For the second time in one week the University debating team failed to convince its audience that "Al Smith was not eminently qualified for the presidency" when it lost to the Columbia University debaters Saturday night at the Horace Mann School in New York.

By a rising vote the audience at New York at the close of the debate decided in favor of the Columbia speakers, who had expounded upon the fitness of Smith. In the debate with Boston College last Wednesday night in Symphony Hall the audience also voted in favor of the opponents of the University.

Speaking for the Harvard team Saturday night were, T. N. Stensland '28, Brooks Otis '28, and Norman Winer '29. The alternates for the occasion were, Saul Rosenzweig'29, A. L. Raffa ocC., and Barret Williams '28.

Harvard contended that Governor Smith had not shown himself to be nationally minded, that he is "wet" in practice as well as in theory, and described him as "a man with a broad smile, an affable winning personality, and, in fact, a great old scout."

The Columbia arguers attacked the present national administration, asserting that Smith could not possibly commit worse errors of diplomacy. They further argued that he had shown that "the best economy is the wise spending of money", and that "there is no valid reason to doubt the ability of Governor Smith to handle any sort of an affair," His record in state administration was cited as proof.

After the debate the Harvard orators volunteered to answer any questions that the audience might wish to ask about the presidential qualifications of Governor Al Smith. A great many questions were asked by men and women alike and this proved the most interesting part of the debate. This innovation in debating was so successfully carried out that Coach E. M. Rowe II, states that it will be continued in the coming debates.