The Star. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 12, 1924. THE CHRISTMAS NUMBER OF THE “ STAR.”

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17410, 12 December 1924, Page 8

The Star. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 12, 1924. THE CHRISTMAS NUMBER OF THE “ STAR.”

The Christmas Xumber of the “Star” to-day conveys to readers the season’s greetings, -which have been so neatly spun into verse by that daily contributor, “ Sinbad,” on behalf of the whole staff. To-day’s issue puts an end to a certain sense of anxiety that has pervaded the office as to the possibility of fulfilling the numerous orders that have crowded in for the Christmas Number. In the ordinary course of events, the problem is merely a matter of having enough bales of paper on hand, but where an art supplement is concerned time becomes the most important factor; and the preparation of the illustrated supplement this year has taken more time than usual because of the very large number of photographs entered for competition, and the very high standard of merit shown by practically all of the competitors. This is particularly gratifying from the point of view of the “ Star,” which makes a daily feature of news pictures, for the encouragement of the photographic habit makes for brighter newspapers and the more graphic presentation of news. The short story and poem competitions. too, give the regular writers for the Saturday issues, as well as those at large, an opportunity to measure their worth in a special effort, and the only regrettable feature of these competitions is that so many entrants, inevitably, just fail to catch the judge's eye. The ** Star ” congratulates the winners, but reserves its special thanks for those others who have helped to make the contests keen without receiving a tangible reward for their efforts.

It s not cricket is a phrase that has come into use as a rough and ready definition of what constitutes unsportsmanlike action in the everyday affairs of life, and it is a fine tribute to the old English game that the phrase is in the mouths of millions who know next to nothing about cricket in the literal sense. For this very reason, those who, literally, play the game should shrink not from the breach for which an immediate penalty is exacted, but rather from the line of conduct which, without, being specially legislated against, comes within the common definition of what is not “ cricket.” And in this connection the fat is in the fire in Australia because a Queensland bow-ler, in daring to claim a penalty which the rules specifically provide for, is presumed to have dealt a blow at the polite fiction that a batsman could not, deliberately, be guilty of cribbing runs. It is not sufficient for the Englishmen, in a spirit of resentment, to reply that in their long experience of first-class cricket they have never seen such an incident before, for that merely implies that they have often seen the batsman taking undue liberties with the bowler under cover of a stupid and one-sided “ code of honour.” Every schoolboy knows that the batsman who leaves his crease at the bowler’s end remains “ in ” only with the goodwill of the bowler, and as it is notorious that many batsmen abuse this little concession, it would be better for all concerned to agree to a rigid reading of the rules in future. Looking under the surface, and applying the true “ cricket ” test to the Toowoomba incident, it is easier to sympathise with the bowler than with the batsman.

Because sky-scrapers have proved a necessity in Xew York, it does not follow that they would be a desirable architectural addition to the cities of the older world or the cities of Australia and Xew Zealand. For one thing, viewed separately, the sky-scraper is frankly ugly. Unless among its fellows in what O. Henry called the “ canyons of Broadway,” it is usually very much out of scale with the buildings round aboui. Another disadvantage is mentioned in a cablegram published in the “ Star ” this week describing the plans of a Xew N ork firm to erect an eighty-eight-storey office building which will over-shadow the Woolworth Block. Before the design can be completed, tests must be made, it is said, to determine (he extent to which such buildings sway in heavy gales. Writing in the “Westminster Gazette recently, Mr ,T. A. Spender expressed deep concern because Mr Topham Forrest, architect of the London County Council, was visiting America and seemed likely to return to England with “ a few skv-scraper ideas in his pocket.” Mr Spender points out that as the object of these huge structures is to save space, it is impossible to provide them with a base broad enough to carry their mass in a manner agreeable to the eye, and that their internal design requires them to be pierced with innumerable lights for rooms of normal size. “ One is always seeing paragraphs in American newspapers,” he says, “ adjuring architects of genius to get busy on a really great design for one of these monsters. But to have a fair chance, the genius would have to be allotted unlimited ground space and permitted to plan his building as a residencc for giants, with rooms of gigantic dimensions.”