We invite all members of the University to contribute to this column, but we are not responsible for the sentiments expressed.

To the Editors of the Crimson:

The editorial in last Tuesday's CRIMSON places before the University, and particularly before the members of the religious societies, the preliminary agitation in regard to a building in which the religious societies might find a more suitable home than they have at present. The editorial is a forcible statement of the opinion that the building should contain a home not only for the religious interests of the students, but also for the more serious of the literary societies. Many men feel that the University would be better served if such a building were intended primarily for the religious interests of the students; and I wish to state briefly some of the reasons for that feeling.

A building of the character proposed would stand in the University for the religious life of the students. It would be to the new student the symbol of the welcome which it is now so hard to express; and to all students it would be a constant reminder of the high aims of the societies which are now almost hidden from view, and even from thought, in their obscure rooms. Its purpose would be anything but a narrow one, for the three societies now represent practically all shades of religious belief, and any new religious society would find a place in the building, as soon as it might be formed. The present membership of the societies might indicate a lack of general interest on the part of students; and yet the membership of the societies has constantly increased, even in proportion to the very rapid growth of the University. The building, also, would undoubtedly concentrate much of the interest which is now dissipated simply by neglect. A basis including all the religious interests of the students seems broad enough for a truly University interest, and yet definite enough to give the building a distinctive character.

So far as isolating the religious societies is concerned, - setting them in opposition to, or exclusive from, the broad and humane interests of the University, - that is certainly far from the wishes of any one. The building should certainly be open to any use which would not interfere with the religious societies, and in this way it would probably furnish a much needed place for lectures, social and literary gatherings, and even rooms for some of the literary or special interest societies.

One other very important consideration is that of the money for such a building. This, it is thought, could be much more readily obtained for a religious building from those who are interested in the best life of the University, than for any purpose so vague as that which would be expressed by a building in which literary, as well as religious societies, find a permanent home.