“My case is a somewhat singular one, gentlemen,” the M.P. responded. “It is this:
“A public road leading to the clubhouse crosses the line to the second hole, and when John Smith and Isaac Rosenstein were playing this hole it happened that Isaac’s bad slice landed his ball under the back seat of a motor-car standing still in the road, said car, curiously enough, being the new one which Rosenstein himself has bought this season, and which, it is suggested, he likes to ‘show off’ with. Seeing where the ball had gone to, and having the price of ten balls on the match, a thought passed through his mind. Hailing the chauffeur in the car, he exclaimed, ‘You mitherable vellow! Did I not tell you to geep that car in the garage at the back of the clubhouse, where it vould not be damaged. Be off vith you this very instant, or I vill sack you! Quick!’ And before John Smith could speak the chauffeur was doing his forty miles an hour back to the clubhouse—with the ball still in the car. Smith and Rosenstein then wrangled for hours, the latter being greatly astonished because his opponent objected to his dropping a ball, and that without penalty, at the spot where he played his last stroke. The points presented for argument are these: (1) Shall Rosenstein drop without losing a stroke? (2) Shall he drop and lose stroke and distance? (3) Shall he not drop at all, but lose the hole? (4) Shall he play the ball from where it lies under the seat of the motor-car in the club garage, as, if he loses on the first two counts, he wants to do? (5) What ought to have been done?”
“I trust that your friend Rosenstein will not offer himself as a candidate for membership of this club,” observed the Colonel with a smile, “because you might tell him if he thinks of doing so that I have heard of this incident, and I happen to be on the committee.”
“He is no friend of mine,” said the M.P.
“Well then, gentlemen,” the man of arms demanded, “what is your pleasure that we should do in the affaire Rosenstein?”
“I don’t think there is very much doubt about that,” observed the Parson, “We must be unanimous in this matter. I think we may safely leave it to you, Colonel, to make the award.”
The M.P. and the Author assented, but it was understood that the former should have the privilege of sending the case back for re-trial if he disagreed.
“Then, gentlemen,” said the Colonel, “I give judgment as follows:
“Rosenstein loses the hole. It was his duty to have played the ball from the place where it lodged in the car, and there is a strong suspicion that he knew it! He is not entitled to regard the car as an agency outside the match, since he controlled the car and ordered it away. By his own act he made it impossible for him to obey the rules. He loses under Rule 7, and it may be mentioned that the Rules of Golf Committee has already decided that a ball played into a motor-car must be played out of it, or the hole given up. Clearly the ball lying in the car in the club garage does not lie where it did before.”
“I quite agree,” said the M.P.