n to carry out even when in the hands of
individuals well versed in the conditions that arise in times of
national emergency. The idea that the Press could censor itself is
ridiculous. That such a theory should ever have been put forward
argues a strange inability to understand the essentials of the
subject, and sets up a doctrine of infallibility in the world of
journalism for which there is no justification.

The Press Bureau which was established at the commencement of the war
was a civil department, entirely independent of the Admiralty and the
War Office although it was in close touch with those institutions, as
also with the Foreign Office, the Board of Trade and other branches of
the Government. In so far as the War Office was concerned, the Bureau
dealt with the Operations Directorate, which was responsible for
watching the censorship of newspapers in general, just as it was
responsible for actually controlling the censorship of cables and
foreign correspondence. As the primary _raison d'etre_ of newspapers
is to provide their readers with news, it was inevitable that
restrictions placed upon publication of information, however necessary
they might be in the interest of the State, would hamper the
activities of those in charge and be regarded as a nuisance. It was
natural that the Press should chafe at the restraint and should be
disposed to exaggerate the inconvenience to which it was put. But the
public, it must be remembered, have heard only one side of the story.
The country has derived its information concerning the Press
censorship from the Press itself--in other words, from what is to all
intents and purposes a tainted source. The nation has had to decide on
a subject of general interest on one-sided evidence.

In so far as the military share of the Press censorship was concerned,
some of the groans of its victims were, no doubt, well justified.
Delays were inevitable. But cases of unnecessary delay no doubt
occurred. Instances could be mentioned of one censor sanctioning the
publication of a given item of news while another forbade mention
thereof. It is human to err, and individual censors were guilty of
errors of judgment on occasion. Examples of information, which might
have been given to the world with perfect propriety, being withheld,
could easily be brought to light. How the humorists of the Fourth
Estate did gloat over "the Captains and the Kings"! There was at least
one instance early in the c