Wilson Clarifies Trespass Action

In reply to objections from students protesting the trial of John C. Berg, the group that recommended legal action against Berg explained the reasoning behind its decision yesterday.

Members of the Committee on Rights and Responsibilities said that Berg's "repeated violations" of a University order barring him from Harvard property "left no alternative but to ask for court action to make the order stick."

The committee-consisting of three students and six Faculty members-was set up in September to handle discipline in cases where University rules of order are violated. After it recommended on Oct. 23 that Harvard seek criminal trespass charges against Berg, the Cambridge District Court issued a subpoena asking Berg to appear on charges of "trespassing on premises."

The committee's chairman, James Q. Wilson professor of Government, said the request for legal action came only after Harvard had warned Berg several times to stay off the campus.

On June 9-when Berg was formally "separated" for his role in the University Hall occupation-the University sent him a letter saying that he was not permitted "to be present in any part of the Harvard University community without specific authorization."

Over the summer, Berg and several other students who had been separated reportedly appeared on campus without approval. Five or six warning letters went out to "remind the students of the June injunction." Wilson said.

After the warning letter, Wilson said his committee heard reports that Berg had "been seen frequently around the University... using the facilities of the University Community as if he were a member in good standing." Acting on those reports, the committee made its decision last Thursday.

In explaining their decision, members of the committee stated that Berg's "separation" did not simply mean that he could not take Harvard courses. Wilson said Berg's punishment was intended to "exclude him from all rights to the University community" and to make him "forfeit his privilege to the University's facilities."

When the committee faced evidence suggesting that Berg had violated the order, it had two choices, according to Wilson: "we could ignore the evidence and conclude that we really didn't mean the earlier warnings, or we could decide that we had to make the warning stick."

Although recent legislation has raised the maximum penalty for criminal trespass to 30 days in jail and a $100 fine. Berg is potentially liable only for the penalty in effect at the time of his arrest-a $20 fine.

The committee members said they took this lower fine into account when recommending legal action. "We tried to enforce the rule with the minimum penalty." Wilson said.

The three student members of the committee-Kirby B. Wilcox 70. Henry Doerr 72, and Richard W. Hausler 72-joined Wilson in denying that the committee was involved in political repression in the Berg case.

The severity of Berg's punishment. Wilson said, came not because he took part in the University Hall occupation, but because the Committee of Fifteen found him guilty of using force against deans in the Hall.

"He was not punished for his thoughts." Wilson said, adding that most of the people involved in the occupation received milder discipline. "But violence is one of those acts which is not permissible, and he was separated because he used force and violence."

No subpoenas have been requested for any of the other people who got warning letters in the summer-even though some have held jobs at Harvard or participated in University events. The committee is not able to investigate any of the cases itself without first getting a complaint from someone in the University-as in Berg's case.