In putting their stamp of disapproval on a system of search for lost books which involved irresponsible undergraduate ransacking of House rooms, Widener officials have acted swiftly and wisely. But it is inevitable that the proceedings should evoke a reasonable complaint that the practice in question was ever allowed to be put into use, that there was no central responsible authority to prevent or at least to advise against its inauguration.

In its editorial of February 14, the CRIMSON concluded that the incident was "a strong argument for a close unified control over the management of House Libraries." Subject to an essential qualification, that conclusion is valid. As one of the most important features of each of the several Houses, the library must, in the final analysis, be under the control of the masters. As at present, they must have power to name the librarians and assistants, to exercise authority through their library committees over the apportionment of books to various departments, to superintend, generally, the regulations which conduct the libraries' use. These wide powers are necessary if there is to be even the slightest pretense of House autonomy.

But there are many details of House library management that could be measurably facilitated if they were handled by an executive whose office would resemble that of a clearing house and whose power would be advisory. Through such an individual, Professors could make known the reading requirements of their various courses: they would not be force, as now, to approach, or to be approached by, the librarians of each of the Houses. Further, much needless red-tape and bookkeeping could be avoided if orders were placed through a central office. This executive could advise House librarians as to the prices which they should pay for books, could act as a temporary check on the ordering of relatively useless works, could be responsible for the neatness and accuracy of records and cataloguing.

This plan is admittedly imperfect and tentative, but the late unpleasantness should be sufficient evidence that the need which it outlines is far from ethereal. House Librarians have enjoyed a considerable degree of independence; and in general their consequent interest has resulted in efficiency. But as long as they remain practically the sole judges of their own management, one may reasonably expect occasional carelessness and abuses.

At present, Widener authorities possess the power to exercise the sort of control indicated above. But as yet they have, perhaps wisely, refrained from any definite interference. It is, however, all too easy to point out that even the slightest word of warning front a responsible library executive might have prevented the introduction of the general search method and the disagreeable reaction which attended its disclosure.