The morning call., 1894-04-27
WILL. WAGE WAR.
Anger Over the Intercol-
legiate Debate.
BERKELEY BOYS in ARMS.
They Declare the Decision was
Wrong.
HART is SEVERELY SCORED.
He Is Accused of Being PredJu'
diced Judge in Favor OF the
StanfordS.

| T6uutT6U db Tile NNSNNO
last Saturday evening the students aud
professors at the State University who
attended the debate have felt and talked
very strongly on the matter of tins de-
cision, and that feeling has eliminated In
action.
Stanford had selected Attorn General
| Hart for its Judge and the University OF
| California First Assistant District Attor-
ney Samue! Knight; the two judges chose
as the third Judge Seawell. Stanford had
the affirmative and California the negative
of the question, which read as follows:
RESOLVED, That the national ownership and
| opera ion of the railroads In the United States
would better subserve the intere SITS Of the peo-
| pie than does the present system of ownership
! and operation by private corporations.
| II being cOnced d-first, that The change can
be made constitutionally and legally and at a
! cost not to exceed $4,000, 100000, which is
assumed to be just and reasonable cOmDen-
sation; and, second. that all Government rail-
road officials and employees shall be appointed
and promoted upon a basis OF business eff
cheney only.
| When the decision was rendered Judge
Seawell read it. stating that by the second
concession political corruption was ruled
out, aad there ore all of The negatives ar
guments on that point were nullified.
| 1t was with a look of dumfounded as
constituent that the State University men
| heard the decision, for they are firm in The
belief that their speakers made by far the
stronger argument.
One of the Berkeley boys said last night:
''Slnce the decision has so unjustly de-
| prved the State University of its credit
attempts have been made to 1athOm the
matter. Prominent attorneys, such as Mr..
Henry E. HightoB. Judge CARRIER. Mr..
| Arthur Rogers and others have been inter-
viewed as to their opinions on the second
concession. They all agree that the con-
| ton, but only one phase OF 1.-THE patron
age system. We had obtained legal In
depreciation of this concession previous to
| the debate, so that we had it in mind
throughout The stand taken by the
| judges, that the political corruption argu-
ments were ruled out deprived the whole
question Of its debatable nature and made
| IL merely an absurd attempt to disprove
the fact that an ideal system was prefer
able to an actual one with real evils.
One of the professors remarked immedi-
ately following the decision: 1.-THE judges
seem to have been mised by che conces-
sion and to have read into it what is not
there.
That the judges did not seem to doubt
that the Berkeley men had made the
stronger arguments was brought out in
| the statement that as the second cOnces-
SIGN ruled out so much of their argument.
| the affirmative won the debate"
| The men at Berkeley felt the peculiar
position they were placed in. and disliked
exceedingly to appear not to accept de-
| ciSion formally rendered against them, but
nevertheless the general thought was that
! the case being so fragrant wrong, it
would be unjust to themselves 10 submit
wItho protest.
To this end mass-meetiDg of the STU
dents was held Wednesday, and the Asso-
cated Students formally adopted the sub
| Joined resolutions:
We, the Assocla ed Students of the University
OF California believing that In lie last intercol
| legiate debate the representatives OF our uni
| versity by their mastery efforts ana by their
able and convincing presentation or irreiutabl e
| arguments thoroughly satisfied not only the
| friends of the university. but also candid aud
impartial Judges; therefore, be it
| Resolred, That we The Associated Students OF
the University of California. in regular session.
| as a token OF our appreciation extend them a
vote OF thanks, and be it further
ResOtUed. That copies Of these resolutions be
published in the college journals.
In addition a committee, consisting of
Professor Jones of the department of Ro-
man law, Russ Avery, president of the
Associated Students. and j. w. Clark of
the training class, was appointed, with
| power to take measures to right he mat
| ter as far as possible. This committee has
| requested each of the three judges to pub
| ish the grounds on which he based his de-
| cision on the debate The Berkeleyan
| yesterday came out with an editorial on
the matter. which shows well the way the
matter Is reflected from public opinion at
| the university:
1.-THE debate is decided and we want to
say few words about the decision. This
university knows when it is beaten fairly
and has never hesitated at saying so in
whatever line the contest happened 10 be.
After last years debate there was not the
shadow OF an objection to the decision
! We knew we had been beaten and beaten
because our opponents did better work
than we did. But this year the universal
| objections to the decision heard here at
Berkely are SUFFICIENT warrant for saving
that the U. e. is unanimous in feeling that
| the decision was not adverse to us because
| Of any superiority on the part of our Oppo-
nents.
There is OF a student here or professor
either who heard that debate who does not
| Dellev6 tDat our reDreSen tatives Outclassed
their competitors In. every point of COM
| parison, and that the judges decided in the
| plalH lace OF the facts and then tried to
Justify that decision by most extraordi-
nary Interpretation of the second proviso.
I'VE do not hesitate to lay most of the
blame Tor the decision on the Judge nomi-
mated by Stanford. When his general
record and expressed beliefs are con-
sidered, when it is perfectly well known
that he was the only one of the three who
at first favored Stanford in the discussion
prior to the decision, and the others were
brought over by sheer persistency on his
part combined with the impotence of the
audience, when everything is taken into
consideration we cannot but feel that Stan
ford went into the contest pc rfectIy certain
which way the vote and influence of that
one Judge would be likely to go regardless
Of the arguments.
I'VE are not registering this kick simply
because we have been beaten, but because
THAT defeat, coming as itdid, has so affected
the spirit OF the university that even pro-
lessons doubt whether it will be worth
while to think of another debating contest
with Stanford. AS we have heard it ex-
pressed. what is the use of working for
year to prepare for debate if we cant
get square deal when the time comes?'
As we said before, this is not the first time
we nave been beaten-but il is the first
| time that this feeling of not being given a
TAR chance has ever manifested itself, and
IL Is so Tar from being a mere nomentary
emotion that it must be expressed.
| stanford will undoubtedly deny even
the possibility of such influences as we
ind hn