FIRES OF CONVICTION

When Thomas Becket, Arehbishop of Canterbury, flashed his episcopal cross on the earls and barons of the Great Council in defiance of the mightiest king in the Western world there arose a storm of discussion whose interest has survived the dust of the chronicles by which it was recorded. It was a case of clash of convictions. When Edmund Burke arose to impeach Warren Hastings on the charge of high crimes and misdemeanors there was no talk of the pedantry and dry formalism of debate; against the fire of intense personal conviction and the crusading zeal of a diligent investigator even the aristocratic aloofness of the Lords would not prevail. And when Webster's thunder was answered by the dying Calhoun through the lips of a fellow Southerner the nation hushed to hear the last words of the giant antagonists.

It is a sad drop from the drama of these argumentative struggles between conflicting ideals to the trained enthusiasm and unstimulating presentation of the usual intercollegiate debate. If attendance statistics prove, as they do, that interest has waned in such discussions the blame must be attributed to the adoption of the formalism of the law court. Efforts to break from this usage they usually consisted of a copying of the "Oxford Union" type of discussion; and the success with which this English institution has become acclimated at Harvard is illustrated by the interest which the Debating Union meetings have aroused. But except for a slight avoidance of technical presentation in the Triangular debate, the Debating Council has not departed far from the "American" style of proof and pleading.

The innovations in the preparation of the Freshman Triangular debaters mark a radical step toward a time when the zeal of personal conviction will enliven the dullest of scheduled debates. To the clash of belief and disbelief in even the preliminary round table discussions is added the inspiration of speaking to an audience when there is any speaking to be done. Debaters who have prepared by this novel method of stimulating enthusiasm and vivld presentation will certainly bring into the forum some of the excitment and fire and even glory of these discussions on which has hinged the fate of men and nations. And while this is a high goal, the Debating Council has initiated the first step. Not the least commendable feature is that this new form of training is not a mere aping of trans-Atlantic institutions; with wise leadership the Council may evolve a Harvard type of debate and discussion.