Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-06-03
DEBATE H0NORS ARE DECIDED.
G. W. U. ORATORS FOR Mega
TIVE ACCORDED VICTORY.
John Jansen, ]. T. Kenneday and E.
Percy Gates Accorded Indi-
vidual Distinction.

Before large throng OF commence
ment friends and college associates, six
young orators of the George WASHINGTON
University battled in debate last night
for two hours at the Jnirers.-y hall, 18th
and III streets, in efforts to win the honor
OF recognition as the best university de-
batter OF the year.
The subject for discussion was: "Shall
all corporations engaged IN interstate
commerce be required to incorporate un-
der federal law-constitutionality grant
ed.
The negative argument advanced by
John Jansen of Utah. Charles Leavitt
and r. Perry Gates. was given the debate
kenneday of Pennsylvania. Charles A.
Sunderlin and Roscoe II. Hopper. lndi-
vidual debating honors were voted to Mr..
Jansen. Mr.. Kennedy and Mr.. Gates
me judges were Judge Stanton j:
Claims; Judge Wendell p. Stafford of the
Supreme Court Of the District. and Prof.
Harlan Of George Washington University.
Debater Taken Ill.
Tie exercises were slightly marred by
the sudden indisposition of debater.
Charles a. Sundcrlin. who Withdrew from
the contest after speaking .or several
stage, however, and assisted his COL
leagues in affirming the proposition.
Another debater, John ID. Ellis Of the
negative team, at the last moment sent
word he could not be present. Charles
LeaVitt was substituted.
DIR. Charles w. Needham, president of
the university, who presided outlined the
subject OF the discussion, and as head
OF the university spoke In most approx
ing terms OF the two debating societies of
the institution and Of collegiate debating
in general.
1T Is ono OF the most potent brain de-
VelopeTs yet discovered In educational
work. In my opinion" said President
Needham. 1T throws the young stu
dent entirely upon his own responsibility
or thought the value Of which is most ap-
parent In addition. debate makes the
student alert and ever looking for a
weak spot in his opponents argument,
which leads directly to self-reliance and
gives him a wide scope Of thought and
action much to be desired
Inc first argument was presented by
Roscoe ii. Hopper, for the affirmative
Mr. Hopper gave minute data relative to
trusts and trust magnates. He quoted
statistics showing that the wealth and
control of the huge corporations were
conferred IN comparatively few men.
Then. as indicated in investigations insti-
tuted by the courts and federal author
tiles. he asserted. they were grasping and
predatory in tho pursuit Of business
The speaker complained that the lack
OF uniformity in state laws in granting
charters to giant corporations was re-
sponsible for the present state OF affairs.
and pleaded that the matter Of controlling
them should lay entirely in the hands
OF the interstate commerce commission
under suitable federal legislation. such as
a federal license, granted on condition
tnat the corporation abolish notorious
abuses.
Especially dangerous were the abuses OF
overcapitalization. Mr. Hupper asserted.
and the interhoiding Of corporate shares
and internal Encouragement He said
that under the wide dissimilarity Of state
laws the only logical and reasonable rem
edy would be absolute federal control