To the Editors of the Crimson:

In an article by William M. Kutik in the Harvard Crimson of Saturday, April 19, it was alleged that I had helped to "rig" the mass meeting of Friday, April 18. In fact I had absolutely no control over the agenda or any other aspect of the meeting. Furthermore I am convinced that had anyone wanted to "rig" such a meeting they would have found it impossible to do so. A meeting of five thousand people cannot be rigged. The ordering of the agenda may be a somewhat controversial subject, but there is no such thing as a completely neutral agenda--someone is always dissatisfied.

The Crimson article claims that I was "spying" on the Committee for Radical Structural Reform. In fact I had been working full time for that organization and had resigned from the Committee on Technical Details to join the CRSR Steering Committee. I attended no secret meetings and participated in no conspiratorial cabals of "agenda riggers"--to say that I was "spying" in the CRSR is melodramatic and inappropriate to the crisis at and. I worked with the CRSR. I had no one to "spy" for.

The Crimson article further alleges that I wanted the strike to continue and that I wrote my own proposals. I did not in fact want the strike to continue; I drafted only one proposal which stated that the question of continuing the strike was one of personal conscience and that the meeting could not make anu collective decision. A fellow member of the CRSR Steering Committee acting as an individual was to be the prime mover of this proposal. Shortly before the meeting she accepted a friendly amendment favoring the continuation of the strike. In this revised form the proposal was voted down on Friday.

I find myself both puzzled and saddened by the false allegations of Mr. Kutik's article. Jeffrey J. Rosen '70