UNIVERSITY LAWN TENNIS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24432, 18 October 1940, Page 3

UNIVERSITY LAWN TENNIS

TO THE EDITOR Sir, —It has been known to students for some time that the University Council intended to enforce its ruling that no lawn tennis should be played on the courts on Sunday. The deputation to the council was the resub of a petition that was sent round the University. Now that the matter is in the public eye, I would like to say that the council’s is a stupid action by bigoted old men who, probably—l say probably —do not enjoy games and would therefore like to stop the students of Otago from having some good, healthy sport. Not one good reason did they advance in support of their cause, except the somewhat vague remark that it might offend people’s ' religious susceptibilities. That is ridiculous. What they meant was offending the Protestants. If this attitude of mind is carried much further, the City Council will be stopping Saturday games for fear of offending the Jewish community.

As you reported, there are shamefully few facilities for students to play tennis on Saturday, and they are being forced, because the council is predominantly Protestant, to give up their time to lying idly around—which is more harmful than breaking the Fifth Commandment, as it may lead to all sorts of trouble since Satan finds work for idle hands to do. The code of education in New Zealand can be summed up in the Latin tag, which, translated, reads: “A healthy mind in a healthy body.” This is what the Government is striving to do, and is this good work to be frustrated by a lot of fogeys who would make other sects obey their dictates? This smacks of religious persecution, albeit of a limited nature. The council cannot hide behind public opinion. To do its members justice, that is a thing they have never done, and I call on them to throw prejudice aside and give us more facilities for the physical education about which they are always talking, and in which tennis takes quite an important part.—l am, etc.. October 16. Student.

TO THE EDITOR Sir, —Independence and a sense of responsibility are lacking in those students who cannot settle their own affairs without attempting to enlist “ public opinion ” on their side. Your correspondent “ Hopscotch ” makes _ a plaintive appeal for this nebulous aid, and so reveals the .feeble state of his own defence in this business of Sunday lawn tennis. I am not going to enter into any controversy about the rights and wrongs of Sunday tennis, but would emphasise what newspaper reports have not shown —viz., that a large number of students are wholeheartedly behind the University Council’s condemnation of the proposal, having no wish to see official support for this expression of secularism. I am proud to see that the council is maintaining the rich heritage left by the founders of our Alma Mater, who worshipped God and kept His Sabbath. Would that those who bleat of bigotry and religious intolerance wipe the mud of puerile agnosticism from their eyes and see the real significance of this present struggle!—l am, etc., Dunedin. October 17. Nec Tamen.

TO THE EDITOR Sir, —I have read with a good deal of interest accounts of the Sunday tennis discussions at the last meeting of the University Council. It is reported that one member of the students’ delegation stated that the indents did not know why the Univc 'y Council prohibits play on their courts on Sunday. The only reasons offered by that body were:—(l) It wasn’t done in the “old days.” (2) The members were scared of public opinion. Disagreement over the religious aspect existed in the council itself. On analysing these reasons it is found that the first requires little comment. It is illogical reasoning, similar to that which retarded every branch of the scientific advancement. and an excuse always offered in desperation by the senile. The second reason is really astounding—a University Council scared to speak its own thoughts! I, who have always looked to the University to act as a guide to public opinion, find it openly declaring itself unable to stand by its private decisions, and stating that it is frightened of what it calls public opinion. This being the case we all must surely cast aside hopes of looking to the members of the supreme University body for a lead. They apparently only follow like sheep, and stragglers at that I am etc., Misplaced Trust. Dunedin, Oct. 16.