To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

The CRIMSON included an editorial Wednesday on the matter of the students who had been suspended for taking books out of Lamont by various illegal channels. The point seemed to be that student morality would be raised by wide-spread contact with such discipline. I know a couple of fellows who have been chucked by the University for offenses against Lamont, and you are right; although I feel not the slightest personal interest in the welfare of Lamont as an institution, such a memory will be quite effective in keeping me from taking books out over a vacation, and using extralegal means for avoiding an overdue fine (which is what the fellows in question did). Quite similarly I would refrain from doing what they did if the University had ordered their right hand lopped off, but the University could not do that for it would be barbarity. Yet the action the University did take is just a subtle form of barbarity, barbarous because it is pointlessly harsh; no one in his right mind would risk say a ten dollar fine or probation just to avoid an overdue fine.

How is the good more than the harm when the desired rise in morals could be accomplished by much less loss to the College and to the persons involved? The morals of the College need very little raising, a light tap is sufficient to clarify the moral issue (and keep the books in Lamont); beating the sinner's brains out with a baseball bat is, as I said, barbarous.

I am writing this not to criticize the Deans' action, but to criticize the CRIMSON for adopting an opinion I consider to be ill considered and peremptory as regards the welfare of the students. Barry Decker '51.

Approval or disapproval of University action in suspending students was not intended. The editorial sought to warn students of the severity of the punishment for infractions of Library rules by publicizing recent suspensions.