The Debating Society

about, their choice. C. R. Clough produced some verse passages, D. N. Brocklebank a sample of American humour, P. A. Morris some poetry of his own composition, and M. G. Hancock an article from "The Times" on subconscious action. These were duly analysed and discussed by other members, and the result was a very entertaining evening.

We were fortunate enough to have Mr. Giles Shaw to speak to us for the third meeting of the term. Mr. Shaw, a former President of the Cambridge Union, had recently toured Canada in that capacity, and told us of some of his experiences. He spoke brilliantly, with a dry wit, of Canadian university life, of Canadian culture and art of the sense of humour, or rather lack of it, and the friendliness of the people; and finally of their loyalty to Great Britain, hence perhaps their choice of debate—"Great Britain is falling, let it fall".

For the last meeting of the term, Canon Purvis very kindly came and unravelled some of the mysteries of the Mystery Plays. Obviously a great authority on the subject, Canon Purvis spoke mainly about the York cycle of plays, 48 in all, each enacting a scene from the Bible, from the Creation to the end of the world. He spoke of the complexity of the verse systems used, and of the problems to be faced when translating the plays into modern English.

At the last two meetings refreshments were kindly provided by the domestic staff.

Mr. B. H. Holbeche opened the first meeting of the term by expressing the belief that "Science plays too large a place in education". In support of his views he wore a vividly coloured waistcoat, and recalled an ancestor, Old Wholeman Holbeche, who was, perhaps, better known as Leonardo da Vinci. His ancestor typified the complete whole man, the type that all education strove to produce. Mr. E. S. Jeffs, opposing, thought few men could combine the multitudinous roles of the past scientists, now that science had reached such a pitch of specialisation. M. B. Wilson, seconding the Proposition, desired to be educated. D. R. Holt, for the Opposition, wished that education might be more progressive. Many speakers thought the sciences and the arts interdependent. The House, dearly impressed by the Proposer's waistcoat, carried the motion by 78 votes to 41.

The second meeting was unusual in that the regular Chairman was absent, but D. Pfluger deputised, and, after newspapers had been banned from the House, he called upon D. J. Oldman to propose that "The House has confidence in H.M.S. Great Britain". The Proposer's point appeared to be that if the country could recover from such catastrophes as the Black Death and the Stuart Kings, then who could doubt that it could recover from the present serious position. T. G. Stephenson established that Britain was doing a great trade selling machines which, in the hands of her competitors, would 31

eventually destroy her export market. P. L. Bellwood glowed with patriotic pride when he recalled the nineteenth century approach towards Egypt and the Middle East. D. N. Brocklebank, for the Opposition, dismissed some of our leading bodies as hives of ignorance, and said that soon Russia would beat us at cricket, and then our last lead in the world would be shattered. D. Kirby, from the floor, had confidence only because the U.S.A. would maintain Britain at all costs. G. V. Plester said, in a speech which tended to the explosive, that tolerance was indifference; this clarified everything, and the motion was carried by 33 votes to 17 with six abstentions.

At the next meeting it was discovered that the part played by six members at the previous meeting had been entirely neglected by the Secretary; this tragedy being rectified the debate proceeded with D. R. Holt proposing the motion that "This House needs more time to stand and stare". Staring developed the imagination, and the imagination saved the individual from the whim of a dominant personality. Today there was little creative thought, men being content to absorb learning. C. W. Jose thought that the fast-moving modern world would indeed leave the country standing, if it embarked on the policy suggested by the Proposition. Mr. L. C. Le Tocq, for the Proposition, maintained that first class honours were gained by men who had time to stand and stare, and had developed that most useful faculty, imagination. R. L. Evans said that if the House gazed, gulped, gasped, gaped, or even sat and thought, then the U.S.A. would soon acquire a new aircraft carrier. From the floor T. Morris amused the House with the story of an encounter with a bull, whilst M. L. Bywater, speaking with authority, said that only a child was capable of creative art. T. G. Stephenson, in the Chair, remained calm throughout. Carried, 30-18-6.

So the term moved to its final meeting. The Secretary rose to propose to the House that it should support unpopular minorities. Minorities were the very leaven of democracy, and it made no difference which minority received support; the fact that it did so would stabilise the democracy which was so dear to the British way of life. T. Morris, opposing the motion, recalled mormon activity in York; he thought that few could support a polygamous sect. It distressed the Opposer to believe that the abolition of Sunday flying by the R.A.F.V.R. had been brought about by a small minority, the Lord's Day Observance Society. M. G. Sykes thought the masses usually moved in the wrong direction, and that this movement could only be checked by the increase of small minorities, which would, of course, be unpopular. The Seconder of the Opposition, M. B. Wilson, tried hard to emphasise the word unpopular, and gave it particular meaning by citing the trade union movement. From the floor T. M. Jenkinson said that an individual was a minority, and that the conception of the individual was worth supporting. When the House lobbied there were 52 Ayes, 1'2 Noes, and 73 "Don't knows".

With this clear-cut result an interesting and often amusing term's debating ended.