EDITORS DAILY CRIMSON: "Faithful James" takes up the cudgel in his masters' behalf and says the Executive Committee as a whole did not sanction the guard. How does "James" know? If this is thus why did the so-called vote of censure apply to the Executive Committee as a whole? Did any member of the Committee disclaim responsibility at any time for that measure? If so, how many, when and where? "James" you have the floor!

Further, "James" inquires how the committee learned there was going to be a "disturbance." Why, bless your "faithful" heart, "James," the Committee would have been deaf, dumb and blind, if the "wars and rumors of wars" all day prevalent had not reached them. Would any other society, similarly threatened, have failed to take measures to protect itself?

With regard to the Vice-President's letter in the Post he clearly pointed out why the opposition wished to use the Boston papers, and showed by example how desperately in need of bolstering up their position was. It is a noticeable fact that the Boston papers have since to all appearances adopted his suggestion, and shut off further partisan agitation.

If as "James" remarks, the Vice-President's arguments do not convince, why did "James" feel called upon to attempt a refutation? The trouble with the "faithful" but "incredulous" "James" is, "he means well, but doesn't know."

Yours humbly,HONEST JEEMS.