To the ever increasing stock of what may be called circumstantial evidence on the Reading Period, the Secretary to the University for Employment today, elsewhere in the CRIMSON, adds his share. And more than a possible misapplication of Harvard's latest educational experiment would seem to have been avoided. Fears that all Harvard would migrate to more agreeable climes have been pretty well blasted by the crowded condition of the Library and the very normal term-time appearance of the Square; Boston hostesses and Yard cops will testify that things have been "quiet" in a social way; and the bootleggers have been heard to complain of the lack of conviviality registered at the University.

But though the industry of the undergraduate seems proclaimed in these facts, it does not necessarily follow that the midyear marks will show a generally higher average. Admitting that most of the tests have laid a distinct emphasis on the Reading Period assignments, there seems to be an almost unanimous sentiment among students that these assignments were often too heavy, and that as a result, the midyear examination found the student either insufficiently read or ill-reviewed on the work which preceded the Christmas recess.

Whatever the results of the present inquisition, the condition of the Reading Period immediately preceding are ample proof of the experiment's soundness. Whether the marks show it or not, there is scarcely any denying the fact that the respite from lectures has brought increased industry, interest, over-long assignments, scarcity of books, improper emphasis, over-strenuous extra curricular activities--these must be admitted and expected in so radical an experiment. Improvement in these matters will come readily through experience.

The real significance of the Reading Period as it has worked is that the American undergraduate has been trusted and has, with but very few exceptions, not betrayed that trust. He has been given leisure and has, to the best of his lights, made the most of it.