Right of Appointment Main Issue In Cases, Russell Says in Letter

Denying that freedom of speech was ever contemplated as his defense either by the College of the City of New York or the Harvard Corporation, Bertrand Russell pointed out in a letter to the CRIMSON that the issue in both cases is the right of a university to appoint its own teachers.

The distinguished mathematician, who will deliver a series of lectures here next year, stated that "the principle of freedom of speech has been invoked not by the New York Board of Higher Education as their legal defense, but by many thousands of people throughout the United States who have perceived its obvious relation to the controversy."

He further held that "even if I were permitted to expound my moral views in the class room, my own conscience would not allow me to do so, since they have no connection with the subjects which it is my province to teach."

Legal Action Stalled

Both in New York and Cambridge the issue is at present snarled over the technical right of Russell's opponents to bring action, but in both cases the principal issue, as Russell has stated, is one of "academic freedom."

In New York the first hurdle that must be surmounted is the legality of the Board of Higher Education's action in hiring the firm of Root, Clark, Buckner and Ballantine as attorneys in place of Corporation Counsel William C. Chanler. The latter declined to appeal the case on the ground that "there was a substantial chance of losing it."

If this right can be established, the case which will be argued before the New York Court of Appeals will be based on the general thesis of the Board's right of appointment. In the city-run institutions of New York these appointments are governed by much more stringent restrictions than are applicable at Harvard.

Falls to Qualify

Not only is there the moral issue in New York but also the two requirements that appointees must be citizens and must pass a qualifying examination. In both of these, Justice McGeehan found Russell wanting, even before reaching the moral grounds.

Thomas Dorgan, legislative agent of the City of Boston, who is leading the fight here against Russell, has not established his right to interfere in the Corporation's appointment. Achieving this, he must go on to prove that Russell will violate a Massachusetts general law holding that "Harvard should endeavor to impress on the minds . . . of the youth permitted in its care . . . the principles of chastity and those other virtues which are the ornaments of human society."

In view of Russell's statement that he will not teach his own concepts of morality in class, Dorgan's contention would seem difficult to uphold