古往今来，伟大的法律文体作家们都深谙情感的说服力量，他们记叙、议论、抒情、说明融于一炉，文章中体现着缜密的理性和充沛的情感，故而文章具有极强的感染力和说服力。
　　例如， 美国首席大法官约翰•马歇尔•哈伦在普莱西诉弗古森一案中 ，在他所作的文书中孤立无援地发表了反对意见，表现了他的宽厚以及充满了对当事人的同情之心，读者还能感觉到作者那一刻炙热的心。后来此案推动了黑人和白人“分立而平等”机制的形成。
　　【T】he constitution of the United States does not ，I think， permit any public authority to know the race of those entitled to be protected in the enjoyment of such rights. Every true men has pride of race ，and under appropriate circumstances， when the rights of others ，his equals before the law， are not to be affected ，it is his privilege to express such pride and to take such action based upon it as to him seems proper. But I deny that any legislative body or judicial tribunal may have regard to the race of citizens when the civil rights of those citizens are involved.
　　我认为美国宪法未能让政府当局认识这个在享有这些权利的时候同样受到法律保护的种族。每一个真正的人都为自己的种族而骄傲，并且会在适当的条件下，在他人——法律面前与之平等的人——的权力不受侵犯的条件下，有权表达这种骄傲，并基于此采取相应的正确的行动。在涉及到这些公民的民权问题的时候，我反对任何立法机构或者审判庭对这个种族的公民另眼相待。
　　……
　　What can more certainly arouse race hate， what more certainly create and perpetuate a feeling of distrust between these races ， than state enactments which in fact proceed on the ground that colored citizens are so inferior and degraded that they cannot be allowed to sit in public coaches occupied by White citizens ?
　　如果国家执法的根据是有色人种低贱、堕落，因此在公共场所无权与白人同坐一条板凳，那么还有什么比这更能激起种族仇恨 ？还有什么比这更能制造种族间的怀疑，并且使这种怀疑根深蒂固呢 ？
　　而普莱西案中亨利•布朗法官代表的多数派意见的风格恰恰相反，其中只有理智而无作者一丝的情感，读来只觉得枯燥的说理，感觉不到作者生命的灵动。
　　We consider the underlying fallacy of the plaintiff′s argument to consist in the assumption that the enforced separation of the tow races stamps the colored races with a badge of inferiority .if this be so ，it is not by reason of anything found in the act ， but solely because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it.

第 [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] 页 共[8]页