Alumni Bulletin Hits at Varsity Club in Editorial

The Alumni Bulletin yesterday attacked erection of the proposed new Varsity Club.

In an editorial in its latest issue, out yesterday, the alumni magazine said, "The project (the new Varsity Club) should be abandoned and effort should be put into making the present club do."

The University's American Veterans Committee chapter also attacked the proposed new Club yesterday, in a letter to the Corporation.

The Bulletin editorial says in part:

"There is not a doubt that Mr. Burr was interested in a new Varsity Club...The big point, it seems to us, is that he was very careful to give the University freedom of choice. His fortune of more than a million dollars was left entirely unrestricted as to use. He wanted Harvard to have what it most needed...

"Harvard, after all, has a Varsity Club which could be made to do. But what about a new hockey rink, an expansion of the tutorial and advising system, more scholarships and aids, or additional athletic endowment?...

"Of course there is a moral obligation to Mr. Burr. But the obligation is to use his money for the great good and the great need. He was a generous, wise, and devoted son of Harvard. Let us, in turn employ his gift, as he apparently intended, as broadly and as wisely as we can."

The Alumni Bulletin is independent of the University. Its editorial policy is determined by a board of editors that includes Joseph R. Hamlen '04, president and publisher of the Bulletin, William Bentick-Smith '37, Bulletin editor: David W. Bailey '21, associate editor of the Bulletin and Secretary to the Corporation; and David McCord '21, executive secretary of the Fund Council and Bulletin contributing editor.

A.V.C. Letter

The A.V.C. in its letter to the Corporation, termed the use of part of Burr's $1,500,000 bequest to build a new Varsity Club an "almost cynical disregard for rational allocation of resources in the University."

The letter also pointed out that the A.V.C.'s recent petition to the University-requesting it not to reduce veterans' housing next year-was turned down by the University on the grounds that it could not afford to take a loss on temporary housing.