No Headline

A gentleman has called our attention to the fact that the recent disturbances in the north entry of Thayer were caused by sophomores, - not freshmen; as the latter gentleman naturally feel aggrieved at being reproved for offences of which they were innocent, we are only too glad to do them the justice to correct our error. We shall always be ready to rectify any mistakes in our columns, and hope that whenever we have done in justice to anybody we shall be informed of it at once. But we cannot close this editorial without again expressing our severe censure of "fresh" conduct of any sort, whether from freshmen or sophomores, or men of any other class. Our former remarks were unjust, only so far as they were not directed against the real offenders. Indeed, the offense from sophomores is more censurable than from freshmen.

While the Conference Committee is discussing how to put down cribbing in examinations, it may be well to consider how the students can deal with other offences against college discipline. A graduate contributor to the Advocate suggests that the editors of the college papers ferret out the authors of the small disturbances, such as the painting of the John Harvard statue. The writer thinks that in this way the responsibility and odium for giving information could be taken from one man and laid upon many, while the management of the matter would still be in the hands of undergraduates. Without doubt such a plan has advantages and disadvantages, which actual experiment only can determine and balance. Meanwhile we should like some expression of opinion from those who are not on the papers.