The accuracy of the Gallup poll can be checked periodically by the results of elections. The poll conducted by Defense cannot be so easily confirmed and is therefore subject to attack. Any poll which did not cover every Harvard student would be challenged by somebody. It is to be doubted that the Crimson would accept any result which did not conform to its impression of the facts. If the Crimson is sincere, if you are not opposing just for the sake of opposition, there is an easy way to find out if our poll is accurate. That is to conduct a poll of your own. We believe that such a poll would confirm our findings. If, however, we were proved wrong, we would welcome the correction. Since our poll was not intended as a "weapon," it could not "boomerang." Our aim was to find the truth. If we have failed in that it remains for others to do a better job. We have facts to back up our conclusion; when you make charges, the burden of proof is on you.

You do not believe that the results of our poll bear out the conclusion that "Harvard feels British victory essential to national defense." Here are the facts: 37 per cent of the total number who voted checked the statement which read "Hitler must go even if we have to fight." 49.3 per cent checked, "British victory is essential to our national defense." Leaving out duplications we find that slightly over 60 per cent took at least the weaker of the two positions. If you take either of these stands, you necessarily accept the policy of all necessary aid.

Defense did not claim that Harvard students were as yet in favor of war. We did say that there was a noticeable trend in that direction. We did say that the logic which students were following would likely lead to that position eventually. We were careful, however, to make it clear that at the present time only a majority of those favoring aid, not a majority of the college, were ready to go all the way if necessary.

The Crimson charges that "very few of the actual questions asked are reprinted." This is untrue since 11 out of the 12 poll questions were reported on. For the sake of the record, here are the correct figures. "This is not our fight," 16.8 per cent. "Let Britain save herself this time," 9.5 per cent. "A Nazi victory won't affect our position," 3 per cent. "I like the British and want to help them," 20 per cent. "A British victory is essential to our national defense," 37 per cent. The one result that we did not print, for reasons of space, was: "I want the British to win but it is not important enough to fight about." It received only 20.2 per cent, a fact which will not give the Crimson much solace.

The Crimson refers to the "well-warranted suspicion" of our polling methods. It is difficult to see how a suspicion can be well warranted until there are some facts to back it up. The details of our technique cannot be of general interest. But we can tell you this: every class in college, every large social group including the commuters was represented. All results were tabulated on a genuine sampling basis and the sample of over 10 per cent was large enough to be accurate.

Your right to question the accuracy of our poll cannot be denied. But by questioning our "devotion to truth," by using such terms as "examples of distortion," "hedging,' and "suspicion," you leave realm of argument. You have a right to question, but you do not have a right to accuse falsely; your right to criticize does not extend to the right to slander. The ethics of the Crimson as well as the policies it advocates stand in danger of repudiation by the students of Harvard.  Richard M. Haber '41,  For the Editors of Defense