Communication.

We invite all members of the University to contribute to this column, but we are not responsible for the sentiments expressed.

To the Editors of the Crimson:

At the meeting of the Harvard Union last Friday night a most important change in the constitution was proposed and, after a stormy and inadequate debate, was declared carried. This action is regarded by very many members of the Union as hasty, unconstitutional and unprecedented. They point to the clause in the constitution providing that a proposed amendment must be laid on the table for at least one week, in order to ensure a full understanding and discussion of it before any radical change is decided upon. This provision was undoubtedly made to protect rights of absent members.

All who understand the condition of the affairs of the Union agree that a change is necessary. Whether the wisest step is the one so hastily taken is an open question. The majority of the Union may consider the new plan the best that can be devised, or on full discussion it may decide to abandon it. Be that as it may, it has seemed wise to the Executive Committee of the Union to call a special meeting of the society that the plan may be thoroughly and adequately discussed. Both sides must allow that the haste shown at the last meeting was not in keeping with the gravity of the question under consideration; and to an amicable discussion of the proposed amendment both must in fairness agree.

A. B. KEELER,Vice-president of the Harvard Union.