C. I.
P
1. Gov. Wil. 210 Conf. 28.7;392 (States action arssoned for 2
50616/29]
1
Censorship of newspaper posters & reqedo
Veli's
This reached me only
Sent on
only 153
evering, not having been originally in color, Thaving bee. retioned for attachment of the Straits Press-restriction. file. H.K. press law is summarised in the meno below (6) on that file, but the summary excludes the Emergency Regins of 1938, which provide for censorship of Chinese prints.
The matter as the only one, should not be Sustriand it. T 4.2. Daily Press (which I think is "British owned) was among
Them.
Undesirable London newspaper posters have recently. been the subject of questione rarewers in Parliament & corres. in The Times, but that was in regard to misleading or mendacions sensationalism, not to
political opinions.
legt he can
If the example the Gov. gives is the
find, it is not a very impressive one with which to justify the measures The broposes. Although it happens to coincide wiin The propaganda put out by Dr. Goebbels it also coincides with the published spontaneous views of the Shanghai Cham- ber of Commore & much of the American Press The Tokyo agreement. It is not suggested that the Jap-owned paper was an offender in
The proposed restrictions being aptar- ently aimed at English posters only (! Think Chinese prints are already, controlled) relevant to ask who are the English- reading public whose loyalty reconfidence are undermined by then.
it is
If the power the Gov, wants to take can be justified
on grounds of public
order rsecurity, it is a
have in redove rule
useful
one to
ruse very sparingly, but
it seems to me that an
it instiped
outson against it,
on the burdence in this tel.
world not only be well-founded but indicate to the foreign & British population
[아