Typewriter Dictionary, S. A. Moran, 479. Palmer's Expert Reporter, E. M. Palmer, 479. Our Future Life, etc., E. B. Burnz, 479. The Phonographers' Manual, E. M. Palmer, 479. The Tempest, E. M. Palmer, 479. Normal Phonography, W. H. Barlow, 480. New Revised Edition Hall's "Multum in LIST OF WRITERS. W. C. Steere, 1, 33, 163, 225, 337. John G. Bowman, 2, 4. Wm. P. Bullard, 7. Miss E. C. Merrill, 9. L. E. Greene, 15, 122, 40, S1, 199, 435. J. Clayton Youker, 15. Miss Jennie T. Masson, 113. J. B. Bonner, 124. Mamie A. Boland, 125, 157. F. G. Morris, 129. The Colonel, 47, 93, 159, 208, 274. John Ritchie, 50. Miss Nellie F. Sargent, George H, Williams, 57. George R. Bishop, 74. Henry Borst, 75. A. M. Haynes, 80. Edward B. Dickinson, 84. M. T. Nede, 98, 384, 408, 432, 449. I don't know, Sir. I can't tell you. I can't tell a thing about it. Should you ask me, What's the trouble? Then my fingers cramp and tremble, Muscles twitch and toes turn under; Pen sticks fast and has no ink on; No. I. Paper slips away round sideways. Then I think about that fellow That was cast headlong from Heaven- I can't read one word in fifty- I could read both past and future; I could read the marks on tea-chests; I'm no witch or seer or wizard- So, I can't tell you what my speed is, Stanton, Mich. SOME EXPERIENCES WITH SHORTHAND SYSTEMS. One of the first questions asked by a person contemplating the study of shorthand is, "which system is the best ?" He assumes, from something he has heard or read, that there must be one particular system that is superior to every other, irrespective of any question as to its adaptability to the peculiar mental and physical characteristics and qualifications of the individual writer. And this assumption is not to be wondered at when we take into consideration the fact that now and then even a professional writer, with no practical knowledge of shorthand outside of the system that he uses, will unhesitatingly and unqualifiedly affirm that that which he uses is the best and the only practicable system known. That there are several very good systems in present use, with each of which first-class reporting is being done every day, no well informed stenographer can conscientiously deny, but that all the writers who are doing this reporting could do it in a first-class manner if they all wrote any one of the sysJems referred to, is extremely doubtful. For the purpose of showing, in some measure, the necessity for careful investigation and deliberation on the part of the student, before finally adopting any particular system, however satisfactory it may be to other writers, we take pleasure in relating our own experiences with the leading phonographic systems, in endeavoring to determine which of them was best adapted to our individual capabilities and wants. Our first experience was with the Munson system, as set forth in the first edition of "The Complete Phonograper." We found the system to be very complete, harmonious, moderately brief, and very easy to learn. We had no serious difficulty in writing the system until we had attained considerable speed, when we were painfully reminded of the necessity for great care in making proper distinctions in the sizes of the initial hooks on curved stems, and in the representation of the by halving, and is it, is the, and is there by the st and ster loops. We also seemed to be handicapped by the inflexible rule of writing all words not phrased in proper position, which caused us too much restraint upon the hand in its efforts to move rapidly forward, as it had been accustomed by long experience with longhand. After considerable special practice to overcome these difficulties, we decided to test some other system. We next learned the Benn Pitman system of 1861. We found it less easy to learn than the Munson, owing to its exceptional methods of representation; but, on the whole, we were pleased with it for its lineality, its employment of only small initial hooks on straight stems and on most of the curves, and for the principle by which a final hook on a lengthened curve |