News

Harvard Quietly Resolves Anti-Palestinian Discrimination Complaint With Ed. Department

News

Following Dining Hall Crowds, Harvard College Won’t Say Whether It Tracked Wintersession Move-Ins

News

Harvard Outsources Program to Identify Descendants of Those Enslaved by University Affiliates, Lays Off Internal Staff

News

Harvard Medical School Cancels Class Session With Gazan Patients, Calling It One-Sided

News

Garber Privately Tells Faculty That Harvard Must Rethink Messaging After GOP Victory

INTERCLASS DEBATING.

Seniors Defeat Juniors in First Debate. Freshmen vs. Sophomores Tonight.

NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED

The Seniors won the first of the interclass debates, held last night between the Seniors and the Juniors. The question was Resolved, That the representation of the several states ought to be reapportioned in accordance with Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment." The Senior team, P. H. Eley, A. G. Alley and T. H. Reed, supported the affirmative. C. P. McCarthy, E. B. Boynton and E. E. Smith were the Junior speakers.

The Seniors defined the question as meaning that there was to be no abridgment of the right to vote, and maintained that the property and educational exactions of the northern states are not such abridgments, but expedient regulations. The negative failed to meet the affirmative in their definition of the question, but maintained that all regulations were abridgments, and that the Fourteenth Amendment was applicable to the whole of the country if applicable at all. But they contended that the amendment ought not to be enforced: first, because it is hostile to the desires of the South; secondly, because it will be injurious to the negro; and thirdly, because it will depreciate manhood suffrage throughout the country.

The speeches of the Seniors were commendable for a skilful use of persuasion. On rebuttal both sides were weak and the arguments were almost always destructive.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags