New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-01-21

day. II is the first time in seven years that the
title has been at stake DR.. Lasker defeated
the late William Steinitz al Moscow in 1891 and
since then all efforts have failed 10 match Las
ker with DR. Tarrasch. the German champion;
Geza MarocZy. the Hungarian expert Carl
SchleChter. the Austrian master; David JanOW
SKI, the hrst player in France, or the late Harry
N Pillsbury, than whom few greater players
ever lived. Marshall the present challenger,
has earned a forward place in recent years in
the chess world. He has his spurs by
earning first prize in two big international tour
naments. in one Of which, at Cambridge Springs,
Penn in 1904, Lasker was second. In that
tournament Lasker and Marshall drew their
game In the meeting at Paris in 1900 which
Lasker won Marshall defeated the champion in
brilliant game. Lasker is a pronounced ia
Norite Tor the coming match, but Marshall does
not lack for followers. who count his orig
inality and daring to pull out victory.
ATHLETICS AT HARVARD
The feeling is growing at Harvard that in
spite OF the uncertainty about the continuance
Of intercollegiate athletics at Cambridge the
university authorities will not put a ban on the
proper conduct OF sports when a final decision
is reached. The undergraduates feel. however,
that they are not being treated altogether fair
ly. and The Harvard Crimson has taken up
the matter editorially. and suggests that the
investigation committee should gather evidence
from the undergraduate body. This seems only
fair, as intercollegiate athletics is a question Of
vital importance 10 every Harvard man. The
editorial says in part
In the course of its investigation the commit
tee appointed Jointly by the corporation and by
the oVerseers to examine and report upon the
whole question Of athletics in the university has
taken the testimony of those men officially con-
nected with the university whose relations with
athletics here have been most intimate for a
number OF years and who therefore, are most
qualified TO talk with authority that subject.
There is no doubt. moreover. that far OBJ
tanning graduate and official judgment and sem
tment are concerned. the investigating COM
mittee has been very thorough. But such opin-
ions, although obviously of great Importance,
are given perhaps only from one point Of view.
Undergraduate opinion is not represented. II
the committee has not proceeded so far in its in
designations is TO have already formed its con-
illusions on the matter. The Crimson would
assume the liberty Of suggesting that on several
phases Of the athletic situation, undergraduates,
who have taken the foremost part in various
athletic endeaVor. and whose views should be
representative should be allowed 10 state their
opinions before the committee, The questions
OF an increased undergraduate representation
on the athletic committee and the best way of
bringing about that increase: of the value OF
and the need for training tables; Of the justice
and reasona beness of the rule limiting men to
participation in only two seasons Of sport in one
year; Of the adYisabity of employing profess
sional coaches; Of the method Of conducting
competitions for the positions OF assistant man
ayers OF the teams; Of the large expenditures
necessary under present conditions. and finally
OF the value to undergra duates Of intercollegiate
sport, are all subjects of Importance in any dis
cussion Of Harvard athletics.