Although displaying the best brand of football it has shown this season, the Harvard 1928 eleven was on the short end of a 7 to 6 score when the final whistle blew ending the game with the Yale Freshman team on Soldiers Field Saturday. Captain Bell's eleven outplayed the Elis throughout, but the failure to produce a scoring punch when deep in the Yale territory tells the tale of the Crimson's defeat.
Long March Fails on One-Yard Line
With the Yale Freshmen leading by the margin of a single point in the middle of the last quarter. Harvard recovered a fumble on the Blue's 43-yard line, and by straight football carried the ball to a first down on the Eli six-yard line.
Three tries into the line left the pigskin only a yard from the goal. Although a drop-kick would have won the game for the Crimson, quarterback Burns elected to send Gallway off tackle. Quarrier stopped the play, and Yale took the ball on downs. Harvard continued to threaten throughout the balance of the quarter, resorting to long passes, but were not successful in their attempts to score.
Yale scored in the first quarter on a forward pass from Ordway to Fishwick, which the Eli quarterback converted into a touchdown after a brilliant 40-yard dash. The Harvard touchdown came when Pratt, who was the shining light in the Crimson defense, blocked a punt, and Fordyce scooped the ball up and ran for a touchdown. Burns try for the extra point was blocked by Goodwin.
Gallway, Crosby, and Linscott bore the brunt of the Crimson attack, which netted three yards to the Blue's one. In the line, Pratt and Bell were towers of strength. For Yale, Stone and Ordway played well, with Quarrier distinguishing himself in the line. "The policy framed by the maidenly fears of squeamish old tabby cats has reduced Boccaccio to the position in the undergraduate mind of a pleasantly indecent myth."
"The next books I looked up," says the editorial writer, "were certain psycho-analytical works by Havelock Ellis; the catalogue referred me to the Philosophical Library in Emerson Hall, where I found the books I was looking for were some of them listed, but were none of them in the places they were supposed to be."
The writer compares Princeton liberalism, where the shelves are open to all-comers, to this Widener policy. He lays a good deal of the blame on the backs of officials of the library who have taken upon themselves an authority that does not belong to them. "The Widener Bureaucracy" is to blame in his opinion.
Comment on the article was not very general on Saturday as but few had had the opportunity to read the Advocate. Mr. Briggs, when intreviewed, said that he disliked the vindictive attitude of the writer but that all criticism was always to be welcomed. "The Library Council", he said, "is the group to which to appeal for any change in rule and it will give any such appeal its intelligent consideration."
Professor A. C. Coolidge, who is the Director of the Library Council, was reached on the telephone. He had not yet read the article and therefore had no comment to make. Mr. W. C. Lane, the Librarian, also made no comment.
It is expected that the Library Council will issue an official statement in the near future in answer to the attack