Part: 1234         Session: 1234         Page 262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307 of 512

Now, the only other thing, as far as I can see, that is pertinent here - is that this comment of mine about my conception of an Op-Ed page, in September, '66, and I said my idea was that it would represent, broadly speaking - here I'm quoting from the actual memo - from the minutes of the meeting: “It would represent, broadly speaking, the intellectual focus of the paper. The Editorial Page on one side and the Op-Ed Page on the other would be a repository in the paper of the whole broad range of opinion, the conflict of ideas as expressed on the one hand by the institution which is the Editorial Page, and on the other hand by Times individuals writing under their own names, and also possibly articles from other publications, signed and unsigned. It would be a forum --” and this really is the key sentence, as far as my thinking goes, because I wasn't at all certain whether it would be Times people, outside Times people, I thought it would have a lot of reprints in it and so on from other publications, but the real key is this sentence which I've never deviated from throughout all those years: “It would be a forum for the exchange and clash of ideas, not exclusively political, but covering a whole broad range of intellectual interests.”

And then I had - then we went on to discussion of more specifically what it would contain, and Scotty, by the end of the discussion, was very, very enthusiastic about the whole idea.

But not Salisbury? Or did he?

Well, let me just - I think that Harrison's contribution - and remember, he was representing Cliff Daniel, in all fairness - well, he chimed in to say that the thought the page should take (it's only an assumption that it was going to be created) such a form as,