Most of the strident objections to the Corporation's list come from former members of the new defunct Faculty liberal caucus, and their objections have a great deal of substance.

After a bitter battle between the former conservative (or moderate) and liberal caucuses two years ago, most of the central issues and much of the personal antagonism between caucus members had seemingly subsided this Fall. "While the residue of the caucuses is still around, and the residue of the paranoia's around, the University seems to be coming around to a united position," one dean remarked.

A LOOK at the Corporation's master list, however, especially those from within the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, displays a systematic omission of anyone who has even brushed close to the liberals in the last year. At the same time, the list bristles with formerly active members of the conservative group: Bailyn, Dunlop, Heimert, May, Rosovsky, and Wilson. H. Stuart Hughes, Paul Doty, Edwin Reischauer, and Roger Rosenblatt-four other, essentially non-caucus Faculty politicians, have gradually moved to the conservative side of one of the major caucus disagreements-the political neutrality of the University-as they became more involved in Faculty politics. None have ever gotten deeply into the Faculty infighting, but still they remain suspect in the eyes of liberals.

Prominent Faculty liberals, Jerome Bruner, professor of Psychology, or Stanley Hoffman, professor of Government, for instance, stand out because of their omission from the list; especially when it is so broad as to include some "courtesy candidates."

"I think the list has a corroborative value," one of the liberals commented, "it shows that the Faculty is still polarized and maybe we do need someone who knows us well and is quite apart from us, perhaps from the graduate schools. That way you will have a honeymoon period for the new man."

"You've got to keep your eye on the house end of the list because it's the place where you can tell what the intentions of the Corporation are," another liberal leader remarked cryptically. "The point is not that you want a caucus leader, but you have to define by example what you want. In a list of 69 names, one would expect some additional names that aren't there."

Some say the liberals view is paranoiac, but it's widely shared by many students who have waited quietly through the Fall fearing the worst. If the Faculty votes of last year are any indication, the liberals are a minority of one-third of the Faculty, and totally without a representative in the administration. But they are an important one-third with some leverage if the Corporation plans to stick to its pledge not to alienate large constituencies with its choice.

Right now there are many inside names on the list that liberals would find acceptable, but few they whole heartedly endorse. Some of these Faculty members have already held meeting with the Corporation to explain their disappointment with the list, but at this point there are not that many viable alternatives to it.

While the Faculty now haggles over the 69 names, President Pusey has shown little or no interest in participating in the search proceedings. Early last Spring, he told Corporation members he did not want to be intimately or even peripherally involved in choosing his successor. Consequently, the Corporation has been meeting separately as the Fellows of Harvard College the night before regular Corporation meetings and has given only informal reports on the state of the hunt.

Addressing the University Committee on Governance last Monday, however, Pusey did receive one direct question on the presidential sweepstakes. "Mr. Pusey, can you give us the single most necessary qualification for the new president?" one of the members asked.

"A belief in God," the President answered after a short pause.