To the Editors of The Crimson:

The October 9 Crimson contains an article on British politics, by Paul Rowe, which suffers from a number of major factual errors;

1) Labour's opinion poll lead is not 14 per cent, but 7 per cent, based on this week's average, of the five major polls. Last week's average lead figure was 8 per cent. Only one poll (N.O.P.) has offered the 14 per cent figure, and it is by no means the most recent. (See, e.g., The Economist, 5 October.)

2) The Scottish Nationalist Party holds only 7 of 71 Scottish seats in the outgoing Parliament, not 18 of 71.

3) Labour does not insist on Common Market withdrawal but on re-negotiation and a referendum on the result. While there is strong opposition to the EEC within the Party, the leadership is divided, and even if Labour wins the election withdrawal is by no means certain.

4) It is dubious to say that "Labour has swung swiftly and militantly to the left," though this is the conventional wisdom expressed by the Conservative British press. The trade unions have become more militant in their demands, but the Party leadership remains largely unaltered. Wilson's likely successor would be James Callaghan (a more conservative figure and an erstwhile supporter of America's Vietnam policy.) Other possible Labour leaders include Roy Jenkins and Shirley Williams (both articulate and moderate social democrats and supporters of the Common Market), and Denis Healey (whose policies are less predictable, but who might pursue a more radical policy.) In the meantime it is unclear how much Wilson might diverge from his orthodox economic policies of 1964-70.

Contemporary British politics are at an interesting and possibly fluid point, but Mr. Rowe's article does not provide a reliable guide to understanding. Robert J. Lieber   Research Associate