'Cliffe Alumnae Petition to Delay College Merger

Nearly 60 Radcliffe alumnae have petitioned college officials to delay a Harvard-Radcliffe merger fearing that "a merger at the present time would mean a 'sub-merger' for Radcliffe," Mrs. Clifton E. Helman '43, Radcliffe Club of Boston president, said yesterday.

The petitions, presented Monday to Helen Homans Gilbert '36, chairman of the Radcliffe Board of Trustees, C. Douglas Dillon '31, president of the Harvard Board of Overseers, and the Fellows of the Harvard Corporation, call for a postponement of any administrative or contractual change in the Harvard-Radcliffe relationship.

At present, the "non-merger" merger plan is to be presented to the Radcliffe Trustees Jan. 28. If approved, it will pass on to the Radcliffe Council and Harvard Corporation and a contract between Harvard and Radcliffe could become effective June 30, 1971.

According to the petition, a postponement would allow the new President "to familiarize himself with the situation" and grant "all interested parties including the general body of Radcliffe alumnae... an ample opportunity for complete and direct information, discussion, and response."

The "non-merger" plan would keep Radcliffe as a separate though redefined institution within Harvard University. The ambiguity of the redefinition worries some alumnae.

The plan retains the title of President of Radcliffe College, incorporates Radcliffe housing into the total House system, maintains Radcliffe's admissions and financial aid office, and integrates the Radcliffe budget into that of the Faculty of Arts and Sclences.

On Saturday, the Radcliffe Club of Boston, with the support of the Radcliffe Alumnae Association, sponsored the first public discussion of the Harvard-Radcliffe merger since the release of the "non-merger" merger plan to alumnae in November. About 150 alumnae attended the Agassiz Hall meeting.

The petition's 60 signatures-although only a scant percentage of Radcliffe's 18,500 alumnae, represented a cross-section of classes from 1920 to 1969. Hel-man, chairman of the meeting, feels that "the numbers were significant in that it was the only concerted consensus. No one else has circulated petitions, either pro or con."

"People have felt that the earlier classes would be sentimental and the later classes would want merger. It is not so, just as it is not so that older alumnae have found co-residential living horrifying. Radcliffe ladies have a large capacity for absorbing change," Helman added.

The alumnae furiously discussed the merger's timing, finances, and administration, and the role of women in the University. They want to insure in a contract that "causes which women see as high on their priority lists will not be submerged," Helman said.

At the meeting, one alumna expressed disappointment that undergraduates were not included in the petition, and suggested that they circulate their own. Another suggested that an ad hoc solution be tried before legalizing a corporate solution. No one suggested changing the 4:1 Harvard-Radcliffe ratio.