§ 31. Captain CARR - GOMMasked whether any of the articles written about the Higher Command of the Army and Navy appearing recently in the "Daily Mail" and "Weekly Dispatch" newspapers were submitted to the Law Officers of the Crown?
§ Sir G. CAVEThese articles are under the consideration of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
§ Mr. G. LAMBERTWhy has the Director of Public Prosecutions not yet made up his mind in this case, whereas he has made up his mind in the case of Colonel Repington's article, which was written three weeks later?
§ Sir G. CAVEThese articles were not submitted to the Press Bureau, but the attention of the Director of Public Prosecutions was called to them later, and he has not consulted the Law Officers about them.
§ Mr. ANDERSONThese articles may have contained information useful to the enemy. Will the Home Office, before taking action, consult with the Director of Propaganda?
§ Mr. BILLINGIf a prosecution is entered on, will not the defendant be a member of His Majesty's Government?
33. Mr. LLEWELYN WILLIAMSasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the facts concerning the publication by the "Daily Mail" on 8th January last of the sinking of a hospital 593 ship near Swansea by a German submarine, although the Press Bureau had refused permission for the publication, were placed before the Law Officers of the Crown; and, if not, whether he will now take steps to obtain the opinion of the Law Officers as to the feasibility of a prosecution under Regulation 18 of the Defence of the Realm Act, so as to ensure proper respect for the decision of the Censor and equality of treatment for all newspapers?
§ Sir G. CAVEAs I informed the hon. and learned Member on the 18th January, this information, which was published by the newspaper mentioned on the morning of the 9th January, was released to all newspapers at noon on the same day. As the statement was true, and its publication anticipated by a few hours only the authorised issue of the news to the public, it was considered that a prosecution, even if successful, would not be likely to result in the infliction of a substantial penalty, and the case was accordingly not submitted to the Law Officers. The facts were brought before the conference of newspaper proprietors, who dealt with the matter.
Mr. WILLIAMSIs it not an offence against the Regulations under the Defence of the Realm Act to ignore the refusal of the Censor to allow publication? Is it not a fact that the "Daily Mail" published this article in spite of the refusal of the Censor?
§ Sir G. CAVEMy hon. and learned Friend is attributing to the Press Bureau greater powers than it possesses. If the publication is a breach of the Regulations, a prosecution- can be taken.
§ Sir G. CAVEThat, of course, is a question. I have given the answer which explains why there was no prosecution.
34. Mr. WILLIAMSasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been directed to an article which appeared in the month of January in the "Daily Mail," and written by Mr. Lovat Fraser, in which the High Command were attacked; whether the Law Officers of the Crown have been consulted as to the practicability of a prosecution of the editor, printer, and publisher of the "Daily Mail," and of the writer of the article, under Regulation 27 of the Defence of the 594 Realm Act; and, if not, whether, having regard to the prosecution of other newspapers and writers, he will now lay the facts before the Law Officers for their opinion?
§ 40. Mr. G. LAMBERTasked if Mr. Lovat Fraser's article attacking Sir William Robertson, which appeared in the "Daily Mail" of 21st January last, was submitted to and passed by the Censor; and, if not, whether any action is to be taken?
§ Sir G. CAVEI understand that the Director of Public Prosecutions has referred this matter to the Law Officers for their opinion.
§ Mr. LYNCHIs this case, in which no information was given to the enemy, but in which a certain policy has been advanced by fair arguments, one in which it would be just to set the law in motion?
§ Sir G. CAVEThat will be for the Law Officers of the Crown to say.
35. Mr. WILLIAMSasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that the article which appeared in the "Morning Post" on 11th February by Colonel Repington appeared on the same date in the "Yorkshire Post" and the "Liverpool Courier"; and whether it is proposed to prosecute the editors of these two newspapers under the Defence of the Realm Act?
§ Sir G. CAVEMy attention was yesterday called to the fact that this article appeared, with certain modifications, in the papers named. The modifications in the article as it appeared in the "Yorkshire Poet" were very substantial, while those in the "Liverpool Courier" were less so. Neither article was submitted to the Press Bureau. As the "Morning Post" case is sub judice, it is undesirable that I should at the present stage express any opinion as to the action of the other newspapers, but the matter will be considered after that case has been disposed of: