A SATISFACTORY REFUTATION.

EDITORS DAILY CRIMSON: You publish in yesterday's issue a communication which admonishes the enthusiasts on the subject of flooding Holmes Field to consider "both sides of the question before advocating their plan, so ardently before their college." The writer names an objection which he seems to think explodes the whole scheme; namely, that three feet of water will be needed "to cover amply all the undulations and irregularities on the surface of such a large field." The gentleman might as well have made the number of feet ten or twenty instead of three; for they would have sounded more formidable, and would have stated the case just as truly.

I noted carefully the irregularities on the field when it was covered with snow-ice; and unless the gentleman would wish to cover the back-stop fence, I am convinced that five or six inches of water would make as smooth a field of ice as three or four feet would. Every winter a mass of snow-ice accumulates on Holmes Field, sometimes to a considerable depth; none of the dire calamities which the gentleman predicts would follow artificial flooding, have ever yet occurred, and I am sure a few inches of ice will have no perceptible effect on the field in the spring.