The Athletes and Athletic Sports of Scotland

PUTTING THE STONE. 4i whether gate-money ormore substantialsubscriptions, was paid by the public on theunderstanding that in every event for which prizes were given they wouldsee agenuine contest, and that the pest man for the timebeing would win, except in handicaps. If Ihe public understood that the best throwers, leapers, and [unners had arranged to divide the prize-money, and agree asto vho was to be first, second, andthird, before suchcompetitions began, and were not to try and beat eachother, then the general public would not pay gate-money, and the wealthier patrons of Ithletic sports would not give subscriptions, and there would loon be neither gamesnor prize-money to be competed for. So Ihat when the three athletes named, orany athletes whatever, Irrange beforehand that they arenot to try their best to beat feachother, and then take prize-money subscribedby the public bn the understanding that they areto try their best to beat each [)ther, it seems aclear caseof getting money on false pretences. Nothing, in fact, is so detrimental to the interests of athletes Ihemselves in the longrun as sham contests, as in the endthey lose both money andpublic respect. Had Dinnie,Fleming, and pavidson each thrown to win every time they contested, and pad the public onceknown they did so, even although Dinnie Sid win far oftenest, the waiting and hoping forthe times that lis lighter and less powerful rivals would win, would have pro- luced far more interest and excitement, and brought in far more loney than any number of contests after the public had lost faith in their genuineness. To have lost occasionally in genuine prials would have detracted far less from Dinnie's reputation than winning by preconcerted arrangement did. It may seem to some [hat too much has been said on this point; it is sufficient mswer that on athletes keeping good faith with the public, and | r ying theirlevel best to win every time they are fit and well, lepends the whole future well-being of athletes and athletic fports. As John George's 36 ft. 10 in. with the 22 lb. stone at iVboyne, 1871, was done under very adverse circumstances, |liere is nothing to deduct from its credit. He hasalso 43 ft.1 3