Committee Asks Funds To Aid Furry Defense

A committee of 20 professors mailed a letter to every member of the faculty Thursday soliciting money to help defend Wendell H. Furry, associate professor of Physics, indicted last month for contempt of Congress.

Citing the possibility of a long legal battle, and even an appeal to the Supreme Court by either the government or Furry's counsel, the group said the increased expenses the litigation will entail "justifies this appeal to the entire Harvard faculty, whose concern it is." The group calls itself the "Furry Legal Aid Fund."

The appeal declared that the minimum "expenses immediately in prospect" will be about $5000 in spite of agreements by Furry's lawyer, Gerald A. Berlin, to keep his fees as low as possible. Later expenses may double the costs.

Although "Members of the University differ widely in their attitude towards Professor Furry's conduct," the letter said, "Some--we do no know how many-- believe he was right in refusing to become what they would regard as a political informer.

Committee Members

The Furry Legal Aid Committee has got up an office in Room $35, Lyman Physics Laboratory to which all contributions should be sent. Edwin C. Kemble, professor of Physics, is chairman of the group, and Robert V. Pound, associate professor of Physics, is treasurer.

Faculty Urged Stand

Outlining its reasons for making a general appeal for funds, the committee presented three main arguments.

1) The members of the Physics Department have confidence in Furry's loyalty to the United States and his personal integrity. "They respect his scruples against naming persons who were former Communists and whom he believes innocent of wrongdoing."

2) All Physics Department members feel Furry should have counsel "of the highest competence," and that their "responsibility in this case is increased because Professor Furry is to be prosecuted in consequence of taking an attitude urged upon him by an important segment of University opinion.

3) The case raises fundamental issues about Congressional investigations which should be argued in the courts "on the basis of competent legal argument."