The Olympic Games and the Duke of Westminster's Appeal

THE OLYMPIC GAuIES . 23 contradict certain errors of fact which have been published with the authority of h is name. " I t will, perh aps, clear the ground if I deal with certain questions of general principle first. If Mr. Harrison desires us to withdraw entirely from the Olympic movement, I must remind him why we o.ro ' in honour bound ' to compete at Berlin. Germany would not have accepted t he responsibility of t he Go.mes of 1916 unless she had previously satisfied h erself that a ll the greater nations- including the United K ingdom- would send representatives. Australia , South Africa, Canada, New Zea land, will cer ta.inly compete. T he Mother Country is bound to send a team. The fact t hat we organized the Go.J!les of 1908 and beat a ll our visitors to London would in itself provide an almost unanswerable reason. But perhaps 1\fr. Ho,rrison's objection applies more strongly t o the appeal for money than to representation in itself. Well, we have tried sending a team without sufficient money already, and the results of Stockholm were so bitterly and widely resented that the experiment is never likely t o\ be repeated. Those who shouted loudest in 1912 will, of course, be the first t o subscribe in order that 1916 may not suffer from the same mistake. It is quite clear tha t t he public mean s t o provide sufficient funde t o give our representatives in Berlin the same advantages enjoyed by other nations. "But there is still a third alternative. Mr. Harrison may not object to representation as such, or t o a moderate subscription. What .annoys him may be the total of £100,000, which he appears to consider is to be applied to Berlin alone. He is misinformed. It will not cost more than about £25,000 to carry out every detail of the programme of preparation laid down by the various associations governing different branches of amateur sport between now and the summer of 1916. In addition to this, we should be prepared with about £15,000 to transport a bout 500 men to Germany, to house and feed them in Berlin, and to get them home again. " But this is far from including the whole pro– gramme of th~ British Olympic Council, I admit that we are not yet bound to enter a.gain after 1916, but it is probable that this country will be represented in 1920, and even in 1924. 'With care, the sum now asked for would suffice. But neither the results of one meeting, nor the possibility of other meetings, exhaust the programme in which the King-inter– preting the national sentiment--fi<> graciously ex– pressea. his interest. By the mere progress of cen– tralization and training necessitated by our prepara– tions for Berlin we shall have given such a stimulus - --1------...,...... he- athletio- youth- of---the-whole country that a general improvement in the physical standard of the community must inevitably result. By the system of standard medals, by the spread of skilled instruction, by the opportunities given to undis– covered talent; a widespread and invaluable impetus will be given to energies which are at present scattered and incapable of improvement. Sport will not be professionalized by being better · organized. "But :Mr. Harrison suggests the dangers both of ~f~ionalism and of specialization. He writes cleligbtfully of the days of Mynn. · of· Felix, or of Lillywhite. Does he !!ealize that all his memories of ffnt.cf888 cricket centre in professionals ? Does he consider that these men would never have reached the eminence which so attracted him if the stress of competttion had not developed their natural talent ? Ther were apeoialiste, if you like. But what ill one o the outstanding features of tho Berlin Olympic ~? The Modem Pentathlon, the flntlllt aft-round event· in the history of sport. What gloomy views does Mr. Harrison take of the mo.n who in shooting, fencing, riding, running, and swimming does better th an all the rest of the world in 1916 ? And is it specialism which introduces half a dozen new contests in the athletic section alone, and gives t heir t rue value t o those field events which h ave gradually and unfortunately lost their legitimate prominence in this country ? " Mr . Harrison rightly chooses the late Mr. Justice Chitty as a type of the athlete of his day. He might have added the names of A. L . Smith, Macnaghten, and Esher--all men who rowed in their university crew and became Judges in the High Court of Appeal. B ut modern developments have not stopped their suc('.essors from doing a lmost as well. And no first-rate oar has ever been born who did not give up a.t least three years of his playt ime t o his favourite sport. It has done no harm to other at hletes to do the same. All we ask, in view of Berlin, is that during this same amount of time men will practise under proper instruction and with proper precautions. Not one of them will get a farthing, personally, from the fund subscribed. Th9.t money will be expended by the amateur associations on the lines they have themselves laid down. They are as eager to preserve th e true amateur spirit as an y one could desire. " l\fr. H arrison would like the rest of t he world to meet us at h ome a.t football. They did so in 1908. I t is our turn t o meet them in 1916. He would like them to play cricket against us a.t Lord's. Does he realize that this would be equivalent t o the United States challenging us at baseball, or Spa.in a.t pelota ? No game is suitable for international competition unless at least six n ations can play it. Mr. Harrison has very delightfully expounded the charm ~ the days in which h e played the games he lovecl <Every one will agree with him. No one wants t hat 'charm to fade. All we ask for to-day is a littlemorekeen– ness and a little more organization. We have done our share of theory in givi~g the world the first inter– national code for 20 games accepted by 20 different nations. We can scarcely refuse our share of prac– tical achievement for fear of being beaten. We can scarcely preach the tenets of true sport and deny the necessity for giving any personal examples. And in spite of all our modern developments we need not lose our love for the old quiet days of domesti– city ; nor is our attitude so different as Mr. Frederic Harrison imagines from the glad spirit which infused his youth." FAVOURABLE PUBLIO SENT!MENT. Important letters, ta.king the same line in favour or the Appeal, appeared also in The Times from Mr. Sidney Abrahams, Mr. S. P. B. l\fais, and other athletes. Correspondence on the subject.flourished in almost the entire Press of the United Kingdom, and served t.o show that while . there were hMe and there men of the older school who were strongly opposed t.o a genera.I scheme of training or t.o anything else which would tend t.o the glori– fication of the Olympic Games, the judgment of the country as a whole recognized in an oTer– whelming proportion that we cannot avoid par– ticipation in the Games and must make some sort of preparation for them. In their edit.oriaJ colUJDDS newspapers generally have warmly supported the Duke of Westminster's appeal and the Special Committee, aad, what is m.me impadant, senti– ment in the athletic usocia.tiona ia praotically– unanimous (whstever differmces or jealousies there may be on individual details} u to thn1eed