All the good old-fashioned sentiments like love and Christmas are so commercialized nowadays that many of the old saws seem rusty, if not wornout. One of these, "The gift without the giver is bare," has been heavily battered again this week, now that the Combined Charities Drive seems to have repudiated it so effectively.

Last Wednesday the campaign's co-chairmen announced they had been forced to move the annual appeal from November to the spring term, "when students have more money." The shift to a more lucrative season was necessary because the Administration had again rejected their request to charge charity pledges to the term bill.

Superficially, the Drive's leaders seem to have legitimate grounds for complaint. After all, Combined Charities pledges had been charged on the term bills for many years. And the University's decision to stop this service was based on a danger really very remote--that it might some time be legally unable to collect a delinquent term bill while acting as a collecting agent for an outside organization. The drive, however, was willing to guarantee payment of possible losses from its own funds. Also, as Combined Charities spokesmen point out, a campaign with such noble purposes could be said to deserve special assistance from the administration.

These arguments, convincing though they are, under-estimate the problems involved. By lending its term billing facilities to the Charities Drive, the University risks not only the loss of a few term bills, but also its legal status. Because of such dangerous incidents as the film controversy last year, University lawyers have become increasingly wary of legal situations which could endanger Harvard's position as a tax-free, non-profit organization.

The old term billing system is further objectionable because it allows students to masquerade as philanthropists, while unsuspecting parents pay the bills. This is a good way to satisfy solicitors without giving them cash, to impress them with one's generosity, and to forget the obligation completely. According to the plan which the Combined Charities committee is presently advocating, these careless pledges would be charged on term bills as "Coupon books," used ordinarily to buy extra meals. Certainly, a plan which in the past has foisted student generosity on parents is bad enough, without further disguising donations as midnight snacks.

Though a return to term billing is not advisable, Combined Charities need not despair of future prospects. Longer pledge periods could be offered in a campaign conducted by the Drive itself. For those short of cash, this waiting period would defer payment just as long as term bills, and insure that students will give more thought to their donations. Then the organization will be able to campaign honestly in the spirit of a "charity drive."