Page images
PDF
EPUB
[graphic]

A. P. CONNIFF. P. F. DOYLE. J. A. SULLIVAN. J. F. McGRATH (alternate).

Holy Cross Speakers.

The holy Cross Purple.

THE HOLY CROSS PURPLE is a Literary Magazine, published at Holy Cross College, Worcester, Mass. Its aim is to cultivate a high literary spirit among the students by exercising them in both critical and creative composition. It serves also as a bond between the Alumni and their Alma Mater chronicling their successes and telling briefly the important happenings of college life.

Subscription: One dollar a year, payable in advance; single copies, 15 cents. THE HOLY CROSS PURPLE is issued every month, excepting August and September.

Entered at the Post Office at Worcester, Mass., as second-class mail matter.

BOARD OF EDITORS.

Editor-in-Chief: JOHN F. MURPHY, 'OI.

[blocks in formation]

The Harvard-Holy Cross debate which took place on the evening of December 12th is now a matter of college history. However, as friends of the college were not satisfied with the necessarily brief account of the debate which appeared in the December number of THE PURPLE, and expressed a desire to learn more about its details

we proceed to gratify their pardonable curiosity. Some time in October, Mr. Stephen B. Rosenthal, president of Harvard Union, in behalf of the Junior Wranglers of Harvard, sent a challenge to the Debating Society of Holy Cross. We may say in passing that the Junior Wranglers form a debating club whose membership is restricted to students of the Junior Class. The question, then, was in due time submitted to the B. J. F. Society, and after some discussion it was voted that the challenge be accepted and the society defray all necessary expenses. A slight difficulty here presented itself, arising from our inexperience in conducting debates with outside societies. As debates of this nature are unique in the history of the B. J. F., no regulations to govern them had ever been formulated by the society, and so we were obliged to adopt the Harvard rules, which, be it said in all fairness, are admirably fitted to secure a good debate.

The only concession asked for by our society was that our representatives should be chosen from among the members belonging to the Junior Class. The reason for this provision was that, the equipment of both teams being equal in point of advancement in the college course, a more even and fairer debate might result. To this arrangement Harvard readily agreed. According to Harvard rules for intercollegiate debates, the right to choose the question must be decided by lot, the losing team receiving choice of side. Harvard won the choice of question, and proposed as subject for the debate: "Resolved:

That the permanent retention of the Philippines by the United States is desirable."

After the question had been announced, seven days were given to Holy Cross in which to determine the side it would defend. In the meantime both colleges held trial debates for the purpose of selecting their respective speakers. The negative side was chosen by Holy Cross.

Our team immediately went to work with a will to prepare themselves for the fray; for they had no time to lose, only eighteen days being allowed in which to get themselves in readiness. Both sides of the question were thoroughly studied, sifted and discussed; all the literature on the subject which could be reached was brought into requisition, especially Senator Hoar's able speech in opposition to permanent retention, and Professor Blumentritt's learned exposition of the present state of affairs in the Philippines.

The debate was held in Mechanics Hall, the largest in the city of Worcester. As the topic chosen for discussion was at the time engaging the attention of our statesmen at Washington, and was much talked of in the daily press, curiosity to see how college men would handle it brought a large audience of some two thousand to the hall. As was to be expected, the sympathies of the audience were with the Worcester boys, but the representatives of Harvard were not forgotten in the hearty applause; their clever work in picking flaws in the arguments of their opponents was appreciated.

The debaters were arrayed on opposite sides

« PreviousContinue »