Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1904-04-23
BOWDOIN WINS.
Defeats Old Time Rival, AM
herst, in Annual Debate.
Final Result Of Meeting at Brunswick,
Friday Night.
Debate Throughout Characterized by
Spirit Of Fairness.

brunswick. Me, April 22.-(SpeciaD.-
Before one Of the largest and most en-
thusiastic audiences that has filled
Memorial hall for a long time, Bowdoin
defeated her rival. Amherst, in the
third annual debate. Tonight's contest
was the third one of its kind in which
Bo"doin and her sister college has met
both of which have been won by Am
herst. AS result of these defeats
boWdoin's team. this year, has doubt
less worked harder than any team the
college has put out. and as result of
inns, more than oratOrical ability, Bow
doln won her victory, tonight. Each
OF Bowdoin's men showed Il greater ia
lni!larity with the subject than did AM
herst. especially in the rebuttals. when
they showed a knowledge of the ques-
ton in all its bearings in d way that
opponents could not successfully meet
Amherst was represented by strong
| team. Her men were excellent speak
erS and this was their strongest point
as they did not equal BOwdoin in any
other respect that goes to make up a
debating team.
The question deba ted was "ResOlved
That aside from the question of amend
ing the constitution, the best interests
OF the American people require federal
regulation Of Industrial combinations
| commonly known as trusts" Amherst
had the affirmative and BCwdoin the
negative. BowdOin was represented by
Phillip Macean Clark OF Cambridge.
Mass: Edwin Laforest Harvey of Beth
el, and William Edward Lunt of Lis
bon, with Leonard Augustus Pierce of
H0ulton, as alternate. Annherst's team
consisted of Joseph Bartlett Eastman
of PottSvilie. Pa, John Francis Kane
of Gardiner. Me-. Fayette Brown Dove
of Rochester. n. Y, with Harrison
Lloyd Packard of Bridgewater,( Mass,
as alternate.
Amherst hinged their argument i'm
proveing that there were certain evils
connected with trusts that states We're
neither capable or inclined to regulate
them. and that the onigalternative was
federal regulation. Aldhg This line they
built up strong arguments. but ones
which We're well met by their oppo-
nentS. Amherst failed to meet Bow
dOin's arguments il a successful man.
ner.
BOwdoin argued their side from the
standpoint that government supervi-
sion would throw an unnecessary bur
den on the federal government. ir-
crease Office holding and kindred evils.
that it would cause friction between
state and national government and
that government supervision was
neither wise nor efficient. She also
oontended taht the chief cry against
trust came from the investing and con-
Stunning classes, the evils of which were
greatly overestimated. Figures We're
produced to show that but very few
trusts were able to obtain absolute
control and if obtained. to successfully
retain it. They argued that the whole
question was 4 question Of railroad su-
pervisiOn. They also insisted that the
affirmative must prove not only a
great evil. but that there was abso-
lutely no other way to remedy it,
The debate throughout was charac-
terized by a spirit of fairness and hon
esty and the large audience listened
with keen interest from beginning to
end.
The judges We're Prof. Thomas Nix
on Carver of Boston University: Prof.
Bruce Wyman of Harvard. and Prof.
George T.. Gardner of Harvard Hon.
Harold NJ. Sewall of Bath, presided