The Monmouth inquirer., 1925-04-02
EXCURSIONS IN
SPOND
BY THOMAS ARKLE CLARK
Dean Of Men, University Of Illinois.
Business Details

Observation-Disclosures
Business Details
7 AM doing business pretty regularly
1 every day with young fellows
shrewd, alert, clever young fellows. If
/ call one to the office to talk over
with him his work, or his conduct, he
is quite prepared for me when he
comes in. He has thought out what 1t
Is all about, he anticipates what / will
say, and he is prepared t o meet I'M
criticism or suggestion which l may
make. | have learned that when / can
approach him in a different way from
what he anticipated, IL I am pleasant
when he Is looking for irritation, If /
commend him when he expects criti-
cism, or neglect entirely to mention the
matter that was In his mind, / take
him off his guard, he is unprepared
for my methods, and / am likely to
win.
The same thing is true in the con-
strnction of a business letter. When
1t follows slavishly conventional lines,
when it say just what we thought 1t
would say in the way that such things
are ordinarily said, 1t makes little Inn
preston on us. Originality, surprise,
the unexpected, holds our attention,
and sells the proposition to us more
quickly than the duh routine form can
do.
A good many business men in writ
Ing letters, fight shy of the personal
pronoun Il" and even as individuals
cast themselves in the more general
role Of 1--WE" There is a lack Of per-
~sonality In such a letter, an abortive
attempt to get behind a mythical part
ner, an unwillingness to assume an in
dividual responsibility for what is
said, that seems often weak. The use
Of 1--WE" when writing as the repre-
sentative Of a firm is, of course, unob-
~jectionable. and may often be desir-
able, or necessary, but between indi-
vlduals, it is formal, indirect, and in
effective. It is a sort of pedanticism
which belongs to the time Of our grand
parents.
4 huNC hCFCA GCCn ally ODJCCltOnS "
making the signature to a business
letter at least reasonably ineligible,
although my own often comes far
short Of perfection in that regard. II
the name of the individual signing the
letter appears as a part Of the printed
Or engraved letter head, a tendency
toward illegibility does not matter
quite so much-one can solve the puz-
zle by carefully studying the letter
head-but If the Identity of the writer
hangs wholly upon the signature at
the end of the letter, then some care
should be given to making that de-
cipherable. If one does not write
legibly, he should see to it that his
name appears somewhere on the letter
In printed, or typewriter form. I
have occasionally, In answering a bust
ness letter, had to resort to the device
of cutting the mans signature from
his letter, and FASTING it on the en-
velope in which my answer was en-
closed, and so passing the buck to the
railroad officials, or the local postman.
1t Is very much easier to refuse a re-
quest by letter than by word Of mouth.
One can choose his words more care
fully, one is freer from the embarrass-
ment of personal contact in such a
case, and the matter may be con
Guided in short order. There is no
chance for discussion or argument. 1t
is much simpler to decline a request
fAr a laon on IN 90 n mans Cna4yrffu
or to invest in a friends pet scheme,
when the request is made by mail,
than when 1t is presented personally.
One can think out what he is going to
write, but the personal request often
finds one off his guard.
There should be no ~quibbling In a
business letter. Questions should be
answered directly If an attempt is
made to answer them at all. There is
nothing more annoying than to have
a half answer, or an evasion. When /
say to my lawyer in Minneapolis, IT
should like to have you tell me if the
taxes upon my farm in Trail county
have been paid, and indicate the date
when this was DONE" it is unsatisfac-
tory to have him evade the question
entirely, or to say to me that l have
no cause to worry, and hat every
thing will be all right, as soon as he
can get around to 1t.
In the writing of business letters,
women should be careful to indicate
their sex, and also whether or not
they are married. It is embarrassing
to address a m as mr." or a mar
ried m as Miss" When a WON
an signs only her initials, 1t is impos-
sible, short of omniscience, to deter
mine either her sex or her matrimo-
NAL situation. She should sign at
least one full name as, elizabeth B.
JONES'" and in order that 1t may be
clear as tt whether or not she is mar
ried, she should prefix Miss or
Mrs" to this signature in ~parenthe-
ses. She al thus avoid n misun-
Outstanding.
20 1895. by Western Newspaper Union)