Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-03-20
COLLEGIATE FOOT BALL.
A Severe Blow to the Game Dealt by
Hnrvarlrs Faculty.

A Severe Blow to the Game Dealt by
Hnrvards Faculty.
The most severe blow that has been
struck against the game of foot ball came
yesterday in the form Of a second vote Of
the Harvard faculty. This is the official
statement of the vote: THE faculty hav-
ing received and considered communica-
ton from the committee on the regulation
of athletic sports, dated February %, 1895.
remain of the opinion that no student under
their charge should be permitted to take
part in intercollegiate foot ball contests
The communication referred to was a
statement prepared by the athletic commit
tee appointed by the college corporation
to have supervision in such cases as this.
At its former meeting the faculty recon-
mended to the athletic committee the aboli-
ton of intercollegiate foot ball. The latter
replied by suggesting certain notifications
of the game instead of its utter abolition.
The recommendations proposed that all
games be played upon the home grounds
of the competitors; that the sale of tickets
be limited to graduates and undergraduates
for themselves and their guests. Reforms
in the rules of play were also proposed.
AS regards intentional rough play, the
advisers expressed their conviction that
nearly all the players on college teams
desire to play in an honorable way, but
that more effective legislation is needed for
the detection and summary punishment OF
the exceptional player of a vicious and I'M
governable temper, and to this end they
recommend an additional umpire and an
increase in the powers and responsibilities
of all the officials. Another meeting of the
faculty will be held August 2, when final
and decisive action on the question is an
ticipated.
CAMBRIDGE. Mass, March 2O.-Capt. A.
H. Brewer Of the Harvard foot ball team
ward students in relation to the action of
the faculty at yesterdays meeting. He
says: Whether last evenings vote of the
faculty is unwise or not is to be seen In
future years. Whether they have really
acted toward the prosperity of the college
remains yet to be proven. For the present
at least, the deed is done, and, as we think,
perhaps one OF our most manly sports has
been torn from us. But are we actually in
a position to question the wisdom of this
action? Do we, as undergraduates only in
this college, consider that we can judge
with that judgment that comes from eX-
perience? Is it not better to trust to the
foresight of our elders in experience at
least? Surely they realize the Importance
of the step they have taken, and are will
ing to accept the result which they must
sincerely believe will be only to our adj
vantage. Is it not most disrespecful to the
faculty if we tear to pieces their opinions
and criticise them piecemeal, we, who are
undergraduates, who have scarcely reach
ed our twenties? Let it be for others to
Criticise. Let 1t be for those who justly be-
lieve themselves capable, but let us at least
prove ourselves NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. and
manly
The action of the faculty is emphatically
condemned in student circles. as much be-
cause it ignores the authority Of the ath-
letic committee as because it seems to in
dictate a desire to crush out the sport. 1t
appears to the students in the light of a
body who are for the most part unfamiliar
with the game, disregarding the recon-
mendations of well-versed athletes. who
have the interest Of Harvard at heart as
deeply as the faculty have.
The faculty members are most reticent
| in speaking about the matter. One mem
| Der, however. said:
"In nv opinion the vote merely expresses
that the faculty is unchanged in it's oppo'
sitior to the game I have the idea thai
| if the faculty were to be convinced thai
other colleges as well as Harvard were te
| take part in the movement of reform, they
| would he willing to have the game played
on trial another season.