Complaints about the House system almost invariably begin, either in jest or seriousness, with the restriction of parietal hours. The Student Council understandably polled the students two weeks ago in an attempt to discover how much sentiment really exists for proposed changes.

Unfortunately the poll has several grievous faults, not the least of which is the narrow range of alternatives offered. The Council asked whether House members would prefer extension of hours on Friday night to 10 p.m. without any other

Unfortunately the poll has several grievous faults, not the least of which is the narrow range of alternatives offered. The Council asked whether House members would prefer extension of hours on Friday night to 10 p.m. without any other change and also whether they would approve such an extension if it were necessary to sacrifice a number of afternoons during the week. There was no question to discover if the students favored more than the 10 p.m. extension, or if they possibly favored a reduction of parietal hours. Perhaps the restraint was due to their consideration of what is acceptable to the House Masters, but the biased nature of the proposals on the poll could only serve to prevent a true sampling of student opinion on the matter.

The poll, however, did have its humorous side. Again, probably in deference to the Masters, the Council presented three rather flimsy and ludicrous arguments against any extension: "displacement of roommates,..adverse effect of women on the emotional tone of a House, and...increased conformity." How two or four more hours a week with women in the Houses could wreak such devastation to the moral fibre of the Harvardman was not explained.

Not quite so funny and more objectionable in the poll was the tone of bargaining it conveyed: if you will sacrifice one afternoon a week will you sacrifice two? three? The premise of such an argument seems based on the sacred nature of the present total of 35 hours a week when "members of the House may entertain lady guests in their rooms," which evidently, is inviolate.

A reasonable change in the parietal hours and one which would eliminate many of the inconveniences of the present ones, is an extension of the hours on Friday night from 8 p.m. to 12 p.m. In a College without the facilities of fraternities for entertaining women, the Houses become the logical and only place to do so. There can be little protest against making the hours on Friday night the same as on Saturday. One can say, however, that the proposed two hour extension to 10 p.m. will represent little improvement. A couple forced out of the Houses at 10 will still have the problem of where to go until the girl must be in. And at that hour it is too late to go to a show or night spot.

Extension to midnight is not a catastrophic or revolutionary change, yet is one that many students would find advantageous. A 40 hour week is worth fighting for.