The season just ended has been at least successful as far as the Debating Society is concerned. For the first time the Club has succeeded in winning the annual Debating Tournament conducted by the Debating Societies' Union. The College team (E. Armit, M. H. Oram and J. M. Hogben in the first debate and the two last-named and G. H. Gibb in the remainder), managed to defeat all the teams that they met. In the first debate Y.M.C.A. were beaten by thirty-five points; in the second St. Hilda's (Island Bay) were vanquished by fifteen points; in the third round the Karori team were defeated, in the best debate in which the College team took part, by nine points; and in the final round the Kent Terrace team were conquered by thirteen points. Armit obtained the highest number of marks in the first debate, while Gibb obtained an average of seventy-two per cent. in the three debates in which he took part. It will be seen that the College was not represented by its strongest team and if individual members will be prepared in the future to give up a little time to preparation, the championship should rest with the College for some years to come.

The competition for the Union Prize resulted in E. Armit winning with 23 out of a possible 30 points, John Mason being placed second with 22. M. H. Oram was the winner of the prize for the most improved new speaker. John Mason and D. S. Smith were selected as the representatives of Victoria College in the next University Tournament Debate.

The ordinary debates of the Society have been well attended and with one or two exceptions have been of a fairly high standard. Details of the various debates follow:—

On the 6th of June, M. H. Oram, in a highly coloured speech, moved,—"That the alliance between Britain and page 54 Japan ought to be at once terminated," his chief argument in support of an impossible case, was an old friend: "East is East and West is West." He was opposed by D. S. Smith, who by the way shows little if any improvement on his last year's style, and was seconded by John Mason. The latter's speech contained some sound argument. P. J. Scantlebury seconded the opposition. Rex Mason then beamed on the audience, as also did A. M. Salek, whese style reminds one of a motor cycle which explodes every five yards it travels. Others to Woo the judge were: F. A. de la Mare, G. V. Bogle and E. E. Rutherfurd in the heavyweight class, and C. A. Treadwell and K. McGrath, light weights. The motion was lost by eight votes to twenty-eight and Mr. P. Levi placed John Mason, Smith, Oram, Salek and Scantlebury in that order as the five best speakers.

The literary debate of the session. "That Sir Walter Scott is the greatest novelist of English literature," took place during the vacation on the 4th July. A. MacDougall was the proposer of the motion and was seconded by H. D. Skinner. B. E. Murphy lead the Opposition and was supported by C. A. L. Treadwell. Others who took part in the debate were:—Miss Coad, E. Armit, G. H. Gibb, H. E. Evans, and R. Kennedy. Mr. C. Wilson of the College Council also addressed the meeting. The motion was lost by thirteen votes to twenty-one, and Mr. T. S. Weston, M.A., L.L.B. placed the first five speakers in the following order:—Armit, Miss Goad, MacDougall, Gibb and Treadwell.

"That the adoption of vegetarianism would benefit the human race," was the motion set down for hearing on the 18th of July. W. Perry and J. M. Hogben, two ardent vegetarians, appeared in support and their arguments were at least ingenous. F. R. Lankshear for the defence, failed to see the point of the joke, but was assisted by John Mason who dined on split peas on one occasion and was hungry for six days as a result. Mousley was much perturbed by the fact that he foresaw in the adoption of vegetarianism the loss of his stout and oysters—especially his stout—while D. S. Smith feared a decline in the value of his shares in the Wellington Meat Company. By way of change, A. M. Salek treated the subject seriously, but Mr. Hursthouse, a vegetarian, made Salek's speech seem, by comparison with his own, the very height of levity. Those present were in favour of the retention of stout and oysters by seventeen votes to eight. The debate was not a "regular debate" and was not therefore judged in connection with the Union Prize Competition.

page 55

Professor D. K. Picken delivered his Presidential address on the 1st of August, choosing as his theme the subject of "University Ideals." The function of the University, he said, is firstly to rear men and women who will dare to follow the truth if they know it, and secondly to train in them the powers of thought by which they may arrive at knowledge of the truth they are to follow. University students should be standing aside for a few years from the hurry and bustle of the world. The recognised central principal of University growth must be, he said, the broadening of the basis of culture Students must remember above all that "labour is the only price of solid fame." The Professor referred to the tyranny of the examination system: "it has had its day, and there is nothing but stagnation to be had under its domination now." (Hear, hear.) He urged the students of Victoria College to set their hearts on the wisdom that is more than gold, "and with all thy getting (of wisdom) get understanding." At the close of his address Professor Picken was accorded a very hearty vote of thanks.

"That in view of the poverty existing in the Old World, immediate land nationalisation is imperative in New Zealand," was the motion set down in the syllabus for debate on the 15th of August. Some speakers entertained the judge and chairman (the secretary may have kept awake for a few minutes) with systems which they called land nationalisation, whilst others expounded at length schemes for the relief of poverty some speakers spoke about nothing at all (John Mason spent about seven minutes discussing this theme.) A. M. Salek in moving the motion laid down the principle that "If you want to milk a cow, you must have a piece of land to milk it on." The opposer, E. E. Rutherfurd did not dispute this, but showed the weaknesses in several land nationalising schemes which Salek had not mentioned. M. H. Oram and D. S. Smith were the respective seconders, whilst the following also made a display of their ignorance:—J. M. Hogban, J. Mason, J. C. Dudley, H. W. Monaghan, Hursthouse, H. E. Evans, C. H. Taylor. The motion was lost by five votes to eighteen, and the speeches of Smith, Rutherfurd, Oram, Salek, and Mason, in that order, were considered by Mr. J. W. Joynt to show the least lack of merit.

The debate on August 29th was notable for the pointlessness of the interjections from the back of the hall, to which however the speeches of the evening ran a good, second. In support of the motion, "That the time has not yet arrived for page 56 Australia to possess a separate navy," A. Fair made a sound speech and was supported by some cogent reasoning from E. Armit. H. F. O'Leary who led the Opposition managed by speaking very slowly, to make his matter take up the fifteen minutes allowed the opposer. O'Leary had found somebody else who was willing to attempt the proof of the impossible in J. M. Hogben, who seconded him. The five subsequent speakers all spoke on the affirmative side of the question. They were: J. M. Richmond, who spoke with much condescension, G. H. Gibb with some common sense, E. E. Rutherfurd with much weight, M. H. Orani very fluently, and H. E. Evans with much precision. The motion was carried by thirteen votes to eight—the first motion to be carried this season. Professor Picken was the judge of the evening and placed the first five speakers in the following order: Fair, Armit, Gibb, Hogben and Oram.

The last meeting of the session was held on the 26th of September, when the subject for discussion was—"That it would be expedient to adopt a system of No-license throughout New Zealand." W. J. McEldowney who led the affirmative buried his audience in an avalanche of figures which were evidently intended to prove the truth of his side of the case. John Mason led the opposition and brought forward few solid arguments in a most forcible manner. The respective seconders were E. Armit and J. M. Hogben. A goodly number of speakers followed on both sides of the question: A. MacDougall, J. W. Ross, G. R. Hutcheson, F. A. de la Mare, and H. E. Evans in the affirmative, and R. Butcher, A. Fair, M. H. Oram and V. B. Willis, in the negative. The motion on being put to the meeting was carried by 25 votes to 12. Mr. Granville Hunt, the judge, gave much kindly criticism and placed the five speakers in the following order:—A. Fair, E. Armit, J. Mason, J. M. Hogben, and R. Butcher.