The Common Room Committee

I am driven to write to you, more in sorrow than in anger, by two letters in the last issue of your rag, in which the activities of the Common Room Committee were attacked by writers who signed themselves "Irate" and "The Critic" respectively. Who, or what, these two are I do not know, but they are typical of a body of students in this College who take no interest whatever in any activities of the main student body until there is danger of their personal comfort being in some way affected. "The Critic," for example, is apparently a student of at least one year's standing, and yet until recently he did not know anything about the Men's Common Room Committee, which actually came into being some time late in 1931!

The Committee was elected by habitues of the Common Room. It was given special disciplinary powers by the Professorial Board as a result of certain disturbances in the room, and its Constitution was approved by the Board: its Constitution was incorporated in the Students' Association, which was given plenty of publicity and adopted at a Special General Meeting in 1932; it functioned in a fairly lively manner during the early part of 1932, and anybody who frequented the Common Room during that time must have known of the Committee's existence. Yet "The Critic" had never heard of it, although he considers that he has such a thorough knowledge of College politics that he is competent to criticise at great length the Committee's work.

It does not seem to occur to him, or to his friends who suggest that "the Executive should take immediate steps to put a stop to the body," that if it were not for the efforts of this Committee there would probably be no Common Room furniture at all by now. The furniture, which was purchased in 1931, or thereabouts, has already been smashed up at least twice by humorous students (who do not appear to realise that it is the Students' own money which the Executive must use for repairs) and repaired under the direction of the Committee. The funds have been supplied by the Executive, assisted by voluntary subscriptions—the College authorities will not contribute.

Surely "The Critic" has sufficient common sense to admit the desirability of the existence of such a Committee, or if he considers himself sufficiently brilliant to evolve a better method of operation he should suggest it, instead of wasting his time writing letters of that type to "Smad." If he is still in the dark about the organisation of the Committee, I would strongly advise "The Critic" to purchase for the sum of sixpence a copy of the Constitution of the Students' Association, and in future to find out something about his subject before he rushes into print, and not to make an ass of himself.

In conclusion. I suppose I should make it clear that I am not, and never have been, a member of the Common "Room Committee, and that this letter is not written, of course, on behalf of the Executive or any other body.