To the Editor of the Crimson:

Apparently without having investigated the matter, Jack Prudden, '42, has jumped to the conclusion that the Freshman petition on the method of House room allotments was nothing but a campaign on the part of eleven men to gain admission to Houses for some of their personal acquaintances. But this petition appears to us to be definitely altruistic; certainly none of the committee sponsoring it could believe their complaint would result in any revision of the already completed House assignments. We believe this petition was formed after considerable thought to aid future Freshmen who are willing to work hard in attempting to assure for themselves a room in a House.

This petition included several provisions embodied in a similar protest submitted by last year's Student Council Committee on the Houses but not accepted in the present Student Council report, which merely recommends various remedies for the vital problems.

Mr. Prudden's argument that men in Group Four with three important outside activities will be "dabblers" seems ridiculous. Show us a man who earns his numerals by dabbling. Show us a dabbler on the Crimson or Red Book boards. Show us a Group Four dabbler in three important activities.

Mr. Prudden's cases seem to be based on careless misapprehensions, and he appears to have coupled a decided lack of knowledge about the present situation with distastefully personal accusations. The petition appears to avoid clearly any expression of private "gripes." We believe the committee would be glad to cite numerous examples of over-sights in the recent House assignments besides the two cases they chose as samples. Mr. Prudden has rushed to groundless conclusions; we wish he had offered a little constructive instead of destructive criticism. Vern K. Miller '42.   Dave Stearns '42.