possessions," the discussion would necessarily turn on the special question, Who are "anarchists"?

3. Should not be too broad.-Questions should be selected that can be adequately treated in the time allotted for the debate. Subjects dealing with "World Peace," "The Late War in Europe," "Socialism," etc., are too broad in their scope to be satisfactorily discussed in the short time usually agreed upon. For this reason, and many others, the constitutionality of a question is always conceded. In every question where the constitutionality may be an issue it is better to append it; as, "Resolved, that the several States should adopt a schedule of minimum wages for unskilled laborers, constitutionality conceded."

4. Should contain one central idea. The reason for this caution is obvious. It is based on the rule in deliberative bodies which allows a member to divide a motion that contains more than one issue, so that the assembly need debate but one question at a time. Sometimes in formal debate two main propositions are included in the statement of the question, with a view of thus making the question more evenly divided. But unless such a purpose is in mind, avoid a compound or complex statement. For example, "Resolved that the United States Government should inaugurate a comprehensive plan for the improvement of our inland waterways, and that the Mississippi River should be made navigable for deep-sea vessels as far north as St. Louis." Plainly, here are two separate propositions, and either of them would furnish ample opportunity for an hour's debate. Again, a question may be stated singly, on its face, and involve several definite issues. For example, "Resolved, that President Wilson's foreign policy be approved." A moment's analysis of the term "foreign policy" will show that our attitude toward Mexico, Germany, England, and other countries, not to mention other matters of foreign policy dealt with during President Wilson's administration, are all included in the statement of this question.

5. Should be stated affirmatively. To affirm a denial is always a weak statement, for no one, in the first instance, can well prove a negation. To put the matter in another way, the affirmative should be called upon to present a constructive line of argument. Now in many questions of pure fact one may affirm one side or the other of a matter in dispute. But in those questions where a change in present conditions or policies is proposed, the proposed change should be affirmed. For example, if one were to affirm that "the formation of a national debating league is undesirable," he is placed in the position of defending an existing condition before it has been attacked. In questions of reform or of policy the test would be: Does the affirmative of this proposition propose any change in existing conditions?

EXERCISES

Let the student determine wherein the following questions (collated from treatises on debate and from published lists) are open to criticism, either as to form of statement or as to subject-matter:

1. Is photography of greater practical value than mechanical drawing?

2. Was Titian a greater artist than Correggio?

3. Is the Wagnerian school entitled to a permanent place in classical interpretation?

4. Is Art the handmaid of Science?

5. The best way to solve our so-called race problem is to stop talking about it.

6. In the next Presidential election, Democracy should be triumphant.

7. Was Burke a greater orator than Fox?

8. Are all men "born free and equal"?

9. Is Quo Vadis a more powerful novel than Ben Hur?

10. Resolved, that if conscience says a thing is right, it is

right.

11. Resolved, that the time has come when in place of our present robber tariff we should adopt the saner policy of tariff for revenue only.

12. Resolved, that whenever Congress has to deal with questions involving the possibilities of war, jingoism and politics play too prominent a part.

life.

13. Resolved, that there is more happiness than misery in

14. Railroads in the United States should not be owned by the Government.

15. Reciprocity tariff treaties should displace our present protective tariff, and free trade should be instituted.

16. Resolved, that the cow is more useful than the horse. 17. Resolved, that the farmer is of more benefit to the world than the merchant.

18. Resolved, that women should have equal rights with men. 19. Resolved, that the rural community centers are a greater help to the farmer than the town or city centers.

20. Resolved, that the President of the United States should be elected for one term of seven years, and be ineligible for re-election.

21. Resolved, that the United States should join the League of Nations.

22. Resolved, that labor of prisoners in the State penitentiary should be utilized in improving the highways of the State.

23. Resolved, that prohibition is a failure.

24. Resolved, that written term examinations should be instituted in our high school.

25. Resolved, that the sharing of public funds for purposes which ignore the constitutional separation of church and state is a menace to our Federal, State, and municipal institutions and should be abandoned wherever inaugurated and prevented wherever existing or proposed.

Make a proposition that will stand the tests, on the following subjects:

(a) Entrance Examinations for Colleges.

(b) Honor System.

(c) Intercollegiate Football.

(d) European War.

(e) Jitney Cars.

(f) Convict Labor Camps.

(g) Poverty.

(h) Debating in the High School.

(i) Examination Exemptions.

(j) Newspapers.

(k) Juvenile Courts.

(1) The Kansas Industrial Court.

(m) Naval Disarmament.

(n) Co-education.

(0) Russian Soviet.

(p) Ship Subsidies.

(q) Immigration.

(r) Treaty of Versailles.

(s) Foreign Debts.

(t) France and Germany.

(u) The Modern Ku Klux Klan.

G

CHAPTER II

ANALYSIS OF THE QUESTION

IVEN a good subject for debate, stated affirmatively and in unambiguous language, the next step for the debater is to ask himself such questions as these: Just what does this question mean? What issue or issues are raised by it? What must be proved to establish the affirmative of the question? and, What must be proved to uphold the negative? In other words, he must analyze the question. Analysis is the process whereby the proposition for debate is resolved into its constituent elements. It is a process of critical examination, in order to extract the essence of the question and to ascertain the single propositions that enter into the argument of the proposition as a whole.

Now, analysis enters into debating at every step, in the development of the direct argument and in rebuttal. The skilful debater will not only analyze the argument for himself, but at every point will analyze the argument of his opponent, so that, as the debate proceeds, he is able to state, concisely and clearly, the point toward which the