“The Student Council was abolished because the liberals were unhappy with my continuing to be elected,” Phillips said.

THE RISE OF HCUA

Hornblow’s suggestion was defeated in the same session it was proposed, and the drama swirling around the Student Council seemed to have passed. But controversy was reignited a week later when Dunster House Committee Chair William E. Bailey ’62 proposed that his House secede from the Council.

According to a 1961 Crimson article, Bailey’s proposal was based on the claim that the Student Council was ineffective and unproductive—an opinion which many of his classmates shared.

Dunster withdrew from the Council in late April, and Council members scrambled to devise plans of reform in response.

One plan, known as the Phillips-Council plan, suggested that the Council remain intact but expand its representation so that presidents of undergraduate organizations in addition to five members of the sophomore, junior, and senior classes would be included, according to a 1965 Crimson article.

Dunster House members, with the backing of Dean of the College John U. Monro ’35, developed an alternative plan that would abolish the Council and create a new “Student Affairs Committee”—a body whose structure would “prevent another Howie Phillips,” according to a Crimson article.

In November, after months of considerations and planning, the Council approved the Dunster-supported plan. In December, 85 percent of undergraduates voted in favor of the new constitution, and the Harvard Council for Undergraduate Affairs was born.

HCUA differed from the Student Council in several ways. Its membership was 24 instead of 32, and its top positions were called chairman and vice-chairman in attempt to avoid the connotations held by the titles president and vice president.

Whereas the Council under Phillips was known for its partisan bent, William K. Dabaghi ’67, who was elected to HCUA in the following academic year, described the HCUA’s composition as representing “a wide range of students.”

Though personal politics triggered the overhaul of the College’s student government, politics did not taint personal relations.

“He was a likeable guy,” Hornblow said. “I don’t think he really had enemies. We disagreed with him but it was a friendly disagreement.”

And Phillips acknowledged that he was a man of controversy on campus.

“I had my opinions,” Phillips said. “It is important to have one’s views tested and placed under scrutiny.”

—Staff writer Laya Anasu can be reached at layaanasu@college.harvard.edu.

—Staff writer Alyza J. Sebenius can be reached at asebenius@college.harvard.edu.