No Headline

There appears this morning in another column a communication on the change of the spring recess. The writer is evidently in earnest, but his position seems to us a mistaken one. He argues that there is a great inequality in the length of the autumn, winter and spring terms, and implies that the vacation he proposes would remedy this alleged evil. According to his division of the year's work, the autumn term contains about twelve weeks, the winter term fifteen weeks, and the spring term less than eight weeks. It takes but little calculation to determine that the vacation he proposes would not change this inequality materially. If the vacation ended on April nineteenth, the autumn term would contain about twelve weeks, the winter term over fourteen weeks and the spring term about eight weeks. The vacation last year divided the period from the Christmas vacation until the summer with rather more equality than the present recess does, but on the other hand the recess now divides the second half year exactly.

The new date seems to us better than the old for it gives more promise of making the vacation enjoyable. The first week in April, as far as the weather is concerned, is almost invariably an unpleasant one. Experience has shown that the plans of vacation after vacation have been upset by stormy or disagreeable weather. As we said last year in discussing this same subject before the change had been made, we believe that even if the old recess did divide the year a trifle more equally, this theoretical advantage is much more than counterbalanced by the practical advantage to be gained from a vacation that gives the greatest promise of making open-air amusements possible.

Recommended Articles