On speaking of the theft of Mr. White's sign, we purposed to point out that a student ought to respect the rights of fellow-members of a University, even if he did not respect the rights of those who were much less closely connected with him. This seems to us to be quite different from saying that a student, if he treats men in the University well, may do what he wills to outsiders. He is under obligation to respect the rights of all, but we are free to say that we think that his obligation becomes greater, the closer he is connected with others. Certainly this principle is recognized everywhere, and all feel instinctively that they have an obligation of a different kind toward members of the University than toward outsiders. To say that one thing is to be recognized as worse than another, is not to say that the second is blameless.

Re-reading the editorial in the light of the communication, we see how it could be misinterpreted. We are glad to have the opportunity to correct any false impression that may have been given.