To the Editors of The Crimson:

Evidently, space limitations forced you to make some unfortunate choices in editing Brooke Master's article "School Uses Bartenders, Carders (October 31, 1987). I would therefore like to offer two clarifications.

While it is true that the Beverage Authorization Teams (BATs) which I am hiring are not responsible for preventing undergraduates from giving their drinks to others, that does not mean that the College is unaware of this possibility or is ignoring it. It is--as it has always been--the responsibiity of House Tutors to supervise parties in the Houses. Moreover. BATs will enforce a one-person/one-drink rule. Your article left the incorrect impression that there would be no effort at all to prevent this obvious possibility.

When I said, "This is a really good deal for all of us," I was not talking only about the graduate students whom we will be hiring, as the context suggested. This new system is, in fact, a good deal for the undergraduates as well, because it allows the College to continue to sponsor parties where alcohol is served, albeit to a smaller group of students.

The point of the new policy is this: It is irrelevant to compare the previous systems to new system, since the previous systems are now illegal. Rather, we have to compare th enew system to the only alternative, which woul dbe the elimination of alcohol laws of Massachusetts. those are the stark choices. This new policy, therefore, allows the maximum choice of drinking at College parties within a very severe outside constraint. I am confident that we can all make it work. Neil H. Buchanan