OU O'Connor Gets The Marx

AUC affirmed against OU the proposition "That it is in the interests of the community to be ruled by its philosophers." Mr. Olphert, with a certain solemnity and an absolute immobile countenance and a rather blandishing Mr. O'Sullivan provided a team with more balance than Otago's, but the OU second speaker, Mr. O'Connor was head and shoulders above all the others as an individual speaker. This debate, of course, dwelt at length on Plato, and ranged from "evil" philosophers such as Marx and Nietszche to "wise" philosophers—statesmen such as Wilson. Smuts and Masaryk. Mr. O'Connor scored highly on his voice, stance, matters, style and personality, he had a speech polished but not too exact, his opening was inspiring and he held the audience in the hollow of his hand. One feature of this debate was the way in which Mr. Olphert crossed the interjections of the OU leaders with a withering glance interjection, while not even bothering to interrupt his flow of words.

The last debate was affirmed by CAC against VUC on the subject "That divorce in New Zealand should be made easier." Its great weakness was Lincoln's failure to advance any logical affirmation which, as it were, left VUC the unenviable task of shadow-boxing. Both Ben O'Connor and Jim Milburn were very restrained. They debated well, and Jim, who was placed third was the better speaker of the two. When Jim interjected during a statement "the children would be far better off" with "in a house" the CAC leader replied "exactly."

While the judges were absent, an old student' of VUC. Mr. Prosser, told the audience some interesting facts about Mr. Joynt and the contest he founded. The contest as a whole proved the advantages of divorcing it from Tournament and of sending it to the Agricultural Colleges.