(We invite all men in the University to submit communications on subjects of timely interest, but assume no responsibility for sentiments expressed under this head.)

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:--

The specimen of passionate and pessimistic piffle that appeared in your columns on March 22 is but characteristic of the opposition that has manifested itself to the proposed plan of compulsory membership at the Harvard Union. The assertive attitude of the writer is doubtless open to exception.

What is there that makes it plainly evident that student opinion is against compulsion? Surely it cannot be the fact that no single opponent to the plan appeared before the Student Council Committee which sat for the express purpose of hearing whatever objections might be advanced against compulsion.

And, furthermore, the fact that there are more students who are non-members than members little indicates what the attitude of the student body would be in regard to compulsion. There are many students who are non-members who would become members should the membership rate be lowered, and these would doubtless favor compulsion.

Finally, the Harvard Union is not a side-show, as the writer so "generously" termed it. In fact, since its very creation it has been the "big tent" for undergraduate activity, and this is clearly evident from the numerous mass meetings and smokers held there. In short, the Union has been the center of undergraduate life in the past, and by the plan of compulsion it is hoped to perfect it as such for the future.

Only through the instrumentality of the Union can the spirit of the University spell democracy, and the sooner that common meeting ground becomes available for all students, the sooner will that spirit of democracy be realized. ELIJAH ADLOW '16.M