COUNCIL '37 TO COUNCIL '38--TO HARVARD

New and proud possessors of an office and meeting place in P.B.H., given through the generosity of Mrs. Robert R. Ames, the Student Council has for the third year continued its growth toward more and more efficacy and has this year so tightened its understanding of its primary functions that the Council President's report can philosophize about them. This is not unfortunate, because although the Council has not accomplished as many material results as its predecessor, from an objective interpretation of its purposes has arisen the important fact that the Council is necessarily different from similar organizations in other colleges and must therefore seek different ends. A year ago President Bowditch said in his report, the first ever made, that the Harvard Council was unique since it did not deal with intimate student problems nor with disciplinary relations between student and dean. Furthermore, he pointed out that its main purpose was to take undergraduate action, not to reflect mere undergraduate opinion. His conception of the Council's function was supported by its activities during that year. In comparison, President Keppel's Council, making fewer investigations yet contributing one that may prove the best of all in recent times--namely, the budgetary report, has nonetheless been marking time, while gathering up its skirts of policy.

That the Council has emphasized policy rather than action during the current year can best be shown by tracing its operations and examining the President's report. The argument, first, that the Council should not be the victim of commitments by its predecessor is well taken, for obviously a new Council may be unwilling to undertake an investigation left over from the previous year's program. Suggestions, not orders, are all that should be passed on. Together, the two reports by the Committee on Research were a startling expose of the double evil in Harvard of poor teaching, due to the pressure of research, and of one-sided distribution of funds to departments. The investigation last fall into the collection for a Spanish ambulance taught the Council that it should supervise more carefully appeals to undergraduates for money. In connection with the question of student funds, it is to be noted that the Council has set up a new policy of concentrating its charity at home. Thus, while $300 less was given to local charities, $600 more was added for scholarships, which meant that twice as many were awarded. In addition, the Council helped to make swimming a major sport, to change some aspects of the Commencement exercises, and advised on the American History Plan.

The suggestions for future work in the President's report make it clear that the Council has left much undone that it can well do next year. The problem of both Freshman and Senior elections it still unsolved, and from the present sentiment of the Council it can be deduced that certain parts of these may need to be abolished. This brings us to its general attitude. Certainly, the Council has no swords to draw with University Hall, for Dean Hanford has been the acme of cooperation. Certainly, also, because of Harvard's Jaissez-faire attitude toward the student, it would be a mistake for the Council to attempt to discipline his private affairs. Harvard is too much a place for individualized learning to favor such practical training in citizenship as the ideal student council is supposed to afford. For students in those colleges which impose strict regulations upon undergraduate life, it is right that they have a loud voice in forming and administering their own codes. But this, we hope, will never be necessary at Harvard, and therefore the Council's function should be to keep one eye on University Hall and the other on the student's interest, with as much independence and as little formality as possible.