DEFIANT CLUB

Evening Star, Issue 20049, 14 December 1928, Page 11

DEFIANT CLUB

AMD YACHT ASSOCIATION After a short discussion, the Otago Yacht and Motor Boat Association last night reaffirmed its decision not to challenge for the Cornwell Cup, and refused to sanction the challenge by the North-east Harbour Club. The positibn now is that the club must either withdraw' its challenge or secede from the association’s ranks. It was a special meeting of the association called to discuss a letter from the club and a resolution asking for a reconsideration of tho case by a general meeting of members. “ I feel that this question could best be disposed of in a few words,” said the President (Mr J. T. Paul). “ The club should bo informed that the association adheres to its former decision.” The resolution not to challenge, carried on October 10, had been affirmed on November 9, and the club’s atitude had been considered at a meeting last week. To his mind, further discussion would be only beating the air, as it was in tho best interests of tho sport that the association should reaffirm its decisions. The decision would be operative. Mr W. H. Sell said that if tho members of the association had attended the meeting of the club on Saturday no doubts would exist as to the friendly relations between the two bodies. The club understood it could challenge in its ow’ii name, and the date for the closing of entries was reached while correspondence was passing between the association and tho club. The request of a large body of members for reconsideration of the case would give the association an opportunity of proving to the public that it was out to help the sport. Tho association had informed tho club by November 12 of its decision not to challenge, said Mr T. Anderson, and entries did not close until December 1. The association’s views had been clearly explained. He moved—“ That this association reaffirms its former decision not to challenge for tho Cornwell Cup, and cannot endorse the challenge of the North-east Harbour Club.” Mr F. Goodwin seconded the motion. “ If you are going to throw ua out, get tho impression out of your head that tho club is against the association,” said Mr H. E. Moller, after traversing the events leading up to the club’s challenge. Ho was sure that if the association had known the effect of its decision, on stopping a club from challenging, the decision wmuld not have been come to. Mr W. Martin said it looked as if the Takapuna Club w r as ignoring the challenge, as the northern club had not communicated . with the association to obtain its endorsement. The President said it should be distinctly understood that the club was throwing itself out, and was not being throw'll out by the association. The club could only ccaso to he a member of the association by continuing its action of defiance. Mr Moller said tho association had mentioned the expense as being one of the reasons for the decision not to challenge. Mr Anderson: You brought up the question of expense yourself. Mr Moller: T wemt to hare nothing to do with you, Mr Anderson. I am not speaking to yon. Tho President: A person .must address the meeting through the chair, and not any member, particularly with remarks like that. No matter wffio he is, I will allow' no member to speak in those terms to any other member of tho association. “ No,” replied Mr Moller, when he was invited to proceed. “ T have no more to say. 1 was speaking to you as chairman, and I will not have Mr Anderson hutting in.” The motion was carried, Mr Sell being the only dissentient. Mr Moller did not vote. Tho club was urged by_ tho president to come to a speedy decision as to its future actions. While the club was loyal to the association, he did not want it to suffer, and he deprecated any suggestion of boycott. ■