In your article on Yale game you congratulate the College upon the success of "systematic cheering given by the students, and conducted by appointed leaders." For some years I have watched the growth of this method of encouraging a nine or team, and have wondered whether it would or not call out some comment from the students or alumni. I do not doubt it serves as a stimulus to the players, but to me it would seem to do so at the sacrifice of far more desirable results. Why should athletics be supported by a pronounced and well led body of claquers? What merit or credit in the playing when backed by a mechanical system of applause?

I can imagine nothing which would have a more decided tendency to foster ill will, and controversy between two colleges. In days gone by the college paper would comment on the discourtesy shown in failing to applaud good plays of the college opponents, while now the zeal of the paper is expended in cultivating the most aggravated form of local and selfish applause.

In outdoor games as in indoor contests applause should be a spontaneous tribute to work well done, and might well furnish occasion for the display of independent, and discriminating judgement, as well as give visiting college men the impression that Princeton has positive purpose to show every courtesy to others.