Council Members Call Monro's Stand Biased

Two representatives from the Student Council last night charged Dean Monro with "taking an adverse position" on the question of Council reorganization.

Howard J. Phillips '62, Council president, and Roger M. Leed '61, a former member, accused the Dean of partisanship toward the Council shakeup plan proposed by William E. Bailey '62, chairman of the Dunster House Committee. Leed called Monro's attitude "highly unethical for a member of the Administration," saying that College officials should maintain a disinterested stand on the issue of Council changes.

The former Council member speculated that Monro could "quite possibly" be the source of Bailey's plan, "since it encompasses everything he favors." Bailey yesterday asserted that Monro knew nothing of his proposal until it was discussed at a meeting of the House committee chairmen with the Dean Tuesday night.

Phillips will ask the Council tonight to elect a ten-member committee "drawn partly from House committees, class committees, and past and present Council members" to talk over Bailey's suggestions, the Council-endorsed recommendations drawn up by Leed and Eugene H. Zagat, Jr. '61, and "any other reasonable proposals."

The Eliot House committee unanimously endorsed Phillips' recommendation last night.

Meanwhile, Dunster House's two Student Council representatives mailed the Council their signed resignations. David A. Rotwein '62 and David R. Nawi '62 said, "We counted on the Council doing something Monday night, and they barely considered reorganization, adjourning before they even listened to the Dunster House plan."

Phillips and Leed are challenging what they consider the essence of Balley's plan, that the members of a reorganized inter-House body be more like House committeemen. "The Council type has received a different sort of training and needs a different mentality," according to Leed. "The typical House committee chairman is really quite parochial."