on Bolton once a week. [Laughter.] We British people receive news whether it be good or bad with composure and moderation. A message of success will not distract us from steadily pursuing the task before us; the report of a loss will only make us more determined to regain the lost ground, and to make our ultimate triumph doubly sure. But that is known to everybody, and it is perfectly well understood by those who are in control of the Press Censor. I come here to say that the one and only reason why any news is ever withdrawn from circulation is because its publication might injure us or help the enemy. The enemy may be assisted by news of our plans, of our movements, or of the numbers, position, or condition of our forces. Let me give you two examples. It was by a bold use of the Press Censorship that the British Expeditionary Force—the best-equipped body of men that ever represented any country in Europe—[cheers]—crossed the seas and took up their place in the firing-line without ever running the slightest risk of being attacked on the way. And if you go a little later it was by a bold use of the Press Censorship that General Sir John French—[cheers]—was able to move the British forces from somewhere in the centre of the Allies' line right round to the left, in order to resist the German advance upon Calais. When the history of these things comes to be written, the absolute necessity of such a censorship will become apparent to everybody.
That is the first mistake made about the censorship.
The second mistake is even further removed from the true facts. It seems to be imagined that when the order goes forth that for reasons of national policy and military strategy certain information is to be withheld it is the Press Censor who decides the matter at his own whim and pleasure. The Press Censor, besides being a fellow-Minister, happens to be in a very special degree a colleague of mine, and I wish he could come back and help me with my job. But to think that it is Sir Stanley Buckmaster who decides which piece of news ought to be published and which ought not is an obvious absurdity. The moment people understand that the only reason why you don't publish a particular piece of news is because of military and naval reasons, it follows that it is not the Press Censor but the military and naval authorities who have to judge whether news is to be published or not.
I do not know what you think, but I think a little honest criticism is good for everybody, and I am sure the naval and
