§ VISCOUNT HALIFAXMy Lords, I wish to ask His Majesty's Government whether their attention has been drawn to the communication professing to come from the seat of war which was published in The Times of yesterday, the contents of which were calculated to cause so much needless distress, and which, apparently, from the official account published by Lord Kitchener this morning, were not justified by the facts.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT HALDANE)My Lords, the attention of His Majesty's Government has been called to the article to which the noble Viscount refers. It was a very regrettable article and inconsistent with the facts as they have been ascertained. Your Lordships are aware that there is no existing legislation by which Parliament has control over the Press, and, on the whole, it has not been necessary. The Press has acted very loyally in carrying out arrangements which were thought out long before the war, and which have been carried out since, and we have had no cause to complain, with some slight exceptions; but the article in The Times of yesterday was a most regrettable incident. I do not myself believe that it will recur. I think there must be some explanation of it. Sunday editions come out sometimes when those responsible are not on the spot, and I have every hope that the incident referred to by the noble Viscount will not be repeated, and that the loyalty which the Press has shown—a loyalty which has been very great—will be observed in future generally. If it should happen that more of this kind of thing occurs, it might be considered necessary to ask Parliament for exceptional powers to deal with such cases.
Meanwhile, I wish to add that the Government are taking steps to supply as fully as they can, and in a more adequate form than has been possible up to the present, a narrative of events from day to day founded on direct information from the seat of war, which will satisfy the legitimate public desire to know what is going on. The fact that that narrative has not been given up to now has not been the fault of the War Office. The reason is that information has come very carefully from the seat of war at times when fighting was going on, and it is not always possible to send from the Army Headquarters the news until a considerable period has elapsed. Your Lordships will see from telegrams the substance of which was published yesterday that it is now possible to give a narrative in a much more connected form than has hitherto been done, and we hope that that system will be maintained and developed in the future. I can assure your Lordships that we are endeavouring to make arrangements to that effect.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURYMy Lords, the noble and learned Viscount has made a statement which throws the entire responsibility upon the newspaper which published the article in question, but that newspaper has stated that the document was sent to the Official Censor and passed by him. I know nothing about the matter myself; but if that be true, it seems to me that it ought to have had a place in the statement of explanation given on behalf of the Government. If the Official Censor passed this article, clearly the responsibility does not rest wholly with the journal which printed it.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, I believe the Official Censor did see the document and that the particular sentences were either passed by him or escaped his notice. They were obviously sentences which should not have been there, but, as I say, I do not think the incident is likely to recur. There have been cases in which things have appeared in the newspapers which have not been before the Censor, but I have every confidence from what I know that the Press will respect the obligation of loyalty which is incumbent at this time, and that we shall not have occasion again to regret such an incident.
LORD ELLENBOROUGHMy Lords, for three or four years in succession I have brought before your Lordships' House the subject of the dissemination of news in time of war, requesting the Government to undertake well-considered legislation in time of peace for fear of bringing in bad legislation in a hurry in time of war. The Times is not the only newspaper to be complained of. I read in the Globe an estimate of the number of troops that had been sent abroad. Now it is obvious that that estimate should never have appeared in any newspaper. That is one of the things for the enemy to find out. The writer of that article in the Globe called himself Major Redway. I do not know whether his name is to be found in the Army List. I certainly could not find a major of that name in the Army List through which I looked. I maintain that figures of this kind ought not to have been printed. If legislation on this matter is not undertaken, I am afraid we shall have other and more troublesome cases of information being given to the enemy which he certainly ought not to have.