Annual Report Finds Harvard Kennedy School Faculty Remains Largely White, Male


Harvard Square Celebrates Oktoberfest


Harvard Corporation Members Donated Big to Democrats in 2020 Elections


City Council Candidates Propose Strategies for Supporting Low-Income Residents at Virtual Forum


FAS Dean Gay Hopes to Update Affiliates on Ethnic Studies Search by Semester’s End

Harvard Union Debate.


The Union debate in Sever 11 last evening was on the question "Resolved, that Harvard athletics should be confined to New England."

Mr. F. W. Dallinger '93, opened the dehate for the affirmative. He stated that this decision of the faculty to restrict Harvard athletics to New England has not been made hastily, but is the result of careful thought during the past few years, and of the faculty's best judgment. The great diminution of expenses that would result from abolishing the long railroad journeys to points outside of New England is also a strong argument in favor of the new regulation. If we are doubtful as to the success of the prospective dual league with Yale we have only to bear boating in mind and see how by degrees other colleges have been dropped out, until Harvard and Yale are left alone. If a dual league on the water is so entirely successful why should not the same style of contest be the best in other athletics.

Mr. C. T. R. Bates '92, opened the debate for the negative. He said that the idea of the new regulation was not merely to restrict Harvard athletics to New England alone, but was the preliminary step towards confining Harvard to Harvard herself. He said that when deprived of the New York games Harvard athletics would have to make a demand for much larger subscriptions from the students. Lastly, the Mott Haven team which has won most of Harvard's glory in late years will soon be a thing of the past.

Mr. A. P. Stone '93, then spoke for the affirmative. He said that we have never been in so advantageous a position to receive this new regulation, and it is to be hoped, that we never shall be again, and the present time far from being unsuited for its adoption is really most opportune. We have gained very little from our associations with the small colleges, and in fact the vote of the University of Pensylvania in an athletic meeting last fall practically deprived Harvard of all chance of winning in football.

Mr. J. L. Dodge, '91, continued for the negative. He said that after the new regulation came into force, the best track athletes as well as team athletes of other colleges would be deprived of all chance of meeting their Harvard rivals with whom they are in all ways worthy to compete. Contests should always be between the strongest, but the new regulations will make this impossible.

After a number of those present had spoken from the floor, Mr. Bates closed for the affirmative and Mr. Stone for the affirmative. The vote on the merits of the question was, affirmative 12, negative 23; on the merits of principal disputants, affirmative 25, negative 17; on debate as a whole, affirmative 5, negative 6.

The question for the next debate is, "Resolved, That congress shall have power to interfere with elections as they occur in the states."

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.