Advertisement

JUNIORS DEFEATED SENIORS

In Interclass Debate.--Winners Excelled in and Form.

In an interesting, but one-sided debate, the Juniors last evening defeated the Seniors in the second contest of the interclass series. The winning team supported the negative side of the question, "Resolved, That if it were possible a reasonable property qualification for the exercise of the municipal franchise in the United States would be desirable."

The Juniors excelled both in value of evidence and method of presentation; and their arguments formed a more connected whole. On the other hand the Seniors showed lack of team work and based their arguments on general suppositions, which the Juniors handled cleverly and proved to be absurd in practice. J. W. Plaisted, A. N. Holcombe, and J. W. Appel made up the Senior team, and spoke in the order named. The Junior order was: A. B. Church, R. E. Gish, A. H. Elder.

In the first speech of the evening J. W. Plaisted, of the affirmative, outlined the importance of having good governments in our cities. He explained the corrupt abuses, and contrasted them with the excellent municipal control in foreign cities. For the negative A. B. Church opened the debate. He pointed out that the good governments of European cities were not the result of the property qualification but of other conditions; namely, continuity of executive expert heads of departments and rigid anti-corruption measures A. N. Holcombe continued the argument for the affirmative and made specific suggestions for the improvement of the evils outlined by the first speaker. A successful property qualification would be in the form of exclusion for all persons paying less than $7 per month rent. This speech was well refuted by R. E. Gish for the negative, who pointed out the evils of a limited franchise in the United States., In the last speech for the affirmative J. W. Appel showed the inefficiency of the corruptible class to vote for reasonable measures; but his arguments were squarely met by A. H. Elder, for the negative, who showed that the property qualification was not only inadequate to cure the present evils, but was in itself the cause of municipal corruption.

In the rebuttal speeches the Juniors had a distinct advantage. They summed up their arguments well, and showed the weakness of the affirmative in getting at the root of the question.

The judges for the debate were Professor T. N. Carver, Dr. W. B. Munro, and R. W. Kelso 2L. P. Dana 2L. presided.

Advertisement

The final debate of the interclass series will be held in February, between the Juniors and Sophomores, upon some question relating to modern French politics. From this debate the award of the Pasteur medal will be determined.

Advertisement