text:  Since the individual cases are all the evidence we can possess; evidence which no logical form into which we choose to throw it can make greater than it is; and since that evidence is either sufficient in itself or if insufficient for one purpose cannot be sufficient for the other; I am unable to see why we should be forbidden to take the shortest cut from these sufficient premisses to the conclusion and constrained to travel the 'high _priori_ road' by the arbitrary fiat of logicians