CONFLICTS OF PRINCIPLES

Since Mr. Mellon has offered his scholarship for a year's study in Germany with the unfortunate implication of "replacing" the rejected Hanfstaengl award, the Corporation has followed a consistent policy in turning it down. No matter how sincere the intentions of the donor may have been, the wording of his grant has made it impossible to disassociate it from that of Dr. Hanfstaengl.

That the refusal is not based on educational grounds is made clear by the fact that four students are studying in Germany on Harvard grants at the present time. When the Hanfstaengl's scholarship was turned down it was because he was "closely associated with the leadership of a political party which has inflicted damage on the universities of Germany through measures which have struck at the principles we believe to be fundamental to universities throughout the world." Thus the donor and not the desirability of German education caused the rejection. Mr. Mellon seems to have allied himself with this donor in the words "replacement of the Hanfstaengl scholarship," ambiguous wording which necessarily bears the implication of substitution and makes refusal obligatory.

Perhaps now the reasons for the Corporation's policy in October may be regarded in their true perspective. The fact that such action was the only weapon with which Harvard could voice its disapproval of the present German system becomes increasingly clear. In a colder light the use of this sword is an active defense for principles whose impairment is foreign to the ideals of the American education.

It is wise to remember that the Hanfstaengl case and this one which has developed from it should be considered as individual cases. If Mr. Mellon or any person disinterested in the Hitler government were to present a student with a similar chance--but without the present implication--the problem would not be the same and different action would be advisable.