Explanation

To the Editor of the CRIMSON:

The "personal and class feeling" that appears in the first issue of the Harvard Progressive was not "allowed to become evident"; it was placed there deliberately. The editors have appealed to a class, to that class possessing a civic conscience; they have stated that they consider the report of Messrs. Flexure and Burlingham a very real and personal matter.

It is true that the Sacco-Vanzetti Case is not specifically a matter of Socialism, but the daily newspapers refused to handle the report, and we felt that it was something Harvard men should read.

What happened to the Crimson, so free from "The stress and competition of the business world"? On October 23, Time, in an editorial, commented unfavorably on the North Carolina Game, and next day the Crimson rushed to the defense with a lead editorial entitled, "The Sneer and the Yellow Sheet." On February 8, Mr. Kenneth L. Roberts, writing for the Saturday Evening Post, made merry at Harvard's expense, and once more the Crimson responded nobly. Where was the Crimson on March 1; on that day, the New York World under the title, "More Sacco-Vanzetti Evidence", printed grave charges about President Lowell. Was not this news, or was it to be ignored as "the policy of sensationalism of one of a large number of radical journals," or were all the Crimson editors engaged in writing interviews with Gilda Gray? Perhaps the paper was all full; among the important items of news enjoyed by the Crimson's readers next morning were such sensations as "Pi Eta Announces Plans for Whoops Dearie", and "Gibson Terrace Lodgers Seek Aid in Feud with Crooning Felines."

Incidentally, even the Crimson is not so free from "The stress of competition of the business world." On February 28, there appeared a half page advertisement of the University Theatre featuring signed testimonials from several editors. It is rumored that each editor received forty dollars for this act of kindness.

"In the student section of the Socialist movement one might hope to find a blending of youthful idealism and careful thinking...." Well, as far as we know, we are the only ones in Harvard College so youthfully idealistic as to be interested in the "Liberation of manhood theme," or in the failure of two Anarchist Wops to secure a fair trial. Surely, we are the only ones doing any careful thinking, for, as yet, the Crimson has failed to touch on the real issue: "Was or was not the leading article true."

We regret deeply that the Transcript misread your Editorial, "Mark of the Beast," on March 21, and trust that "Squirrel Cage", in this morning's paper, has been sufficient to appease the Crimson's trustees.

We are Very truly yours,   The Harvard Socialist Club.