Debate Won by Princeton

knowledge of practical difficulties, the secretaries would be very helpful in securing adequate legislation. By having them on the floor, the congressmen could also learn the needs of the departments by a simple system of questions. Finally the able Cabinet members would be in a position to bring out the truth in any important investigation.

R. A. Dudley, Third Negative.

The proposed measure brings new difficulties and dangers. It will interfere with the business of the Cabinet by taking the men from the duties which they are intended to perform, and will tend very definitely to change its personnel for the worse, making the Cabinet a body of political leaders. It will interfere with the business of Congress.

H. Epstein '16, Third Affirmative.

The introduction of the Cabinet on the floor of Congress is the culmination of a gradual growth towards open and efficient democratic government. The tendency of all nations of Europe and America, including the United States, is toward greater efficiency through an intimate connection between the legislature and the administration.

Reports of Congressional committees, substantiated by the expressions of great statesmen and endorsed by present Cabinet officials, are unanimous in favor of this reform which is the consummation of all popular government; securing efficiency, publicity, and democracy.

Rebuttals at New Haven.

The Freshman affirmative team supported the proposition in rebuttal by maintaining that the change would give the Cabinet members opportunity to defend their policies publicly, and would make the Cabinet more efficient by bringing it into closer touch with Congress.

The negative rebuttal centred about the arguments that the reform would lead to a declined in power of the President, and that the Cabinet would grow to influence Congress more than it would the actual administration.