UNIVERSITY DEBATING TEAM LOSES TO TIGER BUT DEFEATS YALE MEN

In the fourteenth annual intercollegiate debate last night with Princeton and Yale, the University was defeated by Princeton, in Sanders Theatre, but won from Yale at New Haven each by a two to one decision.

The subject of the triangular debate was: "Resolved, that the United States in joint action with England, France, and Japan, should recognize the Soviet government of Russia". The University defended the negative in Cambridge, the affirmative in New Haven. The Princeton negative team also defeated Yale at Princeton, thereby winning the title.

The judges in Sanders Theatre were the Honorable Joseph P. Walker, President Murlin of Boston University and Mr. George F. Williams. Judge A. P. Stone '93 presided.

J. B. Darby '24 speaking for the affirmative opened the debate for Princeton, The recognition of Russia, he said was in accord with our own past foreign policy and with international law. The soviet government is supreme in Russia. Nothing more could be demanded of is without violation long established principles of international law.

The first speaker for the negative, N. E. Himes '23, explained in detail the nature of the present policy of the United States, which is based, on the fact that it is impossible to have dealings with such a government as Russia's. It should not be abandoned unless we are sure that some benefit and not disastrous consequences will result.

Alexander Avidan '23 was the second speaker for the affirmative. Recognition, he said is necessary to the economic rehabilitation of Russia and the rest of the world. It would mean the opening of that great country to trade, and wold make possible the much desired world disarmament.

The second speaker for the negative, P. E. Walker '25, pointed out that to recognize Russia would not remedy the terrible conditions caused by the economic policy for the Soviet government. There are at present he said 30 million starving people in Russia. Since the war conditions there have been growing worse, unlike the rest of Europe. Recognition, by strengthening the present regime, would postpone any improvement in Russia.

R. H. Scholl '22 closed the affirmative case. After reviewing his colleagues' argument, he pointed out that the present hostility to Russia was disastrous to the world. Recognition, he said. would be to the advantage of all parties.

The closing speaker, S. A. Rosenblatt '22, after summing up the arguments for his side, pointed out the dangers of recognition. It would, he said, prove to be a second Mexico, only on a far larger scale. Our present policy has the double advantage of avoiding all such danger, and of hastening a change in the Russian government.

The alternates, whose work was of the greatest assistance to their respective sides, were, for Princeton, C. H. Tuttle '22; for the University, M. P. Lichauco '23.

After the debate, Professor E. V. Huntington '95 awarded the Coolidge Debating Prize of $100 for the best work in preparing for the debate of S. A. Rosenblatt '22