IIT Chicago Kent College of Law - Transcript Yearbook (Chicago, IL)

Page 95 text:

i 'rms Y 1 TPANSCPIPT - IRVING 'l'0l'l,lN F. ALLAN MINNE HAROLD FISHBEIN Varsity Debating Teams and it might even be said. enlightening. The Seniors were victorious and thereby became the college champions. The first inter-collegiate debate of the season was with the Lincoln College of Law at Springfield, Illinois. Messrs. F. Allan Minne, Irving Toplin and Harold Fishbein composed the Kent team which journeyed to Springlield and brought back a decision in favor of Kent. Following this debate, Marquette University came to Chicago for a debate by way of radio. Messrs. Harold T. Huber. Eli D. Langert and Carlyle Guibor advanced the atiirmative arguments for Kent. The subject debated was: RE- SOLVED, the United States government create a separate Air Corps. This debate caused a great deal of interest among the radio listeners. The decision was two-to-one in favor of the boys from Marquette University. The University of Oklahoma furnished the opposition in the third debate of the year. Chicago-Kent was represented by Messrs. Minne, Toplin and Fish- bein. The debate was broadcasted by VVMAQ and was closely contested from start to finish. The judges awarded the decision to the Oklahoma boys. Iowa State College of Ames, Iowa, was next on the schedule. This debate, like the two previous ones, was also broadcasted by VVMAQ. The radio public was asked to render the decision. The vote was overwhelmingly in favor of Kent, which was repreesnted by Messrs. Irving Toplin, Harold Fishbein and Eli D. Langert. The fifth debate to be held was with Northwestern College of Naperville. This was an open-forum debate and, consequently, no decision was given. Toplin, Fishbein and Langert again represented' Chicago-Kent. The sixth debate was with the University of VVyoming and was broad- casted by VVMAQ. The respective teams were composed of two men each. Mr. Toplin and Mr. Fishbein made up the Kent team and succeeded in inducing a majority of the radio listeners to vote in our favor. thereby giving the Chicago-Kent College of Law three victories out of a possible five. 91 9261? ,

Page 94 text:

Q c 2 IPANSHIERWT - ELI D. LANGERT CARLYLE GUIBOR HAROLD T. HUBER Varsity Debating Teams t HE Chicago-Kent College of Law debating teams have been busily en- gaged in a number of intercollegiate debates during the past season. Shortly after the commencement of the first semester, the try-outs were held in the respective classes to determine the winners of the Burke Memorial debating prizes. The freshmen responded to the call for debaters with a great vigor and had thirty students in competition with each other to determine the three best debaters i11 that class. From these contestants the following students were selected and awarded first, second and third prizes, respectively: Irving Toplin, Frank Block and M. C. Crew. In the Junior class the interest manifested was not as great as in the Freshman class, but even so, keen competition prevailed between those who did take part. Carlyle Guibor, Harold Fishbein and Morris Wfasher were awarded first, second and third prizes, respectively. The Senior class contest was the last to be held and brought out a large number of asiprants for forensic honors. This try-out resolved itself into a three-cornered iight between three veteran debatersg namely, F. Allan Minne, Harold T. Huber and Eli D. Langert, and first, second and third prizes were awarded to them in the order in which their names appear. After the foregoing students had been selected, an interclass debate was staged between the Freshman and Junior classes. The Juniors proved too strong for the Freshman and defeated them on the question: RESOLVED, that the United States government should recognize the Soviet govermnent of Russia. By winning from the Freshmen, the Junior Steam carried the right to meet the Senior class team to determine the class championship of the college. The Juniors debated the Seniors on the subject: RESOLVED, that the states should approve the proposed Federal Child Labor amendment. Both teams were about equally matched and greatly delighted their audience with their verbal quips, which, though not exactly argumentative at times, nevertheless proved interesting, 90 1926

Page 96 text:

IPANSCDXPT ! F 219261