=5

Referring to the letter addressed to Dr, Allen on February 8, 1942, con-
cerning an alleged conversation that your informant had with "Dutch" Scheuffler,
in this connection I wish to say that the letter seems so ridiculous that it
doesn't merit much comment, However, my investigator interviewed Mr. Scheufler,
who stated that he had never given out any such interview as is related in the
letter, and vehemently denied making the statements eharged by your informant.

It seems strange to me that your informant accuses "Dutch" Scheufler of being a
"tramp", and at the same time is willing to accept a statement of condemnation of
rumored actions of the University ¢ Oklehoma, based upon statements given him
by a man he classes as a “no account".

Especially significant is the next to the last paragraph, which says:
"T can't prove any of these statements but they look genuine to me and I'm confident
Dutch was telling me these things just as they happened. He is one of these fellows
who always likes to brag and seem important and have connections with men who are
in the places of importance in the athletic world.”

Your informant, an attorney of Wichita, is willing to believe statements
about the University of Oklahoma and its athletic department, coming from 4 man
he immediately accuses as being unreliable and a worthless braggarte

Referring to Mr. Allen's letters of February 9 and 10, 1942, we find that

Mr. Allen refers to the Burton Cossey case which in no way concerns the University
of Kansas. I made a complete statement of this case at the Big Six Conference
meeting held late in February. The athletic authorities of Oklahoma A. & lM. College
and the University of Oklahoma investigated this entire matter and are in complete
agreement on the case. 1 wish to state for your information, however, that no
person on the athletic staff of the University of Oklahome. in any way urged, induced,
or otherwise tried to influence lir. Cossey to return to the University of Oklahoma.

In his letter, Mr. Allen makes the following statement concerning two
letters which he received from certain attorneys in Wichita: "It takes the inform-
ation that the two lawyers have to make the case against Haskell a perfect one".
Statements mde in the two letters are based on hearsay and rumor, and in a court
of lew such evidence is not even admissable. Furthermore I had every charge in-
vestigated, with the results as reported above. The case against Mr. Haskell
doesn't contain any of the elements of a case, much less a perfect cns@e

Mr, Allen refers to the Layton case in his letter, and I wish to state
that I have before me a photostatic copy of an affidavit, signed by Lester Layton
and by both his father and mother, denying the existence of a professional baseball
contract between Lester Layton and any baseball clube

I want to state that it will require some other proof other than the un-
supported statements of Mir, Allen or the statements from his attorney friends, who
base their information on hearsay and rumors, to make the University of Oklahoma
authorities believe that the parents of Lester Layton have sworn falsely. Mr. Allen
further states that he believes that secret or sub-rosa agrangements exist between
Leyton and the Boston Reds, which he terms a "gentleman's agreement", It seems to
me that before any further cognizance should be given statements by Mr. Allen, he
should be required by the University of Kansas authorities to furnish concrete
evidence or to cease his child's play.