DEBATING TEAMS

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 266, 5 August 1932, Page 9

DEBATING TEAMS

Alcohol: For and Against A debate between teams representing the Youth Movement Against Alcoholism and the Victoria College Debating Society was held on Wednesday evening in St John’s Schooltoom. The subject was : That consumption of alcoholic beverages, even in moderation, is detrimental to the community.” The speakers for the Youth Movement Against Alcoholism were Miss Z. Henderson, Mr. Bern Wood and Mr. S. Odell, while the Victoria College team was Mr. H. R. Bannister, Mr. Max Riske and Mr. H. J. Bishop. Mr. W. J. Mountjoy, Jun., was chairman. In "moving the motion Miss Henderson cont£nded that if the effect of alcohol on the individual could be shown to be disastrous, then the effect of alcohol on~ the whole community must be bad. She quoted medical men, scientists and psychologists, including Professor McDougall, to show that the effect of even one glass of spirits on reflex actions, on reaction times, on conscious or willed actions, and on all mental processes was invariably bad. The effect on the general health of even small quantities was such that it rendered the drinker more susceptible to disease, it greatly reduced the expectation of life and the chances of recovery from any severe illness, and it caused degeneration of the heart and liver.

Mr. Bannister urged that people should do everything in moderation. Total prohibition, said the speaker, had a deleterious effect on the State, since it gave people a greater incentive to break the law. Self-reverence and self-control he considered to be better for the community than total abstinence, especially total abstinence enforced by a legislature, since such legislature would only cause an increase of the drug traffic.

Mr. Wood, seconding the affirmative, pointed out that the whole of Mr. Bannister's speech had been addressed not to the motion but to prohibition. He showed that a large number of accidents occurred every month as a result of the consumption of alcohol. He quoted the rules given to motorists by the Berlin police authorities, in which they pointed out that indulgence even in small amounts of alcohol rendered motoring unsafe. Mr. Bishop said that it seemed obvious that the speakers on the other side were ‘speaking under the disadvantage that they had not the practical knowledge of the subject that the speakers of the negative had. Alcohol was a temporary stimulant and as such was useful. The consumption of alcohol does not have any deleterious effect on the social organisation until it causes harm to the great mass of the people. Mr. Odell pointed out that Mr. Bannister had urged moderation in the consumption of alcohol. Would he also urge moderation in the use of cocaine and other drugs, instead of abstinence? Alcohol was declared by a British Royal Commission to be not a stimulant but a narcotic. Mr. Riske questioned the value of the experiments which had been instanced, and stated that the community did not consist in the sum of individuals. The effect of alcohol depended on the individual and varied according to whether a man was an introvert or an extravert. He defended the temporary effect of alcohol on the grounds that what is real to you at any time is real. A poor man could not make himself as poor by spending his money on motor-cars or any other form of vice as by spending on alcohol. The motion was carried on a vote of the audience. 1 i