The Project Gutenberg EBook of Boating, by W. B. Woodgate
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
Title: Boating
Author: W. B. Woodgate
Commentator: Harvey Mason
Illustrator: Frank Dadd
Release Date: September 19, 2011 [EBook #37462]
Language: English
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BOATING ***
Produced by Chris Curnow, Hary Lamé and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive)
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
| TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES: |
| |
| Text printed in italics in the original is represented here |
| between underscores, as in _text_. Texts printed in small |
| capitals in the original work have been changed to ALL |
| CAPITALS. |
| Greek words in the original book have been transcribed and are|
| here given between square brackets, as in [hakatoi]. |
| The oe-ligature is represented as [oe]; [+] represents a |
| dagger symbol. |
| In the form that occurs in this work, blanks have been changed|
| to lines of underscores: ________________. |
| |
| More detailed transcriber's notes will be found at the end of |
| this text. |
| |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
The Badminton Library
OF
SPORTS AND PASTIMES
EDITED BY
HIS GRACE THE DUKE OF BEAUFORT, K.G.
ASSISTED BY ALFRED E. T. WATSON
_BOATING_
PRINTED BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
LONDON
[Illustration: GENERAL VIEW OF HENLEY REGATTA (_Frontispiece_)]
BOATING
BY
W. B. WOODGATE
WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY THE REV. EDMOND WARRE, D.D.
AND
A CHAPTER ON ROWING AT ETON
BY R. HARVEY MASON
[Illustration]
_WITH NUMEROUS ENGRAVINGS AFTER FRANK DADD_
_AND FROM PHOTOGRAPHS_
LONDON
LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.
1888
_All rights reserved_
_DEDICATION_
_TO_
_H.R.H. THE PRINCE OF WALES._
BADMINTON: _March, 1887_.
Having received permission to dedicate these volumes, the BADMINTON
LIBRARY of SPORTS and PASTIMES, to HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCE OF
WALES, I do so feeling that I am dedicating them to one of the best and
keenest sportsmen of our time. I can say, from personal observation,
that there is no man who can extricate himself from a bustling and
pushing crowd of horsemen, when a fox breaks covert, more dexterously
and quickly than His Royal Highness; and that when hounds run hard over
a big country, no man can take a line of his own and live with them
better. Also, when the wind has been blowing hard, often have I seen His
Royal Highness knocking over driven grouse and partridges and
high-rocketing pheasants in first-rate workmanlike style. He is held to
be a good yachtsman, and as Commodore of the Royal Yacht Squadron is
looked up to by those who love that pleasant and exhilarating pastime.
His encouragement of racing is well known, and his attendance at the
University, Public School, and other important Matches testifies to his
being, like most English gentlemen, fond of all manly sports. I consider
it a great privilege to be allowed to dedicate these volumes to so
eminent a sportsman as His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, and I do
so with sincere feelings of respect and esteem and loyal devotion.
BEAUFORT.
PREFACE.
A few lines only are necessary to explain the object with which these
volumes are put forth. There is no modern encyclopædia to which the
inexperienced man, who seeks guidance in the practice of the various
British Sports and Pastimes, can turn for information. Some books there
are on Hunting, some on Racing, some on Lawn Tennis, some on Fishing,
and so on; but one Library, or succession of volumes, which treats of
the Sports and Pastimes indulged in by Englishmen--and women--is
wanting. The Badminton Library is offered to supply the want. Of the
imperfections which must be found in the execution of such a design we
are conscious. Experts often differ. But this we may say, that those who
are seeking for knowledge on any of the subjects dealt with will find
the results of many years' experience written by men who are in every
case adepts at the Sport or Pastime of which they write. It is to point
the way to success to those who are ignorant of the sciences they aspire
to master, and who have no friend to help or coach them, that these
volumes are written.
To those who have worked hard to place simply and clearly before the
reader that which he will find within, the best thanks of the Editor are
due. That it has been no slight labour to supervise all that has been
written he must acknowledge; but it has been a labour of love, and very
much lightened by the courtesy of the Publisher, by the unflinching,
indefatigable assistance of the Sub-Editor, and by the intelligent and
able arrangement of each subject by the various writers, who are so
thoroughly masters of the subjects of which they treat. The reward we
all hope to reap is that our work may prove useful to this and future
generations.
THE EDITOR.
* * * * *
The author desires to record his thanks and indebtedness to the
following gentlemen, for much kind co-operation and assistance, and for
leave to reproduce passages from their valuable works upon
aquatics:--Geo. G. T. TREHERNE, Esq., author of 'Record of the
University Boat Race'; E. D. BRICKWOOD, Esq. ('Argonaut'), author of
'Boat Racing'; L. P. BRICKWOOD, Esq., Editor of the 'Racing Almanack';
the Proprietors of the 'Field'; the Proprietors of 'Land and Water,' and
Mr. R. G. Gridley for kindly assisting with the Map of the Cambridge
Course.
_ILLUSTRATIONS._
(ENGRAVED BY W. J. PALMER, J. D. COOPER, AND G. PEARSON, AFTER DRAWINGS
BY F. DADD AND PHOTOGRAPHS BY G. MITCHELL, HILLS & SAUNDERS, AND MARSH
BROS.)
* * * * *
FULL-PAGE ILLUSTRATIONS.
ARTIST
GENERAL VIEW OF THE HENLEY } _From a photograph_ _Frontispiece_
REGATTA }
METHOD OF STARTING THE }
COLLEGE EIGHTS PRIOR TO } _Frank Dadd_ _To face p._ 28
1825, OXFORD }
STARTING THE EIGHTS, OLD } _Frank Dadd_ " 40
COURSE, HENLEY }
COACHING UNIVERSITY CREW _Frank Dadd_ " 68
EMBARKING _Frank Dadd_ " 84
PAIR OARS--IMMINENT FOUL _Frank Dadd_ " 124
BUMPING RACE WAITING FOR } _From a photograph_ " 170
THE GUN }
OFF THE BROCAS _Frank Dadd_ " 202
THAMES WATERMEN AND } _Frank Dadd_ " 218
WHERRIES }
CLIEFDEN (RIVER SCENE) _From a photograph_ " 242
* * * * *
WOODCUTS IN TEXT.
ARTIST PAGE
VIGNETTE ON TITLE-PAGE _Frank Dadd_
FLEET OF EGYPTIAN QUEEN _From a photograph_ 11
ANCIENT BOAT DEPICTED ON VASE _Frank Dadd_ 15
BAS-RELIEF OF ANCIENT GREEK ROWING _Frank Dadd_ 19
BOAT
ANCIENT GALLEY FIGHT, FROM POMPEII _Frank Dadd_ 21
HENLEY COURSE (BETWEEN RACES) _From a photograph_ 26
OXFORD BOAT IN 1829 } _From 'Record of the_ { 31
BUMPING RACES (OLD STYLE) } _University Boatrace'_ { 33
A COLLEGE PAIR _From a photograph_ 37
TOWING GUARD BOATS UP HENLEY REACH _From a photograph_ 39
PAIR-OAR _From a photograph_ 41
GONDOLA _From a photograph_ 43
BISHAM COURT _From a photograph_ 53
MARLOW _From a photograph_ 66
A SCRATCH EIGHT ('PEAL OF BELLS') _From a photograph_ 75
MEDMENHAM ABBEY _From a photograph_ 79
'PROSE' _Frank Dadd_ 83
BISHAM COURT REACH _From a photograph_ 92
FEATHER 'UNDER' THE WATER _From a photograph_ 102
PRACTISING STROKE (1) _From a photograph_ 110
PRACTISING STROKE (2) _From a photograph_ 110
PRACTISING STROKE (3) _From a photograph_ 111
PRACTISING STROKE (4) _From a photograph_ 111
A COLLEGE FOUR _From a photograph_ 118
FOUR-OAR _From a photograph_ 121
NEAR MEDMENHAM _From a photograph_ 123
CLOSE QUARTERS _Frank Dadd_ 127
A SPILL _Frank Dadd_ 133
SCULLING RACE, WITH PILOTS IN _Frank Dadd_ 139
EIGHT-OARS
PUMPED OUT _Frank Dadd_ 141
THE LAST OF THE THAMES WHERRIES _From a photograph_ 142
'POETRY' _Frank Dadd_ 153
GOING TO SCALE _Frank Dadd_ 157
SMOKING IS FORBIDDEN _Frank Dadd_ 165
'RUN A MILE OR TWO' _Frank Dadd_ 167
FOUR-OAR _From a photograph_ 178
EARLY AMATEURS _Frank Dadd_ 192
WINDSOR _From a photograph_ 200
A FOUL _Frank Dadd_ 238
* * * * *
MAPS
SHOWING
THE OXFORD COURSE _To face p._ 288
" CAMBRIDGE " " 296
" HENLEY " " 318
" PUTNEY " " 322
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. THE RISE OF MODERN OARSMANSHIP 26
III. SCIENTIFIC OARSMANSHIP 53
IV. COACHING 66
V. THE CAPTAIN 79
VI. THE COXSWAIN AND STEERING 92
VII. SLIDING SEATS 102
VIII. FOUR-OARS 118
IX. PAIR-OARS 123
X. SCULLING 127
XI. BOAT-BUILDING AND DIMENSIONS 142
XII. TRAINING 153
XIII. ROWING CLUBS 178
XIV. THE AMATEUR, HIS HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION 192
XV. ROWING AT ETON COLLEGE 200
XVI. WATERMEN AND PROFESSIONALS 217
XVII. LAWS OF BOAT-RACING (THEIR HISTORY, AND RULES OF THE ROAD) 238
'THE TEMPLE OF FAME' 243
APPENDIX 313
INDEX 331
_Erratum._
Page 119, line 19, _for_ Bodleian _read_ Radleian.
[Illustration: BOATING.
CHAPTER I.]
INTRODUCTION.
As parts of human life and practice the out-of-door games and amusements
with which Englishmen are familiar have had a long course of
development, and each has its own history. To trace this development and
history in any particular case is not always an easy task. Most of the
writers who deal with these subjects treat the 'Origines' in a summary
fashion. Not a few ignore them altogether. The Topsy theory, ''spects it
growed,' is sufficient.
And yet if it be possible to deal more philosophically with a subject of
the kind, the attempt ought not necessarily to be devoid of interest. It
involves a retrospect of human life and human ingenuity. It will trace
development in man's ways and means, marking points which in some
regions and with some races have determined the limit of their progress,
and in others have served as stepping-stones to further invention. It
will present facts which will not only not be disdained by the true
student of men and manners, but will serve to broider the fringes of
serious history, and will give additional light and colour to the record
of the character and the habits of men. For indeed the sports and
pastimes of a people are no insignificant product of its national
spirit, and react to no small degree upon national character. They have
not unfrequently had their share in grave events, and the famous and
oft-quoted saying of the Duke of Wellington respecting the playing
fields at Eton (_se non è vero, è ben trovato_) contains a truth,
applicable in a wider sense to national struggles and to victories other
than Waterloo.
Pastimes and amusements generally may be divided into two main classes:
(1) those that have been invented simply as a means of recreation, such
as cricket, tennis, racquets, etc.; and (2) those that have their origin
in the primary needs of mankind. The latter have in many cases, as
civilisation has advanced, and the particular needs have been supplied
in other ways, survived as pastimes by reason of the natural pleasure
and the excitement and the emulation which accompanied them. Of this
latter class, those that have appropriated the name of 'sport' _par
excellence_, such as hunting, shooting, fishing, etc., hold the field,
so to speak, in antiquity, as compared with other pastimes, having their
origin in the initial necessities and natural instincts of man, which
compelled him to fight with and to destroy some wild beasts, that he
might not himself be eaten, and to catch or kill others that he might
have them to eat.
The spirit of emulation and the pride of skill, and the desire of
obtaining healthy exercise for its own sake, have been among the
principal causes which have converted into sports and pastimes man's
means and methods of locomotion. Almost every class of movement which
can be pressed into that form of competition which is called a race, or
in which a definite comparison of skill is possible, has been enlisted
in the host of amusements with which civilisation consoles its children
for the loss of the wild delights of the untutored savage.
Among these perhaps the most important and the most conspicuous is
Rowing, which as a serious business has played no inconsiderable part in
great events of human history, and as a pastime is inferior to none of
the class to which it belongs. Its votaries will not hesitate to claim
for it even the chief place, by reason of the pleasure and emulation to
which it so readily ministers, as a healthful exercise, and as a means
of competitive effort requiring both skill and endurance.
But the oar, before it ministered to recreation, had a long history of
labour in the service of man, which is not yet ended, and itself was not
shaped but by evolution from earlier types, of which the paddle and
ultimately the human hand and arm are the original beginnings.
Will it be wearisome to speculate on these beginnings, and to try to
cast back in thought and research for the first origins of the noble
pastime which forms the subject of the present volume? Fortunately, in
savage life still extant on the habitable globe we have the survival of
many, if not of all, the earliest types of locomotion. Man in his
natural condition has to follow nature, and by following to subdue her
in his struggle for existence. Climate and race differentiate his action
in this respect, and results, under parallel circumstances, similar,
though different in detail, attend his efforts in different parts of the
world.
A land animal, he is from the first brought face to face with water,
deep water of lakes, and of rivers, and of the sea, and in all these he
finds bounds to his desires, as well as things to be desired; opposite
shores to which he wishes to cross, fish and vegetable growth which he
wants for food. Horace tells us that 'oak and triple brass he had around
his breast who first to the fierce sea committed his frail raft,' but
the first man who committed _himself_ to deep water, and essayed the
oarage of his arms and legs, must have been free from such incumbrances,
and yet have had a stout heart within him. And simultaneously with, or
even prior to such adventure, must have been others of a similar
character aided by a piece of wood, or a bundle of rushes, or an
inflated skin, the elementary boat, the very embryo of navigation. Such
beginnings are still in evidence on the western coast of Australia,
where savages may be seen sitting astride on a piece of light wood and
so venturing forth upon the waters of the sea. Homer, who in the Odyssey
delights in making the man of many counsels and many devices, with all
his wealth of what was then modern experience, find himself reduced to
the shifts and expedients of a man thrown, like the savage, upon his own
solitary resources, pictures to us Ulysses seated astride upon the mast
of his shipwrecked vessel and paddling with both hands, thus reverting
in his distress, as no doubt others have done since, to the very
earliest method of navigation, now only practised for choice by savages,
whose progress in navigation, as in other things, has been checked at
this early stage, and who remain the nearest visible types of primitive
man.
But some savages, other than they, did make progress in the matter of
locomotion by water, and the next step was the raft, of which the
earliest type known is the sanpan, three pieces of buoyant wood tied
together. On this construction, which supplied the earliest generic
names both in the east and in the west (sanpan, [schediê], _ratis_), a
man would stand and paddle and move along upon the water, and assert his
power of hand and eye with the weapons with which native ingenuity had
already supplied him.
In warm climates, where swimming had become a necessity, and the very
children from their earliest years had been habituated to the water, the
familiarity that breeds contempt of the very danger which at a previous
stage acted as a deterrent, would soon encourage attempts to improve,
and enlarge, and increase the speed of the rude vessel in common use.
These attempts would naturally follow the line of providing the means
for conveying in safety other things besides the living freight of the
human person. There would also arise the very natural desire to keep
things dry, which would spoil if wetted. Hence the enlargement of the
raft, and then the protection afforded by platforms raised upon its
central surface, or by planks laid edgewise so as to make a defence, a
breastwork against the wave.
And no doubt by this time the use of the sail for propulsion had become
familiar, and man had already prayed his god for 'the breeze that cometh
aft, sail-filler, good companion.' But interesting as it would be to
trace the effect of the sail upon the construction of vessels and their
development, we must leave that pleasant task to those who, in the
present series, will treat of the yacht and its prototypes ([hakatoi]).
The earliest method of propulsion was with the human hands. In the
picture of Ulysses seated on the mast and keel of his shipwrecked
vessel, which he had lashed together with the broken backstay made of
bullhide, paddling with his hands on either side, Homer, as we have
seen, has presented us with the hero of the highest civilisation known
to him reduced to the straits of the merest savage; and he has again
enforced this idea in his picture of the same hero of many wiles and
many counsels devising for himself the means of escape from the island
of Calypso, and, not without divine suggestions, constructing for
himself, like an ancient Robinson Crusoe, a primitive raft, with certain
improvements and additions; a broad raft be it remembered, and not a
boat. A boat would mar the conception which presents to us the civilised
man driven back to the straits of barbarism by the unique circumstances
in which he is placed.
This is the point which ingenious commentators, who have given elaborate
designs and figures of Ulysses' _boat_ and written pages upon its
construction, seem to have missed. The poet has added colour to his
picture by bringing the new and the old together. And of a truth new and
old exist together and continue throughout the ages of man in marvellous
juxtaposition. The fast screw liner off the Australian coast may pass
the naked savage oaring himself with swarthy palms upon his buoyant log,
and almost every stage of modern invention in ship-building and ship
propulsion has had alongside it the three-timbered sanpan, and the
original types of raft that float in the Malay Archipelago.
But we must follow the development of our special pastime through its
embryonic stage to a moment when, all unknown and unseen in the womb of
time, like the sudden changes which differentiate the gradual ascents
from a lower to a higher being, unseen, unknown, and unwritten in
history, that great event occurred, the birth of the first 'dug-out'
canoe. Unnoticed perhaps at the time, the importance of the event was
recognised by the poet in after ages as a real forward step in the
onward progress of the arts.[1] 'Rivers then first the hollowed alders
felt.'
[1] Virg. _Georg._ i. 136: 'Tunc alnos primum fluvii sensere cavatas.'
To some primitive man or men in advance of their fellow men, the idea of
flotation, as apart from the mere buoyancy of the material, had
occurred, and suggested the hollowing out of the log. Wherever and
whenever this was first effected, it was a great event in the world's
progress. A simple thought had wedded fact destined to be fruitful to
all future ages. O prototype of the longboat--of the frail eights which
freighted with contending crews speed yearly over Father Thames amidst
the cheers and applause of thousands! Where wast thou launched? What
dusky arms propelled thee? What wild songs of exultation heralded thy
first successful venture? Once achieved, what present benefits, what
future triumphs didst thou not ensure to man? In the power of carrying
something, or anything beside the living freight, dry and secure, and in
the increased facility of movement and of turning, must have been
manifest from the first the advantage of the canoe over the raft, where
the lapping of the water and the wash of the wave, in spite of all
contrivances, could scarce be kept out. How soon must efforts have been
made to increase this advantage to obtain greater carrying power and
greater speed! The application of the sail was made possible by the
ingenious adaptation of the outrigger, a trunk of light wood laid
parallel to the side of the dug-out at some feet distance, and attached
to it by transverse bars. The oldest type and the type with this
improvement still survive, and the ingenious models of such craft which
were exhibited at the Fisheries Exhibition in London a few years ago
will have been noticed by many of our readers. Twin vessels like the
'Castalia,' and, if we are to believe the learned Graser, the great
Tesseraconteres of Ptolemy, had their primitive germ, so to speak, in
this early stroke of genius. It may appear strange to some boating men
who are accustomed to hear a good deal about outriggers, that this
outrigger of which we have been speaking has nothing to do with the
outrigger with which they are familiar. It never apparently passed into
the Western Seas. The Mediterranean knows it not. The Andaman Islands
and the Seychelles are its westernmost limits.
But if the invention of the dug-out canoe was a step onward in the
general progress of the arts, being the appreciation and application of
a principle in nature, a still greater triumph was achieved, and the
particular art still more decidedly advanced, by him who first
constructed the canoe properly so called. Herein was the real prototype
of the _species_ boat. A skin of bark, duly cut and shaped so as to
taper towards the ends and be wide amidships, was attached to a
longitudinal framework or gunwale all along its upper edges, and this
itself was kept apart and in shape by three or more transverse pieces
stretching from side to side, while a series of curved laths of soft
wood, the extreme ends of which also fastened to the gunwale, served to
keep the vessel itself in shape and to protect the bark skin from the
tread of men and from the immediate incidence of any weight to be
carried. 'Ce n'est que le premier pas qui coûte.' The idea once
conceived, whether in one place or in many, and at whatever time or
times, could not be lost and must soon have been fruitful in
development. Of this class by far the most common is the birch-bark
canoe, which, though found also in Australia, is properly regarded as
having its home upon the American continent. If not the original of the
type, yet it deserves particular attention owing to the peculiarity of
the material of the skin, which combines lightness and toughness and
pliability. A truly ingenious and original idea to flay a birch tree and
make a boat of its skin! In the framework of the canoe we have the
embryo _ribs_ and _inwale_ of the future boat, and the three cross-ties
may be regarded as the ancestors of _thwarts_ to be born in time to
come. As yet no keel. But that was soon to be. Go north, and trees
become scarcer and dwindle in size. The birch is no longer of sufficient
girth to serve the ingenious savage in the construction of a canoe. But
the inventive genius of man was not to be denied. Skins of beasts, or
woven material made waterproof, stretched upon a frame would serve for
the same purpose as bark. But a stronger framework was necessary for a
material thinner and more pliable than bark. And accordingly in all this
class (except the coracle) we find stronger and more numerous timbers,
including a longitudinal piece from stem to stern, and uprights at each
end acting as stempost and sternpost respectively. The rude
canvas-covered vessels of Tory Island, off the west coast of Ireland,
still preserve one development of this type, close at home to us; while
the cayaks of the Esquimaux and the larger fishing canoes of the
Alaskans and the Greenlanders exhibit the skin-clad variety in many
forms. In one of the models exhibited at the Fisheries Exhibition the
framework showed in great perfection the ingenuity of the savage, to
whom wood was a very scarce and precious article, short pieces being
made to serve fitted together and fastened with thongs of hide, the
whole being covered with a stout walrus skin. Even outriggers (as
understood by the English oarsman) made of double loops of hide just
long enough to cross each other and enclose the loom of the oar, were
attached to the inner side of the gunwale.
Not only bark and skin and canvas-covered canoes exist and seem to have
existed from an unknown antiquity, but a similar cause to that of which
we were just speaking, viz. a scarcity of wood or of suitable wood, led
to the construction of canoes of wood made of short pieces stitched
together, and approaching more nearly to the type of vessel which may be
called a boat. To these belong the canoes of Easter Island made of
drift wood, and of many other islands in the Pacific, which are truly
canoes and propelled by paddles, and the same peculiarity of build
extends to the Madras surf boats, which are more truly boats. Many of
these are tied together through holes drilled or burnt through a ledge
left on the inner side of the plank or log, a peculiarity noticeable as
appearing even in the early vessels of the Northern Seas. The stitched
boat has not a nail Or a peg in her whole composition, but the
structure, though liable to leak, is admirably suited for heavy seas and
surf-beaten coasts, and owing to its pliability will stand shocks which
would shatter a stiffer and tighter build. This being so, it is not
surprising that vessels larger than canoes or boats were constructed
(some authorities say even as large as 200 tons burden) upon this
principle, which is certainly one of very great antiquity.
There is also a curious analogy in the progress of construction of these
sea-going craft with the natural order in the construction of fishes,
that is to say, if the ganoids are to be considered antecedent to the
vertebrates among the latter. For in the case of the stitched vessels
the hull is the first thing in time and construction, the ribs and
framework being, so to speak, an afterthought, and attached to the
interior when the hull has been completed, whereas the later and modern
practice is to set up the ribs and framework of the vessel first and to
attach the exterior planking afterwards. But the invention of trenails
and dowels must have preceded the later practice, and have led the way
to the building of such boats as those described by Herodotus (ii. 96),
the ancestors of the Nile 'nuggur' of modern times. Ulysses, as a
shipwright well skilled in his craft, uses axe and adze and auger, and
with the latter makes holes in the timbers he has squared and planed,
and with trenails and dowels ties them together. The wooden fastenings,
be it remarked, are in size and diameter severally adapted, the first to
resist the horizontal, the second to resist the vertical strain to which
the raft would be exposed upon the waves. All this, we may observe,
points to a stage anterior to that in which the use of metal nails and
ties in ship- and boat-building had been introduced. Trenails and
dowels are however still in use, and have a natural advantage over iron
in the construction of wooden vessels, owing to the absence of
corrosion, which in early times must have caused difficulties as to its
employment for boat-building. Copper, on the other hand, though free
from this objection, would be less available by reason of expense and
the great demand for it for other purposes.
And now we have reached a point where we enter upon the borders of
history. No doubt, if we knew more about the venerable antiquity of
China, we might be able to add interesting facts, showing the
development from the earliest sanpan to the great river boats, and the
growth of that curious art which produced the Chinese junk, a vessel
undoubtedly of a very antique type. But this knowledge is not ours at
present, and so we must turn to the equally venerable civilisation of
Egypt for information upon the subject. In Egypt fortunately the tomb
paintings have preserved to us a wealth of illustration of boats and
ships, some of which, if we may trust the learned, take us back to dates
as early as 3000 B.C. In turning over the interesting plates of such
works as Lepsius's 'Denkmäler,' or Duemichen's 'Fleet of an Egyptian
Queen,' we are struck by the reflection that, if at that early date
boats, and ships, and oars, and steering paddles, and masts, and sailing
gear had all been brought to such a stage of perfection, we must allow
many centuries antecedent for the elaboration of such designs, and for
the evolution of the savage man's primary conception of canoe and
paddle.
However this may be, the lovers of our pastime, if they will consult the
pages of the works above mentioned, will find rowing already well
established as an employment, if not as an amusement, in the hoar
antiquity of Egypt. Not only the Nile water, whether the sacred stream
was within his banks or spread by inundation over the plain within his
reach, was alive with boats, busy with the transport of produce of all
sorts, or serving the purposes of the fowler and the fisherman, but the
Red Sea and the Mediterranean coasts were witnesses of the might and
power of Pharaoh, as shown by his fleets of great vessels fully
manned, ready with oar and sail to perform his behests, ready to visit
the land of Orient, and bring back thence the spices and perfumes that
the Egyptians loved, together with apes and sandal wood, or else to do
battle with the fierce Pelesta and Teucrians and Daunians who swarmed in
their piratical craft upon the midland sea, entering the Nile mouths,
and raiding upon the fat and peaceable plains of the Delta.
[Illustration: FLEET OF EGYPTIAN QUEEN.]
The Egyptian boats present several noticeable features. Built evidently
with considerable camber, they rise high from the water both at stem and
stern, the ends finished off into a point or else curved upwards and
ornamented with mystic figure-heads representing one or other of the
numerous gods. The steering is conducted by two or more paddles fastened
to the sides of the boat in the larger class, and sometimes having the
loom of the paddle lengthened and attached to an upright post to which
it is loosely bound. A tiller is inserted in the handle, and to this a
steering cord fastened, by which the helmsman can turn the blade of the
paddle at will. The paddles vary but little in shape. They are mostly
pointed, and have but a moderate breadth of blade. In some of the
paintings they are being used as paddles proper, in others as oars
against a curved projection from the vessel's side serving as a thowl.
But whether this is solid or whether it is a thong, like the Greek
[tropôthêr], against which the oarsman is rowing, it is not easy to say.
The larger vessels depicted with oars have in some cases as many as
twenty-five shown on one side. In others the number is less. But it is
quite possible that the artist did not care to portray more than would
be sufficient to indicate conventionally the size of the vessel. In some
of the vessels there are apertures like oar-ports, though no oars are
shown in them, which raise a presumption that the invention of the
bireme, the origin of which is uncertain, may with some probability be
attributed to the Egyptians. The larger vessels are all fitted with
sailing gear, and the rowing is evidently subsidiary to the sail as a
means of locomotion. The wall paintings of Egypt give us ample details
of Egyptian ships and boats extending over a period, as we are told, of
twenty centuries and more. In them we have a glimpse of the maritime
enterprise, in which the oar must have taken a principal part, of the
races which inhabited the seaboard of the Mediterranean in which piracy
had its home from very early times. Teucrians, Dardanians, Pelesta (?
Pelasgians), Daunians, Tyrrhenians, Oscans, all seem to have been
sea-going peoples, and at intervals to have provoked by their marauding
the wrath of Pharaoh and to have felt his avenging hand.
But of all the seafaring races that made their homes and highways upon
the waters of the great inland sea, the most famous of early times were
the Ph[oe]nicians. According to some accounts connected with Capthor
(Copts), and according to others emigrants from the coast of the Persian
Gulf, their genius for maritime enterprise asserted itself very early,
so that already before Homer's time they were masters of the commerce of
the Mediterranean, and had rowed their dark keels beyond the mystic
pillars that guarded the opening of the ocean stream.
And yet, though the facts are certain, we know but little of these
famous mariners, of their vessels and their gear. The only
representation of their vessels is from the walls of the palaces of
their Assyrian conquerors, an inland people, not likely to detect or
appreciate any technical want of fidelity in the likeness presented.
And, accordingly, the pictures are conventional, telling us but little
of that which we should like to know about their build, and oars, and
oar ports, &c. The date, moreover, is not in all probability earlier
than 900 B.C.
Such being the case, we are driven for information to the more ample
store of Greek literature, and to Greek vases for the earliest
representations of the Greek vessel.
Homer abounds in sea pictures. He has a wealth of descriptive words,
touches of light and colour which bring the sea and its waves and the
vessel and its details with vivid and picturesque effect before us. His
ships are black and have their bows painted with vermilion, or red of
some other tone; they are sharp and swift, and bows and stern curve
upwards like the horns of oxen. And withal they are rounded on both
sides, and well timbered and hollowed out, and roomy, having by the gift
of the poet a facile combination of all the opposite qualities, so
desirable and so difficult in practice to unite. As yet there is no spur
or ram, but round the solid stempost shrieks the wave, as the vessel is
urged onward either by the mighty hands of heroes, or the god-sent
breeze that follows aft. Nor is the vessel decked, except for a short
space at bow and stern, where it had raised platforms. On the
quarterdeck, so to speak, of the stern sat the great chiefs, whose
warriors plied the oar, and there they laid their spears ready for use.
There also was the standing place of the steersman who wielded the long
paddle which served to guide the vessel. The thwarts which tied the
vessel's sides together (yokes or keys as they are called) served as
benches for the oarsmen; those amidships had the heaviest and longest
oars, so that they were places of honour reserved for the heaviest and
strongest men, e.g. for Hercules and Ancæus in the Argo. Whether the
'sevenfoot,' to which Ajax retreats from the stern deck, when defending
the Greek ships against the Trojans and hard pressed by them, be bench
or stretcher, it gives us an idea of the breadth of the Homeric vessel
at or near the place of the stroke oar. Long low galleys they must have
been, with a middle plank running fore and aft, interrupted by the
'tabernacle,' in which the mast when hoisted was secured, having fore
and back stays. The warriors were oarsmen, the oarsmen warriors. The
smallest complement, as Thucydides observes, was fifty, the largest one
hundred and twenty.
It is doubtful how far the Alexandrine poets can be relied upon as
giving accurate information respecting details of ancient use. Yet we
have many lifelike pictures and a great profusion of details, drawn no
doubt from the ample stores of antiquarian knowledge which these
laborious men of letters had at their service in the great Alexandrine
library, and these go to fill up that which is lacking in the Homeric
picture. And so when Apollonius the Rhodian paints for us such scenes as
those of the building of the Argo, the launching, the detail of the
crew, and the starting of the vessel, we cannot help feeling that they
are described _con amore_, not of the sea, or of ships, or of rowing,
but of the literary beauty of similar descriptions by earlier poets. In
a word, they are at second hand. But better this than none at all.
[Illustration: ANCIENT BOAT DEPICTED ON VASE.]
The 'bireme,' or two-banked vessel, does not appear in Homer. But, as we
have seen, it was probably in existence before Homer's time. If of
Egyptian parentage, it was adapted for use on the Mediterranean waters
by the shipwrights of Sidon or Tyre. It is a curious reflection that
this remarkable evolution of banked vessels should, so far as we can
judge, have occupied about two thousand years; the curve, if we may use
the expression, of development rising to the highest point in the
useless Tesseraconteres of Ptolemy, and after Actium declining to the
dromons and biremes of the Byzantine Emperor Leo, and finally subsiding
into the monocrota or one-banked vessels, the galleys of mediæval times.
The problem which taxed the ingenuity of those early shipwrights was
briefly this, how to get greater means of propulsion by increasing the
number of oars, without such increase in the length of the ship as
would, by increased weight, neutralise the advantage and still further
diminish that facility in turning which was of the greatest moment to
the ancient war-vessel. Galleys with fifty oars on either side had
already been constructed,[2] and all the speed that a hundred pairs of
hands could give had been obtained, when the invention of the bireme
exhibited the means of nearly doubling the power without much increasing
the weight to be moved, since but little additional height or breadth
was required.
[2] Perhaps even with a hundred, if [hekathozygos] is to be taken
literally.
The normal adjustment of the horizontal space between the oarsmen was
then, as it is now, regulated by that canon of the ancient philosopher,
'Man is the measure of all things.' Twice the man's cubit gives room for
his legs when in a sitting posture. Hence the two-cubit standard
([schêma dipêchaikhon]) which is referred to by Vitruvius as the basis
of proportion in other constructions besides ships and boats. Given this
as the interscalmium (space between the thowls) or distance between
points at which the oars in the same tier were rowed, it is clear that
the rowing space of a vessel's side would be, for a penteconter, or
twenty-five a side, seventy-five feet, and for a hecatonter, if there
ever was such a thing, 150 feet. To this must be added the parts outside
the oarage space ([parexeireshia]), for the bows ten feet, and something
more, say twelve feet, for the stern. So that a penteconter would be a
long low galley of about ninety-seven feet in length. The new invention
nearly doubled the number of oars without increasing the length of the
oarage space.
It was found that by making apertures in the vessel's sides at about
three feet from the water and dividing the space between the (zyga)
thwarts, room could be made for a second row of men with shorter oars,
but still handy and able to add to the propulsion of the vessel. For
these seats were found in the hold (thalamus), and hence while the upper
tier of the bireme took their name from the zyga, benches or thwarts,
and were called 'Zygites,' the men of the lower tier were called
'Thalamites.' These names were continued when the invention of the
'thranos,' or upper seat, had added a third or upper tier with longer
oars to the system, and so introduced the trireme. If the number of the
zygites in the penteconter was twenty-five a side, and the first bireme
was a converted vessel of that class, the number of thalamites, owing to
the contraction of the bow and the stern, would necessarily be two or
three a side less. Thus we may consider a converted penteconter to have
been capable of carrying a rowing crew of between 90 and 100 men.
Similarly a triaconter would have been capable of adding nearly twenty
pairs of arms to her propelling power. When, in consequence of the new
invention, vessels were expressly built as triremes, we may imagine that
for convenience' sake the benches or zyga would be a little raised, so
as to give more room for the raised seat of the thalamites that was
fastened on to the floor of the vessel.
The narrowness of the vessels affected the disposition of the rowers in
the Greek galleys in a peculiar way. It is evident from the testimony of
the ancients that they adhered strictly to the principle of 'one man to
each oar.' The arrangement seen in mediæval galleys was absolutely
unknown to them, and would not have suited them. It belongs to a
different epoch and a different order of things, when the invention of
the 'apostis' had made the use of large sweeps rowed by two or three men
possible, and a vessel with sets of three rowing upon the same
horizontal plane might be called a trireme, though utterly unlike the
ancient vessel of that name.
In the ancient vessel the tiers of oarsmen must have sat in nearly the
same vertical plane, obliquely arranged, one behind and below the other.
Thus in the bireme the zygite, as he sat on his bench, had behind him
and below him his thalamite whose head was about 18 inches behind the
zygite thwart and a little above it. Moreover, as his seat was now a
little raised, the zygite required an _appui_ for his feet, which was
formed for him on the bench on which the thalamite next below and in
front of him was sitting; on either side of him his feet found a
resting-place. As the zygite fell back during the stroke and
straightened his knees, there was plenty of room for the thalamite
below to throw his weight also on to his oar. There seems to have been
but little forward motion of the body. The arms were stretched out
smartly for the recovery, as we learn from Charon's instructions to
Dionysus in the 'Frogs' of Aristophanes, and then a _driving smiting_
stroke was given (cf. the words [helahynein, pahiein, hanarrhiptein hala
pêdô]) and the brine tossed up by the blade.
When once the principle had been established, by which additional power
could be gained without increasing the length of the vessel, and had
been tested by practical experience, its development was sure to follow.
What century witnessed the birth of the trireme is not certain, but
probably by 800 B.C. the earliest vessels of this description had been
launched. The quick-witted sharp-eyed Greek was not slow to copy, and by
the beginning of the next century the busy shipwrights of Corinth were
building the new craft for Samians as well as for themselves.
It is, however, in the Attic trireme such as composed the fleets of
Phormio and Conon that historical interest has centred, and though
quinqueremes were commonly in use in the second and third centuries,
B.C., and even still larger rates of war vessels constructed till they
were _inhabilis prope magnitudinis_, unwieldy leviathans, such as the
sixteen-banked flagship of Demetrius Poliorcetes, yet the interest in
the trireme has never failed, and the splendour of its achievements has
insured to it an attention on the part of the learned which no other
class of vessel has been able to attract to itself. The problem of
construction of the trireme, and of the method of its propulsion, has
exercised the ingenuity of scholars ever since the revival of letters.
It has a literature of its own, and it may fairly be said that if the
enigma has not been solved, it is not for want of industry or acumen.
One point we may as well make clear at once, viz., that whatever was the
vessel the ancients invariably went upon the principle, _One man, one
oar_. Volumes have been wasted in attempts to prove that the arrangement
of the ancient galleys with respect to propulsion were identical with,
or very similar to, those of the mediæval galleys of Genoa or Venice.
But the mediæval galleys were essentially _monocrota_, or one-banked
vessels, though they may have been double-banked or treble-banked in the
sense that two or three men were employed upon one oar.
[Illustration: BAS-RELIEF OF ANCIENT GREEK ROWING BOAT.]
Another distinction that it is necessary to note with reference to the
ancient galleys is that they were called _Aphract_ or _Kataphract_
according as the upper tier of rowers was unprotected and exposed to
view, or fenced in by a bulwark stout enough to protect them from the
enemy's missiles. The system of side planking is observable as already
adopted in some of the Egyptian vessels, though of the Greeks the
Thasians are credited with the invention.
In the year 1834, during the process of excavating some ground for new
public buildings in the Piræus near Athens, some engraved stone slabs
were found built up in a low wall which had been uncovered. These were
happily preserved and deciphered, and were found to be records of the
dockyard authorities of the Athenian admiralty in the second and third
centuries before Christ. Many interesting details were thus brought to
light which were set in order by the illustrious scholar Boeckh in his
volume entitled 'Urkunden über das Seewesen des attischen Staates.' His
pupil Dr. Graser has carried on his researches by the examination of
innumerable coins, vases, etc., and has rescued the subject from much of
the obscurity which enveloped it. The following description of the
trireme, based upon his labours, is quoted, by permission, from the new
edition of the 'Encyclopædia Britannica,' vol. xxi. pp. 806, 807.
In describing the trireme it will be convenient to deal first
with the disposition of the rowers and subsequently with the
construction of the vessel itself. The object of arranging the
oars in banks was to economise horizontal space and to obtain an
increase in the number of oars without having to lengthen the
vessel. We know from Vitruvius that the 'interscalmium,' or
space horizontally measured from oar to oar, was two cubits.
This is exactly borne out by the proportions of an Attic aphract
trireme, as shown on a fragment of a bas-relief found in the
Acropolis. The rowers in all classes of banked vessels sat in
the same vertical plane, the seats ascending in a line obliquely
towards the stern of the vessel. Thus in a trireme the thranite,
or oarsman of the highest bank, was nearest the stern of the set
of three to which he belonged. Next behind him and somewhat
below him sat his zygite, or oarsman of the second bank; and
next below and behind the zygite sat the thalamite, or oarsman
of the lowest bank. The vertical distance between these seats
was 2 feet, the horizontal distance about 1 foot. The horizontal
distance, it is well to repeat, between each seat in the same
bank was 3 feet (the seat itself about 9 inches broad). Each man
had a resting-place for his feet, somewhat wide apart, fixed to
the bench of the man on the row next below and in front of him.
In rowing, the upper hand, as is shown in most of the
representations which remain, was held with the palm turned
inwards towards the body. This is accounted for by the angle at
which the oar was worked. The lowest rank used the shortest
oars, and the difference of the length of the oars on board was
caused by the curvature of the ship's side. Thus, looked at from
within, the rowers amidship seemed to be using the longest oars,
but outside the vessel, as we are expressly told, all the
oar-blades of the same bank took the water in the same
longitudinal line. The lowest or thalamite oar-ports were 3
feet, the zygite 4-1/4 feet, the thranite 5-1/2 feet above the
water. Each oar-port was protected by an _ascoma_ or leather
bag, which fitted over the oar, closing the aperture against the
wash of the sea without impeding the action of the oar. The oar
was tied by a thong, against which it was probably rowed, which
itself was attached to a thowl ([skalmhos]). The port-hole was
probably oval in shape (the Egyptian and Assyrian pictures show
an oblong). We know that it was large enough for a man's head to
be thrust through it.
[Illustration: ANCIENT GALLEY FIGHT, FROM POMPEII.]
The benches on which the rowers sat ran from the vessel's side
to timbers which, inclined at an angle of about 64° towards the
ship's stern, reached from the lower to the upper deck. These
timbers were, according to Graser, called the diaphragmata. In
the trireme each diaphragma supported three, in the quinquereme
five, in the octireme eight, and in the famous tesseraconteres
forty seats of rowers, who all belonged to the same 'complexus,'
though each to a different bank. In effect, when once the
principle of construction had been established in the trireme,
the increase to larger rates was effected, so far as the motive
power was concerned, by lengthening the diaphragmata upwards,
while the increase in the length of the vessel gave a greater
number of rowers to each bank. The upper tiers of oarsmen
exceeded in number those below, as the contraction of the sides
of the vessel left less available space towards the bows.
Of the length of the oars in the trireme we have an indication
in the fact that the length of supernumerary oars ([perinheô])
rowed from the gangway above the thranites, and therefore
probably slightly exceeding the thranitic oars in length, is
given in the Attic tables as 14 feet 3 inches. The thranites
were probably about 14 feet. The zygite, in proportion to the
measurement, must have been 10-1/2, the thalamite 7-1/2 feet
long. Comparing modern oars with these, we find that the longest
oars used in the British navy are 18 feet. The University race
is rowed with oars 12 feet 9 inches. The proportion of the loom
inboard was about one third, but the oars of the rowers amidship
must have been somewhat longer inboard. The size of the loom
inboard preserved the necessary equilibrium. The long oars of
the larger rates were weighted inboard with lead. Thus the
topmost oars of the tesseraconteres, of which the length was 53
feet, were exactly balanced at the rowlock.
The Attic trireme was built light for speed and for ramming
purposes. Her dimensions, so far as we can gather them from the
scattered notices of antiquity, were probably approximately as
follows:--length of rowing space ([hegkôpon]), 93 feet; bows, 11
feet; stern, 14 feet; total, 118 feet; add 10 feet for the beak.
The breadth at the water-line is calculated at 14 feet, and
above at the broadest part 18 feet, exclusive of the gangways;
the space between the diaphragmata mentioned above was 7 feet.
The deck was 11 feet above the water-line, and the draught about
8 to 9 feet. All the Attic triremes appear to have been built
upon the same model, and their gear was interchangeable. The
Athenians had a peculiar system of girding the ships with long
cables ([hypozhômata]), each trireme having two or more, which,
passing through eyeholes in front of the stem-post, ran all
round the vessel lengthwise immediately under the waling-pieces.
They were fastened at the stern and tightened up with levers.
These cables, by shrinking as soon as they were wet, tightened
the whole fabric of the vessel, and in action, in all
probability, relieved the hull from part of the shock of
ramming, the strain of which would be sustained by the
waling-pieces convergent in the beaks. These rope-girdles are
not to be confused with the process of undergirding or frapping,
such as is narrated of the vessel in which St. Paul was being
carried to Italy. The trireme appears to have had three masts.
The mainmast carried square sails, probably two in number. The
foremast and the mizen carried lateen sails. In action the
Greeks did not use sails, and everything that could be lowered
was stowed below. The mainmasts and larger sails were often
left ashore if a conflict was expected.
The crew of the Attic trireme consisted of from 200 to 225 men
in all. Of these 174 were rowers--54 on the lower bank
(thalamites), 58 on the middle bank (zygites), and 62 on the
upper bank (thranites),--the upper oars being more numerous
because of the contraction of the space available for the lower
tiers near the bow and stern. Besides the rowers were about 10
marines ([hepibhatai]) and 20 seamen. The officers were the
trierarch and next to him the helmsman ([kubernhêtês]), who was
the navigating officer of the trireme. Each tier of rowers had
its captain ([stoicharchhos]). There were also the captain of
the forecastle ([prôrehys]), the 'keleustes' who gave the time
to the rowers, and the ship's piper ([triêraulhês]). The rowers
descended into the seven-foot space between the diaphragmata and
took their places in regular order, beginning with the
thalamites. The economy of space was such that, as Cicero
remarks, there was not room for one man more.
Such, we may believe, was the trireme of the palmy days of Athens. Built
for speed, it was necessarily light and handy, and easily turned, so
that the formidable beak could be plunged into the enemy's side, the
moment a chance was given. But it required sea room for its
man[oe]uvres, and in a narrow strait or land-locked harbour, such as
that of Syracuse, was no match for the solid balks of timber with which
Corinthian and Syracusan shipwrights strengthened the bows of their
vessels. Against these the pride of Athens was hurled in vain, only to
find itself broken up and rendered unseaworthy by the crash of its own
ram.
With the defeat of Athens comes in the fashion of larger vessels with
more banks of oars, quadriremes, quinqueremes, and so on up to sixteen
banks, when the increase of the motive power had been more than
overtaken by the increase in bulk and weight. The principles of
construction in these larger vessels seem to have been the same as in
the trireme. The space for each man was probably somewhat less, and the
handles of the upper tiers of oars were weighted with lead, so as to
give a balance at the thowl between the parts outboard and inboard.
A question difficult to solve has often been raised respecting the pace
at which these ancient galleys could be propelled. If five-man power
could be taken as equivalent to one-horse power, then for the propulsion
of the trireme there would have been available about thirty-five horse
power, but that would hardly give a very high rate of speed.
There is a passage in Xenophon[3] in which he speaks of a distance of
about 150 nautical miles, from Byzantium to Heraclea, as possible for a
trireme in a day, but a long day's work. Assuming eighteen hours' work
out of the twenty-four, a speed of something over eight knots per hour
would be required for this, which may perhaps seem excessive. Still we
may believe that by a crew when fresh a pace not less than this could be
achieved.
[3] _Anab._ vi. 42.
The Romans, though it may be inferred from treaties with Carthage and
with Tarentum that they had some kind of fleet in the time even of the
kings, yet did not apply themselves readily to maritime pursuits, and
made no serious effort to become masters of the Mediterranean till the
first Punic War. We hear then of their copying a quinquereme which had
fallen into their hands by accident. A fleet was constructed in sixty
days from the time that the trees were first cut down, and meantime
crews were practised diligently in rowing on dry land in a framework of
timber which represented the interior of the vessels that were building.
This first essay at extemporising a fleet does not seem to have been
very successful. But nothing daunted they persevered, and the second
venture under the Admiral Duillius took with it to sea a new invention
called the 'corvus,' a sort of boarding bridge by which, when it once
fell on the enemy's vessel, the Roman infantry soon found its way on to
his deck, and made short work with the swarthy African crew. This
revolutionised the maritime struggle, and gave unexpectedly the naval
superiority to Rome. The large vessels of war (_alta navium
propugnacula_) continued to be built until the time of Actium, when the
light Liburnian galleys, which were biremes, were found to be more than
a match for the leviathans, whose doom from that moment was sealed.
From that time, with the exception of the accounts of _naumachiæ_, there
is very little of interest about galleys to be gathered. The coins and
the paintings of Pompeii show us craft degenerating in type. The column
of Trajan exhibits biremes as still in vogue. Later on there is a light
thrown upon the subject by the _Tactica_ of the Byzantine Emperor Leo
about 800 A.D., who gives directions as to the building and composition
of his fleet, which is to consist of biremes, or dromones as he calls
them, and light galleys with one bank of oars.
From these latter eventually sprang the mediæval galley, which however
differed from the ancient galley in the arrangement of its oars by the
use of the 'apostis,' a projecting framework which took the place of the
ancient 'parodus,' and upon which the thowls were placed, against which
the long sweeps could be plied by two or three men attached to each. For
full and accurate descriptions of these mediæval vessels the reader who
has any curiosity on the subject should consult the ample works of M.
Jal. His _Archéologie Navale_ and _Glossaire Nautique_ contain the
fullest information as regards the build, and fittings, and crews of the
mediæval galley. The sorrows and sufferings of 'la Chiourme' were enough
to give rowing a bad name, as an employment too cruel even for slaves
and fit to be reserved for criminals of the worst description.
It is in England, and in the hands of English free men and boys, that
the oar has maintained an honourable name, as the instrument of a
pastime healthy and vigorous, with a record not inglorious of struggles
in which the strength and skill of the nation's youth have contended for
the pride of place and the joy of victory.
CHAPTER II.
THE RISE OF MODERN OARSMANSHIP.
[Illustration: HENLEY COURSE (BETWEEN RACES).]
GENERAL.
Written records of rowing performances in the last century are but
scarce. In 1715 Mr. Doggett, comedian, founded a race which has survived
to the present day--to wit, 'Doggett's coat and badge' (of freedom of
the river). 'Watermen' have to serve as 'apprentices' for seven years,
during which time they may not ply for hire on their own account, but
only on behalf of their masters. When they have served their time they
can become 'free' of the river, on payment of certain fees to the
Corporation.
In order to encourage good oarsmanship, prizes which paid the fees for
freedom, and bestowed a 'coat and badge' of merit, have often been given
by patrons of aquatics. Doggett's prize is the oldest of its class, and
of all established races. The contest used to be from London Bridge to
Chelsea against the ebb--a severe test of stamina; and formerly six
only of the many applicants for competition were allowed to row, being
selected by lot. The race is now reformed. It is managed by the
Fishmongers' Company. The course is changed, so far that it is now rowed
on the flood. This makes it fairer; on the ebb, it is hard to pass a
leader who hugs the shore in the slack tide. 'Trial heats' are now
rowed, to weed off competitors till the old standard number of six only
are left in. Authentic records of the race exist since 1791.
Mr. Brickwood, who has taken much pains to look up old accounts, informs
us in his 'Boat Racing' that the Westminster 'water ledger,' dating June
1813, is the earliest authentic record of Thames aquatics of this
century. We venture to give the result of Mr. Brickwood's researches in
his own words:--
This book commences in the year 1813 with a single list of the
six-oared boat 'Fly,' viz., Messrs. H. Parry, E. O. Cleaver, E.
Parry, W. Markham, W. F. de Ros, G. Randolph. The 'Fly'
continued to be the only boat of this school down to 1816
inclusive, in which latter year it 'beat the Temple six-oared
boat (Mr. Church stroke), in a race from Johnson's dock to
Westminster Bridge, by half a boat; the latter men having been
beat before;' to which is added a note that the Temple boat
'requested the K. S. to row this short distance, having been
completely beat by them in a longer row the same evening.' In
1817 there was a six-oar built for Westminster, called the
'Defiance,' and 'sheepskin seats were introduced.' In 1818, the
'Westminster were challenged by the Etonians,' and a six-oared
crew was in course of preparation for the race, but the contest
was prohibited. In 1819 an eight-oar called the 'Victory' was
launched, but the six-oar 'Defiance' appears to have been the
representative crew of the school, for there is a note that in
the spring of 1821 'the boat improved considerably and beat the
"Eagle" in a short pull from Battersea to Putney Bridge.' In
1823 a new six-oared cutter was built, and the name of 'Queen
Bess' given in honour of the illustrious foundress. In 1823 this
boat was started from the Horseferry at half past five in the
morning, and reached Chertsey bridge by three o'clock. On their
way back they dined at Walton, and again reached the Horseferry
by a quarter before nine. The crew of the eight-oar 'Victory' in
the same year 'distinguished themselves in the Temple race and
several others.' A new eight called the 'Challenge' was launched
in 1824, and the record says this boat did beat every boat that
it came alongside of, as also did the 'Victory.' And again in
April 13, 1825, this boat ('Challenge') started from the
Horseferry at four minutes past three in the morning, reached
Sunbury to breakfast at half past seven, and having taken
luncheon at the London Stairs, just above Staines, went through
Windsor bridge by two o'clock in the afternoon. After having
seen Eton, the crew returned to Staines to dinner, and
ultimately arrived at the Horseferry, having performed this
distance in twenty-one hours. The locks detained them full three
hours, and, including all stoppages, they were detained seven
hours. A waterman of the name of Ellis steered the boat in this
excursion, and both steered and conducted himself remarkably
well.
Such are some of the early Westminster School annals, as collated by Mr.
Brickwood. One cannot help feeling that if these long journeys were
samples of the school aquatics, it is not to be wondered that parents
and guardians of old days imbibed prejudices against rowing, and
considered it injurious both to health and to study.
In the following decade there seem to have been plenty of aquatics
current. The 'Bell's Life' files of those days teem with aquatic notes.
One day we read (dated May 26, 1834) a self-exculpatory letter from Dr.
Williamson, head-master of Westminster School, explaining why he did not
approve of his scholars rowing a match against Eton, and complaining of
the 'intemperance and excesses which such matches lead to.'
On July 3, says 'Bell' of July 6 in that year, a match was rowed between
a randan (Campbell, Moulton, and Godfrey) and a four-oar (Harris, Eld,
Butcher, and Dodd, Cole cox.)--from Putney to Westminster. The randan
were favourites, and led; but Moulton fainted, and the four won. The
race was for a purse of 70_l._--50_l._ for winners and 20_l._ for
losers. In the same paper, Williams challenges Campbell to a
match--apparently for the incipient title of Champion of the Thames.
Williams wishes Campbell to stake 40_l._ to 30_l._, because he is six
years the younger. Compare the modesty of these stakes with those for
which modern champion, and some less important matches, are rowed!
[Illustration: METHOD OF STARTING THE COLLEGE EIGHTS PRIOR TO
1825--OXFORD.]
'Lyons House' seems to have been a sort of resort for amateurs. Cole,
who steered the waterman's four (_supra_) _v._ the randan, is described
as the waterman of those rooms.
On July 8, same year, a Mr. Kemp, of the 3rd Dragoon Guards, matches
himself for a large stake to 'row his own boat' from Hampton Court to
Westminster and back in nine hours. Time is favourite, but Mr. Kemp wins
by 27 minutes, having met the tide for several miles of his voyage. Such
are a few samples of the current style of aquatic sports between 1830
and 1840.
The 'Wingfield Sculls' were founded in 1830, given by the donor, whose
name they bear, to be held as a challenge prize by the best sculler of
the day from Westminster to Putney, against all comers, on the '4th of
August for ever'--so a silver plate in the lid of the old box which
holds the silver sculls bears testimony. Since its foundation the prize
has been more than once placed on a different footing. Parliaments of
old champions and competitors for the prize have been summoned, and the
original donor gave assent to the changes of course and _régime_. Lists
of winners and competitors from year to year, with notes as to the
course rowed, will be found in 'Tables' later on. The race has from its
earliest years been described by amateurs as equivalent of 'amateur
championship.' A panoply of silver plates has grown up in and around the
box which holds the trophy, and on these plates is recorded the name of
each winner from year to year. About a quarter of a century ago a
'champion badge' was instituted. It consists of a small edition of the
Diamond Sculls (Henley) challenge prize; as to shape, it is a pair of
silver sculls crossed with an enamel wreath and mounted on a ribbon like
a 'decoration' or 'order.' There is a 'clasp' for the year of winning. A
second win only adds a fresh clasp with date, but no second badge. The
secretary of the 'order' is Mr. E. D. Brickwood, himself winner of the
title in 1861.
UNIVERSITY TRAINING.
Eight-oars had been manned at Eton before they found their way to
Oxford. At Cambridge they appeared still later. At both Universities a
plurality of eight-oars clubs had existed for some seasons before the
first University match--1829.
In 1881, at the time when the 'Jubilee' dinner of University boat-racing
was held, the writer took the opportunity of the presence in London of
the Rev. T. Staniforth, the stroke of the first winning University
eight, to inquire from him his recollections of college boat-racing in
his undergraduate days.
Fortunately for posterity, Mr. Staniforth had kept a diary during his
Oxford career, and it had noted many a fact connected with aquatics. He
kindly undertook to bring to London at his next visit his diaries of
Oxford days. He met the writer, searched his diaries, and out of them
recorded history which was taken down from his lips, and reduced to the
following article, which appeared in 'Land and Water' of December 17,
1881.[4] It is now reproduced verbatim, by leave. The writer regrets to
say that, from various causes, he has been unable to pursue his
researches beyond the dates when Mr. Staniforth's diaries cease to
record Oxford aquatics.
[4] See Appendix.
There must be many an old oarsman still alive who can recall historical
facts between 1830 and 1836, and it is hoped that such memories may be
reduced to writing for the benefit of posterity, and for the honour of
the oarsmen of those years, before _tempus edax rerum_ makes it too
late.
The writer considers that he will do better thus to reproduce verbatim
his own former contribution to 'Land and Water' than to paraphrase it.
The more so because much of the text of it is actually the [hepea
pterhoenta] of the old Oxford stroke, taken down as uttered from his
lips to the writer, and read over again to him for emendation or other
alteration, before the interview in question was concluded. It may be
added that Mr. Staniforth kindly showed to the writer the actual text of
the diaries referred to, from which he refreshed his memory and recorded
the appended history.
As to the intermediate history between 1830 and 1837, in which year the
Brasenose boating record opens (two seasons before an O.U.B.C. was
founded), Christ Church started head in 1837; therefore, apparently,
they finished head in 1836.
[Illustration: OXFORD BOAT IN 1829.]
Mr. Brickwood, in his book on 'Boat Racing,' has collected some history
of these years, but unfortunately he does not record the source, so that
what might be a tree of knowledge for inquirers to pluck more from seems
to be sealed against our curiosity. We have, however, to thank him for
the following information, which we reproduce (page 157 of 'Boat
Racing'):--
1833.--Queen's College is chronicled as head of the river at
Oxford this being the only record between 1825 and 1834. Christ
Church, it is true, was said to have kept that position for many
years, but the precise number is not given. However, there seems
no doubt that Christ Church was head in 1834, 1835, and 1836,
after which the official record commences.
Mr. Brickwood, moreover, seems to have gleaned from some independent
source sundry valuable details of early Oxford races. He tells us that
'the first known races were those of the college eights in 1815, when
Brasenose was the head boat, and their chief and perhaps their only
opponent was Jesus.' He speaks of four-oared races in the next ensuing
years, and of a match between Mr. de Ros' four and a pair manned by a
B.N.C. man and a waterman--won by the pair. Then comes some information
as to the years 1822, 1824, and 1825, which exactly tallies with Mr.
Staniforth's journals, save that Mr. Brickwood ascribes the
discontinuance of the races in 1823 directly to the recorded quarrel
between B.N.C. and Jesus; whereas Mr. Staniforth attributes it to the
untimely death of Musgrave (_supra_).
The first University race took place in 1829, over the course from
Hambledon Lock to Henley. Mr. Staniforth states that till the Oxford
went to practise over the course, no one thought of steering an eight
through the Berks channel, past 'regatta' island. However, the Oxonians
'timed' the two straits, and decided to select the Berks one, if they
got the chance. They took that channel in the race and won easily. A
foul occurred in the first essay at starting, and the boats were
restarted. This pair of pioneer University crews produced men of more
than usual celebrity in after life: two embryo bishops, three deans, one
prebendary, and divers others hereafter
In hamlet and hall
As well known to all
As the vane of the old church spire.
The full list of the crews engaged in this and in all other contests in
which Universities were represented, will be found in 'Tables' towards
the end of this volume. At this time there was no O.U.B.C., nor did such
an organisation exist until 1839, when a 'meeting of strokes' of the
various colleges was convened, and a generally representative club was
founded. At Cambridge a U.B.C. had existed since 1827. In that year the
system of college eights seems to have been instituted, according to the
testimony of Dr. Merivale, still Dean of Ely, and a member of the
C.U.B.C. crew of 1829. Trinity were head of the river on that occasion,
and there seems to have been also a Westminster club, of an independent
nature in Trinity. The records of college racing at Cambridge seem to be
unbroken since their institution; whereas those of Oxford were for many
years unofficial and without central organisation, and consequently
without official record, until 1839. The Brasenose Club record dates
from 1837.
[Illustration: BUMPING RACES (OLD STYLE).]
The next occasion in which a University eight figured was in a match
which somehow seems to have slipped out of public memory, though it
occurred several years later than the first match between the
Universities. The writer was talking to old George West, the well-known
Oxford waterman, in 1882, at the L.R.C. boat-house, while waiting for
the practice of the U.B.C. crews of that year. Casually old George
remarked, 'I steered a University eight once, sir.' The writer looked
incredulous. 'Yes, against Leander--Leander won,' quoth George. The
writer had known West since his school days, and had heard him
recapitulate his aquatic memories times out of mind, but never till
that hour had he heard any allusion to this Leander match. Only the year
before, the 'Jubilee' dinner of old Blues had taken place, and all who
had ever been known to have represented their University in a match or
regatta were asked to join in the celebration. At that date not one of
the executive had any inkling of this match, although one of the Oxford
crew, the present Bishop of Norwich, could certainly have been found at
an hour's notice. Letters from old oarsmen, who had not actually rowed
for the flag (often because there was no match during their career),
used to pour in while the jubilee feast was in preparation, asking for
admittance to it. None of this Oxford crew seem to have put in any
claim. A slight, though an unintentional one, was thus perpetrated upon
all of them, whether alive or dead, by the omission to record them as
old Blues on that occasion. When the writer compiled the history of 'Old
Blues and their Battles,' which Mr. G. T. Treherne incorporated in his
book of 'Record of the University Boat Race,' and which was published
soon after the jubilee, neither of these gentlemen was aware of this
race. No speaker at the banquet seemed to remember or allude to it. Yet,
on referring to old files of 'Bell's Life,' record of this match is to
be found. Since it was recorded in that journal, it seems to have been
unnoticed in any print till now. Better late than never; the performers
in it are now officially brought to light, and their names will be found
in the tables of University oarsmen and their opponents, later on.
This match was for 200_l._ a side. Leander would row on no other terms,
and insisted on having their own waterman to steer them, as they did in
their later matches against Cambridge. This was the only Oxford
University eight ever steered by a professional. Only one of the 1829
crew seems to have remained to do duty in this race. The Pelham referred
to is now Bishop of Norwich. He used, before this, to row in the Christ
Church eight behind Staniforth. The Waterford is the former marquis of
that ilk, who lost his life later on through a fall when hunting. _En
passant_, it may be mentioned that Bishop Selwyn (of C.U.B.C. crew
1829) and Pelham of Oxford 1834, each begat sons who rowed for their
respective Universities: Selwyn, junr. 1864 and 1866; Pelham, junr. 1877
and 1878. The latter oarsman unfortunately lost his life in the Alps
very shortly afterwards. J. R. Selwyn has succeeded his late father as a
colonial bishop. Inasmuch as we here record, for the first time for two
generations, a lost chapter of University Boat Racing, we think it will
be of interest to append the account given, in 'Bell's Life' of that
day, of this forgotten match.
EIGHT-OARED MATCH--LONDON AND THE OXFORD AMATEURS FOR £200.[5]
[5] _Bell's Life_, Sunday, June 26, 1831.
This interesting match was decided on Saturday week at Henley
Reach. The Trinity boat, built by Archer of Lambeth, proved
successful on a former occasion when opposed to the Oxonians,
was, we understand, again selected by them in the first
instance, but they ultimately decided on rowing in a boat built
by Searle, which they considered had been unjustly denounced 'a
rank bad un,' simply on the score of the Cambridge gentlemen and
the Westminster Scholars having lost their matches in her--the
former against Oxford, and the latter against the Etonians.
The gentlemen of Oxford selected a large but peculiarly light
eight belonging to Mr. Davis of Oxford. On Friday the London
gentlemen left town for Henley, and took up their quarters at
the Red Lion. Noulton of Lambeth was selected to steer them.
Although Oxford were favourites on the match being first
concocted, it was with difficulty that a bet could be made on
the Londoners on the last two days, and then only at 6 to 4
against Oxford.
At about 6.30 the contending parties arrived in their cutters
near the lock, to row from thence against the stream to Henley
Bridge, which is reckoned two and a quarter miles.
The names of the respective parties and their stations in the
cutters were as follows:
_London_--Bishop (stroke), Captain Shaw, J. Bayford, Lewis,
Cannon, Weedon, Revell, Hornemann.
_Oxford_--Copplestone (stroke), Lloyd, Barnes, Pelham, Peard,
Marsh, Marquis of Waterford, Carter. The latter was steered, we
believe, by a boy belonging to the lock.
Mr. Hume and Mr. Bayford were appointed umpires on part of the
London gentlemen, and Mr. Lloyd and another gentleman on the
side of Oxford.
The Oxford gentlemen won the toss and took the inside station.
The umpires having a second time asked if all was ready,
receiving an answer in the affirmative, gave the signal. In less
than a dozen seconds the London gentlemen almost astounded their
opponents by going about a boat's length in advance, so rapid
were their strokes when compared with those of Oxford. The
Oxford gentlemen soon recovered. Before half the distance had
been rowed London were two lengths in advance. The Oxonians,
finding they were losing ground, made a desperate effort and
succeeded in coming within a painter's length. On nearing the
goal the exertions of each party were increasing. One London
gentleman (Captain Shaw) seemed so much exhausted, that it was
feared he would not hold out the remaining distance. Noulton,
seeing this and fearing the consequence, observing the Oxford
gentlemen fast approaching them, said that 'if the Londoners did
not give it her it would be all up with them.' They did give it
her, and the consequence was they became victorious by about two
boats' lengths. The distance was rowed in 11-1/4 minutes.
The exertions at the conclusion of the contest became lamentably
apparent. Captain Shaw nearly fainted and had to be carried
ashore; Mr. Bayford was obliged to retire to bed instantly; so
was also one of the Oxford gentlemen. The others were more or
less exhausted.
The London gentlemen rowed to town on Tuesday, and were greeted
on their way with cheering and cannon. On arriving at Searle's a
_feu-de-joie_ was fired.
_Note._--Of the various performers in this Oxford crew, the following
notices of the after career of some may be of interest. Messrs.
Copplestone and Pelham rose to adorn the episcopate. Mr. Peard became
known to fame as 'Garibaldi's Englishman,' and played an important part
in the cause of the liberation of Italy.
There had been a second University match in 1836, this time from
Westminster to Putney (see Tables). No official record exists of this.
It is said that 'light blue' was on this occasion first adopted by
Cambridge. Certainly in 1829 the Cantab crew wore _pink_, while Oxford
sported blue. The late Mr. R. M. Phillips, of Christ's, used to tell the
writer that he it was who fortuitously founded light blue on this
occasion. He was on the raft at Searle's when the Cantab crew were
preparing to start (either for the race or for a day's practice) the
race so far as recollection of Mr. Phillips' narrative serves the
writer. One of the crew said, 'We have no colours.' Mr. Phillips ran off
to buy some ribbon in Stangate. An old Etonian accompanied him, and
suggested 'Eton ribbon for luck.' It was bought, it came in first, and
was adhered to in later years by Cambridge.
[Illustration: A COLLEGE PAIR.]
In 1837 the head college crews of the two Universities rowed a match at
Henley. The Brasenose book says, Christ Church were head, but took off
because their Dean objected to their rowing at Henley; the effect of
their 'taking off' was to leave Queen's College, on whom the
representation of the college crews would devolve, with the titular
headship.
The B.N.C. book says, the Queen's crew went, 'as was usual,' to row the
head boat of Cambridge, and beat them easily. The latter statement is
correct. Mr. Brickwood in his treatise demurs to the accuracy of the
B.N.C. allegation that such matches were 'usual,' and research qualifies
his scepticism. The B.N.C. hon. sec. of that day seems to have been
drawing somewhat upon his imagination. He had probably heard of these
various Leander and other matches at Henley in other years; hence his
inference.
1837.
_Henley. College match._
QUEEN'S. | LADY MARGARET (St. John's).
1. Lee, Stanlake. | 1. Shadwell, Alfred H.
2. Glazbrook, Robert. | 2. Colquhoun, Patrick.
3. Welsh, Jos. | 3. Wood, H. O.
4. Robinson, John. | 4. Antrobus, Edmund.
5. Meyrick, Jos. | 5. Budd, R. H.
6. Todd, Jos. | 6. Fane, W. D.
7. Eversley, John. | 7. Fletcher, Ralph.
Penny, Chas. J. (stroke). | Hurt, Robert (stroke).
Berkeley, Geo. T. (cox.). | Jackson, Curtis (cox.).
The names of the Queen's and St. John's crews are here given, instead of
recording them in the lists of University oars, for this was not
strictly a University race, though in those days it had almost as much
prestige as one.
In 1839 the third University match was rowed, and Henley Regatta was
founded. At the Universities, about this date, various prizes were
established, all of which gave a stimulus to oarsmanship.
Pair-oar races were established at Oxford in 1839. They were rowed with
coxswains until 1847. At Cambridge similar pairs were founded in 1844,
and were rowed from the first without coxswains. The obsolete rudder of
the Oxford pairs is now held by the coxswain of the head eight. The
Colquhoun Sculls had been founded at Cambridge in 1837. 'University
Sculls' were instituted at Oxford in 1841. Four-oar races, each crew to
be from one college, were founded at Oxford in 1840, and at Cambridge in
1849. Thus, by the latter year, each U.B.C. had its set of contests for
all classes of craft--eights, fours, pairs, and sculls. Lists of the
winners of these various honours from year to year will be found
elsewhere in this volume.
[Illustration: TOWING GUARD BOATS UP HENLEY REACH.]
Aquatics may be said to have reached full swing with the completion of
these institutions at the Universities. Matches between the Universities
were propounded annually by one or other club from 1839, but time and
place could not always be agreed upon, nor could 'dons' be always
persuaded to allow men to row in such races. There was many a hitch in
old days, from one cause or another. Since 1850 the U.B.C.'s have
annually met each other in some shape or other at Henley, or in a match;
since, and including, 1856 matches over the Putney course have been
annual. Since 1859 neither University has put on at any regatta.
Various causes tended to stimulate rowing, e.g. regattas and also
professional racing, which is dealt with separately under the head of
'Professionals.' A perusal of the tables of records of Henley and other
regattas will also show how competitions gradually increased in number,
and also in the fields which they produced.
REGATTAS.
The institution of Henley Regatta in 1839 was the outcome of the various
eight-oared matches which have been rowed on that part of the river
during the ten years preceding. The regatta began with one prize only,
the Grand Challenge Cup, a trophy which is unique for classical design,
and which is to this day the 'blue ribbon' for amateur clubs. The
gradual growth of Henley may be traced by perusal of a leading article
contributed by the writer of this chapter to the 'Field,' in the July of
1886, on the eve of the greatest change which the regatta has undergone,
that of alteration of the course. The article is now reproduced,[6]
through the courtesy of the proprietors of that journal.
[6] See Appendix.
The new course, as compared with the old one, will best be understood by
reference to the map of the reach, which appears elsewhere. The change
has had only two trials, those of 1886 and 1887, but it may be said that
so far rowing clubs which frequent Henley are unanimous in approving of
the alteration; and so are all retired oarsmen, whose personal
experience of the regatta was under the old _régime_.
[Illustration: STARTING THE EIGHTS--OLD COURSE, HENLEY.]
The old course was very one-sided. In the middle third of a mile--on a
stormy day--with a stiff wind from W. or S.W., the shelter of the Bucks
bushes--especially before house-boats and steam launches multiplied and
monopolised the frontage of the Bucks and Oxon shores--used to reverse
entirely the advantage otherwise pertaining to the Berks stations. On
such a day the Berks station placed most boats hopelessly out of the
race, unless they could keep within a length of the Bucks boat till the
'point' was reached--in which case the poplar corner made a pretty
counterpoise to the advantage of Bucks shelter, and caused some
interesting finishes. Under the new _régime_ not more than two boats can
row in one heat; and as the course is now staked out, and neither
competitor can hug the bank, the difference between windward and leeward
stations, even when hereafter a gale shall blow, will no longer be so
glaring as of old.
[Illustration: PAIR-OAR.]
The Universities no longer compete at Henley. In these days of keelless
boats more practice is needed, in order to do justice to the craft, than
when heavier and steadier craft were used. It is found to be impossible
to collect all the eight best men of either U.B.C. twice in one year.
Examination and other causes reduce the ranks more or less; and, as the
annual Putney match between the Universities is considered by them to be
of more importance than any other contest, they devote their best
energies to that, and leave minor sections of either U.B.C. to fight
Henley battles. It is found that a good college eight, or a club crew of
which some one college forms a nucleus, can be got together better, in
the limited time available for practice for the regatta, than eight
better men who probably cannot find time to practise all together for
more than a week, and who will further, for the same reason, be short of
condition.
Till 1856, it was the custom for the U.B.C.'s, if they could not agree
as to time and place for a match, to assent to meet each other in the
Grand Challenge; and such meetings ranked practically as University
matches. Records of these _rencontres_ of the U.B.C.'s will be found in
tables at the end of this volume, together with a history of Henley past
and future.
The 'Seven-oar episode' of 1843 was not a University match or meeting.
The O.U.B.C. were entered at Henley; Cambridge were represented by the
'Cambridge Rooms;' but the C.U.B.C. was not officially represented by
that crew. Just before the final heat, the Oxford stroke fainted, and
the Cambridge reasonably objected to the introduction of a substitute.
The Oxonians then decided to row with seven oars. They had a wind abeam,
favouring the side which was manned by only three oars. They eventually
won by a length, or thereabouts.
In 1843 the Thames Regatta was started, and greatly supplemented the
attractions of Henley. The mistake of this regatta was the rule which
made challenge prizes the permanent property of any crew which could win
them thrice in succession. By this means the Gold Cup for eights, the
_pièce de résistance_ of the regatta, passed in 1848 to the possession
of the 'Thames' Club. The regatta lingered on one year longer, shorn of
its chief glory, and then died out.
Records of the winners of the chief prizes at it, amateurs as well as
professionals, will be found in 'Tables.'
In 1854 a new Thames regatta, called the 'National,' was founded. It was
supported by the 'Thames Subscription Club,' and died with that club in
1866. In the last year of its existence it introduced amateur prizes as
well as the usual bonuses for professionals. In 1866 a very important
regatta was founded--the Metropolitan. Its founders expected it to
eclipse Henley, by dint of offers of more valuable prizes, but it never
took the fancy of the University element, and for want of the
wider-spread competition which strong entries from the U.B.C.'s would
have produced, it never attained the prestige of Henley. Still the
honours of winning eights, fours, pairs, or sculls at it rank, in
amateur estimation, second only to Henley. Barnes Regatta is of very old
standing. The tideway is always a drawback to scenery, but Barnes always
used to produce good audiences and good competitors. Its chief patrons
were tideway clubs and the Kingston Rowing Club.
[Illustration: GONDOLA.]
Walton-on-Thames flourished in the 'sixties.' It has now died out. It
was as a picnic second only to Henley. The course was rather one-sided,
and hardly long enough to test stamina.
Molesey Regatta, of less than ten years' growth, now holds much the same
station in aquatics that Walton-on-Thames once claimed. It draws its
sinews of war from much the same up-river locality that used to feed
Walton.
Kingston-on-Thames has a longer history than any regatta except Henley.
Its fortunes hang on the Kingston Rowing Club, but it is well patronised
by tideway clubs.
Regattas have for a season or two been known at Staines and Chertsey,
but they depended on some one or two local men of energy, and, when this
support failed, they died out.
Reading has a good reach, and has of late come to the fore with a good
meeting and a handsome challenge cup.
To return to watermen's regattas. The late Mr. J. G. Chambers, and a
strong gathering of amateur allies of his, revived a second series of
Thames regattas in 1868; these meetings were confined to watermen and
other professionals, whose doings are scheduled in 'Tables' hereafter.
How the second series of Thames National regattas followed the fate of
series No. 1, and of the 'Royal Thames Regatta' before that, will be
found in the chapter on professional rowing. The so-called
'International' Regatta lived but two years, and fell through so soon as
its mercenary promoters came to the conclusion that they could not see
their way to harvest filthy lucre out of it.
There used to be a well-attended regatta at Talkintarn, in the Lake
district. It died out from causes similar to those which led to the
collapse of the 'Royal' Thames regattas, i.e. the dedication of its
prizes to those who could win them a certain number of times
consecutively. The Messrs. Brickwood thus became the absolute owners of
the chief prize for pairs, and a Tyne crew became the proprietors of the
four-oar prize.
The Tyne, the Wear, Chester, Bedford, Tewkesbury, Worcester,
Bridgnorth, Bath, and other provincial towns produce regattas, but none
of them succeed in drawing many of the leading Thames clubs, and without
these no regatta ever establishes even second-class prestige.
The rules of Henley Regatta are here appended. They serve to inform
intending competitors of the code under which they will have to enter
and to row, and they may also offer valuable hints to other regatta
executives, present and future.
HENLEY ROYAL REGATTA.
_Established_ 1839.
_President._
THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LORD CAMOYS.
_Stewards._
THE MAYOR OF HENLEY.
The Rt. Hon. the EARL OF | FREDK. FENNER, Esq.
MACCLESFIELD. | H. T. STEWARD, Esq.
W. H. VANDERSTEGEN, Esq. | Colonel BASKERVILLE.
ALEXANDER C. FORBES, Esq. | HUGH MAIR, Esq.
J. F. HODGES, Esq. | Sir F. G. STAPYLTON, Bart.
HENRY KNOX, Esq. | W. H. GRENFELL, Esq., M.P.
J. W. RHODES, Esq. | J. H. D. GOLDIE, Esq.
W. D. MACKENZIE, Esq. | The Rt. Hon. LORD LONDESBOROUGH.
HENRY HODGES, Esq. | T. C. EDWARDES-MOSS, Esq., M.P.
The Rev. E. WARRE, D.D. | J. COOPER, Esq.
F. WILLAN, Esq. | J. PAGE, Esq.
CHARLES STEPHENS, Esq. | A. BRAKSPEAR, Esq.
JOHN NOBLE, Esq. | The Rt. Hon. the EARL OF ANTRIM.
The Rt. Hon. W. H. SMITH, |
M.P. |
A. BRAKSPEAR, _Hon. Treasurer_.
J. F. COOPER, _Secretary_.
* * * * *
CONSTITUTION.
On May 16, 1885, at a meeting of the stewards, the following resolutions
were agreed to:--
1. That the stewards of Henley Regatta shall constitute a council for
the general control of the affairs of the regatta.
2. That the stewards shall elect a president, who shall, if present,
take the chair at the general meetings.
3. That the chairman shall have a casting vote.
4. That not less than _five_ shall form a quorum at the general
meetings.
5. That two ordinary general meetings shall be held in each year, one in
the month of May and another in the month of November.
6. That other general meetings shall be summoned by the secretary, when
ordered by the president, or at the request of any two stewards, in
writing, provided that not less than fourteen days' notice shall be
given of any such meeting.
7. That the stewards shall elect annually, at the meeting in November,
from their own body, a committee of management.
8. That the number of the committee shall not exceed twelve, of whom not
less than _three_ shall form a quorum.
9. That the committee shall elect one of their own body to act as
chairman.
10. That the committee be empowered to manage and exercise control over
all matters connected with the regatta, excepting such as shall involve
the alteration of any of the published rules of the regatta.
11. That the committee shall present a report, together with a statement
of accounts, to the stewards, annually, at the November meeting in each
year.
12. That meetings of the committee shall be summoned by the secretary
when ordered by the chairman, or at the request of any two members of
the committee, in writing, providing that not less than one week's
notice be given of any such meeting.
13. That the committee shall have power to make and publish by-laws
respecting any matter connected with the management of the regatta, not
already determined in the published rules.
14. That no alteration shall be made in any of the foregoing
resolutions, or in any of the published rules of the regatta, except at
a general meeting specially convened for that purpose, of which fourteen
days' notice shall be given, such notice to state the alterations
proposed, and unless the alteration be carried by a majority of
two-thirds at a meeting of not less than nine stewards.
* * * * *
QUALIFICATION RULES.
THE GRAND CHALLENGE CUP,
FOR EIGHT-OARS.
Any crew of amateurs who are members of any University or Public School,
or who are officers of her Majesty's army or navy, or any amateur club
established at least one year previous to the day of entry, shall be
qualified to contend for this prize.
THE STEWARDS' CHALLENGE CUP,
FOR FOUR-OARS.
The same as for the Grand Challenge Cup.
THE LADIES' CHALLENGE PLATE,
FOR EIGHT-OARS.
Any crew of amateurs who are members of any of the boat clubs of
colleges, or non-collegiate boat clubs of the Universities, or boat
clubs of any of the Public Schools, in the United Kingdom only, shall be
qualified to contend for this prize; but no member of any college or
non-collegiate crew shall be allowed to row for it who has exceeded four
years from the date of his first commencing residence at the University;
and each member of a Public School crew shall, at the time of entering,
be _bonâ fide_ a member '_in statu pupillari_' of such school.
THE VISITORS' CHALLENGE CUP,
FOR FOUR-OARS.
The same as for the Ladies' Challenge Plate.
THE THAMES CHALLENGE CUP,
FOR EIGHT-OARS.
The qualification for this cup shall be the same as for the Grand
Challenge Cup; but no one (coxswains excepted) may enter for this cup
who has ever rowed in a winning crew for the Grand Challenge Cup or
Stewards' Challenge Cup; and no one (substitutes as per Rule 7 excepted)
may enter, and no one shall row, for this cup and for the Grand
Challenge Cup or Stewards' Challenge Cup at the same regatta.
THE WYFOLD CHALLENGE CUP,
FOR FOUR-OARS.
The qualification for this cup shall be the same as for the Stewards'
Challenge Cup; but no one shall enter for this cup who has ever rowed in
a winning crew for the Stewards' Challenge Cup; and no one (substitutes
as per Rule 11 excepted) may enter, and no one shall row, for this cup
and for the Stewards' Challenge Cup at the same regatta.
THE SILVER GOBLETS,
FOR PAIR-OARS.
Open to all amateurs duly entered for the same according to the rules
following.
THE DIAMOND CHALLENGE SCULLS,
FOR SCULLS.
Open to all amateurs duly entered for the same according to the rules
following.
* * * * *
GENERAL RULES.
_Definition._--1. No person shall be considered an amateur
oarsman, sculler, or coxswain--
(_a_) Who has ever taken part in any open competition for a
stake, money, or entrance fee;
(_b_) Who has ever knowingly competed with or against a
professional for any prize;
(_c_) Who has ever taught, pursued, or assisted in the practice
of athletic exercises of any kind for profit;
(_d_) Who has ever been employed in or about boats, or in manual
labour for money or wages;
(_e_) Who is or has been by trade or employment, for wages, a
mechanic, artisan, or labourer, or engaged in any menial duty.
_Eligibility._--2. No one shall be eligible to row or steer for
a club unless he has been a member of that club for at least
two months preceding the regatta, but this rule shall not apply
to colleges, schools, or crews composed of officers of her
Majesty's army or navy.
_Entries._--3. The entry of any amateur club, crew, or sculler,
in the United Kingdom, must be made ten clear days before the
regatta, and the names of the captain or secretary of each club
or crew must accompany the entry. A copy of the list of entries
shall be forwarded by the secretary of the regatta to the
captain or secretary of each club or crew duly entered.
4. The entry of any crew or sculler, out of the United Kingdom,
must be made on or before March 31, and any such entry must be
accompanied by a declaration, made before a notary public, with
regard to the profession of each person so entering, to the
effect that he has never taken part in any open competition for
a stake, money, or entrance fee; has never knowingly competed
with nor against a professional for any prize; has never taught,
pursued, or assisted in the practice of athletic exercises of
any kind for profit; has never been employed in or about boats,
or in manual labour for money or wages; is not, and never has
been, by trade or employment, for wages, a mechanic, artisan, or
labourer, or engaged in any menial duty; and in cases of the
entry of a crew, that each member thereof is a member of a club
duly established at least one year previous to the day of entry;
and such declaration must be certified by the British Consul, or
the Mayor, or the chief authority of the locality.
5. No assumed name shall be given to the secretary, unless
accompanied by the real name of the competitor.
6. No one shall enter twice for the same race.
7. The secretary of the regatta shall not divulge any entry, nor
report the state of the entrance list, until such list be
closed.
8. Entrance money for each boat shall be paid to the secretary
at the time of entering, as follows:--
_£._ _s._ _d._
For the Grand Challenge Cup 6 6 0
" Ladies' Challenge Plate 5 5 0
" Thames Challenge Cup 5 5 0
" Stewards' " " 4 4 0
" Visitors' " " 3 3 0
" Wyfold " " 3 3 0
" Silver Goblets 2 2 0
" Diamond Challenge Sculls 1 1 0
9. The committee shall investigate any questionable entry,
irrespective of protest.
10. The committee shall have power to refuse or return any entry
up to the time of starting, without being bound to assign a
reason.
11. The captain or secretary of each club or crew entered shall,
seven clear days before the regatta, deliver to the secretary of
the regatta a list containing the names of the actual crew
appointed to compete, to which list the names of not more than
four other members for an eight-oar and two for a four-oar may
be added as substitutes.
12. No person may be substituted for another who has already
rowed or steered in a heat.
13. The secretary of the regatta, after receiving the list of
the crews entered, and of the substitutes, shall, if required,
furnish a copy of the same, with the names, real and assumed, to
the captain or secretary of each club or crew entered, and in
the case of pairs or scullers to each competitor entered.
_Objections._--14. Objections to the entry of any club or crew
must be made in writing to the secretary at least four clear
days before the regatta, when the committee shall investigate
the grounds of objection, and decide thereon without delay.
15. Objections to the qualification of a competitor must be made
in writing to the secretary at the earliest moment practicable.
No protest shall be entertained unless lodged before the prizes
are distributed.
_Course._--16. The races shall commence below the Island, and
terminate at the upper end of Phyllis Court. Length of course,
about 1 mile and 550 yards.
17. Boats shall be held to have completed the course when their
bows reach the winning-post.
18. The whole course must be completed by a competitor before he
can be held to have won a trial or final heat.
_Stations._--19. Stations shall be drawn by the committee.
_Row over._--20. In the event of there being but one boat
entered for any prize, or if more than one enter, and all
withdraw but one, the crew of the remaining boat must row over
the course to be entitled to such prize.
_Heats._--21. If there shall be more than two competitors, they
shall row a trial heat or heats; but no more than two boats
shall contend in any heat for any of the prizes above
mentioned.
22. In the event of a dead heat taking place, the same crews
shall contend again, after such interval as the committee may
appoint, or the crew refusing shall be adjudged to have lost the
heat.
_Clothing._--23. Every competitor must wear complete clothing
from the shoulders to the knees--including a sleeved jersey.
_Coxswains._--24. Every eight-oared boat shall carry a coxswain;
such coxswain must be an amateur, and shall not steer for more
than one club for the same prize.
The minimum weight for coxswains shall be 7 stone.
Crews averaging 10-1/2 stone and under 11 stone to carry not
less than 7-1/2 stone.
Crews averaging 11 stone or more, to carry not less than 8
stone.
Deficiencies must be made up by dead weight carried on the
coxswain's thwart.
The dead weight shall be provided by the committee, and shall be
placed in the boat and removed from it by a person appointed for
that purpose.
Each competitor (including the coxswain) in eight- and
four-oared races shall attend to be weighed (in rowing costume)
at the time and place appointed by the committee; and his weight
then registered by the secretary shall be considered his racing
weight during the regatta.
Any member of a crew omitting to register his weight shall be
disqualified.
_Flag._--25. Every boat shall, at starting, carry a flag showing
its colour at the bow. Boats not conforming to this rule are
liable to be disqualified at the discretion of the umpire.
_Umpire._--26. The committee shall appoint one or more umpires
to act under the Laws of Boat-racing.
_Judge._--27. The committee shall appoint one or more judges,
whose decision as to the order in which the boats pass the post
shall be final.
_Prizes._--28. The prizes shall be delivered at the conclusion
of the regatta to their respective winners, who on receipt of a
challenge prize shall subscribe a document of the following
effect:--
'We, A, B, C, D, &c., the captain and crew of the ______________
and members of the ____________________ Club, having been this
day declared to be the winners of the Henley Royal Regatta
____________________ Challenge Cup, and the same having been
delivered to us by E F, G H, I K, &c., Stewards of the Regatta,
do hereby, individually and collectively, engage to return the
same to the Stewards on or before June 1, in accordance with the
conditions of the annexed rules, to which also we have
subscribed our respective names.'
_Committee._--29. All questions of eligibility, qualification,
interpretation of the rules, or other matters not specially
provided for, shall be referred to the committee, whose decision
shall be final.
30. The Laws of Boat-racing to be observed at the regatta are as
follows (_see chapter on this subject_).
A good deal of the history of old regattas at which watermen contended
is necessarily mixed with the history of the rise of professional
racing, and will be found to be dealt with under that heading in another
chapter.
[Illustration: BISHAM COURT.]
CHAPTER III.
SCIENTIFIC OARSMANSHIP.
If a thing is worth doing at all it is worth doing well, whether it be
undertaken in sport or as a means of livelihood.
The first principles of oarsmanship may be explained to a beginner in a
few minutes, and he might roughly put them into force, in a casual and
faulty manner, on the first day of his education.
In all pastimes and professions there is, as even a child knows, a very
wide difference between the knowing how a thing is done and the
rendering of the operation in the most approved and scientific manner.
In all operations which entail the use of implements there are three
essentials to the attainment of real merit in the operation. These are,
firstly, physical capacity; secondly, good tools to work with; thirdly,
practice and painstaking on the part of the student.
For the purposes of the current chapter we shall postulate the two
former, and confine the theme to details of such study and practice of
oarsmanship as are requisite in order to attain scientific use of oars
or sculls.
When commencing to learn an operation which entails a new and unwonted
exercise, distinct volition is necessary on the part of the brain, in
order to dictate to the various muscles the parts which they are to play
in the operation.
The oftener that a muscular movement is repeated the less intense
becomes the mental volition which is required to dictate that movement;
until at last the movement becomes almost mechanical, and can be
reproduced without a strain of the will (so long as the muscular power
is not exhausted).
One object of studied practice at any given muscular movement is to
accustom the muscles to this particular function, until they become
capable of carrying it out without requiring specific and laborious
instructions from the headquarters of the brain on the occasion of each
such motion. Another object and result of exercise of one or more sets
of muscles is to develop their powers. The anatomical reasons why
muscles increase in vigour and activity under exercise need not be here
discussed; the fact may be accepted that they do so.
Hence, by practice of any kind of muscular movement, the student
increases both the vigour and the independence of action of the muscles
concerned.
In any operation with implements there is some one method of performing
the same which experience has proved to be the most effectual for the
purpose required. There will be other methods, or variations of method,
which will attain a somewhat similar but less effectual and less
satisfactory result.
It requires distinct volition in the first instance to perform the
operation in an inferior manner, just as it does to perform it in the
most approved manner, to perform 'clumsily' or to perform 'cleverly.'
Naturally, if the volition to act clumsily be repeated a sufficient
number of times, the muscles learn independent clumsy action with as
much facility as they would have otherwise acquired independent clever
and scientific action. Hence the importance of knowing which is the most
approved and effectual method of setting to work, and of being informed
of the result, good or bad, of each attempt, while the volition is still
in active force, and before the 'habit' of muscular action, perfect or
imperfect, is fully formed.
We all know that, whether we are dealing with morals or with muscles, it
is a matter of much difficulty to overcome a bad habit, and to form a
different and a better one relating to the same course of action.
When the pupil begins to learn to row the brain has many things to think
of; it has several orders to distribute simultaneously to its different
employés--the various muscles required for the work--and these employés
are, moreover, 'new to the business.' They have not yet, from want of
practice, developed the vigour and strength which they will require
hereafter; and also they know so little of what they have to do that
they require incessant instruction from brain headquarters, or else they
make blunders. But in time both master and servants, brain and muscles,
begin to settle down to their business. The master becomes less
confused, and gives his orders with more accuracy and less oblivion of
details; the servants acquire more vigour, and pick up the instructions
with more facility. At last the time comes when the servants know pretty
well what their master would have them do, and act spontaneously, while
the master barely whispers his orders, and has leisure to attend to
other matters, or at all events saves himself the exertion of having
momentarily to shout his orders through a speaking-trumpet. Meantime, as
said before, the servants can only obey orders; and, if their original
instructions have been blunders on the part of the master, they settle
down to the reproduction of these blunders.
Now it often happens that an oarsman, who is himself a good judge of
rowing, and is capable of giving very good instructions to others, is
guilty of many faults in his own oarsmanship. And yet it cannot be said
of him that he 'knows no better' as regards those faults which he
personally commits. On the contrary, if he were to see one of his own
pupils rowing with any one of these same faults, he would promptly
detect it, and would be able to explain to the pupil the why and the
wherefore of the error, and of its cure. Nevertheless, he perpetrates in
his own person the very fault which he discerns and corrects when he
notes it in another! And the reason is this. His own oarsmanship has
become mechanical, and is reproduced stroke after stroke without a
distinct volition. It became faulty at the time when it was becoming
mechanical, because the brain was not sufficiently conscious of the
orders which it was dictating, or was not duly informed, from some
external source, what orders it should issue. So the brain gave wrong
orders, through carelessness or ignorance, or both, and continued to
repeat them, until the muscles learnt to repeat their faulty functions
spontaneously, and without the immediate cognisance of the brain.
This illustration, of which many a practical instance will be recalled
by any rowing man of experience, serves to show the importance of
keeping the mind attentive, as far as possible, at all times when
rowing, and still more so while elementary rowing is being learnt, and
also of having, if possible, a mentor to watch the endeavours of the
student, and to inform him of any error of movement which he may
perpetrate, before his mind and muscles become confirmed in an erroneous
line of action.
The reader will therefore see from the above that it is important for
any one who seeks to acquire really scientific oarsmanship, not only to
pay all the mental attention that he can to the movements which he is
executing, but also to secure the presence of some experienced adviser
who will watch the execution of each stroke, and will point out at the
time what movements have been correctly and what have been incorrectly
performed.
Having shown the importance of careful study and tuition in the details
of scientific oarsmanship, we now enter into those details themselves,
but still confine ourselves to what is known as 'fixed' seat rowing,
taking them separately, and dealing first with the stroke itself, as
distinct from the 'recovery' between the strokes.
While carrying out the stroke upon general principles, the oarsman, in
order to produce a maximum effect with a relatively minimum expenditure
of strength, has to study the following details:
1. To keep the back rigid, and to swing from the hips.
2. To maintain his shoulders braced when the oar grasps the water.
3. To use the legs and feet in the best manner and at the exact instant
required.
4. To hold his oar properly.
5. To govern the depth of the blade with accuracy, including the first
dip of the blade into the water to the moment when the blade quits it.
6. To row the stroke home to his chest, bending his arms neither too
soon nor too late.
7. To do so with the correct muscles.
8. To drop the hands and elevate the oar from the water in the right
manner and at the right moment.
Then again, when the stroke is completed and the recovery commences, the
details to be further observed are:
9. To avoid 'hang' or delay of action either with hands or body.
10. To manipulate the feather with accuracy and at the proper instant.
11. To govern the height of the blade during the recovery.
12. To use the legs and feet correctly and at the right moments of
recovery.
13. To keep the button of the oar home to the thowl.
14. To regulate the proportionate speeds of recovery of arms and of
body, relatively to each other.
15. To return the feathered oar to the square position at the right time
and in the correct manner.
16. To raise the hands at the right moment, and so to lower the blade
into the water at the correct instant.
17. To recommence the action of the new stroke at the right instant.
These several details present an apparently formidable list of detailed
studies to be followed in order to execute a series of strokes and
recoveries in the most approved fashion. In performance the operation is
far more homogeneous than would appear from the above disjointed
analysis of the several movements to be performed. The division of
movements is made for the purpose of observation and appreciation of
possibly several faults, which may occur in any one of the movements
detailed. As a fact, the correct rendering of one movement--of one
detail of the stroke--facilitates correctness in succeeding or
contemporaneous details; while, on the other hand, a faulty rendering of
one movement tends to hamper the action of the body in other details,
and to make it more liable to do its work incorrectly in some or all of
them. Experience shows that one fault, in one distinct detail, is
constantly the primary cause of a concatenation of other faults. To set
the machine in incorrect motion in one branch of it tends to put the
whole, or the greater part of it, more or less out of gear, and to
cripple its action from beginning to end of the chapter.
Taking these various details _seriatim_.
1. The back should be set stiff, and preserved stiff throughout the
stroke. Obviously, if the back yields to the strain, the stroke is not
so effectual. Besides, if the back is badly humped the expansion of the
chest is impeded; and with this the action of the pectoral muscles and
of the shoulders (of both of which more anon) is also fettered. Further,
the lungs have less freedom of play when the back is bent and the chest
cramped; and the value of free respiration requires no explanation.
We have said that the back must be stiff. If the back can be straight,
from first to last, stiffness is ensured, _ipso facto_. If the back is
bent, care must be taken that the bend does not increase or decrease
during the stroke; whether straight or bent, the back should be rigid.
The conformation and development of the muscles of the back are not
quite the same in all subjects. With some persons absolute straightness
of back comes almost naturally; with others the attainment of
straightness is not a matter of much difficulty. With others, again, a
slight amount of curve in the back is more natural under the strain of
the oar, even with all attention and endeavour to keep the back flat.
With such as these any artificial straightening of the back, that places
it in a position in which the muscles, as they are adapted to the frame,
have not the fullest and freest play, detracts from rather than adds to
the power of the oarsman.
But in all cases it is important that the back, whether straight or
slightly arched, should be rigid, and should swing from the hips. If the
swing takes place from one or more of the vertebræ of the spine, the
force which the oarsman can by such actions produce is far less than
would be the case if he kept his spine rigid and had swung to and fro
from his hips.
In order to facilitate the entire body in swinging from the hips, and
not from one of the vertebræ, the legs should be opened, and the knees
induced outward, as the body swings forward. The body can then lower
itself to a greater reach forward, and directly from the hips; whereas
if the knees are placed together the thighs check the forward motion of
the body, and compel it, if it remains rigid, to curtail its forward
reach. (If the vertebræ bend when the swing from the hips is checked by
the bent knees, the extra reach thus attained is weak, and of
comparatively minor effect.)
Next (2) the shoulders have to be rigid. If they give way, and if the
sockets stretch when the strain of the oar is felt, the effect of the
stroke is evidently weakened. Now if the shoulders are stretched forward
at the beginning of the stroke, the muscles which govern and support
them have not the same power of rigidity that they possess when the
shoulders are well drawn back at the outset. The oarsman gains a little
in reach by extending his shoulders, but he loses in rigidity of muscle,
and consequently in the force which he applies to the oar.
3. The legs and feet should combine to exercise pressure against the
stretcher at the same moment, and contemporaneously with the application
of the oar to the water. If they press too soon, the body is forced back
while the oar is in air; if too late, the hold of the water is weak, for
want of legwork to support the body.
4. The oar should be held in the fingers, not in the fist; the lower
joints of the fingers should be nearly straight when the oar is held.
The hold which a gymnast would take of a bar of the same thickness, if
he were hanging from it, is, as regards the four fingers of the hand,
the same which an oarsman should take of his oar. His thumb should come
underneath, not over the handle.
5 and 10. Government of the depression or elevation of the blade,
respectively, during stroke and recovery, is a matter of application of
joints and of muscles. This much may be borne in mind, that the freer
the wrist is, the better is the oar governed; and if an oar is clutched
in the fist the flexibility of the wrist is thereby much crippled.
6. The arms should begin to bend when the body has just found the
perpendicular. The upper arm should swing close to the ribs, worked by
the shoulders, which should be thrown well back.
7. The 'biceps' should not do the work; for, if it does, either the
hands are elevated or the level of the blade altered--if the elbows keep
close to the side; or else, if the level of the hands is preserved, then
the elbows dog's-ear outwards. In either case the action is less free
and less powerful than if the stroke is rowed home by the shoulder
muscles.
8. The part of the hand which should touch the chest when the oar comes
home is the root of the thumb, not the knuckles of the fingers. If the
knuckles touch the chest _before_ the oar comes out of water, the blade
is 'feathered under water'--a common fault, and a very insidious one.
If, on the other hand, the oar comes out clean, but the first thing
which touches the chest is the knuckle, then the last part of the stroke
will have been rowed in _air_, and not in _the water_.
9. Dealing now with recovery. The hands should rebound from the chest
like a billiard-ball from a cushion. If the hands delay at the chest
they hamper the recovery of the body--e.g. let any man try to push a
weight away from him with his hands and body combined. He will find
that, if he pushes with straight arms, he is better able to apply the
weight of his body to the forward push than if he keeps his arms bent.
Having shot his hands away, and having straightened his arms as quickly
as he reasonably can, his body should follow; but his body should not
meantime have been stationary. It should, like a pendulum, begin to
swing for the return so soon as the stroke is over.
If hands 'hang,' the body tends to hang, as above shown; and if the body
hangs, valuable time is lost, which can never be regained. As an
illustration: suppose a man is rowing forty strokes in a minute, and
that his body hangs the tenth of a second when it is back after each
stroke, then at the end of a minute's rowing he will have sat still for
four whole seconds! An oarsman who has no hang in his recovery can thus
row a fast stroke with less exertion to himself than one who hangs. The
latter, having wasted time between stroke and recovery, has to swing
forward all the faster, when once he begins to recover, in order to
perform the same number of strokes in the same time as he who does not
hang. Now, although there is a greater effort required to row the blade
square through the water than to recover it edgewise through the air,
yet the latter has to be performed with muscles so much weaker for the
task set to them that relatively they tire sooner under their lighter
work than do the muscles which are in use for rowing the blade through
the water. When an oarsman becomes 'pumped,' he feels the task of
recovery even more severe than that of rowing the stroke. Hence we see
the importance of economising as far as possible the labour of those
muscles which are employed on the recovery, and of not adding to their
toil by waste of time which entails a subsequent extra exertion in order
to regain lost ground and lost time.
10. The manipulation of the blade through the water is of great
importance, otherwise the blade will not keep square, and regular
pressure against the water will not be attained. Now, since the angle of
the blade to the water has to be a constant one, and since the plane on
which the blade works also is required to be uniform, till the moment
for the feather has arrived, it stands to reason that the wrists and
arms, which are changing their position relatively with the body while
the stroke progresses, must accommodate themselves to the progressive
variations of force of body and arms, so as to maintain the uniform
angle and plane of the oar. Herein much attention must be paid to maxim
4 (_supra_). If an oar is held in the fist instead of in the fingers,
the play of the muscles of the wrist is thereby crippled, and it becomes
less easy to govern the blade.
11. On a somewhat similar principle as the foregoing, the arms, on the
recovery, are changing their position and angle with the body throughout
the recovery; but the blade has to be kept at a normal level above the
water all the time. It is a common fault for the oarsman to fail to
regulate the height of the feather, and either to 'toss' it at some
point of the recovery or else to lower it till the blade almost, if not
quite, touches the water. Nothing but practice, coupled with careful
observations of the correct manner of holding an oar, can attain that
mechanical give-and-take play of muscles which produces an even and
clean feather from first to last of recovery.
12. We are still, for the sake of argument, dealing with fixed-seat
oarsmanship. Slides will be discussed subsequently.
In using the legs, on a fixed seat, for recovery, the toes should feel
the strap, which should cross them on or below the knuckle-joint of the
great toe. Each foot should feel and pull up the strap easily and
simultaneously, so as to preserve even position of body. The legs should
open well, and allow the body to trick between them as it swings
forward.
13. If the body swings true, the oar will keep home to the rowlock;
there should be just sufficient fraction of weight pressed against the
button to keep it home; if it is suffered to leave the rowlock, the
oarsman tends to screw outwards over the gunwale, and also, when he
recommences the stroke, he loses power by reason of his oar not meeting
with its due support until the abstracted button has slipped back
against the thowl.
14. The pace of recovery should be proportionate to the speed of stroke.
If recovery is too slow, the oarsman becomes late in getting into the
water for the next stroke; if he is too quick, he has to wait when
forward in order not to hurry the stroke.
15. Too many even high-class oars are prone to omit to keep the oar
feathered for the full distance of the recovery. They have a tendency to
turn it square too soon. By so doing they incur extra resistance of air
and extra labour on the recovery, and they are more liable to foul a
wave in rough water. The oar should be carried forwards edgewise, and
only turned square just as full reach is attained. It should then be
turned sharply, and not gradually.
16. The instant the body is full forward, and the oar set square, the
hands should be raised sharply to the exact amount required in order to
drop the blade into the water to the required depth, so as to cover it
for the succeeding stroke.
17. The new stroke should be recommenced without delay, by throwing the
body sharply back, with arms stiff and shoulders braced, the legs
pressing firmly and evenly against the stretcher, so as to take the
weight of the body off the seat, and to transfer its support to the
handle of the oar and the stretcher, thus making the very most of weight
and of extensor muscles in order to give force to the oar against the
water.
N.B. Before closing these remarks, it should be added that, with
reference to detail 12, it is assumed that the oarsman, having
progressed to the scientific stage, has so far mastered the use of the
loins as to be able to combine their action with that of the toe against
the strap in aiding the recovery of the body. If he tries to rely solely
on the motor power for recovery from the strap, and the toes against it,
he will not swing forward with a stiff back, and will be in a slouched
position when he attains his reach forward.
The Rev. E. Warre, D.D., published in 1875 some brief remarks upon the
stroke, in a treatise upon physical exercises and recreations. They are
here reproduced by leave, the writer feeling that they can hardly be
surpassed for brevity and lucidity of instruction upon the details of
the stroke.
NOTES ON THE STROKE.
The moment the oar touches the body, drop the hands smartly
straight down, then turn the wrists sharply and at once shoot
out the hands in a straight line to the front, inclining the
body forward from the thigh-joints, and simultaneously bring up
the slider, regulating the time by the swing forward of the body
according to the stroke. Let the chest and stomach come well
forward, the shoulders be kept back; the inside arm be
straightened, the inside wrist a little raised, the oar grasped
in the hands, but not pressed upon more than is necessary to
maintain the blade in its proper straight line as it goes back;
the head kept up, the eyes fixed on the outside shoulder of the
man before you. As the body and arms come forward to their full
extent, the wrists having been quickly turned, the hands must be
raised sharply, and the blade of the oar brought to its full
depth at once. At that moment, without the loss of a thousandth
part of a second, the whole weight of the body must be thrown on
to the oar and the stretcher, by the body springing back, so
that the oar may catch hold of the water sharply, and be driven
through it by a force unwavering and uniform. As soon as the oar
has got hold of the water, and the beginning of the stroke has
been effected as described, flatten the knees, and so, using the
muscles of the legs, keep up the pressure of the beginning
uniform through the backward motion of the body. Let the arms be
rigid at the beginning of the stroke. When the body reaches the
perpendicular, let the elbows be bent and dropped close past the
sides to the rear--the shoulders dropping and disclosing the
chest to the front; the back, if anything, curved inwards rather
than outwards, but not strained in any way. The body, in fact,
should assume a natural upright sitting posture, with the
shoulders well thrown back. In this position the oar should come
to it and the feather commence.
N.B.--It is important to remember that the body should never
stop still. In its motion backwards and forwards it should
imitate the pendulum of a clock. When it has ceased to go
forward it has begun to go back.
There are, it will appear, from consideration of the directions,
about twenty-seven distinct points, _articuli_ as it were, of
the stroke. No one should attempt to coach a crew without
striving to obtain a practical insight into their nature and
order of succession. Let a coxswain also remember that, in
teaching men to row, his object should be to teach them to
economise their _strength_ by using properly their _weight_.
Their weight is always in the boat along with them; their
strength, if misapplied, very soon evaporates.
[Illustration: MARLOW.]
CHAPTER IV.
COACHING.
For reasons which were set forth at the commencement of the chapter on
scientific oarsmanship, the very best oar may fail to see his own
faults. For this reason, in dealing with the methods for detecting and
curing faults, it seems more to the point to write as addressing the
tutor rather than the pupil. The latter will improve faster under any
adequate verbal instruction than by perusing pages of bookwork upon the
science of oarsmanship.
A coach may often know much more than he can himself perform; he may be
with his own muscles but a mediocre exponent of his art, and yet be
towards the top of the tree as regards knowledge and power of
instruction.
A coach, like his pupils, often becomes too 'mechanical'; he sees some
salient fault in his crew, he sets himself to eradicate it, and
meanwhile it is possible that he may overlook some other great fault
which is gradually developing itself among one or more of the men. And
yet if he were asked to coach some other crew for the day, in which crew
this same fault existed, he would be almost certain to note it, and to
set to work to cure it.
For this reason, although it does not do to have too many mentors at
work from day to day upon one crew, nevertheless the best of coaches may
often gain a hint by taking some one else into his counsels for an hour
or two, and by comparing notes.
We have said that it is not absolutely necessary that a good coach
should always be in his own person a finished oarsman; but if he is all
the better, and for one very important reason. More than half the faults
which oarsmen contract are to be traced in the first instance to some
irregularity in the machinery with which they are working. That
irregularity may be of two sorts, direct or indirect--direct when the
boat, oar, rowlock, or stretcher is improperly constructed, so that an
oarsman cannot work fairly and squarely; indirect when some other
oarsman is perpetrating some fault which puts others out of gear.
If a coach is a good oarsman on his own account (by 'good' we mean
scientific rather than merely powerful), he can and should test and try
or inspect the seat and oar of each man whom he coaches, especially if
he finds a man painstaking and yet unable to cure some special fault.
Boatbuilders are very careless in laying out work. A rowlock may be too
high or too low; it may rake one way or other, and so spoil the plane of
the oar in the water. An oar may be hog-backed (or sprung), or too long
in loom, or too short; the straps of a stretcher may be fixed too high,
so as to grip only the tip of a great-toe, and the place for the feet
may not be straight to the seat, or a rowlock may be too narrow, and so
may jam the oar when forward.
These are samples of mechanical discomfort which may spoil any man's
rowing, and against which it may be difficult for the most painstaking
pupil to contend successfully. If the coach is good in practice as well
as in theory of oarsmanship, he can materially simplify his own labours
and those of his pupils by inspecting and trying the 'work' of each man
in turn.
He should bear in mind that if a young oar is thrown out of shape in his
early career by bad mechanical appliances, the faults of shape often
cling to him unconsciously later on, even when he is at last furnished
with proper tools. If a child were taught to walk with one boot an inch
thicker in the sole than the other, the uneven gait thereby produced
might cling to him long after he had been properly shod.
Young oarsmen in a club are too often relegated to practise in cast-off
boats with cast-off oars, none of which are really fit for use. Nothing
does more to spoil the standard of junior oarsmanship in a club than
neglect of this nature.
Having ascertained that all his pupils are properly equipped and are
properly seated, fair and square to stretchers suitable for the length
of leg of each, the next care of a coach should be to endeavour to trace
the _cause_ of each fault which he may detect. This is more difficult
than to see that a fault exists. At the same time, if the coach cannot
trace the cause, it is hardly reasonable to expect the pupil to do so.
So many varied causes may produce some one generic fault that it may
drive a pupil from one error to another to tell him nothing more than
that he is doing something wrong without at the same time explaining to
him how and why he is at fault.
For instance, suppose a man gets late into the water. This lateness may
arise from a variety of causes, for example:
1. He may be hanging with arms or body, or both, when he has finished
the stroke, and so he may be late in starting to go forward; or
2. He may be correct until he has attained his forward reach, and then,
may be, he hangs before dropping his oar into the water; or
3. He may begin to drop his oar at the right time, but to do so in a
'clipping' manner, not dropping the oar perpendicularly, but bringing it
for some distance back in the air before it touches the water.
[Illustration: COACHING UNIVERSITY CREW.]
Now to tell a batch of men--all late, and all late from different causes
as above--simply that each one is 'late' does little good. The cure
which will set the one right will only vary, or even exaggerate, the
mischief with the others.
Hence a coach should, before he animadverts upon a fault, of which he
observes the effect, watch carefully until he detects the exact cause,
and then seek to eradicate it.
Another sample of cause and effect in faults may be cited for
illustration. Suppose a man holds his oar in his fist instead of his
fingers. The effect of this probably will be a want of accuracy in
'governing' the blade. He may thereby row too deep; also only half
feather; also find a difficulty in bending his wrists laterally, and
therefore fail to bring his elbows neatly past his sides. The consequent
further effect may well be that he dog's-ears his elbows and gets a
cramped finish. This will tend to make his hands come slow off the chest
for the recovery; and this again may tend to make his body heavy on the
return swing.
Here is a pretty, and quite possible, concatenation of faults all
bearing on each other in sequence, more or less. To be scolded for each
such fault in turn may well bewilder a pupil. He will be taken aback at
the plurality of defects which he is told to cure. But if the coach
should spot the faulty grip, and cure that by some careful coaching in a
tub-gig, he may in a few days find the other faults gradually melt away
when the one primary awkwardness has been eradicated.
These two illustrations of faults and their origins by no means exhaust
the category of errors which a coach has to detect and to cure.
Sundry other common faults may be specified, and the best mode of
dealing with them by coaches supplied.
_Over-reach of shoulders._--This weakens the catch of the water, and
also tends to cripple the finish when the time comes to row the oar
home. The shoulders should be braced well back. The extra inch or less
of forward reach which the over-reach obtains is not worth having at the
cost of weakening the catch and cramping the finish. The fault is best
cured by gig-coaching and by demonstrating in person the correct and the
wrong poses of the shoulders.
_Meeting the oar._--This may come from more than one cause. If the legs
leave off supporting the body before the oar-handle comes to the chest,
the body droops to the strain from want of due support; or if the
oarsman tries to row the stroke home with arms only, ceasing the swing
back; and still more, if he tries to finish with biceps instead of by
shoulder muscles, he is not unlikely to row deep, because he feels the
strain of rowing the oar home in time, with less power behind it than
that employed by others in the boat. He finds the oar come home easier
if it is slightly deflected, and so unconsciously he begins to row
rather deep (or light) at the finish, in order to get his oar home at
the right instant.
_Swing._--faults of may be various. There may be a hang, or conversely a
hurry, in the swing; and, as shown above, the causes of these errors in
swing may often be beneath the surface, and be connected with faulty
hold of an oar, or a loose or badly placed strap, or a stretcher of
wrong length, or from faulty finish of the preceding stroke. Lateness in
swing may arise _per se_, and so may a 'bucket,' but as often as not
they are linked with other faults, which have to be corrected at least
simultaneously, and often antecedently.
_Screwing_ either arises from mechanical fault at the moment or from
former habits of rowing under difficulties occasionally with bad
appliances. If a man sits square, with correct oar, rowlock, and
stretcher, he does not naturally screw. If the habit seems to have grown
upon him, a change of side will often do more than anything else to cure
him. He is screwing because he is working his limbs and loins unevenly;
hence the obvious policy of making him change the side on which he puts
the greater pressure.
_Feather under water._--The fault is one of the most common, the remedy
simple. The pupil should be shown the difference between turning the
oar-handle before he drops it (as he is doing) and of dropping it before
he turns it as he ought to do; and it should be impressed upon him that
the root of the thumb, and not his knuckles, should touch his chest when
the oar comes home, and should be done _before_, and not after, he has
dropped his handle to elevate the blade from the water.
If a crew feather much under water, it is a good plan to seat them in a
row on a bench, and give each man a stick to handle as an oar. Then make
them very slowly follow the actions of the coach, or a fugleman. 1.
Hands up to the chest, root of thumb touching chest. 2. Drop the hands.
3. Turn them (as for feather) sharply. 4. Shoot them out, &c.
Having got them to perform each motion slowly and distinctly, then
gradually accelerate the actions, until they are done as an entirety,
with rapidity and _in proper consecution_. The desideratum is to ensure
motion No. 3 being performed in its due order, and _not before_ No. 2.
Five minutes' drill of this sort daily before the rowing, for a week or
two, will do much to cure feather under water even with hardened
sinners.
_Swing across the boat._--This is an insidious fault. The oarsman sits
square, while his oar-handle moves in an arc of a circle. He has an
instinctive tendency to endeavour to keep his chest square to his oar
during the revolution of the latter. A No. 7 who has to take time from
the stroke by the side of him is more prone than others to fall into
this fault. The answer is, let the arms follow the action of the oar,
and give way to it, and endeavour to keep the body straight and square.
Keep the head well away from the oar, and its bias will tend to balance
the swing.
_Bending the arms_ prematurely is a common fault. Sometimes even
high-class oars fall into it after a time. Tiros are prone to it,
because they at first instinctively endeavour to work with arms rather
than with body. Older oars adopt the trick in the endeavour to catch
the water sharply at the beginning. Of course they lose power by doing
so; but they do not realise their loss, because, feeling a greater
strain on their arms, they imagine that they must therefore be doing
more work.
Lessons in a tub-gig are the best remedies for this fault.
'Paddling' is an art which is of much importance in order to bring a
crew to perfection, and at the same time it is too often done in a
slovenly manner compared with hard rowing.
The writer admits that his own views as to how paddling should be
performed differ somewhat from those of sundry good judges and
successful coaches. Some of these are of opinion that paddling should
consist of rowing gently, comparatively speaking, with less force and
catch at the beginning of the stroke and with less reach than when
rowing hard, but with blade always covered to regulation depth. When the
order is given to 'Row,' then the full length should be attained and the
full 'catch' administered.
The writer's own version of paddling differs as follows. He is of
opinion that the difference between paddling and rowing should be
produced by working with a 'light'--only partially covered--blade when
paddling. The effect of this is to ease the whole work of the stroke;
but at the same time the swing, reach, and catch should be just the same
as if the blade were covered. Then, when the order comes to 'Row,' all
the oarsman has to do is so to govern his blade that he now immerses the
whole of it, and at the same time to increase his force to the amount
necessary to row the stroke of the full blade throughout the required
time.
Those good judges who differ from him as aforesaid base their objections
to his method chiefly on the ground that it requires rather a higher
standard of watermanship to enable an oarsman so to govern his blade
that he can immerse it more or less at will, and yet maintain the same
outward action of body, only with more or less force employed, according
to amount of blade immersed.
The writer admits that his process does entail the acquisition of a
somewhat higher standard of watermanship than the other system. But he
is none the less of opinion that this admission should not be accepted
as a ground for teaching the other style.
In the first place, it would seem to him better to try to raise the
standard of watermanship to the system than to lower the system to meet
the requirements of inferior skill. In the second, there seems to be
even greater drawbacks to the system preferred by his friends who differ
from him. For instance, under the alternative system the oarsman is
taught to _alter_ his style of body when paddling, but to maintain a
uniform depth of blade. He is taught to apply less sharpness of catch,
and less reach forward. To do so may tend to take the edge off catch,
and to shorten reach, when hard rowing has to be recommenced.
It is plain that paddling cannot be all round the same as rowing; there
must be an alternative prescribed. The writer says, in effect: 'Alter
only the blade (and so the amount of force required), and maintain
outward action of body as before.'
Those who take the other view say, in effect: 'Maintain the same blade,
and alter the action of the body.'
It must be admitted that those who differ from the writer are entitled,
from their own performances as oarsmen and coaches, to every possible
respect; and the writer, while failing to agree with them, hesitates to
assert that for that reason he must be right and they wrong.
One further reason in favour of paddling with a light blade may be
added. When an oarsman is exhausted in a race, it is of supreme
importance that, though unable to do his full share of work, he should
not mar the swing and style of the rest. Now if such an oarsman, when
nature fails him, can row lighter and so ease his toil, he can maintain
swing and style with the rest. But if, on the other hand, he keeps his
blade covered to the full, and seeks relief by rowing shorter and with
less dash, he alters his style and tends to spoil the uniformity of the
crew.
Watermanship is a quality which can hardly be coached; it may,
therefore, seem out of place to deal with it under the head of coaching.
Yet in one sense it pertains to coaching, because a mentor takes into
calculation the capacity of an oarsman for exercising watermanship when
making a selection of a crew.
Watermanship, as a technical term, may be said to consist in adapting
oneself to circumstances and exigencies during the progress of a boat. A
good waterman keeps time with facility, a bad one only after much
painstaking--if at all. A good waterman adapts himself to every roll of
the boat, sits tight to his seat, anticipates an incipient roll, and
rights the craft so far as he can by altering his centre of gravity
while yet plying his oar. A bad waterman is more or less helpless when a
boat is off its keel, or when he encounters rough water. So long as the
boat is level, he may be able to do even more work than the good
waterman, but when the boat rolls he cannot help himself, still less can
he right the ship and so help others to work, as can the good waterman.
Good watermen can jump into a racing boat and sit her off-hand; bad
watermen will be unsteady in a keelless boat even after days of
practice.
One or two good watermen are the making of a crew, especially when time
is short for practice. They will raise the standard of rowing of all
their colleagues, simply by keeping the balance of the boat. Sculling
and pair-oar practice tend to teach watermanship. They induce a man to
make use of his own back and beam in order to keep the boat on an even
keel. We do not for this reason say that every tiro should be put to
take lessons of watermanship in sculling-boats and light pairs: far from
it. He will be likely in such craft to contract feather under water, and
possibly screwing, in the efforts to obtain work on an even keel, after
his own uneven action has conduced to rolling.
University men produce far fewer good watermen than the tideway clubs,
and with good reason. The career on the river at Oxford or Cambridge is
brief, and many a man goes out of residence while he is only on the
threshold of aquatic science, both in practice and theory; although, on
account of his big frame, he may have been taught artificially to ply an
oar, and with good effect, in a practised eight. Watermanship, like
skating, cannot be acquired in a day, and the younger a man takes to
aquatics the more likely is he to acquire it. There is hardly a bad
waterman to be seen as a rule in a grand challenge crew of London R.C.
or Thames R.C. men. Among University oars, watermanship is oftenest
found in those who have rowed as schoolboys.
[Illustration: A SCRATCH EIGHT ('PEAL OF BELLS').]
To coaches generally of the present and of future generations we may say
that there is nothing like having a tenacity of purpose, and declining
to listen to the shoals of excuses which pupils are inclined to propound
in order to explain their shortcomings. There should be no such thing
as 'I can't' from a pupil. On the other hand, the coach should do his
best to render the excuse untenable by ensuring proper 'work' at each
thwart. A coach should not be carried away by every whisper of criticism
by outsiders; and yet at the same time he should realise as said at the
beginning of this chapter, that, however able he may be, he has a
natural tendency to become blind to faults which are being daily
perpetrated under his nose--the more so if he has been specially of late
devoting his attention to some different class of fault in his men. For
this reason he should not decline to listen to suggestions from mentors
who otherwise may be his inferiors in the art, and to give them all
attention before he decides how to deal with them.
In dealing with the selection of men for a crew he has to consider
various points. He has to calculate for what seats such and such an
oarsman will be available, as regards weight and capacity generally for
the seat. He has to bear in mind the date of the race for which he is
preparing his men; many an oarsman may be admittedly unfit for a seat if
the race were rowed to-morrow, and yet he may show promise of being fit
for it six months hence. A may be better than B to-day; but A may be an
old stager hardened in certain faults, and of whom no hope can now be
entertained that he will suddenly reform. B may be as green as a
gooseberry, and yet the recollection of what he was two or three weeks
ago, compared to what he is now, may warrant the assumption that by the
day of the race, some time hence, B will have become the better man of
the two.
A coach who takes a crew in hand halfway through their preparation
should be prepared to hear evidence as to what was the standard of merit
of certain men some time back, compared with their present form;
otherwise he may delude himself as to the relative merits and prospects
of the material which he has to mould into shape.
Just as orators are said to learn at the expense of their audience, so
coaches do undoubtedly learn much at the expense of the crews which they
manage. Many a coach will agree that he has often felt in later years
that, if he had his time over again with this or that oarsman or crew,
he would now form a different judgment from what he formerly did.
In concluding this chapter we cannot do better than extract from Dr.
Warre's treatise on Athletics certain aphorisms for the benefit of
coaches, which he has tersely compiled under the head of 'Notes on
Coaching':
NOTES ON COACHING.
In teaching a crew you have to deal with--
A. Crew collectively.
B. Crew individually.
A. _Collective._
1. _Time._--_a._ Oars in and out together. _b._ Feather, same
height; keep it down. _c._ Stroke, same depth; cover the blades,
but not above the blue.
2. _Swing._--_a._ Bodies forward and back together. _b._ Sliders
together. _c._ Eyes in the boat.
3. _Work._--_a._ Beginning--together, sharp, hard. _b._ Turns of
the wrist--on and off of the feather, sharp, but not too soon.
_c._ Rise of the hands--sharp, just before stroke begins. _d._
Drop of the hands--sharp, just after it ends.
_General Exhortations._--'Time!' 'Beginning!' 'Smite!' 'Keep it
long!' and the like--to be given at the right moment, not used
as mere parrot cries.
B. _Individual._
1. Faults of position. 2. Faults of movement.
N.B.--These concern body, hands, arms, legs, and sometimes head
and neck.
1. Point out when you easy, or when you come in, or best of all,
in a gig. Show as well as say what is wrong and what is right.
N.B.--Mind you are right. _Decipit exemplar vitiis imitabile._
2. To be pointed out during the row and corrected. Apply the
principles taught in 'E. W.'s' paper on the stroke, beginning
with bow and working to stroke, interposing exhortations (A) at
the proper time.
N.B.--Never hammer at any one individual. If one or two
admonitions don't bring him right, wait a bit and then try
again. For coaching purposes, not too fast a stroke and not too
slow. About thirty per minute is right. Before you start, see
that your men have got their stretchers right and are sitting
straight to their work.
He teaches best who, while he is teaching, remembers that he has
much to learn.
[Illustration: MEDMENHAM ABBEY.]
CHAPTER V.
THE CAPTAIN.
The captain of a boat club is the most important member of it, from a
practical point of view. In some clubs, as with the Universities, he is
nominally as well as practically supreme--is president as well as
captain. In clubs on the Thames tideway, such as Leander, London,
Thames, and as in the Kingston club higher up river, there is a
president elected as the titular head of the club, but that functionary
is chiefly ornamental, to add dignity to the society, and to instil
sobriety into its councils. Such a president is usually some old oarsman
of renown, long ago retired from active service, one whose name carries
weight and influence, but who has neither time nor inclination to
interfere with the oarsmanship of the members.
It is the captain who can make or mar a club. He is the general officer
in command of the forces, while the president (when such an extra
official exists) is more of a field-marshal enjoying _otium cum
dignitate_ at home. The qualifications upon which a captain is, or
should be, selected by his club are, in the first place, personal merit
as an oarsman and knowledge of his craft; in the second, a due
seniority, so that he may have proper influence, both socially and in an
aquatic sense, over those whom he is appointed to command; thirdly, tact
and common sense.
Deficiency in either one of these desiderata is often fatal to a
captain's chances of success in his office. If he is a bad oar, and
lacking in practical knowledge compared with those under him, it will
little avail him to be a person of senior standing in the crews and of
social position. He will fail to carry with him that prestige and
confidence which should be the attribute of all commanders who expect to
lead men to victory. If, on the other hand, he is a good oar, even the
best of his club, and yet is a fledgling in age, he will find it
difficult to maintain his command over sundry jealous seniors, and will,
more than all, require the third requisite of tact, which is less liable
to be found in a mere lad than in a man of the world who has well passed
his majority.
A captain should be self-reliant without being obstinate; he should be
good-tempered but not facile; he should be firm but not tyrannical,
energetic but not a busybody. A captain has usually a host of
counsellors, and he too well realises the fallacy of the adage that in a
multitude of counsels there is wisdom. If he were to pay attention to
all the advice offered to him he would never be able to have a mind of
his own. And yet he will do well not to run to the opposite extreme, nor
to decline to listen to anyone who ventures to offer him a suggestion.
If he is captain of a University crew he will find his bed anything but
one of roses. The eyes of the sporting world are upon him from the
commencement of Lent term. Daily he will receive letters from
individuals of whom he has never before heard, offering him advice and
criticising his line of action. Many of his correspondents will be
anonymous, and too many of them splenetic. He must not be surprised to
see himself anonymously attacked in print for the selections which he is
making for a crew to represent his club. He will be accused of
partiality if he selects some man of his own college in preference to an
out-college man. He will find himself abused if he decides to take an
important oar in his own hands, such as stroke or No. 7. He will be
inundated with speculative appeals from vendors of commodities who hope
for gratuitous advertisement of their wares. One of them will send him a
nondescript garment, and will assure him that if he will allow his crew
to row in dress of that build he and they shall be robed gratis in it,
and be assured of victory. Quack medicines will be proffered him, and
photographers will pester him and his crew daily with requests to stand
for an hour in a nor'-easter for their portraits.
Within the circle of his own club matters will not always run smoothly.
Sometimes he finds himself in the unpleasant position of having, after
due consideration and counsel, to dispense with the services of some old
brother blue who has fallen off from his quondam form, or who, though
good enough among an inferior crew of a preceding year, is not up to par
compared with new oarsmen of merit who have come to the fore since the
last spring.
Nevertheless, with all these drawbacks to office, a University president
or captain of a college has perhaps an easier task in managing his crew
than a captain of an elective club on the Thames that is preparing for
Henley or some similar contest. In college life the brevity of career
gives a special standing and prestige to seniority, and the president of
a U.B.C. is not likely to be a very junior man. _Esprit de corps_ does
much to keep College and University crews together, and there is less
likelihood of mutiny in such clubs than in those which are purely
elective, and which compete with each other for securing the best
oarsmen of the day. A malcontent college oar cannot throw himself, even
if he will, into the arms of another college; still less can a
dissatisfied candidate for one shade of blue 'rat' and desert to the
enemy. But in tideway and other clubs on the Thames there is such a
brisk competition for good oarsmen that a man who finds he is likely to
lose his chance of selection in one club has opportunities for obtaining
distinction under some rival flag, and very possibly he already belongs
to more than one such club, and can put his services up to auction as it
were. If he finds that he will be relegated to some comparatively
unimportant seat in the club which has claims of longest standing upon
him, he may, if he is unpatriotic and cantankerous, look out in some
other club for a berth of greater distinction. Such men are not
uncommon, and are thorns in the side of any captain. They tax his sixth
sense of tact more than anything: if he gives way to them, he risks
spoiling the arrangement of his crew; if he stands firm, he may send a
valuable man over to the enemy. On the other hand, it must be said that
many rival captains would decline to accept the services of a deserter
of this sort, and would feel that if such an one would not be true to
one flag, he could not be safely trusted for long to row under another.
Beside this sort of malcontent, whose ambition is to be _aut Cæsar aut
nullus_, the captain has to contend with obstructives of other classes.
There is the habitual grumbler, who is never happy unless he has a
grievance. To-day he cannot row properly because the boat is always down
on his oar. Yesterday he was complaining that his rowlock was too high,
and he had leave to lower it accordingly. He may not be really
bad-tempered, nor mutinous; even his growls have a _triste bonhomie_
about them; in one sense he is a sort of acquisition to the social
element of the crew, for his grumblings make him a butt for jokes and
rallies. But when this system of grumbling goes beyond a certain point
it sorely tries a captain's patience.
Another sort of incubus is the old hand, who has never risen beyond
mediocrity, who has plenty of faults, but who can be relied upon for a
certain amount of honest work, and who fills a place better than some
very backward oarsman. The old stager is case-hardened in his crimes;
they are second nature to him, and, in spite of coaching, still he
maunders on in the same old style, with the same set faults. He has a
time-honoured screw, a dog's-eared elbow, and yet he possesses what many
of the better-finished oarsmen do not--watermanship--and can keep on at
work in a rolling boat when many neater oarsmen are all abroad if the
ship gets off her even keel. Not to coach his too obvious faults may
make visitors fancy that the old screw is a pattern fugleman to be
copied for style; and yet to spend objurgation on one so stiff-necked is
disheartening waste of wind.
[Illustration: PROSE.]
Discipline is all-important in a crew, and it usually requires tact to
maintain it. If the captain is a triton among minnows, he can better
afford to hector; but, as a rule, he runs the risk of mutiny, or at
least of producing sulkiness, if he treats his crew as if they were
galley-slaves. If he is in the boat, working with them, sharing their
toils and privations, his task becomes easier on this score; for the
crew realise that, however irksome the orders for the day may be, they
are felt just as much by the commander as by the rank and file. If a
member of the crew openly defies a captain, the bad example is too
dangerous to be tolerated. To expel a mutineer may ruin the chance of
victory for an impending race, but it will be best for the club in the
long run, and will be likely to save many a defeat.
The writer has in mind two such incidents which occurred to himself at
different times while officiating as captain of a club. In each case the
mutineer was the stroke, and the _spes gregis_. He resented being told
to row slower, or faster, as the case might be, and presently flatly
declined to be dictated to. In each case the boat was instantly ordered
ashore, and the grumbler was asked to step out. His place was filled by
some emergency man, he was left ashore, and was told at the end of the
day that the captain regretted to be obliged to dispense with his
services. In each case the rest of the crew buttonholed their late
stroke, and put the screw upon him to beg pardon, and with success. The
one stroke was reinstated at his old post; the other was also put back
to the boat, but at No. 6. In both cases mutiny was stamped out once and
for all. Of these two men it may be said that one eventually rose to be
stroke of a winning University eight, and the other of a winning Grand
Challenge crew. In each case they were great personal friends of the
captain, and there was no interruption of social relations through the
peremptory line of conduct pursued. Many old fellow-oarsmen of the
writer will doubtless recognise these incidents, in which names are
naturally omitted.
Punctuality is an important detail of discipline in a crew. It is a good
system to order a fine to be levied by the secretary upon anyone who
exceeds a certain limit of grace from the hour fixed for practice. It is
better that the secretary or treasurer should levy it than the captain,
because thereby the captain in this detail places himself under the
subordinate officer's jurisdiction, and is himself fined if he is late.
He can do this without loss of dignity, and in fact adds to his
influence by submitting as a matter of course to the general regulation.
It spoils the discipline of a crew if a captain takes French leave for
himself, and keeps his men dancing attendance upon him, and yet rates
them when one of them similarly delays the practice.
[Illustration: EMBARKING.]
In making up a crew a captain is often in an invidious position. It is
said by cricketers that the danger of having a leading bowler for
captain of an eleven is that he is often judicially blind as to the
right moment for taking himself off. Similarly, for a stroke to be
captain, or rather for a likely candidate for strokeship to be captain,
may be productive of misunderstandings and mischief to the crew. In old
days stroke and captain were synonyms. The 'stroke' was elected by the
club. He was supposed to be the best all-round oar, and as such to be
capable of setting the best stroke to the crew. His office attached
itself to his seat. In sundry old college records of rowing we find the
expression 'a meeting of strokes,' where in modern times we should speak
of a 'captains' meeting.' The U.B.C.'s departed from this tradition more
than forty years ago. Since then captains have been found at all
thwarts, even including that of the coxswain. Most college clubs
followed the U.B.C. principle forthwith, but not all so. We can recall
an incident to the contrary. At Queen's College, Oxon, there remained a
written rule that stroke should be captain as late as about 1862. In or
about that year a Mr. Godfrey was rowing stroke of the Queen's eight in
the bumping races, and was _ex-officio_ captain. He had previously
stroked the Queen's torpid, and with good success. One night during the
summer races Queen's got bumped (or failed to effect a bump). Some of
the crew laid the blame of their failure upon their stroke, for having
rowed, as they alleged, too rapid a stroke. A college meeting had to be
called, and a new stroke to be 'elected,' before a change could be made
in the order of the boat for the next night's race! Mr. Godfrey was
asked to resign his seat as stroke, which of course he did, and took the
seat of No. 6. His successor was thus elected captain. Much sympathy for
Mr. Godfrey's unfortunate statutory deposition from command was openly
expressed by out-college oarsmen, and the result was before long that a
change was made in the code of the Queen's College Boat Club, and its
adaptation to that of the more advanced rules which found favour with
the majority of the U.B.C.
However, just as a bowler at cricket is prone to be blind to his own
weaknesses, and to be imbued with ambition to do too much with his own
hands at moments when they have lost their cunning, so when a captain
has claims, not superlative, to the after-thwart, there is always some
danger lest his eagerness to do all he can may blind him as to the best
choice for that seat. In some cases, as with (of late) Messrs. West and
Pitman, respectively strokes and presidents of their U.B.C'.s, or in the
cases of such oarsmen as Messrs. W. Hoare, W. R. Griffiths, M. Brown, J.
H. D. Goldie, R. Lesley, H. Rhodes, &c., all of whom had won their spurs
as first-class strokes before they were elected to the presidency, the
coincidence of stroke and captain has done no harm and has found the
best man in the right place. Nevertheless, it is advisable to caution
all captains on this score, and to suggest to them that, when they find
themselves sharing a candidature for an important seat, they will do
well to ask the advice of some impartial mentor, and abide by it.
At Eton the traditional law of identity of stroke and captain held good,
with natural Etonian conservatism, until a date even later than that of
the previously related anecdote of Queen's College. So far as we can
recollect, the first instance in which an Eton eight was not stroked by
its captain was in 1864. In that year Mr. (now Colonel) Seymour Corkran
was captain of Eton. He was a sort of pocket Hercules, of great breadth
and weight, scaling close upon 13 st. Eton crews were not then so heavy
as in these days, and the wondrous old Eton 'Mat-Taylor' boat, which
then was still in her prime, would not satisfactorily carry so heavy a
weight in the stern. Mr. Corkran placed himself at No. 7, and installed
a light-weight, Mr. Mossop, at stroke. In this year Eton won the Ladies'
Plate for the first time, University College leaving them to walk over
for it, after University had had a severe losing race earlier in the day
against the Kingston Rowing Club for the final heat of the Grand
Challenge.
The duties of a captain are not confined to the mere selection of his
racing crew for the moment, nor to the preservation of order and
_régime_ in the matter of training. If he is to do his duty by the club,
he should be on duty pretty well all through the season. He should keep
his eyes open to note any raw oarsman who shows signs of talent, and
mark him to be tried and coached into form hereafter. A captain of an
elective club can do much to maintain the credit of his flag by looking
up suitable recruits who have not yet joined a leading club, and by
inducing them to put themselves under his care, and to submit themselves
for election. One of the best oars that ever rowed at Henley, who became
an amateur champion (Mr. W. Long), was secured for the L.R.C. by the
prompt energy of the then captain of that club, on the occasion of Mr.
Long's _début_ at Henley Regatta. On that occasion he came from Ipswich,
to row for the pairs, with a partner much inferior to himself. They did
not win, but Mr. Long's hitherto unknown merits were at once seen, and
his enlistment in the L.R.C. ranks had very much to do with the long
series of victories, especially in Stewards' Cup and other four-oar
races, which for some seasons afterwards attended the fortunes of the
L.R.C.
_Per contra_, to show how a good oarsman may be going begging, in 1867
Mr. F. Gulston was not asked to row either by London or Kingston; he
went to Paris to row in a pair-oar, and still the L.R.C. overlooked him,
though he was a member of their club, and though the L.R.C. were
entered for the international regatta on the Seine. Mr. Gulston was
nearly, probably quite, as good an oarsman then as in his very best
days; but his light, though not hid under a bushel, was openly
disregarded by his club. Through the minor regattas of the summer he
took refuge with an 'Oscillators' crew, and shoved three inferior men
behind along at such a pace that next season it was impossible to ignore
him. He became stroke of the L.R.C. Grand Challenge crew in 1868, and
won the prize easily.
A president of a U.B.C. has not the responsibility of looking after
recruits for his club. He has only to see that he does not overlook the
merits of those who are in it, among the hundreds of young oarsmen who
come out each season in the torpids, lower divisions, and college
eights. The 'trial eights' of the winter term have to be made up by him.
Each captain of a college crew is requested to send in the names of ten
or more candidates for these trials; but it is not safe for a president
to rely entirely upon the lists so furnished to him. He is morally bound
to give a fair trial to all the candidates who are thus officially
submitted to his notice; but he ought also on his own account to have
taken stock during the summer races of the promising men of each college
crew. The opinions of college captains as to who are likely to make the
best candidates for University rowing must not always be relied upon. It
has often happened that better men have been omitted than those whose
names have been sent in to be tried.
We have known a watchful president ask of a college captain to this
effect:
'What has become of the man who rowed No. 6 in your torpid?'
'He played cricket all the summer, and did not row in the summer
eights.'
'You have not sent in his name?'
'No, I thought him too backward; he has never been in a light boat in
his life, and he only began to row last October when he came up as a
freshman.'
'Can I see him to-morrow and try him?' says the president; and
eventually this cricketer of the torpids is hammered into shape, and
subsequently wears a double blue.
The above is no exaggerated picture of what has been known to result
from careful supervision by a president of the college rowing which
comes under his notice. In 1862 Messrs. Jacobson and Wynne rowed in the
Oxford crew; the writer believes, from the best of his recollection,
that neither of these gentlemen was named in the two primary picked
choices which had been sent in to represent Christ Church in the trial
eights. But the then president, Mr. George Morrison, had observed them
when they were rowing for their college earlier in the season, and took
note of them as two strong men, who might be converted by coaching into
University oars; and he proved to be correct.
A captain of a large club usually has his hands so full of duties
connected with representative or picked crews that he can hardly be
expected to find much time for systematically coaching juniors. This
preliminary work he is obliged to depute to subordinates. In a London
club there is usually a sort of subaltern, or sometimes an ex-captain,
who undertakes to instruct junior crews or those who are competing for
the Thames Cup at Henley. In a college club it is a common practice to
elect a 'captain of torpid,' who is usually some one who has rowed in
the college eight, but who has not the physique to compete for a seat in
the University crew. At Cambridge a large college club puts on so many
crews for the bumping races that it is necessary to find separate
coaches for nearly each boat. Even when this occurs, a really energetic
captain will endeavour to spare a day now and then to supervise the
efforts of his subalterns. At Oxford it is, or used to be, customary for
the five committee men of the O.U.B.C. to make a point of coaching in
turn, when asked, those college eights which had no 'blue,' nor old
oarsmen of experience, to instruct them. All these arrangements tend to
raise the standard of rowing in various colleges, and so in the U.B.C.
generally.
The time comes when a captain retires from office, but it is quite
possible that he may find time to row again for his flag after he has
laid down his bâton. In his new _rôle_ he can do, in another line, quite
as much to preserve discipline as when he held the office in his own
person. He should be the foremost to set an example of subordination and
of strict observance of regulations and of training. Nothing does more
to strengthen the hands of a new captain than the spectacle of his late
chief serving loyally under him; and, on the other hand, nothing does
more to weaken the new ruler's authority than the example of an
ex-captain self-sufficient and too proud to acknowledge the sway of his
successor. The ex-captain does not lose caste by strict subordination;
unless his successor is a man devoid of tact, he will freely take his
predecessor into his counsels; and, on the other hand, the predecessor
should be careful not to support anarchy by interfering until he is
asked to advise. We have known the entire _morale_ of a college crew
upset because the ex-captain, a University oar, has taken French leave
and ordered an extra half-glass of beer for himself (beyond the
statutory allowance), without observing the formal etiquette of first
asking the leave of his successor, whose standing was only that of
college-eight oarsmanship. Such a proceeding at once made it more
difficult than ever for the new captain to preserve discipline and
strict attention to training orders among the thirsty souls with whom he
had to deal. In some college boat clubs there is a rule that the captain
must be resident in college. The object of this is to prevent the
archives and trophies of the boat club, which are in custody of the
captain, from passing outside the college gates, and so possibly getting
astray in lodgings. Such a rule as this naturally prevents many a senior
oarsman from holding the office (for after a certain standing
undergraduates migrate from college walls to lodgings). In such cases
those members of the college club who belong to the University eight
constantly find themselves under the formal authority of one who does
not pretend to equal their skill or knowledge of aquatics. As a rule
these retired generals work harmoniously with their inferior but
commanding in-college oarsman; but cases do occur where want of tact on
the part of one or both parties has a very mischievous effect, and
causes the club to take a lower place on the race-charts than it might
have attained had all parties co-operated loyally for the support of the
flag.
The position of captain of a club, whether rowing, cricket, or
athletics, is a very useful school for any young man, if he uses his
opportunity aright. It teaches him to be self-reliant; to avoid
vacillation on the one hand and obstinacy on the other; to exercise tact
and forbearance, and to set a good example on his own part of observance
of standing orders. All these lessons serve him well in after-life. No
man is the worse, when fighting the battle of the world, for having
learnt both how to obey orders implicitly and also how to govern others
with firmness and tact. He will look back to many a decision which he
came to, and will perhaps be able to console himself by reflecting that
at the time he acted according to the best of his lights; but none the
less he will perceive that he was then in error, and that as he sees
more of aquatics, or of any other branch of sport, he finds that he is
only beginning to learn the best of it when the time comes for him to
take his departure from the scene of actual conflict. If he will apply
the analogy to his career in life, whatever that may be, he will prosper
therein all the more by reason of the practical lessons which he gained
when his arena was purely athletic.
[Illustration: BISHAM COURT REACH.]
CHAPTER VI.
THE COXSWAIN AND STEERING.
The 'cock-swain' wins his place chiefly on account of his weight,
provided that he can show a reasonable amount of nerve and skill of
hand. A coxswain is seldom a very practical oarsman, although there have
been special exceptions to this rule, e.g. in the case of T. H.
Marshall, of Exeter, Arthur Shadwell, of Oriel, and a few others. But if
he has been any length of time at his trade he very soon picks up a very
considerable theoretical knowledge of what rowing should be, and is able
to do very signal service in the matter of instructing the men whom he
pilots. When a youth begins to handle the rudder-lines there is often
some considerable difficulty in inducing him to open his mouth to give
orders of any sort. Even such biddings as to tell one side of oars to
hold her, or another to row or to back-water, come at first falteringly
from his lips. It is but natural that he should feel his own physical
inferiority to the men whom he is for the moment required to order about
so peremptorily, and diffidence at first tends to make him dumb. But he
soon picks up his _rôle_ when he listens to the audacious orders and
objurgations of rival pilots, and he is pleased to find that the
qualities of what he might modestly consider to be impudence and
arrogance are the very things which are most required of him, and for
the display of which he earns commendation.
Having once found his tongue, he soon learns to use it. When there is a
coach in attendance upon the crew, the pilot is not called upon to
animadvert on any failings of oarsmen; but when the coach is absent the
coxswain is bound to say something, and, if he has his wits about him,
he soon picks up enough to make his remarks more or less to the purpose.
The easiest detail on which he offers an opinion is that of time of
oars. At first he feels guilty of 'cheek' in singing out to some oarsman
of good standing that he is out of time. He feels as if he should hardly
be surprised at a retort not to attempt to teach his grandmother; but,
on the contrary, the admonition is meekly accepted, and the pilot begins
at once to gain confidence in himself. Daily he picks up more and more
theoretical knowledge; he notes what a coach may say of this or that
man's faults, and he soon begins to see when certain admonitions are
required. At least he can play the parrot, and can echo the coach's
remarks when the mentor is absent, and before long he will have picked
up enough to be able to discern when such a reproof is relevant and when
it is not. In his spare time he often paddles a boat about on his own
account, and this practice materially assists him in understanding the
doctrines which he has to preach. As a rule, coxswains row in very good
form, when they row at all; and before their career closes many of them,
though they have never rowed in a race, can teach much more of the
science of oarsmanship than many a winning oar of a University race or
of a Grand Challenge Cup contest.
A coxswain is the lightest item in the crew, but unless he sits properly
he can do much harm in disturbing the balance of a light boat. He should
sit with a straight back; if he slouches, he has not the necessary play
of the loins to adapt himself to a roll of the boat. He should incline
just a trifle forward; the spring of the boat at each stroke will swing
him forward slightly, and he will recoil to an equal extent on the
recovery. His legs should be crossed under him, like a tailor on a
shop-board, with the outside of each instep resting on the floor of the
boat. He should hold his rudder-lines just tight enough to feel the
rudder. If he hangs too much weight upon them, he may jam the tiller
upon the pin on which it revolves, so that, when the rudder has been put
on and then taken off, the helm does not instantly swing back to the
exact _status quo ante_; and in that case the calculation as to course
may be disturbed, and a counter pull from the other line become
necessary, in order to rectify the course.
A coxswain will do best to rest his hand lightly on either gunwale, just
opposite to his hips. He should give the lines a turn round his palms,
to steady the hold on them. Many coxswains tie a loop at the required
distance, and slip the thumb through it; but such a loop should not be
knotted too tight, for when rudder-lines get wet they shrink; so that a
loop which was properly adjusted when the line was dry will be too far
behind in event of the strings becoming soaked.
When a coxswain desires to set a crew in motion, the usual formula is to
tell the men to 'get forward,' then to ask if they are 'ready,' and then
to say 'go,' 'row,' or 'paddle,' as the case may be. When he wishes to
stop the rowing, without otherwise to check the pace of the boat, the
freshwater formula is 'easy all,' at which command the oars are laid
flat on the water. In the navy the equivalent term is 'way enough.'
'Easy all' should be commanded at the beginning, or at latest at the
middle, of a stroke, otherwise it is difficult for the men to stop all
together and to avoid a half-commencement of the next stroke.
If a boat has to be suddenly checked and her way stopped, the order is
'Hold her all.' The blades are then slightly inclined towards the bow of
the boat, causing them to bury in the water, and at the same time not to
present a square surface to back-water. The handle of the oar should
then be elevated, and more and more so as the decreasing way enables
each oarsman to offer more surface resistance to the water. So soon as
the way of the boat has been sufficiently checked, she can be backed or
turned, according to what may be necessary in the situation.
In turning a long racing-boat care should be taken to do so gently,
otherwise she may be strained. If there is plenty of room, she can be
turned by one side of oars 'holding' her, while bow, and afterwards No.
3 also, paddle her gently round. If there is not room for a wide turn,
then stroke and No. 6 should back water gently, against bow, &c.
paddling.
A coxswain, when he first begins his trade, is pleased to find how
obedient his craft is to the touch of his hand; he pulls one string and
her head turns that way; he takes a tug at the other line, and she
reverses her direction. The ease with which he can by main force bring
her, somehow or other, to the side of the river on which he desires to
be tends at first to make him overlook how much extra distance he
unnecessarily covers by rough-and-ready hauling at the lines.
'Argonaut'[7] very lucidly uses the expression 'a boat should be
_coaxed_ by its rudder,' a maxim which all pilots will do well to make a
cardinal point in their creed.
[7] Mr. E. D. Brickwood.
When a boat is once pointing in a required direction, and her true
course is for the moment a straight one, the pilot should note some
landmark, and endeavour to regulate his bows by aid of it, keeping the
mark dead ahead, or so much to the right or to the left as occasion may
require. In so doing he should feel his lines, and, so to speak,
'balance' his bows on his _point d'appui_. His action should be somewhat
analogous to what the play of his hand would be if he were attempting
to carry a stick end upwards on the tip of his finger. He would quickly
but gently anticipate the declination denoted by each wavering motion of
the stick, checking each such deviation the moment it is felt. In like
manner when steering he should, as it were, 'hold' his bows on to his
steering point, regulating his boat by gentle and timely touches; if he
allows a wide deviation to occur, before he begins to correct his
course, he has then a wide _détour_ to make before he can regain his
lost position. All this means waste of distance and of rowing energy on
the part of the crew.
In steering by a distant landmark the coxswain must bear in mind that
the parallax of the distant mark increases as he nears it; so that what
may point a true course to him, for all intents and purposes, when it is
half a mile away, may lead him too much to one side or other if he
clings to it too long without observing its altered bearing upon his
desired direction.
When a coxswain has steered a course more than once he begins to know
his landmarks and their bearing upon each part of the course. There is
less strain upon his mind, and he becomes able to observe greater
accuracy. There is nothing like having the 'eye well in' for any scene
of action. A man plays relatively better upon a billiard-table or
lawn-tennis ground to which he is well accustomed than on one to which
he is a stranger; and a jockey rides a horse all the better for having
crossed him before the day of a race. However good a coxswain may be, he
will steer a course more accurately, on the average, in proportion as he
knows it more or less mechanically.
There is also a good deal in knowing the boat which has to be steered.
No two ships steer exactly alike. Some come round more easily than
others; some fetch up into the wind more freely than others. In modern
times it has been a common practice for builders to affix a movable
'fin' of metal to the bottom of a racing eight or four, under the after
canvas, which fin can be taken out or fixed in at option. In a cross
wind this helps to steady the track of a boat; but, unless wind is
strong and is abeam for a good moiety of the distance, the draw of the
water all the way occasioned by the fin costs more than the extra drag
of rudder which it obviates for just one part of the course.
In steering round a corner a coxswain should bear in mind that he must
not expect to see his boat pointing in the direction to which he desires
to make. His boat is a tangent to a curve, the curve being the shore.
His bows will be pointing to the shore which he is avoiding. It is the
position of his midship to the shore which he is rounding that he should
especially note. The boat should be brought round as gradually as the
severity of the wave will allow. If the curve is very sharp, like the
corners of the 'Gut' at Oxford, or 'Grassy' or Ditton corners at
Cambridge, the inside oars should be told to row light for a stroke or
two. It will ease their labour, and also that of the oars on the other
side.
When there is a stiff beam wind the bows of a racing craft tend to bear
up into the wind's eye. The vessel is making leeway all the time;
therefore if the coxswain on such an occasion steers by a landmark which
would guide him were the water calm, he will before long find himself
much to leeward of where he should be. In order to maintain his desired
course he should humour his boat, and allow her bow to hold up somewhat
into the wind (to windward of the landmark which otherwise would be
guiding him). To what extent he should do so he must judge for himself,
according to circumstances and to his own knowledge of the leeward
propensities of his boat. To lay down a hard-and-fast rule on this point
would be as much out of place as to attempt to frame a scale of
allowance which a Wimbledon rifleman ought to make for mirage or
cross-wind, when taking aim at a distant bull's-eye.
Generally speaking a coxswain should hug the shore when going against
tide or stream, and should keep in mid-stream when going with it.
(Mid-stream does not necessarily imply mid-river.) Over the Henley
course, until 1886, a coxswain on the Berks side used to make for the
shelter of the bank below Poplar Point, where the stream ran with less
force. The alteration (for good) of the Henley course which was
inaugurated in 1886 has put an end to this, and both racing crews now
take a mid-stream course. The course is to all intents and purposes
straight, and yet it will not do to keep the bows fixed on one point
from start to finish. There is just a fraction of curve to the left in
it, but so slight that one finger's touch of a line will deflect a boat
to the full extent required. The church tower offers a landmark by which
all pilots can steer, keeping it more or less to the right hand of the
bows, and allowing for the increase of its parallax as the boat nears
her goal.
Over the Putney water the best course has changed considerably during
the writer's personal recollections. Twenty years ago the point entering
to Horse Reach, and opposite to Chiswick Church, could be taken close.
The Conservancy dredged the bed of the river, and also filled up a bight
on the Surrey shore. This transferred the channel and the strongest
current to the Middlesex side. In 1866 a head wind (against flood tide)
off Chiswick raised the higher surf near to the towpath, showing that
the main stream flowed there. It now runs much nearer to the Eyot.
Also the removal of the centre arch of old Putney Bridge drew the main
flood tide more into mid-river than of old; and since then the new
bridge has been built and the old one altogether removed, still further
affecting the current in the same direction. There is a noticeable
tendency in the present day, on the part of all pilots, whether in
sculling matches or in eight-oar races, to take Craven Point too wide
and to bear off into the bay opposite, on the Surrey shore. The course
should be kept rather more mid-stream than of old, up to Craven steps,
but the point should be taken reasonably close when rounding; there
should not be, as has often been seen during the last six years, room
for a couple more boats to race between the one on the Fulham side and
the Craven bank.
In old days, when Craven Point used to be taken close, and when the set
of the tide lay nearer to it than now, there ensued an important piece
of pilotage called 'making the shoot.' It consisted in gradually
sloping across the river, so as to take the Soapworks Point at a
tangent, and thence to make for the Surrey arch of Hammersmith Bridge.
This 'shoot' is now out of place: firstly, because the tide up the first
reach from the start of itself now tends to bring the boat more into
mid-river off the Grass Wharf and Walden's Wharf; secondly, because the
Soapworks Point should now be taken _wide_, and not close. The reason
for this latter injunction is that the races of to-day, by agreement, go
through the centre arch of Hammersmith Bridge. Now the flood tide does
not run through the bridge at right angles to the span. It is working
hard across to the Surrey shore. Therefore, if a boat hugs Soapworks
Point as of old, and as if the course lay through the shore arch, that
boat will have to come out, _across_ tide, at an angle of about 25° to
the set of the tide, in order to fetch the outer arch and to clear the
buttress and the steamboat pier. Year after year the same blunder is
seen. Pilots, of sculling boats and of eight-oars alike, wander away to
the Surrey bay off Craven; then they hug the shore till they reach the
Soapworks foot-bridge, and then they have to cross half the tide on
their right before they can safely point for the outer arch of the
Suspension Bridge. A pilot should endeavour to keep in mid-river off
Rosebank and the Crab Tree, and after passing the latter point he will,
while pointing his bows well to the right of the arch which he intends
to pass under, find the river move to the left under him, until, with
little or no use of rudder, he finds himself in front of his required
arch just as he reaches the bridge.
After passing the bridge a boat should keep straight on for another two
hundred yards, else it will get into dead water caused by the eddy of
the Surrey pier. At Chiswick the course may be taken wide (save and
except, as in all cases, where force of wind alters circumstances). The
main tide runs nearest to Chiswick Eyot. Horse Reach should be entered
in mid-river; there is little or no tide on the Surrey point below it.
Making for Barnes Bridge, the boat should keep fairly near to the
Middlesex shore--how near depends upon whether the race is ordained to
pass through the centre or the Middlesex arch of Barnes Bridge. Once
through Barnes Bridge, the course should sheer in (if the centre arch
has been taken) until the boat lies as if it had taken the shore arch.
It should attain this position by the time it breasts the 'White Hart.'
The river is here a horseshoe to the finish. In linear measure a boat on
the Middlesex side has nearly two lengths less to travel than the one
outside it between Barnes Bridge and the 'Ship.' The tide runs nearly as
well within sixty feet of the shore as in mid-river at this point, hence
it pays to keep about that distance from the Middlesex bank.
The old Thames watermen who instruct young pilots over the Putney course
are often inclined to run too much in the grooves which were good in
their younger days, when they themselves were racing on the river. Their
instruction would be sound enough if the features of the river had not
undergone change, as aforesaid, in sundry details. The repeated blunders
of navigation lately seen perpetrated by watermen as well as amateurs
between Craven Steps and Hammersmith make us lose much faith in
watermen's tuition for steering the metropolitan course. We would rather
entrust a young pilot to some active member of the London or Thames
Rowing Clubs. These gentlemen know the river well enough as it now is,
and are not biassed by old memories of what it once was but is no
longer.
University coxswains have easier tasks in these days than their
predecessors before 1868. Until the Thames Conservancy obtained
statutory powers in 1868 to clear the course for boat-racing, it used to
be a ticklish matter to pick a safe course on a flood tide. There would
be strings of barges towed, and many more sailing, others 'sweeping,' up
river. Traffic did not stop for sport. Coxswains often found themselves
in awkward predicaments to avoid such itinerant craft, more so when
barges were under sail against a head wind, and were tacking from shore
to shore. In 1866 a barge of this sort most seriously interfered with
the Cambridge crew in Horse Reach, just when Oxford had, after a stern
race, given them the go-by off the Bathing-place. It extinguished any
chance which might have been left for Cambridge.
In the preceding year C. R. W. Tottenham immortalised himself by a great
_coup_ with a barge. She was tacking right across his course (Oxford had
just gone ahead after having been led by a clear length through
Hammersmith Bridge). This was just below Barnes Bridge. Many a pilot
would have tried to go round the bows of that barge. At the moment when
she shaped her course to tack across tide there seemed to be ample room
to pass in front of her. Tottenham never altered his course, and trusted
to his own calculations. Presently the barge was broadside on to
Oxford's bows, and only a few lengths ahead. Every one in the steamers
astern stood aghast at what seemed to be an inevitable smash. The barge
held on, and so did Oxford, and the barge passed clear away just before
Oxford came up. Even if she had hung a little, in a lull of wind, it
would have been easy for Oxford to deflect a trifle and pass under her
stern. Anything was better than attempting to go round her bows, which
at first seemed to be the simplest course to spectators not experts at
pilotage. It must be admitted that so much nerve and judgment at a pinch
have never before or since been displayed by any coxswain in a
University match. Tottenham had his opportunity and made the most of it.
He steered thrice afterwards, but even if he had never steered again he
had made his reputation by this one _coup_. In justice to other crack
coxswains, such as Shadwell and Egan of old, and, _par excellence_, G.
L. Davis in the present day, we must assume that if they had been
similarly tried they would have been equally triumphant.
[Illustration: FEATHER 'UNDER' THE WATER.]
CHAPTER VII.
SLIDING SEATS.
I. THEIR ORIGIN.
When sliding seats were first used they completely revolutionised
oarsmanship, and caused old coaches whose names were household words to
stand aghast at the invention.
The best use of them was but imperfectly realised by those who first
adopted them; and many of the earliest examples of sliding-seat
oarsmanship were sufficiently unorthodox, according to our improved use
of them in the present day, to justify the declaration of more than one
veteran whose opinion was always respected that--'if that is sliding, it
is not rowing.'
The mechanical power gained by a sliding seat is so great that even if
he who uses it sets at defiance all recognised principles of fixed-seat
rowing, he can still command more pace than if he adhered to fixed-seat
work. It was the spectacle, in earlier days of the slide, of this
unorthodox sliding style beating good specimens of fixed-seat
oarsmanship which so horrified many of the retired good oarsmen of the
fixed-seat school. Before long the true use of the slide became better
understood, and thus oarsmen--at all events scientific amateurs--began
to realise that, while bad sliding could manage to command more pace
than good fixed rowing, yet at the same time good sliding (which will be
explained hereafter) will beat bad sliding by even more than the latter
can distance good fixed-seat work.
Just a similar sort of prejudice was displayed against the earlier style
of rowing in keelless boats. When these craft first came in, oarsmen had
little or no idea of 'sitting' them; they rolled helplessly, and lost
all form, but nevertheless they travelled faster in the new craft than
when rowing in good style in old-fashioned iron-shod keeled boats. In a
season or two style reasserted itself, and it was found that it was by
no means impossible to row in as neat a shape in a keelless boat as in a
keeled one.
Sliding on the seat had been practised long before the sliding seat was
invented, but only to a modified extent. Robert Chambers of St.
Antony's, the quondam champion, tried it now and then, and when
preparing for his 1865 match with Kelley he used to slide a trifle,
especially for a spurt, and to grease his seat to facilitate his
operations. Jack Clasper, according to Mr. E. D. Brickwood's well-known
treatise on Boat-racing, used to slide to a small extent on a fixed seat
when he rowed in a Newcastle four which won on the Thames in 1857. Of
this detail the writer has himself no recollection. Also, in 1867, a
Tyne sculler, Percy, tried sliding on a fixed seat in a sculling match
against J. Sadler on the Thames (so Mr. Brickwood relates). But none of
these earlier sliders made much good out of their novelty. The strain on
the legs caused by the friction on the seat prevented the oarsman from
maintaining the action for long, and meantime it took so much out of him
that it prematurely exhausted his whole frame.
In 1870 Renforth's champion four used to slide on the seat for a spurt,
but not for a whole course. They beat the St. John's Canadian crew very
easily while so rowing in a match at Lachine, but we believe that they
would have won with about as much ease had they rowed on fixed seats. In
the same year a 'John o' Gaunt' four from Lancaster came to Henley
Regatta and rowed in this fashion, sliding on fixed seats. They had very
little body swing, and their style showed all the worst features of the
subsequent style which became too common when sliding seats were first
established. They did almost all their work by the piston action of the
legs, and their limbs tired under the strain at the end of three or four
minutes. They led a light crew of Oxford 'Old Radleians' by three
lengths past Fawley Court, and then began to come back to them. The
Oxonians steadily gained on them, but had to come round outside them at
the Point, and could never get past them, losing the race by less than a
yard. Enough was seen on this occasion to convince oarsmen that the
Lancastrian style was only good for half-mile racing. In the final heat
for the Stewards' fours a good L.R.C. crew beat the Lancastrians with
ease after going half a mile. The Radleians would doubtless have also
gone well by the Lancastrians had the course been a hundred yards
longer.
So far the old fixed seat had vindicated itself for staying purposes.
But in the following year a problem was practically solved. It seems
that (so Mr. Brickwood tells us) an oarsman comparatively unknown to
fame, one Mr. R. O. Birch, had used an actual sliding seat at King's
Lynn Regatta in 1870. Mr. Brickwood seems to have been the only writer
who took cognisance of this interesting fact. University men and tideway
amateurs, also professionals so far as we can gather, seem not to have
heard of, or at least not to have heeded, the experiment. Had Mr. Birch
been a leading sculler of the day, possibly the innovation might have
been adopted earlier than it was.
Meantime in America the sliding seat had been better known, but had not
been appreciated. Mr. Brickwood tells us that a Mr. J. C. Babcock, of
the Nassau Boat Club, constructed a sliding seat as long ago as 1857.
Also that W. Brown, the American sculler, tried one in 1861, but
abandoned it. In 1869 Mr. Babcock once more devoted himself to the study
and construction of sliding seats, and brought out a six-oared crew
rowing on slides. But the invention did not obtain much recognition,
although Mr. Babcock was of opinion that his crew gained in power of
stroke through the new apparatus.
How the seat came to be at length adopted arose thus. In 1871 two Tyne
crews went to America to compete in regattas. One of these was
Renforth's crew, and, as detailed elsewhere, Renforth died during a race
against the St. John crew. Robert Chambers (not the ex-champion) took
his place later on for sundry regattas. The Tyne crews rowed with a good
average of success in America. Taylor, who commanded the other Tyne
four, raced a States four, called the Biglin-Coulter crew, rowing with
sliding seats. These Biglin-Coulter men did not prove themselves, as a
whole, any better than, if so fast as, the British crew; consequently
there was nothing to draw especial attention to their apparatus. Of the
two British crews, that stroked by Chambers proved itself on the whole,
through various regattas, faster than Taylor's four.
Taylor bided his time. He proposed a match on the Tyne between the two
British fours, and the offer was accepted. The match came off in the
fall of the same year. Taylor's men had their boat fitted with sliding
seats, and kept their apparatus 'dark' from the world and from their
opponents. They used to cease sliding when watched, and kept their
apparatus covered up. When the race came off, Taylor's crew decisively
reversed the American regatta form, and beat Chambers's crew easily.
This was ascribed to the slide, information as to which leaked out after
the race. The next University race was not rowed with slides, but a
couple of minor sculling races in the spring were rowed with them. In
June of that year a very fine L.R.C. four (Messrs. J. B. Close, F. S.
Gulston, A. de L. Long, and W. Stout) rowed a four-oared match on the
Thames against the Atalanta Club of New York. The L.R.C. men used
slides. That did not affect their victory; they were stronger and better
oarsmen than the Americans, and could have won easily on fixed seats;
but what gave a fillip to slides was the clear testimony of these four
oarsmen of undoubted skill to the advantage which they felt themselves
gain by their use. Instantly there was a run upon slides. Henley Regatta
was impending. The L.R.C. crews were all fitted with them for that
meeting. Several other crews took to them after reaching Henley, and
after seeing the superiority which London obtained by them. Kingston and
Pembroke (Oxon) had their boats fitted with slides less than a week
before the race. Pembroke was a moderate crew, and only entered because
they held the Ladies' Plate. At first, in practice, Pembroke did about
equal time over the course with Lady Margaret, both crews being on fixed
seats. But the day after Pembroke got their slides they improved some 15
secs. upon the time of Lady Margaret, who kept to their old seats. It
must, however, be recorded that the Ladies' Plate was won by a
fixed-seat crew--Jesus, Camb. This crew was by far the best in material
of all the entries at the regatta. Their individual superiority enabled
them to give away the slide to Pembroke, and had they taken to slides
even for the last few days they would probably have also won the Grand
Challenge. As it was, that prize fell to the L.R.C., a crew which had
four good men, and then a weak tail. The sliding seat had now fairly
established its claims. It should be added that Pembroke, with two good
and two moderate men, won the Visitors' Plate from a very good Dublin
four, about the best four that Dublin ever sent to Henley. Pembroke used
slides, and the Dublin men had fixed seats. (Slides alone won this race
for Pembroke.) The Pembroke slides were on wheels--a mechanism which was
soon afterwards discarded by builders in favour of greased glass or
steel grooves or tubes, but which seems to be returning to favour in
1886 and 1887.
II. THEIR USE.
In order to understand the true action in a slide, it will be well to
recall the action of fixed-seat rowing. On the fixed seat the swing of
the body does the main work, being supported by the legs, which are
rigid and bent.
On a slide the legs extend gradually, while at the same time they
support the body. On a fixed seat the body moves as the radius of a
circle that is stationary; on a slide the body moves as the radius of a
circle which is itself in motion. Suppose a threepenny-piece and a
half-crown placed alongside of each other, concentrically, with a common
pivot. Let the threepenny-piece roll for a certain distance on the edge
of a card. Then any point in the circumference of the half-crown will
move through a curve called a 'trochoid.' This is practically the sort
of curve described by the head or shoulders of an oarsman who rows upon
a sliding seat.
The actual gain of rowing power by means of this mechanism is
considerable. The exact extent of it is not easy to arrive at, there
being various factors to be taken into consideration.
In the first place, the length of reach, or of the 'stroke,' is
considerably increased. Mr. Brickwood in 1873 conducted some scientific
experiments on dry land upon this subject, in conjunction with the
editor of the 'Field' and Mr. F. Gulston. The result of these
measurements was to demonstrate (in the person of Mr. F. Gulston) a gain
of about 18 inches in length of stroke upon a 9-inch slide.
In 1881 some casual experiments of a similar sort were conducted on a
lawn at Marlow by the Oxford crew then training there. The writer was
present, and, so far as he remembers, the results practically confirmed
the estimate of Mr. Brickwood above recorded, allowance being made for
the fact that the gentleman by means of whose body the ideal stroke was
measured at Marlow was longer-bodied and longer in the leg than Mr.
Gulston.
As a second advantage, the sliding seat decidedly relieves the abdominal
muscles and respiratory organs during the recovery. In dealing with
scientific racing we have previously remarked that the point wherein a
tiring oarsman first gives way is in his recovery, because of the
relative weakness of the muscles which conduct that portion of the
action of the stroke. It therefore is obvious that any contrivance which
can enable a man to recover with less exertion to himself will enable
him to do more work in the stroke over the whole course, and still more
so if the very contrivance which aids recovery also gives extra power to
the stroke.
On the other hand, there are two drawbacks to the slide. One of these
is, that when sliding full forward the legs are more bent than would be
the case on a fixed seat. The body cannot reach quite so far forward
over the toes on a full slide as it can on a properly regulated fixed
seat. This slightly detracts from the work of the _body_ at the
beginning of the stroke.
Again, when a slide is used to best advantage, the greatest mechanical
benefit occurs just when the body arrives at the perpendicular, and when
the legs are beginning to do the greater portion of their extension.
This causes the greater force of the stroke to be applied behind the
rowlock, in contradiction of all old theories of fixed-seat oarsmanship.
Taking all _pros_ and _cons_ together, it has been practically proved
beyond doubt to every rowing man for more than a decade that the slide
gains much more than it sacrifices. Even bad sliding secures sufficient
advantage to beat fixed-seat rowing (_ceteris paribus_), and good
sliding completely distances fixed-seat performances. It is often
remarked that the 'times' performed by sliding-seat crews are not
glaringly superior to those of fixed-seat annals. This is correct.
Nevertheless the balance is clearly in favour of sliding performances.
The actual difference is much greater than times happen to disclose; it
is somewhat fallacious to draw deductions from averages of recorded
times, unless the individual condition of wind and weather, and of close
or hollow races, be also chronicled for each year. On p. 106 record is
given of the actual gain attained by Pembroke College crew within ten
days of their essaying the use of slides. It may be added that Kingston,
who adopted slides about the same day, displayed much about the same
increase of speed, as shown by clocking and by comparing their times
with those of other crews before and after their adoption of slides.
Another matter throws light on the question, and that is the records of
practice times--which are, on the whole, more trustworthy to prove an
average than race times. Races have to start at fixed hours,
irrespective of weather, whereas practice can select smooth days for
trials. The records of sliding trials--over Henley courses and
tideway--when wind and water have been favourable, show a much greater
advance over similar practice trials of fixed-seat crews than is
disclosed by the racing times of sliders. The writer believes that he is
not far wrong in estimating the difference between sliding and fixed
seats, in an eight or four, over the Henley course at 15 secs. (rough),
and at something well over half a minute over the Putney course.
Scullers gain more by slides than oarsmen, because they can work square
throughout to the stretcher, whereas the oarsman's handle tends to place
the strain at different angles to his body as the stroke progresses.
Not much importance need be attached to the fact that the first
University race rowed on slides eclipsed all its predecessors (and
successors) for time.[8] It is well known that a gig eight with fixed
seats on a good flood could do much faster time than a racing and
sliding ship on a neap. The 1873 race hit off a one-o'clock tide and
fair weather; and it would equally have surpassed all or most
predecessors if the crews had not used slides. But still it was
fortuitous that the first race of this class in the U.B.C.'s series
should thus indicate the novelty by time record.
[8] See Tables.
What is more striking is the ease with which times of about twenty
minutes or under are now repeatedly accomplished, and by moderate crews,
on moderate tides, and often with breezes unfavourable. Till slides
came in twenty minutes had only once been beaten, and that was by the
Oxford crew of 1857 in practice (19 min. 53 sec.); and as Mr. T. Egan,
at that date editor of aquatics in 'Bell's Life,' then recorded in that
journal, the oldest waterman could hardly recall such springs as foamed
through Putney arches that week, and especially upon that day of trial.
[Illustration: PRACTISING STROKE (1).]
[Illustration: PRACTISING STROKE (2).]
[Illustration: PRACTISING STROKE (3).]
[Illustration: PRACTISING STROKE (4).]
In 1871 Goldie's (third) crew were supposed to do wonderful time (20
min. 11 sec.), on a good spring and smooth day. It sufficed to make them
hot favourites. In these days a sliding crew that could not beat 19 min.
40 sec. on a smooth spring tide would be reckoned to have a bad chance
of success.
The value of slides is therefore beyond dispute, but the oarsman should
realise that good sliding distances bad sliding quite as far as bad
sliding can beat fixed seats.
Hence the importance of using the slide to the best advantage. To
realise what he has to do, let a man test separately his two forces
which he has presently to combine. Let him row an ordinary fixed-seat
stroke: this shows him the power of his swing; then let him sit upright,
holding his oar, and, having slid up forward, kick back with rigid back
and arms. He will feel that he grips the water even more forcibly for
the instant by the second than by the former process. The fallacy of bad
sliders is to be content with this gain of power in the action last
named, and to substitute slide for swing (the arms eventually rowing the
stroke home in either case). The problem which an oarsman has to solve
is to _combine_ the two actions.
In order to do this, he should realise an important fact, viz. that the
body cannot work effectually unless it receives support from the
extensor muscles of the legs. Therefore, if he slides before he swings,
or if he completes his slide before he completes his swing, any swing
which he attempts after the slide is played out is practically
powerless. Also, if the swing is thus rendered helpless, so also is the
finish of the stroke with the arms, for these depend upon the body for
support, and the body cannot supply them with this support unless the
legs in their turn are doing their duty to the body.
Bearing this amount of theory in mind, the oarsman should put it into
practice thus. He should get forward (and immerse his blade, as on a
fixed seat). Then, at the moment he touches the water, he should bring
his body to bear upon the handle, just as if he were for the instant
rowing on a fixed seat; his legs should be rigid, though bent, at the
instant of catch. (See No. 1, p. 110.) So soon as the catch has been
applied, the oar-handle begins to come in to the operator. Now comes a
bit of watermanship and management of the limbs which require special
attention, and which few oarsmen, even in these days of improved
sliding, carry out to exact perfection. The knees have been elevated by
the slide (if it is anything over 4 inches) to a height over which the
oar-handle cannot pass without being elevated in its turn. Therefore,
having once made his catch with rigid knees, the pupil should then begin
to slide, contemporaneously with his swing, for a small distance, until
he has brought his knees to such a level that the oar-loom can pass over
them (No. 2, p. 110). He should during this period of the stroke slide
only just so much as is required in order to bring his knees to the
necessary height before the oar reaches them. By the time that the oar
comes over them he will be about the perpendicular (No. 3, p. 111). Now
comes that part of the stroke which, on a slide, is the most effective.
The body should from this point swing well back, much further so than
would be orthodox upon a fixed seat; all the time that the body is thus
swinging back the legs should be extending, and the pace of extension
should be regulated according to the length of slide. In any case the
slide and swing should terminate contemporaneously (No. 4, p. 111). The
arms, as in fixed-seat rowing, should contract and row the stroke home
while the body is still swinging back. They should not begin to bend
until the trunk has well passed the perpendicular.
The oarsman must bear in mind that the moment for finishing his slide
should be regulated, not by the length of the _slide_, but by _the
length of his swing_, and the latter should go well back until his body
is at an angle of about thirty degrees beyond the perpendicular. Suppose
he has a long slide, say of 10 inches or more, and he decides, either
from fatigue or because he need not fully extend himself, to use only
part of his slide; or suppose he is changed from a boat fitted with
11-inch slides to one with 9-inch ditto, he must not, when using the
shorter slide, allow his legs to extend as rapidly as they did when they
had a longer distance to cover. If he fails to observe this he will
'hurry' his slide, and will bring it to an end before the swing is
completed, thus rendering the latter part of the swing helpless
for want of due leg-support. If slide and swing are not arranged
contemporaneously, it is far better that a balance of slide should
remain to be run out after the swing has finished than _vice versâ_. The
legs can always push, and so continue the stroke, even if the body is
rigid; but the body cannot conversely do anything effective for the
stroke when once the legs have run their course.
The recovery on a sliding seat is not quite the counterpart of that on a
fixed seat. On the fixed seat the recovery should be the converse of the
stroke: i.e. the arms, which came in latest, while the body was still
swinging back, should shoot out first, while the body is beginning its
return swing; and just as the first part of the stroke was performed
with straight arms and swinging body, so the last part of the recovery
should disclose a similar pose of arms and body. But upon a slide there
is not exactly such a transposition on the recovery of the motions which
are correct for the stroke. The hands play the same part as before; they
cannot well be too lively off the chest and in extension, because the
knees require more clearing on slides, and the sooner the hands are on
the safe side of them the less chance is there of fouling the water on
the return of the blade. But, as regards the relations between slide and
swing, these should _not_ bear the same relation conversely which they
did to each other during the stroke. The pupil was enjoined not to let
his slide run ahead of his swing while rowing the stroke through; but on
the recovery he may, and should, let his slide get well ahead, and be
completed before the body has attained its full reach forward. The body
should not _wait_ for the swing to do its duty first, but it should
begin at once to recover, though more leisurely than the legs. The
reasons for this are:--
1. The pace of the slide lends impetus to the trunk, and eases the
labour of the forward swing; it transfers some of the exertion of
recovering the trunk from the abdominal muscles, which are weak, to the
flexors of legs and loins, which are much more powerful, and are better
able to stand the strain.
2. The body needs some purchase upon which to depend for its recovery,
and the legs can aid it in this respect much more effectually when bent
than when rigid. Therefore, since staying power is greatly affected by
the amount of exertion involved in recovery (as explained in previous
pages), the oarsman will last longer in proportion as he thus omits the
recovery of his trunk, by accelerating his slide on the return.
Many good oarsmen slide until the knees are quite straight. In the
writer's opinion, this is waste of power: the knees should never _quite_
straighten; the recovery is, for anatomical reasons, much stronger if
the joint is slightly bent when the reversal of the machinery commences
(No. 4, p. 111). The extra half-inch of kick gained by quite
straightening the knees hardly compensates for the extra strain of
recovery; also leg-work to the last fraction of a second of swing is
better preserved by this retention of a slight bend, and an open chest
and clean finish are thereby better attained. Engineers, who know what
is meant by a 'dead point' in machinery, will at once grasp the reason
for not allowing the legs to shoot quite straight.
When a crew are being coached upon slides, it is of great importance to
get the slide simultaneous, and as nearly as possible equal. A
long-legged man, sculling, may use a much longer slide than a short man.
But in an eight, if the long man fits his stretcher as if for sculling,
he will be doing more than his share, and may be unable to shoot so long
a slide through in the required time, except by dint of 'hurrying' it;
and, if he does this latter, the result is to cripple his swing, as
shown _supra_. There must be a certain amount of give-and-take in
arranging slides in an eight or four oar. That length of slide is best
which all the crew can work simultaneously and effectively, preserving
uniformity of swing and slide.
When tiros are being taught their first lesson in sliding, they should
be placed on very short slides, say 3 inches at most. The centre of the
slide only should be used. The runners should be blocked fore and aft,
so that when the slide stands half way (1-1/2 inch from foremost block),
the distance from the seat to the stretcher should be just as much as
the man would require if he were on a fixed seat.
Young hands are less likely to make their stroke all slide and no swing
if they have at first only such length of slide as above indicated. When
the slide of 3 inches has been mastered, it may be lengthened, inch by
inch. In thus lengthening the slide, it is best to add, at first, more
to the forward part of the slide than to the back part, i.e. say, for a
4-inch slide, 2-1/2 inches before and 1-1/2 inch behind, the point of
seat for fixed-seat work, to the same stretcher. This arrangement
prevents the pupil from lacking leg-support at the end of his swing, and
teaches him to feel his legs well against the stretcher till the hands
have come home to the chest. When 4 inches have been mastered, add
another inch forward and about half an inch back, and so on. In time the
beginner will reach the full range of his slide forward, while yet he is
'blocked' from using the full distance back. When he becomes proficient
in this pose, his slide back can be increased by degrees until he
attains a full slide. The great thing is to induce him from the first to
combine his slide with his swing, and not to substitute the former for
the latter.
When slides first came in shocking form was seen upon them, as
previously stated. This was a venial result of oarsmen being driven--by
emulation to win prizes in races immediately impending--to attempt to
run before they had learnt to walk, so to speak. The year 1873 saw worse
form among amateurs than the writer can recall in any season. In 1874
matters began to mend. The two University strokes of that year, Messrs.
Rhodes and Way, had each been at pains to improve his style since he had
last been seen in public at Henley. Each seemed to realise that he had
been on a wrong tack, and set to work to alter his style radically.
These same gentlemen were strokes of their respective U.B.C.'s in 1875,
and the improvement was still more palpable. The Oxonian had an
exceptionally fine lot of men behind him; the Cantab had two or three
weak men in the bows who did not do justice to him. But none the less,
when these crews performed at Putney, old-fashioned critics, who had
been till then prejudiced against the new machinery, as being
destructive to form, were fain to admit that after all, when properly
managed, slides could produce as good form of body and shoulders as in
the best of the old days. The Leander crew which won the G.C.C. at
Henley in that year showed admirable sliding form. It was stroked by Mr.
Goldie, who had rowed all his University races on a fixed seat. When he
first took to a slide (for sculling) he fell into the same error as many
other amateurs, almost entirely substituting slide for swing. But for
this oversight he might have won both Diamond and Wingfield sculls. He
soon saw his error, like Messrs. Rhodes and Way, and when he stroked
Leander in 1875 no one could have recognised him as the same man who had
been contesting the Diamonds in 1872. These three fuglemen strokes did
much to elevate the standard of sliding among amateurs; it was chiefly
through their examples, crowned with success, that the earlier samples
of sliding oarsmanship became better realised. Professionals remained
blind in their own conceit, as is shown in another chapter, but from
this date amateur oarsmanship completely gave the go-by to professional
exhibitions of skill and science in aquatics.
[Illustration: A COLLEGE FOUR.]
CHAPTER VIII.
FOUR-OARS.
The fewer the number of performers in a boat the longer does it take
(with material of uniform quality) to acquire absolute evenness of
action. This may seem paradoxical, but none the less all practical
oarsmen will, from their own personal experiences, endorse the
statement. It has been said that it takes twice as long to perfect a
four as an eight, twice as long to perfect a pair as a four, and twice
as long to perfect a sculler as a pair. This scale may be fanciful, but
it is approximately truthful; it refers, of course, to the education of
oarsmen for work in the respective craft, from their earliest days of
instruction. It means that a higher standard of watermanship has to be
attained, in order to do justice to the style of craft rowed in,
according as the ship carries more or fewer performers. Many an oarsman
who by honest tugging can improve the go of an eight-oar will do more
harm than good in a light four, and will be simply helpless in a racing
pair.
Four-oar races, with the exception of some junior contests, are now
rowed in coxswainless craft. The first of these seen in Europe was that
of the St. John's Canadian crew (professional, but admitted for the
nonce as amateurs) at the Paris International Regatta 1867. All the
other crews carried steerers. The Canadians had the windward station in
a stiff wind, and won easily. Next year the B.N.C. Oxon Club produced a
four thus constructed at Henley. The rules did not forbid this; but the
novelty scared other competitors and threatened to spoil the racing in
that class. The stewards accordingly passed a resolution forbidding any
of the entries to dispense with a coxswain, and under cover of this
disqualified the B.N.C. four when it came in ahead.
Next year the resolution referred to remained in force (as regards the
Challenge Cups), but a presentation prize for fours without coxswains
was given, and was won by the Oxford Radleian Club. In 1871 the chief
professional matches were rowed without coxswains; but no more prizes
were given for this class of rowing at Henley until 1873, when the
Stewards' Cup was classed for 'no coxswains.' At Oxford college fours
were similarly altered, but the steering was so bad that it was
seriously proposed to revert to the old system. A similar proposal was
made with regard to Henley. Fortunately, wiser counsels prevailed, and
oarsmen realised that it was better to attempt to raise their own
talents to the standard required for the improved build than to detract
from the build to suit the failings of mediocrity. In 1875 the Visitors
and Wyfold Cups were emancipated from coxswains, and since then the
standard of amateur four-oar rowing has gradually risen to the
requirements of the improved class of build.
Steerage is of course the main difficulty in these pairs. Three
different sorts of apparatus have been used in them. Two of these are
much of the same sort. One, generally in use to this day, consists of
two bars projecting from the stretcher, and working horizontally in
slits cut in the board. The foot presses against one bar or other to
direct the rudder, Another process is to fix a shoe to the stretcher, in
which the oarsman places his foot. This shoe works laterally. The third
is one tried by the writer in 1868. Every inventor thinks his goose a
swan, and possibly the writer is over-sanguine as to the merits of his
own hobby. It consists of two bars laid on the stretcher, like a very
widely opened letter V, the arms of the V pointing in the direction of
the sitter. Each arm is hinged at the apex of the V. The stretcher is
grooved, so that either arm can be pressed into the groove, flush with
the surface of the stretcher. Behind each bar is a spring. The bars
cross the stretcher just about the ball of the foot. The hinge is sunk
deep in the wood, so that the arms of the levers do not begin to project
above the wood till some 5 inches on either side of the centre of the
stretcher. The feet are placed in ordinary rowing pose, in the middle of
the V, where the levers lie below the flush surface of the stretcher.
The strap, though tight, has a _wide_ loop, to admit of slight lateral
movement of the feet. To put on rudder either foot is slipped half an
inch or so outward. This brings it on to the lever of that side, and the
pressure of the foot drives the lever flush. This pressure and movement
of the lever, by means of another small lever and swivel outside the
gunwale, in connection with it, works the rudder line. When steerage
enough has been obtained, a half-inch return of the foot to its normal
pose releases the lever, and the spring behind it at once brings it to
_status quo ante_.
Now in the other two mechanisms above cited, the same foot has to steer
_both_ ways. Hence, for one of the two directions, the toe must turn in
like a pigeon's. This must, for the moment, cripple leg-work, especially
on slides. Again, with lateral movement in first and second machines, it
is difficult for the steerer to know to exactness when his rudder is
'off.' He may, in returning it after steerage, leave it a trifle on, or
carry it the other way too far. If so, he has to counter-steer a stroke
or two later, till he feels that his rudder is free and trailing. The
writer claims for his own invention that it never removes the feet from
the proper outward-turned pose against the stretcher, and that the
springs under the lever ensure the rudder swinging back and 'trailing'
so soon as a lever is released.
Whatever apparatus is used, _wires_, not strings, should lead the
rudder, and should not be too tight; they will pull enough, though
slightly loose.
Anyone may steer; the best waterman, if not too short-sighted, should do
so, but stroke should not take the task if anyone else is at all fit for
it.
[Illustration: FOUR-OAR.]
The steerer should not be repeatedly looking round, as regards his
course. If he is sure of no obstacles lying in his path, he can, when
once he has laid his boat straight for a reach, watch her stern-post,
and keep touch on it, to hold it to some landmark.
A coxswainless four really facilitates oarsmanship. It recovers from a
roll more freely than the old-fashioned build with a pilot. It is uneven
rowing which causes a roll, but when once equilibrium has been disturbed
the coxswain has more difficulty than the crew in regaining balance. The
oarsmen aid themselves with their oars, as with balancing poles. The
removal of the coxswain therefore tends to reduce the rolling, and
facilitates the speedy return of the ship to her keel when momentarily
thrown off it. Coxswainless fours at Henley travel now much more
steadily than did those with coxswains fifteen years ago. A runner on
the bank, to look out for obstructive craft, is useful in practice. It
enables the steerer to keep his eyes on his stern-post, and to guide his
course thereby in confidence, without repeated twists round to see if
any loafing duffer is going to smash his timbers. The pace of a
first-class coxswainless four, in smooth water, for half a mile is quite
as great as that of a second-class eight-oar with a coxswain. The
abolition of coxswain has improved the speed of fours some forty seconds
over the Henley course.
One good resulted from the attempt of B.N.C. in 1868 to row without a
coxswain. It opened the eyes of the regatta executive to the unfairness
of tolerating boy coxswains. The University clubs used to carry boys of
four or five stone. In that very year the 'Oscillators' had a four-stone
lad, while University College carried an eight-stone man. There was just
as much difference between these two fours in dead weight carried as
between B.N.C. (with no coxswain) and the Oscillators. University clubs
are _ex officio_ debarred from obtaining boys to steer. This inequality
had been complained of by college crews time after time. Old Mr. Lane,
the usual vice-chairman, used to sneer at the complaint, and say, 'If a
boy can do in one boat what it takes a man to do in another, it is not
fair to prohibit the boy.' If this were logical, then, _pari passu_,
there could be no unfairness for one man to do single-handed what in
other boats it took a man and a boy (or two men) to do, viz. both row
and steer. Mr. Lane's fallacy was exploded by this _reductio ad
absurdum_ of his tenets, and regulation weights for coxswains were
initiated for following years.
[Illustration: NEAR MEDMENHAM.]
CHAPTER IX.
PAIR-OARS.
More than one master of oarsmanship has declared that good pair-oar
rowing is the acme of oarsmanship. Just as there are fewer oarsmen who
can do justice to a four-oar than to an eight, so when we come to
pair-oars we find still fewer performers who can really show first-class
style in this line of rowing. Much as watermanship is needed in a four,
it is still more important to possess it when rowing in a pair. One, or
even two men, out of a four-oared crew may be what would be considered
bad watermen, i.e. not _au fait_ at sitting a rolling boat, and not
instinctively time-keepers. Yet, if the other two men have the quality
of watermanship, the four may speedily fall together, provided the two
outsiders show sound general principles of style. In a pair-oar,
if either of the hands is a bad waterman, the combination will
never rise above mediocrity. In pair-oar rowing there is needed a
_je-ne-sais-quoi_ sort of mutual concession of style. One man is stroke
and the other bow, but there is in good pair-oarsmen an indefinite and
almost unconscious give-and-take action on the part of both men. The
style of the two is a sort of blend.
Old Harry Clasper, when asked which steered, of himself and his son
Jack, in a pair, said that 'both steered.' To do this is the acme of
homogeneous rowing. Of two partners one may, and should, act as chief;
but his colleague should be co-operating with him, and almost
anticipating his motions and orders.
When two strange partners commence work, they should make up their minds
not to row 'jealous.' If each begins by trying to row the other round,
they will disagree like Richard Penlake and his wife. They had better
each try to see who can do least work: sit the boat, paddle gently,
studying to drop into the water together, to catch the water together,
to finish together, to feather together (and cleanly), and to recover
together. The less work they try to do, while thus seeking to assimilate
their motions to each other, the quicker will they settle down.
As to rowing each other round, such emulation should never enter their
heads. To row a partner round is no proof of having done more work than
he towards propelling the boat. One man may catch sharply and row
cleanly, and in a style calculated to make a boat travel; his colleague
may slither the beginning and tug at the end, staying a fraction of a
second later in the water than the other, but rowing no longer in reach.
The latter will probably row the boat round! A tug at the end of a
stroke turns a boat much more than a catch at the beginning; yet the
latter propels the racing boat far more. Of course, if two men row alike
in style and reach from end to end, and one puts on all through the
stroke a trifle more pressure, the ship will turn from the greater
pressure. But, unless it can be guaranteed that the style of each
partner is identical all through the stroke, 'rowing round' does not
prove a superiority of work.
[Illustration: PAIR OARS--AN IMMINENT FOUL.]
We have said that good watermen will sit a pair where bad ones will
roll. So far so good. But good watermen, first beginning practice with
each other, must not assume that because they do not roll their
uniformity is therefore proved. Their power of balance can keep the boat
upright, even though there may be at first some inaccuracies of work.
Thus to balance a boat requires a certain amount of exertion; in a race,
at this stage, this labour of balancing would take something off the
power of the stroke. Besides, until the two oars work with similar
pressure through the whole stroke, the keel cannot be travelling dead
straight. Steady though good men may be at scratch, they will gain in
pace as they continue to practise, and insensibly assimilate their
action. With bad watermen cessation of rolling is a sign that the styles
have at last assimilated; with good watermen the deduction is not
necessarily sound.
In old days pair-oars rowed without rudders. The two oars guided the
ship. It was best to let the stronger man steer. He could thus set his
partner to do his best all the way in a race, could ease an over or two,
or lay on that much extra, from stroke to stroke, according as the
stern-post required balancing on the landmark which had been selected as
its _point d'appui_. To learn each other's strength and to know the
course, to know by heart when to lay on for this corner, or to row off
for that, was the study of practice and tested watermanship. In modern
times a thin metal rudder is usually used, steered as in coxswainless
fours. In a beam wind this materially aids pace, it enables the leeward
oar to do his full share, instead of paddling while his partner is
toiling. Even in still water it is some gain, provided the helm can be
easily 'trailed' when not wanted. The facility with which such a pair
can be steered tempts men to omit to study that delicate balance of a
boat's stern on its point which was the acme of art before rudders came
in. We have seen a (rudderless) pair leave a wake up Henley reach, from
island to point, on a glassy evening, as straight as if a surveyor's
line had been stretched there. In fact, to steer such a pair, with a
practical partner, was, if anything, easier to some men than to steer
an eight. The stern-post lay in view of the oarsman, and could be
adjusted on its point like a gun barrel, whereas the actual bows of an
eight are unseen by a coxswain.
Except a sculling boat, a pair-oar is the fastest starting of all craft;
but if it is thus easy to set in motion at the outset of a race, it is
plain that it can be spurted later on as suddenly. Bearing this in mind,
there is no object in starting a pair in a race at a speed which cannot
go all the way. There is as much scope for staying in a pair as in an
eight; more in fact, for the pair takes the longer to do the same
distance as the eight. The start should be quick, but it is best to keep
a stroke or two per minute in hand for a rush hereafter, if needed, when
the pulse of the enemy has been felt, and when partners have warmed to
their work.
Pairs are best rowed with oars somewhat smaller all round than those
which are used for eights or fours. The pair, more than any other craft,
requires to be caught sharp and light; an oar that is not too long in
the shank nor too big in the blade best accomplishes this. 'Dimensions'
recommended for 'work' in various craft will be found scheduled
elsewhere in this volume.
To conclude the subject of pairs, it may be added, if partners wish to
assimilate, they must make up their minds to avoid recrimination. If the
boat goes amiss say, or assume, 'it is I,' not 'you,' who is to blame.
Keep cool and keep your head in a race. If the steersman bids 'easy'
half a stroke, be prompt in so doing. To delay to right the course at
the correct instant may take the ship lengths out of her course. A
stroke eased in time, like a stitch, often saves nine, and perhaps
obviates sticking in the bank.
[Illustration: CLOSE QUARTERS.]
CHAPTER X.
SCULLING.
Sculling needs more precision and more watermanship than rowing. The
strongest man only wastes his strength in sculling if he fails to obtain
even work for each hand. A pair-oar requires more practice to bring it
to perfection than any other boat manned by oars, but a sculler requires
considerably more practice than any pair of oarsmen. Strength he must
have in proportion to his weight, if he is to soar above mediocrity, but
strength alone will not avail him unless he gets his hands well
together.
His sculls will overlap more or less. It is practically immaterial which
hand he rows uppermost; the upper hand has a trifle of advantage, and
for this reason Oxonians, whose course is a left-hand one, usually
scull left hand over. The first difficulty which an embryo sculler has
to contend with is that of attaining uniform pressure with square body
and square legs upon a pair of arms which are not uniformly placed. One
arm has to give way to another to enable the hands to clear each other
when they cross; and yet while they do this the blades which they
control should be buried to a uniform depth. How to attain this
give-and-take action of the arms is better shown by even a moderate
performer in five minutes of practical illustration than by reams of
book instruction.
The aspirant to sculling honours had better, when commencing to learn,
take his first lesson in a gig. A wager boat will be too unsteady, and
will retard his practice; 'skiffs' are usually to be obtained only as
teach boats with work at sixes and sevens. A dingey buries too much on
the stroke, and spoils style. The beginner should find a stiff pair of
sculls, true made, and overlapping about the width of his hands. He
should ask some proficient to examine and to try his sculls, and to tell
him by the feel whether they are really a pair. The best makers of oars
and sculls too often turn out sculls which are not 'pairs,' and when
this is the case the action of him who uses them cannot be expected to
be even on both sides of his frame. Having got suitable sculls, let the
sculler arrange his stretcher just a shade shorter than he would have it
for rowing. He can clear his knees with a shorter stretcher when
sculling than when rowing, as he can easily see for himself. A stretcher
should always be as short as is compatible with clearing the knees.
Whether or not the pupil is proficient in sliding, he had better keep a
fixed seat while learning the rudiments of sculling; it will give him
less to think about; he might unconsciously contract faults in sliding
while fixing his mind elsewhere--in the direction of his new implements.
He should see that his rowlocks are roomy. In most gigs there is a want
of room between thowl and stopper. A sculler requires a wider rowlock
than an oarsman, because his scull goes forward to an acuter angle than
an oar, with the same reach of body. Nothing puts out a sculler's hands
more than a recoil of the scull from the stopper, for want of room to
reach out. The sculler should examine whether his rowlocks are true; the
sills of them should be horizontal, not inclined, and most of all not
inclined from stern to bow; the latter defect will at once make him
scull deep. Next, let him examine his thowl. This should be clean faced,
not 'grooved' by the upper edge of the loom of oars which have been
handled by operators who feather under water, and who thus force at the
finish with the upper edge and not with the flat back of the loom. Half
the hack gigs that are on hire will be found to have rowlocks so worn,
grooved, and disfigured, that not the best sculler in the world can lay
his strength out on them until he has filed them into shape. The thowl
should show a flush surface, and rake just the smallest trifle aft, so
as to hold the blade just a fraction of an angle less than a rectangle
to the water, but this 'rake' should be very slight.
Having now got his tools correct, the workman will have no excuse for
grumbling at them if he fails to do well. Let him begin by paddling
gently and slowly. He had better not attempt to work hard. If he sees
some other sculler shooting past him in a similar boat, he must sink all
jealousy. Every motion which he makes in a stroke is now laying the
foundation of habit and of mechanical action hereafter; hence he must
give his whole mind to each stroke, and be content to go to work
steadily and carefully. He must feel his feet against his stretcher,
both legs pressing evenly. He must hold his sculls in his fingers (not
his fists), and let the top joint of each thumb cap the scull. This is
better than bringing the thumb under the scull; it gives the wrists more
play, and tends to avoid cramp of the forearm. He must endeavour to do
his main work with his body and legs, when he has laid hold of the
water. He should keep his arms rigid, and lean well back. Just as he
passes the perpendicular his hands will begin to cross each other.
Whichever hand he prefers to row over, he should stick to. When the
hands begin to cross, he should still try to keep the arms stiff, and to
clear the way by slightly lowering one hand and raising the other. Not
until his hands have opened out again after having crossed should he
begin to bend his arms and to bring the stroke home to the chest. He
should try to bend each arm simultaneously and to the same extent, and
to bring each hand up to his breast almost at his ribs, at equal
elevations. He must try to feather both sculls sharply and
simultaneously.
If he finds any difficulty in this, he will do well to give himself a
private lesson on this point before he proceeds further. He can sit
still and lay his sculls in the rowlocks, and thus practise turning the
wrists sharply, on and off the feather, till he begins to feel more
handy in this motion.
On the recovery he should shoot his hands out briskly, the body
following but not waiting for the hands to extend--just as in a 'rowing'
recovery. When the recovering hands begin to cross each other the lower
and upper must respectively give way, and so soon as they open out after
the cross, they should once more resume the same plane, and extend
equally, so as to be ready to grip the water simultaneously for the
succeeding stroke.
Very few scullers realise the great importance of even action of wrists.
If one scull hangs in the water a fraction of a second more than
another, or buries deeper, or skims lighter, the two hands at that
moment are not working evenly. Therefore the boat is not travelling in a
straight line; therefore she will sooner or later, may be in the latter
half of the very same stroke, have to be brought back to her course. In
order to bring her back, the hand which, earlier, was doing the greater
work, must now do less. Therefore the boat has not only performed a
zigzag during the stroke, but also she has been, while so meandering,
propelled by less than her full available forces, first one hand falling
off through clumsiness, and afterwards the other hand shutting off some
work, in order to equalise matters.
As the sculler becomes more used to his action, he will find his boat
keep more even. At first he will be repeatedly putting more force on one
hand than on another, and will have to rectify his course by counterwork
with the neglected hand. Some scullers, though otherwise good, never
steer well. They do not watch their stern-post, to see if they go evenly
at each stroke; still less, if they see a slight deflection to one hand
after one stroke, do they at once rectify the deviation by extra
pressure on the other hand during the ensuing stroke. A good steerer in
sculling will correct his course even to half a stroke; if through a
bend, or a wave, or other cause, he sees one hand has taken the other a
little round by the time that the sculls are crossing, he will row the
other hand home a trifle sharper, and so bring the keel straight by the
time he feathers. When a sculler gets more settled to his work, and has
got over the first difficulty of clearing his hands at the crossing, he
will begin to acquire the knack of bringing the boat round to one hand,
without any distinct extra tug of that scull. He will press a trifle
more with the one foot, and will throw a little more of his weight on to
the one scull, and so produce the desired effect on his boat.
When a sculler promotes himself to a light boat, he must be very careful
not to lose the knack of even turns of wrists which he has been so
assiduously studying in his tub. In the wager boat, far more than in the
tub, is the action of the sculler's body affected and his labour
crippled by any uneven action of either hand. The gig did not roll if
one hand went into the water an infinitesimal fraction of a second
sooner, or came out that much later than the other hand. But the fragile
sculling boat, with no keel, and about thirteen inches of beam, resents
these liberties, and requires 'sitting' in addition, whenever any
inequality of work takes her off her balance. The sculler must
especially guard against feathering under water. He is more tempted to
do so now, while he is in an unsteady boat, than when he was in his
sober-going gig. He feels instinctively that if he lets his blades rest
flat on the water for the instant, when his stroke concludes, he
obtains for the moment a rectification of balance; the flat blades stop
rolling to either side; when he has thus steadied his craft, then he can
essay to lift his blades and to get forward. If he once yields to this
insidious temptation, he runs the risk of spoiling himself as a sculler,
and of ensuring that he will never rise beyond mediocrity. The hang
back, and the sloppy feather, which are to be seen in so many
second-class scullers, may almost invariably, if the history of the
sculler be known, be traced to want of nerve and of confidence in early
days to feather boldly, and to lift the sculls sharp from the water,
regardless of rolling. Of course, for the nonce, the sculler can sit
steadier, and therefore make more progress, if he thus steadies his
craft with his blades momentarily flat; and it is because of this fact
that so many beginners are seduced into the trick. But let the sculler
pluck up courage, and endeavour to imagine himself still afloat in his
gig. Let him turn his wrists as sharply as when he was in her, and lift
his blades boldly out, not even caring if he rolls clean over. There
really is little chance of his so capsizing. If he rolls, his one blade
or other floats in the water, and being strung over at the rowlock,
cannot well let his boat turn over, so long as he holds on to the
handle. Meantime, he must sit tight to his boat, and use his feet to
balance her with his body. He must not try to row too fast a stroke; a
quick stroke hides faults, and speed tends to keep a light craft on an
even keel so long as her crew are fresh; but style is not learned while
oarsmen or scullers are straining their utmost. If the sculler finds
that he really cannot make progress in his wager boat, he must assume
that he wants another spell of practice in his tub, and must revert
again to her for a week or two, or more. If he will only persevere in
studying even and simultaneous action of hands, he will get his reward
in time.
He should not be ambitious to race too soon. Many a young sculler spoils
himself by aspiring to junior scullers' races before he is ripe for
racing. It is a temptation to have a 'flutter,' just to see how one
gets on, but it is of no use to race unless the competitor has had some
gallops beforehand; and it is in trying to row a fast stroke before they
can thoroughly sit a boat that so many scullers sow seeds of bad style,
which stick to them long afterwards, and perhaps always. When at last
the sculler has learned to sit his boat, to drop his hands in
simultaneously, to feel an even pressure with both blades, to see his
stern-post hold on true, and not waver from side to side; when he is
able to drop and turn both wrists at the same instant, to lift both
blades clean away from the water, and to shoot out his hands without
fouling either his knees or the water, then he has mastered more than
half the scullers of the day--even though he can only perform thus for
half-a-dozen strokes at a time without encountering a roll. He can now
lay his weight well on his sculls, and can make his boat travel. He will
have done well if all this time he has abstained from indulging in a
slide; he does not need one as yet, he is not racing, and the fewer
things he has to think about the better chance he has of being able to
devote his attention to acquiring even hands and a tight seat. Once let
him gain these accomplishments, and he can then take to his slide, and
in his first race go by many an opponent who started sculling long
before him, but who began at once in a wager boat and on a slide.
[Illustration: A SPILL.]
A very good amateur sculler--J. E. Parker, winner of the Wingfield
Sculls in 1863--used to say that he always went back until his sculls
came out of the water of their own accord. As a piece of chaff, it used
to be said of him, by his friends, that there was a greasy patch on his
fore canvas, where his head came in contact with it at the end of his
stroke. Of course this was only a jest, but undoubtedly Parker swung
farther back than most scullers, perhaps more than any amateur. The
secret of his pace, which was indisputable, as also his staying power,
probably lay to a great extent in this long back swing of his. He also
sculled exceedingly cleanly, his hands worked in perfect unison, and his
blades came out clean and sharp. The writer cannot recall any sculler
whose blades were so clean, save Hanlan and also W. S. Unwin in 1886.
Much of the secret of each of these scullers lay in the evenness of
their hands; they wasted no power. F. Playford, junior, was a more
powerful sculler, and apparently faster than either of the above-named
amateurs (_ceteris paribus_ as to slides, _quâ_ Parker); but taking his
reach and weight into consideration, it is not to be wondered if
Playford was in his day the best of all Wingfield winners. The late Mr.
Casamajor was a great sculler. He also had a very long back swing, and
clean blades. He never had such tough opponents to beat as had Playford,
but at least it could be said of him that he was unbeaten in public in
any race.
Steerage apparatus is in these days fitted to many a sculling boat. The
writer, as an old stager, is bound to admit that he had retired from
active work before such mechanism was used, he therefore cannot speak
practically as to its value for racing. So far as he has watched its use
by scullers, he is induced to look upon the contrivance with suspicion.
On a stormy day, with beam wind for a considerable part of the course,
such an appendage will undoubtedly assist a sculler. It will save him
from having an arm almost idle in his lap during heavy squalls. But on
fairly smooth days, or when wind is simply ahead, a rudder must surely
detract more from pace (by reason of the water which it catches; even
when simply on the trail) than it ever will save by obviating the
operation of rowing a boat round by the hand to direct her course.
Again, the fittings which carry the rudder must, when the rudder is
unshipped, hold a certain amount of water to the detriment of speed.
Also, if a boat is pressed for a spurt, there must be some risk of the
tiller of the rudder (however delicately made), and the wires which
control it, pulling and drawing the water. When the canvas ducks under
water on recovery, it is important that the water should run off freely
when the boat springs to the stroke. If a post stands up at the stern,
however thin and metallic, this must to some degree check the flow off
of the water. Again, the feet must be moved to guide this rudder; while
they are thus shifting, the fullest power of the legs can hardly be
applied. A sculler who is in good practice, and who is at home with his
boat and sculls, should be able to feel his boat's course through each
stroke, and to adjust her at any one stroke if she has deviated during
the preceding one. On the whole, barring circumstances such as a stiff
westerly wind at Henley, or a gale on the tideway course, scullers will
do best without rudders; and if a competitor desires to provide against
the contingency of weather which will make a rudder advantageous, he had
better, if he can, have a spare boat fitted for that purpose, so that if
the water after all is smooth he will not be carrying any projecting
metal at his stern to draw the water and to check his pace.
There is another objection to the use of rudders, especially for young
scullers. It tempts them to rely on the rudder to rectify their course,
instead of studying even play of hands so that the boat may have no
excuse for deviating at all in smooth water.
All that has been said of the use of slides applies equally to sculling
as to rowing. The leg action, as compared to swing, should be just the
same when sculling as in rowing. That is, the slide should last as long
as the swing. Now, in sculling, a man should go back much further than
he does when rowing an oar. When he has an oar in his hand there is a
limit to the distance to which he can spring back with good effect. His
oar describes an arc; when he has gone back beyond a certain distance
the butt of his oar-handle will come at the middle of his breast or even
more inside the boat. In such a position he cannot finish squarely and
with good effect. Therefore he cannot go back _ad lib_. But the sculler
is always placed evenly to his work, it is not on one side of him more
than another. He should, when laying himself out for pace, swing back so
far that his sculls come out just as his hands touch his ribs. In a
wager boat, when well practised, he can afford to let his sculls overlap
as much as six or even seven inches. But, after all, the extent of
overlap is a matter of taste with so many scullers, that it would be
unwise to lay down any hard and fast rule, beyond saying that at least
the handles should overlap four inches, or, what is much the same, one
hand should at least cover the other when the sculls lie in the rowlocks
at right angles to the keel.
To return to the slide in sculling. Since the back swing should be
longer in sculling than in rowing, and as there is a limit to the length
which any pair of legs can slide, and since also it has been laid down
as a rule that both when sculling and when rowing the slide should be
economised so that it may last as long as the swing lasts, the reader
will gather that the legs will have to extend more gradually when
sliding to sculls than when sliding to oars. Therefore a man accustomed
to row on slides, and whose legs are more or less habituated to a
certain extension coupled with swing when rowing, must keep a watch upon
himself when sculling lest his rowing habits should make him finish his
slide prematurely, when he needs to prolong his swing for sculling.
Unless his slide lasts out his swing, his finish, after legs have been
extended, will only press the boat without propelling her.
In rowing an oarsman is guilty of fault if he meets or even pulls up to
his oar. In sculling, with a very long swing back it is not a fault to
commence the recovery of the body while the hands are still completing
their journey home to the ribs. The body should not drop, nor slouch
over the sculls while thus meeting them. It should recover with open
chest and head well up, simply pulling itself up slightly, to start the
back swing, by the handles of the sculls as they come home for the last
three or four inches of their journey. Casamajor always recovered then,
so did Hanlan, so did Parker, and any sculler who does likewise will sin
(if he does sin in the opinion of some hypercritics of style) in
first-class company. The fact is, this very long swing back (with
straight arms) entails much recovery, and yet materially adds to pace.
The sculler can afford to ease his recovery in return for the strain of
his long stroke. Also lest his long swing should press the boat's bows,
he can ease her recovery as well as his own, so soon as the main force
of the long drag comes to an end. In the writer's opinion, unless a
sculler really does go back _à la_ Casamajor & Co. with straight arms
and stiff back, and until his sculls come out of the water almost of
their own accord as he brings his hands in, it is not an advantage for
him to pull himself up to his handles to this trifling extent at the
finish. A sculler who does not swing back further than when he is
rowing, will do best to row his sculls home just as he would an oar.
In racing all men like a lead. If a sculler can take a lead with his
longest stroke, swinging back as far as he can, and can feel that he is
not doing a stroke too fast for his stamina, by all means let him do so;
but let him be careful not to hurry his stroke and thereby to shorten
his back swing simply for the sake of a lead. Many a long-swing sculler
spoils his style, at all events for the moment, by sprinting and trying
to cut his opponent down. It is almost best for him if he finds that his
opponent has the pace of him, and if he therefore relapses to his proper
style, and bides his time. If he does so, he will go all the faster over
the course for sticking to his style regardless of momentary lead. Some
scullers lay out their work for pace, regardless of lasting power. When
Chambers rowed Green in 1863, he tried to head the Australian, flurried
himself, shortened his giant reach, lost pace, and, after all, lost the
lead. When he realised that, force pace as much as he could, Green was
too speedy, the Tyne man settled to his long sweep, and at once went all
the faster, though now sculling a slower stroke. It was not long before
Green began to come back to him, and the result of that match is
history.
Similarly, the writer recollects seeing the celebrated Casamajor win the
Diamonds for the last time, in 1861. He was opposed by Messrs. G. R. Cox
and E. D. Brickwood. Cox was a sculler who laid himself out for fast
starting: he used very small blades, he did not swing further back than
when rowing, and he sculled a very rapid stroke. He had led both
Casamajor and H. Kelley in a friendly spin earlier in the year, and it
was said that it was to vindicate his reputation as being still the best
sculler of the day that the old unbeaten amateur once more entered for
the Diamonds, where he knew he would encounter Cox in earnest, and no
longer in play. (Casamajor was by no means in good health, and the grave
closed over him in the following August.)
In the race in question Cox darted away with the lead. Casamajor had
hitherto led all opponents in real racing, and _amour propre_ seemed to
prompt him to bid for the lead against the new flyer; he quickened and
quickened his stroke, till his long swing back vanished, and his boat
danced up and down, but he could not hold Cox. Brickwood was last,
rowing his own style, and sculling longest of the three. After passing
the Farm gate, Casamajor suddenly changed his style, and went back to
his old swing. Maybe, Cox had already begun to come to the end of his
tether; but, be that as it may, from the instant that Casamajor
re-adopted his old swing back, he held Cox. (It did not look as if the
pace was really falling off, for both the leaders were still drawing
away from Brickwood.) In another minute Casamajor began to draw up to
the leader, still swinging back as before. Then he went ahead, and all
was over. Brickwood in the end rowed down Cox, and came in a good
second. Casamajor at that time edited the 'Field' aquatics. His own
description therein of himself in the race seems to imply that he
realised how he had at first thrown away his speed by bidding for the
lead, and that he purposely, and not unconsciously, changed his style
about the end of the first minute and a half of the race. His
description of his own sculling at that juncture (modestly penned) was
'now rowing longer and with all his power.' This was quite true--he was
not using his full power until he relapsed to his old style. These
illustrations of two of the best scullers ever seen bidding for
impossible leads, and then realising their mistakes in time, may be
taken to heart by all modern and future aspirants to sculling honour.
[Illustration: SCULLING RACE, WITH PILOTS IN EIGHT-OARS.]
Another reason why scullers like a lead is that it saves them from being
'washed' by a leader, and, conversely, enables them to 'wash an
opponent.' In old days of boat-racing under the old code, lead was of
importance, to save water being taken. Under new rules of boat-racing
(which figure elsewhere in this volume), water can only be taken at
peril. There is not, therefore, so much importance in lead as of old. As
to 'wash,' if a man can sit a sculling boat, he does not care much for
wash. Anyhow, he can, if in his own water, and if his adversary crosses
him, steer exactly in his leader's wake; the wash then spreads like a
swallow's tail on either side of the sternmost man, and does not affect
him. His opponent must get out of his way, if not overtaken, so he need
not disturb himself; and if the leader insists on steering to right or
left simply to direct the wash, he loses more ground by this meandering
than even the pursuer will lose by the slight perturbations of a
sculling boat's wash for a few strokes. It is good practice for any
sculler to take his boat now and then in the wake of another sculler,
and try to 'bump' him. It will teach him how to sit his boat under such
circumstances, and he will be surprised before long to find out how
little he cares for being washed by another sculler.
A sculler, when practising over a course, especially when water is
smooth, may with advantage time himself from day to day at various
points of the course. He will thus find out what his best pace is, and
will ascertain whether his speed materially falls off towards the end,
if he forces extra pace at the start or halfway or so on. He must be
careful to judge _proportionately_ of times and distances, and not
positively; for streams may vary, and so may wind.
On the tideway in sculling matches, it is usual for pilots to conduct
scullers. The pilot sits in the bow of an eight. The sculler may rely on
the pilot to signal to him whether he is in the required direction; but
when he once knows that his boat points right, he should note where her
stern points, just as if he were steering upon his own resources, and
should endeavour so to regulate his hands that his stern keeps straight,
as shown by some distant landmark which he selects. This straight line
he should then maintain to the best of his ability, bringing his
stern-post back to it, if it deflects, until his pilot again signals to
him to change his course, for rounding some curve or for clearing some
obstacle. The pilot cannot inform his charge of each small inaccuracy
which leads eventually to deflection from the correct line; this the
sculler must provide against on his own account. It is only when the
course has to be changed, or when the sculler has palpably gone out of
his course, that the signals of the pilot come into play. Some scullers
seem to make up their minds to leave everything to their pilots; the
result is that their boats are never in a straight line; first they go
astray to one side, and then, when signalled back, they take a stroll to
the other side. Such scullers naturally handicap themselves greatly by
thus losing ground through these tortuous wanderings. The simplest
method of signalling by pilot is to hold a white handkerchief. In the
right or left hand it means 'pull right or left,' respectively. When
down, it means 'boat straight and keep it so.' If the pilot gets far
astern, or if dangers are ahead which are beyond pilotage, taking off
the hat means 'look out for yourself.'
When wind is abeam, a pilot cutter can materially aid a sculler by
bringing its bow close on his windward quarter, thereby sheltering his
stern from the action of the wind. Races such as that of Messrs. Lowndes
and Payne for the Wingfield Sculls in 1880, when Mr. Payne did not row
his opponent down until the last mile had well begun, should remind all
scullers that a race is never lost till it is won, and that, however
beaten you may feel, it is possible that your opponent feels even worse,
and that he may show it in the next few strokes.
[Illustration: PUMPED OUT.]
[Illustration: THE LAST OF THE THAMES WHERRIES.]
CHAPTER XI.
BOAT-BUILDING AND DIMENSIONS.
The 'trim built wherry' of song has been improved off the face of the
Thames. Originally it was purely a passenger craft: it contained space
for two or more sitters in the stern, and was fitted for two pair of
sculls or a pair of oars at option. Larger wherries were also built,
'randan' rig (for a pair of oars with a sculler amidships, or three
pairs of sculls at option). Such boats were the passenger craft of the
silent highway before steamers destroyed the watermen's trade. When
match racing came into vogue, wherries began to be constructed for
purely racing purposes; they had but one seat, for the sculler, and were
carried as fine as they could be, at either end, with regard to the surf
which they often had to encounter. Their beam on the waterline was
reduced to a minimum; but at the same time it was necessary, for
mechanical purposes, that the gunwale, at the points where the rowlocks
were placed, should be of sufficient width to enable the sculler to
obtain the necessary leverage and elevation of his sculls. The gunwale
was accordingly flared out wide at these points, above the waterline.
This flared gunwale had nothing to do with the flotation of the boat; it
was in effect nothing more than a wooden outrigger, and it was this
which eventually suggested to the brain of old Harry Clasper the idea of
constructing an iron outrigger, thereby enabling the beam to be reduced,
and at the same time the sculling leverage to be preserved without the
encumbrance of the top hamper of these flared gunwales. Such was the old
wager wherry, and its later development of the wager outrigger.
We have said that the wherry is obsolete. Modern watermen use, for
passenger purposes, a craft called a 'skiff.' She is an improvement on
the 'gig,' a vessel which came into vogue on the Thames for amateur
pleasure purposes about the year 1830. The 'gig' was originally adopted
from naval ideas. She had a flush gunwale, and the rowlocks were placed
on the top of it. So soon as the outrigger came in, oarsmen realised the
advantage to be gained by applying it to the gig, in a modified form.
Half-outrigged gigs became common; they had a reduced beam, and
commanded more speed; they were used for cruising purposes as well as
for racing. Many regattas offered prizes for pair oars with coxswains in
outrigged gigs. Theoretically a gig was supposed to be 'clinker' built,
i.e. each of her timbers were so attached to each other that the lower
edge of each upper timber overlapped the upper edge of the timber below
it, the timbers being 'clincked,' hence the name. 'Carvel' (or caravel)
build is that in which the timbers lie flush to each other, presenting a
smooth surface. This offers less resistance, and before long builders
constructed so-called 'gigs' for racing purposes, which were carvel
built. From this it was but a step to build racing gigs with but two or
even one 'streak' only, i.e. the side of the hull, instead of being
constructed of several planks fastened together, was made of one, or at
most two planks. The ends of the vessel were open--uncanvassed, and in
this respect only was there anything in common with a 'gig' proper.
This system of stealing advantages by tricks of build caused gig races
to be fruitful sources of squabbles, until regatta committees recognised
the importance of laying down conditions as to build when advertising
their races.
To return to gigs proper. This craft did not find the same favour fifty
years ago with the professional classes that it did with amateurs. The
wherry was still adhered to for traffic; but meantime Thames fishermen,
especially those who plied flounder fishery on the upper tideway, used
what is called a skiff; a shorter boat, with as much beam as the largest
wherry, a bluff bow, and flared rowlocks. She was strongly built,
adapted to carry heavy burdens, and, by reason of being shorter, was
easier to turn, and handier for short cruises. A similar class of boat,
but often rougher and more provincial in construction, was to be found
in use at some of the up-river ferries. The wherry, when once under way,
had more speed than the skiff, but when long row-boat voyages ceased in
consequence of the introduction of steamers, the advantage of the skiff
over the wherry was recognised by watermen. Their jobs came down to
ferrying, to taking passengers on board vessels lying in the stream, and
such like work; and for these services speed was not so important as
handiness in turning.
During the last fifteen years the skiff build has found more favour for
pleasure purposes than the gig. The outrigged gig is liable to
entanglement of rowlock in locks, and where craft are crowded, as at
regattas. (It would be a salutary matter if the Thames Conservancy would
peremptorily forbid the presence of any such craft at Henley Regatta.)
Inrigged craft glide off each other when gunwales collide, whereas
outriggers foul rowlocks of other boats, and cause delay and even
accidents. An outrigged gig has two alternative disadvantages, compared
to the skiff build; if she is as narrow at the waterline as the skiff,
her flush gunwale reduces the leverage for oar or scull. If, on the
other hand, she is built to afford full leverage, this entails more beam
on the waterline than in a skiff, the rowlocks of which are raised and
flared above the gunwale. Hence it is that the skiff build is gradually
superseding the once universally popular gig.
A dingey is a short craft, originally designed as a sort of tender to a
yacht, but adopted for pleasure purposes on the Thames for nearly half a
century. It is sometimes built with a flush gunwale like a gig, but more
commonly with flared rowlocks like a skiff, thereby affording the
required leverage for swells, while at the same time reducing the beam
on the waterline.
Besides the above mentioned craft, which are designed to carry at least
two oarsmen (or scullers) and a coxswain, modern boat-builders construct
what are called sculling dingies and gigs, which are fitted with only
one pair of rowlocks, and are intended mainly for occupation by a single
sculler, though they will at a pinch carry sitters both in the stern
sheets and in the bows. They also build sailing gigs and dingies, which
are usually fitted with a 'centreboard,' and are of greater beam than
those specially designed for rowing or sculling; though they can be also
propelled by oars or sculls when required, they are less handy for the
latter purposes, in consequence of their construction for the double
duties of both sailing and oarsmanship. The following are dimensions
commonly adopted by builders, such as Messrs. Salter of Oxford, for
various classes of gigs, dingies, and pleasure skiffs:--
Length. Beam.
Gig, pair-oared, inrigged 22 ft. 3 ft. 9 in.
ditto randan 25 ft. 3 ft. 9 in.
Skiffs, pair-oared 25 ft. 4 ft. 0 in.
ditto 23 ft. 4 ft. 6 in.
ditto 20 ft. 5 ft. 0 in.
The variations in beam being in such vessels designed conversely as
regards the lengths, in order to obtain approximate equivalent of
displacement--
Length. Beam.
Skiffs, randan 26 ft. to 27 ft. 4 ft. 0 in.
ditto 25 ft. 4 ft. 6 in. to 5 ft
Where the beam ranges as high as 5 feet the vessel will carry about four
sitters in the stern. The narrower craft carry about two, sitting
abreast in the stern.
Dingies (inrigged) range from about 12 feet in length with 4 feet beam
to 16 feet in length with about 3 ft. 6 in. beam.
Some dingies are built as short as 9 feet, but they command but little
speed, and are useful only as tenders to larger vessels for the purpose
of going ashore, &c. Their shortness makes them handy to turn, and
compensates in short journeys for their want of speed.
The prices of the various builds enumerated above depend much upon the
materials used, whether oak, mahogany, cedar, or pine; and also upon
length of keel, and upon fittings, such as oars, sculls, cushions,
stern-rails, &c., masts and sails. Figures vary from about 40_l._ for a
best quality randan skiff, all found, to as low as 20_l._ for a gig, and
12_l._ for a dingey, turned out new from the builder's yard.
It is customary to fit all rowing boats such as above described with a
hole in the bow seat, and also in the flooring below, in order to carry
a lug or sprit sail when required; but the shallow draught of such
vessels as are not fitted with centreboards causes them to make a good
deal of leeway and so disables them from sailing near the wind.
Racing boats are generally built of cedar, sometimes of white pine. The
history of the introduction of the various improvements of outriggers,
keelless boats, and sliding seats, has been given in other chapters. We
propose here simply to give a few samples of dimensions of racing boats.
Various builders have various lines, and no exact fixed scale can be
laid down as correct more than another.
_Dimensions of a sculling-boat recently used by Bubear in a sculling
match for the 'Sportsman Challenge Cup,' built by Jack Clasper._
Length 31 ft. 0 in.
Width 0 ft. 11 in.
Depth, amidships 0 ft. 5-3/4 in.
" forward 0 ft. 3-1/2 in.
" sternpost 0 ft. 2-1/4 in.
_Historical Eight-oars (Keelless)._
Length. Beam. Builder.
1. Oxford boat,[9] 1857 54 ft. 0 in. 2 ft. 2-1/2 in. Mat Taylor.
(at No. 3's rowlock)
2. Eton, 1863 57 ft. 0 in. 2 ft. 1 in. Mat Taylor.
Depth at stern 6 in.
3. Radley, 1858 56 ft. 0 in. 2 ft. 0-3/4 in. Sewell,
Depth at stern 7-1/2 in. for King.
4. Oxford, 1878 57 ft. 0 in. 1 ft. 10 in. Swaddell &
Depth at stern 6 in. Winship.
5. Oxford, 1883 58 ft. 0 in. 1 ft. 10-1/2 in. J. Clasper.
Depth at stern 6-1/2 in.
[9] The first keelless eight that won a University match.
These boats are selected because each in its turn won some reputation,
and also because they exemplify the builds of different constructors.
No. 1 was always highly esteemed by those who rowed in her.
No. 2 carried Eton at Henley Regatta from 1863 to 1870 or 1871.
No 3 was eulogised by Mr. T. Egan in 'Bell's Life,' on the occasion of
her _début_ in the above-mentioned school match _v._ Eton. She retained
a high reputation for several seasons, was once specially borrowed by
Corpus (Oxon) during the summer eights, and was said by that crew to be
a vast improvement on their own ship.
No 4 carried Oxford from 1878 to 1882 inclusive, losing only the match
in 1879, in which year the crew and not the boat were to blame.
No. 5, after one or two trials, was in 1883 found to be faster than No.
4 (which was then getting old!), and in her the Oxonians won a rather
unexpected victory; odds of 3 to 1 being laid against them.
In addition to these builds, the dimensions recorded by the well-known
authority 'Argonaut,' in his standard work on 'Boat Racing,' are here
given. That writer does not commit himself to saying that they are the
_best_, but simply states that they are the 'average dimensions' of
modern racing boats. Unfortunately, the writer cannot trace the
dimensions of the celebrated 'Chester' boat, Mat Taylor's first keelless
_chef-d'[oe]uvre_, but he recollects that her length was only 54 feet;
and her stretchers were built into her and were fixed.
The cost of a racing eight, with all fittings, is about 55_l._ Some
builders will build at as low a price as 50_l._, especially for a crack
crew, or for an important race, because the notoriety of the vessel, if
successful, naturally acts as an advertisement. A four-oar costs 35_l._
to 40_l._; a pair-oar 20_l._ to 25_l._; and a sculling boat 12_l._ We
have known some builders ask 15_l._ for a sculling boat. On the whole,
racing boats are from eight to ten per cent. cheaper nowadays than they
were a quarter of a century ago. Although the introduction of sliding
seats necessarily adds to the expense of making them, competition seems
to have brought down the prices somewhat.
_'Argonaut's' Dimensions of Modern Boats._
+-------------------+---------+-------------------+---------+---------+
| | | Racing Fours | Pair | Sculling|
| | Racing +---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Particulars | Eight | With | Without | Oars | Boats |
| | | Cox. | Cox. | | |
+-------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| |ft. in. |ft. in. |ft. in. |ft. in. |ft. in. |
|Length of boat |58 6 |41 0 |40 0 |34 4 |30 0 |
|Breadth (over all) | 2 0 | 1 9 | 1 8 | 1 4-3/8| 1 4[10]|
|Depth, amidships | 1 1-1/2| 1 0-1/2| 1 0 | 0 10-1/2| 0 8-1/2|
| " stem | 0 8 | 0 7-1/4| 0 7-1/2| 0 4-1/4| 0 3-1/2|
| " stern | 0 7-1/4| 0 6-3/4| 0 6-1/2| 0 3-3/4| 0 2-3/4|
|Distance from seat | | | | | |
|to thowl[11] | 0 5 | 0 5 | 0 5 | 0 4-1/2| 0 4 |
|Height of work from| | | | | |
|level of slide | 0 7-3/4| 0 7-3/4| 0 7-3/4| 0 7-1/2| 0 7-1/2|
|Length of slide | 1 4 | 1 4 | 1 4 | 1 5 | 1 5-1/2|
|Length of amidship{| | | | | |
|oars {|12 6 |12 6 |12 6 | -- | -- |
| Buttoned at {| 3 6 | 3 5-1/2| 3 5-1/2| -- | -- |
|Length of bow and{ | | | | | |
|stroke oars { |12 4 |12 4 |12 4 |12 3 | -- |
| Buttoned at { | 3 4-1/2| 3 4-1/2| 3 4-1/2| 3 4 | -- |
|Length of sculls {| -- | -- | -- | -- {|10 0 |
| Buttoned at {| -- | -- | -- | -- {| 2 8 |
|Space between }| | | | | |
|cox.'s thwart and }| | | | | |
|stroke's stretcher}| 1 8 | 1 8 | -- | -- | -- |
|(cox.'s thwart }| | | | | |
|18 inches deep) }| | | | | |
+-------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
[10] Breadth on boat, 11-1/4 inches.
[11] Measured from front edge of slide to plane of thowl.
The writer thinks, and believes that 'Argonaut' would agree with him,
that these recorded average dimensions could be improved upon in divers
respects, e.g. as to oars, for sliding seats the length 'inboard' should
not be less than 3 ft. 7-1/2 in. to 3 ft. 8 in.; otherwise, when the
oarsman swings back there is not sufficient length of handle to enable
his outside hand to finish square to his chest, and with the elbow well
past the side. The sliding-seat oar requires to be at least 10 inches
longer inboard than the fixed-seat oar, for the above reason; and in
order to counterpoise this extra leverage, it is customary to use blades
an inch wider for slides than for fixed seats, viz. 6 inches wide at the
greatest breadth, instead of 5 inches as of old.
Again, as to distance of the plane of the thowl perpendicularly from
that of the front of the slide when full forward. This should not be
less than 6-1/2 inches, in the writer's opinion, even with a 16-inch
slide. If the oarsman slides nearer than the above to his work, he does
not gain; for much of his force is thus expended in jamming the oar back
against the rowlock, rather than in propelling the boat. He 'feels'
extra resistance, and may accordingly delude himself that he is doing
more work, if the slides close up; but in reality he is wasting his
powers.
In modern racing boats, the men slide too close to their work; and if
any builder will have the courage to set his men further aft than is the
custom (say about 6-1/2 to 7 inches), he will find his ship travel all
the faster.
As to shapes of hull: the earliest Mat Taylor boats have never been
surpassed, in the writer's opinion, and were much faster than the modern
builds. The peculiarity of Mat Taylor's build was that he put his
greatest beam well forward, about No. 3's middle or seat. Such boats
held more 'way' than more modern craft, which are fullest amidships.
Builders of the present day construct as if the only problem which they
had to solve was to force a hole through the water in front of the boat.
This is not all that is necessary in order to get a boat to travel well.
A racing boat leaves a vacuum behind her, and until that is filled she
is sucked back into that vacuum.
A boat built like the half of a split porcupine's quill could enter the
water with the least resistance, but would leave it with the greatest;
in fact, she would not travel at all, because her bluff stern would
create a sudden vacuum behind her, which would retard her progress. This
is a _reductio ad absurdum_, but it shows the effect of having the
greatest beam too far aft. The problem to be solved in designing the
lines of a boat is so to arrange her entry into the water, that what she
displaces in front may with greatest ease flow aft to fill the vacuum
aft which she leaves as she progresses. Otherwise she pushes a heavy
wave in front of her, and drags another behind her. If anyone will watch
the bank as a racing eight passes, noting the level of the water at a
rathole, he will see the level of the stream first rise as the boat
comes nearly abreast of his point of observation. Then, as she passes,
the water will sink, and after she has passed it will rise again higher
than before she neared the spot.
The first rise is caused by the boat pushing a wave in front of her: the
following depression is caused by the vacuum which she is leaving behind
her, and the final rise by the wave which runs behind her to fill her
vacuum. Obviously, the less water the vessel moves the easier she
travels. If by any designing the wave pushed in front could be induced
to run more or less back to the stern, then the second (following) wave
would be more or less reduced in bulk, and the labour would be
proportionately lighter.
The finer the lines taper aft, the easier the front wave displaced finds
its way to the vacuum aft. _Per contra_, the more bluff the midship and
stern sections, the greater the difficulty in filling the vacuum aft.
Builders hamper themselves by adhering to a red-tape idea that all
oarsmen in a boat should be seated at equal distances from each other.
So long as designers adhere to this, they require a good deal of beam
aft, if Nos. 6, 7 and stroke are of anything like average size. Of
course, there must be a minimum of space for each man to reach out in;
but there is no reason why in some of the seats the space should not
exceed this minimum, e.g. to set the first four men at the minimum, and
then to place No. 5 and extra inch past No. 4 and so on, with perhaps
stroke and 7 1-1/2 inches further apart than the forward men, would
enable the builder to attain a greater longitudinal displacement at the
sternmost part of the boat than he would otherwise require to carry his
men. In lieu of this gain, he can then reduce his beam and depth aft,
and so make his lines taper more to the stern.
Mat Taylor built on this principle. Detractors used to laugh sometimes
to see him chalk off his seats, and say, 'A rowlock here--a seat there.'
The fact was, Mat Taylor placed his men, man for man, over the section
of vessel built to carry them, allowing the minimum distance for reach
in all cases, but by no means tying himself down to that distance where
in his opinion the boat required elongating aft. They said he built by
rule of thumb; so, perhaps, he did, but his builds have never been
surpassed. Modern eights travel faster than of old, thanks to sliding
seats and good oarsmanship, but if some of the old lost lines could be
now reproduced, the speedy crews of modern days would be speedier still.
We offer one more illustration to show the effect of having too sudden a
termination to a boat aft of her greatest beam, or of a certain amount
of beam. Let anyone construct two models of racing boat hulls; probably
he will not succeed in making two of equal speed, but such as they are
he can handicap the speedier in his experiment. Let him place the two
models to race, each towed by a line carried over a pulley, with a
weight at the end of the line. The weights which tow the two models can
be adjusted till the two run dead heats.
Then cut off the stern of one of the models, and bulkhead her, say about
coxswain's seat, and let them race once more with the forces which
previously produced a dead heat. The model with a docked stern will have
become the smaller vessel, and will now weigh less. Nevertheless, she
will become decidedly slower than she was before, and will be beaten by
her late duplicate.
In order to do justice to this experiment, the weights should tow at a
pace equivalent to about four miles or more an hour. It will then be
seen that this docked model leaves a whirlpool behind her stern, which
is retarding her. This experiment of course exaggerates the principle of
full afterlines, and their evil, but it may none the less serve to
illustrate the importance of a finer run aft from a point further
forward than amidships. _En passant_, the boat built by Salter of Oxford
for the O.U.B.C. in 1865 may be mentioned; her dimensions are not to be
traced, but she was specially designed to carry the heaviest man (E. F.
Henley) at bow. She was certainly never surpassed by any other boat
which Salter built. She won in 1865. In 1866 a heavier crew were in
training, and the 1865 boat was supposed to be too small. She was not
tried at all at Oxford with the crew. A new boat was built, this time to
carry E. F. Henley at 5. When the crew reached Putney the writer felt
dissatisfied with the movement of the new boat, and persuaded the crew
to try the old one, even though she would be rather too small for them.
They sent for her, and launched for a trial paddle the Monday before the
race; so soon as they had rowed a dozen strokes in her they stopped, and
declared she was the only light boat they had felt that season. They
rowed the race in her, and won, and never took the trouble to set foot
again in the new and rejected boat.
This victorious boat was then bought by the Oxford Etonians. They won
the Grand Challenge of 1866 and 1867 in her, took her to Paris, and
there won the eight-oared race at the International Regatta. She was
sold and left behind in Paris. The writer suspects that her undeniable
speed was mainly owing to the fact that Salter designed some extra
displacement at No. 3, in order to carry E. F. Henley at that seat.
[Illustration: 'POETRY.']
CHAPTER XII.
TRAINING.
DIET.
That 'condition' tells in all contests, whether in brain labours such as
chess matches or in athletics, is known to children in the schoolroom.
Training is the _régime_ by means of which condition is attained. Its
dogmas are of two orders: (1) Those which relate to exercise, (2) those
which refer to diet. Diet of itself does not train a man for rowing or
any other kind of athletics. What trains is hard work; proper diet keeps
the subject up to that work.
The effect of a course of training is twofold. It develops those
muscles which are in use for the exercise in question, and it also
prepares the internal organs of heart and lungs for the extra strain
which will be put upon them during the contest. All muscles tend to
develop under exercise, and to dwindle under inaction. The right
shoulder and arm of a nail-maker are often out of all proportion to the
left; the fingers of a pianist develop activity with practice, or lose
it if the instrument be discontinued.
Training is a thorough science, and it is much better understood in
these days than when the writer was in active work; and again, the
trainers of his day were in their turn far ahead of those of the early
years of amateur oarsmanship. From the earliest recorded days of
athletic contests, there seems to have been much faith pinned to
beefsteaks. When Socrates rebukes Thrasymachus, in the opening pages of
Plato's 'Republic,' he speaks of beefsteaks as being the chief subject
of interest to Polydamos, who seems to have been a champion of the P.R.
of Athens of those days. The beefsteak retains its prestige to the
present day, but it is not the _ne plus ultra_ which it was in 1830.
The earliest amateur crews seem to have rowed in many instances without
undergoing a course of training and of reduction of fat. But when
important matches began to be made, the value of condition was
appreciated. Prizefighters had then practical training longer than any
other branch of athletics, and it was by no means uncommon for watermen,
when matched by their patrons, to be placed under the supervision of
some mentor from the P.R. as regards their diet and exercise. But before
long watermen began to take care of themselves in this respect. Their
system of training did not differ materially from that in vogue with the
P.R. It consisted of hard work in thick clothing, early during the
course of preparation, to reduce weight; and a good deal of pedestrian
exercise formed part of the day's programme; a material result of the
association of the P.R. system of preparation. The diet was less varied
and liberal than in these days, but abstinence from fluid to as great
an extent as possible was from the outset recognised as all-important
for reducing bulk and clearing the wind.
A prizefighter or waterman used to commence his training with a liberal
dose of physic. The idea seems to have a stable origin, analogous to the
principle of physic balls for a hunter on being taken up from grass. The
system was not amiss for men of mature years, who had probably been
leading a life of self-indulgence since the time when they had last been
in training. But when University crews began to put themselves under the
care of professional trainers, those worthies used to treat these
half-grown lads as they would some gin-sodden senior of forty, and would
physic their insides before they set them to work. They would try to
sweat them down to fiddle-strings, and were not happy unless they could
show considerable reduction of weight in the scale, even with a lad who
had not attained his full growth. Still, though many a young athlete
naturally went amiss under this severe handling, there is no doubt that
these professional trainers used to turn out their charges in very fine
condition, on the average.
No trainer of horses would work a two-year-old on the same system that
he would an aged horse; and the error of these old professional trainers
lay in their not realising the difference in age between University men
and the ordinary classes of professional athletes. In time University
men began to think and to act for themselves in the matter of training.
When college eights first began to row against each other, there were
only three or four clubs which manned eights; and these eights now and
then were filled up with a waterman or two. (In these days few college
crews would take an Oxford waterman as a gift--_quâ_ his oarsmanship!)
These crews, when they began to adopt training, employed watermen as
mentors. Before long there were more eights than watermen, and some
crews could not obtain this assistance. The result was, a rule against
employing professional tuition within a certain date of the race. This
regulation threw University men upon their own resources, and before
long they came to the conclusion that good amateur coaching and training
was more effective than that of professionals. Mr. F. Menzies, the late
Mr. G. Hughes, and the Rev. A. Shadwell, had much to do in converting
the O.U.B.C. to these wholesome doctrines. From that time amateurs of
all rowing clubs have very much depended on themselves and their
_confrères_ for tuition in oarsmanship and training.
The usual _régime_ of amateur training is now very much to the following
effect.
Réveille at 6.30 or 7 A.M.--Generally a brief morning walk; and if so,
the 'tub' is usually postponed until the return from the walk. If it is
summer, and there are swimming facilities, a header or two does no harm,
but men should not be allowed to strike out hard in swimming, when under
hard rowing rules. For some reason, which medical science can better
explain, there seems to be a risk of straining the suspensory or some
other ligaments, when they are suddenly relaxed in water, and then
extended by a jerk. (This refers to arms that have lately been bearing
the strain of rowing.) Also, the soakage in water for any length of time
tends to relax the whole of the muscular system. Whether tub or swim be
the order of the morning, the skin should be well rubbed down with rough
towels after the immersion. In old days there used to be a _furore_ for
running before breakfast. Many young men find their stomachs and
appetites upset by hard work on an empty stomach, more especially in
sultry weather. The Oxford U.B.C. eight at Henley in 1857 and 1859 used
to go for a run up Remenham Hill before breakfast, and this within two
or three days of the regatta. Such a system would now be tabooed as
unsound.
Breakfast consists of grilled chops or steaks; cold meat may be allowed
if a man prefers it. If possible, it is well to let a roast joint cool
_uncut_, to supply cold meat for a crew. The gravy is thus retained in
the meat.
Bread should be one day old; toast is better than bread. Many crews
allow butter, but as a rule a man is better without it. It adds a
trifle to adipose deposit, and does not do any special service towards
strengthening his tissues or purifying his blood.
Some green meat at breakfast is a good thing. Watercress for
choice--next best are small salad and lettuce (plain).
Tea is the recognised beverage; two cups are ample for a man. If he can
dispense with sugar it will save him some ounces of fat, if he is at all
of a flesh-forming habit of body. A boiled egg is often allowed, to wind
up the repast.
[Illustration: GOING TO SCALE.]
Luncheon depends, as to its substance, very much upon the time of year
and the hours of exercise. If the work can be done in two sections,
forenoon and afternoon, all the better. In hot summer weather it may be
too sultry to take men out between breakfast and the mid-day meal.
Luncheon now usually consists of cold meat, to a reasonable amount,
stale bread, green meat, and a glass of ale. In the days when the writer
was at Oxford, the rule of the O.U.B.C. was to allow no meat at luncheon
(only bread, butter, and watercress). This was a mistake; young men,
daily wasting a large amount of tissue under hard work, had a natural
craving for substantial food to supply the hiatus in the system. By
being docked of it at luncheon, they gorged all the more at breakfast
and dinner, where there was no limit as to quantity (of solids) to be
consumed. They would have done better had their supply of animal food
been divided into three instead of two daily allowances. They used to be
allowed one slice of cold meat during their nine days' stay at Putney;
it would have been well to have allowed this all through training.
Dinner consists mainly of roast beef or mutton, or choice of both. It is
the custom to allow 'luxuries' of some sort every other day, e.g. fish
one day, and a course of roast poultry (chicken) on another. 'Pudding'
is sometimes allowed daily, sometimes it only appears in its turn with
'luxuries.' It generally consists of stewed fruit, with plain boiled
rice, or else calves'-foot jelly. A crust, or biscuit, with a little
butter and some watercress or lettuce, make a final course before the
cloth is cleared.
Drink is ale, for a standard; light claret, with water, is nowadays
allowed for choice, and no harm in it. A pint is the normal measure;
sometimes an extra half-pint may be conceded on thirsty days.
An orange and biscuit for dessert usually follow. In the writer's days
every man had two glasses of port wine. He thinks this was perhaps more
than was required (as regards alcohol); one glass may suffice, but there
may be no reason against the second wineglass being conceded, with water
substituted, if the patient is really dry. Claret also may take the
place of port after dinner. Fashions change; in the writer's active
days, claret would have been scorned as un-English for athletes.
Such is the usual nature of training diet; of the exercise of the day,
more anon. There does not seem to be much fault to find with the
_régime_ above sketched; in fact, the proof of soundness of the diet may
be seen in the good condition usually displayed by those who adopt it.
All the same, the writer, when he has trained crews, has slightly
modified the above in a few details. He has allowed (a little) fish or
poultry daily, as an extra course, and for the same reason has always
endeavoured to have both beef and mutton on the table. He believes that
change of dish aids appetite, so long as the varieties of food do not
clash in digestion. Men become tired with a monotony of food, however
wholesome. Puddings the writer does not think much of, provided that
other varieties of dish can be obtained. A certain amount of vegetable
food is necessary to blend with the animal food, else boils are likely
to break out; but green vegetables such as are in season are far better
than puddings for this purpose. Salad, daily _with the joint_, will do
good. It is unusual to see it, that is all. The salad should not be
dressed. Lettuce, endive, watercress, smallcress, beetroot, and some
minced spring onions to flavour the whole, make a passable dish, which a
hungry athlete will much relish. Asparagus, spinach, and French beans
may be supplied when obtainable. Green peas are not so good, and broad
beans worse. The tops of young nettles, when emerald green, make a
capital dish, like spinach, rather more tasty than the latter vegetable.
Such nettles can only be picked when they first shoot; old nettles are
as bad as flowered asparagus.
If a crew train in the fruit season, fruit to a small amount will not
harm them, as a finale to either breakfast or dinner. But the fruit
should be _very_ fresh, not bruised nor decomposed; strawberries,
gooseberries, grapes, peaches, nectarines, apricots (say one of the last
three, or a dozen of the smaller fruits, for a man's allowance), all are
admissible. Not so melons, nor pines--so medical friends assert.
In hot summer weather it is as well to dine about 2 P.M., to row in the
cool of the evening, towards 7 P.M., and to sup about 8.30 or 9 P.M. It
is a mistake to assume that because a regatta will come off midday,
therefore those who train for it should accustom themselves to a burning
sun for practice. With all due deference to Herodotus (who avers that
the skeleton skulls of quondam combatant Persians and Egyptians could
be known apart on the battle-field, because the turban-clad heads of
Persians produced soft skulls which crumbled to a kick, while the
sun-baked heads of Egyptians were hard as bricks), we do not believe in
this sort of acclimatisation. If men have to be trained to row a
midnight race, they would be best prepared for it by working at their
ordinary daylight hours, not by turning night into day for weeks
beforehand. On the same principle it would seem to be a mistake to
expose oarsmen in practice to excessive heat to which they have not been
accustomed, solely because they are likely eventually to row their race
under a similar sun. In really oppressive weather at Henley the writer
and his crews used to dine about 2 P.M. as aforesaid, finish supper at 9
or 9.30, and go to bed two hours later. They rose proportionately later
next day, taking a good nine hours in bed before they turned out. So far
as their records read, those crews do not seem on the whole to have
suffered in condition by this system of training.
Many men are parched with thirst at night. The heat of the stomach,
rather overladen with food, tends to this. The waste of the system has
been abnormal during the day; the appetite, i.e. instinct to replenish
the waste, has also been abnormal, and yet the capacity of the stomach
is only normal. Hence the stomach finds it hard work to keep pace with
the demands upon it. Next morning these men feel 'coppered,' as if they
had drunk too much overnight, and yet it is needless to say they have
not in any way exceeded the moderate scale of alcohol already propounded
above as being customary.
The best preventive of this tendency to fevered mouths is a cup of
'water gruel,' or even a small slop-basin of it, the last thing before
bedtime. It should not contain any milk; millet seed and oatmeal grits
are best for its composition. The consumption of this light supper
should be _compulsory_, whether it suits palates or not. The effect of
it is very striking; it seems to soothe and promote digestion, and to
allay thirst more than three times its amount of water would do. Some
few men cannot, or profess to be unable to, stomach this gruel. The
writer has had to deal with one or two such in his time. He had his
doubts whether their stomach or their whims were to blame; but in such
cases he gave way, and allowed a cup of chocolate instead--_without
milk_. (Milk blends badly with meat and wine at the end of a hard day.)
Chocolate is rather more fattening than gruel, otherwise it answers the
same purpose, of checking any disposition to 'coppers.'
It has been a time-honoured maxim with all trainers, that it is the
fluids which lay on fat and which spoil the wind. Accordingly, reduction
in the consumption of fluid has always been one of the first principles
of training, and it is a sound one so long as it is not carried to
excess. It is not at the outset of training that thirst so oppresses the
patient, but at the end of the first week and afterwards, especially
when temperature rises and days are sultry. Vinegar over greens at
dinner tends to allay thirst; the use of pepper rather promotes it. In
time the oarsman begins to accustom himself somewhat to his diminished
allowance of fluid, and he learns to economise it during his meals, to
wash down his solids.
A coach should be reasonably firm in resisting unnecessary petitions for
extra fluid, but he must exercise discretion, and need not be always
obdurate. On this subject the writer reproduces his opinion as expressed
in 'Oars and Sculls' in 1873:--
The tendency to 'coppers' in training is no proof of insobriety.
The whole system of training is unnatural to the body. It is an
excess of nature. Regular exercise and plain food are not in
themselves unnatural, but the amount of each taken by the
subject in training is what is unnatural. The wear and tear of
tissue is more than would go on at ordinary times, and
consequently the body requires more commissariat than usual to
replenish the system. The stomach has all its work cut out to
supply the commissariat, and leave the tendency to indigestion
and heat in the stomach. A cup of gruel seldom fails to set this
to rights, and a glass of water besides may also be allowed if
the coach is satisfied that a complaint of thirst is genuine.
There is no greater folly than stinting a man in his liquid. He
should not be allowed to blow himself out with drink, taking up
the room of good solid food; but to go to the other extreme, and
to spoil his appetite for want of an extra half-pint at dinner,
or a glass of water at bedtime, is a relic of barbarism. The
appetite is generally greatest about the end of the first week
of training. By that time the frame has got sufficiently into
trim to stand long spells of work at not too rapid a pace. The
stomach has begun to accustom itself to the extra demands put
upon it, and as at this time the daily waste and loss of flesh
is greater than later on, when there is less flesh to lose, so
the natural craving to replenish the waste of the day is greater
than at a later period. At this time the thirst is great, and
though drinking out of hours should be forbidden, yet the
appetite should not, for reasons previously stated, be suffered
to grow stale for want of sufficient liquid at meal times in
proportion to the solids consumed.
Such views would have been reckoned scandalously heretical twenty-five
or more years ago, but the writer feels that he is unorthodox in good
company, and is glad to find Mr. E. D. Brickwood, in his treatise on
'Boat-racing,' 1875, laying down his own experiences on the same subject
to just the same effect. Mr. Brickwood's remarks on the subject of
'thirst' (as per his index) may be studied with advantage by modern
trainers. He says (page 201):--
As hunger is the warning voice of nature telling us that our
bodies are in need of a fresh supply of food, so thirst is the
same voice warning us that a fresh supply of liquid is required.
Thirst, then, being, like hunger, a natural demand, may safely
be gratified, and with water in preference to any other fluid.
The prohibition often put upon the use of water or fluid in
training may often be carried too far. To limit a man to a pint
or two of liquid per day, when his system is throwing off three
or four times that quantity through the medium of the ordinary
secretions, is as unreasonable as to keep him on half-rations.
The general thirst experienced by the whole system, consequent
upon great bodily exertion or extreme external heat, has but one
means of cure--drink, in the simplest form attainable. Local
thirst, usually limited to the mucous linings, of the mouth and
throat, may be allayed by rinsing the mouth and gargling the
throat, sucking the stone of stone fruit, or a pebble, by which
to excite the glands in the affected part, or even by dipping
the hands into cold water. Fruit is here of very little
benefit, as the fluid passes at once to the stomach, and affords
no relief to the parts affected; but after rinsing the mouth,
small quantities may be swallowed slowly. The field for the
selection of food to meet the waste of the body under any
condition of physical exertions is by no means restricted. All
that the exceptional requirements of training call for is to
make a judicious selection; but, in recognising this principle,
rowing men have formed a dietary composed almost wholly of
restrictions the effect of which has been to produce a sameness
in diet which has almost been as injurious in some cases as the
entire absence of any laws would be in others.
It should be borne in mind that Mr. Brickwood's field as an amateur lay
principally in sculling, which entailed solitary training, unlike that
of a member of an eight or four. He had therefore to train himself, and
to trust to his own judgment when so doing, blending self-denial with
discretion. He is, in the above quotation, apparently speaking of the
principles under which he governed himself when training. That they were
crowned with good success his record as an athlete shows, for he twice
won the Diamond Sculls, and also held the Wingfield (amateur
championship) in 1861. Such testimony therefore is the more valuable
coming from a successful and self-trained sculler.
As regards sleep, the writer lays great stress upon obtaining a good
amount of it. Even if a night is sultry, and sleep does not come easily,
still the oarsman can gain something by mere physical repose, though his
brain may now and then not obtain rest so speedily as he could wish. The
adage ascribed to King George III. as to hours of sleep, 'six for a man,
seven for a woman, and eight for a fool,' is unsound. He who is credited
with having propounded it, showed in his later years that, either his
brain had suffered from deficiency of rest, or that it never had been
sufficiently brilliant to justify much attention being bestowed on his
philosophy. Probably he never did a really hard day's (still less a
week's) labour, of either brain or body, in his life. Had he done so, he
would have found that not six, nor seven, and often not eight hours, are
too much to enable the wasted tissues of brain or body, or both, to
recuperate. It is when in a state of repose that the blood, newly made
from the latest meal, courses through the system and replenishes what
has been wasted during the day. Recruits are never measured for the
standard at the end of a day's march, but next day--after a good rest.
Cartilage, sinew, muscle, alike waste. The writer used, after racing the
Henley course, perhaps thrice in an evening's practice (twice in a four
or eight and afterwards in a pair-oar or sculling boat, &c), to take a
good nine hours' sound sleep, and awoke all the better for it. Some men
keep on growing to a comparatively late age in life; such men require
more sleep, while thus increasing in size, than others who have earlier
attained full bulk and maturity. As a rule, and regardless of what many
other trainers may say to the contrary, the writer believes that the
majority of men in training may sleep nine hours with advantage.
The period of training varies according to circumstances. A man of
twenty-five and upwards, who has been lying by for months, it may be for
a year or two, can do with three months of it. The first half should be
less severe than the last. He can begin with steady work, to redevelop
his muscles, and to reduce his bulk (if he is much over weight) by
degrees. The last six weeks should be 'strict' in every sense. He can
get into 'hunting' condition in the first six weeks, and progress to
'racing' condition in the succeeding six.
University crews train from five to six weeks. The men are young, and
have, most of them, been in good exercise some time before strict
training begins.
College crews cannot give much more than three weeks to train for the
summer bumping races; tideway crews have been doing a certain amount of
work for weeks before they go into strict training for Henley; this last
stage usually lasts about four weeks.
It is often supposed that a man needs less training for a short than for
a long course. This is a mistake. The longer he prepares himself, so
long as he does not overdo himself, the better he will be. Long and
gradual training is better than short and severe reductions. Over a long
course, when an untrained man once finds nature fail him, more ground
will be lost than over a short course: _cela va sans dire_: but that is
no argument against being thoroughly fit for even a half-mile row. The
shorter the course, the higher the pressure of pace, and the crew that
cracks first for want of condition--loses (_ceteris paribus_).
Athletes of the running path will agree that it is as important to train
a man thoroughly for a quarter-mile race as for a three-mile struggle.
Pace kills, and it is condition which enables the athlete to endure the
pace.
[Illustration: SMOKING IS FORBIDDEN.]
Smoking is, as every schoolboy knows, forbidden in training. However,
_pro formâ_, the fact must be recorded that it is illicit. It spoils the
freedom of the lungs, which should be as elastic as possible, in order
to enable them to oxygenate properly the extra amount of blood which
circulates under violent exertions.
Aperients at the commencement of training used to be _de rigueur_.
Young men of active habits hardly need them. Anyhow, no trainer should
attempt to administer them on his own account; if he thinks the men need
physic at the outset, let him call in a medical man to prescribe for
them.
WORK.
We have said that proper diet keeps an oarsman up to the work which is
necessary to bring him into good condition. Having detailed the _régime_
of diet, and its appurtenances, such as sleep, we may now deal with the
system of work itself.
One item of work we have incidentally dealt with, to wit, the morning
walk; but it was necessary to handle this detail at that stage because
it had a reference to the morning tub and morning meal.
The work which is set for a crew should be guided by the distance of
time from the race. If possible, oarsmen should have their work
lightened somewhat towards the close of training, and it is best to get
over the heavy work, which is designed to reduce weight as well as to
clear the wind, at a comparatively early stage of the training.
There is also another factor to be taken into calculation by the
trainer, and that is whether, at the time when sharp work is necessary
to produce condition, his crew are sufficiently advanced as oarsmen to
justify him in setting them to perform that work at a fast stroke in the
boat. Not all crews require to be worked upon the same system,
irrespective of the question of stamina and health.
Suppose a crew are backward as oarsmen and also behindhand in condition.
If such a crew are set to row a fast stroke in order to blow themselves
and to accustom their vascular system to high pressure, their style may
be damaged. If on the other hand they do no work except rowing at a slow
stroke until within a few days of the race, they will come to the post
short of condition. Such a crew should be kept at a slow stroke in the
boat, in order to enable them to learn style, for a fortnight or so; but
meantime the trainer should put them through some sharp work upon their
legs. He should set them to run a mile or so after the day's rowing.
This will get off flesh, and will clear the wind, and meantime style can
be studied in the boat. Long rows without an easy are a mistake for
backward men who are also short of work. When the pupil gets blown at
the end of a few minutes he relapses into his old faults, and makes his
last state worse than the first.
[Illustration: 'RUN A MILE OR TWO.']
Training not only gets off superfluous flesh, but also lays on muscle.
The sooner the fat is off the sooner does the muscle lay on. The
commissariat feeds the newly developing muscles better if there is no
tax upon it to replenish the fat as well. For this reason, apart from
the importance of clearing the wind, heavy work should come early in
training. When a crew who have been considerably reduced in weight early
in their course of training, feed up towards the last, and gain in
weight, it is a good sign, and shows that their labours have been
judiciously adjusted; the weight which they pick up at the close of
training is new muscle replacing the discarded fat.
In training college eights for summer races there is not scope for
training on the above system. The time is too short, some of the men are
already half-fit, and have been in work of some sort or other during the
spring; while one or two of them may have been lying idle for a
twelvemonth. In such cases a captain must use his own discretion; he can
set his grosser men to do some running while he confines those who are
fitter to work only in the ship. As a rule, however, unless men have no
surplus flesh to take off, all oarsmen are the better for a little
running at the end of the day during the early part of training. It
prepares their wind for the time when a quick stroke will be required of
them. A crew who have been rowing a slow stroke and who have meantime
been improved in condition by running, will take to the quick stroke
later on more kindly than a ditto class crew who have done no running,
and whose condition has been obtained only by rowing exercise. The
latter crew have been rowing all abroad while short of wind, and have
thereby not corrected, and probably have contracted, faults. The former
crew will have had better opportunities of improving their style, will
be more like machinery, and will be less blown when they are at last
asked to gallop in the boat.
For the first few days it will be well to row an untrained crew over
easy half-miles. A long day's work in the boat will not harm them: on
the contrary, it will tend to shake them together; tired men can row
well as to style, but men out of breath cannot row. At the end of a week
or so, the men can cover a mile at a hard slow grind without an easy. If
there is plenty of time, i.e. some five weeks of training, a good deal
of paddling can be done, alternating with hard rowing at a slow stroke.
If there are only three weeks to train, and men are gross, much paddling
cannot be spared. If again time is short and men have already been in
work for other races, and do not want much if any reduction in weight,
then a good deal of the day's work may be done at a paddle.
Thirty strokes a minute is plenty for slow rowing. Some strokes, though
good to race behind, have a difficulty in rowing slow; especially after
having had a spell at a fast stroke. It is important to inculcate upon
the stroke that thirty a minute should be his 'walking' pace, and should
always be maintained except when he is set to do a course, or a part of
one, or to row a start. When once he is told to do something like racing
over a distance, he must calculate his stroke to orders, whether
thirty-two, -four, -six, -eight, &c. But when the 'gallop' is over, then
the normal 'thirty' should resume. It is during the 'off' work, when
rowing or paddling to or from a course, that there is most scope for
coaching, and faults are best cured at a slow stroke.
In training for a short course, such as Henley and college races, a crew
may be taken twice each day backwards and forwards over the distance;
the first time at thirty a minute each way, the second time at the 'set'
pace of the day, over the course, relapsing into the usual 'thirty' on
the reverse journey. The 'set' stroke depends on the stage of training.
A fortnight before the race the crew may begin to cover the course, on
the second journey, at about thirty-one a minute. A stroke a day can be
added to this, until racing pace is reached. If men seem stale, an
off-day should be given at light work. Meantime, each day, attention
should be paid to 'starting,' so that all may learn to get hold of the
first stroke well together. In order to accustom the men to a quicker
stroke and to getting forward faster, a few strokes may be rowed, in
each start, at a pace somewhat in advance of the rate of stroke set for
the day's grind over the course. A couple such starts as this per diem
benefit both crew and coach. The crew begin to feel what a faster stroke
will be like, without being called upon to perform it over the whole
distance before they are fit to go; the coach will be able to observe
each man's work at the faster stroke. Many a green oarsman looks
promising while the stroke is slow, but becomes all abroad when called
upon to row fast. It is best to have some insight to these possible
failings early in training, else it may be too late to remedy them or
to change the man on the eve of battle.
Towards the close of training the crew should do their level best once
or twice over the course, to accustom them to being rowed out, and to
give them confidence in their recuperative powers; also to enable the
stroke to feel the power of his crew, and to form an opinion as to how
much he can ask them to do in the race. The day before the racing
begins, work should be light.
In bumping races, if a college has no immediate fear of foes from the
rear, it is well not to bring men too fine to the post; else, though
they may do well enough for the first day or two, they may work stale or
lose power before the end of the six days of the contest. It is better
that a crew should row itself into condition than out of it. In training
for long-distance racing, it is customary to make about every alternate
day a light one, of about the same work as for college racing. The other
days are long-course days of long grinds, to get men together, and to
reduce weight. When men have settled to a light boat, and have begun to
row courses against time, and especially when they reach Putney water,
two long courses in each week are about enough. Many crews do not do
even so much as this. As a rule a crew are better for not being taken
for more than ten or eleven minutes of hard, uninterrupted racing,
within three days of the race. A long course wastes much tissue, and it
takes a day or two to feed up what they have wasted. Nevertheless, crews
have been known to do long courses within 48 hours of a Putney match,
and to win withal: e.g. the Oxonians of 1883, who came racing pace from
Barnes to Putney two days before the race, and 'beat record' over that
stretch of water.
[Illustration: BUMPING RACE--WAITING FOR THE GUN.]
Strokes and coaches do a crew much harm if they are jealous of 'times'
prematurely in practice. Suppose an opponent does a fast time, there is
no need to go to the starting point and endeavour to eclipse time.
Possibly his rapid time has been accomplished by dint of a prematurely
rapid stroke, while the pace of our own boat, with regard to the rate of
stroke employed, discloses promise of better pace than our opponents,
when racing shall arrive in real earnest. Now if we, for jealousy, take
our own men at a gallop before they are ripe for it, we run great risk
of injuring their style, and of throwing them back instead of improving
them. After the day's race, the body should be well washed in tepid
water, and rubbed dry with rough towels. It is a good thing for an
oarsman to keep a toothbrush in his dressing-room. He will find it a
great relief against thirst to wash his mouth out with it when dressing,
more especially so if he also uses a little tincture of myrrh.
One 'odd man' is of great service to training, even if he cannot spare
time to row in the actual race. Many a man in a crew is the better for a
day's, or half a day's, rest now and then. Yet his gain is loss of
practice to the rest, unless a stop-gap can be found to keep the
machinery going. The berth of ninth man in a University eight often
leads to promotion to the full colours in a following season, as U.B.C.
records can show.
With college eights there used to be a _furore_, some twenty years ago,
for taking them over the long course in a gig eight. These martyrs, half
fit, were made to row the regulation long course, from 'first gate' to
lasher, or at least to Nuneham railway bridge, at a hard and without an
easy. The idea was to 'shake them together.' The latter desideratum
could have been attained just as well by taking them to the lasher and
back again, but allowing them to be eased once in each mile or so. Many
crews that adopted the process met with undoubted success, but we fancy
that their success would have been greater had their long row been
judiciously broken by rest every five minutes. To behold a half-trained
college eight labouring past Nuneham, at the end of some fifteen minutes
of toil, jealous to beat the time of some rival crew, used to be a
pitiable sight. More crews were marred than made by this fanaticism.
On the morning of a race it is a good thing to send a crew to run
sprints of seventy or eighty yards, twice. This clears the wind greatly
for the rest of the day, without taking any appreciable strength out of
the man. A crew thus 'aired' do not so much feel the severity of a
sharp start in the subsequent race, and they gain their second wind much
sooner.
The meal before a race should be a light one, comparatively: something
that can be digested very easily. Mutton is digested sooner than beef.
H. Kelley used to swear by a wing of boiled chicken (without sauce)
before a race. The fluid should be kept as low as possible just before a
race; and there should be about three hours between the last meal and
the start. A preliminary canter in the boat is advisable; it tests all
oars and stretchers, and warms up the muscles. Even when men are rowing
a second or third race in the day, they should not be chary of extending
themselves for a few strokes on the way to the post. Muscles stiffen
after a second race, and are all the better for being warmed up a trifle
before they are again placed on the rack.
Between races a little food may be taken, even if there is only an hour
to spare: biscuit soaked in port wine stays the stomach; and if there is
more than an hour cold mutton and stale bread (no butter), to the extent
of a couple of sandwiches or more (according to time for digestion),
will be of service. Such a meal may be washed down with a little cold
tea and brandy. The tea deadens the pain of stiffened muscles; the
brandy helps to keep the pulse up. If young hands are fidgetty and
nervous, a little brandy and water may be given them; or brandy and tea,
not exceeding a wine-glass, rather more tea than brandy. The writer used
often to pick up his crew thus, and was sometimes laughed at for it in
old days. He is relieved to find no less an authority than Mr. E. D.
Brickwood, on page 219 of 'Boat-racing,' holding the same view as
himself, and commending the same system of 'pick-me-up.'
AILMENTS.
A rowing man seems somehow to be heir to nearly as many ailments as a
racehorse. Except that he does not turn 'roarer,' and that there is no
such hereditary taint in rowing clubs, he may almost be likened to a
Derby favourite.
_Boils_ are one of the most common afflictions. They used to be seen
more frequently in the writer's days than now. The modern recognition of
the importance of a due proportion of vegetable food blended with the
animal food has tended to reduce the proportion of oarsmen annually laid
up by this complaint. A man is not carnivorous purely, but omnivorous,
like a pig or a bear. If he gorges too much animal food meat, he
disorders his blood, and his blood seeks to throw off its humours. If
there is a sore anywhere on the frame at the time, the blood will select
this as a safety valve, and will raise a fester there. If there is no
such existing safety valve, the blood soon broaches a volcano of its
own, and has an unpleasant habit of selecting most inconvenient sites
for these eruptions. Where there is most wear and tear going on to the
cuticle is a likely spot for the volcano to open, and nature in this
respect is prone to favour the seat of honour more than any other
portions of the frame. Next in fashion, perhaps, comes the neck; the
friction of a comforter when the neck is dripping with perspiration
tends often to make the skin of the neck tender and to induce a boil to
break out there. A blistered hand is not unlikely to be selected as the
scene of outbreak, or a shoulder chafed by a wet jersey.
A crew should be under strict orders to report _all_ ailments, if only a
blister, _instantly_ to the coach. It is better to leave _no_ discretion
in this matter to the oarsman, even at the risk of troubling the mentor
with trifles. If a man is once allowed to decide for himself whether he
will report some petty and incipient ailment, he is likely to try to
hush it up lest it should militate against his coach's selection of him;
the effect of this is that mischief which might otherwise have been
checked in the bud, is allowed to assume dangerous proportions for want
of a stitch in time. An oarsman should be impressed that nothing is more
likely to militate against his dream of being selected than disobedience
to this or any other standing order. The smallest pimple should be shown
forthwith to the coach, the slightest hoarseness or tendency to snuffle
reported; any tenderness of joint or sinew instantly made known.
To return to boils. If a boil is observed in the pimple stage, it may be
scotched and killed. Painting it with iodine will drive it away, in the
writer's experience. 'Stonehenge' advises a wash of nitrate of silver,
of fifteen to twenty grains to the ounce, to be painted over the spot.
Mr. Brickwood also, while quoting 'Stonehenge' on this point, recommends
bathing with bay salt and water.
Anyhow, these external means of repression do not of themselves suffice.
They only bung up the volcano; the best step is to cure the blood,
otherwise it will break out somewhere else. The writer's favourite
remedy is a dose of syrup of iodide of iron; one teaspoonful in a
wineglass of water, just before or after a meal, is about the best
thing. A second dose of half the amount may be taken twenty-four hours
later. This medicine is rather constipating; a slight aperient, if only
a dose of Carlsbad salts before breakfast or a seidlitz powder, may be
taken to counteract it in this respect. It is a strong but prompt
remedy; anything is better than to have a member of a crew eventually
unable to sit down for a week or so! An extra glass of port after
dinner, _and plenty of green food_, will help to rectify the disordered
blood.
Another good internal remedy is brewer's yeast, a tablespoonful twice a
day after meals. Watermen swear by this, and Mr. Brickwood personally
recommends it.
If care is taken a boil can be thus nipped in the bud (figuratively); to
do this _literally_ is the very worst thing. Some people pinch off the
head of a small boil. This only adds fuel to the fire. If a boil has
become large, red, and angry before any remedies are applied, it is too
late to drive it in, and the next best thing is to coax it out. This is
done with strong linseed poultices. A doctor should be called in, and be
persuaded to lance it, to the core, and to squeeze it, so soon as he
judges it to be well filled with pus.
_Raws_ used to be more common twenty-five years ago than now: boat
cushions had much to do with them. Few oarsmen in these days use
cushions. Raws are best anointed with a mixture of oxide of zinc,
spermaceti and glycerine, which any chemist can make up, to the
consistency of cold cream. It should be buttered on thickly, especially
at bed-time.
_Blisters_ should be pricked with a needle (_never_ with _pin_); the
water should be squeezed out, and the old skin left on to shield the
young skin below.
Festers are only another version of boils. The internal remedies, to
rectify the blood, should be the same as for boils. Cuts or wounds of
broken skin may be treated like raws if slight; if deeper, then wrapped
in lint, soaked in cold water, and bound with oilskin to keep the lint
moist.
_Abdominal strains_ sometimes occur (i.e. of the abdominal muscles of
recovery) if a man does a hard day's work before he is fairly fit. A
day's rest is the best thing; an hour's sitting in a hot hip bath,
replenishing the heat as the water cools, gives much relief. The strain
works off while the oarsman is warm to his work, but recurs with extra
pain when he starts cold for the next row. If there is any suspicion of
hernia (or 'rupture') work should instantly stop, even ten miles from
home; the patient should row no more, walk gently to a resting-place,
and send for a doctor. Once only has the writer known of real hernia in
a day's row, and then the results were painfully serious. Inspection of
the abdomen will show if there is any hernia.
_Diarrh[oe]a_ is a common complaint. It is best to call in a doctor if
the attack does not pass off in half a day. If a man has to go to the
post while thus affected, it is a good thing to give him some _raw_
arrowroot (three or four table-spoonfuls) in _cold_ water. The dose
should be well stirred, to make the arrowroot swill down the throat. To
put the arrowroot into hot water spoils the effect which is desired.
Many doctors have a tender horror of consenting to any patient rowing,
even for a day, so long as he is under their care, though only for a
boil which does not affect his action.
Professional instinct prompts them to feel that the speediest possible
cure is the chief desideratum, and of course that object is best
attained by lying on the shelf. A doctor who will consent to do his best
to cure, subject to assenting to his patient's continuing at work so
long as actual danger is not thereby incurred, and so long as
disablement for the more important race day is not risked, is sometimes,
but too rarely, found.
_Sprains_, _colds_, _coughs_, &c., had better be submitted at once to a
doctor. A cold on the chest may become much more serious than it appears
at first, and should never be trifled with. Slightly sprained wrists
weaken, but need not necessarily cripple a man. Mr. W. Hoare, stroke of
Oxford boat in 1862, had a sprained wrist at Putney, and rowed half the
race with only one hand, as also much of the practice. He was none the
worse after Easter, when the tendons had rested and recuperated.
Oarsmen should be careful to wrap up warmly the instant that they cease
work. Many a cold has been caught by men sitting in their jerseys--cold
wind suddenly checking perspiration after a sharp row--while some
chatter is going on about the time which the trial has taken, or why No.
So-and-so caught a small crab halfway. A woollen comforter should always
be at hand to wrap promptly round the neck and over the chest when
exertion ceases, and so soon as men land they should clothe up in warm
flannel, until the time comes to strip and work.
Siestas should not be allowed. There is a temptation to doze on a full
stomach after a hard day, or even when fresh after a midday meal. No one
should be allowed to give way to this; it only makes men 'slack,' and
spoils digestion.
If a man can keep his bedclothes on all night, and keep warm, he will do
himself good if he sleeps with an open window, winter or summer. He
thereby gets more fresh air, and accordingly has not to tax the
respiratory muscles so much, in order to inhale the necessary amount of
oxygen. Eight hours sleep with open windows refresh the frame more than
nine hours and upwards in a stuffy bedroom. A roaring fire may obviate
an open window, for it forces a constant current of air through the
apartment. The writer has slept with windows wide open, winter and
summer, since he first matriculated at his University, save once or
twice for a night or two when suffering from cold (not contracted by
having slept with open windows). If a bed is well tucked up, and the
frame well covered, the chest cannot be chilled, and the mouth and nose
are none the worse for inhaling cool fresh air, even below
freezing-point. This refers to men of sound chests. Men of weak
constitution have no business to train or to race.
[Illustration: FOUR-OAR.]
CHAPTER XIII.
ROWING CLUBS.
The formation of a 'club' for the pursuit of any branch of sport gives a
local stimulus at once to the game, and lends facilities for the
acquisition of merit in the performance. This is peculiarly the case
with rowing, and for more than one reason. Theoretically a man might, by
unaided scientific study, elaborate for himself the most improved system
or principle of oarsmanship. Practically he will do nothing of the sort,
and if left to teach himself will develop all sorts of faults of style,
which tend to the outlay of a maximum of exertion for a minimum of
progress. The tiro in oarsmanship requires instruction from the outset;
the sooner he is taught, the more likely is he to become proficient. If
he begins to teach himself, he will certainly acquire faulty action,
which will settle to habit. If later on he has recourse to a mentor, the
labours of both pupil and tutor will be more arduous than if the pupil
were a complete beginner; the pupil will require first to be _un_taught
from his bad style before he is adapted for instruction in good action
of limbs and body.
Moreover, all rowing becomes so mechanical that the polished oarsman is
almost as unconscious of merit in his style (save from what others may
tell him of himself) as the duffer is of his various inelegancies. The
very best oarsman is liable insidiously to develop faults in his own
style which he himself, or a less scientific performer, would readily
notice in another person.
Hence, where men row together in a club, each can be of service to the
other, in pointing out faults, of which the performer is unconscious. So
that half-a-dozen oarsmen or scullers of equal class, if they will thus
mutually assist each other, can attain between them a higher standard
than if each had rowed like a hermit. Still more is the standard of
oarsmanship raised among juniors when the older hands of a club take
them in charge and coach them.
In addition to this system of reciprocal education, a club fosters
rivalry, and organises club races; and, in like manner, a plurality of
clubs stimulates competition between clubs, and produces open racing
between members of the rival institutions.
College clubs seem to be the oldest on record. Some of them go back as
early as the concluding years of George the Third. The rise of British
oarsmanship has been traced in a preceding chapter. The oldest 'open'
rowing club is the 'Leander.' When it originated seems to be uncertain,
but it was considered relatively to be an 'old' club in 1837.
Mr. G. D. Rowe, Hon. Secretary of the Club, has kindly extracted the
following memoranda from the Club's history of its records:--
It would seem that the earliest known metropolitan rowing clubs
were 'The Star' and 'The Arrow,' which existed at the end of the
last century, and expired somewhere about 1820. Out of the ruins
sprang the Leander Club, which is still a flourishing
institution, and which includes amongst its members most of the
great University oarsmen of the last thirty years or so. So far
as can be ascertained, the Leander Club did not exist in 1820,
but it was in full swing in 1825, and in 1830 was looked upon as
a well-known and long-established boat club.
In 1837, 1838, and 1841 Leander rowed races against Cambridge,
losing the first and winning the last, whilst in 1838 the race
was declared a draw owing to fouling.
In all three the course was from Westminster to Putney.
In 1839 Leander was beaten for the Grand Challenge Cup at Henley
by the Oxford Etonians; but in 1840 the Leander crew won the
Cup, whilst in 1841 they came in first, but were disqualified on
a foul. In consequence of this Leander did not again compete for
the G.C.C. till 1858,[12] as the Club considered the ruling of
the Umpire unfair.
[12] The Leander entry at Henley, 1858, arose thus. A mixed team of
old Blues of _both_ colours got up an eight, and qualified by
rowing under the Leander flag.
Meanwhile, however, in 1843, -4, and -5 Leander won the
Challenge Cup at the Thames Regatta, and between 1845 and 1855
Leander won the Presentation Cup at Erith for Four-oars, several
times.
Leander, however, was as much a social association as a
competing rowing club. Up till 1856 the number of members was
limited to twenty-five men, who used to meet at Westminster once
or twice a week, and row to Putney or Greenwich, and take dinner
together. Sometimes they would go to the Albert Docks, and dine
on board a ship, at the expense of one of their members, who was
a large shipowner.
After 1856 the number of members was increased to thirty-five,
and in 1862 the Club was put on a more modern footing after the
example of the London Rowing Club, and no limit was put on the
number of members.
The Club quarters were moved to Putney, where a small piece of
ground was rented on which a tent was erected for housing boats.
This piece of ground was acquired by the London Rowing Club in
1864, and on it was built the present L.R.C. boat-house.
Leander, however, were able to get a lease of a piece of land
adjoining, and in 1866 built a boat-house, which still exists,
though the Club has of late thought of departing from Putney and
establishing themselves on one of the upper reaches of the
Thames.
The rowing successes of Leander of late years have not been very
great, though a Leander crew is always formidable 'on paper'
and comprises a good selection of 'Varsity oars. Want of
practice and of combination usually outweighs individual skill.
In 1875 and 1880 the Grand Challenge Cup was won by Leander
under the leadership of Goldie and Edwardes-Moss respectively,
but since 1880 all attempts to carry off the much-coveted prize
have proved futile.
It must have been a curious sight in old days to see a Leander
crew rowing in front of the 'Varsity race in their 'cutter'
steered by Jim Parish, their waterman coxswain. The crew used to
wear the orthodox top-hats on their heads, whilst the coxswain
was arrayed in all the glories of 'green plush kneebreeches,
silk stockings, "Brummagem" coat, and tall white silk hat.'
The match between Oxford and Leander in 1831 had ended in the defeat of
Oxford, and when, six years later, Cambridge challenged Leander, it was
thought by the London division to be a rash venture on the part of the
Cantabs. But we read in the Brasenose B.C. records that in the opinion
of some experts the Leander oarsmanship was observed to have rather
fallen off of late, and that there were not wanting good judges who were
prepared for the Cantab victory in which the match resulted. This casual
remark seems to show that Leander was a club of some years' standing at
the time of this match. There seems to have been a 'scullers' club,
hailing from Wandsworth, even earlier than this. But if it had a name,
the title is lost. There must have been a fair amount of sculling among
amateurs prior to 1830, in order to induce Mr. Lewis Wingfield in 1830
to present the silver challenge sculls which still bear his name, and
which to this day carry with them the title of Amateur Championship. The
University clubs, when once founded, rapidly developed strength; new
college clubs were founded, and eights were manned by colleges and halls
which hitherto had not entered for the annual bumping races. But London
oarsmanship gradually deteriorated between 1835 and 1855. The cause of
this decay is intelligible. The tideway was churned up by steamers,
rowing from Westminster was no longer the pleasant sport which it had
been, and railway facilities for suburban rowing had hardly developed.
Leander made one show at Henley after its foundation and failed to
score a win. After that Leander crews absented themselves from the
scene until the days of their modern revival. There was a club called
the 'St. George's' which put on a good four-oar or two in the 'forties'
at Henley; and after them came a 'Thames' club, which lasted some
seasons, and chiefly distinguished itself by winning thrice running the
'Gold Cup' of the old Thames Regatta of the 'forties.' The Thames Club
also won the Grand at Henley; but they died out, and a lot of local
small-fry clubs dismembered the rowing talent of the metropolis for the
next few years. Of these, the most distinguished were the 'Argonauts,'
between 1853 and 1856. They were not numerically strong, but they made
up in quality for quantity. They were not enough to man an eight, and
the Grand Challenge Cup at Henley was farmed for several seasons by the
Universities. The Chester men came and went like a meteor in 1856. Their
performances will be found under the description of the first keelless
eight. In that year the London Rowing Club was founded, and in 1857,
being then a year old, it made its _début_ at Henley, and won the Grand
Challenge, Mr. Wood in the Oxford crew breaking an oar in the last two
hundred yards of the race. The foundation of the London Club did more to
raise the standard of amateur rowing than anything in modern times. It
created a third great factor in eight-oared rowing, and served to keep
the Universities up to the mark. It also encouraged other clubs.
Kingston soon followed suit, first with a four and afterwards with an
eight. After them the new (modern) Thames Club also made its appearance
at Henley, beginning like Kingston with fours before aspiring to eights.
In these days Thames are rivals with London for the pick of the rowing
talent of the tideway, and each acts as a stimulus to the other. It is
no exaggeration to say that at an average Henley Regatta, during the
present decade, four or five eights may often be seen, any one of which
would, _ceteris paribus_ (and sliding seats barred), have been
considered a good winner of the Grand Challenge a quarter of a century
ago, so great has been the advance in the standard of amateur rowing.
The Leander Club has been a practical reality once more for nearly
twenty years; it has competed periodically for the Grand Challenge and
Stewards' Cups, and has twice won the Grand, but its composition is now
widely different from what it was in the palmy 'Brilliant' days of fifty
years ago. In those times it represented the rowing talent of the
metropolitan element; it filled the same position that the London and
Thames Clubs now jointly occupy. In these days it is almost entirely
composed of University men, past and present. Having vacated its old
functions, it has in turn filled those formerly performed by the
'Subscription Rooms' of the Universities, which in the 'forties' used to
hail from Stangate. There is but little junior rowing done or taught in
Leander; most of its recruits are already more or less proficient before
they join it. It is not a nursery of oarsmanship, but a colony, to which
rowing men from the Universities resort. It is of value in promoting
sport and competition, but it does not, from the very nature of its
elements, fill the same sort of position that the London and Thames
Clubs hold in the rowing world--as nurseries of junior talent on the
tideway. On the upper Thames, Kingston holds a position of much the same
nature as London and Thames. Twickenham are an old club, but it is only
of late years that they have aspired to Grand Challenge form; they owe
this aspiration to a reinforcement from Hertford College, Oxon. Besides
these leading clubs there are sundry smaller bodies, which content
themselves chiefly with junior rowing. Such are the 'West London' and
'Grove Park,'[13] the 'East Sheen,' and others of this class.
Five-and-thirty years ago it was a rarity to see even a scratch amateur
eight on the tideway, so much had London rowing gone downhill. In the
present day, on a June or July evening, especially on Saturday,
half-a-dozen or more may be seen between Wandsworth and Richmond.
[13] Since the above was written, West London and Grove Park Clubs
have become extinct.
Provincial oarsmanship has made considerable advance during the last
thirty years. The Chester Club was the first to make a great mark, as
mentioned elsewhere. The Eastern Counties are the most behindhand in the
science, although they have good rivers in the Orwell and Yare.
Newcastle produces strong local clubs, and once a champion, Mr. Fawcus,
came from the Tyne. Mr. Wallace, a high-class sculler, also came south,
but without absolute success, some years before Mr. Fawcus. Durham, what
with its school, its University, and its town, shows plenty of sport on
the Wear. Lancashire sent a fair 'Mersey' four to Henley in 1862, and in
1870 the 'John o' Gaunt' men from the same river made a decided hit at
Henley, although they failed to win. Bath has produced some good men
before now, chiefly under the tuition of Mr. C. Herbert, a London
oarsman. The Severn has woke up considerably. In 1850 we doubt whether
four men could have been found on the whole river who could sit in an
outrigger; but during the last fifteen years amateur rowing has made
great advances at Worcester, Bewdley, Bridgnorth, and other towns.
Tewkesbury started a regatta about a quarter of a century ago, and other
towns on the Severn have followed suit. At present the Severn clubs
confine their rowing very much to contests among themselves, and do not
try their luck on the Thames in the leading regattas. The time may come
when they will acquire sufficient talent to enable them to make a
creditable display against the greater clubs of the Thames. The Trent,
though one of the finest of our English rivers, does very little for
oarsmanship. Some very second-class rowing is now and then seen at
Nottingham, and also at Burton-on-Trent. The latter, many years ago,
sent a pair-oar to Henley Regatta; but, so far as we can recall, the
men, or one of them, was a Cantab (Mr. Nadin), and we may surmise that
he owed his oarsmanship to the Cam rather than to the Trent. One curious
feature in provincial rowing is, and has been, the absence of any
professional talent. The Tyne alone has really rivalled the Thames in
respect of producing leading professionals. A good four once or twice
came from Glasgow to the Thames Regatta about sixteen years ago, and
now and then a fair second-class sculler (such as Strong, of
Barrow-in-Furness) has appeared from the provinces, but in other
respects great apathy seems to prevail as regards professional
oarsmanship on all our rivers except Thames and Tyne. The later
decadence of professional talent on these once famous rivers will be
treated in another chapter.
Mr. Brickwood, in his book on 'Boat-racing,' gives some admirable
suggestions for the formation of rowing clubs, which should be read by
all who aspire to found such institutions. For the benefit of those who
may hereafter take the lead in establishing new boat clubs, or in
remodelling old ones, he propounds a 'draft' code of general rules; it
would be presumptuous to attempt to improve upon them, and we take the
liberty of giving them _in extenso_, as sketched by this eminent
authority.
DRAFT RULES.
1. This club shall be called the ---- Rowing (or Boat) Club; and
the colours shall be ----.
2. The object of this club shall be the encouragement of rowing
on the river ---- amongst gentlemen amateurs.
3. Any gentleman desirous of becoming a member shall cause a
notice in writing, containing his name, occupation, and address,
together with the names of his proposer and seconder (both of
whom must be members of the club, and personally acquainted with
him, and one of whom must be present at the ballot), to be
forwarded to the secretary fourteen days prior to the general
meeting at which the candidate shall be balloted for; one black
ball in five shall exclude. In the case of neither the proposer
nor seconder being able to attend the ballot for a new member,
the committee may institute such inquiries as they may deem
requisite, and on the receipt of satisfactory replies in writing
from both proposer and seconder such attendance may be waived,
and the election may proceed in the usual manner.
4. The annual subscription shall be ----, due and payable on
February 1 in each year.
5. Subscriptions becoming due on February 1 shall be paid by
April 1, and subscriptions becoming due after February 1 be paid
within two months; or, in default, the names of the members
whose subscriptions are in arrears may be placed conspicuously
in the club-room, with a notice that they are not entitled to
the benefits of the club.
6. The name of any member whose subscriptions shall be in
arrear twelve months shall be posted in the club-room as a
defaulter, and published in the circular next issued.
7. The proposer of any candidate shall (upon his election) be
responsible to the club for the entrance-fee and first annual
subscription of such candidate.
8. Members wishing to resign shall tender their resignation in
writing to the secretary before February 1, otherwise they will
be liable for the year's subscription; the receipt of such
resignation shall be acknowledged by the secretary.
9. The officers of the club shall consist of a president,
vice-president, captain, and secretary, to be elected by ballot
at the first general meeting in February in each year; the same
to be _ex-officio_ members of the committee.
10. The captain shall be at liberty, from time to time, to
appoint a member of the club to act as his deputy, such
appointment to be notified in the club-room.
11. The general management of the club shall be entrusted to a
committee of ---- members, and ---- shall form a quorum; such
committee to be chosen by ballot at the first general meeting in
February in each year.
12. A general meeting shall be held in every month, in the
club-room, during the rowing season, and at such time and place
during the winter as may be selected by the committee.
13. A notice containing the names of candidates for election at
the general meeting shall be sent to every member of the club.
14. Any member who shall wilfully or by gross negligence damage
any property belonging the club shall immediately have the same
repaired at his own expense. The question of the damage being or
not being accidental shall be decided by the committee from such
evidence as they may be able to obtain.
15. A general meeting shall have power to expel any member from
the club who has made himself generally obnoxious; but no ballot
shall be taken until fourteen days' notice shall have been
given; one black ball to three white to expel such member. This
rule shall not be enforced except in extraordinary cases, and
until the member complained of shall have been requested by the
committee to resign.
16. No crew shall contend for any public prize, under the name
of the club, without the sanction of the committee. All races
for money are strictly prohibited.
17. The committee shall have the management of all club
matches.
18. The rules and by-laws of the club shall be printed, and
posted in the club-room, and the copy sent to every member; and
any member who shall wilfully persist in the infraction of any
such rules or by-laws shall be liable to be expelled.
19. Any member wishing to propose any alteration in the rules of
the club shall give notice in writing to the secretary, two
weeks prior to the question being discussed, when, if the notice
be seconded, a ballot shall be taken, and to carry the proposed
alteration the majority in favour must be two to one.
20. The committee shall have power to make, alter, and repeal
by-laws.
_By-Laws._
1. The boats of the club shall be for the general use of the
members on all days during the season (Sundays excepted),
subject to the following by-laws.
2. That no visitor be permitted to row in a club boat to the
exclusion of a member of the club.
3. That the club day be ---- in each week during the season, and
the hour of meeting ----.
4. That on club days members be selected by the captain (or in
his absence by his deputy) to form crews; the members present at
the hour of meeting to have priority of claim. Should the
decision of the captain or his deputy be considered
unsatisfactory by the majority of members present, the matter in
dispute shall be settled by lot.
5. All boats shall be returned to the boathouse by ten o'clock
at night, except on club days, when club boats taken out before
the usual hour must be returned half an hour before the time
fixed for meeting. Any expense incurred by the club through an
infringement of this by-law shall be paid by the member
offending.
6. Any dispute as regards rowing in any particular boat or boats
shall be settled by lot, this provision having reference more
particularly to club days.
7. In the event of there being more members present than can be
accommodated in the club boats, it shall be at the discretion of
the captain or his deputy, or of such members of the committee
as may be present, to hire extra boats at the expense of the
club.
8. The committee shall from time to time appoint one of their
number to superintend the management of the boathouse, and to
make all necessary arrangements for keeping the boats of the
club in a thorough state of repair and cleanliness.
9. All crews sent by the club to contend at a public regatta
shall be formed by the captain and two other experienced members
to be named by the committee, such crews when formed to be
subject to the approval of the committee.
10. In the event of a crew being chosen to contend in any public
race or match, such crew shall be provided by the club with a
boat for their exclusive use during their time of training, and
shall have their entrance-fees paid by the club.
11. The expense of conveying boats to public regattas at which
crews of the club contend shall be paid by the crews, but the
committee shall have power to repay the whole or any part of
such expenses out of the club funds.
12. The committee, on the occasion of a club race or other
special event, shall appoint a member of the club to take charge
of and conduct all arrangements connected with the same.
13. The member pulling the stroke-oar in any club boat shall
have command of the crew.
14. Upon the arrival of a crew at the place appointed for
stopping, the captain of the boat shall (if required) fix the
time for returning; and, if any member be absent at the
appointed time, the crew shall be at liberty to hire a
substitute at the expense of the absentee.
15. Every member, on landing from a club boat, shall be bound to
assist in housing such boat, and in doing so shall follow the
direction of the captain or other officer.
16. Any member using a private boat without the consent of its
owner shall thereby render himself liable to a vote of censure,
and, if need be, expulsion.
Clubs are often but ephemeral. Some leading spirit founds one, and, when
his influence vanishes with himself, the club wanes; perhaps it pales
before a rival, perhaps it amalgamates with another. From various causes
many minor clubs have risen and set on the Thames within the writer's
memory during the last two decades; others which were in full swing when
he was at school or college have ceased to exist. In the summer of 1886
this question of extinction of small clubs became a subject of
correspondence in the aquatic columns of the 'Field.' Subsequently the
writer of this chapter discussed the question in the following leading
article, published in the 'Field' on July 17, 1886, and now reproduced
by the courtesy of the proprietors. It is given _in extenso_ for the
sake of the history and reminiscences embodied in it.
_The Extinction of Small Rowing Clubs._
We published a fortnight ago a letter of complaint on this
subject from a correspondent who signed himself 'Senior
Oarsman.' We quite admit the fact that the tendency of the great
rowing clubs of the Thames has been to absorb the numerous petty
clubs which at one time abounded on the tideway, but we entirely
fail to agree with his view that this consummation is to be
deprecated, either in the interests of oarsmanship or of
regattas. Our own opinion is, that four or five strong clubs
raise the standard of rowing and the prestige of regattas to a
far greater extent than if these same societies were split up
into a dozen or more minor associations. We can remember when
there were a large number of petty clubs of that description,
many of them hailing from Putney. The ground-floor doors of the
annexe to the 'Star and Garter' at Putney still commemorate the
names of some of them, though the clubs have been extinct for
ages. 'Nautilus' and 'Star' are among the titles which are still
painted on the doors. Prior to the founding of the London Rowing
Club in 1856, the rowing talent of the Thames was split up into
many such small sections. None of them, save the 'Argonauts,'
were fit to man one decent four between them. The L.R.C.
consolidated these small societies for the time being; but there
are always to be found oarsmen who prefer to pose as leaders of
small-fry clubs rather than play second or third fiddle in
first-class clubs. Hence, no sooner had the L.R.C. consolidated
one batch of small clubs than others sprang into existence. At
the date of the founding of the Metropolitan Regatta in 1866
there were once more a host of these minor societies on the
Thames, and one of the causes of weakness in the executive of
that regatta arose from the recognition of these small clubs by
the L.R.C. as factors to be consulted in its organisation. These
petty clubs had no chance of winning the open prizes, but they
were keen to distinguish themselves and have a hand in the
gathering, and accordingly the 'metropolitan' eights and pairs
for local second-raters had to be established, in order to
induce the small clubs to join the undertaking. The result of
this policy was, that before long the L.R.C. provided by far the
larger proportion of the funds for the regatta, and yet had to
defer to the majority of votes of the small clubs in the matter
of executive. At that date Kingston was the only other club
(except those of the U.B.C's.) which was up to Grand Challenge
form, like the L.R.C. Since that date there has been an
expansion of other strong clubs, and, as a necessary corollary,
a gradual decay of minor ones. Thames has grown to be a worthy
rival of London, and has done much to raise the standard of
oarsmanship. Leander has been revived, and Twickenham, which at
one time (in the sixties) was quite a small local club, now
comes out also in Grand Challenge form. This club have not yet
actually landed the great prize, but they have more than once
been good enough to win it, had they been fortunate enough to
draw the best station. Besides these clubs, there has been the
Molesey Club, which in 1875 and 1876 was capable of making the
best crews gallop at Henley, and won the Senior fours at sundry
minor Thames regattas later in the season. Its later absence
from Henley is due to the retirement from active oarsmanship of
Mr. H. Chinnery and others, whose personal energies alone
sufficed to combat the difficulty of distance from London.
Meantime, clubs like the Ariel, Corsair West London, Ino, and
others have become 'fine by degrees and beautifully less,' until
they expired of inanition. There are, and always will be, sundry
ambitious second-class oarsmen who regret the extinction of
societies of this sort, and who recall with regret the
pot-hunting for junior prizes which sometimes fell in their way.
But when we recollect that clubs of this stamp were
conspicuously absent from the winning roll, and usually even
from the competition in senior races in minor Thames regattas,
we fail to see wherein rowing science suffers by their
absorption. Junior oarsmen obtain far better instruction in the
ranks of the crack clubs than they could hope to find in the
small-fry institutions, and they have found this out. When men
have matriculated as oarsmen in weak clubs, they constantly
contract insidious faults of style, the result of being put to
race in light boats before they have mastered the first
principles of oarsmanship. If such men subsequently aspire to
join the better clubs, they have a worse chance of attaining a
seat in a first or even a second crew than if they had joined
the big club at the outset, and had been carefully taught in
tubs till they were fairly proficient. They have to be
'untaught' from a bad style before they can be moulded in a good
one. The Thames cup eights at Henley are of a higher order now
than they were seven or eight years ago, and we are inclined to
ascribe this fact to the 'absorption' system, which not only
strengthens the large clubs, but also provides better
instruction for the rising generation than was the case when
talent was more split up. Oarsmen of good standard who are
really desirous of distinguishing themselves, and are not too
proud to serve in the ranks of a big club after having held
office in a smaller one, freely gravitate from minor to leading
clubs. The juniors of their clubs follow their leaders, and so
the minor clubs become gradually depleted.
We do not consider that regatta entries are practically injured
by the development of the large clubs at the expense of the
smaller ones. We have already said that these small clubs are of
little or no use for senior races, whereas their ingredients,
consolidated in larger bodies, create one or two more strong
clubs which are good enough to produce competent senior crews,
and so swell senior entries. We admit that to some extent junior
entries may fall off in numbers, in consequence of the breaking
up of petty clubs; but, even allowing this, we hold that the
quality of junior entries increases in proportion as those
juniors hail from a good club endowed with scientific coaching.
Clubs whose powers are limited to the production of junior crews
do not contribute much to the standard of oarsmanship, and at
the same time they divert material which in good hands might
attain a good standard. The many petty clubs of fifteen or
twenty years ago used to labour, each by itself, through a whole
season to produce just one junior crew; and this possibly won a
race at last, on a sort of tontine principle, through the
gradual victories of former opponents in junior races, which on
each occasion removed a rival from the field of the future. The
modern strong and first class clubs turn out one junior crew
after another in the season; so that batch after batch of
juniors are thus taken in hand, and competently coached during
the season. Besides regatta rowing, there are club contests, and
these are to be found in even greater abundance and variety
under the management of the leading clubs, and afford more scope
for rising oarsmen, than ever was the case in the expiring and
expired minor clubs. We gave publicity to our correspondent's
complaint, as a matter of fair play in a subject that might be
of interest to many; but, all things considered, we come to the
conclusion that his deductions break down in every respect, and
that rowing and regattas alike benefit rather than lose by
consolidation of material in the first-class clubs of the day.
[Illustration: EARLY AMATEURS.]
CHAPTER XIV.
THE AMATEUR, HIS HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION.
The old theory of an amateur was that he was a 'gentleman,' and that the
two were simply convertible terms. The amateur of old might make rowing
his sport, so long as he did not actually make it his ostensible means
of livelihood. The Leander oarsmen who matched themselves against
University crews between 1830 and 1840 did not consider that they lost
caste by rowing for a stake.
In 1831 Oxford and Leander rowed at Henley for 200_l._ a side, with
watermen steering them. Much later than this it was not considered
improper for two 'gentlemen' to row a match (or race one) for a mutual
_stake_ (not a bet). Until 1861, when the conditions of the Wingfield
Sculls were remodelled at a meeting of ex-champions and old competitors,
it had been the custom for all entries for that prize to pay a fee of
5_l._, and the winner swept the pool! No one dreamed of suggesting that
this was in any way derogatory to the status of an amateur.
But as rowing became more popular, and more widely adopted as a pastime,
it began to be felt that it was invidious to leave the question 'Is he
an amateur?' to the local opinion of the regatta committee, before whom
such a question might be raised. Oarsmen came to the conclusion that
some written definition of the qualification was necessary; some hard
and fast rule, prospective, if not retrospective. Till then, various
executives had adopted various opinions as to what constituted an
amateur. One year, about 1871, the Henley executive declined to
recognise one of the local crews engaged in the 'Town Cup' as
'amateurs;' and on this ground refused to allow them to start for the
Wyfold Cup. It was not alleged that any of this crew had ever laboured
as a mechanic, or rowed for money. The allegation of the Henley
executive was that this crew were not 'gentlemen amateurs,' and as such
they declined to admit them. A few days later another regatta executive
freely admitted this same crew, and none of the recognised amateur clubs
opposed to them raised any objection to the local crew's status.
This variety of opinion led to consultation among certain old amateurs
whose ideas were universally respected, and as a result, on April 10,
1878, a meeting was held at Putney, at which there were present--
FRANCIS PLAYFORD, L.R.C., _Chairman_.
T. EDMUND HOCKIN, Secretary, C.U.B.C.
T. C. EDWARDES-MOSS, President, O.U.B.C.
F. S. GULSTON, Captain, London R.C.
HENRY P. MARRIOTT, for Secretary, O.U.B C.
C. GURDON, President, C.U.B.C.
JAMES HASTIE, Captain, Thames R.C.
M. G. FARRER, Captain, Leander B.C.
C. D. HEATLEY, Captain, Kingston R.C.
ROBERT W. RISLEY, O.U.B.C.
FRANK WILLAN, O.U.B.C.
J. G. CHAMBERS, C.U.B.C.
EDWARD H. FARRIE, C.U.B.C.
JNO. IRELAND, L.R.C.
H. H. PLAYFORD, Vice-President, L.R.C.
E. D. BRICKWOOD, L.R.C., _Secretary_.
These gentlemen drew up and passed the following:--
_Definition of an Amateur._
An amateur oarsman or sculler must be an officer of her
Majesty's Army, or Navy, or Civil Service, a member of the
Liberal Professions, or of the Universities or Public Schools,
or of any established boat or rowing club not containing
mechanics or professionals; and must not have competed in any
competition for either a stake, or money, or entrance-fee, or
with or against a professional for any prize; nor ever taught,
pursued, or assisted in the pursuit of athletic exercises of any
kind as a means of livelihood, nor have ever been employed in or
about boats, or in manual labour; nor be a mechanic, artisan, or
labourer.
In the following year the Henley executive drew up a definition of their
own, much to the same effect, but slightly different in phraseology
(this was on April 8, 1879). It read thus:--
No person shall be considered as an amateur oarsman or sculler--
1. Who has ever competed in any open competition for a stake,
money, or entrance-fee.
2. Who has competed with or against a professional for any
prize.
3. Who has ever taught, pursued, or assisted in the practice of
athletic exercise of any kind as a means of gaining a
livelihood.
4. Who has been employed in or about boats for money or wages.
5. Who is or has been, by trade or employment for wages, a
mechanic, artisan, or labourer.
This definition, with a further slight verbal alteration, will be found
still embodied in the rules of Henley regatta, which are given at p. 48.
This new definition was adopted by the 'Amateur Rowing Association.'
This latter body arose in 1879. The original object of its constitution
was to found a general club which could comprise all the best amateur
talent of Britain, and from which, in the event of any foreign or
colonial crew, composed of the full force of its own country, coming to
these shores, could be put forward to represent the honour of the mother
country; so that the individual clubs of Britain should never hereafter
be in danger of being attacked separately, with forces divided, by the
concentrated resources of some foreign or colonial country. The
association was first called the 'Metropolitan Rowing Association,' but
eventually it took its present name. The rules of this association are
here given _in extenso_, and sufficiently explain the _raison d'être_.
RULES OF THE AMATEUR ROWING ASSOCIATION, LATE METROPOLITAN ROWING
ASSOCIATION.
_Committee._
The President of the Oxford University Boat Club. }
The President of the Cambridge University Boat Club. }
The Captain of the Dublin University Boat Club. }
The Captain of the Dublin University Rowing Club. } _Ex_
The Captain of the Leander Boat Club. } _Officio._
The Captain of the London Rowing Club. }
The Captain of the Kingston Rowing Club. }
The Captain of the Thames Rowing Club. }
JAMES CATTY, T.R.C. | F. S. GULSTON, L.R.C.
H. J. CHINNERY, L.R.C. | JAMES HASTIE, T.R.C.
F. FENNER, L.R.C. | Rev. R. W. RISLEY, O.U.B.C.
J. H. D. GOLDIE, C.U.B.C. | S. LE BLANC SMITH, L.R.C.
_Hon. Secretary._
S. LE BLANC SMITH, Esq.
_Head Quarters, pro tem._
LONDON ROWING CLUB, PUTNEY.
1. That this Club be called 'The Amateur Rowing Association.'
2. That the object of the Association be to associate members of
existing amateur rowing clubs for the purpose of forming
representative British crews to compete against Foreign and
Colonial representative crews, in the event of such entering at
any regattas in the United Kingdom, or challenging this country.
3. That the government and management of the Association be
vested in a committee of fifteen members (of whom five shall be
a quorum), with power to add to their number, who, except the
_ex-officio_ members, shall retire annually, and be eligible for
re-election.
4. That the Presidents of the Oxford University Boat Club and
Cambridge University Boat Club, the Captains of the Dublin
University Boat Club, Dublin University Rowing Club, Leander
Boat Club, London Rowing Club, Kingston Rowing Club, and Thames
Rowing Club, for the time being be _ex-officio_ members of the
committee.
5. That no one be eligible as a member of the Association unless
he be a member of a recognised Amateur Rowing Club.
6. That candidates for election must be proposed and seconded by
two members of the committee, and unanimously elected by the
committee.
7. That, when members of different clubs are selected to form a
crew, they must, for the time being, place themselves
exclusively at the disposal of the Association.
8. That general meetings of the members be summoned by the
Honorary Secretary at such times as not less than five of the
committee think fit, and that committee meetings be held once,
at least, in every three months, and as much oftener as a quorum
shall, from time to time, decide.
This Amateur Rowing Association began modestly, and without any
assumption, to dictate to the rowing world. It was content to take the
patriotic part of guarding national amateur prestige in aquatics. But
all leading clubs so fully recognised the value of the new association,
that pressure was often put upon it to make a _coup d'état_, and to take
the sceptre of amateur rowing and the control of amateur regattas, a
position analogous to that held respectively by the 'Jockey Club' on the
turf, the 'Grand National Hunt Committee' in steeple-chasing, and the
'Amateur Athletic Association' on the running path. To some extent the
Association have followed the course urged upon them, and last season
(1886) they propounded a code of regatta rules, which will doubtless be
adopted by all regattas that desire to entice first-class amateur
competitions on their waters. These rules read thus:--
AMATEUR ROWING ASSOCIATION.
_Established 1879._
(Hon. Sec, S. LE BLANC SMITH, Esq., Coombeside, Sydenham, S.E.)
Cambridge University Boat Club--Cambridge.
Kingston Rowing Club--Surbiton.
Leander Club--Putney.
London Rowing Club--Putney.
Oxford University Boat Club--Oxford.
Reading Rowing Club--Reading.
Royal Chester Rowing Club--Chester.
Thames Rowing Club--Putney.
Twickenham Rowing Club--Twickenham.
West London Rowing Club--Putney.
Marlow Boat Club--Marlow.
Henley Rowing Club--Henley.
_Rules for Amateur Regattas._
1. The committee shall state on their programmes, and all other
official notices and advertisements, that their regatta is held
under the Rules of the A.R.A.
2. No 'value' prize (_i.e._ a cheque on a tradesman) shall be
offered for competition, nor shall a prize and money be offered
as alternatives.
3. Entries shall close at least three clear days before the date
of the regatta.
4. No assumed name shall be given to the secretary unless
accompanied by the real name of the competitor.
5. No one shall be allowed to enter twice for the same race.
6. The secretary of the regatta shall not be permitted to
divulge any entry, nor to report the state of the entrance list,
until such list be closed.
7. The committee shall investigate any questionable entry
irrespective of protest.
8. The committee shall have absolute power to refuse or return
any entry up to the time of starting, without being bound to
assign a reason.
9. The captain or secretary of each club or crew entered shall,
at least three clear days before the day of the regatta, deliver
to the secretary of the regatta a list containing the names of
the actual crew appointed to compete, to which list the names of
not more than four other members for an eight-oar and two for a
four-oar may be added as substitutes; provided that no person
may be substituted for another who has already rowed a heat.
10. The secretary of the regatta, after receiving the list of
the crews entered, and of the substitutes, shall, if required,
furnish a copy of the same with the names, real and assumed, to
the captain or secretary of each club, or in the case of pairs
or scullers to each competitor entered.
11. The committee shall appoint one or more umpires, to act
under the Laws of Boat Racing.
12. The committee shall appoint one or more judges, whose
decision as to the order in which the boats pass the post shall
be final.
13. Objections to the qualification of a competitor should be
made in writing to the secretary of the regatta at the earliest
moment practicable. No protest shall be entertained unless
lodged before the prizes are distributed.
14. Every competitor must wear complete clothing from the
shoulders to the knees--including a sleeved jersey.
15. In the event of there being but one crew or competitor
entered for any prize, or if more than one enter and all
withdraw but one, the sole competitor must row over the course
to become entitled to such prize.
16. Boats shall be held to have completed the course when their
bows reach the winning post.
17. The whole course must be completed by a competitor before he
can be held to have won a trial or final heat.
18. In the event of a dead heat any competitor refusing to row
again, as may be directed by the committee, shall be adjudged to
have lost.
19. A junior oarsman is one (A) who has never won any race at a
regatta other than a school race, a race in which the
construction of the boats was restricted, or a race limited to
numbers of one club; (B) who has never been a competitor in any
International or Inter-University match.
A junior sculler is one (A) who has never won any sculling race
at a regatta other than a race in which the construction of the
boats was restricted, or a race limited to members of one club;
(B) who has never competed for the Diamond Sculls at Henley, or
for the Amateur Championship of any country.
N.B.--The qualification shall in every case relate to the day of
the regatta.
20. All questions not specially provided for shall be decided by
the committee.
With these safeguards, and with the guidance of this leading
Association, it is to be hoped that the status of amateurs in England
will be preserved at that high standard which alone can properly
demarcate the amateur from the professional.
Foreign crews which seek to compete at our regattas are often of a very
dubious character as regards amateurship. The imposture of Lee, the
Yankee professional, at Henley regatta in 1878, was not discovered until
too late; and his case has been by no means an isolated one. The Henley
executive now impose certain conditions upon foreign countries, which
enable our own authorities to make timely inquiries as to the real
status of proposed visitors. These conditions will be found under No. 4
of the 'General Rules' of Henley (p. 49).
[Illustration: WINDSOR.]
CHAPTER XV.
ROWING AT ETON COLLEGE.
The River Thames flows so near the College of Eton that it necessarily
affords an attraction to the boys at least equal to the playing fields,
and has always been frequented for bathing and rowing as well as other
aquatic pursuits. All such amusements have been styled from time
immemorial 'Wet bobbing,' as distinguished from cricket, which is 'Dry
bobbing:' the boys who boat are called 'Wet bobs' and the cricketers
'Dry bobs.' In the good old times, by which we mean the times told of by
old men of our early acquaintance, extending to the end of the last and
beginning of this century, the river was used by the boys for some other
delightful though unlawful sports. Fishing was in those times more
attractive to them than it has been in recent years, and many boys who
did not join the boats would go out gudgeon, pike, or trout fishing with
persistent zeal. Old gentlemen have told us of getting up in the early
morning in the summer half, breaking out through the windows of their
dame's or tutor's houses, and getting on the river to fish before the
early school. Shooting was also practised on the river both at such
times and during the legitimate play hours. The watermen took care of
guns for sporting boys, and went with them in pursuit of water-hens,
kingfishers, swallows, or any bird that might be found about the eyots,
in the willow beds, or up the backwaters of Clewer or Cuckoo Weir. Of
course these sports were interdicted; but the use of the river for any
purpose whatever was so far forbidden that masters must be shirked in
going to or coming from it, and the river itself was out of bounds. The
sixth form also had to be shirked in old times, and could have any lower
boy punished for being out of bounds; but it must have been a sixth-form
boy of no sporting propensities himself who could have given 100 lines
to a lower boy caught shooting in the Clewer stream. Was it more or was
it less praiseworthy of one of the tutors who caught the same lad with
his gun, and only remonstrated with him because it might be dangerous,
and not because he was breaking the rules of the school?
No one but an Etonian could possibly understand the anomalous condition
of things which made the river out of bounds, though no boy was really
prevented from going on it unless he was caught on the way by a master
and actually sent back. The fact was that, when on the river, the boy
was safe from interference. Once only did a headmaster attempt to stop
an eight which he heard was to row up to Surly; this was Dr. Keate, and
he was so finely hoaxed that he never even made a second attempt.
Hearing that an eight was to go out on a certain day, he threatened to
expel anyone who should take part in the expedition, and then went for a
walk along the towpath to waylay them. There issued from the Brocas a
crew of watermen dressed like the Eton eight, and wearing masks over
their faces. Crowds of people followed to see what would happen. Keate
caught them between the Hopes and shouted, 'Foolish boys, I know you
all. Lord ----, I know you. A----, you had better come ashore. Come here
or you will all be expelled.' The boat however pursued its course,
several of the masters followed on horseback, and the ruse was not
discovered until the crew disembarked and took off their masks with a
loud 'Hurrah!' Keate was furious, and vowed that there should be no
Easter holidays unless the boys who had been hooting him behind hedges
gave themselves up, and some twenty victims were accordingly swished.
As a matter of fact the river was permitted from March 1 till Easter
holidays for long boats, and from Easter till Midsummer for boats of all
kinds. In going to or from the river a boy had to shirk a master by
getting into a shop out of his sight. The masters avoided going along
the river when rowing was practised; they ignored, or pretended to
ignore, the procession of boats on June 4 and Election Saturday, and
winked at the Fireworks and the boys being late for lock-up on those
days. On June 4, 1822, Dr. Keate sent for the captain of the boats and
said to him, 'The boys are often very noisy on this evening and late for
lock-up. You know I know nothing! But I hear you are in a position of
authority. I hope you will not be late to-night, and do your best to
prevent disorder. Lock-up time will be twenty minutes later than usual:
it is your customary privilege.'
On March 1, 1860, the captain of the boats went boldly up to Dr.
Goodford and requested that the 'boats' (or boys who belonged to the
eight-oared boats) might be allowed to go to the Brocas without
shirking, and somewhat to his surprise the Doctor gave his consent. In
the following half shirking was abolished in Eton for all the school.
There is however one important condition on which a boy may boat: he
must 'pass' in swimming. When the authorities ignored the boating, boys
who could not swim daily risked their lives, and casualties sometimes
occurred. It was in 1840 that C. F. Montagu was drowned near Windsor
Bridge, and such an effect had this calamity, that the masters
thenceforth ordained that boating should be formally recognised, and
that no boy should be allowed to get into a boat until he had passed an
examination in swimming. One or two masters were appointed river
masters. Bathing-places were made at Athens, Upper Hope, and Cuckoo
Weir, and the eighth and sixth form were allowed to bathe in Boveney
Weir. No boy might bathe at any place but Cuckoo Weir until he had
passed. Watermen were engaged to teach swimming, and be ready with their
punts at bathing-places and elsewhere to watch the boys on the river, to
prevent accidents and report unlawful acts. Bathing is permitted as soon
after the Easter holidays as weather is warm enough, and two days a week
the river masters attend at Cuckoo Weir for 'Passing.' This examination
(so much pleasanter than any other) is conducted as follows: a number of
boys whom the waterman thinks proficient enough appear undressed in a
punt. A pole is stuck up in the water (which is out of depth at the
place) about thirty yards off; the master stands on a high place called
Acropolis, and as he calls the name, each in turn takes a header and
swims round the pole once or twice. He must not only be able to take a
header and swim the distance, but must also swim in approved form so as
to be capable of swimming in his clothes. Since 'passing' was
established there has been only one boy drowned, though many are swamped
under all kinds of circumstances. A boy who has not passed belongs to
the class called 'non nant.'
[Illustration: OFF THE BROCAS.]
The Thames at Eton has changed somewhat from what it was in the 'old
times.' Boveney and Bray Locks were made in 1839, and before that the
river was much more rapid, and there was no sandbank at Lower Hope. At
the weir below Windsor Bridge the fall of water was not so great as it
is now, and many a boy used to amuse himself in the dangerous adventure
of shooting the weir in a skiff or funny.
Although boating was formally recognised by the masters in 1840, it is a
fact that the first race honoured by the presence of a headmaster was
the Sculling Sweepstakes in 1847, when Dr. Hawtrey was rowed in a boat
to see the racing by two undermasters, the Rev. H. Dupuis and Mr. Evans.
From time immemorial there was a ten-oar and several eight and six-oared
boats, with regular crews, captains and steerers. In the early state of
things a waterman always rowed stroke and drilled or coached the crew,
and this practice was continued with some of the eights till 1828, and
after that the captain of each crew rowed the stroke oar. The crews had
to subscribe for the waterman's pay, his beer, and clothes. The best
remembered watermen were Jack Hall, 'Paddle' Brads, Piper, Jack
Haverley, Tom Cannon and Fish. There were upper boats manned by sixth
and fifth form boys, and lower boats originally with six oars for lower
boys. A lower boy could not get into the upper boats however well he
might row. From more recent times no lower boy can get into the 'boats'
at all, but must content himself with his own lock-up skiff, gig, or
outrigger. We should explain here that a lock-up means a boat which a
boy, for himself or jointly with a friend, hires for the summer half and
keeps exclusively. The boat-builders also allow other boats (not
lock-ups) to be used indiscriminately on payment of a less sum, which
are called 'chance boats.' Boys in the 'boats' generally also have a
lock-up or outrigger of their own, or jointly with others.
The ten-oar was always called the 'Monarch,' and is the head boat in all
processions. The captain of the boats rows stroke of the 'Monarch,' and
until 1830 the second captain rowed nine. After that date the second
captain became captain of the second boat. The boats themselves bore
certain names. In the early lists (none exist earlier than 1824) the
'Britannia' was the second boat, and in that year there were five upper
boats, 'Hibernia,' 'Etonian,' and 'Nelson' being the other three. And
the lower boats with six oars were the 'Defiance,' 'Rivals,' and
'Victory.' The following year there were only three upper boats, which
has remained the custom till this day, except in 1832, when there was a
fourth upper boat called the 'Adelaide.' The 'Victory' has always been
the second boat since 1834. And the favourite names of other boats whose
places have changed in different years are the 'Rivals,' 'Prince of
Wales,' 'Trafalgar,' 'Prince George,' 'Thetis,' and 'Dreadnought.' There
has never been any difficulty in getting crews for the one ten-oar and
seven eight-oared boats, and in fact the names put down usually have
exceeded the number of vacancies. In 1869 an additional boat was put on
in consequence of the collegers being allowed to join, and in 1877 the
'Alexandra' was added to the list owing to the increased number of
entries. Before 1869 the collegers had fours and sometimes an eight to
themselves, but did not join the procession of the boats; and as they
did not belong to the oppidan 'boats' they could not row in the eight of
the school.[14] But they rowed some successful matches against
University men on several occasions. There was never any racing between
collegers and oppidans, and the collegers could only race between
themselves. Before 1840 they kept their boats at a wharf by the playing
fields and had a bathing place there. They used to row down to Datchet
and Bells of Ouseley, but from that time were forbidden to go below
bridge and were put on the same recognised footing as oppidans.
[14] In 1864, however, Marsden, a colleger, rowed in the eight, though
collegers were still excluded from the boats.
As soon as the boys return to school after the Christmas holidays a
large card is placed at Saunders' shop, on which those fifth and sixth
form who wish to join and are not then in the boats inscribe their
names. There is some excitement for a time while the captain of the
boats appoints the captain to each boat, which he does usually in the
order of 'choices' (a term which is explained hereafter) of the previous
year; but sometimes it is thought best to put a high 'choice' or two in
the 'Victory' and appoint as captain of some of the lower boats some
good fellow who is not likely to get into the eight of the school, in
order that when the eight is practising these boats should have the
advantage of their captains to take them out. The captain of the lower
boats ranks higher than the captain of the third upper boat. The crew
of the 'Monarch' (ten-oar) is then selected by the captain of the boats,
and he places a high choice as 'nine,' that position being considered
about the fifth highest place. His crew is chosen not of the best oars,
for they are always placed in the 'Victory' or second boat, but usually
of boys high up in the school, and sometimes a good cricketer or two
gets a place in the Easter half and leaves it afterwards. The captain of
the cricket eleven is almost always formally asked to take an oar in the
ten. The second captain then makes up his crew, then the captain of the
third upper, and so on. Each captain has to submit his list to the
captain of the boats, who advises him on his selection. The steerers are
chosen in the same order, and the best steerer (who is also to have the
honour of steering the eight of the school) always steers the ten. The
crews are always selected on what is known of their merits as good oars,
and there is never any preference given to favouritism or rank. When the
lists are all made out they are printed and published in the 'Boating
Calendar.'
Boating begins on March 1 'after twelve,' unless the weather is
excessively bad, or the river unusually high, when it has to be stopped
for a few days. It ends practically at the summer holidays. The half
from after the summer holidays till Christmas is devoted to football and
fives. Before the Easter holidays the long boats only are allowed, but
towards the end of that half some fours are allowed by special
permission of the river master. We remember a four going out in this
half without permission and an attempt being made to row up to
Maidenhead when lock-up was at 6.30, but it was swamped in Bray Lock and
the crew had to walk or run home; on their way they met the river
master, and he gave them all 200 lines to write out, though the day
being very cold he might have thought them sufficiently punished by the
ducking they had got.
The first day opens with a procession of all the boats to Surly Hall;
each crew dressed in flannel shirt and straw hats of different colours,
and the name of the boat on the hatband. The last boat starts first,
then the others in inverse order to their places, and after rowing a
short way they 'easy all' and await the ten-oar, which pursues an
uninterrupted course to Boveney Lock, followed by the others in their
proper order. All go into the lock together, and then on to Surly Hall,
where they land, play games, and perhaps drink a glass of beer. 'Oars'
are called by the captain after about twenty minutes or half an hour,
and all go back in the same processional order. Before locks were built
there was always a sort of race from Rushes to Surly, each boat trying
to catch and bump the one before it, and the fun was to try and get the
rudders off and have a regular jostle. After 12 there is not time to get
further than Surly, but on a half-holiday after 4 several of the boats
get to Monkey Island, and occasionally when lock-up was at 6.30 there
was time for an eight to row to Maidenhead. The distance from Windsor
Bridge to Rushes is 1 mile 6 furlongs, to Boveney Lock 2 miles 1-3/4
furlong, to Surly (about) 3 miles, to Monkey 4 miles 3 furlongs, to Bray
Lock 5 miles, to Maidenhead 6 miles.
The usual practice is for the eights to go out occasionally with the
captain steering and coaching them, and for long rows to Surly or
Monkey. In the summer half there is so much practising for races that
the upper boats seldom get a row with their proper crews. The boys who
'wet bob' and are not in the boats row in skiffs, gigs, or outriggers to
the bathing-places and to Surly, or paddle about from Brocas to Lower
Hope. Canoes, punting, and sailing are not allowed. On June 4 (and
formerly on Election Saturday) there is a procession in the evening, and
the crews wear striped cotton shirts, straw hats lettered, and sailors'
jackets. The steerers are dressed as admirals, captains or midshipmen of
the Royal Navy, and have a large bouquet of flowers; we need not further
describe the well-known scene. On the three Check nights of old days the
upper boats went to Surly in the evening to partake of ducks and green
peas, and were joined by the lower boats as they came home all dressed
in 4th June costume.
The captain of the boats is the acknowledged 'swell' of the school. He
has unlimited power over the boats, managing and controlling all
affairs connected with them; as treasurer and secretary he keeps the
accounts, and writes a journal of the races and events. No one disputes
his authority. No money can be levied without the authority of the
headmaster. The changes effected in 1861 in abolishing Check nights and
Oppidan dinner were ordered and carried out by him without the least
idea that anyone might have objected. He was always asked to play _ex
officio_ in the collegers' and oppidans' football match if he was
anything of a good football player, and in the cricket match whether he
could play cricket or not. He still manages the foot races of the
school. It has happened four times that a boy has been captain two
years, and his power in his second year is if possible greater than
ever.
The eight of the school are the best rowers, whether captains or not,
and are alone entitled to wear white flannel trousers and the light blue
coats. Now that the race at Henley is an institution they are selected
for that event. Before the Radley race of 1858 there was no regular
race, and if a casual crew came down to row it was generally without the
challenge being given long beforehand, so that no training could take
place. The last race of the season was upper eights, the captain and
second captain tossing up for first choice and choosing alternately; the
first eight choices were generally the eight, and paper lists were given
out afterwards of these choices which ruled the position of the boys who
stayed on for the next year.
The earliest school event we hear of was a race against a Christ Church
four in 1819, which was won by the Eton four.
An attempt was made in 1820 to have a match against Westminster; the
challenge from them was accepted, and an eight chosen, but the
authorities forbade it. The first race between the two schools was rowed
on July 27, 1829, from Putney Bridge to Hammersmith and back, and was
won easily by Eton, and Westminster were beaten at Maidenhead in 1831,
at Staines in 1836, and at Putney in 1843 and 1847. Eton were beaten by
Westminster at Datchet in 1837, and at Putney in 1842, 1845, and 1846.
From 1847 till 1858 there were races only against scratch crews, and
Oxford or Cambridge colleges. In 1858 a match, which was thought a grand
event at the time, was rowed on the Henley course against Radley and won
by Eton. In 1860, 1861, 1862, and 1864 the Westminster race was revived
and was rowed from Putney Bridge to Chiswick Eyot, and Eton was so
easily the winner that it has not been thought worth while to continue
this match.
In 1860 Mr. Warre came to Eton as an assistant master, and at the
request of the captain of the boats assisted him to arrange the
Westminster race, and engaged to coach the eight. It was with his
assistance that Dr. Goodford was persuaded to allow the eight to go to
Henley Regatta in 1861, and the tacit understanding was made that if the
authorities would allow this, and also the boating bill by which two
long boats might escape six o'clock absence and have time to row to
Cliefden, the boats would give up Oppidan dinner and Check nights. Mr.
Warre, with the greatest kindness and with unremitting zeal and energy,
first coached the eight for the Westminster races, and then continued
coaching for the Henley Regatta evening after evening during their
training every year for twenty-four years, until he was appointed
headmaster. The Rev. S. A. Donaldson has since undertaken the coaching.
University men at first disliked the appearance of Eton at Henley. Old
oarsmen thought it would ruin the regatta, as men would hate to be
beaten by boys. Masters predicted that the coaching by a master would
spoil the boys, but time has dissipated these objections, and the
Regatta has flourished better than ever.
It will be seen that Eton has on several occasions beaten trained
college and other crews without winning the plate, and we may fairly say
that her place on the river is about equal to that of the best colleges.
After all, the boys are boys of seventeen and eighteen, and if they are
not as strong or heavy as men a year or two older, they have the
advantage of practically always being in training, are easily got
together, and are living a regular and active life.
RESULTS OF HENLEY REGATTA.
----+--------------+-------------------+-------------------+----------
| | | | Average
| | | | Weight
Year| Race |Eton was beaten by | Eton beat | of Eton
| | | | crew
----+--------------+-------------------+-------------------+----------
| | | |st. lb.
| | | |
1861|Ladies' Plate |Trinity College, |Radley | 9 12
| |Oxford | |
| | | |
1862|Ladies' Plate |University College,|Radley | 10 7-3/4
| |Oxford | |
| | | |
1863|Ladies' Plate |University College,|Trinity Hall, | 10 7-1/4
| |Oxford |Cambridge; |
| | |Brasenose, Oxford; |
| | | |
1864|Ladies' Plate | |Trinity Hall, | 10 6-3/4
|(winners) | |Cambridge; Radley |
| | | |
1865|Grand |London R. C.; | | 10 4-1/2
|Challenge |Third Trinity, | |
| |Cambridge | |
|Ladies' Plate |Third Trinity, | Radley | --
| |Cambridge | |
| |(by a foul) | |
| | | |
1866|Grand |Oxford Etonians; | | --
|Challenge |London R.C. | |
|Ladies' Plate | |First Trinity or | 10 9-3/4
|(winners) | |Black Prince, |
| | |Cambridge; Radley |
| | | |
1867|Grand | (scratched) |Kingston R.C. | 10 7
|Challenge | | |
|Ladies' Plate | |Radley |
|(winners) | | |
| | | |
1868|Grand |London R.C. |University College,| 10 8
|Challenge | |Oxford; Kingston |
| | |R.C. |
|Ladies' Plate | |University College,| --
|(winners) | |Oxford; Pembroke |
| | |College, Cambridge |
| | | |
1869|Grand |Oxford Etonians | | 10 10-3/4
|Challenge | | |
|Ladies' Plate | |Lady Margaret, | --
|(winners) | |Cambridge |
| | | |
1870|Grand |London R.C. | | --
|Challenge | | |
|Ladies' Plate | |Dublin Trinity | 10 9-7/8
|(winners) | |College |
| | | |
1871|Grand |Oxford Etonians; |Dublin Trinity | --
|Challenge |London R.C. |College Oscillators|
|Ladies' Plate |Pembroke College, | | --
| |Cambridge | |
| | | |
1872|Ladies' Plate |Jesus College, | | 10 6
| |Cambridge | |
| | | |
1873|Grand |London R.C. |Balliol College, | 10 9-3/8
|Challenge | |Oxford |
|Ladies' Plate |Dublin Trinity | | --
| |College | |
| | | |
1874|Grand |London R. C. |First Trinity, | 10 7-3/4
|Challenge | |Cambridge; B.N.C., |
| | |Oxford; Thames R.C.|
|Ladies' Plate |First Trinity |Radley | --
| |Cambridge | |
| | | |
1875|Ladies' Plate |Dublin Trinity | | 10 5-1/4
| |College | |
| | | |
1876|Ladies' Plate |Caius College, | | 10 3-1/4
| |Cambridge | |
| | | |
1877|Ladies' Plate |Jesus College, |Cheltenham | --
| |Cambridge | |
| | | |
1878|Ladies' Plate |Jesus College, |Cheltenham | 10 5-1/4
| |Cambridge | |
| | | |
1879|Ladies' Plate |Lady Margaret, |Hertford College, | 11 0
| |Cambridge |Oxford |
| | | |
1880|Ladies' Plate |Trinity Hall, |Exeter College, | 11 7-1/2
| |Cambridge |Oxford; Caius |
| | |College, Cambridge |
| | | |
1881|Grand |Leander R.C. | | 11 1-5/8
|Challenge | | |
|Ladies' Plate |First Trinity, | | --
| |Cambridge | |
| | | |
1882|Ladies' Plate | |Trinity Hall, | 11 10-1/4
|(winners) | |Cambridge; Radley |
| | | |
1883|Ladies Plate |Christ Church, |Radley | 11 0
| |Oxford | |
| | | |
1884|Ladies' Plate | |Caius College, | 11 5-1/4
|(winners) | |Cambridge; Radley |
| | | |
1885|Ladies' Plate | |Oriel College, | 11 5-1/4
|(winners) | |Oxford; Corpus |
| | |College, Oxford |
| | | |
1886|Ladies' Plate |Pembroke College, |Radley; Bedford | 10 12-1/4
| |Cambridge | |
| | | |
1887|Ladies' Plate |Trinity Hall, |Hertford College, | 11 1-3/4
| |Cambridge |Oxford |
----+--------------+-------------------+-------------------+----------
The eight are permitted during training below bridge at Datchet. Of the
races at the school in old times, upper sixes was the great event. It
was rowed from Brocas up to Surly and back before the lock was made, and
in after times round Rushes. All races were rowed round a turning point,
and there was more or less bumping. There were no rules of racing then,
and bumping or jostling, knocking off a rudder, and foul play of any
kind was part of the fun; the only object was to get in first anyhow.
There was a match in 1817 between a four of Mr. Carter's house and four
watermen which caused great excitement, and was unexpectedly won by the
boys. Two sides of college, and dames and tutors, were annual events,
but were done away with in 1870. Tutors had won thirteen, and dames the
same number of races. There used to be an annual punting race, but
punting was forbidden after 1851. One of the masters used to give a
prize for tub-sculling, in which about 100 or more started and afforded
great amusement. This was before outrigged sculling and pair-oared boats
were much used, and since they became fashionable there have been junior
pairs and junior sculling. House fours as a regular institution was
begun in 1857, when the Challenge cup was procured by means of a school
subscription. In 1876 trial eights were first rowed, and the race took
place in the Easter half. There are challenge prizes for the house fours
and for the sculling and pulling, as the pair-oar outrigger race is
called. The number of races had to be curtailed owing to the time taken
to train the eight for Henley. The four and eight-oared races start from
Rushes, and are rowed down stream; total distance 1 mile 6 furlongs. The
pulling and sculling races start from Brocas and go round a ryepack at
Rushes and back, a distance of 3 miles 4 furlongs. The winning point is
always Windsor Bridge. The Brocas is the name given to the field between
the railway and the boathouses, and is so called from the family of
Brocas, who used to own the property. The times vary so much with the
state of the river that little comparison can be made between the merits
of individual oarsmen or scullers. It takes about 7-1/2 minutes for an
eight to row down from Rushes with a fair stream, and about 8 minutes 20
seconds for a four. A good sculler can get round Rushes and back in
about 20 to 21 minutes. Pair-oared rowing without coxswains was
introduced in 1863, and a good pair now wins in 19 to 20 minutes. Fours
still continue to carry coxswains.
The boats themselves that are used are very different now from what they
were forty years ago. Up to 1839 they were still built of oak (a very
heavy wood), and measured fifty-two feet in length and were painted all
over. The first outriggers used in the University boat race in 1846 were
built in streaks, and it was not until 1857 that both University crews
rowed in the present sort of boats with smooth skins made of mahogany
without keels and with round loomed oars. The first time an outrigger
was used at Eton was in 1852, and until 1860 the 'Victory' was the only
one in regular use: all the other eights and fours were built with
streaks and had rowlocks in the gunwale, with a half-outrigger for
stroke and bow. The ten-oar had half-outriggers in that year, but soon
afterwards all the eights became fully outrigged. Sliding seats were
first used about 1874. The builders were Mr. Searle, Tolliday, and
Goodman. Perkins, better known for many years by the sobriquet of
'Sambo,' has now become owner of Mr. Searle's premises.
In the old-fashioned boats rowing was to a certain extent done in an
old-fashioned style. The boats went steadily along without any spring to
the first touch of the oars in the water. The stroke was rapid forward,
but became a slow drag from the first dash of the oar into the water
till recovered. Now the boat leaps to the catch, whereas when the first
note was sounded by a University oarsman to 'catch the beginning,' the
Eton boy in the old heavy boat found it impossible to respond. But Eton
boys knew what was meant by Mr. Warre when they got the celebrated Mat
Taylor boat in 1860, and soon learned the new style. The stroke became
quicker, the recovery sharp, and every nerve was strained to cover the
blade of the oar at the first touch in the water when the whole pull had
to be made. From the time when the watermen used to coach and row, no
regular coaching had been done by anyone but the captains. A neat and
traditional style was handed down with all the essential points of good
oarsmanship. But the art of propelling the Mat Taylor, and boats
afterwards used of the same sort of type, was taught by Mr. Warre.
We have alluded to the doubts at first in the minds of old Etonians
about the eight going to Henley, and the great changes effected at that
time. No one now will say that it was anything but unmixed good for the
school. The convivial entertainments of Check nights and Oppidan dinners
had already become institutions of a past age. Drinking and smoking had
died out, and all that was wanted to stir the boys from lounging about
in their skiffs under willow bushes and back streams was the excitement
of a great annual race and the effort to qualify for a place in the
eight. There have almost always been Eton men in the University crews,
and since 1861 there have sometimes been as many as five in one crew,
and certainly as many, if not more, in every 'Varsity' race. Eton has
always had its full share of the Presidentships. Third Trinity,
Cambridge, has never ceased to hold its own in a high position on the
Cam, and we have never heard a word of any deterioration, and much the
other way, of the moral effect on the boys of being coached during their
training. The special advantage of having the river as a recreation
place in addition to the playing fields puts Eton to the front in
athletics among our public schools; and the use of varieties of boats
from early life, under all sorts of difficulties, on a rapid stream, and
having to keep his proper side to avoid other craft, makes the 'Wet bob'
a first class waterman. _Floreat Etona._
CAPTAINS OF THE BOATS AND NOTABLE EVENTS.
+----+------------------------+-------------------------------------+
|Year| Captain of the Boats | Notable Events |
+----+------------------------+-------------------------------------+
|1812| G. Simson | -- |
|1814| R. Wyatt | -- |
|1815| T. Hill | -- |
|1816| Bridgeman Simpson | -- |
|1816| M. Bligh | -- |
|1817| J. O. Secher | -- |
|1818| J. H. Tuckfield | -- |
|1819| R. Tuckfield | -- |
|1820| Lord Dunlo | -- |
|1821| M. Ashley | -- |
|1822| J. A. Kinglake | -- |
|1823| P. J. Nugent | -- |
|1824| W. Carew | -- |
|1825| A. Leith | -- |
|1825| M. Clifford | -- |
|1826| T. Staniforth | -- |
|1827| T. H. Taunton | -- |
|1828| T. Edwardes-Moss | -- |
|1829| Lord Alford | Beat Westminster |
|1830| G. H. Ackers | -- |
|1831| C. M. Roupell | Beat Westminster; beaten by Leander |
|1832| E. Moore | -- |
|1833| G. Arkwright | -- |
|1834| J. Quicke | -- |
|1835| E. Stanley | -- |
|1836| E. Fellowes | Beat Westminster |
|1837| W. J. Garnett | Beaten by Westminster |
|1838| P. J. Croft | -- |
|1839| W. C. Rayer | -- |
|1840| W. R. Harris-Arundell | Beat Old Etonians, and an Oxford |
| | | Etonian Club |
|1841| W. R. Harris-Arundell | Beat Cambridge Subscription Room |
|1842| F. J. Richards | Beaten by Westminster |
|1843| F. E. Tuke | Beat Westminster |
|1844| W. W. Codrington | -- |
|1845| H. A. F. Luttrell | Beaten by Westminster |
|1846| G. F. Luttrell | Beaten by Westminster |
|1847| C. H. Miller | Beat Westminster; beaten by Thames |
| | | in Putney Regatta |
|1848| H. H. Tremayne | -- |
|1849| R. B. H. Blundell | -- |
|1850| G. M. Robertson | Beat scratch Cambridge crew; beaten |
| | | by Oxford |
|1851| J. B. H. Blundell | -- |
|1852| C. H. R. Trefusis | Beaten by an Oxford crew |
|1853| J. J. Harding | -- |
|1854| J. C. Moore | Beat a scratch Oxford crew |
|1855| R. L. Lloyd | Beaten by a Cambridge crew and by |
| | | Balliol |
|1856| G. S. F. Lane-Fox | Beat an Oxford and Cambridge mixed |
| | | crew by a foul, and beaten by an |
| | | Oxford eight |
|1857| T. Baring | Beaten by an Oxford eight |
|1858| Mr. Lawless[15] | Beat Radley at Henley |
|1859| C. A. Wynne | -- |
|1860| R. H. Blake Humfrey[16]| Beat Westminster |
|1861| R. H. Blake Humfrey | Beat Westminster and Radley; beaten |
| | | by Trinity College, Cambridge |
|1862| C. B. Lawes | Beat Westminster and Radley; beaten |
| | | by University College at Henley |
|1863| W. R. Griffiths | Beat Trinity Hall, Brasenose, and |
| | | Radley; beaten by University College|
| | | at Henley |
|1864| S. C. Cockran | Beat Trinity Hall, Cambridge, and |
| | | Radley, and won Ladies' Plate at |
| | | Henley |
|1865| J. Mossop | -- |
|1866| E. Hall | Won Ladies' Plate against Black |
| | | Prince, Cambridge |
|1867| W. D. Benson | Won Ladies' Plate against Radley |
|1868| J. M'Clintock-Bunbury | Won Ladies' Plate against University|
| | | College and Pembroke, Oxford |
|1869| T. Edwardes-Moss | Won Ladies' Plate against Lady |
| | | Margaret, Cambridge |
|1870| F. A. Currey | Won Ladies' Plate against Dublin |
| | | Trinity College |
|1871| F. C. Ricardo | Won heats of Grand Challenge and of |
| | | Ladies' Plate |
|1872| E. R. S. Bloxsome | -- |
|1873| T. Edwardes-Moss | Won first heat of Grand Challenge |
| | | against Balliol |
|1874| T. Edwardes-Moss | Won second heat of Grand Challenge |
| | | against First Trinity, Cambridge, |
| | | and B.N.C., Oxford |
|1875| A. J. Mulholland | Beaten by Dublin in Ladies' Plate |
|1876| G. Cunard | Beaten by Caius College, Cambridge, |
| | | in Ladies' Plate |
|1876| S. Sandbach | -- |
|1877| M. F. G. Wilson | Beat Cheltenham, but beaten by Jesus|
| | | College for Ladies' Plate |
|1878| G. Grenville-Grey | Won second heat against Cheltenham; |
| | | beaten by Jesus College in final for|
| | | Ladies' Plate |
|1879| L. R. West | Won second heat against Hertford |
| | | College; beaten by Lady Margaret |
| | | in final for Ladies' Plate |
|1880| G. C. Bourne | Won first heat, beaten by Trinity |
| | | Hall, Cambridge, in final for |
| | | Ladies' Plate |
|1881| G. C. Bourne | -- |
|1882| F. E. Churchill | Won Ladies' Plate, after interval of|
| | | twelve years |
|1883| H. S. Close | Won first heat Ladies' Plate; lost |
| | | with broken stretcher in final |
|1884| H. McLean | Won Ladies' Plate |
|1885| C. Barclay | Won Ladies' Plate |
|1886| C. T. Barclay | Beaten by Pembroke College in final |
| | | for Ladies' Plate |
|1887| Lord Ampthill | Beaten by Second Trinity Hall in |
| | | final for Ladies' Plate |
|1888| Lord Ampthill | -- |
+----+------------------------+-------------------------------------+
[15] Now Lord Gloncurry.
[16] Changed his name to Mason.
CHAPTER XVI.
WATERMEN AND PROFESSIONALS.
The London waterman is the oldest type of professional oarsmanship. He
was called into existence for the purpose of locomotion, and race-rowing
was a very secondary consideration with him in the first instance. Just
as in the present day credentials of respectability are required by the
Commissioners of Police of drivers of cabs and omnibuses (and none may
ply for hire in these capacities within the metropolis unless duly
licensed), so in olden days great stress was laid on the due
qualification of watermen. An aspirant was and is required to serve
seven years' apprenticeship before he can be 'free' of the river, and
until he is 'free' of it he may not ply for hire upon it under heavy
penalties for so doing. This regulation is in the interests of public
safety. If apprentices exhibit special talent for rowing they can win
what are called 'coats and badges,' given by certain corporate bodies,
and by so doing they can take up their 'freedom' without paying fees for
the privilege. We believe that no such restrictions exist on our other
British rivers. The rule survives on the Thames because in olden times
the Thames was a highway for passenger traffic in 'wherries.' In those
times, where a passenger would now go to a thoroughfare or call a cab,
he would have gone to the nearest 'stairs' and have hailed a wherry.
London had not then grown to its present dimensions, and the Thames lay
conveniently as a highway between Westminster, the City, and the docks.
Amateurs began to take up rowing early in the present century as a
sport; and these contests seem to have fostered the idea of
match-making among watermen. The title of a Champion of the Thames seems
first to have been held by one R. Campbell, who beat C. Williams,
another waterman, in a match on September 9, 1831, and also beat R.
Coombes in a match the date of which is doubtful, but it was in heavy
boats. Campbell was a powerful and heavy man, while Coombes weighed less
that ten stone. Coombes turned the tables on Campbell a few years later
(in 1846), and for some years Coombes was held to be invincible. In
those times London watermen could, at scratch, man an eight to hold or
even beat the best trained crew of amateurs. The original waterman's
wherry was a vehicle of conveyance; it was of much greater size than
would be required to carry one man alone in a sheer contest for speed,
but so soon as 'racing' came into vogue among watermen, lighter craft
were built for matches, and were called 'wager' boats. The hull of the
wherry was constructed as narrow as possible, and the sides flared out
just at the greatest beam, so as to allow of sufficient width to carry
the rowlocks with the requisite leverage for the sculls. This detail has
already been treated in Chapter XI. under the head of 'boat building.'
Coombes had been beaten by Campbell in old-fashioned wherries, such as
could be used for the business of conveying passengers. When he in turn
defeated Campbell both men used 'wager boats.' The time came when years
told on Coombes, and he had to yield to his own pupil Cole. Coombes was
not convinced by his defeat, and made another match, but Cole this time
won with greater ease. They rowed in 'outriggers' on these occasions.
Cole in turn succumbed to Messenger of Teddington in 1855, and two years
later Harry Kelley, the best waterman the Thames ever produced, either
as an oarsman or as a judge of rowing, beat Messenger. Up to this time
London watermen had been considered invincible at sculling. Harry
Clasper had produced four-oar crews from the Tyne to oppose Coombes and
his four, but no Tyne sculler had dared to lay claim to the
Championship. However, in 1859 Robert Chambers was matched with Kelley,
and to the horror of the Thames men their favourite was beaten, and
with considerable ease. The Tyne man was the bigger, and had a very long
sweep with his sculls; on that day he showed to great advantage, the
more so because Kelley was not sculling up to his best form. Defeated
men can always suggest excuses for failure, and Kelley, for years after
that race, averred that he had not been beaten on his merits; he had
been kept waiting a long time at the post, and was cold and stiff at the
start. In those days, whether in University matches or in public
sculling races, the lead was a matter of special importance. In the
first place the old code of rules were in force, which enabled a leading
sculler to take his opponent's water, to wash him, to retain the
captured course, and to compel his adversary to row round him in order
to pass him. Secondly, and even more important, was the action of the
crowds of steamers which followed such races. The Thames Conservancy had
no control over them, and they would lie half-way up Putney Reach
waiting for a race, and then steam alongside of or even ahead of the
sternmost competitor. Their paddles drew away the water from him, and
caused him literally to row uphill. Under such circumstances even the
champion of the day would have found it next to impossible to overhaul
even an apprentice sculler, if the latter were in clear water ahead of
the steamer fleet and the former were a few lengths behind in the 'draw'
of the paddles.
[Illustration: THAMES WATERMAN--CIRC. 1825.]
All this was well known, and could be seen any day in an important
Thames race (the hollowness of the Oxford wins of 1861 and 1862 against
Cambridge was undoubtedly owing to the treatment which the Cantabs
experienced from the steamers when once the lead had become decisive).
Kelley argued to his friends that all that could be said of the race was
that he could not go as fast that day as Chambers for the first mile,
and that after this point, whether or not he could have rowed down his
opponent was an open question, for the steamers never gave him a chance
of fair play. However, for a long time Kelley could not find backers for
a new match. Meantime, Tom White and Everson in turn tried their luck
against Chambers and were hopelessly beaten. In 1863 Green the
Australian came to England to make a match with Chambers. Green was a
square, powerful man, about Kelley's height, but a stone heavier. He
sculled upright in body, and with too much arm work for staying power,
and did not make enough use of his body, especially as to swing back at
the end of the stroke. He sculled a fast stroke, and so long as his arms
lasted went a tremendous pace. Kelley and he fraternised, and practised
together. When the match came off against Chambers, Green went right
away for a mile, and then maintained his lead of three or more clear
lengths for another half-mile. Chambers sculled rather below his form at
first, wildly, as if flurried at being so easily led, but off Craven he
settled down to his old long sweep, and held Green. The end came
suddenly; off the Soap Works Green collapsed, clean rowed out, and
Chambers finished at his leisure. This match did Kelley good with his
friends, for they knew that he could always in private practice go by
Green after a mile or so had been sculled, quite as easily as Chambers
eventually had done. Proposals were broached for a match between the
cracks of the Thames and Tyne, and although the Tyne party pressed to
have the race on the Tyne, they gave way at last, and the venue was the
Thames. The stakes were 200_l._ a side, as usual in Champion matches,
and there was also a staked 'bet' of 300_l._ to 200_l._ on Chambers.
(The race was on August 8, 1865.) The Tyne man was a strong favourite at
the start, but Kelley got away with the lead, and was never again
caught, winning cleverly by four lengths, and sculling in form such as
was never seen before or after, on old-fashioned fixed seats. Just at
this time there was a speedy Tyne sculler called Cooper; he lately had
sculled a mile match with Chambers on the Tyne, and Chambers had won by
_one yard_ only, in a surf which was all in favour of the bigger man
(Chambers). A week or two after the aforesaid Champion race, Kelley,
Cooper, and Chambers met for a 300_l._ sweepstake (specially got up for
these three men, over the two-mile tidal course of the 'Eau Brink Cut'
at King's Lynn). Both Kelley and Chambers had been indulging a little
after their Champion's training. Cooper, who had been lately beaten by
Chambers in the Thames Regatta, for a 50_l._ purse (Hammersmith to
Putney), was very fit, and jumped away from both the cracks. Chambers
was short of wind, and was never in the race. Kelley stuck to Cooper,
and rowed him down half a mile from the finish. Cooper then rowed across
Kelley, fouled him, and drove him ashore. Cooper was properly
disqualified on the foul. Next year Hammill the American came over to
scull Kelley, and the races took place on the Tyne. One race was end on
end, and the other round a stake boat. Kelley won each race with utter
ease. Hammill's style was an exaggeration of Green's, all arm work, and
a stroke up to 55 a minute at the start. About this time J. Sadler was
rising to fame. He had been a chimney-sweep, and afterwards was 'Jack in
the water' to Simmonds' yard at Putney. He, unfortunately for himself,
exposed much of his merits when rowing for the Thames Regatta Sculls in
1865, and instead of making a profitable series of matches up the scale,
beginning with third-rate opponents, he had to make his first great
match with T. Hoare, who was reputed second only to Kelley on the
Thames. Sadler beat Hoare easily, and was at the close of 1866 matched
to scull Chambers for the Championship, Kelley having 'retired' from the
title (Kelley and Sadler were allies at the time, and Sadler was
Kelley's pupil). In the match Sadler went well and fast at Hammersmith,
and then tired, fouled Chambers, and lost the race.
In the following year Kelley and Chambers were once more matched. Kelley
came out of his retirement in consequence of some wrangling which had
arisen out of the previous defeat of his pupil Sadler by Chambers. The
new match took place on the Tyne, on a rough day and with a bad tide, on
May 6. Kelley won and with some ease. It was evident that Chambers was
no longer the man that he had been. He never again sculled for the
Championship, but he took part in the Paris International Regatta in
July of the same year. Very soon after this his lungs showed extensive
disease, and he gradually sank of decline.
_En passant_ we may say of Chambers that, apart from grand physique and
science as an oarsman, he displayed qualities throughout his career
which would stamp him as a model for champions of the present day. He
was always courteous, never puffed up with success, never overbearing,
and yet at the same time always fondly confident in his own powers and
stamina. A more honourable man never sat in a boat. The writer recalls a
little incident as characteristic of Chambers. Just before the 1865
match against Kelley, he accosted Chambers at Putney and asked him if he
wished to sell his boat after the match. (It was a common practice for
Tyne scullers to do this, to save the cost of conveyance back to the
Tyne.) Chambers replied, he would sell her. The writer asked if he might
try her after the race. 'Hoot mon,' said Chambers, 'try her noo, if ye
like.' Now the writer was known to be an ally of Kelley (who usually
accompanied him when training on the tideway for sculling races). In
these days we much doubt whether any championship candidate would allow
a third person--whether amateur or professional--known to be in sympathy
with his opponent, to set foot in his racing craft on the eve of a
match. Nothing would be easier than to have an 'accident' with her; and
all scullers know that to have to adopt a strange boat on the day of a
match would be a most serious drawback. That Chambers never for a moment
harboured such suspicion of his rivals shows that he judged them by his
own faultless standard of fair play.
Not that we suggest for an instant that amateurs of this or of former
days were ever suspected of being prone to foul play, but none the less
do we believe that in these days few scullers in such a position as
Chambers would have made the gratuitous offer which he did upon the
occasion referred to.
In the autumn of 1867, Kelley and his pupil, J. Sadler, fell out; the
result was a Champion match between them. On the first essay Kelley came
in first after having been led, and having fairly tired Sadler out. But
a foul had occurred when Kelley was giving Sadler the go-by, and the
referee was unable to decide which was in the wrong. He accordingly
ordered them to row again next day. The articles of the match provided
for a start by 'mutual consent,' and somehow Sadler did not 'consent' at
any moment when Kelley was ready. Strong opinions were expressed by
several persons who watched the affair from the steamers, and eventually
the referee ordered Kelley to row over the course. The stakes were
awarded to Kelley by the referee, but Sadler brought an action against
the stakeholder, M. J. Smith, then proprietor of the 'Sportsman'
newspaper. The case became a _cause célèbre_. The Court decided that the
referee had acted _ultra vires_ in awarding the stakes to Kelley,
inasmuch as he had not first taken the trouble to observe for himself
Sadler's man[oe]uvres at the starting post. He had formed his opinion
from hearsay and separate statements. Eventually both parties withdrew
their stakes.
In the year 1868 a new sculler of extraordinary merit came suddenly to
the fore. The late Mr. J. G. Chambers, C.U.B.C., had got up a revived
edition of the old Thames professional regattas, and with a liberal
amount of added money. The sculls race brought out all the best men of
the day, and among them Kelley; the distance was the full metropolitan
course. Renforth, a Tyne sculler, electrified all by the ease with which
he won. He was a heavier man than Kelley; he had a rather cramped finish
at the chest, but a tremendous reach and grip forward. He slid on the
seat to a considerable extent, especially when spurting.
Kelley was rather over weight at the time, and excuses were made for him
on this score. As a matter of prestige he had to defend his title to the
championship in a match, and he met Renforth on November 17. He made a
better fight on that day than in the regatta sculls, but the youth and
strength of Renforth were too much for the old champion. Renforth
remained in undisputed possession until his death, which took place
under very tragic circumstances during a four-oared match between an
English and Canadian crew in Canada. The Englishmen were well ahead,
when Renforth, rowing stroke, faltered, fainted, and died shortly after
reaching shore. Some attributed his death to poison, some to epilepsy.
The matter remains a mystery.
Sadler was now tacitly acknowledged to be the best sculler left in the
kingdom (Kelley having retired). But Sadler could not claim the title of
champion without winning it in a match. At last, in 1874, a mediocre
Tyne sculler named Bagnall was brought out to row him for the title, and
Sadler won easily enough.[17] Next year R. W. Boyd was the hope of the
Tyne. He had a bad style for staying. He was all slide and no body
swing; his body at the end of the stroke was unsupported by any leg
work. So long as the piston action of his legs continued he went fast,
but when the legs began to tire he stopped as if shot. His bad style was
the result of his having taken to a slide before he had mastered the
first principles of rowing upon a fixed seat, or had learned how to
swing his body from the hips. Sadler, on the other hand, had been rowing
for years on fixed seats before he ever saw a sliding seat; the veteran
did not discard his old body swing when he took to the slide, but simply
added slide to swing, whereas Boyd substituted slide for swing. The
difference in style between the two was most marked when they showed in
the race. Boyd had youth and strength on his side. Sadler was getting
old and stale, his hair was grey, and he was not nearly so good as when
he had rowed Kelley in 1867 (save that the slide added mechanically to
his powers for speed). Boyd darted away with a long lead; before a mile
had been crossed his piston action began to flag and his boat to go
slower. Sadler plodded on, and when once up to him left him as if
standing still, led easily through Hammersmith Bridge, and won hands
down. Boyd never seemed to profit by this lesson. He stuck to his bad
style so long as he was on the water, else he might have made a good
sculler.
[17] This was the first champion race rowed on sliding seats.
In 1876 Australia once more challenged England. Sadler was the holder of
the championship, and Trickett was the crack of Australia. The
Australian was a younger and bigger man than Sadler; he slid well, but
he bent his arms much too early in the stroke. This would tend to tire
them prematurely, and if the pace could be kept up, Trickett would soon
have realised the effects of this salient fault of his. But Sadler was
older, staler, and more grizzled than ever. He made a poor fight against
Trickett, and a few weeks later in the Thames Regatta Sculls he came in
nowhere, finishing even behind old 'Jock' Anderson, who never had been
more than a third-rate sculler. Enough was then seen to show that our
best sculler, as to style, was hopelessly old and stale, and that our
new men, even if faster than he, had no style to make them worthy to
uphold the old country's honours on the water. Trickett returned to
Australia without trying conclusions with any other of our scullers for
the championship. He made a match with Lumsden, a Tyne man, but the
latter forfeited. If at the moment it had been known that the Sadler of
1876 was some ten lengths in the mile inferior to the Sadler of 1875, it
is likely that Lumsden would have gone to the post, and that some other
British sculler would also have endeavoured, while there was time, to
arrange a match with the Australian.
The title of Champion of the World had now left England. Sadler retired,
and there was still an opening for candidature for his abandoned title.
As regards the now purely local honours of the representatives of
Britain in sculling, Mr. Charles Bush, a well-known supporter of
professional sculling, had found a coal-heaver, by name Higgins, who had
shown good form in a Thames regatta, and was looked upon as the rising
man of the Thames. There was also a rising sculler of the name of
Blackman, who had won the Thames Regatta Sculls. Higgins was matched for
champion honours against Boyd, and the match came off on May 20, 1877,
The wind blew a gale from S.W., and Boyd had the windward station. In
such a cross wind station alone sufficed to decide the race, and Boyd
won easily. The two met again on October 8 of the same year, and Higgins
proved himself the better stayer of the two. He had a better idea of
sliding than Boyd, and used his legs better and swung farther back. Boyd
stuck to his piston action, and was rowed out in six minutes. They met
a third time on the following January 11, this time on the Tyne, and
once more Higgins won, after a foul. He was plainly the better man of
the two for any distance beyond a mile.
In the succeeding summer a Durham pitman, one W. Elliott, came out as a
Championship candidate. He was short and thick-set, and was decidedly
clumsy at his first essay. He met Higgins, and was beaten easily. He
improved rapidly and came out again the following September. The
proprietors of the 'Sportsman' had established a challenge cup, to be
won by three successive victories, under certain conditions. Higgins,
Boyd, and Elliott competed for it, and Elliott beat them both. The final
heat was on September 17. In the following year, 1879, Elliott and
Higgins met on the Tyne, on February 21, and once more Elliott held his
own. He remained the representative of British professional sculling
until the arrival of Edward Hanlan in this country.
Hanlan first attracted notice at the Philadelphia regatta of 1876. Mr.
R. H. Labat, of the Dublin University, London, and Thames Rowing Clubs,
took part in that regatta, and entered into conversation with Hanlan.
He, as one of the L.R.C. men, lent Hanlan a pair of sculls for the
occasion, and with them Hanlan won the Open Professional Sculling Prize.
He beat among others one Luke, who had beaten Higgins in a trial heat.
Higgins was at the moment suffering from exertions in a four-oared race
earlier in the day, so that his defeat did not occasion much surprise;
but Mr. Labat on his return to England told the writer of this chapter
that in his opinion Hanlan was far and away the best sculler he had ever
seen, and that even if Higgins had been fresh and fit, Hanlan would have
been too good for him. At that date Hanlan had not made his great
reputation, but the soundness of Mr. Labat's estimate of his powers was
fully verified subsequently.
In 1879 Hanlan, having beaten the best American scullers, came to
England to row for the 'Sportsman' Challenge Cup. He commenced his
career in England by beating a second-rate northern sculler, in a sort
of trial match; but this was only a feeler before trying conclusions
with Elliott. The two met on the Tyne on June 16, and Elliott was simply
'never in it.' Hanlan led him, played with him, and beat him as he
liked.
It did not require any very deep knowledge of oarsmanship to enable a
spectator to observe the vast difference which existed between his style
and that of such men as Boyd or Elliott. Hanlan used his slide
concurrently with swing, carrying his body well back, with straight arms
long past the perpendicular, before he attempted to row the stroke in by
bending the arms. His superiority was manifest, and yet our British
(professional) scullers seemed wedded to this vicious trick of premature
slide and no swing, and doggedly declined to recognise the maxim
Fas est et ab hoste doceri.
At that rate the two best British scullers were, in the writer's
opinion, two amateurs--viz., Mr. Frank Playford, holder of the Wingfield
Sculls, and Mr. T. C. Edwardes-Moss, twice winner of the Diamonds at
Henley. Either of these gentlemen could have made a terrible example of
the best British professionals, could amateur etiquette have admitted a
match between the two classes. The only time that these gentlemen met,
Mr. Playford proved the winner, over the Wingfield course. A sort of
line as to relative merit between amateur and professional talent is
gained by recalling Mr. Edwardes-Moss's victory for the Diamond Sculls
in 1878. In that year he met an American, Lee, then self-styled an
amateur, but who now openly practises as a professional, and who is
quite in the first flight of that class in America. He could probably
beat any English professional of to-day, or at least make a close fight
with our best man. When the two met at Henley Mr. Edwardes-Moss was by
no means in trim to uphold the honour of British sculling. He had gone
through three commemoration balls at Oxford about ten days before the
regatta. He had only an old sculling boat, somewhat screwed and limp. He
had lent her freely to Eton and Windsor friends during the preceding
summer, not anticipating that he would need her to race in again; but
when the regatta drew nigh he could find no boat to suit him, and had to
make shift with the old boat. In the race he had to give Lee the inside,
or Berks station; and all who have known Henley Regatta are well aware
of the advantage of that side; it gives dead water for some hundreds of
yards below Poplar Point, and still further gains on rounding the point.
Three lengths would fairly represent the minimum of the handicap between
the two stations on a smooth day, such as that of the race. The two
scullers raced round the point, Lee leading slightly; but the Oxonian
caught him and just headed him on the post. Lee stopped one stroke too
soon, whether from exhaustion or error is uncertain, but the performance
plainly stamped the English amateur as his superior, half trained and
badly boated as he was. Over a champion course, in a match, Lee would in
his Henley form have been a score or more lengths behind the Oxonian.
Enough can be guessed from these calculations to show that there would
have been a most interesting race, to say the least, if it could have
been arranged for a trial of power between Mr. Playford and Hanlan. The
latter sculler used to admit, so we always understood, that the London
Rowing Club sculler was the only man he had seen whom he did not feel
confident of being able to beat.
Hanlan's style, good though it undoubtedly was, appeared to even greater
advantage when seen alongside of the miserable form of our
professionals. Hanlan was a well-made man, of middle height, and a
thoroughly scientific sculler. He was the best exponent of sliding-seat
sculling among professionals, only a long way so; but we, who can recall
Kelley and Chambers in their best days, must hold to the opinion that
the two latter were, _ceteris paribus_, as good professors of fixed-seat
sculling as ever was Hanlan of the art on a slide. Had sliding seats
been in vogue in 1860, and the next half-dozen years, we believe that
Kelley and Chambers would have proved themselves capable of doing much
the same that Hanlan did in his own generation. We have seen Kelley
scull on a sliding seat. He was fat and short of wind, and never
attempted to make a study of the leg-work of sliding; but, being simply
an amateur at it, his style was a model for all our young school to
copy. Like all old fixed-seat oarsmen who have attained merit in the old
school, he stuck to his traditional body swing, and added the slide to
it, as it were instinctively. There could hardly be a greater contrast
of action than to see scullers like Boyd or Blackman kicking backwards
and forwards, with piston action and helpless bodies doubled up at the
finish, and to observe, paddling within sight of these, old stagers like
Biffen and Kelley in a double-sculling boat fitted with slides. It was
easy to see that until the new generation of British professionals could
be taught first principles of rowing on a fixed seat, there was small
chance of their ever acquiring the proper use of the slide as
exemplified by Hanlan.
To return to Hanlan's performances. The Championship of the 'World'
still rested in Trickett, who had further maintained his title (since he
had beaten Sadler), by defeating Rush on the Paramatta, Sydney, on June
30, 1877. Rush had once been the Australian champion; Trickett had
beaten him before tackling Sadler, and this was a new attempt by Rush to
regain his lost honours. Technically, Trickett could have claimed to
defend his title in his own country; but plenty of money was forthcoming
to recoup him for expenses of travel, and he assented to meet Hanlan on
the Thames for the nominal trophy of the 'Sportsman' Challenge Cup, but
really for the wider honour of champion of the world. The match came off
on November 16, 1880, and Trickett was defeated with even greater ease
than Elliott on the Tyne.
Just about this date a sculling regatta, open to the world, was
organised on the Thames. It was got up purely for commercial purposes by
a company called the 'Hop Bitters,' who required to advertise their
wares. Nevertheless, it produced good sport. Hanlan did not compete in
it. It came off only two days after his match with Trickett. Our British
scullers took part in it, and with most humiliating results. Not one of
them could gain a place in the final heat, for which four prizes were
awarded to the four winners of trial heats. The four winners of the
contest were one and all either colonials or Americans, and the winner
was one Elias Laycock, also a Sydney man, and undoubtedly a better
sculler than Trickett, although the latter was the nominal champion of
Australia at the time. Laycock sculled in good style, so far as leg-work
and finish of the stroke; his body action was not cramped, but he had
not so long a swing as should, if possible, be displayed by a man of his
size. He scaled rather above twelve stone. Wallace Ross, who finished
second to him, after leading him some distance, had been the favourite,
and had been reputed as only a trifle inferior to Hanlan. The forward
reach and first part of Ross's stroke was as good as could be wished,
but he had a cramped, tiring, and ugly finish with his arms and
shoulders. When Laycock succeeded in beating him a furore was created;
Laycock's staying powers were unmistakable, and many who saw him fancied
that his stamina would enable him to give Hanlan trouble before the end
of four miles. Laycock himself was not endued with so high an opinion of
his own merits; but he was too game a man to shirk a contest when it was
proposed to him, and the result was that he was soon matched to scull
Hanlan.
The match came off on the following February 14, 1881, over the Thames
course. Laycock stuck to his work all the way, but was never in it for
speed. Hanlan led from start to finish, and won easily. A year later
Hanlan was back in England to row Boyd on the Tyne. Boyd's friends
fondly fancied that he had developed some improvement, but it was a
delusion. Never was an oarsman more wedded to vicious style and wanton
waste of strength than the pet of the Tyne. The race came off on April
3, 1882, and was, of course, an easy paddle for Hanlan. The knowledge
that Hanlan was going to be again on English waters, brought about a
return match between him and Trickett. This was rowed on the Thames on
May 1 following, and once more the Canadian won easily.
No one in Britain thought fit to challenge Hanlan again, after the
decisive manner in which he had disposed of all his opponents; but in
his own country he twice defended his title, in 1883. On May 31 in that
year he rowed J. L. Kennedy, a comparatively new man, in Massachusetts,
and beat him; and on the following July 18 he once more met his old
opponent, Wallace Ross, on the St. Lawrence, and beat him, though after
a closer race than heretofore.
In England about this time sculling had sunk even lower among
professionals than in the days when Boyd and Elliott were the professors
of the science. These men had retired; there were sundry second and
third class competitors for champion honours, among them one Largan, who
had been to Australia to scull a match or two, and one Perkins, and one
Bubear. The latter at first was inferior to Perkins, and was a man of
delicate health and somewhat difficult to train. He often disappointed
his backers by going amiss just before a match was due, but he took
rather more pains with his style than other British scullers had done of
late, and eventually he succeeded in surpassing them, and in becoming
the representative (such as it was) of British professional oarsmanship.
We should mention that in 1881 the brothers Messrs. Walter and Harry
Chinnery most generously made an expensive attempt to raise the lost
standard of British sculling, by giving 1000_l._ in prizes for a series
of years, to be sculled for. These two gentlemen were well-known leading
amateur athletes in their day. The elder had been a champion amateur
long-distance runner; the younger had won the amateur boxing
championship, and had rowed a good oar at Henley regattas and elsewhere.
It may be invidious to look a gift horse in the mouth, but we feel that
this generous subsidy of the Messrs. Chinnery was practically wasted for
want of being fettered with a certain condition. That condition should
have been, that the competitions for the Chinnery prizes should be on
fixed seats. One reason why professional racing has fallen off of late
so much, compared to amateur performances, may be found in the fact
that amateurs are taught, and are willing to be taught, from first
principles: whereas our professionals nowadays are little better than
self-taught. Rowing and sculling require scientific instruction more
than ever on slides. In old days the main business of a professional
oarsman was to carry passengers in his boat; the calling produced a
large following, and out of these some few were good oarsmen and took to
boat-racing as well as to mere plying for hire. Here there was a natural
nursery for professional racing oarsmen. The disuse of the wherry for
locomotion destroyed this nursery; we have already shown that our later
professionals are as a rule neither London watermen nor Tyne keelmen.
They are a medley lot by trade; a chimney-sweep, a collier, a
coal-heaver, a miner, a cabman, &c., all swell the ranks. Such men as
these take to the water simply for what they can make out of it, by
racing on it. Their one ambition is to race, and to run before they can
decently walk. Hence they do not go through the school of fixed-seat
rowing before they graduate on sliders, and they have no instructors,
nor will they listen to advice.
Amateurs, on the other hand, belong as a rule to clubs; and all clubs of
any prestige coach their juniors carefully, and lay down rules for their
improvement. Two very usual club rules are, that juniors shall not begin
by racing in keelless crank boats, but in steady 'tub'-built craft. No
such control exists over junior professionals; if a bricklayer's
apprentice takes to the water in spare hours, and begins to fancy
himself as an oarsman, he will probably find friends who will back him
for a small stake against some brother hobbledehoy. Each of these
aspirants will thus endeavour to use the speediest boat and appliances
that he can obtain. Unfortunately it so happens that sliding seats give
so much extra power that even bad sliding _à la_ Boyd produces more pace
than good fixed-seat rowing. The result of this is, that, however little
a tiro may know of rowing, he will, in a day or two, get more pace on a
slide than if he adhered to a fixed seat. So the two cripples race each
other on slides, before they have acquired the barest rudiments of
swing, and as a natural result they can never be expected hereafter to
progress beyond mediocrity.
Now, if there were prizes offered for rising professionals, subject to
the condition that sliding seats should not be used, these tiros would
have some chance of being induced to study the art of using the body for
swing, and of mastering this all-important feature in oarsmanship,
before they ventured to fly so high as to race upon slides.
Twenty and more years ago there was a class of match-making on the
Thames which is now obsolete. This was to row in what were called
'old-fashioned' wager boats, i.e. the lightest form of wherry which used
to be built before H. Clasper established outriggers. The keelless boat
requires a sharp catch up at the beginning to get the best pace out of
it, and it also requires more 'sitting' to keep it on an even keel. (If
it is not on an even keel, the hands do not grip the water evenly, and
power thereby is wasted.) It was because this fact used to be realised
in those days better than now, that so many rough scullers were matched
in 'old-fashioned' boats, rather than in 'best and best' boats, as the
fastest built craft were usually styled in the articles of matches. It
would do good if this quondam practice of matching duffers on even terms
in steady old-fashioned craft could be re-introduced on the Thames.
Another incident has tended greatly to the deterioration of professional
rowing, and this is the lapse of professional regattas. Certain
gentlemen connected with the University and the leading Thames boat
clubs used formerly to get up an annual summer regatta for the benefit
of professional oarsmen. In the 'forties' a somewhat similar regatta had
also existed for a time, but it had consisted of amateur competitions as
well as of professional. This earlier regatta faded away when its chief
trophy, the 'Gold Cup' for amateur eight oars, was won thrice in
succession by, and became the property of, the 'Thames Club.' (That
Thames Club is now extinct, and must not be confounded with the
well-known 'Thames _Rowing_ Club' of the present day.) Some of the
members of the Thames crew that won this 'Gold Cup' in the forties are
still to be found, the most notable of them being Messrs. Frank
Playford, senr. (amateur champion in 1849); and Rhodes Cobb, the
president of the Kingston Rowing Club. (The sons of each of these old
athletes have similarly made their mark in aquatics of the present
generation.) Owing to the action of the chairman of a steamboat company
and other gentlemen who had other interests than those of boating to
serve, these regattas have lapsed.
To resume--as to Thames regattas. The Thames Subscription Club, between
1861 and 1866, got up a Thames regatta, which annually produced fine
sport between Thames and Tyne men, and once or twice good Glasgow crews
joined in the competition. In 1866 the amateur element was introduced as
a mixture. This was the last year of the series.
Meantime the late Mr. H. H. Playford had for three years laboured to
form a sort of 'nursery' regatta for professionals. It was styled the
'Sons of the Thames' regatta, and it had the effect of bringing out
several good men, such as the Biffens, Wise, Tagg, &c., who afterwards
distinguished themselves in the greater regattas on the Thames, which
were open to the world. Never was professional rowing at higher flood
than just at this date, thanks to the gentleman referred to.
In 1867 there was no regatta; but in 1868 a new series was founded. The
late Messrs. J. G. Chambers, George Morrison, Allan Morrison, Rev. R. W.
Risley, the Playfords, Brickwood and other prominent amateurs, gave
money and labour to aid the scheme, and it flourished right well for
nine seasons. It produced, like the preceding series, fine rowing, and
many a subsequent sculling or four-oar match arose out of the regatta
contests. So far these regattas had been promoted solely for sport, and
in pure unselfishness. In 1876 a steamboat company originated the idea
of a Thames regatta, and advertised a scheme. Subscriptions were
obtained from several of the City sources which had formerly subscribed
to _bonâ fide_ Thames regatta, and thus the funds of the old-established
meeting were sapped. The latter came off all the same that year, there
thus being two Thames regattas for one season. But there were not funds
to carry on two such meetings, and the amateur promoters of the old
established regatta retired next year in favour of the speculative
promoters. The speculative regatta lived just one year more, and then
its promoters gave up, and left our British professionals with no
regatta at all to encourage them.
And this was just at a time when our champion honours had been wrested
from us, and when we needed more than ever some disinterested
assistance, in order to revive and encourage the falling fortunes of
professional oarsmanship! It was too late to revive the old regatta; the
hand of Death was busy among the old amateurs who had founded the second
series, and the four or five gentlemen whose names headed the list of
promoters (_supra_) have passed rapidly away, from one cause or another,
in the prime of life. Whether hereafter any combination of later
amateurs will once more come to the rescue, as did the late Messrs.
Chambers, H. Playford, the Morrisons, and Risley, remains to be seen. If
they do so, we hope they will found something, at first, more on the
lines of the Playford series of 'Sons of the Thames' regatta, to bring
out new blood; and that they will insist upon _no slides_ being used in
any race of the meeting, for at least two seasons. Slides are not
allowed in the public schools fours (lately rowed for at Henley, and now
competed for at Marlow), nor in Oxford torpids, nor in Cambridge lower
division races. Nor do the leading amateur tideway clubs allow their
juniors to race on them in club matches. If we are to educate a new
generation of professional talent, we must do so on the same general
principle that we teach our junior amateurs in rowing clubs.
Since the date of Hanlan's invasion of Britain, British scullers have
not been in the hunt for champion competitions. Such champion racing as
has taken place has been confined to Canadians, Americans, or
Australians. In 1884, May 22, Laycock was once more brought out to row
Hanlan on the Nepean river, New South Wales, and Hanlan again held his
own. Meantime an emigrant (in childhood) from Chertsey, one William
Beach, had been rapidly improving his style in New South Wales. He took
hints from his conquerors until, when he was about forty, a time when
most scullers are past their prime, he could beat all comers in his own
colony. Hanlan was persuaded to visit Australia to row him, and the
first match between them came off August 16, 1884, on the Paramatta. To
the surprise of all, Beach went as fast as Hanlan, and outstayed him.
Excuses were made for this reverse to one who had been reckoned
invincible: Hanlan had been unfairly washed by a steamer, and some
fancied he had held Beach too cheap, and was not fully trained. Another
match was made for March 28, 1885. Meantime Beach easily beat, on
February 28 of that year, another colonial challenger, T. Clifford. In
his return match with Hanlan he fairly tired the Canadian out. Beach
scales a trifle over twelve stone, and proves the truth of the old
saying that a good big one is better than a good little one.
In December of 1885 Hanlan beat Neil Matterson, a young and rising
Australian candidate for the championship.
In the summer of 1886, a large amount was subscribed for a series of
sculling prizes on the Thames. Beach was in England, training for a
match against Gaudaur of St. Louis, U.S., who had lately beaten the best
American scullers. Gaudaur did not row in this regatta of scullers, but
Beach did.
The trial heats of this regatta were rowed in stretches of about three
miles each, following the tide over different parts of the tideway. In
the first heat Neil Matterson beat Ross. In the second, Teemer, U.S.,
beat Perkins, a London sculler. Bubear rowed over for the third heat,
and the fourth was won by Beach beating Lee, U.S. (once a pseudo amateur
and an unsuccessful competitor for the Diamond Sculls of Henley!) Next
day Beach beat Bubear, and Teemer beat Matterson. The final heat took
place over the regulation course of Putney to Mortlake. Beach won as he
liked, on a tide that was not first class, in 22 min. 16 secs. The
racing occupied August 31, and September 1 and 2.
On September 18, Beach met Gaudaur for the championship over the Putney
course. Beach was, as the race showed, a little 'off;' apparently he had
been indulging; for to look at Gaudaur few would have expected him to
make such a close fit of the race as he did. The stakes were 500_l._ a
side. The tide was a good one, and the water was smooth beyond
Hammersmith. Beach led, and seemed to have the race safe off Chiswick.
Then he began to lose ground, Gaudaur came up to him, and Beach stopped,
apparently rowed out. Possibly he had 'stitch,' as the sequel shows.
Gaudaur got just in front of Beach, and could not get away. Beach
stopped again, and still Gaudaur could do little better than paddle.
Half way up Horse Reach Beach seemed to recover, and once more came up
with his man. He led by a few feet at Barnes Bridge, and after that drew
steadily away, winning by three lengths in the exceptionally good time
of 22 min. 30 secs. or 22 min. 29 secs.
A week later Beach did a much finer performance, for time. He rowed
Wallace Ross for the championship, over the usual course, and beat him
in a common paddle, without being extended, and with wind foul, on a
_neap_ tide, in 23 min. 5 secs. The pace of this tide, let alone foul
wind, must have been about a minute to a minute and a quarter (if not
more) slower than the tide on which Beach and Gaudaur had sculled some
days before. Those who know the effect of tides on pace, will admit that
this last performance, all things considered, is Beach's best, and is
also the best ever accomplished by any sculler over the Thames tideway
course. Had Beach been on a spring tide that day, and been doing his
best, he would probably have done a good deal faster than 21 min. 30
secs. over our champion course. All factors considered, we believe that
the present champion sculler is the fastest that the world has yet
produced, better than even Hanlan at his best. To compare him with the
best old fixed-seat champions would be invidious to all parties. Each in
his day made the best of the mechanical appliances at his disposal, and
was A1 in style for their use.
[Illustration: A FOUL.]
CHAPTER XVII.
LAWS OF BOAT-RACING (THEIR HISTORY, AND RULES OF THE ROAD).
Laws of boat-racing, until 1872, were variously read by various
executives. One rule was common to all, and yet differently interpreted
by many an umpire or referee. It was that which related to a boat's
course.
The old rule was, that a boat which could take a clear lead of an
opponent, and which could cross the proper track of that opponent with
such clear lead, became entitled to the 'water' so taken. The boat
astern had then to change its course, and to take its leader's vacated
course. If thereafter they fouled, through the leader returning to the
vacated water, the leader lost; if through the sternmost boat catching
the leader in the 'captured' water, then the pursuer lost. Also, under
the old code, a foul, however slight, lost a race, if one boat was in
its right and the other in its wrong course at the time. If both were in
the wrong, the foul did not count.
This code led to many a wrangle over fouls. It also opened the door to
sharp practice--e.g. a leader might cross an opponent, by dint of pure
speed; and then, being in, his 'right' water, by dint of having crossed
with a 'clear lead,' the leader might 'accidentally' shut off speed,
before the boat behind had time to change its course. This forced on a
foul, and the leader could then claim his pound of flesh, and the race.
An umpire had no discretion in the matter.
In 1872 a meeting of leading amateurs drew up a new code. This code was
put in force at the Thames watermen's regattas, governed by amateurs. In
time Henley adopted them, as did all leading regattas. Watermen for some
time had a liking for the old code and its facilities for 'win, tie, or
wrangle' in a match, but as time passed on the new code gained ground,
and gradually the old one became obsolete. The late Mr. John Graham
Chambers, C.U.B.C., was the leading spirit in this reform.
The revised code is now part of the creed of the Amateur Rowing
Association, of which mention has already been made. These rules are now
appended. The Henley executive publish a similar code, but differently
numbered. Rule 15 is more of a _regatta_ rule. It is usually waived in
sculling matches, and in the Wingfield Sculls for the amateur
championship its operation is, by order of the parliament of old
champions, suspended.
THE LAWS OF BOAT-RACING AS APPROVED BY THE AMATEUR ROWING ASSOCIATION.
1. The starter, on being satisfied that the competitors are
ready, shall give the signal to start.
2. If the starter considers the start false, he shall at once
recall the boats to their stations, and any boat refusing to
start again shall be disqualified.
3. Any boat not at its post at the time specified shall be
liable to be disqualified by the umpire.
4. The umpire may act as starter as he thinks fit; when he does
not so act, the starter shall be subject to the control of the
umpire.
5. Each boat shall keep its own water throughout the race, and
any boat departing from its own water will do so at its peril.
6. A boat's own water is its straight course, paralleled with
those of the other competing boats, from the station assigned to
it at starting to the finish.
7. The umpire shall be sole judge of a boat's own water and
proper course during the race.
8. No fouling whatever shall be allowed; the boat committing a
foul shall be disqualified.
9. It shall be considered a foul when, after the race has
commenced, any competitor by his oar, boat, or person comes in
contact with the oar, boat, or person of another competitor,
unless in the opinion of the umpire such contact is so slight as
not to influence the race.
10. The umpire may, during the race, caution any competitor when
in danger of committing a foul.
11. The umpire, when appealed to, shall decide all questions as
to a foul.
12. A claim of foul must be made to the judge or the umpire by
the competitor himself before getting out of his boat.
13. In case of a foul the umpire shall have the power--
(_a_) To place the boats--except the boat committing the foul,
which is disqualified--in the order in which they come in;
(_b_) To order the boats engaged in the race, other than the
boat committing the foul, to row over again on the same or
another day;
(_c_) To re-start the qualified boats from the place where the
foul was committed.
14. Every boat shall abide by its accidents.
15. No boat shall be allowed to accompany a competitor for the
purpose of directing his course or affording him other
assistance. The boat receiving such direction or assistance
shall be disqualified at the discretion of the umpire.
16. The jurisdiction of the umpire extends over the race, and
all matters connected with it, from the time the race is
specified to start until its final termination, and his
decision in all cases shall be final and without appeal.
17. Any competitor refusing to abide by the decision or to
follow the directions of the umpire shall be disqualified.
18. The umpire, if he thinks proper, may reserve his decision,
provided that in every case such decision be given on the day of
the race.
The 'rule of the road' on the river is not settled quite as hard and
fast as on land, or in marine navigation; but certain general principles
are recognised by all rowing men of experience, for the sake of mutual
safety. The following draft of the recognised principles referred to is
set forth by the editor of the 'Rowing Almanack,' and other authorities,
to whom rowing men are much indebted for the publication.
In case of any 'running-down' action, arising out of a collision between
pleasure-boats on the Thames, it would probably go hardly with the
occupants of a boat which had brought about an accident by disregard of
these 'rules of the road.'
_'The Rule of the Road' on the River._
The following are the generally recognised rules adopted by the
leading rowing clubs:--
1. A row-boat going against the stream or tide should take the
shore or bank--which bank is immaterial--and should keep inside
all boats meeting it.
2. A row-boat going with stream or tide should take a course in
mid-river, and should keep outside all boats meeting it.
3. A row-boat overtaking another boat proceeding in the same
direction should keep clear of the boat it overtakes, which
should maintain its course.
4. A row-boat meeting another end-on in still or open waters, or
lakes, should keep to the right as in walking, leaving the boat
passed on the port or left side.
5. A row-boat with a coxswain should give way to a boat without
a coxswain, subject to the foregoing rules, in so far as they
apply.
6. A boat towing with stream or tide should give way to a boat
towing against it, and if it becomes necessary to unship or drop
a tow-line, the former should give way to the latter; but when
a barge towing is passed by a pleasure-boat towing, the latter
should give way and go outside, as a small boat is the easier of
the two to manage, in addition to which the river is the barge's
highway.
7. A row-boat must give way to a sailing-boat.
8. When a row-boat and a steamer pass each other, their actions
should, as a rule, be governed by the same principle as on two
row-boats passing; but in shallow waters the greater draughts of
the steam-vessel should be remembered, and the row-boat give way
to her.
[Illustration: CLIEFDEN.]
'THE TEMPLE OF FAME.'
_WINNERS OF THE WINGFIELD SCULLS._
+----+----------------------+-------+--------------------------------+
|Time| Winner | m. s. | Losers |
+----+----------------------+-------+--------------------------------+
|1830| J. H. Bayford | -- |{ Lewis, Wood, Horneman, Revel, |
| | | |{ A. Bayford, C. Duke, Hume |
|1831| C. Lewis | -- | Bayford |
|1832| A. A. Julius | -- | Lewis |
|1833|_a_ C. Lewis | -- | Julius |
|1834| A. A. Julius | -- | rowed over |
|1835| A. A. Julius | -- | rowed over |
|1836| H. Wood | -- | Patrick Colquhoun |
|1837| P. Colquhoun | -- | Wood, Jones |
|1838|_a_ H. Wood | -- |{ Colquhoun, C. Pollock, H. |
| | | |{ Chapman |
|1839|_a_ H. Chapman | -- | Pollock, Crockford |
|1840| T. L. Jenkins | -- |{ Crockford, Wallace, A. |
| | | |{ Earnshaw |
|1841|_a_ T. L. Jenkins | -- | Chapman |
|1842| H. Chapman | -- | Wallace |
|1843| H. Chapman | -- | Wallace, Kennedy, A. Earnshaw |
|1844| T. B. Bumpstead | -- |{ Chapman, Hon. G. Denman, |
| | | |{ Romayne |
|1845|_a_ H. Chapman | -- | Bumpstead |
|1846|_a_ W. Russell | -- | Walmsley, Fellows, Dodd |
|1847| J. R. L. Walmsley | -- | H. Murray, C. Harrington |
|1848|_a_ J. R. L. Walmsley | -- | rowed over |
|1849|_a_ _b_ F. Playford | -- | T. R. Bone |
|1850| T. R. Bone | -- | rowed over |
|1851|_a_ T. R. Bone | -- | rowed over |
|1852| E. G. Peacock | -- | rowed over |
|1853|_a_ J. Paine | -- |{ A. Rippingall, J. Nottidge, |
| | | |{ H. C. Smith |
|1854| H. H. Playford | -- | rowed over |
|1855| A. A. Casamajor | -- | H. H. Playford |
|1856| A. A. Casamajor | -- | rowed over |
|1857| A. A. Casamajor | -- | rowed over |
|1858| A. A. Casamajor | -- | rowed over |
|1859| A. A. Casamajor | -- | rowed over |
|1860|_a_ A. A. Casamajor | -- | rowed over |
|1861|_c_ E. D. Brickwood | 29 0 | G. R. Cox, A. O. Lloyd |
|1862|_a_ W. B. Woodgate | 27 0 | E. D. Brickwood, G. R. Cox |
|1863|_a_ J. E. Parker | 25 0 | E. B. Michell, J. Wallace |
|1864| W. B. Woodgate | 25 35 | W. P. Cecil, G. Ryan |
|1865|_a_ C. B. Lawes | 27 4 |{ W. B. Woodgate, E. B. Michell,|
| | | |{ W. P. Cecil, T. Lindsay |
|1866|_a_ E. B. Michell | 27 26 | W. B. Woodgate, J. G. Chambers|
|1867| W. B. Woodgate | -- | rowed over |
|1868|_a_ W. Stout | 26 52 | E. B. Michell, W. B. Woodgate |
|1869| A. de L. Long | -- | rowed over |
|1870| A. de L. Long | -- |{ J. Ross, A. C. Yarborough, |
| | | |{ W. Chillingworth |
|1871| W. Fawcus | 26 13 | A. de L. Long |
|1872| C. C. Knollys | 28 30 | W. Fawcus |
|1873| A. C. Dicker | 25 40 |{ C. C. Knollys, N. H. Eyre, |
| | | |{ F. S. Gulston |
|1874| A. C. Dicker | 25 45 | {W. H. Eyre, W. Fawcus, W. |
| | | | {Chillingworth |
|1875| F. L. Playford | 27 6 | A. C. Dicker |
|1876| F. L. Playford | 24 46 |{ A. C. Dicker, A. V. Frere, |
| | | |{ R. H. Labat |
|1877| F. L. Playford | 24 20 | {T. C. Edwardes-Moss, A. H. |
| | | | {Grove, J. H. Bucknill |
|1878| F. L. Playford | 24 13 | Alexander Payne |
|1879|_a_ F. L. Playford | 25 51 | J. Lowndes |
|1880| Alex. Payne | 24 8 | J. Lowndes, C. G. White |
|1881| J. Lowndes | 25 13 | W. R. Grove |
|1882| A. Payne | 27 40 | W. R. Grove |
|1883| J. Lowndes | -- | rowed over |
|1884| W. S. Unwin | 24 12 |{ C. J. S. Batt, E. F. Green, |
| | | |{ W. Hawkes, R. H. Smith |
|1885| W. S. Unwin | -- | F. J. Pitman, C. W. Hughes |
|1886|_a_ F. J. Pitman | 24 12 |{ W. H. Cumming, A. M. |
| | | |{ Cowper-Smith |
|1887| G. Nickalls | -- | J. C. Gardner. |
+----+----------------------+-------+--------------------------------+
(_a_) Resigned.
(_b_) The course before this race was from Westminster to Putney, but
for the first time it took place from Putney to Kew.
(_c_) The course was altered again this year to the present one, from
Putney to Mortlake.
WINNERS AT HENLEY REGATTA.
_GRAND CHALLENGE CUP._
m. s.
1839 Cambridge, Trin. Coll. 8 30
1840 Leander Club 9 15
1841 _a_ London, Camb. Rooms --
1842 London, Camb. Rooms 8 30
1843 _b_ Oxford University 9 0
1844 Oxford, Etonian Club 8 25
1845 Cambridge University 8 30
1846 London, Thames Club 8 15
1847 Oxford University 8 0
1848 Oxford University 9 11
1849 _a_ Oxford, Wadham Coll. 8 0
1850 Oxford University r.o.
1851 _c_ Oxford University 7 45
1852 Oxford University --
1853 Oxford University 8 3
1854 Cambridge, Trin. Coll. 8 15
1855 Cambridge University 8 32
1856 Royal Chester R.C. --
1857 London R.C. 7 55
1858 Cambridge University 7 43
1859 London R.C. 7 45
1860 Cambridge, First Trin. 8 45
1861 Cambridge, First Trin. 8 10
1862 London R.C. 8 5
1863 Oxford University 7 45
1864 Kingston R.C. 7 43
1865 Kingston R.C. 7 21
1866 Oxford, Etonian Club 8 22
1867 Oxford, Etonian Club 7 54
1868 London R.C. 7 20
1869 Oxford, Etonian Club 7 28
1870 _d_ Oxford, Etonian Club 7 17
1871 Oxford, Etonian Club 7 55
1872 London R.C. 8 38
1873 London R.C. 7 52
1874 London R.C. 7 42
1875 Leander R.C. 7 19
1876 Thames R.C. 7 27
1877 _e_ London R.C. 8 16-1/2
1878 Thames R.C. 7 41
1879 Camb., Jesus Coll. 8 39
1880 Leander B.C. 7 3
1881 London R.C. 7 24
1882 Oxford, Exeter Coll. 8 11
1883 London R.C. 7 51
1884 London R.C. 7 27
1885 Camb. Jesus Coll. 7 22
1886 Camb., Trin. Hall 6 53-1/2
1887 Camb., Trin. Hall 6 56
(_a_) Won on a foul.
(_b_) The winners only rowed seven oars in the final heat.
(_c_) Cambridge carried away a rowlock soon after starting.
(_d_) The fastest on record for the final.
(_e_) In the preliminary heat London did the course in 7 min. 12
secs.--the fastest time on record after that date.
_STEWARDS' CUP._
m. s.
1841 _a_ First class fours for medals. Won by
Oxford Aquatic Club 10 5
1842 Oxford Club, London 9 16
1843 London, St. George's Club 10 15
1844 Oxford University 9 16
1845 Oxford University 8 25
1846 Oxford University --
1847 _b_ Oxford C.C.C. r.o.
1848 Oxford C.C.C. r.o.
1849 London, Leander Club r.o.
1850 Oxford University r.o.
1851 Cambridge Univ. 8 54
1852 Oxford University --
1853 Oxford University 8 57
1854 Oxon., Pembroke Club 9 54
1855 Royal Chester R.C. --
1856 Argonaut Club --
1857 London R.C. 8 25
1858 London R.C. r.o.
1859 Camb., Third Trin. 8 25
1860 Camb., First Trin. 9 26
1861 Camb., First Trin. 9 35
1862 Oxon., Brasenose Coll. 8 40
1863 Oxford, Univ. Coll. 8 24
1864 London R.C. --
1865 Camb., Third Trin. 8 8
1866 Oxford, Univ. Coll. 9 20
1867 Oxford University 8 45
1868 London R.C. --
1869 London R.C. 8 36
1870 _c_ Oxon., Etonian Club 8 5
1871 London R.C. --
1872 London R.C. 9 21
1873 _d_ London R.C. 8 25
1874 London R.C. 9 0
1875 _e_ London R.C. 7 56
1876 _f_ London R.C. --
1877 London R.C. 9 7
1878 London R.C. 8 37
1879 Camb., Jesus Coll. 9 37
1880 Thames R.C. 7 58
1881 Oxford, Hert. Coll. 8 15
1882 Oxford, Hert. Coll. --
1883 Thames R.C. --
1884 Kingston R.C. --
1885 Camb., Trin. Hall 7 53
1886 Thames R.C. 7 39
1887 Camb., Trin. Hall. 7 53
(_a_) The prize which is now known as the Stewards' Challenge Cup was
not instituted until the following year.
(_b_) Worcester College, Oxford, were also entered, but withdrawn.
(_c_) Fastest time on record with coxswains.
(_d_) Coxswains abolished.
(_e_) Fastest time on record.
(_f_) Won on a foul.
_PAIR-OARS._
Won by m. s.
1845 _a_ Arnold and Mann, Cambridge --
1846 Milman and Haggard, Christ Church --
1847 _b_ Falls and Coulthard, London --
1848 _b_ Thompson and Johnson, Oxford --
1849 Peacock and Rayford --
1850 _c_ Chitty and Hornby, Oxford r.o.
1851 Chitty and Guess --
1852 _d_ Barker and Nind r.o.
1853 Barbee and Godson, Cambridge 10 0
1854 Cadogan and Short, Oxford 9 5
1855 Nottidge and Casamajor, London --
1856 Nottidge and Casamajor, London --
1857 Warren and Lonsdale, Oxford --
1858 Playford and Casamajor, London --
1859 Warre and Arkell, Oxford 9 0
1860 Casamajor and Woodbridge, London 11 50
1861 Woodgate & Champneys, Oxford --
1862 Woodgate & Champneys, Oxford 8 45
1863 Woodgate and Shepherd, Oxford r.o.
1864 Selwyn and Kinglake, Cambridge 9 29
1865 May and Fenner, London R.C. 9 7
1866 Woodgate and Corrie, Kingston R.C. 9 15
1867 Corrie and Brown, Eton and Radley 8 49
1868 Crofts and Woodgate, Oxford --
1869 Long and Stout, London R.C. 9 25
1870 Corrie and Hall, Kingston R.C. --
1871 Gulston and Long, London R.C. --
1872 Long and Gulston, London R.C. --
1873 Knollys and Trower, Kingston R.C. 9 22
1874 Gulston and Long, London R.C. 10 3
1875 _b_ Herbert and Chillingworth --
1876 S. Le B. Smith and F. S. Gulston 8 35
1877 W. H. Eyre and J. Hastie 10 30
1878 W. A. Ellison and T. C. Edwardes-Moss 9 14
1879 F. S. Gulston and R. H. Labat,
London R.C. 11 6
1880 E. H. Eyre and J. Hastie, Thames R.C. 8 45
1881 W. H. Eyre and J. Hastie, Thames R.C. 9 4
1882 D. E. Brown and J. Lowndes, Hertford
Coll., Oxford --
1883 G. Q. Roberts and D. E. Brown,
Twickenham R.C. 9 22
1884 J. Lowndes and D. E. Brown, Twickenham
R.C. 9 1
1885 H. McLean and D. H. McLean, Etonians,
Oxford --
1886 F. E. Churchill and A. D. Muttlebury,
Third Trin., Cambridge 8 40
1887 C. T. Barclay and A. D. Muttlebury 8 45
(_a_) The first pair-oared race rowed at Henley, which was then called
the Silver Wherries till 1850.
(_b_) Won on a foul.
(_c_) The race was rowed this year for the first time as the Silver
Goblets.
(_d_) Short and Irving, of Oxford, withdrew in the final.
_DIAMOND SCULLS._
m. s.
1844 _a_ Bumpstead, Scullers' Club, London 10 32
1845 Wallace, Leander Club 11 30
1846 Sir Frederick Moon, Magdalen, Oxford --
1847 Maule, Trinity Coll., Cambridge 10 45
1848 Bagshawe, Camb. --
1849 Bone, Meteor Club, London --
1850 Bone, Meteor Club, London --
1851 Edwards, London --
1852 Macnaghten, Camb. --
1853 Rippingall, Camb. 10 2
1854 _b_ Playford, Wandle College --
1855 Casamajor, Argonauts 9 27
1856 Casamajor, Argonauts --
1857 Casamajor, Argonauts --
1858 Casamajor, Argonauts r.o.
1859 E. D. Brickwood, London 10 0
1860 H. H. Playford, London 12 8
1861 Casamajor, Argonauts 10 4
1862 _c_ E. D. Brickwood 9 40
1863 C. B. Lawes, Camb. 9 43
1864 W. B. Woodgate 10 10
1865 E. B. Michell, Oxford 9 5
1866 E. B. Michell, Oxford --
1867 W. C. Crofts, Oxford 10 2
1868 W. Stout, London R.C. --
1869 W. C. Crofts, Kingston 8 57
1870 J. B. Close, Camb. 9 43
1871 W. Fawcus, Tynemouth R.C. 10 9
1872 C. C. Knollys, Oxford 10 48
1873 A. C. Dicker, Camb. 9 13
1874 A. C. Dicker, Camb. 10 47
1875 A. C. Dicker, Camb. 9 15
1876 F. L. Playford, London R. C. 9 28
1877 T. C. Edwardes-Moss, Oxford 10 20
1878 T. C. Edwardes-Moss, Oxford 9 37-1/2
1879 J. Lowndes, Oxford 12 30
1880 J. Lowndes, Derby 9 10
1881 J. Lowndes, Derby 9 28
1882 J. Lowndes, Derby 11 43
1883 J. Lowndes, Thames R.C. 10 2
1884 W. S. Unwin, Magdalen 9 44
1885 W. S. Unwin, Magdalen 9 22
1886 F. J. Pitman, Third Trinity, Cambridge 9 5
1887 J. C. Gardner, Cambridge 8 51
(_a_) After two fouls the race was given in favour of Wallace.
(_b_) At Newenham a foul took place, and the race was awarded to
Playford.
(_c_) After a dead heat, which was rowed in 10 minutes 22 seconds.
_LADIES CHALLENGE PLATE FOR EIGHT-OARS._
_Established 1845._
m. s.
1845 London, St. George's Club 8 25
1846 Camb., First Trin. --
1847 Oxford, Brasenose 9 0
1848 Oxon., Christ Church --
1849 Oxon., Wadham Coll. --
1850 Oxon., Lincoln Coll. r.o.
1851 Oxford, Brasenose 8 10
1852 Oxford, Pembroke College --
1853 Camb., First Trin. 8 15
1854 Camb., First Trin. 7 55
1855 Oxford, Balliol Coll. 7 58
1856 Royal Chester R.C. --
1857 Oxford, Exeter Coll. 7 57
1858 Oxford, Balliol Coll. 7 51
1859 Camb., First Trin. 7 55
1860 Camb., First Trin. r.o.
1861 Cambridge, First Trinity (r.o.) 8 17
1862 Oxford, Univ. Coll. 8 17
1863 Oxford, Univ. Coll. 7 23
1864 Eton College B.C. 7 56
1865 Camb., Third Trin. 7 38
1866 Eton College B.C. 8 16
1867 Eton College B.C. 7 56
1868 Eton College B.C. 7 25
1869 Eton College B.C. 7 56
1870 Eton College B.C. 7 47
1871 Oxford, Pembroke College 7 56
1872 Camb., Jesus Coll. 8 39
1873 Camb., Jesus Coll. 7 54
1874 Camb., First Trin. 8 9
1875 Dublin, Trin. Coll. 7 28
1876 Camb., Jesus Coll. 7 31
1877 Camb., Jesus Coll. 8 22
1878 Camb., Jesus Coll. 8 52
1879 Cambridge, Lady Margaret B.C. 8 52
1880 Camb., Trin. Hall 7 26
1881 Camb., First Trin. 7 51
1882 Eton College B.C. 8 37
1883 Oxon., Christ Church 7 50
1884 Eton College B.C. 7 37
1885 Eton College B.C. 7 21
1886 Camb., Pembroke College 7 17
1887 Trinity Hall, Cambridge (2nd crew) 7 10
_VISITORS' CHALLENGE CUP FOR FOUR-OARS._
_Established 1847._
m. s.
1847 Oxon., Christ Church 9 0
1848 Oxon., Christ Church --
1849 Oxon., Christ Church --
1850 Oxon., Christ Church --
1851 Oxon., Christ Church 9 0
1852 London, Argonauts Club --
1853 London, Argonauts Club --
1854 Camb., St. John's 8 48
1855 Camb., St. John's --
1856 Camb., St. John's --
1857 Oxford, Pembroke College 8 40
1858 Camb., First Trin. --
1859 Camb., Third Trin. --
1860 Camb., First Trin. --
1861 Camb., First Trin. 8 5
1862 Oxford, Brasenose College 8 40
1863 Oxford, Brasenose College --
1864 Oxford, Univ. Coll. --
1865 Camb., Third Trin. --
1866 Oxford, Univ. Coll. 8 49
1867 Oxford, Univ. Coll. --
1868 Oxford, Univ. Coll. 8 15
1869 Oxford, Univ. Coll. 9 7
1870 Dublin, Trin. Coll. 8 37
1871 Camb., First Trin. 9 8
1872 Oxford, Pembroke College 9 28
1873 Dublin, Trin. Coll. --
1874 Dublin, Trin. Coll. 8 50
1875 Oxford, Univ. Coll. 8 20
1876 Oxford, Univ. Coll. 8 5
1877 Camb., Jesus Coll. 9 7
1878 U.S.A., Columbia College 8 42
1879 Cambridge, Lady Margaret B.C. 9 21
1880 Camb., Third Trin. 8 16
1881 Camb., First Trin. 8 22
1882 Oxford, Brasenose College 9 23
1883 Oxon., Christ Church --
1884 Camb., Third Trin. 8 39
1885 Camb., Trin. Hall 7 41
1886 Cambridge, First Trinity B.C. 8 20-1/2
1887 Trinity Hall, Cambridge 8 8
_WYFOLD CHALLENGE CUP FOR FOUR-OARS._
_Established 1856._
m. s.
1873 Thames R.C. 8 2
1856 London, Argonauts Club --
1857 Oxford, Pembroke College 8 30
1858 Camb., First Trin. --
1859 Camb., First Trin. 8 21
1860 London R.C. 10 8
1861 Oxford, Brasenose College --
1862 London R.C. 9 20
1863 Kingston R.C. 8 50
1864 Kingston R.C. --
1865 Kingston R.C. 8 23
1866 Kingston R.C. --
1867 Kingston R.C. --
1868 Kingston R.C. 8 32
1869 Surbiton, Oscillators B.C. 8 58
1870 Thames R.C. 8 34
1871 Thames R.C. --
1872 Thames R.C. 10 8
1873 Kingstown Harbour B.C. 8 37
1874 Newcastle A.R.C. 8 58
1875 Thames R.C. 8 10
1876 West London R.C. 8 56
1877 Kingston R.C. --
1878 Kingston R.C. 8 44
1879 London R.C. 9 56
1880 London R.C. 8 4
1881 Dublin Univ. R.C. 8 8
1882 Camb., Jesus Coll. 8 58
1883 Kingston R.C. 8 51
1884 Thames R.C. 8 58
1885 Kingston R.C. --
1886 Thames R.C. 8 4
1887 Pembroke College, Cambridge 7 50
_THAMES CHALLENGE CUP FOR EIGHT-OARS._
_Established 1868._
m. s.
1868 Oxford, Pembroke College 7 46
1869 Surbiton, Oscillators B.C. --
1870 Surbiton, Oscillators B.C. --
1871 London, Ino R.C. 8 3
1872 Thames R.C. 8 42
1873 Thames R.C. 8 2
1874 Thames R.C. 8 19
1875 London R.C. 7 33
1876 West London R.C. 7 37
1877 London R.C. 8 29
1878 London R.C. 7 55
1879 Twickenham R.C. 8 55
1880 London R.C. 7 43
1881 Twickenham R.C. 7 50
1882 Royal Chester R.C. --
1883 London R.C. 8 5
1884 Twickenham R.C. 7 48
1885 London R.C. 7 36
1886 London R.C. --
1887 Trinity Hall, Cambridge (2nd crew) 7 20
_PUBLIC SCHOOLS' CHALLENGE CUP FOR FOURS._
_Established 1879._
m. s.
1879 Cheltenham College B.C. 11 6
1880 Bedford Grammar School B.C. 8 42
1881 Bedford Grammar School B.C. 8 22
1882 Magdalen College B. C. --
1883 Hereford School B.C. --
1884 Derby School B.C. --
1885 Bedford Model School B.C.[18] --
[18] Transferred to Marlow Regatta in 1886.
_TOWN CHALLENGE CUP._
1839 Wave B.C.
1840 Dreadnought Cutter Club
1841 Dreadnought Cutter Club
1842 Dreadnought Club
1843 Albion Club
1844 Aquatic Club
1845 Aquatic Club
1846 Dreadnought Cutter Club
1847 Dreadnought Cutter Club
1848 Dreadnought Cutter Club
1849 Albion Club
1850 Albion Club
1854 Wargrave Club
1855 Henley B.C.
1856 Henley B.C.
1857 Henley B.C.
1858 Henley B.C.
1859 Henley B.C.
1860 Dreadnought Cutter Club
1862 Oxford, Staff B.C.
1863 Henley B.C.
1864 Henley B.C.
1865 Henley B.C.
1866 Eton Excelsior B.C.
1867 Eton Excelsior B.C.
1868 Henley R.C.
1869 Eton Excelsior B.C.
1870 Eton Excelsior B.C.
1871 Reading R.C.
1872 Marlow R.C.
1873 Henley R.C.
1874 Marlow R.C.
1875 Marlow R.C.
1876 Marlow R.C.
1877 Marlow R.C.
1878 Henley R.C.
1879 Greenwood Lodge B.C.
1880 Reading R.C.
1881 Reading R.C.
1882 Reading R.C.
1883 Marlow R.C.[19]
[19] Ditto in 1884.
OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE BOAT RACE.
_WINNERS since 1828._
+----+------------------------+-----------+---------+---------------+
|Year| Place | Winner | Time | Won by |
+----+------------------------+-----------+---------+---------------+
|1829| Hambledon Lock to | | m. s. | |
| | Henley Bridge | Oxford |14 30 | easy |
|1836| Westminster to Putney| Cambridge |36 0 | 1 m. |
|1839| Westminster to Putney| Cambridge |31 0 | 1 m. 45 s. |
|1840| Westminster to Putney| Cambridge |29 30 | 2/3 length |
|1841| Westminster to Putney| Cambridge |32 30 | 1 m. 4 s. |
|1842| Westminster to Putney| Oxford |30 45 | 13 s. |
|1845| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |23 30 | 30 s. |
|1846|_a_Mortlake (Church) to | | | |
| | Putney | Cambridge |21 5 | 2 lengths |
|1849| Putney to Mortlake | | | |
| | (Ship) | Cambridge |22 0 | 4 lengths |
|1849| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford | -- | foul |
|1852| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |21 56 | 27 s. |
|1854| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |25 29 | 11 strokes |
|1856|_b_Barker's rails to | | | |
| | Putney | Cambridge |25 50 | 1/2 length |
|1857|_c_Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |22 55 | 35 s. |
|1858| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |21 23 | 22 s. |
|1859| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |24 40 | C. sank |
|1860| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |26 5 | 1 length |
|1861| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |23 28 | 43 s. |
|1862| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |24 41 | 30 s. |
|1863|_b_Barker's rails to | | | |
| | Putney | Oxford |23 6 | 43 s. |
|1864| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |22 15 | 26 s. |
|1865| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |21 24 | 4 s. |
|1866| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |25 14 | 15 s. |
|1867| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |22 30 | 1/2 length |
|1868| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |20 37 | 6 lengths |
|1869| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |20 6-1/2| 3 lengths |
|1870| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |21 30-3/4| 2 lengths |
|1871| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |23 9-1/2| 1 length |
|1872| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |21 14 | 2 lengths |
|1873|_d_Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |19 36 | 3 lengths |
|1874| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |22 35 | 3-1/2 lengths |
|1875| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |22 2 | 29 s. |
|1876| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |20 19 | 5 lengths |
|1877|_e_Putney to Mortlake | Dead heat |24 6-1/2| dead heat |
|1878| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |22 15 | 40 s. |
|1879| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |21 18 | 3-1/2 lengths |
|1880| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |21 23 | 4 lengths |
|1881| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |21 52 | 3-1/2 lengths |
|1882| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |20 12 | 20 s. |
|1883| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |22 18 | 2-1/2 lengths |
|1884| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |21 39 | 3 lengths |
|1885| Putney to Mortlake | Oxford |21 36 | 5 lengths |
|1886| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |22 20 | 2/3 length |
|1887| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |20 52 | 2-1/4 lengths |
|1888| Putney to Mortlake | Cambridge |20 48 | 5 lengths |
+----+------------------------+-----------+----------+--------------+
(_a_) This was the first race rowed in outrigged eights.
(_b_) These races were rowed from Barker's rails to Putney, about
1,200 yards more than the usual course. Barker's rails are still
marked by a brick pedestal under Middlesex shore.
(_c_) This was the first race rowed in keelless boats.
(_d_) Sliding seats first used in these races.
(_e_) This is the only dead heat ever rowed in this race. Bow in
Oxford boat broke his oar.
UNIVERSITY MEETINGS AT HENLEY,
_FOR THE GRAND CHALLENGE CUP_.
+------+------------------+-------+---------------+
| Year | Winner | Time | Won by |
+------+------------------+-------+---------------+
| | | m. s. | |
| 1845 | Cambridge | 8 30 | 2 lengths |
| 1847 | Oxford | 8 4 | 2 lengths |
| 1851 |_a_Oxford | 7 45 | 6 lengths |
| 1853 | Oxford | 8 3 | 6 inches |
| 1855 | Cambridge | 8 32 | 2-1/2 lengths |
+------+------------------+-------+---------------+
(_a_) Cambridge broke a rowlock off Remenham farm.
Also at the Thames Regatta, June 22, 1844, Oxford beat Cambridge for the
Gold Cup.
UNIVERSITY OARSMEN.
The following lists show what oarsmen in eights or fours represented
their respective Universities from year to year, whether in matches or
at regattas. Those whose names appear as having thus represented their
University are recognised as 'old Blues.' In some cases crews are given
which are not strictly University crews, e.g. the 'Cambridge
Subscription Rooms,' 'Oxford Aquatic Club,' &c. These crews sometimes
took the place of U.B.C. crews, and though all these members may not be
strictly 'Blues,' the performances are recorded, in order to give as far
as possible a continuous history.
UNIVERSITY OARSMEN.
1829.
_Hambledon Lock to Henley, Wednesday, June 10, 1829, 7.56 p.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Carter, J., St. John's --
2. Arbuthnot, J. E., Balliol --
3. Bates, J. E., Christ Church --
4. Wordsworth, Charles, Christ Church 11 10
5. Toogood, J. J., Balliol 14 10
6. Garnier, T. F., Worcester --
7. Moore, G. B., Christ Church 12 4
Staniforth, T., Christ Church (stroke) 12 0
Fremantle, W. R., Christ Church (cox.) --
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Holdsworth, A. B. E., First Trinity 10 7
2. Bayford, A. F., Trinity Hall 10 8
3. Warren, C., Second Trinity 10 10
4. Merivale, C., Lady Margaret 11 0
5. Entwisle, T., Trinity 11 4
6. Thompson, W. T., Jesus 11 13
7. Selwyn, G. A., Lady Margaret 11 13
Snow, W., Lady Margaret (stroke) 11 4
Heath, B. R., First Trinity (cox.) 9 4
----------
Average 11 1-3/4
1831.
_Leander Match v. Oxford, Henley Course, June 12._
LEANDER, 1. | OXFORD, 2.
1. Horniman | 1. Carter
2. Revell | 2. Waterford (Marquis of)
3. Weedon | 3. Marsh
4. Cannon | 4. Peard
5. Lewis | 5. Pelham
6. T. Bayford | 6. Barnes
7. Capt. Shaw | 7. Lloyd
Bishop (stroke) | Copplestone (stroke)
Noulton, waterman (cox.) | G. West, waterman (cox.)
1836.
_Westminster to Putney, June 17, 1836, 4.20 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Solly, W. H., First Trinity 11 0
2. Green, F. S., Caius 11 2
3. Stanley, E. S., Jesus 11 4
4. Hartley, P., Trinity Hall 12 0
5. Jones, W. M., Caius 12 0
6. Keane, J. H., First Trinity 12 0
7. Upcher, A. W., Second Trinity 12 0
Granville, A. K. B., C.C.C. (stroke) 11 7
Egan, T. S., Caius (cox.) 9 0
----------
Average 11 8-5/8
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Carter, G., St. John's 10 0
2. Stephens, E., Exeter 10 7
3. Baillie, W., Christ Church 11 7
4. Harris, T., Magdalen 12 4
5. Isham, J. V., Christ Church 12 0
6. Pennefather, J., Balliol 12 10
7. Thompson, W. S., Jesus 13 0
Moysey, F. L., Christ Church (stroke) 10 6
Davies, E. W. L., Jesus (cox.) 10 3
-----------
Average 11 7-3/4
1837.
_First Leander Match (C.U.B.C.), Westminster to Putney, June 9, 1837._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Nicholson, W. N., First Trinity 11 0
2. Green, F. S., Caius 11 2
3. Budd, R. H., Lady Margaret 12 0
4. Keane, J. H., First Trinity 12 0
5. Brett, W. B., Caius 12 0
6. Penrose, C. T., First Trinity 12 0
7. Fletcher, R., Lady Margaret 11 10
Granville, A. K. B., Corpus (stroke) 11 7
Moulton, W. (cox.) --
----------
Average 11 9-5/8
LEANDER, 2.
1. Shepheard
2. Layton
3. Wood
4. Lloyd
5. Sherrard
6. Dalgleish
7. Lewis
Horneman (stroke)
James Parish (cox.)
1838.
_Second Leander Match (C.U.B.C.)_
CAMBRIDGE, 1. LEANDER, 2.
1. Shadwell, A. H., Lady Margaret. | 1. Shepheard
2. Smyth, W. W., Second Trinity. | 2. Sherrard
3. Gough, Walter R., First Trinity.| 3. Lloyd
4. Yatman, W. H., Caius. | 4. Layton
5. Penrose, C. T., First Trinity. | 5. Wood
6. Paris, A., Corpus. | 6. Dalgleish
7. Brett, W. B., Caius. | 7. Bishop
Stanley, E., Jesus (stroke). | Lewis (stroke)
Moulton, W. (cox.) | Parish (cox.)
(A foul.)
1839.
_Westminster to Putney, April 3, 1839, 4.47 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Shadwell, Alfred H., Lady Margaret 10 7
2. Smyth, W. W., Second Trinity 11 0
3. Abercrombie, J., Caius 10 7
4. Paris, A., Corpus --
5. Penrose, C. T., First Trinity 12 0
6. Yatman, W. H., Caius --
7. Brett, W. B., Caius 12 0
Stanley, E. S., Jesus (stroke) --
Egan, T. S., Caius (cox.) 9 0
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Lee, S., Queen's 10 4
2. Compton, J., Merton 11 5
3. Maberly, S. E., Christ Church 11 4
4. Garnett, W. J., Christ Church 12 10
5. Walls, R. G., Brasenose 13 0
6. Hobhouse, R., Balliol 12 0
7. Powys, P. L., Balliol 12 0
Bewicke, C., University (stroke) 11 5
Ffooks, W. W., Exeter (cox.) 10 2
----------
Average 11 10-1/2
1840.
_Westminster to Putney, Wednesday, April 15, 1840, 1.30 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Shadwell, A. H., Lady Margaret 10 7
2. Massey, W., First Trinity 11 0
3. Taylor, S. B., First Trinity 11 7
4. Ridley, J. M., Jesus 12 8
5. Appleby, G. C., Magdalene 11 12
6. Penrose, F. C., Magdalene 12 1
7. Jones, H., Magdalene 11 9
Viales, C. M., Third Trinity (stroke) 11 6
Egan, T. S., Caius, (cox.) 9 0
------
Average 11 8
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Mountain, J. G., Merton 11 0
2. Pocock, J. J. I., Merton 11 2
3. Maberly, S. E., Christ Church 11 4
4. Rogers, W., Balliol 12 10
5. Walls, R. G., Brasenose 12 7
6. Royds, E., Brasenose 12 4
7. Meynell, G., Brasenose 11 10
Somers Cocks, J. J. T., Brasenose (stroke) 11 3
Garnett, W. B., Brasenose (cox.) 9 7
----------
Average 11 10-1/2
1841.
_Westminster to Putney, Wednesday, April 14, 1841, 6.10 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Croker, W. R., Caius 9 12
2. Denman, Hon. L. W., Magdalene 10 12
3. Ritchie, A. M., First Trinity 11 10
4. Ridley, J. M., Jesus 12 7
5. Cobbold, R. H., Peterhouse 12 4
6. Penrose, F. C., Magdalene 12 0
7. Denman, Hon. G., First Trinity 10 7
Viales, C. M., Third Trinity (stroke) 11 7
Croker, J. M., Caius (cox.) 10 8
----------
Average 11 5-5/8
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Bethell, R., Exeter 10 6
2. Richards, E. V., Christ Church 11 2
3. Mountain, J. G., Merton 10 9
4. Royds, E., Brasenose 11 13
5. Hodgson, H. W., Balliol 11 10
6. Lea, W., Brasenose 11 7
7. Meynell, G., Brasenose 11 11
Somers Cocks, J. J. T., Brasenose (stroke) 11 4
Wollaston, C. B., Exeter (cox.) 9 2
---------
Average 11 4-1/8
1841.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley, 1841._
CAMBRIDGE SUBSCRIPTION ROOMS, 1. st. lbs.
1. Denman, Hon. G., First Trinity 10 8
2. Shadwell, A. H., Lady Margaret 10 9
3. Cross, W. A., First Trinity 10 6
4. Anson, T. A., Jesus 12 8
5. Yatman, W. H., Caius 10 10
6. Jones, W. M., Caius 11 10
7. Viales, C. M., Third Trinity 11 9
Brett, W. B., Caius (stroke) 11 10
Egan, T. S., Caius (cox.) 9 6
LEANDER, 2. st. lbs.
1. Shepheard 10 2
2. Layton 10 11
3. Julius, W. 11 6
4. Romayne 11 8
5. Jenkins 12 3
6. Wallace 11 7
7. Wood 10 12
Dalgleish (stroke) 11 2
Gibson, H. (cox.) 11 0
1842.
_Westminster to Putney, Saturday, June 11, 1842._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. M'Dougall, F. T., Magdalen Hall 9 8
2. Menzies, Sir R., University 11 3
3. Breedon, E. A., Trinity 12 4
4. Brewster, W. B., St. John's 12 10
5. Bourne, G. D., Oriel 13 12
6. Cox, J. C., Trinity 10 8
7. Hughes, G. E., Oriel 11 6
Menzies, F. N., University (stroke) 10 12
Shadwell, A. T. W., Balliol (cox.) 10 4
----------
Average 11 9-5/8
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Tower, E., Lady Margaret 10 2
2. Denman, Hon. L. W., Magdalene 10 11
3. Watson, W., Jesus 10 13
4. Penrose, F. C., Magdalene 11 10
5. Cobbold, R. H., Peterhouse 12 6
6. Royds, J., Christ's 11 7
7. Denman, Hon. G., First Trinity 10 9
Ridley, J. M., Jesus (stroke) 12 0
Pollock, A. B., First Trinity (cox.) 9 7
----------
Average 11 3-3/4
1842.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley, 1842._
CAMBRIDGE SUBSCRIPTION ROOMS, 1. st. lbs.
1. Yatman, W. H., Caius 10 10
2. Shadwell, A., John's 10 9
3. Appleby, G. C., Magdalene 11 2
4. Lonsdale, J. G., First Trinity 12 4
5. Ritchie, A. M., First Trinity 12 0
6. Jones, W. M., Caius 11 10
7. Selwyn, C. J., Second Trinity 11 12
Beresford, J., Peter's (stroke) 10 10
Egan, T. S., Caius (cox.) 9 2
----------
Average 11 5-1/8
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY BOATING CLUB, 2. st. lbs.
1. Tower, E., John's 10 2
2. Denman, Hon. L. W., Magdalene 10 11
3. Watson, W., Jesus 10 13
4. Viales, C. M., Third Trinity 11 9
5. Cobbold, R. H., Peter's 12 6
6. Royds, J., Christ's 11 7
7. Denman, Hon. G., First Trinity 10 9
Ridley, J. M., Jesus (stroke) 12 0
Pollock, J. C., Third Trinity (cox.) 10 2
----------
Average 11 3-3/8
1843.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley, 1843._
OXFORD, THE 'SEVEN OAR,' 1. st. lbs.
1. Menzies, Sir R., University 11 3
2. Royds, E., Brasenose 12 0
3. Brewster, W. B., St. John's 13 0
4. Bourne, G. D., Oriel 13 12
5. Cox, J. C., Trinity 11 12
6. Lowndes, R., Christ Church 11 2
7. Hughes, G. E., Oriel 11 11
Shadwell, A. T. W., Balliol (cox.) 10 8
Menzies, F. (stroke), _æger_ --
----------
Average 12 1-2/7
CAMBRIDGE SUBSCRIPTION ROOMS, 2. st. lbs.
1. Yatman, W. H., Caius 10 12
2. Shadwell, A. H., Lady Margaret 11 0
3. Mann, G., Caius 12 0
4. Ridley, J. M., Jesus 12 6
5. Cobbold, R. H., Peterhouse 12 5
6. Jones, W. M., Caius 11 12
7. Denman, Hon. L. W., Magdalene 10 11
Viales, C. M., Third Trinity (stroke) 11 13
Egan, T. S., Caius (cox.) 9 6
------
Average 11 9
1843.
_Gold Cup, Thames Regatta._
OXFORD, 1.
Crew same as 'Seven oar' _supra_, except W. Chetwynd-Stapylton, Merton,
10 st. 6 lbs. at bow.
1844.
_Gold Cup, Thames Regatta. Chiswick Eyot to Putney Bridge._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Chetwynd-Stapylton, W., Merton 10 8
2. Spottiswoode, W., Balliol 10 6
3. Milman, W. H., Christ Church 11 0
4. Morgan, H., Christ Church 12 11
5. Buckle, W., Oriel 13 12
6. Dry, W. J., Wadham 11 5
7. Wilson, F. M., Christ Church 12 8
Tuke, F. E., Brasenose (stroke) 11 9
Shadwell, A. T. W., Balliol (cox.) 10 8
----------
Average 11 1-7/8
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Raven, J., Magdalene 8 13
2. Venables, H., Jesus 10 2
3. Mann, G., Caius 10 7
4. Cloves, W. P., First Trinity 11 11
5. Brookes, T. W., First Trinity 11 9
6. Richardson, J., First Trinity 11 12
7. Nicholson, W. W., First Trinity 10 3
Arnold, F. M., Caius (stroke) 11 11
Egan, T. S., Caius (cox.) 10 0
------
Average 10 12
LEANDER, 3. st. lbs.
1. Soanes 9 3
2. Peacock 10 0
3. Lee 12 0
4. Hodding 11 6
5. Julius 12 0
6. Bumpstead 12 0
7. Jefferies 9 4
Dalgleish (stroke) 10 6
Shepheard (cox.) 10 0
----------
Average 10 11-1/8
1844.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Chetwynd-Stapylton, W., Merton 10 8
2. Spottiswoode, W., Balliol 10 6
3. Chetwynd-Stapylton, H. E., University 10 10
4. Spankie, J., Merton 11 4
5. Wilson, F. M., Christ Church 12 8
6. Tuke, F. E., Brasenose 11 9
7. Conant, J. W., St. John's 12 7
Morgan, H., Christ Church (stroke) 12 7
Shadwell, A. T. W., Balliol (cox.) 10 0
----------
Average 11 7-3/8
1844.
_The Stewards' Cup, Henley. (Final Heat.)_
OXFORD, 1. ST. GEORGE'S CLUB,
LONDON, 2. st. lbs.
1. Chetwynd-Stapylton, W., Merton | 1. Wadham 9 10
2. Dry, W. J., Wadham | 2. M'Kay 10 11
3. Wilson, F. M., Christ Church | 3. Ross 11 4
Tuke, F. E., Brasenose (stroke)| Smith (stroke) 10 4
Lewis, G. B., Oriel (cox.) | Johnson, A. (cox.) 7 11
1845.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, March 15, 1845, 6.1 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Mann, G., Caius 10 7
2. Harkness, W., Lady Margaret 10 0
3. Lockhart, W. S., Christ's 11 3
4. Cloves, W. P., First Trinity 12 0
5. Arnold, F. M., Caius 12 0
6. Harkness, R., Lady Margaret 11 0
7. Richardson, J., First Trinity 12 0
Hill, C. G., Second Trinity (stroke) 10 11
Munster, H., First Trinity (cox.) 9 2
----------
Average 11 2-5/8
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Haggard, M., Christ Church 10 3
2. Chetwynd-Stapylton, W., Merton 10 12
3. Milman, W. H., Christ Church 11 0
4. Lewis, H., Pembroke 11 7
5. Buckle, W., Oriel 13 12
6. Royds, F. C., Brasenose 11 5
7. Wilson, F. M., Christ Church 12 3
Tuke, F. E., Brasenose (stroke) 12 2
Richards, F. J., Merton (cox.) 10 10
------
Average 11 9
1845.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Mann, G., Caius 10 8
2. Harkness, W., Lady Margaret 10 1
3. Lockhart, W. S., Christ's 11 3
4. Cloves, W. P., First Trinity 12 1
5. Hopkins, F. L., First Trinity 12 7
6. Potts, H. J., Second Trinity 11 9
7. Arnold, F. M., Caius 12 2
Hill, C. G., Second Trinity (stroke) 10 12
Munster, H., Second Trinity (cox.) 9 2
----------
Average 11 5-1/8
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Chetwynd-Stapylton, W., Merton 10 6
2. Spottiswoode, W., Balliol 10 11
3. Milman, W. H., Christ Church 10 12
4. Buckle, W., Oriel 13 7
5. Breedon, E. A., Trinity 11 10
6. Penfold, E. H., St. John's 11 10
7. Conant, J. W., St. John's 11 13
Wilson, F. M., Christ Church (stroke) 12 11
Shadwell, A. T. W., Balliol (cox.) 10 4
------
Average 11 10
1845.
_The Stewards' Cup, Henley. (Final Heat.)_
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Chetwynd-Stapylton, W., Merton 10 6
2. Milman, W. H., Christ Church 10 10
3. Conant, J. W., St. John's 11 3
Wilson, F. M., Christ Church (stroke) 12 1
Lewis, G. B., Oriel (cox.) --
ST. GEORGE'S CLUB, LONDON, 2. st. lbs.
1. Wadham 10 0
2. Ross 11 0
3. Coulthard 11 11
Smith (stroke) 10 12
Johnson, A., (cox.) 8 4
1845.
_Gold Cup, Thames Regatta._
CAMBRIDGE LONDON ROOMS, 1.
1. Rippingall, C., Lady Margaret
2. Shadwell, A. H., Lady Margaret
3. Lockhart, W. S., Christ's
4. Cloves, W. P., First Trinity
5. Wilder, E., Magdalene
6. Hopkins, F. L., First Trinity
7. Arnold, F. M., Caius
Hill, C. G., Second Trinity (stroke)
Egan, T. S., Caius (cox.)
OXFORD AQUATIC CLUB, 2.
1. Chetwynd-Stapylton, W., Merton
2. Milman, W. H., Christ Church
3. Meynell, G., Brasenose
4. Buckle, W., Oriel
5. Breedon, E. A., Trinity
6. Hughes, G. E., Oriel
7. Conant, J. W., St. John's
Wilson, F. M., Christ Church (stroke)
Richards, F. J., Merton (cox.)
1846.
_Mortlake to Putney, April 3, 1846, 11.10 a.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Murdoch, G. F., Lady Margaret 10 2
2. Holroyd, G. F., First Trinity 11 1
3. Clissold, S. T., Third Trinity 12 0
4. Cloves, W. P., First Trinity 12 12
5. Wilder, E., Magdalene 12 2
6. Harkness, R., Lady Margaret 11 6
7. Wolstenholme, E. P., First Trinity 11 1
Hill, C. G., Second Trinity (stroke) 11 1
Lloyd, T. B., Lady Margaret (cox.) 9 8
----------
Average 11 8-3/8
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Polehampton, H. S., Pembroke 10 9
2. Burton, E. C., Christ Church 11 0
3. Heygate, W. U., Merton 11 8
4. Penfold, E. H., St. John's 11 8
5. Conant, J. W., St. John's 12 4
6. Royds, F. C., Brasenose 11 9
7. Chetwynd-Stapylton, W., Merton 10 12
Milman, W. H., Christ Church (stroke) 11 0
Soanes, C. J., St. John's (cox.) 9 13
----------
Average 11 4-1/8
1846.
_The Stewards' Cup, Henley. (Final Heat.)_
O.U.B.C., 1. st. lbs.
1. Chetwynd-Stapylton, W., Merton 10 6
2. Wilson, F. M., Christ Church 12 1
3. Conant, J. W., St. John's 11 13
Milman, W. H., Christ Church (stroke) 10 10
Haggard, M., Christ Church (cox.) --
-----
Average 11 4
GUY'S CLUB, LONDON, 2.
1. Forster
2. Gruggen
3. Ferguson
Cooper (stroke)
Roland (cox.)
1847.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Moon, E. G., Magdalen 10 4
2. Haggard, M., Christ Church 10 8
3. Oldham, J., Brasenose 11 7
4. Royds, F. C., Brasenose 11 10
5. Griffiths, E. G. C., Worcester 12 6
6. King, W., Oriel 11 0
7. Winter, G. R., Brasenose 11 3
Burton, E. C., Christ Church (stroke) 11 0
Soanes, C. J., St. John's (cox.) 9 10
-----
Average 11 3
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Maule, W., First Trinity 9 12
2. Gisborne, T. M., Lady Margaret 10 10
3. Wolstenholme, E. P., First Trinity 10 10
4. Garfit, A., First Trinity 12 8
5. Nicholson, C. A., First Trinity 13 5
6. Harkness, R., Lady Margaret 11 4
7. Vincent, S., First Trinity 10 10
Jackson, F. C., Lady Margaret (stroke) 11 0
Murdoch, G. F., Lady Margaret (cox.) 10 3
---------
Average 11 3-7/8
1848.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley. (First Heat.)_
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Rich, W. G., Christ Church 10 11
2. Haggard, M., Christ Church 10 4
3. Sykes, E., Worcester 11 0
4. Royds, F. C., Brasenose 11 4
5. Winter, G. R., Brasenose 11 6
6. Mansfield, A., Christ Church 10 10
7. Milman, W. H., Christ Church 11 0
Burton, E. C., Christ Church (stroke) 11 0
Soanes, C. J., St. John's (cox.) 9 13
----------
Average 10 11-7/8
THAMES CLUB, LONDON, 2. st. lbs.
1. Bruce 10 6
2. Thompson 10 8
3. Blake 10 12
4. Playford 11 4
5. Robinson 12 0
6. Wallace 12 8
7. Chapman 11 3
Walmsley (stroke) 10 6
Field (cox.) 9 7
1849
_Putney to Mortlake, Thursday, March 29, 5.40 p.m. (First Race.)_
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Proby, H., Second Trinity 9 13
2. Jones, W. J. H., Second Trinity 10 13
3. De Rutzen, A., Third Trinity 11 8
4. Holden, C. J., Third Trinity 11 8
5. Bagshawe, W. L. G., Third Trinity 11 10
6. Waddington, W. H., Second Trinity 11 10
7. Hodgson, W. C., First Trinity 11 2
Wray, J. C., Second Trinity (stroke) 10 12
Booth, G., First Trinity (cox.) 10 7
----------
Average 11 2-1/2
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Wauchope, D., Wadham 10 4
2. Chitty, J. W., Balliol 11 2
3. Tremayne, H. H., Christ Church 11 5
4. Burton, E. C., Christ Church 11 0
5. Steward, C. H., Oriel 12 0
6. Mansfield, A., Christ Church 11 8
7. Sykes, E., Worcester 11 0
Rich, W. G., Christ Church (stroke) 10 0
Soanes, C. J., St. John's (cox.) 10 8
----------
Average 11 0-5/8
1849
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, December 15, 2.44 p.m. (Second Race.)_
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Hornby, J. J., Brasenose 11 8
2. Houghton, W., Brasenose 11 2
3. Wodehouse, J., Exeter 11 9
4. Chitty, J. W., Balliol 11 9
5. Aitken, J., Exeter 12 1
6. Steward, C. H., Oriel 12 2
7. Sykes, E., Worcester 11 2
Rich, W. G., Christ Church (stroke) 10 2
Cotton, R. W., Christ Church (cox.) 9 0
----------
Average 11 5-7/8
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Baldry, A., First Trinity 10 10
2. Pellew, H. E., Third Trinity 11 9
3. De Rutzen, A., Third Trinity 11 8
4. Holden, C. J., Third Trinity 11 11
5. Bagshawe, W. L. G., Third Trinity 12 0
6. Miller, H. J., Third Trinity 12 0
7. Hodgson, W. C., First Trinity 11 3
Wray, J. C., Clare (stroke) 11 0
Booth, G., First Trinity (cox.) 10 8
----------
Average 11 5-3/4
1850.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley._
O.U.B.C. (_Walked over._) st. lbs.
1. Cheales, H. J., Exeter 10 11
2. Houghton, W., Brasenose 11 2
3. Hornby, J. J., Brasenose 11 8
4. Aitken, J., Exeter 12 1
5. Steward, C. H., Oriel 12 2
6. Chitty, J. W., Balliol 11 9
7. Sykes, E., Worcester 10 2
Rich, W. G., Christ Church (stroke) 11 2
Cotton, R. W., Christ Church (cox.) 9 0
----------
Average 11 4-5/8
1850.
_The Stewards' Cup, Henley._
O.U.B.C. (_Walked over._) st. lbs.
1. Hornby, J. J., Brasenose 11 8
2. Aitken, J., Exeter 12 1
3. Steward, C. H., Oriel 12 2
Chitty, J. W., Balliol (stroke) 11 9
Rich, W. G., Christ Church (cox.) 11 2
----------
Average 11 12-1/4
1851.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley. (Final Heat.)_
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Rich, W. G., Christ Church 10 0
2. Nixon, W., Worcester 11 4
3. Hornby, J. J., Brasenose 11 0
4. Houghton, W., Brasenose 11 10
5. Aitken, J., Exeter 11 12
6. Greenall, R., Brasenose 11 2
7. Sykes, E., Worcester 11 4
Chitty, J. W., Balliol (stroke) 11 3
Burton, E. C., Christ Church (cox.) 11 0
----------
Average 11 4-3/8
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Page, A. S., Lady Margaret 10 1
2. Longmore, W. S., Sydney 10 4
3. Formby, R., First Trinity 11 11
4. Cowie, H., First Trinity 11 12
5. Brandt, H., First Trinity 11 5
6. Holden, C. J., Third Trinity 11 11
7. Tuckey, H. E., Lady Margaret 10 13
Johnson, F. W., Third Trinity (stroke) 10 11
Crosse, C. H., Caius (cox.) 9 1
----------
Average 11 1-1/2
1851.
_The Stewards' Cup, Henley. (Final Heat.)_
C.U.B.C., 1. st. lbs.
1. Page, A. S., Lady Margaret 10 1
2. Longmore, W. S., Sidney 10 4
3. Tuckey, H. E., Lady Margaret 10 13
Johnson, F. W., Third Trinity (stroke) 10 11
Crosse, C. H., Caius (cox.) 9 1
BRASENOSE COLLEGE, OXON, 2.
1. Mescott
2. Errington
3. Hornby
Greenall (stroke)
Balguy (cox.)
1852.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 3, 1.4 p.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Prescot, K., Brasenose 10 0
2. Greenall, R., Brasenose 10 12
3. Nind, P. H., Christ Church 11 2
4. Buller, R. J., Balliol 12 4
5. Denne, H., University 12 8
6. Houghton, W., Brasenose 11 8
7. Meade-King, W. O., Pembroke 11 11
Chitty, J. W., Balliol (stroke) 11 7
Cotton, R. W., Christ Church (cox.) 9 2
----------
Average 11 6-1/2
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Macnaghten, E., First Trinity 11 0
2. Brandt, H., First Trinity 11 5
3. Tuckey, H. E., Lady Margaret 11 3
4. Foord, H. B., First Trinity 12 6
5. Hawley, E., Sidney 12 4
6. Longmore, W. S., Sidney 11 4
7. Norris, W. A., Third Trinity 11 9
Johnson, F. W., Third Trinity (stroke) 11 8
Crosse, C. H., Caius (cox.) 9 7
----------
Average 11 8-1/2
1852.
_The Stewards' Cup, Henley. (Final Heat.)_
OXFORD, 1.
1. Greenall, R., Brasenose
2. Barker, H. R., Christ Church
3. Nind, P. H., Christ Church
Meade-King, W. O., Pembroke (stroke)
Balguy, F. St. J., Brasenose (cox.)
ARGONAUTS, London, 2.
1. Pryor
2. Payne
3. L. Payne
H. H. Playford (stroke)
Burchett (cox.)
1853.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Short, W. F., New 10 8
2. Moore, P. H., Brasenose 9 12
3. King, W., Merton 11 11
4. Buller, R. J., Balliol 12 0
5. Denne, R. H., University 12 10
6. Nind, P. H., Christ Church 10 12
7. Prescot, K., Merton 10 3
Meade-King, W. O., Pembroke (stroke) 11 7
Marshall, T. H., Exeter (cox.) 10 1
----------
Average 11 4-3/8
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Forster, G. B., Lady Margaret 10 10
2. Stephenson, S. V., Caius 10 8
3. Bramwell, A., First Trinity 10 12
4. Hawley, E., Sidney 12 1
5. Courage, E., First Trinity 12 12
6. Tomkinson, H. R., First Trinity 10 9
7. Blake, H., Corpus 10 11
Macnaghten, E., First Trinity (stroke) 10 6
Freshfield, E., First Trinity (cox.) 8 6
----------
Average 11 1-5/8
1854.
_Putney to Mortlake, April 8, 10.40 a.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Short, W. F., New 10 3
2. Hooke, A., Worcester 11 0
3. Pinckney, W., Exeter 11 2
4. Blundell, T., Christ Church 11 8
5. Hooper, T. A., Pembroke 11 5
6. Nind, P. H., Christ Church 10 13
7. Mellish, G. L., Pembroke 11 2
Meade-King, W. O., Pembroke (stroke) 11 8
Marshall, T. H., Exeter (cox.) 10 3
----------
Average 11 1-3/4
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Galton, R. C., First Trinity 9 11
2. Nairne, S., Emmanuel 10 2
3. Davis, J. C., Third Trinity 11 1
4. Agnew, S., First Trinity 10 12
5. Courage, E., First Trinity 12 0
6. Johnson, H. F., Third Trinity 10 13
7. Blake, H., Corpus 11 1
Wright, J., Lady Margaret (stroke) 10 2
Smith, C. T., Caius (cox.) 9 12
----------
Average 10 10-1/4
1855.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley. (Final Heat.)_
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Pearson, P. P., Lady Margaret 11 0
2. Graham, E. C., First Trinity 11 3
3. Schreiber, H. W., Trinity Hall 11 3
4. Fairrie, E. H., Trinity Hall 11 12
5. Williams, H., Lady Margaret 11 8
6. Johnson, H. F., Third Trinity 11 6
7. Blake, H., Corpus 11 11
Jones, H. R. M., Third Trinity (stroke) 10 2
Wingfield, W., First Trinity (cox.) 8 6
----------
Average 11 5-1/8
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Short, W. F., New 10 9
2. Codrington, J. E., Brasenose 10 9
3. Everett, C, H., Balliol 11 2
4. Denne, R. H., University 12 6
5. Craster, T. H. University 12 7
6. Nind, P. H., Christ Church 11 8
7. Pinckney, W., Exeter 11 2
Hooke, A., Worcester (stroke) 10 6
Marshall, T. H., Exeter (cox.) 10 8
----------
Average 11 4-3/8
1856.
_Mortlake to Putney, Saturday, March 15, 10.45 a.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. King-Salter, J. P., Trinity Hall 9 13
2. Alderson, F. C., Third Trinity 11 3
3. Lewis-Lloyd, R., Third Trinity 11 12
4. Fairrie, E. H., Trinity Hall 12 10
5. Williams, H., Lady Margaret 12 8
6. M'Cormick, J., Lady Margaret 13 0
7. Snow, H., Lady Margaret 11 8
Jones, H. R. M., Third Trinity (stroke) 10 7
Wingfield, W., First Trinity (cox.) 9 0
----------
Average 11 9-3/8
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Gurdon, P., University 10 8
2. Stocken, W. F., Exeter 10 1
3. Salmon, R. T., Exeter 10 10
4. Rocke, A. B., Christ Church 12 8
5. Townsend, R. N., Pembroke 12 8
6. Lonsdale, A. P., Balliol 11 4
7. Bennett, G., New 10 10
Thorley, J. T., Wadham (stroke) 9 12
Elers, F. W., Trinity (cox.) 9 2
------------
Average 11 0-11/16
1857.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 4, 11.10 a.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Risley, R. W., Exeter 11 3
2. Gurdon, P., University 10 0
3. Arkell, J., Pembroke 10 10
4. Martin, R., Corpus 12 1
5. Wood, W. H., University 11 13
6. Warre, E., Balliol 13 3
7. Lonsdale, A. P., Balliol 12 0
Thorley, J. T., Wadham (stroke) 10 1
Elers, F. W., Trinity (cox.) 9 2
----------
Average 11 9-1/8
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Holme, A. P., Second Trinity 11 8
2. Benn, A., Emmanuel 11 5
3. Holley, W. H., Trinity Hall 11 8
4. Smith, A. L., First Trinity 11 3
5. Serjeantson, J. J., First Trinity 12 4
6. Lewis-Lloyd, R., Magdalene 11 11
7. Pearson, P. P., Lady Margaret 11 2
Snow, H., Lady Margaret (stroke) 11 8
Wharton, R., Magdalene (cox.) 9 2
------
Average 11 8
1858.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, March 27, 1 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Lubbock, H. H., Caius 11 4
2. Smith, A. L., First Trinity 11 4
3. Havart, W. J., Lady Margaret 11 4
4. Darroch, D., First Trinity 12 1
5. Williams, H., Lady Margaret 12 4
6. Lewis-Lloyd, R., Magdalene 11 13
7. Fairbairn, A. H., Second Trinity 11 12
Hall, J., Magdalene (stroke) 10 7
Wharton, R., Magdalene (cox.) 9 2
----------
Average 11 7-7/8
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Risley, R. W., Exeter 11 8
2. Arkell, J., Pembroke 11 3
3. Lane, C. G., Christ Church 11 10
4. Austin, W. G. G., Magdalen 12 7
5. Lane, E., Balliol 11 10
6. Wood, W. H., University 12 0
7. Warre, E., Balliol 13 2
Thorley, J. T., Wadham (stroke) 10 3
Walpole, H. S., Balliol (cox.) 9 5
----------
Average 11 10-5/8
1858.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley. (Final Heat.)_
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Paley, G. A., Lady Margaret 11 2
2. Smith, A. L., First Trinity 11 4
3. Havart, W. J., Lady Margaret 11 6
4. Darroch, D., First Trinity 12 2
5. Fairbairn, A. H., Second Trinity 11 13
6. Lewis-Lloyd, R., Magdalene 11 13
7. Royds, N., First Trinity 10 4
Hall, J., Magdalene (stroke) 10 5
Morland, F. T., First Trinity (cox.) 8 12
L.R.C., 2. st. lbs.
1. Leeds-Paine, F. 10 3
2. Walter, F. 10 0
3. Schlotel, C. 10 11
4. Ditton, E. G. 10 10
5. Farrar, W. 12 2
6. Paine, J. 12 5
7. Casamajor, A. 11 0
Playford, H. H. (stroke) 10 4
Weston, H. (cox.) 6 0
----------
Average 10 13-1/8
1859.
_Putney to Mortlake, Friday, April 15, 11 a.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Baxter, H. F., Brasenose 10 12
2. Clarke, R. F., St. John's 11 13
3. Lane, C. G., Christ Church 11 9
4. Lawless, Hon. V., Balliol 12 3
5. Morrison, G., Balliol 13 1
6. Risley, R. W., Exeter 11 2
7. Thomas, G. G. T., Balliol 12 0
Arkell, J., Pembroke (stroke) 10 12
Robarts, A. J., Christ Church (cox.) 9 1
----------
Average 11 8-3/4
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Royds, N., First Trinity 10 6
2. Chaytor, A. J., Jesus. 10 13
3. Smith, A. L., First Trinity 11 11
4. Darroch, D., First Trinity 12 4
5. Williams, H., Lady Margaret 12 6
6. Lewis-Lloyd, R., Magdalene 11 9
7. Paley, G. A., Lady Margaret 11 7
Hall, J., Magdalene (stroke) 10 2
Morland, J. T., First Trinity (cox.) 9 0
----------
Average 11 5-1/2
1859.
_Grand Challenge Cup, Henley. (First Heat.)_
LONDON, 1. st. lbs.
1. Dunnage, G. 9 5
2. Foster, C. 10 0
3. Potter, F. 10 4
4. Dunnage, W. 11 7
5. Farrar, W. 12 4
6. Paine, T. 12 10
7. Casamajor, A. A. 10 9
Playford, H. H. (stroke) 10 3
Weston, H. (cox.) 6 4
------
Average 10 12
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Strong, C. T., University 10 11
2. Baxter, H. F., Brasenose 11 3
3. Lane, E., Balliol 12 1
4. Warre, E., Balliol 12 10
5. Morrison, G., Balliol 13 5
6. Arkell, J., Pembroke 11 2
7. Lane, C. G., Christ Church 11 12
Risley, R. W., Exeter (stroke) 11 1
Robarts, A. J., Christ Church (cox.) 9 1
----------
Average 11 10-7/8
_Final Heat._
LONDON, 1. (as before.)
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Heathcote, S., First Trinity 9 7
2. Chaytor, H. J., Jesus 11 2
3. Ingham, J. P., Third Trinity 10 12
4. Lewis-Lloyd, R., Magdalene 11 10
5. Holley, W. H., Trinity Hall 12 0
6. Collings, H. H., Third Trinity 10 12
7. Royds, N., First Trinity 10 4
Hall, J., Magdalene (stroke) 10 5
Morland, J. T., First Trinity (cox.) 8 13
----------
Average 10 11-3/4
1860.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, March 31, 8.15 a.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Heathcote, S., First Trinity 10 3
2. Chaytor, H. J., Jesus 11 4
3. Ingles, D., First Trinity 10 13
4. Blake, J. S., Corpus 12 9
5. Coventry, M., Trinity Hall 12 8
6. Cherry, B. N., Clare 12 1
7. Fairbairn, A. H., Second Trinity 11 10
Hall, J., Magdalene (stroke) 10 4
Morland, J. T., First Trinity (cox.) 9 0
----------
Average 11 6-1/2
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Macqueen, J. N., University 11 7
2. Norsworthy, G., Magdalen 11 0
3. Halsey, T. F., Christ Church 11 11
4. Young, J., Corpus 12 8
5. Morrison, G., Balliol 12 13
6. Baxter, H. F., Brasenose 11 7
7. Strong, C. T., University 11 2
Risley, R. W., Exeter (stroke) 11 8
Robarts, A. J., Christ Church (cox.) 9 9
----------
Average 11 10-1/2
1861.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, March 23, 11 a.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Champneys, W., Brasenose 10 11
2. Merriman, E. B., Exeter 10 1
3. Medlicott, H. E., Wadham 12 4
4. Robertson, W., Wadham 11 3
5. Morrison, G., Balliol 12 8
6. Poole, A. R., Trinity 12 3
7. Hopkins, H. G., Corpus 10 8
Hoare, W. M., Exeter (stroke) 10 10
Ridsdale, S. O. B., Wadham (cox.) 9 0
----------
Average 11 4-1/4
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Richards, G. H., First Trinity 10 4
2. Chaytor, H. J., Jesus 11 3
3. Tarleton, W. H., St. John's 11 0
4. Blake, J. S., Corpus 12 10
5. Coventry, M., Trinity Hall 13 3
6. Collings, H. H., Third Trinity 10 11
7. Fitzgerald, R. U. P., Trinity Hall 11 2
Hall, J., Magdalene (stroke) 10 6
Gaskell, T. K., Third Trinity (cox.) 8 3
----------
Average 11 4-7/8
1862.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 12, 8 p.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Woodgate, W. B., Brasenose 11 6
2. Wynne, O. S., Christ Church 11 3
3. Jacobson, W. B. R., Christ Church 12 4
4. Burton, R. E. L., Christ Church 12 5
5. Morrison, A., Balliol 12 8-1/2
6. Poole, A. R., Trinity 12 5
7. Carr, C. R., Wadham 11 2-1/2
Hoare, W. M., Exeter (stroke) 11 1
Hopwood, F. E., Christ Church (cox.) 7 3
----------
Average 11 11-3/8
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Gorst, P. F., Lady Margaret 10 4
2. Chambers, J. G., Third Trinity 11 8
3. Sanderson, E., Corpus 10 10
4. Smyly, W. C., First Trinity 11 5
5. Fitzgerald. R. U. P., Trinity Hall 11 3
6. Collings, H. H., Third Trinity 11 2
7. Buchanan, J. G., First Trinity 10 12
Richards, G. H., First Trinity (stroke) 10 5
Archer, F. H., Corpus (cox.) 5 2
----------
Average 10 13-1/8
1863.
_Mortlake to Putney, Saturday, March 28, 10.25 a.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Shepherd, R., Brasenose 11 0-1/2
2. Kelly, F. H., University 11 5-1/2
3. Jacobson, W. B. R., Christ Church 12 4
4. Woodgate, W. B., Brasenose 11 11
5. Morrison, A., Balliol 12 4
6. Awdry, W., Balliol 11 4
7. Carr, C. R., Wadham 11 3-1/2
Hoare, W. M., Exeter (stroke) 11 7-1/2
Hopwood, F. E., Christ Church (cox.) 8 4-1/2
----------
Average 11 8-1/2
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Hawkshaw, J. C., Third Trinity 11 0
2. Smyly, W. C., First Trinity 11 4
3. Morgan, R. H., Emmanuel 11 3
4. Wilson, J. B., Pembroke 11 10
5. La Mothe, C. H., St. John's 12 3
6. Kinglake, R. A., Third Trinity 12 0
7. Chambers, J. G., Third Trinity 11 6
Stanning, J., First Trinity (stroke) 10 6
Archer, F. H., Corpus (cox.) 5 9-1/2
----------
Average 11 5-3/4
1864.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, March 19, 11.30 a.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Roberts, C. P., Trinity 10 9
2. Awdry, W., Balliol 11 4-1/2
3. Kelly, F. H., University 11 9
4. Parson, J. C., Trinity 12 9
5. Jacobson, W. B. R., Christ Church 12 3-1/2
6. Seymour, A. E., University 11 1
7. Brown, M. M., Trinity 11 0
Pocklington, D., Brasenose (stroke) 11 4
Tottenham, C. R. W., Christ Church (cox.) 7 3
----------
Average 11 7-1/2
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Hawkshaw, J. C., Third Trinity 11 3
2. Pigott, E. V., Corpus 11 9
3. Watson, H. S., Pembroke 12 4
4. Hawkins, W. W., Lady Margaret 12 0
5. Kinglake, R. A., Third Trinity 12 4
6. Borthwick, G., First Trinity 12 1
7. Steavenson, D. F., Trinity Hall 12 1
Selwyn, J. R., Third Trinity (stroke) 11 0
Archer, F. H., Corpus (cox.) 6 6
----------
Average 11 11-1/2
1865.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 8, 1.3 p.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Raikes, R. T., Merton 11 0
2. Senhouse, H. P., Christ Church 11 1
3. Henley, E. F., Oriel 12 13
4. Coventry, G. G., Pembroke 11 12
5. Morrison, A., Balliol 12 6
6. Wood, T., Pembroke 12 2
7. Schneider, H., Trinity 11 10
Brown, M. M., Trinity (stroke) 11 4
Tottenham, C. R. W., Christ Church (cox.) 7 13
----------
Average 11 11-1/4
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Watney, H., Lady Margaret 11 1
2. Beebee, M. H. L., Lady Margaret 10 12
3. Pigott, E. V., Corpus 11 12
4. Kinglake, R. A., Third Trinity 12 8
5. Steavenson, D. F., Trinity Hall 12 4
6. Borthwick, G., First Trinity 11 13
7. Griffiths, W. R., Third Trinity 11 8
Lawes, C. B., Third Trinity (stroke) 11 7
Archer, F. H., Corpus (cox.) 7 3
------
Average 11 9
1866.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, March 24, 7.48 a.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Raikes, R. T., Merton 11 0
2. Crowder, F., Brasenose 11 11
3. Freeman, W. L., Merton 12 7
4. Willan, F., Exeter 12 2
5. Henley, E. F., Oriel 13 0
6. Wood, W. W., University 12 4
7. Senhouse, H. P., Christ Church 11 3
Brown, M. M., Trinity (stroke) 11 5
Tottenham, C. R. W., Christ Church (cox.) 7 13
----------
Average 11 12-3/4
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Still, J., Caius 11 6
2. Selwyn, J. R., Third Trinity 11 6
3. Bourke, J. U., First Trinity 12 3
4. Fortescue, H. J., Magdalene 12 2-1/2
5. Steavenson, D. F., Trinity Hall 12 5
6. Kinglake, R. A., Third Trinity 12 9
7. Watney, H., Lady Margaret 10 12
Griffiths, W. R., Third Trinity (stroke) 11 9
Forbes, A., Lady Margaret (cox.) 8 0
----------
Average 11 11
1867.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 13, 8.50 a.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Bowman, W. P., University 10 11
2. Fish, J. H., Worcester 12 1
3. Carter, E. S., Worcester 11 12
4. Wood, W. W., University 12 6
5. Tinné, J. C., University 13 4
6. Crowder, F., Brasenose 11 11
7. Willan, F., Exeter 12 3
Marsden, R. G., Merton (stroke) 11 11
Tottenham, C. R. W., Christ Church (cox.) 8 8
----------
Average 12 0-1/8
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Anderson, W. H., First Trinity 11 0
2. Collard, J. M., Lady Margaret 11 4
3. Bourke, J. U., First Trinity 12 9
4. Gordon, Hon. J. H., First Trinity 12 3
5. Cunningham, F. E., King's 12 12
6. Still, J., Caius 11 12
7. Watney, H., Lady Margaret 11 0
Griffiths, W. R., Third Trinity (stroke) 12 0
Forbes, A., Lady Margaret (cox.) 8 2
------
Average 11 12
1868.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 4, 12 noon._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Benson, W. D., Balliol 10 13
2. Yarborough, A. C., Lincoln 11 8
3. Ross of Bladensburgh, R., Exeter 11 8
4. Marsden, R. G., Merton 11 13
5. Tinné, J. C., University 13 7
6. Willan, F., Exeter 12 5
7. Carter, E. S., Worcester 11 8
Darbishire, S. D., Balliol (stroke) 11 3
Tottenham, C. R. W., Christ Church (cox.) 8 7
------
Average 11 12
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Anderson, W. H., First Trinity 11 2
2. Nichols, J. P., Third Trinity 11 3
3. Wood, J. G., Emmanuel 12 6
4. Lowe, W. H., Christ's 12 4
5. Nadin, H. T., Pembroke 12 11
6. MacMichael, W. F., Downing 12 2
7. Still, J., Caius 12 1
Pinckney, W. J., First Trinity (stroke) 10 10
Warner, T. D., Trinity Hall (cox.) 8 4
------
Average 11 11
1869.
_Putney to Mortlake, Wednesday, March 17, 3.58 p.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Woodhouse, S. H., University 10 13
2. Tahourdin, R., St. John's 11 11
3. Baker, T. S., Queen's 12 8
4. Willan, F., Exeter 12 2-1/8
5. Tinné, J. C., University 13 10
6. Yarborough, A. C., Lincoln 11 11
7. Benson, W. D., Balliol 11 7
Darbishire, S. D., Balliol (stroke) 11 9
Neilson, D. A., St. John's (cox.) 7 10
----------
Average 12 0-1/4
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Rushton, J. A., Emmanuel 11 5
2. Ridley, J. H., Jesus 11 10
3. Dale, J. W., Lady Margaret 11 12
4. Young, F. J., Christ's 12 4
5. MacMichael, W. F., Downing 12 4
6. Anderson, W. H., First Trinity 11 4
7. Still, J., Caius 12 1
Goldie, J. H. D., Lady Margaret (stroke) 12 1
Gordon, H. E., First Trinity (cox.) 7 8
----------
Average 11 12-1/8
1869.
_Putney to Mortlake, August 27._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Willan, F., Exeter 11 10
2. Yarborough, A. C., Lincoln 12 2
3. Tinné, J. C., University 13 8
Darbishire, S. D., Balliol (stroke) 11 6
Hall, J. H., Corpus (cox.) 7 2
HARVARD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Fay, J. S., Boston 11 1
2. Lyman, F. O., Hawaiian Islands 11 1
3. Simmonds, W. H., Concord 12 2
Loring, A. P., Boston (stroke) 11 0
Burnham, A., Chicago (cox.) 7 10
1870.
_Putney to Mortlake, Wednesday, April 6, 5.14 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Randolph, E. S. L., Third Trinity 10 11-1/2
2. Ridley, J. H., Jesus 11 9-1/2
3. Dale, J. W., Lady Margaret 12 2-1/2
4. Spencer, E. A. A., Second Trinity 12 4-1/2
5. Lowe, W. H., Christ's 12 7-1/2
6. Phelps, E. S., Sidney 12 1-1/2
7. Strachan, J. F., Trinity Hall 11 13
Goldie, J. H. D., Lady Margaret (stroke) 12 0
Gordon, H. E., First Trinity (cox.) 7 12
----------
Average 11 13
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Mirehouse, R. W. B., University 11 0
2. Lewis, A. G. P., University 11 2-1/2
3. Baker, T. S., Queen's 12 9
4. Edwardes-Moss, J. E., Balliol 13 0
5. Payne, F. E. H., St. John's 12 10
6. Woodhouse, S. H., University 11 4
7. Benson, W. D., Balliol 11 13
Darbishire, S. D., Balliol (stroke) 11 11
Hall, F. H., Corpus (cox.) 7 7
----------
Average 11 13
1871
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 1, 10.8 a.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Follett, J. S., Third Trinity 11 6-1/2
2. Close, John B., First Trinity 11 8
3. Lomax, H., First Trinity 12 2
4. Spencer, E. A. A., Second Trinity 12 9
5. Lowe, W. H., Christ's 12 10
6. Phelps, E. L., Sidney 12 1
7. Randolph, E. S. L., Third Trinity 11 10
Goldie, J. H. D., Lady Margaret (stroke) 12 6-1/2
Gordon, H. E., First Trinity (cox.) 7 13
----------
Average 12 2
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Woodhouse, S. H., University 11 6-1/2
2. Giles, E., Christ Church 11 13-1/2
3. Baker, T. S., Queen's 13 3-1/2
4. Malan, E. C., Worcester 13 1
5. Edwardes-Moss, J. E., Balliol 12 8-1/2
6. Payne, F. E. H., St. John's 12 9-1/2
7. Bunbury, J. M'C., Brasenose 11 8
Lesley, R., Pembroke (stroke) 11 10-1/2
Hall, F. H., Corpus (cox.) 7 10-1/2
----------
Average 12 4
1872.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, March 23, 1.35 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Close, James B., First Trinity 11 3
2. Benson, C. W., Third Trinity 11 4
3. Robinson, G. M., Christ's 11 12
4. Spencer, E. A. A., Second Trinity 12 8-1/2
5. Read, C. S., First Trinity 12 8
6. Close, John B., First Trinity 11 10
7. Randolph, E. S. L., First Trinity 11 11
Goldie, J. H. D., Lady Margaret (stroke) 12 5
Roberts, C. H., Jesus (cox.) 6 6-1/2
----------
Average 11 12
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Ornsby, J. A., Lincoln 11 0-1/2
2. Knollys, C. C., Magdalen 10 12
3. Payne, F. E. H., St. John's 12 11
4. Nicholson, A. W., Magdalen 12 2-1/2
5. Malan, E. C., Worcester 13 3
6. Mitchison, R. S., Pembroke 12 4-1/2
7. Lesley, R., Pembroke 11 13
Houblon, J. H. A., Christ Church (stroke) 10 5
Hall, F. H., Corpus (cox.) 8 0
----------
Average 11 11-1/8
1873.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday March 29, 2.32 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Close, James B., First Trinity 11 3
2. Hoskyns, E., Jesus 11 2
3. Peabody, J. E., First Trinity 11 7
4. Lecky-Brown, W. C., Jesus 12 1-1/2
5. Turnbull, T. S., Trinity Hall 12 12
6. Read, C. S., First Trinity 12 13
7. Benson, C. W., Third Trinity 11 5-1/2
Rhodes, H. E., Jesus (stroke) 11 1-1/2
Candy, C. H., Caius (cox.) 7 5
----------
Average 11 10
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Knollys, C.C., Magdalen 10 11
2. Little, J. B., Christ Church 10 11
3. Farrer, M. G., Brasenose 11 13-1/2
4. Nicholson, A. W., Magdalen 12 5
5. Mitchison, R. S., Pembroke 12 2
6. Sherwood, W. E., Christ Church 11 1
7. Ornsby, J. A., Lincoln 11 3
Dowding, F. T., St. John's (stroke) 11 0
Frewer, G. E., St. John's (cox.) 7 10
----------
Average 11 5
1874.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, March 28, 11.14 a.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Hibbert, J. P., Lady Margaret 11 1-1/2
2. Armytage, G. F., Jesus 11 8
3. Close, James B., First Trinity 11 0-1/2
4. Escourt, A. S., Trinity Hall 11 10-1/2
5. Lecky-Brown, W. C., Jesus 12 5
6. Aylmer, J. A., First Trinity 12 11
7. Read, C. S., First Trinity 12 11-1/2
Rhodes, H. E., Jesus (stroke) 11 7
Candy, C. H., Caius (cox.) 7 5
----------
Average 11 10-3/8
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Benson, H. W., Brasenose 11 0
2. Sinclair, J. S., Oriel 11 5-1/2
3. Sherwood, W. E., Christ Church 11 8
4. Harding, A. R., Merton 11 1-1/2
5. Williams, J., Lincoln 13 0-1/2
6. Nicholson, A. W., Magdalen 12 10
7. Stayner, H. J., St. John's 11 10-1/2
Way, J. P., Brasenose (stroke) 10 9
Lambert, W. F. A., Wadham (cox.) 7 2
-------------
Average 11 9-1/8
1875.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, March 20, 1.13 p.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Courtney, H. M'D., Pembroke 11 0
2. Marriott, H. P., Brasenose 11 12
3. Banks, J. E., University 11 11
4. Mitchison, A. M., Pembroke 12 12
5. Stayner, H. J., St. John's 12 2-1/2
6. Boustead, J. M., University 12 4
7. Edwardes Moss, T. C., Brasenose 12 5
Way, J. P., Brasenose (stroke) 10 11
Hopwood, E. O., Christ Church (cox.) 8 3-1/2
----------
Average 11 12
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Hibbert, J. P., Lady Margaret 11 3
2. Close, W. B., First Trinity 11 10
3. Dicker, G. C., First Trinity 11 8
4. Michell, W. G., First Trinity 11 11
5. Phillips, C. A., Jesus 12 4-1/2
6. Aylmer, J. A., First Trinity 12 12
7. Benson, C. W., Third Trinity 11 3
Rhodes, H. E., Jesus (stroke) 11 7
Davis, G. L., Clare (cox.) 6 10
----------
Average 11 11
1876.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 8, 2.2 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Brancker, P. W., Jesus 11 3-1/2
2. Lewis, T. W., Caius 11 8
3. Close, W. B., First Trinity 11 8
4. Gurdon, C., Jesus 12 9-3/4
5. Pike, G. L., Caius 12 9
6. Hockin, T. E., Jesus 12 8
7. Rhodes, H. E., Jesus 11 13
Shafto, C. D., Jesus (stroke) 11 9-1/2
Davis, G. L., Clare (cox.) 6 13
----------
Average 11 13
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Courtney, H. M'D., Pembroke 11 1-3/4
2. Mercer, F. R., Corpus 11 6
3. Hobart, W. H., Exeter 11 11
4. Mitchison, A. M., Pembroke 13 0
5. Boustead, J. M., University 12 5-3/4
6. Stayner, H. J., St. John's 12 2-1/2
7. Marriott, H. P., Brasenose 11 9-3/4
Edwardes-Moss, T. C., Brasenose (stroke) 12 3-1/4
Craven, W. D., Worcester (cox.) 7 6-1/2
----------
Average 11 13
1877.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, March 24, 8.27 a.m. (Dead Heat.)_
OXFORD. [+] st. lbs.
1. Cowles, D. J., St. John's 11 3-1/2
2. Boustead, J. M., University 12 9
3. Pelham, H., Magdalen 12 7-1/4
4. Grenfell, W. H., Balliol 12 10
5. Stayner, H. J., St. John's 12 5-1/2
6. Mulholland, A. J., Balliol 12 7-1/4
7. Edwardes-Moss, T. C., Brasenose 12 2
Marriott, H. P., Brasenose (stroke) 12 0-1/2
Beaumont, F. M., New (cox.) 7 0
----------
Average 12 3
CAMBRIDGE. [+] st. lbs.
1. Hoskyns, B. G., Jesus 10 11-1/2
2. Lewis, T. W., Caius 11 10
3. Fenn, J. C., First Trinity 11 6
4. Close, W. B., First Trinity 11 12
5. Pike, L. G., Caius 12 8
6. Gurdon, C., Jesus 12 13-1/2
7. Hockin, T. S., Jesus 12 11-1/2
Shafto, C. D., Jesus (stroke) 12 1-1/2
Davis, G. L., Clare (cox.) 7 6
----------
Average 11 13
1878.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 13, 10.15 a.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Ellison, W. A., University 10 13-1/2
2. Cowles, D. J., St. John's 11 6
3. Southwell, H. B., Pembroke 12 8
4. Grenfell, W. H., Balliol 12 11
5. Pelham, H., Magdalen 12 9-1/2
6. Burgess, G. F., Keble 13 3-1/2
7. Edwardes-Moss, T. C., Brasenose 12 3
Marriott, H. P., Brasenose (stroke) 12 2-1/2
Beaumont, F. M., New (cox.) 7 5
----------
Average 12 3
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Jones, L. I. R., Jesus 10 9
2. Watson-Taylor, J. A., Magdalene 11 9-3/4
3. Barker, T. W., First Trinity 12 6
4. Spurrell, R. J., Trinity Hall 11 13-1/2
5. Pike, L. G., Caius 12 8-1/2
6. Gurdon, C., Jesus 12 10-1/4
7. Hockin, T. E., Jesus 12 4-1/2
Prest, E. H., Jesus (stroke) 10 12-3/4
Davis, G. L., Clare (cox.) 7 5-1/2
----------
Average 11 12
1879.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 5, 12.45 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Prest, E. H., Jesus 11 2
2. Sandford, H., Lady Margaret 11 6-3/4
3. Bird, A. H. S., First Trinity 11 8
4. Gurdon, C., Jesus 13 0-1/2
5. Hockin, T. E., Jesus 12 4-1/4
6. Fairbairn, C., Jesus 12 7-1/2
7. Routledge, T., Emmanuel 12 7-1/2
Davis, R. D., First Trinity (stroke) 12 4-1/2
Davis, G. L., Clare (cox.) 7 7
----------
Average 12 1
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Wharton, J. H. T., Magdalen 11 3-1/4
2. Robinson, H. M., New 11 2-1/2
3. Disney, H. W., Hertford 12 7
4. Southwell, H. B., Pembroke 12 9
5. Cosby-Burrowes, T., Trinity 12 9
6. Rowe, G. D., University 11 13
7. Hobart, W. H., Exeter 11 12
Marriott, H. P., Brasenose (stroke) 12 2-1/2
Beaumont, F. M., New (cox.) 7 5
----------
Average 11 13
1880.
_Putney to Mortlake, Monday, March 22, 10.40 a.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Poole, R. H. J., Brasenose 10 6
2. Brown, D. E., Hertford 12 6
3. Hargreaves, F. M., Keble 12 2
4. Southwell, H. B., Pembroke 13 0
5. Kindersley, R. S., Exeter 12 6
6. Rowe, G. D., University 12 3
7. Wharton, J. H. T., Magdalen 11 11
West, L. R., Christ Church (stroke) 11 1
Hunt, C. W., Corpus (cox.) 7 5
----------
Average 11 13-3/8
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Prest, E. H., Jesus 10 12
2. Sandford, H., Lady Margaret 11 5-1/2
3. Barton, W., Lady Margaret 11 3-1/2
4. Warlow, W. M., Queens' 12 0
5. Armytage, N. C., Jesus 12 2-1/2
6. Davis, R. D., First Trinity 12 8-1/2
7. Prior, R. D., Queens' 11 13
Baillie, W. W., Jesus (stroke) 11 2-1/2
Clarke, B. S., Lady Margaret (cox.) 7 0
----------
Average 11 7
1881.
_Putney to Mortlake, Friday, April 8, 8.34 a.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Poole, R. H. J., Brasenose 10 11
2. Pinckney, R. A., Exeter 11 3
3. Paterson, A. R., Trinity 12 7
4. Buck, E., Hertford 11 11
5. Kindersley, R. S., Exeter 13 3
6. Brown, D. E., Hertford 12 7
7. Wharton, J. H. T., Magdalen 11 10
West, L. R., Christ Church (stroke) 11 0-1/2
Lyon, E. H., Hertford (cox.) 7 0
----------
Average 11 10
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Gridley, R. G., Third Trinity 10 7
2. Sandford, H., Lady Margaret 11 10-1/2
3. Watson-Taylor, J. A., Magdalene 12 3-1/2
4. Atkin, P. W., Jesus 11 13
5. Lambert, E., Pembroke 12 0
6. Hutchinson, A. M., Jesus 11 13
7. Moore, C. W., Christ's 11 9
Brooksbank, E. C., Trinity Hall (stroke) 11 8
Woodhouse, H., Trinity Hall (cox.) 7 2
----------
Average 11 9-3/4
1882.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 1, 1.2 p.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Bourne, G. C., New 10 13
2. De Haviland, R. S., Corpus 11 1
3. Fort, G. S., Hertford 12 3-1/2
4. Paterson, A. R., Trinity 12 12
5. Kindersley, R. S., Exeter 13 4-1/2
6. Buck, E., Hertford 12 0
7. Brown, D. E., Hertford 12 6
Higgins, A. H., Magdalen (stroke) 9 6-1/2
Lyon, E. H., Hertford (cox.) 7 12
----------
Average 11 11-1/8
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Jones, Ll. R., Jesus 11 1
2. Hutchinson, M., Jesus 12 1-1/2
3. Fellowes, J. C., First Trinity 12 7
4. Atkin, P. W., Jesus 12 11-1/2
5. Lambert, E., Pembroke 11 12
6. Fairbairn, S., Jesus 13 0
7. Moore, C. W., Christ's 11 7
Smith, S. P., First Trinity (stroke) 11 1
Hunt, P. L., Cavendish (cox.) 7 5
----------
Average 11 12-5/8
1883.
_Putney to Mortlake, Thursday, March 15, 5.39 p.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Bourne, G. C., New 10 11-1/2
2. De Haviland, R. S., Corpus 11 4
3. Fort, G. S., Hertford 12 0
4. Puxley, E. L., Brasenose 12 6-1/2
5. Maclean, D. H., New 13 2-1/2
6. Paterson, A. R., New Inn Hall 13 1
7. Roberts, G. Q., Hertford 11 1
West, L. R., New Inn Hall (stroke) 11 0
Lyon, E. H., Hertford (cox.) 8 1
----------
Average 11 12
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Gridley, R. G., Third Trinity 10 7
2. Fox, F. W., First Trinity 12 2
3. Moore, C. W., Christ's 11 13
4. Atkin, P. W., Jesus 12 1
5. Churchill, F. E., Third Trinity 13 4
6. Swann, S., Trinity Hall 12 12
7. Fairbairn, S., Jesus 13 4
Meyrick, F. C., Trinity Hall 11 7
Hunt, P. L., Cavendish (cox.) 8 1
----------
Average 12 2-3/4
1884.
_Putney to Mortlake, Monday, April 7, 12.54 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Gridley, R. C., Third Trinity 10 6
2. Eyre, G. H., Corpus 11 3-1/2
3. Straker, F., Jesus 12 2
4. Swann, S., Trinity Hall 13 3
5. Churchill, F. E., Third Trinity 13 2-1/2
6. Haig, E. W., Third Trinity 11 6-2/3
7. Moore, C. W., Christ's 11 12-3/4
Pitman, F. J., Third Trinity (stroke) 11 11-1/2
Biscoe, C. E. T., Jesus (cox.) 8 2
----------
Average 11 13
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Shortt, A. G., Christ Church 11 2
2. Stock, L., Exeter 11 0
3. Carter, C. R., Corpus 12 10
4. Taylor, P. W., Lincoln 13 1
5. McLean, D. H., New 12 11-1/2
6. Paterson, A. R., Trinity 13 4
7. Blandy, W. C., Exeter 10 13
Curry, W. D. B., Exeter (stroke) 10 4
Humphreys, F. J., Brasenose (cox.) 7 4
------------
Average 11 12-11/16
1885.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, March 28, 12.26 p.m._
OXFORD, 1. st. lbs.
1. Unwin, W. S., Magdalen 10 10-1/2
2. Clemons, J. S., Corpus 11 9
3. Taylor, P. W., Lincoln 13 6-1/2
4. Carter, C. R., Corpus 13 2
5. McLean, H., New 12 12
6. Wethered, F. O., Christ Church 12 6
7. McLean, D. H., New 13 1-1/2
Girdlestone, H., Magdalen (stroke) 12 7
Humphreys, F. J., Brasenose (cox.) 8 2
------------
Average 12 6-13/16
CAMBRIDGE, 2. st. lbs.
1. Symonds, N. P., Lady Margaret 10 8
2. Hardacre, W. R., Trinity Hall 10 8
3. Perrott, W. H. W., First Trinity 12 2-1/2
4. Swann, S., Trinity Hall 13 3-1/2
5. Churchill, F. E., Third Trinity 13 2-1/2
6. Haigh, E. W., Third Trinity 11 8
7. Coke, R. H., Trinity Hall 12 4
Pitman, F. J., Third Trinity (stroke) 11 11-1/2
Wilson, G., Third Trinity (cox.) 7 11
----------
Average 11 13
1886.
_Putney to Mortlake, Saturday, April 3, 1.38 p.m._
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Bristowe, C. J., Trinity Hall 10 8-1/2
2. Symonds, N. P., Lady Margaret 10 10
3. Walmsley, J., Trinity Hall 12 1
4. Flower, A. D., Clare 12 8-1/2
5. Fairbairn, S., Jesus 13 9
6. Muttlebury, S. D., Third Trinity 13 3
7. Barclay, C., Third Trinity 11 3
Pitman, F. J., Third Trinity (stroke) 11 10-1/2
Baker, G. H., Queen's (cox.) 6 9
------------
Average 11 13-11/16
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Unwin, W. S., Magdalen 10 11
2. Bryne, L. S. R., Trinity 11 11-1/2
3. Robertson, W. St. L., Wadham 11 7-1/2
4. Carter, C. R., Corpus 13 0-1/2
5. McLean, H., New 12 12
6. Wethered, F. O., Christ Church 12 6
7. McLean, D., New 13 0
Girdlestone, H., Magdalen (stroke) 12 9-1/2
Maynard, W. E., Exeter (cox.) 7 12
------------
Average 12 3-23/32
1887.
_Putney to Mortlake, March 26. (Time, 20 min. 52 sec.)_
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. McKenna, R., Trinity Hall 10 7
2. Barclay, F., Third Trinity 11 1
3. Landale, P., Third Trinity 12 0-1/2
4. Oxford, J. R., King's 13 0
5. Fairbairn, S., Jesus 13 5-1/2
6. Muttlebury, S. D., Third Trinity 13 6-1/2
7. Barclay, C., Third Trinity 11 8
Bristowe, C. J., Trinity Hall (stroke) 10 7-1/2
Baker, G. H., Queen's (cox.) 7 1
OXFORD,[20] 2. st. lbs.
1. Holland, W. F. C., Brasenose 10 7
2. Nickalls, G., Magdalen 12 1
3. Williams, L. G., Corpus 12 5
4. Parker, H. R., Brasenose 13 3
5. McLean, H., New 12 8-1/2
6. Wethered, F. O., Christ Church 12 5
7. McLean, D. H., New 12 9
Titherington, A. F., Queen's (stroke) 12 2
Clarke, H. F., Exeter (cox.) 7 9
[20] Oxford broke an oar (No. 7) at Barnes Bridge.
1888.
_Putney to Mortlake, March 24. (Time, 20 min. 48 sec.)_
CAMBRIDGE, 1. st. lbs.
1. Symonds-Tayler, R. H., Trinity Hall 10 7
2. Hannen, L., Trinity Hall 11 3
3. Orde, R. H. P., First Trinity 11 7
4. Bell, C. B. P., Trinity Hall 12 13-1/2
5. Muttlebury, S. D., Third Trinity 13 7
6. Landale, P., Trinity Hall 12 4
7. Maugham, F. H., Trinity Hall 11 5
Gardner, J. C., Emmanuel (stroke) 11 7
Roxburgh, J. R., Trinity Hall (cox.) 8 2
OXFORD, 2. st. lbs.
1. Holland, W. F. C., Brasenose 11 0
2. Parker, A. P., Magdalen 11 11
3. Bradford, W. E., Christ Church 11 9
4. Fothergill, S. R., New 12 10
5. Cross, H., Hertford 13 0-1/2
6. Parker, H. R., Brasenose 13 5
7. Nickalls, G., Magdalen 12 4
Frere, L., Brasenose (stroke) 10 0-1/2
Stewart, A., New (cox.) 7 13-1/2
[Illustration: OXFORD COURSE
_London: Longmans & Co._
E. Weller]
O.U.B.C.: COLLEGE AND CLUB RACES.
_OXFORD UNIVERSITY COLLEGE EIGHTS: HEAD OF THE RIVER._
1815 Brasenose (?)
1822 Christ Church
1823 No races
1824 Exeter
1825 Christ Church
1826 Christ Church
1827 Brasenose
1828 {Balliol
{Christ Church later on
1829 Christ Church
1830 No races
1831} No records
1832}
1833 Queen's
1834 Christ Church
1835 Christ Church
1836 Christ Church
1837 Queen's
1838 Exeter
1839 Brasenose[21]
1840 Brasenose
1841 University
1842 Oriel
1843 University
1844 Christ Church
1845 Brasenose
1846 Brasenose
1847 Christ Church
1848 Christ Church
1849 Christ Church
1850 Wadham
1851 Balliol
1852 Brasenose
1853 Brasenose
1854 Brasenose
1855 Balliol
1856 Wadham
1857 Exeter
1858 Exeter
1859 Balliol
1860 Balliol
1861 Trinity
1862 Trinity
1863 Trinity
1864 Trinity
1865 Brasenose
1866 Brasenose
1867 Brasenose
1868 Corpus
1869 University
1870 University
1871 University
1872 Pembroke
1873 Balliol
1874 University
1875 University
1876 Brasenose
1877 University
1878 University
1879 Balliol
1880 Magdalen
1881 Hertford
1882 Exeter
1883 Exeter
1884 Exeter
1885 Corpus
1886 Magdalen
1887 New College
[21] O.U.B.C. founded.
_WINNERS OF THE UNIVERSITY PAIR-OARS._
1839 R. Menzies, F. W. Menzies, R. S. Fox (cox.), University.
1840 O. B. Barttelot, Corpus Christi; E. Royds, Brasenose; T. Evett
(cox.), Corpus Christi.
1841 H. E. C. Stapylton, W. Bolland, J. H. Griffiths (cox.),
University.
1842 W. Wilberforce, G. E. Hughes, G. B. Lewis (cox.), Oriel.
1843 M. Haggard, W. H. Milman, F. J. Prout (cox.), Christ Church.
1844 M. Haggard, W. H. Milman, F. J. Prout (cox.), Christ Church.
1845 M. Haggard, W. H. Milman, C. J. Fuller (cox.), Christ Church.
1846 A. Milman, E. C. Burton, H. Ingram (cox.), Christ Church.
1847 W. G. Rich, A. Milman, Christ Church.
1848 T. H. Michel, C. H. Steward, Oriel.
1849 E. M. Clissold, Exeter; J. W. Chitty, Balliol.
1850 J. C. Bengoagh, Oriel; J. W. Chitty, Balliol.
1851 R. Greenall, R. Prescot, Brasenose.
1852 W. F. Short, W. L. Rogers, New.
1853 C. Cadogan, Christ Church; W. F. Short, New.
1854 C. Cadogan, Christ Church; W. F. Short, New.
1855 A. F. Lonsdale, E. Warre, Balliol.
1856 E. Warre, A. F. Lonsdale, Balliol.
1857 P. W. Phillips, J. Arkell, Pemberton.
1858 T. B. Shaw-Hellier, Brasenose; F. Ho'comb, Wadham.
1859 B. de B. Russell, R. F. Clarke, St. John's.
1860 W. B. Woodgate, H. F. Baxter, Brasenose.
1861 W. Champneys, W. B. Woodgate, Brasenose.
1862 R. Shepherd, W. B. Woodgate, Brasenose.
1863 C. P. Roberts, M. Brown, Trinity.
1864 C. P. Roberts, M. Brown, Trinity.
1865 R. T. Raikes, Merton; M. Brown, Trinity.
1866 G. H. Swinney, G. H. Morrell, Merton.
1867 W. C. Crofts, F. Crowder, Brasenose.
1868 A. V. Jones, Exeter; W. C. Crofts, Brasenose.
1869 F. Pownall, A. V. Jones, Exeter.
1870 J. Mair, St. Alb.; C. J. Vesey, St. John's.
1871 J. W. M'C. Bunbury, Brasenose; A. G. P. Lewis, University.
1872 H. J. Preston, A. S. Daniel, University.
1873 W. Farrer, Balliol; M. Farrer, Brasenose.
1874 M. Farrer, H. Benson, Brasenose.
1875 H. J. Preston, University; Edwardes-Moss, Brasenose.
1876 H. M. Marriott, T. C. Edwardes-Moss, Brasenose.
1877 D. J. Cowles, W. L. Giles, St. John's.
1878 T. C. Edwardes-Moss, Brasenose; W. A. Ellison, University.
1879 C. R. L. Fletcher, F. P. Bulley, Magdalen.
1880 E. Staniland, Magdalen; L. R. West, Christ Church.
1881 C. Lowry, R. de Haviland, Corpus.
1882 G. C. Bourne, New; C. H. Sharpe, Hertford.
1883 A. G. Shortt, A. B. Shaw, Christ Church.
1884 W. S. Unwin, Magdalen; J. Reade, Brasenose.
1885 H. McLean, D. H. McLean, New.
1886 H. McLean, D. H. McLean, New.
1887 M. E. Bradford, F. W. Douglas, Christ Church.
_WINNERS OF THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY SCULLS,_
_Originally presented by Members of Christ Church._
1841 T. T. Peocock, Merton
1842 H. Morgan, Christ Church
1843 Sir F. E. Scott, Christ Church
1844 Sir F. E. Scott, Christ Church
1845 J. W. Conant, St. John's
1846 E. S. Moon, Magdalen
1847 E. C. Burton, Christ Church
1848 D. Wauchope, Wadham
1849 T. Erskine Clarke, Wadham
1850 T. Erskine Clarke, Wadham
1851 W. Heaven, Trinity
1852 H. M. Irving, Balliol
1853 W. F. Short, New
1854 W. F. Short, New
1855 E. Warre, Balliol
1856 E. Warre, Balliol
1857 R. W. Risley, Exeter
1858 R. W. Risley, Exeter
1859 H. F. Baxter, Brasenose
1860 T. R. Finch, Wadham
1861 W. B. Woodgate, Brasenose
1862 W. B. Woodgate, Brasenose
1863 J. E. Parker, University
1864 E. B. Michell, Magdalen
1865 J. Rickaby, Brasenose
1866 W. L. Freeman, Merton
1867 W. C. Crofts, Brasenose
1868 W. C. Crofts, Brasenose
1869 A. C. Yarborough, Lincoln
1870 A. C. Yarborough, Lincoln
1871 J. W. McC. Bunbury, Brasenose
1872 C. C. Knollys, Magdalen
1873 J. B. Little, Christ Church
1874 A. Michell, Oriel
1875 L. C. Cholmeley, Magdalen
1876 D. J. Cowles, St. John's
1877 T. C. Edwardes-Moss, Brasenose
1878 J. Lowndes, Hertford
1879 J. Lowndes, Hertford
1880 H. S. Chesshire, Worcester
1881 H. S. Chesshire, Worcester
1882 G. Q. Roberts, Hertford
1883 A. E. Staniland, Magdalen
1884 W. S. Unwin, Magdalen
1885 W. S. Unwin, Magdalen
1886 F. O. Wethered, Christ Church
1887 G. Nicholls, Magdalen
_WINNERS OF THE UNIVERSITY FOUR-OARS._
1840 Brasenose
1841 University
1842 University
1843 Oriel
1844 University
1845 Christ Church
1846 Christ Church
1847 Christ Church
1848 Oriel
1849 Brasenose
1850 Brasenose
1851 Christ Church
1852 Trinity
1853 Trinity
1854 Exeter
1855 Exeter
1856 Balliol
1857 Pembroke
1858 Balliol
1859 University
1860 Brasenose
1861 Trinity
1862 University
1863 Trinity
1864 University
1865 University
1866 University
1867 University
1868 University
1869 Balliol
1870 Balliol
1871 Christ Church
1872 Balliol
1873 University
1874 Brasenose
1875 University
1876 Brasenose
1877 Brasenose
1878 Magdalen
1879 Hertford
1880 Magdalen
1881 Hertford
1882 Hertford
1883 Corpus
1884 Magdalen
1885 Magdalen
1886 Magdalen
1887 Brasenose
C.U.B.C.: COLLEGE AND CLUB RACES.
_CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY BOAT CLUB: HEAD OF THE RIVER._
1827 Trinity
1828 St. John's
1829 St. John's
1830 {Lent, St. John's
{May, Trinity
1831 {Lent, St. John's
{May, First Trinity
1832 First Trinity
1833 {Lent, First Trinity
{May, Christ's
1834 {Lent, First Trinity
{May, Third Trinity
1835 {Lent, Third Trinity
{May, Second Trinity
1836 {Lent, First Trinity
{May, Corpus
1837 Lady Margaret
1838 Lady Margaret
1839 First Trinity
1840 Caius
1841 Caius
1842 Peterhouse
1843 First Trinity
1844 Caius
1845 First Trinity
1846 First Trinity
1847 First Trinity
1848 Third Trinity
1849 {Lent, Third Trinity
{May, Second Trinity
1850 First Trinity
1851 {Lent, Lady Margaret
{May, First Trinity
1852 First Trinity
1853 First Trinity
1854 {Lent, First Trinity
{May, Lady Margaret
1855 Lady Margaret
1856 Lady Margaret
1857 Lady Margaret
1858 {Lent, Lady Margaret
{May, First Trinity
1859 {Lent, Trinity Hall
{May, Third Trinity
1860 First Trinity
1861 First Trinity
1862 Trinity Hall
1863 Third Trinity
1864 Trinity Hall
1865 Third Trinity
1866 First Trinity
1867 First Trinity
1868 First Trinity
1869 First Trinity
1870 First Trinity
1871 First Trinity
1872 Lady Margaret
1873 First Trinity
1874 First Trinity
1875 Jesus
1876 Jesus
1877 Jesus
1878 Jesus
1879 Jesus
1880 Jesus
1881 Jesus
1882 Jesus
1883 Jesus
1884 Jesus
1885 Jesus
1886 Trinity Hall
1887 Trinity Hall
_WINNERS OF THE UNIVERSITY PAIR-OARS._
1844 T. W. Brooks and W. P. Cloves, First Trinity.
1845 S. Vincent and E. P. Wolstenholme, First Trinity.
1846 T. M. Hoare and T. M. Gisborne, St. John's.
1847 S. Vincent and W. Maule, First Trinity.
1848 A. B. Dickson and W. L. G. Bagshawe, Third Trinity.
1849 A. Baldry, First Trinity, and W. L. G. Bagshawe, Third Trinity.
1850 J. B. Cane and C. Hudson, St. John's.
1851 E. Macnaghten, First Trinity, and F. W. Johnson, Third Trinity.
1852 W. S. Langmore and E. Hawley, Sidney.
1853 R. Gordon and J. G. Barlee, Christ's.
1854 R. C. Galton, First Trinity, and H. Blake, Corpus.
1855 H. Blake, Corpus, and J. Wright, St. John's.
1856 R. Gordon and P. H. Wormald, Christ's.
1857 R. E. Thompson and N. Royds, First Trinity.
1858 R. Beaumont and F. W. Holland, Third Trinity.
1859 D. Ingles, First Trinity, and J. P. Ingham, Third Trinity.
1860 R. P. Fitzgerald, Trinity Hall, and J. P. Ingham, Third Trinity.
1861 A. D. A. Burney and A. M. Channell, First Trinity.
1862 J. G. Chambers, Third Trinity, and R. Neave, Trinity Hall.
1863 R. A. Kinglake and J. R. Selwyn, Third Trinity.
1864 R. A. Kinglake and W. R. Griffiths, Third Trinity.
1865 J. R. Selwyn and W. R. Griffiths, Third Trinity.
1866 W. R. Griffiths, Third Trinity, and J. U. Bourke, First Trinity.
1867 E. Hopkinson and H. Herbert, Christ's.
1868 C. Pitt-Taylor and J. Blake-Humphrey, Third Trinity.
1869 L. P. Muirhead and E. Phelps, Sidney.
1870 John B. Close and G. L. Rives, First Trinity.
1871 James B. Close and John B. Close, First Trinity.
1872 H. E. Rhodes and E. Hoskyns, Jesus.
1873 P. J. Hibbert and E. Sawyer, Lady Margaret.
1874 G. F. Armytage and C. D. Shafto, Jesus.
1875 W. B. Close and G. C. Dicker, First Trinity.
1876 T. E. Hockin and C. Gurdon, Jesus.
1877 J. G. Pinder and C. O. L. Riley, Caius.
1878 A. H. Prior and H. Sanford, Lady Margaret.
1879 J. A. Watson-Taylor, Magdalene, and T. E. Hockin, Jesus.
1880 L. R. Jones and E. Priest, Jesus.
1881 J. F. Keiser and S. P. Smith, First Trinity.
1882 W. K. Hardacre and F. C. Meyrick, Trinity Hall.
1883 C. J. Bristowe and F. C. Meyrick, Trinity Hall.
1884 P. S. Propert and S. Swann, Trinity Hall.
1885 R. H. Coke and S. Swann, Trinity Hall.
1886 S. D. Muttlebury and C. Barclay, Third Trinity.
1887 S. D. Muttlebury and C. T. Barclay, Third Trinity.
_WINNERS OF THE UNIVERSITY FOUR-OARS._
1849 First Trinity
1850 Lady Margaret
1851 Third Trinity
1852 First Trinity
1853 Lady Margaret
1854 Third Trinity
1855 Trinity Hall
1856 Lady Margaret
1857 Magdalene
1858 Third Trinity
1859 Third Trinity
1860 First Trinity
1861 First Trinity and Trinity Hall rowed a dead-heat.
1862 Third Trinity
1863 Lady Margaret
1864 Lady Margaret
1865 Third Trinity
1866 First Trinity
1867 Emmanuel
1868 Sidney
1869 Sidney
1870 First Trinity
1871 First Trinity
1872 First Trinity
1873 Jesus
1874 First Trinity and Jesus rowed a dead-heat.
1875 Jesus
1876 Jesus
1877 Jesus
1878 Lady Margaret
1879 Lady Margaret
1880 Jesus
1881 Jesus
1882 Third Trinity
1883 Third Trinity
1884 Third Trinity
1885 Third Trinity
1886 Trinity Hall
1887 Trinity Hall
_WINNERS OF THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY SCULLS._
(COLQUHOUN CHALLENGE SCULLS).
_Presented in 1837 by P. Colquhoun, Esq., to the lady Margaret Boat
Club, and by that Club in 1842 to the competition of the C.U.B.C._
1837 Berney, Lady Margaret
1838 Antrobus, Lady Margaret
1839 Vincent, Lady Margaret
1840 Shadwell, Lady Margaret
1841 Shadwell (no challenger)
1842 Denman, First Trinity
1843 Thompson, Peterhouse
1844 Miles, Third Trinity
1845 Cloves, First Trinity
1846 Maule, First Trinity
1847 Bagshawe, Third Trinity
1848 Bagot, Second Trinity
1849 Miller, Third Trinity
1850 Cowle and Hudson[22]
1851 Macnaghten, First Trinity
1852 Courage, First Trinity
1853 Galton, First Trinity
1854 Wright, Lady Margaret
1855 Salter, Trinity Hall
1856 Beaumont, Third Trinity
1857 Busk, First Trinity
1858 Ingles, First Trinity
1859 Faley, Lady Margaret
1860 Channell, First Trinity
1861 J. C. Hawkshaw, Third Trinity
1862 C. B. Lawes, Third Trinity
1863 J. G. Chambers, Third Trin.
1864 G. D. Redpath, First Trinity
1865 H. Watney, Lady Margaret
1866 G. Shann, First Trinity
1867 G. H. Wright, First Trinity
1868 E. Phelps, Sidney, and F. E. Marshall, First Trinity
1869 No race; postponed to 1870
1870 J. B. Close, First Trinity
1870 J. H. D. Goldie, Lady Mar.
1871 C. W. Benson, Third Trinity
1872 James B. Close, First Trinity
1873 A. C. Dicker, Lady Margaret
1874 W. B. Close, First Trinity
1875 S. A. Saunders, Second Trinity
1876 J. C. Fenn, First Trinity
1877 T. W. Barker, First Trinity
1878 H. Sandford, Lady Margaret
1879 Prior, Lady Margaret
1880 J. Keiser, First Trinity
1881 J. C. Fellowes, First Trinity
1882 F. W. Fox, First Trinity
1883 S. Swann, Trinity Hall
1884 F. J. Pitman, Third Trinity
1885 J. M. Cowper-Smith, First Trinity
1886 J. C. Gardner, Emmanuel
1887 C. B. P. Bell, Trinity Hall
[22] Dead heat and division.
PROFESSIONAL WINNERS OF REGATTAS AND CHAMPIONSHIPS.
_WINNERS OF THE AQUATIC CHAMPIONSHIP._
+-----------------+---------------+---------------+------------+-----+
| Date | Winner | Loser | Course | Time|
+-----------------+---------------+---------------+------------+-----+
| | | | |m. s.|
| 1831, Sept. 9 |C. Campbell |C. Williams | W. to P. | -- |
| 1838, Nov. 1 |C. Campbell |R. Coombes | W. to P. | -- |
| 1846, Aug. 19 |R. Coombes |C. Campbell | P. to M. |26 15|
| 1847, Sept. 29|R. Coombes |R. Newell | P. to M. |23 46|
| 1851, May 7 |R. Coombes |T. Mackinnery | P. to M. |25 5|
| 1852, May 24 |T. Cole |R. Coombes | P. to M. |25 15|
| 1852, Oct. 14 |T. Cole |R. Coombes | P. to M. |23 35|
| 1854, Nov. 20 |J. A. Messenger|T. Cole | P. to M. |24 30|
| 1857, May 12 |H. Kelley |J. A. Messenger| P. to M. |24 30|
| 1859, Sept. 29|R. Chambers |H. Kelley | P. to M. |25 25|
| 1860, Sept. 18|R. Chambers |T. White | P. to M. |23 15|
| 1863, April 14|R. Chambers |G. W. Everson | P. to M. |25 27|
| 1863, June 16 |R. Chambers |R. A. W. Green | P. to M. |25 25|
| 1865, Aug. 8 |H. Kelley |R. Chambers | P. to M. |23 26|
|_a_1866, July 4 |H. Kelley |Hammill | Tyne |33 29|
|_b_1866, July 5 |H. Kelley |Hammill | Tyne | -- |
| 1866, Nov. 22 |R. Chambers |J. H. Sadler | P. to M. |25 4|
| 1867, May 6 |H. Kelley |R. Chambers | Tyne |31 41|
| 1868, Nov. 17 |J. Renforth |H. Kelley | P. to M. |23 15|
| 1874, April 16|J. H. Sadler |R. Bagnall | P. to M. |24 15|
| 1875, Nov. 15 |J. H. Sadler |R. W. Boyd | P. to M. |29 2|
|_c_1876, June 27 |E. Trickett |J. Sadler | P. to M. |24 35|
| 1876, |{ A match was made between Trickett and | |
| |{ Lumsden, but the latter forfeited. | |
| | { A match was made between Sadler and | |
| 1876, June 29 | { Higgins for the Championship, subject to | |
| | { the former beating Trickett, but after | |
| | { being defeated Sadler forfeited. | |
| 1877, May 28 |R. W. Boyd |J. Higgins | P. to M. |29 0|
| |{ Trickett beat Michael Rush for the | |
| 1877, June 30 |{ Championship of the World, on the Parmatta| |
| |{ River, New South Wales. | |
| 1877, Oct. 8 |J. Higgins |R. W. Boyd | P. to M. |24 10|
| 1878, Jan. 14 |J. Higgins |R. W. Boyd | Tyne | Foul|
| 1878, June 3 |J. Higgins |W. Elliott | P. to M. |24 38|
| |{ _d_ W. Elliott beat R. W. Boyd in final }| |
| 1878, Sept. 17|{ heat of race for the 'Sportsman's' }|24 20|
| |{ Challenge Cup, Putney to Mortlake. }| |
| 1879, Feb. 21 |W. Elliott |J. Higgins | Tyne |22 1|
| 1879, June 16 |E. Hanlan |W. Elliott | Tyne |21 1|
| 1880, Nov. 16 |E. Hanlan |E. Trickett | Thames |26 12|
| 1881, Feb. 14 |E. Hanlan |E. C. Laycock | P. to M. |25 41|
| 1882, April 3 |E. Hanlan |R. W. Boyd | Tyne |21 25|
| 1882, May 1 |E. Hanlan |E. Trickett | P. to M. |28 0|
| 1884, May 22 |E. Hanlan |E. C. Laycock | Nepean | -- |
| | | |Riv., N.S.W.| |
| 1884, Aug. 16 |W. Beach |E. Hanlan | Paramatta | -- |
| | | |Riv., N.S.W.| |
| 1885, Feb. 28 |W. Beach |C. Clifford | Paramatta |26 0|
| | | |Riv., N.S.W.| |
| 1885, Mch. 28 |W. Beach |E. Hanlan | Paramatta |22 51|
| | | |Riv., N.S.W.| |
| 1885, Dec. 18 |W. Beach |N. Matterson | Paramatta |24 11|
| | | |Riv., N.S.W.| -1/4|
| 1886, Sept. 18|W. Beach |J. Gaudaur | P. to M. |22 29|
| 1886, Sept. 25|W. Beach |Wallace Ross | P. to M. |23 5|
+-----------------+---------------+---------------+------------+-----+
(_a_) This was virtually a row over for Kelley, and no time was taken.
(_b_) Won on a foul.
(_c_) The first occasion of the Championship being taken from England.
(_d_) Boyd passed the post first, but the race was awarded to Elliott
on the foul.
[Illustration: CAMBRIDGE COURSE
_London: Longmans & Co._
E. Weller]
THAMES NATIONAL REGATTA
FOR WATERMEN.
_CHAMPION FOURS (Winners)._
1854 _Elswick Crew._--Winship, Cook, Davidson, Bruce, Oliver (cox.)
1855 _Shakspeare Crew._--Wood, Carrol, Ault, Taylor, Malony (cox.)
1856 _North and South Crew._--H. Clasper, W. Pocock, R. Chambers,
T. Mackinney, G. Driver (cox.)
1857 _Newcastle Crew._--J. H. Clasper, A. Maddeson, R. Chambers,
H. Clasper, Short (cox.)
1858 _Pride of the Thames Crew._--G. Francis, S. Salter, T. White,
G. Hammerton, J. Driver (cox.)
1859 _Newcastle Crew._--J. H. Clasper, R. Chambers, E. Winship,
H. Clasper, R. Clasper (cox.)
1860 _London Crew._--T. Pocock, J. Wise, T. White, H. Kelley,
W. Peters (cox.)
1861 _Kilmorey Crew._--G. Hammerton, J. W. Tagg, E. Winship, R.
Chambers, R. Clasper (cox.)
1862 _Newcastle Crew._--J. H. Clasper, R. Chambers, E. Winship, H.
Clasper, R. Clasper (cox.)
1863 _Thames Crew._--H. Harris, T. G. Tagg, J. W. Tagg, G. Hammerton,
R. W. Hanna (cox.)
1864 _Pride of the Thames Crew._--T. Hoare, H. Kelley, J. W. Tagg,
G. Hammerton, R. Hammerton (cox.)
1865 _Sons of the Thames Crew._--F. Kilsby, R. Cook, G. Cannon, J.
Sadler, S. Peters (cox.)
1866 _Pride of the Thames Crew._--T. Hoare, J. Pedgrift, J. Sadler,
G. Hammerton, J. Hill (cox.)
_SCULLS._
1854 H. Kelley, Fulham
1855 R. Chambers, Newcastle
1856 H. Kelley, Fulham
1857 R. Chambers, Newcastle
1858 R. Chambers, Newcastle
1859 J. Wise, Kew
1860 G. Hammerton, Teddington
1861 H. Kelley, Fulham
1862 R. Cooper, Redheugh
1863 R. A. W. Green, Australia
1864 H. Kelley, Putney
1865 R. Chambers, Newcastle
1866 R. Cooper, Redheugh
_PAIR-OARS (Winners)._
1854 Pocock and Clasper
1855 Winship and Bruce, Elswick
1856 Winship and Bruce
1857 Hammerton and Francis, Teddington
1858 Hammerton and Francis
1860 Winship and Chambers, Newcastle
1861 Winship and Chambers
1862 Winship and Chambers
1863 Green and Kelley, Australia and Putney
1864 Kilsby and Cook, London and Oxford
1865 Kilsby and Cook, London and Oxford
1866 G. Hammerton and J. Sadler, Surbiton
_APPRENTICES' SCULLS: COAT AND BADGE (Winners)._
1856 G. Hammerton, Teddington
1857 S. Salter, Wandsworth
1858 E. Bell, Richmond
1859 W. Hemmings, Richmond
1860 E. Eagers, Chelsea
1861 T. Hoare, Hammersmith
1862 J. W. Tagg, Moulsey
1863 R. Cook, Oxford
1864 T. Wise, Hammersmith
1865 J. Callas, Richmond
1866 W. Sadler, Putney
THAMES NATIONAL REGATTA (_Second Series_).
_FOURS._
1868 _Newcastle Crew._--J. Taylor, M. Scott, A. Thompson, R. Chambers
(Wallsend) (stroke), T. French (cox.)
1869 _Surbiton Crew._--J. Sadler, J. Pedgrift, W. Messenger, G.
Hammerton (stroke), R. Hammerton (cox.)
1870 _Newcastle Crew._--R. Hepplewhite, J. Percy, J. Bright, R.
Chambers (stroke), F. M'Lean (cox.)
1871 _Glasgow Crew._--J. Moody, T. Smillie, J. Calderhead, W.
Calderhead (stroke), J. M. Green (cox.)
1872 _Hammersmith Crew._--H. Thomas, T. Green, J. Anderson, W.
Biffen, jun. (stroke), G. Martin (cox.)
1873 _Hammersmith Crew._--T. Green, H. Thomas, J. Anderson, W.
Biffen (stroke), H. Goldsmith (cox.)
1874 _Hammersmith Crew._--T. Green, H. Thomas, J. Anderson, W.
Biffen (stroke), G. Holder (cox.)
1875 _Newcastle Crew._--R. Hepplewhite, W. Nicholson, R. Bagnall, R.
W. Boyd (stroke), J. Cox (cox.)
1876 _Thames Crew._--W. F. Spencer, H. Thomas, J. Higgins, T. Green
(stroke), J. Holder (cox.)
_PAIRS._
1868 J. Taylor and M. Scott, Newcastle
1869 J. Taylor and T. Winship, Newcastle
1870 G. Carr and T. Matfin, Newcastle
1871 W. Biffen, jun. and G. Hammerton
1872 J. Taylor and T. Winship, Newcastle
1873 R. Bagnall and J. Taylor, Newcastle
1874 W. Biffen and H. Thomas
1875 R. Bagnall and R. W. Boyd, Newcastle
1876 T. Green and H. Thomas, Thames
_SCULLS._
1868 J. Renforth, Newcastle
1869 J. Renforth, Newcastle
1870 J. H. Sadler, Surbiton
1871 _a_ J. Anderson, Hammersmith
1872 _b_ J. Anderson, Hammersmith
1873 _b_ A. Hogarth, Sunderland
1874 _b_ R. W. Boyd, Newcastle
1875 _b_ T. Blackman, London
1876 T. Blackman, Dulwich
(_a_) Limited to men who have never sculled for a stake of 50_l._
(_b_) For men who have never sculled for a stake of 100_l._
_APPRENTICES' SCULLS: COAT AND BADGE._
1868 W. Biffen, Jun., Hammersmith
1869 J. Griffiths, Wandsworth
1870 W. Messenger, Teddington
1871 T. Green, Hammersmith
1872 H. Messum, Richmond
1873 J. Phillips, Putney
1874 W. Phillips, Putney
1875 J. Tarryer, Rotherhithe
1876 H. Clasper, Oxford
THAMES INTERNATIONAL REGATTA.
_CHAMPION SCULLS._
1876 R. W. Boyd,
1877 T. Blackman,
1878 W. Elliott.
_CHAMPION FOURS._
1876 _a_ Tyne crew,
1877 Thames crew,
1878 Tyne crew.
(_a_) After a foul, the Tyne men won on the second day.
_CHAMPION PAIRS._
1876 R. W. Boyd and W. Lumsden.
1877 J. Higgins and H. Thomas.
1878 R. W. Boyd and W. Lumsden.
ROYAL THAMES REGATTA,
_Established 1843_.
_WATERMEN'S PRIZES._
1843 No race for professionals.
1844 FOURS.--_London four_, T. Coombes, Phelps, Newell, and R.
Coombes beat H. Clasper's crew for 100_l._ prize.
SCULLS.--H. Clasper won in the first 'outrigged' sculling boat.
1845 FOURS.--H. Clasper, R. Clasper, W. Clasper, and Hawtor beat
Coombes's four.
1846 FOURS.--T. Coombes, Newell, Phelps, and R. Coombes won.
1847 No race.
1848 Clasper's crew won (Coombes in the boat).
1849 Clasper's crew won fours. (This was the last year of the
regatta.)
BRITISH REGATTA IN PARIS, 1867
(EXHIBITION YEAR).
_CHAMPION FOURS._
1867 _Albion Crew, Newcastle._--J. Taylor, M. Scott, A. Thompson,
R. Chambers (St. Anthony's) (st.), T. Richardson (cox.)
_PAIR-OARS._
R. Cook and H. Kelley, Oxford and London.
_SCULLS._
H. Kelley, Putney.
WORLD'S REGATTA ON THE THAMES.
1880 On November 18 a sculling regatta organised by an American firm,
'The Hop Bitters' Co., was commenced on the Thames. It
lasted three days, and prizes amounting to 1,000_l._ were given
and won as under:--
1. Elias C. Laycock, Sydney, N.S.W. £500
2. Wallace Ross, St. John's, New Brunswick 300
3. George Hosmer, Boston, U.S.A. 140
4. Warren Smith, Halifax, Nova Scotia 60
WINNERS OF DOGGETT'S COAT AND BADGE.
1791 T. Easton, Old Swan
1792 J. Kettleby, Westminster
1793 A. Haley, Horselydown
1794 J. Franklin, Putney
1795 W. Parry, Hungerford
1796 J. Thompson, Wapping Old Stairs
1797 J. Hill, Bankside
1798 T. Williams, Ratcliff Cross
1799 J. Dixon, Paddington Street
1800 J. Burgoyne, Blackfriars
1801 J. Curtis, Queenhithe
1802 W. Burns, Limehouse
1803 J. Fowler, Hungerford
1804 C. Gingle, Temple
1805 T. Johnson, Vauxhall
1806 J. Godwin, Ratcliff Cross
1807 J. Evans, Mill Stairs
1808 G. Newell, Battle Bridge
1809 F. Jury, Hermitage
1810 J. Smart, Strand
1811 W. Thornton, Hungerford
1812 R. May, Westminster
1813 R. Farson, Bankside
1814 R. Harris, Bankside
1815 J. Scott, Bankside
1816 T. Senham, Blackfriars
1817 J. Robson, Wapping Old Stairs
1818 W. Nicholls, Greenwich
1819 W. Emery, Hungerford
1820 J. Hartley, Strand
1821 T. Cole, sen., Chelsea
1822 W. Noulton, Lambeth
1823 G. Butcher, Hungerford
1824 G. Fogo, Battle Bridge
1825 G. Staples, Battle Bridge
1826 J. Foett, Bankside
1827 J. Foss, Fountain Stair
1828 R. Mallett, Lambeth
1829 S. Stubbs, Old Barge House
1830 W. Butler, Vauxhall
1831 R. Oliver, Deptford
1832 R. Waight, Bankside
1833 G. Maynard, Lambeth
1834 W. Tomlinson, Whitehall
1835 W. Dyson, Kidney Stairs
1836 J. Morris, Horselydown
1837 T. Harrison, Bankside
1838 S. Bridge, Kidney Stairs
1839 T. Goodrum, Vauxhall Stairs
1840 W. Hawkins, Kidney Stairs
1841 R. Moore, Surrey Canal
1842 J. Liddey, Wandsworth
1843 J. Fry, Kidney Stairs
1844 F. Lett, Lambeth
1845 J. Cobb, Greenwich
1846 J. Wing, Pimlico
1847 W. Ellis, Westminster
1848 J. Ash, Rotherhithe
1849 T. Cole, jun., Chelsea
1850 W. Campbell, Winchester
1851 G. Wigget, Somer's Quay
1852 C. Constable, Lambeth
1853 J. Finnis, Tower
1854 D. Hemmings, Bankside
1855 H. White, Mill Stairs
1856 G. W. Everson, Greenwich
1857 T. White, Mill Stairs
1858 C. J. Turner, Rotherhithe
1859 C. Farrow, jun., Mill Stairs
1860 H. J. M. Phelps, Fulham
1861 S. Short, Bermondsey
1862 J. Messenger, Cherry Garden Stairs
1863 T. Young, Rotherhithe
1864 D. Coombes, Horselydown
1865 J. W. Wood, Mill Stairs
1866 A. Iles, Kew
1867 H. M. Maxwell, Custom House
1868 A. Egalton, Blackwall
1869 G. Wright, Bermondsey
1870 R. Harding, Blackwall
1871 T. J. Mackinney, Richmond
1872 T. G. Green, Hammersmith
1873 H. Messum, Richmond
1874 R. W. Burwood, Wapping
1875 W. Phelps, Putney
1876 C. T. Bullman, Shadwell Dock
1877 J. Tarryer, Rotherhithe
1878 T. E. Taylor, Hermitage Stairs
1879 Henry Cordery, Putney
1880 W. G. Cobb, Putney
1881 G. Claridge, Richmond
1882 H. A. Audsley, Waterloo
1883 J. Lloyd, Chelsea
1884 C. Phelps, Putney
1885 J. Mackinney, Richmond
1886 H. Cole, Deptford
1887 W. G. East
RIVERS AND COURSES.
_RIVER LEA._
Distance from
/---------^---------\
LIMEHOUSE HERTFORD
m. f. m. f.
Hertford 27 7 0 0
Hertford Lock 27 2 0 5
Ware Lock 25 7 2 0
Ware 25 2 2 5
Hard Mead Lock 24 3 3 4
Amwell Lock 23 4 4 3
Stanstead Lock 22 7 5 0
Rye House, Hoddesdon 21 4 6 3
Feildes Weir Lock 21 2 6 5
Dobbs's Weir Lock 20 3 7 4
Carthagena Lock 19 6 8 1
Broxbourne Lock 19 1 8 6
Aqueduct Lock 17 5 10 2
Cheshunt Mill 16 7 11 1
Waltham Common Lock 15 7 12 0
Waltham Abbey Lock 14 7 13 0
Romney Marsh Lock 14 3 13 4
Enfield Lock 13 1 14 6
Ponder's End Lock 11 2 16 5
Pickett's Lock 10 2 17 5
Edmonton Lock 9 2 18 5
Stone Bridge Lock 8 2 19 5
Tottenham Lock 7 3 20 4
Tottenham Railway Bridge. 6 7 21 0
Lea Bridge. 5 0 22 7
Homerton Lock 4 2 23 5
Duckett's Canal Junction 3 1 24 6
Old Ford Lock 2 6 25 1
Bow Railway Bridge 2 3 25 4
Bow Bridge 2 1 25 6
Bromley Lock 1 4 26 3
Britannia Lock 0 1 27 6
Limehouse Cut Entrance 0 0 27 7
_LENGTH OF RACING COURSES._
Barnes Regatta Course 1-1/2 mile
Barrow, Walney Channel 2 miles 600 yards
Bedford Regatta 3/4 mile
Blyth, Flanker to Cowper Gut 2 miles
Bristol, from Hotwells to Bristol 1-1/2 mile
Boston, River Witham 2-1/2 miles
Cambridge 1-1/2 mile
Chester 1-1/4 mile
Clydesdale 1-1/2 mile
Cork 2 miles
Derby 1 mile
Dublin 2-1/4 miles
Durham 1 mile 300 yards
Ely, Littleport to Adelaide Bridge 2-1/2 miles
Exeter 2-1/2 miles
Halton Water 1-3/4 mile
Henley-on-Thames 1 mile 2-1/2 furlongs
Huntington 1-3/4 mile
" for time races 3 miles
Hollingworth Lake 3 miles
Hereford 1 mile 536 yards
Ipswich 1 mile 700 yards
King's Lynn, Champion Course 2 miles
" Prince of Wales's Course 1-1/4 mile
Kingston-on-Thames, Seething Wells to Kingston
Bridge 1-1/4 mile
Lincoln, sculling and pair-oared 3/4 mile
" four-oared 1-1/2 miles
London Bridge to Old Swan, Chelsea 4 miles 3 furlongs
Manchester 2 miles
Moulsey (down stream) 1-1/4 mile
Newark, Devonmouth to Magnus Boathouse 1 mile
Oxford, Iffley to the Barges 1-1/8 mile
" Abingdon Lasher to Nuneham Cottage 1-1/2 mile
Putney to Barnes Bridge 3 miles 6 furlongs
" to Chiswick 2 miles 4 furlongs
" to Hammersmith 1 mile 6 furlongs
" to Mortlake 4 miles 3 furlongs
Richmond, Sion House to Richmond Bridge 1 mile 7 furlongs
" Cross Deep, Twickenham, to Richmond
Railway Bridge 1 mile 5 furlongs
Stockton-on-Tees, Portrack Course 4 miles
" " " above bridges 1-1/2 mile
Stourport 1-1/4 mile
Sunderland, North Hylton to Spa Well 1 mile
Tyne, High Level Bridge to Waterson's Gates 1 mile
" " " Meadow's House 1-3/4 mile
" " " Armstrong's Crane 2 miles
" " " West Point of
Paradise Quay 2-1/2 miles
" " " Scotswood Suspension
Bridge 3 miles 713 yards
" " " Lemington Point 4-1/2 miles
Tewkesbury 2 miles
Walton-on-Thames (up stream) 1 mile
Warwick 1-1/2 mile
Worcester 1 mile
_DISTANCES OF WEIRS ETC. OXFORD TO LECHLADE._
Distance from
/--------^-------\
OXFORD LECHLADE
BRIDGE BRIDGE
m. f. m. f.
Oxford Bridge 0 0 36 0
Godstow Lock 3 3 33 0
King's Weir 4 4 31 4
Ensham Bridge 7 5 28 3
Pinkhill Lock 10 0 26 0
Skinner's Weir 11 0 25 0
Badlock Ferry 12 4 23 4
Ridge's Weir 16 0 20 0
Newbridge 17 2 18 6
Shifford Weir 19 0 17 0
Dexford Weir 20 0 16 0
Tenfoot Weir Bridge 22 0 14 0
Kent or Tadpole Bridge 23 5 12 3
Bushey Weir 24 5 11 3
Old Nan's Weir 26 1 9 7
Old Man's or Harper's Weir 26 7 9 1
Radcot Bridge 28 3 7 5
Eaton or Hart's Upper Weir 31 3 4 5
Buscot Lock 33 3 2 5
St. John's Bridge 35 2 0 6
Lechlade Bridge 36 0 0 0
_TABLES OF DISTANCES OF LOCKS ETC. ON THE THAMES._
Distance from
/----------^---------\
OXFORD FOLLY LONDON
BRIDGE BRIDGE
m. f. m. f.
Oxford Folly Bridge (stone) and Lock 0 0 110 1-1/4
Iffley Lock 1 1 109 0-1/4
Rose Island 1 7-1/2 108 1-3/4
Sandford Lock 2 5-3/4 107 3-1/2
Abingdon Lock 7 0-1/4 103 1
Abingdon Bridge (stone) 7 3 102 5-1/2
Culham Lock 9 5-1/4 100 4
Clifton Lock 12 2-3/4 97 6
Clifton Hampden Bridge (brick) 12 6-3/4 97 2-1/2
Day's Lock 15 3-1/4 94 6-1/2
Shillingford Bridge (stone) 17 7-1/2 92 1
Benson Lock 19 0-1/4 91 1
Wallingford Bridge (stone) 20 2-3/4 89 6-1/2
Wallingford Lock 20 6-3/4 81 7
Little Stocke Ferry 23 0-3/4 87 0-1/2
Moulsford Ferry 24 3-1/2 85 5-3/4
Cleeve Lock 25 5-1/2 84 3-3/4
Goring Lock 26 3 83 6-1/4
Basildon Railway Bridge 27 5 82 4-1/4
Whitchurch Lock 30 3 79 6-1/4
Pangbourne Bridge 30 4-1/2 79 4-3/4
Maple Durham Lock 32 5-1/2 77 3-3/4
Caversham Bridge (iron) 36 0-3/4 74 0-1/2
Caversham Lock 36 6 73 3-1/4
Sonning Lock 39 3 70 6-1/4
Sonning Bridge (brick) 39 5-1/4 70 4
Shiplake Lock 42 0-1/4 68 1
Wargrave Railway Bridge 42 2-1/2 67 7-3/4
Wargrave Ferry 42 4-1/2 67 4-3/4
Marsh Lock 44 5 65 4-1/4
Henley Bridge (stone) 45 4 64 5-1/2
Regatta Island (from this to Henley Bridge is
the usual Regatta course) 46 7-1/2 63 1-3/4
Hambledon Lock 47 6-1/2 62 2-3/4
Medmenham Abbey and Ferry 49 6-1/2 60 2-3/4
Hurley Lock 51 2 58 7-1/4
Temple Lock 51 7-1/2 58 1-3/4
Marlow Suspension Bridge (iron) 53 3-1/2 56 5-3/4
Marlow Lock 53 5 56 4-1/4
Cookham Railway Bridge (wooden) 56 0-1/4 54 1
Cookham Bridge (iron) 57 2 52 7-1/4
Cookham Lock 57 5 52 4-1/4
Boulter's Lock 60 0-3/4 50 0-1/2
Maidenhead Bridge (stone) 60 6-1/2 49 2-3/4
Maidenhead Railway Bridge (brick) 60 0-1/4 49 1
Bray 61 6-1/2 48 2-3/4
Bray Lock 62 0-1/2 48 0-3/4
Monkey Island 62 0-1/4 47 3
Queen's Island 63 2-1/4 46 7
Boveney Lock 64 7-1/2 45 1-3/4
Windsor Railway Bridge (iron) 66 6-1/4 43 3
Windsor Bridge (iron) 67 1-1/4 43 0
Windsor Lock 67 4-3/4 42 4-1/2
South-Western Railway Bridge (iron) 67 7 42 2-1/4
Victoria Bridge (iron) 68 3 41 6-1/4
Datchet 68 7-1/2 41 1-3/4
Albert Bridge (iron) 69 6 40 3-1/4
Old Windsor Lock 70 4-1/2 39 4-3/4
Magna Charta Island 71 7-1/2 38 1-3/4
Bell Weir Lock 73 3-3/4 36 5-1/2
Staines Bridge (stone) 74 3-1/2 35 5-3/4
Staines Railway Bridge (iron) 74 6-1/4 35 3
Penton Hook Lock 76 1-1/2 33 7-3/4
Laleham Ferry 76 7-1/4 33 2
Chertsey Lock 77 7-3/4 32 1-1/2
Chertsey Bridge (stone) 78 0-3/4 32 0-1/2
Shepperton Lock 79 6 30 3-1/4
Shepperton 80 4 29 5-1/4
Halliford 81 0-3/4 29 0-1/2
Walton Bridge (iron) 81 7-1/2 28 1-3/4
Sunbury Lock 83 4-3/4 26 4-1/2
Hampton Ferry 85 5-3/4 24 3-1/2
Moulsey Lock 86 4-3/4 23 4-1/2
Hampton Court Bridge (iron) 86 5-3/4 23 3-1/2
Thames Ditton Ferry 87 4-3/4 22 4-1/2
Messenger's Island 88 5-3/4 21 3-1/2
Kingston Bridge (stone) 89 5-1/4 20 4
Kingston Railway Bridge (iron) 89 6-1/4 20 3
Teddington Lock 91 2-1/4 18 7
Twickenham Ferry 92 5-1/2 17 3-3/4
Richmond Bridge (stone) 94 0-1/4 16 0-3/4
Richmond Railway Bridge (iron) 94 3-1/2 15 5-3/4
Isleworth (Railhead) Ferry 94 7-1/2 15 1-3/4
Isleworth 95 2-1/2 14 6-3/4
Brentford Ferry 96 4-1/2 13 4-3/4
Kew Bridge (stone) 97 1 13 0-1/4
Strand-on-the-Green Railway Bridge (iron)
about 97 5 12 4-1/4
Barnes Railway Bridge (iron) 99 0-3/4 11 0-1/2
Hammersmith South Bridge (iron) 100 7-3/4 9 1-1/2
Putney Bridge (wooden) 102 5-3/4 7 3-1/2
Battersea Railway Bridge 104 4-1/4 5 5
Battersea Bridge (wooden) 105 1-1/4 5 0
Chelsea Suspension Bridge (iron) 106 1-1/4 4 0
Vauxhall Bridge (iron) 107 1-1/2 2 7-3/4
Lambeth Suspension Bridge (iron) 107 6 2 3-1/4
Westminster Bridge (iron) 108 1-1/2 1 7-3/4
Charing Cross Railway Bridge (iron) 108 4-1/2 1 4-3/4
Waterloo Bridge (stone) 108 6-1/2 1 2-3/4
Blackfriars Bridge (iron) 109 3 0 6-1/4
Southwark Bridge (iron) 109 6-3/4 0 2-1/2
Cannon Street Railway Bridge (iron) 110 0 0 1-1/4
London Bridge (stone) 110 1-1/4 0 0
_ON THE RIVER MEDWAY._
Distance from
/---------^---------\
SHEERNESS TONBRIDGE
m. f. m. f.
Tonbridge 46 4 0 0
Tonbridge Lock 46 2 0 2
Giles's Lock 45 5 0 7
Eldridge's Lock 44 4 2 0
Porter's Lock 43 5 2 7
East Lock 42 0 4 4
Nook Weare Lock 41 3 5 1
New Lock 40 4 6 0
Sluice Weare Lock 40 0 6 4
Brandbridge's Lock 39 3 7 1
South-Eastern Railway Bridge 39 0 7 4
Stoneham Lock 38 6 7 6
Yalding Village 37 6 8 6
Hampstead Lock 37 3 9 1
Wateringbury Bridge 35 4 11 0
Yeston Lock 34 2 12 2
Yeston Bridge 34 1 12 3
East Farleigh Lock 32 0 14 0
East Farleigh Bridge 32 0 14 4
Maidstone Lock 29 7 16 5
Maidstone Bridge 29 6 16 6
Gibraltar Lock 27 6 18 6
Aylesford Bridge 25 6 20 6
Snodland Ferry 20 4 26 0
Lower Halling Ferry 18 4 28 0
Rochester Bridge 14 0 32 4
Rochester Railway Bridge 14 0 32 4
Chatham 12 4 34 0
Chatham Dockyard 12 0 34 4
Upnor Castle 11 0 35 4
Gillingham 8 4 38 0
River Swale 2 0 44 4
Sheerness 0 0 46 4
_ON THE RIVER WEY._
Distance from
/---------^---------\
THAMES LOCK GODALMING
m. f. m. f.
Godalming 20 1 0 0
Catshail Lock 19 3 0 0
Unsted Lock 18 3 1 6
Broadford Bridge 17 5 2 6
Shalford Railway Bridge 17 0 3 0
St. Catherine's Lock 16 5 3 4
St. Catherine's Ferry 16 3 3 6
Guildford Lock 15 5 4 4
Guildford Bridge 15 4 4 5
Stoke Lock 12 4 7 5
Bower's Lock 11 5 6 4
Trigg's Lock 9 5 10 0
Scud Heath 9 1 11 5
Worsfold's Gates 8 7 11 2
Paper Court Lock 7 3 12 6
Newark Lock 6 1 14 0
Pirford Lock 5 2 14 0
South-Western Railway Bridge 3 0 17 1
New Haw Lock 2 4 17 0
Cox's Lock 1 5 18 4
Weybridge Lock 1 0 19 1
Thames Junction Lock 0 0 20 1
APPENDIX.
_THE EARLY HISTORY OF BOAT RACING AT THE UNIVERSITIES._[23]
[23] Reprinted from _Land and Water_ of December 17, 1881.
The history of early college boat racing is not strictly that of the
University boat race itself, but it is closely wound up with it, and it
was, moreover, the origin of that aquatic rivalry between the two
Universities which led to the first match of 1829.
Oxford had inaugurated eight-oared rowing; that introduced inter-college
bumping races. Cambridge followed suit and established similar races,
and hence arose the constant study of aquatics which produced the first
match. For these reasons, we think that the history here given will be
read with interest by all University oarsmen, the more so because it, to
the best of our knowledge, has never before appeared in print. No
official record of their early races has been preserved; the oldest
boating record in Oxford is the Brasenose Club Book, dating 1837. That
of the O.U.B.C. commences with its establishment, 1839. The 'Charts' of
the boat races from 1837, published by Messrs. Spiers & Sons, and which
were not invented till after the year 1850, obtain the retrospective
racing, prior to the time when they first appeared, from the MS. records
of the B.N.C. book, the contents of which were communicated to the
publishers by the late Rev. T. Codrington. But prior to 1837 all is
blank. For the lost history here unearthed we are indebted to the
reminiscences and diaries of oarsmen of those days still in the land of
the living.
Oxford started college boat racing before Cambridge. It does not seem
quite clear as to when bumping races actually commenced. Two or three
colleges had boat clubs and manned eight oars, and at first it seems to
have been the practice for out-college men to join the club and crew of
colleges to which they did not belong.
The eight oars seem to have been in the habit of going down to Sandford
or Nuneham to dine, and of rowing home in company. From Iffley to Oxford
they were inclined to race to see who could be home first. They could
not race abreast, so they rowed in Indian file, and those behind
jealously tried to overtake the leaders. Hence began the idea of
starting in a fixed order out of Iffley Lock, of racing in procession,
and of an overtaken boat giving place to its victor on the next night of
procession.
In 1822, at all events, there were bumping races. Christ Church seems to
have been head. There was a disputed bump between B.N.C. and Jesus, and
some violence seems to have occurred, B.N.C. trying to haul down the
Jesus flag, and the Jesus men defending their colours. The dispute was
finally closed by Post of B.N.C. saying, 'These cries of "Jesus" and
"B.N.C." remind me of the old saying:--
Different people are of different opinions;
Some like leeks, some like onions.'
(The oars of Jesus were decorated with leeks.) The quarrel was made up,
and the crews went together to Nuneham in their racing boats.
Unfortunately Musgrave, one of the party, fell overboard and was drowned
during the festivities. In 1823 there were no eight-oared races, the sad
accident of the year before having cast a gloom over the pursuit. But
several boats were manned. Christ Church refused to put on a boat in
consequence of Stephen Davis, the boat-builder, rowing in the B.N.C.
eight, and Isaac King (who eventually took Davis's business) in the
Jesus boat. Some strong feeling was displayed on this point. When the
B.N.C. boat came up the river, the Christ Church men used to run
alongside of it for many nights shouting, 'No hired watermen.' After
this year no watermen rowed in the college crews. Exeter had a boat
afloat that year, built by Hall of Oxford. She was called the
'Buccleuch' in honour Of the Duke of that ilk.
Among the Exeter men was one Moresby, who was a relative of a naval
captain of that name, and through his advice Exeter ordered an eight-oar
of Little, of Plymouth. She was finished in time to be put on in 1824,
and became famous as the 'Exeter white boat.' Stephen Davis was sent
with a carriage constructed for the purpose, to meet the boat at
Portsmouth, whither she was brought by sea. As this boat was built of
deal, a raft was provided to receive her--the first use of a raft for
this purpose at Oxford. The oars sent with the boat were such as are
used at sea, and made of ash. They were discarded in favour of ordinary
oars, such as those already in use for fresh-water rowing. She was found
to be too high out of the water, so Isaac King cut her down one streak.
The boat, as depicted in Turner's water-colour drawing of her, was taken
when she was afloat and unmanned; her crew were painted in her
afterwards; consequently she rides too high out of the water. The boats
on the river in 1824 were, at the beginning of the season, Christ Church
1, B.N.C. 2, Exeter 3. Exeter bumped B.N.C. under the willows on the
first night; the next night of racing Christ Church took off, and Exeter
became head by the other's default. The races were renewed another day,
and B.N.C. bumped Christ Church. This was the _last_ year in which the
boats started out for Iffley Lock. The racing has hitherto been
conducted on this principle; the start between the boats were just so
much as the dexterity of the stroke could obtain. He, the stroke, stood
on the bow thwart, and ran down the row of thwarts; pushing the boat
along with his shoulder against the lock gates, he reached his own
thwart, by which time the impetus had shot the boat clear of the lock,
he dropped on to his own seat, and began to row. The oarsmen had their
oars 'tossed' meantime. The boat next in order then followed the same
process, and so on. The boats lay in _échelon_ while waiting for the
start. Bulteel, who was stroke of B.N.C. in the disputed race of 1822
(above mentioned), and who afterwards was elected Fellow of Exeter in
1823, was especially skilful at this. The Exeter crew of 1824 were:
Wareing, Dick, Parr, Dowglass, J. C. Clutterbuck, Cole, R. Pocklington
(father of D. Pocklington, stroke of Oxford in 1864), Bulteel (stroke),
S. Pocklington (cox.) The Rev. J. C. Clutterbuck, now rector of Long
Wittenham, near Abingdon, is well known as a conservator of the Thames,
to whom the Universities and rowing men are much indebted for the
clauses in the Conservancy Acts which give that body powers to clear the
river for boat racing. The names of the other two crews of 1824 have not
come fully to posterity, but among B.N.C. are Meredith, North and Karle
(stroke); and in the Christ Church crew were Hussey, Baring and Smyth
(stroke).
In 1825 the boats started in line along the bank, each having its umpire
to regulate the distance between it and its neighbours (one length). The
boats at starting were Exeter, Christ Church Worcester, Balliol (in this
order). Exeter had discarded their old love, and had got a 'black boat,'
larger than the old 'white boat,' but not so fast, according to later
experiments. However, they elected to row in her at first, and Christ
Church bumped them, also Worcester on a subsequent night. Later on
Exeter rebumped Worcester, and at the close of the racing the order was:
Christ Church, Exeter, Worcester, Balliol. Smyth was again stroke of
Christ Church, and R. Pocklington stroke of Exeter, in which Messrs.
Clutterbuck, Parr, Dowglass, Cole, and Wareing rowed again, with Messrs.
Harndon and Day as recruits.
The term 'Torpid' seems to have arisen about this date, and to have been
applied to the 'second' boats of colleges, such as Christ Church, who
launched a second boat in 1826. Later on the 'Torpids' took to racing
among themselves as a separate class, and under distinct qualifications.
In 1826 the following rules were drawn up for the boat-racing, and we
give them verbatim:--
_Rule_ 186.--Resolved (1) That racing do commence on Monday, May 1.
(2) That the days for racing be Monday and Friday in each week, and that
if any boat does not come out on those days its flag do go to the
bottom.
(3) That no out-college crews be allowed to row in any boat, except in
cases of illness or other unavoidable absence, and then that the cause
of such absence be signified to the strokes of the other boats.
(4) That the boats below the one that bumps stop racing, and those above
continue it.
(5) That there be a distance of fifty feet between each boat at
starting.
(6) That the boats start by pistol shot.
(7) That umpires be appointed by each college to see each boat in its
proper position before starting, and to decide any accidental dispute.
H. Saunders, Ch. Ch.
H. Moresby, Ex. Coll.
E. A. Hughes, Jes. Coll.
Henry Towers, Ch. Ch.
T. North, B. N. Coll.
H. Roberts, Ball. Coll.
Of the details of the racing, all that we can gather is that Christ
Church finished head.
In 1827 rules were again drawn up and signed at a meeting of strokes;
the new code being much the same as its predecessor, but with one or two
small alterations. There was no U.B.C. in existence, and therefore no
fixed code, but only such as was agreed on from year to year.
_Rules for Boat-Racing, 1827._
(1) That the racing do begin on May 29.
(2) That the days of racing be Tuesday and Friday in each week, and that
if any boat does not come out on those days its flag do go to the
bottom.
(3) That no out-college man be allowed to row in any boat.
(4) That no boat be allowed to race with less than eight oars.
(5) That the boats below the one that bumps stop racing, those above
continue it.
(6) That there be a distance of fifty feet between each boat at
starting.
(7) That the boats start by pistol shot.
(8) That umpires be appointed by each college to see each boat in its
proper place at starting, and to settle any accidental dispute.
The rules of the racing signed by:--
C.H. Page, Ch. Ch.
R. T. Congreve, B.N.C.
A. C. Budge, Ex. Coll.
R. Pennefather, Ball. Coll.
F. C. Chaytor
Geo. D. Hill, Trin. Coll.
David Reid
T. Fox
During these races Christ Church lost their pride of place. Balliol
seems to have first displaced them, and they in turn fell victims to
B.N.C. who remained head. The exact details of the racing and full list
of boats in this are unfortunately wanting.
The racing of 1828 began as usual. No MS. copy of the rules has come to
our hands for this year, but they are believed to be a reproduction of
those of 1827.
The racing resulted thus:--
June 1.--Order of starting B.N.C., Balliol, University, Christ Church,
Trinity, Oriel.
B.N.C. and Balliol remained in _statu quo_; Christ Church claimed a bump
against University which the latter disputed. Oriel bumped Trinity. The
disputed race between University and Christ Church was renewed on June
3, and the Christ Church men put wet paint on their bows so as to make
sure of leaving their mark if they should touch their opponents. They
effected their bump. The other boats do not seem to have raced on June
3.
The next race was on June 4 between B.N.C., Balliol, Christ Church,
University, Trinity, and Oriel. Balliol bumped B.N.C., and the other
boats therefore ceased rowing according to the rules.
The third race was on June 7. Balliol, B.N.C., Christ Church,
University, Trinity, and Oriel, started in this order: Balliol kept
ahead; Christ Church bumped B.N.C., and the two between them had
therefore to cease rowing; Trinity then took off. On June 10 the races
were renewed, but no bump was effected by any boat.
On June 13 there was another race, and Christ Church displaced Balliol
and went head.
The races concluded on June 16, when Christ Church retained the
headship, and B.N.C. rebumped Balliol.
The Christ Church crew of 1828 were:--(bow) Goodenough; 2, Gwilt; 3,
Lloyd; 4, Moore; 5, Hamilton; 6, Mayne; 7, Bates; (stroke) Staniforth.
Hamilton became Bishop of Salisbury.
In 1829, in consequence of the first match of its kind being then
arranged with Cambridge, and the date being fixed for March 10, there
were no bumping races. Christ Church were accredited as head of the
river, from their having held that position from the preceding year; and
they were saluted as such. A scratch race, however, was improvised on
Commemoration afternoon, between the boats, apparently manned by mixed
crews of all colleges. It seems to have been a bumping and not a level
race, for the record of the race is 'no bump.'
In 1830 the races were renewed, and the following colleges put on
eights:--Christ Church, B.N.C., Balliol, University, St. John's, in the
order named.
The racing began on June 8, and Balliol bumped B.N.C.
On June 11, another race, and no bump by any boat.
On June 15, St. John's bumped University, the others above them
retaining their places and rowing to the end, as the bump was astern of
them.
On June 18 another race, but no bump.
On June 20 another race, and no bump.
We hope at a later period to supply the hiatus in history between this
last mentioned year and 1837, in which year the written records of
the B.N.C. book commenced, and for which charts of the races are
published. Meanwhile we shall thankfully receive any information on this
subject from the heroes of those days who may now be alive and hearty.
[Illustration: HENLEY COURSE
_London: Longmans & Co._
E. Weller]
_HENLEY, PAST AND FUTURE._[24]
[24] From the _Field_, July 5, 1886.
The inauguration of a new era in the history of Henley Regatta naturally
tends to make the mind wander into vistas of the past, perhaps even more
than into speculations of the future. There are oarsmen living who can
recollect when Henley Regatta did not even exist, and yet we are within
an appreciable distance (three years) of the 'jubilee' of the gathering.
There are sundry old Blues of the 1829 match still hale and hearty, and
the regatta was not founded until ten years after that date. _Apropos_
of that 1829 match, we have never seen it officially recorded that in
the race Cambridge steered up the Bucks and Oxford in the Berks channel
of the river, where the island divides it. Yet we have heard the Rev. T.
Staniforth, the Oxford stroke, relate the fact. For some strange reason,
the general opinion of _habitués_ of the river prior to that match was
that the Bucks channel gave the better course. The boughs of the island
trees obstructed the Berks channel more than now, and this may explain
the delusion. However, the Oxonians doubted the soundness of local
opinion, and tested in practice the advantages of the two channels by
timing themselves through each. They naturally found the inside course
the shorter cut. In the race they adopted it, while Cambridge, so we
hear, took the outside channel; and the previous lead of Oxford was more
than trebled by the time that the boats came again into the main river.
Times and ideas of rowing have changed much since the first regatta at
Henley opened and closed with contests for the Grand Challenge Cup, the
only prize at its foundation. The 'Town' Cup seems to have been the next
addition, under the name of the 'District Challenge' Cup, in 1840; but
it does not figure again until 1842, and in 1843 takes the name of the
Town Cup. There were first class fours 'for medals' in 1841, but the
Stewards' Cup was not founded till the following year. The 'Diamonds'
appeared in 1844. 'Pairs' came into existence in 1845, styled 'silver
wherries,' and the then winners, Arnold and Mann, of Caius, have ever
been handed down by tradition as something much above the average. The
prize became 'silver goblets' in 1850, and the first winners of them
were Justice Sir Joseph Chitty and Dr. Hornby, provost of Eton. The
Ladies' Plate was called the 'New' Cup when it appeared in 1845. At that
time it was open to the world, like the Grand. Clubs from the Thames won
it on sundry occasions. In 1857 it was restricted to schools and
colleges as now, copying the 'Visitors' Cup' for fours, founded upon
parallel principles in 1847. The Wyfold Cup dates from 1847, though it
does not figure in the local official calendar of the regatta as a
four-oar prize until 1856. In the latter year it became a four-oar
prize, open to all, and the Argonauts won it and the 'Stewards,' with
the same crew. Later on it obtained its present qualification. As to the
forgotten functions of the 'Wyfold' between 1847 and 1856, we venture to
record them. The cup originally was held by the winner of the trial
heats for the Grand. If the best challenger won the Grand also, or if
the 'holders' did not compete, then the same crew would take both Grand
and Wyfold for the season; but the Grand holders were ineligible to row
for the Wyfold. This latter anomaly in time induced the executive to
obtain leave from the donor to alter the destination of the cup and to
devote it to fours. Local races flourished in the forties and fifties.
Besides the Town Cup, there were local sculls, sometimes for a 'silver
wherry,' and sometimes for a presentation cup. Local pairs existed from
1858 to 1861 inclusive. The Thames Cup began life in 1868 as a sort of
junior race, but later on obtained its present qualification. There was
a presentation prize for fours without coxswains in 1869, but the
Stewards' Cup was not opened for fours of the modern style till 1873;
and the Visitors' and Wyfold were similarly emancipated a year later.
The advent and disappearance of the Public Schools' Cup need no comment.
We well recollect the sensation produced by the first keelless eight,
that of Chester, in 1856. The club came like a meteor, and won both
Grand and Ladies' (the latter being an open race for the last time in
that year). The art of 'watermanship' had not then reached its present
pitch. The Chester men could not sit their boat in the least; they
flopped their blades along the water on the recovery in a manner which
few junior crews at minor regattas would now be guilty of; but they
rowed well away from their opponents, who were only college crews. In
that year, in consequence of the Chester ship being some dozen feet
shorter than the iron keeled craft of Exeter and Lady Margaret, a
question arose as to how the boats should be adjudicated past the post.
The boats started by _sterns_, therefore Chester would be giving several
feet start if adjudged at the finish by bows. So the stewards ordered
the races to be decided by _sterns_ past the post. This edict remained
in force, but unknown to the majority of competitors, till after 1864.
In that year the winner of the Diamonds reached the post several lengths
before his opponent, but stopped opposite to it in a stiff head wind.
The loser came up behind him leisurely, chatted, and shoved the winner
past the post by rowlocks locking. Presently it transpired that the
official fiat was 'won by a foot,' and that the judge did not consider
the race over until the winner's stern was clear of the line! This
discovery caused some inquiry, and the half-forgotten edict of 1857 was
thus repealed; and races have since then been adjudged again by bows.
Among other reminiscences, we can recall the old starting 'rypecks,'
with bungs and cords attached; these bungs had to be held by competitors
till the signal to start; the ropes often fouled rudder lines, and were
awkward to deal with. In 1862 the system of starting with sterns held
from moored punts, now in vogue, was first adopted.
Such are some of the recollections which evolve themselves at this date,
when we are on the eve of a new era and a new course. The old 'time'
records, which have been gradually improving and which, to our
knowledge, are recorded in the most random manner in the local calendar,
will now have to stand or fall by themselves. A new course, with less
slack water in it, will hardly bear close comparison with an old one as
to time. The old soreness of fluky winds, and 'might have beens,' laid
to the discredit of much-abused Poplar Point, must now find no longer
scope. Luck in station there still will be, inevitably, when wind blows
off shore; but there now will be no bays to coast, and no Berks corner
to cut. The glories of Henley bridge have been on the wane for some
years past; we can remember when enterprising rustics ranked their muck
carts speculatively along the north side of the bridge; but fashion and
the innovation of large moored craft have lost the bridge much of its
old popularity. Besides, the newly planted aspens along the towpath,
which were given to replace the old time-honoured 'poplars,' shut off
the view of the reach from the bridge. It is no longer possible,
telescopically, to time opponents in practice from the Lion and Angel
window, as of old. It is not so much as twenty years ago that steamers
were unknown on the reach. The 'Ariel' (the late Mr. Blyth's) was the
first of her kind built by Mr. Thornycroft. Till then, row-boats had the
reach to themselves. We are old enough to recall the Red Lion
flourishing as a coaching inn; then came its breakdown, when 'rail'
broke the 'road,' and it shut up, until Mrs. Williams, the veteran
landlady, who erst welcomed, and is still welcomed by, so many retired
generations of oarsmen, migrated from the Catherine Wheel in 1858, and
re-opened the Lion once more.
The strength of amateur talent is treble what it was twenty-five years
ago. After the pristine Leander retired from action, and the St.
George's shut up, and the Old Thames Club dispersed, the Universities
had Henley almost to themselves as to eights and fours until Chester
woke them up in eights in 1856, and the Argonauts four a year or two
before produced the nucleus of the talent which in 1857 burst upon the
world under the new flag of the L.R.C. They were joined by Kingston in a
four in 1859. In 1861 Kingston had their first eight. Thames, in like
manner, began modestly with a four, which in due time developed winning
Grand eights. We have already spoken of the march of watermanship. A
quarter of a century ago the idea of amateurs sitting a keelless eight
or four, without rolling rowlocks under, until they had first practised
for days or weeks in a steady craft, would have been derided. In these
days three or four scratch eights can be manned any day at Putney,
capable of sitting a racing ship, and of trying starts with trained
University crews. We are not _laudatores temporis acti_ as to
oarsmanship; sliding seats spoilt form and style at first until they
were better understood; but, in our opinion, there are now (_cæteris
paribus_ as to slides _versus_ fixed seats) many more high-class oarsmen
than were to be found thirty, or even twenty, years ago. There are more
men rowing, and more science, and better coaching than of old. 'Vixere
fortes ante Agamemnona;' but we believe that there are on the average
some five Agamemnons now afloat for every two in the fifties and early
years of the sixties. Nor do we wonder at it with four or five times as
many men on the muster rolls of rowing clubs of the present day. As to
boat-building, we think that the 'lines' of racing eights have fallen
off. We can recall no such capacity for travelling between the strokes
as in Mat Taylor's best craft, _e.g._ the Chester boat and the old
'Eton' ship; both of which did duty and beat all comers for many years.
While looking back with interest, we look forward with hope, and
believe that the new Henley will maintain, and perhaps improve, its
modern enhanced and extended standard of oarsmanship, and that the new
course, when fairly tried, will encourage, rather than discourage,
competition that looks for fair field and no favour.
[Illustration: PUTNEY COURSE
_London: Longmans & Co._
E. Weller]
_THAMES PRESERVATION ACT._
In 1884 a Committee of the House of Commons sat to inquire into the best
method of preserving public rights and those of riparians on the Thames.
The latter had developed so much pleasure traffic during the last
quarter of a century that some 'highway' legislation on the subject
became imperative. An Act for regulating steam-launch traffic on the
Thames had been passed in 1883. The report of the Committee produced the
following Act, which should be read by all who intend to navigate the
Thames for pleasure.
Draft by-laws, to carry out the provisions of this Act in detail, have
twice been propounded by the Thames Conservancy during 1886, and a third
code was drafted early in 1887, but the first two editions provoked so
much hostile criticism that the Conservancy withdrew them; and, up to
the date of going to press, the third edition of proposed by-laws, which
still seems too objectionable in many details, has not received the
sanction of the Board of Trade, which is necessary before the code can
become law.
THAMES PRESERVATION ACT, 1885.
48 & 49 VICT. CAP. 76.
_An Act for the preservation of the River Thames above
Teddington Lock for purposes of public recreation, and for
regulating the pleasure traffic thereon._ [_August 14, 1885._]
Whereas the River Thames is a navigable highway; and whereas, by
reason of the increase of population in London and other places
near the said river, it has come to be largely used as a place
of public recreation and resort, and it is expedient that
provision should be made for regulating the different kinds of
traffic in the said river between the town of Cricklade and
Teddington Lock, and upon the banks thereof within the limits
aforesaid, and for the keeping of public order and the
prevention of nuisances, to the intent that the said river
should be preserved as a place of regulated public recreation;
Be it therefore enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty,
by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and
Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and
by the authority of the same, as follows:
PART I.--NAVIGATION.
1. _Public right of navigation._--It shall be lawful for all
persons, whether for pleasure or profit, to go and be, pass and
repass, in boats or vessels over or upon any and every part of
the River Thames, through which Thames water flows, between the
town of Cricklade and Teddington Lock, including all such
backwaters, creeks, side-channels, bays and inlets connected
therewith as form parts of the said river within the limits
aforesaid.
2. _Private artificial cuts not to be deemed parts of the
river._--All private artificial cuts for purposes of drainage or
irrigation, and all artificial inlets for moats, boathouses,
ponds, or other like private purposes, already made or hereafter
to be made, and all channels which by virtue of any conveyance
from or agreement with the Conservators, or the Commissioners
acting under any of the Acts mentioned in the First Schedule to
this Act, or by any lawful title have been enjoyed as private
channels for the period of twenty years before the passing of
this Act, shall be deemed not to be parts of the said river for
the purposes of the last preceding section, or any provisions
consequent thereon.
3. _Conservators may exclude the public._--Notwithstanding
anything in the first section contained, it shall be lawful for
the Conservators from time to time to exclude the public for a
limited period from specified portions of the said river, for
purposes connected with the navigation, or with any public work
or uses, or for the preservation of public order.
4. _Right of navigation to include anchoring and mooring._--The
right of navigation hereinbefore described shall be deemed to
include a right to anchor, moor, or remain stationary for a
reasonable time in the ordinary course of pleasure navigation,
subject to such restrictions as the Conservators shall from time
to time by by-laws determine; and it shall be the duty of the
Conservators to make special regulations for the prevention of
annoyance to any occupier of a riparian residence, by reason of
the loitering or delay of any house-boat or steam-launch, and
for the prevention of the pollution of the river by the sewage
of any house-boat or steam-launch. Provided that nothing in this
Act, or in any by-law made thereunder, shall be construed to
deprive any riparian owner of any legal rights in the soil or
bed of the river which he may now possess, or of any legal
remedies which he may now possess for prevention of anchoring,
mooring, loitering, or delay of any boat or other vessel, or to
give any riparian owner any right as against the public, which
he did not possess before the passing of this Act, to exclude
any person from entering upon or navigating any backwater,
creek, channel, bay, inlet, or other water, whether deemed to be
part of the River Thames as in this Act defined or not.
Provided also, that the powers given by this clause shall be in
addition to, and not to be deemed to be in substitution for, any
powers already possessed by the Conservators.
5. _Riparian owner to remove obstructions unless maintained for
twenty years._--Any person obstructing the navigation
hereinbefore described, by means of any weir, bridge, piles,
dam, chain, barrier, or other impediment, shall be liable to be
called upon by the Conservators to remove the same, and his
refusal to do so shall be deemed to be a continuing offence
within the meaning of this Act, and the obstruction itself shall
be deemed to be a nuisance to the navigation unless the same, or
substantially the same, has been maintained for the period of
twenty years before the commencement of this Act.
6. _Provision against shooting or use of firearms on the
river._--From and after the passing of this Act it shall be
unlawful to discharge any firearm, air-gun, gun, or similar
instrument over or upon the said river within the limits
aforesaid, or the banks or towpaths thereof, or any land
acquired by the Conservators under the provisions of this Act,
and every person discharging any firearm, air-gun, gun, or
similar instrument over or upon the said river limits as
aforesaid, or the banks or towpath thereof, or any such land as
aforesaid, shall be deemed to have committed an offence under
this Act.
PART II.--REGULATION OF PLEASURE-BOATS.
7. _Registration of boats._--In addition to the rights and
duties of the Conservators relating to registration and tolls
already created by the Thames Navigation Act, 1870, the Thames
Conservancy Act, 1878, and the Thames Act, 1883, or by any other
of the Acts in the First Schedule to this Act mentioned, it
shall be lawful for the Conservators to direct by by-law that
all boats or vessels, with the exception of any such class of
boats or vessels as may, together with the reasons of such
exception, be specified in any such by-law for pleasure
navigation, shall be registered, together with the true names
and addresses of the owners thereof respectively, in a General
Register to be kept at their chief office in a form by them to
be prescribed, and as to all vessels propelled by steam power,
and all house-boats, and all rowing or sailing boats plying for
hire, and any such other particular class of boats or vessels as
by them from time to time by by-law, may be prescribed to issue
licences to ply upon any part of the upper navigation, or upon a
limited part thereof only, according to regulations in each case
by them to be made by by-law in manner hereinafter provided.
8. _Navigating without registration to be an offence._--From and
after the dates by any such by-law to be fixed respectively, it
shall be an offence under this Act to use any boat or vessel of
the class mentioned in the same by-law, on any part of the river
to which such by-law applies, unless such boat or vessel shall
have been previously registered or licensed in manner therein
provided.
9. _Lists to be kept of private boats and boats for hire._--In
the General Register in the seventh section of this Act
mentioned, separate lists shall be kept of boats and vessels
used for pleasure navigation by private owners, and of boats and
vessels let for hire. The former class of boats or vessels shall
be distinguished, according to regulations to be made from time
to time by the Conservators, by a registered number, crest,
badge, or mark, and the latter class by a registered number; and
the provisions of section eleven and section thirteen of the
Thames Act, 1883, as to displaying or concealing the same or
number of any steam-launch shall be deemed in all cases to apply
to the said registered numbers, crests, badge, and marks
respectively, with such modifications as the Conservators may by
such regulations from time to time direct.
10. _Renewal of yearly registration._--It shall be lawful for
the Conservators by by-law to enact as to any or all of the
classes of boats or vessels by them from time to time required
to be licensed or registered as aforesaid, that such licence or
registration shall be renewed at any interval not being less
than one year.
11. _Fee for registration._--It shall be lawful for the
Conservators to charge, in respect of boats or vessels
registered under this Act, sums not exceeding the sums
following; that is to say, for each registration of a
pleasure-boat not being a house-boat, a sum not exceeding two
shillings and sixpence, and for each registration of a
house-boat a sum not exceeding five pounds; and if such
house-boat shall be more than thirty feet in length, a further
sum not exceeding twenty shillings in respect of every complete
five feet and the fraction of an incomplete five feet by which
such house boat shall exceed thirty feet in length.
Provided always that nothing in this Act shall require a boat or
vessel not being a house-boat to be registered oftener than once
in three years.
12. _Present registration or licence not to be
affected._--Nothing in this Act shall require any vessel which
may under any Act be required to be registered or licensed by
the master, wardens, and commonalty of watermen and lightermen
of the River Thames to be registered or licensed under this Act.
13. _First registration._--For the purposes of the last
preceding section a fresh registration or licence of any boat or
vessel in a class other than that in which the same was first
registered or licensed shall be deemed a first registration or
licence.
14. _Application of ss. 7, 8, 9, and 14 of The Thames Act, 1883,
to all registered boats and vessels._--The provisions of
sections seven, eight, nine, and fourteen of The Thames Act,
1883, as to registered owners of steam-launches, shall apply to
the registered owners of all boats or vessels for the time being
registered pursuant to the provisions of this Act, and of the
by-laws in that behalf from time to time in force, and the same
section nine and section fourteen shall be read as if the words
'boat or vessel' therein were substituted for the word
'steam-launch,' and as if the words 'this Act' therein referred
to the present Act.
15. _Every boat or vessel to be deemed to be in charge of one
person._--Every boat or vessel used for pleasure navigation upon
any part of the River Thames within the limits aforesaid shall
be deemed to be in charge of one person, who shall be in every
case a registered owner, or the person duly appointed or
permitted by him to be in charge, or the person hiring such boat
or vessel, and, in the absence of any such person, then any
person having control or being in command of such boat or
vessel.
16. _Person in charge to be responsible for order_.--Every
person who for the time being is in charge of any boat or vessel
shall be responsible for the preservation of order and decency,
and for the observance of the provisions of this Act; and upon
proof that an offence under this Act has been committed by any
person on board such boat or vessel, and that the person in
charge has refused to give the name and address of the
offender, then the person in charge shall be deemed to have
committed an offence under this Act.
PART III.--GENERAL POWERS.
17. _Conservators may accept and hold land for certain
purposes._--In addition to their existing powers to take and
hold land, it shall be lawful for the Conservators to accept and
hold any land which any person may offer to them for dedication
to public uses in connection with the purposes of this Act, upon
such terms and conditions as they may see fit, and it shall be
lawful for the Corporation of the City of London, or the
Metropolitan Board of Works, and for the University of Oxford,
or, subject to the provisions of the Municipal Corporations Act,
1882, so far as they are applicable, for the Corporation of the
City of Oxford, or any corporation or other person, to give,
grant, dedicate, convey, or devise any land or right over land
to the extent of their estates and interests respectively, unto
the Conservators, for the purpose of enabling the public to use
such and or any part thereof as a public highway, or as a place
of public resort, or for the purpose of creating bathing-places
or camping-grounds or landing-places, or for any other purposes
connected with this Act, any of the provisions of the Act passed
in the ninth year of the reign of King George the Second,
chapter thirty-six, or any other statute or any rule of law to
the contrary notwithstanding.
18. _Acquisition by agreement of right of abstracting water from
the river._--Where any company or person is entitled under any
Act of Parliament, grant, custom, or otherwise, to any right of
abstracting or appropriating water which might otherwise flow or
find its way into the river, it shall be lawful for any such
person on the one hand and the Conservators or any other person
on the other hand, to enter into and carry into effect an
agreement or agreements for the conveyance of such right to the
Conservators; and every such right may be conveyed to the
Conservators by deed, and shall as from the date of such
conveyance be absolutely extinguished to the intent that such
water shall thereafter be allowed to flow into the river.
And it shall be lawful for any of the companies supplying water
within the Metropolis to make contributions out of their capital
or revenue in aid of the acquisition and extinguishment of any
such right, and for the Conservators to accept such
contributions and contributions from any other person or persons
and employ them for that purpose.
19. _Alteration and suspension of by-laws._--It shall be lawful
for the Conservators, in addition to all powers of making
by-laws already possessed by them under the Acts mentioned in
the First Schedule hereto, to make, and from time to time to
suspend or alter in the same manner and with the same consent as
in the same Acts is provided, all by-laws which they may deem
necessary for the purposes mentioned in this Act, or in the
Second Schedule hereto.
20. _Continuing offences._--Any act or default in contravention
of any of the said by-laws or of the provisions of this Act,
which after due notice is repeated or continued, shall be a
continuing offence under this Act.
PART IV.--PROCEDURE.
21. _Penalty for offence against the Act._--Any person convicted
of an offence under this Act shall, where no other penalty is
provided by this Act or any of the Acts mentioned in the First
Schedule hereto, or by any by-law made thereunder respectively,
be liable to a penalty not exceeding forty shillings.
22. _Penalty for continuing offence._--Any person convicted of
an offence which is a continuing offence under this Act shall,
where no greater penalty has been provided for such offence by
any of the Acts mentioned in the First Schedule hereto, be
liable to a penalty not exceeding five pounds.
23. _Jurisdiction of certain justices._--For the purposes of
this Act, and of every by-law to be made by the Conservators
thereunder, the jurisdiction of all justices of the peace for
the counties of Surrey, Berkshire, Wiltshire, Gloucester,
Oxford, Buckingham, and Middlesex, and of the magistrates for
the city of Oxford, and of every other borough, the police
jurisdiction of which extends to any place upon the River Thames
within the limits aforesaid, and the jurisdiction, powers, and
authority of the Proctors of the University of Oxford and the
marshals and officers acting under them, and the power and
authority of the Metropolitan Police, and of all police officers
and constables acting for any of the said counties or boroughs,
shall extend over the whole of the River Thames, and the
towpaths, banks, and precincts thereof, within the limits
aforesaid.
24. _As to place where offence committed._--For the purposes of
any proceedings in respect of any offence under this Act, or
under any of the Acts mentioned in the First Schedule hereto,
every such offence shall be deemed to have been committed, and
every cause of complaint in respect thereof shall be deemed to
have arisen either in the place in which the same actually was
committed or arose, or in any place in which the offender or
person complained against may be.
25. _Bailiffs and servants of Conservators may be sworn in as
police constables._--It shall be in the power and at the
discretion of the Conservators to procure all or any of their
water-bailiffs, river-keepers, lock-keepers, or other servants,
to be sworn in as police constables for any of the counties or
boroughs aforesaid, but they shall not be liable, without the
consent of the Conservators, to be called upon to perform the
duties of such police constables, except for the purposes of
this Act or of the Acts mentioned in the First Schedule hereto.
26. _Proceedings for summary conviction._--Proceedings in
relation to any offence or continuing offence under this Act or
any of the Acts mentioned in the First Schedule hereto, or under
any by-law already made or hereafter to be made by the
Conservators, or for the recovery of any penalty under this Act
or any of the said Acts mentioned in the First Schedule hereto,
or any by-law made thereunder respectively, may be taken before
a court of summary jurisdiction, according to the provisions of
the Summary Jurisdiction Acts, and all such penalties, whether
recovered summarily or otherwise, shall be paid to the
Conservators, and shall form part of their funds.
27. _Moneys paid to the Conservators to be carried to the
Conservancy Fund._--All moneys recovered or received by the
Conservators or their secretary, or other officer under any of
the provisions of this Act, shall be carried to the Conservancy
Fund, and all moneys arising in respect of the Upper River, as
defined by the Acts mentioned in the schedule hereto, shall be
credited to the Upper Navigation Fund.
28. _Saving clause._--Saving always to the Queen's most
Excellent Majesty, her heirs and successors, and to all and
every other person or persons and body or bodies politic,
corporate or collegiate, and his, her, or their heirs,
successors, executors, and administrators, all such right,
title, estate, and interest, as they or any of them could or
ought to have had or enjoyed of, in to or in respect of the
river and the banks and towpaths thereof within the limits
aforesaid in case this Act had not been passed, excepting so far
as relates to the said right of navigation and other rights
expressly declared and provided for by this Act.
29. _Definitions._--In this Act the following terms have the
several meanings hereby assigned to them, unless there be
something in the subject or context repugnant to such
construction (that is to say):
The terms 'the River Thames' and 'the said river' shall for the
purposes of this Act mean and include all and every part of the
River Thames specified in section one, excepting the cuts,
inlets, and channels specified in section two;
The term 'the Conservators' means the Conservators of the River
Thames;
The term 'due notice' means a notice in writing given by the
Conservators or any person duly authorised in writing by them to
act in their behalf;
The words 'consent of the Conservators' shall mean permission in
writing signed by the secretary of the Conservators;
The term 'by-law' includes rules, orders, and regulations;
The term 'person' includes corporation;
The term 'land' includes land of any tenure, and tenements and
hereditaments, corporeal or incorporeal, and houses and other
buildings, and also an undivided share in land, and any rights
over land whatsoever, whether appendant, appurtenant, or in
gross;
The term 'precincts' includes any place within a hundred yards
of the said river on either side thereof;
The term 'vessel' shall include any ship, lighter, barge,
launch, house-boat, boat, randan, wherry, skiff, dingey,
shallop, punt, canoe, raft, or other craft.
30. _Short title._--This Act may be cited as 'The Thames
Preservation Act, 1885.'
SCHEDULE I.
24 Geo. II. c. 8, 30 Geo. II. c. 21, 11 Geo. III. c. 45, 14 Geo.
III. c. 91, 15 Geo. III. c. 11, 17 Geo. III. c. 18, 28 Geo. III.
c. 51, 35 Geo. III. c. 106, 50 Geo. III. c. cciv., 52 Geo. III.
c. xlvi., 52 Geo. III. c. xlvii., 54 Geo. III. c. ccxxiii., 20 &
21 Vict. c. cxlvii. (the Thames Conservancy Act, 1857), 27 & 28
Vict. c. 113 (the Thames Conservancy Act, 1864), 29 & 30 Vict.
c. 89 (the Thames Navigation Act, 1866), 30 & 31 Vict. c. ci.
(the Thames Conservancy Act, 1867), 33 & 34 Vict. c. cxlix. (the
Thames Navigation Act, 1870), 41 & 42 Vict. c. ccxvi. (the
Thames Conservancy Act, 1878), 45 & 47 Vict. c. lxxix. (the
Thames Act, 1883).
SCHEDULE II.
PURPOSES FOR WHICH BY-LAWS MAY BE MADE UNDER THE POWERS AND
PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT.
1. For preventing offences against decency by persons using the
River Thames, and the banks and towpaths thereof, or any land
acquired by the Conservators under the provisions of this Act.
2. For preventing disorderly conduct, or the use of obscene,
scandalous, or abusive language to the annoyance of persons
using the said River Thames or the banks or towpaths thereof, or
any land acquired by the Conservators under the provisions of
this Act.
3. For preventing any nuisance to riparian residents or others
by persons using the river.
4. For preventing trespasses upon any riparian dwelling-houses
or the curtilages or gardens belonging thereto.
5. For regulating the navigation with a view to the safety and
amenity of the said river in relation to the purposes of this
Act.
6. For preventing injury to flowering and other plants, shrubs,
vegetation, trees, woods and underwoods on or near the said
river.
7. For preventing bird-catching, bird-nesting, bird-trapping,
and the searching for, taking, or destruction of swans' and
other birds' nests, eggs, or the young of any birds or other
animals on or about the said river, saving all existing rights
of fowling, shooting, hunting, and sporting.
8. For preserving the various notice-boards and other works and
things set up by the Conservators or with their consent.
9. For preventing disturbance of the navigation provided for by
this Act.
10. For registering and licensing boats or vessels, and for
regulating the conditions of such licences, and the letting or
hiring of boats, vessels, conveyances, horses or other animals,
in connection with the purposes of this Act.
11. For imposing penalties for breaches of by-laws, subject to
the provisions of this Act and of the Acts in the First Schedule
mentioned.
INDEX.
Abdominal strains, treatment of, 175
Ailments, 172-176
Amateur, the,
anomalous status of, 193;
definition of term, 48, 194;
Henley executive definition, 194;
foundation of Amateur Rowing Association, 195;
A.R.A. rules, 195;
regulations for the conduct of amateur regattas, 197-199;
conditions imposed on foreign crews, 199;
laws of boat-racing approved by A.R.A., 239
Amateur Rowing Association, 195-199, 239, 240
Amateurs, past and present:--
Babcock, J. C., 105;
Barnes, 35;
Bayford, J., 35, 36;
Birch, R. O., 104;
Bishop, 35;
Brickwood, E. D., 29, 107, 138, 172, 174, 185, 234;
Brown, M., 86;
Brown, W., 105;
Bulteel, 315;
Carter, 35;
Casamajor, 134, 137, 138;
Chambers, J. G., 44, 223, 239;
Chinnery, Walter and Harry, 231;
Close, J. B., 105;
Clutterbuck, Rev. J. C, 315;
Cobb, Rhodes, 234;
Copplestone, 35, 36;
Corkran, Colonel Seymour, 86;
Cox, J. R., 138;
Donaldson, Rev. S. A., 209;
Edwardes-Moss, T. C, 181, 227;
Fawcus, 184;
Godfrey, 85, 86;
Goldie, J. H. D., 86, 117, 181;
Griffiths, W. R., 86;
Gulston, F. S., 87, 88, 105, 107;
Henley, E. F., 152;
Herbert, C., 184;
Hoare, W., 86, 176;
Hornemann, 35;
Hughes, G., 156;
Jacobson, 89;
Labat, R. H., 226;
Le Blanc Smith, 195, 197;
Lesley, R., 86;
Lewis, 35;
Lloyd, 35;
Long, A. de L., 105;
Long, W., 87;
Lowndes, 141;
Marsh, 35;
Marshall, T. H., 92;
Menzies, F., 156;
Montagu, C. F., 203;
Morrison, Allan, 234, 235;
Morrison, George, 89, 234, 235;
Mossop, 87;
Musgrave, 32, 314;
Nadin, 184;
Parker, J. E., 134, 137;
Payne, 141;
Peard, 35, 36;
Pelham, 34-46;
Percy, 103;
Phillips, R. M., 37;
Pitman, 86;
Playford, Frank, 134, 227, 234;
Playford, H. H., 234, 235;
Revell, 35;
Rhodes, H., 86, 116, 117;
Risley, Rev. R. W., 234, 235;
Rowe, G. D., 179;
Shadwell, Rev. A., 92, 156;
Shaw, Captain, 35, 36;
Staniforth, Rev. T., 30, 32, 34, 319;
Unwin, W. S., 134;
Wallace, 184;
Warre, 209, 213;
Way, 116, 117;
Weedon, 35;
West, 86;
Wood, 182;
Wynne, 89;
see under Temple of Fame, 243-296
Aquatic championship, winners of the, 296
Authors quoted, see under Books
Bathing, 156
Beach, W., champion of the world, 236, 237
Biglin-Coulter crew, the, 105
Biremes, 12, 15-17
Blisters, treatment of, 173, 175
Boats,
early history of, 3;
sanpans, 4, 6, 10;
Ulysses' boat, 5;
dug-outs, 6;
canoes, 7;
cayaks, 8;
Madras surf-boats, 9;
analogy of construction with that of orders of fishes, 9;
Chinese junks, 10;
Egyptian boats, 12;
Ph[oe]nician vessels, 13;
ships of Homer, 13;
biremes, 15-17, 25;
triremes, 17, 18, 20-23;
pace of the ancient Greek galleys, 24;
early Roman vessels, 24;
boat-building, 142;
wherries, 142;
skiffs, 143, 144;
gigs, 143, 144;
'carvel' build, 143;
inrig and outrig, 144;
dingies, 145;
dimensions, 145-152;
prices, 146, 148;
shape, 150, 151;
position of seats, 151
Boat-builders:--
Archer (of Lambeth), 35;
Clasper, Jack, 146, 147;
Goodman, 213;
Hall (of Oxford), 314;
Little (of Plymouth), 314;
Perkins (Sambo), 213;
Salter, Messrs., 145, 152;
Searle, 35, 213;
Sewell, 147;
Swaddell and Winship, 147;
Taylor, Mat, 87, 147-149, 151, 213, 322;
Thornycroft, 322;
Tolliday, 213
Boils, treatment of, 173, 174
Books, &c. and authors quoted:
Archéologie Navale, 25;
Aristophanes, 18;
'Argonaut,' 147, 148;
Bell's Life, 28, 34, 35, 110, 147;
Boating Calendar, 206;
Boat Racing, 27, 31, 162, 172, 185;
Brickwood, E. D., 27, 31, 32, 95, 103, 104, 162;
Denkmäler (Lepsius's), 10;
Egan, T., 110, 147;
Encyclopædia Britannica, 20;
Field, the, 40, 107, 188, 319;
Fleet of an Egyptian Queen (Duemichen's), 10;
Frogs, 18;
Graser, Dr., 20;
Glossaire Nautique, 25;
Herodotus, 9;
Homer, 4, 5, 13;
Horace, 3;
Jal, M., 25;
Land and Water, 30, 313;
Lane, 122;
Merivale, Dr., 33;
Notes on Coaching (Dr. Warre's), 77;
Oars and Sculls, 161;
Old Blues and their Battles, 34;
Record of the University Boat Race, 34;
Rowing Almanack, 241;
Socrates, 154;
Stonehenge, 174;
Staniforth, Rev. T., 30, 32;
Treherne, G. T., 34;
Urkunden über das Seewesen des attischen Staates, 20;
Warre, Dr., 64, 77;
Westminster Water Ledger, 27;
Williamson, Dr., 28;
Xenophon, 24
Brandy, as a restorative, 172
Building (boat), see under Boats
Bumping races, 33, 313-315, 318
By-laws of boat clubs, 187
Cambridge University Boat Club, 32, 36, 42;
head of the river, 292;
pair-oars, 293;
four-oars, 294;
sculls, 295;
races with Oxford, &c., 252-288;
college and club races, 292-296;
see Temple of Fame
Canoes, 7
Captains, 79;
qualifications for, 80;
multitude of counsellors, 80;
dealing with malcontents, 82-84;
enforcement of punctuality, 84;
position in boat, 85, 207;
former identity of stroke and captain, 86;
duties of, 87;
recruiting, 87;
selection by, of candidates for trial eights, 88;
coaching of juniors by, 89;
conduct of, on retirement from office, 90;
resident in college, 90;
lessons of the post, 91;
list of captains of Eton boats, 214-216
Championship of the world, 296, 297;
see also under Professional racing
Chitty, Sir Joseph, 320
Clothing, Henley rule concerning, 51
Clubs,
practical advantages of, 178;
Star and Arrow, 179;
early records of the Leander, 179-181;
the Leander's matches with the Universities, 181;
the Argonauts, 182;
foundation of the London Rowing Club, 182;
past and present composition of the Leander, 183;
suburban clubs, 183;
provincial clubs, 184;
draft rules for the formation of, 185;
by-laws, 187;
extinction of small clubs, 188-191;
list of those contending at Henley, 245-73;
O.U.B.C. college and club races, 289-292;
C.U.B.C. college and club races, 292-296
Clubs:--
Argonauts, 189, 269, 320, 322;
Ariel, 190;
Atalanta (New York), 106;
Bath, 184;
B.N.C. Oxon, 119, 122, 181, 267;
Burton-on-Trent, 184;
Cambridge London Rooms, 263;
Cambridge Subscription Rooms, 285, 289;
Chester, 182, 183;
Christ Church, 31, 208;
Corsair, 190;
C.U.B.C., see under;
Dublin, 106, 184;
Durham, 184;
Grove Park, 183;
Guy's Club (London), 264;
Ino, 190;
John o' Gaunt, 184;
Kingston, 43, 79, 87, 106, 109, 182, 183, 190, 210, 234, 322;
Lady Margaret, 38, 106;
Leander, 33, 34, 79, 117, 179, 180, 183, 190, 192, 211, 254-256,
258, 260, 272;
London, 79, 87, 88, 105, 106, 180, 182, 183, 189, 190, 210, 211,
226, 228, 272, 273;
Mersey, 184;
Molesey, 190;
Nautilus, 189;
Newcastle, 184;
Nottingham, 184;
Oscillators, 122;
Oxford Aquatic, 263;
Oxford Radleian, 119;
Oxford Etonians, 152, 180, 210;
O.U.B.C. (see under);
Pembroke (Oxon), 106, 109;
Queen's College, Oxford, 31, 38, 85, 86;
Radley College, 209;
St. George's, 182, 261, 262;
St. John's Canadian, 119;
Severn, 184;
Star, 189;
Thames, 42, 79, 182, 183, 233, 265;
Thames Subscription, 42, 234;
Twickenham, 183, 190;
University College, 87;
Wandsworth, 181;
West London, 183, 190;
Westminster, 208, 209;
see also Temple of Fame, 245-296
Coaching, 66;
tendency to become 'mechanical,' 66;
coach should be a scientific oarsman, 67;
testing rowing apparatus, 67;
cause of faults in rowing, 68;
'lateness,' 68;
over-reach of shoulders, 69;
meeting oar, 70;
faulty swing, 70;
screwing, 70;
feather under water, 71;
swing across boat, 71;
prematurely bending the arms, 71;
exercise of crew in paddling, 72, 73;
watermanship, good and bad, 74, 75;
firmness in dealing with pupils, 75;
selection and arrangement of crew, 76;
Dr. Warre's 'Notes on Coaching,' 77;
consumption of liquid in training, 161
Colds and coughs, treatment of, 176
College races, 245-251
Colquhoun Challenge Sculls, 38;
winners of, 295, 296
Conservators, Thames, powers of, 323-327
Course, boat's, 238
Coxswains, Henley Regatta rules concerning, 51;
see also under Steering
Diamond Challenge Sculls,
rules, 48;
Edwardes-Moss's victory, 227;
winners of, 248
Diarrh[oe]a, treatment of, 175
Diet, 153-163
Dingey, the, 145, 146
Doggett's coat and badge, 26;
list of winners of, 303, 304
Drink, 158
Dublin Trinity College, results of matches at Henley Regatta, 210, 211
Dug-outs, 6
Egyptian boats, 12
Entries, regulations concerning, 49
Eton,
rowing at, 86, 87, 200;
fishing and shooting at, 201;
the river out of bounds, 201;
Dr. Keate and the sham eight, 201;
shirking abolished, 202;
swimming enforced, 202;
river masters and bathing places, 203;
'passing,' 203;
changes in the course of the Thames, 203;
first race under official patronage, 204;
watermen as stroke or coach, 204;
upper and lower boats, 204;
names and number of boats, 204, 205;
entries for eights, 205;
captains and 'choices,' 205;
procession on opening day, 206;
practice, 207;
procession on June 4, 207;
position of captain of boat, 207;
_v._ Christ Church four, 208;
_v._ Westminster, 208, 209;
_v._ Radley, 209;
lists of results of races at Henley Regatta, 210-211;
upper sixes, 211;
four _v._ watermen, 212;
punting and tub-sculling, 212;
courses and winning point, 212;
the Brocas, 212;
times, 212;
build of boats, 213;
style of rowing, 213;
list of captains of boats and notable events, 214-216
Festers, treatment of, 175
'Field,' article on Henley Past and Present, 319-323
Firearms, use of, on river, 325
Foreign crews, regulations concerning, 199
Fouls, 239
Four-oars, 118;
without coxswain, 119;
steering apparatus, 119;
in practice, 122;
winners of races, 249-251, 292, 294, 298, 299, 301, 302
Gigs, 143, 144
Gold Cup for eights, 42, 260
Goodford, Dr., 202, 209
Grand Challenge Cup, 40;
rules concerning, 47;
racing record, 182, 183, 210, 211, 253, 258, 259, 261, 262, 264-268,
270, 272, 273, 319, 320;
list of winners, 245
Hanlan, E., Canadian champion, 227, 229-231, 236
Hawtrey, Dr., 204
Henley Regatta,
foundation of, 38;
old and new courses, 40;
qualification rules for cups, 47;
general rules, 48;
definition of an amateur oarsman, 48;
entries, 49;
objections to entries, 50;
course and stations, 50;
a row over, 50;
heats, 50;
clothing, 51;
coxswains, 51;
flag, 51;
umpire and judge, 51;
prizes, 51;
committee, 52;
restrictions on foreign crews, 199;
Eton eight first at, 209;
results of Eton racing at, 210;
advantage of Berks station at, 228;
Oxford _v._ Cambridge at, 254;
Leander _v._ Oxford at, 254;
random recollections of, 319-323;
see also Temple of Fame, 245-253, 258-262, 264-270, 272, 273
Hornby, Dr., 320
House-boats, 324, 325
Junks, Chinese, 10
Keate, Dr., 201, 202
Kelley, Harry, and his contests, 218, 220, 221, 223
Ladies' Challenge Plate,
rules, 47;
racing record, 210, 211;
winners of, 248
'Land and Water,' article on Boat-racing at the Universities, 313-319
Laws of boat-racing, 238;
boats' course, 238;
fouls, 239;
code adopted by Amateur Rowing Association, 239, 240;
rule of the road on river, 241, 242
Limehouse to Hertford and intermediate distances, 304, 305
Medway (Sheerness to Tonbridge, and intermediate distances), 310
Milk, cautious use of, 161
Navigation of the Thames, regulations for, 324
Oxford and Cambridge University Boat Race, list of winners since 1828,
252
Oxford to Lechlade and intermediate distances, 306, 307
Oxford to London and intermediate distances of locks, &c., 307-310
Oxford University Boat Club, races of, with C.U.B.C. and other clubs,
32, 36, 42, 89, 252-258, 260-288;
college eights (head of the river), 289;
winners of pair-oars, 290;
winners of sculls, 291;
winners of four-oars, 292;
college and club races, 289-292;
see Temple of Fame
Paddling, 72, 73
Pair-oars,
the acme of watermanship, 123;
give-and-take action, 124;
'jealous' rowing, 124;
balance and steering, 126;
the start, 126;
manipulation of the oars, 126;
winners of, at Henley, 246, 293
Paramatta, rowing on the, 229, 236
Passing swimmers at Eton, 203
Ph[oe]nicians, the, 13
Pleasure-boats, regulation of, 325
Professional races and their winners:--
The aquatic championship, 296, 297;
Thames National Regatta (champion fours), 298;
sculls, 299;
apprentices' sculls (coat and badge), 299;
T.N.R. (second series), fours, 299;
pairs, 300;
sculls, 300;
apprentices' sculls (coat and badge), 300;
Thames International Regatta, champion sculls, fours, and pairs,
301;
Royal Thames Regatta, watermen's prizes, 301;
British Regatta in Paris, fours, pairs, and sculls, 302;
World's Regatta on the Thames, 302;
winners of Doggett's coat and badge, 303
Professional racing, 217;
the London waterman, 217;
first championship of the Thames, 218;
defeat of Kelley by Chambers, 218;
Green defeated by Chambers, 220;
Chambers beaten by Kelley, 220;
Cooper and Chambers defeated by Kelley, 221;
Hammill beaten by Kelley, 221;
Hoare defeated by Sadler, 221;
second defeat of Chambers by Kelley, 221;
anecdote of Chambers, 222;
Kelley defeats Sadler, 223;
Renforth beats Kelley, 223;
Sadler defeats Boyd, 224;
Trickett defeats Sadler, 225;
Boyd beats Higgins, 225;
Higgins beats Boyd, 225;
Higgins defeats Elliott, 226;
Elliott beats Boyd and Higgins, 226;
Elliott defeated by Hanlan, 227;
Trickett beaten by Hanlan, 229;
Hanlan's victories over Laycock and Boyd, 230;
he beats Kennedy and Wallace Ross, 231;
cause of deterioration in professional rowing, 232, 233;
bad form with sliding seats, 224, 225, 229, 230, 232, 235;
lapse of professional regattas, 233;
Beach defeats Hanlan, 236;
Gaudaur beaten by Beach, 237;
Beach paddles away from Wallace Ross, 237
Professionals, past and present:--
Anderson, Jock, 225;
Bagnall, 224;
Beach, William, 236, 237;
Biffen, 229, 234;
Blackman, 225, 229;
Boyd, R. W., 224, 225, 226, 229-231;
Bubear, 146, 231, 236;
Cannon, Tom, 204;
Chambers, Robert, 103, 105, 137, 218-222, 228;
Campbell, 28, 218;
Clasper, Harry, 124,143, 218;
Clasper, Jack, 103, 124;
Clifford, T., 236;
Cole, 29, Cooper, 220, 221;
Everson, 219;
Fish, 204;
Gaudaur, 236, 237;
Green, 137, 138, 220;
Elliott, W., 226, 231;
Hall, Jack, 204;
Hammill, 221;
Hanlan, Edward, 134, 137, 225-230, 235, 236;
Haverley, Jack, 204;
Hoare, T., 221;
Kelley, Harry, 138,172, 218-223, 228;
Kemp, 29;
Kennedy, J. L., 231;
Largan, 231;
Laycock, Elias, 230, 231, 235;
Lee, 199, 227;
Luke, 226;
Lumsden, 225;
Matterson, Neil, 236;
Noulton, 36;
Paddle Brads, 204;
Perkins, 231, 236;
Piper, 204;
Renforth, 104, 105, 223;
Ross, Wallace, 230, 231, 237: Rush, 229;
Sadler, J. H., 103, 221-223;
Strong, 184;
Tagg, 234;
Taylor, 105;
Teemer, 236;
Trickett, 224, 225, 229, 230;
West, George, 33;
White, Tom, 219;
Williams, 28;
Williams, C., 218;
Wise, 234;
see also 296-304
Prizes, rules regarding, 51
Public Schools Challenge Cup for fours, winners of, 251
Punctuality, 84
Racing courses, length of, 305
Raws, cure of, 174
Regattas,
amateur rules governing, 197-199;
lapse of professional, 233;
see Temple of Fame
Regattas:--
Barnes, 43;
British Regatta in Paris, 302;
Harvard, 279;
Henley, see under;
International, 44;
King's Lynn, 104;
Metropolitan, 42, 189;
Molesey, 43;
National, 42;
Paris International, 119, 152, 221;
Philadelphia, 226;
Reading, 44;
Royal Thames, 301;
Sons of the Thames, 234, 235;
Tewkesbury, 184;
Thames, 42, 180, 221, 234, 260, 263;
Thames International, 301;
Thames National, 298-300;
Walton-on-Thames, 43;
World's Regatta on the Thames, 302
Registration of boats, 325
Renforth, James, champion, 223
Rivers and courses, 304;
distances of locks, &c., on river Lea from Limehouse to Hertford,
304;
length of racing courses, 305;
distances of weirs, &c., from Oxford to Lechlade, 306;
tables of distances of locks, &c., from Oxford to London, 307-310;
intermediate distances on river Medway from Sheerness to Tonbridge,
310;
intermediate distances on river Wey from Thames Lock to Godalming,
311
Rowing,
rise of modern, 26;
Doggett's prize, 26, 303;
Westminster 'Water Ledger,' 27;
match between randan and four-oar, 28;
modest championship stakes, 28;
Kemp's match against time, 29;
foundation of Wingfield Sculls, 29;
University training, 30;
first University race, 32;
records of college racing, 33;
Oxford eight steered by professional, 34;
London and Oxford amateurs, 35;
adoption of 'light blue' by Cambridge, 37;
match between Universities at Henley, 37, 38;
foundation of Henley Regatta, 38;
pair-oar races established at Universities, 38;
Colquhoun sculls and University sculls, 38;
four-oar races, 39;
regattas, 40;
Grand Challenge Cup at Henley, 40, 42;
the 'seven-oar episode,' 42;
Thames Regatta, 42;
'National' Regatta, 42;
Metropolitan Regatta, 42;
Barnes Regatta, 43;
minor regattas, 43;
constitution and rules of Henley Regatta, 45-52;
first principles of scientific rowing, 53-56;
muscular movement and mental volition, 54, 55;
instruction in details, 57, 58;
stroke, 57;
set of back, 58, 59;
swing, 59;
use of legs and feet, 59, 60, 62, 64;
government of oar, 60, 62;
recovery, 61-63;
feathering, 63;
notes on stroke, 64;
origin and use of sliding-seats, 102-117;
four-oared rowing, 118-122;
pair-oared rowing, 123-126;
sculling, 127-141;
training, 153-177;
clubs, 178-191;
amateurs, 192-199;
Eton, 200-216;
watermen and professionals, 217-237;
laws of racing, 238-242
Rule of the road on river, 241
Rules for boat-racing, 316, 317
Rules for the formation of rowing clubs, 185
Running, 168, 171
Rupture, treatment of, 175
Rypecks, 321
Sanpan, the, 4, 6
Scientific oarsmanship, art of, 53-65
Sculling, 127;
management of sculls, 128, 129, 132, 136;
first lessons, 128;
stretcher, 128;
rowlocks, 129;
thowl, 128;
even action of wrists, 130, 131, 132;
steering, 131;
feathering under water, 131;
the swing, 134, 136, 137, 138;
steering apparatus, 134;
slides, 135;
pace, 137, 138;
taking an opponent's water, 139;
pilots, 140
Sheerness to Tonbridge, 310
Siestas, 176
Silver Goblets for pair-oars, rules, 48
Skiffs, 143, 144
Sleep, 163
Sliding seats,
their origin, 102-106;
use, 107;
merits and defects of, 108;
superiority over fixed seats, 109;
practice at, 112;
swing, 113;
recovery, 114;
remedying faulty work on, 115;
introduction at Eton, 213;
professionals at fault in use of, 224, 225, 229, 230, 232, 235;
Hanlan's superiority on, 227, 228
Smoking, 165
'Sportsman' Challenge Cup, 146, 226, 229
Sprains, treatment of, 176
Steamers at races, 219
Steering, 92;
early days of the coxswain, 93;
the coxswain's attitude and action, 94;
handling the rudder-lines, 94;
words of command, 94;
turning, 95;
'coaxing with the rudder,' 95;
landmarks, 95, 96;
characteristics of the boat, 96;
four-oars, 119;
boy coxswains, 122;
pair-oars, 125;
in sculling, 131, 134
Stewards' Cup,
rules, 49;
racing record, 261, 262, 264, 266, 267, 269, 320;
winners of, 245
Strains, treatment of, 175
Stroke, notes on the, 64
Surf boats, 9
Swimming at Eton, 202, 203
Tea, 172
Temple of Fame, the, a list of winners, crews and men, 243-304
Thames Challenge Cup,
rules, 47;
winners of, 250
Thames Lock to Godalming, 311
Thames Preservation Act, 323;
navigation, 324;
regulation of pleasure-boats, 325;
general powers of conservators, 327;
legislative procedure, 328
Thirst, 160-163
Torpid, the term, 316
Town Challenge Cup, winners of, 251
Training, 153;
diet, 154;
old training of a prizefighter or a waterman, 155;
present course, 156;
morning bathing, 156;
breakfast, 156;
luncheon, 157;
dinner, 158;
drink, 158;
practice, 160;
thirst, 160-163;
consumption of fluids, 161-163;
sleep, 163;
period of training, 164;
smoking, 165;
aperients, 165;
work, 166;
running, 168, 171;
the 'set' stroke, 169;
starting, 169;
avoidance of over-fineness of condition, 170;
use of the toothbrush, 171;
value of the 'odd man,' 171;
the 'long course,' 171;
meal before and between races, 172;
ailments, 172-176;
wraps, 176;
siestas, 176
Triremes, 17, 18, 20-23
Universities,
results of races at Henley Regatta, 210, 211;
record of inter and club contests, &c., 254-288;
early history of boat-racing at the, 313;
Brasenose Club Book, 313;
bumping races, 314;
'no hired watermen,' 314;
the 'Buccleuch,' 314;
first use of a raft at Oxford, 315;
boats and crews in 1824, 315;
the term 'Torpid,' 316;
rules drawn up for boat-racing in 1826, 316;
ditto for 1827, 317;
results of racing in 1828, 317;
racing in 1829 and 1830, 318
University oarsmen, lists of, with their weights, and races in which
they rowed, 243-296
Visitors' Challenge Cup, winners of, 249
Water, abstraction of, from river, 327
Waterford, Marquis of, 34, 35
Water-gruel, as a corrective of thirst, 160
Watermanship, as a technical term, explained, 74, 75
Watermen, employed as stroke or coach, 204;
and see under Professionals
Westminster School, 208, 209
Wey (Thames Lock to Godalming and intermediate distances), 311
Wherries, 142, 218
Wingfield, Mr. Lewis, his institution of the prize which bears his
name, 181
Wingfield Sculls,
foundation of, 29;
winners of the, 243, 244
Wraps, 176
Wyfold Challenge Cup,
rules, 48;
conditions held under, 320;
winners of, 250
PRINTED BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
LONDON
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
| ADDITIONAL TRANSCRIBER'S NOTES: |
| |
| The scans on which this e-book has been based have been |
| generously made available by the Internet Archive. |
| |
| Footnotes have been moved to directly under the paragraph or |
| table they refer to. |
| |
| Page 40: the July 1886: possibly a word is missing (issue or |
| similar). |
| |
| Page 254 and further: body weights given in the tables do not |
| always result in the average weights given in the tables. |
| |
| Where the scans were not clear, the text has been completed |
| based on other scanned copies and on 'best guesses.' |
| |
| Inconcistencies (including hyphenation) and (typographical) |
| errors in the original text have not been changed, except as |
| indicated below. Some names are spelled inconsistently even |
| when they (probbaly) refer to the same person: Mc... and M'...,|
| Haig and Haigh, Hornemann, Horneman and Horniman, Langmore and |
| Longmore, and Revell and Revel, etc. These have not been |
| changed. |
| |
| Changes and corrections made to the text: |
| Some obvious typographical and punctuation errors have been |
| corrected silently; |
| page 44: 'Bridgenorth' changed to 'Bridgnorth'; |
| page 53 (chapter title): 'OARMANSHIP' changed to |
| 'OARSMANSHIP' as elsewhere; |
| page 155: 'at a gift' changed to 'as a gift'; |
| page 257: 'Uppleby' changed to 'Appleby'; |
| page 263: 'Magdalen' changed to 'Magdalene;' |
| page 267: year (1851) added above 'Stewards' Cup'; |
| page 272: 'Darrock' changed to 'Darroch'; |
| page 279, 282: 'Edwardes Moss' changed to 'Edwardes-Moss'; |
| page 281: 'Michison' changed to 'Mitchison'; |
| page 304: 'Feildep Weir Lock' changed to 'Feildes Weir Lock';|
| page 333: 'das attischen Staates' changed to 'des attischen |
| Staates'; |
| page 340: 'tooth-brush' changed to 'toothbrush' as in text; |
| Map of Putney Course (caption): 'E. Wellar' changed to 'E. |
| Weller'. |
| |
| The erratum has already been corrected in the text. |
| |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Boating, by W. B. Woodgate
*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK BOATING ***
***** This file should be named 37462-8.txt or 37462-8.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
http://www.gutenberg.org/3/7/4/6/37462/
Produced by Chris Curnow, Hary Lamé and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive)
Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
will be renamed.
Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you
do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is
subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
redistribution.
*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
http://gutenberg.org/license).
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an
individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning
the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked
to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
that
- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is
owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments
must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg-tm works.
- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
of receipt of the work.
- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the
Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with
the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists
because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at
809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
[email protected]. Email contact links and up to date contact
information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
page at http://pglaf.org
For additional contact information:
Dr. Gregory B. Newby
Chief Executive and Director
[email protected]
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To
SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
particular state visit http://pglaf.org
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.
Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily
keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
http://www.gutenberg.org
This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
