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



Ed. Note--The Crimson does not necessarily endorse opinions expressed in printed communications. No attention will be paid to anonymous letters and only under special conditions, at the request of the writer, will names be withheld. Only letters under 400 words can be printed because of space limitations.

To the Editor of the Crimson:

I am writing this solely on the basis of the facts published in your news columns last Saturday, to comment on the unfair tone of your editorial entitled "Payment Deferred", dealing with the protest of certain commuters, against Dudley Hall fees being put on the term bill. Instead of this "outburst of a discontented minority" pointing strongly to "shyster tactics", it seems to me that the commuters have a good case.

It's true that they signed up in October for membership in Dudley Hall for a whole year, and they probably owe the five dollar fee for the second semester that is now being charged on the term bill. But the letter that was sent to commuters in February, asking them to come to Dudley Hall and "renew" their membership for the second semester, could well give rise to misunderstanding. You don't ask a person to come renew a contract when you're trying to collect an amount that is already owing under the original contract.

Once, this misunderstanding was created by the authorities at Dudley Hall, it should have been cleared up in as diplomatic a way as possible. I don't know what measures were taken to inform the members that the balance of their fee was still owing, and that if unpaid at a certain time it would be presumed that they wanted the fee put on the term bill. I gather from your article that no notice of this nature was given the members of Dudley Hall, and those who signed up in October were given no indication that the fee would be put on the term bill. If a bill is in dispute, the parties charged with the debt should be allowed to present their defense before the bill is put on the term bill where if can't be questioned.

This question should be considered by an impartial board of arbitration, instead of having the disputed fee put on the term bill in a high-handed manner without the consent of the parties billed. Dudley Hall has brought an effective settlement of the commuter problem, but don't unsettle the settlement by tactless administration. Charles B. Feibleman 1L. ('36)

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