Football.

The game on Saturday was as complete an anti-climax to the work of the eleven against the Chicago Athletic Club, as one could very well imagine. To be sure the game was won, but when one reviews in his mind the general drift of the play, he finds it hard to explain why Amherst did not keep on scoring and win the game. The only possible reason that such did not happen was owing to Harvard's better endurance and the individual work of a few men. Amherst's defensive work was stronger than Harvard's, their aggressive play was more effective, their tackling quicker and harder, and their team work infinitely better.

Harvard's play was most mortifying. The men were urged to their utmost and individually seemed to be in earnest, but through it all one could see a spirit of demoralization. The visitors' first touchdown seemed to rattle rather than dishearten the men. After that there was a certain indecision, a certain helplessness against Amherst's sharp aggressive game. which filled the minds of the Harvard men with unpleasant thoughts of what may be if a halt is not made immediately and measures taken to see that, from now on, this unreliable changeable sort of work is put an end to, and that the team begins to make some steady, effective progress. The blame of Saturday's game cannot be laid on the shoulders of any one or two men. The whole team is responsible for it. The college can overlook one such exhibition, but others like it would be more than unfortunate; they might even be disastrous in turning college sentiment against those who are trying hard, and can, if they only will make up their minds to rise and meet the present difficulties, develop a team which will represent Harvard worthily.

Harvard's interference seemed to be confined to theory; the results of it were not exactly practical. The Amherst men found no difficulty in breaking through the block and tackling the runner. The loose work of the forwards and the unsatisfactory support given by the right half of the rushline lost many a yard for Harvard, whether in offensive or defensive play. After the first touchdown Amherst rushed the ball down to Harvard's twenty-five yard line, and then lost it on a fumble. Getting it soon after, they sent Van Leuven around our right end for 25 yards, but Harvard got the ball on four downs and kicked. Amherst then began a series of short rushes through the centre and between the guards and tackles and forced Harvard steadily down the field until, from within two yards of the line, Gould carried the ball over between Waters and Mackie. In the V which followed the ball was given to Corbett, who skilfully worked his way through the Amherst men and from the centre of the field carried the ball over the line. The score at the end of the half was 16 to 6. When Amherst got the ball the second time in the second half, she made a long gain around right end. Gould and Baldwin made twenty yards more and then Gould was pushed over the line making the second touchdown for Amherst. No goal was kicked. Lewis was at this point substituted for Mackie and shortly afterward Mason took the place of Newell, who was badly hurt two more touchdowns were made before time was called.

The teams were as follows:

HARVARD AMHERST

Emmons, l. e. Van Leuven

Upton, l.t. Nourse

Waters, l.g. Stone, Cauthers

Mackie, c. Edgell

Acton. r.g. Haskell

Newell, Mason, r. t. Baldwin

Foster. r. e. Rosa

Trafford, q. b. F. R. Pratt

Brewer h. b. Goodale

Gray h.b. Gould

Gage, h. b. Ellis

Corbett, f. b. G. P. Pratt

Referee, Mr. Hamilton of Amherst; umpire, G. E. Burgess '93. Time, two thirty minute halves.