The Plunket Medal Contest.

Owing to the exigencies of the war the Plunket Medal has not been competed for since 1913, but this year it was decided to hold the 10th Annual Contest on September 16th, and the excellent result proved the wisdom of the decision.

The ceremony was perhaps not quite such an ordeal to the speakers as usual, as it was held in the familiar Gymnasium Hall, accustomed ground to debaters. An unusual feature of the contest was the stage—empty, but for the chairman. There were not the customary serried ranks of professors and other dignitaries, the front ones apprehensive of toe-treadings or of sudden blows from the energetic arms of competitors. There were only six speakers on this occasion, and one of them, Mr. J. A. Ross (who was to speak on Sir Geo. Grey) was unfortunately absent through illness. The three judges appointed were: The Rev. Mr. A. M. Johnson, M.A.: Messrs. T. M. Wilford, M.P., and Clement Watson, B.A.

Proceedings commenced with a short address by the chairman of the Debating Society, Mr. G. G. Watson, who outlined the history of the medal, and referred to the plaint of the Press that competitors often recited page 81 rather than orated, and he defended the practice of memorising speeches on set occasions such as this. In mentioning past contests the chairman made such flattering allusions to the subsequent careers of previous winners that one felt the gaining of the Plunket Medal was a high step up the ladder of fame. At the conclusion of his remarks he called upon Mr. K. G. Archer, the first of the competitors, to speak on Booker Washington.

Before severally criticising the speakers we should like to criticise them collectively. In acting it is essential to excellence to forget one's audience, in oratory to remember it. In both, one is aiming at the same result—to play upon the audience as upon an instrument, but the means are different. In oratory it is the appeal direct. But on Saturday night we were seldom directly appealed to by the speakers. They left us on-lookers instead of making us participators in their emotions. Then too we cannot agree with Mr. T. M. Wilford on the subject of elocution. In his remarks that gentleman reminded us of "Sir Oracle"—"When I ope my lips let no dog bark." He confused elocution with enunciation. We agree with the judges that the enunciation was good, markedly so—but elocution is made up of a great many more factors. Pitch, modulation, inflection, phrasing, emphasis, all these are of the utmost importance, yet almost every speaker on Saturday evening showed ignorance of their value, and yet some of those speakers have been gifted with voices capable of fine effect. An accompaniment of elocution— gesture, was another weak point. If some of the speakers would study gesture before a looking-glass they would probably learn "to hold the mirror up to nature" by "suiting the action to the word, the word to the action." As yet, they are strangely at variance. We should also like to suggest that there is room in a speech for humour as well as pathos. Almost all the speakers were determinedly serious—but then that is a characteristic of youth in its moments of inspiration.

The first speaker was Mr. K. G. Archer, who chose for subject the great negro, Booker Washington. Mr. Archer well deserved a place among the first three contestants. He has an excellent voice, clear and ringing, but he pitched it too high and occasionally adopted the tone parsonical. His speech was not an oration—it interested the audience but did page 82 not grip them. It was uneven, held many ill-chosen words and came occasionally near to bathos, nor did it give a clear impression of Washington's personality. But his chief fault lay in his gestures. They were stiff, jerky, and almost invariably inapt. Mr. Archer, however, can easily cure his faults—none of them great—and then his merits will be more clearly seen. With his excellent voice, once he realizes its possibilities, he should do much.

Mr. Cooper next spoke on Lord Roberts. He was happy in his choice of subject, and thrice happy in the possession of a rich and sonorous voice, which, however, he pitched too low, and he kept to sepulchral tones all through his speech. For the main part he spoke slowly and with feeling, but his speech was marred now and again by sudden little rushes of quick words—almost a gabble. The matter of his speech was good, not sensational, but sincere. His gestures were few, but quite fitting. Mr. Cooper has great possibilities before him and showed more promise than any other speaker.

Mr. E. Evans, the winner of the medal, spoke on Garibaldi. Mr. Evans has a weakness for Italian Heroes —we remember a good speech of his on Cavour some years ago. Except in the matter of voice and presence, Mr. Evans outdistanced all the other competitors. His voice is not strong and is too high-pitched, but he knew how to modulate it and showed good variety of tone, though he made use somewhat too frequently of "tears in the voice" and became distressingly plaintive. At first his hands looked unhappy, but as he warmed to his speech, they lost their stiffness and his gestures were most apt. His speech was easily the best-written and showed dramatic feeling and intensity and he ended with a good climax. We believe his award to be most just.

The fourth speaker, Mr. L. K. Wilson, who spoke on Cecil Rhodes, gave a scholarly and well-written speech, but his delivery did not do it justice. Its good points were lost because his manner was too subdued and his voice too faint and breathless. It improved as he went on, but was never really clear and resonant. His pauses were too long, his voice seemed so suspended that one grew fearful that his memory had failed him. When his voice and manner become as good as his subject-matter Mr. Wilson will be an excellent and compelling speaker.

page break page 83

Mr. G. T. Saker, on the subject of Socrates, provided the audience with some welcome mirth. His references to the notorious Xanthippe and his question" Who am I?" were alike received with hilarity. In common with most of the other speakers Mr. Saker kept his voice too level and his gestures were inapt. His speech was not well-constructed, the beginning and end were both weak, but his vocabulary was good and his speech was refreshingly spontaneous and did not sound laboriously "learnt," as some of the others did.

Mr. T. M. Wilford, M.P., spoke on behalf of the judges and made known their award:—(1) Mr. E. Evans; (2) Mr. G. O. Cooper; (3) Mr. K. G. Archer. Hearty cheers (called for by Mr. Wilford, who now took charge of proceedings) were given for the three placed first, and after a brief criticism of the speakers, Mr. Wilford slowly presented the medal to the winner, who was again heartily cheered, and proceedings terminated.