AN editorial in a recent Advocate takes up the much-discussed question of the football championship, and decides that Princeton still has a right to the title which she has held for the past three years. To us it seems that this decision is wrong. The facts are as follows: Princeton was champion last year, and has won two games and tied one this year. (This assumes that she will get a game from Columbia either by play or forfeit.) Yale has precisely the same score. Now, if the championship is something that is played for each year, and if the title to it ceases at the beginning of a new season, there are no champions now. If the championship is a thing which belongs to an individual or a club until they are beaten, that is, if the title of champion is subject to the same rules as the cap or the belt which the Advocate speaks of, then Princeton would be champion were it not for one consideration. The belt, which the Advocate takes by way of illustration (unless there are express agreements and conditions concerning it) is held subject to challenge. In the case of the title to the championship there are no agreements and conditions; and Yale has challenged Princeton, and Princeton has refused the challenge, thus forfeiting the title which would be hers if we granted that the championship is determined by the rules which the Advocate applies. Thus, in whichever way we regard the question, the conclusion is inevitable that Yale and Princeton are tied.