Evening star., 1962-01-31
INQUIRY
Continued From Page A.

Senator Stennis said that 9TH
erwise he would have to recess
the investigation. He estimated
it would require a few days
before this particular matter
could be resolved.
Senator Thurmond skirted
the issue several times in his
questioning of Mr.. Lawrence
and on each occasion Mr.. Law
renee started to decline to an
swer. But each time, Senator
Thurmond said he was not
asking for the name of any in
dividual censor who reviewed a
particular speech.
Gets Back to Point
But he got to the point when
he questioned Mr.. Lawrence
about changes and deletions
that had been made in a state
ment prepared for 1t. Gen.
Arthur G. Trudeau. chief of
Army research and develop
ment, to give last year before
the House Space Committee.
Senator Thurmond said he
differed with suggestions made
by some of the generals and
admirals who have testified in
the investigation. that the dele
tions and changes reflected the
individual judgment or capri
ciousness of the censors.
1T Is my belief" the South
Carolina Senator said, that the
changes were dictated by exist
ing policy, known to the censors
but not known to the speech
makers or the public"
Before this controversial point
arose, Mr.. Lawrence testified,
under questioning by Senator
Thurmond, that he did not
know why such terms as
eventual victory" Ito achieve
victory" and Ito beat the Com
munist challenge" were deleted
from the proposed speeches of
Gen. Trudeau and a number of
other military leaders.
Procedures Explained
In speeches involving ques-
tions of foreign policy. Mr..
Lawrence testified, the speeches
were sent to the Assistant Sec
retary Of Defense for Public
Affairs and to the State De-
partment for review.
He said he assumed the dele
tions and changes were made
by the State Department.
The witness said the censors
themselves do not make changes
but refer their recommends
tions to superiors.
He also said the censors do
not make changes out Of capri
ciouSness but "do the best they
can to carry out policy"
Earlier, Mr.. Lawrence testi-
fled that Pentagon directives
governing what military lead
ers may say publicly are not
always followed literally.
May 81 Directive Cited
At issue was a directive is
sued last May 81 by Secretary
Of Defense McNamara. It said
that in public discussion De-
fense officials should confine
themselves to defense matters"
and should particularly avoid
discussion of foreign policy
matters, a field which is re-
served for the President and
the Department Of State"
Mr.. Lawrence, under ques-
tioning, said that If the Sec
retary's directive were inter-
preted literally this would
"a complete ban" on mil
itary leaders discussing mat
ters involving foreign policy.
II don't think this was what
he intended" Mr.. Lawrence
said.
AS the censorship has oper-
ated, defense officials, military
and civilian, have been per-
mitted to discuss matters bear
ing on foreign policy and par
ticularly on the threat of COM
But speeches refer
ring to an international Com
munist conspiracy directed
from Moscow and related ex-
pressiens were sent to the
State Department for clear
ance.
More CensOrs Being Added
Charles w. Hinkle, retired
Air Force colonel who heads