THE BULLETIN BORED

President Conant, in his welcoming address of the Freshman Class, said, "An incalculably large portion of the value of a college education comes from the fact that the student is living with other men in a stimulating atmosphere of free discussion." Such beliefs, held by the officials of the University, have not only made the publication of the Confidential Guide pamphlet possible but have also made such expressions of opinion the normal course of events at Harvard. Yet the Alumni Bulletin, which portrays Harvard in soft tones to its graduates, criticizes this right when we apply it directly to the courses listed in the catalogue.

The actual attack on the Guide can be discounted since none of it discusses the merits of our criticism. The Bulletin's apparent belief, however, that Dean Leighton should have not written the foreword cannot pass without notice. His belief in the Harvard tradition--the right to criticize and to express criticisms freely--has been strengthened through his contacts with Freshmen and their opinions. He has had the courage to follow his belief out to its logical conclusion in the face of unavoidable criticism. Certainly it is this type of man, who is open to comment, favorable and unfavorable, that belongs in University Hall.

The Bulletin has not assumed a tenable position. While it evidently agrees with the statement of President Conant in the abstract, it is afraid to apply it in a given situation. Not only has the Bulletin seen fit to neglect the possible truth in these statements but it has also pussy-footed on the question of the right to criticize. If the Bulletin felt we did not possess the right and said so, their stand is comprehensible. To meet the issue on the minor questions of adjectives and courtesy, however, shows a failure to grasp our purpose. We would have welcomed constructive suggestions but this article represents a narrow point of view which we hoped had died out of the University.