Inter-House Eating

To the Editor of the CRIMSON:

Your Tuesday morning editorial entitled "Eating Around" came back to mind this morning whon I found my term hill. Expenses under the House Plan system are enough, without burdening the student with the necessity of paying for the privilege of eating with his friends who unfortunately live in another House. Having spent one year under the present inclastic system, I know some of its evils.

With the college split up into many Houses, it is very unlikely that all one's friends will be in the same House. They are acattered; and, as a matter of fact, are so far apart that it is often necessary to make a special effort to nee them. There is no better time to do this than at meals when each has enough leisure to enjoy the other's company.

But at the beginning of the year one is required to sign up for a minimum number of meals for each week. The rates are so weighted as to make it most practical to sign up for fourteen meals. This leaves seven meals which are optional. Several will be lost over the weekend and several more by not getting up for breakfast. It does not give the average man a chance to cat in another House with a friend without the meal being paid for twice to the same person who has contracted to give the meal, but at another table,--no, another dining room. As the CRIMSON editorial said: "a man is constrained either to forego his pleasure or to consider himself an uninvited guest and suffer the embarrassment of knowing that he is causing his host a not inconsiderable expense. Conversely, the extra charges involved in entertaining guests of men prevent a House resident from inviting friends to dine with him."

Now, if a plan were adopted where-by a man might sign at another House but have it counted at his own, it would enable him to see his friends away, and again to invite them or others down for an equal number of times. Such a plan is practical because five out of seven Houses are supplied by the same kitchen, and the burden of interchange of meals would be little or no greater than the same system working out in the Business School. However, in the case of the two Houses which have their own kitchens, I believe it may be assumed that by the law of averages, it will so work out that as many will be away as come in. This has been the case in several large New England colleges that have had the problem of serving a limited number of meals in various scattered dining rooms.

It would be unwise to extend this system to the point where a man could cat no meals in his own House. this, indeed, would defeat one of the most important benefits of the House Plan. Also I would consider that on special House Nights, outsiders would have to come in as guests to prevent over taxing the dining hall.

I am sure the House plan, though it meant to bring men in a House nearer together, never meant to force those in different House apart. I hope the College will take up this issue of the CRIMSON and seriously work out a plan before those men who are in their first year regret that they are tied up by the House Plan. Peyton Murray OcC.