To the Editors of the Crimson:

We would like to point out a glaring inaccuracy in your editorial on the GSD yesterday. Throughout the editorial you refer to the Dean or the administration as making decisions on the Hartman case. This is not so. The ad hoe procedures for the Hartman case were devised by a committee of the Faculty and were accepted by an overwhelming majority in a Faculty vote. Since that time the Rogers Committee has had the difficult task of trying to form the committee following the procedures. While the case is under consideration we have not, and we will not, divulge the details of progress and delays in acceptance and refusal to serve on the committee that have consumed so much time.

At each stage in the process the Faculty of the GSD has endorsed the work of our committee. We find it patently unfair to Dean Kilbridge to blame him for the difficulties in forming the committee. All decisions regarding procedures have been made by the Faculty.

The whole tenor of your editorial implies that the Dean runs the Graduate School of Design singlehandedly. As members of the Graduate School of Design Faculty we know this is not true. Maybe the Crimson should broaden the range of Faculty members to whom it speaks. It would then discover how unreal its contention is that the Graduate School of Design is "a school continually wracked by dissention and mistrust."  The Regers Committee  Peter Rogers (Chairman)  Jerome W. Lindsey  Daniel L. Shooed  Frederick E. Smith

(The Crimson always tries to "broaden the range of Faculty members to whom it speaks," but unfortunately, some GSD faculty members, particularly Mr. Rogers, would rather not speak to us. We stand by our editorial.--The Editors.