EDITORS HERALD-CRIMSON.-In your issue of February 8 you printed an article on "Our Ranking System," suggesting remedies for what many men have long felt to be either a mistaken policy, or an injustice on the part of the faculty. In your issue of February 11, a correspondent, in arguing against your "third reform," makes the following statement: "This reformer would destroy the advantages of the elective system by placing a premium upon a superficial education, such as is to be obtained in the prescribed course which most American colleges require. Under the reform which is suggested, the specialist is triumphed over by the superficialist, which is exactly contrary to the tendency of modern progress." May I ask, through your columns, by whom and when this final decision that a man who is not a specialist must be a "superficialist," was arrived at?

Without wishing to do any "injustice to the specialist," but merely as one whose own brief experience in the world has been to find the specialist of college quite as often open to the charge of superficiality as the possessors of a broad education, I am anxious to know whether my experience is of an anomalous kind. Moreover, as one who has advised an undergraduate this year, with a view to gaining rather a broad education than a special one, to risk losing his college distinctions and take a varied course, I should be glad to know whether I am to be justly accused of having shaped his course toward the goal of superficiality.

H. O. A.