Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1949-12-20
Objects To Mr.. Browns Story
About Navy Intrigue

ABOUT navy 1nLrlguc
To the Editor of The Star:
1t is difficult for me to understand the
reasons upon which an editor of The Star
based his decision to place Constantine
Browns latest gossip column about Navy
intrigue on the front page.
The first three words in Mr.. Browns
column are heretofore undisclosed facts. I"
I have searched the column carefully and
cannot find therein single fact which is
not common knowledge to every one who
regularly reads any Washington newspaper.
Mr.. Brown calls Operation % IAN Office
which handled research matters" Mr.. Brown
should explain in what way the press re-
leases of Operation % concerned research
matters.
Mr.. Brown states that in October, Secre-
tary Matthews had not had time in the
short while he had been head of the Navy
to acquaint himself with all of the activities
in his department" This slur upon Mr..
Matthews abilities cannot be justified by
any of the facts which were presented be-
fore the Congressional investigating COM
mittee, nor will this slur be accepted by your
readers with less incredibility than they re-
serve for most of Mr.. Browns remarks.
Mr.. Brown, In another naive attempt to
cast reflection upon Mr.. Matthews widely
recognized abilities, calls the Secretary of
the Navy IAN Omaha lawyer, who was not
familiar with certain unwritten laws which
have prevailed in the Navy ever since its
inception. One of these is that when q
naval officer is placed on his honor his
words are presumed to be the truth" I am
amazed that Mr.. Brown would insinuate
that naval officers words might not be
the truth were he not to be placed on
his honor.
In discussing naval honor. there are sew
eral facts which I might quote were I
to make use of Mr.. Browns gossip logic:
Cd Capt. Crommelin Leaked" classified in
formation to the press, CD Admiral Den
field recently quoted Admiral Kings state
ment that ANY step that is not good for
the Navy is not good for the Nation" 90
Admiral Bogan's morale" letter was cir
culated among widely separated naval head
quarters before it reached the desk Of Sec
rotary Matthews. a. not one naval officer
testified before the Kinkaid board of in
quiry that he had helped Cedric Worth in
the preparation of his slanderous, anony-
nous document.
Mr.. Brown states that Admiral Denfeld
objected to the Secretary's request for q
surprise investigation of Operation %, which
projected investigation "smacked of police
methods" I would like to remind Mr..
Brown that it was Air Force intelligence
which provided much OF the information
by which Mr.. Worth's authorship Of the
anonymous document was determined.
Naval spokesman were greatly concerned
that a sister service had made such an
Investigation. but these same spokesman
apparently were not in the least concerned
that naval intelligence failed to uncover
even one Of the anonymous authors.
Mr.. Brown has written about the official
investigation Of Operation % as would an
author for a mystery pulp magazine. Both
the style and the content of his column
are designed to convey insinuations and con-
illusions to the hurried reader that will be
recognized as petty and illogical by any
high school student Had Mr.. Browns
gossip been printed beside David Law
rence's column instead of on the front page,
would not have been disposed to comment.
C. DOUGLAS SAGER.