The influence of the Oxford debaters is still being felt in eastern universities. The gradual departure from traditional methods of debating and conformity to the Oxford style is not a mere aping of the English manner but is an awakening to advantages previously overlooked.

Another evidence of this awakening, besides the formation of the Debating Union, is the broadening of the policy of Delta Sigma Rho, the honorary debating society of the University. It has admitted to membership all deserving participants in important debates scheduled by the University Council. Its aim is to honor "scholarly efforts of contestants in debate" and to "encourage effective and sincere public speaking". In a recent announcement of its policy, the society declared itself in favor of decisions at debates being rendered by the audience, of informal rebuttal, and of greater sincerity on the part of the speakers. These innovations are all directly traceable to the Oxford example.

"Greater sincerity" is the keynote. It the audience is to render the decision according to its attitude at the close of the debate, the speaker must not only present a logical case, but must do so with that conviction which only his belief in the cause he advocates can produce. The formal rebuttal following the main speeches could often be prepared ahead of time; but informal rebuttal preceding the speech necessitates rapid, logical thinking on the platform. The statement of the society that a debater should speak only in support of his own convictions is more important as an expression of the goal of present debating methods than as an innovation. The University Council has scheduled the more important debates for two teams so that debaters can support either the affirmative or the negative of a question.

It is true that men who speak on college teams do not always have convictions, and it is also true that there is a certain virtue in being able to support a cause, regardless of convictions, merely for the sake of argument. But if sincerity can find a place in public debating, the interest to the audience will be just that much greater, and the debate will have a meaning beyond its mere value as an exercise of oratory. Adherence to the policy announced by Delta Sigma Rho will do much to improve University debating and to encourage public speaking of the better sort.