What Yale Thinks About It.

The following is the comment which the Yale News makes editorially about the base ball difficulties between Harvard and Yale:

The tone in which Yale's action in respect to the Harvard ball games has been received at Cambridge, leads the News to briefly review some features of the case which may perhaps contribute to a clearer comprehension of it.

In all articles in which the Harvard papers have treated the case they have persistently slighted the real point; they have gratuitously imputed to our base ball management the object of a "scurrilous personal attack" on Capt. Dean in the composition of Yale's letter, they have published a large amount of matter, in which Harvard's independence is proclaimed, and we are warned not to dictate or interfere; but we find barely touched upon the real reason for our measures, the abrogation by Harvard of the agreement entered into by the three Universities.

As it seems to the News, there is no ground for discussion as to the reason and justification of Harvard's action; it is a simple case of fact that the Graduate Advisory Committee reviewed the arrangement entered into by Capt. Dean, thought it inadvisable and vetoed it, by that very act releasing us from any obligation that could possibly bind us.

Why the refusal to play Princeton should influence us to cancel our games with Harvard is not at all a necessary part of the question. There is no reason why we should elaborate a defence, when, in fact, Yale is the injured party and Harvard stands in the position of the offender.

The difference between a league of three colleges, each playing the others, and one college standing single-handed against two which separately strain every nerve to crush it, while it has no chance to play off one against another, should certainly be apparent to the Harvard men; it comes home with a great deal of force to the Yale management. In fairness to the University, however, we would say that the News does not offer this as a vindication needed for our action, it suggests it as a possible reason.

We reiterate the facts: The captains of the three nines met, and in good faith arranged for games; on the return of one of these captains to his college, his acts were vetoed by a mysterious body which professes the right to dissolve its own obligations and yet hold other parties to theirs-the Harvard Athletic Committee-an institution of whose existence we certainly did know, though of whose powers we doubt whether any one does. We changed our measures accordingly.

The present disagreement does not seem to us to be so important in itself, but it brings in a most important principle. We claim no right to interfere in any one else's affairs; we disclaim the intention of allowing any one else to interfere in ours.