New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1914-10-18
London, October Q.

RTh,x rather startling sentence -
.he Military Correspondent OF
iISu Times" lie justihes it by saying;
NJ are able 70 discuss the campaign
~ West with far less freedom than
Russian contemporaries. The kus-
eo reports are far more full than
sS" and Russian comment is far more
cur. cancelled and therefore illuminat-
hs this CRY Of distress there is only
much justification. Colonel KEEP
w ZEN himself uses freedom which
lne~vcentional. but even he, with a
80 access than most writers to ON
III information IN London, knows not
.~rh more than anybody else about
~ military proceedings IN France
M the control OF General Jotre'
nv word Colonel Repington uses rs
~, .ontrol. but dictatorship. lie SUP
~. "a IL with a humorous anectauon
~ content. General Joffre, he says, rs
III justified in exercising q dictator
~ in news and comment, ana N I'M
s ..f il on US" But he adds;
pos,He a;ctstorship is solely justified
y ,s successful. and. as it is nor
Nhsu - su 5ictators TO be distrustful
" heir closest friends, we have no
,ause 10 complain II our oie'a.otS
,rtst Us after the manner OF ther
KIND -. honaI;,c Of o
SsIeate subject. but It rs evident INA.
AIS very accomplished critic ana
ritter says but part OF what ne
Jj Tkc 10 say. This country Is al
var and is willing TO sacrince some
- liberties for the time being, IN
srder TO preserve the whole OF theh'
.,on objects 10 a military censor
hin in theory. No man would OBJECT
a an intelligent censorship IN ,prac-
sse But l am afraid the phrase
..u;rent censorship" involves a con-
trsdiction in terms. The lntelilgemc,e
80 40 fsr IS II is or can be intelll-
cent. depends on the htness OIL inc
S.rsor for his task. We have TO get
hack to the man behind the gun
The Three Headed Censorship.
T,sre have been three such men, Mr..
r Smith. Mr. Mckenna and Sir Stan
II. Rnckmaster. They have a huge
.,se Of assistants. including no jour
';... hut these three are the men d.
IL responsible for the Press Blu
- All three are lawyers, or, as
.Ssv are called here. barristers, and
a, that reason unlikely 70 exercise dis
-..s,lv the duties which call Tor tact
- Knowledge Of the world and plain
..os sense FAR more than for the tech
80 knouledCc with which the law
80 SLED their minds. BY their pro-
s,,s;on thew arc judges of evidence,
An, ~ evidence in the sense IN which
,sst word is used in the courts. EVIL
s,see as il is understood In the world
n business and in the transactions OF
actual life. evidence on which men de-
~ great affairs. is different matter.
Bu, this last is the kind Of evidence
vhich Censov ought TO understand
Sir Stanley Buckmsster.
0f Mr.. F. +. Smith have SAID
.,ongb i'm previous letters. or Mr.
g,Tsrna il is impossible TO say
cough. but him also | will pass over
Tss new working head Of the Press
ggyesu is Sir Stanley Buckmaster'
&C. an able lawyer. now Law ON
wof the Crown. having succeeded Slr
il, simon as Solicitor General when
81 Iobn Simon became Attorney Cen
snl In Mace Of Sir Rufus lsaacs,. on
~ snDointment as Lord Chief Jus
res There is not a word 10 be sald
,v,inst SIR Stanley Buckmaster IN ms
rTivste or professional capacity. IL Is
s,lv ss Censor that / have 10 consider
iiT. and should say Of him that as
Censor he Is actuated by none but tne
biobest motives and sincere deVo.
Ion 10 duty: thankless as the duty O.
censor Is But his success thus lar IS
sot in proportion to his good lnteh-
tons.
Rebuking The Times.
Il il since ne took charge OF TINS
Press Bureau that the supervision ol
hat bodv has been so far eXtenoeu d.
10 inelude rebuke Of THE Times ior
leading article. and an article having
nothing TO do with the movement o.
trsons or the conduct Of the war III
The feld The article dealt with ltaiE
and Rumanla and their neutralI! g
which il discussed i'm studlously car
I'll terms. mostly historical. pom lhls
article fell the hammer OF the Ii'''
Bureau. ,l;,.,
The views expressed i'm leadlhs
article ir "Thp Times OF OCTOBER d"
WITH regard TO Italy and Rumanla are
unauthorized and do not represent ny
si,itude Of His Majesty's Government
But they did not pretend TO, so WHY
suggest that they did? II might DC
suffcient 10 say Of this act OF censure
that aThe Times" is not and has never
been a government organ. nor dld IL III
this article. nor does It ever uhueI =
take TO speak for the government
spesks for itself and very often Ior inc
Nation I'm Germany, where the keptH'
Press Bureau rs a department OF -
Omment. the position of the leaulns
Journal OF Great Britain has never oeeh
understood. and could not be under
stood. Nowhere else on the Contineh
Is the Press reduced 70 such aoJeo
submission as In Berlin, but the mis-
conception OF English journalism nohe
he less prevails IN other cou" -
where the Press is more or less iev
The Times" speaks with voice o. az
ihorty, and 10 is assumed Dy EoIl.i.
mental pubhcists that the autno -, - (; >
must be official. II is perhaps lol VI. mi
very reason that the Censor concelN'u
i, neeessarv IN disavow the article on
Italy and Rumania: not stOpP.nE 91i
feiently 10 consider what blow ne
vas dealing Al the liberty OF the Press
in matters where the Press still has q
night TO liberty.
The Real Author OF the Rebuke.
will 20 further than that. II seem
quite possible and even probable ina,
The Censor did not in this matter ac'
This own motion, but at the misundeI
'iood suggestion Of higher author
rs. Mr.. McKenna is Cabinet MINIS.
tr. Members Of the Cabinet are won
% discuss matters among themselves
With freedom. If the Prime Minister
Of the Foreign Minister thought tnt
Government likely TO be compromise
By an appeal 70 Italy and Rumania "a
reconsider their position Of neutrAllty
hey might naturally enough say so 70
ne Home Secretly. He might nat
afally misunderstood such a remark;
axe II as hint; and so SET in motion