RANDON SHOTS.

Auckland Star, Volume LI, Issue 27, 31 January 1920, Page 18

RANDON SHOTS.

by

Unconscious humour in a, paragraph this week: "The accommodation on the Main Trunk express last night wae sufficient to allow of all passengers travelling without Idiscom'fort." An excellent advertisement for Sew Zealand abroad. ****•£■***** The revelations about wool-profiteer-ing at Home can be dealt with adei.uately only in verse, however halting it ,3. ■Mary had a little lamb. - Whose fleect? -was white ns snow; Anil everywhere that lamb's wool went The profiteer wns sure to go. She sold It to the Government For one-and-six all round, And bought it back as a winter coat For twenty-seveu pound. ********** Many of our readers will be pleased to see that, M. Yerbrugghen lias spoken out about the noises that interfere with music in public- halls "In Auckland," he said, "if we wanted any ventilation in the hall we had to hear an accompaniment of the rumble of tram cars, and cries of dogs, and worst of all, the crying of children, in the most delimte passages we were playing" I noticed a similar conflict at one of Miss Kennedy's violin recitals. The concert chamber is right on lUpiper Queen dtreet, and trame passed up and down regularly all the evening, of course regardless of whether Miss Kennedy was playing fortissimo or pianissimo, "it was stiilingly hot, but if there had been more 'window ventilation there would have been more noise. Can nothing 'be done to lessen this double interference with the enjoyment of music in a hall where so many concerts are given? 4-M-I-1-H-H4 This week Marconi has raised the juestion whether other worlds are siglalling to this. Perhaps they have just leard aliont the -war, and want news. 3r perhaps, having reached a state of MviJisation as superior to ours as ours is :o the Australian aboriginal, they are :rying to send a joint note of protest. The old controversy of the relative merits of Auckland and Wellington has jeen revived in the Wellington Press. iVhen one correspondent compared Weiington as a port unfavourably to Auckand, another retorted that "Auckland vharves are not to be compared with jure," a sweeping statement that is •ather surprising. Are Wellington's vharves so much better than our Queen's md King's wharves? To these dismtants enter a third, who declares that t is ridiculous to compare Auckland, ram cars with Wellington's, that there s only one street of importance in Auckand "(Heavens!), that Auckland has a 'him area within five minutes of the Post 3fiice (Wellington, of course, wiped out Gaining Street and other slum areas long igo), and that generally Wellington ha 3 lot much to learn from Auckland. I ihould say that she could learn at least jne thing—the proper use of one's eyes. But for the sake of peace it might be letter to concede WeUinprton these points jf superiority. They will be some compensation for having to in Welling- ********** Seriously, "though, rivalry and jealousy Jetwcen towns have their comic and even pathetio aspects. How long is the feeling between Auckland and Wellington going to last? Those who hope that the petty side of it will disappear as the populations jrrow may be reminded that Sydney and Melbourne are great cities. but in rivalry they still behave rather like children." 1 remember having my attention drawn to this by an Englishwoman I met on a voyage from Sydney iome years ago. At her table was a Melbourne girl, and slip described to mc with a mixture of wonder and appreciation of the humour of the business, how warmly this irirl stood up for hnr city against the claims of that upstart Sydney, and how. after one of the officers of the ship had ventured to say he preferred Sydney, she would hardly speak to him. The puzzled Englishwoman was probably used to the little village of London, and so did not understand such quarrels. ***+*++++* Lord Krench, Viceroy of Ireland, is stated to be a convert to Home Rule. The P.P.A. is reported to be seriously annoyed. •J.**-!.****** The sporting behaviour of the British team in the Davis Cup matches in Sydnpv raises interesting and wide questions about chivalry in games. When the umpire gave a decision against Patterson which Lowe thought incorrect, the Englishman deliberately threw away a point, and when in his match with Kingscote. Patterson slipped, Kingecote relused to take advantage of the mishap. This is the tennis tradition: if 1 remember rightly. Brookes and Wilding in big matches threw away points to equalise what they regarded as faulty decisions in their favour. F!ut how far could this principal bo pushed? In cricket, for instance, it often happens that a man is given not out when he knows he is out, but rarely docs he throw away his wicket. F have known such case, but the circumstances were exceptional. If a man hits a ball that lodges in the wieketkeeper's hands ami the umpire gives him not out he proceeds with his innings: the idea is that Rood luck of this kind balances the bad luck of being given out unjustifiably. And supposing a batsman falls in the middle of a run. does the fieldsman refrain from putting down the wicket? Or in football, could it be seriously contended that a thrpp-c|iiartor racing for the line should sacriflcf , bis try because the full-back slipped in running for him? The conclusion must bo that no general rule can be laid down, but that every game must develop its own code of sportsmanship. Let us lio thankful that, generally speaking, the codes are so high. The contrast between the German Crown Prince bracing bis foot against a stanchion in a tng-of-n-ar and Kingscote refusing to take advantage of Patterson, reflects in miniaturp a fundamental difference between German and British charnoterletiee. __^___^^^__