To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

In the account of the Princeton baseball game published in this morning's CRIMSON there is a statement that "the opposing coach was in the diamond" at a very critical point in the game, "without a protest on the part of the Harvard captain." Now it is perfectly well understood that a graduate coach has no right whatever to be on the diamond or coaching lines during a game; and I understand from one who saw the game that Princeton was guilty of a number of other discourtesies that were calculated to upset the play of the visiting team. As the CRIMSON states, there was no protest on the part of the Harvard captain, and, as there has been no protest on the part of the CRIMSON, the way now seems clear for Princeton to repeat all these offences and perhaps add new ones the next time opportunity offers. Yale, too, has in the past few years submitted to most extraordinary treatment at Princeton, without protest, or at least without any convincing protest. Like ourselves, Yale is afraid to speak out lest someone say that their protest. Like ourselves, Yale is afraid to speak out lest someone say that their protests are inspired by the "sourness" following the loss of a game. But it seems to me that there should be some straight forward expression of what we all must feel, even at the risk of hearing the trite response about being "sour." Whether or not any of the actions of the Princeton supporters last Saturday made a difference of a few runs, or of the game, is now immaterial; but as a matter of principle for this year and other years, the time has come to say that Princeton has no right, in the midst of a game, to run men around behind the catcher, to allow photographic apparatus to be manipulated in such a way as to annoy the players on a visiting team, and in general to make an apparently studied attempt to berattle opponents.  GRADUATE.

May 31, 1904