TO THE EDITORS OF THE CRIMSON: -

THE Harvard Echo of June 11 contains a long article on the marking system, in which the following gem is found: -

"A striking proof of the great principle underlying our remarks, can be found in the results of a semi-annual examination, the books for which were recently returned. After patient consideration we have surmised that part of the books were marked fairly. We also have ground for supposing that when the instructor was fatigued he counted the number of books, put an equal amount of numbers in a hat, and then drew them. Somehow or other only three denominations were used, consequently a large proportion of the books had either 73, 64 or 46 per cent. That from six to twelve students whose ranks varied largely last year, should all get 64 per cent, at once seemed strange to us, but our theory answers all objections, and must remain accepted until proved false."

Not a word have I altered in this rhetorically perfect specimen of composition; not a comma did I take away or add. Whatever "the grounds" may be which the Echo has for "surmising," until it is kind enough to state these "grounds," in print, it has no business to "surmise." For the present, it is sufficient to say, in order to prove the true value of such "surmising," that the course referred to is Latin II., and that the instructor in question is no other than Professor Greenough. We have witnessed many rude, unpardonable assaults of injudicious hotheads upon instructors, but that committed by the Echo, allow me to say, is an outrage on public decency. Just consider a moment: Professor Greenough is one of the most respected citizens of Cambridge, one of the most successful instructors in the highest seat of learning of this country; he is, in fine, one of the best Latin scholars of America. And such a man is accused of deliberately mixing up names and assigning marks by lottery!! And who is the accuser? An editor of the - Harvard Echo!! That such accusations against such a man could not have been brought save by a candidate either for toga asyli or for the toga virilis, there can be no doubt. Meanwhile, it is a disgrace to the College to have the trashy effusions of such unripe boyhood as the above extract trumpeted abroad as the "representative" opinion of Harvard students.

X.