On April 9 a demonstration disrupted a meeting of the CFIA visiting committee and resulted in the punishment of 18 students, two of whom were ordered to leave the college.

The ROTC issue, which was the main cause of the Spring 1969 disorder, was more muted last year. Yet ROTC remains on campus, if only temporarily, and on May 5 an SDS-led march (with the rumored purpose of burning the ROTC building to the ground) was stopped by a group of moderate students who surrounded the building and persuaded the marchers to stop and talk about the issues.

ROTC will leave Harvard by the end of this academic year, but as long as it remains it will be a sore point and an open target for radicals. It is the most visible symbol of government presence on campus and the most available target for demonstrations against the military.

The Cambridge Project controversy ended in at least a technical victory for the radicals. The Project, funded by the Defense Department, was designed to use computers for basic research into social science methodology. Radicals charged that the product of the computer research would be used for counter-insurgency operations. Liberal members of the Faculty joined the protest. John Womack Jr. '59, assistant professor of History, said, "I suspect that the people getting the most use out of the Project will be the Defense Department, and at this moment in American politics, I don't trust Defense to make the use of it that I would like."

In a surprising move the committee set up to study the Project agreed to compromise its initial position that an alliance would be worthwhile. Instead they agreed just before the Faculty was to have voted on the question, to reject a formal alliance with the Cambridge Project and instead permit individual professors to work for it if they choose.

The University as a Major Corporation

Harvard is a billion-dollar corporation. Its investments are handled by the University treasurer. George Bennett '33, subject only to the approval of the Corporation. Last year Bennett's handling of the University's vast investments came under attack on two fronts.

The biggest battle over Harvard's investment policy concerned the attempt of a group of Washington. D.C. lawyers led by Ralph Nader to make the General Motors Corporation more responsive to the needs of the consumer and the public. The group, which called itself "Campaign to Make General Motors Responsible" proposed three major changes in the operation of the giant automobile company:

Enlarge GM's Board of Directors from 24 to 27 seats, adding three representatives of the public. The group's candidates were Betty Furness, President Johnson's special assistant for consumer affairs; Rene Dubos, a University of Chicago biologist and environmentalist; and the Rev. Channing Phillips, a civil rights leader in Washington, D. C.

Change GM's charter to restrict the corporation to operations which are not "detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the citizens of the United States."

Set up a "shareholder's committee to study GM's impact on the country, including an assessment of its efforts to produce pollution-free engines and safe cars, its effect on na-general the manner in which it national transportation policy, and in dies its economic power."

In response to student and Faculty pressure to vote Harvard's $22 million worth of GM stock shares with Campaign GM, Bennett said, "I only do as treasurer what is in the best interest of Harvard-and that means the students, alumni, and Faculty.

"We're not easily shaken in our convictions as to what makes a good management by groups which may not have the same motivation that we have."

In the months before it came time for Harvard to make its decision on GM, the corporation asked for and received advice from all groups associated with the University. By May I, three fourths of their correspondence supported the Nader group. The statements of support included a Faculty resolution, an alumni poll, a student petition with more than 1500 names, a law brief from the Harvard Environmental Law Society, and letters from Mayor White and Senator Edward M. Kennedy '54.

Yet Bennett affirmed his resolve to support the GM management. On May 18 the Corporation made its announcement: "All but a handful of the communications consist of a recommendation unsupported by consideration of what seem to us to be difficult issues raised by the resolutions. We believe that these issues can best be resolved not by a head count of supporters and opponents, but by thoughtful consideration of the means proposed to effect changes most of us desire."

In voting to support the GM management, the Corporation openly flaunted the overwhelming opinion of students, Faculty, and alumni.