The question of a Harvard War Memorial has slumbered peacefully since last spring. And apparently the committee in charge is still undecided--wearied by the rebuffs which its various suggestions of a monument, a belfry, a fountain and a chapel have received.

It is time that some decision were made; any memorial is likely to be better than no memorial at all. But the essential question remains and one side or the other--sentimentalists or utilitarians--must give way.

In opposition to what is apparently the feeling of the majority of the alumni committee, the CRIMSON has always held with the utilitarians. It has opposed the plan for the chapel, less vehemently it is true, than the suggestions for a purely abstract monument, but nevertheless firmly, because it has felt that a new chapel would prove of value to only a very small proportion of the University and that a neglected memorial would be but an ignominious tribute to those whom it was meant to commemorate. In view of a pressing need for a new gymnasium and an additional Freshman dormitory, the CRIMSON has suggested that the funds for a memorial be devoted to one of these purposes.

It is very easy to understand and to sympathize with the natural objections to these proposals. 'At first sight, the idea of a gymnasium or a dormitory does not seem to accord with the spirit of a memorial. But it is only necessary to think of Harkness at Yale or of the Baker Memorial Rink at Princeton to dispel the prejudice against a "utilitarian" memorial. At its best a new dormitory might be a Harvard Harkness; at its worst it would serve a useful purpose. At i's best a new chapel would be a glorious, if somewhat lifeless, architectural monument: at its worst it would merely be a new Appleton.