Harvard a Leader of Liberalism.

(We invite all men in the University to submit communications on subjects of timely interest, but assume no responsibility for sentiments expressed under this head.)

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

The real point of Senator Hollis's address is not touched by pointing out the expert services given the government by the University: he charged an intellectual dishonesty in the Faculty, a conservatism in teaching, due to the subsidies of the College. He can be refuted only by pointing out the actual well-known liberalism of Harvard University. Both in politics and philosophy its freedom and extreme liberalism, rather than any conservatism, have long been the only cause of complaint. The names of Lowell and Emerson in the past are well matched today by those of Lowell and Eliot, of James and Santayana, of Taussig and Hart. It cannot be denied that intellectual restraint does exist in many colleges. That it does not exist at Harvard is one of our proudest boasts. In theory, Senator Hollis was right: but in fact he was wrong. Harvard is widely praised and widely attacked for leading the liberal thought of the country: to attack it for its conservatism is simply ignorance. ROGER LAFFERTY '12.