Two of the three posts which remained open asthe campaign kicked off were held byofficials--Scott and Green--who had been expectedto play key roles in the fund drive.

But rather than be forthright about problems inthe search, Rudenstine and other Universityofficials remained conspicuously silent.Massachusetts Hall became consistent only in itsdenials. When a secretary let slip that Scott hadtaken a new job and was coming in only formessages and the occasional meeting, Harvardinsisted there was nothing wrong with having apart-time vice president for finance.

The director of budgets, Elizabeth C. "Beppie"Huidekoper, was quietly appointed acting vicepresident less than a week after The Crimson ran astory about the siltation.

And when Green left his post to return to theeconomics department, Harvard's reaction borderedon the bizarre. The 20-paragraph announcement didnot actually mention Green's departure until thefinal sentence.

Officials failed to inform members of the Boardof Overseers of the change before they told thepress about it. And Benjamin M. Friedman, chair ofthe economic department, first learned that Green,who is Wells professor of political economy, wouldbe returning to his department when a reportercalled him.

The departure threatened to hurt the campaigneffort. Green has continued to make fundraisingtrips around the country, including one to Texas,much to the chagrin of members of the Harvard Clubof Dallas.

"We don't have many Harvard guys come down. Thebig dogs only come down for the big occasions,"Dallas club member Peter p. Smith '78 said beforeGreen left for Texas. "If the representative theysend is leaving, I don't think that leaves a verygood taste in our mouths."

"I think it's a problem," Smith added. "I don'tthink he should make the trip."

Smith said he was troubled by the unexplainednature of Green's departure. And nearly two monthsafter it happened, Harvard has given no officialreason for the provost's move.

For his part, Rudenstine has sought to suggestthat Green's departure was prompted by theprovost's desire to assume the new John Leverettprofessorship, a position designed to encourageinter-Faculty teaching and cooperation. But no oneever really believed the president. AroundHarvard, a Leverett professorship was not unlike aflying pig; no one had ever heard of such a thing.

With Boston Globe columnist David L. Warsh '66openly speculating about the turmoil at Harvardthe University attempted to acknowledge the publicrelations disaster and move on to other subjects.

In late April, Acting Vice President forGovernment, Community and Public Affairs Jane H.Corlette said Harvard may have mishandled theannouncement of Green's departure. But she neveroffered the answer desired by administrators,professors and even one inquisitive member of theClass of 1998, who posed the question toRudenstine during pre-frosh weekend: why had Greengone?

"I think it was obviously a matter ofspeculation," Corlette said. "But I think part ofit was our own damn fault for the way we tried toget the information out as fast as possible."

Rudenstine also to make amends for his secrecy.He wrote to members of the Board of Overseers toexplain why they were not told of the impendingdeparture before the public announcement,according to Overseer Charlotte P. Armstrong '49.The letter said the overseers were not informedbecause "the details were still being ironed out,"Armstrong said.

Although overseers said they learned of thechange from reporters or by word-of-mouth,Corlette insisted that the announcement had beenmade to all University affiliates at the sametime.