(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 Editor of the CRIMSON:

I am completely humbled by Mr. Parsons' furious onslaught upon my letter of the 16th. But may I be permitted to give a few yelps by way of rejoinder from the limbo of the utterlys uelched?

I did not condemn Mr. Arthur Pounds' suggestion in the Atlantic nor the CRIMSON'S praise of that suggestion. Even as a man who carries a chip on his shoulder I think it most excellent. Nor do I question the generality that "educated people are the happiest". I am not concentrating in philosophy. And if I accused the CRIMSON of passing judgement, I am entirely to blame for such an accusation. It is not in the province of liberais to pass judgement on anything.

What I was referring to was the attitude so clearly expressed in the first and last paragraphs of the editorial. I could not understand how any college man could "with decency" reprove a laborer for working only eight hours a day, or for throwing himself, or his time, or his vast income to the winds. I merely suggested that we had better look to it that our own house was in order before we looked askance at the of another. I could not see and do not yet see how we, any more than they, avail ourselves of this "means of happiness" of which Mr. Parsons speaks so glibly. EDWIN SEAVER '22. November 21, 1921.