between two prominent United Bermuda Party officials, Tourism Minister the Hon. C.V. (Jim) Woolridge and party treasurer Mr. Roger Davidson.

"After a considerable amount of discussion, it was concluded by Mr. Woolridge and Mr. Davidson that there had been a grave misunderstanding,'' Premier the Hon. Sir John Swan said in a statement yesterday afternoon.

"Mr. Woolridge stated that if in any way his remarks were interpreted as being directed at Mr. Davidson then he was sorry.

"Both parties therefore have concluded not to pursue this issue any further.'' The two men had been at odds since last August, and every attempt at settlement until now seemed to make the problem worse.

It began when Mr. Woolridge accused a Tourist Board member of leaking information to the media. Fellow Tourist Board member Mr. Davidson, who is vice president of H.A.& E. Smith Ltd. and president of the company that owns this newspaper, resigned in protest.

Mr. Woolridge then made a comment about "little white boys who don't mind a black man being in charge as long as they can tell him what to do.'' Sir John fired Mr. Woolridge for refusing to apologise for the remark, but reinstated him 24 hours later after an apology that some complained was not really an apology.

A UBP caucus committee tried to settle the dispute but failed, with Mr.

Davidson insisting on a personal apology and Mr. Woolridge refusing to give one. "They're two hard-headed people,'' one party member said. "Neither will give in.'' Mr. Davidson subsequently filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission.

The hackles of some UBP officials were raised when Mr. Woolridge then employed lawyer Mr. Julian Hall, a Progressive Labour Party MP and one of the Government's most energetic critics, to represent him.

Mr. Woolridge and Mr. Davidson had little to say about the meeting afterward.

"The Premier's statement says it all,'' Mr. Woolridge said.

"Mr. Woolridge explained himself to my satisfaction and he apologised,'' Mr.

Davidson said. "That's all I'm going to say.'' But later yesterday, Mr. Hall issued a statement on behalf of Mr. Woolridge outlining three "points of information''.

Mr. Woolridge at no time intended his remarks as a reference to Mr. Davidson, Mr. Hall said. The "grave misunderstanding'' referred to in the Premier's statement "is, and always has been, Mr. Davidson's ostensibly curious belief that the remarks were made in reference to him''.

The remarks "represent Mr. Woolridge's bona fide description of a mind set which exists within a certain sector'' of the community, Mr. Hall said.

And he said the original comments were made to a The Royal Gazette reporter in what Mr. Woolridge regarded as an off-the-record comment not intended for publication.