Forensic activity

Usage examples of debate.

Coherence was achieved because the men who created the system all used the same, ever-growing body of textbooks, and they were all familiar with similar routines of lectures, debates and academic exercises and shared a belief that Christianity was capable of a systematic and authoritative presentation.

A warm and acrimonious debate was maintained by the Earl of Ripon, the Duke of Wellington, and other opposition peers on the one hand, and Lord Melbourne and the lord chancellor on the other.

The address in the commons was ultimately agreed to after a most acrimonious debate, protracted by the Irish members and their opponents far beyond the limits usual on such occasions.

Notwithstanding these weary debates upon Irish affairs, the house of commons was obliged to participate in another as acrimonious as any of the former.

Bright, on the other, threw some acrimony into these debates, but probably the former never appeared to less advantage in parliament, nor the latter to more advantage than in this discussion.

Ministers were first compelled to adjourn the debate from the 3rd of July to the 10th, and on the 10th it was found necessary to adjourn it again to the 13th.

Under these circumstances, his grace moved that the debate be adjourned, as the house had not sufficient notice of the contents of the bill, and as the title of it did not state anything respecting the precedence of the prince.

After a few observations from Lords Brougham and Londonderry, the debate was adjourned till the following week, when the lord-chancellor stated that he should propose that power be given to the crown to allow the prince to take precedence next after any heir-apparent to the throne.

After a very long and angry discussion, the debate was adjourned, and on the next evening was continued by Earl Fitzwilliam and Lord Monteagle on one side, and the Earls of Haddington and Ripon on the other.

The debate having been adjourned, was resumed by the Earls of Hardwick and Carnarvon, who supported the bill.

The debate having been again adjourned, was resumed by Earl Spencer and the Bishop of Norwich.

The debate was then adjourned, and on the following day it was resumed by Captain Rous, who brought some grave charges against the New Zealand Company.

On the motion for the second reading, which was moved on the 2nd of June, a debate was commenced, which continued by adjournment for two nights.

The debate continued by adjournment up to February 28th, before any division or amendment took place: the opposition wishing to stop it on the very threshold.

The debate continued by adjournment up to Thursday the 28th of May, most of the peers being anxious to deliver their sentiments on this great subject.