why the American people should endure inadequate, interrupted and inefficient service. To give mere explanations of the despicable, awkward, tardy, and irresponsible railroad service under private ownership is not meeting the fundamental problems in this debate. The fact is that the railroads under private ownership have failed to meet the demands of traffic, failed to provide proper terminals, failed to maintain adequate rolling stock, failed to meet the harvest demands of traffic every year since 1900, failed in the upkeep of their lines, failed to provide sufficient freight cars, repair shops, and general equipment, failed to meet the necessary demands in a national emergency. When the government took over the control of the roads they were back in their upkeep, alone, more than $491,000,000 and the depreciation of the value of the securities of the roads in bankruptcy since 1910 was over $719,000,000. In short, the railroads were in a perilous condition, to say the least, when the government took them over.

Certainly it will be admitted that there is a railroad problem in this country and the question is, can we afford to patch up the roads and continue experimenting with private ownership and government regulation, or shall we take a confident step forward? The Negative have merely endeavored to excuse the contemptible failure of the roads under private management. Their solution would be to patch and experiment and temporize with the most vital industry in the United States. Their suggestions have thus far been incomplete and incomprehensive. Undoubtedly when there is no longer any opportunity for examination they will tacitly admit the failure of the roads under the old system and then begin to offer some temporary experimental suggestions for improvement.

Examine their suggestions for yourself to see if they will guarantee prompt executive action, insure responsibility, restore initiative, and guarantee coöperation. From our own examination of the thirty-nine or more experimental projects, we find that in every case there still exists an unequal partnership between the government and private owners, with the result that

these requirements of adequate service are not realized. The case of the Affirmative therefore stands intact.

I. Private ownership with government regulation has proved a failure.

II. The only alternative is government ownership.

Let us now prove that government ownership will meet the vital transportation needs of the country.

Don't be confused by the delusions of the Negative. By this proposal we simply mean that the government shall at the expiration of the twenty-one month period take over the title of the roads and operate them under a system like that under which they are now being operated. The questions of bond issues, kind of rails, appointment of officers, schedules and the rest will be met as they are at present. The questions which concern us are: Will this system secure prompt executive action? Will this system insure responsibility? Will this system restore initiative? And, will this system guarantee coöperation? Consider the experience of one year and a half. During the first four months of government control, car shortage was reduced 70 per cent; 6,500,000 troops were moved in nine months; 135,000 more cars of grain were handled in one month than in any corresponding month of previous years; 1,328 commendations, as compared with only 714 complaints, were received by the bureau of suggestions and complaints. Wages were increased $600,000,000; and the estimated reports of the income for the year 1918 will show a profit of $100,000,000, in spite of great increases in the operating expenses. This saving was the result of more economical use of terminals, cars, labor, and the rights of way. On a group of selected items alone more than $85,000,000 was saved. By re-routing a total of 17,800,000 car-miles was saved in the Eastern and Northwestern sections alone. One hundred thirty-eight terminals were consolidated with a saving of $1,434,000. Unnecessary track was torn up and used to advantage at needed points; 16,000,000 tons of coal in excess of the amount for the year 1917 were moved from the Great Lake region to the Northwest. Seven hundred fifty

eight officers were employed as compared with 907 the previous year, with a saving of $1,115,000.

In the light of these facts, I believe you will agree with us that government ownership has met and will meet the vital transportation needs of the country. First, by re-routing, unification of terminals, and more economical use of equipment, the railroads have been placed on a sound financial basis; second, by the substitution of direct management for round-about conflicting judicial processes, responsibility has been assured; third, by the increase in wages, the abolition of dilatory judicial processes, and the better treatment of employees, harmonious relations with labor have been secured; fourth, by the introduction of many economies, the initiative of the roads has been maintained; and fifth, by the elimination of commissions, state boards, and duplicated authorities, unification of the roads and complete coöperation have and will be secured.

In short, by the elimination of an unequal partnership between the government and profit-seekers, the economies of unified management, the advantages of centralized responsibility, the absence of dilatory processes of control, have given and will continue to give adequate, efficient, and uninterrupted service to the country.

The plan of the Affirmative is direct and practical; and it will guarantee adequate, efficient, and uninterrupted service to the country. The temporary, inconclusive, patched-up, experimental suggestions of the Negative have perilous weaknesses, and will not accomplish these results.

We believe, therefore, that we have established the following points: First, that private ownership with government regulation has proved a failure; second, that the only alternative is government ownership; and third, that government ownership will meet the vital transportation needs of the country. Having proved these points, we believe that we have established the proposition that, within twenty-one months after the declaration of peace, Congress shall provide by legislation for permanent government ownership and operation of the railroads.

APPENDIX H

SPECIMEN SCHEDULE FOR FORMAL DEBATES

Inasmuch as the making of a schedule for debates that are to take place in a class is likely to be a very complicated matter, the following specimen schedule is offered with the hope that it may prove serviceable to teachers.

The exercises on this schedule are adjusted to conform with the assignments in the Suggested Course of Study given in Appendix A.

This specimen schedule presupposes that, when propositions are chosen or assigned, they will be posted in a list on a bulletin board in a class room and will be given a number to which reference is made in the second column of the schedule.

The abbreviation Ex. on the schedule stands for Exercise.

The assignments for diagrams and preliminary Phase-outlines mean that the debaters should hand in at the time of those exercises a diagram for the full fifteen Phases of their case as shown on pages 181-182 of the text, with outlines of the proof in chains of reasoning to be used in support of each of the points drawn off from these diagrams.

Where the specimen schedule records by number the various exercises, calendar dates should be substituted on the actual schedule.