The new cover of crimson and the format innovations which appeared in its December 1 issue ushered in a more aggressive Harvard Alumni Bulletin, which now not only presents a weekly cross section of alumni and undergraduate activities, but also reflects in its editorials and signed articles a greater awareness of world problems.

Under the leadership of John D. Merrill, who served as editor until his death on January 9, the Bulletin was submitted to a drastic streamlining. A new cover designed by David T. Pottinger '06, associate director of the Harvard University Press, larger type, new head-lines, and more photographs were some of the changes.

New Book Column

Acting Editor David McCord '21 continued the transformation, beginning several new features. In its February 2 issue, The Bulletin began the "Harvard Book of the Month" column, reviewing each month one "outstanding book by or about a Harvard man, or about a Harvard subject."

The latest feature to be added is "The College Pump" which first appeared in the March 8 issue as a column "for the stray line of Harvard verse, the pleasant non-sequitur of academic observation, and the simple fragment of phrase."

Protests American indifference

Most indicative of the changes in the Bulletin is its new editorial policy for more objective thinking, both at Harvard and in the country at large, about war issues. Typical of its attitude towards the present European War, the Bulletin endorsed and printed in full in its April 12 issue an address delivered by John Lord O'Brien '96 before the New York Bar Association, protesting the apparent American indifference to the war issues.

"confronted with the spectacle of a war waged against all traditional forms of religion, and with a resurgence of brutal oppression and calculated horror to an extent unknown for centuries," O'Brien said, "some of us have become seriously disturbed by the activities of those leaders of public opinion who in increasing numbers are urging that these matters are no concern of the Americans, that expression of resentment are both futile and dangerous, and that any widespread discussion of these happenings might lead to dangerous states of emotion."

Hitting at the belief of many college students that "America was carried into the last war chiefly by the machinations of selfish business men and the hysteria of a superficial emotion," O'Brien said, "The way to secure peace and make it a lasting peace is to face frankly and to discuss freely disagreeable and tragic realities.

Not In Interventionist

O'Brien insisted, as have editors of the Alumni Bulletin, that they are not advocating intervention. "Most, if not all, of us approve the action of our government in withdrawing our ships from war zones abroad and of preventing our citizens from exposing themselves to the same dangers.

"But our moral frontiers are another matter. They must never be withdrawn and we must never appear to acquiesce in the action of those brutal powers which have brought much inhumanity into the civilized world."

Alumni reaction to this and similar articles in the Bulletin has split pretty much along age groups. Most of the letters which The Bulletin has received approving the editorial policy have been from members of classes before 1930, which most of the disapproval had come from younger Alumni.

Not Enough Social Research

"On the other hand, our universities and industries probably employed less than $5,000,000 in research funds to study the effect of rapid change on men and on human society or to discover how men in industry and agriculture can successfully adjust themselves to change."

The burden of adjustment lies partly with the scientists themselves. Dean Donham stated; they must "consciously direct scientific thought toward social problems." But more important in his opinion are the responsibilities of government administrators. Here "the scope of political action must be clearly defined." Detailed control of business, in his opinion, requires great bureaucracies, which in return require a dictator with "power to break through the coils of red tape if the machine is to function."

Role of Business Vital

Of paramount importance is the role which business must play, he said. "They must work with government support and apply results of scientific research in the solution of unemployment and the agricultural problem, and take risks in order to solve unemployment. Above all, they must bring human relations into their thinking."

The responsibility of labor in solving the problems which modern science has thrust upon us, Dean Donham said, "cannot be discharged merely by tactical skirmishes to secure temporary advantages for one group at the expense of others. It will not be discharged by blind opposition to technical progress, which alone can establish the basis for permanently higher standards of living.

"But as matters now stand, business administrators will do well to realize that labor has a case against emphasis on technological progress of human problems."

In conclusion Dean Donham warned against the disastrous results which, lacking the cooperation he asked, might come about. "If free and orderly civilization is not to disappear in the face of constantly accelerating change, a greater sense of responsibility and a better basis for human collaboration must be discovered and put into effect. A discontented democracy cannot survive. We have no time to waste."

Bruce C. Hopper '18, associate professor of Government, keynoted his speech with the hope for "an allied victory and a wise peace, negotiated with the moderate elements in Germany."

Stressing the fact that "we are living through a transition period when blind forces are smashing the old patterns." Hopper pointed out our responsibility to the moral and economic cause of evolution in Europe against "demoniac revolutionary nihilism." It is the task of the United States to work with the combination of powers most likely to secure a permanent peace, according to Hopper.

"At the end of this war," he urged, "let us aid that regional bloc of nations which is least likely to unite all Europe against us and most likely to cooperate with us in world demobilization, in the transfer of energy from the making of armaments to civil production. In that way, and in that way only, lies peace."

Hopper asserted that the longevity of any peace settlement depends primarily on the outcome of the war. In the event of a Nazi victory, he feels another war would result within a generation. An allied victory leading to the dismemberment of Germany could have only the same result, in his opinion.

A stalemate, he thought would result in an armed peace. There would be two "economic powerhouses," a Mittel Kuropa customs union extending from the North Sea down to the Dannbe, and a British-Fraench bloe which closely amab gamated the two empires.

Only an allied victory followed by a wise settlement can provide a lastins peace, Hopper indicated.

He pointed out that three conditions are absolutely necessary for adjusting the boundaries in any peace settlement The first is economic, as there is an urgent need for more free trade and currency areas and customs unions. A second prerequisite is military strategy, to correct the mistakes of 1919. As a third dictate he chose air power, which is of special importance to the small states. "The nervous tension of awaiting possible bombers would be almost impossible for large states, and it would certainly be out of the question for the small advereignties," he explained.

Concluding his speech, Ropper mentioned his respect for the air plane as a machine of war. "The air bomber has more significance for history and politics than any other weapon since the invention of gunpowder," he stated.