Last summer, in the week that followed the break-in at Watergate, only four TIME readers wrote to the editors to express their views. One of those four was prophetic: "The suspicious burglary at Democratic Party headquarters . . . is a clear warning for all those who have been sitting pathetically on the sidelines to get concerned about the political future of our nation in this election year."

But the big political story that summer was the Democratic nomination of George McGovern for President, and then came the controversy over his running mate, Senator Thomas Eagleton. Watergate submerged into the murk like another Loch Ness monster. TIME letter writers, however, consistently took a more critical view of President Nixon than did the voters as a whole. As of Election Day, TIME's mail ran roughly 4 to 1 against Nixon, compared with his 60.7% majority of the popular vote.

The real flood began after our April 30 cover story on Watergate. One of the 393 Watergate letters we received that week said: "As one who voted for Nixon in November, and looks back on it now with dismay, it is encouraging to see some public demand for the resolution of Watergate." But a number of readers still thought the press was exaggerating. Said one: "A few Republicans spy on a few Democrats and you write and preach and fume about it as if it were the worst scandal in history."

A lively debate had begun, and it has continued ever since at the rate of about 500 letters a week. To date, we have received more than 6,000 letters about Watergate. More than half of them have criticized Nixon in terms ranging from "Unfortunate" to "He should be committed," while about one-fifth have supported the President. Roughly 15% claim the press and/or TIME are prejudiced against Nixon. And some readers just throw up their hands in despair over the whole mess. "Is there no other news in the world?" one of them asked.

Every letter we get (an average of 1,200 per week) goes to Maria Luisa Cisneros and her staff of nine, who answer the mail, analyze trends and distribute excerpts of the most interesting letters among TIME's staff. Isabel Kouri, a letters correspondent since 1960, answers mail critical of our Watergate coverage. "A striking number of readers are worrying about the image of the presidency itself," she says. Last week she wrote to one such reader: "It seems to us that in the long run, competent, thorough, honest and aggressive news reporting is the servant of the national interest, even though in some cases it may be momentarily embarrassing to the Government." To which, amen.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.