The joint proposition made by some Harvard and Yale graduates for the regulation of athletic sports has come to our hands. We are surprised to find that it concedes to Yale every point now in controversy. It provides for only one game of foot ball and that in New York, and makes special students ineligible. It also omits any provision for referees and umpires in football, and the announcement of the names of the players a considerable time before the contests-both of which are important reforms. We cannot understand how any Harvard graduates were moved to draw up such a proposal. The desire to have a football game in New York may have prejudiced them. It should not have blinded them to the interests of the undergraduates and the college as a whole. It seems to us that-after the captains of the university teams, the graduate advisory committees, and the athletic committee had drawn up articles with great care and deliberation, and after the undergraduates had expressed their entire confidence in the outcome of the negotiations, any alumni should have hesitated about taking any steps which might, complicate the discussion. With this proposal purporting to come from a "committee" of New York Yale and Harvard graduates, presented at their mass meeting, it is no wonder that the Yale students refused to accept the Harvard conference committee's proposition. They may well have been misled into thinking that the influence of the Harvard alumni would be used to carry the disputed points in favor of Yale, We repeat that college men and the great majority of the alumni are united in support of the conference committee's proposition, and are determined not to yield on any point. We believe that on further consideration even those graduates who drew-up the second set of articles will see the strength of this position and will sequlesee in giving their uniteds support. It is worthy of note that they did not sign the articles.