The Lawn Tennis Association has once more given a conclusive proof of its inability to answer the needs of the mass of players now in college. In spite of the lengthy discussion of last spring about the feasibility of a more equitable distribution of courts, when the occasion for action arrives the executive of the association simply folds its hands and lets matters frame their own course. So long as they themselves are well provided for, why should they bother about other people's affairs, and if they themselves are successful in getting or keeping hold of desirable courts, why should there be a general ousting in favor of the discontented few? Everyone knows that the number of players is far too great for the number of courts, and yet it does not seem fair that for that unfortunate reason so many should be wholly excluded from the sport. The present system of "scrambling" for courts or of one man reserving for private use the best court to be found, is unjust to the extreme and we hope that another year of dissatisfaction will be more fruitful in reform. Some persons have always insisted upon the inutility of the association except to a select few, and they may now feel reassured in their opinion by the present management of tennis matters.