“Of course not,” the Colonel replied, “but it has to be remembered that this was really almost a matter of life and death to the old man, and in such a case he was perhaps not to be blamed for sticking to the strict letter of the law. From our point of view the spirit is above the law; but when it comes to a case of this kind, with goodness knows how many thousands at stake, a merciless fellow on the other side who is himself inclined to stick to the law exactly, and when Lazarus, as he says, intends to have done with the game, why I am not sure that from his point of view--his, mind you--he is to be condemned for throwing the spirit overboard. His opponent would do so--in fact, to all intents and purposes he does. This has become a strictly business transaction. The question is, did he break the law?” “You remember the Rules Committee’s decision in the famous Selkirk case in 1906?” the M.P. asked. “It showed the Committee’s very proper anxiety to preserve the true spirit even to the extent of straining the interpretation of the rule about touching the line of the putt. I believe some of them privately admitted that they were conscious of straining it; but they were doing so in a very good cause, and to my mind they were to be applauded rather than blamed. In this case a foursome was being played, and while one man was preparing to putt, his partner stood two yards beyond the hole on the other side, and from there pointed out the line of the putt, incidentally letting his putter rest on the turf to do so--two yards beyond the hole. The opponents claimed the hole on the ground that the line of the putt had been touched, meaning that the line from the ball to the hole, continued beyond the hole, was still the line of the putt. The case was sent to St. Andrews, and the Rules Committee upheld the claim and gave the hole to the opponents--a remarkable decision!” “H’m!” the Colonel grunted. “Of course, give some golfers an inch and they will take a yard; and supposing the putter had been laid on that line only two inches beyond the hole, the green had been very keen, and had sloped down to the hole from the back side. If the ball had got to the point where the putter had rested it might conceivably have rolled back into the hole. There would be splendid justification for the Rules Committee in a case of that kind, and it would prove the wisdom of the Selkirk decision. Of course every day of our lives we see golfers, when studying their putts from the back side of the hole, allowing their putters to rest on the green in the continuation of the line. However, Lazarus seems to have been quite clear of any decision of this kind. By no stretch of imagination can you call a line which is a foot to one side of the real line, although parallel to it, ‘the line of the putt.’”