NAUGHTY BERTRAND

The President and Fellows have let Boston's professional moral-minders know that they are not going to back down on the Bertrand Russell issue. This is entirely in line with Harvard's traditional disregard for public opinion in picking its teachers. What is significant is that Harvard is not hollering for free speech, a phrase which dominated the recent New York controversy.

The University is not defending its right to appoint Earl Russell to lecture wide-eyed undergraduates on sex and morals. The President and Fellows are merely upholding their right as an independent body to appoint men they believe are specially qualified for certain jobs. They point out that the William James Lectureship calls for "eminent scholars not connected with Harvard University." Dr. Russell, they add, is a "mathematician and philosopher of recognized eminence," and will lecture here on mathematics, logic, and language.

So stated, Harvard's position is unassailable. But across the Charles stands Thomas Dorgan, author of the teachers' oath law, who refuses to accept that position. He points to a clause in the state constitution which calls on Harvard teachers to dose their pupils with correct moral principles. On the grounds that Russell's appointment violates that clauses, Dorgan is seeking to block by court action his appearance here.

Wisely the President and Fellows have not maintained that they have a right to let Dr. Russell's lectures undermine Harvard's morals. Harvard men who want to be corrupted can easily find Earl Russell's books on marriage and morals in Widener Library. But the Corporation sticks to its point that the famous Briton is eminently fitted to lecture on logic and language. If Mr. Dorgan is worried, he might much more profitable train his guns on Philosophy B, which annually indoctrinates more than 200 innocent undergraduates with the dangerous and subversive tenets of Russell's "Introduction to Philosophy."