The principal question to be settled at the mass meeting to be held next Wednesday at Faneuil Hall by twelve colleges is whether or not the students there assembled believe that "a conference of the powers which shall deal with the economic consequences of peace, as arranged at Cannes, is the logical sequel to the Washington Arms Conference". From what we know of student meetings of this nature we can prophesy with considerable confidence that the resolution will be accepted almost unanimously. The question that interests us, however, is whether or not Harvard will be well represented in Faneuil Hall next Wednesday.

It has been fairly conclusively shown this fall that the great majority of Harvard men have not been interested in attending mass meetings held for the purpose of discussing the issues of the day. The two meetings at the Union to consider the general aspects of the Washington Conference were extremely successful in themselves; they were well conducted, interesting and stimulating. They were not successful, however, if we are to take mere attendance as a criterion.

If a considerable part of the men who did not go to these Union meetings were asked why they had not done so they would reply that in their opinion such discussions were of little practical value; they would point out that they could learn a great deal more about the Conference by study and reading and by informal discussion with their friends than by attending any mass meeting, In spite of the conviction that such meetings are decidedly worth while, we cannot criticise those who hold the contrary opinion, for it is a matter to be settled entirely by the individual and his knowledge of his own case.

The question is whether those who do not attend these public discussions because, although granting the importance of self-education on such topics as disarmament they consider them to be a waste of time, are sincere. Do they keep away because they are able to spend the time more profitably otherwise, or merely because they are, let us say, inclined to shrink from the prospects of intellectual efforts which these meetings require? Sincerity on this point is impossible to determine; yet it is our belief that in cases where a man has never attended any meeting of this character his sincerity is greatly to be doubted.

Those who are familiar with the mass meeting neither can nor need be urged to attend the one at Faneuil Hall on Wednesday. They know from experience either that for them it is worth going to or it is not. But those who have sedulously avoided such gatherings, whether from principle, prejudice or laziness, and show no interest in the doings at Faneuil Hall lay themselves open to the charge of being woofully self-centered and dead to the world.