Notice the use of italics, of punctuation marks, and of capital letters. 1 Laycock and Scales' Argumentation and Debate, page 14. 16 The Subject In all kinds of argumentation, whether the prop- osition to be discussed is clearly expressed or not, the arguer must keep his subject constantly in mind, that his efforts may all be directed toward a definite end in view — to convince and persuade his audience. In debate the speaker should plainly state the subject, and constantly hold it up to the attention of the audience. This procedure renders it impossible for an opponent to ignore the question and evade the real issue. HOW TO FIND A SUBJECT Only those who are debating for practice expe- rience any difficulty in obtaining a subject. In the business world men argue because they are con- fronted with some perplexing problem, because some issue arises that demands discussion; but the student, generally speaking, chooses his own topic. Therefore a few suggestions in regard to the choice of a subject and the wording of a proposition are likely to be of considerable service to him. The student should first select some general, pop- ular topic of the day in which he is interested. He should, for several reasons, not the least of which is that he will thus gain considerable information 17 The Subject that may be of value to him outside the class-room, select a timely topic rather than one that has been worn out or that is comparatively unknown. He should, moreover, choose an interesting- topic, for then his work will be more agreeable and conse- quently of a higher order. Of this general idea he must decide upon some specific phase which readily lends itself to discussion. Then he has to express this specific idea in the form of a prop- osition. HOW TO WORD A PROPOSITION 1. As it is not an easy matter to state a proposition with precision and fairness, one must always care- fully choose the exact words that denote the precise meaning he wishes to convey. Many writers and speakers have found themselves in false positions just because, upon examination, it was found that their subjects were ambiguous or did not present the idea intended. Only a careful study of the mean- ings of words supplemented by the exercise of sound judgment will produce satisfactory results. 2. ]\Ioreover, in phrasing the proposition, the de- bater should so state the subject that the affirmative ^de, the side that opens th e discussi o n, is the one to The Subject advocate a change in existing conditions or belief. This method obviously correspondslo'tKe wayln which business is conducted in practical affairs. No one has reason to defend an established condition until it is first attacked. The law presumes a man to be innocent until he is proved guilty, and there- fore it is the prosecution, the side to affirm guilt, that opens the case. The question about govern- ment ownership of railroads should be so worded that the affirmative side will advocate the new system, and the negative will uphold the old. It should be stated thus: "Resolved, That all rail- roads in the United States should be owned and operated by the Federal government." This ob- ligation of adducing evidence and reasoning to support one side of a proposition before an answer from the other side can be demanded, is called burden of proof. The " burden " always rests upon the side that advocates a change, and the proposition should be so worded that the affirmative will have to undertake this duty. 3. One more principle must be observed : nothing j n the wording of the subject <^hnn1d_ pnvp nnp side any adv antage_oyer the other. Argument can exist only when reasonable men have a difference of opin- ion. If the wording of the proposition removes this 19 The Subject difference, no discussion can ensue. For instance, the word " undesirable," if allowed to stand in the following proposition, precludes any debate : '' Re- solved, That all colleges should abolish the un- desirable game of football." From the preceding suggestions it is seen that the subject of an argument is a definite, restricted thought derived from some general idea. Whether expressed or not, the subject must be a proposition, not a term. In debate the proposition is usually framed in the form of a resolution. This resolution must always be so worded that the burden of proof will rest upon the affirmative side. Nothing in the wording of the proposition should give either side any advantage over the other. These principles have to do with the manner of expression; subjects will next be considered with respect to the ideas they contain. KINDS OF PROPOSITIONS A common and convenient method of classifica- tion divides propositions into two groups; proposi- tions of policy, and propositions of fact. The first class consists of those propositions that aim to prove the truth of a theory, that indicate a preference for 20 The Subject a certain policy, for a certain method of action. The second class comprises those propositions that affirm or deny the occurrence of an event, or the existence of a fact. Propositions of policy usually, though not always, contain the word should op ought; propositions of fact usually contain some form of the word to be. As a rule, only one kind of proposition is at all hard to classify. At first glance it m.ay seem that the proposition, " The commission form of city government is superior to the mayor and council system," is a proposition of fact; it is, however, a proposition of policy. Such a subject gives rise to a weighing of values, a contrasting of policies, and the argument would not be essentially different if the proposition were worded in what is obviously a proposition of policy, " American cities should adopt the commission form of government." The following illustrations will make plainer the differences between propositions of policy and prop- ositions of fact : PROPOSITIONS OF POLICY The right of suffrage should be limited to per- sons who can read and write. Athletics as conducted at present are detrimental to American colleges. 21 The Subject The powers of the Interstate Commerce Com- mission should be curtailed. The single tax as advocated by Henry George would be an improvement over our present method of taxation. PROPOSITIONS OF FACT Russia was responsible for the outbreak of the European War in 1914. Bacon wrote the plays commonly attributed to Shakespeare. Swift was married to Stella. PROPOSITIONS TO BE AVOIDED The most convenient method of studying proposi- tions to see further what subjects are desirable for student debates is to consider those propositions that should be avoided. I. Propositions v^th only one side. Since ar- gumentation presupposes a difference of opinion about a certain subject, it is obviously impossible to argue upon a subject on which all are agreed. Sometimes such propositions as, ''Resolved, That Garibaldi was a great patriot," and '' Resolved, That the public press exerts a great influence on political 22 The Subject conditions in the United States," are found on the programs of literary societies and debating clubs. In such cases mere comment, not debate, can follow. Only subjects on which reasonable men actually dis- agree are suitable for argument. 2. Ambiguous propositions. If a proposition is capable of several interpretations, those who choose it as a subject for an argument are liable not to agree on what it means, and one side will debate in accordance with one interpretation, and the other side in accordance with a totally different interpre- tation. Thus the opponents will never meet in con- flict except when they explain their subject. For example, in a certain debate on the question, "Re- solved, That American colleges should abolish ex- aminations," the affirmative held that only final ex- aminations were involved ; while the negative main- tained that the term " examinations " included not only final but also monthly and even oral examina- tions. Manifestly the debate hinged largely on the definition of this term ; but as there was no authority to settle just what was meant, the debate was a failure. It is usually desirable, and frequently necessary, to explain what the subject means, for un- less it has some meaning which both sides are bound to accept, the argument becomes a mere controversy 23 The Subject over the definition of words. Another ambiguous proposition would be, " Republican government is preferable to any other kind of government in the United States." The word " republican " is open to two legitimate definitions, and since the context does not explain which meaning is intended, a de- bater is at liberty to accept either definition that he wishes. A few alterations easily turn this propo- sition into a debatable subject, '' Government by the Republican Party best promotes the prosperity of the United States." 3. Too general propositions. It is never wise for a writer or a speaker to choose a subject which is so general or so abstract that he cannot handle it with some degree of completeness and facility. Not only will such work be difficult and distasteful to him, but it will be equally distasteful and un- interesting to his audience. No student can write good themes on such subjects as, " Socialism," " Cul- ture," " Subsidies " ; nor can he argue well on prop- ositions like, "Resolved, That socialism is imprac- ticable " ; "" Resolved, That a cultural education is superior to a technical education " ; or " Resolved, That subsidies are undemocratic." These are en- tirely beyond his scope ; they are propositions that cannot be either proved or disproved satisfactorily. 24 The Subject But a college student can handle restricted proposi- tions that have to do with some one phase of some concrete, tangible event or idea, such as, '' Resolved, That at the next national election the Socialist ticket should be supported " ; '" Resolved, That Col- lege should offer an undergraduate course in the his- tory of the art of painting"; ''Resolved, That the United States should subsidize its merchant marine." 4. Combined propositions. It sometimes hap- pens that several heterogeneous ideas, each of which by itself would form an excellent subject for argu- ment, are embodied in a single proposition. The difficulty of arguing on this kind of subject is ap- parent. It is none too easy to establish one idea satisfactorily; but when several ideas must be up- held and defended, the work is enormous and some- times open to the charge of inconsistency. More- over, the principle of Unity demands that a composition be about a single topic. The proposi- tion, ''Resolved, That Aaron Burr w^as guilty of murder and should have been put to death," involves two debatable subjects, each of which is of sufficient importance to stand in a proposition by itself: "Was Burr guilty of murder?" and "Should a murderer be punished by death?" The error of combining in a compound sentence several distinct 25 The Subject subjects for debate is generally detected with ease; but when the error of combination exists in a simple sentence it is not always so obvious. In the sub- ject, '' Resolved, That foreign immigrants have been unjustly treated by the United States," there are, as the same privileges have not been granted all immi- grants, several debatable questions. One who at- tempts to argue on this subject must take into con- sideration the treatment that has been accorded the Chinese, the English, the Germans, the Italians, the paupers, the well-to-do, and others. In one case the laws may be palpably unfair, and in another case, all that can be desired. When two ideas, however, are very closely related and are dependent upon each other for interpreta- tion and support, they may and sometimes should be combined in the same proposition. For example, " Education should be compulsory to the age of six- teen," involves two main issues : " Education should be compulsory," and " The age of sixteen is the proper limit." But in this case the one who advo- cates compulsory education is under obligation to explain some definite system, and this explanation must include the establishing of some limit. To name this limit in the proposition renders the ar- gument clearer to an audience and fairer to an 26 The Subject opponent. For similar reasons, the proposition, " The Federal government should own and operate the railroads in the United States," cannot be con- demned on the ground that it is a proposition with more than one main idea. Propositions, then, adapted to class-room argu- ment, are those which give rise to a conflict of opinion; which contain a definite and unmistakable thought ; which are specific and sufficiently restricted to admit of thorough treatment ; and which contain a single idea. Furthermore, the student will do well to select subjects that are as nearly as possible like the problems which statesmen, educators, professional and business men meet in practical life. He should try to remove his argument as far as he can from the realm of pure academic exercise, and endeavor to gain some insight into the issues that are now confronting the makers of modern civilization. The student who takes this work seriously is sure to gain information, form opinions, and acquire habits of thought that will be of great practical value to him when he takes his place as a man among men. EXERCISES A. Narrow each of the followmg terms into good, de- batable propositions : The Subject Panama Canal tolls ; national expositions ; libel laws ; In- terstate Commerce Commission; regional banks; world peace; pork barrel legislation; divorce laws; national pro- hibition; intensive agriculture; newspaper advertising; tech- nical education; state highways; railroad electrification; compulsory arbitration; wages; employers' liability; re- bates; rural free delivery; direct primaries; standing army; bo3^cott; inland water ways; denominational colleges; dra- matic censorship. B. Criticize the following propositions: 1. The Bible has exerted a strong influence on English literature. 2. The automobile is more useful than the horse. 3. Strikes are beneficial to legislation. 4. United States Senators should be elected by popular vote. 5. Athletic sports benefit college students. 6. All cities in the United States having at least ten thou- sand inhabitants should adopt the highly desirable commis- sion form of government. 7. Travel is a luxury. 8. The Federal government should establish a parcels post. 9. Patrick Henry was a great orator. 10. The Federal government should own and operate the telegraph systems in the country and exercise a strict su- pervision over the issuing of railroad securities. 11. Luxurious living is to be condemned. 12. Congress should repeal the unjust Fifteenth Amend- ment. 13. Evolution is not consistent with the Bible. 14. The Slav is inferior to the Teuton. 15. Undesirable immigrants should not be admitted into the United States. 28 The Subject 16. The parcels post is of greater benefit to the people of the United States than the rural free delivery of mail. 17. Foreign acquisitions have been a detriment to the United States. 18. A forest reserve should be established in the White Mountains. 19. A two-thirds vote of a jury should constitute a verdict in civil and criminal cases. 20. The United States should not estal)lish commercial reciprocity with Canada. 29 CHAPTER III THE INTRODUCTION — PERSUASION Every complete argument consists of three parts : introduction, discussion, and conclusion. Each of these divisions has definite and specific duties to perform. The work of the introduction is three- fold: (i) to concihate the audience; (2) to explain the subject; and (3) to outline the discussion. As the conciliation of the audience is accomplished by an appeal to the emotions rather than to the reason, it is properly classified under persuasion. Explain- ing the proposition and outlining the discussion are of an expository nature and will be discussed under the head of conviction. As has been stated in a previous chapter, the amount of persuasion to be used in any piece of argumentative work depends entirely upon the at- tending circumstances. The subject, audience, author, occasion, and purpose of the effort must be taken into consideration. But whether the amount used be great or small, practically every argument 30 The Introduction — Persuasion should begin with conciHation. The conciHation of the audience — the word audience is used through- out this book to designate both hearers and readers — consists of gaining the good will of those to be convinced, of arousing their interest, and of render- ing them open to conviction. No argument can be expected to attain any considerable degree of suc- cess so long as anything about its author, or anything in the subject itself, is peculiarly disagreeable to the people it is designed to affect. If the ill will re- mains too great, it is not likely that the argument will ever reach those for whom it is intended, much less produce the desired result. In addressing Southern sympathizers at Liverpool, during the Civil War, Beecher had to fight even for a hearing. The speech of an unpopular Senator frequently empties the Senate chamber. Men of one political belief often refuse to read the publications of the opposite party. Obviously, the first duty of the introduction is to gain the approval of the audience. In the next place, interest must be aroused. Active dislike is less frequently encountered than indiffer- ence. How many times sermons, lectures, books have failed in their object just because no one took any interest in them ! There was no opposition, no hostility; every one wished the cause well; and yet 31 The Introduction — Persuasion the effort failed to meet with any attention or re- sponse. The argument did not arouse interest — and interest is a prime cause of attention and of action. In the third place, the conciliator)' part of the introduction should induce the audience to as- sume an unbiased, judicial attitude, ready to decide the question according to the strength of the proof. This result is not always easy of attainment. Long- standing beliefs, prejudice, stubbornness must be overcome, and a desire for the truth substituted for everything else. All this is frequently difficult, but unless an arguer can gain the good will of the people addressed, arouse their interest, and render them willing to be convinced, no amount of reasoning is likely to produce much effect. Now the question arises. How is it possible to conciliate the audience? To this query there is no answer that will positively guarantee success. The arguer must always study his audience and suit his discourse to the occasion. What means success in one instance may bring failure in another. The secret of the whole matter is adaptability. Humor, gravity, pathos, even defiance may at times be used to advantage. It is not always possible, however, for the orator or writer to know beforehand just the kind of people he is to address. In this case 32 The Introduction — Persuasion it is usually best for him to follow out a few well established principles that most arguers have found to be of benefit. y^ ATTITUDE OF ARGUER Modesty. Modesty in word and action is in- dispensable to one who would gain the friendship of his audience. Anything that savors of egotism at once creates a feeling of enmity. No one can en- dure another's consciousness of superiority even though the superiority be real. An appearance of haughtiness, self-esteem, condescension, intolerance of inferiors, or a desire for personal glory will at once raise barriers of dislike. On the other hand, modesty should never be carried so far as to become affectation ; that attitude is equally despicable. Per- sonal unobtrusiveness should exist without being conspicuous. The arguer should always take the attitude that the cause he is upholding is greater than its advocate. ^ In the following quotations, compare the over- bearing arrogance of the first selection with the sim- ple modesty of the second : (a) The circumstances surrounding the matter upon which we deliberate are, perhaps, better known to me than to any other living being. I have investigated fullj- and The Introduction — Persuasion discriminatingly. I have applied the ripe judgment of ma- ture years to the solving of this problem. I have arrived at conclusions that are incontrovertable. (b) Unused to occasions like the present, and without any practice, otlier than forensic, I find myself, unadvisedly, engaged in deliberative debate, where notliing is worthy of attention unless most valuable in material and in detail most finished. If I could now fairly retreat, it would be impossible for me to proceed. Abandoning myself, there- fore, to your candor, sir, and that of the House, I will look to the question for that support which a great ques- tion never fails to afford. Fairness. Few things will assist an arguer more in securing a respectful hearing from those who do not agree with him, but whom he would convince, than the quality of fairness. The arguer should take the position of one seeking the truth regardless of what it may be. If he wishes others to look at the question from his standpoint, he will have to show that he is willing to consider the question from their point of view. Ever}^thing in the shape of prejudice, everything which would tend to indicate that he had formed conclusions prior to his investi- gation, he must carefully avoid,- In this connection consider the following: Is the Stock Exchange, as has been said even by a prom- inent writer on economics, a "gambling hell "? Is it an in- stitution which, perhaps, we ought to suppress? Let us look at these questions in the light of what the Stock Ex- change really is and does. Let us approach the subject with 34 The Introduction — Persuasion an open mind and an inquiring eye and see what light an examination of the facts throws upon the duty of the Stock Exchange to the public and of the public in relation to the Stock Exchange. Heat is an admirable thing in its place, but it never yet has been made to do the work of light.^ Sincerity. Another quality of paramount im- portance to the arguer is sincerity. This he must really possess if he is to be eminently successful. To feign- it is almost impossible ; some word or ex- pression, some gesture or inflection of the voice, the very attitude of the insincere arguer will betray his real feelings. If he tries to arouse an emotion that he himself does not feel, his affectation will be apparent and his effort a failure. There are few things that an audience resents more than being tricked into an expression of feeling. If they even mistrust that a speaker is trying to deceive them, that he is arguing merely for personal gain or repu- tation and has no other interest in the case, no de- sire to establish the truth, they will not only with- hold their confidence, but will also become preju- diced against him. It is really inviting disaster to champion a cause in which one is not interested heart and soul. Of course in class-room work the student cannot always avoid taking a false position, and the training he receives thereby is excellent, but 1 Outlook, 104:419. 35 The Introduction — Persuasion he cannot make his persuasion of the highest type of effectiveness unless he honestly and sincerely be- lieves what he says, and feels the emotions he would arouse. 1 am persuaded, Mr. Chairman, that I in my turn shall be indulged in addressing the committee. We all in equal sin- cerity profess to be anxious for the establishment of a re- publican government on a safe and solid basis. It is the object of the wishes of every honest man in the United States, and I presume that I shall not be disbelieved when I declare that it is an object of all others the nearest and most dear to my own heart. The means of accomplishing this great purpose become the most important study which can interest mankind. It is our duty to examine all those means with peculiar attention and to choose the best and most effectual.- HOW TO AROUSE INTEREST I. Importance of the subject. Specific directions for arousing interest are hard to give. The appeal must suit both the audience and the occasion, and until these are known suggestions must be of a some- what general character. One of the commonest methods, however, of arousing an audience apathetic and indifferent is to impress upon them the im- portance and gravity of the question at issue. Mat- • ters thought to be trivial are apt to receive scant at- 2 Alexander Hamilton, June 24, 1788, in the New York Convention, ^j called to ratify the Constitution of the United States. 36 The Introduction — Persuasion tention. This fact is so universally recognized that many writers and speakers attempt at the very outset fto show that upon the correct solution of the prob- l lem at hand depend serious and far-reaching results. It is seldom enough merely to state that a subject is important ; its seriousness should be made apparent. This method is very popular. Whenever one feels it necessary to open an argument with persuasion, but is at a loss to know how to do so, he may well resort to this device. While it does not, perhaps, constitute the strongest possible appeal, yet it is eminently serviceable, since, if handled properly, it does arouse interest, and, moreover, it applies to many cases. Two examiples will show how this method is com- monly used: (a) The sarte men of this country have at last sighted the large standing army of unemployed — an army probably many times larger than the regular army of which the President of the United States is Commander-in-Chief. They are beginning to realize that its presence in our midst, disorganized and uncommanded, constitutes one of the greatest social problems which confront this country to- day. Statesmen and students, economists and wise business men, labor leaders and social workers everywhere, are de- manding that this problem shall be stated clearly, that the facts in relation to it shall be gathered and analyzed, and that the solution for it must be found. They are insisting that Am.erica shall no longer lag behind the rest of the 37 4131'^ The Introduction — Persuasion civilized world in this phase of its industrial organiza- tion. (b) The present year sees Canada at the portals of a great change, passing from a constructive to a productive era. No other country-, all things considered, has made such material progress or bulked so largely in the world's eye during the past decade as has the Dominion. Her advance in every respect has been nmrvelous, probably the most marvelous in history; and that this has been arrested to even a slight degree occasions surprise, though why this should be is difficult to understand. 2. Timeliness of the subject. To show that a subject is timely is another effective device for arousing interest. As most people wish to keep pace with the times and face the issues of the day, it is natural and forceful to introduce an argument by showing that the subject is being discussed else- where, or by showing how an event or sequence of events places the problem before the public. The arguer calls attention to the fact that the question does not belong to the past or to the distant future, but is of immediate interest and must be settled at once. The recent rise in prices is a matter of great public in- terest. This is because it affects so vitally the cost of living — a question which has now become of the utmost concern to the great majority of people, especially the vrage-earning and salaried classes, and others of relatively small incomes.^ 3 Yale Review, 2:704. 38 The Introduction — Persuasion 3. Appeal for one's self. The safest method of stirring the emotions is to make an appeal in behalf of the subject, but occasionally a writer or speaker who is truly sincere, who is contending against un- fortunate circumstances, and is not seeking personal aggrandizement, may arouse interest by making an appeal on his own behalf. He may present some personal reason why the audience should be inter- ested and give him a respectful hearing ; he calls at- tention not primarily to his subject, but to his con- nection with it, or to some circumstance in his own life. This method is hedged about with several pit- falls : it may expose one to the charge of egotism, of insincerity, or of false modesty ; and it may draw the attention of the audience away from the matter in hand. To use this method successfully one should possess consummate tact and thorough knowledge of human nature. The following portion of an introduction to a magazine article by Aaron Hardy Ulm shows how this device may be used to gain the confidence of the audience : In stating my premises, I must beg leave to make some personal explanations. In my fourteenth year, circum- stances placed me in a cotton-mill as a fifty-cents-a-day la- borer. I was taken from the country, where my home had been humble but comfortable, and my general environment 39 The Introduction — Persuasion of the average kind then to be found in the rural districts of the South, During the greater part of three years, I was a regular operative, working in different departments, and mostly in those where children are mainly employed. After that time, I was fortunate in obtaining employment on the outside, but for nearly ten years my life was cast among these people as closely as if I had been working side by side with them.* 4. An appeal to some emotion. One of the strongest forms of conciliation is the direct appeal to a dominant emotion. If an arguer can find some common ground on which to meet his audience, some emotion by which they may be moved, he can usually obtain a personal hold that will overcome hostility and lack of interest. In deciding what emotion to arouse, he must make as careful and thorough a study of his audience as he can. In general, the use of conviction need vary but little to produce the same results on different men ; proc- esses of pure reasoning are essentially the same the world around. But with persuasion the case is different ; emotions are varied, and in each sepa- rate instance the arguer must carefully consider the ruling passions and ideals of his audience. The hopes and aspirations of a gang of ignorant miners would differ widely from the desires of an assembly of college students, or of a coterie of metropolitan 4 North American Review, 189:890. 40 The Introduction — Persuasion capitalists. Education, wealth, social standing, pol- - itics, religion, race, nationality, every motive that ■ is likely to have weight with the audience, should be taken into consideration. Remembering that he has to choose between such diverse emotions as am- bition, fear, hatred, love, patriotism, sense of duty, honor, justice, self-interest, pleasure, and revenge, the arguer must make his selection with the greatest care, and then drive home the appeal with all the force and eloquence at his command. The higher and nobler the emotion he can arouse, the greater and more permanent will be the result. If the audience is such that he can successfully arouse no higher feeling than that of self-interest or revenge, he will, of necessity, have to appeal to these motives ; j but whenever he can, he should appeal to the noblest / sentiments of mankind. A famous illustration of the effectiveness of this sort of conciliation is found in Patrick Henry's oration entitled " Liberty or Death " : Mr. President : No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abiHties, of the very worthy gen- tlemen who have just addressed the house. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a char- acter very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my senti- ments freely and without reserve. This is no time for 41 The Introduction — Persuasion ceremony. The question before the house is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery ; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfil the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven which I revere above all earthly kings. ^ These, then, are the suggestions offered for the conciliation of an audience : The arguer must be modest, fair, and sincere ; he may arouse interest by showing that his subject is important, by showing that it is timely, by making an appeal for himself, and by exciting some strong emotion. To be suc- cessful he should always study his audTence. * • • These directions are far from complete. Any- thing like an exhaustive treatment of this subject would in itself constitute a book. The advice of- fered here, however, should be of considerable value to one who has difficulty in getting a written ar- gument or a debate successfully launched. The student should supplement this chapter with careful study of the work of proficient writers. If he will notice how they have gained success in this partic- 5 Patrick Henry, in the Virginia Convention, at Richmond, March 23f 1775- 42 The Introduction — Persuasion ular, and if he will imitate them, he is bound to improve his own compositions. The principal dangers to be avoided consist of going to extremes. The conciliatory part of the introduction should not be so meager that it will fail to accomplish its purpose, nor should it be so elaborate and artificial as to hamper the onward movement of the argu- ment. The important thing is to gain the good w^ill and the attention of the audience, and, other things being equal, the shorter the introduction the better. Further directions for the spoken argument may be found in the chapter entitled Debate. EXERCISES A. Criticize the following introductory passages for per- suasiveness, pointing out specifically the methods of con- ciliation used, and any defects that may be found : I. This uncounted multitude before me and around me proves the feeling which the occasion has excited. These thousands of human faces, glowing with sympathy and joy, and from the impulses of a common gratitude turned rev- erently to heaven in this spacious temple of the firmament, proclaim that the day, the place, and the purpose of our as- sembling have made a deep impression on our hearts. If, indeed, there be anything in local association fit to af- fect the mind of man, we need not strive to repress the emotions which agitate us here. We are among the sepul- chers of our fathers. We are on ground distinguished by their valor, their constancy, and the shedding of their blood. We are here, not to fix an uncertain date in our annals, nor to draw into notice an obscure and unknown spot. If our 43 The Introduction — Persuasion humble purpose had never been conceived, if we ourselves had never been born, the 17th of June, 1775, would have been a day on which all subsequent history would have poured its hght, and the eminence where we stand a point of attraction to the eyes of successive generations.^ 2. Mr. President, this is a great public question ; a question which affects the welfare not only of our boys and girls but of the mature vocational workers, including the home makers of the United States, as has no other which has been before Congress for more than half a century; a question which is engaging the best thought of eminent publicists and edu- cators from one end of the country to the other — indeed, throughout the civilized world. It is a question which the American people have come to believe directly affects the economic conditions of the country in a degree little, if any, less than the largest of our large economic problems. It is a question which will, in my judgment, settle in great meas- ure the quality of our citizenship in the generation upon which we are now entering. 3. Shall American stock exchanges be put under govern- ment regulation and control ? This is a question which began to be discussed after the great depression in prices last summer and the discussion has been stimulated by several recent failures, in which the " bucketing " of orders and cool appropriation of customers' securities seem to have been every-day occurrences. Finan- cial disaster, as on previous similar occasions, has involved a train of losses, impoverishment, and suicides, for which the blame has been cast by many upon the organization of the stock exchange, and often upon the entire system of sell- ing products for future delivery. And as measures for is- suing " more money " usually appear in Congress in times of stress, there has appeared the usual crop of measures for taxing and regulating transactions on the exchange. 4. Fellow-citizens of the State of Ohio: I cannot fail 6 Daniel Webster, First Bunker Hill Monument Oration. 44 The Introduction — Persuasion to remember that I appear for the first time before an au- dience in this now great State — an audience that is ac- customed to hear such speakers as Corwin, and Chase, and Wade, and many other renowned men; and remembering this, I feel that it will be well for you, as for me, that you should not raise your expectations to that standard to which you would have been justified in raising them had one of these distinguished men appeared before you. You would perhaps be only preparing a disappointment for yourselves, and, as a consequence of your disappointment, mortification for me. I hope, therefore, that you will commence with very moderate expectations ; and perhaps, if you will give me your attention, I shall be able to interest you in a mod- erate degree."^ 5. The history of English literature begins and ends with the name of God. The opening verses of Caedmon, the first of EngHsh bards, chant the praises of the Almighty Maker of all things. The last words of Tennyson and Browning, who close the long line of imperial torch-bearers, sound the pean of faith triumphant; and, like a golden thread through the entire web of our literature, runs the in- fluence of the English Bible. 6. " I say. Bill, 'ere's a quiet lookin' cove, let's 'eave 'arf a brick at 'im." These moving words, so mellifluous but so direct, are placed by one of Mr, Punch's young men on the lips of an idly bellicose navvy, and I have borrowed them to indicate a very common attitude toward the college pro- fessor. 7. May it please your Honors : I am not afraid that you will underrate the importance of this case. It concerns the rights of the whole people. Such questions have generally been settled by arms. But since the beginning of the world no battle has ever been lost or won upon which the liberties of a nation were so distinctly staked as they are on the re- sults of this argument. The pen that writes the judgment 7 Abraham Lincoln. 45 The Introduction — Persuasion of the court will be mightier for good or evil than any sword that was ever wielded by mortal arm. As might be expected from the nature of the subject, it has been a good deal discussed elsewhere, in legislative bodies, in public assemblies, and in the newspaper press of the country. But there it has been mingled with interests and feelings not very friendly to a correct conclusion. Here we are in a higher atmosphere, where no passion can dis- turb the judgment or shake the even balance in which the scales of reason are held. Here it is purely a judicial ques- tion; and I can speak for my colleagues as well as myself when I say that we have no thought to suggest which we do not suppose to be a fair element in the strictly legal judgment which you are required to make up.^ B. On the affirmative side of one of the following propo- sitions, write the conciliatory portion of an introduction, using about two hundred words, suited to the audience in- dicated : AN AUDIENCE OF EMPLOYERS 1. Workingmen are not receiving a fair wage. 2. The eight-hour day without reduction in wages should be adopted in all industries. 3. Labor unions have been a benefit to the United States. AN AUDIENCE OF MANUFACTURERS 4. A low tariff would benefit the United States as a whole. 5. Freight rates should be increased. AN AUDIENCE OF WORKINGMEN 6. Labor unions are a detriment to the country. 7. High wages are responsible for the high cost of living. 8. Railroad employees in the United States are receiving higher wages than they deserve. 8 Jeremiah S. Black, The Right to Trial by Jury. 46 The Introduction — Persuasion AN AUDIENCE OF COLLEGE STUDENTS 9. American colleges should abolish intercollegiate ath- letics. 10. Student government is not for the best interests of a college. 47 CHAPTER IV THE INTRODUCTION — CONVICTION As soon as the persuasive portion of an introduc- tion has rendered the audience friendly, attentive, and open to conviction, the process of reasoning should begin. First of all, it is the duty of the ar- guer to see that the meaning of the proposition is perfectly clear both to himself and to all the people whom he wishes to reach. If the arguer does not thoroughly comprehend his subject, he is likely to produce only a jumble of facts and reasoning, or at best he may establish a totally different proposition from the one that confronts him ; if the audience fails to understand just what is being proved they remain uninfluenced. The amount of explanation required to show what the proposition means varies according to the intelligence of the people addressed and their familiarity with the subject. DEFINITION To begin with, if there are any unfamiliar v/ords in the proposition, any terms or expressions that 48 The Introduction — Conviction are liable to be misunderstood or not comprehended instantly, they must be defined. At this point the arguer has to exercise considerable judgment both in determining what words to define and in choosing a definition that is accurate and clear. Synonyms are almost always untrustworthy or as incompre- hensible as the original word, and other dictionary definitions are usually framed either in too technical language to be easily grasped or in too general lan- guage to apply inevitably to the case at hand. Definition by authority. x\s a rule, the very best definitions that can be used are quotations from the works of men distinguished for their knowledge in the special subject to which the word to be de- fined belongs. The eminent economist defines eco- nomic terms ; the statesman, political terms ; the jur- ist, legal terms; the scientist, scientific terms; the theologian, the meaning of religious phraseolog>\ To present these definitions accurately, and to be sure of the author's meaning, one should take the quotations directly from the author's work itself. If, however, this source is not at hand, or if time for research is lacking, one may often find in legal and economic dictionaries and in encyclopedias the very quotations that he wishes to use in defining a term. It is always well, in quoting a definition, to tell 49 The Introduction — Conviction who the authority is; unless he is particularly well known, some information which will show that he actually is an authority should be given; moreover, it is usually well to make an exact reference to the passage quoted. The following is an excellent illus- tration of definition by authority : It is necessary at the outset that we have a clear under- standing as to what is meant by scientific management. To obtain it, we will go at once to headquarters. Mr. Fred- erick W. Taylor, consulting engineer, Philadelphia, is acknowledged as the dean of the efficiency experts and the originator of the new system. Mr. Taylor was conspicu- ously successful in his management of the Midvale Steel Company, where he was successively laborer, foreman, superintendent, and general manager. There his system was first worked out. In addition he has also made an inter- national reputation as the inventor of high-speed steel for metal-cutting tools and drills, an achievement in itself suf- ficient to stamp him as a man of remarkable scientific attain- ments. The fundamental principles of Mr. Taylor's system are definite, and are set forth by him as follows : * First. Each man in the establishment, high or low, should daily have a clearly defined task laid out before him. This task should not in the least degree be vague or in- definite, but should be circumscribed carefully and com- pletely, and should not be easy to accomplish. Second. Each man's task should call for a full day's work, and, at the same time, the workman should be given such conditions and such appliances as will enable him to accomplish his task with certainty. Third. He should be sure of large pay when he accom- plishes his task. 50 The Introduction — Conviction Fourth. When he fails, he should be sure that sooner or later he will be the loser by it. Fifth. When an establishment has reached an advanced state of organization, in many cases the task should be made so difficult that it can be accomplished only by a first-class man.i [* From a paper read by Mr. Taylor before the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, June, 1903.] A definition by authority may consist of the exact words that the man quoted has used, or it may con- sist of a summary of what he has said, or it may consist of a summary of what several writers have said. Definition by illustration. Since the purpose of each step in the reasoning portion of the introduc- tion is to convey information accurately, quickly, and, above all else, clearly, a particularly good method for defining terms is by illustration. In us- ing this method, one holds up to view a concrete ex- ample of the special significance of the word that is being explained. He shows how the law, or cus- tom, or principle, or whatever is being expounded, works in actual practice. For example, if he is ad- vocating the superiority of the large college over the small college, he should define each term by giving specific examples of large colleges and of small col- 1 W. J. Cunningham, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 25:541. 51 The Introduction — Conviction leges. The advantage of this method Hes in its sim- plicity and clearness, qualities which enable the audi- ence to understand the discussion without much con- scious effort on their part. Investigation reveals that the definitions of great writers and speakers are replete with illustration. Whenever the student of argumentation has something to define that is par- ticularly intricate or hard to understand, he should illustrate it. If he fails to find already prepared an illustrative definition that exactly fits his needs, he will often do well to learn just what the term means, and then make his own illustration. Consider how this method has been used. The term " closed shop " has been defined as follows : The "closed shop" means just this: John Smith owns a cotton mill in New England. He employs only union labor. One day he needed an expert dyer. A skilled operative ap- plied for the job, but Mr. Smith could not hire him because he was not a member of the union. It made no difference whether he had tried to join the organization or not, whether he was wilhng to join it or not; it made no dif- ference how much his serv^ices were needed. Until he actu- ally had a union card, the other employees in that mill would not work beside him. Notice how the following quotation makes plain the meaning of " social productivity " : Except the Socialists, it may be said that there is to-day no one to deny the productivity of the preacher or singer 52 The Introduction — Conviction or actor or teacher or man servant or maid servant. If the artisan who constructs a violin is productive, so, also, is the artist who plays it. If to grow wheat or to grind it is eco- nomic production, so is baking it. If we may regard as pro- ductive the industry which furnishes the beef, so may we also the industry that cooks it; we eat the broiling on our steak as truly as we eat the steak. If a stock car is produc- tive in transporting beeves over wide intervals of space, so likewise must be the waiter who brings the steak from the kitchen or passes it at the table. One colorist with his brush fixes his fancies upon canvas ; another color worker by the magic of his words paints pictures on the tablets of the mind; the fact that we pay for either shows either to be value rendering. To create matter is in truth given to none of us; we only arrange and combine and distribute.^ EXPLANATION Not only must the arguer define the unfamiliar words that occur in the proposition, but he must also explain the meaning of the proposition taken as a whole. Since an audience often has neither the inclination nor the opportunity to give a prop- osition careful thought and study, the disputant himself must make clear the matter in dispute, and show exactly where the difference in opinion be- tween the affirmative and the negative lies. This process is of great importance; it removes the subject of dispute from the realm of mere words -^ words which arranged in a formal statement are 2 H. J. Davenport, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 25:97. 53 The Introduction — Conviction to many often incomprehensible — and brings out clearly the idea that is to be supported or con- demned. To discover just what the proposition means, the arguer must weigh each word, carefully noting its meaning and its significance in the proposition. To neglect a single word is disastrous. An inter- collegiate debate was once lost because the affirma- tive side did not take into consideration the words " present tendency " in the proposition, "' Resolved, That the present tendency of labor unions is detri- mental to the prosperity of the United States." The negative side admitted everything that the affirmative established, namely, that unions are detrimental; and won by showing that their tend- ency is beneficial. In another college debate on the subject, "Resolved, That the United States should immediately dispose of the Philippines," one side failed to meet the real point at issue because it ig- nored the word " immediately.'' A thorough ex- planation of the proposition would have shown the limitations that this w^ord imposed upon the dis- cussion. In the next place, the arguer should usually pre- sent to the audience a brief history of the matter in dispute. Many debatable subjects are of such 54 The Introduction — Conviction a nature that the arguer himself cannot, until he has studied the history of the proposition, fully understand what constitutes the clash in opinion between the affirmative and the negative sides. To understand the debate, the audience must possess this same information. An historical sketch would be absolutely necessary to render intelligible such subjects as: ''Japan's declaration of war against Germany was unjustifiable " ; " The canteen should be restored to the United States army " ; " Congress should abridge the powers of the Interstate Com- merce Commission." In the last place, the arguer must give his audi- ence all essential information concerning the matter in dispute. For example, if the proposition is, " Naturalization laws in the United States should be more stringent," a mere definition of " naturaliza- tion laws " is not enough ; the disputant must tell just what naturalization laws exist at the present time, and just how stringent they are to-day. Again, if the subject is, '' The United States army should be enlarged," the arguer must tell exactly how large the army is now. If the proposition is, '' The right of suffrage should be further limited by an educa- tional test," the arguer must state what limits now exist, and he must also tell what is meant by ''an 55 The Introduction — Conviction educational test." In a debate the work of the affirmative and of the negative differ sHghtly at this point. Since the proposition reads an educa- tional test, the advocate for the affirmative has the privilege of upholding any sort of educational test that he wishes to defend, provided only that it comes v/ithin the limits of '' an educational test." He may say that the test should consist of a knowl- edge of the alphabet, or he may advocate an examination in higher mathematics ; but he is under obligation to outline carefully and thoroughly some specific system. The negative, on the other hand, must be prepared to overthrow whatever system is brought forward. If the affirmative fails to out- line any system, the negative has only to call atten- tion to this fact to put the affirmative in a very embarrassing position. The following quotation concerning the govern- ment of the Panama Canal Zone shows how a prop- osition may be explained in a magazine article or a student's debate: NECESSARY PANAMA CANAL LEGISLATION From the American occupation of the Canal Zone in 1904 until the present time, the Zone has been governed by the President of the United States, whose executive orders are the law of the land. The President has acted without a grant of authority by Congress, there being no disposition =;6 The Introduction — Conviction on the part of Congress to place any restrictions whatever upon the President other than those imposed upon him by the Spooner Act of 1902, which instructed the President to construct the Canal through the agency of a commission of seven men. The time has now come when Congress should definitely authorize the President to govern the Zone in the future. Different views are held concerning the policy to be adopted for the future government of the Canal Zone and for the operation of the Canal. There are those v/ho, ani- mated by a zeal for the spread of democratic institutions, would seek to make the Zone a modern republic — an ideal to inspire all Latin America. Those who are of this mind would maximize the civil government of the Zone, place a civilian governor at its head, and make the superintendent, or director of the Canal, a subordinate in charge of one de- partment of the administration. Others, equally patriotic, would have Congress authorize the President of the United States to establish military rule upon the Isthmus by placing a major-general in charge of the fortifications and making him the director of the Canal. Those who would emphasize the civil authority would dis- sociate the civil and military functions of government and would welcome the settlement of the Canal Zone, preferably by a permanent population of American homesteaders ; while those who advocate the military administration of the Canal contend that the Zone cannot be profitably cultivated, and that if successful farming were possible, the portions of the Zone not occupied by the Canal and its appur- tenances should be kept as a government reservation to be used as future needs may require for the enlargement of the Canal and for the purposes of the army and navy. The problem, thus stated, seems to be clear cut. Shall the Zone be a military reservation, and shall the Canal and the Zone be subject to the commander of the forts, or shall 57 The Introduction — Conviction the three hundred and forty square miles (more or less) of land withhi the Canal Zone not immediatel}^ required by the Canal and its auxihary works and structures be made, if possible, the seat of a model democracy whose civil gov- ernor, selected by the President of the United States, shall be responsible for the operation of the Canal? ^ ISSUES Following the discovery of the real meaning of the proposition, comes the finding of the issues. Whenever a man in business, professional, or political life, or in any circumstances whatsoever, must determine upon some policy or come to some decision regarding theoretical or practical matters, he formulates his belief and chooses his line of action in accordance with the answers that he makes to certain questions either consciously or uncon- sciously present in his mind. For instance, if he considers the purchase of a certain piece of real estate, he says to himself: *' Is the price fair?" " Have I the money to invest ? " " Can I sell or use the property to good advantage ? " " How much pleasure shall I derive from it?" If he answers these questions in one way, the purchase is likely to be made; if in another, it is not. Again, a board of college trustees may be considering the C Emory R. Johnson, North American Review, 194:714. 58 The Introduction — Conviction abolishment of football. In arriving at a decision, they are confronted with these questions : '* Is the game beneficial or detrimental to the player ? " ''' How does it affect the college as a whole ? " Those who favor the game will, of course, say that it is a benefit to the player and the whole college; v/hile those who oppose it will maintain that it is a detriment to all concerned. But evidently the same questions must be met and answered by both sides. These questions are called issues. Issues are subdivisions of the subject under dis- cussion, and are always essentially the same for any given idea. The first requirement for the issues of any proposition is that they be comprehensive; that is, the sum of their ideas must equal the main idea expressed in the proposition. To those who are carrying on the discussion and to the audience, if there is one, it must be perfectly evident that these questions cover the entire field of controversy ; that if these questions are satisfactorily answered in one way or the other, the discussion is settled and nothing remains to be said. The second re- quirement is that the issues consider only disputed matter. A question that gives rise to no disagree- ment, that admittedly has but one answer, is never an issue. Issues, therefore, may he defined as the 59 The Introduction — Conviction questions that must be answered by both the affirma- tive and the negative sides of the proposition under discussion and that, if answered in one way, estab- lish the proposition, and if anszvered in another way, overthrow it. The issues of a proposition exist independently of the side that is being upheld. The affirmative will find the same issues as the negative, but it rarely happens that two men will divide a proposi- tion in exactly the same manner and thus state the issues in precisely the same language. If, however, the work of both has been fair and complete, their issues will not vary in any important particular. For example, under the subject, " The Federal government should own and operate the railroads of the United States," one person might give as issues : 1. Has the government the right to take the roads without the consent of the present owners? 2. Is the government financially able to buy the roads ? 3. Does the present system contain serious de- fects ? 4. Will the proposed system remove these defects without bringing in new evils equally serious ? Another might state as issues : 60 The Introduction — Conviction 1. Is the proposed plan practicable? 2. Will it benefit the people ? The issues in both instances, however, are es- sentially the same, as questions one and two of the first list are equivalent to one of the second; and three and four of the first, to two of the second. At this point it may be well to micntion a common error that must be guarded against. It often hap- pens that a question is stated as an issue which is not a subdivision of the proposition at all, but is the entire proposition itself, framed in slightly dif- ferent language. Such would be the error if the question, "Would the change be desirable?" were used as an issue for the proposition, " All State colleges should abolish secret societies." It sometimes happens that one is forced to defend or attack what has been called a " combined propo- sition," a proposition that contains two distinct sub- jects for argument. Such subjects are to be avoided as much as possible, but when they must be met, it is usually necessary to have two separate sets of issues. An example of such a proposition would be, " All American colleges and universities should adopt the honor system." The only practicable method of finding the issues of a proposition is to question it from all pertinent 6i The Introduction — Conviction points of view, and then to eliminate all questions that have no vital bearing on the subject, or that are acknowledged to have but one answer. The questions that remain are the issues. In using this method of analysis, one must be careful to consider the proposition in all its phases and details, and from both the affirmative and the negative sides. Neglect to give the subject thorough consideration often results in one's being suddenly confronted with an issue that he has not previously discovered and consequently cannot meet. Failure to cast aside all questions that are not real issues may cause equal embarrassment : an arguer never wishes to waste time and effort in estabhshing proof that is not essential to the argument, or that is admitted by the other side. It is hardly possible even to suggest all the various kinds of questions that may be asked about de- batable subjects. An arguer must depend largely upon his own judgment and common sense in analyzing each proposition that he meets. He may, however, find the issues of many propositions by carefully questioning them from certain important and comprehensive points of view. The list of standpoints indicated here is not exhaustive; only the more important and general standpoints are 62 The Introduction — Conviction considered. The student should bear in mind that the following instructions are designed to teach him a practical method of analysis ; they do not con- stitute a formula that can be applied in all instances. First, the analysis of propositions of policy will be taken up; secondly, the analysis of propositions of fact. PROPOSITIONS OF POLICY I. Is the plan practicable? Whenever a plan is proposed, first ask whether or not it is practicable. If those who oppose the idea maintain that great obstacles exist which will prevent the undertaking of the project or hinder its execution, then the question of practicability constitutes an important issue. For instance, one who contemplates a thorough argument on the proposition, " The United States navy should be greatly enlarged,'' must prove that the plan is, or is not, practicable. Plainly, such hindrances as enormous expense, inadequate facili- ties for building and repairing battleships, and the increased demand for officers and sailors render questionable the expediency of such a measure. This issue, however, is not found in connection with all propositions; it does not concern propositions that micrely approve or condemn existing condi- 63 The Introduction — Conviction tions or assert the occurrence of an event. For example, practicability does not enter into such subjects as these: '' The boycott is morally justifi- able " ; " The maintenance of a large standing army is provocative of war " ; " Congress should repeal the Sherman Law." But most propositions that advo- cate a change, that propose some new system of op- eration, have this issue involved. Such subjects are : " A national prohibitor}^ law offers the best solution of the liquor problem " ; " Congress should provide for uniform Federal marriage and divorce laws " ; " The United States should dis- pose of the Philippines." 2. Will the proposed plan be a moral benefit or detriment to those concerned? Not all prop- ositions, by any means, but many, are of such a character that they must be considered from the standpoint of morality. The arguer must ask whether the idea involved in the subject is morally right or wrong; whether it is morally beneficial or harmful. This point of view includes more than at first appears. It takes into consideration justice, duty, honesty, faithfulness, religion, ever}'thing that pertains to what is right or wrong. Under the proposition, " The treatment of the American Indi- ans by the United States should be condemned," ap- 64 The Introduction — Conviction pears the moral issue, " What is our duty toward the people of this race?" The proposition, ** Pub- lic libraries, museums, and art galleries should be open on Sunday," presents this issue, " Is the method of recreation afforded by the opening of these buildings in accordance with the teachings of the Christian religion ? " The proposition, " Football is an undesirable college game," must be settled in part by the answer to the question, " Is the game beneficial or harmful to the player's character ? " 3. Will the proposed plan be a material benefit or detriment? In the third place, the proposition should be questioned from a material point of view, to determine whether the plan is, or is likely to be, a benefit or a detriment. In some form this issue will doubtless be found in connection with al- most every proposition of policy. In all systems of government, of business, and even of education, material betterment is invariably one of the ulti- mate objects sought. The question of national ex- pansion presents the issue, " Will such a course add to the glory, the prestige, or the wealth of the nation ? " When a boy considers going to college, he desires to know whether a college education is a valuable asset in business, social, or professional 65 The Introduction — Conviction life. An issue which puts to the touch the mat- ter of personal gain is sure to involve a substantial portion of the controversy. The arguer who can decisively settle the question of dollars and cents always has a strong argument. Usually the issue involving the question of material benefit or detri- ment is plain and direct; sometimes, however, it is partially concealed. A man debating on the af- firmative side of the proposition, " Resolved , That candidates for the Presidency of the United States should be nominated by the direct primary sys- tem," may urge as a reason that such a method will result in purer politics. This particular line of ar- gument he may carry no further, taking it for granted that every one will recognize the connec- tion between honest ofiice holders and material gain. 4. Will the proposed plan be an intellectual benefit or detriment? All propositions that deal with education or with other matters that pertain to man's progress and advancement should be viewed from an intellectual standpoint. No per- son in discussing a measure bearing upon the wel- fare of an individual, of a community, or of a na- tion, can afford to neglect questioning its influence for mental advancement or retrogression. Propo- 66 The Introduction — Conviction sitions relating to schools, colleges, and similar in- stitutions, and propositions dealing with social and industrial conditions, present this issue. Modern theories of government, both municipal and na- tional, are frequently based to some extent upon the idea of teaching the people how to live and how to govern themselves. The policy of the United States in the Philippines and in the West Indies has been greatly influenced by the query, " How will it affect the intellectual welfare of the people concerned?" 5. Will the proposed plan be a physical bene- fit or detriment? All subjects that concern the life, health, strength, or in any way bear upon the physical well-being of man, present this issue. An argument on government ownership of railroads would have to answer the question, " Under which system will fewer accidents occur ? " All such propositions as, " Eight hours ought legally to con- stitute a working day " ; " State boards of health should compel all persons afflicted with contagious diseases to be quarantined " ; '' Football is an un- desirable college game," give rise to the issue of physical welfare. 6. Will the proposed plan be a political benefit or detriment? If a plan is of such far-reaching 67 The Introduction — Conviction significance that its adoption or rejection would affect a whole town, state, or nation, then its mer- its usually depend to some extent upon its political significance. The issue may take some such form as, '' How will the system affect the country po- litically?" "Will the system encourage bribery and graft, or will it tend to do away with these evils?" "What will be its effect upon bossism?" 7. How has the plan succeeded where it has been tried? This question frequently occurs as an issue in connection with all sorts of proposi- tions. Its importance and significance are so evi- dent that no explanation is needed. The value of precedent is known to every one. 8. Does the present system contain serious evils? The asking of this question is frequently one of the very best ways to get at the heart of a proposition of pohcy. To be sure, this question overlaps and embraces several other questions that have been suggested, but a comprehensive issue like this is sometimes preferable from the standpoint both of the arguer and of the audience. It removes from the arguer the necessity of classifying each evil under the head of moral, financial, intellectual, etc. ; and in many cases it results in an argument more easily understood by the audience. In some 68 The Introduction — Conviction form this issue applies to nearly all political, eco- nomic, and financial propositions. 9. If the present system does contain serious evils, will the proposed system remove them? Equal in importance with the question as to whether the existing system is defective, is the question as to whether the proposed system will remove these defects, without, of course, introducing equally great disadvantages. These two issues almost in- variably go together ; they set the system advocated by the affirmative and the system advocated by the negative side by side, and compare and contrast each with the other. 10. If the present system contains serious evils, is the proposed system the only remedy? This last question is very closely connected with the two preceding questions. The whole discus- sion may hinge not on w^hether evils exist, but on how they shall be remedied. If the argument takes this turn, the advocates of a certain system must show that their plan is the only one suitable for adoption, or, at least, is the best plan, w^hile the negative must introduce and uphold a totally dif- ferent scheme. For instance, under the proposi- tion, " The United States army should be greatly enlarged," the first two issues would probably be 69 The Introduction — Conviction these : " Is the present army adequate to protect the nation? " and " Is the enlargement of the army the only means of rendering the nation safe from invasion ? " PROPOSITIONS OF FACT I. Does the proposition state a possible truth? To find the issues of a proposition of fact, first ask whether the occurrence in question could have happened or the condition alleged in the proposi- tion could possibly have existed. This question is so important that if it can conclusively be answered in the negative the discussion is ended. Legal pro- ceedings invariably center around some form of a proposition of fact. In the criminal court a man to prove his innocence has only to establish an alibi or prove physical inability to commit the crime with which he is charged. Not always, of course, does the question of possibility constitute an issue, since frequently the possibility is admit- ted. Such would be the case if the following propositions came up for discussion: "Joan of Arc was burned at the stake " ; " Nero was guilty of burning Rome.'' In these instances possibility gives way to probability. 70 The Introduction — Conviction 2. Does the proposition state a probable truth? If the question of possibility has been answered affirmatively or inconclusively, the issue of proba- bility next arises. In connection with many prop- ositions of fact this is the most important issue to be encountered. Unless a condition or an event — its possibility being admitted — can be affirmed or denied by reliable witnesses who testify from their own personal knowledge of the matter, the most that any arguer can do is to establish a balance of probability. Those who believe that Bacon wrote the plays attributed to Shakespeare try to show how improbable it is that a man like Shake- speare could have produced such works, and how very Hkely it is that Bacon was the real author. Many criminals are convicted or acquitted on evi- dence that establishes merely a strong probability of guilt or of innocence. 3. Is there any direct evidence bearing on the proposition? In the third place, a person who is trying to prove or disprove a proposition of fact must consider the direct evidence involved. Indi' rect evidence tends to establish the possibility or probability that a statement is true or false, while direct evidence asserts that it is true or false. Di- rect evidence on the question, " Country roads in 71 The Introduction — Conviction New England are inferior to those of the Middle West," would not be a description of the topo- graphical and geographical features of both re- gions, for this information could at its best estab- lish only a strong probability; direct evidence on this subject would be the testimony of people who have investigated the roads, and could thus speak from direct personal knowledge. This issue of direct evidence has two phases. The arguer must ask, " Is any direct evidence available?" and "If there is any, what is its value ? " It is easily seen that not all evidence is equally reliable. Both the man and what he says must be tested : the man for such qualities as truth- fulness, intelligence, and experience; the statements for consistency and general credibility. The tests of evidence are given in detail in another chapter. TESTS FOR ISSUES After an arguer has secured his list of issues, he should test his work by asking the four following questions : I. Does each issue really bear upon the proposi- tion? 2., Is each issue a subdivision of the proposition, 72 The Introduction — Conviction or is it the proposition itself formulated in differ- ent language? 3. Does each issue comprise only disputed mat- ter? 4. Do the issues, taken collectively, consider all phases of the proposition? At this place it may be well to point out that although issues have been defined as questions, they are by no means always worded as such in either written or spoken discourse. The issues may be expressed in almost any construction: oftentimes they appear in the form of indirect questions; fre- quently they are cast into the form of statements that the arguer will attempt to prove. Several il- lustrations will show more plainly just what issues are and how they are brought into the introduction : THE RECALL OF JUDGES The recall of judgment is a principle in the science of government that has never received the test of actual trial and its beneficial or pernicious influence rests upon specula- tive reasoning rather than upon facts to be gathered from experience. The Federal Constitution provides : " The United States shall guarantee to every State In this Union a republican form of government." The questions which present themselves are: First, is the independence of the judiciary one of the necessary and essential elements of a republican form of government? 73 The Introduction — Conviction And, secondly, is the proposed recall of the judges, with- out charges against them preferred, without trial or evi- dence, and without cause, other than the mere will of the' majority of the electorate, that is to say, the dominant party, destructive of their independence? If these questions are answered in the affirmative, it would seem to follow that the principles contended for would be within the inhibition of the section quoted above.* THE DARTMOUTH COLLEGE CASE It will be contended by the plaintiffs, that these acts are not valid and binding on them, without their assent, 1. Because they are against common rights, and the Con- stitution of New Hampshire. 2. Because they are repugnant to the Constitution of the United States.^ SOME PROBLEMS OF PUBLIC OWNERSHIP The question of the public ownership of those commun- ity services which are commonly grouped together under the title of "public utilities" is one which affects the in- dividual in many ways. As a member of the community he is interested in the social effects of an assumption of an industrial undertaking by the State, as a citizen he is in- terested in the way in which this extension of governmental functions would affect the political organization of the State, and as a taxpayer and a user of service he is directly interested financially in the success or failure of the un- dertaking. The problem must be discussed along broad economic lines and falls naturally into three main divisions — the social, political, and financial effects of such an assumption of business undertakings by the State.^ 4 North American Review, 193:672. 5 Daniel Webster, 6 Walter S. Allen, North American Review, 197:8. 74 The Introduction — Conviction PARTITION In college debate, though not frequently else- where, the issues as a rule are immediately fol- lowed by a series of statements that show how each issue is to be answered. These statements consti- tute an outline of the discussion and are known as the partition. When a partition is made, each statement becomes a main point to be established by proof in the discussion. There are several forms in which the partition may be expressed: it may consist of a single sen- tence that indicates how the issues are to be an- swered; it may consist of the issues themselves turned into declarative sentences so that they read in favor of the side being upheld; or it may an- swer each issue by means of several statements. The following will illustrate the several methods : Proposition: Resolved, That College should adopt the honor system. Issues: i. How would the honor system affect the students individually? 2. How would the honor system affect the college as a whole? 75 The Introduction — Conviction Partition (affirmative) : First method. I. We will establish our side of the arg-u- nient by proving that 'in each case the honor system would be a benefit. Second method. 1. The honor system would benefit the stu- dents individually. 2. The honor system would benefit the col- lege as a whole. Third method. 1. The honor system would benefit the stu- dents morally. 2. The honor system would benefit the stu- dents intellectually. 3. The honor system would produce greater harmony between students and faculty. 4. The honor system would advertise the college. The partition is usually found in college debate because in a contest of this sort absolute clearness is a prerequisite for success. As but little interest may center around the subject itself, each debater 76 The Introduction— Conviction knows that if he is to make any impression on the audience he must so arrange his argument that it will, with a minimum amount of effort on the part of the listener, be clear to every one. To one read- ing an argument, a partition, unless of the simplest kind, will probably seem superfluous ; to one listen- ing to a speech in which he is truly interested, the partition may seem labored. But when the whole interest centers in the method of presentation, and in the processes of reasoning rather than in the sub' ject matter, the partition does increase the clearness of the argument, and should, therefore, be used. Summary. The work of conviction in the intro- duction, is to show the relation between the propo- sition and the proof. The arguer accomplishes this task (i) by defining each word the meaning of which is not generally comprehended; (2) by ex- plaining, in the light of these definitions, the mean- ing of the proposition taken as a whole; (3) by discovering the issues through a careful process of analysis ; and (4) by making a partition when he is engaged in debate and has reason to think that the audience will not see the connection between the is- sues and the discussion. 77 The Introduction — Conviction HOW TO INVESTIGATE A SUBJECT A student will hardly have reached this point in the study of Argumentation before finding it neces- sary to search for information that will assist him in the construction of his argument. To one un- familiar with a library, a search after facts bearing upon a given subject is likely to prove tedious. For this reason a few words of advice concerning the proper way in which to use a library may be of great help to a beginner. Nothing, however, can be given here that will even approximate the value of a few hours' instruction by the librarian of the college in which the student is enrolled. In the absence of such instruction, one can seldom do better at the outset than to become familiar with indexes to periodical and contemporary Hterature, encyclope- dias, government reports, and the library catalogue. The best indexes are the Reader's Guide, Poole's Index, the Annual Library Index, and the Current Events Index. These give references to all articles published in the principal magazines and newspapers for many years. In these articles one will find al- most limitless material on nearly every popular topic of the day — political, economic, scientific, social, educational. The writers, too, are often of national 78 The Introduction — Conviction and even of international reputation, and the opin- ions and ideas given here are frequently as v\^eighty and progressive as can be found. In searching through an index for articles upon a certain subject, one should invariably look under several headings. For example, if one is seeking material in regard to firearms, he should consult several terms, such as rifle, shotgun, cannon, howitzer, ordnance. Just what publications will be most serviceable it is hard to say. For strictly current topics, maga- zines like the Review of Reviews, the Independent, the Outlook, the Literary Digest, and the World's Work are generally considered exceptionally useful. The North American Review and the Forum as a rule contain articles of less news value but perhaps of greater import. Practically all periodicals, ex- cept those devoted solely to fiction, print special ar- ticles that an investigator should read if reference is made to them in the index he consults. One word of caution in regard to the value of editorials : their worth depends entirely upon the reputation of the publication for unbiased, discriminating judgment and sound principles. In estimating the worth of signed articles, one must consider both the character of the periodical and the standing of the writer. For the latter pur- 79 The Introduction — Conviction pose books of biographical reference like Who's Who in America are indispensable. This contains the names of tb.e prominent men in the United States and brief biographies setting forth the posi- tions they have held, the work they have done, and the honors they have received. The student should consult this book every time he reads an article written by a living American author with whom he is not familiar. Similar books are published for England, Germany, France, Japan, the Far East, New York City, Pennsylvania, and the women of the United States and Canada. Other valuable sources of information are ency- clopedias. They often give broad surveys and com- prehensive digests that cannot readily be found elsewhere. Although they do not, as a rule, discuss subjects that are of mere local or present-day interest, yet the thorough searcher after evidence will usually do well to consult at least several. A fact w^orth bearing in mind is that in connection with these articles in encyclopedias references are often given to books and articles that treat the subject ver}' thoroughly. In the next place, official publications frequently furnish invaluable help in regard to public problems. Both State governments and the national govern- 80 The Introduction — Conviction ment constantly publish reports containing statistics, the opinions of experts, and suggestions for eco- nomic and political changes. Some of the most val- uable of these documents for the purposes of the arguer are Census, Immigration, Education, and Interstate Commerce Commission reports, the mes- sages of the Presidents, and the Congressional Rec- ord, There are indexes to all these, and one can easily find out how to use them.. Furthennore, one should not fail to consult the library catalogue. To be sure, if the books are catalogued only according to titles and authors, one will probably get little assistance from this source unless he knows beforehand what particular books or authors to search for. If, on the other hand, the books are also catalogued according to the subjects of which they treat, one can see ahuost at a glance what books the library has that bear upon the matter under investigation. EXERCISES A. Definition of Terms. 1. Define by authority: copyright, curfew law, dramatic unities, equipment bonds, indemnity, industrial education, monotheism, neutrality, protective tariff, single-tax system. 2. Define by illustration: crop rotation, forest reserve, free trade, government by commission, monopoly, ravvr ma- terials, referendum^, sonnet, subsidy/, watered stock. 8i The Introduction — Conviction 3. Define by both authority and illustyation: balance of power, budget system of expenditures, contraband of war. Federal reserve bank, militarism, naturalization, short bal- lot, socialism, treaty obligations, unearned increment. B. Criticize the issues that are given for the following propositions : 1. Resolved, That letter postage should be reduced to a one-cent rate. a. How would one-cent postage affect the country eco- nomically? b. How would one-cent postage affect the country so- cially? c. How would one-cent postage affect the country intel- lectually? 2. Resolved, That the New York legislature should estab- lish a maximum eight-hour working day for all occupa- tions. a. Is a ten-hour day too long? b. Is an eight-hour day practicable? c. Would a change be wise? 3. Resolved, That the Federal government should acquire and operate the telegraph systems in the United States. a. Is government ownership desirable? b. Does the present system contain serious evils? c. Will the proposed plan benefit the people? 4. Resolved, That all states should abolish the jury sys- tem. a. Is a judge or a jury better qualified to render a ver- dict? b. Should two-thirds of a jury be allowed to render a decision? c. Does the present system contain serious evils? d. If it does contain serious evils, will the proposed system rem.ove them? e. Is the plan practicable? 82 The Introduction — Conviction 5. Resolved, That labor unions are detrimental to the working man. a. Hov/ do unions affect the country as a whole? b. Do unions benefit the laborer? c. Do unions benefit the employer ? d. Do unions seek to raise wages ? 6. Resolved, That capital punishment should be abolished. a. Is capital punishment in accordance with the teach- ings of the Christian religion? b. Is it a just punishment? c. Does it cause the criminal to reform? C. Write introductions to the following propositions : 1. The writings of " O. Henry" have permanent literary value. 2. Germany was justified in invading Belgium. 3. The South should raise a diversification of crops. 4. The United States navy should be greatly increased. 5. American colleges should establish the fully elective system of studies. 6. A commission form of government is preferable to a mayor and council plan. 7. The Yosemite was formed by glaciation. 8. For factories reinforced concrete is superior to the cement block style of architecture. 83 CHAPTER V THE INTRODUCTON — BRIEF- DRAWING Preceding chapters have dwelt on the essential characteristics of the introduction and have shown what it should be like when completed. No one but an expert writer, however, can hope that his argument, in either introduction, discussion, or con- clusion, will attain any considerable completeness and excellence without first passing through a pre- liminary form known as the brief. A brief is a special kind of outline : it is an outline that sets forth in specific language all the ideas to be used in that portion of the argument kiiozun as conviction, and that shows the exact relation these ideas bear to. each other and to the proposition. An outline in narrative, descriptive, or expository composition is invariably made up of general sug- gestions, w^hich seldom indicate the same ideas to different persons ; it is inexact and incomplete. A brief, on the contrary, fails in its purpose unless 84 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing it conveys accurate information. The material composing it is always in the form of complete sen- tences; the ideas are expressed in as exact and specific language as the writer is capable of using. A good brief means as much to the one who reads it as to the one who draws it. It is, too, a complete work in itself. It does not deal with persuasion; with this exception, however, it contains in con- densed form all the material to be used in the finished argument. There are many reasons why an arguer should first cast his material in the form of a brief. To begin with, this device enables him to grasp, almost at a glance, all the material used for the purpose of conviction; it keeps constantly before him the points that he must explain, and shows him instantly just how far he has progressed with the proof of each statement. Furthermore, a brief renders the arguer invaluable assistance in preserving the fun- damental principles of composition, especially those of Unity, Coherence, Proportion, and Emphasis. It greatly simplifies his task of assorting material and assigning each part its proper place and func- tion. It exhibits so clearly every particle of evi- dence and every process of reasoning employed that it affords great convenience for testing both 8s The Introduction — Brief-Drawing the quality and the quantity of the proof. In fact, a good brief is so essential a part of a good argument that a student who neglects to draw the first is doomed to meet failure in the second. The rules governing brief-drawing logically divide themselves into four classes: those which apply to the brief as a whole constitute the first class and are called General Rules ; those rules which apply to each of the main divisions of a brief constitute the three remaining classes and are called Rules for the In- troduction, Rules for the Discussion, and Rules for the Conclusion. GENERAL RULES In drawing a brief, the student should first divide his material into three groups, corresponding to the three divisions of the complete argument: the In- troduction, Discussion, and Conclusion. Moreover, since absolute clearness in every particular is the prime requisite for a good brief, he should label each of these parts with its proper name, so that there may never be the slightest doubt or confusion as to where one part ends and another begins. Hence the first rule for brief-drawing is: Rule I. Divide the brief into three parts, and 86 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing mark them respectively. Introduction, Discussion, and Conclusion. A brief, as has been explained, is an outline that contains all the reasoning to be found in the finished argument. Reasoning processes are carried on, not with vague ideas and general suggestions, but with specific facts and exact thoughts. For this reason, only complete statements are of value in a brief. Mere terms must be avoided. A statement, it should be remembered, is a declarative sentence; a term is a word or any combination of words other than a sentence. The following examples of terms plainly show that no reasoning process can exist without the use of complete statements : The maximum size of the United States army. The present size of the army. The ratio between the army and the population of the United States. Since such expressions as these give no informa- tion, they are manifestly out of place in a brief. Each term may call to mind any one of several ideas. No one but tlie author knows whether the first term is intended to indicate that the maximum size of the army is too great or too small, and he even neg- lects to state what the size is. The second term 87 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing does not indicate whether the present size is the same as the maximum size, or whether the size of the army should be increased or decreased. The third term is equally indefinite. Notice, however, that as soon as these terms are turned into complete sentences, they may well serve as explanation or proof : Under existing law the United States army must not exceed 100,000 enlisted men. At present the army falls a good many thousands short of the maximum. There are less than a thousand soldiers for every million of inhabitants in the United States and the insular possessions. This explanation gives rise to the following rule : Rule II. Express each idea in the brief in the form of a complete statement. Moreover, each sentence should contain only one idea. Every thought expressed has some specific work to do, and it can do it far more effectively if it stands by itself as a unit. The awkwardness and impracticability of proving the truth or falsity of a statement that makes several assertions has been treated under the head of Combined Proposi- tions. Obviously, there are insurmountable difficul- ties in grouping explanation or proof about such The Introduction — Brief-Drawing a statement as, '' Municipal ownership has failed in Philadelphia, has succeeded in Edinburgh, and is likely to meet with indifferent success in New Orleans." Furthermore, a sentence that contains several distinct thoughts is very ineffective as proof for some other statement. Since one part of the sentence may be accepted as true and another part rejected, the resulting confusion is very great. To avoid all errors of this kind, the student should use, as far as possible, only simple sentences. Rule III. Make in each statement only a single assertion. In the next place, one who draws a brief should take pains to frame all his statements in as concise a form as he can. If he is able to state an idea in six words, he should not use seven. This principle does not mean that small words like a, an, and the should be left out, or that an obvious subject may be omitted; it does not mean that the "diary" style of writing is permissible, or that abbreviations and contractions may be used. It simply means that one should always state his ideas as briefly as possible without violating any of the rules of Com- position. Quotations should rarely appear in a brief, never unless they are very short. When an arguer wishes to make use of another writer's 89 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing material, he should condense it into his own lan- guage, and state from what source he derived his information. In an expanded argument the full quotation may appear. The ability to express ideas both concisely and, at the same time, clearly, is at- tained only by considerable labor, yet a departure from the principle of brevity is a serious violation of good brief-drawing. Hence the rule : Riile IV. Make each statement as concise as is consistent with clearness. Every brief is primarily a process of explanation. From this fact it is evident that clearness must be sought above all other qualities. Not only must the idea expressed be understood, but the relation between ideas must be perfectly plain and evident. The reader should be able to see at a glance what material is of co-ordinate rank and what is of sub- ordinate rank. This perspicuity is especially neces- sary in the discussion, where each statement is either being proved by subordinate statements or is serving as proof for some other statement. The device ordinarily adopted for exhibiting at a glance the relation betw^een the ideas in a brief consists of two parts: first, all subordinate statements are indented farther than more important statements; 90 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing and second, numbers and letters are used to in- dicate what statements are of co-ordinate importance and what are of secondary rank. The system of marking most generally adopted is as follows : I. 1. 1'. a'. B. 11. A. etc.^ Thus the fifth rule is: Rule V. Indicate the relation between statements by indentation and by the use of symbols. In indicating the relation between ideas, a writer should never put more than one symbol before a statement. It seems almost superfluous to mention an error so apparent as the double use of symbols, but the mistake is frequently made and much con- 1 See briefs on pp. 94-98, 172-183. 91 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing fusion results. The numeral I before a heading indicates that the statement is of primary impor- tance; the letter A indicates that it is of secondary importance. If a statement is marked L'V, appar- ently it is both primary and secondary, clearly an impossibility. Rule VI. Mark each statement zdth only one symbol. RULES FOR THE INTRODUCTION It has been seen that a brief is a complete compo- sition in itself, embodying all the material for con- viction that will later be found in the expanded argument. The introduction, therefore, must con- tain sufficient information to make the proof of the proposition perfectly clear. This portion of the brief serves as a connecting link between the prop- osition and the discussion; it must explain the nature of the proposition and then show how the proof which is to follow applies to it. The exact work that the introduction to a brief must perform is stated in the following rule : Rule VII. Put into the introduction sitfHcient explanation for a complete understanding of the discussion. This explanation usually involves: (a) a definition of terms, 92 The Introduction— Brief-Drawing (b) an explanation of the meaning of the proposition, (c) a statement of the issuesy and (d) the partition. Neither an introduction to a brief nor an introduc- tion to a complete argument should contain any statements not admitted by both sides. All ideas that savor of controversy or prejudice have no place in an introduction. The sole purpose of the in- troduction is to prepare the way for the discussion ; if it contains anything in the nature of proof, any- thing which is not admittedly true, it is no longer pure introduction, but becomes in part discussion. If explanation and proof are thus thrown together indiscriminately, confusion will result. Accordingly the following rule is of great importance : Rule VIII. Put into the introduction only state- ments admitted by both sides. The following introductions to briefs may well serve as models for student's work : FIRST MODEL Resolved, That the Federal government should acquire and operate the railroads in the United States. 93 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing AlJirmative Brief INTRODUCTION I. The railroad situation in the United States presents an important problem, because A. Many abuses are believed to exist. B. Many roads have gone bankrupt. C. The railroad is an important element in every phase of modern industry. II. The railroads in the United States proper are owned and operated by private capital, sub- ject to State and Federal control. A. State control is effected through State laws and State commissions. I. Some States fix the rates for railroad service and prescribe conditions of train operation within their borders. B. Federal control is effected through the In- terstate Commerce Commission. 1. This commission practically deter- mines all ntes for interstate traffic. 2. It compels the roads to adopt a uni- form method of accounting. 3. It prescribes many conditions of train operation, the use of safety devices, etc. 94 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing III. The proposed system would remove the rail- roads entirely from the hands of private enterprise and invest their ownership and operation in the Federal government. IV, To determine whether private ownership or government ownership of railroads is preferable, the following questions must be answered : ^ A. Does the present system contain serious evils ? B. Would the proposed system remove these evils ? C. Would the proposed system bring in new evils? D. Is the plan theoretically practicable ? E. What has been the experience of other countries ? V. The affirmative will prove that the United States should adopt government ownership for the following reasons : A. Private ownership of railroads gives rise to serious evils. B. Government ownership would remove these evils. C. Government ownership would not bring in new evils. 95 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing D. Government ownership is theoretically practicable. E. The experience of countries that have government ownership is in favor of this system. SECOND MODEL Resolved, That College should adopt the honor system of holding examinations. ^ Negative Brief INTRODUCTION I. Two methods of holding examinations are under consideration : the proctor system and the honor system. 11. These two systems may be described as fol- lows : A. The proctor system has the following characteristics : 1. During examinations college officers watch the students. 2. Students are not generally allowed to leave the examination room until they have finished their work. 3. If the officers discover any cheating, the offender is punished by the col- lege faculty. 96 The Introduction- — Brief-Drawing 4. The customary penalty is expulsion or suspension from college for one year. B. The honor system has these characteris- tics : 1. Students are not watched by any mem- ber of the college faculty during ex- aminations. 2. Sometimes an instructor is in the ex- amination room for the purpose of answering questions. 3. Students may leave the room at will. 4. At the close of the examination each student signs a statement to the effect that he has neither received nor given any help during the ex- amination. 5. A student board sits in judgment on any student reported by another student as having cheated. 6. Students convicted of cheating are re- quired to leave college. III. The real question to be answered is, Should the honor system be substituted for the proctor system? A. The comparative value of each system 97 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing must be judged by the following stand- ards: 1. Under which system will the student get the better education ? 2. Under which system will the student get the better moral training ? 3. Which system will promote the bet- ter feeling betwee^ faculty and stu- dents ? 4. Which system will give the college the better reputation? IV. The negative will prove that in each instance the proctor system is to be preferred. EXERCISES A. Write introductions to briefs on the propositions found on page 83. B. Put the following introduction to an argument into brief form: THE MONROE DOCTRINE " The American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are hence- forth not to be considered as subjects for future coloniza- tion by European powers. . . . We should consider ayiy at- tempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power, we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the governments who have declared their independ' 98 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing ence, and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration, and on just principles, acknozvl- edged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling, in any other manner, their destiny, by any Euro peon power, in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition to- wards the United States. . . '' Thus, in 1823, did President James Monroe, acting under the influence of his able Secretary of State, John Quincy Adams, enunciate a doctrine which has been the most uni- versally accepted foreign policy that we have ever had. No one questions the fact that the enunciation of this policy of "America for Americans," and our firm adherence to it for so many years, has had a very decided effect upon the history of the Western Hemisphere. There have been times when ambitious European mon- archs would have liked nothing better than to help them- selves to poorly defended territory in what is now termed Latin America. Had it not been for the Monroe Doctrine, the American republics would have found it very much more difficult to maintain their independence during the first three-quarters of a century of their career. And this notwithstanding the fact that the actual words "Monroe Doctrine " were rarely heard or seen. In 1845, without mentioning this shibboleth by name, President Polk declared that the United States would not permit any European intervention on the North American continent. This, as Professor Coolidge has brought out, pushed the theory further than it has been carried out in practice, although it restricted the original idea by leaving South America out of account. A few years later, while we were engaged in civil war, Napoleon HI attempted to set up a European monarch in Mexico. Scarcely had we recovered, however, from the throes of our great conflict, when Mr. Seward took up with the French government the necessity for the withdrawal of 99 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing the French troops from Maximilian's support. Here we were acting strongly in accordance with the best traditions of the Monroe Doctrine, and yet the mysterious words were not employed in tlie correspondence. In fact, while it was generally understood that we would not countenance any European interference in the affairs of North and South America, it was not until 1895, during the second administration of President Cleveland, that a Secretary of State thought it expedient or necessary to restate the I^Ionroe Doctrine and to bring us to the verge of a European war by backing it up with an absolutely un- compromising attitude. Venezuela had had a long-standing boundary dispute with British Guiana. Nobody cared very much either way until it was discovered that in the dis- puted territory were rich gold fields. In the excitement which ensued, the Venezuelans appealed to the United States, and Secretary Olney, invoking the Monroe Doc- trine, brought matters to a crisis. Fortunately for us, Lord Salisbury had a fairly good sense of humor, and declined to take the matter too seriously. Instead of standing, in the proverbial British manner, strictly for his honor and his rights, he politely ignored the Boundary Commission which we had impetu- ously called into existence, and, dealing directly with his neighbor Venezuela, arranged for an international court of arbitration. Less than three years afterwards we were at war with Spain. The progress of the v.^ar in Cuba and the Spanish colonies was followed in South America with the keenest interest. Our neighbors felt that a decided change had come over the Monroe Doctrine ! In 1823 we had declared that " with the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered, and shall not interfere" (so runs the original Monroe Doctrine). In 1898 we not only interfered, but actually took away all of Spain's colonies 100 The Introduction — Brief-Drawing and dependencies, freeing Cuba and retaining for our- selves Porto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. In 1895 we declare that we are practically sovereign on this continent ; in 1898 we take a rich American island from a European power, and in 1903 we go through the form of preventing a South American republic from subduing a revolution in one of her distant provinces, and eventually take a strip of that province because we beHeve we owe it to the world to build the Panama Canal. Furthermore, we intervened in Santo Domingo. Again, we have twice landed troops in Central America and taken an active part by way of interfering in local politics. We believed that the conditions were so bad as to justify us in carrying out the Monroe Doctrine by aiding one side in a local revolution. Of our armed intervention in Cuba it is scarcely neces- sary to speak, except to refer in passing to the newspaper stor3% credited and believed in Cuba, that if American troops are again obliged to intervene in the political life of that country, they will not be withdrawn as has been the practice in the past. The menace of intervention, armed intervention, the threatened presence of machine guns and American mar- ines, have repeatedly been used by Latin-American poli- ticians in their endeavors to keep the peace in their own countries. And we have done enough of that sort of thing to make it evident to disinterested observers that our pres- ent conception of the Monroe Doctrine is to act as inter- national policeman, or at least as an elder-brother-with-a- big-stick, whenever the little fellows get too fresh. Is this Doctrine worth while? Let us see what it involves: first, from the European, second, from the Latin-American point of view.^ 2 Hiram Bingham, Atlantic Monthly, 111:721. lOI CHAPTER VI THE DISCUSSION — CONVICTION It has been seen that one who wishes to estabhsh the truth or the falsity of a proposition must answer certain vital questions that are bound to arise in connection with it. Then, as different persons may answer these questions in different ways, it be- comes necessary for him to convince his audience that his answers are correct. He must always be- ware of assertiveness. This defect occurs whenever a speaker or writer makes a statement but does not establish its truth. As simple denial is always suf- ficient answer to mere assertions, an unsupported statement is worthless. No one can hope to win in debate or change another's belief unless he can prove that what he says is true; he must substan- tiate with proof every statement that he makes, and show that no possibility for error or deceit can exist. In argumentation every statement not com- manly accepted as true must he proved. 102 The Discussion — Conviction The following passage is a highly assertive bit of argument ; its worthlessness is apparent : The passing of the tariff bill in the last Congress was the biggest and the best piece of constructive legislation that the government has seen for the past one hundred years. Under its benign influence American industry will thrive. Every mill wheel will turn; every anvil will ring. The farmer can till his broad acres strengthened with the knowl- edge that an eager market awaits every bushel of grain that he may raise. Wages will go up, but the necessities of life will become cheaper. The scientific classification of tariff schedules places the burdens of taxation where they can best be borne. High wages and cheap foodstuffs ! Who can ask for more than that? And all the time there will be ample revenue for every expense of the government. Proof is '' anything which serves either immedi- ately or mediately to convince the mind of the truth or the falsehood of a fact or proposition." ^ Belief in a specific statement is induced by a presentation of pertinent facts, and usually by a process of reasoning whereby from the existence of these known facts, the conclusion, hitherto unaccepted, is reached. Those facts that have to do with the proposition under discussion are known as evidence. The process of combining facts and deriving an inference from them is known as reasoning. Evi- dence may be made up of the testimony of witnesses, the opinion of experts, knowledge derived from 1 On Evidence, Best, p. 45. 103 The Discussion — Conviction experience, the testimony of documents, or circum- stances that are generally known to have existed. Reasoning is the process by which men form opin- ions, render judgments, explain events, or in any way seek new truths from established facts. In the following quotation notice how the simplest form of reasoning from a few facts constitutes strong proof : Any one who studies the figures of our recent elections must be convinced that if the people do not rule as fully and completely as they ought to rule, it is at least partially because they are too indolent, or too indifferent, to take the necessary trouble. In 1908, when Taft and Bryan were candidates for the Presidency, the number of voters who stayed away from the polls was more than seven million, or about one-third of the entire electorate. Even in the elec- tion wheii Wilson, Roosevelt, and Taft were candidates, and when the popular interest was as great as it is ever likely to.be, thirty voters out of every one hundred stayed at home on election day. In Ohio in 1912, a state conven- tion was held for the purpose of drafting amendments to the state constitution. Only one-fourth of the voters went to the polls and voted for the convention delegates. Out of thirty-two legislative measures submitted to the peo- ple of Oregon at the general election of 1910, not a single one was adopted or rejected by a majority of the enrolled voters. In the primary election in New York in 1912, only fifteen per cent, of the voters cast a ballot. The govern- ment falls into the hands of the bosses and politicians be- cause the people do not do their duty. 104 The Discussion — Conviction Since the first step in the generation of proof is the discovery of facts, the arguer should at the very outset become sufficiently familiar with the various kinds of evidence to estimate the value and strength of each idea that has a bearing upon the subject. I. EVIDENCE There are two kinds of evidence: (a) direct, and (b) indirect or circumstantial. If a man sees a gang of strikers set fire to the buildings of their former employer, his evidence is direct. If, how- ever, he only sees them stealthily leaving the build- ings just before the fire breaks out, his evidence is indirect. In the latter case the man's testimony is direct evidence that the men were in the vicinity of the fire when it started, but it is indirect evidence that they perpetrated the crime. If a student who has failed to do good work throughout the term, and who has had Httle or no opportunity for special preparation, passes in a perfect paper at the close of an examination, the presumption is that he has received aid. The evidence on which this supposi- tion rests is entirely circumstantial. But if some one saw the student obtaining aid, that fact would be direct evidence against him. 105 The Discussion — Conviction Direct evidence, as a rule, is considered more valuable than indirect, but each kind is frequently sufficient to induce belief. The best possible kind of evidence, the kind that is least liable to contain error or falsehood, is a combination of both direct and indirect. Either one by itself may be untrust- worthy. The unreliability of evidence given by eyewitnesses is shown by the conflicting stories they frequently tell concerning the same incident even when they are honestly attempting to relate the facts as they occurred. Also, it is always possible that the inferences drawn from a combination of cir- cumstances may be entirely wrong. When, how- ever, both kinds of evidence are available, each confirming the other and leading up to the same conclusion, then the possibility of error is reduced to a minimum. The opportunity of the college student for ob- taining evidence in his argumentative work is limited. A lawyer before entering upon an impor- tant case often spends weeks and months in in- vestigation; scientists sometimes devote a whole ^ lifetime in tr^-ing to establish a single hypothesis. But the college student in preparing an argument must obtain his evidence in a few days. There are several sources at his disposal. The first available 1 06 The Discussion — Conviction source is his fund of general knowledge and ex- perience. If a man can establish a statement by saying that he personally knows it to be true, he has valuable proof. Then the people w4th whom the student comes in contact constitute another source of evidence. Any one who can give information on a subject that is being investigated is a valuable witness. Especially in discussions on questions which pertain to college life, the opinions and ex- periences of college men and of prominent educators are unsurpassed as evidenece. But the greatest source of evidence for the student of argumentation is the library. Here he may consult the best thought of all time in every branch of activity. He may review the opinions of statesmen, economists, edu- cators, and scientists, and introduce as evidence their experiences and the results of their investiga- tions. Here he may familiarize himself with the current events of the world, and draw his own con- clusions as to their significance. In fact, a well equipped library treats of all subjects, however broad or narrow they may be, and furnishes evi- dence for all sorts of debatable questions. As not all evidence is equally valuable, a large part of the work of argumentation consists in ap- plying tests to the evidence at hand for the sake of 107 The Discussion — Conviction determining what facts are irrefutable, what are doubtful, and what are worthless. Moreover, one engaged in argumentation must test not only his own evidence but also that of the other side. No better method of refuting an opponent's argument exists than to show that the facts on which it rests are untrustworthy. Tests of evidence may be di- vided into two classes : tests of the source from which it comes, and tests of the quality of the evi- dence itself. A. Tests of the Source of Evidence Since in courts of law, in college debate, and in all kinds of argumentation, facts are established by the testimony of witnesses, the sources of evi- dence are the witnesses who give it. The debater and the argumentative writer have not the oppor- tunity, as has the lawyer, of producing the witnesses and permitting them to tell their own stones to the audience. He must himself relate the evidence ; and, in order that it may be believed, he must tell whence it comes. The sources of evidence may be common rumor, newspapers, magazines, official documents, private citizens, or public officials. The extent to which these witnesses are accepted as trustworthy by the people before whom they are quoted de- io8 The Discussion — Conviction termines in a large measure whether or not the evidence will be believed. Tests for determining the trustworthiness of witnesses will next be given. The first test of the source of evidence should be: (i) Is the witness competent to give a trust- worthy account of the matter under consideration f To answer this question, first determine whether the facts to be established are such that any ordinary person can speak concerning them with reasonable accuracy, or whether they can be understood only by persons w^ho have received special training. A landsman could well testify that a naval battle had occurred, but only a man with nautical training could accurately describe the manoeuvers of the ships and tell just how the engagement progressed. A coal heaver's description of a surgical operation would establish nothing, except perhaps the identity of the people and a few other general matters ; only a person with a medical education could accurately describe the procedure. The testimxony of any one but a naturalist would not even tend to prove the ex- istence of a hitherto unknown species of animal life. A witness without technical knowledge can- not give reliable evidence on matters of a technical nature. 109 The Discussion — Conviction Then, if it is found that the witness does possess the necessary technical training, or that no previous training is necessary, still further test his ability to give reliable evidence by asking whether he has had ample opportunity for investigating the facts to the existence of which he testifies. For even a skilled player sitting in the first base bleachers at a baseball game to criticize an umpire's decisions on balls and strikes is absurd; the opinion of a transient visitor to Panama on the methods used in operating the Canal is not valuable; a traveler who has spent a single month in Japan cannot draw reliable con- clusions on the merits and defects of its political structure. In not one of these cases has the op- portunity for investigation been sufficient to render the witness able to give reliable evidence. A current magazine in discussing the weakness of testimony that comes from incompetent witnesses says: Generalizations about the tastes and interests of the age are so easy that all except the most wary fall into them, and the world is full of off-hand opinions touching the condition of society and the state of the world, which are far more conspicuous for courage than for discretion. There are very few men or women in any particular period who know it intimately enough, and with sufficient insight and sympathy, to pass judgment upoh it. One hears almost every day sweeping judgments about Americans, English, IIO The Discussion — Conviction French, Germans, Chinese, and Japanese which are entirely valueless, unless they are based on a very broad and in- timate knowledge of these various peoples, a knowledge which, in the nature of things, few people possess. The charming American girl who declared that, since gloves are cheaper in Paris, American civilization is a failure, may stand for a type of interesting and piquant oracles, to be heard with attention, but under no circumstances to be followed. Americans are so familiar with the European traveler who arrives and makes up his opinion over night in regard to men, morals, and manners in the Western world and have so often been the victim of this self-con- fident critic, that they ought not to repeat the same blunder in deahng with other peoples.^ In the court room, where witnesses are present and can be carefully examined by the lawyers on both sides, it is customary to apply both mental and physical tests. The witness who testifies to knowl- edge of some event that occurred a long time before is given a memory test; the senses, also, through which occurrences are perceived are frequently ex- amined. But as writers and debaters in general sel- dom have the opportunity to apply tests of this sort to their sources of infomiation and as these tests are seldom important outside of the law courts they are not taken up in detail in this book. The second test of the source of evidence should be: 2 Outlook, 86:384. Ill The Discussion — Conviction (2) Is the zvitness ivilUng to give an accurate ac- count of the matter? One iniporfant influence that may cause a witness to give false evidence is self-interest. Not only in- dividuals, but social and industrial organizations, political parties, communities, and States are fre- quently swayed by this emotion to the extent of de- liberately perverting the truth. The evidence found in newspapers and other publications is often false, or at least misleading, because it has been tampered with by those who put their selfish interests before all else. The owner of an industry protected by a high tariff would scarcely be considered a reliable witness in matters affecting tariff reform. The opinion of a railroad magnate on the subject of a compulsory two-cent rate law would not be consid- ered as unbiased. No disinterested seeker after truth would accept the political conclusions of a newspaper owned by a politician or recognized as the organ of a certain party. In all such cases self- interest may prompt the witness to make statements not in strict accordance with the truth. Perjury in the court room is not uncommon; falsehood else- where must be guarded against. The arguer should always carefully scrutinize the testimony of a wit- ness who has any special interest in the matter for 112 The Discussion — Conviction which evidence is being sought. Though the self- interest is strong, the witness may be wiUing to state the matter accurately ; but, as long as human nature remains as it is, this willingness should not be taken for granted. The third test of the source of evidence should be: ( 3 ) Is the iiitness p rejudicedf Another emotion that frequently keeps a witness from telling the exact truth is prejudice. Every one is familiar with instances of how this passion warps men's morals and corrupts their judgment. If a man is prejudiced for or against a person or a sys- tem, he cannot be accepted as a trustworthy witness in matters where his prejudice comes into play. Should an economist known to favor socialism write a treatise advocating municipal ownership of public utilities, his evidence and his reasoning would not be convincing; it would be taken for granted that he looked at the subject through socialistic spec- tacles. A person who sets out with the expectation and intention of finding flaws in anything usually succeeds. Though he is willing to tell the exact truth, yet because of his prejudice he is sure to see only that which will coincide with his preconceived opinions. For this reason, political speeches and 113 The Discussion — Conviction intensely partisan books and papers are invariably unreliable sources of evidence even though they are not intentionally dishonest. The fourth test of the source of evidence is : (4) Does the imtness have a good reputation for honesty and accuracy? The human conscience is so constituted that many people deviate from the truth for no apparent reason whatever. Some are given to exaggeration ; some habitually pretend to know that of which they are entirely ignorant; others are so inaccurate that everything they say is open to grave suspicion. If a witness is known to have been repeatedly dis- honest or inaccurate in the past, little reliance should be placed in his testimony. " Yellow jour- nalism," which is largely the reflection of common rumor, affords constant examples of witnesses that give questionable evidence. Ability and willingness to give exact evidence, an unprejudiced attitude, and a good reputation for honesty and accuracy are the qualities that should characterize the sources of evidence. If a writer or speaker is securing testimony from friends or acquaintances, the application of these tests is not difficult. If, however, the sources are books and periodicals, his work is harder; but to be success- 114 The Discussion — Conviction fill, he must not shirk it. When one procures evidence from books, he should investigate the character and standing of the author. When one obtains it from signed articles in papers and maga- zines, he must consider both the author and the character of the publication. In the case of news- paper " stories " and editorials, one should find out on what general policy and principles the paper is conducted. A cautious arguer will always avoid, as far as he 'can, the use of evidence that comes from a doubtful source. If one finds that an opponent has used the testimony of questionable witnesses, he can, by exposing the fact, easily refute the argument. Necessity of Stating Sources. It sometimes happens that an arguer fails to state the source of his evidence. This omission is usually fatal to suc- cess. No one is likely to put much confidence in statements that are introduced by such flimsy pre- ambles as, '' A certain statesman has declared " ; " I have read somewhere " ; " An acquaintance told me." Not only must evidence come from sources that seem good to the writer, but those sources must be satisfactory to the audience. In the last analysis the audience is the judge of what is credible and what is not. Moreover, if the evidence is of great 115 The Discussion — Conviction importance, or is liable to be disputed, the arguer should show in a few words why the witness is especially reliable. B. Internal Tests of Evidence (l) Is the evidence consistent zvith (a) other evidence in the same argument; (h) knozcn facts; (c) human experience? The requirement that every separate bit of evi- dence in an argument shall be consistent with every other bit of evidence in the same argument is too well understood to need explanation. One familiar with courts of law knows that a witness Vv^ho con- tradicts himself is not believed. Furthermore, if the testimony of several witnesses for the same side is inconsistent, the case for that side is materially weakened. So it is in general debate: the arguer who wishes to succeed must not use evidence that is self-contradictory. His proof must " hang to- gether " ; his facts must all go to establish the same conclusion. A flagrant violation of this principle once oc- curred in a class-room debate. The speaker for the negative on the proposition, ''Resolved, That freshmen should be ineligible for college teams,'* said that such a rule would deprive the freshmen of Ii6 The Discussion — Conviction much-needed physical exercise. Later on, he said that just as many freshmen would receive injuries under this rule as without it, since they would take part in equally dangerous contests as members of freshmen teams. This contradiction ruined his ar- gument. In the next place, evidence to be of any value whatever, must be consistent with what is known about the case. If an arguer is so careless as to make statements contradictory either to well-estab- lished facts or to facts easily proved, he cannot hope to attain the slightest measure of success. Only one guilty of gross neglect or absolute falsehood is likely to fall into such an error. The following quotation shows how effectively such an argument is demoHshed: Those who are so constantly urging that the States of North America and of South America are by geographical proximity friends and allies, commercially and politically, apparently forget that the largest cities of South America are geographically nearer to Spain and Portugal than to New York and New England. They fail to remember that the rich East Coast of South America is no farther from Europe than it is from Florida. As for the West Coast, it actually takes longer to travel from Valpariso, the chief South American west coast port, to San Francisco, the chief North American west coast port, than it does to go from Valpariso to London. 117 The Discussion — Conviction Abraham Lincoln was an expert at detecting in- consistency wherever it existed. He won many of his lawsuits by the straightforward method of show- ing that the one or two vital statements on which the whole case of the opposition rested were false, inasmuch as they were inconsistent with well-estab- lished and incontrovertible facts. An instance of this sort is here described : The most damaging evidence was that of one Allen, who swore that he had seen Armstrong strike Metzker about ten or eleven o'clock in the evening. When asked how he could see, he answered that the moon shone brightly. Under Lincoln's questioning he repeated the state- ment until it was impossible that the jury should forget it. With Allen's testimony unimpeached, conviction seemed certain. Lincoln's address to the jury was full of pathos. It was not as a hired attorney that he was there, he said, but to discharge a debt of friendship. . . . But Lincoln was not relying on sympathy alone to win his case. In closing he reviewed the evidence, showing that all depended on Allen's testimony, and this he said he could prove to be false. Allen never saw Armstrong strike ]Metzker by the light of the moon, for at the hour when he said he saw the fight, between ten and eleven o'clock, the moon was not in the heavens. Then procuring an almanac, he passed it to the judge and jury. The moon, which was on that night only in its first quarter, had set before midnight.^ 3 The Life of Abraham Lincoln, Vol. I, p. 2^2. Ida M. Tarbell. The Doubleday & McClure Co. Il8 The Discussion — Conviction An arguer should also be extremely careful to use evidence that on its face appears reasonable. Only an extremely credulous audience will accept ideas that run counter to human belief and experi- ence. To attribute the occurrence of an event to supernatural causes would bring a smile of derision to any but a most ignorant and superstitious person. To attribute to men qualities and characteristics that human experience has shown they do not possess will bring equal discredit. No one is likely to accept evidence that contradicts his habits of thinking, that is contrary to what his life and ex- perience have taught him is true. For this reason savage people are slow to believe the teachings of the Christian religion. For this reason it is difficult to make an audience believe that any one will de- liberately and consistently work against his own interests, or follow any other unusual hne of action. Evidence contrary to human experience may be true, but it needs explanation and proof. Unless such proof is forthcoming, the argument is open to rebuttal. ISTotice the following example: The advocates of the commission form of municipal gov- ernment say that this system means government by the people and freedom from boss rule. In reality, however, a 119 The Discussion — Conviction commission means government by a small oligarchy, even though chosen by the people. It is a form of benevolent paternalism that confesses incompetency in representative government. The history of the development of all or- ganizations, whether governments, church hierarchies, secret organizations, or what not, shows that when a few men are vested with extraordinary power this power be- comes centralized and extremely difficult to dislodge. There is every reason for believing that government by commission will operate very quickly toward this end. If it does not, it will be an exception to a universal rule, con- trary to universal experience. (2) Is the evidence first-hand or hearsay evi- dence F It is universally recognized that hearsay evidence is unreliable. A narrative is sure to become so garbled by passing from mouth to mouth that un- less a witness can testify to a fact from his own personal knowledge the evidence he gives is worthy of little credence. There is sufficient chance for error when the person who witnessed the event relates the account himself; if the story is told by a second, and perhaps by a third person, it is likely to reflect but little of what really happened. Every one is familiar with the exaggerations of common rumor; it distorts facts so that they are unrecogniz- able. The works of Herodotus are untrustworthy because he frequently believed hearsay evidence. Since second-hand evidence both fails to establish 120 The Discussion — Conviction anything worth while, if allowed to stand, and is easily overthrown even by a very little first-hand evidence, an arguer will do well to follow the cus- tom of the law courts, and, as a rule, exclude it altogether. (3) Can the evidence he considered as especially valuable f (a) Hurtful admissions constitute an especially valuable kind of evidence. Since men are not wont to give evidence detrimental to their personal in- terest unless im.pelled to do so by conscientious scruples, any testimony damaging to the one who gives it is in all probability not only truthful, but also the result of careful investigation. When a practising physician admits that half the ailments of mankind are imaginary or so trivial as to need no medical attention, he is making a statement that is likely to injure his business; for this reason he is probably stating the result of his experience truthfully. If a railroad president says that in his opinion more stringent government supervision of railroads will benefit the public in the matter of rates and service, it may be taken for granted that he has given his honest belief, and that his natural reluctance to surrender any authority of his ovv^n has kept him from speaking carelessly. If a member of 121 The Discussion — Conviction the United States Senate admits that that body is corrupt, and selfish, and untrustworthy, he is lower- ing his own rank; therefore it is reasonable to be- lieve that he is speaking the truth according to his honest belief. The following is an example of this kind of evidence : Could the flabbiest of mollycoddles have spoken out so sharply against the excess of athleticism in the colleges as Mr. Courtney, of Cornell, did the other day? In speeches before Cornell alumni associations in the West, the greatest of American rowing experts, the field-marshal of countless victories, has explicitly declared that the legitimate work of the university is suffering from too much athletics. Too many men on probation are on the football team, the track team, and even the crew. The strain of too many games and races is bad for the men.* It is hardly necessary to add that one who places especial reliance on this kind of evidence must be sure that the admission is really and not merely apparently contrary to the interest of the one who gives it. (b) Another particularly valuable kind of evi- dence is negative evidence or the evidence of si- lence. Whenever a witness fails to mention an event which, if it had occurred, would have been of such interest to him that he might reasonably i Nation, 98:148. 122 The Discussion — Conviction be expected to have mentioned it, his silence upon the matter becomes negative evidence that the event did not occur. For many years no one sug- gested that Bacon wrote the Shakespearean plays; this absence of testimony to the belief that Bacon vi^rote them is strong evidence that such belief did not exist until recently, a fact that tends to dis- credit the Baconian theory of authorship. The fact that in the writings of Dickens and Thackeray no mention is made of the bicycle is negative evi- dence that the bicycle had not then come into use. That Moses nov/here in his writings speaks of life after death is negative evidence that the Hebrews of his time did not believe in the immortality of the soul. If admittedly capable and impartial of- ficials do not inflict penalties for foul playing dur- ing a football game, there is strong presumption that little or no foul playing occurred. The following paragraph shows how this kind of evidence may be handled very effectively: The suggestion that the recall of judges might be used successfully by the corporations and special interests is a childish suggestion in view of the fact that the special in- terests and their spokesmen — the lawyers and lobbyists of the trusts, railroads, and public service corporations — are not supporting the measure. If the recall would help Standard Oil, United States Steel, and Union Pacific work their will on the judiciary, you would find their lawyers, 123 The Discussion — Conviction editors, and preachers favoring the law. No one who has studied the history of corporations has ever said he found them slow to support political measures that would be of practical use to them. Argument From Authority There is a particular kind of evidence frequently available for debaters and argumentative writers known as argument from authority. This evidence consists of the opinions and decisions of men who are recognized, to some extent at least, as authori- ties on the subjects of which they speak. An emi- nent scientist might explain with unquestioned certainty the operation of certain natural phenom- ena. A business man of wide experience and with well recognized insight into national conditions might speak authoritatively on the causes of busi- ness depressions. In religious matters the Bible is the highest authority for orthodox Christians; the Koran, for Mohammedans. In legal affairs the highest authorities are court decisions, opinions of eminent jurists, and the Constitution. If a certain college president is considered an authority in the matter of college discipline, then a quotation from him on the evils of hazing becomes valuable evi- dence for the affirmative of the proposition, *' Haz- ing should be abolished in all colleges." If the ar- 124 The Discussion — Conviction guer wishes to strengthen his evidence, he may do so by giving the president's reasons for condemning hazing; but he then departs from pure argument from authority. Pure argument from authority does not consist of a statement of the reasons in- volved; it asserts that something is true because some one who is acknowledged to be an authority on that subject says it is true. Argument from authority differs from other evi- dence in that it involves not merely investigation but also the exercise of a high degree of judgment. The statement that in a certain year thirty-five cities in the United States had some form of com- mission government is not argument from author- ity; the discovery of this truth involved merely in- vestigation. On the other hand, if some reputable statesman or business man should say that those cities which have commission government are more efficiently managed than those which have the mayor and council system, this evidence would be argu- ment from authority; only through both investiga- tion and judgment could such a statement be evolved. This kind of evidence is very strong when those addressed have confidence in the integrity, ability, and judgment of the person quoted. If, however, 125 The Discussion — Conviction they do not know him, or if they do not consider him reliable, the evidence is of little value. There- fore, the test that an arguer should apply before using this kind of evidence is as follows: Is the witness an acknozuledged authority on the subject about zvhich he speaks? Sometimes a short statement showing why the witness quoted is able to speak wisely and con- clusively will render the evidence more valuable in the eyes of the audience. In the following quo- tation the author makes a statement and proves it by " authority '' : The little red schoolhouse — the public school of the country — has an affectionate place in the minds of the American people, but otherv/ise it is sadly neglected. Mr. A. C. Monahan of the United States Bureau of Education says : " It is generally true for the United States as a whole, that rural schools lack intelligent and economical management, adequate supervision, and efficient teaching. The majority of them are housed in uncomfortable build- ings, unsuitable from almost every standpoint, without proper furniture or facilities for heating, ventilating, and lighting; without adequate provisions for guarding the health and morals of the children, and with comparatively little equipment for teaching." ^ 5 World's Work, 26:228. 126 The Discussion — Conviction II. REASONING As has been said, proof consists of evidence and reasoninof. Evidence has been considered first because this order corresponds to the way in which proof is usually generated ; obviously, the discovery of facts precedes the process of reasoning which shows their significance. In some instances, how- ever, this order is reversed: a man may form a theoiy and then hunt for the facts on which to base it; but in general, facts precede inferences. Since all people when they reason do not reach the same conclusion, it is very essential for a stu- dent to investigate the various processes of reason- ing. Given exactly the same evidence, some men will draw one conclusion, some another. A cur- rent periodical recognizes this fact when it says: How widely divergent may be conclusions drawn from the same source can be judged by contrasting these two statements : Messrs. Clark and Edgar declare that " where municipal ownership has been removed from the realm of philosophic discussion and put to the test of actual expe- rience it has failed ingloriously " ; Professor Parsons and Mr. Bemis on the contrary assert, to use Professor Par- sons' words, " it is not public ownership, but private owner- ship, that is responsible for our periodic crisis and the ruin of our industries,'* and " it is not impossible that the elimin- ation of the public ser\nce corporations through public own- 127 The Discussion — Conviction ership is one of the things that would do much to help along the process of making our cities iit." ^ Because of the divergencies in the results pro- duced by reasoning, a student should study with considerable care the various processes of arriving at a conclusion, so that he may be able to tell what methods are strong, what are weak, and what are fallacious. According to a common classification, there are two methods of reasoning: the inductive process, and the deductive process. I. Inductive Reasoning. When one carefully investigates his reasons for believing as he does, he often finds that he accepts a certain statement as true because he is familiar with many specific in- stances that tend to estabhsh its truth. The belief that prussic acid is poisonous is based upon the large number of instances in which its deadly effect has been apparent. The fact that railroad men are exposed to injury is unquestioned because every one is familiar with the many accidents that occur each year. The statement that water freezes at thirty- two degrees Fahrenheit has been proved true by innumerable tests. This process of reasoning by which, from many specific instances, the truth of 6 Outlook, 86:622. 128 The Discussion — Conviction a general statement is established, is called induc- tion. Examples of inductive reasoning are found in the following quotations: Our action in foregoing our advantage in China at the time of the Boxer rebellion, our course in giving Spain mil- lions for the Philippines, which we fairly won by force of arms, and later our action in Cuba have given validity to our profession of a desire to deal fairly and candidly with every nation, and not to permit might to become right in formulating our foreign policy^ The guaranty of bank deposits does not bring much money out of hoarding. This has been demonstrated clearly in Kansas, Texas, and Nebraska. In each of these States the increase of bank deposits since their guaranty laws went into effect has been very little more than the normal in- crease in States near by.s In using inductive reasoning, one must always be on his guard against drawing conclusions too hastily. It is never correct to conclude from a con- sideration of only a few instances that a general truth has been discovered. Further examination may show that the opinion first formed will not hold. Some people call all men dishonest because several acquaintances have not kept faith with them. Others are ready to believe that because they have made money in the stock market all can 7 Philadelphia Ledger, s Independent. 129 The Discussion — Conviction do likewise. Most superstitions arise through gen- eralization from too few instances : those who have several times met misfortune on the thirteenth day of the month are apt to say that the thirteenth is always an unlucky day. Such reasoning as this shows the weakness of inductive argument: a con- clusion is worthless if it is drawn from too few examples. Professor Fred Lewis Pattee, in writing on Er- rors in Reasoning, says : Qiildren and even adults often generalize from a single experience. A little boy cautioned me at one time to keep away from a certain horse, for " white horses always kick." An old Pennsylvania farmer laid down the law that shingles laid during the increase of the moon always curl up. He! had tried it once and found out. A friend will advise you to take Blank's Bitters: "I took a bottle one spring and felt much better ; they always cure." Physicians base their knowledge of medicines upon the observations of thousands of trained observers through many years, and not upon a single experience. Most people are prone to judge their neighbors from too slight acquaintance. If a man is late at an appointment twice in succession, some one is sure to say: "Oh, he's always late." This is poor thinking be- cause it is bad judgment. Judgments should be made with care and from fullness of experience.^ The value of inductive reasoning depends upon the number of instances observed. Very seldom is 9 The Adult Bible Class and Teacher Training Monthly, May, 1908, P- 295- 130 The Discussion — Conviction it possible to investigate every case of the class under discussion. Of course this can sometimes be done. For instance, one may be able to state that all his brothers are college graduates, since he can speak authoritatively concerning each one of them. But usually an examination of every instance is out of the question, and whenever induction is based on less than all existing cases, it establishes only probable truth. From the foregoing it is seen that the tests for in- duction are two: (i) Have enough instances of the class under consideration been investigated to establish the probable existence of a general law? (2) Have enough instances been investigated to establish absolutely the existence of a general law? 2. Deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is the method of demonstrating the truth of a par- ticular statement by showing that some general principle, which has previously been established or which is admitted to be true, applies to it. A stranger on coming to the United States might ask whether our postal system is a success. The an- swer would perhaps be, " Yes, certainly it is, for it is maintained by the government, and all our government enterprises are successful." When the 131 The Discussion — Conviction metal thurium was discovered, a query doubtless arose as to whether it was fusible. It was then reasoned that since all metals hitherto known were fusible, and since thurium was a metal, undoubt- edly it was fusible. Stated in clearer form, the reasoning in each case would be: A. All our government enterprises are success- ful. B. The United States postal system is a govern- ment enterprise. C. Therefore the United States postal system is successful. A. All metals are fusible. B. Thurium is a metal. C. Therefore thurium is fusible. Such a series of statements is called a syllogism. A syllogism always consists of a major premise (A), a minor premise (B), and a conclusion (C). The major premise always states a general law; the minor premise shows that the general law ap- plies to the particular case under consideration ; and the conclusion is, in the light of the two premises, an established truth. The strength of deductive argument depends on two things : the truth of the premises and the f ram- 132 The Discussion — Conviction ing of the syllogism. The syllogism must always be so stated that a conclusion is derived from the ap- plication of a general law to some specific instance to which the law obviously applies. In the next place, the premises must be true. If they are only probably correct, the conclusion is a mere presump- tion; if either one is false, the conclusion is prob- ably false. But if the syllogism is correctly framed, and if both premises are true, the conclusion is irrefutable. As premises are facts that have first been established by induction, the relation between inductive and deductive reasoning is very close. In fact, deduction depends on induction for its very existence. To overthrow a deductive argument all that is necessary is to show the error in the induc- tive process that built up either one or both of the premises. The tests for deduction are: (i) Are both premises true? (2) Is the fact stated in the minor premise an instance of the general law expressed in the major premise? In practical argumentation it is not always neces- sary or desirable to express a deductive argument in full syllogistic form. One premise is frequently omitted; the syllogism thus shortened is called an The Discussion — Conviction enthymeme. The reasoning then takes some such form as " This man will fail in business because he is incompetent." The major premise " All in- competent men fail in business," is understood, but is not expressed. The enthymeme constitutes as strong and forceful an argument as the syllogism, provided the suppressed premise is a well-estab- lished fact; but whenever this premise is not ac- cepted as true, it must be stated and proved. The argument will then consist of the full syllogistic process. The following outline illustrates the chief differ- ence between induction and deduction : The commission form of municipal government is a suc- cess, because (induction) 1. Commission government has succeeded m Gaiveston. 2. Commission government has succeeded in Des ]\Ioines. 3. Commission government has succeeded in Cedar Rapids. (deduction) 1. This system puts the administrative work of the city in the hands of a few m.en, 2. This system puts each man in charge of certain de- partments. 3. Under this system the people know exactly where to place all praise and blame. The deductive reasoning expressed in full would be thus : 134 The Discussion — Conviction (i) A. All forms of municipal government that invest the administrative work of the city in the hands of a few men are a success. B. Commission government invests the administra- tive work of the city in the hands of a few men. C. Therefore commission government is a success. The reasoning given in (2) and (3) may be ev- pressed in similar syllogisms. To test the inductive part of this argument, one should determine how well the three examples show the existence of a general law. To test the de- ductive part, he should ask whether the premises, both those stated and those suppressed, are admitted facts, or whether they need to be proved. If all reasoning were purely inductive or purely deductive, and if it always appeared in as simple a form as in the preceding illustration, one would have little difficulty in classifying and testing it. But frequently the two kinds appear in such ob- scure form and in such varied combinations that only an expert logician can separate and classify them. Because of this difficulty, it is worth while to know a second method of classification, one which is often of greater practical service than the method already discussed in assisting the arguer to determine what methods of reasoning are strong 135 The Discussion — Conviction and what are weak. A knowledge of this classifi- cation is also very helpful to one who is searching for ways in which to generate proof. This method considers proof from the standpoint of its use in practical argument; it teaches not so much the dif- ferent ways in which the mind may work, as the ways in which it must work to arrive at a sound conclusion. I. ARGUMENT FROM ANTECEDENT PROBABILITY The process of reasoning from cause to effect is known as the argument from antecedent probabil- ity. Whenever a thinking man is asked to believe a statement, he is much readier to accept it as true if some reasonable cause is assigned for the ex- istence of the fact that is being established. The argument from antecedent probability supplies this cause. The reasoning may be from the past toward the present, or from the present toward the future. If an inspector condemns a bridge as unsafe, the question arises, " What has made it so? " It some one prophesies a rise in the price of railroad bonds, he is not likely to be believed unless he can show an adequate cause for the increase. In itself, the 136 The Discussion — Conviction establishment of a cause proves nothing. A bridge may have been subjected to great strain and still be unimpaired. Though at present there may be ample cause for a future rise in the securities market, some other condition may intervene and prevent its operation. The assignment of a cause can at best establish merely a probability, and yet the laws of cause and effect are so fundamental that man is usually loath to believe that a condition exists or will exist, until he knows what has brought it about or what will bring it about. A course of reasoning which argues that a proposi- tion is true because the fact affirmed is the logical result of some adequate cause is called argument from antecedent probability. Simple examples of this kind of reasoning are found in the following sentences : " This man will succeed in business because he is industrious " ; " If the import duty on beef, sugar, and fruit is decreased, the cost of living will be lowered.'' The following are more extended illustrations: Government ownership of railroads in the United States is now generally feared by its citizens. The effects are dreaded. It would mean an enormous increase of power and patronage to the government. It would mean that the government would be sv/indled in acquiring the railroads. It would mean bad service, stagnation of enterprise, and The Discussion — Conviction financial loss. It would mean inefficient and at times cor- rupt administration of the railroads. These enterprises re- quire the highest class of administrative ability and economy in their operation. Politicians do not and cannot furnish that ability. Worst of all the change would mean a national debt of some fourteen billions of dollars.^^ Bertrand Russell maintains, through this same kind of reasoning, that since certain fundamental causes of war are now in operation, there is little prospect of permanent world peace : Beginning in childhood, with the school text-books of history, and continuing in the press and in common talk, men are taught that the essence of "glory" is successful robbing and slaughter. The most " glorious " nation is the one which kills the greatest number of foreigners and seizes the greatest extent of foreign territory. The most " patriotic " citizen is the one who most strongly opposes any attempt at justice or mercy in his country's dealings with other countries, and who is least able to conceive of mankind as all one family, struggHng painfully from a con- dition of universal strife toward a society where love of one's neighbor is no longer thought a crime. ... So long as hate and fear and pride are praised and encouraged, war can never become an impossibilit3^ll Since argument from antecedent probability can at most set up only a strong presumption, and since it is often not of sufficient weight to accomplish even this, an arguer, to be successful, must know 10 McClure's Magazine, 38:352. 11 Atlantic Monthly, 115:376. 138 The Discussion — Conviction the tests that determine how strong and how weak reasoning of this sort is. He may apply these tests both to his own reasoning and to the reason- ing of others. The first test is : (i) Is the cause of sufficient strength to pro- duce the alleged effect? The significance of this question is at once ap- parent. In the case of a criminal prosecution, it asks whether the accused had sufficient motive for performing the deed. In connection with political and economic propositions that advocate a change in existing conditions, this test asks whether the new method proposed is sufficiently virile and far- reaching actually to produce the excellent results anticipated. A few years ago the advocates of free silver were maintaining that *' sixteen to one " would be a sure cure for all poverty and financial distress. A careful application of this test would have materially weakened such an argument. Be- lievers in reformatory rather than punitive methods of imprisonment say it is antecedently probable that kind treatment, healthful surroundings, and instruc- tion in various directions will reclaim most crim- inals to an honest life. Before accepting or re- jecting this argument, one should decide in his own 139 The Discussion — Conviction mind whether or not such treatment is adequate to make a released convict give up his former criminal practices. If the argument stands the first test, the next question to ask is: (2) May something intervene and prevent the action of the cause? During the spring of 1908 it was generally known that the Erie Railroad had no money with which to pay the interest that w^as about due on its outstanding bonds. Wall Street prophesied that the road would go into a receiver's hands. This result was extremely probable. Mr. Harri- man, however, president of the Union Pacific, stepped in and by arranging for the payment of the interest saved the road from bankruptcy. This was an example of how an intervention prevented the action of a cause. When Congress passed the Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution, many people said that this legislation would inevitably cause the social, political, and financial ruin of the whole South. Since they did not take into consid- eration an intervening action, namely, drastic meas- ures for negro disfranchisement by the white in- habitants of the South, their reasoning from ante- cedent probability was entirely erroneous. 140 The Discussion — Conviction 2. ARGUMENT FROM SIGN Argument from effect to cause. The process of reasoning from effect to cause is called argument from sign. Since every circumstance must be the result of some preceding circumstance, the arguer cries to find the cause of some fact that is known to exist, and thereby to establish the existence of a hitherto unknown fact. For instance, when one sees a pond frozen over, he is likely to reason back to the cause of this condition and decide that there has been a fall in temperature, a fact that he may not have known before. The sight of smoke indi- cates the presence of fire. Human footprints in the snow are undoubted proof that some one has been present. In the following quotation the attacks upon the Monroe Doctrine by the South American repub- lics are said to be a sign that these countries fear the United States: The question naturally arises, why do these South Amer- ican people continually attack the Monroe Doctrine instead of expressing at least some degree of gratitude for the pres- ent protection which it gives them against the military powers of Europe? The answer is that they do not fear Europe, actively and consciously, but do fear the United States.^2 12 North American Review, 198:781. 141 The Discussion — Conviction The strength of this kind of reasoning depends upon the closeness of the connection between the effect and the assigned cause. In testing argument from sign, one should ask: (i) Is the alleged cause adequate to produce the observed effect? This test is nearly the same as the test of ade- quacy for antecedent probability. One could not maintain that the productiveness of a certain piece of ground was due entirely to the kind of fertilizer used on it, nor that a national financial upheaval •was caused by the failure of a single unimportant bank. In each of these cases the cause suggested may have assisted in producing the result, but ob- viously it w^as not of itself adequate to be the sole cause. (2) Could the observed effect have resulted from any other cause than the one assigned? If several possible causes exist, then it is neces- sary to consider them all, and show^ that no cause but the assigned cause produced the ob- served effect. If an employer who has been robbed discovers that one of his clerks has suddenly come into possession of a large sum of money, he may surmise that his clerk is a thief. This argu- m^ent is valueless, however, unless he can show that 142 The Discussion — Conviction his employee did not receive his newly acquired wealth through inheritance, fortunate investment, or some other reasonable method. But if no other reason than burglary or embezzlement can explain the presence of this money, the argument is very strong. One might greatly weaken the argument (quoted on page 141) which assigned the cause of the re- cent attacks upon the Monroe Doctrine by the South American countries to fear of the United States by showing that this action was not the re- sult of the assigned cause but largely of another cause. He might prove that these republics were fundamentally friendly to the United States, but had sufficient national pride to wish to stand alone in the eyes of the world without having any pro- tecting arm stretched over them. Argument from effect to effect. Argument from sign also includes the process of reasoning from effect to effect through a common cause. This method consists of combining the process just described with the argument from antecedent prob- ability. A reduction of wages in one cotton mill is a sign that there may be a reduction in other cotton mills. Here the reasoning goes from effect to effect, passing, however, though perhaps the 143 The Discussion — Conviction reasoner is not aware that the process is so com- plex, through a cause common to both effects. In full, the reasoning would be: a reduction in the first mill is the result of the cause " hard times " ; it is then antecedently probable that this cause will produce a similar reduction of wages in other mills. This method may be represented by the follow- ing figure: Cause Effect Effect Only one effect is known; the other effect is inferred, first, by a process of reasoning from a known effect to an unknown cause, and secondly, by the process of reasoning from this assumed cause to an unknown effect. This method of reasoning is sound and legitimate when both effects have the same cause. Its weak- ness lies in the fact that it may be attacked on two sides: on the reasoning from effect to cause, and on the reasoning from cause to effect. If the con- 144 The Discussion — Conviction nection can be broken in either process, the argu- ment is overthrown. The tests to be used have al- ready been given. 3. ARGUMENT FROM EXAMPLE Argument from example is the name given to the process by which one reasons that what has been true under certain circumstances will again be true under the same or similar circumstances. In using this method of reasoning one argues that whenever several persons or things or conditions are alike in some respects, any given cause operat- ing upon them will in each case produce the same effect; any line of action adopted by them will in each case have the same result. There are two divisions of argument from ex- ample. When the resemblance between the things compared is close, the process is called argument by generalization ; when the resemblance is so slight that there can be no direct comparison, but only a comparison of functions, the process is called argument from analogy. Argument by generalization. If one finds that a certain mastifif becomes with training an excellent watch dog, he may reasonably take it for granted 145 The Discussion — Conviction that training will produce the same result in an- other dog of the same breed. If a college student with certain pronounced physical and mental char- acteristics is known to be an exceptionally good football player, the athletic trainer is sure to rea- son by generalization that another student with these same characteristics w^ould be a valuable ad- dition to the team. Burke in his Speech on Con- ciliation uses this kind of reasoning when he says that just as Turkey and Spain have found it neces- sary to govern their distant possessions with a loose rein, so, too, England will be obliged to govern the American Colonies leniently. Following is a short quotation that illustrates this method of argument: The successful business man insures his business against fire, and the practical farmer his crops against storms, and the thoughtful man his life against the ravages of disease. Bank deposits are just as susceptible of being insured as any other kind of property, and the losses resulting from bank failures are often so much greater and so much m.ore severe than those resulting from fire, storms, and death that all reasons against insuring them fall to the ground. Argument by generalization very rarely consti- tutes absolute proof. In dealing with things, it may do so in rare cases ; in dealing with human actions, almost never. The reason why it can establish only 146 The Discussion — Conviction a strong probability lies in a weakness in the proc- ess of reasoning. Notice that while this kind of argument appar- ently reasons directly from the example cited to the case in hand, there is in reality an intermediate step. This step is a general truth of which both the known fact and the fact to be proved must be instances. When it is argued that since one mas- tiff makes a good watch dog another mastiff will also make a good watch dog, the reasoning passes through the general statement, " All mastiffs make good watch dogs." Graphically the process might be represented thus: General Law Known Fact Fact to be Proved This method is very much like the method of reasoning from effect to effect, except that here the intermediate step does not cause, but merely ac- counts for the facts. In the illustration taken from Burke, the known fact is that neither Turkey nor Spain can govern their distant provinces despot- 147 The Discussion — Conviction ically. The general law is that no country can govern a distant dependency harshly. The fact proved is that England cannot play the despot with the American colonies. The weakness of this sort of reasoning is now easily seen. In the first place, there are few general laws governing human action that always hold true. In the second place, unless there is a very strong resemblance between the cases compared, unless they are alike in all essential particulars, they will not both be examples of the working of one general law. The following illustration shows how argument by generalization may frequently be attacked: The claim that government ownership of raih'oads would be a success in the United States because government own- ership has succeeded in Germany and Belgium fails to rec- ognize any difference between their form of government and ours, or between the railroad problems presented there and here. Not to mention the vast difference in track mile- age and number of employees, it must be remembered that the inclination of the German mind is bureaucratic and ours is just the opposite. Their system has been con- structed under supervision of the State and there are prac- tically no competing lines ; with the exception of a few grants of land our system has been built independent of the government, and competing lines are numerous. Their trade and country are fully developed and no new lines are being constructed. Germany has a perfected civil service of long standing, 148 The Discussion— Conviction and her government is decidedly executive and administra- tive in form; the United States has a crude, imperfect civil service, and the government is parliamentary and legisla- tive in form. These important differences must be taken into account before safe conclusions can be arrived at, and when they are carefully considered the fact will appear that operations of our roads by political machinery would in all probability be fraught with far more disastrous evils than are sustained at present under private management. Argument from analogy. When two instances or objects which are unlike in themselves, but which perform similar functions or have similar relations, are compared for the sake of showing that what is true in one case is true in the other, the process is called argument from analogy. The following quotation is a good illustration of this kind of argu- ment : To establish bread lines, to throw open churches, to pro- vide " relief works," is usually to invite endless trouble and to do untold harm to the honest unemployed, anxious and willing to work, those who for the first time are obliged to seek relief. Charity, like cocaine, relieves pain, but it creates an appetite. Cocaine should be administered only upon the advice of a physician. Similarly, relief should be administered only by experienced hands. Charity and cocaine are not alike in themselves; they cannot be directly compared, but according to this illustration they are alike in the relations they bear to certain circumstances. 149 The Discussion — Conviction When President Lincoln refused to change gener- als at a certain time during the Civil War, saying that it was not wise to " swap horses while crossing a stream," he reasoned from analog}\ Since the horse in taking its master across the stream and the general in conducting a campaign are totally unlike in themselves but have similar relations, the argu- ment is from analogy and not from generalization. It is easy to see that such reasoning never con- stitutes indubitable proof. If argument from gen- eralization, where the objects compared differ from each other in only a few respects, is weak, plainly, argument from analogy is much weaker, since the objects are alike merely in the relations they bear. Though argument from analogy does not con- stitute proof, yet it is often valuable as a means of illustration. Truths frequently need illumination more than verification, and in such cases this sort of comparison may be very useful. I\Iany prov- erbs are condensed arguments from analogy, their strength depending upon the similarity between the known case and the case in hand. It is not hard to find the analogy in these expressions : " Lightning never strikes twice in the same place " ; " Don't count your chickens before they are hatched " ; " The darkest hour is just before dawn." 150 The Discussion — Conviction The student who has carefully read this chapter up to this point should have a fairly clear idea of the nature of proof ; he should know that proof consists of evidence and reasoning ; he should know the tests for each of these; and he should be able to distinguish between strong and weak arguments. The next step for him to take will be to apply these instructions in generating proof for any statement that he wishes to establish. A common fault in argumentation is the failure to support important points with sufficient proof. One or two points well established will go farther toward inducing belief in a proposition than a dozen points that are but weakly substantiated. A statement should be proved not only by inductive reasoning, but, if possible, by deductive. If one uses argument from antecedent probability in estab- lishing a statement, he should not rest content with this one method of proof, but he should try also to use argument from sign, and argument from ex- ample, and, whenever he can, he should quote authority. Notice that in the following outline four kinds of proof are used. The amount of proof here given is by no means sufficient to establish the truth of the proposition being upheld; the outHne, how- 151 The Discussion — Conviction ever, does illustrate the proper method of building up the proof of a proposition : To be proved — x\n educational test for immi- grants would benefit the United States politically. Sign I. The admittedly unintelligent votes of many of the foreign-born citizens in the United States prove that, from a political stand- point, our immigration laws are faulty. Antecedent Probability II. The educational test would allow only those people who are intellectually capable of learning about our institutions to enter the United States. Example III. The educational test for immigrants has bene- fited political conditions in Australia. (Prof. Frank Parsons, Annals of Ameri- can Academy, 24:209.) Authority IV. Such men as Senators Lodge and Dillingham testify to the political benefit that would be derived from this test. {Survvey, 25:604.) 152 The Discussion — Conviction PERSUASION Though it has been stated in a previous chapter that the persuasive portions of an argument should be found for the most part in the introduction and the conclusion, still persuasion in the discussion is extremely important. It is, true that the real work of the discussion is to prove the proposition; but if conviction alone be used, there is great danger, in most cases, that the arguer will weary his audi- ence, lose their attention, and thus fail to drive home the ideas that he wishes them to adopt. Since everything depends upon how the arguer has al- ready treated his subject, and how it has been re- ceived by the audience, specific directions for per- suasion in the discussion cannot possibly be given. Suggestions in regard to this matter must be even more abstract and general than were the directions for persuasion in the introduction. To begin with, persuasion in the discussion should usually be of a supplementary^ nature. Unless the arguer has won the attention and, to some extent at least, the good will of his audience before he com- mences upon his proof, he may as well confess failure and proceed no farther. If, however, the persuasiveness of his introduction has accomplished 153 The Discussion — Conviction the purpose for which it exists, he may introduce his proof without hesitation, taking care all the time to interweave enough persuasion to main- tain the favorable impression that he has already made. In general, the directions for doing this are the same as those for securing persuasion in the intro- duction. In both divisions modesty, fairness, and sincerity, are the characteristics that make for suc- cess. The same conditions that demand these qualities in one place require their use throughout the whole argument. Then, too, it is often effec- tive to make occasionally an appeal to some strong emotion. As a rule, the attitude of the modern audience is essentially one of indifference, of so great indiff'erence that special eft'ort must be made first to gain, then to hold, their attention. The direct emotional appeal, when the subject, the oc- casion, and the audience are such that there is no danger of its being ludicrous, will usually accom- plish this result. If such a method, however, is manifestly out of place, other means must be sought for producing a similar effect. One of the very commonest devices for gaining attention is to relate a short anecdote. Ever}'body 154 The Discussion — Conviction enjoys a good story, and if it is chosen with proper regard for its illustrative value, the argument is sure to be strengthened. On the whole, humorous stories are best. They often reHeve the tedium of an otherwise dry speech, and not only serve as per- suasion, but drive home a point with greater em- phasis than could the most elaborate course of reasoning. The following is an example of this kind of story: I am reminded, Mr. President, in this connection of an experience that I had when I was the manager of one of the mercantile establishments in Utah. I sold a sack of sugar to a lady in my home town. She saw the name " Lehi " upon the bag and immediately sent it back and said that she did not want beet sugar, that she wanted cane sugar, because she could not make cakes and pastry so well with beet sugar as with cane. She happened to be a very close relative of mine, so I merely took the same sugar, put it into a cane sugar bag, and sent the same sugar back to her. About a week after she met me and said, " Now, don't you ever send me any more beet sugar ; you send me the kind of sugar you sent me the last time — cane sugar." That is about all the difference there is in it — the brand upon the sack, and nothing more.i^ Owing to the limited amount of time at their command, student debaters can, as a rule, use only the very shortest stories, and these should be chosen 13 Reed Smoot, United States Senate, Aug. 19, 19 13. The Discussion — Conviction for their illustrative rather than for their persuasive value; in written arguments greater latitude is pos- sible. Another method that often finds favor in both v^^itten and spoken arguments is the introduction of a paragraph shov^^ing the importance of the topic under consideration or appealing directly to some powerful emotion. Oftentimes the arguer can show that this particular phase of the subject is of wider significance than at first appears. Perhaps he can draw a picture that will turn a seemingly unin- teresting and commonplace subject into one that is teeming with romance and w^onderment. The fol- lowing persuasive quotation, taken from an argu- ment on the tariff, appeals to national thrift and pride. Notice that in this isolated paragraph it is impossible to tell whether the argument is for or against the imposition of customs duties: A nation with countless thousands of acres of agricul- tural lands capable of producing almost everything through its various climates which comes to the table in the way of necessaries, a nation thus equipped ought to adopt those poUcies which will encourage and protect, foster and build up its agricultural interests. We ought to give strength to our citizenship, breadth and wholesomeness to our civil- ization, health and permanency to our social order, and economic soundness to our industrial Hfe by encouraging men to leave the centers of population and gc to the farms, iS6 The Discussion — Conviction by preparing In a distinct and settled and positive way to live off of our own acres, out of our own gardens, and from our own farms.^* These devices an arguer will often find helpful for bringing an element of persuasion into his proof, but he should aim at a type of persuasion much more effective, yet much harder to attain, than is the result of any mere device. Proof is the strong- est when each separate bit of it appeals both to the reason and the emotions. If an arguer can connect his subject with the feelings of his audience and then introduce reasoning processes that will at the same time both convince them and play upon their feelings, he is certain to attain a large measure of success. Although not all subjects readily lend themselves to this method of treatment, yet if the debater will go to the very bottom of his subject and consider the real significance of the question he is arguing upon, he can usually succeed in mak- ing his conviction persuasive and his persuasion convincing. Undoubtedly the best way for a stu- dent to train himself in this respect is to study great arguments. The following quotation from an ar- gument on " The Philippines " is an excellent ex- ample of persuasive proof: 14 William E, Borah, United States Senate, Aug. 13, 1913. The Discussion — Conviction Mr. President, the times call for candor. The Philip- pines are ours forever, "territory belonging to the United States," as the Constitution calls them. And just beyond the Philippines are China's illimitable markets. We will not retreat from either. We will not repudiate our duty in the Archipelago. We will not abandon our opportunity in the Orient. We will not renounce our part in the mis- sion of our race : trustee, under God, of the civiHzation of the world. And we will move forward to our work, not howling out regrets Hke slaves whipped to their burdens, but with gratitude for a task worthy of our strength, and thanksgiving to Almighty God that he has marked us as His chosen people, henceforth to lead in the regeneration of the world. This island empire is the last land left in all the oceans. If it should prove a mistake to abandon it, the blunder once made would be irretrievable. If it proves a mistake to hold it, the error can be corrected when we will. Every other progressive nation stands ready to relieve us. But to hold it will be no mistake. Our largest trade henceforth must be with Asia. The Pacific is our ocean. More and more Europe will manufacture the most it needs ; secure from its colonies the most it consumes. Where shall we turn for consumers of our surplus? Geography an- swers the question. China is our natural customer. She is nearer to us than to England, Germany, or Russia — the commercial powers of the present and the future. They have moved nearer to China by securing permanent bases on her borders. The Philippines give us a base at the door of all the East. Lines of navigation from all our ports to the Orient and AustraHa, from the Isthmian Canal to Asia, from all Orien- tal ports to Australia, converge at and separate from the Philippines. They are a self-supporting, dividend-paying fleet, permanently anchored at a spot selected by the strategy of Providence, commanding the Pacific. And the Pacific 158 The Discussion — Conviction is the ocean of the commerce of the future. Most future wars will be conflicts for commerce. The power that rules the Pacific, therefore, is the power that rules the world. And, with the Philippines, that power is and will forever be the American Republic. China's trade is the mightiest fact in our future. Her foreign commerce was $285,738,300 in 1897, of which we, her neighbor, had less than nine per cent., of which only a little more than half was merchandise sold to China by us. We ought to have fifty per cent., and we will. And China's foreign commerce is only beginning. Her re- sources, her possibilities, her wants, all are undeveloped. She has only 340 miles of railway. I have seen trains loaded with natives and all the activities of modern life al- ready appearing along the line. But she needs, and in fifty years will have, 20,000 miles of railroad. Who can estimate her commerce then? That statesman commits a crime against American trade — against the American grower of cotton and wheat and tobacco, the American manufacturer of machinery and clothing — who fails to put America where she may command that trade. Germanj'^'s Chinese trade is increasing like magic. She has established ship lines and secured a tangible foothold on China's very soil. Russia's Chinese trade is growing be- yond belief. She is spending the revenues of the Empire to finish her railroad into Peking itself, and she is in phys- ical possession of the imperial province of Manchuria. Japan's Chinese trade is multipHed in volume and value. She is bending her energy to a merchant marine, and is lo- cated along China's very coast ; but Manila is nearer China than Yokohama is. The Philippines command the com- mercial situation of the entire East. Can America best trade with China from San Francisco or New York? From San Francisco, of course. But if San Francisco were closer to China than New York is to Pittsburgh, what then ? And Manila is nearer Hongkong than Havana is to Wash- The Discussion — Conviction ington. And yet American statesmen plan to surrender this commercial throne of the Orient where Providence and our soldiers' lives have placed us. When history comes to write the story of that suggested treason to American su- premacy, and therefore to the spread of American civiliza- tion, let her in mercy write that those who so proposed were merely blind and nothing more.^^ EXERCISES A. Point out the kind of reasoning found in each of the following arguments : 1. Since he was a brilliant athlete, it is likely that he will be a brilHant soldier. 2. Nothing produced by man is perfect, and the Con- stitution of the United States was written by mortal men. 3. The cracked earth, the parched grass, and the dry streams showed that for months there had been no rainfall. 4. Because his name is found in Who's Who in America^ John Doe may be considered a famous man. 5. To prove that woman suffrage is a success, I have merely to point to such States as Wyoming, Oregon, Colo- rado, Wisconsin, Illinois. 6. Sooner or later the ravages of the boll weevil will compel Southern planters to raise a diversification of crops. 7. An educational test for immigrants would benefit the condition of our cities, because with this test in operation our slums would be less congested. 8. It is perfectly plain that if you make the occupation of farming so unprofitable that farmers leave their land uncul- tivated, prices will be dearer and the cost of living higher. g. Would you put your money into a bank if you knew that all its officers, from president to bookkeeper, were to be changed every few years? Yet such a system would be 15 Albert J. Beveridge, United States Senate, Jan. 9, 1900. 160 The Discussion — Conviction no worse than the spoils system which prevails in so many departments of our government. 10. The recent great expansion in the manufacturing in- dustries in Canada is strong evidence that capitalists in the United States and the United Kingdom have the utmost con- fidence in the commercial future of the Dominion. 11. Athens, Rome, Spain fell because their wealth came not from the successful cultivation of their own soil or from the intelligent development of their commerce, but from tribute levied upon other countries. Let the United States learn this lesson well. 12. It is a well-recognized principle that the man who " totes " a revolver is far more liable to get into trouble than the man who carries only the weapons nature gave him. So it is with nations ; large armies and navies do not make for peace. 13. As proof that political considerations exert a strong influence on the rates of government-owned railroads, wit- ness the Intercolonial Railway of Canada. Its rates are thirty per cent, lower than the average on the other railways of the country — and for years it has not earned the interest on its bonded debt. 14. If the prosperity of Crawford County may, as many believe, be fairly attributed to its good roads, then Rocking- ham County, which is starting in on an era of good road building, may expect to become a thriving section of the State. 15. The fact that our battleships spend more time in tar- get practice than the ships of any other nation leads me to believe that our gunners are the best in the world. 16. In the old days men in England suffered as the vvomen do now, but since they got political power they have altered all that. The cheap labor of women is not a local difficulty that can be remedied by local means ; it is a national difficulty, and nothing less than a national reform, giving women the protection of political power, can make 161 The Discussion — Conviction any really effective change in their position. So wc are agitating for votes for women. B. Apply the tests for evidence and reasoning to the arguments found in the following passage : x\thletics Foster Dishonesty Training for a college team in these days furnishes a drill in complex dishonesty which far overbalances any benefits that may be derived — at least that is the belief of many careful observers. In competition among gentlemen there is no place for the man who " stacks " the cards and sig- nals his partner across the table; who deHberately miscalls the score at tennis; or v/ho picks his ball out of a bad lie on the golf links. He is barred from respectable clubs, and is not welcomed in respectable society. Yet college men, so often the soul of honor in all their other activities, see no wrong in deliberately and slyly violating in football, baseball, and kindred sports any rule that may diminish their chances of victory. The progress of every football game is interrupted by the referee's penalizing first one side, then the other, and the guilty players lose standing only in so far as the coach scolds them for being caught. Not many years ago a football coach, a business man of good repute, enjoying the confidence of faculty and un- dergraduates alike, was seen drilling his linemen in an illegal play, the essence of which was to swing the fist vio- lently into the opponent's face. After some minutes he vented his disgust with an awkward pupil in these words: " Not that way, not that way, you boob ! You have got to be nifty to get away with that play." The question of the eligibility of men to represent their colleges in intercollegiate contests calls forth tactics similar to those in vogue in the actual conduct of the games. There is a rule in many colleges providing that no man who has competed for money shall play on a college team, and every 162 The Discussion- — Conviction candidate is required to give a signed statement that he has not violated this rule. In spite of these requirements there are charges and counter-charges of professionalism made by one college against another. Every charge of profes- sionalism is an accusation of lying against the m.an involved. Another eligibility rule in effect in most colleges is that no man shall compjste in athletics more than four years, yet the papers and magazines are filled with accounts of men who, after representing a small Western college for a year or more, have entered a large Eastern university and played under its colors for a full four years. To do this they had to deny their participation in athletics at the first institution. If practices like this involved only the guilty player, they could be attributed to the " black sheep " sure to be found in every group of men, and would not be ground for the arraignment of college athletics in general. They are, how- ever, known to the other players and the undergraduates. In fact, colleges have become so imbued w^ith the spirit of "anything to win," that the athletes themselves are pos- sibly less guilty than the whole mass of alumni and under- graduates who encourage their trickery- and deceit. C. Prove or disprove the following statements, using, wherever it is possible, argument from antecedent prob- ability, sign, example, and authority. Give references for all evidence except generally admitted facts. 1. Government by commission is a success in Des Moines, Iowa. 2. Hazing tends to destroy college spirit. 3. Indiscriminate novel reading is intellectually harm- ful. 4. Playing football is physically injurious. 5. Capital punishment for murder is morally unjustifiable. 6. Final examinations in college courses are physically harmful. 7. Woman suffrage purifies politics. 163 The Discussion — Conviction 8. Frequent attendance at moving pictures injures the eyesight. 9. Compulsory education of children in the United States benefits the public at large. 10. The destruction of forests in the United States has aflfected the water supply of brooks and rivers. 164 CHAPTER VII THE DISCUSSION — BRIEF-DRAWIN'G The second division of a brief corresponding to the second division of a complete argument, is called the discussion. In this part of his brief the arguer logically arranges all the evidence and reasoning that he wishes to use in establishing or overthrow- ing his proposition. Illustrative material, rhetori- cal embelHshment, and other forms of persuasion that may enter into the finished argument are omitted, but the real proof is complete in the brief. There are two possible systems of arranging proof. For the sake of convenience they may be called the " because " method and the *' therefore " method. These methods derive their names from the connectives that are used. When the " be- cause " method is used, the proof follows the state- ment being established, and is connected to this statement with some such word as : as, because, for, or since. To illustrate : I6S The Discussion — Brief-Drawing I. Expenses at a country college are less than at a city college, because A. At the countr}^ college room rent is cheaper. B. Table board costs less. C. Amusement places are less numerous. Under the " therefore " method, the proof pre- cedes the statement being established; the connec- tives are hence and therefore. The previous argu- ment arranged in this form would read as fol- lows : A. Since room rent is cheaper at the country college than at the city college, and B. Since table board costs less, and C. Since amusement places are less numer- ous, therefore I. Expenses at a country college are less than at a city college. The student should always use the ''' because " m.ethod of arrangement. It is preferable to the " therefore " method since it affords a much easier apprehension of the argument advanced. If the reader of the brief has the conclusion in his mind at the very start, he can test the strength and ade- quacy of the proof very quicldy, and can, perhaps, the first time he reads the argument form an opinion i66 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing as to its worth. But he will almost always have difficulty in grasping the significance of evidence and reasoning before he knows what the proof is expected to prove. The " therefore " method usu- ally obliges a careful reasoner, after finally reaching the conclusion, to go over the whole proof a second time. To assist the student in carrying out the proper arrangement of his proof, two rules have been formulated. One rule deals with main headings, the headings marked with the Roman numerals; the other deals with subordinate headings. Rule IX. Phrase each principal statement in the discussion so that it will read as a reason for the truth or the falsity of the proposition. Rule X. Phrase each subordinate statement in the discussion so that it luill read as a reason for the truth of the statement to which it is subordinate. The connectives to be used are: as, because, for, and since. In connection with the first of these rules, notice that principal headings read as reasons for the truth or the falsity of the proposition. Obviously they read as reasons for the truth if the brief is on the affirmative side, and for the falsity if the brief is on the negative side. Headings and sub- 167 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing headings should always be supported, not demol- ished. The error of making unsupported statements in a complete argument has already been discussed. Assertion in a brief is equally faulty. To insure belief, all statements must rest ultimately either upon the testimony of witnesses or upon statements admitted to be true. Notice, for example, in the discussion of the brief that begins on page 172, how worthless would be the statements marked with capital letters were they not supported with proof. Hence the rule : Rule XI. Make no unsupported statements un- less they are generally admitted to he true. It has already been shown that the arguer must reveal to his audience the sources from which he gathered his evidence. If he gained certain in- formation from magazines, he should state definitely the name, the volume, and the page; if he gained his information elsewhere, he should be equally explicit. Since this knowledge of the source of the evidence is essential to the success of the proof, a statement of the sources is a part of the work of conviction. Accordingly, these sources must be stated in the brief as well as in the expanded argu- ment. Thus the rule : 168 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing Rule XIL After all evidence state in parentheses the source from which it came. In addition to establishing the side of the propo- sition which it advocates, a good brief almost in- variably refutes the main arguments of the oppo- site side. The way in which this refutation is ex- pressed is very important. A brief on the affirma- tive side of the proposition, ''Resolved, That the Federal government should acquire and operate the telegraph systems within the United States," would be weak and ludicrous, if, when answering the ar- gument of the negative that the cost would be prohibitive, it should contain the following reason- ing: The Federal government should acquire and op- erate the telegraph systems in the United States, be- cause I. The cost of acquiring the systems would not be prohibitive. One might think from such a statement that the drawer of the brief considered the contention that the expense would not be too great, a constructive argument in favor of government ownership. In reality, it is nothing of the sort. The arguer is merely trying to destroy his opponent's argument to the effect that expense is an obstacle in the way 169 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing of the proposed plan. This refutation should be expressed in such a manner as to show that it is refutation and not positive proof. It might well read thus: The Federal government should acquire and op- erate the telegraph systems in the United States, because I. The contention of the negative that the cost of acquiring the systems would be prohibitve is unsound, since A. Etc. Notice that this form of refutation states clearly the argument to be answered. No doubt can arise from such a statement as to the direction the argu- ment is taking; no confusion can occur between refutation and positive proof. Hence the rule: Rule XIII. Phrase refutation so that the argu- ment to be answered is clearly stated. THE CONCLUSION As there is but one rule for brief-drawing that applies to the conclusion, it may well be given at this point. The purpose and the value of this rule are so apparent that no explanation is necessary. Rule XIV. Put into the conclusion a summary of the essential points established in the discussion. 170 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing RULES FOR BRIEF-DRAWING General Rules I. Divide the brief into three parts, and mark them respectively, Introduction, Discussion, and Conclusion. II. Express each idea in the brief in the form of a complete statement. III. Make in each statement only a single asser- tion. IV. Make each statement as concise as is con- sistent with clearness. V. Indicate the relation between statements by indentation and by the use of symbols. VI. Mark each statement with only one symbol. Rules for the Introduction VII. Put into the introduction suifici^nt expla- nation for a complete understanding of the discus- sion. This explanation usually involves (a) a defi- nition of terms, (b) an explanation of the meaning of the proposition, (c) a statement of the issues, and (d) the partition. VIII. Put into the introduction only statements admitted by both sides. 171 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing Rules for the Discussion IX. Phrase each principal statement in the dis- cussion so that it will read as a reason for the truth or the falsity of the proposition. X. Phrase each subordinate statement in the dis- cussion so that it will read as a reason for the truth of the statement to zvhich it is subordinate. The connectives to be used are: as, because, for, and since. XL Make no unsupported statements unless they are generally admitted to be true. XII. After all evidence state in parentheses the source from which it came. XIII. Phrase refutation so that the argument to be answered is clearly stated. Rule for the Conclusion XIV. Put into the conclusion a summary of the essential points established in the discussion. MODEL BRIEF Resolved, That the Federal government should cooperate with the several States in the permanent improvement of the public highways. 17: The Discussion — Brief-Drawing Affirmative Brief INTRODUCTION I. The recent introduction into Congress of eighty- three bills providing for Federal as- sistance in the improvement of public high- ways has brought the matter of good roads prominently before the public. A. The Federal government first began to be interested in highways in 1893. B. During that 3^ear Congress established the Office of Road Inquiry under the Department of Agriculture. 1. This office has acted in an advisory capacity to the various political units that have sought assistance. 2. It has built object-lesson roads in thirty-four different States. II. At the present time public highways are built and controlled by towns, counties, and States. A. Each State has its own method of caring for its roads. III. The proposed plan provides that the Federal government shall contribute money to im- prove the roads in each State in the Union. 173 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing A. The roads on which any government money is expended shall be known as government roads. B. The money contributed by the govern- ment to any State shall be in direct proportion to the money raised by that State for the building of these govern- ment roads. C. All government roads shall be built and afterwards supervised by the Office of Public Roads in Washington. IV. To determine whether the Federal govern- ment should aid the States in the improve- ment of their highways, the following ques- tions must be answered : A. Do improved highways concern the na- tion as a whole ? B. Have the present systems of road con- trol been a success or a failure ? C. If the present systems have not suc- ceeded, is Federal aid the proper rem- edy? V. The affirmative will establish the following facts : A. Good roads increase the prosperity of the nation as a whole. 174 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing B. The present systems of road control have failed. C. Federal aid is the proper remedy for present conditions. DISCUSSION I. Good roads increase the prosperity of the nation as a whole, for A. They benefit the farmer, since 1. They lower his cost of transporta- tion to market, because a. In Spottsylvania County, Va., the building of good roads lowered the cost of transporta- tion on highways eight cents a ton for each mile. (L. D. Hewes, Dep't. of Agriculture, World's Work, 24:688.) b. In Harris County, Texas, the sav- ings was seven cents a ton for each mile. (Ibid.) 2. Good roads stimulate business in rural communities, since a. After the building of good roads in Spottsylvania County the shipment of agricultural and 175 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing forest products increased forty- nine per cent. (Ibid.) 3. Good roads enable the farmer to take advantage of fluctuations in the price of his products, because a. In sections of the South that have good roads planters rush their cotton to market when the price advances. (Country Life in America, 25:54.) 4. Good roads increase the value of farm land, for a. After the construction of 350 miles of improved road the as- sessed valuation of Harris County, Texas, increased %72y- 000,000. (L. D. Hewes, World's Work, 24:688.) b. The average value of land in six- teen counties in Ohio having less than ten per cent, of their roads improved is $45 an acre. {Ihid.) c. The average value of land in forty-five Ohio counties having ten per cent, of their roads 176 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing improved is ^66 an acre. (Ibid.) d. Since the beginning of an im- proved road system in Massa- chusetts, tlie value of land has increased from $2 to $10 an acre. (Director of Office of Public Roads, U. S. Depart- ment of Agriculture, World's Work, 24:679.) e. In one year more famis were sold on the improved roads in Spott- sylvania County, Va., than in the five years preceding the im- provement. (L. J. Graves, World's Work, 24:689.) 5. Good roads give the farmer better so- cial and educational advantages, since a. They enable him to attend church more easily. b. They enable him to send his chil- dren to school, for i'. School attendance In Spott- sylvania County, Va., in- creased with good roads ^77 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing from 5 to 35 per cent. (James Ashley, Divi- sion Superintendent of Schools, World's Work, 24:690.) 2'. Similar investigations in thirteen other counties reveal similar results. (Ibid.) B. Good roads benefit the inhabitants of cities, because 1. They enable city dwellers to have a better and more uniform supply of farm products, for a. Good roads mean quicker trans- portation. 2. They enable city dwellers to buy farm products cheaper, since a. At present the wagon haul to and from the railroad is rela- tively the greater part of the cost of transportation. (North American Reviei'o, 198:321.) 3. Stimulation of business in the coun- try means stimulation of business in the city. 178 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing 4. The improvement of social condi- tions in the country will tend to relieve tlie congestion of the cit- ies. 5. Good roads open up a wonderful pleasure ground to city people, as a. In 19 1 2 there were over 600,- 000 auto vehicles in the United States. II. The present systems of road control have failed, for A. Local officers are often unduly influ- enced by local conditions, because I. They feel bound to favor the men who have elected them to office. (Outlook, 84:217.) B. Local officers are often incompetent, for 1. The office does not pa}^ sufficiently well to attract experts. 2. Costly blunders are frequently made, since a. In Pendleton County, W. Va., a fill made of logs v/as burned by a forest fire almost as soon as it was finished. (World's Work, 24:680.) 179 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing b. A Texas county built several miles of macadam road with material lacking in cementing qualities. (Ibid.) 3. Lack of knowledge of system has frequently brought disastrous re- sults. (J. E. Pennybacker, Sec- retary of American Association for Highway Improvement, World's Work, 24: 690.) C. State work is hampered by its connec- tion with politics, as I. On account of the general change in the political situation the highway departments of the following States were seriously interfered with: Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Con- necticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, ]\Iar)'land, West Virginia, Ohio, Washington. (L. W. Page, World's Work, 24: 676.) D. Under town, county, and State control, only a ridiculously small percentage of our roads has been improved, for I. In 1909 we had improved only 7.14 180 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing per cent, of our roads. (Put- nam's Magadne, 6:781.) 2, In 1 91 2 we had improved only 10 per cent, of our roads. {World's Work, 24:676.) 3. We are spending yearly on our 2,- 250,000 miles of road about the same amount that England spends on her 150,000 miles. (Ibid.) III. Federal aid is the proper remedy for present conditions, for A. The Federal government has already demonstrated its ability to handle the work, since I. The Office of Public Roads has con- structed over 200 object-lesson roads in thirty-four different States. (Putnam's Magazine, 7:688.) '2. It has tested over 3,000 samples of road materials from every State in the Union to determine their value for road building. (Ibid.) 3. The laboratories of this office are recognized as the foremost in the world, because 181 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing a. The British government has sub- mitted to it for analysis 300 specimens of road materials. (Ibid.) 4. Consultation with this office in 1904 saved Pike County, Ala., an initial expense of $500,000 in the build- ing of 115 miles of road. (World's Work, 24:680.) B. Tne various States would be willing to spend much more of their own m^oney on roads, because I. They would receive aid from the government only in proportion to the money they raised themselves. C. The roads would be built where they are the most needed, for I. Local politics and jealousies would not determine their location. D. The roads would be built most eco- nomically and permanently, since I. Only experts would have charge of their construction, because a. This work would all be in the hands of the Office of Public Roads. 182 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing CONCLUSION I. The affirmative has proved that the Federal government should cooperate with the sev- eral States in the permanent improvement of the public highways for the following reasons : A. Good roads increase the prosperity of the nation as a whole. B. The present systems of road control have failed. C. Federal aid is the proper remedy for present conditions. EXERCISES Brief the following articles: I. Shall Officers be Substituted for Civilian Instructors ? The proposed substitution of officers for civilian in- structors at the Naval Academy is indefensible from every point of view. The net result of this policy would be that officers would be withdrawn from their national duties to attempt a task for which many, if not most of them, are unfitted by either inclination or training. What would be the consequences to the midshipmen of pursuing courses in English, chemistry, and mathematics under the guidance of instructors who would be every moment under a strain not to show that they did not know what they were talking about? That this is not an extreme view is evidenced by the statement of a prominent officer of the Department, 183 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing who finds advantage in the fact that, as these officers might be "rusty" in such subjects, the assignment to teach would force them to " brush up " their knowledge. The profit of this situation to the officer is, indeed, mani- fest, but the benefit to those fated to sit at his feet is any- thing but clear. In addition to this, there would be fre- quent changes in the teaching staff, since officers would not be assigned permanently to any of these positions. Even the argument of economy is lacking, since the places of of- ficers detailed to give instruction at the Academy would have to be filled by new appointments. Taking into account the difference in pay between a civilian instructor and an officer, the change in contemplation would double the cost of instruction. Is this the real motive behind the proposal — to get more officers just as the Department is always moving heaven and earth to get more battleships? It is to be hoped that such representations will be made to Con- gress as will result in the restoration to the Naval Appro- priation Bill of the item providing for ten civilian in- structors of the junior grade now at the Academy, instead of the four to which it is now proposed to reduce them.i 2. Motor Trucks and Horse-drawn Vehicles One of the chief advantages of the motor truck over the horse and wagon is in the greater territory which it can cover. A single horse with a one-ton wagon, for instance, has a very restricted radius of action, averaging twent3"-two miles a day — and to attain this, one-half the distance is generally covered without load. In other words, it has a productive mileage of eleven miles for a day's service. The two-horse, three-ton wagon will average twenty miles a day, or a productive service of ten loaded miles. The three- horse, five-ton wagon, which is the largest practical unit for city service, is limited to a working radius of eighteen 1 Nation, 96:71. 184 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing miles a day, or nine miles with load. It is interesting to compare the daily average mileage of power vehicles of equal and larger load capacities with these figures. A first-class, one-ton power truck is easily capable of traveling eighty miles a day. The three-ton truck can cover sixty miles and, if well built, is capable of repeating the perform- ance six days a week without material yearly depreciation. A good five-ton truck will average fifty miles a day while a ten-ton truck can make thirty-eight miles. While the ordinary horse and wagon is going four miles in an hour, the one-ton truck will cover eighteen miles. It can make a delivery ten miles from the store very nearly two hours quicker than the wagon. Where time is money in delivery, such a saving is most important. Even a five- ton truck, which is the largest size needed in most busi- nesses, can go ten miles in an hour, or about three times as fast as a three-horse wagon's speed. Besides its greater speed, the motor truck has the added advantage of being able to work all day and every day in rush periods without rest. It can run night and day continuously when need be. Moreover, bad weather affects motor truck deliveries very little. With the coming of deep snows and glassy pavements the limitations of the horse are forcibly im- pressed on the minds of every urban dweller. The efforts of horses to stay on their feet in drayage service in our North- ern cities, much more to pull heavy loads, is so exhausting and so laming that their efficiency is badly impaired and the rehability of delivery of merchandise by animal power is reduced. The power vehicle, on the other hand, has only to attach chains or some other form of anti-skidding appli- ance to the tires and go on as well as ever. The use of the power vehicle in winter does necessitate, however, a certain degree of care by the driver to obviate freezing of the radiator of a water-cooled gasolene machine; but with or- dinary care this disadvantage of the internal combustion motor is a negligible factor, 185 . The Discussion — Brief-Drawing The thorough reliabihty of the gasolene motor business- truck in the winter season was forcibly demonstrated in an extraordinary performance with a three-ton truck last win- ter. A large motor-cycle manufacturer in Massachusetts had an important shipment for exhibition at a London show to forward to New York, and it was necessary to get it on a certain steam.er or be debarred from showing his prod- uct abroad. The heavy snows had congested freight traffic so badly that the railways could not promise a car in time to catch the steamer. In despair the motOr-cycle maker ap- pealed to a power-truck builder to get the shipment to New York within the time Hmit — three days. Although the roads were badly blockaded with snow and ice the power- truck made the journey, 150 miles, to New York in less than two days, and the shipment went on its way to Europe. But to an even greater degree does the boiling heat of summer demonstrate the superior efficiency of power busi- ness-vehicles over horses in 'the actual service performed. When the heat brings down the norm.al efficiency of draft horses, causing sickness and heavy mortality, delays in de- livery and the spoiling of perishable products cost the pub- lic hundreds of thousands of dollars. Much of this loss, however, can be avoided, for the power vehicle will give just as good service on the hottest summer day as in or- dinary times and, moreover, will perform work which no animal team can possibly do.2 3. Labor Unions and Industry 1 would specify three classes of benefits which unions give to their members. The first is the immediate, mate- rial benefit for which the union is organized, namely, a fair working day and as high wages as possible. If you find a trade with short hours and good wages, you may be sure that it is one whose workers have been organized into a 2 Rollin W. Hutchinson, Jr., World's Work, 23 :268, 186 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing union. If the hours are long and the wages small, you may safely infer that the trade is either unorganized or weakly organized. The only exceptions are a few highly skilled trades where organization may not be necessary to secure a monopoly of labor. Further material benefits from trade unions are found in the efforts of unions to secure the safety of their mem- bers in the use of dangerous machines, in the maintenance of good sanitary conditions under which the work shall be performed, in the granting of out-of-work, sickness, and death benefits. A labor union is also an employment bu- reau, and its officers spend no little part of their time in securing work for members out of work. The second benefit of a trade union to its members is that the union seeks to maintain permanent employment. A well-organized union is always opposed to strikes except as a last resort. The strength of a union can be judged by the frequency of strikes in the trade. Labor leaders, as a class, are opposed to strikes and prevent many labor difficulties of which employers are not aware and for which the leaders receive no credit. This statement may be a surprise to some and may be denied by the enemies of trade unions, but it is nevertheless true. As union officers are not connected with the shop in which difficulties arise, they are usually free from its prejudices and its irritations. There have been many instances in which they have kept men at work, where " hot-heads " would have caused a strike and would have involved their members in loss. Em- ployers who indignantly resent what they call the in- trusion of outsiders in the management of their own affairs would do well to consider this statement. This service of labor leaders is neither known nor appreciated as it de- serves to be. The unreasonable demands and overbearing manners of a few are taken as characteristics of the class. The third benefit of a trade union to its members is the moral benefit. Unions in the technical trades demand tests 187 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing of efficiency from their members. Some also demand the maintenance of a certain standard of technical efficiency, and many scrutinize moral character. The officers of a union who find a member repeatedly out of work and con- stantly coming to them for another job are sure to advise him to do better work and warn him against the results of dissipation. Hence, unionism, though not encouraging competition between members, does encourage good char- acter and good work. The benefits of a trade union to employers have been recognized by a few, grudgingly admitted by some, and doubted by many. But I am convinced that it is as cer- tainly to the advantage of the employer to deal with a union, rather than with unorganized bodies of working men, as it is to the advantage of the men to belong to unions. The first benefit to the employer who wishes to learn the real cause of his difficulties with his men is that he can deal through the union with their own chosen rep- resentatives, who, as a rule, are best quahfied to speak in their behalf. Not being dependent upon the employer, the leaders are able to speak frankly and freely, and the root of the difficulty can be reached more quickly through them than through the workers who constantly fear that their complaints may cause the loss of their jobs. Secondly, employers often indignantly declare that they are wiUing to meet their own men, but do not admit the right of outsiders to "interfere" in their business. With- out discussing the economic questions involved in that proposition, but considering the case merely from the em- ployer's point of view, I believe the prejudice is short sighted. The employer needs to learn the real cause of the difficulty in his shop from those who are best able to express it and who will be free from personal prejudice and local bias. The labor leader knows how to handle his own men, is not deceived by their attempt to give an in- correct statement of the case, quickly sifts the evidence, 1 88 The Discussion — Brief-Drawing and because of his experience, is an expert representative of the laborer's point of view. If the employer is willing to meet his men fairly, he cannot find any one so well qualified to help him settle the difficulty justly to both sides as the accredited leader of an organization. Thirdly, the employer is immensely benefited by the con- servatism of the experienced labor leader. Unorganized bodies of men are much more likely to strike hastily than if directed by experienced leaders. Of course there are leaders who involve their unions in unnecessary strikes, make negotiations with employers difficult, exercise a bad influence over the men, and are generally unworthy of re- spect or confidence. But the true character of such men is sure in time to be discovered. A union will not keep a leader who does not " hit it off " with the employers. My opinion is that while some unworthy and dishonest leaders are unwisely trusted by their organizations, in the majority of cases it would be better for the men if they more thoroughly trusted their own chosen leaders. Dis- trust of their leaders is the greatest weakness of labor unions. While a few so-called " walking delegates " may be untrustworthy, the majority of them are reliable and hard working, having less leisure than the men whom they represent. The labor leader who works sixteen hours a day to secure an eight-hour day for his men is not con- sistent with his principles, but he is entitled to the respect of his organization. 189 CHAPTER VIII METHODS OF REFUTATION A COMPLETE argument consists of two kinds of proof: constructive proof and refutation. Con- structive proof is that part of an argument which sets forth direct reasons for belief in a certain prop- osition; refutation is that part which destroys the reasons for beHef in the opposite side. In general, each of these divisions is of about equal importance, at times the value of one pre- dominating and at times the value of the other.- If one is addressing an audience unacquainted with his views or hostile towards them, he is not likely to make much progress in getting his own beliefs accepted until he has, at least in part, shattered the opinion already existing. If, however, the audi- ence is predisposed or even willing to accept the doctrine advocated, very little but constructive proof may be necessary. In debate, the side that has the burden of proof will usually have more use for constructive argu- 190 Methods of Refutation ment, and the opposite side will have more use for refutation. This statement will not always hold true, however, for the rule will vary under differ- ent circumstances; a debater must, therefore, hold himself in readiness to meet whatever contingencies arise. Debate may be likened to the play of two boys building houses with blocks; each boy builds the best house he can, and at times attempts to overthrow the work of his playmate. The one that has the better structure when the game ends comes off victorious. Thus it is in debate; each debater must do his best both to build up his own argument and to destroy his opponent's. To handle refutation successfully, either in written argument or in debate, one must know what to refute and what to leave alone. The general rule governing this matter is: Refute only those arguments which are essential to the proof of the other side. All trivial ideas, even all misstatements which if refuted would not destroy any fundamen- tal process of an opponent's proof, should pass un- noticed. To mention them means waste of time and eft'ort. It is not uncommon for a debater to make trivial errors intentionally, in the hope that his opponent will consume valuable time in refuting them and thus allow his main argument to go un- 191 Methods of Refutation scathed. When this stratagem succeeds, the one who made the mistakes can acknowledge that he was wrong in those unimportant details, and yet show* that his fundamental arguments have not been overthrown. While arguing on a political question, an intercollegiate debater once laid considerable stress on an opinion expressed by Arthur T. Hadley, " President," as he stated, " of Harvard Univer- sity." His opponent, of course, might have held this statement up to ridicule, but such an exposure would have been impolitic, in that it would have in no wise impaired the value of Mr. Hadley's opinion as evidence. Another debater, not so wise, once spent considerable time in correcting an op- ponent who had said that the Steel Trust was formed in 1891 instead of in 1901, as was the case. As these dates had no vital bearing on the question at issue, the error should have been allowed to pass. The temptation to point out the flaws that are most obvious is always great, but unless by so doing one can knock out the props on which an opponent's proof rests, such an attack accomplishes nothing. Another common error in refutation consists in " answering one's self." A person is guilty of this •fault whenever he misstates an opponent's argu- ment, either because he does not understand it or 192 Methods of Refutation through design, and then refutes this misstatement. The folly of such procedure is made apparent by merely calling attention to the fact that the original argument has been garbled but in no wise refuted. An opponent can convict the one who has " an- swered himself " either of unpardonable ignorance about the subject or of downright dishonesty. To guard against these errors of refuting un- important details and of '' answering one's self," it is always well to reduce an opponent's argument to the form of a brief. If the argument is in print, this task is comparatively simple; if the argument is oral, the task will be harder but will still present no serious difficulties to one who is used to draw- ing briefs. When all the ideas have been arranged in the form of headings and subheadings, and the relation between the ideas has been indicated by means of numbers and letters, then the arguer can quickly decide what points he ought to refute and what ones he can refute. It goes without saying that the headings marked with the Roman numerals contain the most impor- tant ideas, and should, therefore, be overthrown as far as possible. There are three ways of dispos- ing of them: one way is to state that the headings are false and then bring on new proof to show 193 Methods of Refutation their falsity; the second way is to call attention to the subheadings with which the opponent has bol- stered up the main headings, and then, by proving these subheads false, allow the main heads to fall to the ground; the third way is to admit that the subheads are true and then show that the infer- ences drawn from them are unwarranted. To illustrate: A part of an argument on the affirmative side of the proposition, "' Resolved, That students in American colleges should be excused from final examinations in all subjects in which they have attained a daily grade of at least eighty- five per cent.," might be reduced to the following brief form: I. This rule would be of great intellectual benefit to college students, for A. They would master their work more thor- oughly, because I. They would study harder during the term. The first method of overthrowing the heading in- dicated by (I) would be to attack it directly. This attack might consist of opinions of prominent edu- cators who, on theoretical grounds, do not believe an intellectual benefit would result from the adop- tion of such a rule; of the opinions of educators 194 Methods of Refutation who have tried the rule and declare that it is an intellectual detriment; and of a course of reason- ing which would show that this system would rob the students exempted of the great intellectual bene- fit that is derived from the preparation for an ex- amination and from the taking of an examination. The second method would be to show that (i) is not true; therefore (A) would be false, and (I) would be left entirely unsupported. Under the third method the arguer would admit the truth of (i), but would deny that the truth of (A) is established by it; therefore (I) v/ould be unsupported. Whenever a subheading is attacked, it is always very essential to show that the attack is made sim- ply because this subheading serves as a foundation for the main heading. In this particular argument, refutation according to the second and third meth- ods might read as follows : " The contention of the affirmative that the eighty-five per cent, rule should be adopted because it would result in an in- tellectual improvement among college students, rests on the supposition that students would study harder during the term, and for that reason would more thoroughly master their subjects. This rea- soning is erroneous because, in the first place, as 195 Methods of Refutation I will show, but very few students, if any, would study harder during the term ; and, in the second place, even if they did, those exempted would not have mastered their work so completely at the end of the year as they would have if they had taken an examination." From the preceding, it is apparent that refutation consists of discrediting evidence and attacking rea- soning. The ways to overthrow evidence will be considered first. EVIDENCE It is taken for granted that the evidence mus- tered by the opponent is sufficient, if not over- thrown, to establish his side of the discussion. Of course, if enough evidence for this purpose is lack- ing, one has only to call attention to this funda- mental weakness in order to overthrow the argu- ment then and there. The rules, therefore, for testing evidence assume that the opponent has cited facts that, if not combated, will establish his case. These tests are the same as those given in Chap- ter VI; a hasty review of them, however, may be serviceable at this point. 196 Methods of Refutation I. Tests of the sources of evidence. A. Is the witness competent to give a trust- worthy account of the matter? B. Is the witness wilUng to give an accurate account ? I. Does he have any personal interest in the case? C. Is the witness prejudiced? D. Does the witness have a good reputation for honesty and accuracy? 11. Internal tests of evidence. A. Is the evidence consistent (a) with it- self, (b) with known facts, (c) with human experience? B. Is it first-hand evidence? C. Can the evidence be classed as especially valuable ? 1. Does it consist of hurtful admis- sions ? 2. Is it negative evidence? IIL Test of argument from authority. A. Is the witness an acknowledged author- ity on the subject about which he tes- tifies ? To overthrow or weaken argument from author- ity, one may either discredit its source or bring to 197 Methods of Refutation light some inconsistency in the statement itself. Usually the former method alone is possible. To accomplish this result, one may show that the wit- ness spoke from insufficient knowledge of the mat- ter, or was prejudiced, or had some personal in- terest in the case. Counter authority will also be of assistance. The following quotation taken from a college debate furnishes the student a good ex- ample of how to handle this sort of refutation : We have heard many statements to the effect that the amount of unemployment throughout the country is ab- normal. Oiicago especially is cited as an example. But who are the authorities for this information? Two news- papers, whose political affiliations are such that it would be for their interest to make it appear that the country is in a state of great industrial depression; and one amateur investigator, Chauncey Beaulieu, whose sole claim to rec- ognition seems to be scattering magazine articles of the popular^ sensational type. On the other hand, no less a person than Professor Charles R. Henderson, Secretary of the Chicago Commission on Unemployment, stated that as a result of the study of that commission, it was his be- lief that in Chicago the amount of unemployment was not unusual. REASONING L Induction. A. Have enough instances of the class under consideration been investigated to es- 198 Methods of Refutation tablish the probable existence of a gen- eral law? B. Have enough instances been investigated to establish absolutely the existence of a general law? II. Deduction. A. Are both premises true? B. Is the fact stated in the minor premise an instance of the general law ex- pressed in the major premise? III. Antecedent probabihty. A. Is the cause of sufficient strength to pro- duce the alleged effect? B. May something intervene and prevent the action of the cause? IV. Sign, A. Argument from effect to cause. 1. Is the alleged cause adequate to pro- duce the observed effect? 2. Could the observed effect have re- sulted from any other cause than the one assigned? B. Argum.ent from effect to effect. I. Do the combined tests of argument from effect to cause and from cause to effect hold? 199 Methods of Refutation V. Example. A. Is there any fundamental difference be- tween the case in hand and the case cited as an example ? FALLACIES A fallacy is an error in reasoning. The preced- ing part of this chapter has already suggested tests that will expose many such faults, but there are a few errors which, because of their frequency or their inadaptability to other classification, demand separate treatment. This book follows the plan of most other texts on argumentation, and treats these errors under a separate head marked fallacies. To detect a fallacy in another's argument is to weaken, if not to destroy, his case; to avoid making a fal- lacy in one's own argument means escape from hu- miliation and defeat. Hence, a knowledge of fal- lacies is one of the most essential parts of a de- bater's equipment. The classification given here does not pretend to be exhaustive; it does, however, consider the most common and insidious breaches of reasoning that are likely to occur, and the following pages should be studied with great care. 200 Methods of Refutation I. Begging the Question (Petitio Principii) I. Mere assumption. Begging the question means assuming the truth of that which needs proof. This fallacy is found in its simplest form in epithets and appellations. The lawyer who speaks of " the criminal on trial for his Hf e " begs the question in that he assumes the prisoner to be a criminal before the court has rendered a verdict. Those writers who have recently discussed " the brutal game of football " without having first ad- duced a particle of proof to show that the game is brutal, fall into the same error. An unpardonable instance of question-begging lies in the following introduction, once given by a debater who was at- tacking the proposition, '^Resolved, That the Fed- eral government should acquire and operate the rail- roads in the United States " : We of the negative will show that the efficient and highly beneficial system of private ownership should be main- tained, and that the irnpracticable system of government ownership can never succeed in the United States or in any similarly governed coimtry. Private ownership and government ownership may possess these qualities attributed to them, but the debater has no right to make such an assump- tion ; he must prove that they have these qualities. 201 Methods of Refutation 2. Assumption used as proof. Such barefaced assumptions as the preceding usually do little dam- age except to the one vv ho makes them. They are not likely to lead astray an audience of average in- telligence; on the other hand, they do stamp the arguer as prejudiced and illogical. But when as- sumptions are used as proof, hidden in the midst of quantities of other material, they may produce an unwarranted effect upon one who is not a clear thinker, or who is off his guard. If, without show- ing that football is brutal, one calls it an extremely brutal game, and then urges its abolishment on the ground of its brutality, he has used an assumption as proof, and has, therefore, begged the question. The debater who stated, without proving, that vast numbers of unskilled laborers were needed in the United States, and then urged this as a reason why no educational test should be applied to immigrants coming to this country, furnished an example of the same fallacy. 3. Unv^arranted assumption of the truth of a suppressed premise. The student is already fa- miliar with the enthymeme. The enthymeme con- stitutes a valid form of reasoning only when the suppressed premise is recognized as true. There- fore, whenever an arguer makes use of the enthy- 202 Methods of Refutation meme without attempting to establish a suppressed premise whose truth is not admitted, he has argued fallaciously. This is a third method of begging the question. To illustrate: In advocating the abolishment of football from the list of college ath- letic sports, one might reason, " Football should be abolished because it obviously exposes a player to possible injury." The suppressed premise in this case would be: All sports which expose a player to possible injury should be abolished. Failure to prove the truth of this unadmitted statement con- stitutes the fallacy. 4. Assumption equivalent to the proposition to be proved. It is not surprising that a man car- ried away with excitement or prejudice should make assumptions that he does not even try to sub- stantiate, but that any one should assume the truth of the very conclusion that he has set out to es- tablish seems incredible. Such a form of begging the question, however, does frequently occur. Sometimes the fallacy is so hidden in a mass of il- lustration and rhetorical embellishment that at first it is not apparent; but stripped of its verbal finery, it stands out very plainly. The following passage written on the affirmative side of the proposition, '' Resolved, That the college course should be short- 203 Methods of Refutation ened to three years," will serve as a particularly flagrant illustration: It is a well-known fact that in the world of to-day time is an essential factor in the race for success. No young man can afford to dawdle for four long years in acquiring a so-called " higher " education. Three-fourths of that time is, if anything, more than sufficient in which to attain all the graces and culture that the progressive man needs. It is evident that the " argument " in this case consists of nothing more than a repetition of the proposition. 5. Arguing in a circle. Another phase of beg- ging the question consists of using an assumption as proof of a proposition and of then quoting the proposition as proof of the assumption. Two as- sertions are made, neither of which is substanti- ated by any real proof, but each of which is used to prove the other. This fallacy probably occurs most frequently in conversation. Consider the fol- lowing : A. " Government by commission is the best form of city government." B. " What makes you think so ? " A. " Because it has been adopted by our most progressive cities — Des IMoines, Galveston, Cedar Rapids." 204 Methods of Refutation B. " Why do you call them our most progres- sive cities ? " A. " Because they have adopted the best fonn of city government." This fallacy occurs when one proves the author- ity of the church from the testimony of the scrip- tures, and then establishes the authenticity of the scriptures by the testimony of the church. A sim- ilar fallacy has been pointed out in the works of Plato. In Phoodo, he demonstrates the immortal- ity of the soul from its simplicity, and in the Re- public, he demonstrates the simplicity of the soul from its immortality. The following fragment of a brief argues in a circle: I. This principle is in accordance with the princi- ples of the Democratic party, since A. The leader of the Democratic party be- lieves in it, for I. As the leader of the party, he natu- rally believes in Democratic princi- ples. II. Ambiguous Terms (Equivocation; Con- fusion of Terms) The fallacy of ambiguous terms consists of using the same term in tv/o distinct senses in the same 205 Methods of Refutation argument. Thus if one were to argue that " no Sv,.^^^ designing person ought to be trusted; engravers are by profession designers; therefore they ought not to be trusted," it is quite apparent that the term " design " means totally different things in the two premises. The same fallacy occurs in the ar- Tgument, " Since the American people believe in a republican form of government, they should vote the Republican ticket." Again: " Interference with another man's business is il- legal ; " Underselling interferes with another man's business ; " Therefore underselling is illegal." J. S. Mill in his System of Logic discusses the fallacy of ambiguous terms with great care. In part he says : The mercantile public are frequently led into this fal- lacy by the phrase " scarcity of money." In the language of commerce, "money" has two meanings: currency, or the circulating medium; and capital seeking investment, especially investment on loan. In this last sense, the word is used when the " money market " is spoken of, and when the "value of money" is said to be high or low, the rate of interest being meant. The consequence of this am- biguity is, that as soon as scarcity of money in the latter of these senses begins to be felt, — as soon as there is difficult^' of obtaining loans, and the rate of interest is high, — it is concluded that this must arise from causes acting upon the 206 Methods of Refutation quantity of money in the other and more popular sense; that the circulating medium must have diminished in quan- tity, or ought to be increased. I am aware that, inde- pendently of the double meaning of the term, there are in the facts themselves some peculiarities, giving an apparent support to this error; but the ambiguity of the language stands on the very threshold of the subject, and intercepts all attempts to throw light upon it. As countless words and expressions have several meanings, there is almost no limit to the confusion which this fallacy can cause. Some of the most common terms that are used ambiguously are right, liberty, law, representative, theory, church, state, student. By carefully defining all terms that have more than one meaning and by insisting on a rigid ad- herence to the one meaning wherever the term is used, a debater can easily avoid fallacies of this sort in his own argument and expose those of his opponent. III. False Cause The fallacy of false cause occurs whenever that which could in no way bring about the effect that is being established is urged as its cause. This fal- lacy in its most obvious form is found only in the arguments of careless and illogical thinkers. Some 207 I Methods of Refutation college students occasionally draw briefs that con- tain such reasoning as the following: I. The Midland Railroad first mortgage bonds are an unsound investment, because A. The Interstate Commerce Commission has pre- scribed a uniform method of accounting for all railroads in the United States. A member of an intercollegiate debating team once argued thus : I. The adoption of woman suffrage in the United States will work political harm, for A. Many women will not go to the polls. The error of such plainly absurd reasoning as occurs in the preceding illustrations needs no ex- planation. There is one form of the fallacy of false cause, however, that is much more common and insidious and therefore deser^'es special treat- ment. Post hoc ergo propter hoc. (After this, there- fore, on account of this.) This phase of the fal- lacy consists of the assumption that since cause pre- cedes effect what has preceded an event has caused it. The most frequent occurrence of the error is to be found in superstitions. If some one meets with an accident while taking a journey that began on Friday, many people will argue that the accident 208 Methods of Refutation is the effect of the unlucky day. Some farmers be- lieve their crops will not prosper unless the planting is done when the moon is in a certain quarter; sailors often refuse to embark in a renamed ves- sel. Because in the past, one event has been known to follow another, it is argued that the first event was the cause of the second, and that the sec- ond event will invariably follow the first. But this fallacy does not find its only expression in superstitions. To post hoc reasoning is due much of the popularity of patent medicines. Po- litical beliefs, even, are often generated in the same way; prosperity follows the passing of a certain law, and people jump to the conclusion that this one law has caused the " good times." Some dema- gogues go so far as to say that education among the Indians is responsible for the increased death rate of many of the tribes. A slightly different phase of the post hoc fal- lacy consists in attributing the existence of a cer- tain condition to a single preceding event, when at the most this event could have been only a partial cause of what followed, and may not have been a cause at all. A medicine that could not have ef- fected a cure may have been of some slight benefit. A law that could not possibly have been the sole 209 Methods of Refutation cause of " good times " may have had a beneficial effect. To avoid this fallacy, one must be sure not only that the assigned cause is operative, but that it is also adequate. In the following passage. Harpers Weekly points out the error in the reasoning made by several col- lege presidents who, after compiling statistics, stated that a college education increased a man's chance of success from one in ten thousand to one in forty: Not many persons doubt any longer that an American college education is an advantage to most youths who can get it, but in these attempts to estimate statistically what college education does for men there is a good deal of con- fusion of post hoc and propter hoc. Define success as you will, a much larger proportion of American college men win it than of men who don't go to college, but how much college training does for those successful men is still de- batable. Remember that they are a picked lot, the likeliest children of parents whose ability or desire to send their children to college is evidence of better fortune, or at least of higher aspirations than the average. And because their iparents are, as a rule, more or less prosperous and v/ell educated, they get and would get, whether they went to college or not, a better than average start in life. . . . If one boy out of a family of four goes to college, it is the clever one. The boys who might go to college and don't are commonly the lazy ones who won't study. The colleges get nowadays a large proportion of the best boys of the strongest families. The best boys of the strongest families would wnn far more than their proportionate share of success even if there were no colleges. 210 Methods of Refutation An exposure of similarly fallacious reasoning is made by Edward M. Shepard in the Atlantic Monthly: The Republican argument is that the whole edifice of our prosperity depends upon high protective or prohibitive duties, and that to them is due our industrial progress. Is it not, indeed, a disparagement of the self-depending facul- ties of the American people thus to affirm that, in spite of their marvelous advantages, they would have failed in industrial Hfe unless by force of law they could have pre- vented the competition with them of other peoples? It is only by the sophistry to which I have referred that this disparagement is justified. It is that old argument of veritable folly that, because event Z follows event W, as it follows events A and B and many besides, therefore W is the sole cause of Z. From what has been said it is obvious that it is never safe to account for an occurrence or a con- dition by merely referring to something that ac- companies it or precedes it. There must be a con- nection between the alleged cause and the effect, and this connection must be causal ; otherwise, both may be the result of the same cause. The cause must also be adequate; and it must, moreover, be evident that the result has not been produced, wholly or partially, by some other cause or causes. 211 Methods of Refutation IV. Composition and Division Composition. The fallacy of composition con- sists of attributing to a whole that which has been proved only of a part. To condemn or to approve of a fraternity because of the conduct of only a few of its members, to say that what is advanta- geous for certain states in the Union would there- fore be beneficial for the United States as a whole, to reason from the existence of a few millionaires that the English nation is wealthy, would be to fall into this fallacy. Furthermore, it is fallacious to think that because something is true of each mem- ber of a class taken distrihntively, the same thing holds true of the class taken collectively. It is not logical to argue that because each member of a jury is very likely to judge erroneously, the jury as a whole is also very likely to judge erroneously. Because each witness to an event is liable to give false or incorrect evidence, it is unreasonable to think that no confidence can be placed in the con- current testimony of a number of witnesses. Division. The fallacy of division is the con- verse of the fallacy of composition. It consists of attributing to a part that which has been proved t»f the whole. For instance, Lancaster county is 212 Methods of Refutation the most fertile county In Pennsylvania, but that fact by itself does not warrant the statement that any one particular farm is exceptionally fertile. Because the people of a country are suffering from famine, it does not follow that one particular per- son is thus afflicted. Again, it would be fallacious to say : It is admitted that the judges of the court of appeal cannot misinterpret the law; Richard Rowe is a judge of the court of appeal; therefore he cannot misinterpret the law. V. Ignoring the Question (Ignoratio Elenchi) An arguer is said to ignore the question, or to argue beside the point, whenever he attempts to prove or disprove anything except the proposition under discussion. This fallacy may arise through carelessness or trickery. An unskilled debater will often unconsciously wander away from his sub- ject; and an unscrupulous debater, when unable to defend his position, will sometimes cunningly shift his ground and argue upon a totally new proposition, which is, however, so similar to the original one that in the heat of controversy the change Is hardly noticeable. A discussion on the subject, " The boycott is a legitimate means of se- curing concessions from employers,'' which at- Methods of Refutation tempted to show the effectiveness of the boycott, would ignore the question. Likewise, in a discus- sion on the proposition, " The average college stu- dent could do in three years the work now done in four," any proof showing the desirability of such a crowding together of college work would be he- side the point. In the following passage Macaulay holds up to scorn certain arguments which contain this fallacy : The advocates of Charles, like the advocates of other malefactors against whom overwhelming evidence is pro- duced, generally decline all controversy about facts, and content themselves with calling testimony to character. We charge him with having broken his coronation oath ; and we are told that he kept his marriage vow! V/e ac- cuse him of having given up his people to the merciless in- flictions of the most hot-headed and hard-hearted of pre- lates; and the defence is, that he took his little son on his knees and kissed him! We censure him for having vio- lated the articles of the Petition of Rights, after having, for good and valuable consideration, promised to obey them; and we are informed that he was accustomed to hear prayers at six o'clock in the morning! Whenever an arguer avoids the question at issue and makes an attack upon the character, principles, former beliefs, or personal pecuharities of his opponent, he commits the special form of this fal- lacy known as argumentum ad hominem. It is obviously fallacious to reason that a principle is 214 Methods of Refutation unsound because It is upheld by an untrustworthy advocate, or because it is inconsistent with 'the ad- vocate's former beliefs and practices. Honesty is a worthy principle, even though advocated by a thief. ' The duty of industry is no less binding be- cause it is advocated by an idler. Lawyers often commit this error by seeking to discredit the op- posing attorney. Campaign speakers frequently attempt to overthrow the opposing party's platform by showing that it is inconsistent with the party's previous measures and declarations. To bring in such irrelevant matter is to ignore the question. Closely allied to argumentum ad hominem is an- other phase of ignoring the question called argu- mentum ad poptdiim. This fallacy consists of using before a certain audience statements which will strongly appeal to their prejudices and partisan views, but which are not generally accepted facts and which would undoubtedly meet with strong op- position elsewhere. A speaker who brings in this kind of argument makes use neither of reasoning nor of legitimate persuasion. He neglects his proposition and attempts to excite the feelings of his audience to such an extent as to render them in- capable of forming a dispassionate judgment upon the matter in hand. Methods of Refutation In general, it is necessary only to point out a fallacy to weaken an argument. Sometimes, how- ever, the error is so involved and so hidden that, though it is apparent to one who is arguing, yet it is not easily made apparent to the audience. In overcoming this difficulty, arguers often resort to certain peculiar devices of arranging and present- ing the material for refutation. Long experience has shown that the two methods given here are of inestimable value. I. Reductio ad Absurdum (Reducing to an Absurdity) The method of refuting an argument by reduc- tio ad absurdum consists of showing that the argu- ment to be refuted, if true, proves not only the con- clusion given, but also other conclusions which are manifestly absurd. For example, a debater once contended that colleges should not seek to root out professionalism in athletic sports, because, by com- ing in contact with college life, professional play- ers receive considerable benefit. His opponent an- swered him by showing that tlie same argument carried out to its logical conclusion would prove that a college should encourage the attendance of criminals and degenerates on the ground that they 216 Methods of Refutation will be benefited thereby. Thus he reduced, the ar- gument to a manifest absurdity. At one time the officers of a national bank per- mitted their institution to be wrecked by certifying, and thereby practically guaranteeing, the checks of a firm of stock brokers when the brokers did not have the money represented by the checks de- posited in the bank. This was distinctly a criminal offense. The brokers failed, and, the bank having closed its doors in consequence, the president of the bank was brought to trial. The Atlantic Monthly reduces to an absurdity the chief argument used for the defense : A jury having been empaneled to try him, he pleaded guilty, his counsel urging, as a reason for clemency, that the violation of this statute was a habit of the New York banks in the Wall Street district, and that if the wrecked bank had not followed this law-breaking custom of its com- petitors the stock brokers would have withdrawn their ac- count. The plea was successful, and the officer escaped with a small fine. Imagine a burglar or a pickpocket urg- ing a plea for clemency based on the general business habits and customs of his criminal confreres ! ^ In the following quotation Henry George assails the belief that priority of occupation justly carries with it the ownership of land : 1 Atlantic Monthly, 94:173. 217 Methods of Refutation As for the deduction of a complete and exclusive in- dividual right to land from priority of occupation, that is, if possible, the most absurd ground on which land owner- ship can be defended. Has the first comer at a banquet the right to turn back all the chairs and claim that none of the other guests shall partake of the food provided, ex- cept as they make terms with him? Does the first man who presents a ticket at the door of a theater, and passes in, acquire by his priority the right to shut the doors and have the performance go on for him alone? Does the first passenger who enters a railroad car obtain the right to scatter his baggage over all the seats and compel the pas- sengers who come in after him to stand up? 2 College students are continually urging as a de- fense of professionalism in their own athletic teams the argument that since other colleges employ pro- fessional players it is necessary for them to do likewise. By carrying this argument a step farther, one could show, with equal reason, that since drinking, stealing, and cheating are prevalent in other colleges, these same practices should also be indulged in at the college in question. In the same way one may refute by reductio ad ahsur- dum all such arguments as, " Custom has ren- dered the spoils system desirable " ; " The preva- lency of the high license law shows its superiority to prohibition " ; " Since in the past all college students were required to study Latin and Greek, 2 Progress and Povertj', p. 342. 218 Methods of Refutation these subjects should be required at the present time." II. The Dilemma Another device that an arguer will often find useful when he wishes to refute an opponent's statement is the dilemma. In the dilemma the arguer shows that the statement he wishes to disprove can be true only through the truth of at least one of two possibilities. He then proves that these possibilities are untenable, and therefore the original statement is false. To rep- resent the dilemma with letters: The truth of A rests upon the truth of either x or y ; but as x and y are both false, A is false. According to the exact meaning of the word, the dilemma applies to only two untenable positions; the process is exactly the same, however, when the possibilities are more nu- merous. The argument that the United States ought to dis- pose of the Philippines immediately is frequently attacked by means of a dilemma. Those who favor retaining the islands point out that there are only two methods by which we could dispose of them : to give them self-government, or to turn them over to some other nation. The " imperialists " then go on 219 Methods of Refutation to show that the inhabitants of the Philippines are not capable of ruling themselves, that self-govern- ment would mean barbarism and anarchy ; then they prove that to turn the islands over to another na- tion would result in misrule and the exploitation of the natives. While urging Virginia to join the Union in 1788, Edmund Randolph made use of the dilemma in answering the arguments that Virginia should re- main a sovereign nation by herself: If Virginia can exist without the Union, she must de- rive that ability from one or the other of the two sources, namely: from her natural situation, or because she has no cause to fear from other nations. What is her situa- tion? She is very accessible; the large, capacious bay of Chesapeake, which is but too excellentl}' adapted for the admission of enemies, renders her very vulnerable. She has frontiers adjoining the States of Pennsylvania, Mary- land, and North Carolina. Two of these States have de- clared themselves members of the Union. Will she be in- accessible to the inhabitants of those States? ... If then, Sir, Virginia, from her situation, is not inaccessible, let us consider if she be protected by having no cause to fear from other nations. Have you no cause to fear from Spain, whose dominions border on your country? Every nation, every people, in our circumstances, have always had abundant cause to fear. We owe a debt to Spain : do v/e expect indulgence from that quarter? Will the Dutch be silent about the debt due to them? Is there any pretension that any one of these nations will be patient? The debts due the British are also very considerable ; these debts have 220 Methods of Refutation been witheld contrary to treaty; if Great Britain will de- mand the payment of these debts peremptorily, what will be the consequences? Can we pay them if demanded? Will no danger result from a refusal? . . . Thus, Sir, I hope I have satisfied you that we are unsafe without a union, and that in union alone safety consists. In conversation and debate, the dilemma is fre- quently introduced by means of a question. The debater, wishing to trap his opponent, asks him a pertinent question which previous investigation has shown can possibly be answered in only two or three ways, and which the opponent cannot afford to answer at all. A good illustration of this de- vice occurs in the New Testament: And it came to pass, on one of the days, as he was teaching the people in the temple, and preaching the gospel, there came upon him the chief priests and the scribes with the elders ; and they spake, saying unto him, Tell us : By what authority doest thou these things? or who is he that gave thee this authority? And he answered and said unto them, I also will ask you a question and tell me: The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or from men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying. If we shall say, From heaven; he will say. Why did ye not believe him? But if we shall say. From men ; all the people will stone us : for they be persuaded that John wal a prophet. And they answered, that they knew not whence it was. And Jesus said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.^ 3 Luke XX, 1-8. 221 Methods of Refutation Before one can safely use the dilemma he must carefully investigate every phase of the statement that he wishes to refute. If he is to use the di- lemma directly, he must consider every possibiUty — commonly called the horns of the dilemma — upon which the truth of the statement may rest. If there is a single possibility which he is not ready to meet and overthrow, his whole effort is fruitless. For instance, a debater, in attempting to rebut the statement that college fraternities are harmful, said that his opponent must show that fraternities are either morally, socially, financially or intellectually detrimental to their members; he then proved as best he could that in these respects fraternities are beneficial rather than harmful, and sat down think- ing that he had gone a long way toward winning the debate. His opponent then arose and admitting nearly everything that had been said, based his ar- gument on the idea that fraternities were harmful to the college as a zvhole. The first speaker had not considered every alternative. If an arguer is to approach a dilemma through the medium of a ques- tion, he must be sure that he knows every reason- able answer that his opponent can make. When one has satisfied these conditions, he can use the dilemma with great effect. 222 Methods of Refutation By way of summary it may be said that the suc- cessful arguer must both build up his own proof and destroy his opponent's. To accomplish the lat- ter one has to know what to refute and what to leave alone; he must distinguish between the im- portant and the unessential, and he must take care not to *' refute himself." Since proof consists of evidence and reasoning, the first step for him to take in refuting an argument is to apply the tests for each, and if possible show where his opponent has erred. In the next place, he should see whether he can discover and point out any of the more im- portant fallacies; the ones mentioned here are beg- ging the question, ambiguous terms, false cause, composition and dizision, and ignoring the ques- tion. Should the arguer find any of these funda- mental weaknesses, it is ordinarily sufficient merely to call attention to them ; for the sake of emphasis, however, one may make use of two especially ef- fective methods of refutation, reductio ad absurdum and the dilemma. EXERCISES A. Criticize the following arguments; point out and name the fallacies they contain : I. Since the State is made up of occupational groups, the welfare of the State is the sum of the welfare of all these occupational groups. 223 Methods of Refutation 2. The jury system could hardly be adapted to our mod- ern civilization, since it had its origin a great many years ago. 3. If most men who have been in prison lead criminal lives afterwards, is there any doubt that prisons exercise a debasing influence? 4. This argument for socialism is unsound. I admit that the author of the article is a skilful, plausible writer, but he has been under the ban of the law. A few years ago he spent ten months in the penitentiary, convicted of having incited a riot. 5. It is certain that the X automobile is the best machine manufactured in the United States, because it is put out by the most reUable company. We know that the X Company is the most reliable manufacturing firm in the business, because it manufactures the best automo- bile. 6. It being admittedly the duty of the State to protect its citizens even when they are abroad, New York should re- quire Mexico to show every courtesy to those members of the commonwealth who are now at Vera Cruz. 7. Alabama is a Democratic State; Coosa County is a Democratic county ; therefore John Smith of Coosa County is a Democrat. /8. The Senator-elect will be a great orator, for he is able to reason clearly — a faculty that all eloquent speakers pos- sess. 9. The engineering school has an excellent course of study since each subject in its curriculum is important and practical. 10. Since the university is now building a modern, com- modious gymnasium, it will have a superior football team next fall. 11. This man represents the kind of people that live in Century, because he represents that town in the Legisla- ture. 224 Methods of Refutation 12. College students being, as a rule, the most energetic and the brightest young men in the country, it is safe to conclude that the president of the junior class is a person of unusual attainments. 13. A man who passes under a ladder will meet with misfortune soon afterwards. 14. To prove that Congress erred in not constructing a sea-Ie\'el canal at Panama, I shall attempt to show you, first, how much traffic now crosses the Atlantic that for- merly passed through the Mediterranean. 15. A State constabulary is considered a necessity in Pennsylvania ; therefore a State constabulary should be or- ganized in Rhode Island. 16. I am to speak this evening about the honor system, and I shall endeavor to prove that our college ought to adopt this practicable, character-developing method of holding examinations. 17. Since whatever system fails at Harvard will cer- tainly fail at this college, we should not adopt the fully elective system of studies. 18. The incompetency of the present session of the Leg- islature is attested by the useless laws that it has passed. Of course these laws are useless; they were made by the most incompetent Legislature we have had in twenty- live years. 19. Government Is a blessing. Despotism Is one form of government; therefore despotism is a blessing. 20. All great leaders have been men who inspired con- fidence. Since this candidate for the Presidency Inspires confidence, he will be a great leader. B. Refute the following statements and name thel method of refutation employed In each case: 1. It is practicable to reduce the four years' course in this college to three years. 2. We should not adopt the Initiative and referendum 225 Methods of Refutation form of government, inasmuch as this system was not thought of by the founders of our nation. 3. In the recent gubernatorial election in New York the amount of illegal voting was unusual; both the New York Journal and the Boston American testify to this. 4. Since playing pool costs money, college students should not indulge in this form of recreation. 5. The employment of the best athletic coach in the coun- try will certainly give the college a championship team. 6. The Panama Canal does not need fortifications. 7. The honor system has succeeded at Princeton ; it v/ill always succeed where it is given a fair trial. 8. The preparedness of our navy and the brisk recruiting in our army show that war is imminent. 9. In the contest between England and the Boers it was right that Americans should sympathize with the South Africans, because they were the weaker side. ID. It is an established fact that the reduction in the tariff has benefited the country; no less a person than Woodrow Wilson has said so. C. Put the following article into the form of a brief and show exactly what methods of refutation are used : Government Ownership One of the persistent claims of the advocates of the ex- tension of governmental functions is that if the State or the municipahty undertakes to operate large business prop- erties, then the community at large will take a greater in- terest in government and the business taken over will be run more successfully. This has a most plausible sound, but experience fails to lead to this conclusion. Take as a concrete example the Post Office Department. Its business methods are such as would put a private en- terprise in a receiver's hands — yet the people care little for its management. The buildings occupied by the Post 226 Methods of Refutation Office and owned by the United States are given to the Post Office Department, and lighted and cared for at the expense of the Treasury Department. Yet if at the end of the year the Post Office shows a meager excess of rev- enue over expenses, the people declare it a business suc- cess. "Strikes will be eliminated," is the often-made state- ment of those believing in government enterprises. Un- fortunately strikes have not been eliminated — as, for in- stance, the Australian and the French railway strikes, the gas-workers' strikes in England, and in this country there have been strikes of street laborers, and once a strike of letter-carriers. A frequent claim is made that labor conditions under public ownership are better as regards hours of labor, wages, safe conditions of operation, and so forth. If this were true, it would merely mean that the methods em- ployed are such as will increase the cost of the service at the expense of the users and lead to the estabHshment of a privileged class of workers. So far as working conditions are concerned, careful investigation will fail to show any appreciable difference between publicly and privately owned utilities. As an instance of the failure of public employ- ment to give greater consideration to the comfort and safety of the workingman than does private employment, we may compare the work of the railway mail clerks with that of the baggage-men laboring on the same train. 22*J CHAPTER IX DEBATE — SOME PRACTICAL SUGGES- TIONS Debate has been defined as the oral presenta- tion of argument under conditions that allow both sides to be heard. In both class-room and inter- collegiate debating each debater usually makes two speeches, a main speech and a rebuttal speech. The main speech ordinarily extends over a period of from seven to twelve minutes, according to the rules governing the contest, and is largely constructive in nature. The rebuttal speech, commonly called the rebuttal, is usually a little more than half the length of the main speech, and is for the most part destructive. It is almost superfluous to add that both sides are allowed exactly the same amount of time in which to present their arguments; that the affirmative side speaks first, the order being, when there are several debaters, affirmative, nega- tive, affirmative, negative, and so on; and that all the main speeches are given before either side makes 228 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions a rebuttal speech. If there is only one debater on each side, it is undoubtedly best for the affirmative to offer the first rebuttal; if there are several de- baters, the order is usually reversed. The debaters on either side may or may not speak in rebuttal in the same order as in the main argument. HOW TO PREPARE FOR DEBATE In several ways the work of the debater differs from the work of one who is preparing a written argument or who is to speak without being con- fronted by an opponent. As far as the completion of the brief, the work in all cases is the same, but at this point the debater has to decide what special preparation he shall make for handling and pre- senting to the audience the material that he has collected. He is puzzled to know whether it will be worth while to expand his brief ; and if he does expand it, he is in doubt as to just what he should do with the expanded argument. A debater has his choice of several possible methods of procedure. The simplest, though not the most effective method, is to write out the argu- m^ent in full, and to memorize it word for v/ord. The weakness of such a course lies in the immo- 22g Debate — Some Practical Suggestions bility of its attack and defense. The first speaker for the affirmative may decide beforehand exactly what he will say and the order in which he will say it, but all those who are to follow should adapt their arguments, to some extent at least, to the exigencies of the debate. They will find it desirable to make a change in one place in order to join their arguments harmoniously to those of their colleagues; they will wish to make changes in another place for the sake of assailing an obvi- ously weak spot or in order to ward off an unex- pected attack. This versatility is practically im- possible if one is delivering an argument that he has memorized word for word. Again, a memo- rized argument cannot carry with it the force and the conviction that may be found in an effort of a more spontaneous character. Furthermore, if a de- bater should be so unfortunate as to forget even a few words of a memorized selection, he would probably be forced to sit down with his speech only partially completed. Another method that some debaters follow is to memorize portions of their argument and to ex- temporize the rest. This is open to two great ob- jections: first, it is difficult to join together grace- fully the memorized passages and the extemporized ; 230 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions second, the very smoothness with which the mem- orized passages are delivered betrays the crudeness and awkwardness of the extemporized parts. A third method, and undoubtedly the best one for the student to adopt, is not to expand the brief before he debates, but to memorize the greater part of it a^ a brief. In this way a debater has his ideas well in hand, and, without being tied down to any particular manner of expression or obliged to follow any set order of procedure, he can use his material as opportunity requires. His language should be at least partially extemporaneous; he may have a fairly clear conception of how he is to frame his sentences, but he should have nothing learned word for word. Thus his speech may have an element of spontaneity that will give it a tone of sincerity and earnestness unattainable when one is repeating a memorized passage. Too much, however, must not be left to the inspiration of the moment; no student should ever try to debate without first at- tempting in his room to expand his brief orally. He is sure to meet with considerable difficulty the first time he tries to formulate his ideas in clear, forceful, and elegant language ; but several attempts will produce a remarkable change. After a few endeavors he will discover ways of expressing him- 231 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions self that he will remember, even though the words vary greatly each time. The superiority of this method is marked. It enables the debater to become perfectly familiar w^th all his material, and it gives him a fairly good idea of what language he shall use. He is not, however, bound down to any set speech; he can alter his argument to suit the occasion. Should he unexpectedly find that his opponent has admitted a certain idea, he can merely call attention to this fact and not waste valuable time in giving super- fluous proof. If he sees that his opponent has made such a strong argument that some refutation is necessary at the outset in order to gain the confi- dence of his audience, he can instantly change the order of his proof and begin with a point that he had, perhaps, intended to use in another part of his speech. In fact, this method enables one to debate rather than to declaim. In most debating contests it is permissible for the contestants to make use of a few notes written on small cards that can be carried in a pocket or held unobtrusively in the hand. Such a practice, if not abused, is commended by some teachers of ar- gumentation. On these cards the debater can put 232 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions down the main headings of his brief, all statistics that are difficult to remember, and all quotations. He had better not refer to these cards for the head- ings of his brief if he can possibly avoid doing so. It will be a great stimulus, however, for him to know that he has this help to rely on in case of neces- sity. Statistics and quotations he may read with- out hesitation. One should speak his debate many times by him- self, not only for the purpose of gaining facility in expression, but also for the sake of condensing his material to an argument that will approximately occupy the exact time allowed him for debating. It is a deplorable fact that many debaters try to say so much that when their allotment of time has expired they find themselves in the very midst of their argument. Such an ending leaves the audi- ence confused and unimpressed. No debater should ever omit his conclusion. If there is only one con- testant on each side, a conclusion is certainly neces- sary both for the sake of clearness and emphasis, and because an unfinished argument is not a unit. If there are several contestants on each side, the fact that the opposing speakers intervene and distract the attention of the audience makes it even more neces- 233 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions sary that each debater end his argument with a formal conclusion, and by means of it bind his work to that of his colleagues. REFUTATION As much time, if not more, should be spent in preparing the destructive as in preparing the con- structive portion of an argument. One can deter- mine beforehand almost exactly how he will estab- lish his side of the proposition, but just what ma- terial he will need to overthrow his opponent's proof w^ll depend upon how that proof is con- structed. Ordinarily one can predict what lines of reasoning an opponent will take; in fact, no one should ever attempt to debate until he has studied the proposition so thoroughly that he can antici- pate practically all the arguments that will be ad- vanced. Yet until he sees on what points the em- phasis is placed, what arguments are ignored, and what evidence is used, he cannot tell positively what facts and what inferences will be most valuable as refutation. Therefore, a debater who wishes to offer good refutation must have a wealth of material at his command and be able to select instantly the ideas that will be of the greatest value. 234 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions This necessity for an abundance of information precludes the idea, held by some, that good de- baters depend for their refutation on the inspira- tion of the m.oment. Great speakers often spend incalculable time in preparing to answer the argu- ments of the opposition. Webster's Reply to Hayne, which is a recognized masterpiece of oratory, and which is almost entirely refutation, was at first thought to have been composed over night, but Webster declared that all the material he had used had lain in his desk for months. Refutation should come for the most part, though not entirely, in the rebuttal. Unless one has made a thorough study of both sides of the question, and is thus sure of his ground, anticipatory refutation is dangerous. It is sometimes an excellent plan to take the wind out of an opponent's sails by over- throwing an argument of his before he has a chance to present it, but in doing this the debater must use the greatest caution. To begin with, he must be sure that the argument he refutes is of such a fun- damental nature that it is essential to the case of the other side, for if his opponent fails to use this point, the debater not only has exposed himself to ridicule, but has wasted valuable time. When one does refute in advance a point that must be up- 235 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions held by the opposition, a skilful opponent often can, by calling attention to the fact that even those on the other side recognize the importance and strength of this argument, destroy much of the ad- vantage that has been gained. To refute an argu- ment before it is advanced, sometimes brings fail- ure and sometimes brings success. A debater must exercise judgment. One must also exercise a high degree of judg- ment in deciding where he can most advantageously answer the arguments that have actually been given. Whenever a debater presents so thorough and so strong proof that the audience is likely to think that he has settled the question and won the debate, the succeeding speaker on the opposite side will have great difficulty in making any impression un- less he can at the start at least partially discredit the preceding argument. The attitude of the audi- ence will compel him to use refutation before be- ginning his constructive work. On the other hand, if the preceding argument has apparently produced but little effect, he may at once begin to build his own proof. He should, however, show good rea- son for postponing his refutation. To ignore the previous arguments entirely, or arbitrarily to post- 236 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions pone answering them, is likely to give the audience an unfavorable impression. Common errors in refutation. A common er- ror in refutation is the failure to attack an oppo- nent's main arguments. Students especially are wont to neglect fundamental principles, and instead of overthrowing the points that count, occupy inval- uable time with trivial matters. To rebut unimpor- tant details, admitted matter, mere illustrations, and errors obviously due to haste in speaking, is a fault that every debater should carefully avoid. Such trivialities the audience immediately forgets, and to bring them up again and refute them serves no worthy purpose whatever. Another serious fault common to refutation in student debates is lack of coherence. The student falls into this error when he rebuts a miscellaneous lot of points without having first ascertained the function of each and differentiated the main ideas from the subordinate ones. Instead of looking at the argument as a whole and attacking it with the concerted strength of all his forces, he fires scatter- ing shots, and does but little damage. In refuta- tion a debater must first see clearly the relation between each point that he rebuts and the proposi- 237 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions tion ; otherwise his work is wasted. Secondly, he must make this relation perfectly plain to the audi- ence. Instead of overthrowing isolated statements, a debater should take up his opponent's case as a zuhole and weaken it as much as he can. He should attack each main point. Coherent refuta- tion adds much to the effectiveness of a debate. Availability of material for refutation. In of- fering refutation, every inexperienced debater has difficulty in laying his hands on just the material that he desires to use. Possibly he remembers that he has seen somewhere an article that proves the in- sincerity of a man who has just been quoted as an authority; but if he can neither produce this article nor state its substance, he might as well not know about it. Perhaps he remembers having seen a table of statistics showing that his opponent has erred in regard to the death rate in the Spanish- American War ; but unless he can produce the table, his knowledge is of no avail. There is scarcely any time for searching through books or unorganized notes ; material to be of use must be instantly avail- able. Some definite system of arranging rebuttal material is absolutely indispensable. One method that has been tried with great suc- cess consists of putting down on cards of a uniform 238 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions size all the material that can possibly be of use in refutation. These cards the debater then groups, in alphabetical order, under headings that cor- respond to the main divisions of the subject under discussion, and if it seems advisable in any particu- lar instance, he may group them under subdivisions of the proposition. To be more explicit, if a de- bater thinks that the opposition may question the financial success of a plan that he is advocating, he should write out on as many cards as are neces- sary, usually putting only one idea on each card, all the material that goes to show why the plan should succeed and where it has succeeded. Furthermore, if the plan has failed anywhere, he should put down, providing he is able, explanations that will ac- count for the failure without condemning the sys- tem. These cards, then, would naturally be ar- ranged under some such heading as " Finance " or " Success." If the debater wishes, he may also arrange his cards under subheadings. For instance, those cards that go to show why the plan ought to succeed could be put under the subheading, '' Ante- cedent Probability " ; those that show where the plan has succeeded, under " Sign," and those that ac- count for failure of the plan in certain places, un- der the heading " Failures." Any one at all famil- 239 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions lar with a library card catalogue will at once see the various possibilities for arranging these cards. Cards for rebuttal should be made out about as follows : Proposition: Resolved, That profit-sharing and cooperative methods generally afford the most prom- ising solution of the labor problem. (Affirmative.) PRACTICABILITY Practicability The Union Polishing Metal Plating pany has been successfully operating this method since 1902. (C. H. Quinn, look, yz :452.) Com- under Out- 240 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions Practicability The great iron works of Evansville, Wis., are operated under this method. (G. L. Mc- Nutt, Independent, 55:619.) The advantages of such a system are obvious. This method gives not only one debater, but the whole team, almost instant command of all the ma- terial that has been collected. One can find what he wants, and find it hastily; he is not obliged to spend much valuable time in hunting after needed evidence and thus neglect large portions of the speech that is being delivered. A debater should begin on the classification of rebuttal material al- most as soon as he begins to read on his subject. In this way he will save all the material that he gathers, and his catalogued information will be of assistance to him in drawing his brief and in con- structing his main argument as w^ell as in making refutation at the time of the debate. WHAT EACH DEBATER MUST DO The first speaker for the afHrmative. The first speaker for the affirm.ative should be of an ag- 241 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions gressive temperament — in fact, aggressive men, as a rule, make the best affirmative debaters and conservative men the best negative debaters. Upon the first speaker falls the duty of interpreting the proposition. Since the subject of analysis has al- ready been fully discussed, but few directions need be given here. It may be well, however, to em- phasize the qualities of clearness and fairness. A debate, unHke a written argument, cannot be studied and re-read time and again. For this reason, unless the proposition is explained in the very simplest language and by means of the very clearest defini- tions and illustrations, many people in the audience will not understand wliat the debate is about. Long words and high-sounding phrases have no place here. The debater must aim to reach not merely those who are familiar with the subject, but also those to whom the question is absolutely new. If, when the first speaker has finished, any attentive listener of average intelligence fails to understand both the subject of the debate and the attitude of the affirmative side, the speech has been a failure. Then, too, the analysis of the proposition must be fair and just to both sides. A debater has no right to strain or twist the meaning of the proposi- tion so as to gain any advantage for himself. In 242 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions the first place, this practice is dishonest, and an honorable debater does not wish to win by trickery or fraud. Secondly, such an act almost always brings defeat. The fact that a debate is being held, presupposes a subject about which reasonable men may differ. If a debater interprets the proposition so that only one reasonable side exists, manifestly he must be in error, and upon' the exposure of this error he is sure to lose the decision. In debate, therefore, clearness and fairness should especially characterize the four steps that are taken in analyzing the proposition : to define termis, to explain the proposition as a w^hole, to discover the issues, and to make the partition. Upon the completion of the introduction, the first debater for the affirmative proceeds to the discus- sion, and later, should he be the only contestant on the affirmative side, to the conclusion. But if, as is usually the case, there be several debaters on each side, he takes up only one or two main points of the discussion. Since the burden of proof always rests on the affirmative, the first speaker in the argu- ment proper, as a rule, points out the weaknesses in existing conditions, leaving to his colleagues the task of presenting the advantages of a change. In han- dling his proof he must be sure so to correlate his 243 • Debate — Some Practical Suggestions work with the work of his colleagues that, in the minds of the audience, it will all hang together a.s a united whole. To accomplish this object, he may, as he finishes with his partition, state what points he will discuss himself, and what points will be handled by the affirmative speakers that are to succeed him ; and he must, without fail, when he nears the end of his allotted time, hastily summarize the proof that he has given, and outline the proof that is to follow. In this way he may keep the intervening speeches of his opponents from entirely destroying the con- tinuity that should exist between his speech and the speeches of his colleagues. The first speaker for the negative. It rests with the first speaker for the negative to determine whether the introduction as presented by the afhmi- ative is satisfactory, w^hether the analysis of the proposition is clear, adequate, and fair. If the af- firmative has erred in any respect, it is the duty of the first negative debater to supply the defi- ciency or make the correction; otherwise he errs equally with the afifimiative. If the affirmative has failed to explain the proposition so that it is generally understood, the negative is sure to win favor with the audience by spending a few moments in elucidating the subject of controversy. 244 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions If the affirmative debater has analyzed the question inadequately or unfairly, the negative debater should not begin to establish proof until he has set these preliminaries straight. In correcting an unfair analysis, it is never enough that one merely make objections or even give an introduction of his own ; he must briefly — and often a single sentence is sufficient — show to the satisfaction of the audience that his opponent has not interpreted the proposition correctly. On the other hand, if the first speaker for the negative considers the Intro- duction given by the affirmative perfectly fair and satisfactory, he can pass by it without comment, and begin his own argumicnt either with refutation or with a statement of the points that the negative side will establish in attacking the proposition. It is thus apparent that a debater who opens a negative argument must depend for the beginning of his speech rather on a thorough understanding of the subject In all its details and fundamental principles than on a speech that he has to de- liver word for word. To repeat an introduction that has already been given is absurd ; to fail to correct an Introduction that, as a whole, is obscure or is un- fair, is to merit defeat. It may be added, by way of caution, that when a debater supplies 245 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions any deficiencies in the speech of his predecessor, he should do this without any appearance of " smart- ness '' or personal antagonism. Even if the affirm- ative debater has been manifestly unfair, the nega- tive speaker will do well to correct this unfairness in a friendly, though in a forceful manner. As soon as the introduction is out of the way, the negative speaker proceeds to the discussion. Two courses are open to him ; he may at once re- fute his predecessor's arguments, or he may proceed to take up his constructive proof, giving reason for postponing the refutation. As this matter has al- ready been discussed, it is only necessary to say that the course he should choose depends largely upon the strength of the preceding argument. Most frequently, perhaps, the first negative speaker up- holds present conditions, and depends on those who follow him to attack the plan that the affirmative proposes. The same directions that have been given to the affirmative debater for connecting his work to his colleagues' apply equally to the negative. Summaries and outlines aid greatly in binding the arguments of a debating team into one compact mass. The other speakers. About the only practical suggestion which can be made to the other speak- ers is that they adapt their constructive work to that 246 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions of their colleagues, and deploy their refutation so as to hammer the principal positions of their op- ponents. Each debater may or may not begin his speech with refutation, but he should always begin his main argument with a terse, clear summary of what has been said on his side, and in closing he should not only summarize his own arguments, but he should also give again, in very brief form, the gist of what has been proved by his colleagues. In addition, any speaker except the last one on each side, may, if he thinks best, give an outline of the argument to follow. In making these summaries, a debater must always avoid stating them in so bald and crude a form as to make them monotonous and offensive. He ought rather to use all the in- genuity at his command in an attempt to make this repetition exceedingly forceful. It often happens than an inexperienced debater never reaches his conclusion. While he is still in the midst of his proof, his allotment of time expires, and he is forced to sit down, leaving his speech hanging in the air. Such an experience is both awk- ward and disastrous ; a skilful debater never allows it to happen. The peroration is the most important part of an argument, and on it the debater should lavish his greatest care. To omit it is almost the 247 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions same as to have made no speech at all. As soon as the debater perceives that he has but a short time left, he should at once bring this main speech to a close, and even though he may have to omit important ideas, begin at once on his conclusion. As is pointed out in Chapter X, the conclusion con- sists both of a summary and an emotional appeal. What emotion shall be aroused and how it shall apply to the summarized headings can largely be determined beforehand. Some debaters go so far as to commit this conclusion to memory. This prac- tice is not recommended except in special cases, and yet a debater should be so familiar with his peroration that he will have no difficulty in putting it into vigorous and pleasing language. Rebuttal speeches. A rebuttal speech usually furnishes an excellent test of a debater's miastery of his subject. It shows whether or not he compre- hends the fundamental principles that underly the argument. If he does not understand fundamen- tals, he cannot distinguish between what is worth answering and what is trivial. If he is not per- fectly familiar with the arguments on both sides of the question, his refutation will be scattering; that is, he will rebut only a few of his opponent's head- ings, those for which, in his scanty preparation, 248 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions he has discovered some answer. On the other hand, if he really understands the subject, he will deal largely with main ideas; and if his knowledge of the subject is as extensive as it should be, he will almost invariably be able to offer some opposition to every main heading used by his opponents. When a debate is held between only two contest- ants, each one has to refute the whole argument of his opponent. In this case there are no complica- tions; but when two teams are debating, the mem- bers of each must decide among themselves as to how the rebuttal shall be handled. One way is for each member to refute all he can, working inde- pendently of his colleagues. Much better results are secured, however, when a team works systemati- cally. In the first place, a team should always re- solve the opposing arguments into a hasty brief. The main points of the opposition can then be as- signed for rebuttal to the various members of the team, and each debater can give thorough treatment to his assignment. In this way every point is sure to be covered, and there will be little, if any, dupli- cation of work. Such a course presupposes very careful prepara- tion on the part of the debaters. It means that each member of the team must have sufficient knowl- 249 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions edge and material at his command to oppose with credit any argument that may be advanced. In general, the assignment of headings for rebuttal may be such that each debater will refute those points of w^hich he took an opposite view^ in his main speech, but as it is usually desirable to rebut argu- ments in the same order in which they were origi- nally given, no member of the team can afford to shirk mastering each detail that in any way has a vital bearing upon the proposition. The last rebuttal speaker. The work of the last speaker on each side differs somewhat from the work of his colleagues. All the speakers try to overthrow the opposing arguments, and by means of summaries keep their case as a whole before the audience. The last speaker devotes far less time to pure refutation, gives a more detailed summary, and, in addition, compares and contrasts the arguments of his side with the arguments of the opposition. This last process is called '' amplifying and dimin- ishing." It is not alw^ays necessary to prove a main head- ing false in order to destroy its effectiveness. A debater may of necessity have to admit that the op- position has successfully established the points it set out to prove. In such a case, he cannot do bet- 250 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions ter than to acknowledge the correctness of his op- ponent's proof, and then remembering that an au- dience awards a decision by a comparison of the relative weight of the proof of each side, amplify the importance of his own arguments, point by point, and diminish the importance of the argu- ments advanced by the other side. For instance, in a debate on the question as to whether immigration should be restricted, the affirmative might maintain that unrestricted immi- gration brings serious political evils, and the neg- ative might show that the policy of nonrestriction greatly increases the wealth of the country\ If neither of these contentions be successfully refuted, the favor of the audience will incline towards the affirmative or the negative, as far as those two points are concerned, according as they think that political purity or economic prosperity is the more important. Plainly, it would be for the interest of the affirmative to convince the audience that the preservation of political integrity is of greater mo- ment than any mere material gain. In many respects the last rebuttal speeches on each side are the most conspicuous and decisive parts of a debate. If the last speech is hesitating and weak, it is liable to ruin all preceding efforts, 251 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions even though they were of the highest order ; If it is enthusiastic and strong, it will often cover up pre- ceding defects, and turn defeat into victory. Be- cause of its importance this portion of the work usually falls to the best debater on the team, and if he is wise he will give it his greatest thought and care. In this speech he should strive in every pos- sible way to attain perfection. His delivery, should be emphatic and pleasing; his ideas should be logi- cally arranged; and his knowledge of what he has to say should be so complete that there will be no hesitation, no groping for words. Furthermore, he should introduce an element of persuasion; to reach both the minds and the hearts of his hearers is es- sential for the greatest success. All this has to be done in a short time, yet to be of a high rank even the shortest closing speeches must contain these characteristics. SPECIAL FEATURES OF DEBATE An argument, like other kinds of composition, should possess the qualities of style known as Clear- ness, Force, and Elegance, and should in all respects observe the principles of Unity, Selection, Coher- ence, Proportion, Emphasis, and Variety. Since 252 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions the student from his study of Rhetoric is already famiUar with these matters, it would be superfluous to dwell upon them in this book. A good written argument, however, does not always make a good debate; limited time for speaking, lack of oppor- tunity for the audience to grasp ideas and to re- flect upon them, the presence of strong opposing ar- guments that must be met and overthrown with still stronger arguments, — these conditions render the heightening of certain characteristics indispensable in a debate. Above all else the successful debater is forceful. He uses every possible device for driving home his arguments. He bends every effort toward making his ideas so plain and so emphatic that the audi- ence will understand them and remember them. Realizing that the audience cannot, like the reader of a written article, peruse the argument a second time, he uses w^ords and expressions that cause his thoughts to stick fast wherever they fall. Statistics. Statistics improperly used are dry and uninteresting; they often spoil an otherwise forceful and persuasive debate. The trouble often lies, strange to say, in the accuracy with which the figures are given. A brain that is already do- ing its utmost to accept almost instantaneously a 253 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions multitude of facts and comprehend their signifi- cance, or a brain that is somewhat sluggish and lazy, refuses to be burdened with uninteresting and unimportant details. For this reason, when a debater speaks of 10,564,792 people, the brain be- comes wearied with the numbers and in disgust is apt to turn away from the whole matter. On the other hand, the round sum of 10,000,000 not only does not burden the brain, but also, under ordinary conditions, gives in a rather forceful manner the in- formation it was intended to convey. " About five hundred " presents a much more vivid picture than " four hundred and eighty-six " or " five hundred and eighteen " ; " fifteen per cent." is stronger than " fifteen and one-tenth per cent." ; the expression *' eighty years " seems to indicate a longer period of time than " eighty-two years, seven months, and twenty-nine days." If one is to quote statistics, he should always, un- less the circumstances be very unusual, use round numbers. Figures themselves, however, are often less emphatic than other methods of expression. The ordinary mind cannot grasp the significance of large numbers. As a rule it is well for the arguer to seek out some standard that can at least partially be understood. The mere statement that the Penn- 254 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions sylvania Railroad spent half a billion dollars in ten years leaves little impression. The following quota- tion, however, reinforces the plain fact with a vivid comparison : Do you realize that in the ten years of Cassat's presi- dency the Pennsyh-ania Railroad spent half a billion dol- lars? There is not a transcontinental railroad in the United States, yet two railroads could have been built from New York to San Francisco for less than this sum. We are accustomed to thinking of the Panama Canal, a lock canal by the way, as the greatest feat of all times, a project that only a nation of limitless genius and resources could undertake, yet the Pennsylvania could have built a sea- level canal for less than this half billion. To give the exact number of square miles in Korea would mean little to the average person ; he neither remembers the area of other countries nor can he easily realize what the figures represent. However, the statement that Korea is nearly as large as New York and Pennsylvania combined may give a vivid and fairly accurate impression. Hardly any one would be particularly interested in the number of barrels of cem.ent used in the con- struction of the Panama Canal. But the infonnation that there is enough cement in the Gatum Locks to build a wall eight feet thick and twelve feet high around the entire State of Delaware is impressive. The officials of the forestry service, in speaking 255 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions of the great devastation caused by forest fires, make the startHng assertion that a new navy of first-class battleships could be built for the sum lost during a few weeks in the fires that raged from the pines of Maine to the redwoods of CaHfornia. Figures used in this way are most efifective, and yet probably nothing in argumentation is more tedious than too many of these descriptions of statis- tics coming close together. If numbers absolutely have to be indicated a great many times, even figures are likely to be less tiresome. Some debaters have found it useful to present statistics on charts large enough to be seen by the audience. Concreteness. General statements and abstract principles invariably weary an audience. Theories and generalities are usually too intangible tO' make much impression. Specific instances and concrete cases, however, are usually interesting. A vivid picture of real persons, things, and events is neces- sary to arouse the attention of an audience and cause them both to understand the argument and to give it their consideration. The slogan of a recent po- litical campaign was not, '' Improved economic con- ditions for the laboring man " ; it was, '' The full dinner pail." The political orator who is urging the necessity for a larger navy on the ground that 256 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions war is Imminent does not speak of possible antag- onists in such general terms as foreign pozvers; he specifies Germany, Japan, and the other nations that he fears. The preacher who would really awaken the conscience of his church does not confine him- self to such terms as original sin and zveaknesses of the flesh; he talks of lying, stealing, and szvearing. Compare the effectiveness of the following ex- amples : Stock-raising on a large scale is being sup- planted by general farm- ing. Children cannot re- ceive as good an educa- tion in the country as in the town. Scientific research suf- fered sore bereavement in the European War. Scientific management The man with the lariat has given way to the man with the hoe. The little red school- house at Danbury Cor- ners cannot compete with the graded schools of the capitol city. Dr. Bertheim, the greatest recent authority on organic arsenic com- pounds, was one of the first German soldiers to fall. John Smith, efficiency 257 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions has been substituted for expert, rules the Groton the old-fashioned, hap- Mills with a stop watch, hazard methods of manu- facturing, By citing the opinions of earlier statesmen. Sen- ator Hoar, in the following quotation, opposes the proposal that the United States should retain the Philippine Islands. He does this not in vague, gen- eral terms ; he refers to the forefathers specifically : I have sometimes fancied that the question before us now might be decided not alone by the votes of us who sit here to-day, but by the votes of the great men who have been our predecessors in this Chamber and in the Conti- nental Congress from the beginning of the Republic. Would that that roll might be called. The solemn as- sembly sits silent while the Chair puts the question whose answer is so fraught with the hopes of liberty and the destiny of the Republic. The roll is called. George Washington : " No. Why should we quit our own, to stand on foreign ground ? " Alexander Hamilton: "No. The Declaration of In- dependence is the fundamental constitution of every State." Thomas Jefferson : " No. Governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Every people ought to have that separate and equal station among the nations of the world to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them." John Adams : " No. I stood by the side of Jefferson when he brought in the Declaration; I was its champion on the floor of Congress. After our long estrangement, I come back to his side again." 258 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions James Madison: "No. The object of the Federal Con- stitution is to secure the union of the thirteen primitive States, which we know to be practicable, and to add to them such other States as may arise in their own bosoms or in their neighborhood, which v/e cannot doubt will be practicable." Thomas Corwin: "No. I said in the days of the Mexican war: * If I were a Mexican, as I am an Amer- ican, I would welcome you with bloody hands to hospitable graves ; ' and Ohio to-day honors and loves me for that utterance beyond all her other sons." i Figures of speech. The use of figurative lan- guage is also an aid to clearness and to force. Simile, metaphor, personification, antithesis, balance, climax, rhetorical question, and repetition are all effective aids in the presentation of argument. The speeches of great orators are replete with expres- sions of this sort. Burke, in his Speech on Concili- ation, says, " Despotism itself is obliged to truck and huckster " ; " The public," he said, " would not have patience to see us play the game out with our ad- versaries ; we must produce our hand " ; " Men may lose little in property by the act which takes away all their freedom. When a man is robbed of a trifle on the highway, it is not the twopence lost that constitutes the capital outrage." In speaking of certain provisions of the Constitution, Webster 1 United States Senate, April 17, igoo. Debate — Some Practical Suggestions says that they are the " keystone of the arch/' In the following paragraph Henry Ward Beecher uses highly figurative language in referring to the American flag: The stars upon it were to the pining nations like the bright morning stars of God, and the stripes upon it were beams of morning light. As at early dawn the stars shine forth even while it grows light, and then as the sun ad- vances that light breaks into banks and streaming lines of color, the glowing red and intense white striving together, and ribbing the horizon with bars effulgent, so, on the American flag, stars and beams of many-colored light shine out together. And wherever this flag comes, and men be- hold it, they see in its sacred emblazonry no ramping lion, and no fierce eagle; no embattled castles, or insignia of im- perial authority; they see tlie symbols of light. The following quotation is taken from one of the best known speeches of recent years: Having behind us the producing masses of this nation and the world, supported by the commercial interests, the laboring interests and the toilers everywhere, we will an- swer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them : You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon the cross of gold.2 Sometimes figures of speech are used to such ex- cess or in such incongruous combinations that they detract from the effectiveness of the debate in 2 William J. Bryan, Democratic National Convention, 1896. 260 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions which they occur rather than add to it. The dis- tance from a forceful figure to an absurd figure is so short that a debater has to be on his guard against using expressions that will impress his audi- ence as ridiculous or even funny. A mixture of highly figurative language with literal language and commonplace ideas, and a mixture of several fig- ures are especially to be guarded against. DELIVERY To be a successful debater one must understand how to talk and how to act in the presence of an audience. Uncouthness in appearance and awk- wardness in speech have often brought defeat. Moreover, it is not enough that a debater refrain from ofifending his audience; his bearing and his voice should be of positive assistance to him both in pleasing them and in interpreting to them the ideas that he wishes to convey. First of all, a good delivery is one that assists in making the ar- gument clear. Its next most important function is to make the argument forceful. A speaker should never rest content with being able to present his ar- gument merely with clearness; he should strive to be interesting and impressive also. These qualities 261 Debate— Some Practical Suggestions depend in no small measure upon the way a speech is delivered. The best story or the best argument will fall flat unless it is full of the fire of enthusi- asm, unless the personality of the speaker vivifies it and makes it a living reality. Unfortunately, this intangible quality in a speaker, often called " personality " or " magnetism," cannot, to any great extent, be taught. In the main, one must seek this and develop it for him.self. A text-book can point out what constitutes good form, what is pleasing and impressive to the eye and to the ear, and, in a word, what make up the externals of a good delivery; but beyond these mechanical direc- tions it cannot go. A student should observ^e the following fundamental directions as his first step toward becoming a successful speaker. After- wards, he should cultivate earnestness, enthusiasm, perception, a gense of humor, and all other such qualities as go to make up a really great speaker. Position, The best position for a debater to take on the stage is in the center well toward the front. He should take the center because in that position he can best see the entire audience, and the entire audience can best see him. He should stand near the front edge of the platfomi for several reasons: first, he can make himself more easily understood ; 262 Debate— Some Practical Suggestions his voice need not be so loud in order to be heard distinctly in every part of the hall. This is no small advantage for one who is not gifted with unusual powers of speech. In the next place, if a debater stands close to his audience, he can adopt a more conversational style of delivery. He can establish a direct personal connection between him- self and his hearers and talk to them as man to man. If the hall is not too- large, he need scarcely raise his voice from its accustomed tone; he can look his audience in the eye, receiving the stimulus of whatever interest they express ; and at the same time he can let them see in his features the earnest- ness and sincerity that he feels. To stand near the back of the stage is undoubtedly easier for one who is diffident or inexperienced; perhaps he will then be able partially to forget where he is and to imagine that he is alone ; but such an attitude both severs all personal connection betvv^een speaker and hearer, and shows that the debater does not trust himself, that he has no great belief in his subject, and that he fears his audience. An impression of this sort is a great handicap even to the strongest case. If one would inspire confidence, he must appear confident; if one would make friends, he must be friendly, avoiding even a suggestion of 263 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions aloofness. To accomplish these purposes as far as is possible by action, a debater should come close to his audience, having every appearance of being glad that he is to speak and confident in the strength of the side that he is to uphold. The next thing for a speaker to learn is how to stand. He should not take a natural posture, as some writers say, tmless that posture is one of strength and, to some degree, of grace. A student without training will usually stand with his head protruding forward, his shoulders drooping, his body twisted, and his feet far apart, with all his weight on one leg. Such an attitude is enough to condemn one even before he begins to speak. A slipshod appearance suggests slipshod thinking and reasoning. A speaker should always stand erect, with his head back, chin in, shoulders rolled back and down ; either the feet should be near together with the weight of the body on both, or one foot should be slightly in advance of the other with the weight of the body entirely on the rear foot. In the latter case, the leg on which the body rests must form a straight line with the body, there being no unsightly bulging at the hip; and the leg on which the body does not rest must be slightly bent at the knee. This posture is not difficult to attain if one 264 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions will practise it frequently, endeavoring in his every- day life to walk and stand in a soldierly manner. On the other hand, erectness should not be carried to such an extreme as to become stiffness. A de- bater's object is to be forceful and pleasing. In striving for this end, he should always remember that he can very easily err in either of two direc- tions. A debater should allow his hands, for the most part, to hang naturally at his sides. There may be a great temptation for him to put them in his pockets, but he should resist this for two reasons: such a procedure is not considered good form, and his hands are less available for instant use in the making of gestures. If one is delivering a lengthy argument, there is no particular harm in putting one hand behind the back for a short time, or even in front of the body along the waist line, provided this can be done in an easy, natural manner; but in the case of a short speech, one will do well to keep his hands at his sides. They must hang nat- urally in order not to attract attention, being neither closed tightly nor held rigidly open. If one will follow these directions, his hands and arms may feel awkward, but they will not appear so. Another important principle in the matter of po- 265 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions sition requires that a debater shall keep his eyes fixed on his audience. He must not look at the floor, at the ceiling, or at the walls. He must look at the people he would convince. Only in this way can he hope to hold their attention. Only in this way can he win their confidence and reach their feelings. To look into space means to debate into space. In the next place, a speaker must beware of fall- ing into ludicrous and disgusting habits of deport- ment. Nervousness will often cause one in the presence of an audience to keep making an un- sightly gesture, a peculiar twitch or step that will absolutely ruin his whole speech. Some speakers have been known to change their weight from one foot to the other as often as twenty or thirty times a minute. Other speakers have adopted a peculiar jerk of the head or a constant shrugging of the shoulders that is most disagreeable to see. Still others keep constantly opening and shutting their hands. For years one speaker of some small prom- inence spent the greater part of his time while on the platform in tugging at his coat, apparently in an effort to make it fit better around the collar. All such actions as these are to be carefully guarded 266 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions A debater, however, is not expected to stand per- fectly still : he should use considerable interpreta- tive and emphatic action. To begin with, he ought not to stand all the time in exactly the same spot. Monotony of position is to be avoided as well as monotony of action or of voice. He will rest him- self and his audience if he will occasionally move about, taking two or three steps at a time. In doing this he must never go backward; he must never retreat. If, for any reason, he began his speech while standing near the rear or the center of the stage, he should move forward ; if he cannot go foi-ward, he may move back and forth near the edge of the platform. The best time for one to change his position is at the conclusion of a para- graph. A paragraph division, it will be remem- bered, indicates a change in thought. If a debater, therefore, makes a longer pause than usual at this point, and in addition alters his position slightly, he helps interpret his argument. He does for the hearer exactly what indentation does for the reader. Gestures. So much has been said and written about gestures that a student is often puzzled to know whose advice to follow and what to do. Some writers say that no gestures at all are desir- able; others deem them necessary, but declare that 267 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions they should never be made unless they are spon- taneous and natural. In the light of such conflict- ing advice, what will determine the proper course for a student to follow? The answer to this ques- tion lies in a consideration of the ultimate object of a course in debating. If it is to give students some facility in expressing their thoughts before an audience, if it is to train students for practical work in business and professional life, then those men who are recognized as the polished and pov/er- ful speakers of the day should be taken as models. Most of these, it will be found, use gestures. There is but one reasonable course, then, for the student to follow : he should make gestures. They may be crude and awkward at first, but only by practice can he ever hope to improve them. The best method of procedure, undoubtedly, is for the beginner to become familiar with two or three of the most common gestures, learning how to make them and just what they signify. He should then use them. They may seem mechanical and ungainly at first, but constant practice both in private and before a class will soon enable him to make them with considerable emphasis and ease. From this point on, the road is clear. The knowl- edge that he can use his hands to good advantage, 268 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions even in a limited way, will soon cause him to make gestures spontaneously. Nor will he be limited to the few with which he started. In the midst of an explanation and in the heat of an impassioned plea, he will find himself using gestures that he had not thought of before. The awkward and pre- meditated gesture with which he began will have become forceful and spontaneous. The gestures that a student should first learn to use must be illustrated to him by his instructor. To see a gesture made several times gives one a better idea of how to make it and of what it means than could a dozen pages in a text-book. The choice of gestures, too, may rest with the instructor. It makes no particular difference with what ones a debater begins, provided that they are simple in execution and are such as he will wish to use in practically every debate into which he enters. Or- dinarily, the best ones for a beginner to practise on are those indicating emphasis. If he wishes for a wider field, he might also try to use gestures indi- cating magnitude and contrast. When he has fin- ished with these, he should hesitate before delib- erately introducing many others. A debate is not a dramatic production, and it should in no wise savor of melodrama. 269 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions Voice. Correct position and forceful gestures are very important, but upon no one thing does the success of a debater, aside from his argument, de- pend so much as upon his voice. One may move his audience in spite of an awlcward posture and in the absence of all intelligent gestures, but unless his voice meets certain requirements, his case is al- most hopeless. Above all else a speaker's voice must be distinct. Distinctness depends upon several things. First, the voice must be loud enough to be heard without difficulty in every part of the room. To produce this result, one should speak especially to those in the rear, carefully watching to see whether he holds their attention ; at the same time he must be careful not to shout in a manner unpleasant to those sitting nearer him. The stress laid by public speakers upon the matter of loudness is well illustrated by a story told of one of the foremost orators of the day. It is said that he invariably stations some one in the back of the audience to signal to him when his voice is either too low or unnecessarily loud. In the next place, distinctness depends upon enunciation. The debater who drops off final sylla- bles, slurs consonants, runs words together, or 270 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions talks without using his lips and without opening his mouth is hard to understand. It often requires considerable conscious effort to pronounce each syllable in a word distinctly, but the resulting clear- ness is worth a strenuous attempt. One great cause of poor enunciation is too rapid talking. A fairly slow delivery is preferable not only because the words can be more easily understood, but also because it gives a debater the appearance of being more careful and accurate in his reasoning. Great rapidity in speech may be due to nervousness or inexperience; whatever its cause, it is usually fatal to distinctness. A pleasing tone of voice is not of so great mo- ment as distinctness of utterance, yet its cultivation is by no means to be neglected. Harsh, rasping sounds and nasal twangs are disagreeable to hear, and no speaker can afford to offend his audience in this way. An unpleasant voice may be the re- sult of some physical defect; more often it is caused by sheer carelessness. In most cases a little practice will produce a wonderful change. A very common breach of elegance in speaking is the habit of drawling out an er sound between words. The constant repetition of this is exceedingly annoying. It is usually caused by an attempt to fill in a gap 271 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions while the speaker is groping about for the next word. The best way to correct this blunder is to be so familiar with what one is going to say that there will be no gap to fill in ; but in case one does have to hunt for words, it is a thousand times preferable to leave the gap unfilled. Each word should stand out by itself, even though there is a pause of many seconds. To offend the ears of an audience with a crude tone of voice or with mean- ingless sounds is a bad violation of propriety. The first step to be taken in the cultivation of a distinct and pleasing voice is to acquire the habit of standing correctly. Under the subject of position it was stated that the body should be kept erect, the head thrown back, and the shoulders rolled back and down. This posture is the best not only be- cause it is the most graceful but because it gives the speaker the greatest command of his vocal organs. Stooping shoulders and a bowed trunk contract the lungs and diminish the supply of breath, and a bent neck renders the cords of the neck less controllable. After taking the proper position, one should next endeavor to breathe as deeply as he can. The louder he has to speak, the deeper should be his breathing. Remembering that he does not wish to talk fast, he will do well to fill his lungs at the Debate — Some Practical Suggestions close of each sentence, always inhaling, in order not to make an unpleasant gasping noise, through the nose. While speaking, he should control his supply of breath not by contracting the chest but by elevating the diaphragm. This procedure will give his voice a richness and a resonance that it other- wise could not have. Breathing merely from the top of the lungs means squeakiness of tone and poor control. One who breathes incorrectly will find it necessary to shout to make himself heard at a dis- tance; one who breathes correctly can usually be heard under the same conditions by merely talking. The superiority of the round, deep tone over the shout is too obvious to need comment. In the next place, a speaker must think about this voice. Thought and study are as essential in the training of a voice as in the mastery of any art. A natural voice is not usually pleasing; it becomes so only through cultivation. Much of this training can be done by the speaker unaided. Few people are so insensible to qualities of sound that they cannot detect harshness and impurities even in their own utterance, provided that they will give the matter their attention. It is not enough, however, for one to watch his voice only while he is debating or while he is repeating his arguments in preparation Debate — Some Practical Suggestions for a debate; he must carry constant watchfulness even into his daily conversation. The services of a good instructor are invaluable, but at best they can be only auxiliary. All improvement must come through the efforts of the speaker himself. Attitude toward opponents. If one will bear in mind that the fundamental purpose of argument — whether written or spoken — is to present truth in such a way as to influence belief, he will at once understand that a debater should always maintain toward his opponents the attitude of one who is trying to change another's belief, the attitude of friendship, fairness, and respect. Such a point of view precludes the use of satire, invective, or harsh epithets. These never carry conviction; in fact, they invariably destroy the effect that an otherwise good argument might produce. Ridicule and blus- ter may please those who already agree with the speaker, but with these people he should be little concerned; a debater worthy of the name seeks to change the opinions of those who disagree with him. For this reason he is diplomatic, courteous, and urbane. A debater should, moreover, keep to this same at- titude even though his opponent introduce objec- tionable personalities. One will find it for his own 274 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions best interest to do so. Good humor makes a far better impression than anger; it suggests strength and superiority, while anger, as every one knows, is often the result of chagrin, and is used to cover up weaknesses. Besides, an audience always sympa- thizes with the man who is first attacked. All this does not mean that a debater should calmly submit to unfairness and vilification. On the contrary, he should defend himself spiritedly; but he should not meet abuse with abuse. To do so would be to throw away an invaluable opportunity. He should remain dignified, self -controlled, and good-hu- mored; then by treating his opponent as one who has inadvertently fallen into error, and by pointing out the mistakes, the unfairness, and the way in which the real question has been ignored, he can gain an inestimable advantage. The following quotations illustrate both the in- correct and the correct attitude for a debater to maintain toward his opponent : The gentleman has misconceived the spirit and ten- dency of Northern institutions. He is ignorant of North- ern character. He has forgotten the history of his coun- try. Preach insurrection to the Northern laborers! Preach insurrection to me! Who are the Northern la- borers? The history of your country is their history. (Charles Naylor.) My Fellow-Citizens: When a man hears himself some- 275 Debate — Some Practical Suggestions what misrepresented, it provokes him — at least, I find it so with myself; but when misrepresentation becomes very gross and palpable, it is more apt to amuse him. The first thing I see fit to notice is the fact that Judge Douglas alleges, after running through the history of the old Dem- ocratic and the old Whig parties, that Judge Trumbull and myself made an arrangement in 1854 by which I was to have the place of General Shields in the United States Senate, and Judge Trumbull was to have the place of Judge Douglas. Now all I have to say upon that subject is that I think no man — not even Judge Douglas — can prove it, because it is not true. I have no doubt he is " conscientious " in saying it. As to those resolutions that he took such a length of time to read, as being the plat- form of the Republican party in 1854, I say I never had anything to do with them, and I think Trumbull never had. (Abraham Lincoln in the Ottawa Joint Debate.) HOW TO JUDGE A DEBATE Three judges usually award the decision in a de- bating contest. Their sole duty is to determine which side had the better of the argument. Some- times the method that they shall follow in arriving at a decision is marked out for them ; they are given printed slips indicating the relative importance of evidence, reasoning, delivery, and the other points that must be considered. Most commonly, how- ever, each judge is instructed to decide for himself what constitutes excellence in debate. According to the rules governing any particular debate, the Debate — Some Practical Suggestions judges may cast their ballots with or without previ- ous consultation with each other. The following outline gives in condensed form the main points that a judge should consider. It will be of service not only to the judges of a debate but to the contestants, as it gives a comprehensive view of just what is expected of a debater. I, Which side has the better analysis? 11. Which side has the stronger proof? A. Consider the preponderance of the evi- dence. B. Consider the quality of the evidence. C. Consider the skill used in reasoning. III. Which side offers the better refutation? A. See which side has more main points left standing after the refutation has been given. IV. Wliich side has the better delivery? A. Consider general bearing, voice, and lan- guage. 277 CHAPTER X THE CONCLUSION Most arguments have a more or less formal end- ing. Both writers and speakers, when seeking to influence the beliefs and acts of others, have usu- ally deemed it advisable, upon completing their proof, to add a few summarizing words and to make a final appeal to the emotions. This part of the argument that comes at the close and that con- tains no new proof is called the conchision, or the peroration. In spoken argument, occasionally, the conclusion is wholly ignored. If at any time, re- gardless of the point he may have reached, an ar- guer clearly perceives that he has won his case, he is wise to stop immediately and avoid the danger of adding anything that might possibly detract from his success. Such an experience may frequently happen to a salesman, a preacher, a lawyer. Argu- ments, however, that are written or that are de- livered before large audiences cannot be curtailed in this way. Under such conditions the arguer is 278 The Conclusion unable to tell when he has won his case: he must use all his proof and make it emphatic in every way possible. Therefore the student who is argu- ing for the sake of practice will do well to disre- gard exceptions and to close all his arguments, both written and spoken, with a peroration. The same two elements — conviction and per- suasion — that make up the introduction and the discussion are ordinarily found also in the con- clusion. The general principles that govern the proportionate amount of each to be used in the first two divisions of an argument apply equally to the third division. Ir^ every case the relative amount of space to be devoted to conviction and to persuasion depends upon the nature of the sub- ject and the attitude of the audience. In some in- stances a conclusion should consist wholly of con- viction; in other instances persuasion should pre- dominate; most commonly there should be a judi- cious combination of both. In concluding an argument on " National Aid to Good Roads," Jonathan Bourne merely recapitu- lates the points he has already made. The subject is of such a nature that only clear and logical rea- soning is required; a fiery emotional appeal would be out of place. 279 The Conclusion Briefly summarized the plan for Federal aid here out- lined insures extensive road construction and adequate maintenance over a long period of years, enlists the co- operation of the States, provides for efficient supervision, guards against the subservience of State officials to a Fed- eral bureau, prevents the building up of a large organiza- tion that could be used for political purposes, and avoids legislation that might degenerate into a pork barrel. Adop- tion of this plan will result in a vast saving of cost of transportation on highways and a corresponding increase in the value of farm property. From the standpoint of good business judgment there is no investment that offers larger returns than expenditures for highway improve- ment, provided the expenditures be made in accordance with a systematic plan that guards against waste.^ A type of conclusion far more common and usu- ally far more effective is one that not only refers to the preceding arguments but also contains con- siderable persuasion. The peroration marks the final opportunity for the arguer to move his audi- ence. Here he should make his greatest effort. Since belief and action ordinarily depend upon both the intellect and the will, the arguer who would at- tain success must appeal to both. Merely to call to mind the proof that he has advanced is seldom enough: he must arouse the emotions. The per- oration of an argument is like the finish of a race or the last charge in a battle. In the conclusion the arguer should use his greatest skill, his strong- 1 North American Review, 198:331. 280 The Conclusion est eloquence. Here are found the most inspiring passages in the masterpieces of oratory. Some of the various ways for reaching the emo- tions have been pointed out in the chapter deahng with persuasion in the introduction. These same suggestions apply equally well to persuasion in the conclusion. The best advice that can be given, however, is for one to use his common sense. He must consider his subject, his audience, his ability, and his own interest in the case — all the circum- stances in connection with his argument — and then depend, not upon some set formula, but upon his judgment to tell him in what way he can best be persuasive. The following illustrations will give some idea of how successful writers and speak- ers have concluded their arguments with persua- sion. Notice the patriotic appeal in the first quo- tation : Pray God the time may never come when Mammon and the love of ease shall so debase our blood that we will fear to shed it for the flag and its imperial destiny. Pray God the time may never come when American heroism is but a legend like the story of the Cid. If American faith in our mission and our might become a dream dissolved, then the glory of our mighty race is departed. And that time will never come. We will renew our youth at the fountain of new and glorious deeds. We will exalt our reverence for the flag by carrying it to a 281 The Conclusion noble future as well as by remembering its ineffable past. Its immortality will not pass, because everywhere and al- ways we will acknowledge and discharge the solemn re- sponsibilities our sacred flag, in its deepest meaning, puts upon us. And so, Senators, with reverent hearts, where dwells the fear of God, the American people move forward to the future of their hope and the doing of His work.^ The following peroration to a speech by Wendell Phillips on " The Maine Liquor Law " is espe- cially effective: 1 contend that no man needs argument, no man needs evidence on such a subject as this; and no man has lived forty years who has not seen his pathway of life marked by the graves of some that he loved most, from whose promise he augured most, whose career was to be the brightest, who have not fallen at his side, victims of the drink curse. I should not dare to uncover one single roof in this city, no matter how guarded by wealth, education or any other fence; for I should be sure to find even in the narrowest family circle, one vacant seat which this gigantic tempter had emptied. I have only such a tale to tell as every one of your hearts bears witness to. Law- yer, merchant, divine — no matter where you take your testimony, every man's heart is full, every man's memory is the most accusing witness against this great social evil. Edith Abbott concludes her magazine article on ^' The English Working-woman and the Fran- chise/' with a touch of pathos: One feels more strongly perhaps the magnificent promise of this movement when one has seen in the great textile 2 Albert J. Beveridge, United States Senate, Jan. 9, 1900. 282 The Conclusion districts of England the long processions of women with their shawls pinned tightly about their heads, passing to or from the mills in the early morning and the late twi- light. These shawled women have for generations been passing everywhere in the Lancashire district; for genera- tions they have inherited the burdens of life with few of its opportunities. As they have worked patiently there for more than a hundred years, so they are still working pa- tiently, but they are awake as they have never been be- fore to the injustice of their position; and this movement for the franchise is symptomatic of a new solidarity among them which has grown out of a new consciousness of their own needs, and which brings with it a new sense of their own power. When one knows something of the history of these " women in industry," of their share in the development of the textile industries, their generations of work under the discipHne of Lancashire cold and fog, the slow but steady growth of their great trade unions, one can understand the earnestness, the moderation, and intel- ligence that they have shown in this campaign. And al- most inevitably one believes that, when this political jus- tice has been meted out to them, industrial justice must be swift to follow.3 As a rule, most of the criticisms that can be made of any conclusion pertain to matters of taste and judgment. A writer or speaker may have made too detailed or too brief a summary; he may have erred in choosing the best method of persua- sion ; he may have injured his argument in almost countless other ways. In these matters a text-book can give only general and rather vague instruction. 3 Atlantic Monthly, 102:346. 283 The Conclusion Each argument must be suited to the particular case in hand. There are several common errors in students' work, however, that should always be avoided and that can definitely be pointed out. 1. An argument should not have an abrupt and jerky ending. It is not uncommon especially in class-room debate, to hear a student at the close of his discussion say, " This is my proof ; I leave the decision to the judges " ; or " Thus you see I have established my proposition." Such an ending can in no way be called a conclusion or a peroration. 2. A conclusion should contain no new proof. Violations of this principle brand an arguer as careless, and greatly weaken his argument. Proof is most convincing when arranged in its proper place and in its logical order. Furthermore, the purpose of the conclusion is to review the points that have already been established. If the arguer forgets this fact and mixes proof with summary, the audience is liable to become badly confused and not know what has been established and what has not. 3. A conclusion should not refer to a point that has not already been established. A careless writer or debater will sometimes state that he has proved 284 The Conclusion an argument which he has not previously touched upon. Such a procedure smacks of trickery or ig- norance, and is sure to be disastrous. Not only will the audience throw out that particular point, but they will be highly prejudiced against both the arguer and his argument. It is permissible for one to maintain that he has proved a point even though the proof be somewhat inadequate, but for one to refer in his conclusion to a point that he then mentions for the first time is unpardonable. 4. A conclusion must reaffirm the proposition ex- actly as stated at the beginning. Sometimes a writer, discovering at the close of his argument that he has not stuck to his subject but has proved something different, or at best has proved only a part of his subject, states as his decision a totally different proposition from that with which he started. To illustrate, a student once attempted to argue on the affirmative side of the proposition, " The United States should discontinue its protec- tive tariff policy " ; but he gave as his concluding sentence, '' These facts, then, prove to you that our present tariff* duties are too high.'* This last sen- tence embodied the real proposition which he had discussed, and if he had taken as his subject, " Our 285 The Conclusion present tariff duties are too high," his argument would have been successful. As it was, his failure to support the proposition with which he started rendered his whole effort worthless. A conclusion that is weaker than the proposition is commonly called a " qualifying conclusion." When one has fallen into this error there are two possible ways of removing it: one is to change the whole argument so that the conclusion will affirm the truth or falsity of the proposition ; the other is to change the proposition. In a debate, of course, or whenever a subject is assigned, the latter method cannot be followed. As a final example of what a good peroration should be, consider the conclusion to Senator Hoar's speech against the retention of the Philip- pines. Notice the skilful interweaving of summa- rizing arguments with persuasive appeal, and re- member in connection with the principle of propor- tion that this is the conclusion of a speech containing about 12,000 words. Our fathers dreaded a standing army; but the Senator's doctrine, put in practice anywhere, now or hereafter, ren- ders necessary a standing army, to be reinforced by a pow- erful navy. Our fathers denounced the subjection of any people whose judges were appointed or whose salaries were paid by a foreign power; but the Senator's doctrine re- 286 The Conclusion quires us to send to a foreign people judges, not of their own selection, appointed and paid by us. The Senator's doctrine, whenever it shall be put in practice, will entail upon us a national debt larger than any now existing on the face of the earth, larger than any ever known in his- tory. Our fathers dreaded the national tax gatherer; but the doctrine of the Senator from Connecticut, if it be adopted, is sure to make our national tax gatherer the most familiar visitant to every American home. Our fathers respected above all the dignity of labor and rights of human nature. The one thing created by God a little lower than the angels was a man. And they meant to send abroad the American flag bearing upon its folds, invisible perhaps to the bodily eye, but visible to the spirit- ual discernment, the legend of the dignity of pure man- hood. That legend, that charter, that fundamental truth, is written in the opening sentences of the great Declara- tion, and now the Senator from Connecticut would repeal them. He would repeal the great charter of our covenant. No longer, as the flag floats over distant seas, shall it bear on its folds to the downtrodden and oppressed among men the glad tidings that there is at least one spot where that beautiful dream is a living reality. The poor Malay, the poor African, the downtrodden workman of Europe, will exclaim, as he reads this new doctrine : " Good God ! Is there not one place left on earth where in right of my manhood I can stand up and be a man?" Will you disregard every lesson of experi- ence? No tropical colony was ever yet successfully ad- ministered without a system of contract labor strictly ad- ministered and enforced by the Government. I will not speak of the Thirteenth Amendment. In our parliamen- tary practice amendments fall with the original bill. This amendment will fall with the original Constitution. Mr. President, this spasm of folly and delusion also, in 287 The Conclusion my judgment, will surely pass by. Whether it pass by or no, I thank God I have done my duty, and that I have adhered to the great doctrines of righteousness and free- dom, which I learned from my fathers,* 4 George Frisbee Hoar, United States Senate, Jan. 9, 1899- 288 APPENDICES 289 APPENDIX A A WRITTEN ARGUMENT AND ITS BRIEF ENFORCED COMPETITION^ BY RAY MORRIS The main fabric of American railroad legisla- tion rests on two principles, which are all but ir- reconcilable with each other: first, that carriers serving the same or adjacent territory must com- pete with one another; second, that rates for like and contemporaneous service under substantially similar circumstances and conditions must be the same to all comers — that is to say, not competitive — and that one city or territory must not be built up at the expense of another (long-and-short-haul clause) ; a process which is directly and naturally the result of competition. The Act to Regulate Commerce prohibits pooling, and the Sherman Anti-Trust Law apparently makes every kind of trade agreement between persons engaged in the 1 Atlantic Monthly, 102:366. Abridged. 290 Argument and Brief THE SHERMAN LAW SHOULD BE RE- PEALED Affirmative Brief INTRODUCTION I. American railroad legislation rests on two contradictory principles : A. Carriers serving the same or adjacent territory must be competitive. B. These carriers must not compete in the rates they charge. II. The following laws apply to railroads: A. The Act to Regulate Commerce prohibits pooling. B. The Sherman Anti-Trust Law makes every kind of trade agreement between persons engaged in the same kind of business an act of conspiracy. 291 Argument and Brief same kind of business an act of conspiracy, so that Congress has strongly affirmed the competitive principle; yet the 1906 revision of the Commerce Act makes it specifically impossible for a carrier to change its rates without giving thirty days' prior notice to the Interstate Commerce Commission, un- less the Commission exempts it by special action, an exemption which the commissioners have been very loath to give. This provision is, of course, along lines the reverse of competitive, since a thirty-day-notice cut-rate to move competitive traf- fic is about as effective a device as setting a tortoise to catch a squirrel. So the railroads are told with blunt plainness that they must compete, and are then immediately reminded that they must not. The Sherman Anti-Trust Law of 1890 says defi- nitely that every person v/ho makes a contract or engages in any combination, in the form of a trust or otherwise, in restraint of trade or commerce, is guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to severe pen- alties, which have been made cumulative by sub- sequent court decisions; and eminent corporation counsel have expressed the opinion that it is tech- nically impossible for two New York grocers in the same block to walk down the street together and agree on the price at which they will sell New 292 Argument and Brief C. The 1906 revision of the Commerce Act forbids a carrier to change rates with- out giving thirty days' prior notice, un- less exempted by the Interstate Com- merce Commission. I. This exemption has rarely been given. III. The Sherman Law upholds the doctrine of individual competition with tremendous vigor. 293 Argument and Brief Jersey eggs, without rendering themselves Uable to fine and imprisonment, and to threefold damages payable to any other grocer whose business is in- jured by the reduction in price agreed upon. Thus the doctrine of individual competition is upheld with tremendous vigor, while trade agreement, or collective competition, is strongly repressed. Are we, as a nation, correct in assuming that in- dividual competition can and should be enforced by law? These questions open up a very interest- ing field of economic discussion, which is of par- ticular appropriateness because we are apparently on the threshold of an era of sharp competition between railroads. As applied to the railroad situation in the United States, the discouraging fact about competition leg- islation is that it was given an exhaustive trial in England, fifty years ago, at which time certain truths were developed at great cost which, so far as we are concerned, need never have been devel- oped at all, since we have not noted the relation of these truths to our own problems, but are pro- ceeding independently, at still greater cost, to de- velop the same principles in this country. Charles Francis Adams showed that it had al- ways been the theory in England that the railroads 294 Argument and Brief IV. The questions to be answered are these : A. Can individual competition be enforced by law? B. Should individual competition be en- forced by law? DISCUSSION Individual competition cannot be enforced by law, because A. England failed to compel competition by law, for I. Up to 1872 England tried to enforce competition. (Charles Francis Adams.) 295 Argument and Brief ought to compete, until the commission of 1872 demonstrated that in the forty years since railroads began, English railroad legislation had never ac- complished anything which it sought to bring about, nor prevented anything it sought to hinder. Thir- ty-three hundred useless enactments had cost the companies eighty million pounds, but the commis- sion reported that competition between railroads existed only to a limited extent, and that it could not be maintained by legislation. The commission cited the case of the North Eastern Railway, for- merly composed of thirty-seven independent, com- peting, and more-or-less bankrupt companies, but in 1872 (as to-day) prosperous and giving general satisfaction, and found that in view of such facts as this it was clear that amalgamation had " not brought with it the evils that were anticipated, but that in any event, long and varied experience had fully demonstrated the fact that, while Parliament might hinder and thwart, it could not prevent it, and it was equally powerless to lay down any general rules determining its limits or charac- ter." The attitude of British law toward the broad question of competition between the railroads of that country does not find particularly clear ex- 296 Argument and Brief . According to the commission of 1872 railroad legislation during forty years, consisting of 3300 enact- ments, had not produced competi- tion, since a. Parliament had failed to prevent the amalgamation of thirty- seven competing companies into the North Eastern Rail- way System. 3. England now permits railroad com- binations, as 297 Argument and Brief pression to-day, but the conservative work of the Railway and Canal Commission, which owes its ex- istence to the parliamentary report just referred to, and the precedent of a long line of court decisions, make it quite apparent that the early lessons have had their effect. The working agreement recently proposed by the Great Northern and Great Central companies, which had competed extravagantly in almost identical territory in the eastern part of England, was not opposed on any broad lines of governmental polic3^ The arrangement amounted to a consolidation, to be brought about by the sim- ple device of appointing the boards of directors of the two companies as a joint committee to manage both properties. This proposal was contested chiefly by certain other railroads because of its re- lation to their own special interests, and was refused by the Railway and Canal Commission (in which refusal the Commission was upheld by the Court of Appeal) for the purely technical reason that the original charter powers of the two companies did not provide for any such agreement. A work- ing arrangement has been in force for three years between the London & North Western and the Lancashire & Yorkshire, and has been conspicu- ously successful, resulting in greater efficiency and 298 Argument and Brief a. A working agreement between the Great Northern and the Great Central companies was refused on purely technical grounds. b. A working arrangement has been in force for three years be- tween the London & North Western and the Lancashire & Yorkshire. 299 Argument and Brief economy of operation to the railroads and better service to the public. But our national attitude toward consolidation of steam railroads which from their geographical lo- cation are presumed to be competitors, is perfectly uncompromising; so uncompromising that, practi- cally speaking, it is unenforcible in its entire pur- view. There are few indeed of the railroad sys- tems of the country that really know whether their skirts are clear of the entanglements of the law, as it has at present been construed; and it is hard to see how any large industrial company can avoid being a combination intrinsically in restraint of some other man's trade, and hence illegal. To all intent, the government can exercise the widest choice in its selection of victims ; a condition w^hich gives opportunity for unlimited favoritism, and tends to inject a personal element into prosecutions. The futility of the en forced-competition legisla- tion, when actually carried out, needs but a single instance — the Northern Securities case. James J. Hill controlled the Great Northern Railway and was influential in the Northern Pacific, but these lines had no proprietary access to Chicago, coming no nearer to it than St. Paul, and Ashland, Wiscon- sin. The joint purchase of the Chicago, Burling- 300 Argument and Brief B. Enforced competition as embodied in the Sherman Law has failed in the United States, for I. The law is so uncompromising as to be unenforcible, because a. Few roads know whether they are really guilty or not. b. Large industrial companies can hardly help being guilty to some extent. c. The personal element enters into prosecutions, as i'. Opportunity is given for un- limited favoritism, since a'. The government can ex- ercise a very wide choice in its selection of victims. 301 Argument and Brief ton & Quincy by the Great Northern and the Nor- thern Pacific, in 1901, was really designed primarily to afford a perpetually friendly route into Chicago, the absence of which had handicapped the Hill lines in securing what they considered a full share of transcontinental traffic. To thwart this plan, Mr. Harriman and his associates, as everybody remem- bers, began buying Northern Pacific in the open market in March, 1901, and actually got control of that property by a narrow margin, — the price of stock going from fifty-eight dollars a share to one thousand dollars during the process. Both parties saw the futility of cut-throat competition, however, and compromised the matter by forming the Nor- thern Securities Company, which ultimately held a very large proportion of the capital stocks of the Great Northern and Northern Pacific. The Nor- thern Securities Company was bitterly opposed in the Minnesota courts, and was dissolved by the United States Supreme Court in 1904, on the ground that it was a combination in restraint of trade. Well, let us see what happened then. The Northern Pacific was the original bone of conten- tion. The device of the Securities Company kept the Northern Pacific Cand one-half of a half-con- 302 Argument and Brief 2. The Northern Securities case is an instance of how enforced competi- tion has failed of its purpose, for 303 Argument and Brief trol of the Burlington) equitably poised between Hill and Harriman ; the distribution required by the dissolution of the Securities Company by the Su- preme Court decision was pro rata, and resulted in leaving an absolute monopoly of three companies in Mr. Hill's hands, — the Great Northern (which he started with), the Northern Pacific (with which Mr. Harriman went into the Securities Company), and the Burlington, which had been divided between the Great Northern and the Northern Pacific. The Northern Securities decision was widely her- alded as a positive governmental affirmation of the principle of enforced competition, — but does it ap- pear that any important reduction in monopoly was effected thereby? Apart from the technical result of the decision, Mr. Hill got absolute control of eight thousand miles of parallel and competing lines of which he previously shared control with Mr. Harriman. His monopoly in the American North- west w^as strengthened, not weakened. The original purpose of the Sherman Anti-Trust Law was undoubtedly to restrain manufacturing, rather than transportation, combination. Let us see what it accomplishes here. In every branch of manufacturing, efficiency and economy have been carried to lengths undreamed of 304 Argument and Brief a. The outcome of the case gave James J. Hill absolute control of more miles of railroad than he had controlled before. 305 Argument and Brief ill early days, simply because they had to be, if the products were to be marketed in competition with similar products made somewhere else. But this competitive efficiency was not law-made ; the law had nothing whatever to do with it. The law did not require Eli \\Tiitney to invent the cotton gin, nor was it instrumental in producing the sew- ing machine, or the power-loom, or the steamboat, or the telephone. Just as soon as combination gets two or three or more competing streams of industry diverted into the same channel and attempts to raise prices it in- vites fresh competitors into the same field, and also stimulates invention and resourcefulness to provide substitutes. Sometimes one of these effects is pro- duced; sometimes the other; sometimes both to- gether. It follows, therefore, that the successful combinations are those which use their organiza- tion to effect economies, which keep the distribution price of their products just a little too low to tempt outsiders. The four corners of the world are tied so tightly together nowadays by steam and cable that competition has a long arm: American meat and meat-products compete in Europe, not only with European producers but with Australia, New Zea- land, and South Africa; Denmark and Devonshire 306 Argument and Brief II. Competition should not be enforced by law in the United States, because A. The argument that law-made competition promotes efficiency is false, since 1. Efficiency and economy of manufac- ture have been promoted by other causes. 2. Such inventions as the cotton gin, sewing machine, power-loom, steamboat, and telephone were not the result of law-made competition. B. The argument that combinations neces- sarily kill natural competition is untrue, because 1. If combinations raise prices, fresh competitors are invited into the same field. 2. If prices are raised, invention is stimulated and substitutes are pro- vided. 3. American concerns have to compete with foreign companies, for a. Steam and cable have brought all countries close together. 307 Argument and Brief place their dairy products side by side in the Lon- don market, with a shght advantage in favor of Denmark ; and oil from Kansas and Texas must be sold at an extremely low figure in Calcutta if it is to compete with oil from Baku. We have heard much about the " Beef Trust " in the last few years, and a considerable element of the daily press has actually maintained with bit- terness that a group of Chicago packing-houses could make prices for meat as high as they chose, in utter disregard of the fact that cattle, sheep, hogs, and chickens can be raised in every State in the Union, and that thousands of local butchers would be delighted to undersell the *' trust '* if current prices were high enough to make it profitable. As a matter of fact, this omnipresent local competition is felt especially strongly in the provision business, and there is perhaps no other large industry where the margin of profit is smaller in proportion to the capital tied up. The net profit which a great pack- ing-house derives from buying a steer, slaughter- ing it, and selling the meat and the by-products is around two dollars, or approximately four-fifths of the commission which a banker gets for the com- bined purchase and sale of a bond, with the im- portant difference that the banker gets spot cash 308 Argument and Brief The argument that combinations cause high prices is not true, since I. The much talked of Beef Trust works on a great deal smaller mar- gin of profit than does the banker when he sells a bond. 309 Argument and Brief or marketable collateral to cover his capital expendi- ture, while the packing-house pays spot cash for what it buys, but has to carry an open account un- secured for what it sells. Yet the government has been so afraid of combination in this industry, and has taken such vigorous steps to prevent it, that the Chicago packers no longer dare meet together to settle details of mutual helpfulness. The very fact of the ease with which competition takes place in the provision business accounts for the concentration of capital in the gigantic packing plants at Chicago, Kansas City, and Omaha. As in nearly every other manufacturing industry, concen- tration brings efficiency with it; every one of the by-products can be developed to the highest com- mercial degree, and profits are made, not by raising prices but by eliminating waste. There is no doubt that the », small, independent butcher finds it harder to make a living than he would if the great plants were not able, by their efficient organization, to sell meat a thousand miles from where it is dressed, at the smallest fraction above cost ; but there is nothing in this situation to cause the consumer uneasiness. It is possible to demonstrate the truth of this in a striking manner by means of the industrial statistics collected by the Bureau of Labor, not only in the 310 Argument and Brief 2. This trust makes much of its profit by eliminating waste, because 3" Argument and Brief provision industry, but in others which may be se- lected as highly organized. The price of all farm products (non-concentra- tion of capital) was 28.6 per cent, higher in 1906 than in 1898; the price of beefsteak (concentration of capital) rose only 14.2 per cent, in the same period. Much has been said about the " Sugar Trust," as representing an oppressive economic system, and the activities of this trust, along with all the others, are supposed to have become much more baneful in the last decade than in former times. Note, then, that the average price of sugar was 4.7 per cent, less in 1908 than it was in 1901, and 3.1 per cent, less in 1906 than it was in 1898. It would be possible to cite many more examples illustrating the tendency of raw materials and manufactured articles representing no concentra- tion of capital to increase in price faster than those articles produced by concentration of capital and the supposed elimination of competition. To take a few illustrations at random: candles (concentration, non-competitive) were 2 per cent, cheaper in 1906 than in 1890-99; axes (non-concentration, competi- tive) were 43.1 per cent, dearer; hides (raw ma- terial, competitive) rose in price 64.7 per cent.; 312 Argument and Brief a. According to the Bureau of La- bor the price of all farm prod- ucts (non-concentration of capital) rose 28.6 per cent, be- tween 1898 and 1906. b. The price of beefsteak (concen- tration of capital) rose 14.2 per cent, in the same period. 3. The Sugar Trust lowered the price of sugar 4.7 per cent, between 1901 and 1908. 4. It lowered the price of sugar 3.1 per cent, between 1898 and 1906. 5. Candles (concentration, non-competi- tive) were 2 per cent, cheaper in 1906 than in 1890-99. 6. Axes (non-concentration, competi- tive) were 43.1 per cent, dearer. 7. Hides (competitive) rose 64.7 per cent. 8. Leather (concentration) rose 20.4 per cent. 313 Argument and Brief leather (concentration of capital, reduced competi- tion) increased 20.4 per cent. The Government in its arraignment of the Stand- ard Oil Company admitted freely that the combina- tion has not made prices burdensome, but argued that it might have made them cheaper. It is more or less generally recognized that the ef- fects of competition fall short of any usefulness in certain public-service enterprises. Nobody saves telephone bills by living in a city which is served by two or three competing telephone companies. Even if the toll-rate is low, two or three cheap serv- ices cost more than one dear one, and a business man must have them all. This is a case where monopoly is convenient to the consumer ; a street railway in a crowded district usually furnishes a case of monop- oly which is inevitable. The clearest thinkers in all countries now concede that regulation furnishes a better solution in safeguarding the public welfare than competition does, throughout a fairly long list of what are generally termed public-service enter- prises. The most conservative of these think- ers believe, probably without so much as rais- ing the question in their own minds, that police forces and sewer systems are branches of the public service which can best be provided for by the ^ 314 Argument and Brief 9. The Government admitted that Stand- ard Oil has not made prices bur- densome. D. Monopoly is often highly desirable, be- cause I. This is true of the telephone service, since a. The service is cheaper, for i'. One rate, even if high, is cheaper than several cheap rates. 2'. Business men must have all the telephones in use. 315 Argument and Brief municipality itself. It is also quite universally con- ceded that the control and supply of a city's drink- ing water ought to be a regulated monopoly rather than a competitive industry. There is difference of opinion whether better service is obtained from waterworks owned by private capital or from water- works owned by the municipahty, but this point is alien to our discussion. Further down on the list come lighting and heat- ing plants, telephones, and street railways. We do not want w^arfare between the companies supplying us with gas or electricity, involving fluctuating rates and large liability of interruptions to service because of wars and receiverships; we want regular, undis- turbed service. The reason why competitive tele- phones are undesirable has already been stated. As regards street railways, competition under any cir- cumstances must be of vtry limited extent, because the company first on the ground will always have secured the best routes, at least for a term of years, and it is not generally either feasible or desirable for two companies to operate on the same street. Where competition in one form or another does ex- ist between street railways in the same town, it may be taken for granted that transfer privileges will not be liberal, that traffic will be interrupted, and 316 Argument and Brief Competition between heating and lighting plants results in fluctuation of rates and interruption to service. Competition between street railways is seldom desirable, for a. Two companies can hardly oper- ate on the same street. b. With competition transfer privi- leges cannot be liberal. c. Traffic is liable to interruption, since i'. With competition bankruptcy is frequent. 317 Argument and Brief that the disadvantages attendant upon the operation of a bankrupt or financially embarrassed company will tend to crop up with considerable frequency. Cleveland has been giving an illustration, for some five years, of the practical disadvantages arising from street-railway competition in a busy city, these disadvantages including tracks torn up in midnight warfare, abolition of transfer privileges between competing lines, failure to run through services to important points, such as railroad stations, and the like. The steam railroads have given ample demonstra- tion that nobody gets any permanent profit from cut-throat competition between them. In the ten years when the general competition in this country was most severe, say from 1870 to 1880, the shipper might get an exceedingly low rate on a competi- tive transaction, but was quite sure to get an exceed- ingly high one to compensate for it on a transaction in non-competitive territory. At all events, he never knew six months, or even one month, ahead, what his rate was going to be, and the uncertainty at- tendant upon this state of affairs worked a great deal of harm and resulted in a thousand forms of discrimination, intentional and unintentional on the part of the railroad. Moreover, the lines which felt 318 Argument and Brief d. Cleveland affords an illustration of the disadvantages of compe- tition of street railways, for i'. Tracks were torn up in mid- night warfare. 2'. Transfer privileges were abolished. 3'. Service was interrupted. The steam railroads have demon- strated that nobody gets any perma- nent profit from cut-throat compe- tition, for a. During the highly competitive period from 1870 to 1880, rates were exceedingly low in com- petitive territory, but high in non-competitive territory. b. Rates fluctuated widely. 319 Argument and Brief the competition most were in wretched physical con- dition, and were unable to better themselves. This was particularly true in the South. Albert Fink pointed out that, in the rate wars prior to the for- mation of the Southern Railway and Steamship Association, gross earnings of the southern railroads were reduced about 42 per cent, below what regular rates would have allowed; an amount in many cases equal to the whole net earnings which could have been derived from the competitive business at the regular rates, so that the business was really un- profitable, and the roads were, in consequence, prac- tically worthless to their owners. In 1876 a com- mittee of the stockholders of the Central Railroad & Banking Company of Georgia reported : '"' It is con- ceded that the property of your stockholders is on the brink of being sunk forever, and the bankruptcy of a number of your roads is imminent, if not even now a fact." Of course, roads in this condition could not afford to make their facilities better or to give their country a better service in any way. They had no surplus net earnings for betterment work, and nobody wanted to buy their securities. It was not until the great consolidations like the Southern Railway, the Atlantic Coast Line, and the Seaboard Air Line got the situation well in hand 320 Argument and Brief c. The lines that felt the competi- tion most were in wretched physical condition, as i'. Gross earnings of southern roads were 42 per cent, be- low what regular rates would have allowed. (Al- bert Fink.) 2'. They had no surplus net earnings for betterment work. d. Southern roads were on the verge of bankruptcy. (A com- mittee of the stockholders of the Central Railroad & Banking Company of Georgia, 1876.) e. Consolidations like the Southern Railway, the Atlantic Coast Line, and the Seaboard Air Line brought good service. 321 Argument and Brief that the South began to have a decent railroad service. Prior to that time, the best and strongest companies always had to compete with the bank- rupts ; a process which does no good to a well com- pany or a sick company, or to the territory which either of them serves. S. W. Dunning, with his long experience as a close observer and critic of railroad affairs, used to say that the people who built the West Shore Railroad did more harm and caused greater destruc- tion of property than they w^ould have done if they had gone around burning barns all along the route ; and this simile portrays pretty well the workings of unrestricted competition. The shipper gets a high rate one day, a low one the next, and confronts a constant tendency on the part of the hard-beset railroad company to " scamp " its work ; the railroad company w^orks at cost in one locality and on a basis of exorbitant profit in another, and engages in a long struggle with bankruptcy, while the in- vestor realizes that he has made a mistake, and re- solves to keep out of such enterprises in the future, or else to require an extremely high potential return on his investment. This, in brief, was the effect upon railroads and upon the interests they served, in the period of 322 Argument and Brief f. The building of the West Shore Railroad — a competitive line — did great harm. (S. W. Dunning.) g. Investors in railroads lost money. 323 Argument and Brief maximum free competition. The particular harm- fulness of this kind of competition to railroads arises from the fact that the capital invested in them must perform its work just where it is, no matter how great the disadvantages, so that the bankrupt that has given up trying to pay fixed charges has powers of harmfulness almost unlimited. It is surely to our discredit as an intelligent people that we should try to maintain this kind of free competi- tion by law ! It should not be inferred from this argument that the writer believes that railroads and industrial com- binations should be free of regulation in the public interest. Certain police powers are just as neces- sary to the national government as they are to a municipal government; certain kinds of corporate conduct, such as the practice of giving rebates to favored shippers, may certainly be determined to be contrary to public policy without violation of economic laws. But the attempt to confer a public benefit by requiring universal competition in place of consolidation is just as absurd in theory as it is unattainable in practice. 324 Argument and Brief The evils arising from railroad and in- dustrial combinations may be removed by government regulation CONCLUSION I. The attempt to confer a public benefit by re- quiring universal competition in place of consolidation is just as absurd in theory as it is unattainable in practice. 325 APPENDIX B PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS Many teachers have found that debate can best be taught by turning the class into a parhamentary body, with a student as chairman and the instructor as critic. In preparation for a formal debate the contestants should always submit briefs of their arguments to the instructor a sufficient length of time beforehand so that he may criticize them and, if necessary, revise them. On the day of the con- test interest will be added if judges are appointed or elected and a decision is given near the close of the exercise. As soon as the scheduled debaters have finished both their main speeches and argu- ments in rebuttal, the question under consideration comes before the house for discussion, for amend- ment, or for whatever the organization sees fit to do with it. The speeches that are made at this time may or may not be fully prepared beforehand ; they should seldom be impromptu. Most decidedly they ought 326 Parliamentary Proceedings not to be mere repetition of what has already been said. Some teachers consider it best to have the students speak from the house according to a fixed schedule; others, preferring that considerable lati- tude in the choice of subjects be allowed, merely re- quire each student to make during the term a cer- tain number of floor speeches of a stated length. Since few students are familiar with parliamen- tary practice, the following table showing what mo- tions are possible and when they may be made will be found useful. Each motion in the list gives way to the motion that follows it. For example, if the main motion is to purchase a copy of Cushing's Manual, it is perfectly proper for the chairman at any time during the debate to entertain the motion to refer the matter to a committee. While this is being debated, he could not properly entertain the motion to postpone the matter indefinitely ; since that motion, as the table shows, precedes the motion to refer to a committee. Any following motion, how- ever, such as to take a recess, would be in order, and this last motion must be voted on before the motion to refer to a committee is put to the house. If the motion to take a recess is lost, then the mo- tion to refer the question to a committee must be voted on before the main motion. 327 Parliamentary Proceedings PARLIAMENTARY MOTIONS. 1. '^ Main Motion 2. (a) '-'Motion to Amend ^ (b) Motion to Amend an Amendment^ (c) Motion to Postpone Indefinitely ^ 3. * Motion to Refer to a Committee 4. * Motion to Postpone to a Definite Time 5. t " The Previous Question " 6. Motion to Lay on the Table 7. t Motion to Suspend the Rules 8. Motion to Withdraw a Motion 9. * Motion to Divide a Question 10. Motion to Read Papers 11. fThe Objection 12. Appeal 13. Point of Order 14. Call for '' the Order of the Day " 15. * Questions of Privilege 16. Motion to Take a Recess 17. Motion to Adjourn 18. Motion to Adjourn to Meet at a Cer- tain Time and Place Only motions printed in heavy type are debat- able; those marked with an asterisk may be amended; those marked with a dagger require a two-thirds vote. 1 The motion to amend an amendment takes precedence over a motion to amend; each of these two motions is of the same value as the motion to postpone indefinitely and may neither supersede it nor be superseded by it. 328 Parliamentary Proceedings 1. Main motion. In parliamentary assemblies policies are discussed and business is transacted by- means of motions. A motion may be made by a member of the body only after he has risen and has been recognized by the presiding officer. The motion should be stated in this form: " Mr. Chair- man, I move that we elect a board of judges for the scheduled debate." If this motion is seconded, the presiding officer announces it to the house thus : " It has been moved and seconded that we elect a board of judges for the scheduled debate. Is there any discussion? If there is no discussion [or no further discussion], are you ready for the ques- tion ? " This original motion is called the main motion. Until this main motion has been disposed of, no other main motion may be introduced. 2. (a) Motion to amend. If any member of the assembly wishes the main motion changed be- fore it comes to a vote, he has the privilege of mov- ing to amend the motion by adding to it, by taking away from it, or by changing the wording of the motion. For example, one might move to insert the word "three" before "judges" in the motion mentioned in the preceding paragraph. If this mo- tion to amend is seconded, the amendment must be voted on before the main motion is put. As many 329 Parliamentary Proceedings amendments to a main motion may be made as are desired, but each one must be disposed of as it rises before another can be offered. (b) Motion to amend an amendment. An amendment may be amended also. The motion mentioned in the preceding paragraphs will furnish an illustration. After it has been moved that the original motion be amended by the insertion of the word " three/' it would be proper for a member to move that the word " three " be changed to " five." This motion would be an amendment to an amend- ment. In order that there may be no such piling up of amendments on top of amendments as would cause confusion and make the transaction of busi- ness almost impossible, there cannot be an amend- ment of an amendment to an amendment. Stated more clearly, the rule is this: Only two amend- ments may be pending at any given time, one amending the original motion, and one amendment to this amendment. It is always necessary to vote upon an amendment to an amendment before vot- ing upon the original amendment. (c) Motion to postpone indefinitely. The mo- tion to postpone indefinitely is of the same value as the motion to amend and the motion to amend an amendment, and when either of these two latter is 330 Parliamentary Proceedings before the house, the motion to postpone indefinitely cannot be made since it has no higher value. For the same reason when the motion to postpone in- definitely is before the house, neither the motion to amend nor the motion to amend an amendment can be made. If the motion to postpone indefinitely is passed, the original motion is cast out and can come up only at a subsequent meeting, and then only as new business. 3. Motion to refer to a committee. Commit- tees greatly facilitate the work of deliberative bod- ies. If discussion is taking place concerning a main motion, an amendment, an amendment to an amendment, or a motion to postpone indefinitely, it is proper to move that the question under consid- eration be referred to a committee — a standing committee or a committee to be appointed or elected. The committee may or may not be in- structed when to bring in a report. Should no in- structions be given, the report of a committee may be presented to the assembly at any suitable time provided that no one objects. When objections arise, a motion to hear the report is in order. If the report contains only information, the usual pro- cedure is to pass a motion accepting the report; if it recommends certain lines of action, it is customary 331 Parliamentary Proceedings for some one to move that the report be accepted and adopted. The acceptance of the report dis- solves the committee, unless it is a standing com- mittee. The adoption of the report binds the as- sembly to the action recommended. 4. Motion to postpone to a definite time. The motion to postpone to a definite time can be made in reference only to a main motion, together with its amendments if there are any; it cannot refer merely to an amendment separate from the prin- cipal motion. If the motion to postpone the con- sideration of a question to a definite time is passed, this question can be taken up sooner only by a two- thirds vote. If the consideration of the question has been postponed to a certain hour, the question takes precedence at that time over everything ex- cept matters of privilege. If the postponement has been made to a certain day merely, the question comes up on that day as unfinished business. 5. " The previous question." To move the pre- vious question is to make a motion which, if passed, will stop debate and bring the original mo- tion to a vote. That this procedure should be called by the technical name " moving the previous question " is unfortunate, because this phrase often Z2>^ Parliamentary Proceedings confuses men unskilled in parliamentary law. For one to say, '* I move the previous question," is equivalent to saying, *' I move that debate about the motion before the house cease, and a vote be taken." If there are several motions before the house when the previous question is passed, such as a main mo- tion and a motion to amend, there can be no more debate about any of them; a vote on each must be taken at once in the proper order. The only ex- ception to this rule occurs when a committee has made a report. Then that member of the commit- tee who has given the report may close the debate on the adoption of the report even after the previ- ous question has been passed. At all other times if the previous question is passed, all debate ceases; if the previous question fails to pass, the business be- fore the house is in the same condition as though the previous question had never been moved. 6. Motion to lay on the table. Whenever an assembly wishes to delay action on a measure until more information can be gathered, more thought taken, or more important business transacted, it usually passes a motion to lay the question under consideration on the table. A majority vote may call up the question again at any time. The true 333 Parliamentary Proceedings function of this motion is to aid a measure by de- ferring the vote until a more favorable time. It differs from the motion to postpone indefinitely in that the question indefinitely postponed cannot be brought up again at the same session. A main mo- tion cannot be separated from its amendments, and the tabling of one means the tabling of all. If other motions are pending, such as a motion to refer to a committee, they are lost. 7. Motion to suspend the rules. Most organ- izations have by-laws prescribing the order in which business shall be transacted. Usually these by-laws also provide that a two-thirds vote shall be competent in a particular case to set aside the regular order temporarily, and to permit a measure to come up out of its turn. If no such by-law ex- ists, the rules cannot properly be suspended except by common consent. A motion to suspend the rules never applies to established parliamentary principles. 8. Motion to vvithdraw a motion. If no one ob- jects, the mover of a motion may withdraw it at any time before it has been passed. As a matter of courtesy special permission is usually asked of the seconder of the motion. If objection is made, a motion to withdraw is in order. After a motion 334 Parliamentary Proceedings has been withdrawn, business is resumed as though the motion had never been made. g. Motion to " divide the question." When a motion contains two or more propositions, it is fre- quentty desirable to divide it so that each proposi- tion may be voted on separately. If a motion to divide the question is passed, the propositions are debated and voted on in the order in which they occur. 10. Motion to read papers. If no protest is made when a member asks permission to read papers or reports, or to have them read, a motion is unnecessary. If objection does arise, however, a motion may be resorted to. Leave is usually granted unless the reading is manifestly for the pur- pose of delay. 11. The objection. If any member — even the chairman — thinks that a motion is for some rea- son objectionable and should not be discussed, he is privileged as soon as the motion is stated, but not later, to object to the consideration of the ques- tion. No second is necessar}^ No debate can en- sue. The chairman must at once say, " Objection has been made to the consideration of this ques- tion. All those in favor of discussing this question will vote in the affirmative. Those opposed to the 335 Parliamentary Proceedings discussion of this question will vote in the nega- tive." It will be noted tlmt a negative vote sus- tains the objection. 12. Appeal. Whenever a member believes that the chairman has made a wrong decision, he may say, " Mr. Chairman, I appeal from the decision of the chair." If the appeal is seconded, it con- stitutes a motion and is debatable. At the close of the debate the chairman puts the motion thus: " Those who wish to support the decision of the chair will vote in the affirmative. Those who op- pose the decision of the chair will vote in the nega- tive." The chainnan is permitted to vote even though there be no tie. A majority vote is neces- sary to reverse the chair's decision. The decision of the assembly must be obeyed whether it cor- responds to parliamentary law or not. 13. Point of order. Should anything improper occur, such as the use of objectionable language, disorder on the part of any one, or some violation of parliamentary law, the presiding officer ought to exercise his authority to enforce order, propriety, and correct parliamentary procedure. If he does not, a member may stand, regardless of who has the floor, and say, " Mr. Chairman, I rise to a point of order." No second is needed. The chairman 336 Parliamentary Proceedings will ask him to state his point, and will then rule as to whether any departure from propriety or par- liamentary order has occurred or is occurring. If the chairman is in doubt, he may ask the assembly to decide the question. Any one who disagrees with the ruling of the chair has the right to ap- peal. 14. Call for " the order of the day." If an or- ganization votes to adopt a certain program at a certain time, or to postpone a question to a certain hour, then when that time arrives, in spite of other business that may be before the house and even though another member has the floor, a member may address the chair and call for the order of the day. This motion requires no second. The chairman must immediately put the question, " Shall we proceed to take up the order of the day? All in favor will vote aye. All opposed will vote no." If this motion is passed, the business that constituted the order of the day comes before the house without an additional motion. 15. Questions of privilege. Questions of priv- ilege spring from matters that affect the efficiency of an organization and the rights and the comfort of its members. Such questions may be brought up at any moment and introduced as follows : 337 Parliamentary Proceedings Member : " Mr. President, I rise to a question of privilege." Chair : " State your question." Member : " A person not belonging to this or- ganization is in the hall and is voting. I suggest that we suspend business until he leaves." Chair: "If there is no objection, business will be suspended until the person who is not a member of this body leaves the hall." Should an objection be raised, the question be- comes a motion, and the chairman says, " Shall we suspend business until the person mentioned has left the hall?" Question of privilege may be amended, referred to a committee, postponed, or laid on the table; they are also subject to *' the previous question." 1 6. Motion to take a recess. A motion to take a recess may be made when other business is pend- ing; it cannot be debated or amended under such circumstances. At other times it may be treated as a main motion. If the motion fixes no definite time, it is understood that the meeting will be re- sumed at the discretion of the chair. After a re- cess business proceeds as though there had been no interruption. 17. Motion to adjourn. The motion to adjourn 338 Parliamentary Proceedings may be made at any time except when the chair- man or some other member is speaking, when vot- ing is in progress, or when a vote is being verified. Even though this motion does not fix the time and the place of the next meeting, it may not be amended. If, however, before the motion to ad- journ has been passed and adjournment declared, it seems necessar}^ to fix the time and the place of the next meeting, then the simple motion to ad- journ gives way to a new motion of greater priv- ilege that will correct this fault. This motion of higher value is discussed in the following para- graph. 1 8. Motion to adjourn to meet at a certain time and place. If a motion to adjourn to meet at a certain time and place is made when no other busi- ness is pending, it may be treated as a main mo- tion, and as such it may be debated, amended, or divided. If, however, other business is before the house, such a motion takes precedence over all other motions and must be disposed of at once. 339 APPENDIX C A LIST OF PROPOSITIONS 1. The United States should take the initiative in forming a federation of all American Republics for the purpose of settling such disputes as threaten to disturb international relations in the Western Hemisphere. 2. The United States should adopt the " budget system " as a method of determining national ap- propriations. 3. The Federal government should appoint a commission to determine the price of foodstuffs. 4. Italy was justified in withdrawing from the Triple Alliance. 5. Germany's entrance into Belgium was justi- fiable. 6. The United States should acquire and operate ships as a means of increasing our merchant ma- rine. 7. The United States should maintain a system 340 A List of Propositions of subsidies for the protection of American mer- chant marine. 8. The Federal government should exempt Amer- ican ships engaged in coastwise trade from paying Panama Canal tolls. 9. Congress should repeal the Sherman Law. 10. Congress should repeal the Fifteenth Amend- ment. 11. The United States should abandon her gen- eral fixed policy of neutrality in world affairs. 12. Neutral nations should refuse to sell arms to belligerent nations. 13. Presidents of the United States should be nominated by the direct primary. 14. The President of the United States should be elected by direct vote of the people. 15. The President of the United States should be elected for a term of six years and be ineligible for reelection. 16. The United States should build at least four superdreadnaughts a year. 17. The standing army of the United States should be increased to five hundred thousand men. 18. The United States army should be strength- ened by the establishment of a military reserve of at least one million men. 341 A List of Propositions 19. As a part of the military and naval equip- ment of the United States there should immediately be a large increase in the number of air craft. 20. The United States should abandon the IMon- roe Doctrine. 21. The United States should grant full citizen- ship to the people of Porto Rico. 22. The annexation of Cuba to the United States would be for the best interests of Cuba. 23. Political union with Cuba would be for the best interests of the United States. 24. The United States should permanently retain the Philippines. 25. The United States should immediately give the Philippines their independence. 26. The Federal government should acquire and operate the coal mines in the United States. 2^. The Federal government should acquire and operate the interstate railroads in the United States. 28. The Federal government should acquire and operate all interstate telephone and telegraph sys- tems in the United States. 29. The United States should discontinue the pro- tective tariff policy. 30. Letter postage should be reduced to one cent an ounce or fraction thereof. 342 A List of Propositions 31. Corporations engaged in interstate com- merce should be required to take out a Federal li- cense. 32. American municipalities should own and op- erate their street car systems. 33. In the State of , all cities having at least ten thousand inhabitants should adopt the Des Moines system of government. 34. A State constabulary should be established in . 35. The recall of State and local judges by pop- ular vote is desirable. 36. Federal judges should be elected by popular vote. 37. Justices of the United States Supreme Court should be elected by popular vote. 38. The right of suffrage should be limited in the State of by an educational test. 39. Immigration to the United States should be further restricted by an educational test. 40. The State of should adopt the: initiative and referendum system of government. 41. Japanese control will be of greater benefit to China than Russian control. 42. Free trade should be established between tUe United States and the Philippines. 343 A List of Propositions 43. The Chinese should, be excluded from the Philippines. 44. The present laws relating to Chinese immi- gration should be amended to include the Japanese. 45. The United States should admit the Chinese on equal terms with other immigrants. 46. The United States should admit all raw ma- terials free of duty. 47. Postmasters should be elected by popular vote. 48. The date of the Presidential inauguration should be changed. 49. Labor unions are detrimental to the best in- terests of the w^orking man. 50. Employers are justified in refusing to recog- nize labor unions. 51. Members of trade unions are justified in re- fusing to work with non-union men. 52. The boycott is morally justifiable. 53. Convicts should not be farmed out to private contractors. 54. The products of prison labor should not be allowed to compete in the open market. 55. The State of should abolish the death penalt}% 56. The United States government is treating the Indians unjustly. 344 A List of Propositions 57. In all criminal cases three-fourths of a jury should be competent to render a verdict. 58. The establishment of moving picture houses has been a detriment to the United States. 59. The present powers of courts to grant injunc- tions should be greatly curtailed. 60. The United States should establish an old- age pension system similar to the one in operation in England. 61. The white citizens in the Southern States are justified in maintaining their political supremacy. 62. Railroad pooling should be legalized. 63. Congress should restore the canteen to the United States army. 64. Steel should be admitted into the United States free of duty. 65. The plea of insanity should not be available as a bar to punishment for crime. 66. The progress and prosperity of the United States would be increased if the right of suffrage were not denied any one solely on account of sex. 67. The Supreme Court should be deprived of the power to declare statutes of Congress unconstitu- tional. 68. All counties in should adopt a commis- sion form of government. 345 A List of Propositions 6g. The establishment of large foundations, such as the Carnegie and Rockefeller foundations, is contrary to the best interests of the United States. 70. The Legislature should grant no ap- propriation to private institutions. 71. There should be national laws governing marriage and divorce. ^2. The short ballot should be used in State and municipal elections. y^. High license is preferable to prohibition. 74. Local option is the proper solution of the liq- uor problem. 75. State boards of arbitration, with compulsory- powers, should be appointed to settle disputes be- tween employers and employees. 76. Military tactics should be taught in the pub- lic schools. yy. Secret societies are a detriment to public schools. '^8. No prizes should be offered in public schools. 79. The practice of furnishing free text-books to pupils in public schools should be abolished. 80. American colleges should admit students only on examination. 346 A List of Propositions 8i. The education of the American negro should be industrial rather than liberal. 82. For the average student the small college is preferable to the large college. 83. The three-term system is preferable to the semester system at College. 84. In colleges and universities the lecture system of teaching economics is superior to the recitation system. 85. Degrees should be granted twice a year at College. 86. Compulsory chapel attendance should be abol- ished at College. 87. Greek-letter fraternities are a detriment to American colleges. 88. Education in all States should be compul- sory to the age of sixteen. 89. College students receiving an average daily grade of eighty-five per cent, in a subject should be excused from final examination in that sub- ject. 90. Class rushes should be abolished at Col- lege. 91. All colleges should abolish hazing. 92. Freshmen should not be debarred from inter- collegiate athletic contests. 347 A List of Propositions 93. Athletics, as conducted at present, are detri- mental to College. 94. A large city aifords a better location for a college than does the country. 95. The honor system of holding examinations should be adopted at College. 96. American universities should admit women on equal terms with men. 97. The Legislature should refuse State aid to all colleges maintaining Greek-letter fraternities. 98. The organization of sororities at College would be for the best interests of all concerned. 99. Intercollegiate football contests should be lim- ited to one game. 100. All American colleges and universities should abolish the paid athletic coach. 348 ADDITIONAL PROPOSITIONS 349 Additional Propositions 350 Additional Propositions 351 INDEX Admissions against interest, 121. Affirmative, work of, 241, 246. Ambiguous terms, 205. Amplify and diminish, 250. Analogy, 149. Analysis of proposition, 48. As an aid in refutation, 191. Answering one's self, 192. Antecedent probability, 136. Tests for, 139, 140. Arguer, qualifications of an, 9- Arguing in a circle, 204. Argument and its brief, 29c. Argumentation, definition of, 3- Purpose of, 3. Field of, 4. Benefits of, 5. An art, 6. Aims of, 7. Twofold nature of, 7. Argumentum ad hominem, 214. Argumentum ad populum, 215. Assertiveness, 102. Audience, definition of, 31. Authority, 124, Begging the question, 201. Brief-drawing, rules for, 86, 167, 171. Briefs, model, 93, 172, 291. Burden of proof, 19. Composition and division, 212. Conciliation, 30. Conclusion, 278. Errors in, 284. Concreteness, 256. Connectives in a brief, 165. Conviction, definition of, 7. In introduction, 48. In discussion, 102. In conclusion, 279. Debate, definition of, 3. Suggestions for, 228. Special features of, 252. How to judge, 276. Deduction, 131. Definition, 48. 353 Index Definition, by authority, 49. By illustration, 51. Delivery, 261. Position, 262. Gestures, 2^^, Voice, 270. Attitude toward oppo- nents, 274. Dilemma, 219. Discussion, 102. Enthymeme, 133. Evidence, classification of, 105. Sources of, 106. Tests of, 108, 116. Negative, 122, Of silence, 122. Against interest, 121. Example, 145. Explanation of proposition, Fairness as means of con- ciliation, 34. Fallacies, 200. Begging the question, 201. Ambiguous terms, 205. False cause, 207. Composition and division, 212. Ignoring the question, 213. False cause, 207. Figures of speech, 259. Generalization, 145. Gestures, 267. Ignoring the question, 213. Indentation in brief, 90. Indexes for reference, 78. Induction, 128. Introduction, work of, 30. Persuasion in, 30. Conviction in, 48. Brief of, 84. Issues, how to find, 58. Tests for, 72. Modesty as means of con- ciliation, 33. Negative evidence, 122. Negative, work of, 244, 246. Partition, 75. Persuasion, definition of, 7. In introduction, 30. In discussion, 153. In conclusion, 279. Post hoc ergo propter hoc, 208. Preliminary reading, 78. Proof, definition of, 103. Necessity for, 102. Proposition, definition of, 14. How to word, 18. Of fact, 20. Of policy, 20. With only one side, 22. Ambiguous, 23. 354 Index Proposition, too general, 24. Combined, 25. Propositions, list of, 340. Qualifying conclusion, 286. Quotations in a brief, 89. Reasoning, 127. Inductive, 128. Deductive, 131. From antecedent proba- bility, 136. From sign, 141. From example, 145. Rebuttal speeches, 248. Reductio ad ahsurdum, 216. Refutation, 190. Special methods of, 216. Arrangement of material for, 238. Sign, 141. Tests for, 142. Sincerity as a means of con- ciliation, 35. Statistics, 253. Subject, importance of, 36. Timeliness of, 38. Subjects suitable for argu- ment, 14. Syllogism, 132. Symbols, use of in brief, 91. Term, definition of, 14, Unity, 252. Variety, 252. What each debater must do, 241. 3SS TViic Viriftlr ic TkTTT! in.r:T Ai jun University of California SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 305 De Neve Drive - Parking Lot 17 . Box 951388 LOS ANGELES, CALiFORNIA 90095-1388 Return this material to the library from which It was borrowed. APR 14 2008 DEC APR 2 MAY 1 .iiii": of Form ] I AA 000 410 503 7 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-LOS ANGELES L 007 772 708 9