The correspondence between Harvard and Yale, which is published in another column, speaks for itself. We can add but little, yet there are a few points which we may emphasize.

With one or two exceptions we can heartily commend the fairness of Yale's proposition. It expresses apparently a sincere desire to arrange games in base ball this spring. It also for the first time intimates that Harvard's cooperation in Yale's efforts to reform collegiate athletics is sought for. Had Yale seen fit, at the very beginning, to take Harvard into her plans, we venture to say that the two universities could have succeeded in adopting measures for purification, which would have been satisfactory to all. However, Yale did not see fit to do this; Harvard is nevertheless willing by her own example to set a pure standard which others can follow or not as they please. The rules which we publish have been adopted finally by the Athletic Committee and will be applied to all athletes at Harvard after the calendar year of 1893. irrespective of any regulations which other colleges may determine upon. We believe that our scheme will purify effectively all forms of athletics; at the same time it maintains the idea of university teams. We do not stipulate that any other college shall fall in line with us; yet we shall be glad to see them do so. We shall not refuse to play colleges because they differ with us in our views of the proper restrictions which should be placed upon athletes. We have taken our stand, and, following it, are willing to meet any team and run our chances for victory or defeat. We do not mean to imply that we shall refuse obstinately all compromise. If Yale can point out clearly serious faults in our plan, and if a reasonable concession will promote the interests of athletics, it is safe to say that Harvard will show a fair spirit and act in a sportsmanlike manner. It should be borne in mind that Yale asked for a statement of Harvard's position in regard to the undergraduate question. Harvard has made this statement, but it is in no way a formal proposition to Yale.

We took exception above to the fairness of Yale's letter. The attitude of Harvard at the meeting of the Intercollegiate Association, as stated by Yale, cannot but make us seem inconsistent in the eyes of the public. We regret that the misstatement was made, but it is comparatively a small point. Manager Hill has answered it squarely and also the implied inconsistency between our present attitude and the statement made by the Chairman of the Advisory Committee in the January number of the Harvard Graduates' Magazine.

Harvard has thus defined clearly her position and the lines upon which she intends to work. We believe that she has come forward in a way which can leave no doubt as to her sincerity and fairmindedness. We trust her plan may be one which others may care to adopt of their own free will. We will gladly cooperate with Yale, or any other college, by taking measures for our own purification. But to us, coercion in athletics, seems neither manly nor sportsmanlike. Rather, let our own standard be such that others may see it, admire it and follow it.