each speaker as he came to the platform; but most of the hand-clapping and cheering during and at the conclusion. of speeches was given by the speakers' colleagues. On two occasions I heard "boos" and hisses; but I prefer not to tell from which side of the House. I believe that it was a good idea to hold this Open Forum discussion as a preliminary to the final debate, because now we can devote our attention to the political party aspects of the Question.

2. Report By The Second Critic: The Speeches.

Mr. Chairman, Fellow Students: The First Critic was right in telling you that Mr. Russell, the Moderator of our Open Forum meeting had announced that he would introduce the Smith advocates and the Hoover advocates in rotation; but as we all know, he found it necessary or desirable to depart slightly from this order; probably partly because there were originally more Hoover partisans than Smith partisans, and partly because the Moderator preferred to recognize speakers as soon as they asked for "the floor". So I shall discuss the speeches in the order of presentation. Also, I shall have very little to say about the content of the talks; as I prefer to stimulate no further discussion of the issues, and as I expect to have my hands full attempting to defend my criticisms. of delivery and platform peculiarities.

Mr. Franklin (for Smith) spoke longer than did anybody else. I understand that he had been given permission by the Instructor to do so, as his was a makeup speech for one which he had missed last week. He held an outline in his hand. It had been understood that none of us was to have the privilege during this course. He was obviously earnest. He spoke directly to us, and would have held our attention had he not been so slow. He seemed to be "dead on his feet". His voice lacked volume.

He halted frequently in the middle of sentences. He said, "... which I refer to . . .", thereby using ", thereby using a preposition to end a sentence with. He accented the second syllable of "subsequent". Some of his words which ended with final consonants faded away. His conclusion was indefinite.

Mr. Barker (for Hoover, later for Smith) forgot to wipe his nose until he got up here. He seemed to be enjoying his voice by chewing and swallowing it. He said "uv" for "of". He should have known better than to say, after he done his work . . .". He said "eggriculture" for 'agriculture". When he announced, later, that he had come out for Smith, he finally seemed to have his heart in what he said.

66

Mr. Carter (for Hoover) had his right fist doubled up; and the tense expression of his face made me think that he was either worried or angry. Whatever nasality is, he probably has it. He was just as "dead on his feet" as Mr. Franklin was; but he pronounced his words more clearly.

Mr. Lewis (for the Socialists, later for Smith) had a little private conversation with himself. I heard a few smart phrases; but he looked at the piano and at the rear wall rather than at us, so I lost interest. He spoke overtime.

Mr. Collins (for Smith) was scratching his back, I guess; also he swung around and kicked his feet at imaginary stones on the floor. He said “uh" about forty times. I lost count. He was afraid to look at us, too; and he spoke longer than he had any right to.

Mr. French (for Hoover) started out full of thunder. He was in no doubt about whom he preferred; but he obviously antagonized the Smith faction. He used no gestures, although he might have, with such vigorous statements as he made. He had to be called for time.

Miss Kent (for Smith) spoke as a New Yorker who knows what she is talking about. (There's one of those caboose prepositions.) Her gestures were all from the neck up. Her facial expression helped. She said more in three minutes than Mr. Franklin did in eight. She over a hundred bureaus . . ."; I think she

said,

Mr. Cotton (for Hoover) had no arms as soon as he reached the platform. I know he has them though; because I've Indian-wrestled with him, and he threw me two out of three times. I can't understand why a strong fellow like him should stoop over so, and be so "pepless". His voice was monotonous; but he made out a good case for Hoover.

Mr. Small (for Hoover) certainly stirred things up. It seemed to me that he had a right to come out flat-footed the way he did; although I admit his opening remark was rather blunt. However, he weakened his case when he said, " ... I don't think anyone . . ." and then spoke too modestly about Hoover. The Smith faction must have frightened him.

Mr. Finch (for Smith) gave a distinct and sharp rebuttal to what Mr. Small had just said. He came up here with all of the moral support of his delegation, and gave the best speech that had been presented. The way he raised his voice and quickened his action as he went along was excellent. Also, I like the way he brought out that phrase about Smith being "of, by and with the common people of this Country". He finished what he had to say exactly when his time was up, and deserved all the applause he received from both sides of the House.

Miss Warren (for Hoover) had the difficult task of following our most fiery orator. Her manner of address is more quiet, probably too unassuming. However, Mr. Finch's challenge brought out a rhetorical question which

she put to the Smith faction very neatly. She got hold of her audience at the start, and spoke so fast and with so much appropriate gesturing, that she held all of us.

Mr. Miller (for Smith) was "not so hot", as undignified members might say. He kept his upper limbs out of sight. Hardly any muscles moved except a couple to open and shut his mouth. He had notes, and read from them instead of talking to us. If some noise outside of the building for a minute had not forced him to raise his voice, his speech would have been a total failure.

Mr. Tabor (for Smith) clenched both fists, because of nervousness rather than of pugnacity. He stopped that after he began to use some natural arm gestures. There was good conversational quality in his voice and in the way he talked with us rather than down to us.

Mr. Simpson (for Hoover) Ah! That was a speech! You know, it began with the most nearly perfect introduction we have listened to this Summer; something like this: "There are so many reasons why I like Al Smith; for his courage, his cheerfulness, his administrative ability; that I realize with great regret that his connection. with institution like Tammany Hall practically disqualifies this good and able man from election to the position of highest public trust." Mr. Simpson's speech was distinguished by its good phraseology and its apt contrasts. Even if one doubts his, "... Herbert Hoover is the Superman of America. picture which Mr. Simpson drew of him.

...

one is stirred by the The speaker's

habit of smacking his lips was offset by the almost magnetic hold which his eyes had upon us.

Miss Denby (for Hoover) began her speech with the words, "I don't think that . . .". We preferred to doubt her. The reason why she began by holding her arms behind her was, apparently, that she had some notes in one hand. She mispronounced several words, possibly be

...

cause she spoke so fast and so emotionally. Her expression, ". . . chewin' the stumpuvuh cigar. . was characteristic. The speech was almost spoiled toward the end by her apparent assumption that the audience was against her, as shown by the recurrent expression, "Now you say The fact that Miss Denby was somewhat rushed for time was a cause of her weak conclusion.

Mr. Chairman, and Friends: If there were time I should like to hear a dozen much more caustic criticisms of my own speeches than I have offered you of yours; so please make it unnecessary during the remainder of the day for me to have police protection.

II. ANALYSIS OF A DEBATE

1. Report By The First Critic: Preperation For The Contest.

Mr. Chairman, and Classmates: On July 25, 1928, we phrased the Question which eight of our number on August 2 debated in Holden Chapel auditorium before a capacity House of members of the class and visitors. The Question was: "Resolved, that this House favors the election of a Democratic National Administration on November 6, 1928". At a preliminary Open Forum meeting we had all spoken our minds about the personalities of the rival candidates for the Presidency, so that the final debate centered more upon the respective merits of the Democratic and the Republican parties than upon the qualifications of Alfred Smith and of Herbert Hoover for the office of Chief Executive.

About ten days before the contest the Instructor selected the members for the teams and appointed all of the other officials; so that an equal number of partisans was busy on each side, and so that there was no question about the qualifications of the officials for the offices which they were to hold. The personnel of officials for the debate