EDITORS HARVARD HERALD. The suspension of an undergraduate for supposed violation of the rules of the college is not so rare an occurrence as to excite extended discussion beyond the sphere of the victim's intimate friends; but there may be circumstances which make such an event of more general interest. Such circumstances seem to exist in the case which has just occurred, and justice to a popular and worthy man, as well as to truth, demands that the facts should be known. Mr. Sartelle, being in my room, casually read my theme, and some time afterwards wrote his, on the same subject. By a freak of memory there appeared striking resemblances between the two themes, which led the instructor to make an investigation. Mr. S. told a straightforward, manly, truthful story about the matter to the instructor, the dean and the president : that he did not write his theme until the next day after reading mine; that he did not copy mine; and this statement I confirmed; that he had a somewhat remarkable verbal memory which had been trained in various ways, until it often worked unconsciously; that he had no knowledge that the themes were so nearly alike until informed of it by the instructor. The instructor and the dean expressed their belief in the truth of his explanation. But it come out in the course of the investigation that the faculty are very much aroused at present about the prevalence of "cribbing" and kindred forms of dishonesty among the students. An instructor said two weeks ago that this case had occurred at a very unfortunate time on that account. It was necessary, it seemed, that somebody should be made an example of, and Mr. S. became the scapegoat. He has been suspended. The faculty refused to consider anything except that one theme reproduced the other in part. Mr. S.'s explanation counted for nothing.

These being the facts in the case, what inferences are we to draw from them? It would seem to be a fair inference that the college authorities attach very little value to the honor of a student who is accused of a misdemeanor, and that they are content to reason from effects to causes and motives without regard to the man's word. No man in college was more trusted and respected than Mr. S., and those who know him know that he would not be guilty of a dishonest act such as the faculty have practically convicted him of. To obey the requirements of the sentence inflicted upon him is tacitly to admit his guilt. He has shown his manhood by refusing to submit, preferring to sever his connection with the college. Confident in his own mind that he has committed no wrong, he will not sacrifice his self-respect by attempting to carry out the terms of a sentence which, indeed, his circumstances render almost impossible. I think it is but an act of simple justice to put on record the opinion of every man with whom I have spoken on the subject - that Mr. S. has suffered without just cause, and that the faculty have made a mistake.

It is regretted that more intimate relations do not exist between the faculty and the students, if for nothing else, in order that the latter might know whether or not they err in supposing, as many do, that the faculty do not trust the honor of the students, and that their policy is to sacrifice the slight offender or even the innocent transgressor that the greater but undetected wrong-doers may see and tremble.

W. W. WINSLOW.