First Published: Harvard Crimson, November 26, 1969.
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Paul Saba
Copyright: This work is in the Public Domain under the Creative Commons Common Deed. You can freely copy, distribute and display this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line as your source, include the url to this work, and note any of the transcribers, editors & proofreaders above.
A group of 16 Weathermen attempted to enter the Center for International Affairs (CFIA) at 4:30 p. m. yesterday afternoon to serve two CFIA officials with subpoenas to appear at the Weathermen trial at 9 a. m. today in Third District Court.
Eric Mann, who is now on trial on charges of assault and battery, and disturbing the peace for the September 25 disruption of the CFIA, attempted to serve Robert R. Bowie, Director of the CFIA, and Seymour M. Lipset, professor of Government and Social Relations, with subpoenas to testify for the defense at today’s trial.
The demonstrators, carrying a large NLF flag, stood on the front steps of the building chanting “Power to the people” and “Off the pigs,” then attempted to enter the building. Three Harvard police told the group that the building was locked, and refused to let them in.
Mann read the subpoenas, which he claimed were legally notarized, and called for Bowie and Lipset to come out to receive them.
“We’re not here to break the doors down,” Mann said. “We have legal subpoenas and we’re serving Bowie and Lipset. By not coming out, Bowie is saving ’Fuck the Constitution.’ If he believes in the law so much, why doesn’t he come out and get it?’
After about 15 minutes, the demonstrators left peacefully. When asked if they would try again to deliver the subpoenas. Mann said, “We have other things to do besides serve subpoenas.”
John G.S. Flym, attorney for Mann and the other Weathermen in the pending conspiracy trial, said last night that Mann was subpoenaing Bowie and Lipset to testify about the nature of the CFIA’s position at Harvard.
Two of the counts Mann faces involve defacing school property and disturbing a school assembly. If Mann can prove in court that the CFIA is not a school, those two counts would be invalidated, Flym said.
William P. Homans Jr. 41, attorney defending the Weathermen in court today, said that he knew nothing about the subpoenas. “If Mann is acting as his own counsel, he has a perfect right to subpoena whenever he wants,” he said. “It is legal for anyone on trial to subpoena someone to serve as a witness in his case, if the subpoena is properly notarized.”
Homans also said that if Bowie and Lipset were served at their legal residences, they would have to appear in court. Bowie and Lipset were not available for comment last night.
Standing trial with Mann today are Philip C. Nies. Henry A. Olson, James H. Reeves, Susan Hagedorn and Jill H. Wattenburg. All have been charged with assault and battery and disturbing the peace in the CFIA disturbance.
They have also been charged, along with 17 others, with conspiracy to commit murder, stemming from a November 8 shooting incident, for which they will face a probable cause hearing November 28 in the Third District Court.
About 40 members of SDS met with J. Boyd Britton, administrative vice-president of Radeliffe yesterday, and challenged him and Mrs. Bunting to a public debate on wages and working conditions of Radcliffe kitchen employees.
When the students entered Fay House, the Radcliffe administration building, with the intention of speaking with Mrs. Bunting, Britton met them in the hall. He told the students that they had come on a “unilateral invitation” and that Mrs. Bunting had other commitments.
Sarah M. Glazer ’70 challenged the figures on kitchen workers Mrs. Bunting presented in her statement (CRIMSON, Nov. 19). “I don’t think she even tried to find out what the facts are,” she said.
Miss Glazer, who works in the East House kitchen, said that Mrs. Bunting’s count of how many students cat there is wrong. “There are 250 eating in Cabot and another 100 in Whitman. Mrs. Bunting’s figure of 250 eating in East House dining rooms just dropped from the sky.” she said.
The SDS students are demanding improvements in kitchen working conditions and an end to the wage differential between first cooks (women) and chefs (men).
Britton said that the differential is partly based on the different capacities of house dining rooms. “North House, where the chefs work, has a capacity twice that of either East or South House,” he said. When a girl from North House told him that the Holmes Hall dining room is never filled, he said, “That’s beside the point.”
Demonstrators accused Britton of repeatedly changing his explanation of the differential. “First it’s the amount of training, then it’s quantity of work, and now it’s the number of chairs in the dining room.” Ellen J. Messing 72, and SDS co-chairman, said.
The demonstrators maintained that the wage differential is a form of “male chauviaism.” Ginny Vogel 70 told Britton, “According to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, this sexual discrimination is illegal.” When she and other students asked Britton why all the chefs were men and all the cooks women, he said, “There’s a long tradition of male superiority.”
He also told the students that both wages and the differential will be negotiated with the union when the contract runs out. He added that, until negotiations with the union two years ago, the differential was even greater. “We consider any differential too great,” a demonstrator answered.
After the demonstrators challenged him and Mrs. Bunting to a public debate sometime before Dec. 4, Britton agreed to collect the figures on the number of students acting in each dining room. But he reined to present them directly to a public meeting. “I will give them to Mrs. Bunting, I think that’s more orderly,” he said.