Debating Conference.

The intercollegiate debating conference at New Haven last Friday resulted in some changes that have been much desired by debaters. It was agreed by the representatives of Princeton, Yale and Harvard to abolish the customary banquet after the debate and leave the entertainment of the judges and the visiting team to the discretion of those managing the debates at each college. The banquets have never been successful since they are necessarily held at a very late hour. The judges are tired, and the defeated team is in no mood for enjoyment, while the winners are under constant restraint to keep their satisfaction from adding to the discomfiture of their opponents. The new arrangement bids fair to be both more graceful and more satisfactory to everybody. Another important change is in the order of rebuttal speeches. During the coming year the affirmative instead of the negative will make the last rebuttal speech and close the debate. This is in accordance with the procedure in law courts, and removes the too great advantage heretofore held by the negative. The disadvantages of the burden of proof will now be somewhat offset by the final rebuttal.

A definite set of instructions is to be drawn up and printed upon slips sent the judges before the debate. During the debate the judges are to be seated separately in order to avoid the present tendency of the debaters to speak to one part of the house. In the selection of judges, a list of twenty will be submitted together with the question, six weeks before the debate. Two weeks later nine names, in order of preference, will be returned. Of these nine the first three in order who accept will be chosen to judge the debate.

In regard to faculty coaching the status quo was left unchanged. The question of an undergraduate, graduate or faculty coach is to be a matter for decision by each college for itself.

Yale of course believes in faculty coaching, yet she was willing to rule out all but undergraduate coachers. Princeton does not wish to stand as an advocate of faculty coaching, but is compelled either to accept that or depend entirely upon undergraduates, because she has no resident graduates upon whom she can call.

Undergraduate management of debating teams is almost impossible because, in the first place, nearly every team has on it one or more law or divinity school men, since it takes that long to develop 'varsity debaters, and in the second place there can seldom be found among the undergraduates a man able to maintain the control necessary to produce harmony under his coaching.

There was therefore no alternative but to leave the question of coaching as the conference left it, with confidence in the fairness of whatever action each college takes. This fairness was strongly evinced by generosity and good feeling throughout the conference, which augured well for the future of intercollegiate debating.