Image provided by the Yale Club & Scholarship Foundation of Hartford, Inc.
About Yale Alumni Magazine | View Entire Issue (April 11, 1900)
Vou “LX No: -28. NEW HAVEN, CONN., WEDNESDAY, APRIL 11, 1900. ~ Copyright, 1900, by Yale Alumni Weekly. Price 10 Cents. | THE TENEYCK, Am Essay Wins It—Some Good Speak-= ing and Bad Faults. A piece of excellent literary quality, but not at all an oration, has just won the second highest prize given in Yale for the best original public speaking. The decision of the judges on the Ten- Eyck speaking, held in College Street Hall, April 5, gave the first prize: to Arthur Huntington Gleason of South Norwalk, Connecticut, for his piece on “Notre-Dame de Paris.” wage This has, not for the first time, raised the question: “What is the prize given for, and what is Yale trying to develop in these public speaking contests”? Mr. Gleason’s *essay was a piece of such quality, and he had such distinction in winning the prize, that the writer feels no hesitation in discussing the incident; indeed it is hard to see why there should be any more hesitation in a criticism of public speakers than in a criticism of rowers or football players. When the crowd went out of College Street Hall—a little better crowd, by the way, than there has usually been at TenEyck speaking in recent years, and making a much better impression on College Street Hall than the few score used to in Battell Chapel—the average judgment was, that the prize lay be- tween Ernest Hausberg of Charles City, lowa, who spoke on “Lord Cromer: the English in Egypt,” and John Arthur Keppelman, of Reading, Pa., the subject 9f whose address was “The French in the American Revolution.” The two pieces were very unlike, but each had certain clear claims. ss Strong things could be said in favor of Keppelman, but very much stronger things could be said against him. He had a voice which was more than musi- cal: it was music. Perhaps some of the strange thirigs in his essay were less thought of because of the delight his hearers found in his tones. No one would have dreamed that he had got- ten out of bed, where the grip had him, to come down to College Street Hall to speak. He handled his rich voice well; better than he handled himself. As far as modulation and enunciation went, he was good, but he had the common habit of every once in a while stepping some- where or taking a new position, with no apparent reason. As to his-piece, he gave, in the way he had constructed it, and in the way he delivered it, the excellent impression of feeling it, and of feeling it strongly; and, what is more, of not being ashamed of having a lot of feeling and voicing it. In the vernacular, he let himself go a good deal; a point which some- times seems to be rather discouraged in public addresses here. If a man does not let himself go, it is fair to say that he is not liable to arrive anywhere or carry anybody with him. But it must also be said that it is a serious defect in any address to try to sketch the march of mind and the progress of the human soul from the days of the prophets to these latter days, all in twelve minutes, especially when the sttbject is “The French in the American Revolution.” The essay had been going some time before the Chris- tian era was reached, and by the time the French armies were under the American flag, there was no opportunity to say anything about them. It was well to “dwell on the grandeur of the idea of human liberty, which was ex- pressed in the foundation of the Ameri- can Republic and was suggested by feelings which were stirring in France; but a picture can hardly afford to be all background, especially when that back- ground is a telescopic reach over mill- ennia. | On the other hand, Hausberg’s piece on “The English in Egypt,” did not stray far afield. There were some things in it that did not belong to the subject necessarily, and, considering the extent of the problem which he solved toward the- end of his piece, a closer keeping to the descriptive might have been quite as appropriate. He skipped from Cairo to the Cape, in his discussion of the British imperialistic policy, in a way which befuddled some of his most intel- ligent hearers, who complained that they could not see how Fuzzy-Wuzzy could be called the cousin of John Bull or a free man. But, on the whole, Haus- berg’s piece was clear cut; enforced its point well, made a strong impression, and was delivered in a clear, earnest and dignified manner. As to his gestures, he seemed to want to make them, and they added to the effect of what he had to say. With a full realization of the experience and judgment of the judges, this writer still fails to see why his oration did not clearly lead.: Mr. Gleason’s piece will be seen in the Tit, where its excellent quality will be further appreciated. It Was very pleas- ant to listen to him; his voice was good, and where he did not try to make an oration of his piece, the effect was good. : Nearly every one on the list had some strong suporter. The last speaker, Wal- ter Bruce Howe, of Washington, whose subject was “The Partition of China,” although he forgot his piece two or three times, must have won some votes. “He was stich a_ gentleman,” some critic said, “and took us into his con- fidence in such a quiet, dignified way, that we could not have refused to listen to him.” Besides, he had some good things to say. He has a good voice, which he did not handle to its best ad- vantagé, and he did not at all know what to do with his hands; but he has a good deal of the making of an orator if he wants to do hard work. . George Peters Chittenden had a paper on “Nathan Hale,” which he might have made very effective. It was well put together and had some nice passages— discriminating and stggestive. His declamation was artificial and altogether attached. from the outside. It was rather a pity. The subject is ideal, and in writing he came up to it well. Malvern Hall Tillitt, of Elizabeth City, N. C., ought to keep on working. His piece on “The Lollards” was not as clear as should be, but it showed a good deal of appreciation and imagination; turned well, and had a climax or two worth going to hear. He ought to treat his voice until it is clear, and then the Carolina accent will be all the more delicious. On the grand subject for an oration— “Andrew Jackson,” Arthur Parks Wright had a good many well-con- sidered and interesting things to say, but the delivery was without life. William Hills Hutchins of Indian Orchard, Mass., whose subject was “The Maccabees,” went straight ahead and spoke it all with clearness and confidence, and made the general -de- scription interesting. He strained a little for the climax—went too far up and’ down on the two sides of the sub- ject. But it was the kind of piece that held the attention of the audience, and when he, like the others, have had a lot of handling, he will produce a still better effect. FASTER TRIP OF THE NINE The Make-up of the Team, and the Itinerary. The University baseball. nine begins its Easter trip Wednesday, April 11, and will play in all six games. Al- though an unexpected weakness was de- veloped in the Wesleyan game Yale men, generally, feel that the team will do good work in the Souch as there is splendid material in the squad. Fourteen players will be taken on the trip as follows: . Camp. 1900; (Captain), ss.; F. McD. C. Robert- son, 1001) pi = -J. <8: Garvan, 1002) pi ; J. S. McKelvey, 1902, p.; A. H’ Sharpe, 1902 M.S., 1b.; E. H. Brown, 1901, 2b. ; W:-P. dewin, yous §...2b33:-F: Ls Gum- by, 1901 S., 3b.; L. D. Waddell, 1oor S.., ef) 3G) -. Subvany) 19000. co 3s AR: Cunha, 1901 L.S., c.; R. G. Guernsey, 1002, Li; -Gi A. Lyen, 1900, c25 A. Barnwell, 1902S., rf. Coach Nichols will be with the team the greater part of the trip. : ty ah SS a Se ee .The Itinerary. The itinerary of the University Nine for the Easter trip is as follows: Wednesday, April 1t1—Leave New Haven 9.35 A. M.. Arrive at New York 11.25. Address, Murray Hill Hotel. Game at Fordham grounds, One Hun- dred and Ninetieth Street and Third Avenue at 2.30 oclock. Leave New York via C. R. R. of New Jersey, foot of Liberty Street or Whitehall, at 12.10 midnight. Thursday, April 12—Arrive at Wash- ington 7.30 A. M. Address, Arlington Hotel. Game with Georgetown Uni- versity at Georgetown. Friday, April 13—Leave Washingon at 10 A. M: yia Bo and UO. R.- RR... Arrive Baltimore, Camden Station, 10.45. Ad- dress, Hotel Stafford. Game with Uni- versity of Maryland at Union Park. Leave via. Chesapeake Line, Pier 18, Light Street, at 6.30 P. M. Saturday, April 14—Arrive Old Point Comfort 6.10 A.. M. Address, Hygeia Hotel. Trip by boat to Norfolk, Va., at 2 P. M., where Boston League is played on Norfolk grounds, returning 5.45. ; Sunday, April 15—Leave Old Point via C. & O. Ry. at 4 p.m. Arrive Rich- mond at 6.50. Dinner at Hotel Jeffer- son. Leave Richmond 10.30 P. M. Monday, April 16—Arrive Charlottes- ville. Va; at 2.45 A. mM: Car may be occupied until 8 a. m. Address, Hotel Gleason. Play University of Virginia in afternoon. Leave Charlottesyille via Co & 0; Ry.:.3.26 A. me: Tuesday, - Gar ready for occupancy at IO P. M. Tuesday, April 17—Arrive Washing- ton at 6.47 A. mM. Address, Arlington Hotel. Game at Georgetown in the af- ternoon. Leave Washington B. & O. mtation, 3630 .». M.< Car ready at 16 P. M. : Wednesday, April 18—Arrive.in New York 6 A. M. Yale 14; Tufts 3. Yale defeated Tufts in a six-inning game at the Field, Wednesday after- noon, April 4. Tufts played very poor baseball after the first three innings, while Yale kept steadily improving. A feature of Yale’s work, as in the game with New York University, was her hard hitting and sharp, lively fielding. Sharpe, who is learning the duties of first base very rapidly, made -a home run with a long drive into deep right field. Quinby was at third and led at the batting, but his throwing to first was weak. Robertson pitched four innings, and though his control was good, hé was hit quite freely. Garvan succeeded him and not a hit was. made off his de- livery in the remaining innings. The weather was clear but cold and windy, which kept the attendance downg+to a few hundred. The score: YALE, AB. R. IB. PO. A. E. QOuinby, 3b.i45 es. le) Sea, eee Ge ee Barnwell ee tT 1 0: O06 Waddell 7h oF 86} Guersey. fis =, & 2: 2 OnG 6 Canty es5.4.25, 2297 ow Oe Bi 8 8 sillivan, G33. 445, Th Sie ee ey brown, 2b... 2 4 00.0. 6 Shatpe;. 102.02) EE SG OE EvoW Gi) 6 OT SE BO Robertson, 6.7... S11 84 Gatval, 62-38 oo el Os B64 a i413 BB 9 TUFTS. AB. R. IB. PO. A. E. Slices: Oh (ie a Ob Oe Eawton: ie 2) OF ne 8 Pletuing.. 66027 oe, es ee ae ea Panera. 4 nc 2 ye AN Wats et ee et ee TiAgeOu. In 4, 3°6 6. 86-2 Woodworth, p. ..... = 0 O° 42 2 she. Cs 4°0 2 6376 Oey My Mig ae, Sees sail) 3 O- tf ' OG. of 28::32 0 18 2 @ £2 3 405-6 We. eds | Io I 5 0 Y—I4 AOSTA ao cha es Oo I 20 0 G3 Summary: Two-base hit—Guernsey. Home run—Sharpe. Left on bases— Yale 7, Tufts 6. Stolen bases—Quinby 3, Guernsey, Camp, Stiles, Lawton, 2, Williams 2. Sacrifice hit—Barnwell. Struck out—Robertson, Guernsey, Quin- by, Sharpe, Lyon; Stiles, Lawtam 2 First base on errors—Yale 6, Tufts 4. Hit by pitched ball—Barnwell. Base on balls—by Woodworth 2. Wild pitch— Woodworth 2. Passed ball—Fiske. Umpire—McKee. | Wale 12; Wesleyan 10. Yale played Wesleyan at the Field Saturday afternoon and defeated her by twelve runs to ten, in a game in which very poor playing and very good playing were mingled. McKelvey was in the box for Yale in the first seven innings, five of which he handled cleverly. In the sixth and seventh, however, he weakened greatly, and Wesleyan added three runs. Wescott was given a chance in the pitcher’s box in the eighth, but he was very nervous and _ ineffective, Wesleyan batting him hard and making four runs in the inning, although there were no fielding errors. Garvan suc- ceeded Wescott in the ninth, when the score was growing uncomfortably close. s. He, too, was hit,.but by a brilliant double play of Camp’s when one man was out the side was retired. Quinby, at third, gave a very poor exhibition, fumbling an easy grounder between third and short, and throwing over Sharpe’s head at first base. He was suffering from a strained arm, however, which was prob- ably responsible for- the uneven work. Guernsey, in left field, let two liners get past him, both of which he should have had, and on which Wesleyan scored two runs. Yale’s batting, on the whole, was unexpectedly weak, if Lyon and Sulli- van are excepted, and when hits were needed no one made them. Lyon was injured slightly by collision with Catcher Inglis, while sliding to home plate, and was replaced by Wear in the eighth inning. The score:
