Teach-In 'Disrupters' Subpoena Pusey, Bok

Six members of the Harvard Administration and Faculty-including President Pusey and President-designate Derek C. Bok-were served with subpoenas yesterday by lawyers for one current and two former Harvard students who go on trial today in connection with the March 26 Teach-In disruption.

Other members of the Administration and Faculty who were served with subpoenas were Donald G. Anderson, chairman of the Committee on Rights and Responsibilities (CRR): Samuel P. Huntington, professor of Government: Archibald Cox '34, University troubleshooter and Williston Professor of Law; and Oscar Handlin, Charles Warren Professor of American History, according to an SDS spokesman.

The spokesman also said that I. Milton Sacks, professor of Government at Brandeis and one of the Teach-In speakers, and three Harvard students had been served with subpoenas.

The Harvard students subpoenaed were Laszlo Pasztor '73, co-chairman of the Students for a Just Peace and an organizer of the Counter Teach-In; Richard Zorza '71, who made a short, impromptu speech during the Teach-In; and Peter W. Galbraith '73.

Harvey Silvergate, lawyer for John Pennington '67-4, said that the subpoenas had been delivered yesterday by Steven Kehoe, lawyer for Jamie Kilbreth '69 and John T. Berlow '71.

Silvergate said that the defense will "examine Harvard witnesses as to whether Harvard can make any rules about the amount of noise at a political rally."

Not Illustrious

Silvergate also said that the defense would attempt to show by its questioning of the subpoenaed witnesses that "Harvard does not have an illustrious record in the area of free speech and that their contention that a University tradition of free speech was breached is false.

Berlow and Kilbreth are charged with criminal trespass and Pennington is charged with disrupting a lawful public assembly.

Of those allegedly served with subpoenas, only Anderson, Cox, and Galbraith said that they would be in court this morning. Both Cox and Anderson, however, said that they would have been in court anyway.

Cox said last night that since he had filed the complaint against the defendants for the University he was going to be there anyway. Anderson said that aschairman of the CRR he would also be in court to give testimony as a prosecution witness. He said he did not expect to be called as a defense witness.

Galbraith said that since he had been properly served, he would be in court. He contended, however, that "there is no way they can make a case that I should be there."

Pusey was unavailable for comment, but Daniel Steiner '54, General Counsel to the University, said that Pusey had not been served with a subpoena as of 5 p.m. yesterday and would not be in court.

Some Paper

Bok said that while he was away from his office "somebody left something on some piece of paper sometime this morning." He said that his office had told him that he had been improperly served so that he did not have to go to court.

Zorza said that while he had intended to go to court even though the subpoena had been served to his roommate, he had received a call late last night from one of the defendants who told him that his subpoena had been cancelled. Zorza said that he would probably not be in court.

Huntington, Handlin, Sacks, and Pasztor could not be reached for comment.

The trial will take place this morning at 9 a. m. in East Cambridge District Court.