East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current, 1914-03-28
BAKER GOES DOWN
TO DEFEAT BEFORE
LOCAL HIGH BOYS
Pendleton Debaters Win Champion.
ship in Contest Held in This City
by Two to One Decision.
UNBROKEn RECORD PRESERVED
Clarence Bean Makes One OF Most
Forceful Speeches in History Of the
school - His Colleague Vernal
Backman Ably Supports Him-Ba-
ker Taken Unawarcs by the Defense

BY a two to one decision the Pendle
ton high school last evening won the
debating championship from the Ba-
ker high school, thus adding another
victory to an enviable forensic record
and incidentally preserving the un-
broken series Of triumphs over the
Baker school.
Defending the question, Resolved,
That the general welfare of the Unit
ed States would be fostered by the
complete application of the principle
of tariff for revenue only" the local
team from an argumentative stand
point left the visitors without much
support for its claims. The Baker
men made the fatal mistake of as
suming that, because Pendleton was
denying the principle Of tariff for
revenue only that she would advocate
free trade. Instead. the local de-
baters set up n substitute that rob-
bed their opponents arguments of
most of their effectiveness, and left
them laundering against a policy that
was not an issue
Clarence Bean, who had been III for
a week, was able to participate in the
debate and made one OF the most
forceful speeches in the history oi
local debate. His colleague, Vernal
Backman. ably supported him and
was particularly strong in his rebut-
tai despite the fact that he had had
less than week to prepare It.
/. b. Bowen, Jr., and Roy Allison
represented Baker and both boys
handled their subject in way that
was a credit to their school. How
ever, they were taken unawares by
the defense of their opponents and,
though they tried valiantly to regain
lost footing, they never quite succeed
ed. Young Bowen was very much
broken up over the defeat
In a general way the affirmative
argued that tariff Is taxation. They
contended that the fixing OF high du-
sies was burdensome to the general
consuming public because 1t enabled
the manufacturer or producer to sell
his wares at n higher price. They
argued that the general welfare OF
the people would be promoted by the
removal Of duties and thus lowering
the cost Of living. They argued, fur'
ther. that the wages of the laboring
men were not affected by the tariff
and cited the wages of protective ma
t,ons which are lower than those in
England which is a tariff-for-revenue'
only country
Where the affirmative made Its
greatest mistake was to accuse mega
tive OF advocating free trade when.
as a matter Of fact, the negative did
not advocate free trade as a general
policy. Furthermore. the affirmative
argued against the trusts and the neg
atiye showed that their substitute
plan dil not foster trusts.
The negative presented plan OF
protection which provided for duty
sufficient to cover the difference In
the wage scale here and abroad In
those Industries only in which the
United States had a superior natural
advantage and they showed num-
Der Of Industries especially adapted
TO this country. They showed further
that these Industries would either
have to be abandoned or else the
scale OF wages lowered to that Of the
foreigner
of the city, DR.. A. w. Penniman OF