Here, as everywhere in the exercise of the Censor-
ship, there was an element of compromise and, in
consequence, of inconsistency. The point of view
of the Propagandist gentlemen, for instance, often
and necessarily conflicted with that of the censors
or of other Departments with whose wishes we
were in duty bound to comply as far as possible.
It was thought desirable by the propagandists, and
sometimes by officers of the Ministry of Munitions
itself, to describe in glowing terms the manifold
activities of this town or of that. I remember one
case in which, without consulting us, the Ministry
had put out such an account. By the next post
we received a protest from the municipal authori-
ties asking why we had sanctioned a publication
which amounted to a direct invitation to the enemy



io6 PRINCIPLES AND LIMITS chap.
to visit the town in question on the next air-raid.
Then there was the point of view of the enterprising
manufacturer concerned for the future of British
trade. On the other hand, there was a time when
from a military point of view it was deemed of the
first importance by the Air Ministry, and quite
rightly, not to give the enemy any hints as to the
numbers or types of engines or machines under
construction. The complexities and implications
of the matter were infinite, and few branches of
the Censorship presented more perplexing
questions.
The next paragraph of the Regulations was
simpler, and the reason for it might have been
thought too obvious for any attempt to evade it to
be contemplated, but here also there was some
difference in point of view.
(4) Information about Defences.
