IN DEFENDING his decision to vote with the management on the General Motors proxy ballot, University Treasurer George Bennett cited both his trust in GM's social conscience and his desire to avoid an all-out proxy fight with the company. Since his statement last month, however, the second objection has been voided and an opportunity has arisen to test the first.

Therefore, the Corporation's decision to reconsider its GM stand today comes at a time when the University can satisfy both its students and its own conservatism by voting for the insurgent stockholders at the May 22 annual meeting.

Two weeks ago, the Securities and Exchange Commission ordered GM to place two of Campaign GM's nine resolutions on the stockholder's ballot. The two resolutions, which now appear as legitimate business proposals, are the mildest and most general of the nine submitted. The first calls for expanding the Board of Directors from 24 to 27 members, to include three "representatives of the public." The second asks for a Sharcholders' Committee to study and report on GM's social and economic policies and their impact on the country.

Neither resolution will entail a major outlay of capital as other resolutions might have nor will they restrict the scope of GM's present or future activities.

Campaign GM's three candidates for the Board-Rene Dubos, Betty Furness, and Channing Phillips-will not replace any of the present businessmen now on the GM Board. They will, hopefully, add a new and articulate view to the Board's discussion-a perspective which will become increasingly important in the '70's.

The Sharcholders' Committee will serve only as an impartial investigating board whose report next year will climinate much of the conflict over what exactly GM is doing. Bennett is right in insinuating that most of the criticism of GM is uninformed. For one thing, specific information on GM's anti-pollution and safety efforts has been consistently denied to the public. (Although GM was glad to pool its anti-pollution research with other auto companies-until the Federal government filed an anti-trust suit against the Big Three last January.)

The Corporation's decision to review the GM proxy shows its willingness to consider Harvard's stock investments as a social responsibility. Ideally, the University should have supported all nine of Campaign GM's resolutions when they were announced last month. By voting for the two resolutions on the proxy ballot now, they will, at least, uphold the spirit of the other seven.