2. People have turned their thoughts to re

forming criminals instead of killing them.

C. What parts of the following plan or brief show that the writer is aware of opposition and is prepared to meet it? Imagine yourself an advocate of the jury system. What points in favor of that system are not answered below?

Proposition: The jury system should be abolished. Be

cause

A. It makes just verdicts hard to secure. For
1. Juries are often ignorant.

2. Juries are often prejudiced. For

a. They are influenced by church or society affiliations.

b. They are prejudiced against railroad corporations.

B. The trial of all cases by judges without a jury would

1. Judges are intelligent and experienced in deciding intricate matters.

2. Judges are not prejudiced by church or society affiliations.

3. Judges are not moved by the eloquent sophistry of lawyers.

4. Judges are not easily deceived by witnesses. 5. Judges can be just to corporations as well as to the poorest suitor.

C. The substitution of judges for juries would not be a dangerous innovation. For

1. Appellate, Chancery, and Supreme Courts now get along without juries.

2. Many conservative lawyers have long favored the substitution.

D. Find out the meaning of the terms "initiative” and “referendum." Then study the following arguments, especially with the purpose of finding answers to some of them if possible.

Proposition: The Initiative and Referendum should be made parts of our state constitutions. Because

4. They will purify legislation. For

I. They will prevent the passage of corrupt and unjust laws. For

1. Legislatures knowing that the people stand ready to repudiate any vicious

or unjust act, will make better and wiser laws.

II. They are the only complete and specific cure for bribery. For

1. They deprive legislators of their present monopoly of legislative power. The

legislator would not be bribed because he can no longer "deliver the goods." III. They will destroy the lobbyist and overthrow the "boss." For

1. Each derives his power from his ability to influence, or even to buy and sell, legislation giving special privileges.

IV. They will break the power of trusts and monopolies. For

1. These cannot control legislation through

the lobby.

2. The people will by the initiative be able to pass laws to regulate these.

V. Refutation.

The argument that the voters will be bribed to vote directly for bad laws is unsound. For

1. While it might be easy to bribe the representative of a district, it would

be impossible to bribe a whole district or state.

For

a. A large majority of the people are always eager to be on the side of justice.

VI. They will make it easier to elect good men to office. For

1. There will be no incentive to buy men before they are elected or to elect men

who can be bought after election.

B. They will open the door to legislative progress.

For

I. They will give the people the power to get the legislation they want without discouraging delays.

II. They will elevate the press and greatly diminish partisanship. For

1. Attention will then be directed to measures rather than to party or individual success.

III. They will educate the people as no other institution can. For

a. They require that the voters study

the questions before the people. IV. They will simplify the law and aid in its

enforcement.

C. They will act as a safety valve against discontent, and as a guarantee against disorder. For I. They will clarify the political atmosphere and settle questions permanently.

II. Revolutions have little chance where the people can easily change their laws.

Argumentation and Exposition.

126. The chief difference between argumentation and exposition is in the purpose. In exposition the purpose is to explain the subject to those who do not understand it clearly. In argumentation the purpose is not merely to explain; it is to convince and to persuade others to accept one belief or one course of action rather than another.

Again, the writer of exposition assumes that there is only one true explanation of the subject and that people are ready and willing to accept this explanation as fast as he can make it clear to their minds. argument can assume no such thing. some people dissent entirely from his resist accepting it as long as they can. others are indifferent and must be interested and persuaded.

But the writer of
He knows that
view and will
He knows that

Yet the writer of argument must use exposition con

stantly as a help in convincing and persuading. He will feel it necessary to explain carefully every step of his reasoning, and to that end he will use freely any of the means of exposition that we have studied -- connecting new ideas with old, definition, generalized narration, comparison and analogy, specific instances, examples, contrasts, reconciling contradictory ideas, dividing and subdividing. But he will use these only because they help him to convince and persuade people to believe or to act as he wishes them to believe or to act.

Notice with what fullness the writer of the following illustrates his meaning, before he announces his proposition in the fourth sentence.

If a servant girl applies for employment in a family, we demand, first of all, a recommendation from her former mistress. If a clerk is searching for work, he carries with him, as the sine qua non of success, certain letters which vouch for his honesty and ability. If a skilled workman becomes discontented and throws up his job, he has a right to ask of his employer an indorsement, and armed with that he feels secure. Why should not every immigrant be required to bring a similar indorsement with him? Why should we allow the whole riffraff of creation to come here, either to become a burden on our charitable institutions, or to lower the wages of our own laborers by a cutthroat competition? We have already had too much of that sort of thing. If a foreigner has notified the nearest United States consul of his intention to emigrate, and the consul, after due examination, has pronounced him a proper person, let him come by all means. We have room enough for such persons. But for immigrants who have neither capital nor skill, who never earned a living in their own country and will never earn one here, we have no room whatever.

- N. Y. Sun.

Description and Narration in Argument.

127. The writer of argument will also use description and narration, to help him win people to his view. If, for instance, he is arguing against long examinations, he will likely find it a good argument to describe the looks of the examination room and of the teacher and pupils after they have been engaged in an examination for two or three hours. If he is arguing in favor of a law to limit the hours of labor for factory women, he will describe some of the scenes that may be witnessed in factories where conditions are bad. He may tell the