The spectacle of more than 15,000 students ascending on Washington last weekend brings behind another demonstration for peace in the season's capital, three years ago. In February, 1962, Harvard's now-defunct peace organization, Tocsin, conceived and led a march of 6000 collegians, urging President Kennedy to continue his moratorium on nuclear testing and to abandon his fallout shelter program. Despite many similarities, however, the two marches differed fundamentally on goals and on means of attained their objectives. These differences illustrate changes which have taken place in the student peace movement in the intervening years. In 1962 Tocsin was led by one of the most charismatic Harvard students in recent years, Carter C. Goldmark; and he was responsible for March of the 1962 demonstration's tone. Familiar undergraduates for activities ranging from planning Tocsin to organizing the First Intercollegiate Elephant Race, Goldmark brought extraordinary intellectual energies to his work by an electric ability to involve others.

Although they mustered the largest number of pickets to invade the city since the Bonus Marches in the early '30's, the leaders of the Washington Project were anxious to avoid the rage of a demonstration. The major emphasis was on a series of appointments with officials the State Department, the Administration, the Soviet Embassy, and more than 300 Congressmen to discuss their proposals.

They prepared an eight-page policy pamphlet which spelled out a program of "unilateral initiatives" for a stable peace which would not threaten the nation's deterrent. Couched in modern language, the Tocsin proposals were designed to elicit a meaningful dialogue between the demonstrators and official Washington.

Days before the March, Tocsin leaders were hopeful that their intellectual approach would get results. Some still hoped that they might persuade Kennedy not to resume testing. "Since Eisenhower is out," Goldmark said, "the people there now are the ones we can talk to." He hoped for "a small but noticeable effect," and "to have the ideas of our policy injected with force into public discussions."

But Washington's reaction to this novel student lobby amazed and disappointed the marchers. A few Congressmen reacted almost violently. Sen. John O. Pastore (D-R.I.) refused to see a delegation from the group, and told a CRIMSON reporter that Tocsin had been "carried off by cliches and slogans." He said solutions would come from "clear heads knowing all the facts, not by emotional outbursts." He claimed the demonstration had "questioned the ability of chosen leaders to make calm deliberate decisions." Rep. Chet Holifield (D-Calif.) told reporters the marchers were "full of bologna."

Cold Shoulder

A handful of friendly Congressmen welcomed the demonstrators, but most of the Senators and Representatives who met with delegations were neither hostile nor receptive: they simply refused to engage in the exchange of ideas Tocsin had envisioned. The marchers were thanked for their interest, told of the Congressman's strong feeling about the importance of peace and shown the door. "We were treated as if we were very very young, not at all intelligent and totally in the dark on cold war issues," Goldmark remarked after one such meeting.

The failure of this effort was followed in the fall of 1962, by the spectacular defeat of H. Stuart Hughes in his Senate race against Edward M. Kennedy '54. The President's successful handling of the Cuban crisis further isolated the peace organizations throughout the country. In addition the growing civil rights movement was becoming a severe drain on the funds and enthusiasm of the peace groups, and by the fall of 1963 Tocsin was virtually dead. Last fall, after a year's gap, the Vietnamese crisis seemed to provide a rallying cry once again, and the peace forces regrouped under the banner of the Students for a Democratic Society, the organization responsible for last weekend's march.

SDS held none of Tocsin's naive hopes about establishing a meaningful dialogue with Washington officialdom. Its leaders chose Easter weekend for the march, although they must have realized that Congress would be in recess and Johnson probably in Texas. Students made no appointments with officials. They did not seem to think that they could "come and reason together" with Johnson; nor did they believe that a dramatic reevaluation of U.S. policy would result.

Instead, the organizers concentrated on a primarily physical demonstration. Their idea was to have as many people as possible picket the White House and march to the Capitol, and thus to demonstrate to the President, Congress, and the American public the size of the anti-war sentiment in the nation.

In terms of these goals the demonstration was a success. The crowd which gathered, from as far away as Mississippi, Berkeley and Minnesota, far exceeded the private expectations of SDS leaders. While news coverage was , and probably did not equal that accorded the Tocsin demonstration, the figures alone are impressive.

But because of the emphasis on protest rather than policy, the marchers lacked the clear thinking and directed proposals of Goldmark's Project Washington. In 1962, although Tocsin had a very fragile coalition of allies (the Student Peace Union, Student SANE, the American Friends Service Committee, and SDS), it managed to produce a sharply focused set of policy proposals.

This year SDS alone led the march; yet its members could agree only that the war was bad and that the U.S. should withdraw if possible. "Although those among us might differ as to which method is most desirable," a policy statement read, "we are unanimously of the opinion that the war must be brought to an end."

Solemn Mood

Even the mood of the marchers was different. In 1962 a peace march was novel, and the demonstrators were novices. An air of solemn appreciation surrounded the Tocsin marchers; the participants were clearly moved by what they were doing.

The wet snow on the first day of the march fed this quiet emotion. The students trudged through the slush all day Friday and through much of the night feeling brave and somewhat martyred. The march ended Saturday in a solemn procession to the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier two miles away, where the demonstrators stood silently among the rows of clean white tombstones each representing a death in war.

Although there was nothing frivolous about last weekend's march, it did have a professional quality about it. The students were deadly serious in their protest against the Vietnam war; yet they were not overwhelmed by their own participation; they were activists with a realistic appraisal of their own role.

Despite the strength showed on Saturday, however, the student peace movement is still weak. At Harvard, anyway, there is no leader of Goldmark's caliber. In addition no group except the May 2nd Movement has yet produced position papers which approach the sophistication of Tocsin's. But the fact that the March on Washington outdrew Tocsin's 1962 demonstration nearly three to one mean sthat the foundation exists on which to build a strong peace movement