A CRITIQUE OF POOR REASON

Under the caption "College Grafters" the Boston Herald yesterday editorialized on the charge of a fraternity publication that "almost every student office which handles money has grafters among its incumbents." Accepting the information of an admittedly informal survey as substantial, the Herald deplores the "nasty situation" and suggests that the offending element might well be eradicated by a strict policy of expulsion.

Aside from the unconvincing nature of the Herald's information the picture of a metropolitan daily singling out for attack comparatively trivial undergraduate peculation's is a trifle ridiculous. But the charge compares perfectly with the vague sentiment of college men, based on a few proven instances, that responsible positions are frequently abused for personal profit. The accusation obviously cannot be denied, but the proposed cure is singularly superficial.

The implications of such a condition lie far deeper than the Herald would suggest. Looking to their elders for examples of an acceptable code of ethics, the offending undergraduate officials find on one side shameless dishonesty and on the other helpless complacency. Their natural reaction is to regard graft as a legitimate profit, the assumed right of officialdom. The immediate consequence of such an attitude firmly established in the minds of these college men becomes tragically obvious when one considers that they are destined to fill responsible positions in the world. There is probably need for some such disciplinary action as the Herald proposes, but any complete solution must depend on a decisive change in public attitude. Undergraduates do not form their own ethical code; the influence of their elders' example is undeniable. In disregarding that fundamental the Herald clothes its editorial with superficiality and loses an opportunity to strike the problem at its roots.