§ Mr. MOLTENOasked the Solicitor-General why the French official communiqué issued on Friday, the 9th April, was censored and several words eliminated; and what is the object of depriving the British public of information which is open to the whole of the rest of the world?
§ Mr. FELLasked the Solicitor-General if the French official reports of the fighting in France are subjected to censorship in this country, and if portions of these reports have been struck out by the Censor; and, if so, on what grounds this has been done, seeing that they have already been published in extenso in France and the information contained in them is common property?
§ Sir STANLEY BUCKMASTEREvery document describing the movement of the British Forces is liable to censorship. On Friday, 9th April, the following four words, "Between Kemmel and Wulverg-hen," were excised from the French official communiqué of that date. Upon the information then received, which information has been subsequently confirmed, it was believed that the reference to this area was due to a mistake, and the words were therefore omitted. It is not safe to assume that information published in France reaches German headquarters as quickly as information published here. Consequently, there may be rare occasions when it is in the public interest to omit a statement relating to British troops contained in a French official document.
§ Mr. MOLTENOasked the Solicitor-General whether he has forbidden the publication of the Dutch protest in connection with the British Order in Council of 15th March which has appeared in the Dutch and German papers; and whether he will now permit it to appear?
216W
§ Sir S. BUCKMASTERI have only found two cables dealing with this matter: they were both passed.