these letters of protest the editor's reply was the same, namely:
"Dr. Barnes himself read these articles, in manuscript twice, and in galley proofs once, and what factual changes he wanted made, we made."
To recipients of that letter, I furnished evidence that both of the editor's claims are easily disproved. The evidence consisted of stenographic records of telephone conversations between McCardle and myself; and also of a document, which states that on two occasions, once in December and again in January, McCardle, in the presence of four witnesses, furnished proof of what he means by "approval of copy." Again, his specious technique had failed, and his claim of "approval" was exposed as false.
It was equally easy to prove the falsity of the editor's assertion that "Dr. Barnes himself read these articles...in galley proofs once, and what factual changes he wanted made, we made." How stupid to make that assertion,
