The Commonwealth High Commissioner [1] has communicated to me a
copy of your telegram 15th February about censorship arrangements
in connection with the arrival of the Australian troops in Egypt
[2] and asked if I would telegraph my observations to you. I have
gone into the matter with the competent authorities and, in the
first instance, I should like to express my regret that these
arrangements should have caused embarrassment to you.

2. It seems desirable before commenting in detail upon the
specific instances quoted in your telegram to the High
Commissioner to state the general principles which naval and
military authorities here regard as governing their views on
censorship. The policy in this respect as regards the release of
information about troop and convoy movements is to deny or at
least to delay as long as possible authentic information which is
likely to be of military assistance to the enemy and in this
connection a distinction is drawn between an official announcement
and a report whose accuracy the enemy have no means of verifying.

Hence in this particular case endeavour was made to avoid official
announcement on the following points-composition of convoy and
escort, state of preparedness of forces, and its exact location.

It is known that the precise strength and preparedness of the
allied troops in the Middle East is a matter of concern to the
German or even Russian High Commands and it seems most important
therefore to deny this information as regards what is a
substantial part of the total allied forces available in that
area.

3. As regards the 2nd paragraph the original correspondence
referred only to official announcement. As the enquiry from the
New Zealand Government in their telegram No. 34 of 8th February
[3] asked whether specific reference might be made in this to
Egypt rather than to the Middle East the reply was confined to
this point. No reference was made to the port of disembarkation in
the official statement issued here. Mention of Suez was made in
the Press despatches released from Egypt to this country and
presumably to Australia also. In point of fact Suez was not the
only port of disembarkation. The fact that neutral Press agencies
succeeded in sending telegrams out of Palestine made it impossible
to withhold the information as to the destination of the troops
any longer and no time was lost in informing the Commonwealth
Government of this change of plans. It is unfortunate that this
unforeseen development occurred but in the circumstances there was
no alternative but to agree to the release of information and the
Commonwealth Government were informed at once in my telegram No.

40 of 13th February. [4]

4. As regards the third paragraph, notification of my visit was
communicated to you through the United Kingdom High Commissioner
[5] by my telegram of 9th February [6] in which it was stated that
news of the visit was being kept in close secret until the actual
arrival of the troops in Egypt was made public. It was assumed
that after the arrival of the troops had been reported, Press
messages referred [sic] to my visit would be released without
further delay.

5. As regards paragraph 4 the general rule of concealment of
disposition of particular naval forces is designed to prevent the
enemy from drawing deductions as to the disposition of forces
generally. Moreover reference to the composition of an escort of
this kind would help the enemy to assess the composition of
escorts on future occasions and give them time to prepare plans.

Hence concealment of the composition of the escort does in fact
afford additional security. Advantages from the point of view of
public opinion as to announcement of strength of the escort are
appreciated but for above reasons it is felt that these are more
than compensated by the additional security provided by the
secrecy.

6. As regards paragraph 5 there has never been any intention of
using the channel of communications between the Admiralty and the
Commonwealth Naval Board as a substitute for inter-governmental
communication. The fact that my telegram No. 30 of 6th February
[7] referred to correspondence between the Admiralty and the
Commonwealth Naval Board which arose out of specific enquiry from
the latter was due to the desire to save time and expense.

7. Should be grateful if copy of your telegram of 15th February
could be communicated to the United Kingdom High Commissioner
together with this reply.