Developments last night of the proposed post-season football game between Harvard and Princeton in the interests of charity, gave definite indication, it was said, that the proposal was probably a product of the imagination of the Boston Post, metropolitan daily, which completely "scooped" its contemporaries with a front-page story on the subject yesterday morning.

When queried by a CRIMSON reporter, Dr. A. B. Emmons, II '98, executive director of the Boston Red Cross, in whose name the idea was supposedly advanced, expressed surprise at the statements attributed to him in yesterday's edition of the Post.

"The Red Cross is not primarily interested in unemployment". Dr. Emmons declared, "and the idea certainly had no sanction from me." The Red Cross director had conferred earlier in the day with William Bingham, athletic director of the University, and personally denied the remarks quoted under his name. Mr. Bingham, when interviewed, said that the proposal was strictly a matter for the Athletic Council and the Corporations.

No suggestion of a post-season meeting between, the two members of the former Big Three who broke off relations in 1926, have been presented to the Princeton Athletic Association at a late hour Monday afternoon, according to a wire from The Daily Princetonian, undergraduate daily.

There are several definite obstacles in the way of such a match, even if the contest were to be considered seriously, it was declared. It is a well known fact that the University officials are absolutely opposed to any kind of a post-season game in any sport, and it is not expected that the present suggestion will prove to be an exception to the rule. Harvard last participated in-a game after the completion of the regular schedule when it journeyed to California for a game with Oregon in 1920. Since that time, the idea has always been frowned upon because of such tendencies as overemphasis, absence from classwork and the dubious practicality' of continuing a sport season beyond its usual period. The evident lack of the names of responsible officials, both in the personnel of the two universities and the Red Cross, seems a direct refutation of the scheme advanced in the press.