The Crimson prints today a communication from a member of the University who attacks Columbia and her president for the dismissal of two professors. There is only one comment which we should like to make on this letter. And this is the form of an interrogation. Is the writer possessed of sufficient facts to warrant such a statement appearing before the public with his signature appended? If so, he should have stated what these were, so as to strengthen his case; nay, to make it secure. For is it not possible that the governing body of Columbia University may be cognizant of that which it does not care to make known just at this time? The American public has not yet been informed of the reasons upon which this body acted. That they have a right to such knowledge before condemning two professors is another thing entirely. At the present, however, would it not be the wise way to ask the powers that be at Columbia why she followed such a course. When this challenge has been made, that institution of learning can decide as it sees fit. If it refuses to give out any word on the subject, then each individual has the right to judge as his convictions or inclinations direct him. If the just grounds are proved, the matter is settled. Perhaps this is what the author of this letter meant. Perhaps his letter was intended as a challenge to Columbia. At any rate the glove has been thrown down. The sagacious policy is to grant New York's great seat of learning reasonable time to make a statement. Until that time, for the current accounts in journals are hardly sufficient, "Pax Vobiscum."