Local Debaters Argue Merit Of University Investigations

"Highly controversial" was the way moderator Arthur N. Holcombe, Eaton Professor of Government, introduced last night's debate at New Lecture Hall.

Dr. Dirk Struik of M.I.T. and Allard Lowenstein, second year law student at Yale, took the negative of the question, "Should Universities be investigated." For the affirmative were Kenneth D. Robertson '29, and Thomas Dorgan, Clerk of the Superior Civil Court.

Dorgan opened with the assertion, "If the intellectuals were more loyally alert, and weren't so concerned about academic freedom, there would be no need for investigations." He also characterized Harvard professors Shapley and Mather as "blind men."

Speaking next, Struik exalted the doctrine of "teach for open minds." He compared the Communists of today with with radicals of the past. Midway in his delivery a voice from the audience shouted, "Sit down, Struik!" One of the many police moved toward the offender.

"You don't find Communists because they're hiding somewhere under the guise of Socialists," asserted Robertson. Citing Struik as the "best reason for an investigation," he read from the magazine "Communist" of 1937 that teaching was the most important step in taking over a country.

Lowenstein admitted Communism should be feared, but "investigations served the Communist purpose to confuse the people." The attempt to find out what people think, and not what they have done, conceals the real conspirators.

In the forum, a fuming Thomas Dorgan pointed to the Board of Overseers as a "Red front." Senator Saltonstall, he said, did not want to be associated with it.