Part: 1234         Session: 123         Page 8990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119 of 512

Now, I felt that because I wanted to keep the page interesting and lively and readable and helpful and useful to the readers, I felt that this was a matter of interest, how we would do if we had to be a Republican voter in New Hampshire. Remember there's very important context there, if we were Republican and if we were in New Hampshire. Within that context, I thought it would be interesting to have a piece, and my two principal political colleagues on the board agreed. We all three agreed that were we faced with this decision that we would probably support Rockefeller and vote for Rockefeller, and so we worked out an editorial position just saying this.

This I cleared with the publisher, of course, before publication. This had to be cleared by the publisher, and the crucial edit on this, in which, of course, we explained carefully to the reader that we were not necessarily supporting Rockefeller for the nomination, and we certainly were not necessarily supporting the Republican nominee for the presidency, but only in the New Hampshire context. We felt it was between Rockefeller and Goldwater, and the other nine candidates, minor candidates, we felt that Rockefeller had done best.

When the edit was written and rewritten, it was then, of course, given to the publisher for his approval, and he told me later that when a matter of this sort, just as I've described before on the presidential matter, he felt it was desirable that he should show this very same piece, before publication, to the chairman of the board; namely, Mr. Sulzberger, Mr. and Mrs. Sulzberger, who are the, with Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, are the three controllers of the Times. He did clear this edit with them, and everybody was in agreement that if we were to vote in the Republican New Hampshire primary, we would be in favor of Rockefeller and that was it.