proposed to continue the game under protest,
giving the point to Bucknell, and subsequently
to refer the point to proper authority for de
cision. Bucknell refused. We refused to play
under Bucknell foot-ball rules, as erratic as
Bucknell courtesy exemplified by the Mirror.
The game closed. The statement that we
"were perfectly willing to sneak off without
demanding any money for expenses," requires
a slight explanation at our hands. It is a bald
lie.
We asked for the $20.00 promised in the
letter above referred to. Their manager stated
that they did not have the money ;—he would
pay us out of his own pocket if his present
circumstances would allow. We agreed to
release them from the claim, they absolving
us from the $20.00 guaranteed for the ensuing
"return game" promised in the above letter,
and again promising a "return game," All
these matters of money for expenses " Buck
nell will readily recall. But there are some
other items of the same nature connected with
our relations with them which they may not
recall. If the business manager of the" Buck
nell athletic" association will look over his
several accounts he will find the following ac
count with State College unsettled:
BUCKN ELL,
1886, May 6, To guarantee money on base
ball game, . .
By cash,
1888, June 9, To guarantee money on base
• ball-game, .
To stage fare from Lemont
to college and return,
By cash,
1888, Oct, 27, To guarantee money on foot
ball-game,
• X 65 00 $34 50
Balance due State College, 31 oo
The "challenge from Bucknell" is also be
fore us under date of October 30, Mr. West
wrote: "The team will not play you a game at
State College. . . . However, we chal-
THE FREE LANCE.
lenge you to play in a deciding game at Wil
liamsport on the athletic grounds, if they can
be obtained November 10, on the following
terms: All traveling expenses of both teams,
each consisting of not more than fourteen men,
are to be paid, the rent of grounds and cost of
advertising, and the surplus to be divided
equally between the two teams. If there is de
ficit, it also to be sustained equally by each
team;" (we italicize as Mr. West underscored).
Where is the return game promised to be
played on our own campus? Where is our
20,00 gauranteed? We are asked to go to
Williamsport, farther away and harder to reach
than Lewisburg itself. We are asked to bear
half the expenses. We are asked to forget our
$20,00. Moreover, in view of our experience
with Bucknell " in money for expenses" and
promises of a "return game," only God knows
(perhaps Bucknell knows) whether they would
have been at Williamsport to play, and whether
we would have recovered any "money for ex
penses" at all from Bucknell without a civil
suit. The base-ball matter referred to in the
Mirror is a thing of the past, and we regard
this fling at us only as blatant speech, calculated
for nothing in particular, unless it be calculated
to offend However, since we are dealing once
for all with this matter, we take the opportu
nity to say that our team was not in condition
to play last season, because our ground was en
tirely destroyed in the erection of our new
buildings, so that the team got scarcely any
practice
. at all, and because our pitcher sud
denly left us in the spring, thus leaving us with
out even a man in prospect until very late. More
over, in the game at Lewisburg, the pitcher
was in a state of health making him entirely un
fit to pitch, and he went into the box only at
dangerous risk to himself and under great dis
advantage to our team. Again, Bucknell nine
contained only five Bucknell men. The bat
tery were not Bucknell men, and two others,
making four in all, did not belong to the Uni
versity. Bucknell nine never furnished a
$2O 00
$l4 50
5 50
20 00
$65 5o