We invite all members of the University to contribute to this column, but we are not responsible for the sentiments expressed. Every communication must be accompanied by the name of the writer.

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

When, in the class meeting, a motion was made which was meant to begin the formation of a constitution for the Class of 1906, it was little thought that any one would seriously question the advisability of having such a constitution. This question has, however, been raised; and since, in nearly every instance, there has been manifested a misconception of the intention of the motion, it would seem well to explain what was really intended.

In the first place, written laws are much safer, and more definite, than unwritten ones. They do not, it is true, have the sentiment that unwritten traditions have; but they are much more satisfactory in case of a difference of opinion. Further, they apportion duties definitely, and fix responsibility accurately--or at least, they should do so, if carefully made.

As will be readily seen, this is the kernel of the argument in favor of the adoption of a constitution. It is the fundamental reason for its adoption by any organization--it is a means by which official business, in the interests of all, may be conducted more systematically, more definitely, and more serviceably.

In the case under consideration the changing of tradition to written law would have another important effect: it would familiarize succeeding classes of Freshmen with those traditions, and would perpetuate them in a manner far better than the oral transmission from year to year can possibly do.

It has been urged that the class will have very little business to transact, and therefore will have no need of going to all the trouble necessary for the establishment of a constitution which will often act as a hindrance rather than as a benefit. But how a reasonable constitution, adopted by the class, and always subject to amendment, can act as a restraint upon anything but irresponsibility and ineffectiveness, is somewhat difficult to perceive.

Altogether, while a constitution is not absolutely necessary, it is a luxury which is inexpensive, lasting, with few or no bad effects, and several good ones; and therefore it ought to appeal to all as a desirable innovation. E. K. THURLOW '06.