ATHLETICS.

West Coast Times, 20 April 1911, Page 4

ATHLETICS.

THE CHANGE OF VENUE DISPUTE. Ira* .-mess association.- -coryniGHT. J DUNEDIN, April 18. The venue dispute in connection with the Australasian Amateur Athletic Championship meeting is occasioning considerable attention locally. Mr Marryat, of Wellington, President of the Council, who is spending Eastm in Dunedin, Was interviewed by a “Star” reporter to-day. He says; “Mr Pollock and myself feel that we have been unjustly used in the intemperate language employed in criticising our action. Our long connection with the sport; both in Otago and Wellington, should surely have caused those who differed from us at least to give us credit for having acted honestly in accordance with our convictions. AVe have preferred to -take up an attitude which we know would entail the loss of our seats on the Council, and which, in my own case, involves giving up the office of President, a position I treasure very highly. We have preferred, to act up to our convictions as to what is best for the sport rather than retain our seats on tho Council by voting against our convictions, and we claim that our action entitles us to respect instead of obloquy. It lias been stated that this case is on all fours with the dispute over the old Council in Christchurch. AVe do not wish to reopen that matter, but merely- to point out this difference. Mr Pollock and myself preferred to take an action involving our disappearance from the legislation on the sport rather than vote against our convictions, whereas in the case of the old Council at Christchurch the reverse was the case, members retaining their seats in defiance of an expression of no confidence from the majority of the centres.”

In connection with the resolution of the Otago centre revoking our appointment we are of opinion that that reso-lution-isHiltra vires., “but we intend to make no use of that position, and if the Otago centre will act in a constitutional way they will find that Mr Pollock and myself will act in the way they expect of us. One of the speakers at the Otago Centre’s meeting said that we had no right to judge between right and wrong, that we went in the Council simply to vote as they instructed us. Now, I ask these gentlemen if they would, under any consideration accept an honorary position on sports or any other body whereby he was precluded from exercising his judgment as between right and wrong. Even misstatements have been made to incite opposition to the action of the Council in .selecting Wellington. It has been alleged that some months ago the Council wrote to the associations in Australia asking them to give an indication as to the date on which they would like the meeting to be held, and th,at in that letter the Council stated that the meeting would probably be held in Wellington. No such statement was ever made by any member of the Council or by any of the Council’s officials. “Furthermore it has been stated that the Otago delegates to the conference of'centres in Christchurch met me and obtained my promise that Otago would receive fair play. These gentlemen met me in Christchurch, and tried their utmost to get me to give my opinion on the locality of the championship meeting. I told them that as President of the Council I could not in all fairness give any such indication, and that in any case no member of the Council would be justified in expressing his opinon until he had heard Ihe evidence. I certainly promised that Otago would receive full consideration and fair play. I claim that Otago has had those.”