SENIOR DEBATING SOCIETY
President: THE HEADMASTER
Hon. Secretary: M. WARNER
Committee Messrs. MUJRDOCHI and RAWLINSON, M. WARNER, W. H. LEA, K. MARROW and
T. DONALD*
· Elected to fill the vacancy caused by the departure of Marrow.
· It is a winter's evening, a few minutes after the last bell has tolled. Already scholars released from their tuition are seen making their way to a small alcove on the top corridor. A queue forms, but before long a certain pedagogue of tall and scholarly appearance, somewhat undergraduate in appearance, opens the door of what appears to be the modern indoor equivalent of the classical amphitheatre. Instantly some small boys are conscripted to procure chairs for the principal speakers and himself.
This motley assemblage of individuals constitutes the Senior Debating Society-a refuge for the fiery demagogues of the modern sixth, a haven for the artistic idealists, an education for an occasional scientist, a quasi-music-hall entertainment for the fifths. The formal procedure is, of course, modelled on that only of "reputable debating societies," but the exact identity of these is unknown. The Cambridge (or even the Oxford) Union, and the Houses of Parliament might meet the required standards, or they might not.
Under the inspiring and witty chairmanship of Mr. Murdoch, the Committee organised the first debate for October 16th. The motion" that this House would flog any criminal convicted of violent assault" was proposed by D. J. Hurst and opposed by T. Donald; B. Dickinson and D. Woodhouse spoke third and fourth. The level of debating was high and the motion was carried by a large majority. The second debate, on November 4th," that this House no longer bears any grudge against Guy Fawkes, and does not wish to let off fireworks," when the motion was proposed by M. Slotwiner and P. W. Ivell and opposed by E. M. E. Flood and G. Shaw, produced many pyrotechnics and was defeated by a large majority. The debate with the Old Boys a week later, " That this House has no use for Commercial Television," was excellently argued by both sides. W. H. Lea and D. L. Love, who proposed the motion, put up a magnificent performance against the most eloquent Mr. John Budd (who is a practising lawyer) and Mr. Darbyshire. The motion was carried by a small majority. The following week, the motion "That this House sees no point in perpetuating the British Empire" was originally proposed by Flood and Hurst and opposed by Donald and A. D. Sudall; however, after a time it became clear that different people understood different things by this motion, and the Chairman took the unusual and interesting step of substituting two different motions for the original, and these were to be debated concurrently. All of which was too complicated for some members, and Donald, now speaking from the floor of the House, was clearly doubtful what, if anything, he was now opposing. The debate was probably the most entertaining of the year, for at one time the House seemed about to witness the dramatic volte-face of Hurst as he crossed the floor, while one of the substitute motions, "That this House would inject a large measure of self-government into the dependent colonies," was tied so too was the vote taken by the House to decide whether the Chairman should be compelled to use his casting vote, and so he escaped ; the second motion, "That this House would dissolve the British Commonwealth of Nations as quickly as possible," was almost unanimously opposed.
Refreshed by its Christmas vacation, the House again met on January 2lst, when the motion, That this House has no confidence in democratic government," was proposed by IvelI in his usual lively and witty manner, and opposed by our future Oxford don, Hurst Donald and B. L. Oldfield spoke third and fourth. The motion was carried by a small majority in spite of the valiant efforts of the democrats in the House. The debate of the following week was, in the Secretary's opinion, one of the best of the year. The motion, " That this House would prefer to be uncivilized," presumed, of course, that the House was already civilized, a fact doubted on many occasions by the Secretary, who proposed the motion with I. P. Fairclough Sudall and E. D. Hindle, from the Fifth Form, spoke for the opposition. The motion was lost by a considerable majority.
That this House cannot love its enemies, and does not believe in preaching what it cannot
practise," was proposed a fortnight later by A.F. Bagnall, and opposed by Oldfield
F. Bostock and Donald spoke third and fourth.
The motion was defeated by a House one could suspect packed by the Anglo-Catholic lobby. The controversial political motion of February 25th showed that the House was far from being a mediaeval institution. The motion, " That this House would not re-arm Germany," was vehemently proposed by the Hon. Secretary and his political colleague, Ivell, and opposed by Hurst and Lea, armed with a vast array of newspapers and periodicals to add weight to their argument. The motion was carried by a House presumably influenced by the M.P. from Ebbw Vale. The next debate was with the P.T.A., when the motion was "That this House considers that education in the Grammar Schools and Universities is too academic." The motion was enthusiastically proposed by the Secretary and Mr. F. V. Hargreaves (of the parents), but the eloquence and cogency of Mr. Rawlinson, who spoke fourth, and Hurst, who opposed the motion, were so compelling that it was unanimously defeated. It was unfortunate that the school was so poorly represented, and it produced only one speech, but the level of debating was high. The last debate of the year was in conjunction with the junior Debating Society, and the motion, " That this House has no confidence in modern youth," was proposed by Donald and opposed by Warner, while P. N. Barton and P. D. Mears (both of III Alpha) spoke third and fourth. All speakers reached a high level of debate, not least the junior members, but, notwithstanding the reasoned pessimism of Donald and the self-assured and scintillating oratory of Barton, the motion was defeated, perhaps by a prejudiced House.
The year was thus a successful and stimulating one, hut the Secretary's job was made more difficult by the apathy of the Sixth Form when individuals were approached to speak. The only people who were ever ready to give of their eloquence were the Modern Sixth, which one can predict as a possible nursery for
M.P.s political agents or Hyde Park orators.
M . W .
For all enquiries or to be added Website Prefect page last updated 17:41 08/09/02