To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

The rally of last night was the first I have witnessed since transferring to Harvard from the University of London. Newspaper reports and witness accounts of past Harvard rallys had left me with the impression that those I had participated in at London University could put the finest Harvard could offer to shame. I should not here that when speaking of rallys I am not alluding to irresponsible riots characterized by "On to Radcliffe."

One may perhaps question the justification of a mass turnout of three or four thousand students (as was had on occasions), marching down Oxford and Regent Streets, across Piccadilly Circus and on through the center of London. This accompanied by "removing" of policeman's helmets, dousing them with water and other highly irregular actions--even pulling loose the trolley pole of trackless trolleys; an action which a student here now regrets.

To the sophisticated this might all seem childish and immature. This may be true, but tradition, youth, and the majority of us will have it so. Rallys have been, and always will be, a part of student life; be they banned here in Cambridge, and carried on in other parts of the world, or not On the other hand, concede for a moment that the sophisticated are correct in assuming that rallys have no place in student life, are a danger to the public, and should be suppressed by law. One must still contend with the methods used by the police here in Cambridge to disperse the meeting. Are the police warranted in handling the situation which arose last night in such a brutal and callous manner?

Brutallty Here

In the past I have felt that I could boast of London's superiority insofar that such gatherings of students there were both more successful and enjoyable. However, I now feel that my opinions were inaccurate. Little did I realize how savagely aggressive a police force could be in dispersing a rally which, as in London, had been permitted by the local police chief. I dread to think what the Cambridge constabulary would have done should I have tried to steal a cap or two. It is not hard for me to remember the good-humored way in which a group of London policemen would control the crowd, and I shudder when I think of the antics of last nights "riod squad." Perhaps a Harvard student would be naive to anticipate any other conduct on the part of the police having once heard their rankling over the PA system in the Square.

I had little idea that the Cambridge police thought Harvard students so offensive and repugnant. I have witnessed race riots in India when rioting caused considerable public injury, but police action seemed little different. A poor student onlooker last night had the nerve to mumble something about "Soviet police'--the unfortunate individual was last seen being highjacked toward the Paddy wagon as if he were a Brinks robber. Freedom of speech?

Surely no student participating in a rally such as that organized for last night, ventures out with the intent of behaving himself as he would at High Table. Boisterousness, within reason, might easily be tolerated on the part of law enforcers. If such an attitude on the part of London police is effective in presenting any unreasonable disturbance why shouldn't it work here? But then the spirit is all wrong. The attitude that Harvard students are mobsters and thugs invites disaster. In my opinion it was the police, not the students, who were looking for trouble. Less animosity on the part of the police would have averted subsequent outbursts. Also the student body might then be persuaded to cooperate more satisfactorily with the police, with the result that the local jail might be less full.

Where the Guilt Lies

May we be granted the right to hold a rally occasionally? Perhaps such an affair may not come within the bounds of freedoms which this country cherishes so sacredly, but then is such police action, as I witnessed, so tolerated by a democratic society? Maybe the Pogoists are Communist inspired and the gallant Cambridge police thwarted a threat to American independence--I rather think not.

How many students, and police, in Cambridge have witnessed martial law and the reading of the Riot Act in other less tranquil parts of the world? And how many have witnessed the ensuing struggle when hoodlums will not heed such measures to maintain law and order? I can vouch that defensive tactics used by the authorities are essentially similar to those used last night, the main difference being that the police normally use such methods to prevent injury from crudely armed hoodlums, not only to themselves but to the law-abiding public. Were I to ask a witness of last nights fracas whom he feared most, the "incited mob" or the police, I feel sure what his answer would be. Yours very truly,   Peter W. Kent '52