I was interested to read the letter from Mr. Willmer suggesting that it would be “irresponsible” to form another MG Car Club. A myriad already exist within the so called MGCC in its “registers”, which are also mentioned.
My concept of a “register” is such as to detail chassis and engine nos. and limited history etc. of worthwhile motor cars of limited production and I see it as essentially distinct from, though analogous to, the hunt for spares (for an MG-C—really?).
Certainly I consider the MGCC register mad, and whilst too few agree with my historical interpretation that MG proper ceased manufacture in 1936 I do entirely fail to comprehend the potential camaraderie of ownership between the possessor of an o.h.c. car and say that of a lump of bulbous 1950s badge engineered Magnette (what a prostitution of that name), and as for registering them for posterity . . .well!
In attempting to indiscriminately appeal to such a very wide range of interest, with just two letters on a badge in common (largest one make car club they drool) I consider that they appeal to no particular section satisfactorily, and equally lower the standards of potential service to members by this fragmentation of resources.
As a member a both the VSCC and the MGCC and both having similar membership figures, it is with awe that I regard the organisation and efficiency of the former. Certainly they have a clearer philosophy. But I know cases where MMM MG owners (are there any others?) have received more forth coming and useful help from VSCC sources than the MGCC—perhaps through them being devoid of the nasty sectional self interest which can be smelt in some MGCC circles—and this for usually ineligible cars. Who says there’s no room for another MGCC? Some people got so sick they formed one for pie-1955 cars, which was a step in the right direction anyway. What I can say though to the chap with the MG-C is go ahead, join the MGCC. It will be just your cup of tea!
Prestwich MAURICE GLEESON
[This correspondence is now closed—ED.]