POPULARITY OF BISLEY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21020, 8 May 1930, Page 5

POPULARITY OF BISLEY.

WOMEN COMPETITORS. DECISION OP THE COUNCIL. (From Our Own Correspondent.) LONDON, March 27. Presiding at the London general meeting of the National Rifle Association, Earl Jellicoe made an interesting statement regarding the position of women at Bisley. “ The council of the National Rifle Association,” he said, “is of opinion that ladies who have served their country, or who are still serving in officially recognised corps which have a definite military status, and come under direct military control, and whose duties may be of an. extremely hazardous nature, are entitled to the same recognition and privileges in respect of such patriotic services, as our rules accord to the opposite sex.” Lord Jellicoe mentioned that considerable ; attention had been directed to an amendment of the regulation relating to the eligibility of women to compete as members of H.M. Forces. LATENT OPPOSITION. Outlining the position, prior to the meeting, the military correspondent of the Morning Post wrote: “ Immediately after the war, in compliance with the expressed wish of the King, who is patron of the association, the council agreed to open the Royal and other prizes to past and present members of all units o I H.M. Forces. Formerly, the competitions were confined to past and present members of the volunteers and territorials. This widening of the field fof entrants included women’s units which had found their way into the Army List and ex-service women did not long delay their application for recognition. The ‘ all-comers ' competitions were open -to women as well as men. That privilege was not questioned. But a latent opposition was known to exist as regards ‘ service ’ competitions, which were understood to be confined to soldiers, combatant' and non-combatant. No serious attempt, however, was made to challenge the decision of the council until this year, when it was officially decided to substitute the word ‘ corps ’ for ‘ unit,’ so that recognition of units by the association includes ‘ any women’s corps shown in the Navy, Army, •or Air Force lists.’ Opponents held that the alteration would widen the field to women | soldiers ’ (the National Rifle Association say that the change is intended to have the reverse ■ effect), and the opportunity was taken to open the whole question as it ! affected women. The N.R.A, claim that their interpretation of ‘last .and present members of H.M. Forces ’ cannot do other than include women, and since some of them performed valuable service at home and overseas, their claim to shoot could not be disregarded. Against that the protestors argue that the presence of women in a contest held ‘to be training for war" is undesirable and is not without a touch of incongruity. Women, they hold, would not be allowed to bear arms in the war; their sphere of duty is in non-combatant service. It is pointed out, however, that women, do not take up arms at Bisley with any bloodthirsty Intent any . more .than do members of the Royal Army Chaplain’s Department. They adopted it as a sport.” INCREASED DEMAND FOR ACCOMMODATION. In spite of the curtailment of official ammunition grants, Earl Jellicoe was able to report an encouraging increase in the demand for range accommodation at Bliley. During the year, he explained, targets had been provided for 107 units, associations, and clubs for rifle meetings. A convenient and attractive centre, Bisley Camp was being increasingly used by units of the Territorial Army and others for training purposes. 1 Captain D, H. Steers suggested that representation on the council should be given to public school boys who attended Bisley. He pointed out that during the last three years the entrance fees for the Ashburton Shield amounted to £B6B, though there was no prize money, and for the Cadets’ Challenge Trophy, £192. For the Public Schools Snap Shooting Competition the entrance fees were £230, and the prizes £26 13s 4d. The total profits^on the 1929 meeting were £1,264, to which the public school boys had contributed £665. . Colonel Lord Cottesloe replied that the council would give sympathetic consideration to the matter, and Major C. E_. Etches said that the figures did not give a true picture. The boys’ contribution was an exactly fair proportion of the overhead expenses.