The Birmingham age-herald., 1909-02-19
prom the Louisville Courier.Journal.


 @ cCoRDING to Professor Eliot WU Harvard is opposed to luxury
 and the segregation of the rich'
 in It's student life and with striking senti-
 ment and apt philosophy he recalls the day when the students of Harvard did not have even gas or water and had
 to live amid many discomforts. He makes it plain that in preaching against lux ury and snobbery he does not speak for a life without gas, water and other com forts but it Is easily inferred from his re- marks that as between the enervating ease of modern luxury and the devel- oping hardships of the past he would prefer for tho students the latter.
 Thus Professor Eliot once more attacks a problem which has become a live one
 in college faculties, in homes and in
 those circles interested in sociological
 research. He recognizes, with many
 others the softening effect a certain
 kind of college life has on the youth,
 when it's normal purpose should be to
 broaden, strengthen and harden him
 and equip him for an active, vigor-
 ous and achieving career among men.
 He recognizes the tendency of the rich
 mems sons to flock together and, flock
 ing together, to assume snobbish atti-
 tudes toward others while leading the
 weakening life of spendthrifts and
 sybarites. He recognizes. apparently,
 the danger such results hold for socie-
 ty. the emasoulating effect they have
 upon the young men of prominent
 families and the permanent damage
 they work upon colleges which become
 instruments for such evils.
 It is a problem hard to manage, for, | in the first place, it is difficult to over
 come the tendencies of rich youths to
 crave the luxuries they have been
 reared to and in the second it is diff
 cult for rich parents to refuse their
 sons the indulgence they seek. These two considerations may properly be combined with the parents being con- demned as the responsible persons. If the parents were strict and sensible enough to deny their sons the money with which to yield to the temptations of luxury the sons necessarily would have to lead a simpler life. They might then have time to be democratic, impulses to be masculine and sense to be students.
 Of course, in discussing such a sub ject, it must be understood that nobody is conforming college education. The colleges turn out more splendid young men then they do mollycoddles, but nevertheless, the proportion of molly coddles is too large and of those weak lings the proportion of rich mems sons Is conspicuously great. It seems that the place to begin a reform of>the evils of luxury and snobbery Is in the home; that the persons to club are not so much the sons as the parents Parents make possible the luxurious existences of the sons. They are the original sim
 ners@
 It goes without saying that the uni versailles should properly turn out the ablest, the most viriie the sturdiest and pluctiest of youths. The university raining should be the training that makes men femocratlc, diliges1t' ann bilious men, with mind and character equally equipped. That, instead, It IS common for youths to come from college fit for little else than spending money' dancing and struggling for social ex- clusiveness is most unfortunate. Prob ably 1t is just way the subtly-operat- ing natural forces have of equalizing conditions, of overthrowing the rich by emasculating their species and exalt- ing the poor by giving them the chance to do the most of the real work of the world. That is what some theorists argue. But even if true that does not