News
Garber Announces Advisory Committee for Harvard Law School Dean Search
News
First Harvard Prize Book in Kosovo Established by Harvard Alumni
News
Ryan Murdock ’25 Remembered as Dedicated Advocate and Caring Friend
News
Harvard Faculty Appeal Temporary Suspensions From Widener Library
News
Man Who Managed Clients for High-End Cambridge Brothel Network Pleads Guilty
In an open forum held last night in the Lowell House Common Room, four Faculty experts discussed the question of feeding the small democracies before a large audience, and turned up several noteworthy decisions somewhat apart from current thought on the subject.
The four men who spoke were: Bart J. Bok, assistant professor of Astronomy, Lucien Brouha, physiologist to the Grant Study, Henry J. Cadbury, Hollis Professor of Divinity, and William Y. Elliott, professor of Government. So far, they have held very different positions on food relief, but they are of one accord that no action should be taken through a private group such as the Hoover Committee, but that the government should be the one to formulate and carry out the work.
Elliott Would Send Vitamins
Professor Elliott went so far as agreeing to ship vitamins to the children of the occupied countries, in connection with a statement by Dr. Brouha that such supplies would be adequate to maintain the balanced diet of small children.
At the same time, he refused to support any plan which would feed the adult populations, for by doing so, he feels that the United States would merely strengthen a group which is capable of working for the Germans. "The thing to remember," he said, "is that the best weapon England has is an economic war, and that anything which would take the slightest load off the Nazis' shoulders will be a blow to Britain and the United States."
Hoover Plan Barred as Dangerous
In the discussion of the Hoover Committee, it appeared that in the last war there were definite leakages through the lines to Germany. That the Hoover system of distribution was and can be watertight, is one of the strong selling points of the food plan, and the insecurity which the speakers see in it makes them outlaw it as an effective method.
On still another important aspect of the problem the four agreed, namely that the United States government has done very little constructive work on the food relief problem. Since they felt that the government is the only medium for a foolproof, efficient plan, they are anxious that Washington devote more attention to it than it has to date. Only government interest can put across what the speakers consider an important step toward winning continental sympathy for England and America, and building sound minds and bodies in the next generation.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.