Harvard Alters Look To Handle GM Issue

The General Motors proxy fight is not the first time University investment policies have been questioned, though it is probably the most well-organized and most direct statement of the University investment dilemma.

NEWS ANALYSIS

Aware of its importance, both the Overseers and the Corporation have reevaluated Harvard's investment policies in the last ten days, and if their position hasn't changed, their approach to the problem of student critics has.

The immediate result of their discussion was yesterday's unprecedented three-hour meeting between George F. Bennett '33, treasurer for the College, and representatives of five student organizations.

Massachusetts Hall will soon release a summary of Harvard's efforts to fight pollution, offsetting its announcement of support for the GM management.

The conciliatory approach is something Harvard did not try in other investment controversies-like those over South African investments and Harvard holdings in the Mississippi Power and Light Co. -three years ago.

In 1967. President Pusey answered investment critics very bluntly that "Our purpose is just to invest in places that are selfishly good for Harvard. We do not use our money for social purposes."

Step Softly

Since last April, the University has been stepping a little more softly in questions of its social responsibility.

The GM proxy fight invalidates the old argument that Harvard cannot worry about the social effects of the companies it invests in-that its investments are unrelated to the company's social concern.

Voting a proxy. GM challengers have shown, is a way of using investments to influence corporations without necessarily cutting dividends.

As James Shattuck, assistant treasurer for the College, indicated yesterday, the University does influence management policies, but "we have more power expressing our concerns when we go to the management as a friend rather than when we vote a proxy againstthem."

Bennett's stance yesterday reflects his own dilemma on University investments. The University position may be changing from Pusey's 1967 stand. but Bennett is not sure how far it is going.

"Our primary assignment is education and related efforts that we can back-low income housing is one of them. I don't think we have any obligation to go into low income housing. but other agencies have defaulted. We are going over and above our obligation now," he said.

The six students at yesterday's meeting pressed for some mechanism through which students and faculty could express their opinion on investments.

"You can make all the points you want right now." Bennett replied, "and if they are logical and sound my opinion will be affected by this."

"We have to look at Harvard as more than the 15,000 students there now," he said. The University's major constituents, according to Bennett, are the alumni.

Asked if a student or faculty resolution poll will influence the Corporation's GM decision, Bennett answered no. Asked about an alumni poll, he replied, "We are very interested in the alumni. They are more numerous and, frankly. I think their voice should be seriously considered."