The current issue of Harper's Weekly, in its column for amateur sport, discussed Harvard's athletic position at some length; and, among other things, it accuses of gross inconsistency the Committee on the Regulation of athletic sports. It says "Why, when the athletic team has been permitted to disport itself outside the hallowed precincts of New England, the base ball nine should not be granted equal privilege is not entirely clear." The article goes on to state that this decision from the Athletic Committee has proved the New England rule to be a mere blind.
We do not attempt here to discuss the wisdom or unwisdom of the New England rule; but we wish to show how the writer in Harper's Weekly, when claiming that the Athletic Committee has been inconsistent in this particular, has entirely missed the point.
For the good of our athletics, it has been deemed best to set some limit to our intercollegiate contests. This limit the Athletic Committee has made New England-provided always in such a case that the highest interest in the sport can be kept up. They found that track athletics this year, unless allowed to be contested outside New England, would possibly be vitally injured. The nine would run no such danger. It could meet its strongest rivals in New England, and the greatest interest in the sport kept up. There is, then, no analogy between the cases of the athletic team and the nine; and all attempts to draw one must necessarily prove as utterly feeble as the one in Harper's Weekly.