page 3

Plunket Medal Contest

The number of speakers at the Plunket Medal Contest this year was, we are sure, a record in the history of the Debating Society. As a result the proceedings were somewhat lengthy, both the last speakers and the audience showing what might be termed "signs of wear" towards the end of the programme:: not that the standard of the speeches was lower than that of previous years, but it is possible to have too much of a good thing.

The first speaker was Mr. R. J. Reardon, who delivered himself of an impassioned and convincing address on Belgium's wrongs under the heel of the Prussian invader. Unfortunately his subject was not German oppression, but Cardinal Mercier, and his straying from the path, which he had mapped out for himself, probably lost him a place among the first four.

Mr. H. R. Bannister dealt with the life and work of Dr. Barnardo. He gave an interesting but somewhat disjointed account of his hero's work amongst the slums, but failed to give just that colour and fluency which distinguishes oratory from debating. Mr. Bannister's manner always gives us the impression that he is supporting the lesser of two evils, and on this occasion he appeared to praise not by conviction but with effort.

Mr. R. F. East had so steeped himself in the atmosphere of Woodrow Wilson that he was able to produce with tolerable accuracy, not merely the views of that unfortunate man, but also, at times, his accent. Mr. East did not appear to be at all at home on the platform, and for that reason failed to hold his audience.

Mr. W. J. Mountjoy appeared on that favourite old steed, which hardly ever fails to start in the Plunket Medal Stakes—Napoleon Buonaparte. That he was able to ride it to victory is a tribute more to his skill as a jockey than to the staying powers of his mount. His speech was among the very few we heard that evening which could be classed as oratory. His matter was excellent and gave full opportunity for the light and shade of which he appears to be capable. If Mr. Mountjoy had only a deep and resonant voice, and one which would not drop at the end of a phrase, he would be one of the best speakers the College has produced for some years.

Mr. H. I. Forde, who spoke on Beethoven, handled his difficult subject surprisingly well. His manner was unnatural and his voice forced, but he appeared to be so inspired by his subject, and spoke with such apparent sincerity, that he moved his audience perhaps more than any other speaker except Mr. Mountjoy. At times, however, we felt that he was in imminent danger of crashing to the ground, so ominously did he sway on his feet.

page 4

Mr. C. H. Arndt was unfortunate in choosing a subject which did not appeal to his audience. Few of us are inclined to lift Edward Gibbon Wakefield onto the plane to which Mr. Arndt would have lifted him, especially when we are told that he abducted an heiress "for no reason whatever." Furthermore the speech seemed to be lacking in opportunity for eloquence. Mr. Arndt was cramped by his matter.

Mr. W. J. Hall appeared in the title role of W. E. Gladstone. His pleasant voice and easy manner made the impersonation an excellent one, but it somehow lacked the touch of the genius of persuasion so characteristic of the "Grand Old Man." Mr. Hall would be well advised to learn his speech; once or twice he obviously lost the thread of his tale.

Miss Forde delighted her hearers with her sketch of the career of the Earl of Shaftesbury. It was an interesting speech and, of its kind, almost perfect. She must have presented a problem to the judges, for her style was so different from that of the other speakers, and it appeared to us that she should have been placed either first or not at all.

Mr. G. R. Powles's subject was Mazzini. His matter was excellent, but his delivery, though very clear and perhaps in keeping with his subject, lacked the necessary fire to raise his effort to the plane of an oration.

From Genghis Khan, in the person of Mr. Crossley, we hoped for great things, for we thought that a plunge into such depths of history must be productive at least of interest. We were not disappointed. Unfortunately Mr. Crossley made the same mistake as the first speaker in failing to confine himself to his subject. What he did say he said well, but it was hardly to the point.

The judges (The Hon. J. A. Young, M.P., Mr. H. F. O'Leary, LL.B., and Mr. W. A. Armour, M.A.), awarded the medal to Mr. Mountjoy, and placed Miss Forde second, Mr. Forde third, and highly commended Mr. Hall.