Two weeks ago the police prevented a possible rict from taking place in City Square with only minor injuries a week ago the National Guard fired into a raging riot in Teoedo, causing two deaths. This is not an unfair comparison for often in this country police have been forced, sometimes justly and sometimes unjustly, to adopt such tactics in a crisis of this sort. From this angle, the immediate usage of methods which involve only slight brutality to stop these demonstrations is more sensible than waiting until drastic steps are necessitated.

The report which the Committee is publishing today fails to take into account this side of the question; it points to many unwarranted cases of unjustified force, but does not examine the broader aspect of the problem. Orders, inspired by practical experience, were given to stop a demonstration. They were carried out. Had the police been saner and had less the fooling of a field day, these regrettable instances, of course, might have been avoided. But Harvard must remember, also, that a riot in Charlestown is a more alarming occurrence than a case of spring fever in the Square. It is easy to sit around afterwards and philosophize on fairly sound grounds, but to make the arguments effective they must be constructive.

And it is here where the Committee's findings have more to offer, for they have hit at the crux of the situation; the ignorance of the police in dealing with mob psychology. Their proposal to have a squad developed which will study methods of dealing with riots is excellent. Nevertheless, education must be given not only to the police, but also to the demonstrators. It is the latter's duty to find out what is within the bounds of freedom of speech and to conduct themselves thus.

What does seem indefensible is the fact that several of the prisoners were beaten inside the police station. Certainly any citizen of this country is entitled to personal safety when he falls in the clutches of the law. This clever strategy inside the jail unquestionably warrants a punishment for everyone concerned in its perpetration. But this isn't the only thing which cannot be justified as an emergency measure: there are those six months sentences and fines which earry safety to almost preposterous lengths.

The whole Charlestown affair is unfortunate. While the police have a presentable case on their handling of the riot, they and the courts carried their jobs to illogical extremes. Both of these latter developments should merit careful review. But there is one important indication which stands forth from the welter of confused comment; not only the police, but also the rieters must be taught to consider riots and freedom of speech in their proper perapective. Let the Committee use their findings to achieve this purpose.