negative side of the query, won the award of the Aycock Memorial Cup in the final debate held in Memorial Hall on April 7, 1922. Since the Durham High School was victorious in the final debates both in 1921 and 1922, this school came into permanent possession of the first Aycock Memorial Cup, the trophy given to the High School Debating Union in 1913 by the inter-collegiate debaters of the University of North Carolina. The Query for 1922-1923 The query which will be discussed this year by the schools having membership in the High School Debating Union is, RESOLVED, That Congress should provide for the enforcement of decisions of the Railroad Labor Board. The strike of railway shopmen during the past summer months served to focus the attention of the American people on the relations existing between capital and labor on the railways of the country. A study of this general problem brings about the question: should capital and labor be compelled by Congressional enactment to abide by the decision of the Railroad Labor Board? It is of great importance to all citizens that this question be answered rightly. The committee trusts that it may be of considerable profit to the debaters and high school students and to the citizens of the State, generally, to have a State-wide discussion of the query which has been chosen. Regulations 1. The Dialectic and Philanthropic Literary Societies and the University Extension Division of the University of North Carolina will suggest a query, to be discussed on a given date by the schools entering the Union. 2. All secondary schools of North Carolina, however supported, offering regularly organized courses of study above the seventh grade, and not extending in their scope and content beyond a standard high school or secondary school course, shall be eligible for membership in the High School Debating Union. 3. Schools accepting this offer and thus becoming members of the Union shall be arranged into groups of three for a triangular debate, the status and standards of the schools, their proximity, accessibility, and convenience of location to be considered in forming the groups. 4. Each school of each triangular group shall agree to furnish two debating teams of two members each, the one to uphold the affirmative side of the query, and the other to defend the negative side. 5. The members of the debating teams must all be bona fide students of the schools they represent. To be bona fide students, they must be in regular attendance at the time of the debate, and they must have been in regular attendance for at least 30 per cent of the school year up to and including the date of the debate, and must have made passing grades on a majority of the studies in some regularly organized course of study. 6. The team debating at home shall in each case uphold the affirmative side of the query, and the visiting team the negative. 7. The schools themselves shall select and agree upon the judges of the local contest. 8. Each speaker shall have twenty minutes at his disposal, not more than fifteen of which shall be used in the first speech. 9. Any school which shall win both of its debates shall be entitled to send both of its teams to the University for the State championship contest. Provided, that the committee may, with the approval of the schools, arrange for a second triangular contest between the winning schools throughout the State prior to the final contest at the University, should this plan appear to be a wise one. In this case, only those schools whose teams should win both debates in the second contest would be entitled to representation at Chapel Hill. 10. In the event that one school of a triangle drops out and the committee at Chapel Hill is unable to secure a school to take its place, then the two teams remaining shall debate one another, each sending a team on the negative to the other. 11. In the event that two schools of a triangle drop out of the Union and the committee is unable to secure schools to take their places, then the remaining school shall be declared the winner over the others, by their default. 12. The school having the strongest team on the affirmative side of the query and the school having the strongest team on the negative side shall be entitled to contest publicly in Memorial Hall at the University for the Aycock Memorial Cup. (The strongest team on each side of the query is to be determined by means of preliminary contests in debate at Chapel Hill.) 13. The school which shall win the debate, thus finally held, shall have its name inscribed on the Aycock Memorial Cup, together with the names of its two winning representatives. 14. Any school which shall win in the final contest for two years in succession shall have the cup for its own property. 15. All high school representatives and principals coming to the University for this contest will be entertained free of cost for two days at Chapel Hill. 16. All contestants are expected to prepare their own speeches with legitimate assistance of the teachers, principals, or superintendents in their school systems. Legitimate assistance is interpreted to mean oral advice, suggestions, discussions, and criticism. Suggestions as to Judges 1. The judges should be disinterested parties to the success of either team, and, so far as possible, should be non-local. 2. They should sit apart during the debate. 3. They should judge the contest as a debate, and at its conclusion without consultation should vote "Affirmative" or "Negative" on the merits of the debate. They should not consider the merits of the question. 4. Each judge should sign and seal his vote and deliver it, through an usher, to the presiding officer who should publicly open the votes and announce the decision. 5. Before the debate begins a copy of these suggestions should be given to each judge for his guidance. Originality of Debates The High School Conference in session at Chapel Hill during the summer of 1916 recommended, "that the principals of the schools in the various triangles be urged to take some steps among themselves looking toward the originality of the debates." The committee realizes that "the debate which a speaker produces should be his very best; but it should under no circumstances be better than his best"; that the success of the Union will be seriously hindered unless in each instance the speech of a debater represents his own individual work. It wishes, therefore, to ask the principals to give this matter their very careful consideration and to note particularly Regulation No. 16. In cases where necessary, the principals in the various triangles should take such action among themselves as they deem necessary. For further information, address E. R. RANKIN, Secretary, The Enforcement of Railroad Labor Board Decisions Query RESOLVED, That Congress should provide for the enforcement of decisions of the Ralroad Labor Board. Explanations and Limitations For the purpose of uniformity and definiteness of issue in the debates of the High Shool Debating Union, the following explanations and limitations of the query are expressly laid down: It is understood that any question of the constitutionality of a legal measure making provision for the enforcement of decisions of the Railroad Labor Board is to be waived from the discussions. It is understood that penalties for violation of Railroad Labor Board decisions would include in the judgment of the court for the leaders of the employers and for the leaders of the employees and, in the last analysis, for the individual employers and the individual employees, fine or imprisonment or both, such fine not to exceed one thousand dollars for each violation and such imprisonment not to extend beyond sixty days for each violation. It is understood that the statement of the query, as given above, contemplates in the future, close relationship and close co-operation between the Inter-State Commerce Commission, the government ratemaking body, and the Railroad Labor Board, the government wagefixing body. It is understood that the statement of the query as given above does not contemplate that the right of the individual railway manager to employ and discharge as he chooses shall be abridged, or that the right of the individual employee to change his employment when he chooses shall be abridged, except that the manager for his part shall not engage in lockouts and the employee for his part shall not engage in concerted walkouts, or strikes. เษ The Enforcement of Railroad Labor Board Decisions Brief RESOLVED, That Congress should provide for the enforcement of decisions of the Railroad Labor Board. Introduction I. The question is one of great importance. A. Nothing else so vitally affects the average man, woman, or child, as does a strike or lockout on the railway systems of the country. Efficient railway transportation is essential to a well-ordered, progressive nation. II. The present is an opportune time for its discussion. A. The threatened nation-wide railway strike of September, 1916, the passage of the Adamson eight-hour work-day law, the threatened railway strike of 1921, and the national strike of railway shopmen in the summer of 1922 are among the elements which give special significance to the problem of the relation between railway employers and employees at the present time. III. While Congress has created by statute the Railroad Labor Board, whose function it is to hear disputes between the railways and their employees and to render decisions, still no power has been granted for the enforcement of the decisions made, and the question now arises as to whether Congress should provide for enforcement of the decisions of the Railroad Labor Board. AFFIRMATIVE I. Present conditions existing between railway employers and employees in the United States demand a remedy. A. The life and health and continued progress of the people of the United States as a foremost civilized nation depend absolutely on continuous railway service. A general breakdown in railway transportation by reason of a strike or lockout would be the most overwhelming calamity which could befall the nation. |