Amid Boston Overdose Crisis, a Pair of Harvard Students Are Bringing Narcan to the Red Line


At First Cambridge City Council Election Forum, Candidates Clash Over Building Emissions


Harvard’s Updated Sustainability Plan Garners Optimistic Responses from Student Climate Activists


‘Sunroof’ Singer Nicky Youre Lights Up Harvard Yard at Crimson Jam


‘The Architect of the Whole Plan’: Harvard Law Graduate Ken Chesebro’s Path to Jan. 6

No Headline


EDITORS DAILY CRIMSON. - Your correspondent in Monday's issue evidently writes in ignorance of the true state of the cribbing question before the Conference Committee. The committee did not take up the question of its own motion and could not therefore avoid the discussion without extreme discourtesy, even granting that it was desirable to do so. But we do not admit that the discussion of the question is objectionable. The mere fact that the subject is being agitated is not in the least proof that the practice is universal, or even generally prevalent here. The members of the committee would be the first to deny the truth of such an inference. The practice exists - to a comparatively slight extent, to be sure - but still it exist; and as long as that is the case, it should be the aim of every true Harvard man to find some remedy which will remove it. It is absurd to shut our eyes to the evil because we believe it is less here than elsewhere, and to look for its disappearance if we refuse to consider it, simply because the discussion offends our fine sensibilities.

That the Conference Committee should turn from the consideration of a practice which just so far it exists depreciates the value of the degree of every honest graduate, to the more "vital" questions of plank walks and "muckers," is by no means a self evident proposition. Surely the value of the Harvard degree should be a matter of vital importance to every undergraduate.

Far from stopping the discussion let us continue it until the practice stands revealed in all its disgusting details, and the whole body of students unite in branding the "cribber" as unfit for the society of Harvard men, whether his aim be forty per cent. or seventy-five

But so far only one of the communications has even approached the question on which communications were asked. The Advocate cavalierly dismisses the subject with the statement that there are a number of reasons, none of which it states; and the Monthly avoids the main issue to discuss a minor point of detail, in the "danger" to the Conference Committee.

It was with a view to making the punishment for "cribbing" more severe, and at the same time more just, both to the accused and to the students in general, that the "student jury," was proposed. This was the subject on which communication was invited. The discussion desired was on the remedies rather than on the evils existing at present.


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