The Crimson invites all men in the University to submit signed communications of timely interest. It assumes no responsibility, however, for sentiments expressed under this head and reserves the right to exclude any whose publication would be palpably inappropriate.

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

I was cheered when the CRIMSON republished Dr. Lake's article on education. It is a stalwart blow against a pernicious fallacy. Editorial Honoris Causa No. 2 depressed me, for it is no way true that "success in life is based upon detailed study of facts," at least for those few who do not wish to become Berlin statisticians. It is if possible even more false that universities have any such raison d'etre. Instructors who think so mistake the proper means of teaching us "how to think and to find out things for themselves." To paraphrase Dr. Lake further: "it is not how much we are taught, but rather how readily we attain the faculty for learning," which makes for success in life. We will never "learn how to teach ourselves by using books properly and by exploiting our teachers to the best advantage" if we seek in "peptonised information" for the "detailed facts which insure success in life." Education has been defined in two ways: "Individual effort," and secondly, "placing students so that they cannot resist instruction." The choice of the better of these is not hard to make. I should like to see a detailed list of your philosopher-stone-like facts, but at all events, remind your readers from time to time that primarily we come to college for a single, simple purpose--to make our minds ready tools. J. B. WHEELWRIGHT '20.