THE MAIN ISSUES REACHED THROUGH THE CLASH OF OPINION Here, then, are the arguments of both sides, set side by side for the sake of comparison. It is clear that the two sides meet with a definite clash on the first four contentions. Subordinate The questions, therefore, which must be decided, the main issues on which the advocates of the new system must win or lose their case, are these four: (1) Whether each pupil can choose better for himself or school authorities for all; this in turn depends on (a) whether there is a common ground essential for all pupils; (b) whether with freedom of choice pupils will avoid this common ground; (c) whether there are a sufficient number of safeguards to prevent unwise choices. (2) Whether the group system or any system of partial election has sufficient advantages to offset those of the elective system. (3) Which plan is better suited to secure the interest, sympathy, effective work, and happiness of teachers and principals. (4) Whether the moral benefits of drudgery, of conquering distasteful subjects, of submitting to authority, acquiring habits of persistence and accuracy, which are claimed for the prescribed system, outweigh the moral worth of training in free choice which is claimed for the elective system. Such are the four main issues. Transitional Above and beyond these, on which the two sides clinch, other arguments are advanced on both sides of the question. What is their bearing? If they are beside the point, we can Paragraph. discard them at once; if they are germane, but incontestable, we must keep them in mind as truths to be reckoned with; but in any event, since they have all been brought forward repeatedly in connection with this subject, we must give them fair consideration. We may well do so before we examine the main issues. EXCLUSION OF IRRELEVANT MATTER In an overlapping group we included the objection that the majority of public high schools are too limited in teaching force and equipment to introduce elective studies; and another objection, — the danger of superficiality in the so-called enriching and broadening of lower-school programmes. These two matters are continually and often evasively slipped in among the arguments against elective studies; but if this analysis of the question serves any purpose, it helps to make clear that these two points are not germane, but beyond the limits of the present subject. They are extraneous, because, as regards the first objection, it is obvious that schools which can offer only one complete course are not concerned with the matter of election; such schools fall beyond the scope of this discussion until they are able to extend their curricula. Likewise, concerning the second objection, however important it may be to recognize the possible dangers in enriching and broadening the programmes of the lower schools, the question does not concern the election of studies. This point is important. If there are any subjects which are worthless, out of place, or superficially taught, they are so whether they are imposed on the pupil or left to his choice. The real fault is that they are in the curriculum at all. These two matters, therefore, may be safely banished from the real issues. STATEMENT OF ADMITTED MATTER The arguments against the elective system further include two contentions: first, that unrestricted election is impossible, since there are so many hindrances to its free play; second, that the elective system throws on busy parents a responsibility hitherto wholly assumed by the schools. Surely these two points concern us vitally; but they are admitted by everybody. So much is common ground. The last objection mentioned above a kind alway urged against any reform, namely, that the new system will not put a stop to all educational wastes - is also conceded. APPENDIX VI SPECIMEN BRIEFS1 "GRANTING the willingness of Cuba, the annexation of Cuba to the United States would be for the best interests of the United States." (A) BRIEF FOR THE AFFIRMATIVE INTRODUCTION I. The question arises from the following facts: A. "Cuba is a natural extension of our coast-line" (President B. The United States by the Treaty of Paris stands sponsor for C. In the summer of 1906 Cuba broke into revolution, and in D. On account of the apparent inability of the Cubans to maintain order, the cry for "anexation" is echoed through the United States. E. On the other hand, such an eminent statesman as Andrew D. White believes that annexation would be a serious mistake. II. The opponents of annexa- III. Those who favor annexa tion maintain: A. Annexation would not 1. It would ruin the Amer ican beet sugar indus- tion maintain: A. Annexation would pay economically, for 1. It would increase our trade, for 1 This brief was prepared by a Bowdoin College debating team, and used in an intercollegiate debate at Syracuse University in 1907. The clash of opinion (in II and III) was elaborated for the sake of finding the issues, not for delivery in this complete form. a. The production of Cuban sugar cane would in crease. b. Cuban cane sugar would enter the United States duty free. a. Annexation would give Cuba a stable government, and a'. This would develop the island. 2. Annexation would stimulate our fundamental economic industries. 3. Annexation offers the American sugar consumers a saving of $108,000,000 yearly. 4. Even if annexation would ruin the American beet sugar industry, the land can be more profitably used in raising corn. B. The Cubans (1,600,000) are B. The inferiority of the Cuban D. Annexation is not the only solution of the Cuban situation, for 1. An American protectorate would give the island stable government. 2. Reciprocity would secure all the trade advantages of annexation. of circumstances, and should be changed by circumstances. 2. This question grants the willingness of Cuba. D. Annexation is the best solution of the Cuban situation, for 1. No other method has so many advantages as annexation. IV. The question is thus resolved into the following main issues: A. Would the annexation of Cuba pay economically? B. Is the inferiority of the Cuban population sufficient to offset the advantages of annexation? C. Would annexation be dishonorable? D. Does any other solution of the Cuban situation offer equal advantages? PROOF I. The annexation of Cuba would pay economically, for 1. Although heretofore conditions in Cuba have been 1'. Yet, under annexation conditions would be favorable to trade, for a. The United States would extend its own stable government to Cuba. b. The island would be insured against internal war fare. c. The United States would extend its own efficient school system to Cuba. d. There would be free trade between Cuba and the United States, for (Refutation.) (1) The argument that the Cuban tariff would not be removed, since the Philippine tariff has not been removed, is an unsound analogy, for |