The elimination of Latin and Greek from the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts, now being seriously considered by the Yale Corporation, again brings up the whole mooted question of the value of the classics as essentials. For every lover of Euripedes or Aeschylus who rises to point out the benefit of a classical foundation, there is an Edison or a Henry Ford to declare that dead languages have no part in the world of today; and for every Edison questionnaire published there is an interview with a business man of Dayton, Ohio, who emphasizes the importance of a classical background to serve as a setting into which to retire after the first three millions are "cleared up." The controversy chases itself dizzy without getting anywhere.

From the point of view of the average man now in or through college, the classical requirement looks very much like the study of geography finished in the fifth grade at grammar school. He appreciates its importance, but sighs with relief to think that he finished with it before the war changed all the maps. Latin and Greek are very much appreciated,--in retrospect; but whether this appreciation should or should not be stimulated by official requirements is still an open question. Perhaps the best solution is the University's method of dividing the sheep from the goats by requiring entrance Latin for an A.B., but not for an almost similar college career ending in a B.S. And here is the opportunity for reopening the controversy by wondering, which are the goats?