Part: 1234         Session: 12345         Page 385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421 of 512

It's an interesting story.

I really don't know any of that of my own knowledge. Would [Neil] Sheehan have come into that?

Sheehan was in that also, yes. Okay, you talked a little bit about the newsroom editors and their opinions. Were there ever points in which you had discussions with the publisher, who by that time is Punch Sulzberger -- because we're discussing 1963, '64 -- about particular editorials that you wrote and you passed by him or that he read in the paper about the positions you were taking on Vietnam?

I remember very, very seldom any discussions about particular editorials. The routine, of course, always was to send him the galley of editorials that were going to appear. We always did that as a matter of course. And he could then comment on them if he got around to reading them, or not. We sometimes, particularly important editorials, would send them a couple of days in advance, to make sure that he had plenty of opportunity. I honestly remember very little comment from Punch on our editorials, except for one very spectacular exception dealing with the bombing editorial. I'll talk about that one first, and then I will mention really only one other time that I remember. At one time, an editorial denouncing the carpet bombing -- this was later, I think in the '60s somewhere -- that the Air Force -- was written on a Sunday, when I happened to be out of town, written by my regular Sunday man, who wrote a very impassioned denunciation of the bombing in Cambodia, I believe it was. I always had the editorials read to me, even when I was away from the office on a weekend. But in this case, the editorial writer wrote this on the basis of a news story, and a very impassioned piece denouncing the bombing. I hadn't been in touch