Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

C. The English Bill differentiated between Kansas and other States seeking admission to the Union.

D. The English Bill was in opposition to the principles underlying the national government: for

1. Equality among the States is a fundamental principle of this government.

2. Such use of the Federal power as was justified by the English Bill would be prejudicial to the South: for

a. There was, in Congress, a majority against the South.

The reason for the analytic, or deductive, ordering of brief-material is evident. If the brief were to be constructed on the synthetic, or "hence-therefore " principle, the composition would, indeed, be entirely logical and coherent, yet the principal steps of the main argument would be thrown into positions of greatest insignificance, and the ultimate purpose of the brief would be defeated.

Special Rules of Construction. In addition to the preceding general rules there are several specific rules that concern various details of brief-construction.

(1) The Main Issues, constituting the fourth principal division of the argumentative brief (p. 7), reappear as the principal subdivisions of the Main Argument.

They thus serve to keep prominently before the reader the principal contentions upon which the maker of the brief is basing his argument. Reference to the typical brief on pages 62–73 will show the application of the principle.

(2) Each subordinated statement should present a clear and definite reason establishing the contention to which it is appended,

The following examples of faulty briefing will show the confusion that results from failure to observe this rule:

(a)

I. We cannot argue that it is fair to cheat in examinations, A. Simply because we do not believe in them, and

B. Considering the privileges granted us by the Board of Education,

1. Whose standards are high, and

2. Whose wish is for our welfare.

C. Furthermore, it is our duty to uphold the rules and regulations of the Board.

This specimen is mere chaos labeled with the symbols of a brief. There is no proper relation between the subordinated statements and the principal contentions. The writer, if he had any argument at all in mind, probably reasoned along some such line of thought as indicated below:

(b)

I. Our personal disbelief in the principle of examinations is no sufficient excuse for dishonesty in passing them: for A. Whatever be our personal opinions, we are under obligation to meet the rules and regulations of the Board of Education: for

1. The Board has shown that it is desirous of our welfare: for

a. It has granted us many privileges.

b. It has established a high standard of work.

(a)

I. Governor Johnson holds it to be his duty to sign the bill at present pending in California with reference to the exclusion of the Japanese from holding land: for

A. Action in this matter has become imperative: for

1. Thirty years ago, when the present constitution of California was adopted, the people wished to prevent this immigration: for

a. That constitution declared the presence of foreigners ineligible to citizenship to be dangerous to the State.

b. The Japanese are ineligible to citizenship.

2. The people want this bill: for

a. The vote in the Senate was 35 to 2, and in the Assembly 72 to 3.

Examination of this attempt at briefing will show that it utterly fails to meet the rule regarding logical relations. The fact (1) that when the constitution of California was adopted thirty years ago the people of the State desired to prevent the immigration of the Japanese does not establish the major contention (A) that action in excluding the Japanese from holding land has become imperative at this time. Nor does the fact (b) that the Japanese are ineligible to citizenship establish the contention that thirty years ago the people of California wished to prevent further immigration. Readjusting these and other faults of the brief, one may perhaps secure a better representation of what the writer really had in mind:

(b)

I. Governor Johnson of California is justified in favoring the bill now pending before the legislature of that State, whereby it is proposed to deprive the Japanese of the right to own land: for

A. The bill is in accord with the state constitution: for
1. The constitution declares that the presence of
foreigners who are (like the Japanese) ineligible
to citizenship is a menace to the welfare of the
State.

B. The people of California are in favor of the proposed
legislation: for

1. In the State Senate the vote was 35 to 2 in favor of the bill, and in the Assembly it was 72 to 3.

(a)

I. The contention of the South that the Republican Party, by its policy and doctrines, is stirring up insurrection among the slaves is not to be maintained: for

A. It has never been possible to trace any uprising among the slaves to Republican instigation: for

1. Even the Southerners themselves have never at

tempted to fix any blame upon the Republicans. B. The contention that the John Brown raid and the Harper's Ferry affair were gotten up by the Republicans is untenable: for

1. It has been proved that John Brown was a fanatic, and not a Republican.

In this case the violation of the rule is apparent mainly in the loose reasoning that characterizes the ordering of the thought. Aside from the general assertiveness of the brief, it will be noticed that A. 1. is practically contradictory of I: the contention that Southerners are unable to prove their charge against the Republican Party is scarcely refuted by saying that they have never attempted to bring such charge. A simplification of the brief will bring out more clearly the ideas that really underlie the writer's line of reasoning:

(b)

I. The contention made by Southerners to the effect that the Republican Party, by its policies and doctrines, is stirring up insurrection among the slaves is not to be maintained: for A. No actual evidence has been cited in support of this charge.

B. The charge that John Brown's raid was conducted under Republican auspices has no weight: for

1. History has demonstrated the fact that John Brown was an irresponsible fanatic.

(3) The use of "hence," "therefore," or other illative connective at once indicates faulty. organization of material.

The reason for this rule has already been indicated under the third of the general rules of the brief (p. 20). As the whole system of brief-ordering is based on the principle that first the main contention must be laid down, and then that the contention itself be established through the citation of evidence, the use of "hence," "therefore," and similar

connectives at once brings about a reversal of the brieforder. For example:

(a)

I. The proposed law excludes "all persons" ineligible to citizenship from holding land: therefore

A. The bill does not specify the Japanese: hence

1. The proposed law does not discriminate against the Japanese.

In the brief as here presented the matter included under 1 is, in fact, the principal contention, the point to be proved; and yet it is relegated to the position of greatest insignificance. The entire scheme of organization should be reversed, thus:

(b)

I. The contention that the proposed legislation establishes discrimination against the Japanese is not to be maintained:

for

A. The bill in question does not specify any particular nation by name: for

1. By its own terms it excludes "all persons" who are ineligible to citizenship from the right to

hold land.

The confusion resulting from the use of "hence," "therefore," etc., is particularly difficult to handle when the connective crops out in the very midst of a complex argument; in such cases there is not even the consistency of logical method that is found in the foregoing specimen, and the entire structure falls to pieces. If the reader will attempt to reorganize the following example of briefing into coherent and logical arrangement, he will realize the obstacle presented at the point where "hence argument:

[ocr errors]

appears in the

I. Douglas's statement to the effect that Lincoln had charged the Dred Scott case with prohibiting the negro from be

« AnteriorContinuar »