The Waterbury Democrat., 1946-01-14
By DrsvC Pearson

daai of difficulty in various points if pubshed In the papem, we tried hard to persuade Reuter- not to publish same. They first nsated that sney always maintained neutral attitude as regards the hand- ling of news and they were not ln position to create or ignore any news tn the interests or vne parties concerned. iet.
 we stated that their information was incor- rect Fortunately we could insist that ther news was actually incorrect although in minor points Finally with the kind assistance of Mir. Hasagawa, the head of teh Domei news agency here, Reuter- agreed to kill this news SO far as they were concerned.
 wye immediately arranged with Mitsu that they would take Q similar attitude if approached py Reuter- and in fact, Mitsui were later asked Ike question Dy Rsussr wien ,.r they nSmOeo SSnsr Mitsui, jointly invited Mfr May, commercial editor of Reuter-, and Mfr Hasagawa to lunch on the l2th when friendly discussion took place and MT Msy fully appreciated our position and agreed that he would first refer to whenever he received import ant news on business with Japan, not only salmon but other commodities" 4EaH
 The letter went on to complain, however that the sunday Dispatch of London did not suppress the news, nor did the Daily Express and various other papers
 slmmering beneath the surface in Washington is . hot battle of bureaus which concerns one of the most important jobs inside the government-foreisn intelligence. Some people use an uger word-espon- age.
 Call it what you please, it is an important fact that almost any nation today has to keep its eyes open as to what other nations are doing. Especially in these days Of aUOmlc Dompsp when tne uagAOn which gets the first jump may rule the world, Is it necessary to know what others are doing.
 Present controversy revolves round the proposal to create super-duper detective agency in the State Department.
 Before the war, most foreign intelligence was carried on by the Army and Navy, with the FBr operating inside the USA and on certain specific missions abroad. During the war; the Office of Stra- tegic Services, which did great job behind enemy nes was accused of messing up the entire intelii- gence picture by enlisting lot of amateur detectives and social sleilths in Washington. a
 Big question is: Who should do this delicate but important job now that the war is over?
 In the opinion of this columnist, who has watched the merTy-go-round of Washington for many years the only agency which has the confi- dence of both Congress and the public is the FBI. They had a superb though little publicJed record in Latin America as well as the uSA.
 To do a good intelligence job you have to get Congressional funds and you can't always tell Con- gress publicly how you are spending undercover money. The FBI, far more than the State Depart ment, has the public confidence and can get the appropriations. Furthermore, the State Department should not be put in position where it must both pour oil on diplomatic waters and at the same time stir them up by planting secret agents inside foreign countries. The FBI should get the informa- ton on its own and then hand 1t over to the State Department
 However, certain ambitious gentlemen, trans ferred from the Army to diplomacy, think otherwise. Result is one of the hottest battles of the bureaus raging backstage in Washington.