SCRUBWOMEN AGAIN

The most recent opening of the scrubwomen case brings up no new principles. The case is essentially where it was left off last spring. The University administration believes that its position is defensible both technically and morally; Lamont and his backers believe that it is defensible on no grounds whatsoever. As in most situations of this kind there is something to be said on both sides; but the CRIMSON does not propose to review the whole case again. It feels however, that there are several aspects of these most recent developments which should be pointed out.

In the first place there can be little doubt that Lamont is acting sincerely; he believes that a wrong has been done and that it is his position to right it. Granting that a wrong has been done, it does not follow that the name of the University will be cleared by his act. Under these conditions the University administration which committed the injustice is the one to make amends. Lamont and his group would have done their duty by objecting to the policy of the administration and attempting by reasonable methods to get it changed. If they had wanted to get up a fund quietly to give the scrubwomen their "due" as a Christmas present, they would have been doing a generous thing and at the same time appeasing their own consciences. In acting beyond this, they are doing the University, whose fair name they are so assiduously attempting to clear, grievous injury. No possible good can come from dragging an already unsavoury story out for more publicity and unfavorable comment by a press always on the alert to give Harvard a black eye.

On the other side of the fence stands the administration, convinced of its innocence, despite the fact that virtually no one is willing to issue an absolutely clean bill of health. As the CRIMSON pointed out continually last year, the University's policy has been at best a miserly, penny-pinching, and stupid one throughout. Out of it all, though, came the promise to investigate the whole employment situation thoroughly. Why has there been so much delay? If there is good and adequate reason why hasn't the public been kept informed of developments along these lines; and, if, as Lamont's letter states, the investigation is not to include the scrubwomen case, why isn't it?

These are questions to which Harvard men are entitled to know the answer. If the University wants the alumni and undergraduate support which are the very essence of the institution, it can ill afford to continue its present policy of silence and procrastination.