There has never been, up to this time, any definite system for judging the intercollegiate debates and consequently the judges have often based their decisions on widely varying standards. With a view toward eliminating this unsatisfactory element, the Intercollegiate Debating Association, composed of the presidents of the debating clubs of Harvard, Yale and Princeton, met in New Haven on October 20 and adopted the following instructions for judges:

(1) Each college in its debates with its competitor selects alternately the question to be debated, and sends the formulated question to its opponent, leaving to its opponent the choice of sides. The side which either college team chooses to advocate need not, therefore, necessarily represent the prevalent trend of opinion in that college, nor even the individual opinions of the debaters.

(2) The Intercollegiate Debating Association is agreed upon the general principle that the award should not be made on the merits of the question but upon the merits of the debate; that is to say, consideration as to what may seem to a Judge the intrinsic merit of either side of the question should not enter into or determine the award; but the award ought to be made to that college team which evinces in general greater argumentative ability and better form as speakers.

The Association is agreed that, in determining argumentative ability, the Judges should take into consideration thorough knowledge of the subject, logical sequence, skill in selecting and presenting evidence, and power in rebuttal; and that in considering the form of the speakers as distinguished from their arguments they should regard bearing, quality of voice, correct pronunciation, clear enunciation, ease and appropriateness of gesture, and directness, variety, and emphasis in delivery. Without attempting to assign exact valuation to these various elements, the Association is agreed that as between the two, matter is more important than form; and that should one team excel in matter, and the other to an equal degree in form, the award should go to the former.

Lastly, the Association ventures to suggest to the Judges that upon with-drawing after the debate to make their decision, they cast a written ballot (before consultation) in order thereby to obtain a working basis from which the final decision may be reached. Should there be doubt in the mind of any Judge as to the purport and intent of these instructions, the Association suggests that the Judges meet just before the debate with a representative of each college, and that in this conference an attempt be made to resolve any difficulty connected with the interpretation of these instructions. Respectfully submitted,   RAYNAL C. BOLLING 1L.,

President Harvard University Debating Club.   ASHLEY DAY LEAVITT (1900),

President Yale University Debating Union.   JAMES HUGH MOFFATT (1900),

Chairman Intercollegiate Debating Committee of Princeton University.