EDITORS HARVARD HERALD: Now that all the doubt and uncertainty surrounding the Thanksgiving recess has been cleared up, I think it is time to give the college some expression of the views of a large body of students who did not approve of the measures made use of by two of the papers to obtain a longer recess. I was just as anxious for the two extra days as any one in college, but I do not think that the way to gain such a concession is by ambiguous editorials inciting students to take an unfair advantage of one of our most valued privileges, that of voluntary recitations. I do not believe that is the way students of Harvard have heretofore obtained favors from the faculty, and I am very much inclined to think that such measures are apt to do our cause more harm than good. Now that it is perfectly plain that the faculty were helpless in the matter, and had been transcending their powers in previous years, I think that every one will see in what poor taste were the remarks which appeared in some of the college papers. I feel sure that in the case of these papers, their zeal got away with their discretion. But in the case of the notices posted in Memorial and elsewhere, reminding students of their privilege of voluntary recitations - a privilege of too great value to endanger by abuse - and impudently remarking that "everybody intended to cut," I think no excuse is possible. The papers had the courage to make themselves responsible for their exhortations by printing them as editorials, and, indeed, only claim to represent the sentiment of their editorial boards, but the promulgators of this notice had the effrontery to sign it as issuing from "a committee of students," self-constituted, I suppose. Of course any person can constitute himself "a committee of students," and give his effusions this anonymous authority if he desires it; but we would like to have it thoroughly understood that such a committee does not represent the entire body of students in the sentiments it may advance. The remark that "everybody is going to cut" was disproved by the fact that there was a very fair attendance in most of the recitations on the days following the recess, the only falling off worthy of note being in the case of chapel. '84.