Clarifies Draft Statement

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

The headline and story about draft policy in Thursday's CRIMSON gave an erroneous impression of my views. I am not necessarily opposed to the plan approved in principle by General Hershey or in favor of any other specific plan at this stage of the discussion. The problem is exceedingly, difficult and any answer to it will be open to serious objections. I don't know what the answer should be and was simply trying to point to pros and cons and suggest an alternative policy which also has serious drawbacks.

My own views are of no particular importance and the College will, of course, have to adjust itself as best it can to whatever policy is finally adopted. In the interest of full discussion of this complex issue, however, I want to point out two strong arguments in favor of the recent proposal approved by General Hersey.

First, it would guarantee an uninterrupted flow of superior, trained manpower into the professional schools and the professions. In the long run this might be of vital importance for national defense and other purpose. Can we afford a two-year hiatus in college and professional training? Would there necessarily be such a hiatus in the production of scientists, doctors, etc. if every one were taken into national service for two years at eighteen, or could that gap be made up by shortening college or professional training or otherwise?

Second is a mere selfish consideration. The proposed plan would at least keep the colleges half full or more. What would be the effect on the colleges if the other plan were adopted and we lost, next summer, all or most of our present students and got no new students for two years? All private colleges are in economic difficulties now some of the weaker ones might go under. Others would be in a weakened condition for years and the balance would swing strongly towards the tax-supported institutions. Harvard would survive no doubt and, provided the bills could be paid, it would be an interesting experience for the faculty and the deans to have two years with no students, no CRIMSON, no football team, etc. Presumably Radcliffe would go on, a little lonely but otherwise undiminished.

There is also the question of just what the manpower needs of the armed forces will be and whether they will be so great that nobody can be deferred. Wilbur J. Bender   Dean of the College