The only action of importance at the meeting of the Intercollegiate Athletic Association on Saturday, was the rejection of the undergraduate rule as proposed by Yale. It is a significant point that whereas a two-thirds vote was necessary to pass the amendment, the two thirds vote was cast against it. This action shows clearly the position which the large majority of colleges represented at the meeting, take in regard to this question. Harvard, with the others, placed herself on record as opposed to the rule, but not because she was opposed to reform. She simply believes that, in the heat of enthusiasm, Yale was indiscreet in attempting to narrow her athletics down to a college basis; and this feeling is apparently strong even at Yale. With college sentiment expressed so strongly against the measure, it would seem dictatorial, at the least, to persist uncompromisingly in a plan so weakly backed.
Out of this complication a solution will eventually be found, which will probably keep up the university standard, but rid it of its present objectionable features. However, with the undergraduate rule in the precarious position it now holds, it seems a questionable policy, for those who have of their own free will adopted it, to try to drag others down to their own level. We think that the athletic spirit at Yale must be too sportsmanlike to allow the baseball games to fall through because Yale has, by her own deliberate action, weakened her teams and their chances of winning. If this were not the case, Yale "grit" would soon become a by-word. However, we do not believe that Yale will be found wanting in spirit and we look forward hopefully to a final settlement of the difficulties.