The college faculty have passed a vote advising the corporation that in their opinion it would be unwise to build a fence round the new athletic grounds. The reasons for taking this step were numerous. In the first place it was felt by many members of the faculty that the building of the fence would be undemocratic, in that it would prevent a large number of men from witnessing the games on account of inability to pay the price of admission. To the minds of some the matter appears in its mercenary aspect, and it is feared that the erection of a fence for the purpose of increasing the gate receipts will smack of professionalism. Still another class look at the question from an aesthetic point of view, and in the eyes of these the unsightly appearance of the fence is its chief fault. It is believed, also, that the erection of a fence will create opposition to the athletic interests of the college in the minds of those whose good will would be of value.
The final, and perhaps the most effective, argument against the fence in the opinion of the faculty is the belief shared by its leading members, that the students themselves are really opposed to the project, although many of them do not see fit to express their sentiments on the question. Many of these reasons appear to have some foundation in the nature of the case; but it does not seem to us that, taking all the facts into consideration, they are strong enough, whether taken separately or together, to justify the abandonment of the plan as first proposed of building a fence. The number of students who stay outside to see a game is very small, and the few who do so would not, in our opinion, object strongly to paying the regular price of admission, which is by no means exorbitant.
The objection raised on account of the air of professionalism which will be given to our athletes by the erection of a fence, is answered by mentioning the fact that the purpose of the fence is not to make money - although it might incidentally increase the amount of gate receipts - but rather to keep out the hordes of "muckers" who infest the outskirts of the field and make themselves disagreeable by the hoots and cries, and who at the end of every game rush on to the field in a body, cutting it up seriously and doing more damage in one day than would otherwise be done in weeks.
The aesthetic objection can be done away with by building an ornamental fence, which would certainly not be an impossible feat. The next dangerous objection is that of opposition to the plan by students themselves. This objection we believe to be entirely without foundation, and it is to be hoped that the students will take some method to make known their real position on the question.