j	1 BRITISH UBRARY |
or S T7 r* IJuTr-
D£i/1Y £iIP^
N Sfe
Newspaper of the London School of Economics Students Union
No. 65
Thursday November 24th 1966
3d.
BEAVER FRONT PAGE -COMMENT-
Where do we go from here? Adelsteln has been found guilty but not sentenced, and Union seems resolved to press for an immediate revision of the regulations under which he was charged, whilst the School insists that rapid changes are just not possible.
The answer is, of course, that we go forward slowly. Impatience over the coloured' situation is understandable, and it is not confined to the students. But more important than achieving a rapid solution is achieving the correct solution
We have a good case for many of our demands. The boycott on Monday demonstrated our determination to have them accepted. We must now consider very carefully how best to achieve our aims. But which ever methods we choose we shall need both determination and patience.
STATEMENT BY Mr. ^Adelstein's lawyers, L. Albert and A. Irvine:
"A full and very fair hearing was given to Mr. Adelstein today. Important procedural rights requested by him were fully granted. Much time was spent on the argument concerning the ambiguity in the rules and the Board actively participated on this diflBcult point. While we think our arguments were more persuasive, the Board presumably was not of this view. Our only unsatisfied desire was the omission of any reasons to support the Board's conclusion that the Union could not publish its resolutions without prior consent. But we are happy that the Board was of the view that David Adelstein had acted with unimpeachable motives."
DIRECTOR FAVOURS
CHANGES
III	
	
	ilwip
Ipii	¦pi
H	
	

"I PERSONALLY, should favour a review of the School ^ Regulations," School Director Sir Sydney Caine told Beaver on Tuesday. "But you must appreciate that the School is a large and complex organization, its authority widely dispersed. There must be detailed discussion within the School before any decision on this can be reached. Sudden and dramatic changes cannot be expected."
He said that he is in favour of full consultation with student representatives on the Regulations, but again the precise methods would have to be worked out first.
His decision to stand down from the Board of Discipline was a result of legal advice. He was advised that, if he sat on the Board, then there might be difficulties in case of an appeal.
The scene in Houghton Street at 11 a.ni. Monday. Owing to a misunderstanding with the police, the street was not closed to traffic.
He decided this after the boycott meeting, but, his decision, "Insofar as one can ever say what causes one to reach a particular decision," had not been influenced by Union.
The decision that official minutes would be taken was just a matter of convenience; there was no change in principle. The decision was taken before the Union boycott meeting.
There had in fact been no change over the issue of Adelstein's legal representation. The dispute was the result of a "misunderstanding".
The procedure to be adopted by the Board was agreed last Friday. Why did he not announce his decision to stand dovm from the Board then? "I did not think it right to inform Union of my decision until I had told the Board of Discipline."
THAT MESSY MONDAY MEETING
.N
Pressures From
Parliament
IT IS now suspected that certain Tory MPs might have put pressure on the Board of Discipline before the hearing on Monday. Indeed they are not content to leave the issue merely that "Adelstein broke the School rules in good faith".
Commenting on the result of the hearing, Nicholas Scott Conservative MP) agreed that the next step was to change the rules. He hopes to get the support of ex-Minister of Education Sir Edward Boyle in backing a student committee to look into the regulations at LSE.
INFORMAL discus-sion" under the guise of a Union meeting was held in a crammed Old Theatre on Monday. "The easiest meeting we've ever handled," said DP Alan Gillie, who took the chair. He had begun by saying that as it would be premature to put any motion until the Board's decision were known, and announced that anybody could comment for four minutes on the day's events.
Scott Moss rose to put a motion of "direct relevance". He advocated a committee of five to negotiate with the Director in future, but was defeated by an Impatient House.
Slim Malik gave a progress report on the day's picketing (page 3, col 1). He was followed
by Alex Finer and Steve Jefferies who proposed a Vote of Thanks to Mr. Cedrlc Thomberry and those other lecturers who had either cancelled lectures and classes or were "absent" on Monday. The motion was carried and Alan Gillie said he would convey Union's feelings to those concerned.
From this point onwards, the meeting became an organised free for all. President-elect of the GSA, Marshall Bloom, expressed hopes for "increasing graduate support for undergraduate activities such as today's. Even assuming a successful verdict, this is only the start of a longer battle".
Sentimentality
A conscientious objector brought to Union's notice the fact that "a small group was sitting outside the Committee meeting room in Connaught Ho"Ke. singing and generally
creating a disturbance." David Lazar defiantly declared the need to show solidarity. The point was taken up by an equally determined Chris Harman who showed contempt for the "moderate, nice, responsible" approach.
Next to speak was Scott Moss, dramatic as ever, who drew the amusement of the House with his sentimentality: 'I have never. . . (long pause hilarious laughter). . . been prouder of the way LSE Students behaved.
Not so proud of his association with LSE was one "disgusted" student who expressed shame at belonging to the self-interested Law Faculty.
After this, the infamous Mr. Francis Dobbyn rose, despairing the seemingly religious overtones of the boycott organisation. He dismissed Scott Moss as "the poor man's matinee idol", and defended those
"hyena" who had opposed the boycott.
Repetition
Many people then began to leave as the discussions were not following any coherent order and repetition was making the democracy of the meeting a farce. Bob Hilliard therefore moved an adjournment but was defeated.
It was significant at that stage that Professor Alan Day cancelled his six o'clock lecture in the O.T. The House was then told that President Dave Adelstein had arrived. On entering, he again received a standing ovation — that the Disciplinaiy. Board had decided to take no action had come as a curious anti-climax. Dave said that Union had scored a limited victory, but NUS President Bill Savage maintained that as a test case, it had set a precedent for "colleges aU over the country".
CTUDENTS POURED into
Houghton Street some 1,000 strong. Loud speakers were set up in the window of SI00 and everyone waited patiently for the speeches to begin. It had been expected that the police were going to close Houghton Street, but owing to a "misunderstanding" this was found to be impossible.
Alan Gillie spoke first informing the meeting that the boycott had achieved immediate success in that the Disciplinary Board had agreed to grant Adelstein his three prerequisites for the hearing — firstly that the board agreed to allow a legal representation, secondly that minutes would be taken and finally that Sir Sydney Caine would stand down from the hearing.
He then called on Geoff Martin,	?? of the
National Union of Students, to address the meeting. He expressed profound surprise at the fact that it was LSE of all places that had to boycott lectures for the sake of academic freedom. He continued :
"This demonstration gives the opportunity for the students of LSE to express their opinions in public. The NUS gives its fullest support to the democratically elected Union Council of LSE."
Trouble broke out afterwards when one of the "Agitator Crew" grabbed ^e microphone and appealed to students to demonstrate further outside the Disciplinary Board itself. The appeal had a limited success. About fifty students went up H706 in Connaught House "armed" with guitars.
continued on back page
2

BEAVER
November 24tfa, 1966
iv#'
i
d

Scott Moss speaks to Union.
Pre-Boycott
Council
Meeting
¥ TNION COUNCIL took the unprecedented step last Wednesday of moving its meeting from its usual "chambers" of S117 to the much larger SlOO to accommodate its curious audience.
Union Council were to discuss the merits of Scott Moss' boycott proposals (for details see report of Union Meeting).
After Mr. Moss had been summoned to address Council, the President asked for comments from Council members:—
Marion Rubin (Academic VP) "I'll support it as long as it works," she said; but new Senior Treasurer, George Ellington was not so sure:— "I think its ill-advised and badly timed," he said, "I would like to know who intends to pick up the pieces afterwards. I don't think this action will get us anywhere — I've had experience of this sort of thing before and when all the fuss has died down, ill-feeling is the only result. But I do sympathise with what you're trying to do — the end is all right—its the means which are at fault."
Publicity
Salim Malik (Welfare VP) disagreed. He told how he'd lain in bed wide awake until four o'clock the previous night turning the issues over in his mind. It was, he said, the most important decision he'd ever taken. But finally he realised that boycott action was a "must."
"The boycott must be vitally publicised. It is the only way to sway the opinions of prejudiced people."
Chris Brown (Admin VP) and Alan Gillie (Deputy President) agreed. Jimmy Beck was noncommittal and Dave Kershaw (External VP) again struck out on his own.
"The timing is bad — let's wail until the Board of Discipline have met,- then we'll strike if things don't go our way."
Behind the Scene preparations...
Jimmy laying down the law.
Gillie at the Director's office.
SIMMONDS
Univentty BooJueUcn
Our shop is not the Oiggest in London, but It Is among the best.
And it's a place where you will obtailn Individual attention.
We stock most of the books on your syllabus, and we are five minute* frcHn L^Ji.
16 Fleet Street, London, E.C.4 Opposite Chancery Lane)
Massive Boycott Majority
lAST THURSDAY'S Union meeting was the biggest to date. Over 700 students paclced tlie Old Theatre, with many unable to get in. The boycott motion was passed by 516 to 118, with 53 absten-sions. Scott Moss, proposing the motion, reminded the House that he had opposed the last boycott motion, because he felt that all possible channels of communication should be tried out before any
direct actions were taken.
"But now the position has dramatically changed,."
Scott Moss told the Union that in 1955 the then President of the Union had written to the Iraqi government without the permission of the School. "The President received a letter from the Director complaining that the President had disobeyed school rules — the letter finished up, however, by saying 'this offence is not such as to require the summoning
of the Disciplinary Board'
Slim Malik seconded the motion. "Union instructed Dave Adelstein to write to The Times. This decision was either right or wrong. If it was right, well and good; if it was wrong, then the entire Union is responsible and should be in the "dock" alongside Dave Adelstein."
Shirley Campbell was called upon to oppose the motion.
"Last Friday a similar boycott motion was defeated.
Nothing has changed since then, except that everyone has leapt upon the boycott bandwagon. If we must boycott, it should come after the Board of Discipline's verdict."
An attractive Indian student then rose to oppose the motion, and was applauded for her suggesting that the motion did not go far enough. She was not too clear about what further action was called for.
Dave Adelstein told the


SCHOOL THWARTS COFFEE-BAR TAKE-OVER
yHE UNION'S * Three Tuns
claim for the bar to run Florrie's coffee bar (see Beaver
November 3rd) has received short shrift from the School. But at least they listened. In a
JEWELLERY & WATCHES
20%—25% DISCOUNT
To aU N.U.S* Members on oar own manufactured goods*
DIAMOND
ENGAGEMENT RINGS
GOLD—Wedding & Signet Rings. GOLD AND SILVER—Cigarette Cases, Powder Boxes, Bracelets, Necklaces, Charms, Brooches, i^r-clips. Links, etc.
SILVER AND E.P.N.S.—Tea-sets, etc.
Open weekday! 9—^* Sats* 9—12
10%—20% DISCOUNT
To all NeU*S* Members on branded goods—All Swiss Watches Clocks, Cutlery, Pens, Lighters, etc., and on Secondhand Jewellery.
GEORGES & CO.
of Hatton Garden
(Entrance in Grerffle St. ONLY)
80/90 Hatton Garden, E.C.1 HOL 0700/<431
Special attention to orden by post or 'phone
point-by-point reply, the School "refuted" the arguments of Ronny Millet's Refectory Action Committee, submitted on behalf of Union.
The Union's point that only students use Florrie's profitable coffee bar, and thus in effect subsidise the refectory services used by the staff and admin., vcas virtually ignored: "the Director withdraws his earlier ruling that profits from one refectory outlet should not be used to subsidise other outlets". P\irther, the point that the coffee bar would be more efficiently run if under the same
administration as the Three Tuns Bar, was turned aside by the School as being an argument for the School to take over the Three Tuns!
The School once did offer the running of the St. Clements' coffee bar to the Union, but it is clearly not intending to repeat the offer.
The School's answers did not satisfy Ronny and his Committee. "This is a masterpiece of red-herring and an inversion of our argument," he told Beaver earlier this week.
Union that he had written to The Times "because he felt that his loyalty to the Union was greater than his loyalty to the School."
He added, "the Board of Discipline has not met since 1951. It has no established rules of procedure and it cannot draw on precedents from the older universities. It is significant that the new universities are able to combine the elements of natural justice in their disciplinary regulations."
He went on to outline the kind of support he had received from outside sources.
He was given a long standing ovation.
Criticisms of Alan Gillie's handling of the meeting became more sustained, and, ever eager to please, he resigned the chair to the effervescent Gen. Sec. Jimmy Beck. In a further bout of musical chairs. Gillie resumed the chair and Jimmy leapt spryly to the floor to address the Union. He reiterated his statement of the previous Union meeting that "this is not the time for a boycott. A boycott will not work."
He denied that his reluctance to support the boycott was connected with the fact that he had .a class on Monday. "That's not the point. Outside public opinion will think a lot more of us if we behave rationally and in an enlightened manner. I suggest an amendment; demonstrate but don't boycott."
Colin Crouch did not support the amendment. To say that "the boycott will fail can become a self-fulfiUing prophecy. We must be on guard against this."
The amendment was defeated.
Steve Jeffries, however, managed to get his ammend-ment heard. It proposed that lectures and research staff should be asked to join in the boycott, the Union should meet again on Monday to report back on progress and pickets and leaflets should be organized.
After a pause for reflection Scott Moss accepted the ammendment.
November 24th, 1966
BEAVER
3
Swinging, singing, protesting LSE . . .
cannot even hoist a flagl
The protest starts at 10 a.m....
Anyone remember David Aaeisiein?
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Dear Sir,
As one of those who parti-• cipated in the decision of I the Students' Union to in-j struct the President to reply ; to the letter by Lord Bridges j in 'The Times', as a signatory i of the petition whereby I 1,026 students accepted res-j ponsibility for Union's de-i cision, I feel obliged to ' explain why I spoke against the proposed boycott at Thursday's Emergency meeting. My reasons were simple: they were not at all concerned with disputing the facts of what has happened at LSE since early October nor the placing of responsi-
Lectures, Classes and Seminars
39%
20% 0%-20% 19% 20%-40% 7% 40%-60% 3% 60%-80% 12% 80%-100%
cancelled, attendance, attendance, attendance, attendance, attendance.
bihty for the breakdown in relations with school on one hand and the Union on the latter.
I felt that students should not at this time exhaust their feeble means of influencing the school so that they have no answer to offer to the Board of Discipline in the eventuality of an unfavourable decision.
It was my belief that a demonstration of the solidarity on Monday would serve our purpose admirably. I was not certain that the proposer of the motion to boycott had considered what students would do in the event of the President being subjected to disciplinary measures. Another boycott?
We are concerned with two issues which, though both concern the principle of justice in a democratic society, can be treated separately. They are:— a) the right of free association of students and b) the right to a fair hearing for students on discipline charges.
STAFF REACTIONS
Members of staff as well as students have given their I opinions today. Two of them have been particularly forth-' coming.
One saw three main issues at stake: the Adams affair, which has to a large extent now faded from view; relations between students and the governing body of the school, and therefore the board of discipline business; and general staff-student relations.
He felt that if staff-student relations were so bad that the only way to remedy them was by boycott, this was horrifying. He rather doubted it. About the boycott, he was relatively indifferent. Even if students feel a boycott necessary, this occasion hardly called for it. He didn't actually know very much about it but thought it a '9-day wonder'.
The vital issue was the one of staff-student relations in general. We can't treat LSE as a provincial university; it is a very large college in the middle of London, with all the attendant outside influences. The nature of staff-student contact is bound to be different. He did not want to see the Board of Discipline as a court martial. Nevertheless, Adel-stein's situation was very
serious, so the measures employed should be carefully watched.
The other member of staff was less equivocal. His own personal feelings, he said, were completely in agreement with those of the union. The opinion among the staff generally was that of waiting to asses reactions; some were violently against it. At the last AUT meeting there was a motion asking for lenient measures from the discipline board.
He also mentioned Dr Adams. He said that asking him to be director was an example of insensitivity. At the time no-one bothered about it because they were too busy with exams; but the board should have realised that Dr Adams was a controversial figure because of the Rhodesian situation.
Those who feel they differ on an issue of principle from these I would ask to go to Union office and read or reread the documentary evidence on the Union's communications with the School; You should not escape the decision that, at the very least, there has been a lamentable failure of demo-


cratic attitude on the part of the School which makes the continuation of the informal position of the students impossible.
But I doubt if the boycott will achieve much.
Yours faithfully, Shirley Campbell. (This letter has been considerably cut.—Ed.]

BEAVER
Editor .................................... David Baume
News Editor .................................John Rose
Photographers......Gene Milgram, Alastair Dunn,
Stephen Hayes
Contributors: Frank Mansfield, Tricia Israel, Nigel Bowen, Catherine Liebetegger, Hilary Jones, Ann Mulcahy, Bill Hanley, Magnus Carter.
LAPEL BADGES PORTER'S JOKE IN A PRISON
Probably the only neutral people in LSE on Monday were the porters, Florrie and Bert in Wright's Bar.
One of the porters told me he thought their general reaction was "It's a bit of a joke" but another said that on the whole he felt the porters were "definitely on the students side — though of course we can't show it. I thought the demonstration was very well conducted; they got out of the way when I asked them to, and I think they deserved their victory
on Adelstein's verdict."
The story was a bit different in Wright's bar. "We found it was terrible — nobody came in here all the time. Profits were right down —please, no more demonstrations!"
Florrie wouldn't comment.
The lapel badges everyone was wearing on Monday started off as "Free LSE" but soon evolved into personal originalty. "Free Roland Kirk", "I am an enemy of LSE" and "Support your Union — its ruptured"
flourished on the St. Clement's steps. I even saw "Syd lives and is in Argentina" hidden in the Three Tuns.
LAST WORD: The new Treasurer George Ellington asks us to point out that the
story in Beaver last time made it seem as if only two of his ten years "associated with prisons" were spent as a prison officer. In fact, he's yet to be on the other side of the bars.
I WANNA RESieN
0NE OF the problems relevant to the Board of DiscipUne hearing on Monday was whether or not the Union is a voluntary body.
WF I Q
UCR "breach of discipline"
^HIRTY-ONE students of the University College of Rhodesia received letters from the Government last week informing them that their grants and scholarships had been withdrawn with effect from the end of the term. The letters state: "You are adjudged by the college authorities to have committed
a serious breach of discipline," the offences having occurred during a rowdy graduation-day demonstration last July.
Professor Milton, a senior professor and Vice-Principal at UCR, said that the University authorities had not been informed by the Government of the matter.
So in an attempt to dissociate herself from the current activities of the Union, one third year LIB student has attempted to resign from the Union. She went to the Union office to try to hand in her resignation. They did not know how she should proceed. If you are a registered student of the School you are automatically a member of the Students' Union. There is, of course, nothing to say that you may not resign; that is going too far. Nevertheless, this student found it very difficult.
She tried going direct to the School. The Registrar, Mr. Alcock, was "very helpful" but said there was nothing much he could do. So she tried going to the School Secretary. He could do nothing either. Her original reasons for wanting to resign have obviously been submerged in an attempt now to find out whether it is possible to resign at all. The nearest thing she got to an answer was that the only thing it seemed possible to do was resign her course.
Geog. Debate
The LSE and King's joint Geographical Association are holding a debate from 6-8 p.m. on December 8th in SlOl. The motion "That Regional Planning is Bunk" will be proposed by Enoch Powell, M.P., and opposed by Bill Rodgers, M.P. The seconders are Ralph Harris and Mr. Bill Rodgers, M.P.
Dramsoc
L.S.E. Dramsoc's contribution to the N.U.S. Drama Festival is "Fando and Lis" by the Spaniard Arrabal. The play, "a superb analysis of basic human relationships". It will be presented in the Old Theatre on Monday at 7.30.
Psychedelphia vs.
Ian Smith
Round House, Chalk Farm, Dec. 3rd
Big party with Pink Floyd. Underground films, poetry, fancy dress, etc. Proceeds to ZAPU. Tickets from concourse area, 6/-.
BEAVER
back page
NO. 65
November 24th, 1966
• from page one
Having seated themselves on the seventh floor of Con-naught House, singing began. Distortions of several 'folksy' songs were forthcoming :
"We're gonna bury Walt Adams down by the riverside." "We shall overcome" was the most popular and its verses were also bent to fit the occasion:
"We shall pick our own director".
"We shall win our rights".
Colin Crouch suddenly came ruiming upstairs asking the singers to stop : "This sort of thing doesn't do any good — anyway with aJl of you up here there is no-one on the picket lines."
Some of the singers went outside again, but the most were content to sit and continue.
The singing was inter-/rupted again, by Professor /Roberts, who explained that he was a member of the School Administration. The demonstrators were delighted. This seemed a good opportunity for direct communication with part of the School bureaucracy. The demonstrators fired questions at Professor Roberts.
Why is Adelstein there? Why are communications so poor? Why can't we have student representation? What happened to the Staff-Student Committee?
Professor Roberts was very sympathetic. He attempted to answer all the questions, and asked the demonstrators what they hoped to achieve by sitting outside the hearing.
"We are speaking to the administration at long last." they retorted.
Professor Roberts is a member of the Academic Board, the Appointments Committee and the Staff-Student Committee.
He asked the demonstrators to come with him into another room and discuss the problems in more detail. Some of the demonstrators were not too keen, but finally it was agreed that Richard Kuper, who had been by far the most articulate, would accompany the Professor into ^•lOther room with several others. Professor Roberts explained that one of the reasons for the poor quality of communications was due to the fact "that administrative decisions are taken by committees. These committees often take a great deal of time to come to their conclusions."
"Then how did the committee which fixed up the Disciplinary Board hearing manage to operate so rapidly?" someone said.
Union Meeting today at 3 p.m. in Old Theatre to discuss regulations and student problems. Next week, prior to Sir Sydney Caine's address to the Union, there will be a BEAVER Special containing a statement from Union Council on student problems.
Thornberry's Justice
Professor Roberts went on to comment on the StafiE-Student relations issue:
"A case can bo made out for student representation, but this does not necessarily solve the Staff-Student problem. At the University of Wisconsin, where they have Student representation, there is a block in communication between the student representatives themselves, and the rest of the student body."
Professor Roberts believes that the Students' Union here is probably unrepresentative too, since it would seem that only a minority takes any active interest in its activities. Richard Kuper pointed out to him that the attendance at Union meetings has over the last few months dramatically increased.
Professor Roberts said that he was well aware that much needs to be changed at LSE. He put-lined some of the crucial points.
1)	Staff must stop giving the impression that they look at students as a nuisance and concentrate more on their teaching than on their research.
2)	We must integrate students, particularly first year, into more of the School's activities.
3)	The Freshers resent the fact that no one seemed to care about their progress.
4)	We must have more consistency between the different faculties, closer relations between staff and students, and more effective communications in all departments.
In conclusion, he outlined one of the dangers of student representation; "If we put a student on one of the committees, he would become institutionalised. He would agree to the same unpopular decisions as the rest of the committee".
Thornberry Practices Justice — Others merely study it 'yWO PEOPLE turned up to English Legal Institutions for knowledge may be such that it will overcome their
T A	-* «¦ 1	ml	It	-I	Txrt .	n CI O CIV* f/-\	r\oot/-»	/~vr c<^l r v	t v-vm"
Lecture on Monday. The usual house numbers 110. What may have influenced this dramatic overflow of the black-legs, was a letter read out by the lecturer, Cedric Thomberry.
He said that the Union had a 'prima facie' case for the boycott and said that he wholly supported its aspirations. Scored under on the letter was the passage "I therefore give the boycott my full support". Referring to those whose "thirst
enthusiasm to secure basic rights of self-expression" he stated their right to attend his lectures. In a stilleto-like cavicat Mr. Thomberry pointed out that he would give the same lecture next week.
Speaking to BEAVER he observed that law students had been more inclined to ignore the boycott, being "more establishment-minded than their colleagues pursuing other subjects."
How We Made The
TF YOU measure success in terms of press coverage, Monday's events were supremely successful. The Press loved it. Even before anything had happened, the Telegraph came out with an editorial condemning the boycott as "an outrageous piece of undergraduate insolence" enacted by "minors being educated for the most part at lavish public expense." As the Morning Star said next morning, the Telegraph "seems to think we're still living in feudal times, and that students should be treated like serfs." It must have been agonising for the Telegraph's third leader-writer on Tuesday morning to see on his front page what was, all in aU, a fair report on the demonstration headed by "LSE Boycott Ends with Ovation for Student".
Law Motion
IT IS now known that six of the ten members of the Committee of the Law Society which met on Tuesday tried to introduce a motion condemning those members of the Society who saw fit not to support their fellow students In Monday's boycott.
((
The People's , eh, eh..."
Flag
IN THE strike sing-song — featuring the Euston Labour Exchange Male Voice Choir, a certain song was suggested, "THE RED FLAG." The only difficulty was that the majority of LSE's prominent Socialists DIDN'T KNOW THE WORDS.
News
Between the two extremes, reaction was much as one would expect. The Mail happily followed the News and Standard of the night before and printed a photo of that girl in the GI tin hat above "Student Strike — the first full-scale strike by students at a British University".
The Times (avoiding any anti-student bias) put the story at the top of their Home News page, with "No penalty for LSE Man", recalling that Top People aren't students but Men. Understandably, they emphasised Dave's letter to the Times as the cause of it all, relegating the boycott itself to nine lines at the end of the sto^. They made up for it by printing by far the best photo of all, splashed across the back page. It was notable mainly for the shot of VP Chris Brown looking distinctly nasty behind a policeman's back.
The Guardian kept quietly
Folk Club
International Night
Modern, traditional, Israeli and Flamenco. Week today. Concourse Area. 7.30 p.m. 2/-
in the centre, talking about the decision rather than the boycott, and asked Sir Sidney, a bit pathetically, whether he felt "saddened" at this turn of events during his last remaining months here. Sir Sydney, not surprisingly, didn't comment on his grief, but stuck to "I don't pretend to have a ready-made quick solution . . ."
The populars headed straight for the prettiest student. The Mirror's pic of a blonde outside St. Clement's led into two-and-a-half inches of nothing. The Sketch (whose reporter had a few angry moments with Alex Finer in a Connaught House lift on Monday) led in with "David writes to the Times, Then . . ." and spotlighted "students with guitars singing 'We Shall Overcome'.".
Their story was marred even more by a report that Sir Sydney claims he changed his mind about standing on the Discipline Board "long before the students had demanded his withdrawal" — where did they get that idea from?
and what the papers DIDN'T say
rpHE DAILY TELEGRAPH man disagreed with his paper's 'Student Impertinence' leader. Our Sketch Man detected the guiding hand of the Communist Party. Beaverbrook's minion stamped the Aldwych Bar beat disemanating visiting cards to the masses. The Mirror man wanted the facts, another Fleet Street scribe wanted 'a bit of leg'. All-in-all- the Fourth Estate did us proud. Most of them were pro-student. Our Telegraph friend, however, earned a fuU measure of abuse every time he announced his brand-name Alex Finer came up against the steel tip of the gutter pressmen, when he tried to shield our shattered but victorious President, from a prop in the Newsprint rugger scrum. Alex sensing that David was not in full possession of his P.R, faculties, suggested that David should have time to recover before the vitriol dipped pens could get to work. The response of the Journalist heavy
mob, was 'F-off, I am trying
to do my job.' He reinforced this semantic gem, no doubt culled from his N.P.J, lexigan, with what lawyer Alex described as 'a technical assault*. Realising that the pen is mightier than the punch-up, our journalist friend later apologised.
Ciot-hes for the up-and-coming
Leonard lute
86 Kingsway W.C.2
Branches throughout London & Suburbs
BLAZERS
SLACKS
TOPCOATS
SCARVES
TIES
SHIRTS
KNITWEAR
Published by London School of Economics Students Union. Printed by F. Bailey & Son Ltd., Dursley, GIos.