Oxford debaters met Harvard Sunday at Sanders Theatre, and the Britishers gained an impressive 2 to 1 decision on the question of nationalization of basic industries.

Almost 500 students braved snow and forewent exam study to watch British debating style win the split-decision of judges Karl Compton, President of M.I.T.: Ralph Lowell '12, member of the Board of Overseers; and Charles E. Whitamore, British Consul-General in Boston.

In contending that American free enterprise has failed to solve the problems of unemployment, monopoly, and inefficiency, the Oxford representatives, Anthony N. W. Benn and David K. Harris supported the affirmative, asserting that nationalization of only 20 percent of industry has solved these problems for England.

Socialism to Follow

Countering Benn's argument that centralization of economic policy extends both political and economic freedom of the people, William P. D. Bailey '46 of the Debate Council warned that nationalization can only mean socialism, and that just 20 percent but the entire economy would be controlled.

"It is not a case of Socialism vs. Democracy," Harris answered. "In England today, not only are we getting the goods, but there is much greater worker satisfaction all around."

The alternative to nationalization, as offered by Edwin J. Jacob '47 is America's system of "controlled free enterprise" where the government is empowered with certain checks on the economic system.

"Perhaps more controls are necessary, but even if they are imposed, they certainly would not involve the surrender of all liberty for the questionable measure of security which nationalization offers."