News

‘Deal with the Devil’: Harvard Medical School Faculty Grapple with Increased Industry Research Funding

News

As Dean Long’s Departure Looms, Harvard President Garber To Appoint Interim HGSE Dean

News

Harvard Students Rally in Solidarity with Pro-Palestine MIT Encampment Amid National Campus Turmoil

News

Attorneys Present Closing Arguments in Wrongful Death Trial Against CAMHS Employee

News

Harvard President Garber Declines To Rule Out Police Response To Campus Protests

BEER

NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED

Early this week the CRIMSON editorially favored the serving of beer in the House dining halls. Since that time, the Comptroller has issued a statement to the effect that, having carefully weighed all advantages and disadvantages, he has decided against the introduction. As the State legislature yesterday carried a resolution legalizing Massachusetts beer, some criticism of the Comptroller's decision might be pertinent. First, of course, is the consideration that Cambridge may not revoke its statute against sale at the general election called for the purpose. But aside from this, the principal objections of the Comptroller seem to fall under two heads; the fear of moral reprobation, and the difficulty and expense involved.

In regard to the former, the only group affected would be the absolute prohibitionists. Certainly real temperance opinion cannot be concerned with the inclusion of beer of low alcoholic content on the menus of student dining halls. That the privilege need be abused is an assumption, after all, largely gratuitous. If the authorities are disposed to cynicism, there can be little objection to an intelligent regulation. As for those who disapprove of the consumption of alcohol within whatever limits, one would have thought that an experiment of ten years duration had discredited them rather thoroughly. To such groups as the intransigent drys and the anti-nicotine coterie the University is surely not compelled to defer.

The second objection is, on the whole, more respectable. Should Cambridge do the expected and repeat its ordinance, dispensing beer would still necessitate a license, and there might be fears that the innovation would not justify itself financially. But in the past the authorities were able to cope with both features, and after the legalization of beer the situation should not be substantially different. Many corporations of smaller stature than the University propose to become licensed, and the management which accumulated a surplus in the House dining halls should be equal to the problem of selling beer profitably. Now that an unrepresentative prohibition has been dispelled, the university could resume easily and naturally the enjoyable functions which its passage interrupted.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags