We are inclined to agree with the writer of the communication printed in another column, in questioning the right of the so-called University polo team to its self-styled name. The fact that this team has declared itself open to challenge does not constitute it a "varsity team." It is indeed the custom in professional athletics and to some extent also in amateur athletics outside of the college world, for an athletic team to assume the championship of a certain section as long as it is unchallenged and unbeaten, but it is a well-established college precedent that no team should claim to represent the University unless it were formed by a pre-announced and open competition.

It might be said that a protest against the name would have come in better grace before, rather than after the defeat by Brown. We do not think so. The University at large cares very little about the name of a scrub team so long as it limits itself to playing unimportant teams. But when a few men who call themselves the University team play against the accredited representatives of another college and the impression is given to the public that the contest is between the two colleges, the University has a right to demand that the team which bears its name shall be really representative.

We have no intention of casting any imputations on the members of the polo team in question, nor do we think that they have ever formally set themselves up as a Harvard team; they adopted the name, "University Polo team," as a member of the team wrote to the CRIMSON last Tuesday, "for want of a better."

Still we think that the technicality should be observed which precedent has established as a wise one.