It is unfortunate that our previous editorial comment concerning the selection of a new coach has been construed as a personal attack against Mr. Harlow. Having no such intention, we were solely concerned, as we have been all fall, with the principles which should govern the conduct of Harvard football. That there may be no further misunderstanding, we feel it wise to outline these principles.

First, Harvard should be represented by a team capable of holding its own against that of any other university following similar athletic policies. To be continually defeated by such teams is unfair to players, injurious to Harvard pride, and harmful to football receipts, which normally bear the brunt of expenses incurred by other teams.

Second, there should be no proselyting, subsidizing, or the employment of any means whatever of attracting to Harvard, men for the sole purpose of turning out winning teams.

Third, the practices of segregating football players in season, of instituting a training system so rigorous that it interferes with the normal pursuit of college life, would be alien to Harvard tradition, and would result in mechanization and over-emphasis.

We feel that if the H.A.A. rigidly adheres to these principles, Mr. Harlow will have the opportunity to turn out teams which will win universal respect. With such a platform, any questions raised by Mr. Harlow's previous coaching positions will become unimportant, since he will avoid in the future any pressure from administrative officials.