EX-99

             Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
Dreyfus Premier Emerging Markets Fund

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of Dreyfus
Premier Emerging Markets Fund (one of the funds comprising Dreyfus International
Funds,  Inc.),  for the year ended May 31,  2004,  we  considered  its  internal
control,  including control activities for safeguarding securities,  in order to
determine our auditing  procedures  for the purpose of expressing our opinion on
the financial  statements and to comply with the requirements of Form N-SAR, not
to provide assurance on internal control.

The management of Dreyfus Premier  Emerging Markets Fund is responsible for
establishing   and   maintaining    internal   control.   In   fulfilling   this
responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the
expected  benefits and related costs of controls.  Generally,  controls that are
relevant to an audit  pertain to the entity's  objective of preparing  financial
statements for external  purposes that are fairly  presented in conformity  with
U.S.  generally  accepted  accounting  principles.  Those  controls  include the
safeguarding of assets against unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because of inherent  limitations  in internal  control,  error or fraud may
occur and not be  detected.  Also,  projection  of any  evaluation  of  internal
control to future  periods is subject to the risk that it may become  inadequate
because of changes in  conditions  or that the  effectiveness  of the design and
operation may deteriorate.

Our  consideration of internal  control would not necessarily  disclose all
matters  in  internal  control  that  might be  material  weaknesses  under  the
standards of the Public Company  Accounting  Oversight Board (United States).  A
material  weakness is a significant  deficiency,  or  combination of significant
deficiencies,  that  results  in more than a remote  likelihood  that a material
misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented
or detected.  However,  we noted no matters  involving  internal control and its
operation,  including controls for safeguarding securities,  that we consider to
be material weaknesses as defined above as of May 31, 2004.

This report is intended  solely for the  information  and use of management
and the Board of  Directors  of Dreyfus  Premier  Emerging  Markets Fund and the
Securities  and Exchange  Commission and is not intended to be and should not be
used by anyone other than these specified parties.



                                                      ERNST & YOUNG LLP

New York, New York
July 12, 2004

EX-99

                        SUB ITEM 77E - LEGAL PROCEEDINGS



On January 30, 2004, a purported shareholder in the Dreyfus Disciplined Stock
Fund filed a class action in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Pennsylvania against Mellon Financial Corporation, Mellon Bank,
N.A., The Dreyfus Corporation, Founders Asset Management LLC (the "Investment
Advisers"), and the directors of all or substantially all of the Dreyfus Funds
and the Dreyfus Founders Funds, on behalf of a purported class and derivatively
on behalf of said funds, alleging violations of Sections 34(b), 36(b), and 48(a)
of the Investment Company Act of 1940, Section 215 of the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940, and common law claims. (Hays v. Mellon Financial Corp., et. al.)  A
purported investor in the Dreyfus S&P 500 Stock Index Fund filed a similar class
action in the United States District Court for the Western District of
Pennsylvania on February 25, 2004 which is virtually identical in all material
respects in that it names the same defendants, asserts similar claims for relief
based on similar factual allegations and seeks similar relief as the Hays
complaint. (Wortman v. Mellon Financial Corp., et. al.)  The actions seek to
recover allegedly improper and excessive Rule 12b-1 and advisory fees charged to
various funds for marketing and distribution services. More specifically, the
plaintiffs claim, among other things, that 12b-1 fees and directed brokerage
were improperly used to pay brokers to recommend Dreyfus funds over other funds,
and that such payments were not disclosed to investors.  In addition, plaintiffs
assert that economies of scale and soft-dollar benefits were not passed on to
investors.  Plaintiffs further allege that 12b-1 fees charged to certain funds
that were closed to new investors were also improper.  The complaints seek
compensatory and punitive damages, rescission of the advisory contracts and an
accounting and restitution of any unlawful fees, as well as an award of
attorneys fees and litigation expenses.  On April 22, 2004, the actions were
consolidated.  Dreyfus and the funds believe the allegations to be totally
without merit and will defend the actions vigorously.