the mark!) was produced. An odd rhyme is sometimes sung in these processions :

The first of May is Garland day,

And chimney sweepers' dancing day.

Curl your locks as I do mine,

One before and one behind.

The study of these ancient Mayday customs and ideas (of which this paper can be but a fragmentary bird's-eye view) has something more behind it than mere archæological interest. The spirit of to-day, though proclaiming itself loudly as progressive and even revolutionary, has yet a curious undercurrent within it leading it to hark back to the old ways of the old days. In every direction it is trying to recapture and embody in its progression all that was best and most full of meaning in those distant times of Chaucer, Spenser, and Elizabeth, when life was less complex, less congested; when man could live more spaciously and nearer to Nature, when England was beautiful in her woodlands and her countryside as a whole, instead of, as to-day, in mere patches between vast areas of mean dwellings and paved streets. tendency to blend the old and the new is seen in our latest houses, designed of an old-time aspect, but 'replete with every modern convenience'; in the rescue of ancient country dances from oblivion, by much painstaking effort, that they may be taught in our most modern schools; in the unearthing, after eager and diligent search, of songs and music from mediæval MSS. that they may grace the most musically advanced London concert.

This

So with these Mayday customs. In the effort to bring home some idea of the beauty of Nature, some realisation of the beneficence of the spirit of the trees and the true inwardness of the flowers, to the children of a land that man is daily pushing further and further from the Creator's first conception of earth as a garden, it is suggested that Mayday revivals may yet play a happy and not unimportant part. Hence up and down the country such revivals are being fostered, and, if the leading of them be judicious and spontaneity can be evoked, our boys and girls, even of the city, may learn of such simple joys as Chaucer found in the daisies, and of which he wrote:

To them have I so great affection,

As I said erst, when comen is the May,
That in my bed there daweth me no day
That I nam up and walking in the mead
To see this flow'r against the sunné spread,
When it upriseth early by the morrow;
That blissful sight softeneth all my sorrow ;
So glad am I when that I have presence
Of it, to doen it all reverence.

G. CLARKE NUTTALL.

RUGBY FOOTBALL TO-DAY

THE recent visit of a team from New Zealand, together with their excellent record, served to bring the game of Rugby more to the notice of the public than ever. This is, on the whole, a good thing for Rugby football, though there are many and serious dangers attendant upon too large a public support of a purely amateur game. But it hardly needed a visit from the All Blacks to make the game widely known. Since 1919-20, the popularity of the game has increased by leaps and bounds, and it is no exaggeration to say that there must be at least four times the number of clubs playing regularly nowadays that there were in 1913-14. The spectators, of course, have increased in numbers too, but far more important than this is the number of healthy young fellows who regularly indulge in this splendid winter game. Watching matches up and down the country as I do, I often still see, with much regret, huge numbers of young men looking on instead of playing. There comes a time-too soon, alas !—when we are unable to play this vigorous and exacting game, but until that time comes we should do our very best to get into a club where we can be sure of a match in one of the many sides that clubs of to-day run. With the increase in the number of Old Boys' clubs there will be greater facilities for young fellows who are really keen on using their youth' youthfully,' and not as men past the 'Rugger' age. This question is closely allied with that of grounds, the lack of which is a great hindrance to the further development of existing clubs and the creation of new ones. The influential committee formed recently may do some good in this direction.

When the 1905' All Blacks came here the game was not nearly so widespread in its appeal as it was when C. G. Porter and his team arrived in September last. I had the good fortune to play my first game for England against the New Zealanders in that memorable match at the Crystal Palace in 1905, so that I have been more than usually interested in 'thinking back' to twenty years ago when watching our recent visitors, and pondering over what has happened in the meanwhile. It will be remembered by keen followers of the game that when David Gallaher's team came here English football, except in the West

Country, was undoubtedly at a low ebb. We had one of those lean times that all countries have in their turn, a time when highclass players are notably lacking. This was aggravated by the fact that the Rugby public in England was somewhat apathetic, and in this respect, at all events, the visitors did us a lot of good We needed stirring up, and the overwhelming defeats sustained by our clubs and our international team had the desired effect of making us look into things a little. The fact that England did not win the International Championship between 1892 and 1910 illustrates my point.

Round about the time in question the Championship honours used to go, as a rule, to Wales or Scotland, with Ireland sharing them in 1906. It was the heyday of Welsh football. E. T. Morgan, Gwyn Nicholls, R. T. Gabe, and W. M. Llewellyn formed a line of three-quarters that has not been matched in Wales or surpassed in any other country, whilst they were fed by R. M. Owenan inside half without an equal, in my opinion, purely as a 'feeder.' This side it was that inflicted the only defeat upon New Zealand. I wonder how many times E. T. Morgan, now in practice at Swansea, had to show people last season just how his famous try was scored! Whenever I saw him he seemed to be trying to avoid folk who wished to know exactly what happened. Both Scotland and Ireland had magnificent sides as well. K. G. and L. M. McLeod, Pat' Munro, E. D. Simson, Louis Greig, D. R. Bedell Sivright, W. P. Scott, J. C. McCallum, Basil Maclear, H. Thrift, C. E. Allen, Arthur Tedford, George Hamlet-these were just some of the stalwarts of those days; and that the New Zealanders crossed their line three times more than did either Ireland or Scotland is ample testimony to the fact that R. G. Deans, G. W. Smith, W. J. Wallace, J. Hunter, W. J. Stead, C. Seeling, D. Gallaher, and F. Roberts were members of one of the greatest sides of all time, even though they lost a match, which their successors did not do. Amongst other things that we learned from the 1905 visit were the value of fine physique, an increased knowledge of tactics (in a good sense), the importance of straight running, and the great assistance any visiting side has from the combination which the men are bound to develop by playing together and living together.

Things were different when the New Zealand team landed last year. England had been concerned in the Championship honours four times in the past five years, winning them outright three times out of the four. In addition, England had won the Championship in both seasons that immediately preceded the Great War. A. D. Stoop, John Birkett, Ronald Poulton, W. R. Johnson, F. E. Chapman, R. Dibble, Charles Pillman, C. N. Lowe, J. A. King, E. R. Mobbs, and W. J. A. Davies were some of the

players who took a leading part in this great change. The game was improved considerably by the careful attention given to offensive tactics by A. D. Stoop and his Harlequins. There is no doubt that the game had got rather stodgy in this country: it needed brightening, and the skilful use of pace and passing, together with a policy of attack whenever possible,' supplied this brightening. The first tangible result of this change of policy was seen when the Twickenham ground was opened in January 1910 with the match against Wales. England had not won this match since 1898, though the 1904 game at Leicester had been drawn. In the opening match at Twickenham England won, and restarted a winning sequence which has been unbroken as far as home matches are concerned. It was my good fortune to play in this memorable match too, partnering Stoop at half. Our defence was very shaky, but the prearranged policy of Stoop, captaining the side, enabled us to attack sufficiently to win by a small margin, though the whistle for 'no-side' came none too soon as far as we were concerned. This attacking policy was helped considerably by our putting it into practice right from the kick-off. Wales started the game. The ball reached Stoop, who, instead of kicking to touch, which was the orthodox thing to do, started a bout of passing from which we scored. England won the Championship that year, the first time since 1892.

After that, English football predominated for most of the time. Stoop was succeeded by W. J. A. Davies; C. N. Lowe came along ; Ronald Poulton developed into one of the game's greatest geniuses; Charles Pillman became a most effective winger; and W. R. Johnston was as reliable a full-back as England has ever had. Welsh football continued to be good for a year or two, but with the withdrawal of the famous line referred to above the standard gradually deteriorated, though the continued presence of Owen and W. J. Trew among the backs tended to make mediocre players into moderately good ones. Things did not go too well with Scotland either. There were no really worthy successors to Munro, Simson, Greig, and the McLeods, which was not surprising, and for some time Scotland had to rely mainly upon her forwards, though in 1912 there came along one of the prettiest wings that Scotland ever had, viz., John Will. Ireland missed Maclear badly, but R. A. Lloyd's advent at outside half in 1910 served to give the backs a good player on whom to pivot. The mainstay of the Irish team, however, continued to be the forwards-the traditional strength of an Irish side.

Rugby paid a very heavy toll in the war, and many of the glorious players named above played their last game for their side in something more serious than Rugby football. Thus things were very much unsettled when the threads of the game were taken

hold of by the various clubs in 1919. The five years that had elapsed had meant the death or retirement of most of our great players of 1914, and new blood was badly needed. Fortunately for England, W. J. A. Davies was still fit and well, even though his delightful partner, F. E. Oakeley, one of the most effective and likeable inside halves I ever played against, had gone down with his ship. The question of finding a worthy partner to Davies was of urgent importance to English football, and I well remember early in the 1919-20 season talking over this matter with EngineerCommander E. W. Roberts, R.N. I was rather pessimistic, for in that short time I had not seen an English inside half of any class at all. Roberts, however, cheered me up by speaking more than hopefully of a youngster he had seen at Portsmouth. The youngster was C. A. Kershaw, who got into the English side that very season and began a partnership with Davies that will form an important part of Rugby history. Kershaw's great qualities were his ability to give long and swift passes (a quality, though, that he was inclined to over-indulge), his magnificent dashes on his own' instead of feeding his partner, his defence, and his backing up of Davies, whilst his pace and weight made him as difficult to stop when on the run as a centre three-quarter.

Then what can one say of Davies that has not been said before? He ranks with Basil Maclear and Ronald Poulton as one of the greatest match winners of my time-that is going back to about 1900, the date at which I could take a critical interest in the game. No side that was not too far behind need despair if Davies was playing, and more than once since 1919 have England and the Navy won their matches solely through the individual brilliance of this great player. A wonderfully safe pair of hands, a superb faculty for drop-kicking and screw-kicking to touch, an uncanny instinct for spotting an opening through the defence that no other man on his side could see for certain, and great speed for a short distance were (and are still) just a few of his qualities. The memory of Davies fielding a bad pass, nosing' his opening, and going hard for the line with his head well back and with his long strides, is as abiding as that of one of his many glorious dropped goals.

The chief limitation in connection with Davies's play was that it was so individualistic in its nature that few, if any, threequarters could show their very best form in playing with him. Centres must inevitably be perturbed in playing with an outside half who will leave them'in the air' at any moment whilst he is winding his tortuous way through a defence in such a manner that it is well-nigh impossible for a three-quarter to follow in support. The result was that English three-quarter play tended to become, until latterly, individualistic too. The passing was not