LAW STUDENTS’ DEBATE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21975, 9 June 1933, Page 2

LAW STUDENTS’ DEBATE

On Monday evening last the Otago University Law Students’ Debating Society held its third debate. The proposition before the meeting was “ That India Should be Granted Home Rule.” Mr P. S. Anderson acted as judge, and the teams were as follow: —Affirmative, Messrs Moller and More; negative— Messrs Stevenson and Mowat. Mr Moller, in opening the debate, pointed out the evils .existing under the British system of administration. He said England’s policy in regard to India was a selfish one, and the natives had every right to independence. Moreover, the British army in India was nothing more than an incubus on the taxpayers. Mr Stevenson, for the negative side, said India was not a nation. Her climate, peoples, and various religions rendered unity impossible. The Indian Nationalists were a small, dissatisfied party which did not represent the people. The majority of Indian peoples did not care about home rule, and ns long ns their needs were met they were more than satisfied. Mr Moore, for the affirmative, said India had been united under Mohammed. The lower classes were almost entirely spiritually-minded, and this life was to them a mere preparation for the next. Thus they could not appreciate Western methods and development. Mr Mowat urged the need of Imperial unity. India was a mighty power .n the British Commonwealth of Nations, and if she was granted home rule, England’s position as an economic stabiliser in world affairs would be seriously impaired. The debate was then thrown open for discussion; such subjects as thuggism, child marriage, and diversities of religion were considered from a Western viewpoint. When Messrs Moller and Stevenson had summed up the judge placed the following speakers.—Mr Mowat 1, Messrs Moller and Stevenson (equal) 2, Mr More 4. The meeting ended with a hearty vote of thanks to the judge, proposed by Mr Moller.