We invite all members of the University to contribute to this column, but we are not responsible for the sentiments expressed. Every communication must be accompanied by the name of the writer.

To the Editors of the Crimson:

In view of the discussion started by Mr. Storrow's advocacy of a change in the length of the race with Yale, will you allow me to present the following considerations?

The reason--the only reason--suggested for the change is that four miles is too exhausting. Before going any further it must be remembered that it is yet to be shown that any man whose vital organs were sound and who had properly and carefully trained, has ever been injured in a 'Varsity race, either in this country or in England. A certain amount of exhaustion is a necessary result of any severe physical contest where the participants are using their nervous and muscular energy to the highest degree. It takes some little time to regain the energy thus expended;--in rowing, perhaps longer than in most other sports--but if the recovery is complete, and I say again there is nothing to show that it is not, is any harm done? Are we to give up contests involving endurance because a man requires a little time to recover from them? Our crews hardly need to be in their best condition again the day after the race, when we row Yale only once a year.

Will three miles be much less exhausting than four miles? That a crew will be very much more used up at the end of a three mile race than it will be at the end of the third mile in a four mile race, is obvious. If the race is to end at the three miles, the final desperate spurt will begin near two and a half miles, and it is this last spurt that takes it out of a crew. Besides this, a three mile crew will row a higher stroke all the way, at least two points higher, than the same crew for four miles, and a higher stroke uses a man up relatively much faster. A man who has rowed two and a half miles at thirty-five or thirty-six is not in very much better shape for the punishment of the last half mile than he would be after three and a half miles at thirty-two. A three mile race would then be at best not very much less exhausting than four miles.

To sum up the question of exhaustion, no evil results have appeared nor are likely to appear, providing there is suitable preparation, from our four mile races. But even if it is desirable to reduce the exhaustion, three miles is, if at all, very little better than four in this respect.

So far, I have considered the only argument in favor of shortening the race, but there are many reasons why four miles is the more desirable distance. I have learned from those who were active in rowing when the change from sixes to eights was made (in 1876) that four miles was not adopted principally because that is the distance rowed by Oxford and Cambridge (their race is about four miles and three-eights), but because it was thought that a three mile race, which had been the distance for sixes, was altogether too short a distance for eights. It was believed then that the preparation would be more thorough, and that the stroke would be slower and would be not only much less dangerous to participants, but that it would be a much more satisfactory test both of the endurance and rowing ability of the crews. The shorter distance which induced inadequacy of preparation and a rapid stroke had been condemned so much before 1876 that the change was thoroughly approved; and it is worthy of note that those who had had the experience of both distances reached conclusions directly opposite to the views now advanced by Mr. Storrow. Nothing has occurred since to impair the soundness of the reasons which induced the adoption in 1876 of four miles as the distance. The longer race is a better test of the rowing ability of the crews, for the longer the race the more skill in rowing, and especially in crew rowing, counts, while mere individual strength is less important. To win a four mile race requires a long period of thorough and careful preparation. If the length of the race is shortened, there would be danger of a tendency towards insufficient preparation.

The fact that Harvard and Yale have always rowed four miles (in eights) is a consideration, possibly sentimental, but of considerable weight. There is now a long list of records, and we are able to compare through them, the rowing of past years with that of today.

The course at Henley is only a little over a mile, but the eights that row there have not the time to train for a longer race, and the races have to be rowed in heats. Oxford and Cambridge, as has been mentioned, row considerably more than four miles. If our English friends can do it, I for one think the American college rowing men ought to have the stamina, and I believe they have it. To many people, it is a source of great humiliation that the Englishmen are so much superior to us Americans in contests involving endurance. Here, in rowing, we have the finest test of endurance that there is. We should be very slow to take away in the least from this feature of the race.

Six or eight years ago there was another argument used in favor of shortening the race;--that the 'Varsity race was always settled long before the three-mile mark was reached. In the last two years this argument has been demolished, but in such a way that, as Mr. Storrow says, this is a very unfortunate time for Harvard to suggest that the race be shortened.  HUGH BANCROFT.