The Harvard Crimson assumes no responsibility for the sentiments expressed by correspondents, and reserves the right to exclude any communication whose publication may for any reason seem undesirable. Except by special arrangement, communications cannot be published anonymously.

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

Professor Mather in the report of his evidence given at Dayton quoted in the CRIMSON of October 13, makes the following statement: "We should go back into chaos if we took out of the laboratories, out of the dissecting rooms, out of the field of investigation, this great doctrine of evolution.

Chaes would inevitably destroy the whole moral fabric of society as well as impede the physical progress of human-kind."

In reply to Professor Mather's views herein contained I say with the Frenchman. "Il ne s'agit pas de cela." It is not a question of the results which would arise either from the suppression of the investigation and teaching of evolution, or from the freedom to continue such investigation and teaching. Each side of the controversy dodges the main issue when it asks about the possible outcome of a dissemination of evolutionary theory. When the scientist approaches the solution of a new problem, he does not hesitate to search for the truth of the matter, regardless of whether or not this truth may controvert some of his previous opinions. Regarded in this light, the main issue of the debate may be stated as follows: shall scientists and teachers be permitted to search for the truth and to teach it in so far as they know it to be the truth, or shall "he attempt to find and to spread the truth, be frustrated by the narrow unwillingness fairly to examine evidence which might tend to nullify traditional beliefs? Samuel C. Sander '28