To the Editors of The Crimson:

As senior vice president and ranking senior officer of the International Relations Council, Inc. and not as acting president, as your article erroneously referred to me, I feel that it is imperative that I respond on behalf of the organization and myself to the allegations and innuendoes made in the articles concerning the Model United Nations found in your March 7 and 8 editions. To begin with, I personally feel that I was grossly misquoted several times. First is the fact that it was not made clear that I stated during my interview with The Crimson that "at no time during staff selection for the high school conference did I feel that working for South-western or any company was used as a basis for appointments. At no time was the name of any company mentioned."

I was correctly quoted (but out of context) as saying that the Model United Nations has "a great many third-ranking officers, more than usual in a Harvard organization who have or will be working for Southwestern." However, you failed to note accurately the ending clause of that sentence in which I said, "and by a great number, I mean three or four." This is out of a total staff of 83 people for the high school conference.

When asked whether I knew of an instance in which a Southwestern person had been promoted over a non-Southwestern person, I responded as quoted. However, you neglected to mention that I definitely did not believe that working with Southwestern had been the deciding factor. You also fail to mention that these appointments were not made for the staff of the high school conference as your article implies.

With respect to your reporting of the financial affairs of the 1974 high school conference, I sincerely believe that The Crimson has ignored all bounds of journalistic professionalism. The report of the auditors surreptitiously presented to The Crimson by a member of the board of directors was not intended to be an indictment of anyone and should not be interpreted as such. I, as a member of the investigative committee, have not drawn any conclusions concerning this report, but as I informed you, at no time during the conference did I feel that the co-Secretaries General authorized the expenditures of any funds for totally unjustifiable expenses. Mr. DeWalt and Mr. Pellett were under a great deal of pressure during the last week before the conference due to numerous factors. For example, the size of the conference increased by over 400 students three days before the conference began due to the fact that many schools failed to inform the staff of increases in the size of their delegations. As a result, numerous last minute adjustments had to be made by the Secretaries-General in accommodating this unexpected increase in the number of delgates. This entailed additional expenditures for such things as providing security and locating accommodations for the new delegates. In light of such unforeseen complications, it is remarkable that the Secretaries-General were able to cope as well as they did.

It is quite unfair to imply that the staff of the high school conference derived undue benefits from working with the Model United Nations. Eighty-three staff members worked 20 hours per day for four days (not three as you reported) during the conference and untold hours beforehand laying groundwork for the conference. Providing security by walking hotel corridors until 3 a.m., escorting high school delegates to Harvard and back to the hotel again, staying up late advising delegates and typing their resolutions, calmly smiling while irate faculty members berated personal ancestries, and finally being jammed into a hotel double with at least five other exhausted staff members does not seem, in my opinion, to be the luxurious living that your articles imply. Since each staff member was expected to pay for all of his meals with the exception of two, many lost money working with the Model United Nations. If anything, the Secretaries-General did not provide enough benefits for the staff.

Quite frankly, the journalistic integrity of The Crimson should be questioned when you must resort to publishing inaccuracies (for example, you erroneously reported the hotel bill as having been paid at the full amount when, in fact, this expense is still under negotiation), making midnight phone calls, as well as exaggerating the internal political workings of one of the largest, most effective, and most ethnically, racially and sexually non-biased organizations on campus under the guise of news reporting. In the process, not only did you subject the reputations of outstanding student leaders to undue abuse, but you also exacerbated and further polarized political factions within and without our organization to the benefit of no one.

At the instigation of an extremely small unofficial minority source, your paper has made suggestive remarks uncalled for in light of the fact that the Dean's committee has just begun its investigation and as yet has reached no conclusions. All of this can only hinder the proceedings of both the Dean's committee and our own organization in constructively approaching the present situation. Marvin N. Bagwell '76

GARRETT AND LEMANN REPLY

We erred in reporting that Marvin Bagwell is acting president of the International Relations Council, and in saying the high school conference instead three days instead of four. Otherwise we stand completely by our stories.   Robert T. Garrett   Nicholas Lemann