The following letter from the Yale delegates to the recent base ball conference at Springfield appeared in the Yale News of Wednesday morning:
"Messrs. Editors Yale News:
In yesterday's Harvard Crimson there appeared an account of what took place at the conference between the representatives of Yale and Harvard, which was held at Springfield on Monday. While the facts as published are true, the article, as a whole, is is apt to be misleading as to the reasonableness of Yale's position, because the reasons given in the meeting for our refusal to agree to Harvard's propositions are not stated. Our proposition was to play three games, one at Cambridge on June 23d, one on New Haven on June 28th, and a third to take place on neutral grounds previous to the games at Cambridge and New Haven. Harvard at first proposed a series of four games, with a fifth in case of a tie. This we found by the experience of two years ago was extremely unadvisable. During that year, on account of a tie game with Princeton, we were forced to play nine championship games in a limited season, which was found to be disastrous to the playing ability of our nine. In order not to undergo the chance of having to experience such a strain again we refused to agree to play more than three games. Harvard waived the point but objected to playing the game on neutral grounds before either of the other two games. Their reason, as given, was, that by such an arrangement Harvard would be at a disadvantage in playing the final game on Yale's grounds. Be it understood that during the entire argument concerning dates it was taken for granted by both parties that the chances were in favor of a Harvard victory in the game at Cambridge and Yale's winning at New Haven. This would make the game on neutral grounds the most important and probably the deciding game. We pointed out to the Harvard delegates that if Harvard won the first game, the advantage would be theirs, while if Yale won, it would be Yale's, and therefore the arrangement would not be unfair to either college. Their objection to it then was that "it was not the right way to conduct a series," i. e. to have the deciding game played first. As that is a matter of opinion we could make no answer to it, but it seems to us that it is not a strong enough argument to justify their refusal on that ground. It was then proposed by Harvard that the game on neutral grounds be played on Saturday following the boat race, this game to take place only in case the first two should result in a tie. We objected to this for the following reasons: First - We would be forced to play all three games in the space of ten days, which the Yale captain was unwilling to do. Second. - We found by experience that a game which takes place after all the leading events of Commencement week are over and after nearly all of the students and visitors have left New Haven, is by no means a success either in the number of spectators or in the interest manifested. Third. - After waiting until the second game is played in order to find if there is a tie, there are left only three days in which to make all arrangements as to leasing grounds, advertising, etc., which time is insufficient.
Harvard then proposed playing the two games above mentioned without playing a third game in any case. This seemed to us inadvisable, on account of the probability that the superiority of either team over the other would be left undecided. Being unable to come to any agreement, the convention adjourned, no time being appointed for another meeting.
We make the above statement in order to put the University in possession of the facts and our reasons, that they may form a correct opinion as to the justice of our position in the matter.
W. B. FRANKLIN,T. L. MCCLUNG,W. H. MURPHY."