The Virginia enterprise. [volume] (Virginia, St. Louis County, Minn.) 1893-19??, 1908-04-17

-, 40 "OAA no VIC EOSANA ou>NNooAN
team. may have an opportunity te
compete for the state championship
in accordance with agreed rules
and it.. respectfully refers to ou1
League compact, believing that the
attempted action of the Board is in
error, due to mistaken authority.
SCOPE OF AUTHORITY OF DEBATING
BOARD.
Article 13 of the Constitution is
as follows:
ARTICLE l3-DIsPUrEs. "An dis
putes between members of the
League, except in regard to the ap-
pointment of judges, shall be set
tied by the Debating Board of the
University. lin considering dis
putes, the Board will reject all oral
agreements that are not witnessed
by a disinterested party, and all
written agreements that are not
signed by the interested parties.)
If two teams have a controversy
concerning the selection of Judges,
each team shall appoint one person,
these two shall appoint third and
these three shall settle the dispute
If either team refuses to accept the
decision of the above committee it
shall lose by default"
The only persons bound by or en-
tering into the League are the men,
bers of the League; they made the
rules; they are represented by the
district directors. The Debating
Board is not a party to the agree
ment and is not concerned, except
as to disputes which properly are
submitted and which that Board
may, in it's option, consent to act
upon.
The Board, mistaking it's author
ity, has endeavored to upset the de-
cision of the judges on the merits
of a debate, upon technicalities,
which in no way affected the result
of the debate or the decision of the
prominent and disinterested men
who acted as officials. We believe
that any attempt to do 80 is in error
and of no effect, under the rules. If
any dispute had arisen, such dis
putez could be properly settled, as
the article mentioned provides.
There could be no dispute unless it
arose prior to the decision of the
judges, and if one did, it should
at once be acted upon by the
officials.
The Board can have no authority
except that which ia expressly Civ
en- it. by the Constitution and By
Laws. Article 13 provides that all
disputes, except as to judges, shall
be settled by the Debating Board.
A committee of three shall settle
any dispute as to judges to be ap-
pointed, and if the decision of such
committee is not accepted, then the
objecting team shall lose by de-
fault. This is the only case in
which, under the League rules, a
default can be entered against a
team. This cannot be entered by
any committee or board, but be-
comes operative of itself without
any action. In the present case
there is not claimed to be dispute
between contestants. All arrange
ments were satisfactorily made, and
the debate was held. 1t was never
intended, and is not provided, that
anyone could or should go behind
the decision of judges. The presi
dent of the League, Prof. +. E. Nc
Dermott, recently deceased, always
held that said Board had no power
to go behind the returns of the
judges, and in all the existence of
the League no attempt has ever
been made by the Board to alter a
vote of the judges.
There was no dispute between the
teams, as is contemplated by Arti-
Gle l3 of the Constitution; nor was
any agreement of the contestants
called in question. The Virginia
team has done nothing; has not dis
puted. There can be no dispute un.
less there are two disputants. If
there is any dispute here it must be
between the Minneapolis team and
the presiding officer. 1t is a case
similar to where a football team
objects 10 a ruling of an umpire OF
referee. There is no dispute here
between members of the League
and under the constitution and rules
no person can settle a dispute be:
tween debater and an officer. (The
debater. by choosing and accepting
the officer, agreed to be bound by
the decision of that officer) Wheu
debate is arranged and the argu
ments begin, how can there be a dis
pute between the contestants? They
can Debate, but must confine them
selves to the question-they have
no opportunity to dispute. Certain
questions can be presented to the
presiding officer. and by him decid
ed, and the League rules provide nt
method of questioning the correct
ness of such decision; the fairness
and capability and hixh-minded
ness Of the official is and must O.
necessity be relied upon. The onl,
question that can possibly be rails