An investigation of the claims against Charles Engelhard reveals that he is more of a tool than a symbol. In fact, George Croft of The Boston Globe (Oct. 25, 1978, page 70) reports that Charles Engelhard was actually a liberal Democrat who was also a liberal on apartheid! Mr. Croft adds that Mr. Engelhard was a close friend of Presidents Kennedy and Johnson and served as a personal representative of the White House at the coronation of Pope Paul VI and at the Independence Day celebrations in two Africa countries: Gabon and Zambia. Mr. Croft also quoted from a speech Engelhard delivered in Johannesburg: "Fuller use must be made of potential skills and capacities of all peoples who make up the population of South Africa. And this calls for more widespread education so that leadership and ability can develop in all sections of the community, and the non-European must have the opportunity to improve his standard of living, if he is to be encouraged to work alongside the European." Mr. Croft further reported that The New York Times quoted Engelhard as saying: "South Africa, for world acceptance, must begin to realize the dignity of man as a basic concept."

Richard Tofel '79 of The Harvard Independent (Nov. 30, 1978, page 3) reports that Charles Engelhard heavily invested his time and money in the campaigns of John Kennedy '40 and Robert Kennedy '48. Mr. Tofel added that Lyndon Johnson joined liberal Senators Edward Kennedy '54, Harrison Williams, Hubert Humphrey and Mike Mansfield at the Engelhard funeral in 1971. And Kennedy School Dean Graham T. Allison notes that Mansfield is a director of the Engelhard Foundation and that the Foundation has given money to the United Negro College Fund, the National Urban League and to community organizations in Newark, New Jersey (The Boston Globe, Oct. 25, 1978, page 70).

Is it credible to contend that Harvard, John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Edward Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Mike Mansfield, Harrison Williams, Hubert Humphrey, the United Negro College Fund and the National Urban League would openly welcome the friendship or money of an exploiter?

Do you favor an alternative to the current 21-meal dining plan?

William G. Mayer '79, a member of the food services subcommittee of the Committee on Houses and Undergraduate Life [CHUL], wrote the following article [excerpted here] as the sub committee's report to CHUL.

The complaint is rather frequently heard at Harvard, that all resident students are required to purchase a compulsory 21 meal per week board contract, even though statistics show that the average student eats only 14 meals per week. We believe that many residents of Harvard College desire a choice of meal plans, which would allow them greater flexibility and possible monetary savings, as compared to the present 21-meal plan.

In evaluating different meal plans, however, it is important to keep in mind that the price of current meal contracts already takes into account the fact that most students eat only 14 meals per week. If all students ate the 21 allowable meals, the amount of food consumed would necessarily rise, and board contracts would be substantially higher than they are now.

In calculating the costs of alternative meals plans, we have assumed that the fixed costs of the Food Services--labor, administrative, and overhead--should be borne equally by all resident students. The variable prices will reflect only the differences in the non-fixed, food costs. (This appears to be the practice at every other school we have examined.) Thus the savings that might result to those who purchase a 14-meal plan would come solely from a reduction in the cost of the food that they eat. At the same time, this would mean that board contracts would rise for those purchasing the new 21-meal plans.

Had a 21-14 variable meal plan been in effect in 1978-79, those choosing a 21-meal plan would have been required to pay $60.30 more. Those choosing a 14-meal plan would have saved $72.80. In light of the estimated $8000 that it presently costs to spend a year at Harvard, these cost differences are probably not enough to have a major impact on a student's overall financial situation, but they are substantial.

Variable meal plans require tighter security precautions because they would create an entirely new category of stolen meals. At present, almost all stolen meals occur when a Harvard student tries to obtain a meal for a non-Harvard friend. Under student holding a contract which allows him less than 21 meals per week must be prevented from taking part in meals for which he is not eligible.

A variable meal plan could be enforced in any number of ways--meal coupons, ticket books, a compute system--but regardless of the method, a flexible meal system would require some major changes in dining hall security. A partial list of such changes would be:

1) locking all back doors to dining halls;

2) use of only non-student checkers;

3) tighter checking of IDs, possibly picture IDs;

4) tighter policing of students removing food from the dining halls.