The latent enthusiasm of Harvard men for political matters has at last been roused to some extent. The misfortune of accusations of dishonest campaigning within the University may be alleviated by the discussion of such matters in the columns of the CRIMSON. The Mail has thus far, however, argued the case for only one side. The defendants have not publicly replied, but they have offered their files for verifications as to numbers and authenticity.

Perhaps the real source of error lies in the close association of two clubs with essentially similar aims. There is apparently no way to prevent signatures from appearing legitimately on the rolls of both the regular party organizations, of the University and the more ephemeral clubs existing during a single campaign. Some duplication of members undoubtedly results from this circumstance, and the true strength of each party's following can only be determined by comparison of the rolls of clubs alike in purpose.

In the interim, the apathy which until now has characterized the politics of Harvard has given way to sincere if violent expression, and the lid is off a campaign of roars instead of whispers.