The lawmakers answered the poll as follows: 4. Harvard's exemption from taxes is unfair. Agree strongly  17.2% Agree  15.6% Disagree  40.6% Disagree strongly  23.6% Don't know  3.1% 5. Harvard should be compelled to pay more state taxes. Agree strongly  12.7% Agree  22.2% Disagree  42.9% Disagree strongly  17.5% Don't know  4.7%

A third set of questions asked for the legislators' opinions on the University's admissions policy. 6. Harvard should show more favor in its admissions policy towards residents of Massachusetts than it does now. Agree strongly  21.7% Agree  13.% Disagree  33.3% Disagree strongly  10.1% Don't know  21.9% 7. Harvard's admissions policy exhibits unfair discrimination on grounds of race, deletion, and nationality. Agree  5.9% Agree strongly  4.4% Disagree  50.7% Disagree strongly  16.4% Don't know  22.6% 8. The Harvard admissions office makes a sufficient effort to get students from as many income brackets as possible. Agree  4.3% Agree strongly  31.8% Disagree  14.5% Disagree strongly  5.8% Don't know  43.6% 9. Harvard is too much a "rich boy's" school. Is  24.4% Is not  59.1% Don't know  26.5% 10. Too many Harvard students are drawn from "fashionable" preparatory schools. Are  28.4% Are not  37.3% Don't know  34.3% 11. The Harvard admissions policy draws too heavily on men of exceptionally competent scholastic ability and not sufficiently on men of all around ability. Does  26.9% Does not  31.4% Don't know  41.7%

The three following questions had to do with how much the legislators thought the University benefited Massachusetts. 12. Harvard could contribute more to the benefit of the Commonwealth. Could  71.2% Could not  9.1% Don't know  19.7% 13. Harvard contributes greatly to the Commonwealth. Does  27.4% Does not  54.9% Don't know  17.7% As a clincher question the poll asked. 14. Harvard contributes greatly to the benefit of the Commonwealth. Does  62.9% Does not  21% Don't know  16.1% 15. If I had a son of college age I would be happy to have him attend Harvard. Would  71.2% Would not  28.8%

Questionnaires, as any social relations man will hasten to say, tend to eliminate the subtleties of the issue involved. In order to give such subtleties some play the poll asked the legislators to comment on the problems brought up in the questions.

Only 31 lawmakers elaborated on their basic "check one" answers to the poll. About a third of these pleaded that they lacked sufficient information to answer the questionnaire meaningfully.

One representative commented that "the principles of academic freedom as expressed by Harvard University officials are a great contribution to searching for truth . . . any school which does not allow exploration of all subjects . . . does a disservice to its students."

Hits Headline-Seekers

Another wrote: "As a Harvard graduate, I am profoundly concerned about the irresponsible and headline seeking utterances of such professors as Shapely and Mother. Any such men bring justified criticism upon the University by their actions and words, rather than by their thinking. Will the authorities tolerate and wink at everything in the name of academic freedom and freedom of speech?" Along somewhat the same line of thought, a lawmaker wrote that he had seen many friends absorb extreme leftist sympathies at Harvard. This, he continued, "must be mainly due to the leftist sympathies of certain instructors."

Except for one answer which suggested that Harvard by its historical, geographical, and economic position ought to cater more to Massachusetts natives, comments on the University admissions policy generally praised it as fair. One answer went so far as to label the Fair Education Practices Act a "vile insult to my own college." Several voiced doubts about the absolute absence of unfair discrimination in the Medical School, however.

A legislator, considering the overall question of the poll. "What is Harvard's place in the Commonwealth so far as the General Court is concerned?" wrote that the University's lack of influence in the legislative and official life of this state should spur its students and faculty to careful introspection. An assent to this view was more specific. It suggested that Harvard make available its faculty for adult education programs and that the Business School broaden the sort of men its teaches.

Few, as the percentages of the poll showed, felt the University's tax status should be changed, though the comment on on questionnaire recommended that profits from property which Harvard leases to private business should be taxable.

Many when they answered the question about Harvard's contributions to the Commonwealth noted that they considered the University's contributions adequate but by no means so great as they could be.

Several of the General Court members, obviously mortified by the University's dismal athletic performances of late took advantage of the poll to slip in plugs for a more "positive" attitude toward athletics at Harvard.

Since not one questionnaire return recommended a general tightening of state control over the University it seems safe to predict that barring an enormous increase of the already unpleasant political tensions, the Harvard-State House relationship will remain the one tradition since 1865 of the successful and clever off-spring every so often called before the family council.

Before 1865, the College was considerably less independent than it has been since, and the state archives are full of pamphlets in which Harvard was trying to assert itself.