Amid Boston Overdose Crisis, a Pair of Harvard Students Are Bringing Narcan to the Red Line
At First Cambridge City Council Election Forum, Candidates Clash Over Building Emissions
Harvard’s Updated Sustainability Plan Garners Optimistic Responses from Student Climate Activists
‘Sunroof’ Singer Nicky Youre Lights Up Harvard Yard at Crimson Jam
‘The Architect of the Whole Plan’: Harvard Law Graduate Ken Chesebro’s Path to Jan. 6
With the reading of a Student Council resolution by Shaun Kelly, Jr. '36, Harvard undergraduate interest in the effort to repeal the Massachusetts Oath Bill reached its climax yesterday morning.
Other speakers before the Second session of the legislative hearing, who were of significance to the College, included Bishop Lawrence '71, Elliott C. Cutler '09, Moseley Professor of Surgery and James A. McLaughlin, Professor of Law.
These three men presented an attack on the law from the three outstanding rostra of teaching, church, and medicine.
Kelly's brief report expressed undergraduate support of President Conant's stand. Grounds for protest were absence of teachers preaching subversive doctrine at Harvard, curtailment of academic freedom brought about by the law, and failure of the method of the measure to effect its purpose in any case.
After he had spoken, the committee asked Kelly two questions before permitting him to withdraw.
In answer to what his personal views on the oath bill were the Student Council representative said that he considered himself unqualified to express them. To the query as to whether he was a member of the Student Council, the First Marshall responded quietly in the affirmative.
Thomas H. Quinn '36, president of the Student Council, stood ready to support Kelly but was not called on.
In some quarters it was felt that McLaughlin's testimony was of more damage than aid to the cause of suppression of the Oath. In adopting filibuster tactics the Law professor was repeatedly called to order by the chair for diverging from the subject of the bill.
McLaughlin claimed that the only purpose of the bill was to "bulldoze" "ignorant professors". Anybody may lawfully criticize the Constitution which serves as the reason of being for the bill.
In a dignified but impassioned address Bishop Lawrence spoke of the Oath Bill as a breeder of distrust in a society where today the element of mutual confidence is most needed
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.