News

Cambridge Residents Slam Council Proposal to Delay Bike Lane Construction

News

‘Gender-Affirming Slay Fest’: Harvard College QSA Hosts Annual Queer Prom

News

‘Not Being Nerds’: Harvard Students Dance to Tinashe at Yardfest

News

Wrongful Death Trial Against CAMHS Employee Over 2015 Student Suicide To Begin Tuesday

News

Cornel West, Harvard Affiliates Call for University to Divest from ‘Israeli Apartheid’ at Rally

Speakers at Food Relief Forum Favor Government Action Soon

Elliott Endorses Plan For Feeding Young Children

NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED

In an open forum held last night in the Lowell House Common Room, four Faculty experts discussed the question of feeding the small democracies before a large audience, and turned up several noteworthy decisions somewhat apart from current thought on the subject.

The four men who spoke were: Bart J. Bok, assistant professor of Astronomy, Lucien Brouha, physiologist to the Grant Study, Henry J. Cadbury, Hollis Professor of Divinity, and William Y. Elliott, professor of Government. So far, they have held very different positions on food relief, but they are of one accord that no action should be taken through a private group such as the Hoover Committee, but that the government should be the one to formulate and carry out the work.

Elliott Would Send Vitamins

Professor Elliott went so far as agreeing to ship vitamins to the children of the occupied countries, in connection with a statement by Dr. Brouha that such supplies would be adequate to maintain the balanced diet of small children.

At the same time, he refused to support any plan which would feed the adult populations, for by doing so, he feels that the United States would merely strengthen a group which is capable of working for the Germans. "The thing to remember," he said, "is that the best weapon England has is an economic war, and that anything which would take the slightest load off the Nazis' shoulders will be a blow to Britain and the United States."

Hoover Plan Barred as Dangerous

In the discussion of the Hoover Committee, it appeared that in the last war there were definite leakages through the lines to Germany. That the Hoover system of distribution was and can be watertight, is one of the strong selling points of the food plan, and the insecurity which the speakers see in it makes them outlaw it as an effective method.

On still another important aspect of the problem the four agreed, namely that the United States government has done very little constructive work on the food relief problem. Since they felt that the government is the only medium for a foolproof, efficient plan, they are anxious that Washington devote more attention to it than it has to date. Only government interest can put across what the speakers consider an important step toward winning continental sympathy for England and America, and building sound minds and bodies in the next generation.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags