Which System of Shorthand
should we learn?
by
Enoch Barker
THE LIBRARY
OF
THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
LOS ANGELES
WHICH SYSTEM
OF
iSHORTHAND
Should we Learn?
BY
E. BARKER, Toronto.
REVISED EDITION.
'
NEW YORK:
ISAAC PITMAN & SONS,
THE PHONOGRAPHIC DEPOT, 31 UNION SQUARE.
CONTENTS
Introduction ... ... ... ... i
SYSTEMS: —
Modern Phonography ... ... ... 4
The Natural System ... ... ... 4
The Sloan-Duployan ... ... ... 5
The Pernin System ... ... ... 6
Simple Phonography ... ... ... 8
The New Rapid ... ... ... 8
The New Standard ... ... ... 9
The Gregg System ... .. ... 13
Cross's Eclectic ... ... ... ... 23
Isaac Pitman v. Variations ... ... 24
Benn Pitman ... ... ... ... 25
Graham System ... ... ... 27
Munson System ... ... ... .. 29
Various Pitmanic Systems ... ... 29
Various non-Pitmanic Systems ... ... 24
The Light-Line Principle ... ... ... 14
The Writing Slope ... ... ... 15
The One Position ... ... .. 17
Connective Vowel Arrangement ... ... ... 19
Curves v. Angles ... ... 21
Elliptical Writing Forms ... ... ... 23
Uniform and Universal System ... .. 30
Ulhieh System of Shorthand
should uae Iieat*n?
By «. BARKER. *—.
DALLAS,
INTRODUCTION.
THIS is an old title for a new pamphlet. Some ten years ago,
the repeated inquiries of students and others about the re-
spective merits of the different systems of shorthand in use,
induced me to put into print my own convictions on the
subject, which were the conclusions of nearly half-a-century's
study and experience. The demand for two editions of the
little booklet proved that there was a place for such a publi-
cation; and now that these are exhausted, the demand seems
equally strong for a third. But the complexion of the short-
hand world has undergone a considerable change in a decade;
systems formerly in vogue have disappeared from public view,
and new ones have sprung up which are now exciting interest.
For this and other reasons, the booklet requires to be almost
entirely rewritten.
Less attention, or none at all, will be given to those sys-
tems that may be counted by the hundred, but which have
only a sporadic existence, and show no prospect of ever
becoming anything else. They may be used as illustrations
jnly, when this would serve any purpose ; they would be
unworthy of serious examination.
It is pleasanter to speak of systems than of their authors,
especially when need is felt for criticism. If this is not
always done, it will be because the two cannot well be separ-
ated. In many cases, it is, "Touch my dog, and you touch
me." More than ever, it is my desire to write without
personal feeling, or unworthy bias of any kind. Sometimes,
however, when men will show themselves ridiculously per-
verse, and regardless of other people's rights or interests, it
would be neither human nor divine to manifest no displeasure
towards such.
It is hardly necessary to say that this booklet is intended
449599
principally for North America. In Britain, there is at the
present time no call for anything of this character, because
the question in the title above is not asked, but one
system of shorthand being in actual use there. But on this
side of the Atlantic, the shorthand field is like our broad
prairies, glowing and bristling with an almost endless variety
of flowers and weeds in wild confusion. The question is with
us still a live one: would that it were otherwise ! But though
the two countries differ so widely in this respect, the subject
is by no means a national one, and patriotism has nothing to
do with the decision of the question- especially that spurious
thing miscalled " patriotism," which consists as much in
ignorant prejudice against everything foreign, as in loyalty
to the institutions of pur own country, and which chooses an
article more because it is a home product than because it is
the best. " Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? " is
hardly the question for a truth-seeker. If we want to get the
best, we will take it, whether it comes from England or from
America, from China or from Africa.
Look out for misstatements. This is about the first
piece of advice that is needed, but it is too often the last to
be taken. Even in the higher and sacred sphere of religion,
there was need of the warning against those who cry, " Lo
here!" or "Lo there!" as false leaders would rise who would
" shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, e\> n
the elect." If such things could exist in this higher sphere,
it should not be hard to believe that they might exist in the
humbler sphere of the shorthand art, and it is not surprising
if our " elect" should be deceived sometimes. \Ye need not
he quite so pessimistic respecting human nature as Thomas
Carlyle, who spoke of the population of Great Britain — not
that they were worse than other people — as " about thirty
millions — mostly fools ;" or the old minister, who, after
reading the passage, "I said in my haste, All men are liars,"
calmly surveyed the congregation and remarked, " Had David
lived in our day, he might have said this at his leisure."
Still it is both safe and wise for us to believe in the possibility
of deception on the part of rival shorthand publishers, and
not take for granted everything they say in their own favor,
especially when we find their statements in direct conflict
with one another. Had the Pitmanic systems, so-called, been
a unit in America as they are in Britain, inferior and worth-
less systems would have had no better chance here than they
have had there. But, sad to say, many have been brought
over here where they have flourished, after they have been
killed out there ; — not because they had not liberty in Britain,
for there was no law to prevent them : but while the Pit-
manites here are quarrelling among themselves, and so divided
that no united movement in education, in the press, or in anv
other way can be undertaken, these useless methods have
every freedom and encouragement for their growth.
Generally, there is no difficulty in detecting misrepre-
sentations. " Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of
thistles ? " As a rule they can be detected by the modes
employed in propagating them. If these are full of blow
and bluster, trumpeting their own merits and decrying all
others, keep on the watch. They will have some gran-
diloquent title, perhaps, such as " Excelsior," " Eureka,"
etc. ; they will be far the easiest to learn, the most legible,
the swiftest, the cheapest ; reporters everywhere will be
eagerly catching them up, and throwing away the old thread-
bare systems ; colleges and schools by the score and by the
hundred will be hailing them as a great boon ; experts in
other systems will be investigating them and be over-
whelmed with delight ; the nobility will be patronizing
them ; those too prejudiced to examine them will be old
fogies and away behind the times ; in fact, a great revolu-
tion will be under way, and the old methods will soon be
swept away ! If you see a system announced in this way,
don't get alarmed. You may be sure there is hollowness
there ; truth does not need to parade herself in such gar-
ments. The gaily dressed folks are the dudes in society ;
it is not under feathers and diamonds that you look for
brains. Letters like the following come from sensible men :
" I enclose a letter from a ... writer. Read it, and then pity the
poor man, and a little later when he gets on the market as a full fledged
college proprietor, your pity will go out to the public who are being gulled
I am rather amused at his reference to my changing systems, or getting
left. This threat of the coming of a . . . writer has hung over the
heads of many a poor man like a nightmare. I consider it a direct thrust
not at the Isaac Pitman system, but at the many Pitmanic forms which are
said to be so ' arbitrary that the average student cannot learn them.'
Two of these new systems have struck this town within the last five years.
They lived here about three months, and the parties vanished. Where the
Isaac Pitman system is taught effectively, and there is a certain public
sentiment about standards, these simple 'systems' cannot go. Whtre the
public is ignorant, they will swallow anything."
So then, vou cannot be too much on your guard. Do not
accept superlative laudations without testing for yourself.
Remember, too, that testimonials are cheap. All have them;
some are good, others otherwise, and you must judge for
you'rself. Take the Master's simple rule : " Ye shall know
them by their fruits." It will be my part to endeavor to
show you the fruits, and leave you to decide for yourselves
whether the tree be " good " or whether it be " corrupt."
In the former editions of this pamphlet, mention was made
of what was styled
Modern Phonography,
for which there was no little rush for a time in certain parts.
It was " so easy to learn ; " one or two months was sufficient
to gain fitness for a position. It had no shading, and no
detached vowels, besides other wonderful features, the most
striking of which was the stringing together nearly all the
words of one line into a phrase. On asking the author what
one of these sky-rockets meant, as the system was more
easily written than read, he replied that such a phrase was
" no good," and it would be " fired " in the next edition. It
was fired, and so was the whole book, the very preface of
which was a plagiarism, and that was the best part of it. So,
of course, Modern Phonography needs no notice in this edition.
There is another book published, entitled :
" The Natural System of Shorthand
Writing,"
by August Mengelcamp, Stenographer, 1889." An extract
or t\vo from the Prefaces will sho\v both the aim of the
system, and the knowledge of grammar and composition that
the author possesses : —
"Other points of merit will readily suggest themselves upon closer ex-
amination of the system, above all its comparative great brevity, respectively
speed which, owing to the graphic character of its word-forms, absence of
shading, connective vowels, great lineality, etc., far exceeds that of any other
system extant."
" A good pointed pen or also a medium soft pencil, are equally well suited
for class work. For speed exercises, a lead pencil or a good fountain pen
will be found preferable."
The ideas in these sentences are not very clear, but one is
not so much surprised after reading them that the system of
which August Mengelcamp calls himself '' the author," and
to which he gives the name of " The Natural System," is
really "The Roller System," invented by Heinrich Roller of
Germany ! The "author" wanted to bind me to give him a
two-page notice in this pamphlet ; but this is quite enough.
Then we have the
" Sloan=Duployan Light=Line System,"
which appeared first in Britain under magnificent, yet very
suspicious auspices. There lies before me as I write a small
pamphlet clad in a flaring red cover. On the outside of the
front cover, we read in display letters — " THE SHORTHAND
REVOLUTION." Under this comes the Royal Arms — a Crown
surmounted by a Lion. Then we read again — -" Recognized
by His Grace the Duke of Fife, K.T., P.C., D.L. ; The Right
Hon. The Earl of Pembroke ; The Right Hon. C. T. Ritchie,
M.P., P.C. ; Sir Richard Temple, Bart, P.C., G.C.S.I., C.I.E.,
F.R.S. ; And over Forty Noblemen and Members of Parlia-
ment." There are some, probably, with whom such a pon-
derous title-page would have great weight, but it should not
take very well in democratic America. Because people belong
to the gentry, they may not be the best authorities in Short-
hand Literature; they may not know as much about it as their
butlers or boot-blacks. It is a common thing, as we all know,
for the underlings to give testimonials, etc., to grovelling
suitors just to get rid of them, without their masters knowing
anything about the matter. But we ought to know that our
beautiful art does not depend on blue blood for its nobility
and worth. It is rather a friend of the toiling class. After
such a flaming introduction, we are not surprised to read a
preface like this : —
" Why is it that shorthand, which is so useful and essential to many and
so beneficial to all, is acquired (with any degree of efficiency) by such a com-
paratively small number ; and of the many who have fairly left the starting
post, scarce ten per rent, have ever reached the wished-for goal ?
" The secret to this query is not far to seek. The old systems have been
too complicated and artificial. They required for their acquisition an undue
amount of mental effort, and hard dry-as-dust practice. They took years to
learn, and burdened the memory with multitudes of rules and grammalogues;
and were illegible, owing to vowels being omitted, which brought about a
state of affairs calculated only to please those who g'ory in unravelling
mysteries.
" But with the introduction of the Sloan-Duployan system, all these
difficulties are done away with, and shorthand can now be learned in one-
twelfth the usual time. It is no fable But an established fact, that the labor
of years is reduced to months, and a few easy lessons will suffice to learn the
most perfect system of shorthand extant. Sloan-Duployan shorthand is
the system that not only promises, but, as thousands can testify, has accom-
plished this transformation."
There is a lot of this — blather, shall we call it ? — about
the "ingenious devices," "the great and incomparable
services of Mr Sloan," " a new educational era commencing,
the results of which had been hitherto deemed impossible ; "
but I have quoted already ad nauseam. The usual number
and style of testimonials follow ; and after quoting a flatter-
ing one from Newfoundland, which place, in the author's
estimation, seems to be the hub of the shorthand universe,
the pamphlet says : —
"The above clearly shows how the SIoan-Duployan system has taken
the place of the old style in Newfoundland. The same change is gradually
taking place in the United Kingdom, but of course the transformation will
take longer, as the country is much larger ; nevertheless, it will not be long
before Sloan-Duployan has triumphantly superseded the old style in this
country (Britain)."
This prediction was uttered some ten years ago in
England, and by this time the promised transformation
should have been effected ; but judging from the quietness
of the "Sloan-Duployan Association'' (apparently consisting
of one member) at the present in P'ngland, and from reliable
information furnished by those who are in a position to
know, the transformation in Britain has changed — like some
other systems that we know — to a transportation to our
shores, thus to increase the "confusion worse confounded"
that already prevails here. But for this I would not have
occupied so much space with the Sloan-Duployan. It is
well that we should know what kind of immigration we art-
getting. The strange feature of the whole thing, however,
is that thePet'fiin Monthly Stenographer charges the inventor
of these "ingenious devices," with as " bold a literary theft
as was ever perpetrated;" and savs of the Sloan-Duployan
text-book : — " It was an exact reprint of ' Pernin's Practical
Reporter,' made possible by the absence of an international
copyright law. and a disregard of the eighth commandment ! "
And what also is the
"Pernin System,"
so-called ? Its text-book acknowledges that it is not original
— at least the basic part of it ; it admits that its alphabet was
originally brought from France in 1887 by Mr Pernin, but
asserts that it has been modified from time to time until
"but little resemblance can now be traced between the two
systems." Mr Sloan, however, retorts by saying : —
" Mrs Pernin really possesses little or no copyright. Over her shorthand
alphabet she prints, ' Pernin's Phonographic Alphabet, 'but it is the alphabet
of the Rev. E. Duploye. As regards the abbreviations in the Pernin method,
we have a letter in our possession received from M. Duploye, in which he
states, ' They are nothing but a translation of my work.' "
Leaving the twin sisters to settle their own quarrels, it is
evident that neither of the systems is original ; they are both
trading on the fruits of other men's labors, and calling by
their own names what is not theirs. But the Pernin text-
book is equally guilty with the other of attempts at misleading
by such statements as the following : —
" The body of the contractions in all systems but the Pernin are arbitrary,
requiring a constant effort of the memory to keep them in practice."
" One system — the Graham — has a dictionary of 60,000 word-signs to be
committed to memory, besides the great variety of other arbitrary contrac-
tions upon which the method is based."
" The Cross shorthand employs characters to represent letters instead of
sounds as in Phonography, and uses seven positions in writing."
" Phonography should be made a school study. Before the introduction
of the Pernin shorthand, this could not be done, as all other methods, on
account of shading, position, memorizing of so many arbitrary contractions,
etc., are entirely too difficult for the comprehension of the children." —
Pernin's Universal Phonography."
These quotations need not be multiplied. I do not know
any system except perhaps the Gregg, that has so many con-
tractions as the Pernin, and these are, as a rule, exceedingly
arbitrary ; that is, made without rule. Anyone may know
that a dictionary, whether it be a shorthand dictionary or an
English dictionary, is not made to be committed to memory.
On the contrary, teachers of the Pitman system will not
allow their pupils the use of a dictionary until they have nearly
completed their course, lest they lean on it for outlines
instead of on the rules. The Cross shorthand has only five
positions, not seven. And as to children in the schools not
being able to learn shorthand before the Pernin came into
use, the writer of that paragraph, unless exceedingly ignorant
of shorthand history, must have known that, since 1848, when
Oliver Dyer taught the class in Philadelphia High School
from which Murphy and McElhone emanated, children by the
thousands and tens of thousands have been learning the
Pitmanic systems, both in Britain and in America. If the
Sloan crime was made possible by a disregard of the eighth
commandment, these statements of the Pernin text-book
were made possible by a disregard of the ninth command-
ment !
There was also a form of the Duployan system, alias
Pernin, alias Sloan-Duployan, taught at Truro, Nova Scotia,
and other parts of the Province, under another alias, that of
Simple Phonography,
by Mr S. G. Snell. It is but a trifle more modest in its
claims, and in its disparagement of other systems. These
three borrowed systems all come into one category, the
foundation principles of which will be explained shortly
under the head of " Hobbies."
This would, perhaps, be the most appropriate place to
notice the McKee group of systems, as the peculiar method
of introducing them to the public renders it unnecessary to
refer at any length to their construction, although about three
pages of the former editions of this booklet were devoted to
a critique on the construction of one of them. Mr McKee
speaks of having invented "a number of systems "• — how
many he does not say ; but, so far as I know, only two were
published, the first of which was
The New Rapid.
In a letter from Mr J. G. Cross, author of an " Eclectic
System," he says : — " My publishers years ago sued the
publisher of the ' New Rapid ' for piracy of my system, the
'New Rapid' being mine in a little different form. In the
suit, he put in the plea that mine was not an original system,
and therefore any one had the right to use it. Second, that
his system was not in any sense like mine, and therefore was
not an infringement. Finally we beat him, and he put out
another system." Certainly, the resemblance is not very
close, but such is the charge. But what we would direct
attention to particularly is the inconsistency of Mr McKee
himself, which completely discredits both his systems, ren-
dering unnecessary, as has been said, an examination of the
merits or demerits of the systems as such. In the preface to
the " New Rapid" text-book, it is said: —
"The author's former work on shorthand [what was that ?] has met with
unprecedented success, and proven itself superior to other previously existing
methods. But, as was stated in its pages, it was not, in the author's mind
the ultima thule to which improvement could be carried ; and, living in a
progressive spirit, we have sought for greater advancement and improve-
ment, and are happy to say that, in ' New Rapid ' we have reached the goal,
having produced by far the most harmonious, complete and perfect system of
shorthand ever devised."
Then, after stating the seven fundamental principles that go
to make up a perfect system, he adds : —
" These foregoing requirements, which are absolutely essential to make a
perfect and complete system of shorthand, are all embodied in ' New Rapid1
Phonography. . . . Hence, we have reason to believe that this system will
open the eyes of the stenographic profession, though blinded as they are by
the intervention of the old systems."
Now, after perfection, what? Though, as stated in my
critique, perfection in that line seemed a long way off, yet I
was not prepared two years later to find perfection super-
seded by another system,
The New Standard,
which, without apology or blush, is introduced to a credulous
public in the following style : —
"The great advancement that has been made in all the departments of
human activity within the past few years renders the systems of former days
behind the times in many ways, and incapable of meeting all the require-
ments of this progressive age. ... In the New Standard shorthand,
we have a method which is equally well adapted to all classes of shorthand
work. It is so simple that all are able to learn it ; so legible that all are
able to read it ; and so swift that all are able to write it. These three im-
portant features — -simplicity, legibility, and rapidity — are the three cardinal
virtues of New Standard shorthand, and it is the securing of these three in
such a high degree of perfection that renders this system of shorthand so far
superior to others. . . . This, our latest work, comes as a settled
standard, in which every writer can repose with confidence in its unchange-
ableness. It is the author's ideal system . . . and the completeness of
the structure is such that the foundation must ever remain the same."
Supposing that, between the litigation of Mr Cross and
the condemnation of the author himself, the New Rapid was
no more to be heard of, it occasioned me no little surprise,
about a year ago, to receive a letter from an educationist in
Colorado holding a public position (judging from the headline
of his letter), speaking in no mild terms of rny old criticism,
and declaring that there was no equal to the New Rapid.
So it may be alive yet in some dark corners. If so, instead
of repeating my criticism, I would simply direct its adherents
as I did the one mentioned, to rub their eyes and wake up ;
the author himself has reminded them that they are " behind
the times," and there is nothing so alarming as this. And if
the author misled us before, can we trust him now?
The question naturally comes in here — was not the appro-
priating of the Isaac Pitman system by so many modifiers in
this country an act of the same character as those we have
mentioned previously — Mengelcamp, Sloan, Pernin,Snell, etc.?
There is this important difference, that when the Isaac Pitman
system was first propagated, the author gave it away in his .
large-hearted desire to bring a blessing to the world. He
10
gave Pearl Andrews the seed which was brought to America
and planted here. Those, however, who took the system and
made their own changes in it, publishing the whole in their
own name, were wronging the author; and that was no small
wrong either. The copyright at home prevented a like fate
befalling the system there, but that copyright did not extend
to this country; pity that it had not ! Mr Benn Pitman says
very truthfully : — " If ever the true story of these varied
schemes shall be written, the display of idiosyncrasy, vanity,
and sometimes of shocking dishonesty that will appear, will
form a strange chapter in the history of shorthand." He
also says in his own defence " The text-books were mine,
the system was not." And again, " The title, ' the Benn
Pitman System of Phonography,' is not of my selection ;
and personally, I never use it." It seems to me that ex-
onerates Mr Benn Pitman — at least so far. But no one else
of the many modifiers have said as much. Theyhave sever-
ally, though not denying that the system is Isaac Pitman's,
acted as full proprietors of it; — have changed it as thev liked,
have called it by their own names — perhaps with the addi-
tion of another, and have copyrighted what they could, so as
to retain all the advantages in their own hands. But it is
a question whether Mr Benn Pitman should have assumed
even the title, "The American System," though it was not
he who gave it that title at the outset; for it is not even an
American system, let alone being the American system ; it
is an English system, though its birthplace is a matter of
inferior importance. Dr Harris, Commissioner of Education
at Washington, was found great fault with for calling the
group, "the Isaac Pitman system"; but he was right. If a
man either borrows or steals my horse, and then crops and
docks it, it is my horse still, and it would be wrong to call
it anything else. All the " systems" are the Isaac Pitman ;
> others can claim nothing but the cropping and the docking,
and that they are welcome to.
The peculiar mode of advertising some systems must
be here noticed. There are phenomenal records of speed
attained, in incredibly short periods of study, which it is
safer to disbelieve than to believe ; — at all events, it is
always safe to question and demand ocular demonstration.
I have seldom or never tried the latter plan without having
to discount heavily on the record. " There are tricks in
every trade," they say ; certainly, there are here. One
II
could very easily get a pupil, who was perfectly raw, to learn
to write 150 words a minute with any system, after only five
minutes' practice. The matter dictated may be very familiar
and studied, or full of contractions and phrases, such as the
Gregg phrase for, " I am in receipt of your letter," which
contains only five letters — Im-r-le ( an n might follow the m
in the same line, but it would be indistinguishable), and is
joined thus o — ^_P. Such phrases are charming in their
brevity, and one could be written consecutively at leisure
some forty or fifty times in a minute, which would mean a
gait of from 280 to 350 words a minute. And you could learn
those five letters in almost as many seconds. Sometimes
dictated matter is court evidence, in simple conversational
language, not only with an unusual proportion of phrases, but
also with a large number of words that are implied without
writing at all, such as the Q's and A's for Question and
Answer. In the 395 words of evidence which Mr Dement,
of Chicago, is said to have written in one minute, there are
no less than forty-eight words of the Q and A omitted, besides
others that are implied without writing. Such matter, too,
is very easily memorized, especially when read back imme-
diately ; and errors are not so easily marked as when a tran-
script has to be furnished. And the writing is illegible— letters
omitted, scrawls resembling anything else but the letters
intended; it is certain that no one however expert — not even
the writer himself, could read the matter if unaided by mem-
ory. It is not a test of writing unless others can read it also.
Mr Isaac Pitman's tests are certainly the fairest of those
generally used: — dictation for seven or ten minutes ; matter
perfectly new to the writer and of an ordinary style of com-
position, say, a speech or an editorial ; full transcript to be
furnished ; only two per cent, of errors allowed. It would be
a still fairer test of the writing if the dictation lasted for half
an hour, and the writing be sufficiently legible for a stranger
to be able to make out a transcript : or if it were left to lie
for a month or even for months until perfectly " cold." A
test is really nothing if the writing itself be not capable of
being read, as well as of being written at a certain speed.
Then we have statements published of converts from other
systems, and schools rejecting one system and adopting
another \ these have to be sifted. Of course, people will change
from system to system, but it is often for other reasons than
a preference for one system above another. Within my own
12
observation, teachers have gone for situations and salaries
instead of the merit of systems ; colleges have added systems,
besides those used in the colleges ordinarily, just to attract
a certain class of pupils ; and many have professed to change
when they never had anything to change from. In the list of
Shorthand Institutions furnished by the Bureau of Education
at Washington for 1890, some of these institutions are entered
as teaching " Any modification of Pitman's Phonography;"
others, "Graham's, Pitman's, Munson's, Cross's, and
McKee's ; " others again, "Any of the leading systems."
These colleges send for the books of different systems perhaps
merely for examination or trial, and immediately they are
claimed by each system as adherents and converts. A few
years ago the Pernin Publishers sent me a list of the colleges
using their system, and among the rest there were two that
I knew were using the Isaac Pitman altogether. On enquiry,
for further satisfaction, I was informed that they were using
none but the Isaac Pitman, and were perfectly satisfied with
it. This got into the press without my cognisance, and cost
me a hair-pulling from the " Pernin Stenographer;" but the
only explanation was that one of the colleges had some time
previously ordered some of their books. I know three similar
cases with another Light-Line system : and such cases make
one suspicious that these are only samples of many.
The little experience, too, that I have had with professed
converts from the Pitman to the non-Pitmanic systems, is
not any more satisfactory. I have come into actual contact
with only one convert from Pitman to Light- Line— a Pro-
fessor of Gregg in New Jersey — who kindly wrote out for
me a list of words, by way of contrast, in the two styles —
the one abandoned and that adopted. Out of forty-one
words that he attempted, twenty-four are written wrongly
in the Pitman style, showing how little he ever knew of
Pitman. I give a few samples : —
Gregg ... ... ... 69 Sarah, CQ_, Supplant, C.9^ Spinster.
Pitman (as he wrote it) \( „ <). •• ) iL^f etc., „
Pitman (as it should be) o^ „ & „ \> „
A former well-known teacher and vigorous champion of
the Gregg system in an advertisement announces himself
as a " Former teacher of Isaac Pitman's shorthand,"
and gives two samples of the Isaac Pitman, one to
13
ridicule the positions, and the other to contrast the forms. In
the former, of only seven words, he makes three errors—
nearly half of the words ; and in the other, with only four
words, he writes one as no Isaac Pitman writer would write
it ! An Isaac Pitman writer might have known better after
two weeks' study. This teacher, too, is something of a
poet ; probably the poet laureate of the Gregg style, since
Mr Gregg honors his poem of six stanzas with a page of
his text-book. In that poem we have this couplet : —
" Oh ! why should a shorthand omit all the vowels,
And leave you to guess if 'tis tells, tales, or towels ? "
Here again these words, instead of being alike, are all written
differently. They differ more in the Isaac Pitman than in
the Gregg, thus : —
Gregg : ^ — i tells, ,£ — -< tales, /&* — f towels.
I. Pitman: [ [^°
So much for those who have left the Isaac Pitman for the
Gregg ; if they are fair samples — they are the only ones
that I have seen draw a comparison — then inquirers need
not be alarmed by the stories told by converts.
There is a class qf systems that ride special HOBBIES,
which are pushed to the front as if of transcendent importance,
and which, it is claimed, give these systems an immense
advantage over the older ones, especially the Pitmanic.
Some of this class ride one of these hobbies, and some ride
more; but The Gregg System
combines them all, and presents them thus : —
" (i). No Compulsory Thickening'. — May be written either light or heavy.
' (2\ Written on the Slope of Longhand, thus securing a uniform manual
movement.
' (3) Position Writing Abolished. — Maybe written on unruled paper, and
in one straight line. (
" (4). Vowels and Consonants are Conjoined, and follow each other in
their natural order.
" (5). Angles are Rare. — Curves predominate."
And here I may say that, when examining the Gregg
system for myself some ten years ago now, some difficulties
were met with, which I lately submitted to Mr Gregg
himself for an explanation, not wishing to misrepresent
his system when reviewing it. I sent him a short list of
puzzling words — puzzling, at least, to me. He replied that
he recognised me as the writer of the pamphlet " Which
System, " and by way of banter or benevolence (it mattered
not which), he invited me to investigate the system, and
offered to give me a complete course of lessons gratuitously,
which offer was gratefully accepted. Having completed the
course, I can speak with more confidence perhaps than
before, especially as Mr Gregg had been kind enough to
answer many questions that were submitted to him aside
from the regular course. \Ve will examine these hobbies
as briefly as possible : —
i. The Light-Line Principle. — " No compulsory thicken-
ing;" that is, thickening or shading any letter is optional.
But the lines are generally light, and hence the name. It
was a beautiful discovery by Mr Pitman that the consonant
sounds of the English language are nearly all paired according
to the force of expression, each of eight pairs having one light
and one heavier sound; as p, b; t, d; etc. He made use of
this beautiful correspondence of sound by shading the
heavier one, thus, \ \ p b, | | t d, etc. The systems that
object to shading double the letters in length instead; thus.
C f~~ p, b (Gregg); I | (Pernin). The objections to shading
are thus stated in the Pernin Manual (Introduction) : —
" Leading stenographers admit that this alone detracts at
least 25 per cent, from rapidity ; besides, in rapid writing, it
is impossible to shade accurately, and consequently great
illegibility is the result." I do not know who are these
" leading stenographers ;" but their experience differs widely
from mine. It may be a little difficult at first to shade
horizontal letters ; but there are not many of these — only
three, and these not the most frequently used. There are no
heavy strokes besides these but down strokes, and it is
generally more difficult to keep pupils from shading these
than otherwise, especially with the pen. In writing a word
for me (Trafalgar), Mr Gregg unconsciously shaded in his
beautiful hand, not only a%down stroke, but even a horizontal
one ; thus, -g^-^ ; or abbreviated, ^^ (Trafal.) (The
original is given the engraver, that he may produce an exact
imitation.) I am not conscious of shading less in rapid
writing than in slower and more deliberate writing, and am
unconscious of either loss of speed, or neglect of shading in
rapid work, and cannot but feel that the objection is a mere
bugbear to frighten the inexperienced. Who the " leading
stenographers" are that speak of a loss of 25 per cent, in
shading letters, many would like to know ; that assertion is
15
certainly stretching a point, and made for a purpose. But
whether there be a loss in the shading or no, it is easy to see
that there is a great loss in the lengthening of the letter in
lieu of the shading.
First, the lengthening process requires the pen to travel
over a good deal more ground, and at the same time makes a
far worse zig-zag motion than what Mr Gregg complains of
in the use of "geometrical" outlines. Compare xb babe,
(s> brave (Gregg), with X^ °Xi (Pitman). And how
awkward it would be to have two or three double letters
strung along in one line, even though horizontal, as d-d ^^
in dead, m-m-n — D — =_ in mammon, m-n-m-m — o-o — => — in
minimum. Probably some of the vowels would be omitted
in these words, as — o — ° > though we cannot tell
without a dictionary what to omit, or how much of a word to
cut off altogether (it is Mr Gregg's empty boast that the
simplicity of the system makes a dictionary unnecessary, and
yet his dictionary at the end of his text-book grows longer
with every new edition); the words might be simply mam for
mammon, and min for minimum. But Mr Pitman would
never allow m-m or m-n to be joined in one line ; he is too
careful about legibility ; the Gregg, however, does it contin-
ually, and you must guess whether it is only one m, or m-n,
or m-m.
Secondly, the Pitman system utilizes the double length for
a very common and powerfully abbreviating scheme, which
advantage the Gregg, Pernin, etc. lose altogether, namely, the
expression of the whole syllable -ther, and its cognates -ter,
-der. For instance, ^ — <• is mother; in the first position or
above the line, it is matter The Gregg uses the letter th
for -ther, which therefore is ambiguous, because f maybe
either mouth or mouther, ^ sooth OK soother. Of course, as the
author would say, the context would easily determine ; but a
system is lame that has to lean much on the context. We
sometimes get the sense of a sentence only by going some
words beyond the doubtful word, and then have to back up
and repeat, losing time and bungling. And the Gregg has no
sign for -ter or -der, so that matter would have to be written
in full — T$^ or contracted to mat — tf, which makes ambiguity
again. The Gregg leans on the context continually.
2. The next hobby is the one slope—" The Slope of Long-
i6
hand." This is peculiar to the Gregg system. The Pernin
does not use it. MrGregg says (Preface to First Edition): —
" I believe that the trend of shorthand progress is towards a more complete
identity with our ordinary longhand writing, whic-h in its adaptability to the
hand embodies the wisdom of ages."
But what about the vertical method of longhand which is
now so strongly contended for by many educationists, and
so largely practised in schools ? What about the physical
argument : —
" A Belgian doctor has been making observations in the schools of Liege
on the effect on children of the upright, as opposed to the sloping style of
handwriting He finds that fifty-eight per cent, of the children who are
taught vertical writing have their shoulders in the normal position, as
opposed to thirty-two per cent of those who are taught the sloping style "
It is easily conceived that the effect of sitting with one side
to the desk, as is usually done in sloping writing, with one
shoulder elevated and the other drooping, might become a
permanent deformity, and might even cause curvature of the
spine. But we may pass that by. Mr Gregg thinks that
the habit of sloping in longhand makes it easier to slope in
shorthand. Of course, this has no application where the
habit of vertical writing has been acquired ; in such case,
vertical forms in shorthand would be the easiest. But what
does this amount to, if other points of much greater import-
ance are involved? Whether a certain form be harder or
whether it be easier, matters little ; the great thing to look
after is to get the best. Lazy folks alone will prefer the
' easiest.
But here is a strange inconsistency again. While Mr
contends so vigorously for the one slope, almost half
the letters of his alphabet have no slope at all, but are
horizontal, and two letters slope in the opposite direction to
the one contended for namely, ^ "^-. ng and ngk. This
makes really more than half of all excepting the little straight
and curved dashes r and / , that have not the longhand slope!
One cannot but question sincerity in such a case. But
supposing all were of the one slope, there would be these two
difficulties: —
a. So many strokes running in the same direction would
cause them to collide and intersect continually, and thus
make illegible forms. How can you join J _/and / (up), t
or ^ tli (up), and put either of the small circular vowels
between ? How much better when some have the opposite
slope, such as "V
b. With so little variety to choose from, the alphabet is
necessarily very limited. There are twenty-four simple
consonant sounds in the English language, and Mr Gregg
has only eight, long and short, on the writing slope,
except the little dashes mentioned ; then he has six hori-
zontals, two letters sloping like backhand, and one dot,
making twenty-six in all. In the two diagrams of the
Pitman forms, H-^ 0*y> twenty-four distinct letters of
uniform length, light and heavy, can be contained. You see
the contrast at once, and the advantage the Pitman has.
Mr Gregg has spoken more wisely than he has acted when
he said in his preface : —
" It is almost needless to say that a faulty allotment of the alphabetic
characters would have entirely nullified in practice the value of the natural
principles which form the basis of the system "
His faulty alphabet nullifies the value of the whole system.
It is as though a building contractor was required to con-
struct a building with a scanty allowance of material, and
some of this too short and gnarly. He will have an un-
finished building, and a poor one at that. When we come to
examine the Gregg vowels, we find them worse still. But
we have no more time for the one "slope;" does it not seem
to be a mere fad?
3. The next hobby is "Position writing abolished." What
is meant by position writing is this. The Pitman system
has three positions in which short words may be placed,
so as to distinguish them without inserting the vowels ;
thus, ..LT. ..I __ and .\ ...... without vowels, are the same as
L_ L_ L_! (talk, take, took) with the vowels. The objec-
tion to this method is thus expressed by the "poet laureate "
already mentioned : —
" Oh ! Why should a shorthand fly hither and there ?
To write so in longhand, you scarcely would dare
This form written sky-high, the next one below,
You bob here and there like a bear in a show.
'Tis all far from natural, take this as a sign —
They write one position in Gregg's modern Light-Line."
And the same poet illustrates it in this manner, which is
more ludicrous than true: —
I nice.
say it not
must is
i8
Well, he is certainly humorous. But it is rather " phunny "
for an old " Isaac Pitman teacher" (as he declares himself)
to make three mistakes of position in this short, simple
sentence, as has been observed before. Had he known more
about position, his objections to it might have had some
weight. We will now compare the two systems in correct
form, and you can see for yourselves, even if you know not
a letter in shorthand, which " bobs" most: —
Gregg : Q—r QI S __ _p x Pitman : ^ ^ "^ x
In this case, the Gregg forms do not happen to be the sloping
ones, except the short dashes; but even then it cannot be said
that any of the Pitman words are "sky-high," though they are
in different positions, three of them in the first or highest ;
and the line is not quite so straggling as the poet's imagina-
tion pictured it. But suppose we take a sentence where we
have some of the sloping letters in the Gregg style ; say the
line, " You bob here and there like a bear in a show."
Gregg : o * ^ ^ ^ v_p . £
Pitman : n N^ S^ ' ) (^ ' \^ '
Now by drawing lines along at the points that the letters
reach above and below, it is easily seen which system bobs
most. No one can say this is not a fair comparison, for the
extreme positions are represented in Pitman, and it would be
very easy getting worse words in the Gregg style than are
represented there. The fact is this :— In the Gregg writing,
not only are lines used to write upon just as in other systems
and a rule for placing letters with respect to that line, as the
rule says — "The first consonant (except S when followed by a
downward stroke) rests on or starts from the line of writing"
(Gregg text-book) ; but these lines of writing require to be
further apart in the Gregg than in the Pitman. By actual
measurement, comparing the brief reporting style in Pitman's
Phonetic Journal with the same style in the Gregg system,
there are eight lines of the former to seven of the latter ; in
the exercises of the two Manuals there are five of the Pitman
to four of the Gregg ; and in the blank note-books gotten up
by Mr Gregg for pupils, five lines occupy as much space as
seven or eight of those used ordinarily by Pitman pupils. I
don't think we should therefore hear any more about the
Gregg system using no lines, or having no " zig-zag; " or of
19
the " bobbing " that the poet sings so sweetly about. It is
a pity, however, to spoil the poetry.
4. But the great hobby is " The Connective- Vowel A rrange-
ment." That is, the vowels are written in with the con-
sonant strokes, instead of being detached as most of Pitman's
are. Here comes inconsistency again : —
a. These systems all leave out many of the vowels, though
boasting of their being inserted between the consonants, —
the Gregg especially. Many of the words are as bare of
vowels as Pitman's, without the position method of Pitman
that indicates the vowel sound, and here they lose in com-
parison. Got is written with g-t ; progress with p-r-g;
patronage with p-t-r-g, etc. — no vowel. Awkward vowels,
such as &> are generally omitted, and o is changed into
o a ; thus the Gregg text-book says : " In writing might, for
example, it will be sufficient to write mat, as 'it mat (might)
be,' ' in ma (my) opinion.' ' (Sec. 59.)
b. The great argument for inserting the vowels is, that it
is not required to lift the pen in making them, and thus
speed is gained. Whereas the fact is that, in both the
Gregg and the Pernin, many of the vowels themselves are
not complete without lifting the pen ; in Gregg, eight out of
twelve of the simple vowels. Thus, d — d — Psalm,, same ;
^^ ^^^ red, read ; c^" f^ awed, owed ; L_^ L_^ full,
fool. Pernin has two such vowels, or rather diphthongs :
— <4- 9- trite, trout. And both of these systems have even
consonants requiring dots beside the strokes to distinguish
them as > 2, J. (up) th (hard), 6 ha. They say that these
dots and dashes can generally be omitted; but they cannot
be omitted and be as legible as Pitman's writing when his
dots and dashes are omitted. Look over a page of reporting
style of the two different systems, and see which has the
most dots and dashes for which the pen has to be lifted.
This argument seems but a hollow pretence.
c. But the loss of time in writing the inserted vowels is the
great objection to the plan. Mr Gregg says : —
" In the body of a word, it is usually as easy to include a circle as to
omit it, and it frequently happens that by taking away an angle that would
obstruct the continuous movement of the pen, the circle actually increases
the speed, with which an outline may be written."
Did Mr Gregg ever try that ? If he did he will probably
be compelled to come to a different conclusion. You can
20
write more forms in a minute with the angle alone than you
can with the simplest circle added, i.e. — more of I than of
J — . But Mr Gregg is very careful to say nothing about the
more complicated vowels and diphthongs : —c x roll, oL
fine, — ,T" mouth. Pitman's easy forms for these are "/"
ba. _4-. There is a great loss of time, on the whole, in
writing the inserted vowels.
d. The great difficulty with these connected vowels is that
it is a perfect impossibility to devise a sufficient number of
forms to meet the need. Mr Pitman tried it and gave it up
long ago. Mr Gregg is still sweating over it, and trying to
get new forms for ie, io, ea, etc., etc., by putting " wheels
within wheels," dots in circles, such as &r science, to dis-
tinguish from &r signs; ^_9- lion, to distinguish from ^J£-
line, etc. One can imagine what would be made of these
little curlicues in a 150 or 200 gait. But the idea of at-
tempting to represent some dozen and more of these diph-
thongal sounds by connected vowels is preposterous. My
correspondence with Mr Gregg commenced by asking his
help in writing such words as Ohio, oyez, Oivhyhee , on the
connective vowel principle — one of the bases of the system.
There being no consonant forms for h, w, h, there was
nothing to connect the vowels with. I was told that I knew
nothing about the system, and was trying to write difficult
words before I knew even the principles ; and then came the
kind offer of a gratuitous course of lessons, which, as said
before, was accepted. As my teacher had not at first
answered my questions and given me the outlines I
asked for, when the point was reached in the lessons that
bore upon these questions, I repeated them, only to get a
severe castigation for "desiring to find out what cannot be
done with Gregg shorthand, rather than what can be done
with it ; " he asserting that he had never heard of the word
" Owhyhee," and could not find it in the dictionary; that the
system was equal to writing any word, even Owhyhee, and
he wanted to know whether it was "necessary to sneeze in
pronouncing it ! " He then gratified me with this explana-
tion : " All that the stenographer has to do is to write the
signs for the sounds as they occur, vowels and consonants
following each other in natural order, and draw a line under-
neath to show they are connected, thus : ^Ojt O-:ch\'licc,
21
vy_^, oyer, ^_^ Oyez, ~$__0^, Ayah, <_5$. O'Hara.
"This," Mr G. continued, "will no doubt commend itself
to you as being more natural than the Nominal Consonant
plan of the Isaac Pitman, which always appeared to me a
very arbitrary expedient." I had simply to assure Mr
Gregg that I had no intention to offend ; that I was investi-
gating the system at his invitation, and certainly did desire
to know both what the system could do and what it could not
do ; that I thought he was anxious to show what it was
capable of, and should have been pleased to receive my
questions; that " Owhyhee " was one way of spelling
Hawaii — once the common way — and was to be found in an
Atlas before me — -one of the latest published ; that the same
name in sound — Owyhee— was a familiar name in Nevada
and the West, and should have been in every dictionary, as
it was in two of mine ; that reporters had no time for
sneezing, especially if they had to write the letters all
separate and add to them a connecting stroke ; and, finally,
that Isaac Pitman does not use the Nominal Consonant with
such words, as he has plenty of real consonant forms for the
purpose, 'as &f* Owhyhee, 2^ Oyer, £^ O'Hara, 7* Ohio.
This is not a mere pleasantry, but a simple illustration of
the hollowness of the pretensions that insist on a " One
Slope " that robs the consonant alphabet of strokes for h, w,
and y on which to hang the dependent vowels so often
occurring; and that insist also on a "Connective-Vowel"
idea where the vowels cannot be connected, but that in the
attempt to do so, the vowel alphabet is impoverished to such
an extent that about half of the vowel and diphthong sounds
of the language cannot be expressed. It seems to me a fad, a
farce, a hobby — and a wooden hobby at that — only for child's
play. There is another of these hobbies in the Gregg system
that must be little more than barely mentioned : —
5. " Angles are rare, Curves predominate." Why? Be-
cause "curves are written more easily and more quickly."
Sometimes they are ; sometimes they are not. /"" — ^ (up
strokes used for /~ _/ ) are no doubt written more easily than
and — / ; and Q (^ more easily than what they repre-
sent /} [_/ . But the difficulty is that you will have to
depend on the letters or words of the context to know what
these outlines are — always a lame expedient ; for instance,
22
/^"~ is f-n, d-n, t-m, d-m in -V^ contains, condense, contemns,
condemns ; but it is only d or t in ^3 flte^y, ^^ active. The
same stroke written downward is sometimes g, but generally
b. This makes difficulty in reading, and illegibility. But,
in some cases, a curve is much harder to write, and slower
than an angle ; as ^L_ ^ f-m, f-r are much more difficult
than 1 — and <L. To make such as the former with any kind
of grace requires a good deal of that training of the hand that
Mr Gregg calls drawing. But we cannot, and need not dwell
longer on this peculiarity.
Taking these five hobbies together as the Gregg system
attempts to do (none of the other systems takes them all),
the foundation is unsound, and the whole superstructure suffers
in consequence. By insisting on these hobbies, as we have
seen, the whole alphabet is impoverished to an extent that
forbids some of the most important qualities of a good
shorthand; and what is infinitely worse, the awkward at-
tempts to connect unnecessary vowels forces out the many
and beautiful expedients of the Pitmanic varieties for
abbreviating words by hooks, circles, loops, halving, etc.
Instead of using a simple circle, larger or smaller, for s, sr,
ns, STV, in different positions ; or a loop for st, str, nsf, nstr ;
instead of a hook for /, r, n, f, and -tion ; instead of halving
a letter to add t or d ; — instead of such simple, yet powerful
and ever recurring expedients as these, these light-line and
connective-vowel systems are obliged to write all these
letters out at full length, or — what is even worse — behead,
or betail, or disembowel the words in order to obtain the
needful brevity, until they are so maimed or murdered as to
be unrecognizable. S and t {r /) make a poor joining, so
the t has to be omitted, and mus is written for must, mos for
most, bes for best, etc. ; t and d cannot be written distinctly
after r and / (/ ^ t, d, - *> — ^ r, /), and so these are left
out altogether and hold becomes hole, port becomes pore, etc.
Omissions are necessary everywhere. There is one lesson
on the " Omission of Words," another on the " Dropping of
Terminations"; another on the "Omission of Consonants,"
and a parallel one on the " Omission of Vowels." Then we
have more than a dozen " Joined Prefixes," all of which are
distinguishable from the single letters only by the context ;
and two dozen or more " Disjoined Prefixes," and a goodly
number of "Compound Joined Prefixes," and "Irregular Com-
pounds," while Pitman needs less than half a dozen prefixes
23
altogether! We have, in like manner, the "Joined and Dis-
joined Affixes," with their "Compounds," and some twenty-
one "Analogical Abbreviations," which is only another
species of Affixes and Prefixes. And thus the words are
mixed and mangled (take, for example, > interested, in com-
parison with Pitman's simple connected "f with just as many
letters') — until the beautiful promises about " not lifting the
pen," " vowels and consonants conjoined," etc., are forgotten.
And all this confusion simply because of riding these hobbies !
Is not that about riding them to death ? As said before, these
illustrations are mostly drawn from the Gregg system, be-
cause he makes rather more use of these methods than Pernin
or any other of the so-called " Light-Line" systems; but it
can be easily seen how they would all be affected alike.
Cross's Eclectic Shorthand
has a hobby of its own, which the author styles the " Chiro-
graphic Ellipse," and explains thus : —
" In writing, we constantly employ two forces, viz. : the protective and the
retractive. The projective force of the hand, acting on the pen, carries it
upward and forward, corresponding to the centrifugal force acting upon the
spheres. The retractive (orce carries the pen backward and downward,
corresponding to the centripetal force in its action on the spheres. These
two forces combined must produce elliptical outlines, all outlines evolved in
the act of writ'ng being more or less affected by the two motions. This is
espec ally true in rapid writing," etc.
Mr. Cross certainly goes to a high source for his theory ;
but we imagine most people would say that "an ounce of
practice is worth more than a pound of theory," — especially
such theory. Ellipses lying in five directions — two sloping
to the left, two to the right, and one lying horizontally — with
five straight lines in the same directions, form the basis of
his alphabet. He abhors perpendicular strokes. The con-
sequence is, as a practical man will observe at first sight,
that the sloping letters written so nearly in one direction,
and the curves taken from the longer sides of the ellipses
being so nearly straight lines, they cannot be distinguished
except written very slowly and carefully, as his diagram will
show: — ///' (I) ^^ \\A \\\ Another weakness which
is quite as evident is the use of five positions, thus: — -^^-
Both of these defects tend strongly to illegibility. A third
weakness leading to the same result is the use of six
24
different lengths or sizes of the same character to represent
different letters ; and the author advises thus : — " Practise
the following exercise until you can preserve the relative
sizes when written rapidly __ __ _
o o 0 jo! d d
etc." It is very evident that these would require a good deal
of practice, both to write them with the needed distinction,
and to get a keen eye to observe the distinction when written.
The Pitman systems allow no such indistinctness between
letters. This Eclectic also uses the connective vowel plan
to a certain extent, but with no better success than other
systems that attempt the impossible. The awkwardness of
joining such outlines as the alphabet contains cannot but
make clumsy forms, which retard the writing as well as
interfere with legibility. The huge number of prefixes and
affixes, with the method of dividing syllables, is also a
peculiar and objectionable feature of this system, of which
contra-ct, conce-al are ordinary specimens. But we can go
no further, and there is probably no need to do so. You, my
reader, can form a fairly correct idea of the system from
what little has been said.
There is no need at this date of dwelling upon such systems
as Lindsley's Takigrafy, which is more like an abbreviated
longhand than shorthand, and is very little in use now; nor
the Scovil system, nor Towndrow's, which are not phono-
graphic but bitterly anti-phonetic, and which are not pushed
now ; nor Gabelsberger's system, of German origin and
adapted specially to the German language; nor the Script,
though an attempt was made to introduce it among us, after
a dismal failure in Britain ; nor the Eureka, the author of
which publishes two systems, which he has tried to foist
upon some of our school authorities on this side of the
" pond," but happily in vain. No wise man would wish to
spend his time and money in chasing after Will-o'-the-wisps,
when he has light that is evidently more real and reliable.
Isaac Pitman versus the Variations.
The Isaac Pitman was first published in England in 1837.
It was brought to this country, as said before, by Mr Pearl
Andrews in 1846, and published in the form that the system
then had reached. Webster soon after published it when at
a little more advanced stage. In 1852, Mr Benn Pitman,
25
brother of Isaac, brought it to this country, and disseminated
it in the still more advanced style then existing in England.
This is
The Benn Pitman
of the present day. He says of it later: — "Up to 1857,
there was but one form of Phonography used. All suggested
changes in, and additions to, the system were amply dis-
cussed by the general body of phonographers, and were by
them either rejected as worthless, or concurred in as being
in the direction of progress, and tending to the best develop-
ment of the system." That is very true ; and what was true
of Mr. Isaac Pitman's method then is true still ; as the
improvements up to 1857 were " amply discussed by the
general body of phonographers, etc.," so has it been with all
the later improvements, but Mr. Benn Pitman was not
willing to follow any further. It is true that some others,
like Mr. Benn Pitman, objected to these further changes —
and there always will be objections to changes ; but the
" general body " moved on : and now which is more likely to
be correct ? To prevent divisions in such cases, Mr. Isaac
Pitman was obliged to copyright his system, thus rendering
impossible in Britain those inroads upon it that have pro-
duced such an unfortunate effect in America, upon not only
the Pitman system, but upon the art of shorthand in general.*
This system, also now claiming the title, " The American
System of Shorthand," therefore lacks the many improve-
ments that have been made in the Isaac Pitman (pure) during
the past half-century. It has still the old vowel scale of the
Ninth Edition ; that is, the e of that edition in such words as
pea is ah now, as in pa ; and / short, as in pit, is a now as in
pat. This, of course, reverses the positions of words con-
taining these vowels, making quite a gain, as most phono-
graphers have thought, in both speed and legibility (see
Preface to Munson's first edition). Then the Benn Pitman
still retains the old forms ~^ f~ S for w, y, and h, instead
of being put to better uses for -rer, -Ir, and y. The " Irregular
* The copyright of the Twentieth Century revision of the Isaac Pitman
system is secured by the publishing in America of the " Shorthand
Instructor," and all rights reserved. If ordering through a bookseller,
special attention should be called to the fact that worthless piracies of old
editions will be refused, and only those bearing the imprint of Isaac
Pitman and Sons will be accepted.
26
Double Consonants" of the Benn Pitman have also now been
superseded by others, in the interests of simplicity and
harmony ; while the newer duplicate forms for f and th in
conjunction with the liquids / and r, which greatly increase
legibility, brevity, and ease of execution, are entirely lost in
the Benn Pitman. The initial sway circle, too, adopted in
1888, which produces the simple forms ^ P °\ *") for
sweep, sweet, sweeper, sweeter, etc., and such convenient
phrases as Q^ p °) for as we have, as we do, as we say, etc.,
displace the much longer forms of the older system. The
doubling of straight letters for -ther, etc., is not only more
in harmony with the like treatment of curved letters, as ^/
surrender, printer (like (^ slander), but makes easier
and briefer forms ; this is lost in the older Benn Pitman.
There are some other changes ; but enough has been said to
give any one an idea of the nature of the difference between
the two systems. In the face of the fact that these changes
have been made after careful tests ; that they have been
adopted by the general consensus of experts ; and that they
have stood the severest trials in actual practice, it seems
idle for a comparatively few — and these parties mostly inter-
ested in propagating their own systems — to protest that
these are not real improvements. Is it reasonable that any
new invention of mortal should stand still for half a century?
Or that the great majority of practical business men would
hold on to poorer methods while better ones were within
easy reach ?
But there is a greater difference between the Isaac Pitman
and the Benn Pitman than the mere construction of outlines.
There is really no comparison between the amount of short-
hand literature in the two systems respectively. The Benn
Pitman has a monthly publication, containing only a
few pages of phonography, the rest being in common print ;
it would pay to publish it as a mere advertisement of the
system, whether its subscription list would support it or not.
But no one has ventured to publish a pure Benn Pitman
Phonographic periodical simply in the interests of general
literature, or as a paying speculation. On the other hand,
the organ of the Isaac Pitman system, The Phonetic Journal,
has a circulation itself of about 33,000, and is a weekly.
Then there is Pitman's Shorthand Weekly, having also a large
27
circulation, and filled with general literature, all in shorthand.
Besides these, Isaac Pitman writers can have the choice of half
a dozen monthly Phonographic periodicals, stored with inter-
esting reading, disconnected altogether from the Pitman
propaganda, and some of which have been paying invest-
ments for decades !
And while there is nothing worthy of the name of a book
published in the Benn Pitman style of shorthand, some two
hundred standard literary and religious works in the Isaac
Pitman style are put within our reach, from the Bible and
Pilgrim's Progress, down to works of history, science, bio-
graphy, romance, novels, etc. These facts show plainly
enough the superior advantages of the Isaac Pitman student,
as well as the brighter prospect of this system's becoming in
time the universal one.
Most of what has been said about the Benn Pitman system
applies to what is generally known as
The Graham System,
called, however, by Mr. Graham himself, " Standard or
American Phonography." It is as old, within a year or two,
as the Benn Pitman ; and like it also, has undergone no
change since its first publication. It has the same old con-
sonants and vowels, also double letters ; and it lacks all the
improvements that the Isaac Pitman has made in its onward
march the last sixty years. It started out with a few new
devices of the author's, such as a large hook on a certain
side of straight letters for the termination -five, which makes
an inconvenient outline when an initial hook happens on the
same side, and which cannot be used with curves. Its rules
for halving letters in the addition of d and t, with the excep-
tions, are numerous and complicated, leading to ambiguity,
such that the single outline ^ without vocalization, would
represent broad, brought, bride, bright, and breed. In fact
the complaint about his numerous rules and exceptions is so
general that a number of modifications of the system have
appeared in the direction of simplifying it, and especially of
reducing the size of the Manual. It has no more literature
than the Benn Pitman, and perhaps not so much as it.
These two have been the leading systems in the United
States since they came into the field, and so far they have
kept the lead. Both claim precedence ; and the methods on
28
which they base their claims show how easy it is to manipu-
late figures to prove just what we like. Mr. Jerome B.
Howard, the acting propagandist of the Benn Pitman system
since Mr. Pitman himself retired some years ago, bases his
claim on the tabulated list of Educational Institutions where
shorthand is taught, as furnished by the Bureau of Educa-
tion at Washington for the year, June, 1889-90. To show
how poor a basis this furnishes for an accurate estimate,
schools are mentioned where not only two, three, four, five,
and six systems are taught, but "any of the leading systems,"
or " any modification of Pitman's ;" — schools with 15 teachers
for 23 pupils ; and to offset this, one teacher for 510 pupils.
A pretty well-known Academy of Houston, Tex., returns
four Benn Pitman teachers, and no pupils, and none as ever
having graduated from the school. The Graham publishers
base their estimate on the list of " Official Court Reporters
of the United States." This list is very partial, including
only 30 States and Territories out of 50, and wholly exclud-
ing some of the largest cities — such as even Washington and
Chicago. We know of one case where returns were sent for
publication in this list, namely from Rhode Island ; but for
some unknown reason, these are omitted.
On such unsound bases as these, is it any wonder that the
estimates widely differ? The Benn Pitman statistics reckon
34.7 per cent, of teachers to Graham's i6'8 per cent, or 747
to 363 ; while the Graham method of reckoning gives that
system 48 per cent, to Benn Pitman's 12 per cent., or a pro-
portion of 305 to 77 ! If the respective parties do not
manifest a sufficient sense of shame to induce them to with-
draw such data and conclusions, we may well blush for the
fraternity. Instead of withdrawing them, however, they are
making matters worse by publishing them to the present day,
as if the conditions of a decade ago were the same still. In
the Benn Pitman statistics, the Isaac Pitman comes fifth in
rank ; and in the Graham, it is put fourth. They now make
no allowance for the fact that, up to 1890, when the Bureau of
Education published the list of teachers and taught, the
Isaac Pitman system had no business representation in
America, but was left to the mere accident of immigration ;
but since that date, when the firm of Isaac Pitman and Sons
opened a house in New York, and the Copp, Clark Co.
started an Agency at Toronto, the system has been extend-
ing by leaps and bounds, as evidenced by reports from
29
Colleges, by its exclusive adoption into the High Schools
of New York and elsewhere, by the fact that some of the
most influential and widely circulated papers (such as The
Christian Herald and the American Boy — the former
with a weekly circulation of about 300,000) have published
courses of Isaac Pitman lessons in them. Whatever the
Benn Pitman and Graham statistics amounted to ten years
ago, they cannot speak for to-day, either for the Isaac
Pitman system, or for other systems, some of which have
faded or died out altogether, and others have improved in
circulation.
The Munson System
has probably ranked third among the " variations " in public
patronage, since its Hrst appearance not long behind the
Graham. In some respects, especially in the newer vowel
scale of Isaac Pitman, and the large initial / hook on curves,
it was in advance of its compeers when it first set out; but it
has been, like them, languishing ever since. It has some pecu-
liarities of its own that the author and his followers thought
valuable, but they have never gained a wide acceptance, and
only served to make another division in the ranks. Mr.
Munson publishes no organ, and comparatively no literature,
which itself would be sufficient to account for the limited
constituency of Munson writers.
It is needless to more than name Longley's Eclectic, The
Burnz System, The Osgoodby, The Thornton, The Barnes,
Eames' Light-Line, The Moran, The Dement, The Day,
The Gilbert, The Allen ("Universal"), The Watson, The
Scott- Browne, The Bishop ("Exact"), The Haven, The
Beale (" Simplified"), The Robert F. Rose, and I know not
how many other modifications and remodifications, variations
and deviations, of the Pitman family. Each author is
perfectly confident that he has made improvements— more
confident than others seem to be; one thing is certain, how-
ever, namely that each " improvement " helps the confusion,
and weakens the general cause. If this be the fruit of liberty,
there is reason to fear that too high a value has been
attached to it when so much blood has been shed on its
behalf. If any of these derived systems had really improved
the original in its principles, then there would be less
occasion for departing from the principles and adopting con-
tracted forms or arbitraries in their stead. But the fact is
449599
30
patent that the pure Isaac Pitman has a much smaller list of
contracted words than any of these variations, and yet it is
safe to say that none of the latter has stood severer tests of
speed or legibility than the parent system. Not one of them
has done the same amount of difficult work, or has been so
carefully and fairly attested by formal official trial. About
thirty persons have now carried off the Isaac Pitman silver
and gold medals for writing at a speed of from 200 to 250
words per minute, for seven to ten minutes, perfectly new
matter, and transcribed before examiners, free from any grave
errors. Higher rates have been attained for shorter tests,
and the writing read off at once, and not written, and
specially selected matter ; but I have never known any per-
formance that has surpassed or even equalled these, by any
of the so-called " improved " Pitmanic systems, and certainly
none by the non-Pitmanic ones.
No argument is needed to show the importance of having
One Uniform, Universal System.
Personally, I would like to be a writer of the system that
seemed to stand the best chance of reaching that desirable
position. And were I occupying a post in which I had any
influence upon the schools and colleges of a country, I would
use that influence in securing the introduction into these
institutions of that system which had the best prospect of
gaining the precedence ultimately. From the facts presented,
you may judge for yourself, and I think very easily, which
system has the advantage in this respect. What superior
opportunity has the Benn Pitman to climb to the top every-
where, taking into account its construction, its amount ol
literature, or its constituency ? \Yhat the Graham ? \Yhat
any other of the varieties of Pitman ? What chance has
Gregg, Pernin, Cross, or any of the non-Pitmanic systems to
v drown out the practice and the literature of Isaac Pitman, or
even the Benn Pitman or the Graham ? The chances of
success on the part of any but the one of these, to my mind,
seem slim, but you may see it otherwise ; form your own
judgment and act accordingly. Looking at the subject from
my standpoint of long experience and a somewhat wide
observation, and seeking to be divested of any prejudice, it is
a beautiful vision that confronts me: — one system of short-
hand writing, ever growing in efficiency through the combined
wisdom of practical experts, for at least the whole English-
speaking race, having its origin in one continent ; and its in-
dispensable handmaid, the typewriter, springing to its assist-
ance from the other continent, both combining to carry their
rich blessings to aid in the education, commerce, and religion
of humanity generally ! May this vision soon become a reality !
DR. WM. T. HARRIS.
(Formerly Supt. of Schools, St. Louis, Mo.
The Commissioner of Education of the United State.-:, said in his
Riport of 1893 :—
" It will be seen, in the chapter giving the statistics of instruction in Short-
hand in the United States, that the system mainly folio-wed is
that Of Isaac Pitman. Few inventors within the last two hundred years
have been so happy as he in discovering devices that have proved useful in
practice, and at the same time called forth universal admiration for their
theoretic perfection." — Extract from '•'•Circular of Information No. 7"
(Washington, D.C.), 1893.
COURT REPORTERS' ENDORSEMENTS
OF
ISAAC PITMAN'S PHONOGRAPHY.
te^"* The highest authenticated record for ten minutes' continuc
writing from new matter in any system is held by an Isaac Pitma
writer. See particulars in " Pitman's Shorthand and Typewriting Year Book."
Superior to any other.
" I have been a practitioner of the Isaac Pitman system for many years, and believe
it.is superior to any other Although lam personally acquj in ted with many- fast and
accurate writers among the users of the various Pitmanic systems, I regard this fact as ^p
an endorsement for the Isaac Pitman system, because, 'imitation is the sincerest form of Wjt
Mattery.' I can, however, truthfully say that I am not acquainted with, **
nor do I know of by reputation (excepting two veteran Gurney writers), a
single rapid and accurate writer who is not a Pitmanic follower. It
does not follow, of cour:-e, that such dp not exist, but I do know they are not conspicuous
in this vicinity. I am a firm believer in the orthodox manner of teaching and practising
Phonography as laid down in the authorized text-book of the Isaac Pitman system, viz. :
' The Complete Phonographic Instructor,' and am decide lly of the opinion that any
serious departure therefrom will only produce harmful results." — Frank D. Curtis,
Official Stenographer, U.S. Circuit Court, New York Citv.
Compelled to Abandon L«ght=Line.
" For the past twenty-three years I have be.-n an official court stenographer writing
the Isaic Pitman system. In addition to court work, I have reported verbatim political
meetings lor the Press and a n imber of Conventions both in Canada and the United
Stales. All the High Court stenographers in Ontario use the Isaac Pitman or modifi-
cations of it. My assi-tant in court work can easi y read my notes, and, with her assis-
tance in dictating my notes to typewriter operators, I have transcribed a trial of over
i, 300 pages of foolscap in five days. I have yat to meet the court reporler or rapid
stenographer who uses a ' light-line' system. I have met several whj started out with
such systems, but were compelled to give them up and adopt the Isaac Pitman in order
to do fast work." — Wm. C. Coo, Official Court Reporter, London, Ont.
32
TEXAS The system of To-Day.
" I learned the Pernin system nearly five years ago, and used it in office work with
rather indifferent results. I was offered the position of court reporter here in Detroit,
some three years ago, and found that the Pa-nin system was about as good for reporting
as longhand, and hen I could not read it. I finally took the advice of a young court
reporter here, and learned the Isaac Pitman system, and I wish to say that I do not think
there is a system m existence that can compare with it. •! certainly think it is the system
of to-day."— L. B. Caldu-ell, Detroit, Mich.
Equal to every Emergency.
" I find the Isaac Pitman system equal to every emergency, both as to speed and legi
bility. It is a notable fact that the entire English stiff of the Canadian House of Com-
mons, numbering six, are all writers of the Ii-aac Pitman sjstem, ard that eight out of
the eleven English Official Stenographers in Montreal (including the Superior and Police
Courts/ are writers of this system. I believe the ' Shorthand Instructor' the most satis-
factory text-book yet published." — C. F. Larkin, Official Stenographer, Superior Court,
Montreal, Canada.
Wasted no Time on Modern Fads.
" I hav.i been engaged in official court reporting Lir fifteen years. I have never used,
nor desired to use, any o:her system than the old original I-aac Pitman, the only
system found worthy of notice in the great Encyclopedias. A circle can be made no
rounder — a square can b<* made no square • — a perfect system of shorthand can not be im-
proved up >n — therefore I have wasted no time on modern fads and fakes." — John Y.
Mardick, Official Steno ^rapher, Charleston, Mo.
Is more Legible.
" Although a writer of one of the ' modifications ' of the I^aac Pitman system I claim
that the use of the later and Improved Isaac Pitman vowel scale (used by all Britis-h
phonographe s since it* introduction in 857) gives me a better differentiation of outlines.
For instance, with the present Isaac Pitman vowel scale I can at once (without the- aid
of context) disti >guish between at and out ; see and saw ; laivs and lease (construction of
the laws or const- uction of the lease) ; fall and fill ; by-laws and bills, and hund eds of
other words wh'ch I need not mention at this time. I adopt many of the Isaac Pitman
principles, for instance adding dr, tr, and thr after the final hooks, by lengthening the
stems." — Mr, Robert S. Taytor, Official Court Reporter, St. Paul, Min.
High Speed with Legibility.
" The Isiac Pitman system is an admirable one. Avoiding alike the cumbrous, e'e-
mentary fulness >>f some systems, and the grotesque and illegible brevity of others, it
strikes the happy medium ;ind combines theoretical perfection with entire practicability.
This system can be written at a great speed without sacrifice to legibility — an invaluable
quality in court work, where note-; have to be read months and even years after they are
written." — Harold Eyre, Official Stenographer, Municipal Court, New York City.
NO HIGHER INDORSEMENT.
Isaac Pitman's Shorthand
OFFICIALLY ADOPTED BY THE
NEW YORK HIGH SCHOOL OF COMMERCE,
AND
GIRLS' TECHNICAL HIGH SCHOOL.
(Under Control Board of Education).
"Destined to be the two leading commercial educational institutions in the United
States." — N.Y. Commercial Advertiser.
01 C
AT
LOS ANGELES
20th Century
EDITION OF
ISAAC PITMAN'S
Shorthand Instructor.
This work is a new presentation of ISAAC PITMAN'S
system based on the accumulated experience of the past
sixty years, and includes many valuable improvements which
appear for the first time.
Cloth, gilt lettered, 276 pages. Price $1.50.
" I am de'ighted with the Twentieth Century Edition of the ' Instructor.' It is terse,
compact, and comprehensive. In short, it is multum in parvo. Chapter XVIII., on
' Disyllabic Diphthongs ' should be extremely interesting to professional shorthand
writers, because in theological, scientific, and medical reporting, they encounter words
with comparative frequency in which there are more vowels or diphthongs than there are
consonants, and such words are difficult to decipher by the bare consonantal outlines ;
hence an accurate knowledge of the shorthand characters to designate the diphthongs is
very essential. The vari us sections devoted to 'Advanced Phraseography ' illustrate in
a clear and striking manner to what extent one may phrase in accordance with sound
principles, and not adopt a slipshod method of phrasing. These sections deserve special
stress, and should be hailed with delight. In Chapter XXXVII., your admirable elucida-
tion of the principles of intersecting words deserves the highest commendation. Inter-
sections are time-savers, and they can be applied to almost any form of commercial work
or professional reporting, To sum up : Judging from my familiarity with other systems,
I think the majority of those who write the Isaac Pitman system will agree with me when
I say that you have produced the greatest and best one volume text-book on shorthand
that has ever been published." — William Whitford, Medical Stenographer, Chicago, 111.,
Official Stenographer for The Medical Age, The Medical News, etc.
" In its present form it will considerably modify the difficulties for the student who
rectmg some of the awkward outlines which were necessary before, by the introduction of
rules similar to that in Paragraph 82. I welcome these changes as fully in keeping with
the advance of the times."— JV. T. Jackman, Teacher of Isaac Pitman Phonography,
I 'nii'ersity of Vermont, Burlington, Vt.
"'A Ne\v Shorthand Instructor ' has been issued by Pitman and Sons, entirely revised
and improved, designed for class-work or self-instruction. This Twentieth century
edition presents the accumulated experience of over sixty years, and the student has the
benefit of that array r.f data which has made the Pitman shorthand publications standard
authorities wherever they have been introduced." — School, Official Organ of the Public
..herever they
and High Schooh of New York City.
NEW YORK:
Isaac Pitman and Sons, Publishers, 31 Union Square.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
Los Angeles
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.
3AN1
* 7
AUG I* 1950
MAY 2 6
Form fe9-25m-9,'47(A5618) 444
9. it is taught in tne Commercial High Schoo
New York City, Brooklyn, and other large citi
10. The U.S. Commissioner of Education (Dr. W.
Harris) says : " It is the Best system and o
which forms the basis for a hundred or mo
modifications."
UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY •™£Wt
A 000 564 835 7
j
if J7