'Now ?? But Ducks??

Second thoughts after original enthusiasm over Radcliffe's merger proposal in February 1969 have played a large part in the Committee on Harvard-Radcliffe Relationships' "non-merger" proposal.

The major financial advantages of merger are still there. Harvard will absorb Radcliffe's gaping $250,000 deficit, although it is warning its sister to keep the alumnae gifts coming in. Consolidation of such administrative services as Buildings and Grounds should cut down substantially on Radcliffe's future deficits.

Equally as important is the University's proposed underwriting of more financial aid to Radcliffe. This would bring Radcliffe's percentage of scholarship students up to Harvard's.

Avoiding total legal merger satisfies two groups who have recently expressed considerable opposition to merger. Both Radcliffe alumnae who see their alma mater as representing women's demands in the University, and Faculty and Admi?? threatened by the ?? not worry under the new ??

The plan keeps the Radc?? stitute and the College's career couns??ling office-which helps alumnae find jobs in later life. It also keeps Radcliffe as a name and an administration, capable of negotiating another relationship if this one fails after four years.

Many men on the Faculty and in the administration who see Harvard as an institution primarily to educate a male

NEWS ANALYSIS elite have feared that a legal merger will eventually necessitate a one-to-one male-female ratio, as opposed to the present four-to-one. Committee members freely admit that their proposal has intentionally avoided the ratio issue-a feeling that seems out of keeping with the report's constant emphasis on "full and equal participation of Radcliffe students in the intellectual and social life of the University."