The Pioche weekly record. [volume] (Pioche, Nev.) 1877-1900, 1891-08-06
SHORTHAND WRITING.
The Incompetence Of Some Per-
sons to Learn It.
Very Few of the Many Who Undertake
the Study Ever Become Proficient
Horace Greeley and the
Stenographer.

There is good deal of nonsense writ
ten and talked. both by those who know
and by those who don't, concerning the
possibilities and actual achievements OF
shorthand writing. Not long ago an
elderly woman, accompanied by child
of apparently about thirteen years of
age, appeared before a justice at the
jefferson Market police court and told
pitiful tale. She said that she was a
widow and that the child was her only
daughter; that in order to procure some
employment for the girl she had been
induced to send her to school of type
writing and shorthand. She had paid
to the professor sixty dollars of her
hard earnings and had been informed
and believed that at the conclusion of a
few months tuition this child would be
able to earn fair salary. The pro-
fessor, however, had failed to carry out
his agreement, and at the conclusion of
the tuition she found herself with her
money gone and no probability of the
fulfillment of the promises which had
been made to her. She was informed
by the justice that if she had any
remedy at all it was in civil suit for
damages for breach of contract.
The experience of this child, says the
New York Sun, is but repetition of
the experiences of by far the larger
number of those who attempt to learn
shorthand writing. 1t is fact that but
a very few of those who begin to learn
ever succeed in becoming competent
stenographers. The experience detailed
so graphically and amusingly by Charles
Dickens in the story of David Copper
field" which is said to be in fact the
experience of Dickens himself, is fair
sample of the difficulties with which
the learner has to contend. Few per-
sons, indeed, have the requisite perse-
verance to continue the much-needed
practice in the face of discouraging re-
suits, which is essential before pro-
ficiency can possibly be reached.
Many of these failures might have
been predicted from the start, because
of the utter disqualification of the
learner on account of the lack of the
preliminary study and training and
knowledge which are necessary to
make competent stenographer. 1t
must be borne in mind that the SUBJ
jects which may possibly be presented
for accurate reporting comprise the en-
tire field of human knowledge. There
is no department. of science, literature
or art which may not some time or
other appear in the course of speeches,
of arguments, of lectures, of briefs, of
dissertations, of debates, or of dictation.
There is, OF course, no stenographer
who is so thoroughly familiar with the
vocabulary even of his own language, in
all departments of study, as to be able
on the spur of the moment to report ac-
curately all kinds of scientific matter.
There are, in fact, but very few of the
most reliable stenographers in this or
any other country who can be relied
upon to give a verbatim report of
scientific congress. How futile, how
foolish, must it be, then, for mere chill
dren, for persons without even the
parliamentary clements of education, to
undertake to qualify themselves for such
a business. And yet there are shorthand
schools and professors of shorthand
that take the money of pupils who at
tempt this impossible task, when it is
known at the beginning that the money
so expended is really thrown away by
the pupils.
1t was related of the late Horace
Greeley that upon one occasion an in
competent stenographer was employed
by him TO take at dictation political
speech. Mr.. Greeley talked away with
great earnestness and volubility upon
subject with which he was entirely
familiar, using the names of many
prominent public men in the present
and past generation, referring to vari-
GUS public measures of the times, until
he had reeled off, as he supposed, con-
siderable address. 1t SO happened that
the stenographer was thoroughly UNI
familiar with about every subject of
which the great philosopher had treated
and his manuscript when presented for
review proved to be so crowded with err
rors and omissions and misspelling of
names and misapprehension of what
Mr.. Greeley had said that it was entirely
useless, and with that force for which
Mr.. Greeley was renowned among those
who knew him, the founder of the
Tribune exclaimed: "What the deuce
is stenography worth?"
There are limits to shorthand, Every
honest stenographer will admit that no
person is able to report the most rapid
speakers or to follow with accuracy an
argument which consists of many refer
ences to scientific books and contains
quotations which must be accurately re.
corded. In practice, wherever speaker
makes use of many quotations, particu-
larly of poetry or of statistics, the stem
ographer is always anxious to be sup
piled with the quoted parts. Among
the very best stenographers the prac-
tical impossibility of one writer being
able to record the most difficult speak
ing with accuracy is so well recognized
that in the most important cases a sys-
of check notes is always observed, so
that points which may be missed by one
writer will be caught by another. This
is really not an unusual practice, and it
has been found to be absolutely essen
tial in many cases.