The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-12-12

ton he In 60 attend I am sure he would
never get to II. I am morally certain
that a well wisher OF this institutions
athletic prowess Is acting the philan-
thropist or the crook in this case. but
] could not prove 1t. The system pre-
vents that. The boy would be dropped
we're the facts laid bare.
There Is no question that this boy
would not get this chance for an edu-
cation were he not an athlete. When
he goes to college he probably will he
asked to sign a statement declaring he
is not receiving financial aid. What
Will this boy do? Is this right or wrong"
Are the rules all poppycock n ultra
ethical. or are the rules OF sport just
and righteous?
There IL no doubt tina the colleges
have a big problem before them. 1t is
national In ecope yet distinct in each
section or group. There Is a right or a
wrong side to everything. and the men
In control Of the athletic situation at
the many institutions must make the
decision. They have FIRST to decide n
II IL serious or not. II they are right
in demanding the standa rds that are
not being lived up to, and II not right.
what regulations should be adopted to
cover h IA many points. They have to
consider many points, many questions.
but the main one before them Is to
note with much accuracy and after care
full hearing whether our college sport
as now conducted Is harmful to the
student and the college. and above all
II II Ia in any measure a handicap TO
the boy in his future.
Recalling Famous Cases.
Recalling the famous eligibility cases
that eppna NJ Nrct Ia pl-tha SvIarEcnp
and Cults ones Mt Harvard. the Smith
and Zeigler affairs at Pennsylvania. the
Vaughn and Lear troubles at Princeton,
the Eddie Collins exposure at Columbia.
the Solon matter at Minnesota. the Glass
and LeGore infractions At Yale, the 1904
baseball muddle at Brown and its anal
ogy at Pennsylvania in 1906. when each
college put practically it's entire nine IN
der the ban. the Brickley case at Trinity
and the Rogers case at West Virginia-ft
does not seem that any progress has been
made In Strengthening our intercollegiate
athletic tangles. taking The matter as d
whole.
II il the purpose OF these articles TO dig
deep into the matter. to Investigate IN.
situation at the various colleges and To
present the conditions found in each
group as well As the opinions OF the men
In control OF sport in each case. The
writer will visit many OF the colleges
with this In view. and a special trip will
be made to the larger and more promi.
mont preparatory schools TO learn Jus,
what the situation Ia relative to prose.
lytizing.
Yale. Harvard and Princeton hold q
prominent place in the collegiate athletic
world and have already been discussing
In conference the eligibility conditions
peculiar 10 themselves. The next artiri,
will cover the problems OF this grouI
and what Is being done about IL.
Other articles 10 follow will include q
study Of the conditions At Cornell. Coium.
bia. Dartmouth and Pennsylvania tn,
New England group. Amherst. Brown
Trinity. Wesleyan and Williams tho
New York city colleges. the New York
and Pennsylvania institutions. the col.
ieges OF the South and West, includins
the Conference. and Michigan the pre-.
paratory schools and p~roselytizing
with "A summary and conclusion dealing
with the remedies. II by chance any have
been found.