Everything that has been written upon every subject in all general, technical, and school magazines, can be found by looking up the desired topic in:  The Reader’s Guide to Periodical Literature, or Poole’s Index.

If the matter being studied deals with civics, economics, or sociology, look in:  Bliss, Encyclopaedia of Social Reform, etc.; Lalor, Cyclopaedia of Political Science, etc.; Larned, History of Ready Reference and Topical Reading; Bowker and lies, Reader’s Guide in Economics, etc.

What Congress is doing and has done is often important.  This can be found in full in:  The Congressional Record.

Jones’s Finding List tells where to look for any topic in various government publications.

In studying many subjects the need of definite and reliable statistics will be felt.  These may be found on almost any question in the following publications:  Statesman’s Yearbook, Whitaker’s Almanac, World Almanac, Chicago Daily News Almanac, Hazell’s Almanac, U.S.  Census Reports.

Never consider your reading completed until you have looked for any special book that may be written upon your subject in the Card Catalogue of your Library.

Make out a Bibliography or Reading List (as illustrated briefly in Appendix V) before you proceed to actual reading.

APPENDIX II

ILLUSTRATIONS OF ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE THE ISSUES OF THE QUESTION

The two specimens that immediately follow are analyses of the same question by students of the same university.  The first is a selection from the speech made by Mr. Raymond S. Pruitt in the Towle Debate of Northwestern University Law School in 1911.  The second is the introduction to the speech made by Mr. Charles Watson of the Northwestern University Law School in the 1911 debate with the Law School of the University of Southern California.  Students should observe how the two speakers determine somewhat different issues.

Resolved, That in actions against an employer for death or injury of an employee sustained in the course of an industrial employment the fellow-servant rule and the rule of the assumption of risk as defined and interpreted by the common law, should be abolished.

Mr. Pruitt, speaking for the affirmative: 

The question which we discuss tonight is partly economic and partly legal.  By that I mean that viewing it from the standpoint of legal liability, we possibly can agree with the gentlemen of the Negative that the employer should respond in damages to his injured employee, only when the injury has been caused by the employer’s own fault.  But, on the other hand, viewing the same problem from an economic standpoint, you cannot deny, that, when through no fault of his own, a worker is injured in the course of an industrial