The CRIMSON a short time ago in this column fully explained the postion which it believed members of the University should take regarding the expression of personal opinion in the present European crisis. The astonishing proposal recently said to have been made to Professor Muensterberg concerning his withdrawal from the University has only put that position to the test. Little notice need be paid the proposal itself. Whether genuine or not, that it should even have been published is sufficient cause for regret and contempt. On the other hand, the opinion may gain strength in some quarters that the fact of such a proposal being possible is sufficient evidence of the inadvisability of any members of the University departing from the position of complete departing from the position of complete neutrality as regards public utterances which President Wilson has proclaimed desirable. The CRIMSON wishes to reiterate in as emphatic language as may be possible its former statement: namely, that no cencorship should be imposed either directly or indirectly upon any member of the University. An additional warning, however, seems advisable. While it is the undoubted duty of a University to grapple with every great question that may arise no matter what the consequences, it is even more the peculiar task and duty of a University to secure its deliberations in a complete impartial manner and to do nothing in word or speech which shall arouse fruitless passion or personal antagonisms. Whether or not this line has as yet been overstepped is a matter of individual opinion. It is a conclusion admitting of no diversity of opinion that with the foreign situation in its present critical position, with the continued neutrality of the United States by no means assured, it is the duty of every member of the University to err on the side of understatement and restraint rather than of excess and agitation.