[We invite all men in the University to submit communications on subjects of timely interest. The CRIMSON is not, however, responsible for the sentiments expressed in such communications as may be printed]

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

I should like to make what seems to me a few potent objections to the abuse of the Class Day nominations as shown by the large number of petitions which have been presented to the Senior class during the last few days. The Election Committee this year has nominated a total of fifty men, as opposed to thirty-six and thirty-nine by the classes of 1903 and 1904, respectively. In spite of this, there have been at least eight petitions which I myself have been asked to sign, while in the last two years there have been one and two nominations by petition.

It seems to me that the whole work of the Election Committee is being nullified by these numerous petitions. When many candidates for an office are voted on by the Australian ballot, the one elected is not necessarily the one most generally satisfactory; his plurality may be due merely to splitting of the votes among other candidates. The most important function of a nominating committee is to select for each office a few from many possible candidates, thus making the result of the election as nearly as possible representative of the feeling of the majority.

As the matter now stands, it is unfair to the nominees because many men signed the petitions merely from a mistaken idea of obligation to the man, or to be rid of the canvasser, although they do not intend to vote for the men thus nominated. It is unfair to the class because it may result in the election of men to whom the majority are opposed, to avoid which they left the work to the Committee on Class Day Elections.

In offices for which there are a large number of candidates, would it not be well for some of them to withdraw and thus make more certain that the elections will express the desire of the class? 1905.