To the Editor of the CRIMSON:

I have been called up today by several newspaper men in Boston, including the inquired as to the basis of a story in a manager of the Associated Press, who Boston afternoon paper headed, "Harvard Tries Sports Bribe. Writers Offered $100 to Delay Dope on the Yale Came." The article shows that this was based on a statement in the CRIMSON editorial of March 27th, as follows:

"A few years ago the sport writers of Boston papers were offered $100 apiece to refrain from mentioning the Yale game until the week immediately preceding it; they refused, claiming, in effect, that the importance of the Yale game was largely due to them."

I assume that the twisting of the facts in this case by the CRIMSON was unintentional, though it is in line with the statement made to me a few weeks ago by a president of the CRIMSON in explaining an editorial on football, that it was necessary to exaggerate the facts in order to arouse public interest.

In any event, the truth in this case is as I then stated it to the president of the CRIMSON. Some years ago, while discussing with several Boston newspapermen the desirability of numbering football players, the statement was made by one of them that Harvard University as well as every other University wanted all the publicity it could get, and that this publicity had made football what it was, even the Yale game. In reply I said that in my opinion the exaggerated publicity given to football by the news papers was the worst feature about the game and was doing more harm than any other one thing, and to emphasize my feeling said in a joking way that I would personally give $100 to each of them if they would promise not to publish a word about the Yale game during the whole season.

The editorial quotation above gives the impression wholly unjustified by the incident, that this was a serious attempt to bribe the newspaper writers I would thank the CRIMSON to correct this false impression.  FRED W. MOORE  Graduate Treasurer,  Harvard Athletic Association. March 27, 1922.

(Our apparent misrepresentation of the facts in yesterday's editorial was, as Mr. Moore assumes unintentional. We regret that it occurred, and apologize therefore--Ed.