To the Editors of the CRIMSON:
The Student Council Committee headed by Robert A. Monks has made one of the most alarming suggestions that we have ever heard. A plan whereby all freshmen would be assigned to a House without any expression of choice on their part is foolish and unnecessary for the following reasons:
1. Instead of a definite minority being disappointed by failure to make the House of their choice, virtually everybody will be disappointed. This, we suppose, would "remove inequities," as Mr. Monks puts it, but the idea that this represents an advancement of some sort is absurd.
2. This proposal will do nothing to decrease the number of people who are admitted to no House, since the number of rooms remains constant. This is really the greatest source of "hard feelings" to which Mr. Monks alludes.
3. The right to choose one's associates is not a privilege to be lightly discarded. The fact that it involves an "administrative headache" for the College to attempt to facilitate the students' desires is not a sufficient reason for abandoning the attempt.
Mr. Monks' reasoning on this point could also lead to the compulsory assignment of all freshmen to fields of concentration, since this question also involves a "popularity contest" and "administrative headache."
Perhaps the best move to make at this point, in order to save undergraduate freedom, would be to permanently assign Monks to Appley Hall 35, where he can further evolve his ideas without distraction. Thomas D. Edwards '53, Varick Bacon '55, F. P. Maybank '55, J. R. Corcoran