Thomas Dixon - "The Man in Gray"

Pierre Loti - "Madame Chrysantheme, v2"

Jean de La Fontaine - "The Tales and Novels, v18: Feronde &c."

Annie H. Ryder - "Hold Up Your Heads, Girls!"

New Philadelphia Book Publisher Highlights Local Talent
Book and Publishing News from Publishers Newswire(tm)

Looking for Child to be on Cover of a New Book, 'The Model Child'
PHILADELPHIA, Pa. -- The Philadelphia literary world will celebrate the launch of two new players today, April 10th: Kay Square Press, a new publishing company focused on Philadelphia-area artists, their stories, and their art; and Kay Square's first release, 'With the Rich and Mighty: Emlen Etting of Philadelphia' (ISBN: 978-0-9815129-0-7), a critical biography by Kenneth C. Kaleta.

FlatSigned Press Alleges Don Imus Remarks Damage Legacy of President Gerald R. Ford
NEW YORK, N.Y. -- Nathan Yungerberg, an accomplished model scout and professional child photographer is launching a nation-wide casting call to find the cover model for his highly anticipated book release, 'The Model Child: A Parents Guide to the Child Modeling Industry' (ISBN: 978-0-9817018-0-6).

Books: Practical Argumentation

G >> George K. Pattee >> Practical Argumentation




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 will 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 subheadings should always be supported,
not demolished.

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 how unconvincing is the following portion of a brief:--

Proposition--American cities should own and operate all street-car
lines within their limits.

I. The present system of operating street-car lines is efficient,
for

A. The street-car service in the United States is the best in
the world.

B. Street-car fare in the United States is remarkably low.

The insertion of testimony, however, to substantiate A and B turns
this bit of brief into excellent proof.

I. The present system of operating street-car lines is efficient,
for

A. The street-car service in the United States is the best in
the world, because

1. It is best in respect to extent, since

a. James W. Garner says that England has less than a
quarter of the street-car facilities found in the
United States. (Dial, Feb. 1908, p. 20.)

b. In 1902, two hundred and ninety-five communities in the
United Kingdom of from 8,000 to 25,000 inhabitants
were without street cars; while in the United States
there were only twenty-one such communities.
(Municipal and Private Operation of Public Utilities,
W. J. Clark, Vol. I, p. 445.)

2. It is best in regard to equipment and accommodation, since

a. The cars are the best equipped in the world. (Ibid.)

b. The cars are run with shorter intervals between them
than anywhere else in the world. (Ibid.)

B. The fare in the United States is remarkably low, because

1. Although the fare in Glasgow, a leading exponent of
municipal ownership, is but twopence, yet it will carry
one only eight miles; but five cents in New York will
carry one fifty miles.

Rule XI. _Make no unsupported statements unless they are generally
admitted to be 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
information 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
argument. Thus the rule:--

Rule XII. _After all evidence state in parentheses the source from
which it came_.

In addition to establishing the side of the proposition which it
advocates, a good brief almost invariably refutes the main arguments
of the opposite side. The way in which this refutation is expressed is
very important. A brief on the affirmative side of the proposition,
"_Resolved_, That the Panama canal should be built at sea-level,"
would be weak and ludicrous, if, when answering the argument for the
negative that the cost of a sea-level canal would be enormous, it
should contain the following reasoning:--

The Panama Canal should be built at sea-level,
(for)
I. The cost would not be much greater than for a lock canal.

One might think from this statement that the drawer of the brief
considered the contention that the sea-level type would cost a little
though not much more than the other type, a positive argument in favor
of the sea-level canal. 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 of the sea-level type.
This refutation should be expressed in such a manner as to show that
it is refutation and not positive proof. It might well read something
like this:--

The Panama Canal should be built at sea-level,
(for)
I. The contention of the negative that a sea-level canal would cost
enormously more than a lock-canal 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 argument is taking; no confusion can occur between refutation and
positive proof. Hence the rule:--

Rule XIII. _Phrase refutation so that the argument 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_.


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 assertion_.

IV. _Make each statement as concise as is consistent 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 sufficient explanation for a
complete understanding of the discussion. This explanation usually
involves (a) a definition 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_.


RULES FOR THE DISCUSSION.

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_.

X. _Phrase each subordinate statement in the discussion so that it
will 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_.

XI. _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 immigration to the United States should be
further restricted by an educational test.


AFFIRMATIVE BRIEF.

INTRODUCTION.

I. The question of further restricting immigration to the United
States by an educational test gains in importance from the
alleged impairment of American institutions and standards by
immigration.

II. The following explanations will aid in the discussion of the
question:--

A. Immigration to the United States means the migrating of people
into the United States for the purpose of permanent
residence. (Century Dictionary.)

B. The restrictive measures now in force are as follows:--

1. Idiots, insane persons, paupers, convicts, diseased
persons, anarchists, polygamists, women for immoral
purposes, assisted aliens, contract laborers, and the
Chinese are excluded. (Statutes of the United States.)

2. A head tax of four dollars is imposed. (Ibid.)

C. The proposed restrictive measure is as follows:--

1. Every immigrant to the United States between the ages of
fifteen and fifty must be able to read and write a few
sentences of some language. (Congressional Record, Vol.
XXVIII, page 5421.).

III. The points to be determined seem to be:--

A. Is there a need for further restriction of immigration?

B. If there is such a need, would the educational test accomplish
this further restriction in a proper manner?

DISCUSSION.

I. There is great need for further restriction of immigration,
because

A. The character of the immigrants since 1880 has greatly changed
for the worse, for

1. Before 1880 most of the immigrants were earnest, energetic
people from northern and western Europe. (International
Encyclopaedia, under Immigration.)

2. At the present time seventy and one-half per cent. of the
total number of immigrants are from the unenergetic
people of southern and eastern Europe. (Ibid.)

3. More immigrants have become paupers than was formerly the
case, for

a. Prior to 1880 there were comparatively few paupers among
the immigrants. (Ibid.)

b. At present the percentage of pauperism among the
foreigners here is four times as great as among the
natives. (Ibid.)

4. While the Germans, English, and other immigrants from
northern Europe who came here before 1880 were moral and
upright, the present immigrants from southern Europe have
a low code of morals, for

a. The moral degeneracy of the races of southern Europe is
well known. (Henry Rood, Forum, Vol. XIV, page 116.)

5. Crime among foreigners in this country has increased
immensely, for

a. In 1905 twenty-eight per cent, of our criminals were of
foreign birth. (Report of the Commissioner-General of
Immigration for 1905.)

6. Illiteracy among immigrants has greatly increased, for

a. In 1905 the percentage of illiterates of foreign birth
was twenty-six. (Ibid.)

b. Many of the present immigrants are illiterates from
southern Italy. (S. E. Moffett, Review of Reviews,
Vol. 28, page 55.)

B. The condition of the cities and especially of their slum
districts is alarming, for

1. The number of immigrants is increasing astonishingly,
inasmuch as,

a. 8,385 immigrants arrived in 1820.

b. 788,992 immigrants arrived in 1882.

c. 1,026,499 immigrants arrived in 1905. (Report of
Commissioner-General of Immigration, 1905. page 42.)

2. Two-thirds of the total number of immigrants in 1902
settled in the cities. (Editorial in Outlook, Vol. LXXI,
page 154.)

3. These congested districts foster unsanitary conditions,
physical degeneration, and crime. (Deputy Clerk of
Children's Court, New York City, North American Review,
Vol. CLXXIX, page 731.)

4. Charitable organizations are unable to cope with the
problems in congested districts, for

a. The number of immigrants is increasing too rapidly.
(Report of Commissioner-General of Immigration, 1905.)

C. The present immigration is politically harmful, for

1. Immigrants of the kind that are now coming in do not make
good citizens, because

a. They are indifferent to civic manners, for

1'. They cannot appreciate the spirit of American
government, as has previously been shown.

b. They are easily influenced in all political affairs by
pecuniary persuasion, for

1'. Their sole object in this country is to acquire
wealth. (Prescott F. Hall, Secretary of the
Immigration Restriction League, Annals of American
Academy, Vol. XXIV, page 172.)

D. The number of immigrants is too great to be assimilated
properly, since

1. Most of the immigrants are extremely clannish, for

a. "Little Italies," "Little Hungaries," and "Ghettos,"
exist in great numbers and size throughout the United
States. (Henry Rood, Forum, Vol. XIV, page 114.)

2. Most of the immigrants never try to learn the English
language, for

a. They have no need for it, since

1'. They seldom come in contact with English-speaking
people. (Ibid.)

3. Their tendency is not to become citizens, for

a. Thirty-one per cent. of the immigrants return home after
having been here a few years. (Report of the
Commissioner-General of Immigration, 1905.)

b. Those who remain cannot for the most part appreciate our
government, for

1'. They have been continually trodden upon in their
home countries.

2'. They have had no opportunity to interest themselves
in government. (N. S. Shaler, Atlantic Monthly,
Vol. LXXI, page 646.)

4. The argument that because we were able to assimilate the
immigrants in the past we shall be able to do so in the
future, is unsound, for

a. The character of the present immigrants has changed, as
shown previously.

b. In the future we may expect a much larger immigration.
(Prescott F. Hall, Annals of American Academy, Vol.
XXIV, page 172.)

E. Immigrants lower the standards of American labor, because

1. They create harmful competition, since

a. More immigrants are coming now than we really need, for

I'. In 1906 at least 200,000 aliens came here who were
of no use whatever. (Commissioner of Immigration
for New York, Popular Science Monthly, Vol. LXVI,
page 175.)

b. They work for lower wages than do Americans, for

1'. They are able to live more cheaply. (Henry Rood,
Ibid.)

2'. They place a lower value on their labor. (T. V.
Powderly, North American Review, Vol. CXLVII, page
165.)

2. They tend to destroy the independence of the American
laborer, for

a. They work under conditions that no American laborer will
tolerate, for

1'. They create degrading forms of employment. (W. H.
Wilkins, Nineteenth Century, Vol. XXX, page 588.)

b. Their selfish desires keep them from organizing with
American laborers for protection.

II. The educational test would accomplish the further restriction of
immigration in a proper manner, for

A. It would change the character of the immigrants for the
better, since

1. It would keep out the unenergetic races of southern and
eastern Europe, because

a. Ninety-three per cent, of illiterates come from southern
and eastern Europe. (International Encyclopaedia,
under Immigration.)

2. It would decrease the amount of pauperism, for

a. The southern Italians, who are the most illiterate,
produce the most pauperism. (Ibid.)

3. It would raise the standard of morality, since

a. Ignorance is closely coupled with immorality, for

1'. The southern Italians have a very low standard of
living in the United States. (Henry Rood, Forum,
Vol. XIV, page 116.)

b. The educational test would exclude such people.

4. It would decrease the amount of crime, for

a. It would keep out most of the immigrants from southern
Europe, for

1'. Ninety-three per cent, of the illiterates come from
this source.

b. The criminal tendencies of people from southern Europe
are well known. (Henry Rood, Ibid.)

B. The educational test would improve the condition of the
cities, for

1. They would be more sanitary and less criminal, since

a. These evils are due largely to congestion.

b. Under this test the cities would be less congested, for

1'. Immigration would be reduced twenty-two and six
tenths per cent.

2'. Educated immigrants are not likely to settle in the
slums.

c. If the cities were less congested, charitable societies
could remove more evils from the slums, and in time
even eliminate the slums.

C. The educational test would aid the country politically, for

1. We should receive only those immigrants who are
intellectually capable of becoming good citizens, for

a. Education enables a man to become interested in the
government in which he lives.

2. Bribery would cease, for

a. Greed for small amounts of money is not so strong among
the intelligent. (Prescott F. Hall, Ibid.)

D. The educational test would aid the work of assimilation, for

1. It would bar to a great extent the clannish immigrants, as

a. Clannishness is largely a result of superstition and
ignorance. (Henry Rood, Ibid.)

2. It would practically force the immigrants to learn the
English language, for

a. Their clans broken up, they would naturally come in
contact more and more with English-speaking people.

3. It would produce among the foreign-born element of the
United States a wider interest in civic affairs, for

a. Those who have some education can better appreciate our
government than those who are illiterate.

b. It would admit only those who, by reason of their
education, small though it may be, have had the
chance to study somewhat their home governments. (N.
S. Shaler, Ibid.)

E. The educational test would tend to raise the standards of
American labor, for

1. It would cut down competition, since

a. It would shut out many laborers, for

1'. Most of those affected by this test would be
common laborers.

b. It would tend to equalize the rate of wages, because

1'. Immigrants would not be willing to work for lower
wages, for

a'. The slums being gone, they would need more
money for existence.

2. It would aid the independence of American labor, for

a. Immigrants would no longer be so reluctant to cooperate
with American laborers for protection, for

1'. It is well known that, as a rule, only the most
ignorant classes refuse to join unions.

b. The low industrial competition would be removed, as
previously shown.

F. The educational test would be practical, for

1. It is not a test depending upon the representations of
immigrants or the decisions of inspectors. (Prescott F.
Hall, Forum, Vol. XXX, page 564.)

2. The educational test has worked well in Australia.
(Professor Frank Parsons, Annals of American Academy,
Vol. XXIV, page 215.)

G. It would lessen the burden of education for the government,
for

1. It would force prospective immigrants to get their
elementary education in Europe.

2. The immigrants would have some education as a foundation
for more.

CONCLUSION.

The affirmative has proved the following:--

I. There is great need for further restriction of immigration.

II. The educational test would accomplish the further restriction of
immigration in a proper manner.

Therefore, immigration to the United States should be further
restricted by an educational test.


EXERCISES

State the propositions upheld in the following arguments, and put the
material into brief form:--

1. At all events, this is clear: that throughout those six months the
government knew perfectly well the danger in which General Gordon was
placed. It has been said that General Gordon did not ask for troops.
Well, I am surprised at that defense. One of the characteristics of
General Gordon was the extreme abnegation of his nature. It was not to
be expected that he should send home a telegram to say, "I am in great
danger, therefore send me troops." He would probably have cut off his
right hand before he would have sent such a telegram. But he did send
a telegram that the people of Khartum were in danger, and that the
Mahdi must win unless military succor was sent forward, and distinctly
telling the government--and this is the main point--that unless they
would consent to his views the supremacy of the Mahdi was assured.

My lords, is it conceivable that after that--two months after that--in
May, the prime minister should have said that the government was
waiting to have reasonable proof that Gordon was in danger? By that
time Khartum was surrounded, and the governor of Berber had announced
that his case was desperate, which was too surely proved by the
massacre which took place in June.

And yet in May Mr. Gladstone was waiting for reasonable proof that
they were in danger. Apparently he did not get that proof till August.

A general sent forward on a dangerous expedition does not like to go
whining for assistance, unless he is pressed by absolute peril. All
those great qualities which go to make men heroes are such as are
absolutely incompatible with such a course, and lead them to shrink as
from a great disgrace from any unnecessary appeal for exertion for
their protection. It was the business of the government not to
interpret General Gordon's telegrams as if they had been statutory
declarations, but to judge for themselves of the circumstances of the
case, and to see that those who were surrounded, who were the only
three Englishmen among this vast body of Mohammedans, who were already
cut off from all communication with the civilized world by the
occupation of every important town upon the river, were in real
danger.

I do not know any other instance in which a man has been sent to
maintain such a position without a certain number of British troops.
If the British troops had been there treachery would have been
impossible; but sending Gordon by himself to rely on the fidelity of
Africans and Egyptians was an act of extreme rashness, and if the
government succeed in proving, which I do not think they can, that
treachery was inevitable, they only pile up an additional reason for
their condemnation. I confess it is very difficult to separate this
question from the personal matters involved. It is very difficult to
argue it on purely abstract grounds without turning for a moment to
the character of the man who was engaged and the terrible position in
which he was placed.

When we consider all that he underwent, all that he sacrificed in
order to save the government in a moment of extreme exigency, there is
something infinitely pathetic in reflecting on his feelings, as day
after day, week after week, month after month passed by--as he spared
no exertions, no personal sacrifice, to perform the duties that were
placed upon him--as he lengthened out the siege by inconceivable
prodigies of ingenuity, of activity, of resource--and as, in spite of
it all, in spite of the deep devotion to his country, which had
prompted him to this great risk and undertaking, the conviction
gradually grew upon him that his country had abandoned him.

It is terrible to think what he must have suffered when at last, as a
desperate measure to save those he loved, he parted with the only two
Englishmen with whom during those long months he had any converse, and
sent Stewart and Power down the river to escape from the fate which
had become inevitable to himself. It is very painful to think of the
reproaches to his country and to his country's government that must
have passed through the mind of that devoted man during those months
of unmerited desertion. In Gordon's letter of the fourteenth of
December he said: "All is up. I expect the catastrophe in ten days'
time; it would not have been so if our people had kept me better
informed as to their intentions."