U. of P. and Harvard Deny Dissatisfaction.

The following communication comes from the chairmen of the U. of P. and the Harvard Athletic Committees:

"Since the recent Harvard-Pennsylvania football game, the newspaper criticisms of decisions rendered by the umpire and referee have induced a popular belief that the University of Pennsylvania is unwilling to accept the result of the game without protests and explanations. It happens, also, that charges of unfairness, purporting to emanate from Harvard, have been preferred publicly against Pennsylvania as respects the playing of Brooke upon her team.

"In the interests of intercollegiate sport it seems proper to meet these criticisms by a single official statement to the effect that at neither university are the athletic authorities in any way responsible for what has been said upon these points. As a matter of fact, the referee and umpires were accepted by Pennsylvania, and she is content to abide by their decisions. On the other hand, the question of Brooke's eligibility was fully discussed by the proper authorities at each university before the game was played and was made the subject of correspondence and conference. Pennsylvania's decision that Brooke should take part in the game was based upon his eligibility under the rules of that institution, and was voluntarily acquiesced in by the Harvard authorities. In playing him Pennsylvania broke no rule and violated no principle.

"EDGAR F. SMITH, "Chairman of University of Pennsylvania Athletic Committee.

"JOSEPH H. BEALE, "Chairman of Harvard Athletic Committee."