"Spectator" Competitions

RULES AND CONDITIONS

Entries must be typed or very clearly written on one side of the paper only. The name and address, or pseudonym, of the competitor must be on each entry and not on a separate sheet. When a word limit is set words must be counted and the number given. No entries can be returned. Prizes may be divided at the discretion of the judge, or withheld if no entry reaches the required standard. The judge reserves the right to print or quote from any entry. The judge's decision is final, and no correspondence can be entered into on the subject of the award. Entries must be addressed to :—The Editor, the Spectator, 99 Gower Street,

London, W.C. 1, and be marked on the envelope Competition No. (—).

Competition No. Go (SET BY "DEGLI.") A PRIZE of £2 2s. is offered for a Safety Jingle for Pedestrians. Competitors are reminded of the seaman's Rule of the Road : " When both side lights show ahead

Port your helm and show your red, &c."

and of other memory jingles that are worth a score of rules.

Entries must be received not later than Monday, June 6th,1932. The result of this competition will appear in our 183U0 of June 18th, 1932.

Competition No. GI (SET BY "CARD.")

A emzE. of £2 2s. is offered for a list of the Six Greatest Fools in history. Only those who have attained a certain eminence are to be considered as qualifying for inclusion. Choice is limited to those who died before the beginning of the twentieth century. Competitors need not attempt to conform with what they expect to be the general verdict.

Entries must be received not later than Monday, June 13th, 1932. The result of this competition will appear in our issue of June 25th, 1932.

The result • of Competition No. 59 will appear in our next issue.

Limerick Competition No. 31

A PRIZE of £1 ls. is offered each week for a new and original English Limerick verse on some subject dealt with in the current number of the Spectator. The thirty-first of these competitions closes on Monday, June 13th, 1932. Entries should be marked " Limerick No. 31."

The result of the twenty-ninth of these competitions will be announced in our next issue.

[It is requested that, to facilitate the work of the judges, entries should, when possible, be submitted on postcards.] Result of Limerick Competition No. 28

THE most popular subjects for Limericks this week were : " On Reading the Newspapers " (Moth), " The Future for British Films " (John Grierson), " The Toll of the Roads " (Lord Brentford), " The Portrait of an Irishman " (Austin Clarke). The prize is awarded to Rev. J. R. Coates, Selly Oak College, Birmingham.

THE WINNING ENTRY.

" ON READING THE NEWSPAPERS."

When a judge wants to rouse British wrath,

Instead of the usual froth,

He sententiously vapours About the newspapers ; But can't hold a candle to " Moth."

(REv.) J. R. COATES.

Report of Competition No. 58

(REPORT AND AWARD BY " DEGLI.") IT was assumed that a group of English prize winners in the Dublin Derby Sweep had combined to offer their joint winnings, amounting in all to about £100,000 to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for any national purpose chosen by him. A prize of £2 2s. was offered for an extract from the speech in which he accepted or declined the offer. No extract was to be more than 500 words in length.

It has also been assumed by the majority of competitors that any speech made by a Chancellor of the Exchequer should be thick with metaphor and weighed down with heavy words. Too many, also, took the opportunity of writing a Chancellor's speech to air some favourite grievance or advance some scheme which might have benefitted by the sweepstake winnings. The entries were, in fact, decidedly dull.

Competitors were about equally divided between those who made the Chancellor accept and those who made him decline. The prize is also divided, and £1 Is. is awarded to both of the following : Guy Hadley, 27 Madeley Road, Ealing, W. 5, and " Halj." The Rev. B. M. Hancock, Norman Ackroyd and Q. E. A. are Commended.

THE WINNING EXTRACTS.

The Chancellor said that His Majesty's Government bad only decided to decline this munificent offer after grave and protracted consideration of the moral and constitutional issues involved. It could not be denied that the organization of a public sweepstake was an offence under the existing laws of the United Kingdom, and it followed therefore that in knowingly receiving the profits accruing from such an offence he would be condoning a breach of the law. It was not in the sphere of his duty to comment on the merits or demerits of our legal system ; he was aware that it might be argued that legislation of whatsoever kind was ultimately designed to serve the national advantage, and that in circum- stances where its rigid interpretation opposed this advantage the law was defeating its own object. He hastened to add that he slid not advance this as a personal opinion either of himself or of his colleagues. The adoption of such an argument must inevitably set up precedents obstructive to the proper administration of justice ; dishonest financiers might seek to evade prosecution by surrendering a percentage of their ill-gotten gains to the Treasury, or a resourceful criminal might secure immunity by making presents to the Mint of gold and silver plate for the ostensible purpose of strengthening the nation's bullion reserves. For these reasons he felt that even in this period of crisis no degree of legal casuistry could justify his acceptance of this large sum of money. At the same time he wished to express his gratitude to these public-spirited citizens for their admirable offer, an offer which should inspire taxpayers throughout the country.

The Chancellor added, in conclusion, that the Government would immediately introduce legislation rendering forfeit in tote any moneys arising from sweepstakes or lotteries, such legislation

to take effect from June 1st, 1932. GUY HADLEY.

. . When I first received the offer of this money it appeared to me impossible that the Government could accept it without confessing itself highly illogical—not to say hypocritical. I was, however, anxious to accept ; because we cannot afford, at the present time, to sneeze at any sum, no matter how small : I had the will to accept this hundred thousand—it remained only for me to discover the way. I am happy in being able to tell the House that I have been successful. (Loud cheers.) Fortunately, this sum was offered for any national purpose which I might choose : I have therefore accepted it on behalf of the Board of Betting Control, operating what is commonly termed the Tote ; which, in common with many other industries, has not done any too well of late. (Some interruption.) Now the Dublin Sweep- stake and the Tote are in much the same line of business—they both fully understand the expression, " Money for nothing." (Laughter and cheers.) The two are, in fact, brothers; and it appears to me a perfectly reasonable and logical proceeding that the prosperous brother should be allowed, however indirectly, to extend a helping hand to his brother in distress. I have therefore decided to take a chance and invest this hundred thousand with the chairman of the Board of Betting Control. (Cheers and

laughter.) Haw.

Commended :

In the Great War we were a united people because of our common devotion to our country in her hour of peril. Once again, and no one knows this better than a Chancellor of the Exchequer, we are face to face with perils at least as great as we faced in 1914. Our Prince bid us all in these days, each one in his measure, be good neighbours. It is in the spirit of "good neigh- bours " that you have, in response to a suggestion made by one of you in the public Press, co-operated so readily in asking me to take and use to the best advantage of the whole country all the " winnings " that fortune placed at your disposal. Such co- operation, such ready and complete sacrifice of all sets free great forces. In ways we cannot trace in detail, your generous, patriotic sacrifice will increase the number of folk who will be impelled to make willing and heroic sacrifices to save our people from dire disaster and distress.

Some logically-minded critics have asked me : " How can one in my position accept for my country's needs money which was obtained by an evasion of the laws of the land ? "

I am not really much perturbed by this criticism. And that for two reasons. First, whatever the British may be, they are not logical. "Red Revolutions" are sometimes the direct result of " logic." We British seem to have the capacity to settle practical problems by deserting logic for compromise. As one who is interested in Income Tax I have to watch any who adopt " evasions of the law." The Irish Sweepstake is in Ireland strictly legal. The folk on this side who are dedicating their winnings to their country's needs carefully observed their country's laws. They did not post their money for the tickets they purchased.

I hope my critics are answered. I gladly accept the generous