The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-05-27
TIE COLUMBIAN Debate
Annual Contest of the Schools of
Law and Diplomacy.
The Eject of Labor Organization on
the Working Classes the Question
for Discussion - Close Argument
and Witty Speeches Deci-
sion by the Judges Difficult.

sion scintilating with sharp argument an
sparkling with wit the six debaters, in tn
opinion of the judges, decided the mo
mentous question in the affirmative, "Tha
labor organizations are detrimental to tn
interests of the laboring classes"
Upon the affirmative side appeared IL
succession Albert r. Stuart, of Soutl
Carolina; Wilfred Hearne, of .Srkansas. ant
Warren E. Greene. of Rhode Island. TIL
negative was supported by Samuel r. Via
of Virginia; Walter A. Mcneil, CT Tennes
see and John w. Langley, of Kentucky
The judges of the debate were Alexander
! S. Clay, United States Senator from Geor
| gia: Donelson Gallery, United States Sen
| ator from Louisiana, and Edgar d. Crum
| packer, member of the House of Repre-
sentatives from Indiana.
| Shortly after $50 o'clock the judges filet
into the hall and took the seats reserved
for them, while from a door back of the
platform the president of the debating So
| ciety, Dwight Anderson, and the six de-
baters entered. This was the signal fol
profuse applause and the execution of uni
versity yeiis by the factions in the au-
dience representative of the several speak
erS.
After order had been restored Mr.. An
derson arose and delivered brief address
of welcome to those present. He explained
that the debaters were not chosen because
of their popularity alone. They had been
made eligible to this debate by virtue OF
honors previously won. Six public debates
were held during the session, in each OF
which six young men participated. The
first honor men of those six debates, he
said, would appear as the competitors for
Al 81 49,, Nv
Anderson further announced that the
judges would first decide which side won
on the merits of argument, and that upon
them would rest the further responsible
ity of deciding upon two of the debaters
which in their opinion excelled in elo-
quence originality of thought, and logical
force of the arguments advanced.
Albert r. Stuart as the first speaker on
theaffirmative pleaded for the rights OF man
against monopoly. Trades unions he de-
clared to be monopolies of labor, throttling
the freedom of the worker, destroying his
independence and destroying his ambition.
He ascribed the growth of trades unions
proper to the nineteenth century. claiming
TINT there was no legitimate relation be-
tween the labor organizations of the pres
ent day and the guilds of Europe in the
eighteenth century and prior to that time.
The plea was made that it was useless 10
connect the general progress and prosper
ity of the laboring classes with unionism.
There were many other agencies at work,
he thought, to that end Social progress
was described as a pyramid with an ever
broadening base attributable to the pub
lie school, the newspaper. and the circu at
ing library far more than to the lodge
room of organized labor.
Samuel r. Via, in support of the mega
tive, maintained that capital had found 1t
necessary to combine in order to succeed
in carrying out Its purposes. and this
made it necessary for labor TO organize
to withstand the entertainments Of the en-
ploying class. The benefits were equal. he
thought, and declared that 1t was too late
in the history Of industrial progress to
prate about the loss of freedom and the
labor organization. Besides the necessity
of the union of laborers, he though; it
was a benefit to workmen to be governed
by the most intelligent of their class.
Wilfred Hearne, the second speaker up
on the affii native, INDUCED in some witty
references to the arguments of the mega
tive, calculated TO show that his opponents
had been shooting very wide of the target
in their efforts TO make big noise with
their guns. II the organization OF labor
has for its object to offset the aggressive
ness of capital il is failure. Mr.. Hearne
thought, and he declared. that organiza-
ton never was and never will be neces-
sary TO the progress Of the laboring man.
Nothing, in his opinion, should exist mere
ly to foster antagonism. Society, he
thought, was founded upon right and not
upon might, and the position assumed by
organized labor in creating conflict with
capital was reprehensible In Europe IL
was possible to read the history Of trades
unionism and to see that 1t had failed in
all its pretensions and aspirations. In
America labor organization was young,
and We could not discern just what the
end would be, but the speaker thought 1t
was our duty to learn from the experience
of the Old World ard not to be guilty Of
the same mistakes here. In Europe the
labor unions had placed q barrier between
laborer and capitalist and had fostered the
separation of classes. The result has been
the destruction of individual worth and the
elimination Of all ambition from the life
of the toiler.
Walter A. Mcneil, second speaker for the
negative, proved to be master OF wit and
sarcasm. Through the greater part of his
speech he ridculed his opponents merci-
lessly, impaling them upon his jibes and
illustrating their faults of reasoning by ap-
propriate stories. He carried his pleas
antry so far that when somewhere about
the middle Of his address he turned to the
judges and stated that he would consider
the question seriously, It was some minutes
before he could proceed, that being regard
ed as the biggest joke of all.
Labor and capital, Mr.. Mcneil insisted.
were naturally antagonistic elements, not
to the point of destruction, but to an eter-
nal struggle for supremacy. In that strug-
gle II became necessary for labor TO or
ganize or go to the wall. To neutralize
the growing power Of wealth was the mo-
tive behind labor unions. and equality
could best be secured in that way.
Warren T. Greene, the final speaker on
the affirmative, might be described as di-
minutive Daniel Webster. Hailing from
New England, by suggestion, If not by ac
tual similarity Of feature. he reminded one
of that statesman. He proved match for
all his adversaries in wit. and. in the
minds of the judges, more than a match
for them in argument, originality OF
thought, and eloquence. II was left 10 Mr..
Greene to sum up the argument for his
side, and this he did in manner which
won for him the honors OF the occasion. He
began with a brief parody on Sheridan's
ride, the refrain Of which was 1.-The ques-
tion was twenty miles away" He then
expressed the opinion that 1t was unfor-
tunate that Adam did not know about the
advantages of organization SO that he
could have organized the animals in Eden.
and when the blow of punishment fell he
might have called a sympathetic strike.
and straightway have overcome the order
OF the Angel Gabriel.
John w. Langley, summing up for the
negative, presented closely woven web
of argument logical and convincing, which
won from the judges the second honors
of the debate. His address was listened
to with great interest and was perhaps
the best exposition of the question given.