New-York tribune., 1911-01-06
too NARROW, SAYS TAFT
President Thinks Ban on Golf
Putter UnCalled For.
TRAVIS ALSO TAKES STAND
opposed to Any Standardizing of
Club or Balls, and Gives
Reasons.

The latest shot nreu III lhe WoroS ""i
.. IA whether American golfers should or
sboula not abolish the mallet-headed putter
,,st becaass old St Andrews has so ruled
Games rom the White House, and the et-
,sc, It will have on the devotees OF the
raoe on this side Of the Atlantic is bound
- he of interest. Briefly, President Taft
has spoken on the subject.
Tho views Of the nations Chief Executive
onncar in the current number of The
American Golfer" and are in reply TO a
letter which the President received from
walter j. Travis, publisher of the maga-
nine in question. This reply from the
white House. under date Of December II,
1910. is as follows:
Nv Dear Mr.. Travis l have yours of
Dscember T. / think the restriction inn
nosed by ST Andrews is too marrow. |
ibjnk putting with a Schenectady putter is
sportsmanlike and gives no undue adVah-
'Ss' WILLIAM II. TAFT.
The rather lengthy letter which produced
the above response was in itself sharp
senunciation Of the methods of old st. An
drews. as may lie seen by the following
written to the President under date OF De-
cember Z:
A, Won are doubtless aware, st. Andrews
has recently declared Illegal all mahet-
headed or Centre-Shafted CluDs, SuCll d.
those Of the Schenectady type. Inc leeilhs
in this country is quite pronounced against
such an arbitrary ruling. i thlnk ~ may
safely he said that fully nlne-lenIns OF
American players are in favor ot me Cnlteu
States Golf Association, at the annual uleSt s,
ing next month. coming out hat-tootedly
and leCalzing the use of suCh barred clups
in America These were placed on et 1ne
bIackNst on the ground that they are not
Of accepted and traditional form ano make
For the last ten years the ScheneStady pu,-
fer has been used: II may be salu 10 De az AZ.
American institution, and BACK IN lspt -
Wae rsed in the British amateur Champion
shin. which for the first and only tne was
brought TO this country. -. ,,a,,ers
There is no good reason why payer :
should not be allowed 70 use any 1,lioi hil!u 81 !
eppliauces such as springs. lhere Is ~
necessity for any standardlzns OF JiuoS, 5o9a ~
halls Golf is about the ohly pait sdIITT
,,,beve there is no interchange OF lle pdll
,,.ttrea, opDonents-the only game WneTe
a Wise choice is allowed IN lhe Ndi IL! ;
weights and lengths of the CLUBS r uSeu, le 70
suit individual preferences ,I'd dn rl,t0Sneri,,
mont of the game which shoulu PoPeI y
bays q fved standard is the size OF the nole
(which is already determlned)' ioI Wy
simnIe reason that oil have to play INTO
ne Sdnt ,be tprneple Of standardization he &C;
ouiesced in. with respect TO the form id and
make Of clubs, it must loSicaly .ii iedr
sooner or later to standardi5lns .i tnsii
iooc,bs and weights which would be mani
feeflr unfair and would strike q serious
tloyy at the individualistic character ol
golf-which is its very essence; many wears
standing and mature experience, am en-. en-
boI5eneJ 10 ask if you believe America
should follow the lead OF ~. ANU e"9 ~
abolishing the Schenectady put'er'
Several pages Of The American Golfer
are devoted TO this all-absorbing SUBJECT
and. according 10 Mr.. Travis, the United
states Golf Association cannot in justice
10 itself afford to make any compromise
he says, in part as follows:
The schenectady putter is essentially an
American idea 1t has been in vogue LOT
the last ten years. 1t would therefore SetIi'
eminently fitting that, IN all lne CIiCuii-
stances the United States Golt Association
shCuld have been consulted on such an m
uortant question as the exclusion OF CLUBS
Of This type. 1t is not the tate o. the
schenectady putter whlch concerns, uS ,oe, &c
much as the fact that two great principles
are involved The first Is whether staHG
ardiZation is not in essence a blow at Soii
a. a game and. the second Is Whetner IL i
the duty o. the United states 1oil ili ASSot so
citation to adopt a rule which IL doeS no.
epproye Of and in the making OF WHlcu II
had no voice solely IN older uIdl We
American rules may not dlHer from @ we
j
Golf Association has always been loyal 10
ST. Andrews, even at time |heh aoIies-
tic troubles were uppermoSt and Wnen lheie
was imminent danger Of complete OieaA-
ing away from ST. Andrews. a.,
There has always been strong IesllhE
in this country as 10 the cesiraolllty OF
plsving the game under a UNIFORM code ol
rules. II may not, however; be out QI plaS : :
10 here draw attention 10 the fact that the
limited states Golf Association ruleS are
not the same as St Andrews. Nnen me me T. r.
vision took place, i'm 1908, the JnIlea oIaleSS oItleS
Golf Association issued a code Wmch iedu
The rules of golf as approved by the
ROYAL and Ancient Golf club OF -. Sn-
drews. September 1908, and "a amended pY
the United States Golf Association feo-
ruary IT, l+e.'
In the preface il is stated that:
The United States Golf Association, IN
making these rulings and interpretauohs
has made few changes in the WORDING or
I'm the import Of the rules Of goli as adoptc
ed by the Royal and Ancient Goit SluD OF
S. Andrews and has only added Such
dednitjons and explanations as appeared 10
be called for or suggested by custom ana
decisions Of competent experts. -. -
The changes in question were maze IN
Rule 80 relating 10 disputes 10 match pay
and Rule 16 relating 10 disputes IN st1Oke
plav 80 that IL would not really he break
Ing dNsy from St Andrews rules Ior tue
first time. ! do not refer so mucn 10 lie
special INTERPRETATIONS 10 Rules II, IL, 10
and o. which are really different rules. we
allow practice swings: they don't. Why not
allow individual choice in CLUBS, even II
they bar them? There is far greater dan
ger Of trouble ahead Of US not only from
St Andrews If we create the precedent OF
accepting it's rules without conSuitaIloh'
but from the golfers in this country, II we
set up a rule Of action which compelS us 10
play the game in this country regardless OF
the wishes of our players.
The suggestion is offered that there IS
vay out Of the present trouble. Mr.. Mac
donald quotes a letter from the chairman
Of the rules Of golf committee, wherein u
is suggested that "the United States COR
Association can adopt the St. Andrews
rules and interpret a mallet t-headed Iype
of club so as not 10 bar the Schenectady.
This Is quite impossible. 81. Andrews has
added 10 the clause on form anf MAKE o!
golf clubs which formerly read as follows:
The rules Of golf committee intmateS
that u will not sanction any stnstdnudl
departure from the traditional ana accept
ed form and make Of golf clubs. whlch In
iis opinion. consist OF a plain shaft and
head which does not contain any nleciidm-
cal contrivance such as springs
1t also regards as illegal the use or such
clubs as those Of the mallet- -headeh type
or such clubs as have the neck so DeHI As
n produce a similar effect
The rules OF Golf committee intimates
that the following general co9sloeratlons
Will guide II i'm interpreting ms RUE %
The head of golf clubs shall be so con-
structed that the length Of the head from
the hack Of the heel 10 the TOE sRaI ne
grtatsr than the breadth from the race 70
the back Of the head C2 The shaft shall
be fixed AZ the heel or TO neck, socket
or hose which terminates at the heel. On
TIE lower part Of the shaft shall, N pro
tuoed, meet the heel of the club or tas TOT
xu0zn sRW@