American superficiality and British thoroughness were not illustrated by the recent debate of Bates College with Oxford, as reported in the Gavel, the organ of the intercollegiate honorary society for debaters. The Bates professor who accompanied the American trio does not assert that the Yankees prepared their arguments more fully. But he draws a sharp contrast between their businesslike, precise methods and the longer, more extemporaneous British procedure. The three Americans had carefully dovetailed their arguments. The three Britons each presented an individual point of view, caring nothing for minor inconsistencies. The American debate was based upon a careful brief. The British debate lacked logical arrangement and satisfaction. The Americans were communications in their one of evidence citing their authorities observing strict syllogistic and having generalizations upon representative cases. The British showed are such conscientiousness. But the British speakers excelled in wit and epigram. Their appeal to the audience was more direct and winningly informal they allowed time for interesting by play. In brief, the American and British methods of training debaters appear to differ in much the same war at the American and British methods of training athletes.

As it well known, the Oxford Union, models its procedure after the House of Commons. Our debaters do not model themselves after the House of Representatives that would be too deadly but after the best law courts. It is probable that debaters of each country could learn something from the other. But each system of debate is the natural outgrowth of its own college environment. New York Evening Post