Walter J. Leonard, President Bok's special assistant, has been overseeing the administration's plans for the W.E.B. DuBois Institute for nearly a year and a half. During most of that time the proposed Afro-American research center was subject to the same controversies that kept it from getting off the drawing boards in 1970, the year DuBois was originally slated to commence operations. But Leonard has been determined not to be thwarted in efforts to put the institute finally on its feet, and when the administration's design for the research facility became the focus of a concerted attack last spring he adopted a "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead" strategy to stave off challenges to his conception of what DuBois should be.

Leonard's dogged approach to the DuBois controversy seems to be paying off. He is now confidently predicting the institute will begin operations along the lines he proposed within a year. He says he doesn't know if the other antagonists are ready to dispense with their disputes, but he indicates it doesn't really matter much. "I don't intend to engage in any crippling disagreements," he says.

Despite Leonard's perseverance and his readiness to minimize the importance of the objections that critics raise about his institute design, the contours of the debate over DuBois remain clear and well defined. Much of the debate centers on what relationship the research institute should maintain with the Afro-American Studies Department.

Leonard's plan for the DuBois Institute stipulates no formal connection between the Afro Department and the research center. Ewart Guinier '33, chairman of Afro, and a student-faculty coalition insisted last spring that a formal structural connection is necessary for both black studies facilities to thrive. The Afro Department, they claimed, needs the institute's resources to support the continuing education of its undergraduate concentrators. The proponents of a formal alliance between DuBois and Afro also argued that the department, which only has one tenured professor teaching in it, would be in a better position to attract new faculty if it could offer them access to DuBois's financial and research resources.

Leonard continues to maintain that the research institute and the Afro Department will develop a rapport as a matter of course. In a letter sent to Guinier last winter, Bok took essentially the same position. "I find it difficult to assume," Bok wrote, "that such an institute will not develop a close relationship with the department."

Despite Bok's reassurances, Guinier remains skeptical. "If you want a close relationship," he asks, "why don't you say so in the institute's charter?"

The relationship between the DuBois Institute and the Afro Department is becoming an issue in the proceedings of a committee that has been searching for new Afro faculty for over a year. Guinier says that candidates are concerned with the availability of research facilities and that several of them have been dissuaded from coming to Harvard by the fact that they cannot be guaranteed full access to DuBois.

Guinier says he is also concerned about Leonard's insistance on separating the DuBois Institute from any teaching functions. "It's hard to think that anything Harvard does should not help students. It's a betrayal of the purposes of the institute. Research has to relate to life," he says.

Leonard defends his scheme for the institute's development by emphasizing the importance of "maintaining the independence of integrity of its scholarship." He argues that Afro-American research has been neglected for such a long time that scholars must now be given the chance to devote their full attention to their studies.

Bok's special assistant says the question of Afro's relationship with DuBois is "legitimate but overplayed." He adds, "We tried to develop the two independent of each other so both could participate with each other on even and equal terms. Individuals who are intellectually astute should realize that."

Guinier was joined in his crusade against the Leonard proposals last spring by a student-faculty group called the United Committee of Third World Organizations. It is not clear how either Guinier or the Third World group will deal with the issue this fall, but one of its leaders said during the summer his group will again make its voice heard on DuBois if student support can be generated for their position.

For his part, President Bok has already begun appointing members of the DuBois Institute's advisory board. Leonard said that the bulk of the board will be drawn from Harvard faculty. Bok is also expected to appoint a secondary advisory committee, whose members would come from without the University, later in the year. Both Bok and Leonard have been in contact with foundations as part of an effort to raise over $5 million for DuBois.

Bok will also have to appoint a director for the institute by year's end. The appointment may have a profound effect on the future of the controversies that have enveloped DuBois since 1969, since statements from Mass Hall indicate that the new director will have broad discretion in setting institute policy. During the spring, Bok and Leonard declined to respond to United Committee of Third World Organizations requests that DuBois provide summer research grants for students because neither administrator wanted to "tie the new director's hands" on specific matters of procedure.

Because of the appointment's importance, the way Bok goes about making it is of some significance. Leonard has indicated that the new advisory board will play a large role in searching out the director. In his letter to Guinier last January, Bok said there would be a full and formal search, adding that Guinier would have an opportunity to air his opinions on the directorship in the course of the process.

Housing for the research center is a problem that is still very much in the air. In his December report to Bok, Leonard recommended that the institute be located in the new Nathan M. Pusey Library. Leonard said early this month that he still hopes that the DuBois Institute will find a home in the Pusey Library. But Louis E. Martin, librarian of Harvard College, said there is "no possibility" that the research institute will move into the not-yet-completed library. "It's not possible, certainly not very desirable and I doubt very much that it will happen," Martin said.

If Bok does not intervene on the DuBois Institute's behalf and help make room for it in Pusey--where Martin says space was allocated "years ago"--Leonard will try to find another central location for it.

Finding a home for the DuBois Institute, however, is much less a problem for Bok and Leonard than defusing the opposition to their handling of the whole matter. Leonard concedes that his approach to the subject last spring may have hurt his cause. Although his report on DuBois--which outlined the institute design--was delivered to Bok in December, its public release did not come until April. Leonard says he was hoping to keep the issue low key, but concludes "our attempts to keep it from becoming a political football made it a political football."

Leonard released his report after some of its recommendations had been leaked and the storm of protest was already underway. Leonard did his best to weather the storm, and he hopes the worst is over. But DuBois has been an issue at Harvard since 1969, and it's doubtful that Leonard and Bok will have the clear sailing they'd like while preparing to get the institute off to its belated start.