CRITICISES PRESENT METHODS OF DEBATING

In an interview for the CRIMSON recently, Judge Arthur P. Stone '93 pointed out the many advantages that are offered by college debating. He took part in the first intercollegiate debate that was ever held and for many years was coach of the team. Since he retired from that position he has closely followed the progress of the University speakers.

"I do not think the practical advantage of debating is in the oratorical practice," declared Judge Stone. "We succeeded for many years at Harvard because we did not practice oratory as such, but because we constructed logical arguments." Now, he said, the tendency had swung to the method which emphasizes oratory, with the result that the success of the modern teams has been greatly diminished. During the first years of debating we spent much more time in hard and intensive preparation. The organization of the material for an intercollegiate debate was as much of an educational value as a good stiff half course. We investigated both sides and in doing so we collected material of wonderful intellectual value."

Judge Stone briefly outlined the history of debating at the University mentioning the fact that the Hasty Pudding Club was originally a debating society. In 1831 the first debating organization as we know it today was formed and until 1892 it was entirely a club affair. It was in this same year that the first intercollegiate contest was held when Yale challenged us to two contests, the first to be held at Cambridge and the second at New Haven. The tremendous interest which was aroused and the general success of the novel event established intercollegiate debating on a firm footing."

Judge Stone emphasized the fact that far too little attention, was paid to the study of the question from all angles, and he believed that the only way to remedy this defect was to have but one or two debates a season and to spend all the intervening time in preparation.