The explanation, given in yesterday's HERALD, of the excessive charges for board in the last term bill is hardly satisfactory. According to the statement made there, the bursar assessed the members for repairs, although there was a surplus of $1800 in the hands of the association. In the first place, where does this surplus come from? And if we have such an amount of money on hand, why was that not used to pay for such extensive repairs? And, moreover, what were these repairs and why have we not heard of them before? Why were they not posted in the hall, as the other expenses were? The bill for $4.80 included repairs. How is it that, all at once, we are told of some enormous repairs and asked to pay for them, although we have seen no statement from the auditor that such repairs were ever made?
A rumor has been circulating that these "repairs" consisted of the roofing of the tower and the lighting of Sanders. This is so ridiculous that it is, of course, untrue. But the word "repairs" is indefinite and we would like to hear from the auditor. In all probability, the matter is clear enough to those that understand it, but common justice requires that we should all understand it. The whole affair looks peculiar from a business standpoint.