CHAPTER XII

HOW THE FAIRFIELD BOYS ORGANIZED

I knew several of the boys at Fairfield, and because I was much

interested in debating generally, I was delighted when Jack Mason asked

me if I would like to go with him to a meeting called to discuss the

organization of a debating club. Jack was a fine lad about seventeen

years old; he was an enthusiastic ball player and delighted in outdoor

sports. His particular chum, Frank Lawrence, was a different lad. He

found his chief interest in books and reading, although he was by no

means a “dig” or a recluse. However, the two boys made a fine team, and

each supplied what the other may have lacked.

Frank was really the leader in the movement to organize the club. He

had been reading several volumes of orations and had been impressed by

the force and vigor of the great speakers. Like all boys who amount to

anything, he wanted to try his hand, and naturally he didn’t want to

do it alone. He took the matter up with Jack and, while Jack at first

laughed at the idea, Frank finally brought him round to see it was a good

thing. The result was that fifteen or twenty of the boys came together

to talk things over.

When I arrived I found just a crowd of ordinary boys, no better or no

worse than average lads in a community. They all wanted to do something;

they were not satisfied with waiting for something to happen; they wanted

to make something happen. With that spirit in them, they speedily got

down to work and before I realized it they had organized their club.

Some of the boys were Scouts and naturally preferred to have that

organization connected in some way with the club. Jack, I think, approved

this idea, but Frank pointed out that although many of them were Scouts

and all of them had friends who were Scouts, this really was not a scout

organization and they might wish to take into the club boys who possibly

did not believe in the scout organization, and might thus be prevented

from joining. Charlie Taylor suggested that it be called “The Debating

Club of the Epworth League.” Charlie was a Methodist and belonged to the

Epworth League. George Perkins, however, who was an ardent member of the

Christian Endeavor Society, objected, and of course when the proposal was

put that way, Charlie at once saw that it was not fair. The boys finally

agreed that the only thing they had in common, as far as the organization

of the club was concerned, was first, that they were boys, and second,

that they wanted to debate. Therefore, they decided to call it by a name

which would, by its very simplicity, avoid any misunderstanding and at

the same time properly characterize the object of the club. They decided

therefore to call the club “The Boys’ Debating Club of Fairfield.”

When they came formally to state the purpose of their organization, after

some discussion they agreed upon this preamble: “We, the undersigned,

appreciating the advantages to be derived from practice in debate, hereby

organize ourselves into a club for that purpose and agree to be governed

by the following constitution:”

Frank wished to have more in this preamble and urged that they write

it so that it would state that they would be benefited by drill

in discussion, in composition, in declamation, in elocution, in

parliamentary practice; in fact, in many other ways growing out of their

meeting as a club, but Henry Jordan, a quiet, unassuming member, asked

if all that really was not included in the word “debate.” They said, “Of

course,” and so the short preamble stood.

The first few articles were adopted without much discussion, as they all

thought substantially alike on those points.

The question of a short term of office called forth much discussion. My

friend Jack is decidedly businesslike and he could see no real reason,

he said, for going through the fuss and bother of so many elections. “If

a man makes a good president,” he said, “why do we want to put him out

of office after he has been working ten weeks and has just got the run

of things? Besides, he would scarcely have time to show what he could do

in ten weeks.” Frank replied: “Suppose he doesn’t make a good president;

even these ten weeks would be a pretty long time, wouldn’t it?” Jack

grumbled a good deal and insisted that the boys would put in most of

their time electioneering for office. The boys laughed him down on this

point, but Henry Jordan convinced them all when he said: “If practice is

what we are after in this club, the more the offices are passed around

the more practice we will all get.” They decided to fill vacancies by

election at any meeting of the club, although some of the boys thought

that it would be simpler to have the president appoint some boy to fill

out the unexpired portion of the office, if a vacancy should occur.

There was a good deal of discussion of the duties of the various

officers. Henry Jordan thought it would be enough if the constitution

simply set out the ordinary rules governing similar bodies. Ralph

Parsons—the boys called him “Tubby”—suggested, quite ingenuously I

thought, that he supposed the various officers would have so much work

to do that they would not be expected to take part in the debates. The

thought in his mind was clear to all. The boys evidently knew him. “No,

indeed,” announced Jack, “the president and all the rest of the officers

take part in the debates when their time comes.” “O, well!” sighed

“Tubby.”

Frank made a suggestion at this point which I thought was very good.

“There are other debating clubs,” he said, “we ought to get acquainted

with. There are societies for doing other kinds of work which is worth

while. There is the Epworth League, and the Christian Endeavor Society,

and the Boy Scouts, and the High School literary society, and the Girls’

Library Club, and lots of organizations which are just as good as ours.

I think it would be great to get together with them just as much as we

can—have joint programmes and all that sort of thing, you know. It might

be good for them, and I know it would be fine for us.”

“Splendid!” I could not help exclaiming.

“I move that it be one of the duties of the President to see these clubs

and carry out this idea,” said George Perkins. This motion was carried

enthusiastically. After more discussion the enumeration of the other

duties of the officers was left to a committee.

One office was created for which I suppose I am responsible. The boys

felt pretty “cocky” and Jack said something about the good work they were

going to do in their club. They had asked me before to take part in

their discussion and I ventured to ask: “How will you know whether your

work is good or not?”

“Well,” Charlie Taylor replied, “when we have a debate with that Onarga

bunch and lick them good and plenty, I guess they’ll know we are doing

good work.”

“Well, we may not find judges who will stand for ‘lick them good and

plenty’ arguments,” interrupted Frank. “That kind of talk won’t go in a

dignified debating club.”

“Anyway,” I replied, “suppose you don’t know what kind of work you are

doing until the result of some debate contest tells you. Isn’t it quite a

while to wait?”

“I tell you what, boys,” I continued. “I know folks say there is a great

deal of education in learning through our mistakes, and of course there

is. But there is also a lot of energy wasted in doing things the wrong

way. We would look well, wouldn’t we, if we insisted in finding out for

ourselves every fact in geography or physics when we have available the

accumulated experience of centuries. So don’t try to do it all alone,

boys. Get some older men who have gone through the mill themselves and

get them to act as your critics and advisers. You will save a lot of time

and get along much better.”

This advice seemed good, and they adopted the following section: “The

President shall appoint at each session of the club a Critic, whose duty

it shall be to criticize the conduct of the meeting and of the individual

members in all respects and to render to the club such other help in

advice and counsel as may seem wise to him. Such Critic shall, when

possible, be appointed from the honorary members of the club.”

When they came to the question of membership there was a hot debate.

There was an almost even division on the question of admitting the girls.

There was no nonsense about the boys; they were not rough or boorish on

the one hand, nor “sissified” on the other. One faction contended stoutly

that it would be a good thing to have the girls with them. They urged

the difference in the minds of boys and girls and felt that any question

would be better understood if they had both points of view about it.

Jack led the opposition to having the girls join. He said:

“You fellows all know my sister Polly.” (There was a chorus of assent and

several side glances at Frank, who looked carefully out of the window.)

“You know Polly is great. She is as good a fellow as any of you here.”

Here he glared pugnaciously about, but as no one seemed to disagree with

him in the least he continued.

“I would as lief chum with Polly as not—but not in this club. I think

we would have better times and do more business if we were alone. We

could easily enough have social nights in the club once in a while. We

can always get the girls and have a good time together outside, but I

believe we ought to keep the club out of it. I wish they would organize

a debating club of their own. It would be great sport to have a joint

debate.”

The antis won, and the word “boy” used in the provision on membership.

Only two other points concerning membership made much discussion—how many

votes were necessary to get a boy in and how many votes were necessary to

get him out after he was in.

Will Morrissey had not talked much yet, but he grew eloquent when he

urged that one vote should be enough to keep a boy out. “Why,” he said,

“if we are going to do good work here we must be careful who we have in.

If we have united action we must be a band of brothers. We must not have

in here anyone who is obnoxious to anyone else.”

Pietro Frontenelli was an Italian lad who had completely won the hearts

of the rest of the boys since he had been in Fairfield. He was supposed

to be a socialist at least, quite likely an anarchist, possibly a

Camorrist, but altogether a most likable fellow. The boys indifferently

called him “Pete” or “Nellie” for short; he admitted himself that his

whole name made quite a mouthful.

“Pete” thought it made little difference whether we all thought alike

or not. “Of course,” he said, “we want to thresh out the questions we

have up for discussion and get at what seems to be the correct answer.

But it’s a sure shot we will be more likely to get at that result if we

approach it from as many angles as we can. I would like to see members

elected by a majority vote.”

George Perkins thought that provision would be too liberal and finally

the boys compromised on allowing election if no more than three votes

were cast against the candidate.

They decided to follow the same rule in the election of honorary members.

Right here I broke in again. “Boys,” I said, “let me repeat, don’t try

to do it all alone. Get your older friends in. Get your big brothers,

your fathers, your teachers, the fathers of the other boys, even if their

sons don’t belong. It is a good thing to have a lot of them with you as

honorary members. Of course they are busy men. There will not be many of

them out any one night, but you ought to have some outsiders and advisers

here every night.”

“I don’t know about that,” said “Tubby.” “If we have folks like that

here, we won’t feel free and easy. We will be on dress parade all the

time.”

“That’s just how we should be,” said Charlie Taylor. “If we don’t take

ourselves seriously, no one else will.”

“That’s the way to talk,” chimed in Jimmy Francis. “We don’t want any

‘rough house’ or bear dances or anything like that. We want to do

business in this club of ours.”

“Now, look here, fellows,” said “Tubby.” “Who said anything about rough

house or anything like it? I don’t want that any more than you do.”

Jimmy assured him that they all knew that he wasn’t standing for anything

like “rough house.”

“But it’s going to be awful hard work to keep braced up all the time,” he

sighed to himself. “I won’t dare even to slide down in my chair. O well!”

When it came to considering the conduct of members within the society

and methods of discipline, the boys were decidedly at sea. They wanted

to maintain the dignity of the club and yet they wanted to be fair to

everyone. “But,” as Frank Lawrence put it, “what rule shall we follow in

passing upon the guilt of members? What standards shall we follow? What

is a crime and what is not a crime?”

That was the question. What should be regarded as conduct unbecoming a

member of the club? It was finally decided that no one code of rules

could answer such a question, but that each case should stand on its own

merits. Consequently the section was worded like this: “Any member who

is guilty of conduct unbecoming a member of the club may, at any regular

meeting, be suspended or expelled at the discretion of the club. But

the charge against such member shall be signed by one of the officers

of the club or at least three members, shall definitely state the facts

constituting the alleged offense, shall lie on the table one week, and

shall require a two-thirds vote of the members present for its adoption.”

In arranging for their programmes the boys felt that they should allow

some latitude for joint sessions with other clubs. Consequently they

instructed their committee who had the drafting of the rules in charge

to give a place for such things on the order of business. While they

were organizing a debating club, they said, they didn’t want to shut out

anything else they might want to do.

How should they provide the necessary funds? Since Sam Levi’s father was

a banker, he was regarded by all the boys as an authority on finance.

He talked quite at length on bonds, debentures, income taxes, and just

dues, and when it was all over the boys seemed to be quite clear that if

they ever decided to build a club house they might want to sell bonds,

but until that time they would simply levy dues on all members equally.

They really did not need much money. The School Board had told them they

could use the school assembly room for their meetings. Their incidental

expense would not amount to much, and they thought ten cents per member,

besides an initiation fee of twenty-five cents, would take care of it.

One point did cause some discussion. Suppose a boy didn’t pay his dues;

what then? Jack as usual was for drastic action. He wanted such a boy

“fired” right off. Sam suggested that a penalty of ten per cent. per

month on the past due fees would keep the boys up to the mark. “If they

have to pay eleven cents instead of ten if they are behind a month,” said

he, “or twelve cents if they are back two months, they will look out.”

It struck the boys as good finance until Jimmy Francis suggested rather

timidly: “If a fellow is hard up and couldn’t get his money together just

right it would rather hurt to pay the extra cent or two.”

The boys quickly saw the other side. Jimmy was the son of a widow.

Everyone respected him, for, although he didn’t pity himself the least

bit, he was always looking out for odd jobs to help out. All the lads

knew he would have to find one more job to take care of his dues. His

mother had to count every penny as it was.

They finally decided not to impose any penalty for non-payment of dues.

As Frank pointed out, they felt that “if any fellow is mean enough to

quit on his dues because there is no penalty tacked on, that’s conduct

unbecoming a member of the club and we can ‘fire’ him.”

After they had taken care of a few miscellaneous provisions, they found

they had a good working organization. I agreed with them, and in the

appendix, beginning on page 156, you will find their constitution in

full. In the next chapter I am going to tell you about the rules of order

they adopted. They appointed a committee to draft them and I helped with

the work. We talked the rules over a good deal both in this committee

and afterward in the first two or three meetings. They were good enough

to make me Critic several times and most of the help I gave them was in

parliamentary practice. I have given you the rules, together with the

running discussion we had on them. Possibly the reasons given for the

rules will help you, as they seemed to help them.

Debating for boys · 第 12 / 15 章