Every artificial proof consists either of indications, arguments or examples. I am well aware that
many consider indications to form part of the arguments. My reasons for distinguishing them are twofold. In the first place indications as a rule come
under the head of inartificial proofs: for a bloodstained garment, a shriek, a dark blotch and the like
are all evidence analogous to documentary or oral
evidence and rumours; they are not discovered by
the orator, but are given him with the case itself.