Public Speaking Part 18

A further objection to force is, that you _impair the object_ by your very endeavors to preserve it. The thing you fought for is not the thing which you recover; but depreciated, sunk, wasted, and consumed in the contest. Nothing less will content me, than _whole America_. I do not choose to consume its strength along with our own; because in all parts it is the British strength that I consume. I do not choose to be caught by a foreign enemy at the end of this exhausting conflict, and still less in the midst of it. I may escape; but I can make no a.s.surance against such an event. Let me add, that I do not choose wholly to break the American spirit; because it is the spirit that has made the country.

Lastly, we have no sort of _experience_ in favor of force as an instrument in the rule of our colonies. Their growth and their utility has been owing to methods altogether different.

Our ancient indulgence has been said to be pursued to a fault. It may be so. But we know if feeling is evidence that our fault was more tolerable than our attempt to mend it; and our sin far more salutary than our penitence.

These, Sir, are my reasons for not entertaining that high opinion of untried force, by which many gentlemen, for whose sentiments in other particulars I have great respect, seem to be so greatly captivated. But there is still behind a third consideration concerning this object, which serves to determine my opinion on the sort of policy which ought to be pursued in the management of America, even more than its population and its commerce, I mean its _temper and character_.

EDMUND BURKE: _Conciliation with America_, 1775

Reconstructing the Outline. In the preliminary arrangement Burke knew that he was going to give his reasons against the use of military force. In his first plan he may not have decided just where he was going to place his four arguments. So they very likely appeared as four topic entries:

Against use of force.

1. temporary 2. uncertain 3. damages America 4. no experience

Notice that these are jottings to suggest the germs of the arguments.

When Burke revised this section he may have changed the expression to indicate more certainty.

Force should not be used against the colonies, because: 1. it is only temporary 2. it is uncertain in its results 3. it would damage the wealth of the colonies 4. it is based on no experience of Great Britain with colonies

Of course, a practised statesman would not have to a.n.a.lyze farther, perhaps not so far, but to ill.u.s.trate for a student how he might build up his outline, let us a.n.a.lyze one degree farther. Just what is meant by such terms as _temporary, uncertain?_ Under each statement, then, might be added a detailed explanation. The finished part of the outline would then appear somewhat like this.

Force should not be used against the colonies, because: 1. it is only temporary, for _a._ though it subdue for a time, it would have to be used again.

2. it is uncertain in its results, for _a._ Great Britain might not subdue the colonies.

3. it would damage the wealth of the colonies, for _a._ we would fight to retain a wealthy land, yet after the war we should have a ruined one.

4. it is based on no experience of Great Britain with colonies, for _a._ Great Britain has always been indulgent rather than severely strict.

Speaking or writing from such a detailed outline as this, consider how much thinking has already been done. With these entries under his eye the speaker need think only of the phrasing of his remarks. He would feel perfectly certain that he would not wander from his theme. Notice how the ideas can be emphasized. The suggestion of damage can be expressed in _impair the object_, and in _depreciated, sunk, wasted, consumed_.

So far this outline--though it covers all its own material--does not indicate the place at which it shall be used in the speech. It could be used near the conclusion where Burke planned to answer all the supporters of plans other than his own. That would be a good place for it. But Burke found a better one. He separated this from his other remarks against his opponents, and brought it in much earlier, thereby linking it with what it most concerned, emphasizing it, and disposing of it entirely so far as his speech was concerned. He had just enumerated the wealth of the colonies as represented by their commerce. He knew that the war party would argue, "If America is so wealthy, it is worth fighting for." That was the place, then, to refute them. To introduce his material he had to make clear the transition from the colonial wealth to his arguments. Notice how plainly the first paragraph quoted here does this. Having given his four reasons against the use of force, notice that he must bring his audience back to the theme he has been discussing. The last paragraph does this in a masterly manner. He has cited two facts about the colonies. To make understanding doubly certain he repeats them--population and commerce--and pa.s.ses to the next, plainly numbering it as the third.

This recital of the process is not an account of what actually took place in Burke's preparation, but it will give to the student the method by which great speakers _may_ have proceeded; we do know that many did follow such a scheme. No amateur who wants to make his speeches worth listening to should omit this helpful step of outline or brief making. Whether he first writes out his speeches in full, or composes them upon his feet, every speaker should prepare an outline or brief of his material. This is a series of entries, so condensed and arranged as to show the relative significance of all the parts of the speech in the proper order of development.

Outline, Brief, Legal Brief. An outline contains entries which are merely topics, not completed statements or sentences.

A brief contains completed statements (sentences).

A legal brief is a formally prepared doc.u.ment (often printed) submitted to a certain court before a case is tried, showing the material the lawyer intends to produce, citing all his authorities, suggesting interpretations of laws and legal decisions to support his contentions, and giving all his conclusions. It is prepared for the use of the court, to reduce the labor in examining records, etc.

Practice in the drawing up of such briefs is an important phase of legal study.

The Outline. An outline may recall to a person's mind what he already has learned, but it is seldom definite and informative enough to be as helpful as a brief. A good distinction of the two--besides the one respecting the forms already given--is that the outline represents the point of view of the speaker while the brief represents that of the hearer. Consider again the a.n.a.lyses of Burke in this chapter. Notice that the first list does not give nearly so clear an idea of what Burke actually said as the third. A person seeing only the first might _guess_ at what the speaker intended to declare. A person who looked at the third could not fail to _know exactly_ the opinions of the speaker and the arguments supporting them.

Pupils frequently make this kind of entry:

Introduction--Time Place Characters

The main objections to such an outline are that it tells nothing definite, and that it might fit a thousand compositions. Even an outline should say more than such a list does.

In one edition of Burke's speech the page from which the following is quoted is headed "Brief." Is it a brief?

Part II. How to deal with America.

A. Introduction.

B. First alternative and objections.

C. Second alternative and objections.

D. Third alternative.

E. Introduction.

F. Considerations.

1. Question one of policy, not of abstract right.

2. Trade laws.

3. Const.i.tutional precedents.

4. Application of these.

The Brief. One of the shortest briefs on record was prepared by Abraham Lincoln for use in a suit to recover $200 for the widow of a Revolutionary veteran from an agent who had retained it out of $400 pension money belonging to her. It formed the basis of his speech in court.

No contract.--Not professional services.--Unreasonable charge.--Money retained by Def't not given to Pl'ff.--Revolutionary War.--Describe Valley Forge privations.--Pl'ff's husband.--Soldier leaving for army.--_Skin Def't_.--Close.

The following will give some idea of the form and definiteness of briefs for debate.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

_Resolved:_ That capital punishment should be abolished.[1]

_Brief for the Affirmative_

I. Capital punishment is inexpedient.

(_a_) It is contrary to the tendency of civilization.

(_b_) It fails to protect society.

(1) It does not prevent murder.

(2) New crimes follow hard on executions.

(_c_) It makes punishment uncertain.

(1) Many criminals are acquitted who would be convicted if the penalty were imprisonment.

(_d_) It is not reformatory.

II. Capital punishment is immoral.

(_a_) It rests on the old idea of retribution.

(_b_) It tends to weaken the sacredness of human life.

(_c_) It endangers the lives of innocent people.

(_d_) Executions and the sensational newspaper accounts which follow have a corrupting influence.

III. Capital punishment is unjust.

(_a_) Its mistakes are irremediable.

(_b_) Many men are criminals from force of circ.u.mstances.

(1) From heredity.

(2) From environment.

(_c_) Inequalities in administration are marked.

(1) In some states men are hung, in others imprisoned for the same crime.