To the Editors of the CRIMSON:
We feel it is incumbent upon us to liberate the following information in order to dispel some of the rumors current in the community concerning candidates for the presidency of the University. The offer of Thomas P. Hoving on permanent loan from the City of New York has been refused with thanks. Charlie Wong declined the appointment, muttering something about dirty linen. Oscar Handlin has said that he prefers to remain in a position of real power. Sidney Hook's public statement-that he would not accept the appointment because the necessity of putting theory into practice would limit his academic freedom-annoyed members of the Corporation since he was not under consideration. Several candidates have been considered but rejected because of their age: Prince Charles as too young, General De Gaulle and Pope Paul as too old, and J. Edgar Hoover as immortal. Referring to Hoover's statement that if appointed he would continue to serve in his Washington post as well since "What's good for Harvard is good for the FBI," members of the Corporation have emphatically denied that possible conflict of interest was a negative factor in his case, pointing out that the primary function of both Harvard and the FBI is to gather information. In summary, although a dissenting member of the Corporation insists that the appointment of Alfred Vellucci would pave the way to better town-grown relations, the strongest candidate right now is definitely God. A member of the Corporation was overheard to say at a party, "We think He's the right man for the right job." Our Lord, questioned about his possible appointment, said that he was always eager to advance his career and that he would consider the Harvard presidency the capstone of a lifetime of public service.
[EDITOR'S REPLY: Rumor has it that the Corporation found God to be unacceptable because he does not have a "primary academic commitment."]
To the Editors of the CRIMSON:
The October 1, 1970, issue of the Harvard CRIMSON carried on its front page an article by Mr. David Landau headlined "Affiliated Hospitals Center Changes Site in Roxbury." The second paragraph of that article stated "The AHC . . . decided last July to alter its construction plans in such a way that it will probably take the land under all 182 housing units-instead of 60, as had been anticipated. . . . "
I do not know where Mr. Landau obtained that information. I was interviewed by Mr. Landau on September 30, the day before the article appeared, but provided no such information. I told him, rather, that so far as land use was concerned, the implications of the July decision to change the plans would not be known fully until answers were developed to certain questions now under study. I told him further that the matter of land availability was closely related to the matter of replacement housing which is a matter between residents of the area and the appropriate officials of Harvard University.
[The article states: "In order to keep the complex on its present timetable, AHC officials will have to know of Harvard's final relocation housing plans by 1972, according to Richard D. Wittrup, executive vice president of the AHC. Its size and design will depend on how much land Harvard can promise them by that time, Wittrup said (Sept. 30)."
Nowhere did I attribute to Mr. Wittrup the statement that "the, AHC will probably take the land under all 182 housing units."
The CRIMSON will otherwise stand by its report.