Double in Clubs

Since pre-Revolutionary War days, when undergraduates were ranked numerically according to social standing, the public has often associated the name Harvard with snobbishness. Today, the University prides itself that most of this unfortunate reputation is a dying myth. A few Harvard Alumni Clubs, however, perpetuate the impression by continuing restrictive policies of admission.

The original formation of the Harvard Clubs was to provide a common meeting ground for alumni. In fulfilling such a purpose, the clubs have often become important centers of recruiting applicants, publicizing the University, and focusing alumni interest. In actual practice the clubs are usually local alumni associations where interested graduates may come together to meet others with similar experiences, and to center their Harvard activities.

But the passing of years, and the prestige that comes from established and prominent membership lists has induced a few clubs in large eastern cities to restrict their admissions.

Clubs which restrict membership defend themselves on two counts. Their present facilities, they point out, are scarcely adequate to accommodate all alumni in their area. And they argue that some Harvard graduates just are not congenial with the present members--admitting them would cause unrest.

No one will deny that admitting 8,000 members to a club house built for 5,000 would be highly unpleasant for all concerned. Nevertheless the extra members would bring new funds to premit building larger facilities. Yale Clubs, which admit almost all alumni to their ranks, have expanded their club houses.

Nor would any one deny that "congeniality" plays a large role in any social club. A social club, indeed, is almost by definition exclusive.

But a Harvard Club is ideally not just a social club. Any group of men who happened to be Harvard graduates could quite justifiably organize their own club, but the society should not have the name "Harvard Club." If a club takes the name which identifies it with the interests of all local alumni, every graduate should be allowed to join if he wishes.

Obviously bigger and better clubhouses cannot be built in a day. And it takes a long time to break some customs. Yet encouraging signs of change--admission of Negroes to the Washington Club, and recent relaxing of restrictions at the Boston Club--should point out to clubs which retain restrictions that the present inertia can be broken. Working with the proposed Alumni Affairs Committee the metropolitan clubs should begin the slow process of fitting their policies into national practice and their own original purposes. Only then can they justifiably call themselves "Harvard" Clubs.