Princeton, N. J. April 23: Harvard tonight defeated the Princeton debating team to take a clean sweep of the Triangular debating contests.

Silvery tongues proved more valuable than forceful arguments in the Lowell House Common Room last night as the Harvard Debating team defeated Yale with a decision that, though unanimous, was questioned by many members of the audience.

It was with considerable reluctance that New Dealish Arthur N. Holcombe '06, Professor of Government and chairman for the evening, announced the decision which gave the Crimson team victory on the negative side of the subject: Resolved, that this House do approve the President's Supreme Court proposal.

While Holcombe was sympathizing with the Yale debaters he felt had been "gyped", the three judges had all concurred against the Elis. They were all Boston lawyers, J. Robert Ayers, Andrew L. Moore and Walter G. Wehrle.

James B. Satterwaithe, John E. Ecklund and W. A. W. Krebs, Jr., argued for the Elis that the split between a conservative court and a liberal public opinion necessitated a change. No amendment, they said, could answer the issue--so the obvious thing was to change the membership of the court.

Harvard's Claudius J. Byrne '39, Richard W. Sullivan '38 and Joseph P. Healey '38 started out with a tirade against Roosevelt and denied that there was any real need for a change. Roosevelt was out-and-out packing the Court for political reasons. What they may have lacked in argument was made up for by a surprising strength in delivery.