To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

As the issue of free speech has become increasingly confused at Harvard in the last few weeks. I would like to extract what seem to me to be three clear principles.

1. Lawful assemblies, no matter who holds them, must not be disrupted, and anyone who is shown to have done so should be punished. The freedoms of speech and assembly are among the most essential Constitutional rights.

2. No one may be punished for what he has merely said, and especially not, as in the case of Allen Weinrub, for what he is supposed by his silence to have thought. Exceptions should be made to this principle only in cases of truly desperate "clear and present danger."

3. Finally, all student organizations must be permitted to assemble peacefully at Harvard and enjoy freedom from disruption. To request Harvard's administration to deny this right to certain organizations, such as the SJP has reportedly done, is to make as sinister and terrifying an attack on freedom as a disruption, for it betrays the same utter incomprehension of the principle involved.

I hope that amidst this spring's welter of fanaticism moderates will keep in sight the necessary ideal of free speech.