There are three things in the report of the Athletic Director to the President which merit special attention, namely, the discussion of summer baseball, the questioning of the feasibility of polo as an intercollegiate sport, and the effort mentioned to make the coaching positions at Harvard more permanent. Unfortunately Mr. Bingham does not commit himself on either of the first two topics, he merely raises a question.

Harvard has a rule at present forbidding its baseball players to play on teams during the summer on which any man receives monetary remuneration. This rule is unnecessarily strict. There should be a rule forbidding men to receive money for play during the summer, but it is hardly necessary to restrict men from playing on a semi-professional team if they themselves are doing so for pure recreation. If this regulation would be adhered to strictly and, if any man received money, would be disqualified immediately from further play at Harvard would face the situation honestly. It would make for poorer baseball teams since stars from secondary schools would go to colleges that openly permit their athletes to accept money for summer playing. But Harvard does not desire to be a haven for such athletes.

Mr. Bingham also raises the question: should Harvard play colleges that permit their athletes to play summer baseball? Why not? Harvard has never requested more than that its opponent follow out its own eligibility rules.

Much has already been said about collegiate polo. Certainly the Athletic Association can not support the sport completely. It seems only fair, however, that it be given the same opportunities as the other forms of athletics. A polo field should be provided and the regular number of trips should be granted. But expenditures for mounts can hardly be made. Polo can only be played by those of sufficient means. If those men are willing to use their own ponies the game should certainly be allowed to continue. If the latter is not the case, polo can hardly occupy a place in the intercollegiate athletic program.

The third important point in the report mentions a movement along which progress has already been made, namely, the granting of permanence to coaching positions. This action can only be commended. It is desirable at all times for the coaches to know that good character coupled with an interest in their work and the ability to teach will result in their continued retention and that the knack to produce winning teams is no longer a criterion in this respect.