PROPOSITION-Immigration should be further restricted by law.

By contrasting the arguments thus tabulated we derive the following main issues.

I. Is immigration under existing conditions a detriment or a benefit to the country?

(The answer depends upon the answers to these subordinate questions.)

I. Is the undesirable element excluded?

3.

Do they exert a detrimental influence upon the standard of living of the American workman?

II.

III.

Are the present laws satisfactory?

I.

Are they the most effective in excluding undesirable

immigrants that it is possible to enact?

Do they exclude diseased persons?

2.

3.

Do the present laws exclude paupers?

4.

Are the present laws enforced?

Do we need all the immigrants now coming to us?

1. Do we still need all the immigrants we can get to develop our natural resources?

This arrangement of the affirmative and negative arguments places the whole matter, so far as it has been worked out, before the student in tangible form. It also affords a basis for the formal statement of the main isues. The plan of analysis thus set forth should now be examined with a critical eye. Here arise some of the most difficult problems of argumentation. In the first place, is the analysis presented an exhaustive one? Does it include the entire field of argument. It includes the proposed immigration laws and their probable effects. It includes the present laws and their effects. From these two facts it is evident that the analysis covers the entire field of the proposed change in the immigration laws.

Before passing final judgment upon the thoroughness of the analysis, there are at least two other plans which may be applied to the question to see whether either of them will afford a better method of treatment than the foregoing. The first of these plans includes the division of the question into three parts; viz. (1) political, (2) social, and (3) economic. An examination of the question just discussed will show that all the material suggested in the formal analysis could be grouped under one the other of these heads. For example, the anarchists, Black Hand societies, etc., would come under "politigal"; the question of assimilation would come under "social"; while the effect upon the American workman and the question of the development of our natural resources would come under "economic."

or

This division may be applied to many questions, but it is well suited to only a limited number. In fact, some eminent authorities are of the opinion that it is almost never to be recommended. It is not as well adapted to the immigration question as the division already made, for the reason that it would be necessary to include some of the subject-matter under two separate heads. For example, the Little Spains, Little Italys, etc., mentioned above, might require treatment under the social and political divisions

and even under the heading of economics. This is objectionable, because it requires a duplication of the statement of facts under each head, and also because it is not conducive to the clean, clear-cut thinking which is the result of a sharp division of the subject into parts which do not overlap.

The second plan of analysis, which forms a good working basis for many propositions, is that of dividing the subject into three parts, namely, (1) Necessity, (2) Practicability, and (3) Justice. This division of the subject is often applicable to propositions which advocate the adoption of some new plan of action, as, "Resolved, That the Federal Government should levy a progressive inheritance tax," or "Resolved, That cities of the United States, having a population of over 5000, should adopt the commmission form of government."

These and similar questions may be analyzed by one of the two plans stated above, but it is well to beware adopting one or the other of these methods merely because it affords an easy way out of the task of analyzing the proposition. That analysis of a question should be adopted which reveals the main issues of the proposition in the clearest and most direct manner.

I.

SUMMARY OF ESSENTIAL STEPS IN ANALYSIS

A broad view of the subject.

2. The origin and history of the question.

3.

Definition of terms.

4. Narrowing the question.

(1) Excluding irrelevant matter.

(2) Admitting matters not vital to the argument.

5. Contrasting the affirmative arguments with those of the negative.

THE MAIN ISSUES

The process of analysis with which we are dealing has revealed the main issues of the proposition. It now becomes the duty of the debater to arrange the issues in logical and climactic order. The most forcible array of argument should come at the end. For example, in the question just analyzed the logical as well as the climactic order of arrangement for the main issues of the affirmative would be as follows:

I. The present laws are not satisfactory.

II. We do not need all the immigrants now coming to us. III. Immigration (under the present system) is a detriment to the country.

This analysis should be the result of a thorough study of both sides of the whole proposition. If the task has been well done no change in the essential elements of the analysis will become necessary. However, as the investigation of the subject progresses, and the work of collecting evidence leads the student into a more intimate acquaintance with the proposition, it may be found advisable to make some alterations in the analysis first written out. Such alterations should be made only after careful deliberation, for it often happens that, in investigating a subject at close range, one loses the broad general view which is necessary to an intelligent analysis. It may even become necessary for a beginner to change his entire plan after he has made a more thorough investigation of the subject. In such an event the work originally spent in analysis should not be regarded as lost, because it is absolutely necessary that the student have some definite plan as a basis for his investigation. If it does no more than show him that he is wrong, the time spent on it cannot be said to be wasted. In any event, the student should keep his mind open for the reception of ideas which will make his analysis clearer, briefer, and more forcible.

3. EVIDENCE

a. Collecting and Recording Material for Evidence

After the question has been analyzed and the main issues determined, the next step is to obtain material by which to prove the truth or falsity of the arguments that have been revealed by the analysis. In the work that the student has already done he has obtained a great deal of information. It is necessary, however, to study the question exhaustively in order that every possible bit of information may be secured that will assist in proving his side of the question or in refuting the arguments of his opponents. The material required for such proof is termed evidence.

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

The first question that naturally arises in the mind of the debater is "where may evidence be obtained?"

First of all the debater should examine his own mind to determine just how much he really knows about the subject

and should set down every fact and argument which he can discover, being careful, however, to distinguish between what is exact knowledge and what is mere conjecture. He should also talk the subject over with his friends. It is also practicable to solicit the opinions of men and women who are known to be especially interested in the question for debate and who are in a position to have special knowledge concerning it. Personal letters and interviews, when backed up by the names of people who are really authoritative on the subject, form valuable evidence.

By far the larger part of the evidence, however, must be obtained from the reading of many books, pamphlets and magazine articles on the subject. The most practical and economical debate, debaters' handbooks and similar sources contain bibliography. This should be put on cards-3x5 cards are most often used-and only one reference should be put on each card. For such a bibliography the student may consult the following

Sources:

SPECIAL BIBLIOGRAPHIES.-It is often found that bibliographies have been prepared on the subject chosen for debate. The Library of Congress often publishes bibliographies on special subjects, which may be secured from the Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. Many of the manuals for debate, debaters' handbooks, the Public Affairs Information Service, and similar sources list bibliographies of up-to-date subjects. A great many of these are listed in Appendix II at the close of this volume.

GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHIES.-For a list of books and pamphlets the United States Catalog, Books in Print, 1912, the Supplements, 1912-1924 and current numbers of the Cumulative Book Index from 1924 to date, the A.L.A. Booklist subject index, and the Book Review Digest should be consulted. The card catalogs in the public and other libraries will also reveal books and pamphlets on the subject. For magazine articles the student should consult the Readers' Guide to Periodical Literature, fiveyear cumulations and current subscription, from 1900 to date. Other magazine indexes are the International Index to Periodicals (formerly the Readers' Guide Supplement), 1907 to date, and the Magazine Subject Index, 1907 to date. If the subject is of a legal nature, references may be found in the Index to Periodicals, 1913 to date. The Industrial Arts Index, 1913 to date, will