Evening capital and Maryland gazette. (Annapolis, Md.) 1910-1922, 1911-11-27
STANDS BY ST. JOHNS.
Alumnus Comments On Hopkins St.
Johns Game Played A Week
Ago.

A letter 70 the Baltimore Sun. so
vigorously expresses St. Johns part
of the controversy with Johns Hop
kins that a number of friends of the
college have requested its publication
in these columns. The writer says in
part:
mo Marylander with the finer sense
of apprecition would willingly do or
say anything to diseredit the efforts
Of those who are trying to better ath-
letics at Johns Hopkins; but, in all
reason, is il fair for the leaders of
Hopkins athletics to build up repu-
tation upon hollow victories.
IF | am credibly informed, there
were but three undergraduates upon
the heavy eleven which tramped down
the mere boys of st. Johns, and be
it remembered that it took many
hard knocks and long-continued bat
tering of st. Johns plucky line to
do that trampling. Whether there
were three undergraduates or not,
is not so important an offense to the
accepted etiquette of the game as
was the open defian of the eligi-
bility rules in the playing of such
past masters at football as the five
year Stollenwerck, who takes a
"joke" course in political economy at
Hopkins, not for his own edification
so much as for the unsportsmanlike
purpose Of lending, selling or surren-
dering his football ability to Johns
Hopkins University while he is a bona
fide student of the famous old Uni
versity of Maryland, of which st.
Johns College is a part.
"Similar comment may also be
made upon the playing of Profess
scr" Bridgman and other post-grad-
uate heavyweights, who workedIso hard
to undo an honorable rival and adver-
tise to the unwary that Hopkins is
superior to st. Johns in football.
But the unwary are fortunately in
the minority in Baltimore and in the
State, and their opinion does no
harm to St. Johns College, whose
reputation for craftsmanship and
clean athletics has been so long es-
tablished that the name of st. Johns
and the term "pure athletics" were
synonymous before Johns Hopkins
ever had team.
at must be a matter of regret
to the high-principled gentlemen of
the Hopkins faculty that the smaller
and lighter undergraduate team of an
ancient Maryland college should be
forced to compete with experts Of
past years, who still style themselves
bona fide students of Hopkins for no
other purpose than to wage unequal
contests and to pile up meaningless
and empty scores against her.
Whatever Disadvantages Hopkins
may have to overcome in the matter
of gathering together a team from a
student body four times as large as
st. Johns is not excused by sports
men, when she knowingly employs
methods so flagrantly unfair simply in
order to win. The St. Johns team
accepts their drubbing without a muir
muir, but those who know the facts
which made the drubbing possible de-
plore them, as much for the ultimate
athletic renown of Hopkins as for the
undeserved victory.
''Let Hopkins hereafter treat St.
Johns as fairly as she was compelled
to treat the strong team of the Uni
versity of Virginia, which won from
st. Johns by the narrow margin of 6
to 0, and that on fluke, and from
Hopkins by the decisive score of 81
to 0. Hopkins is entitled to all the
credit she can get by fair and reason
able means. and st. Johns men will
always honor and respect whatever
superiority she may attain by super
iority skill and craftsmanship. No
true St. Johns man ever "squeals''
when defeated in a fair fight.
WALTON HOOD GRANT. 'O3."