H-Y-P Debate Deadlocks on Treaty Topic

Three rounds of argumentation produced a three-way tie last night in the annual Harvard-Yale-Princeton Debates, as the decisions went to the three visiting teams who argued against the proposition "Resolved, that a treaty of alliance with Great Britain would assure the United States the most effective means of security."

A Crimson trio consisting of Hugh H. Hill '48, Edwin J. Jacob '47, and Howard L. Swartzman '47 defeated their hosts at Princeton, while their collegues were losing a unanimous verdict to a visiting team from Yale in the Lowell House Junior Common Room. Princeton took the third leg of the series by trouncing Yale on the Eli home grounds.

Russian Expansion Feared

The losing Harvard team, which included J. Phillip Bahn '49, Robert M. Beren '47, and Roy G. Clouse '50, attempted to justify the proposed alliance on the grounds that it is the only possible way to check the threat of Russian expansion. Such an alliance would be merely a formalization of the working agreement that we currently have with Britain on many phases of foreign policy, they maintained.

Their arguments were effectively stymied by the Eli rejoinder that Russian expansion has been stopped in Greece and Iran without recourse to Anglo-American alliance, and that world security must depend upon world organization rather than the unilateral action of a British-American treaty.

The victorious Yale team included William J. Graham, Richard E. Shapiro, and Leo C. Graybill, who was chosen the best speaker of the evening. State Senator James E. Callahan, William Perry G.Ed., and Charles Rugg of the English Department formed the judging panel.

Last year's triangular debate ended with a victory for the Elis, and in the previous contest Princeton defeated her two opponents in the exclusive Big Three circles. Just when the Crimson won its last championship was a doubtful point last night.