From “Q.C.G.”,
May 1905
The Literary and Debating Society.
We think it will he generally admitted that this Society has had a most successful session, and that it can look back to the past year with nothing but feelings of satisfaction. We are all acquainted with the usual “tags” about the great value of the Debating Society; they are dinned into our ears often unto the point of weariness, and we think that the Society may fairly congratulate itself on having made these claims good on having accomplished some really useful work during the session.
Nor are the reasons far to seek. First, we think, was the general disposition to take the Debating Society more seriously and to give it a fair chance. And here the heartiest thanks of all are due to the ladies for having come forward to the help of the Society, and having given it an aid and stimulus that it stood in good need of. Their arguments and speeches did much to raise the intellectual level to the meetings, and their presence had an effect on the proceedings that was highly beneficial.
Then we think the Society was fortunate in having capable and energetic officers. They seemed to he honestly desirous of fulfilling the task committed to them, and to the officers as a body in no small degree is the success of the past year to be attributed. We must refrain from drawing invidious distinctions, hut we think that the two secretaries deserve special mention for the capable way in which they discharged their duties. It is interesting to note that the former annual practice of passing a vote of censure on the outgoing officers seems to have come to an end. It was omitted last year for the first time—whether by an oversight or not, we do not know. This year, however, we believe an informal vote of thanks took the place of the long continued vote of censure. This surely is a good sign, and long may the practice continue.
The outstanding feature of last session was undoubtedly the number of successful debates that were held, and we think that next year’s officers would be well advised to follow their predecessors in this respect and to go in strongly for debates. For after all it is debates that are most value. Papers and essays are all very well; all of those read last year were interesting and instructive, but they do not offer as much opportunity for speaking as could be desired, and this is where debates score. Furthermore, many papers are no doubt very valuable, but how much of them do we really carry away? Very little, we think. Thus we do not derive much permanent improvement from papers, whereas from debates we have a better opportunity of carrying away an improved capacity for public speaking. Certain it is that all of us will feel the need of this at some time in our lives, and it is equally certain that we will feel we have fallen short of what we aimed at, and here it may not be inopportune to mention the rather sharp but very true advice once given to a beginner; he was counselled to try to speak in such a way that be would recognise his own remarks when they were presented to him again.
While dealing with debates, we think the chairman would have been well advised to have drawn attention to the apparently increasing practice of reading speeches in detail. Most of us are compelled to prepare our speeches in debate, but that is quite a different thing from reading them as though they were essays. This is a most undesirable practice and cannot be too strongly discouraged. We hope that speakers will take this advice to heart and that next year we will be treated to no read speeches in debate.
But we must admit that there is a considerable difficulty in selecting suitable subjects for debate, with that far famed rule 13 in force. We certainly must be careful as to the subjects that are introduced for discussion before the house, and we do not think it would be advisable to completely do away with rule 13. But we think it would he well if some latitude were allowed in this rule. There are many subjects of a more or less political nature that could be discussed with profit. A strong chairman—such as we have for the next session—could do much to guide the discussion to a profitable channel. We think the Council should be induced to allow a little relaxation in this rule, provided sufficient guarantee for the proper conduct of affairs were given. This, we think, could be done. We are heavily handicapped by this resolution—one not shared by any other College, we believe; and we think the time has come when it might, at least, be a little relaxed.
The election of officers passed off very quietly and without any of that feeling which marked former elections. This, we think, was not because little or no interest was taken in the results, but because there was no doubt as to the right men for the right office. The officers for next year will enter office under the best auspices, and we have no doubt that the expectations held of them will be more than fulfilled.
Lack of space prevents us dealing in detail with the individual meetings of the last few weeks of the session. However, all of us look back to Professor Trench’s lecture with great pleasure. His subject was “A Young Lady’s Diary of One Hundred Years Ago,” and it dealt with the life of one of his ancestors, Jane Currie (Currie?). She certainly was a wonderful woman, and her interesting life lost nothing in Professor Trench’s presentation.
Very general regret was expressed that our much esteemed Patron, President Anderson, was unable to deliver his usual Public Lecture. Almost every year the President honours this Society with a Public Lecture; and all of us look forward to hearing one from him early next session.
In conclusion, we may mention that the
Queen’s College at