Elsewhere in these columns appear two editorials that take opposite sides on the question of prohibition polls in general and collegiate prohibition polls in particular. One says that the CRIMSON'S drive to ascertain college opinion is one of the three big phantoms staring the dry leaders in the face, the other takes the smug "nothing-ever-matters" attitude and joins the ranks of the cynics by saying that the collegiate statistics do not delve deep enough.
Granted that there are two sides to this question it must, however, be acknowledged that there is some basis for this effort at getting reliable prohibition statistics when the purpose that prompted this action is examined. The object of the CRIMSON'S prohibition poll was to crystalize student opinion on prohibition. That it did. It may be that some of the votes were cast in devil-may-care attitude but when 24,000 college students speak out there is a tone of seriousness accompanying the facts. The paper from Wisconsin states that if the number of drinkers and non-drinkers could be ascertained, a basis for an intelligent observation would be laid. However, a poll asking "Do you drink" could not do this, according to this belligerent sheet. The indirect methods, they say, must be used. How much grain and juniper juice is consumed? How much crime and poverty exists?
College prohibition polls have done what they set out to do, namely, get the college students' stand on prohibition. The results have added weight to the ever growing wet sentiment. This is less important than the fact that this expression came from a cross section of the country from whom those men who will act on either prohibition, or its successor, in the next generation, will be chosen.