Communication

To the Editor of the CRIMSON:

The mass meeting at the Union last Wednesday night brought out clearly an attitude which I have heard hinted at before and against which I strongly protest. With the single exception of Captain Kane, each successive speaker expressed his gratification to see the "enthusiastic support of the undergraduates" and the "splendid spirit of the Harvard undergraduate body". This distinction is as unnecessary as it is unfortunate. These remarks were made in such a manner that one could not help feeling strongly the implication that the graduate students are disloyal, (and made me personally feel apart from the demonstration which I wished to share). Whether or not this was done purposely, I do not know.

I do not think this attitude is justified. I do not think that the graduate body as a whole is disloyal to the Crimson. If the graduates are, why should they have so roundly hissed a man who Saturday morning entered a class-room with a blue feather conspicuous? Why should they have added by their presence to the huge cheering crowd which jammed that very mass meeting? Why should they have so intensively craved a Harvard victory and so sincerely rejoiced at the glorious triumph?

It is true that graduate students from other institutions have not, and should not have equal advantages with native Harvard College men. It is true that some of the graduates come here from other nearby college or universities which regard Harvard as a hated rival, and that these men can not in a few months overcome an ingrown prejudice of four years. But these men are in the minority. It is true that the graduates are obviously accorded second or third consideration in some things, such as ticket allotments. Here however, we may argue that this consideration is an effect--or, we may argue that it is a cause. It's a circle to be avoided.

To Kane's credit let us repeat that he was "delighted to see the pep and enthusiasm of both the graduates and undergraduates". That is what the graduates want: they are a part of Harvard University and want recognition of the fact. It is absurd and unfair to say that his remark was "tactful", for that is not the spirit in which it was intended. He meant is as he stated it--a truth, which if only recognized by others, would clear the air, dispelling clouds of suspicion and dislike on the part of the undergraduates, and claiming for a more united University the honest ardor which the graduates are begging the opportunity to show and receive acknowledgement and respect therefor.  MONROE HEATH 1G.  Nov. 19, 1921