Believing that destructive criticism is worse than no criticism at all, we do not intend to let the class election issue slumber until it is awakened by another such disgraceful exhibition as that of last Tuesday. The time to propose a remedy is before the painful recollection has died out of the minds of Harvard men, lest we again give occasion for Boston newspapers to seize gleefully upon the chance to hold "Harvard indifference" up before the public.

The fault in the election system is generally considered to lie in the method of making the nominations. At present they are made by the retiring class officers, supplemented by petitions requiring thirty-five signatures. No good purpose is served by this way of managing it, and, as has been shown, the results may be distinctly bad.

The CRIMSON proposes that the class constitutions be altered so that the nominations shall be made by a convention. Direct primaries are open to the same objection as the present scheme--the undergraduates would show no more interest in primaries than they do in elections. The class meetings, if properly advertised, would draw a large gathering, and there the name of anyone proposed and seconded would be put upon the convention ballot. Then, by direct election, it could be shown who were real candidates for the respective offices and who were merely vote-splitters. The four or five leading men for each position would be put on the class ballots for final election. Thus the double purpose would be served of inspiring interest in the elections and of fostering class spirit.

If Harvard undergraduates are to have class officers at all, they must be elected by the classes. But if no more than twenty per cent of the eligible voters care about who their officers are, it is better not to have any elections whatever.