From “Q.C.G.”, May 1903

The Literary and Debating Society.

Words do well

When he that speaks them pleases those that hear.

Towards the end of the year, the ordinary meetings of the Debating Society showed a marked improvement on those which had preceded them. The attendance was good, and the speakers both numerous and enthusiastic. The “I have got nothing-to-say” orator was, however, also very much in evidence. Could not some one invent another form of introduction for the bashful or modest speaker? A rather uncompromising friend of mine told me even a swear word (which is not to be heard of course) would be preferable.

The paper by Mr. J. O’Neill, M.A., on that fascinating subject “Irish Mythology” was typical of the man. He treated the subject in a most poetic and romantic fashion which was not entirely lost on his audience, even if he spoke over the heads of many, or most of us. Mr. T. Walsh, BA., objected to certain of his views, which were, we think, too sceptical, and the discussion between two gentlemen so well versed in Celtic Lore was most interesting.

The Parliamentary night was like others at which we have been, but the opposition was too weak, the speakers on the different sides not having been very judiciously selected. The chief bill was one for “Early closing” the hour selected being 6 a.m. At next meeting, Mr. McFarland supported the general adoption of Vegetarianism, Mr. Minnis leading the opposition. The debate was perhaps peculiar, for, though the principal speakers were excellent, they appeared to consider the question from a purely academical point of view, while some of the others seemed to take it as a matter of vital importance. The Vegetarians (?) were victorious, but their majority was small, and listening to the debate did not make any change in my convictions, if any, on the subject.

One public lecture was delivered during the term, the chair being occupied by the President of the College. Professor McElderry chose for the title of his lecture “The Modern Renaissance,” and dealt in a very exhaustive and entertaining manner with the revival of classical learning in modern times. To the ordinary listener most of it was interesting and we are sure all of it was delightful to those versed in the lore of ancient Greece and Rome, and for whom old manuscripts and archaeological discoveries in Egypt have an undying interest. The only fault we found—if fault it be—was that so much was crowded into the time, the result being that our minds had scarcely grasped one picture before our attention was directed to another- Would it be too much to hope that it may yet appear in print so that we may study it at our leisure? Mr. McFarland in proposing the vote of thanks displayed his well-known tact and ornate language, and Mr. Flack, who seconded it, was fiercely frank in protesting his ignorance of those abstruse classics, but he treated us to one of his amusing speeches on nothing in particular.

Of course, that ever-green discussion on the conduct of the officers, so far as observance of the rules is concerned, was introduced by the factious member who likes to raise a little storm and to stand by and amuse himself. If it did good by teaching many of the members the rules of the Society for the first time it was also mainly responsible for the bungling by which Mr. Cusack’s nomination for the chair was rendered invalid. Mr. I. Flack was elected chairman for the coming year, when we expect the society to continue its useful and interesting work amongst the students of the College.

“AUDITOR.”