CORRESPONDENCE.

TO THE EDITORS OF THE CRIMSON: -

DOUBTLESS the marking system will long remain, as now, the mystery of mysteries of college life, - one of those things which, as Lord Dundreary would say, "no fellow can understand." In vain we seek of the Faculty, of proctors and instructors, of graduates and undergraduates, for an exposition of the principles of this mysterious institutions, which hear without argument, judges in secret, and from whose decision there is no appeal; an institution unmoved by entreaty, callous to criticism, and stoically indifferent amidst the ruin it has wrought. It is not my present intention to censure this system per se, but to call especial attention to the unreasonable delay in arriving at decisions, - a delay which seems to be paralleled only in the English Court of Chancery. When students are relieved from a prescribed course, on passing a satisfactory examination at the beginning of the year, the mark then obtained, whatever it may be, is the mark in the Annual Scale. This mark may be regarded as unjust, or unsatisfactory, and, if made known to the student in season, he might prefer to attend the course prescribed, and endeavor to obtain a more satisfactory mark at the regular examination, and he certainly ought to have such opportunity. But all the information he could obtain in the case of Soph. History (first half-year) was that he passed the examination. He was left in ignorance of his mark until the shortness of the time precluded any attempt to better it at the semiannual examination. I have been gratified to hear that the marks in the History for the second half-year have been returned with more promptness, but this is of little practical comfort to those unfortunates who suffered in the examination of last September.

A. L. H.TO THE EDITORS OF THE CRIMSON: -

The writer (or perhaps writers) of the article in your recent issue, entitled "A Progressive Age," satirized, as far as he was able, pretty much everything in a rather bitter way. He ended up by favoring us with his views on the Philosophical Society that has been started by some who elect that branch of study. He evidently laughs at the idea of it, as he appeared to do at that of all societies and clubs of which he is not a member; for instance, the Art Club, the Telephone Society, and perhaps others could be mentioned.

He seems to forget that he is now known as a man whose philosophical controversies have filled so much of your valuable space lately, and that any attempt to crush out the existence of this most excellent Philosophical Club, a club which will eventually be of of great good to all in it (if to them only), any attempt from him to do this would savor of the "disappointed aspirant."

The intention of the club is, not to settle in one evening matters of gravity over which gray-haired men have spent their lives, but to familiarize students who take some interest in current topics with the most able discussions bearing on those points.

ONE INTERESTED.TO THE EDITORS OF THE CRIMSON: -

I would beg, through the columns of your paper, to clear up a misunderstanding that appears to be current among many of our undergraduates.

There are two distinct associations, the Rifle Corps and the Rifle Club. One of these has on its shingle H. R. C., and the aim of this association is, I believe, military drill and discipline such as will fit its members, at some future date, to occupy enviable positions in the Cadet Corps and other "crack" militia organizations of similar character. The other has on its shingle H. U. R. C., - in full, Harvard University Rifle Club, - and although such discipline is observed in it as to insure the safety of its members and the public at large, still it has a constitutional provision that guards against anything resembling military organization. The practice of "off-hand" rifle-shooting was the end for which it was originated by the Class of '77. By that class it was left to the University without debt, and with considerable property in its possession. The club is now in the same condition; and it only remains to be seen if the victories of American riflemen in the great International matches of 1876 and 1877 have given any enthusiasm more lasting than that of momentary pleasure at the American victories to our undergraduates. If it has, will they not join the Rifle Club? and if they think that club, in its present condition, is undeserving of their support, will they not by their efforts improve it?

H. W. P.TO THE EDITORS OF THE CRIMSON: -

Last week the Freshman class held a meeting for the purpose of deciding whether it should row Cornell or not. From the very outset it was evident that there was not a little opposition to the project, and when the final ballot was taken, it was ascertained that about two thirds of the men present favored the plan of rowing Cornell, and one third opposed it.

Now let us look carefully into this matter and consider the true sentiment of the class. In the first place, there was but a trifle over half the members of the class present. It is safe to assume that none of the absent members were very desirous of rowing Cornell, but were indifferent about the matter; and when a man is indifferent about having a crew, he is also very loath to support it with the necessary funds. There were also a few men who did not vote at all, and who, almost without exception, opposed the sending of a crew. Now, the inevitable conclusion one arrives at is, that there is no use in trying to conceal the fact that the class is disunited, and, laying aside all considerations of honor or expense, the broad fact stares us in the face that only ninety-nine men out of two hundred and forty, came forth as advocates of a Freshman crew.

*