COMMUNICATIONS.

EDITORS DAILY CRIMSON:-Two letters concerning the action of the junior class were published in your columns Wednesday morning which would seem to deserve attention-the one for its suggestion, the other for its misstatements. Let us consider the latter first.

The writer states that a letter was received from the chairman of the Independent Committee, which "urged the students to parade with the Democratic procession, offering as an inducement the fact that the Institute of Technology had decided to parade in their ranks." But, says the writer, ingenuously, the Technology does not propose to parade in their ranks, consequently, can Harvard, "in respect to itself, turn out with a party that takes such shady methods"-that tells a naughty lie, to speak boldly, "to secure our presence in its ranks?" Well, we hardly know. If the simple facts were considered we are very sure the Independents would not desire in their ranks anyone who could adopt so shady a method of argument as the writer has done, for the letter stated that it was probable that the Technology would turn out in their parade, and desired, merely, in effect, to know if the Independent movement was strong enough here at Harvard to lead a majority of the students to parade in the Independent procession. We would suggest that the writer may find "various other channels in which he may be useful," instead of writing letters based on ignorance of the facts.

The writer of the other letter declares the invitation to be 'remarkable,' "most preposterous," an "utter absurdity," "unreasonable." This is vigorous language, and hardly justified by what is said in proof. A class, he says, is a unit; it is impossible that there are not many who are in favor of Blaine; consequently it is impossible for the class to march in the Independent parade as a class; consequently the invitation is absurd, etc. He kindly states that he has "no objection to seeing as many juniors as seem so inclined joining in the proposed procession," for which he may be sure the juniors return thanks. But he goes on to say, he does object to these men representing the junior class, and here we believe most of the men will agree. Whether Republicans or Independents shall prove in the majority, they have no right to represent the minority. Minorities have their rights as well as majorities, and it is obvious that either a parade must be non-partisan, or the class, as a class, cannot be represented in it. The writer does not see, apparently, that it is just as absurd for Blaine, or, perchance, Butler, as for Cleveland, for in each case there are those who would dissent from such action. His letter gives the impression that the "unreasonableness" is all on one side, but evidently it is not. It must be granted, even according to his somewhat one-sided argument, that in fairness to everyone, the parade must be non-partisan in character.

X. '86.