To the Editors of the Crimson:

I feel impelled to take strong objection to the editorial in the Crimson entitled "For Students Only." It attacks a "religious organization within the college" because it "has seen fit to send postcards to its members reminding them to vote for 'their' candidate in the impending election of delegates to the Chicago Student Conference."

It will be necessary first to review the facts, since the Crimson misrepresented them: The organization is the Catholic Club. The postcard sent out by them did not remind anyone to vote for any candidate. It said, (and I quote the exact words used) "The Catholic Club nominee is James Sullivan. We urge you to vote." That was all. The writer of the postcard was obviously very careful to avoid saying that the members of the Club should vote for "their" nominee; he merely urged them to vote, and certainly no, one can take exception to that.

Let me say right now that I am not a Roman Catholic, and do not intend to vote for Mr. Sullivan. But I feel that it is a perfectly proper thing that the Catholic Club has done, and that the Crimson editorial is at best foolish, and perhaps malicious. If the Liberal Union, for instance, had seen fit to notify its members who "their" candidate was, would the Crimson have been so quick to cry, "Shame"? I doubt it.

Doubt, did I say? There is no need for doubt. A member and former officer of the Liberal Union informs me that there are two members of that organization on the ballot. Anyone who attended the meeting which selected them knows who they are, and most members would recognize them as fellow members anyway, he reports. He told me that he saw nothing reprehensible in the Catholic Club's postcard.

Especially in an election of this sort it is essential that the electorate have an accurate knowledge as to the ideas and principles represented by the candidates. If other organizations (such as the Liberal Union) would follow the lead of the Catholic Club in informing not only their own members, but the student body as a whole, as to who their candidates are, votes could (and I am sure they would) be more intelligently cast. John Jay Hughes '48