Mr. Lazarus Illogical.

(We invite all men in the University to submit communications on subjects of timely interest, but assume no responsibility for sentiments expressed under this head.)

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

I have read with some interest the communication of Mr. Isidor Lazarus in the CRIMSON of October 26, and I must confess that his attack on the Republican sympathizers in the University impresses me as being not only particularly pointless but as eminently unfair and unreasoning. He makes three statements the truth of which I cannot for a moment admit, and from them draws a conclusion which is not only illogical but is also a insult to the intelligence of the majority of men who voted in the recent straw ballot.

He says first: "The overwhelming majority of our straw votes for Hughes is in strange distinction from the figures obtained in similar tests elsewhere resulting in victory for Wilson or in practical draws or in very slight favor of Hughes." It is to be presumed that he means straw votes in other colleges and in reply I can only say that the straw vote in every college I have heard of so far this year has resulted in a substantial victory for Hughes. These facts are easily verified.

He further says: "The expressions of admiration for Hughes are pronouncedly militaristic and pro-Ally, whereas it is the pro-Germans throughout the country who are prepared to 'strafe' Wilson for his independent Americanism." The phrasing of this sentence has unfortuately befogged its meaning, but I assert that the majority of Republicans, whether in the University or not, are far from militaristic. Moreover, if, as he says, the Hughes supporters are pro-Ally, I fall to see how this constitutes an indictment against them, inasmuch as it is the pro-Germans who "are prepared to 'strafe' Wilson."

His third statement is as follows: "The phrases most frequently uttered by Harvard Hughes supporters have to do with every subject on earth except the sole visible and apparently eternal issue of a Republican high tariff, sufficiently recognized by the rest of the country." I beg to state that the tariff is not the paramount issue of this campaign and indeed the tariff policies of both parties are every day becoming more and more alike, owing chiefly to conditions anticipated after the war. Even the Democrats have come to recognize the need for a certain amount of protection under present conditions.

His conclusion states that "Harvard University . . . . is exposing itself to the ridicule of America by taking a political stand based on puerile prejudice, mob imitation and unreasoning ignorance of economic history."

This assertion is so obviously illogical and even ridiculous that it scarcely deserves an answer. He is not only thus characterizing Harvard University but, in the event of a Republican victory in November, the majority of the voters of this country. HOYT SHERMAN '18.