BROWN SQUAD HARD AT WORK

Three days having elapsed since the Yale contest, the Brown eleven has settled down to active preparation for the game in the Stadium Saturday. Well satisfied with the team's sweeping victory over Yale last Saturday, the Brown coaches did not press the team hard in Monday's practice. Yesterday, however, nearly all the players were on the field.

The chances of the team in next Saturday's contest were materially increased on Monday by the appearance on the field of Ward, tackle, and Conroy, left back, neither of whom were in the Yale game. Brown came through the Yale game without a serious injury. Purdy, quarterback, wrenched his ankle slightly, but he was out again to direct the team yesterday.

Never before in the 20 years' history of Harvard-Brown encounters has there been so much interest displayed as in the game Saturday. Five thousand seats in the Brown section have already been sold in Providence, and indications are that probably 10,000 people will come to the game from that city alone.

Lawrence Perry Praises Eleven.

The game in the Stadium last Saturday remains as the index of the type of football which the University and Princeton elevens may be expected to play against both Brown and Yale. Lawrence Perry, sporting editor of the New York Evening Post, makes the following general comment on the game:

"Harvard's three to nothing defeat of Princeton at the Stadium, Cambridge, on Saturday was well-earned, and a triumph for players as well as coaches. The Crimson was an inexperienced eleven, an eleven which had to know defeat by a minor college team before it began to weld into an efficient organization. It was all of that on Saturday last. Taking the Crimson team by and large, it suffers by comparison with Harvard elevens of the past few years in so far as it is weak in punting and drop-kicking and lacks the threat which Mahan was wont to provide. It also lacks the pristine ability to hold the ball and to shapter backfield defence. None the less, the Haughton system has realized fully upon the material with which it had to work, and has developed a good strong team out of green players who will be more formidable against Yale than they were against the Tigers. The game was neither thrilling nor spectacular. Yet it was interesting because it was closely fought because, too, it contained a great deal of first-class football. This is not, however, to say that the contest was unmarked by poor-grade football. There was loose handling of the ball by both elevens. For the fumbling of kicks elemental conditions provided adequate excuse, but hands were inexcusably slivery in other cases. Both teams injured themselves through commission of faults calling for penalties. And the rivals indulged in some poor generalship. On the other hand, both teams produced a strong, if inconsistent, attack--which needed this game to make it better for future contests. The tackling was uniformly good and the interference well executed. Work of both sets of forwards was quite up to the accepted tenets of line play.

"Breaks in the game favored each contestant; but Princeton was favored to greater extent. The Tigers failed to take advantage of all their opportunities; Harvard took full advantage of one of her's and thus won the contest. Of the handling of punts in the backfield, which gave the game a sloppy look, there has been criticism--mainly unjust. For it will be noted that a large percentage of the fumbling occurred in the north section of the gridiron--the sunfield. When it is stated that players standing in this half of the field were unable to see the south goal posts because of the sun shining in their eyes, when, also, the swirling wind currents coming from the direction of the sun are noted it will be patent that the outlying backs were laboring under a fearful disadvantage. Princeton of course recognized all this when she won the toss and elected to impose upon the Crimson the handicap of these factors. What Nassau expected to happen did happen. The Harvard backs found themselves by the adverse conditions, and later, when positions were reversed, the Tigers found themselves in similar plight. But this, of course, offers no alibis for the fumbling of the ball on plays into the line. Both teams committed this fault, without evil effect, however, except in one instance, when a fumble by Casey stopped a brilliant Harvard advance, and at the same time threw the Princetonians, who had recovered the ovoid, loose into the open. Had the right back secured the ball, say Moore or Driggs, Harvard would have had a touchdown scored against her. As it was, Harte saved the day by a tackle from behind.

"Casey, of Harvard, is one of the best backs in the East, even though he does not hold onto the ball very well. Harvard's line play, from tackle to tackle, was superb. The two ends, Coolidge and Harte, did fine work on attack and defence. They were good, if not brilliant, on downfield work, and did acceptably, if not brilliantly, in protecting their wings. All things considered, the rival lines had pretty much of an even break of it. The Harvard backfield, aside from kicking, was superior to the Princeton backfield. Harvard did her share of ballchanging and thimble-rigging on attack, but found her most consistent gains arising from straightaway thrusts and sharp slants. Wheeler and Sweetser, of Harvard, played finely at the tackles, particularly in the second half, and Thacher and Horween's defensive work was good.