the month, much after the style of the stere
•otyped beginning of some people's letters :
" I received your letter and was glad to hear
from you, etc." To another it is simply a
department of college notes. Some take it
.as a place to display their ability as a critic,
cutting right and left without any discretion
whatever : while others take the'other extreme
of making it a sort of " mutual admiration "
affair.
Lately there has been an attempt to make
this department of more universal interest
than it has been heretofore, by a scheme in
troduced by the Lutherville Seminarian. The
plan introduced is, that of the editors of the
exchange departments shall each propose
some question pertaining to college life, and
its necessities, and these questions are then
to be taken up and discussed by the different
journals as exchange matter. The idea is a
commendable one, in as much as it shows a
desire to get out of the rut of commonplace
comment. But just so soon as the discussion
of some important question is taken up it
then becomes matter for sonic other depart
ment, or has no room in the journal at all.
For, if the discussion be elaborate, the liter-
ary department is the place for such matter,
and if it is a mere expression of opinion with-
out any substantiation, it has no room in any
part of the paper
The college papers are supported almost
entirely by the alumni. And, as every good
paper should seek to present -the most news
and best matter for the benefit of the greatest
number, it does not seem right that a whole
department should be kept up for the mere
interchange of civilities between the editors
of these departments. Of what gratification
THE FREE LANCE.
is it to the subscriber when he strikes some
thing like this ?—" There is an excellent arti
cle in the last number of the X, Y, Z, which
is well worth reading, (and yet the editor
knows that not one out of six will ever have
an opportunity of reading this article). The
masterly way in which the writer handles his
subject, shows him to be perfectly familiar
with the very fundamental principles of the
vital question, etc.," and possibly follow with
an elaborate compliment upon the paper
equally as vague.
We do not wish to convey the idea that we
believe in the wholesale copying of every
article we find worthy of comment, but we
do believe that if an article is worth comment
ing upon at all, there should be sufficient
matter taken to give the subscriber some idea
of the subject under discussion.
It is most always possible in any well writ
ten piece, to find some terse expression which
will serve as a key to, the whole discussion,
and tlMs give the reader some idea of current
thought in other colleges.
If a journal deserves adverse criticism it
should be given in an open and sincere man-
ner, and because the paper deserves criticism
is no reason at all that the college itself should
be attacked. Scurrility should have no place
in any department of college journalis'm.
And to answer an honestly meant criticism
by derisive refutation simply gives proof of
how well the "shoe fits." The idea of taking
advantage of the so-called "freedom of the
press " in college journalism is an idea en
tirely foreign to college publications. It may
seem all right in the great political journals
of the day, to deride each other and call men
liars, thieves, scoundrels and all such compli