Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-04-23
GEORGETOWN WINNER
BOSTON MEN DEFEATED IN DE-
BATE LAST EVENING.


L i
| Georgetown University School of Law adj
| ministered defeat to. the team of the
William E. Russell Debating Club of Bos-
| ton University Law School in CASTOR Hall,
GEORGETOWN last night. The proposition de-
bated affirmed THAT the Northern Secure
| ties Company is a combination in restraint
of trade within the provisions of section I
| of the Sherman antitrust law and in the
| opinion of the judges, who were three MEM
| bers of Congress-, and of the thousand spec
| tators present, the youthful speakers wres-
| tied with the question in a profound. elo-
quent and lawyer-like manner. rejecting
much credit on the institutions they repre-
scented.
Those, who spoke for Georgetown. In the
! order of their speeches, were William F. x.
| Geoghan, Phil A. Grau and John F. Muir
ply, and those arguing for Boston were
Clarence L. Newton, Fred F. Lawrence
and Harry Dunbar. Each young man
showed that he had gwen careful study to
the portion of the argumentx that fell to
him, and gave proof of his ability to speak
extemporaneously in rebuttal. The Judges
| were Representatives Alfred Lucking .,,, "
Michigan W. R. Smith of Texas and Will
lam S. Greene of Massachusetts,. Mr.. Luck
ing acted as spokesman, announcing the
decision against the boys from his state.
Interest Of Audience.
CASTOR Hall was very prettily decorated
with palms. ferns and flowers, and the floor
and galleries were we'll filled with interested
auditors who were very liberal in their ap-
plause. The debate began shortly after .
o'clock and lasted until after II o'clock. w.
Thomas Doar president of the Georgetown
Law School Debating Society, presloec anu
introduced the speakers, who, according "
the intercollegiate debating rules, were
given fourteen minutes each for their LOT
NAL arguments and six mlnutes each 10,
rebuttal During the evening, BEFORE ana
after the debate, and In the uIeri,is DC
tween the presentation of the formal argu-
ment and the rebuttal and while the Judges
were arriving at their decision, appropriate
music was furnished by Haley's Band, UNI
der the leadership of Will A. Haley.
Georgetown's Arguments.
The arguments advanced by the George
r. MN mon who supported the affirmative
side of the proposition. were along the INES
followed by the lawyers in the arguments
of the case recently before the supreme
Court. but no reference was made to any
thing that transpired there on that occa-
sion, according to an agreement enteieu
into when the subject was chosen, Whlcn
was before the decision was handed down
by the United States Supreme justices.
The Northern Securities Company was
clearly combination formed IN ofoer W
stamp out competition, 1t was stated, ana
numerous facts and examples were mus
tered to substantiate the statement. De-
struction of competition, they contendeu.
was the same as restraint of trade and
commerce Whether or not the company
used it's power to restrain trade, SAID they,
made no difference for in numerous SINH
lar cases the Supreme Court had held that
to have the power was Illegal.
Boston Took Negative.
The position of the Boston men, from the
nature of the case was "a difficult one. as
they had to meet conditions favorable to
the affirmative. But they set about 1t
manfully and succeeded in making their OPP
ponents think hard to meet some of their
arguments. They undertook to prove that
the Northern Securities Company was not
a combination in the real meaning of the
word used in the Sherman act, but merely
a legitimate corporatiepi that, If 1t were
combination, 1t was not in restraint Of
trade, and, lastly, that 1t did not come
within the ban of the first section Of the
Sherman law. @tt
The contest was by no means entirely one
sided and the audience was well repaid for
the journey over to the heights