STATE COLLEGIAN
Published on Thursday of each week during the
college year by the students of The Pennsylvania
State College in the interest of the Students. Fac
ulty. Alumni and friends of the college.
Entered at the Post Office, State College, Pa.,
as second class matter.
EDITORS
T. F. FOLTZ, *O6, Chief.
F. K. BREWSTER, 'O7.
H. D. MASON," ’O7.
A. K. LITTLE, ’O7
R. B. MECKLEY, 08.
J. K. BARNES, ’O9
BUSINESS MANAGERS,
W. J. DUMM, ’O6.
S. H. YORKS, ’O7.
B. W. SCRIBNER,
SUBSCRIPTION
$l. 50 per year or $1.25 if paid within 20 days after
date of subscription.
THURSDAY, MARCH 8, 1906.
EDITORIAL
Another column of this issue
states the attempt to inaugurate a
new custom at "State.” A move
ment has now been begun which
ought to have been firmly estab
lished long ago. At first glance it
may appear that it is but a reflection
onthe greenness of the.Freshmen.but
a little consideration will show that
it is but for their own advantage. At
the beginning of the college year a
new Freshman can be immediately
picked out by a Sophomore, but the
former cannot recognize his own
classmates. The new custom will
accelerate an early acquaintanceship
which is so valuable, especially in
the Freshman year.
The class of 1909 has just suf
fered its first loss by death in the
passing away of their beloved com
rade, Francisco L. Herrera. In his
quiet and loving way he won a place
in the hearts of his college mates
during his short stay in State Col
lege. A short time ago he con
tracted pneumonia, and although
cared for well, he passed away from
our midst, leaving a mourned va
cancy in the college roll.
THE STATE COLLEGIAN
Some Reform Suggestions.^
Why cannot State assume the
lead among colleges of her class in
accepting this splendid ‘ ‘ one year
rule,” which Penn and Princeton
have adopted, and Yale and Har
vard are seriously considering?
Surely we are big enough to recog
nize its value. Some may ask how
we students may go about securing
its adoption at this place. Simply
in this way, —we can approve the
measure by a vote at the next meet
ing of our Athletic Association, and
recommend its adoption to our
Faculty Committee on Athletics,
which will surely do whatever is
wisest and best for the future in
terests of the institution. Here is
the rule, briefly: —“No student shall
be eligible to a ’Varsity team unless
he shall have completed a full year’s
work at our college, and shall
have passed satisfactory examina
tions for advance with his class.
No student shall compete as a mem
ber of a ’Varsity team for more than
three years. This rule shall go into
effect September, 1906 with the un
derstanding, however, that it will not
apply to men now in college.”
How does this look to you, men
of State? Is it not a square deal to
our college, as well as to our incom
ing athletes, who will thus be able to
get a year of solid foundation in their
college work previous to taking up
their time in athletics? There can
be no argument as to the equity and
value of this ruling, but there simply
remains the question as to whether
we, the men of Pennsylvania State,
are willing to take upon ourselves
the responsibility of adopting such
an important and far-reaching
measure. Few of our sister insti
tutions give us credit for a strict and
honest code of athletic laws, but
now is our golden opportunity to
show the college world at large ex
actly where State College stands
with regard to clean and honorable
methods in athletics. Are we big
enough to seize the opportunity?
It may be very reasonably said
that the passage of these measures
will place State College at a great
disadvantage; in the first place, be
cause no other institution of the same
standing has adopted such rulings;
and in the second place, because
next season’s ’Varsity teams will be
severely handicapped for material.
As an answer to such objections it
can readily be seen that mere pres
ent success in athletics is not the ob
ject in view, but rather a true uplift
ing of athletic purity at State for the
years to come. No college in the
great Keystone State, outside of the
University of Pennsylvania, has, in
recent years, attained a higher pres
tige in general athletics than State,
therefore it is her plain duty to fol
low the lead of the “Big Four” in
the adoption of these beneficial
measures.
The mere fact of next season’s
’Varsity teams being crippled is a
secondary consideration when com
pared to the broad minded princi
ples of athletic reform involved in
these proposed measures.
The general adoption throughout
the college world of this “one year
rule” will prove the grandest reform
since college athletics has become
such an important feature of our na
tional life; and it will be putting into
good practice that favorite maxim of
President Roosevelt, ‘ ‘A square deal
for all.”
Along with the adoption of these
measures should go a tacit under
standing among colleges that all this
foolish bombast concerning “profes
sionalism” and “summer base-ball”
be stopped. What right has any
college to dictate to its students what
they shall do to earn their living dur
ing their summer vacations? To
take extreme cases, consider the av
erage wealthy student who spends
his entire summer lolling about some
fashionable summer resort; while ov
er against such a type we have the