Law School Group Urges Boycott of Alumni Gifts

The 1977 Law School Class Committee urged all third-year law students to withhold contributions after graduation until several reform proposals are adopted in a letter sent to all law students and faculty yesterday.

The letter outlined a number of faculty and administration practices that "make it impossible to take full advantage of the educational opportunities" at the school and offered proposals for change.

Among the proposals were greater student participation in decision making, relaxation of the third-year paper requirement and increases in minority enrollment.

"Only through a serious effort to make significant institutional changes can the situation be remedied," Laurie D. Zelon, third-year class marshal, said yesterday, adding that a demonstration of serious intent to implement the committee's reform proposals might be grounds for terminating the boycott.

The class committee voted 11-3 in favor of a boycott two weeks ago, joining a move the Class of 1976 attempted last year.

That boycott has had little impact on contributions from members of the Class of 1976, Wilson H. Pile, secretary of alumni affairs, said yesterday.

The purpose of the current boycott is to highlight institutional problems that demonstrate "the faculty's efforts to intimidate intellectually" the "naive, outgunned student," George Kammer, a third-year student, said yesterday.

Thomas Burroughs, third year class secretary, who dissented from the boycott said, "The grievances are legitimate and the problems ought to be faced but I don't think alumni should dictate changes that won't affect them."

Other students were even more cautious. "This letter only represents the views of a small minority," Otto Chu, a first-year student, said yesterday.

In a vote yesterday the Law School faculty seemed close to adopting one of the reforms mentioned in the letter--changing exam period to before Christmas, Stephen M. Bernardi '52, assistant dean of the Law School, said yesterday.