Public Speaking Part 19

[Footnote 1: Taken from Brookings and Ringwalt: _Briefs for Debate_, Longmans, Green and Co., where specific references of material for many of the topics are given, as well as general references for the entire subject.]

(2) Many jurors have conscientious scruples against condemning a man to death.

(3) Men of wealth and influence are rarely convicted.

IV. The abolition of capital punishment has been followed by satisfactory results, (_a_) In Europe.

(1) Russia.

(2) Switzerland.

(3) Portugal.

(4) Belgium.

(5) Holland.

(6) Finland.

(_b_) In the United States.

(1) Michigan.

(2) Rhode Island.

(3) Maine.

(4) Wisconsin.

_Brief for the Negative_

I. Capital punishment is permissible.

(_a_) It has the sanction of the Bible.

(1) Genesis ix, 2-6.

(_b_) It has the sanction of history.

(1) It has been in vogue since the beginning of the world.

(_c_) It has the sanction of reason.

(1) The most fitting punishment is one equal and similar to the injury inflicted.

II. Capital punishment is expedient.

(_a_) It is necessary to protect society from anarchy and private revenge.

(1) Death is the strongest preventative of crime.

(_b_) No sufficient subst.i.tute has been offered.

(1) Life imprisonment is a failure.

(2) Few serve the sentence.

(_c_) Its abolition has not been successful.

(1) In Rhode Island.

(2) In Michigan.

III. The objections made to capital punishment are not sound.

(_a_) Prisons are not reformatory.

(_b_) The fact that crimes have decreased in some places where executions have stopped is not a valid argument.

(1) All causes which increase the moral well-being of the race decrease crime.

(_c_) The objection that the innocent suffer is not strong.

(1) The number of innocent thus suffering is inconsiderable when compared with the great number of murders prevented.

(_d_) The objection that the penalty is uncertain may be overcome by making it certain.

A few paragraphs back it was said that an outline or brief shows the relative significance of all the parts of a speech. This is done by a systematic use of margins and symbols. From the quoted forms in this chapter certain rules can easily be deduced.

Margins. The speech will naturally divide into a few main parts. These can be designated by s.p.a.ces and general t.i.tles such as introduction, body, development, main argument, answer to opposing views, conclusion. Other captions will be suggested by various kinds of material. Main topics next in importance are placed the farthest to the left, making the first margin. A reader can run his eye down this line and pick out all the main topics of equal importance. Entries just subordinate to these are put each on a separate line, starting slightly to the right. This separation according to connection and value is continued as long as the maker has any minor parts to represent in the brief. It should not be carried too far, however, for the purpose of the entries is to mark clearness and accuracy. If the helping system becomes too elaborate and complicated it destroys its own usefulness.

It is perfectly plain that such an outline might be made and be quite clear, without the addition of any symbols at all, especially if it was short.

Discrimination in the use of words is secured by

The study of synonyms antonyms h.o.m.onyms and care in employing them.

Symbols. Some scheme of marking the entries is a great help. There is no fixed system. Every student may choose from among the many used. If there are many main topics it might be a mistake to use Roman numerals (I, XVIII) as few people can read them quickly enough to follow their sequence. Capital letters may serve better to mark the sequences, but they do not indicate the numerical position. For instance, most of us do not know our alphabets well enough to translate a main topic marked N into the fourteenth point. By combinations of Roman numerals, capitals, usual (Arabic) numerals, small letters, parentheses, enough variety to serve any student purpose can easily be arranged.

The following are samples of systems used.

_Specimen_ 1

Introduction Argument

I-------------------------------------------------- A------------------------------------------------ 1---------------------------------------------- _a_-------------------------------------------- _b_-------------------------------------------- _c_-------------------------------------------- (1)---------------------------------------- (2)---------------------------------------- (3)---------------------------------------- 2---------------------------------------------- B------------------------------------------------ 1---------------------------------------------- 2---------------------------------------------- II------------------------------------------------- Conclusion

_Specimen_ 2

A-------------------------------------------------- I------------------------------------------------ _a_---------------------------------------------- 1-------------------------------------------- 2-------------------------------------------- _b_---------------------------------------------- II----------------------------------------------- _a_---------------------------------------------- _b_---------------------------------------------- _c_---------------------------------------------- 1-------------------------------------------- 2-------------------------------------------- 3--------------------------------------------

_Specimen_ 3

1-------------------------------------------------- 1^1---------------------------------------------- 2^1---------------------------------------------- _a_^1-------------------------------------------- _b_^1-------------------------------------------- _c_^1-------------------------------------------- 2-------------------------------------------------- 1^2---------------------------------------------- 2^2---------------------------------------------- _a_^2-------------------------------------------- _b_^2-------------------------------------------- _c_^2-------------------------------------------- 3-------------------------------------------------- 1^3---------------------------------------------- 2^3----------------------------------------------

Tabulations. With unusual kinds of material and for special purposes there may be value in evolving other forms of outlines. A technically trained person accustomed to reading tabulated reports with hosts of figures to interpret might find a statistical statement at times better suited to his needs. Such tabulations are not any easier to prepare than the regular brief. In fact to most people they are infinitely more difficult to get into form and almost beyond speedy comprehension afterwards. The following is a good ill.u.s.tration of a simple one well adapted to the speaker's purpose--a report of the objections to the first published covenant of the League of Nations.

He knew the material of his introduction and conclusion so well that he did not represent them in his carefully arranged sheet. The form was submitted as regular work in a public speaking cla.s.s and was spoken from during more than forty minutes.

CRITICISMS OF PROPOSED COVENANT OF LEAGUE OF NATIONS

1.--Draft indefinite and loosely written. Lg Lo Sp Tt Br Hu 2.--Should have clause-limiting powers to those specifically granted. Lo 3.--Proportion of votes required for action of Council not generally stated--should be unanimous. Lg Sp Tt Hu 4.--Should have clause reserving the Monroe Doctrine. Lg Lo Sp Tt Br Hu 5.--Should state that no nation can be required to become a mandatory without its consent. Lg Lo Br Hu 6.--Should have provision for withdrawals. Lg Lo Sp Tt Hu 7.--Jurisdiction of League over internal affairs (immigration, tariffs, coastwise trade) should be expressly excluded. Lg Br Hu 8.--Terms of admission of other nations too strict. Br 9.--Basis of representation not fair. Br 10.--Provision should be made for expansion of nations by peaceable means. Br 11.--Each nation should have right to decide whether it will follow advice of Council as to use of force. Br 12.--Each nation should have right to determine whether it will boycott delinquent nations. Br Note:--items 11 and 12 are apparently directed against Art.

XVI containing the Ipso Facto clause and Art. X.

13.--Should not guarantee the integrity and independence of all members of the league. Lg Hu

Above criticisms taken from published statements of

Messrs. Lodge Lowell Spencer Taft Bryan Hughes (denoted respectively Lg, Lo, Sp, Tt, Br and Hu).

Authorities in the Brief. Authorities for the statements made in the brief may be put into parentheses, if they are to be included. Such further devices will suggest themselves to students. In addition to such markings as here listed, some men who use many outlines emphasize upon them details which they may have to find quickly by underlining the symbol or first word with colored pencil. Such a device is especially valuable to a technical expert whose system could be uniform through the outlines of all his reports, etc. Or a lecturer with so much time to fill may mark upon the outline 1/4, 1/2, 3/4, to indicate to himself that his material is being covered at a proper rate to correspond with the time. He might put in _15 min._ or _30 min._ or _45 min._ if he was to speak for an hour. The first division is the better, for he might be required to condense a twenty-minute speech to ten.

Selections for Briefing. Before the student makes many briefs of his own he should work in the other direction by outlining material already in existence so that he can be a.s.sured he knows main topics from minor ones, important issues from subordinate reasons, headings from examples. If all the members of the cla.s.s outline the same material the resulting discussion will provide additional exercise in speaking in explanation or support of an interpretation. After the teacher and cla.s.s together have made one, the students should work independently.

EXERCISES

Besides the extracts quoted here others should be supplied. Editorials from a single issue of a newspaper can easily be secured by the entire cla.s.s for this work. A chapter from a book may be a.s.signed.

1. INCIDENTS OF GOVERNMENT TRADING

An expert before the President's street railway commission of inquiry testified that he disapproved of public ownership and operation theoretically, but approved it practically, because it was the quickest and surest way of making people sick of it. Otherwise he thought that education of the public out of its favor for high costs and low profits by public utilities would require a generation, and the present emergency calls for prompt relief.