Sfit,—Mr. Horsfall's suggestion (see Spectator, June 10th) of comparing the
relative physical proportions of the well-to-do classes in England and Germany by a series of photographic groups from both countries would be interesting, but scarcely convincing. Photography flatters, and I admit that the Germans would look more showy, but this would be largely due to their. general "make up" and padded attire ; and if the subjects photographed were aware of the reason, national patriotism would doubtless inflate their chests and add inches to their stature. Even in Mr. Hall's photographs of the Leeds Jew and Gentile children, I have it on good authority that whilst the children of the Gentiles were chosen from the very poorest class in Leeds, those of the Jews were cadfully selected from the 'best of that race. Notivithstanding this, it must be admitted that Hebrew mothers of the humbler class look after their children better than English mothers. They are better able to do this by reason of the help extended to them by their fraternity. The Jewish child is undoubtedly fatter, but this does not necessarily imply a better physique ; and when these children grow up to adult age they are still fat, and would scarcely be considered to possess athletic proportions. I fear that many people mistake large propor- tions for physical development. Surely bulk is not the end -and aim of physical training ; an elephant is not as useful as a horse. The true aim of physical training should be to promote good health and longevity, not to produce abnormal muscular development, tending to make a man heavy, slow, and short-lived, but to make him active, skilful, self-reliant, with good powers of endurance ; and the best preparation for these lies in the outdoor games and sports of our large public
Previous page
