The gentleman who writes the communication in another column in regard to foot ball says "all flings at the referee are but cowardly utterances." It would be far from our intentions to dispute this statement; in fact we fully coincide with him in this opinion. But the gentleman seems to imply that there were "flings at the referee" printed in our columns. In regard to this, we wish to say a few words in defence. In Thursday's issue we expressed ourselves to the effect that "unsteadiness, aided by decisions of the referee cost us the game." In this phrase, we do not make any allusions to dishonest refereeing, we merely stale that the decisions of the referee happened to aid the other side. We thoroughly believe that the referee acted fully up to his convictions in regard to any one disputed point; what we mean by our statements referred to is, that the referee, because of certain facts which he did not see, seemed to us to make such mistakes that the play of the other side was materially aided. We do not think this to be a "fling" at the referee, but merely an expression of an opinion which we have as much right to hold as the referee.