CHAPTER VI. THE FORENSIC ITSELF. THE RELATION OF THE FORENSIC TO THE BRIEF. HEN a student understands Analysis and, in conse WHEN A skilled quence, has carefully drawn up his brief of his subject; when he has decided what evidence he will use and why, he is certainly ready to write his argument, his forensic. This is really but an expansion of the brief itself. In it the introduction, the brief proper, and the conclusion of the brief are developed in literary form into the introduction, the argument itself, and the peroration. Just as the scaffolding precedes the building and aids in its construction, to disappear entirely when the building is completed, so the brief precedes the forensic, aids in its construction, and disappears when the work is completed. builder will know that a certain kind of scaffolding must have helped in the construction of a particular building; so, too, any skilled worker in Argumentation will see the neat structure underlying a well-constructed forensic. Just, however, as the builder cannot tell at once of what wood the scaffolding was made, so the student of Argumentation will not know just how the heads and subheads were phrased or marked. In other words, the brief underlying a forensic should be evident, not on its face, but only after careful scrutiny of the work. No letterings, headings, numberings, mark a good forensic — it is simply a written argument resulting from careful analysis that has taken form in a good brief, careful selection of evidence, and literary skill that knows how, placing the carefully selected evidence at the places where the brief proper calls for it, to expand the brief into the complete Vargument. The forensic will be well constructed because its brief had unity, that is, all its parts were made "subservient to one principal end"; clear, because its brief develops clearly, and its author knows how to write clearly; forcible, because the brief had climax and the writer has selected and handles his evidence well, and phrases his ideas with strength; elegant, if need be, because the writer has a graceful, flowing style. As far as conviction is concerned, then, if a student has mastered Analysis and the selection of Evidence, and, from previous study, understands the rules of Rhetoric well enough to have clearness, force, and elegance in the phrasing of his ideas, there are but few suggestions as to writing a forensic to be added to those given in the preceding chapter. These few will deal with effective methods of handling evidence. It is the fact that the work of almost every argument consists of something more than conviction, of persuasion as well, that makes this chapter really necessary. It is very important that before a student writes much argument he should understand the well-nigh inseparable union of conviction and persuasion in all strong Argumentation. THE THREE DIVISIONS OF A FORENSIC. As has been said, a forensic has three parts, corresponding to the three parts of the brief, though they are not, as in the brief, carefully designated by headings. The introduction of the forensic corresponds to the introduction of the brief, the argument itself to the brief proper, the peroration to the conclusion. It will be convenient in considering the forensic itself to treat it under these divisions, for the work of each somewhat differs from that of the other two THE INTRODUCTION. ITS WORK IN CONVICTION. Following a division made early in this book (p. 1), it may be said that the work of the introduction is twofold: to appeal to the understanding to convince; and to appeal to the emotions to persuade. Its work in conviction is exactly that of the brief introduction, to show clearly what the question in dispute is. In order to do this, it, like the brief, does as much of the following as may be necessary to make the meaning of the question perfectly clear. It may give the proposition, define terms, show the origin of the question, settle what facts are admitted by both sides, cut out extraneous matter, and state the special issue. In other words, it phrases only what both sides must admit to be true if there is to be any discussion. The final test of it is that it shall lead clearly to the argument itself, giving a reader just the information he needs to make the development of the argument itself clear. Some idea of the unsatisfactoriness of introductions which do not comply with these conditions is given in that part of Chapter III. which considers unsatisfactory brief introductions. The first eleven lines of the forensic on the Beaconsfield Ministry and the Eastern Question, (p. 182), and the following quotations, will make clear what inadequate brief introductions produce as introductions for forensics: "DID HENRY CLAY ENTER INTO A CORRUPT BARGAIN IN 1825? "Perhaps one of the most important events in the life of Henry Clay was the charge of entering into a corrupt bargain, brought forward after the presidential campaign of 1824. The impression made by this false accusation remained by him throughout the greater part of his life. "Henry Clay may be taken as an example of an innocent man falsely accused of some grave charge. This is not an uncommon occurrence in this world, but it is something every one should try and avoid, because slander has wings like Mercury. There are so many people in the world who are ever ready to believe a calumny, though they have no proofs to substantiate the charge. It was so with Henry Clay. There were many of these same people who thought Clay was justly accused, before they had examined the case on one side or the other." "A CONDEMNATION OF THE EPICUREAN THEORY OF LIFE. "The epicurean theory of life makes man's aim the attainment of pleasure. The supporters of this theory maintain that man is born into the world to enjoy himself. His all-important purpose is to get the greatest possible pleasure. His wisest course is the shortest which shall lead to the accomplishment of that purpose. His motto is 'Man hath no thing better under the sun than to eat, to drink, and to be merry.' 1 The confusion of the introduction to the Beaconsfield forensic, the inadequacy of all these introductions, must be apparent. In none of them has preliminary analysis prepared a good brief introduction that showed just what the question in dispute is, and how much information a 1 Monthly Religious Magazine. reader must be given before he can properly comprehend a discussion of the point at issue. This is particularly true of the Condemnation of the Epicurean Theory of Life. In this a reader does not hear what has given rise to the discussion. He is, too, given a definition that begs the question, since those who uphold the Epicureans say that the view given is not the only possible interpretation of Epicureanism. He is left uncertain just what is the question for him to consider. No brief at all, or briefs with inadequate introductions preceded these three specimens. Compare these with the following, and the influence of a good brief introduction on the forensic will be clear: "ARE CONTINENTAL AREAS PERMANENT? "The question Are continental areas permanent?' is an important one, for upon its correct solution depends the result of many investigations of geologists into the past history of the organic and inorganic kingdoms of our earth. In fact its importance is proved by the attention directed to it by many eminent geologists. The result of their investigations has been in the main to lead them to the conclusion that continental areas are not permanent. Sir Charles Lyell, in his Elements of Geology, published in 1872, states that it is not too much to say that every part of the land which we now term continental land has been under the sea, and all that which is now beneath the sea, even that in the greatest depths, has been continental land. This remark represents pretty well what the general idea was as to permanence of continents up to 1872. Since that date, however, a constantly increasing number of geologists have declared that in their opinion continents were permanent, although subject to constant modification of form. Such is 1 A careful reference to the volume and page should be given here. |