WE differ from the Advocate on the action of the base-ball convention in allowing a college nine, some of whose men are professionals, to play for an amateur championship, and insist that it is establishing a bad precedent. In all intercollegiate contests it is always understood that only amateurs can compete, and the absence of the professional element in base ball heretofore should have warned these men that, by becoming members of a professional club, they ceased to be amateurs, and disfranchised themselves, so to speak. In other words, a long standing precedent becomes in effect a law. These facts being known to the Brown men previously to their engagement, refusing to accept their explanation would not have been in the "nature of an ex post facto law." Moreover, ex post facto laws relate only to criminal cases, and therefore can have no application to this one. We are sorry that "private reasons" forced the Brown men to join a professional club; but at the same time we think that this fact should have no influence on our delegates, and hope that to-morrow they will vote to exclude all but amateurs from playing for the intercollegiate championship.
Read more in Opinion
Amusements.
