TO THE EDITORS OF THE CRIMSON:-

I AM sorry I cannot write for the Crimson an article about my way of marking examination-papers, nor even furnish materials for an article to be written by you. Such an article would make it necessary for me to write another, provided any one attacked my method, and I should then be involved in a controversy in which my part would be an unbecoming one, and in which whoever wrote against me would have the irritating consciousness of not being able - or at any rate likely - to effect any change in my procedure by all his logic.

I hope you will not construe this refusal of mine as a refusal to furnish an explanation to any one who wants it for any other purpose than publication or discussion in print.

You are quite at liberty to publish this letter, - indeed, I hope you will do so, for I am anxious to explain 'my' system to any one who thinks either that it differs materially from that of other instructors or that it is a sort of hocus-pocus.

Yours truly,

THE SPRING RECESS.

TO THE EDITORS OF THE CRIMSON:-

AT the risk of being charged with repetition, I should like to express my disapprobation of the time of the Spring Recess. I think the Faculty would willingly change the time, if a petition could be gotten up showing the desire for a later vacation, especially as Fast Day comes so early this year, and by having the vacation a week later we could participate in the Easter festivities at home.

It has always seemed to me so ridiculous that we should be sent home to fast, when we have so many opportunities at Memorial.

Will not some one start such a petition?

THE OTHER SIDE.

TO THE EDITORS OF THE CRIMSON:-

AFTER carefully reading the letter of "Churchman" in the last Advocate, and hearing the arguments of those who wish the time of the Spring Vacation changed, I must say that it does not seem to me that there is any adequate reason for doing so. There is not much probability of such a change being made, but as there is a principle involved, I should like to say a few words on the other side.

It seems to me that the College has nothing to do with any religious fast or festival, - Holy Week, Easter, or anything else. It is conducted on a non-sectarian basis, and to change the time of a vacation because it interfered with the religious observances of any particular sect would be contrary to its policy. Even if five sixths of the men in college were Episcopalians, and were dissatisfied with the present time of the vacation, they would have no right, as Episcopalians, to demand a change. If they wish to have the vacations arranged to conform to the festivals and fasts of their church, I am afraid they will have to go elsewhere.

It is nonsense to say that the College would no more recognize Easter by changing the vacation so as to come after it than it now recognizes Christmas by having a vacation at that time. Not to mention the different character of the two days, there is surely some difference between leaving a vacation where it is, because, on the whole, it is the best time, and changing it to suit the convenience of those students who belong to a particular sect.

But some of those who are eager for a change say that they ask it not as Episcopalians, but because amusements are suspended at the time when the vacation now comes. This is certainly a more sensible ground to put the request on than the other, but I very much doubt whether the object of the Faculty in giving us vacations is to provide us with amusement.

In conclusion, I would suggest that Holy Week is a time when all good Episcopalians should be at church, and so the large number of "us Episcopalians" in college should feel obliged to the Faculty for putting the vacation at a time when they can perform their duty as churchmen without cutting recitations.

FRENCH II.