Richmond daily palladium. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1876-1904, 1901-04-27
COLLEGE DEBATE.
Earlham Wins q Third VIC
tory Over indiana
University.

University.
Last evening occurred the debate
between indiana University ana
Earlhsm, the most important inter-
collegiate event of our school year
This i the third time these two col
lepes have met in debate and the
third time the Earlham team has
won over opponents who have shown
themselves formidable in debate and
gentlemanly in defeat.
A few minutes after the appointed
hour, amid the cheers OF a large au-
dience, the opposing teams appeareo
in the forensic arena carrying large
stores of arms and ammunition IN tie
form of books, documents, letters
anS charts. When these were ar
ranged President 8fills, who with
Hon. John L, Griffiths, had followed
the debaters on to the ros-
trum, opened the meeting by
brief and very appropriate speech
OF Welcome which he closed by intro
ducing Hon. ]. L. Griffiths, who pre-
sided during the meeting.
Mr.. Griffiths in his charming way
spoke briefly of the changes in the
colleges since his oyhoOd, emphaslz-
ing in particular the superiority of
the debate over the Grafton in its
value both to speaker and audience.
He closed his speech by stating the
question of debate, 'sResolved that
the United States should Subsidize
her Merchant Marine" and by call
ing Mr.. Feeger, the first speaker on
affirmative.
Mr.. Feeger in an earnest and ef1ec-
tive way spoke of the need of mer-
chant marine from strategic and
commercial points of view.
Mr. Lawre ICE, the first speaker on
the negative, pointed out the causes
of the decline in our merchant ma
rine, presenting our commercial
growth in contrast.
Mr. Copeland, the second speaker
on the affirmative, spoke on the de-
cline of our merchant marine and the
need of legislation to protect our
shipping interests.
Mr.. Hutton, the second on the
negative, devoted his chief attention
t. statistics and the quotation of au-
thorities on the question.
The last on the affirmative, Mr..
Robbins, presented the various plans
for building up our shipping inter
ests and maintained that the subsidy
plan is the only efficient one.
Mr.. McGooney, the last on the
negative, condemned the subsidy
plan and argued in favor of free
ships.
The first speeches closed without =
decided advantage to either side.
The rebuttals were opened by Mr.
Hutton, who was followed by "
Feeger, McGooney, Copeland, vs
- 81 sss ! ftnls. 1t =. 49, H.
lndlvlQuat excellence andV
operation that won the rebutta
Earlham.
On the visiting team Mr.. Lawr ny
showed great skill both in plain ar
gument and in rebuttal. The best
first speech on the affirmative was
probably that of Mr.. Copeland. while
the rebuttal of Mr.. Robbins was the
most telling speech of the entire de
bate. Mr.. Feeger deserves special
mention for the excellence of his work
and the promise of his future ability
as debater.
The men of Indiana University
showed great individual merit, but
did not WORK together to the best ad-
vantage. The supporters of the
affirmative dealt with only the i'm
portant phases of the question and
adhered closely to them, while
the excellent team work made
a strong logical connection
between all the arguments of the af-
tirmative. These two factors aud the
skill end earnestness in delivery won
the day for Earlham The victory
reflected great credit on all the men
of the team and on Prof E. p. True
blood who has spent so much time
and care in drilling them
The debating teams were as follows:
Affirmative, Earlham College.
1. Luther Feeger
4. Albert L. Copeland.
5. Byram c. Robbins.
Negative, Indiana University.
2. Charles NJ. Lawrence.
4. Herbert F. Hutton.
6. Dudley O. McGooney.
The judges were:
Judge John V. Hadley, Indianapo-
lis, Ind.
Prof. Geo. W. Knight, Ohio State
University.
Hon. Merrill Moores, Indianapolis,
Ind.
Time-keepers:
Albert ]. FELTON,, Indiana Univer-
sity.
Harry n. Wright, Earlham Col
lege.
The instant that the decision was
announced the chapel rang witE such
cheers as never greeted a foot ball