Gleason and James Q. Wilson, professor of Government, are the two members of the steering committee who were not present at the meeting. Gleason served on the Fainsod Committee and therefore was not asked to sign the letter. Wilson went to Michigan on October 23; he said yesterday that Wolff tried to reach him after his departure for the airport.

The preamble to the letter stated that it was intended "for purposes of information and as a point of departure for further thought and discussion." But the letter stressed "the importance of a large turnout [at the Faculty meeting] to defeat... amendments... designed to make the future Faculty Council wholly elective."

The Fainsod Committee's recommendations, the letter said. "already provide a large element of election in the process of choosing the Council. We think any future dean will need the tiny minimum of opportunity allowed him by the Fainsod report to select members of the Faculty Council in whom he himself has confidence."

According to Hermstein, the letter "was directed at trying to hold back somewhat against the tide of increasing politicization" of the Faculty. Wolff said that "we were not laying down the line."

Wolff added that it is "quite possible" that he. perhaps with other Faculty members, will send similar letters to the Faculty before future meetings. Walzer said that circulating such a letter "is not something we [the liberal caucus] have discussed."

The Faculty voted last Tuesday to postpone a vote on the Faculty Council. The Council and other recommendations of the Fainsod Committee will be up for consideration at a meeting on November 18.