OCR Text |
Show Mr. Su.rW and Mlas Melville both were calm, reserved and Impressive, yet full of energy and fire. In argument argu-ment It Is harder to dotermlne the relative rel-ative strength of the teams. There U no question In the writer's mind but that tbe affirmative side of the ques-lion ques-lion l the right aide; and that certain affirmative arguments In hla mind outweigh out-weigh all the negative side might say; but that Is to pas judgment on the merits of the question, and the judged were Instructed not to do that. On the whole, we think the Fillmore team outclassed their opponents In argumentation. argu-mentation. Their contenllong were better supported by reiisonlng,, authority au-thority or evidence than were the contentions con-tentions of their opponent; further, their apeeches were more carefully bridged from point to point, and hence were more convincing than were the speeches on tbe afflrmutlve. It wan clearly evident that Fillmore wh much better prepared on the aubjert than wa Hinckley. We think the Fillmore team apent more time In sludy for the debate than did their opponent. On the whole. It was a clean and IntereMtlng and instructive debate. Kvery speaker did well and watt roundly applauded. The judge were Mr. Woodward, principal of school at Deneret; Mr. J. Avery llmfiop, pout master at Delta, and Mr. Ileckwlth, cashier of the Delta bank. Their decision was unanimous for the negative. The audience also was nearly, near-ly, If not entirely, unanimous for the negative. The utmost Rood will pre valW after the debate, which wms particularly pleasing after the dissatisfaction dissat-isfaction over the judges' decision a year ago. We think that likely the do-bate do-bate of the other evening has done a great deal to create a more friendly feeling between the two school. At any rate, we earnestly hope so. Several Sev-eral other from Fillmore went over to the dt'biue. Among the number were Vr. and Mr. J. Frank Day, Mis Ava Sevens, Miss Helen Ilrunson, Mr. Orval Stott. and Miss Kthel Day. In behalf of the Millard County High School the correspondent wlshec to thank Mr. Ileber J. Mitchell and family (or their generous nld in tran porting tlx- Fl'lmoie team and their friend from Oasis to Hinckley unci rettiru. THE NEWS FROM FILLMORE ftilic Main and Local Happening! tt Lhi County Seal With this Issue of the Chronicle will end my Intermittent correspondence for that, in my opinion, worthy paper. pa-per. Several reasons have Induced m to this resignation. I shall be out of town during most of the summer, and cannot, therefore, render Mr. Dresser the aervlce he deserves. A further reason Is that some of my friend think that the Fillmore column has hardly been written in just the style and manner that they have desired. Then, again, I shall escape a good deal of work. All In all, it is best for me and also for the paper that someone In closer touch with what Is going on relieve me of Hie duty of writing "the new.' In this connection I wish to expre my appreciation of the courteous treatment and broad-minded policy of the editor. He has generously allowed allow-ed the expression of political and other oth-er vlewa In direct conflict with his own, and In other way has shown himself open minded and liberal. Not only on this account are the people of Millard county to be congratulated, but also because the Millard County Chronicle Is edited by the most ablo writer now living In the county. I wish him and hla paper the success both deserve and especially that the people of the county will appreciate fully what the Chronicle and Its editor ha done for the county. J. FRANK DAY. The triangular debate this year between be-tween the Murdock Academy, the Millard Mil-lard Academy, and the Mill tid Coun'.y High School resulted In one victory, the Millard Academy losing by default, for the Murdock Academy and two victories lor the Millard County HlKh School. Fillmore's debute with Hinckley Hinck-ley was held last Friday evening; at Hinckley. Tbe team from Fillmore were Mr. Will Starley nud Ml.-ts Jo'le Melville; the torn from Hinckley were Mr. Clark Allred and Mis 7ellj Neilson. The former bad the ihiu tlve aide of the follow ing question, the latter the affirmative, "Resolved, That the controversy between Great Ilrltaht and the United States should be arbitrated arbi-trated at The Hague- Tribunal." Mr. Allred argued that we were under legal le-gal obligation to arbitrate under the C'aytou HuUer convention, the Hay-aimrcfote Hay-aimrcfote treaty, and the arbitration treaty of Ifi'tH. Mr. Stailey followed by arguing that for Ave reasons ti.e Mays Paufleefote treaty was void and hence the I'nlted State was not legally le-gally bound, showed further that even If this treaty were not void lu provisions pro-visions were not Infringed by the a t if congress objected to. Mis NcilsMi ratlin next with the points tlmt e were morally bound to arbitrate V.,e fiuestlon and that America's Interests demanded such a course. Mis:i Melville Mel-ville then attempted to show that t!ie Arbitration treaty of I9'H does not apply ap-ply to the present controversy, for three reasons, namely, (I) the controversy con-troversy affects our vital interests, iur national honor and our Independence; Independ-ence; (2) It affects the Interests of third party, the Republic of Panama; Pan-ama; (3)lt Is not concerned with an existing treaty.'. The three argu I that it would be inexpedient to arbitrate arbi-trate for several reasons. In general the Fillmore debaters had considerably considera-bly the bet of their opponents In de-'.Iv.-.-y and Fnglish. Mr. Allred was too rapid and for that reason,, somewhat some-what lacking In force and Impressive-ness. Impressive-ness. Miss Neilson was pleasing, but hardly forceful and emphatic enough. |