Download the Full Version of textbook for Fast Typing at textbookfull.

com

How to Prove It: A Structured Approach Daniel J.

Velleman

https://textbookfull.com/product/how-to-prove-it-a-
structured-approach-daniel-j-velleman/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWNLOAD NOW

Download More textbook Instantly Today - Get Yours Now at textbookfull.com

 Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.

How to Prove It Solutions Manual Third Edition Daniel

Velleman

https://textbookfull.com/product/how-to-prove-it-solutions-manual-
third-edition-daniel-velleman/

textboxfull.com

Market Segmentation How to Do It and How to Profit from It

Mcdonald

https://textbookfull.com/product/market-segmentation-how-to-do-it-and-
how-to-profit-from-it-mcdonald/

textboxfull.com

Convinced How to Prove Your Competence Win People Over 1st

Edition Jack Nasher

https://textbookfull.com/product/convinced-how-to-prove-your-
competence-win-people-over-1st-edition-jack-nasher/

textboxfull.com

Convinced How to Prove Your Competence Win People Over 1st

Edition Jack Nasher

https://textbookfull.com/product/convinced-how-to-prove-your-
competence-win-people-over-1st-edition-jack-nasher-2/

textboxfull.com
Prove It Do or Die Book 1 MM 1st Edition Stephanie Hoyt

https://textbookfull.com/product/prove-it-do-or-die-book-1-mm-1st-
edition-stephanie-hoyt/

textboxfull.com

Public Health What It Is and How It Works 6th Edition

Bernard J. Turnock

https://textbookfull.com/product/public-health-what-it-is-and-how-it-
works-6th-edition-bernard-j-turnock/

textboxfull.com

The IT Support Handbook: A How-To Guide to Providing

Effective Help and Support to IT Users Mike Halsey

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-it-support-handbook-a-how-to-
guide-to-providing-effective-help-and-support-to-it-users-mike-halsey/

textboxfull.com

A Critical Introduction to Knowledge How J. Adam Carter

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-critical-introduction-to-knowledge-
how-j-adam-carter/

textboxfull.com

How To Analyze People 1st Edition Daniel Spade

https://textbookfull.com/product/how-to-analyze-people-1st-edition-
daniel-spade/

textboxfull.com
How To Prove It
HOW TO PROVE IT

A Structured Approach
Third Edition

Daniel J. Velleman
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
Amherst College
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
University of Vermont
University Printing House, Cambridge CB2 8BS, United Kingdom
One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor, New York, NY 10006, USA
477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia
314–321, 3rd Floor, Plot 3, Splendor Forum, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi – 110025, India
79 Anson Road, #06–04/06, Singapore 079906
Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.
It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of education, learning,
and research at the highest international levels of excellence.
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781108424189
DOI: 10.1017/9781108539890
© Daniel J. Velleman 2019
This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant
collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published 1994
Second edition 2006
Third edition 2019
Printed in the United Kingdom by TJ International Ltd, Padstow Cornwall
A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Velleman, Daniel J., author.
Title: How to prove it : a structured approach / Daniel J. Velleman (Amherst College, Massachusetts).
Description: Third edition. | Cambridge ; New York, NY : Cambridge University Press, [2019] |
Includes index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2019013488| ISBN 9781108424189 (hardback : alk. paper) | ISBN
9781108439534 (pbk. : alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Logic, Symbolic and mathematical–Textbooks. | Mathematics–Textbooks. | Proof
theory–Textbooks.
Classification: LCC QA9.V38 2019 | DDC 511.3–dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019013488
ISBN 978-1-108-42418-9 Hardback
ISBN 978-1-108-43953-4 Paperback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for
external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any
content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
To Shelley
 Contents

Preface to the Third Edition

Introduction

1 Sentential Logic
1.1 Deductive Reasoning and Logical Connectives
1.2 Truth Tables
1.3 Variables and Sets
1.4 Operations on Sets
1.5 The Conditional and Biconditional Connectives

2 Quantificational Logic
2.1 Quantifiers
2.2 Equivalences Involving Quantifiers
2.3 More Operations on Sets

3 Proofs
3.1 Proof Strategies
3.2 Proofs Involving Negations and Conditionals
3.3 Proofs Involving Quantifiers
3.4 Proofs Involving Conjunctions and Biconditionals
3.5 Proofs Involving Disjunctions
3.6 Existence and Uniqueness Proofs
3.7 More Examples of Proofs

4 Relations
4.1 Ordered Pairs and Cartesian Products
4.2 Relations
 4.3 More About Relations
4.4 Ordering Relations
4.5 Equivalence Relations

5 Functions
5.1 Functions
5.2 One-to-One and Onto
5.3 Inverses of Functions
5.4 Closures
5.5 Images and Inverse Images: A Research Project

6 Mathematical Induction
6.1 Proof by Mathematical Induction
6.2 More Examples
6.3 Recursion
6.4 Strong Induction
6.5 Closures Again

7 Number Theory
7.1 Greatest Common Divisors
7.2 Prime Factorization
7.3 Modular Arithmetic
7.4 Euler’s Theorem
7.5 Public-Key Cryptography

8 Infinite Sets
8.1 Equinumerous Sets
8.2 Countable and Uncountable Sets
8.3 The Cantor-Schrӧder-Bernstein Theorem

Appendix: Solutions to Selected Exercises

Suggestions for Further Reading
Summary of Proof Techniques
Index
 Preface to the Third Edition

Students of mathematics and computer science often have trouble the first
time they’re asked to work seriously with mathematical proofs, because
they don’t know the “rules of the game.” What is expected of you if you are
asked to prove something? What distinguishes a correct proof from an
incorrect one? This book is intended to help students learn the answers to
these questions by spelling out the underlying principles involved in the
construction of proofs.
Many students get their first exposure to mathematical proofs in a high
school course on geometry. Unfortunately, students in high school geometry
are usually taught to think of a proof as a numbered list of statements and
reasons, a view of proofs that is too restrictive to be very useful. There is a
parallel with computer science here that can be instructive. Early
programming languages encouraged a similar restrictive view of computer
programs as numbered lists of instructions. Now computer scientists have
moved away from such languages and teach programming by using
languages that encourage an approach called “structured programming.”
The discussion of proofs in this book is inspired by the belief that many of
the considerations that have led computer scientists to embrace the
structured approach to programming apply to proof writing as well. You
might say that this book teaches “structured proving.”
In structured programming, a computer program is constructed, not by
listing instructions one after another, but by combining certain basic
structures such as the if-else construct and do-while loop of the Java
programming language. These structures are combined, not only by listing
them one after another, but also by nesting one within another. For example,
a program constructed by nesting an if-else construct within a do-while loop
would look like this:
do
 if [condition]
[List of instructions goes here.]
else
[Alternative list of instructions goes here.]
while [condition]
The indenting in this program outline is not absolutely necessary, but it is a
convenient method often used in computer science to display the underlying
structure of a program.
Mathematical proofs are also constructed by combining certain basic
proof structures. For example, a proof of a statement of the form “if P then
Q” often uses what might be called the “suppose-until” structure: we
suppose that P is true until we are able to reach the conclusion that Q is
true, at which point we retract this supposition and conclude that the
statement “if P then Q” is true. Another example is the “for arbitrary x
prove” structure: to prove a statement of the form “for all x, P(x),” we
declare x to be an arbitrary object and then prove P (x). Once we reach the
conclusion that P(x) is true we retract the declaration of x as arbitrary and
conclude that the statement “for all x, P(x)” is true. Furthermore, to prove
more complex statements these structures are often combined, not only by
listing one after another, but also by nesting one within another. For
example, to prove a statement of the form “for all x, if P(x) then Q(x)” we
would probably nest a “suppose-until” structure within a “for arbitrary x
prove” structure, getting a proof of this form:
Let x be arbitrary.
Suppose P(x) is true.
[Proof of Q(x) goes here.]
Thus, if P(x) then Q(x).
Thus, for all x, if P(x) then Q(x).
As before, we have used indenting to make the underlying structure of the
proof clear.
Of course, mathematicians don’t ordinarily write their proofs in this
indented form. Our aim in this book is to teach students to write proofs in
ordinary paragraphs, just as mathematicians do, and not in the indented
form. Nevertheless, our approach is based on the belief that if students are
to succeed at writing such proofs, they must understand the underlying
structure that proofs have. They must learn, for example, that sentences like
“Let x be arbitrary” and “Suppose P” are not isolated steps in proofs, but
are used to introduce the “for arbitrary x prove” and “suppose-until” proof
structures. It is not uncommon for beginning students to use these sentences
inappropriately in other ways. Such mistakes are analogous to the
programming error of using a “do” with no matching “while.”
Note that in our examples, the choice of proof structure is guided by the
logical form of the statement being proven. For this reason, the book begins
with elementary logic to familiarize students with the various forms that
mathematical statements take. Chapter 1 discusses logical connectives, and
quantifiers are introduced in Chapter 2. These chapters also present the
basics of set theory, because it is an important subject that is used in the rest
of the book (and throughout mathematics), and also because it serves to
illustrate many of the points of logic discussed in these chapters.
Chapter 3 covers structured proving techniques in a systematic way,
running through the various forms that mathematical statements can take
and discussing the proof structures appropriate for each form. The examples
of proofs in this chapter are for the most part chosen, not for their
mathematical content, but for the proof structures they illustrate. This is
especially true early in the chapter, when only a few proof techniques have
been discussed, and as a result many of the proofs in this part of the chapter
are rather trivial. As the chapter progresses, the proofs get more
sophisticated and more interesting, mathematically.
Chapters 4 and 5, on relations and functions, serve two purposes. First,
they provide subject matter on which students can practice the proof-
writing techniques from Chapter 3. And second, they introduce students to
some fundamental concepts used in all branches of mathematics.
Chapter 6 is devoted to a method of proof that is very important in both
mathematics and computer science: mathematical induction. The
presentation builds on the techniques from Chapter 3, which students
should have mastered by this point in the book.
After completing Chapter 6, students should be ready to tackle more
substantial mathematical topics. Two such topics are presented in Chapters
7 and 8. Chapter 7, new in this third edition, gives an introduction to
number theory, and Chapter 8 discusses infinite cardinalities. These
chapters give students more practice with mathematical proofs, and they
also provide a glimpse of what more advanced mathematics is like.
Every section of every chapter ends with a list of exercises. Some
exercises are marked with an asterisk; solutions or hints for these exercises
are given in the appendix. Exercises marked with the symbol PD can be done
using Proof Designer software, which is available free on the internet.
The biggest changes in this third edition are the addition of a new chapter
on number theory and also more than 150 additional exercises. The section
on reflexive, symmetric, and transitive closures of relations has been
deleted from Chapter 4 (although these topics are now introduced in some
exercises in Section 4.4); it has been replaced with a new section in Chapter
5 on closures of sets under functions. There are also numerous small
changes throughout the text.
I would like to thank all those who sent me comments about earlier
editions of this book. In particular, John Corcoran and Raymond Boute
made several helpful suggestions. I am also grateful for advice from
Jonathan Sands and several anonymous reviewers.
 Introduction

What is mathematics? High school mathematics is concerned mostly with

solving equations and computing answers to numerical questions. College
mathematics deals with a wider variety of questions, involving not only
numbers, but also sets, functions, and other mathematical objects. What ties
them together is the use of deductive reasoning to find the answers to
questions. When you solve an equation for x you are using the information
given by the equation to deduce what the value of x must be. Similarly,
when mathematicians solve other kinds of mathematical problems, they
always justify their conclusions with deductive reasoning.
Deductive reasoning in mathematics is usually presented in the form of a
proof. One of the main purposes of this book is to help you develop your
mathematical reasoning ability in general, and in particular your ability to
read and write proofs. In later chapters we’ll study how proofs are
constructed in detail, but first let’s take a look at a few examples of proofs.
Don’t worry if you have trouble understanding these proofs. They’re just
intended to give you a taste of what mathematical proofs are like. In some
cases you may be able to follow many of the steps of the proof, but you
may be puzzled about why the steps are combined in the way they are, or
how anyone could have thought of the proof. If so, we ask you to be patient.
Many of these questions will be answered later in this book, particularly in
Chapter 3.
All of our examples of proofs in this introduction will involve prime
numbers. Recall that an integer larger than 1 is said to be prime if it cannot
be written as a product of two smaller positive integers. If it can be written
as a product of two smaller positive integers, then it is composite. For
example, 6 is a composite number, since 6 = 2 · 3, but 7 is a prime number.
Before we can give an example of a proof involving prime numbers, we
need to find something to prove – some fact about prime numbers whose
correctness can be verified with a proof. Sometimes you can find interesting
patterns in mathematics just by trying out a calculation on a few numbers.
For example, consider the table in Figure I.1. For each integer n from 2 to
10, the table shows whether or not both n and 2n − 1 are prime, and a
surprising pattern emerges. It appears that 2n − 1 is prime in precisely those
cases in which n is prime!

Figure I.1.

Will this pattern continue? It is tempting to guess that it will, but this is
only a guess. Mathematicians call such guesses conjectures. Thus, we have
the following two conjectures:

Conjecture 1. Suppose n is an integer larger than 1 and n is prime. Then 2n

− 1 is prime.
Conjecture 2. Suppose n is an integer larger than 1 and n is not prime.
Then 2n − 1 is not prime.
Unfortunately, if we continue the table in Figure I.1, we immediately find
that Conjecture 1 is incorrect. It is easy to check that 11 is prime, but 211 −
1 = 2047 = 23·89, so 211 − 1 is composite. Thus, 11 is a counterexample to
Conjecture 1. The existence of even one counterexample establishes that the
conjecture is incorrect, but it is interesting to note that in this case there are
many counterexamples. If we continue checking numbers up to 30, we find
two more counterexamples to Conjecture 1: both 23 and 29 are prime, but
223 − 1 = 8,388,607 = 47 · 178,481 and 229 − 1 = 536,870,911 = 2,089 ·
256,999. However, no number up to 30 is a counterexample to Conjecture
2.
 Do you think that Conjecture 2 is correct? Having found
counterexamples to Conjecture 1, we know that this conjecture is incorrect,
but our failure to find a counterexample to Conjecture 2 does not show that
it is correct. Perhaps there are counterexamples, but the smallest one is
larger than 30. Continuing to check examples might uncover a
counterexample, or, if it doesn’t, it might increase our confidence in the
conjecture. But we can never be sure that the conjecture is correct if we
only check examples. No matter how many examples we check, there is
always the possibility that the next one will be the first counterexample.
The only way we can be sure that Conjecture 2 is correct is to prove it.
In fact, Conjecture 2 is correct. Here is a proof of the conjecture:
Proof of Conjecture 2. Since n is not prime, there are positive integers a and
b such that a < n, b < n, and n = ab. Let x = 2b − 1 and y = 1 + 2b + 22b + · ·
· + 2(a − 1)b. Then

Since b < n, we can conclude that x = 2b − 1 < 2n − 1. Also, since ab = n

> a, it follows that b > 1. Therefore, x = 2b − 1 > 21 − 1 = 1, so y < xy = 2n
− 1. Thus, we have shown that 2n − 1 can be written as the product of two
positive integers x and y, both of which are smaller than 2n − 1, so 2n − 1 is
not prime.
□
Now that the conjecture has been proven, we can call it a theorem. Don’t
worry if you find the proof somewhat mysterious. We’ll return to it again at
the end of Chapter 3 to analyze how it was constructed. For the moment,
the most important point to understand is that if n is any integer larger than
1 that can be written as a product of two smaller positive integers a and b,
then the proof gives a method (admittedly, a somewhat mysterious one) of
writing 2n − 1 as a product of two smaller positive integers x and y. Thus, if
n is not prime, then 2n − 1 must also not be prime. For example, suppose n
= 12, so 2n − 1 = 4095. Since 12 = 3 · 4, we could take a = 3 and b = 4 in
the proof. Then according to the formulas for x and y given in the proof, we
b
would have x = 2b − 1 = 24 − 1 = 15 and y = 1 + 2b + 22 + · · · + 2(a − 1)b =
1 + 24 + 28 = 273. And, just as the formulas in the proof predict, we have xy
= 15 · 273 = 4095 = 2n − 1. Of course, there are other ways of factoring 12
into a product of two smaller integers, and these might lead to other ways of
factoring 4095. For example, since 12 = 2 · 6, we could use the values a = 2
and b = 6. Try computing the corresponding values of x and y and make
sure their product is 4095.
Although we already know that Conjecture 1 is incorrect, there are still
interesting questions we can ask about it. If we continue checking prime
numbers n to see if 2n − 1 is prime, will we continue to find
counterexamples to the conjecture – examples for which 2n − 1 is not
prime? Will we continue to find examples for which 2n − 1 is prime? If
there were only finitely many prime numbers, then we might be able to
investigate these questions by simply checking 2n − 1 for every prime
number n. But in fact there are infinitely many prime numbers. Euclid
(circa 300 BCE) gave a proof of this fact in Book IX of his Elements. His
proof is one of the most famous in all of mathematics:1

Theorem 3. There are infinitely many prime numbers.

Proof. Suppose there are only finitely many prime numbers. Let p1, p2, . . . ,
pn be a list of all prime numbers. Let m = p1p2 · · · pn + 1. Note that m is not
divisible by p1, since dividing m by p1 gives a quotient of p2p3 · · · pn and a
remainder of 1. Similarly, m is not divisible by any of p2, p3, . . . , pn.
We now use the fact that every integer larger than 1 is either prime or can
be written as a product of two or more primes. (We’ll see a proof of this fact
in Chapter 6 – see Theorem 6.4.2.) Clearly m is larger than 1, so m is either
prime or a product of primes. Suppose first that m is prime. Note that m is
larger than all of the numbers in the list p1, p2, . . . , pn, so we’ve found a
prime number not in this list. But this contradicts our assumption that this
was a list of all prime numbers.
Now suppose m is a product of primes. Let q be one of the primes in this
product. Then m is divisible by q. But we’ve already seen that m is not
divisible by any of the numbers in the list p1, p2, . . . , pn, so once again we
have a contradiction with the assumption that this list included all prime
numbers.
Since the assumption that there are finitely many prime numbers has led
to a contradiction, there must be infinitely many prime numbers.
□
Once again, you should not be concerned if some aspects of this proof
seem mysterious. After you’ve read Chapter 3 you’ll be better prepared to
understand the proof in detail. We’ll return to this proof then and analyze its
structure.
We have seen that if n is not prime then 2n − 1 cannot be prime, but if n is
prime then 2n − 1 can be either prime or composite. Because there are
infinitely many prime numbers, there are infinitely many numbers of the
form 2n − 1 that, based on what we know so far, might be prime. But how
many of them are prime?
Prime numbers of the form 2n − 1 are called Mersenne primes, after
Father Marin Mersenne (1588–1648), a French monk and scholar who
studied these numbers. Although many Mersenne primes have been found,
it is still not known if there are infinitely many of them. Many of the largest
known prime numbers are Mersenne primes. As of this writing (February
2019), the largest known prime number is the Mersenne prime 282,589,933 −
1, a number with 24,862,048 digits.
Mersenne primes are related to perfect numbers, the subject of another
famous unsolved problem of mathematics. A positive integer n is said to be
perfect if n is equal to the sum of all positive integers smaller than n that
divide n. (For any two integers m and n, we say that m divides n if n is
divisible by m; in other words, if there is an integer q such that n = qm.) For
example, the only positive integers smaller than 6 that divide 6 are 1, 2, and
3, and 1+ 2+ 3 = 6. Thus, 6 is a perfect number. The next smallest perfect
number is 28. (You should check for yourself that 28 is perfect by finding
all the positive integers smaller than 28 that divide 28 and adding them up.)
Euclid proved that if 2n − 1 is prime, then 2n−1(2n − 1) is perfect. Thus,
every Mersenne prime gives rise to a perfect number. Furthermore, about
2000 years after Euclid’s proof, the Swiss mathematician Leonhard Euler
(1707–1783), the most prolific mathematician in history, proved that every
even perfect number arises in this way. (For example, note that 6 = 21(22 −
1) and 28 = 22(23 − 1).) Because it is not known if there are infinitely many
Mersenne primes, it is also not known if there are infinitely many even
perfect numbers. It is also not known if there are any odd perfect numbers.
For proofs of the theorems of Euclid and Euler, see exercises 18 and 19 in
Section 7.4.
Although there are infinitely many prime numbers, the primes thin out as
we look at larger and larger numbers. For example, there are 25 primes
between 1 and 100, 16 primes between 1001 and 1100, and only six primes
between 1,000,001 and 1,000,100. As our last introductory example of a
proof, we show that there are long stretches of consecutive positive integers
containing no primes at all. In this proof, we’ll use the following
terminology: for any positive integer n, the product of all integers from 1 to
n is called n factorial and is denoted n!. Thus, n! = 1 · 2 · 3 · · · n. As with
our previous two proofs, we’ll return to this proof at the end of Chapter 3 to
analyze its structure.

Theorem 4. For every positive integer n, there is a sequence of n

consecutive positive integers containing no primes.
Proof. Suppose n is a positive integer. Let x = (n + 1)! +2. We will show
that none of the numbers x, x + 1, x + 2, . . . , x + (n − 1) is prime. Since this
is a sequence of n consecutive positive integers, this will prove the theorem.
To see that x is not prime, note that

Thus, x can be written as a product of two smaller positive integers, so x is

not prime.
Similarly, we have

so x + 1 is also not prime. In general, consider any number x + i, where 0 ≤ i

≤ n − 1. Then we have
so x + i is not prime.
□
Theorem 4 shows that there are sometimes long stretches between one
prime and the next prime. But primes also sometimes occur close together.
Since 2 is the only even prime number, the only pair of consecutive integers
that are both prime is 2 and 3. But there are lots of pairs of primes that
differ by only two, for example, 5 and 7, 29 and 31, and 7949 and 7951.
Such pairs of primes are called twin primes. It is not known whether there
are infinitely many twin primes.
Recently, significant progress has been made on the twin primes
question. In 2013, Yitang Zhang (1955–) proved that there is a positive
integer d ≤ 70,000,000 such that there are infinitely many pairs of prime
numbers that differ by d. Work of many other mathematicians in 2013–14
narrowed down the possibilities for d to d ≤ 246. Of course, if the statement
holds with d = 2 then there are infinitely many twin primes.

Exercises
Note: Solutions or hints for exercises marked with an asterisk (*) are given
in the appendix.

*1. (a) Factor 215 − 1 = 32,767 into a product of two smaller positive
integers.
(b) Find an integer x such that 1 < x < 232,767 − 1 and 232,767 − 1 is
divisible by x.
2. Make some conjectures about the values of n for which 3n − 1 is
prime or the values of n for which 3n − 2n is prime. (You might start
by making a table similar to Figure I.1.)
*3. The proof of Theorem 3 gives a method for finding a prime number
different from any in a given list of prime numbers.
(a) Use this method to find a prime different from 2, 3, 5, and 7.
(b) Use this method to find a prime different from 2, 5, and 11.
4. Find five consecutive integers that are not prime.
5. Use the table in Figure I.1 and the discussion on p. 5 to find two more
perfect numbers.
6. The sequence 3, 5, 7 is a list of three prime numbers such that each
pair of adjacent numbers in the list differ by two. Are there any more
such “triplet primes”?
7. A pair of distinct positive integers (m, n) is called amicable if the sum
of all positive integers smaller than n that divide n is m, and the sum
of all positive integers smaller than m that divide m is n. Show that
(220, 284) is amicable.
1
Euclid phrased the theorem and proof somewhat differently. We have chosen to take a more
modern approach in our presentation.
 1

Sentential Logic

1.1 Deductive Reasoning and Logical

Connectives
As we saw in the introduction, proofs play a central role in mathematics,
and deductive reasoning is the foundation on which proofs are based.
Therefore, we begin our study of mathematical reasoning and proofs by
examining how deductive reasoning works.

Example 1.1.1. Here are three examples of deductive reasoning:

1. It will either rain or snow tomorrow.
It’s too warm for snow.
Therefore, it will rain.
2. If today is Sunday, then I don’t have to go to work today.
Today is Sunday.
Therefore, I don’t have to go to work today.
3. I will go to work either tomorrow or today.
I’m going to stay home today.
Therefore, I will go to work tomorrow.
In each case, we have arrived at a conclusion from the assumption that
some other statements, called premises, are true. For example, the premises
in argument 3 are the statements “I will go to work either tomorrow or
today” and “I’m going to stay home today.” The conclusion is “I will go to
work tomorrow,” and it seems to be forced on us somehow by the premises.
But is this conclusion really correct? After all, isn’t it possible that I’ll
stay home today, and then wake up sick tomorrow and end up staying home
again? If that happened, the conclusion would turn out to be false. But
notice that in that case the first premise, which said that I would go to work
either tomorrow or today, would be false as well! Although we have no
guarantee that the conclusion is true, it can only be false if at least one of
the premises is also false. If both premises are true, we can be sure that the
conclusion is also true. This is the sense in which the conclusion is forced
on us by the premises, and this is the standard we will use to judge the
correctness of deductive reasoning. We will say that an argument is valid if
the premises cannot all be true without the conclusion being true as well.
All three of the arguments in our example are valid arguments.
Here’s an example of an invalid deductive argument:
Either the butler is guilty or the maid is guilty.
Either the maid is guilty or the cook is guilty.
Therefore, either the butler is guilty or the cook is guilty.
The argument is invalid because the conclusion could be false even if both
premises are true. For example, if the maid were guilty, but the butler and
the cook were both innocent, then both premises would be true and the
conclusion would be false.
We can learn something about what makes an argument valid by
comparing the three arguments in Example 1.1.1. On the surface it might
seem that arguments 2 and 3 have the most in common, because they’re
both about the same subject: attendance at work. But in terms of the
reasoning used, arguments 1 and 3 are the most similar. They both introduce
two possibilities in the first premise, rule out the second one with the
second premise, and then conclude that the first possibility must be the
case. In other words, both arguments have the form:
P or Q.
Not Q.
Therefore, P.
It is this form, and not the subject matter, that makes these arguments valid.
You can see that argument 1 has this form by thinking of the letter P as
standing for the statement “It will rain tomorrow,” and Q as standing for “It
will snow tomorrow.” For argument 3, P would be “I will go to work
tomorrow,” and Q would be “I will go to work today.”
 Replacing certain statements in each argument with letters, as we have in
stating the form of arguments 1 and 3, has two advantages. First, it keeps us
from being distracted by aspects of the arguments that don’t affect their
validity. You don’t need to know anything about weather forecasting or
work habits to recognize that arguments 1 and 3 are valid. That’s because
both arguments have the form shown earlier, and you can tell that this
argument form is valid without even knowing what P and Q stand for. If
you don’t believe this, consider the following argument:
Either the framger widget is misfiring, or the wrompal mechanism is out
of alignment.
I’ve checked the alignment of the wrompal mechanism, and it’s fine.
Therefore, the framger widget is misfiring.
If a mechanic gave this explanation after examining your car, you might
still be mystified about why the car won’t start, but you’d have no trouble
following his logic!
Perhaps more important, our analysis of the forms of arguments 1 and 3
makes clear what is important in determining their validity: the words or
and not. In most deductive reasoning, and in particular in mathematical
reasoning, the meanings of just a few words give us the key to
understanding what makes a piece of reasoning valid or invalid. (Which are
the important words in argument 2 in Example 1.1.1?) The first few
chapters of this book are devoted to studying those words and how they are
used in mathematical writing and reasoning.
In this chapter, we’ll concentrate on words used to combine statements to
form more complex statements. We’ll continue to use letters to stand for
statements, but only for unambiguous statements that are either true or
false. Questions, exclamations, and vague statements will not be allowed. It
will also be useful to use symbols, sometimes called connective symbols, to
stand for some of the words used to combine statements. Here are our first
three connective symbols and the words they stand for:
 Thus, if P and Q stand for two statements, then we’ll write P ∨ Q to
stand for the statement “P or Q,” P ∧ Q for “P and Q,” and ¬P for “not P
“or “P is false.” The statement P ∨ Q is sometimes called the disjunction of
P and Q, P ∧ Q is called the conjunction of P and Q, and ¬ P is called the
negation of P.

Example 1.1.2. Analyze the logical forms of the following statements:

1. Either John went to the store, or we’re out of eggs.
2. Joe is going to leave home and not come back.
3. Either Bill is at work and Jane isn’t, or Jane is at work and Bill isn’t.
Solutions
1. If we let P stand for the statement “John went to the store” and Q
stand for “We’re out of eggs,” then this statement could be
represented symbolically as P ∨ Q.
2. If we let P stand for the statement “Joe is going to leave home” and Q
stand for “Joe is not going to come back,” then we could represent
this statement symbolically as P ∧ Q. But this analysis misses an
important feature of the statement, because it doesn’t indicate that Q
is a negative statement. We could get a better analysis by letting R
stand for the statement “Joe is going to come back” and then writing
the statement Q as ¬R. Plugging this into our first analysis of the
original statement, we get the improved analysis P ∧ ¬R.
3. Let B stand for the statement “Bill is at work” and J for the statement
“Jane is at work.” Then the first half of the statement, “Bill is at work
and Jane isn’t,” can be represented as B ∧ ¬J. Similarly, the second
half is J ∧ ¬B. To represent the entire statement, we must combine
these two with or, forming their disjunction, so the solution is (B ∧
¬J) ∨ (J ∧ ¬B).
Notice that in analyzing the third statement in the preceding example, we
added parentheses when we formed the disjunction of B ∧ ¬J and J ∧ ¬B to
indicate unambiguously which statements were being combined. This is
like the use of parentheses in algebra, in which, for example, the product of
a + b and a − b would be written (a + b) · (a − b), with the parentheses
serving to indicate unambiguously which quantities are to be multiplied. As
in algebra, it is convenient in logic to omit some parentheses to make our
expressions shorter and easier to read. However, we must agree on some
conventions about how to read such expressions so that they are still
unambiguous. One convention is that the symbol ¬ always applies only to
the statement that comes immediately after it. For example, ¬P ∧ Q means
(¬P) ∧ Q rather than ¬(P ∧ Q). We’ll see some other conventions about
parentheses later.

Example 1.1.3. What English sentences are represented by the following

expressions?

1. (¬S ∧ L) ∨ S, where S stands for “John is smart” and L stands for

“John is lucky.”
2. ¬S ∧ (L ∨ S), where S and L have the same meanings as before.
3. ¬(S ∧ L) ∨ S, with S and L still as before.
Solutions
1. Either John isn’t smart and he is lucky, or he’s smart.
2. John isn’t smart, and either he’s lucky or he’s smart. Notice how the
placement of the word either in English changes according to where
the parentheses are.
3. Either John isn’t both smart and lucky, or John is smart. The word
both in English also helps distinguish the different possible positions
of parentheses.

It is important to keep in mind that the symbols ∧, ∨, and ¬ don’t really

correspond to all uses of the words and, or, and not in English. For
example, the symbol ∧ could not be used to represent the use of the word
and in the sentence “John and Bill are friends,” because in this sentence the
word and is not being used to combine two statements. The symbols ∧ and
∨ can only be used between two statements, to form their conjunction or
disjunction, and the symbol ¬ can only be used before a statement, to
negate it. This means that certain strings of letters and symbols are simply
meaningless. For example, P ¬ ∧ Q, P ∧ ∨ Q, and P ¬ Q are all
“ungrammatical” expressions in the language of logic. “Grammatical”
expressions, such as those in Examples 1.1.2 and 1.1.3, are sometimes
called well-formed formulas or just formulas. Once again, it may be helpful
to think of an analogy with algebra, in which the symbols +, −, ·, and ÷ can
be used between two numbers, as operators, and the symbol − can also be
used before a number, to negate it. These are the only ways that these
symbols can be used in algebra, so expressions such as x − ÷ y are
meaningless.
Sometimes, words other than and, or, and not are used to express the
meanings represented by ∧, ∨, and ¬. For example, consider the first
statement in Example 1.1.3. Although we gave the English translation
“Either John isn’t smart and he is lucky, or he’s smart,” an alternative way
of conveying the same information would be to say “Either John isn’t smart
but he is lucky, or he’s smart.” Often, the word but is used in English to
mean and, especially when there is some contrast or conflict between the
statements being combined. For a more striking example, imagine a
weather forecaster ending his forecast with the statement “Rain and snow
are the only two possibilities for tomorrow’s weather.” This is just a
roundabout way of saying that it will either rain or snow tomorrow. Thus,
even though the forecaster has used the word and, the meaning expressed
by his statement is a disjunction. The lesson of these examples is that to
determine the logical form of a statement you must think about what the
statement means, rather than just translating word by word into symbols.
Sometimes logical words are hidden within mathematical notation. For
example, consider the statement 3 ≤ π. Although it appears to be a simple
statement that contains no words of logic, if you read it out loud you will
hear the word or. If we let P stand for the statement 3 < π and Q for the
statement 3 = π, then the statement 3 ≤ π would be written P ∨ Q. In this
example the statements represented by the letters P and Q are so short that
it hardly seems worthwhile to abbreviate them with single letters. In cases
like this we will sometimes not bother to replace the statements with letters,
so we might also write this statement as (3 < π) ∨ (3 = π).
For a slightly more complicated example, consider the statement 3 ≤ π <
4. This statement means 3 ≤ π and π < 4, so once again a word of logic has
been hidden in mathematical notation. Filling in the meaning that we just
worked out for 3 ≤ π, we can write the whole statement as [(3 < π) ∨ (3 =
π)] ∧ (π < 4). Knowing that the statement has this logical form might be
important in understanding a piece of mathematical reasoning involving this
statement.

Exercises
*1. Analyze the logical forms of the following statements:
(a) We’ll have either a reading assignment or homework problems, but
we won’t have both homework problems and a test.
(b) You won’t go skiing, or you will and there won’t be any snow.
(c)
2. Analyze the logical forms of the following statements:
(a) Either John and Bill are both telling the truth, or neither of them is.
(b) I’ll have either fish or chicken, but I won’t have both fish and mashed
potatoes.
(c) 3 is a common divisor of 6, 9, and 15.
3. Analyze the logical forms of the following statements:
(a) Alice and Bob are not both in the room.
(b) Alice and Bob are both not in the room.
(c) Either Alice or Bob is not in the room.
(d) Neither Alice nor Bob is in the room.
4. Analyze the logical forms of the following statements:
(a) Either both Ralph and Ed are tall, or both of them are handsome.
(b) Both Ralph and Ed are either tall or handsome.
(c) Both Ralph and Ed are neither tall nor handsome.
(d) Neither Ralph nor Ed is both tall and handsome.
5. Which of the following expressions are well-formed formulas?
(a) ¬(¬P ∨ ¬¬R).
(b) ¬(P, Q, ∧ R).
(c) P ∧ ¬ P.
(d) (P ∧ Q)(P ∨ R).
*6. Let P stand for the statement “I will buy the pants” and S for the
statement “I will buy the shirt.” What English sentences are
represented by the following formulas?
(a) ¬(P ∧ ¬S).
(b) ¬P ∧ ¬S.
(c) ¬P ∨ ¬S.
7. Let S stand for the statement “Steve is happy” and G for “George is
happy.” What English sentences are represented by the following
formulas?
(a) (S ∨ G) ∧ (¬ S ∨ ¬G).
(b) [S ∨ (G ∧ ¬S)] ∨ ¬G.
(c) S ∨ [G ∧ (¬ S ∨ ¬G)].
8. Let T stand for the statement “Taxes will go up” and D for “The
deficit will go up.” What English sentences are represented by the
following formulas?
(a) T ∨ D.
(b) ¬(T ∧ D) ∧ ¬(¬T ∧ ¬D).
(c) (T ∧ ¬ D)∨ (D ∧ ¬T).
9. Identify the premises and conclusions of the following deductive
arguments and analyze their logical forms. Do you think the reasoning
is valid? (Although you will have only your intuition to guide you in
answering this last question, in the next section we will develop some
techniques for determining the validity of arguments.)
(a) Jane and Pete won’t both win the math prize. Pete will win either the
math prize or the chemistry prize. Jane will win the math prize.
Therefore, Pete will win the chemistry prize.
(b) The main course will be either beef or fish. The vegetable will be
either peas or corn. We will not have both fish as a main course and
corn as a vegetable. Therefore, we will not have both beef as a main
course and peas as a vegetable.
(c) Either John or Bill is telling the truth. Either Sam or Bill is lying.
Therefore, either John is telling the truth or Sam is lying.
(d) Either sales will go up and the boss will be happy, or expenses will go
up and the boss won’t be happy. Therefore, sales and expenses will
not both go up.

1.2 Truth Tables

We saw in Section 1.1 that an argument is valid if the premises cannot all be
true without the conclusion being true as well. Thus, to understand how
words such as and, or, and not affect the validity of arguments, we must see
how they contribute to the truth or falsity of statements containing them.
When we evaluate the truth or falsity of a statement, we assign to it one
of the labels true or false, and this label is called its truth value. It is clear
how the word and contributes to the truth value of a statement containing it.
A statement of the form P ∧ Q can be true only if both P and Q are true; if
either P or Q is false, then P ∧ Q will be false too. Because we have
assumed that P and Q both stand for statements that are either true or false,
we can summarize all the possibilities with the table shown in Figure 1.1.
This is called a truth table for the formula P ∧ Q. Each row in the truth
table represents one of the four possible combinations of truth values for the
statements P and Q. Although these four possibilities can appear in the table
in any order, it is best to list them systematically so we can be sure that no
possibilities have been skipped. The truth table for ¬P is also quite easy to
construct because for ¬P to be true, P must be false. The table is shown in
Figure 1.2.

Figure 1.1.

Figure 1.2.

The truth table for P ∨ Q is a little trickier. The first three lines should
certainly be filled in as shown in Figure 1.3, but there may be some
question about the last line. Should P ∨ Q be true or false in the case in
which P and Q are both true? In other words, does P ∨ Q mean “P or Q, or
both” or does it mean “P or Q but not both”? The first way of interpreting
Other documents randomly have
different content
President in the Philippines sufficed fully, it was contended,
for every purpose of temporary or provisional government
there, except in its lack of ability to grant franchises and
to dispose of the public lands. Hence it was freely charged
that the controlling influences which pressed this measure on
the government came from capitalists and speculators who were
reaching after valuable franchises, mining rights and land
grants in the archipelago. Said Senator Daniel in the debate:
"So far as any legislation which looks forward to the opening
of the way to civil government may be involved to the
softening of the conditions which exist, to the amelioration
of the distresses which are upon the Philippine people, I
would give most cheerful acquiescence. But because we desire
to do these things in a good spirit, in a resolute and
patriotic spirit, let us not permit the provocation of
difficult conditions to lead us into enacting any kind of
provision of law that is not necessary to these ends. Let us
not undertake to give to the President of the United States
any power of disposing of the permanent assets of the
Philippine people; let us not put him in the attitude of being
a franchise giver or a franchise seller or a franchise lessor.
The franchises of those islands—their rivers, their ferries,
their streets, their roads, the thousand and one privileges
which are granted by public authority—are as important and as
valuable to that people and as permanently associated with
their happiness and their prosperity as are their fields or
their mines or their fisheries or anything else which belongs
to their country. … It is true there is the reservation of the
right to alter, amend, or repeal, but while that is legally
broad enough for any remedial legislation whatsoever to
follow, we know that practically it is of very small
consequence. If capital goes in and invests itself in
improvements which are in themselves of a permanent nature, if
railroads are constructed, telegraph lines run, telephones
established, ferries built, steamers and boats, gas
establishments, electrical establishments—if those things are
disposed of, the man who once gets in will never be gotten
 out. In all such affairs possession is nine points of the law
before they get into court, where it is generally made the
tenth."

Senator Hoar called attention "to the fact that the report of
the Taft commission urges that power be given to sell the
public lands at once, as it is necessary for their
development, and a large amount of capital is there now
clamoring to be invested," and he remarked: "So I suppose that
one of the chief purposes of this is that the public lands in
the Philippine Islands may be sold before the people of the
islands have any chance whatever to have a voice in their
sale." He then quoted the following passages from the report
of the Taft commission:

"The commission has received a sufficient number of

applications for the purchase of public land to know that
large amounts of American capital are only awaiting the
opportunity to invest in the rich agricultural field which may
here be developed. In view of the decision that the military
government has no power to part with the public land belonging
to the United States, and that the power rests alone in
Congress, it becomes very essential, to assist the development
of these islands and their prosperity, that Congressional
authority be vested in the government of the islands to adopt
a proper public-land system, and to sell the land upon proper
terms. There should, of course, be restrictions preventing the
acquisition of too large quantities by any individual or
corporation, but those restrictions should only be imposed
after giving due weight to the circumstances that capital can
not be secured for the development of the islands unless the
investment may be sufficiently great to justify the
expenditure of large amounts for expensive machinery and
equipments.
{401}
Especially is this true in the cultivation of sugar land. …
Restricted powers of a military government referred to in
discussing the public lands are also painfully apparent in
respect to mining claims and the organization of railroad,
banking, and other corporations, and the granting of
franchises generally. It is necessary that there be some body
or officer vested with legislative authority to pass laws
which shall afford opportunity to capital to make investment
here. This is the true and most lasting method of
pacification." "In other words," said Senator Hoar, "the
leading, principal, bald proposal on which this amendment
rests is that before those 10,000,000 people are allowed any
share in their own government whatever their property is to be
sold by Americans to Americans in large quantities, as on the
whole the best means of pacification—that the best way to
pacify a man is to have one foreign authority to sell his
property and another to buy it." An amendment to the
amendment, offered by Senator Bacon, reserving to Congress the
right to annul any grant or concession made, or any law
enacted, by any governmental authority created under the
powers proposed to be conferred on the President; another
offered, by Senator Vest, providing that "no judgment, order,
nor act by any of said officials so appointed shall conflict
with the Constitution and laws of the United States," and
still others of somewhat kindred aims, were voted down; but
the influence of Senator Hoar prevailed with the Senate so far
as to induce its acceptance of the following important
modification of the so-called "Spooner Amendment":

"Provided, That no sale or lease or other disposition of the

public land, or the timber thereon, or the mining rights
therein, shall be made: And provided further, That no
franchise shall be granted which is not approved by the
President of the United States, and is not, in his judgment,
clearly necessary for the immediate government of the islands
and indispensable for the interests of the people thereof, and
which can not, without great public mischief, be postponed
until the establishment of a permanent civil government, and
all such franchises shall terminate one year after the
 establishment of such civil government."

With this proviso added, the "Spooner amendment" was adopted

by the Senate on the 26th of February (yeas 45, nays 27, not
voting 16), and agreed to by the House on the 1st of March
(yeas 161, nays 136, not voting 56).

Congressional Record,
February 25-March 1, 1901.

PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1901 (March).

Organization of provincial governments.
Establishment of a department of public education.
Proposed tariff.
Date fixed for cessation of military regime.

On the 3d of March, the President of the Philippine

Commission, Judge Taft, addressed a cable despatch to the U.
S. Secretary of War in which he reported: "Commission has last
three weeks organized five provincial governments—Pampanga,
Pangasinan, Tarlac, Bulacan, Bataan—last two are Tagalog
provinces. Attended each provincial capital in a body; met by
appointment Presidentes, Councillors, and principal men of
towns; explained provisions general provincial act and special
bill for particular province and invited discussion natives
present of both bills. Conventions thus held very
satisfactory; amendments suggested, considered, special bills
enacted, appointments followed. … In three large provinces
natives appointed provisional Governors. In Bataan, on
petition, eight out of nine towns, volunteer officer
appointed. In Tarlac feeling between loyal factions required
appointment American. … In compliance with urgent native
invitations leave March 11 for south to organize provinces
Tayabas, Romblon, Iloilo, Capiz, Zamboanga, such others are
ready. Returning shall organize Zambales, Union, Cagayan,
Ilocos Norte. Military Governor has recommended organization
Batangas, Cavité, Laguna, Nueva Ecija, but shall delay action
as to these until return from northern and southern trips."

On the 18th of March it was announced from Washington that a

number of recent Acts of the Philippine Commission had been
received at the War Department, among them one which
establishes a general department of public instruction, with a
central office at Manila, under the direction of a general
superintendent, to be appointed by the commission, at a salary
of $6,000 a year. "Schools are to be established in every
pueblo in the archipelago where practicable, and those already
established shall be reorganized where necessary. There are to
be ten school divisions in the archipelago, each with a
division superintendent, and there is to be a superior
advisory board, composed of the general superintendent and
four members to be appointed by the Philippine Commission, to
consider the general subject of education in the islands and
make regulations. The English language, as soon as
practicable, shall be made the basis of all public
instruction, and soldiers may be detailed as instructors until
replaced by trained teachers. Authority is given to the general
superintendent to obtain from the United States 1,000 trained
teachers, at salaries of not less than $75 nor more than $100
a month, the exact salary to be fixed according to the
efficiency of the teacher. The act provides that no teacher or
other person "shall teach or criticise the doctrines of any
church, religious sect or denomination or shall attempt to
influence the pupils for or against any church or religious
sect in any public school." Violation of this section is made
punishable by summary dismissal from the public service. It is
provided, however, that it may be lawful for the priest or
minister of the pueblo where the school is situated to teach
religion for half an hour three times a week in the school
building to pupils whose parents desire it. But if any priest,
minister or religious teacher use this opportunity "for the
purpose of arousing disloyalty to the United States or of
discouraging the attendance of pupils or interfering with the
discipline of schools," the division superintendent may forbid
 such offending priest from entering the school building
thereafter. The act also provides for a normal school at
Manila for the education of natives in the science of
teaching. It appropriates $400,000 for school buildings,
$220,000 for text books and other supplies for the current
calendar year, $25,000 for the normal school, $15,000 for the
organization and maintenance of a trade school in Manila and
the same amount for a school of agriculture.

{402}

The new tariff for the Islands, which the Commission had been
long engaged in framing, was submitted, in March, to the
government at Washington for approval. "In his letter of
transmittal Judge Taft says that the proposed bill follows
largely the classification of the Cuban tariff, 'but has been
considerably expanded by the introduction of articles
requiring special treatment here by reason of different
surroundings and greater distance from the markets.' Judge
Taft says also that the disposition of the business interests
of the islands is to accept any tariff the commission
proposes, provided only that the duties are specific and not
ad valorem. The question of revenue was kept steadily in view
in the preparation of the schedules, but it was not the only
consideration. Raw materials of Philippine industries, tools,
implements and machinery of production, materials of
transportation, the producers and transmitters of power and
food products are taxed as lightly as possible. … Export
duties are levied on only six articles—hemp, indigo, rice,
sugar, cocoanuts, fresh or as copra, and tobacco. The free
list admits natural mineral waters, trees, shoots and plants,
gold, copper and silver ores, fresh fruits, garden produce,
eggs, milk, ice and fresh meat, except poultry and game. There
is also a list of articles conditionally free of duty. The
importation of explosives is prohibited, but that of firearms
is not."
 It is announced from Washington that "Judge Taft and General
MacArthur have agreed upon July 1 as the date for the
establishment of civil government in the Philippines. The
military regime in the islands will therefore cease on June
30, when General Chaffee will relieve General MacArthur of the
command, and Governor Taft will be inaugurated the next day
with considerable ceremony."

PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1901 (March-April).

Capture of Aguinaldo.
His oath of allegiance to the United States.
His address to his countrymen, counselling peace.

A stratagem, executed with great daring by General Funston of

the American forces, accomplished the capture of the Filipino
leader, Aguinaldo, on the 23d of March. From intercepted
correspondence, it had been learned that Aguinaldo, then
occupying his headquarters at Palanan, Isabela Province, was
expecting to be joined by some riflemen, whom his brother had
been ordered to send to him from central Luzon. On this,
General Funston conceived the plan of equipping a number of
native troops who should pass themselves off as the expected
reinforcements, several American officers going with them
ostensibly as prisoners, the hope being that Aguinaldo might
thus be reached and taken by surprise. General MacArthur
approved the scheme, and it was carried out with success. The
party was made up of 78 Macabebe scouts, four Tagalogs who had
formerly been officers in the insurgent army, and General
Funston, Captain Newton, Lieutenants Hazzard and Mitchel, who
acted the part of prisoners. They were taken by gunboat from
Cavite to a point above Baler, whence they made their way on
foot, sending a message in advance that the expected
reinforcements were on the way and had captured some prisoners
en route. The following brief narrative of what occurred
subsequently is taken from a newspaper account of the
expedition:
"For six days the expedition marched over an exceedingly
difficult country, covering 90 miles. When the men reached a
point eight miles from Aguinaldo's camp they were almost
exhausted from lack of food and the fatigue of the march. They
stopped at this place and sent a message to Aguinaldo,
requesting him to send food to them. The ruse thus far had
worked with the greatest success, and on March 22d, when
Aguinaldo sent provisions, it was seen that he did not have
the slightest suspicion. With the food he sent word that the
Americans were not wanted in his camp, but instructing their
supposed captors to treat them kindly. On March 23d the march
was resumed, the Macabebe officers starting an hour ahead of
the main body of the expedition. The 'prisoners,' under guard,
followed them. When the party arrived at Aguinaldo's camp a
bodyguard of 50 riflemen was paraded, and the officers were
received at Aguinaldo's house, which was situated on the
Palanan River. After some conversation with him, in which they
gave the alleged details of their suppositious engagement with
an American force, they made excuses and quietly left the
house. They at once gave orders in an undertone for the
Macabebes to get in position and fire on the bodyguard. The
order was obeyed with the greatest rapidity, and three volleys
were delivered. The insurgents were panic-stricken by the
sudden turn in affairs, and they broke and ran in
consternation. Two of them, however, were killed and eighteen
wounded. Simultaneously with the delivery of the volleys the
American officers rushed into Aguinaldo's house. Major
Alhambra, one of Aguinaldo's staff, had been shot in the face.
He, however, was determined not to be captured and he jumped
from a window into the river and disappeared. Two captains and
four lieutenants made their escape in a similar manner.
Aguinaldo, Colonel Villa, his chief of staff, and Santiago
Barcelona, the insurgent treasurer, did not have time to make
an attempt to get away before General Funston and the others
were upon them, demanding their surrender. Seeing that the
situation was hopeless, they gave themselves up. Aguinaldo was
furious at having been caught, but later he became
 philosophical and declared that the ruse by which he had been
captured was the only one which would have proved successful
if the Americans had tried for 20 years. One of the Macabebes
was wounded. The party stayed two days at the camp and then
marched overland to the coast, where the Vicksburg, whose
arrival was excellently timed, picked them up and brought them
back to Manila."

On the 2d of April, a despatch from General MacArthur to the

War Department announced that Aguinaldo, on the advice of
Chief Justice Arellano, had taken the following oath of
allegiance to the United States: "I hereby renounce all
allegiance to any and all so-called revolutionary governments
in the Philippine Islands, and recognize and accept the
supreme authority of the United States of America therein; I
do solemnly swear that I will bear true faith and allegiance
to that government; that I will at all times conduct myself as
a faithful and law abiding citizen of the said islands, and
will not, either directly or indirectly, hold correspondence
with or give intelligence to an enemy of the United States,
nor will I abet, harbor or protect such enemy; that I impose
upon myself these voluntary obligations without any mental
reservations or purpose of evasion, so help me God."

{403}

On the 19th of April, Aguinaldo issued the following address

to his countrymen: "I believe I am not in error in presuming
that the unhappy fate to which my adverse fortune has led me
is not a surprise to those who have been familiar with the
progress of the war. The lessons taught with a full meaning,
and which have recently come to my knowledge, suggest with
irresistible force that a complete termination of hostilities
and lasting peace are not only desirable, but absolutely
essential to the welfare of the Philippine Islands. The
Filipinos have never been dismayed at their weakness, nor have
they faltered in following the path pointed out by their
 fortitude and courage. The time has come, however, in which
they find their advance along this path to be impeded by an
irresistible force, which, while it restrains them, yet
enlightens their minds and opens to them another course,
presenting them the cause of peace. This cause has been
joyfully embraced by the majority of my fellow countrymen who
already have united around the glorious sovereign banner of
the United States. In this banner they repose their trust and
believe that under its protection the Filipino people will
attain all those promised liberties which they are beginning
to enjoy. The country has declared unmistakably in favor of
peace. So be it. There has been enough blood, enough tears and
enough desolation. This wish cannot be ignored by the men
still in arms, if they are animated by a desire to serve our
noble people, which has thus clearly manifested its will. So
do I respect this will, now that it is known to me. After
mature deliberation, I resolutely proclaim to the world that I
cannot refuse to heed the voice of a people longing for peace,
nor the lamentations of thousands of families yearning to see
their dear ones enjoying the liberty and the promised
generosity of the great American Nation. By acknowledging and
accepting the sovereignty of the United States throughout the
Philippine Archipelago, as I now do, and without any
reservation whatsoever, I believe that I am serving thee, my
beloved country. May happiness be thine."

PHŒNICIANS, The:
Modified estimates of their influence upon early
European civilization.

See (in this volume)

ARCHÆOLOGICAL RESEARCH: CRETE.

PILLAGER INDIAN OUTBREAK.

See (in this volume)

INDIANS, AMERICAN: A. D. 1898.
PLAGUE, The Bubonic.

For years the plague has "continued to breed in various inner

parts of Asia, and in 1894, coming from the Chinese province
of Yunnan, it invaded Canton, taking there 60,000 victims in a
few weeks. Thence it spread to Hong Kong, reached next year
the island of Haïnan and Macao, invaded Formosa in 1896, and
in the autumn of the same year appeared at Bombay. In the big
city of India it found all necessary conditions for breeding,
unchecked, for several months in succession: famine,
overcrowding, and the absence of all preventive measures; and
from Bombay it was carried by rail and road, to different
parts of India. … Happily enough, the plague is no longer the
mysterious, revengeful being which it used to be for our
ancestors. Its cause and modes of propagation are well known.
It is an infectious disease with a short period of incubation.
From four to six days after infection takes place, a sudden
loss of forces—often a full prostration, accompanied by a high
fever-sets in. A bubo appears, and soon grows to the size of
an egg. Death soon follows. If not—there is a chance of slow
and painful recovery; but that chance is very small, because
even under the best conditions of nursing, the mortality is
seldom less than four out of each five cases of illness. As to
the means of propagation of the plague, they are many. The
poison may infect a wound or a scratch; it may be ingested in
food; it may be simply inhaled. Dust from an infected house
was sufficient to infect healthy rats; and when healthy rats
were shut up in one cage with unhealthy ones, all caught the
disease and died. Already in 1881 Netten Redcliffe and Dr.
Pichon indicated that before the plague attacks men it
destroys mice and rats. This was fully confirmed in 1894 by
the Japanese and French bacteriologists Kitasato and Yersin,
at Hong Kong, and by Dr. Rennie, of the Chinese Customs, at
Canton. Masses of dead rats were seen in the streets of the
infested parts of Hong Kong, and the keeper of the west gates
of Canton collected and buried 24,000 of these animals. Dr.
Rennie also pointed out that among those inhabitants of Canton
who lived in boats on the river there were no cases of plague,
except a few imported from town, so that even rich Cantonese
took to living in boats; and he explained the immunity of the
boat-dwellers by the absence of infection through rats. The
worst is, however, that swine, and even goats and buffaloes,
snakes and jackals, are attacked by the plague. …

"As soon as the plague broke out at Hong Kong, the great
Japanese bacteriologist Kitasato and the French doctor Yersin,
who is well known for his work with Roux on the serum
treatment of diphtheria, were already on the spot. Yersin
obtained from the English authorities permission to erect a
small straw hut in the yard of the chief hospital, and there
he began his researches. Both Kitasato and Yersin had no
difficulty in ascertaining that the plague buboes teemed with
special bacteria, which had the shape of tiny microscopic
sticklets, thickened at their ends. To isolate these bacteria,
to cultivate them in artificial media, and to ascertain the
deadly effects of these cultures upon animals, was soon done
by such masters in bacteriology as Kitasato and Yersin. The
cause of the plague was thus discovered. It was evident that
infected rats and swine—especially swine with the Chinese, who
keep them in their houses—were spreading the disease, in
addition to men themselves. The same bacteria teemed in the
dead animals. As to men, the discharges from their buboes, and
even, in many cases, their expectorations, were full of plague
bacteria. Besides, Yersin soon noticed that in his
'laboratory,' where he was dissecting animals killed by the
plague, the flies died in numbers. He found that they were
infested with the same bacteria, and carried them about:
inoculations of bacteria obtained from the flies at once
provoked the plague in guinea-pigs. Ants, gnats, and other
insects may evidently spread infection in the same way, while
in and round the infested houses the soil is impregnated with
the same bacteria. As soon as the pest microbe became known,
experiments were begun, at the Paris Institut Pasteur, for
 finding the means to combat it; and in July 1895 Yersin,
Calmette, and Borel could already announce that some very
promising results had been obtained."

P. Kropotkin,
Recent Science
(Nineteenth Century, July, 1897).

{404}

Of the first appearance of the plague in India, at Bombay, and

the early stages of its spread in that country, the Viceroy,
Lord Elgin, made the following report to the Secretary of
State for India, on the 27th of January, 1897: "The first
official intimation of the outbreak which reached us was in a
telegram from the Government of Bombay, dated the 29th
September 1896. The disease was then reported to be of a mild
type, and at first it showed no tendency to increase. …
Throughout the months of October and November the disease made
little or no progress, and the number of deaths reported a day
averaged nine. Early in December there was a marked increase,
and the number of deaths reported daily from the 2nd to the
23rd (inclusive) was about 32. From the 24th December onwards
there was another marked increase, and the number of deaths
reported from that date to the 14th January (inclusive)
averaged about 51. The next week shows a further increase, the
reported number of deaths averaging 74 a day. The total number
of deaths reported during October was 276; during November,
268; during December, 1,160; and from the 1st to the 25th
January, 1,444. The total number of deaths reported from the
beginning of the outbreak thus amounts to 3,148. We have
reason to fear that all deaths from the plague have not been
reported as such, and that the true mortality from the disease
is higher than is shown by the above figures. … For a
considerable time, except for a few imported cases in some
towns in Gujarat, the outbreak was confined to Bombay itself,
but on the 23rd of December we learnt from the Government of
Bombay that the plague had broken out in Karachi. … The total
number of deaths that have been reported in Karachi, from the
beginning of the outbreak up to the 24th January, is 608. It
will be observed that the disease has been very malignant in
Karachi, and that almost all the cases reported have been
fatal. As soon as the Surgeon General with the Government of
Bombay reported to that Government that he had seen cases of a
mild type of bubonic plague in the city, preventive measures
were adopted and a Committee of medical experts were appointed
to report on the disease and the situation. The Municipal
Corporation have from the outset required the infected
quarters to undergo a thorough and systematic cleaning and
disinfection; and they have also pushed on vigorously other
sanitary measures, such as the improvement of house
connections and the construction of surface drains in quarters
where the drainage was defective. A house-to-house visitation
by medical officers has also been instituted. The Corporation
have sanctioned liberal measures towards these ends, and the
executive officers have displayed great energy in carrying
them out. … We have informed the Government of Bombay that we
consider it necessary that the plan of removing all persons
from infected houses, and thoroughly cleansing and
disinfecting the buildings, should be carried out, and we have
asked His Excellency in Council, if he agrees, to report the
measures that are adopted to bring the plan into general
effect."

To the above suggestion that all persons be removed from

infected houses, the government of Bombay replied, on the 12th
of February: "His Excellency is advised that, to give full
effect to such a proposal, at the lowest computation, 30,000
persons belonging to different races, castes, and creeds would
need to be provided with temporary dwellings. There is no site
within the limits of the Bombay municipality which would
accommodate a tenth of this number. Great difficulty has
attended all attempts at the segregation of healthy inmates of
infected houses hitherto made, and very limited success bas
been achieved. From the beginning of the outbreak of this
disease it has been found that the native inhabitants of the
city are very reluctant to leave their houses or to allow any
member of their family afflicted with the disease to be taken
away. Indeed, their dread of the disease itself appears to be
hardly so powerful as their horror of being removed from their
houses. Ignorance and superstition prevent them from
discerning either that removal to a hospital is good for the
sick or removal [from] infected dwellings good for the
healthy, and they are far more easily moved by fear of the
municipal and police authorities than by any realisation of
the benefits that will accrue from a sensible course of
action. It is estimated that not less than 300,000 persons
have already fled from Bombay, moved so to do, not only by
fear of the plague, but quite as much, if not more, by an
unfounded and unreasonable fear of what might happen to them
at the hands of the police and municipal authorities were they
to remain."

Contending with such obstacles to the use of the most

effective measures for checking the spread of the disease, the
authorities at Bombay and elsewhere, who seem to have worked
with energy, saw little to encourage their efforts for some
time. In a second report to the Secretary of State for India,
made February 10, Lord Elgin was compelled to write: "We much
regret that we are unable to report that the plague shows any
signs of abating. In both Bombay and Karachi there has been an
increase in the daily number of seizures and deaths since the
beginning of the current month." But, a month later, on the
10th of March, the Viceroy reported that "the position of
affairs in Bombay is distinctly better. There has been a
decrease in the reported number of plague seizures and deaths,
and the total daily mortality from all causes shows a marked
diminution. During the week ending the 22nd February, the
average daily number of seizures and deaths was 115 and 117,
respectively; during the following week the daily average fell
to 107 and 99, whilst during the period March 2nd to March 8th
 it has been 99 and 84. … Persons are now returning to the
quarters of Bombay, which are comparatively free from plague,
from the more infected outlying suburbs, and the Government of
Bombay have therefore found it necessary to watch persons
entering as well as those leaving Bombay. In the suburbs of
Kurla, Bandora, and Bhiwandi the plague continues to be
severe. Outside Bombay in the Presidency proper the number of
indigenous cases has increased, and the disease shows a
tendency to spread, especially in the Thana and Surat
districts. … Outside Karachi the plague shows no tendency to
spread in Sind, and Sukkur is the only other place from which
indigenous cases have been reported."

Great Britain, Parliamentary Publications

(Papers by Command: C.-8386, 1897; and C.-8511, 1897).

{405}

From that time there appears to have been a nearly steady

subsidence of the disease until the following September, when
it showed renewed virulence at Poona, and began to be newly
spread, invading districts in the Punjab and elsewhere outside
of the Bombay Presidency. By the middle of November Poona was
substantially empty of inhabitants, except those stricken with
the disease and those who bravely cared for the sick and dying.
In December there was a fresh outbreak in Bombay, which soon
became more deadly than that of the previous winter and
spring. By the beginning of February, 1898, and through March,
the deaths from plague alone in Bombay had risen above a
thousand a week. Then another subsidence occurred, followed by
another recrudescence of the disease in August, and another
decline in October. But the variations in other districts were
not uniform with those in Bombay. At the end of 1898, the
total of mortality from plague in all the afflicted districts
of India, reckoning from the beginning, was believed to exceed
100,000, including 70,000 in the Bombay Presidency and Sind
(28,000 in the city of Bombay), and 2,000 in the Punjab. In
Calcutta there had been but 150 deaths. Although the measures
taken for checking the spread of the pestilence were far less
stringent than they would have been among people more capable
of understanding what they meant and what their importance
was, they alarmed the religious jealousies of both the Hindus
and the Mohammedans, and were resisted and resented with
dangerous fury at a number of times. At Poona, in June, 1897,
two British officials were murdered by young Brahmins, who had
been excited to the deed by native journals, the language of
which was so violent that the government found it necessary to
prosecute several for sedition. At Bombay, in March, 1898,
when the plague was at its worst, there were very serious
riots, in which a number of Europeans were killed, and troops
were called to the help of the police before the frenzied mob
could be overcome.

Again, in 1899, there was a revival of the disease in India,

especially at Bombay, during the winter, with a decline in
April and fresh virulence in September. At the end of the year
the estimate of total mortality from plague in India since the
beginning was 250,000.

Of the wider spreading of the pestilence during 1900 the

following summary of information is given in the annual report
of the United States Secretary of the Treasury, in connection
with details of quarantine measures: "The Surgeon-General
reports that plague has been more widely distributed during
the year than was ever known in history, and for the first
time obtained lodgment in the Western Hemisphere, at Santos,
Brazil, in October, 1899. By this it is not meant that the
disease has been actually more prevalent than before, but that
its points of contact have embraced nearly every civilized
country in the world, though its prompt recognition and
application of modern methods have either entirely prevented
its spread or have caused it to disappear after a short period
of infection. The scientific knowledge of the disease renders
it far less to be dreaded than before, but increase in rapid
communication between different parts of the world facilitates
its transportation. In illustration, the fact is cited that 20
vessels have been reported, arriving at as many principal
seaports in different parts of the world, on which plague was
discovered on arrival or had manifested itself during the
voyage. As heretofore, its chief ravages have been in India,
where preventive measures have been hindered by religious
fanaticism. In India during the year there were 66,294 deaths.
Notable outbreaks of the disease occurred in Kobe and in
Formosa, Japan, at Oporto, Santos, Rio de Janeiro, Honolulu,
Sydney, Mauritius, Hongkong, and Glasgow.

"In December, 1899, on account of the apparent spread of this

disease, 12 commissioned officers were detailed by order of
the President for duty in the offices of the United States
consuls at the principal ports in England and on the
Continent. In June, the disease fortunately not having become
as widespread as anticipated, they were recalled, with the
exception of five, who are still retained for the purpose of
furnishing information and for service at any needed point.
Two of those thus retained, when the plague was announced at
Glasgow, Scotland, on August 28, 1900, were immediately sent
to that point and began inspection of vessels for the United
States and also for Canada, by request of that Government,
thus enabling vessels to be entered at ports on this side
without undue restraint. In the laboratory of the Service,
scientific investigations as to the viability of the plague
bacillus and the methods and efficiency of disinfection have
been conducted, and the results, together with excerpts from
all available literature hearing upon the prevention of
plague, have been published in the Public Health Reports,
forming, for this year, a volume containing most complete
information upon this disease. About 700,000 doses of
Haffkine's prophylactic were also prepared in the laboratory
and sent to the United States quarantine officers at home and
abroad, together with large quantities of Yersin's serum,
purchased early in the year from the Pasteur Institute in
 Paris. In these two preparations, the one (Haffkine) a
prophylactic and the other (Yersin) both prophylactic and a
cure, the Surgeon-General says that science has effective
methods of combating the spread of this disease."

United States, Secretary of the Treasury,

Annual Report, December 4, 1900.

The "antitoxin, or serum, first prepared by Professor Haffkine

as a plague inoculation, called Haffkine's prophylactic, is
now being used in Bombay and western India with remarkable
results. This prophylactic is prepared by first taking the
plague bacilli, or the young germs, from a person affected
with the plague and cultivating them. These microbes are
killed by artificial means and a high degree of heat. From
these dead germs and their poisonous excrements is produced a
fluid that is believed to have acquired the power, when
injected into the human system, to render the blood immune
from the attack of plague germs and to neutralize their
effect. The injection of such a poison has the effect of an
antitoxin and prevents the system from nourishing plague. A
dead plague germ being inoculated into a person, plague will
not follow. A person after having one attack of the disease is
rarely liable to a second. The person first inoculated is
subject to symptoms of the plague.
{406}
In vaccination for smallpox
a living germ is dealt with, whereas in plague inoculation
dead seed only are injected. … Inoculation is exceedingly
unpopular among the natives. The government has had great
labor in persuading the Hindoo mind of the efficacy of
Haffkine's prophylactic against plague and at the same time of
its utter harmlessness in every other respect. The Hindoo is
suspicious that the dead germs and their toxic excreta may be
of animal rather than vegetable substance, which would make
the injection of the fluid into their body a religious
offense."
 United States Consular Reports,
January, 1900, page 101.

"In the present epidemic, plague-spots are scattered over the

whole face of the globe from Sydney to Santos and Hongkong,
and recently from San Francisco suspicious cases have been
reported. The annual pilgrimage of Moslems to worship at the
shrines of Mecca and Medina is now, as in the past, of all
human agencies, the most active in spreading the pest. … Since
Egypt is nearest, plague first appears there in the seaport
towns, particularly Alexandria. Sanitary conditions have
improved vastly, like economics, under British control; and,
last year, what in other times might have been a devastating
epidemic was limited to relatively a few scattered cases.
Recognizing the danger to themselves, the European powers have
been led to take steps, under the Venice Convention, for their
own protection. An international quarantine, under the control
of the Egyptian Sanitary, Maritime, and Quarantine Council, in
which the powers have one vote each and Egypt three, has
established stations at two points on the Red Sea."

American Review of Reviews,

May, 1900.

PLATT AMENDMENT, The.

See (in this volume)

CUBA: A. D. 1901 (FEBRUARY-MARCH).

PLURAL VOTING.

See (in this volume)

BELGIUM: A. D. 1894-1895.

PLYMOUTH COLONY:
Return of the manuscript of Bradford's History to
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com