(Ed. Note--The Crimson does not necessarily endorse opinions expressed in printed communications. No attention will be paid to anonymous letters and only under special conditions, at the request of the writer will names be withheld.)

To the Editor of the CRIMSON:

I was both gratified and bewildered by your recent editorial on the Leverett Latin Table. My gratification was occasioned by your acceptance of the reading of Latin as a worthwhile and illuminating experience; my bewilderment arose from your conclusion that any essay in conversational Latin must logically be relegated to the realms of the pedantic.

By your acceptance of the value of the Classics you release me from the necessity of writing their apologia, although I cannot refrain from stating at this point that I believe their study has a universal value as a prerequisite to a full culture.

The point at issue is whether or not, once this value has been accepted, experiments in conversation will further a man's appreciation of the literature and its underlying culture. If you deny this you must then assert that the French and German tables perform simply a pragmatic function, which is that of making Freshmen able to get around in Europe. In all other senses, Latin is just as much a "living" language as any other. Certainly a lover of Latin can think in Latin, just as a lover of French thinks in that language as he reads his favorite authors.

Is it necessary to add that all present considered the banquet highly successful even though it were judged by Epicurean standards alone? The Classical Club has demonstrated its satisfaction by voting to hold such dinners regularly in the future. Donald B. Campbell '32.