The daily morning journal and courier., 1906-03-31
HARVARD WINS THE DEBATE
Continued from First Page.)

Jason Noble Pierce, 1906s in the Di- yinity school, graduated from Amherst before coming to Yale. At Amherst he was prominent in debating and won prizes for oratory and high standing in scholarship. On entering Yale he be- came a prominent member of the Leon- ard Bacon club. In 1908 he won place on the Yale debating team which de- feated Princeton. He was also a mem- Der of the team which defeated Prince ton last March, and spoke against Har- ward on the team which was worsted by the crimson last winter.
 Edward Henry Hart, 1907, of Brook lyn, prepared at the Brooklyn Boys high school where he was a member of their debating team. He debated on his freshman and sophomore debating teams. Last year he won the Thatcher prize, which is offered for the best de- batter from the academic department in the trials for the Harvard team. He was an alternate speaker last year against Harvard and is one of the Ten Eyke speakers in the junior exhibition this year.
 Henry Dickinson Smith, 1908 T. S., of Beloit, Wis, graduated from Beloit .col- lege, where he took part in interoollegi- ate debating, literary society work ora torical and other speaking contests. He has been active also as coach of vest ern college teams.
 Of the individual speakers for Yale. E. H. Hart presented his case clearly and his delivery was careful, but on the rebuttal he lost himself little and l did not seem to have control of his mat | ter. MT. Pierce had the most attractive delivery and good arguments. He had 1 the audience with him every minute and was frequently interrupted by applause, H D. Smith had poor delivery, but 1 his arguments were good and he was rather witty On the whole the Yale team excelled in matter and argument, but fell short in delivery
 1 Of the Harvard team E. ID. Elder was very powerful, clear speaker and presented one or two very good points, but failed in pressing them upon the audience MT. Hinkley's delivery was good and he made an attractive ap- pearance, but he presented little new argument. A. P. Mathews delivery was
 the best, but le made poor summary
 and did little to refute the negatives
 points. All In all, the delivery of liar
 wards team was the better, but they
 clung to one or two arguments, failed
 to press their points and were not en-
 tirely successful in refuting Yale's bes
 arguments
 Harvard argued for the aff1rmativ'
 and Yale for the negative of this ques
 tion;
 Resolved, That it would be for tn
 best interest of New York city to ow1
 it's street railway system. (The tern
 Street Railway System is taken t
 mean elevated, surface and subwa, lines)
 The arguments were substantially a ! follows:
 Opening for the affirmative Harvart explained the question and showed it
 importance in a city as large and pc culiarly situated as Is New York. Tn
 present service is antiquated, inconven tent and unsatisfactory. Of the cars per cent. are Rnsanitary, old horse cars The companies are four times over capitalized and yet pay per cent. div idends And now there is no openin for competition, the only remedy absolute municipal ownership. Regula tion of these utilities has been tried fo fifteen years and found futile. The cit must buy back the franchises they gay
 away. In England and Germany mu