(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. Only letters under 400 words can be printed because of space limitations.) March 29, 1940

To the Editor of the Crimson:

My attention has been called to the news story in the Crimson on March 27th. Normally I should not, of course, regard a news story in the Crimson as a matter for any comment, regardless of its content. The exception to this rule, however, seems to me to be created by your article, which has attracted the interest of the outside press. I therefore beg to protest against what seems to be a totally irresponsible piece of journalism which violates not only the canons of good taste but the sound rule that unfounded rumors should not be used "to make news".

If the outside journalistic community were entirely familiar with the habit of having candidates for the Crimson scout about at this season of the year for anything that would make a story, they might have treated the article in question in the light that was suggested by the cartoon and its presumably funny caption. However, the assumption seems to have been made that the article was seriously intended and, as such, it surely should have had some basis other than totally unfounded and perhaps joking rumer.

The whole affair would give me no concern if it affected no one other than the but of your cartoon and the subject of the article itself. The faculty is, no doubt, fair game for the Crimson, and I am sure your whole story was intended to be very amiable and flattering to me. You must realize, however, that the repercussions in the outside press from such a story might seriously embarrass one who holds a very important public office. My own views are so extreme that they are incompatible with political responsibility to an electorate that certainly holds quite different views, so far as I can see. To attribute any sympathy with them to one of our most responsible statesmen is unjust, particularly with the specific type of forecast that you allowed your reporter to make.

It is useless, of course, to deny rumors and to ask for retractions. Once started, the harm is done. May I, however, suggest that the Crimson has editorial responsibility of the same character that any other news organ has. To permit publication of an utterly absurd story of this character can serve no useful purpose. I leave the question of good taste to your own maturer reflections.   William Y. Elliott

Ed. Note: The Crimson apologizes to Professor Elliott for not having printed his letter immediately upon receipt. The first sentences of the last paragraph seemed to the editors to indicate that the letter was not intended for publication.