Of the many innovations of the current Summer Session none is more unjustified or dictatorial than the new policy of requiring every man who buys a participation fee to rent a locker. The decision was taken by the H. A. A. without consulting the Student Council and was then cleverly disguised in order to soften the blow. Nowhere on the card was the compulsory rental made clear; it was left to the student to figure it out all by himself.

The official division of the spoils is five dollars for participation fee and three for locker. Both of these are extortionate. In a full forty-week session, the charge of ten dollars was paid by only a small fraction of the undergraduate body; now, for twelve weeks every man is forced to pay half as much. This means that total income for the summer session is at least as large as in the whole past academic year. Searching for a reason is more fruitless than trying to develop good crews at Yale. The wear and tear on equipment caused by calisthenics is absolutely nil, except for boxing gloves, and the instructors are mostly unpaid Mil Sci men. To say that furnishing a locker and towels costs the University three dollars is nothing short of ludicrous. Total income from the charges imposed on undergraduates is easily fourteen thousand dollars, without including the revenue from Army and Navy officers at the same rate. That sum cannot be even remotely approached by the costs of the athletic program.

Almost as an afterthought, the assertion that without a locker men would dress in street clothes without taking a shower was added as a further reason. That slim chance was not even considered during the spring, when the lockers were taken voluntarily. Come now, gentlemen; give the undergraduate credit for some intelligence!

The new H. A. A. policy is unnecessary, unjust, and unfair. It appears to be a hidden attempt to cover future deficits by current profits, a wartime tactic for which some of the nation's business men have been publicly attacked.