Considerable discussion has lately arisen in regard to the privileges of men who want tennis courts laid out. In several cases different claimants have appeared for the same ground, and in other instances there have been disputes in regard to presumed encroachments by tennis players on the cricket and la crosse fields. The man "Tom," who lays out the courts, seems to have become a self-constituted authority, whose interests extend little beyond his white-wash bucket, and getting the money for his work. The popularity of tennis this spring seems to be on the increase, and numerous claims have been made on the ground available for courts, so that our fields are now closely scored. The distribution of these courts is remarkable. They lie at every angle with each other and at all points of the compass. Occupancy of the ground is the whole law, and possession is ill-defined. It is to be hoped that the Tennis Association will revive sufficiently to take some action in regard to the occupancy of courts and the terms of possession. Some equitable rules should be drawn up to govern the distribution of courts, and to bring about some satisfactory solution to the vexed questions now pending of ownership, and of demand for new grounds.