New-York tribune., 1922-04-11
Difficulty at
Princeton Due
10 Loan Fund
Committee Makes Official
tseport on Late Ineligi.
hility Cases of Athletes

"Nos' Feo from jurthcr intercollegiate
competition marks a new departure and
new Interpretation of existing rules
ne oecision means that in the futur.
as IN the case Of the Princeton mon
concerned other mon whose motives
may DC above criticism and whose acts
may be proper in themselves NAV have
TO he declared ineligible to represent
Harvard, Yale or Princeton
-, lhose facts were revealed to-dav IN
the account of the action prepared
rom documents Of the Princeton com
mlttee on outdoor sports which will ba
printed in The Princeton Alumni
weekly on Thursday of this week.
summary of this report follows.
a fund had been raised as q loan
fund for needy students. The MON men
VINO contributed TO this fund intended
1t to be used for all deserving students
VINO look part in extra curriculum ac-
tlVlt'es, athletic or otherwise. In all
cases notes to cover loans made were
10 be required and the sums renaid
turhed back, thus creating a revolving
1uho. The borrowers had to be men
OF good character to meet the scholas-
TIC requirements of The university in
order to receive such aid.
"ihls fund for a time was admin
1stefed IN the office of the bureau of
student self-help. an Office then not
conducted under the immediate super
VISION of the university. Something
over year ago this bureau was re-
! organized and became the bureau of
appointments and student employment
under the supervision of the secretary
OF the university. Certain funds at
that time were not turned over to the
new bureau and the administration has
been carried on without the knowledge
or the university authorities Loans
/ nave been made out or this fund to
tour members Of the athletic teams
VINO have represented Princeton.
As soon as the existence of this
tuno came to the attention of the
1acu ty committee they began search
ing investigation. The men concerned
were called before the committee, ana
alumni who had contributed to the
1und, were also interviewed. The men
who received aid insisted that they
had regarded these sums as loans. for
which they had given notes. These
notes were of substantially the same
character as those required of the
university OF men receiving remission
of tuition. Notes were not ALWAYS
signed at the time the loans were made.
but 1t was the practice to require
note to cover the amounts of the loans
contracted during the year before the
end Of the year.
Each of the students insisted that
he was acting in good faith in giving
such notes and thought that the receiv-
ing Of these loans could not cause any
question to be raised
Concerning his eligibility because
the loans were made by the bureau of
OF student self help; and this bureau
Of ho /, \ al.
aid was given to needy and worthy stu
dents. The men maintained therefore
that in receiving loan from the bu-
reau Of student self help they had
every reason to believe they were re-
ceiying loan under the auspices OF
the university, with regard to which
there could be no question. especially
since some OF the payments were made
directly and openly into the office Of
the treasurer of the university by
checks drawn against the account Of
the old bureau Of self help.
"The Princeton committee on out
door sports was strongly of the opin-
ion that any fund administered solely
or primarily for the benefit of ath-
| letes, as this seemed to be, is wholly
improper and that all aid received from
this fund was Of sort to be reported
to the three chairmen Of the Harvard,
|
tees. since it fell under Rule 2 of the
Harvard Yale Princeton agreement
which reads:
No student shall represent his uni
versity on any athletic team or crew
who receives from others than those on
whom he is naturally dependent for
financial support money or the equiva
lent of money, such as board and lodg-
ing, unless the source and character of
these gifts or payments to him shall be
approved by the university committee
on eligibility subject to the approval
of the committee OF the three chairmen,
on the ground that they have not ac-
crued to him primarily because of his
ability as an athlete. All such cases
are to be submitted in advance to the
university committee on eligibility
"Oniy four men were involved and
the only three eligible to further COM
petition on any future Princeton teams
were T. G. Mcnamara, Ralp c. Gilroy
and Arthur j. ~5aIIy, OF the freshman
football squad. -GcNamara and Cilroy
were declared ineligible and Barry was
declared ineligible until ncXt fall.
he Princeton committee is Of the
opinion, therefore, that under the in
depreciation Of Rule Princeton is not
entitled to the services in competition
W tllGSt Gtt-cCGS ana SHcu4U tNCluuc
them from intercollegiate competition
from this date, but, as made clear
above, without declaring them profess
sionals or taking action in any form
thas would give other athletic bodies
ground to declare them professional Is.
In a statement issued by Dean Nc
C.cnahan was the following eXplana-
ton:
"The committee Of the three chair
smen felt that the Princeton men in
volved had not professionalism them
selves and should not be declared pro-
fessionals, because, the committee be-
ieves, the aid the men had received
was in the form of genuine loans which
would be repaid; nevertheless, the COM
mittee felt that the aid which the men
had received had been extended to them
primarily because of their athletic
ability and that they had, therefore, to
be withdrawn from competition under
Rule 2 of the Harvard Yale Princeton
agreement"