Mr Callender's Explanation.—A Reply. EDITOR "WITNESS.

Otago Witness, Issue 1894, 9 March 1888, Page 27

Mr Callender's Explanation.— A Reply. EDITOR "WITNESS.

Srß.—Tho first thing that strikes one on reading Mr Calender's letter is that he has written a long letter, and that there is very little in it. It is quite true that Mr Callender has been prominently connected with bowling hitherto. But lam pleased to notice that there are in this couutry not only better bowlers, but equally as good friends of bowling as ever Mr Callender was, so that the fact of Mr Callender withdrawing his allegiance from the association will not be attended by any disastrous results. That the association is calculated to benefit the game of bowls I admit at once, but I also submit that it is only in its infancy, and that its rules are not yet perfect.

Now, what are the facts of the present dispute? It will be remembered that last year the Christchurch Club and Caledonian Club were drawn together to play for a medal at Oamaru. Application was made to the association to allow the match to be played ou the Dunediu green (a neutral green), as the Christchurch Club was down here at the tournament. The association agreed to that after the consent of the Oamaru Club had been obtained. Now I maintain that a precedent was here laid down for future guidance, till such time as the rules could be altered, and one which should have been followed when a similar application was made by Canterbury to play the Caledonian on the Christchurch green, as both clubs were at the late tournament. In October last, when the application was mado by tho Canterbury Club, it was refused on the casting vote of the chairman, showing that the .association was evenly divided on the question. On the night previous to the tournament commencing a large body of bowlers was assembled in Christchurch, including seven representatives of the association, and the question of the medal match cropped up. The Canterbury and Caledonian Club 3 were willing to play the match on the Christchurch green, and seeing that they would not be able to meet again this season, the Christchurch Club generously placed their green at their disposal. The seven members agreed to allow the match to proceed, or certainly did not raise a single objection to it. The representative of Oamaru said he would guarantee his club would not object. Now only one thing appeared to be necessary, and out of courtesy to the president, Mr Butterwortb, I moved— " That the chairman should be consulted and his permission asked, and a telegram stating the facts of the case be forwarded to him." This was carried unanimously. The president replied " that ho could not deviate from the rules " (in spite of the precedent previously laid down). Why did he not call a meeting of the members remaining in Duuedin to further consider the matter? He did nothing of the kind. He may have consulted Mr Callender, but that gentleman was not an officer of the association ; and only represented the Balclutha and Invercargill Clubs, which were not interested and not in any way prejudiced by the match. Now, the two olubs not having obtained the permission of the president, a further consultation took place, and it was mutually agreed to play .the match, and if the association did not recognise it that the losers would give the winners a medal, The match was played ; Canterbury won ; and when the members returned to Dunedin a meeting of the association was held, and a resolution carried recognising the match. Thereupon Mr Callender resigned, aud Mr Butterworth followed suit later on. These are the facts of the case so far as I know, and I was present throughout. Mr Callender throws out slurs about clubs not wanting to go long distances to meet one another because of the £ s d question, which I maintain in these bad times n a strong argument. If he is so prominently connected with bowling, and is consequently such a "big qua" amongst the various clubs, surely his presence was necessary at Christchurch at the late tournament. Perhaps he, too, was influenced by the £s d question. In my opinion all Mr Callender had to do on resigning was to send word to the two clubs he represented asking them to appoint another delegate (which they would have done), instead of making such a fuss about a trivial matter. Mr Callender justly complains about the delegates threatening "that their clubs would withdraw from the association if the medal match was not recognised." I for one do not approve of such threats by any means, and I do not believe the two clubs do as a body. Mr Callender, in resigning because he could not bounce j the members of the association to take his view of the matter, has adopted a course of.

action similar to that which one might expect to see only amongst the juvenile fraternity. In conclusion, I maintain that any. sporting club or association is justified at times in somewhat relaxing any cast-iron rule in order that it may if it can oblige some of its members, and at the 6ame time do no injury to the others. I will not say anything about Mr Calender's autocratic and domineering style. This is too well known to members of the Dunedin clubs. As he cannot agree with the majority of the association, however, his resignation will be received with a certain amount of satisfaction. I also hope that the country clubs will enter rinks for the forthcoming tournament to be" held in Dunedin in Easter week, and if the affair is carried out in the same admirable style as our friends in Christchurch carried out their tournament it; will be a great success. — Yours, &c, W. Carltok.

Roslyn, March 6.