THE CREW SYSTEM BEFORE THE ATHLETIC COMMITTEE.

At its meeting tonight the Athletic Committee will do well to settle definitely the question of whether the coach or the captain is to select the oarsmen on the University crew. Only through the coach as the highest authority in technical matters can the greatest experience and special knowledge be brought to the helm, and a general confidence and support be restored.

The Athletic Committee can afford to allow itself to be guided in this matter by undergraduate sentiment. As Mr. Herrick said, crew like other sports, belongs to the undergraduates and should be managed by them. They want crew to come into the system under which the other major sports are successful; and which our competitors use. E. W. Mahan has clearly summarized the duties of a captain, and has given ample justification for his position. W. J. Bingham has set forth the undergraduate dissatisfaction with the present policy. Among the communications which the CRIMSON has received on the subject, it is significant that there has not been one by an undergraduate favoring the captain's supremacy.

The question in which the Athletic Committee should not become involved is the irrelevant problem of professional and amateur athletics. Harvard is called upon to put forth teams and crews developed under given conditions, and Harvard, in fairness to her supporters, must leave no stone unturned in her effort to give her best. The question is simply this: Who is to have the right to select the oarsmen of the crew? Is that power to be vested in a young, inexperienced captain, or in a responsible, experienced coach, employed as a permanent authority? In fairness, alike to every captain and to every coach, the CRIMSON believes that the burden of this responsibility should rest upon the coach.

The Athletic Committee should settle this situation squarely tonight, and that means to define the proper powers of a coach. Any other action would merely postpone the settlement and prolong the existing dissatisfaction.