Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-31T02:33:18.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Official Secrecy in England

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2025

D. G. T. Williams
D. G. T. Williams*
Affiliation:
Emmanuel College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The battles over official secrecy have to be fought on many different fronts. In the United Kingdom—whose ministers and public servants allegedly have a “passion for secrecy”—this was more than usually evident during 1967. Two pieces of legislation—namely, the Parliamentary Commissioner Act, 1967 (U.K.) and the Public Records Act, 1967 (Eng.)—represented a modest triumph for those who would wish to see more light shed upon the affairs of the nation. Elsewhere the picture was rather more familiar. The Security Commission recommended a further tightening of documentary security in the Cabinet Office; this followed upon the conviction under the Official Secrets Acts, 1911 to 1939 (U.K.) of a young typist in the Cabinet Office, “the first known occasion on which classified papers have been extracted from” this inner sanctum of government.

Type
Research Article
Information
Federal Law Review , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , March 1968 , pp. 20 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © 1968 The Australian National University

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 20 note 1 Chapman, Brian, British Government Observed (1963) 61Google Scholar.

2 Report of the Security Commission, cmnd 3365 of 1967. This was the third Report submitted by the Security Commission since it was set up early in 1964; the others are those on the Bossard and Allen cases (cmnd 2722 of 1965) and on the Reen case (cmnd 3151 of 1966). The Commission was set up “to conduct stable-door inquiries into breaches already committed, partly as a way of reassuring Parliament and the public that the Government of the day was not covering up their misdeeds, and partly to give the Government experienced advice on the working or failure to work of security procedures”, The Times, 11 May 1965, 13. The chairman of the Security Commission is Lord Justice Winne There are seven members in all (see The Times, 25 August 1965, 8), three of whom form a quorum.

3 Cmnd 3365, para. 14.

4 The proposed new site is in Stansted in Essex. See “The Third London Airport”, cmnd 3259 of 1967 (White Paper); H.C. Deb., vol. 749, cols 769-894 (29 June 1967).See generally, Cook, Olive, The Stansted Affair (1967)Google Scholar; Morrison, Alasdair, “Preventing the Stansted affair from happeningagain”, The Times, 14 December 1967Google Scholar. The Government has now given way to pressure for a new inquiry—see H.C. Deb., vol. 759, cols 667-674, 22 February 1968.

5 See H.L. Deb., vol. 287, cols 1114-1240 (13 December 1967). See, in particular,the speeches of Lord Radcliffe (cols 1130-1141) and Lord Snow (for his observations on secrecy in government, cols 1176-1178). See also, “Government by Contempt”(pamphlet, Chatto and Windus, 1968); leading article (“Cases of Arrogance”), The Times, 16 December 1967, 7.

6 H.L. Deb., vol. 287, col. 1176 (Lord Snow).

7 This involved protests by the Government about press disclosures of the activities of Harold (“Kim”) Philby. See Wigg, George, “Government and the Press: an insider's view”, The Times, 21 November 1967, 9Google Scholar; and replies, e.g. Daily Mirror, 22 November 1967, 2, and The Times, 23 November 1967, 11. See also, “The Philby Affair” (leading article), Sunday Times, 8 October 1967, 10.

8 This involved the naming of the heads of M.I. 5 and M.I. 6, the Security Service and the Secret Service respectively. The names were originally published in the United States and then reproduced in the Daily Express, 19 October 1967, 1. See The Times, 19 October 1967, 1; H.C. Deb., vol. 751, cols 558-559 (written answer), 26 October 1967. For a recent article on the security and secret services, see Howe Ransom, Harry, “Great Britain's Secret Service”, (1967) 8Google Scholar Midway 19 (University of Chicago Press).

9 This involved apparent misunderstandings as to the “off-the-record” or “nonattributable” remarks made by Lord Chalfont, the Minister of State at the Foreign Office, as to the consequences of a veto on the British application to join the Common Market. See e.g. Grimond, Jo, “Democracy in Jeopardy”, The Guardian, 6 November 1967, 16Google Scholar, and Irving, Clive, “Closing the Gulf Between Press and Government”, The Times, 9 November 1967, 11Google Scholar.

10 Infra. A ‘D’ Notice (variously described as a ‘D’ Notice, a D Notice, a “D” notice, a ‘D’ notice, and so forth) is simply a “Defence” Notice. Its nature is explained below.

11 Wigg, George, “Politicians and the Press”, The Listener, 21 September 1967, 363-366Google Scholar. Mr Wigg resigned from the Government in November 1967, and is nowa life peer.

12 The Times, 13 January 1967, 11 (the parliamentary correspondent).

13 E.g. Chapman, Brian, British Government Observed (1963)Google Scholar; Williams, David, Not In The Public Interest (1965)Google Scholar; and innumerable newspaper articles or reports, e.g. Sunday Times, 19 June 1966, 10 (“Government in a democracy is not a mystery to be conducted in secret, but a continuous process in which people have a right to take part”); The Times, 21 May 1966, 11 (leading article); The Observer, 1 January 1967, 1-2 (report of Labour Party evidence to the Fulton Committee on the civil service); The Times, 14 November 1967, 10 (report of Mr Jo Grimond's address—the Herbert Samuel Lecture—to the Friends of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem).

14 For a discussion of the Swedish position, see Rowat, Donald C., “The Problem of Administrative Secrecy”, (1965) XXXIGoogle Scholar Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 479. See also, Herlitz, Nils, “Publicity of Official Documents in Sweden”, [1958Google Scholar] Public Law 50.

15 E.g. Howard, Anthony “Washington and Whitehall”, The Listener, 21 July 1966, 75-76Google Scholar, 93; The Times, 22 November 1967, 10 (report of meeting arranged by the Institute of Journalists). See generally, Campbell, Enid “Public Access to Government Documents”, (1967) 41Google Scholar Australian Law Journal 73.

16 On the American problems in this area, see e.g. Wiggins, J. R., Freedom or Secrecy (1956)Google Scholar; Rourke, Francis E., Secrecy and Publicity (1961)Google Scholar. And see Enid Campbell, supra, n. 15, for a valuable comparison of the laws in Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom.

17 Aspinall, A., Politics and the press c. 1780-1850 (1949) 34-35Google Scholar.

18 Brownrigg, Douglas, Indiscretions of the Naval Censor (1920) 88Google Scholar. An account of the control of the press in World War II is to be found in Williams, Francis, Press, Parliament and People (1946) pt IGoogle Scholar.

19 Williams, See, Not In the Public Interest (1965) ch. 1Google Scholar.

20 The Committee, which was set up in 1912, was known as the Admiralty, War Office and Press Committee—see “Security Procedures in the Public Service”, cmnd 1681 of 1962, paras 126-129.

21 H.C. Deb., vol. LXVI, col. 477, 31 August 1914 (Mr F. E. Smith). See also, H.C. Deb., vol. 47, cols 388-389, 22 January 1913 (Winston Churchill).

22 Christiansen, Arthur, Headlines All My Life (1961) ch. 26Google Scholar.

23 [1961] Public Law 225-229 (Geoffrey Marshall).

24 E.g. Bulloch, John and Miller, Henry, Spy Ring (The Full Story ofthe Naval Secrets Case) (1961) 155Google Scholar; Hutton, Clayton, Official Secret (1960) 175-176Google Scholar (‘D’ Notices in respect of books); de Gramont, Sanche, The Secret War (1962) 291Google Scholar (the George Blake case); Joesten, Joachim K., They Call it Intelligence (1963) 111Google Scholar (the Blake case); Young, Wayland, The Profumo Affair (1963) 81-82Google Scholar; “Spies for Peace”, Manchester Guardian, 9 April 1966, 8Google Scholar; Williams, , Not In the Public Interest (1965) ch. 4Google Scholar; H.C. Deb. vol. 639, col. 1616, 4 May 1961 and vol. 640, cols 636-638, 11 May 1961 (the Blake case); H.C.Deb., vol. 676, col. 413, 25 April 1963 and H.C. Deb., vol. 676, col. 23ff., 23 April 1963 (the “Spies for Peace” case); [1967] Public Law 271-272 (Geoffrey Marshall); Evidence of Mr Chapman Pincher before the Committee of Privy Counsellors in 1967, 144 ff. (cmnd 3309).

25 “Security Procedures in the Public Service”, cmnd 1681 of 1962, ch. 9 (this led to certain modifications of the ‘D’ Notice system; see H.C. Deb., vol. 682, col. 640, 1 August 1963); “Report of the Committee of Privy Counsellors Appointed to inquire into ‘D’ notice matters”, cmnd 3309 of 1967.

26 “The “D” Notice System”, cmnd 3312 of 1967.

27 Cmnd 1681, para. 125.

28 Cmnd 3309, para. 6.

29 McLachlan, Donald “Publish and be D'd”, The Spectator, 24 February 1967, 221Google Scholar.

30 Cmnd 1681, paras 124, 134; Dulles, Allen, The Craft ofIntelligence (1963) 240-241Google Scholar.

31 Cmnd 3309, para. 7; cmnd 1681, para. 132.

32 E.g. The Law and the Press (Report of a Joint Working Party of “Justice” and the British Committee of the International Press Institute, 1965), paras60, 63, 66. See also, H.L. Deb., vol. 250, cols 904-905, 29 May 1963 (Lord Balfour of Inchrye).

33 Cmnd 1681, para. 135.

34 Cmnd 3312, para. 29.

35 Cmnd 3309, paras 14-18.

36 Cmnd 3312, para. 2.

37 Ibid. para. 22.

38 The two ‘D’ Notices are set out in cmnd 3309, para. 20. See also paras 73-80 (on the role of The Spectator in publishing the relevant parts of these ‘D’ Notices in March, 1967).

39 Cmnd 3309, paras 21-50. For an excellent analysis of the entire affair, see Geoffrey Marshall, [19671 Public Law 261-273 (Comment). See also,Hedley, Peter and Aynsley, Cyril, The D-Notice Affair (1968)Google Scholar, (reviewed by Lord Shawcross in the Daily Express, 19 February 1968, 8).

40 H.C. Deb., vol. 748, cols 1972-2100, 22 June 1967. The debate was opened by the Attorney-General, Sir Elwyn Jones. For useful general comments on the‘D’ Notice system, see col. 1981 (the Attorney-General), cols 2009-2011 (Mr Selwyn Lloyd), col. 2017 (Mr Charles Pannell), col. 2049 (Mr Emlyn Hooson), col. 2080 (the Prime Minister).

41 H.L. Deb., vol. 284, cols 767-846, 6 July 1967.

42 H.L. Deb., vol. 284, cols 775-783, 6 July 1967.

43 The Times, 7 July 1967, 1 (the parliamentary correspondent).

44 Col. 801. A particularly instructive speech was that of Lord Francis-Williams, cols 802-810.

45 H.C. Deb., vol. 748, cols 2010-2011.

46 H.L. Deb., vol. 284, col. 781. (Both quotations).

47 H.C.Deb., vol. LXXXI, col. 430, 23 March 1916.

48 William Robson, A., The Governors and the Governed (1964) 36Google Scholar.

49 H.L. Deb., vol. 284, col. 781, 6 July 1967. See also H.C. Deb., 4th series, vol. LXXXVI, col. 1593 (27 July 1900); H.L. Deb., vol. XXI, col. 843 ff. (2 May 1916). See generally, on alleged Government manipulation of news: Cater, Douglass, The Fourth Branch of Government (1959) ch. 9Google Scholar; Ransom, Harry Howe, Can American Democracy Survive Cold War ? (1964) 196Google Scholar; Cohen, Bernard, The Press and Foreign Policy (1963) 169 ff.Google Scholar; Rourke, Francis E., Secrecy and Publicity (1966)Google Scholar; Wiggins, J. R., Freedom or Security (1964)Google Scholar; Schlesinger, Arthur M., The Bitter Heritage (Vietnam and American Democracy 1941-1966) ch. vGoogle Scholar.

50 Speech of 12 April, 1913.

51 The Times, 16 December 1932, 15 (leading article). See correspondence The Times, 17 December, 13, 19 December, 13, 20 December, 13. See also, Laski, Harold, Parliamentary Government in England (1959) 254-255Google Scholar; Low, Sidney, The Governance of England (1904) ch. 2Google Scholar; Jennings, Sir Ivor, Cabinet Government (3rd ed. 1961) 267-276Google Scholar; Anson, Sir William, The Law and Custom of the Constitution, vol. 2, pt I (4th ed. 1935). 120 ffGoogle Scholar.

52 H.L. Deb., vol. XXI, col. 850, 2 May 1916. See also, H.C. Deb., vol. LXXXII, col. 371 ff., 8 May 1916 (see especially Sir Herbert Samuel, col. 414).

53 H.C. Deb., vol. 261, col. 523, 8 February 1932.

54 Pollock, F., “Governments by Committees in England”,(1909) 25Google Scholar Law Quarterly Review 53, 60-62; Jennings, , Cabinet Government (3rd ed.) 267Google Scholar.

55 E.g. The Times 16 November 1858, 8; The Times, 13 April 1878, 9. But see Williams, Francis, Dangerous Estate: The Anatomy of Newspapers (1959 ed.) 80 ffGoogle Scholar.

56 Parliamentary Government in England (1959) 255. See also, Mackintosh, J. P., The British Cabinet (1962) 217Google Scholar; Dulles, Allen, The Craft of Intelligence (1963) ch. 16Google Scholar; New Statesman, 31 July 1964, 140-141 (Francis Williams); H.C. Deb., vol. LXXXII, cols 387-388 (8 May 1916) (Mr Walter Roche); H.C. Deb., vol. 699, cols 1802-1803 (30 July 1964). In the United Kingdom in late 1967, early 1968, there was a good deal of alleged information about Cabinet discussions on “Arms for South Africa” and on economic measures following upon devaluation.

57 E.g. A. Aspinall, Politics and the press, c. 1780-1850 (1949) 192-197; Low, The Governance of England (1904) 76 (footnote); Earl of Avon, The Eden Memoirs: Facing the Dictators (1962) 221, 372-373Google Scholar, 454, 510-512, 574-575; Cater, Douglass, The Fourth Branch of Government (1959) chapters 6, 7Google Scholar.

58 The Listener, 21 September 1967, 363-366 (“Politicians and The Press”).

59 Nation, 15 July 1967, 5. (Richard Farmer, “D-noticed out of Print”).

60 See Government Submissions to the Radcliffe Committee in 1967, cmnd 3309,48.Apparently there were 16 ‘D’ Notices in force in February, 1967.

61 Cmnd 3309, para. 10. Both the Radcliffe Committee and the Government,however, have accepted the need for a clear delimitation of the Secretary's powers: see cmnd 3309 paras 69-70; cmnd 3312, para. 32.

62 E.g. H.L. Deb., vol. 284, cols 772, 782, 784, 827, 840-841 (6 July 1967); H.C. Deb., vol. 748, col. 2080 (22 June 1967).

63 Parliamentary Debates of the Commonwealth of Australia (Senate) vol. 26, 881 (1 October 1964).

64 Cmnd 3309, 49.

65 E.g. The Times, 20 March 1962, 17 (speech by Major Oliver Stewart).

66 H.C. Deb., vol. LXXIV, col. 526, 22 September 1915.

67 Cmnd 3312, para. 34.

68 H.C. Deb., vol. 742, col. 278, 28 February 1967. See also H.C. Deb., vol. 748, col. 2080, 22 June 1967 (Mr Harold Wilson); H.L. Deb., vol. 284, col. 784, 6 July 1967 (Lord Gardiner, L.C.).

69 The Times, 7 March 1892, 6; The Times, 11 April 1892, 6.

70 There were some cases in 1967. See e.g. The Times, 27 January 1967, 9.

71 Chandler v. D.P.P. [1964] A.C. 763.

72 R. v. Crisp and Homewood (1919) 83 J.P. 121; The Times, 16 January 1919, 5; The Times, 12 February 1919, 7.

73 See e.g. The Times, 10 February 1910, 4; The Times, 3 July 1902, 13; The Times,25 June, 6; 15 July, 4; and 13 August,S, of 1932; The Times, 24 September, 6, 22 October, 13 and 28 October, 10, of 1937.

74 The Times, 15 November 1967, 2.

75 The Times, 27 May 1965 and 18 November 1966.

76 The Times, 21 August 1937, 12; The Times, 10 September 1937, 7; The Times, 27 May 1948, 3; The Times, 8 September 1965, 10; The Times, 10 August 1966, 8.

77 E.g. The Times, 27 March 1943, 2.

78 See generally, Williams, , Not In the Public Interest (1965)Google Scholar.

79 The Law and the Press (1965) 18-23; Hardcastle, William “Press Freedom”, The Listener, 7 December 1967, 739-740Google Scholar.

80 H.C. Deb., 4th series, vol. 188, col. 674, 11 May 1908.

81 H.C. Deb., vol. 135, col. 1537 ff., 2 December 1920.

82 Minney, R. J., The Private Papers of Hore-Belisha (1960) ch. xiiiGoogle Scholar; H.C. Deb.,vol. 337, cols 1534-1540, 27 June 1938; H.C. Deb., vol. 337, cols 2155-2237, 30 June 1938; H.C. Deb., vol. 342, cols 889-964, 5 December 1938.

83 H.L. Deb., vol. 111, col. 924, 23 February 1939.

84 H.L. Deb., vol. 274, col. 1377, 25 May 1966. This was in a debate on The Law and the Press, vol. 274, cols 1371-1447. See also, the remarks of Lord Francis Williams, col. 1397.

85 The Law and the Press (1965) para. 68; see also, Shawcross, Lord “The Shadow of the Law”, Encounter (March 1966) 78, especially 87-89Google Scholar.

86 E.g. The Times, 24 May 1965, 7. And see the Compton Mackenzie case, The Times, 13 January 1933, 9 (discussed in the latest volume of his autobiography,published in 1968). The restrictions apply especially to the publication of books or articles about war-time and similar experiences: see e.g. Hutton, , Official Secret (1960)Google Scholar; Sweet-Escott, , Baker Street Irregular (1965)Google Scholar; Scotland, , The London Cage (1957)Google Scholar. see, But, The Times, 5 May 1967, 1Google Scholar (as to Nutting's, No End of a Lesson (1967)Google Scholar); Sunday Express, 7 August 1966, 17.

87 Hardcastle, William “Press Freedom”, The Listener, 7 December 1967Google Scholar.

88 H.L. Deb., vol. 274, col. 1397 (Lord Francis-Williams).

89 Ryan, A. P., Lord Northcliffe (1953) 90-91Google Scholar. On the Daily Mail affair, see Hansard, 4th series, vol. XCVIII, cols 379-381 (29 July 1901); Hansard, 4th series, vol. XCVIII, cols 582-599 (30 July 1901).

90 See, as to the Official Secrets Acts, 1911 to 1939 (U.K.), H.L. Deb., vol. 77, cots 1331-1340, 3 June 1930; H.C. Deb., vol. 334, col. 1693, 11 April 1938; H.C. Deb.,vol. 657, cols 610-612, 5 April 1962.

91 H.C. Deb., vol. 342, col. 1314, 7 December 1938.

92 16 June, 1967 (leading article).

93 [1967] Public Law 261, 268-271 (Geoffrey Marshall).

94 Williams, , Not In the Public Interest (1965) ch. 9Google Scholar; Jackson, D. C., “Individual Rights and National Security” (1957) 20Google Scholar Modern Law Review 364; Joelsen, M. R., “The Dismissal of Civil Servants in the Interests of National Security” [1963]Google Scholar Public Law 51; “Security Procedures in the Public Service”, cmnd 1681 of 1962; Report of the Vassall Tribunal, cmnd 2009 of 1963; Lord Denning's Report, cmnd 2152 of 1963; Report of the Standing Security Commission, cmnd 2722 of 1965. See also, H.C. Deb., vol. 754, cols 1486-1487 (23 November 1967): “We have tightened up the procedures enormously in the last year or two … ”. (the Prime Minister).

95 See respectively, The Times, 18 January 1967, 12Google Scholar; The Times, 7 February 1967, 9; The Times, 1 December 1964, 5; The Times, 13 May 1965, 12. See also, H.C. Deb., vol. 687, cols 45-46 (written), 16 January 1964; H.C. Deb., vol. 743, cols 160-161 (written), 17 March 1967.

96 Report of June 1965, cmnd 2722, paras 119-124; Report of June 1967, cmnd 3365, para. 21. Then see H.C. Deb., vol. 723, col. 23 (written), 25 January 1966; H.C. Deb., vol. 751, cols 1504-1507, 24 October 1967.

97 Johnson, Nevil, Parliament and Administration: The Estimates Committee (1966) 11Google Scholar.

98 George, Lloyd, War Memoirs, vol. 1 (1933) 46-51Google Scholar; Cooper, Duff (Viscount Norwich), Old Men Forget (1954) 161Google Scholar; Laski, Harold, Reflections on the Constitution (1951) 83 ffGoogle Scholar., especially 87, 115.

99 E.g. Wigg, George “Politicians and the Press”, The Listener, 21 September 1967, 363-366Google Scholar.

page 37 note 1 The Times, 31 January 1967, 10. This was in the evidence of the Association of First Division Civil Servants to Lord Fulton's Committee on the civilservice. See leading article The Times, 31 January 1967, 11.

2 Chubb, Basil, The Control of Public Expenditure (1952)Google Scholar; Reid, Gordon, The Politics of Financial Control (1966)Google Scholar; Johnson, supra, n. 97; Butt, Ronald, The Power of Parliament (1967) ch. 14Google Scholar.

3 H.C. Deb., vol. 738, col. 483, 14 December 1966 (Mr Richard Crossman).

4 See Chester, D. N. and Bowring, Nona, Questions in Parliament (1962)Google Scholar.

5 H.C. Deb., 4th series, vol. CII, col. 712, 7 February 1902.

6 Cater, Douglass, The Fourth Branch of Government (1959) 145Google Scholar.

7 The Supreme Court in the American System of Government (1963) 81.

8 H.C. Deb., vol. 553, col. 1507, 8 June 1956.

9 H.C. Deb., vol. 669, col. 1835, 30 July 1964 (Mr George Wigg); The Times, 26 February 1966, 9; The Times, 12 February 1965, 13 (leading article); Critchley, Julian “Why Defence Lacks a Forum”, The Times, 9 July 1965, 13Google Scholar; H.C. Deb., vol. 337, cols 2177-2178, 30 June 1938 (Mr Winston Churchill).

10 Peter Richards, G., Parliament and Foreign Affairs (1967) especially ch. 4CrossRefGoogle Scholar; MacNeill, J. G. Swift “Foreign Policy and Parliamentary Control”, (1911) 95Google Scholar Fortnightly Review 209. But see also, The Times, 30 September 1965, 8Google Scholar (Mr Harold Davies addressing the Labour Party conference about his abortive visit to Hanoi).

11 E.g. H.C. Deb., vol. 738, cols 470-611, 14 December 1966; The Times, 27 August 1965, 5, 9; “Reforming the Commons” (P.E.P. Report, October 1965, by members of the Study of Parliament Group).

12 The Power Elite (1957) 355.

13 Para. 22.

14 Reading, Brian “Hush Hush in Whitehall”, The Spectator, 30 December 1966, 833-834Google Scholar.

15 Zuckerman, Sir Solly “Too Many Secrets”, Sunday Times, 5 June 1966, 21Google Scholar.

16 The Times, 14 September 1965, 6 (report of speech at the Engineering Materials and Design Conference).

17 E.g. A. J. P. Taylor, English History 1914-1945 (1965) 602-604; Robert James, Rhodes “The Fifty-Year Rule”, The Spectator, 21 August 1964Google Scholar; Thomas, Hugh, in a chapter in Crisis in the Civil Service (1968)Google Scholar (reproduced in substance in The Times, (Saturday Review) 17 February 1968, 17); The Times, 11 July 1964, 6 (report of speech by H. G. Nicholas); The Times, 18 September 1965, 9 (report of international conference of historians).

18 H.C. Deb., 4th series, vol. LXXIII, col. 1175, 30 June 1899.

19 Hewart, Lord, The New Despotism (1929) 46-49Google Scholar; The Times, 4 July 1967, 10 (report of Lord Justice Salmon's address to “Justice”).

20 Corbett v. Social Security Commission [1962] N.Z.L.R. 878, 895 per Gresson P.

21 Ibid. 897.

22 [1964] 3 All E.R. 354.

23 Ibid. 363 per Harman L.J.

24 Ibid. 371 per Salmon L.J.

25 Wednesbury Corporation v. Ministry of Housing and Local Government [1965] 1 W.L.R. 261,270.

26 Wigg, George “Government and the press: an insider's view”, The Times, 21 November 1967, 9Google Scholar.

27 H. Levy, Phillip, The Press Council (1967) 39-49Google Scholar.

28 E.g. Robson, William A., The Governors and the Governed (1964) ch. 3Google Scholar; Murrow, Edward R., “Television and Politics” (Dons and Crooners, Granada, 1959) 47-80Google Scholar.

29 Waller, Ian “The Press and Politicians” (printed in Studies in British Politics (ed. Richard Rose), (1967) 177-190)Google Scholar.

30 26 January 1882, 9.

31 For a confident statement of the power of the United States press, see Cater, Douglass, The Fourth Branch of Government (1959)Google Scholar.

32 Cmnd 1811 of 1962, para. 29. The Commission was here referring solely to the newspaper press.

33 Cmnd 218 of 1957, ch. 23.

34 [1915] A.C. 120.

35 See generally, Wade, H. W. R., Administrative Law, (2nd ed. 1967) ch. 6Google Scholar.

36 H.C. Deb., vol. 616, col. 1393, 5 February 1960.

37 “Local Government and Civil Liberty” (pamphlet, National Council for Civil Liberties, 1965, ch. 3); Beith, A. J., “The Council and the Press”, New Society, 9 September 1965Google Scholar; H.C. Deb., vol. 616, col. 1350 ff., 5 February 1960; Report of Royal Commission on the Press, cmnd 7700 of 1949, paras 544-546.

38 The Times, 31 December 1962, 11 (leading article); The Times, 27 December 1962, 4; The Times, 8 January 1963, 5; Daily Telegraph, (leading article) 12 February 1966, 8. See generally: The Times, 14 February 1967, 2 (Bournemouth); The Times, 8 February 1965 6 (Exeter); The Times, 16 September 1965, 6 (Edinburgh); The Times, 10 December 1965, 15 (Oxford); Nottingham Evening Post, 19 March 1963, 8.

39 E.g. H.C. Deb., vol. 732, col. 222 (written).

40 E.g. The West Australian, (leading article) 16 March 1967, 6; The News (Adelaide),12 April 1967, 1 (dismissal of employee for allegedly passing information to a rate-payer).

41 “Open Meeting Statutes: The Press Fights for the “Right to Know” ”, (1962) 75 Harvard Law Review 1199.

42 Re Grosvenor Hotel, London (No.1) [1964] 1 All E.R. 92; Re Grosvenor Hotel, London (No.2) [1965] Ch. 1210; Merricks v. Nott-Bower [1965] 1 Q.B. 57; Wednesbury Corporation v. Ministry of Housing and Local Government [1965] 1 W.L.R. 261.

43 Conway v. Rimmer [1967] 2 All E.R. 1260.

44 Annual Survey of Commonwealth Law for 1966 (chapter on administrative law).

45 [1931] A.C. 704.

46 [1942] A.C. 624.

47 Ex parte Brown, Re Tunstall [1966] 1 N.S.W.R. 770, 778.

48 The Times, 21 April 1964, 10.

49 Wade, H. W. R., Administrative Law (2nd ed. 1967) 290Google Scholar.

50 [1967] 2 All E.R. 1260.

51 The Times, 21 April 1964, 10. See also, the remarks of Lord Justice Salmon— The Times, 4 July 1967, 10.

52 [Editor's Note]. The House of Lords, in February 1968 reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal while making a re-assessment of Crown privilege. See case note section, this Review.

53 First Report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, 1967-1968 H.M.S.O. (8 November 1967), para. 22, and appendix II.

54 Ibid. para. 11.

55 The Times, 6 November 1967, 3; The Times, 26 October 1967, 10; The Times, 13 October 1967, 3.

56 See especially the terms in which the Government in 1962 rejected the idea of an ombudsman: H.C. Deb., vol. 666, col. 1125, 8 November 1962. The Act of 1967 was to a large extent based on the “Justice” recommendations in The Citizens and the Administration (1961).

57 The Times, 18 October 1966, 11.

58 H.C. Deb., vol. 734, col. 44, 18 October 1966.

59 H.C. Deb., vol. 545, col. 1484, 7 November 1955.

60 H.C. Deb., 4th series, vol. 104, col. 45, 28 February 1902. See also, the remarks of Mr George Brown (Foreign Secretary)—H.C. Deb., 5th series, vol. 758, cols 111-112, 5 February 1968.

61 H.C. Deb., vol. 668, col. 1544, 6 December 1962 (Mr A. P. Costain).

62 H.C. Deb., vol. 734, col. 48, 18 October 1966.

63 Section 11 (3).

64 Sawer, Geoffrey, Ombudsman (1964)Google Scholar.

65 H.L. Deb., vol. 282, col. 1655, 11 May 1967 (Lord Gardiner, L.C.).

66 Cmd 9163 of 1954.

67 H.C. Deb., vol. 585, col. 499, 26 March 1958 (Sir Harry Hylton-Foster, SolicitorGeneral).

68 Section 5 (1).

69 Cmd 9163 of 1954, paras 153-155.

70 But see, as to the Casement diaries, H.C. Deb., vol. 609, cols 1523-1527 (23 July 1959), and, as to certain World War I records, H.C. Deb., vol. 749, cols 25-27,26 June 1967. See also, Daily Telegraph, 12 February 1966, 8Google Scholar.

71 H.L. Deb., vol. 282, col. 1660, 11 May 1967; see also, H.C. Deb., vol. 669, cols 1207-1209, 11 December 1962.

72 H.L. Deb., vol. 282, cols 1659-1660, 1664, 11 May 1967.

73 H.C. Deb., vol. 749, col. 27, 26 June 1967 (Sir Elwyn Jones, Attorney-General). See also, H.L. Deb., vol. 282, col. 1664, 11 May 1967 (Lord Denning).

74 Watt, D. C., “The Clash Over Whitehall's Secrets”, The Spectator, 28 January 1966Google Scholar.

75 H.L. Deb., vol. 282, col. 1666, 11 May 1967 (Lord Bridges).

76 Cmd 9163 of 1954, para. 111.

77 H.L. Deb., vol. 282, col. 1664, 11 May 1967.

78 The press was generally against the fifty-year rule. See e.g. The Guardian, 12 February 1966, 8, referring to the fifty-year rule as “only one example of a secretive, an l often proprietary, official attitude towards the mysteries of government”. See also, The Guardian, 12 March 1966, 8Google Scholar.

79 H.C. Deb., vol. 725, cols 561-563 (written), 9 March 1966.

80 H.C. Deb., vol. 733, cols 1706-1708, 10 August 1966.

81 H.C. Deb., vol. 733, col. 1708.

82 H.C. Deb., vol. 749, col. 25, 26 June 1967 (Sir Elwyn Jones, Attorney-General).

83 Robert James, Rhodes “Cabinet's Eye View of War”, Daily Telegraph, 3 January 1966, 12Google Scholar.

84 H.C. Deb., vol. 749, cols 30-31 (Sir John Hobson). See also, Daily Telegraph, 30 December 1967, 8, 23Google Scholar.

85 The Bulletin, 25 March 1967, 15.

86 Among papers which have raised difficulties of access are: (a) the Irish papers—H.C. Deb., 3rd series, vol. CCCX, col. 1752, 17 February 1887; H.C. Deb., 4th series,vol. III, col. 554, 4 April 1892; H.C. Deb., vol. LXXIII, cols 1160-1178, 30 June 1899; H.C. Deb., 5th series, vol. 749, cols 28-29, 32, 34, 26 June 1967; H.C. Deb., vol. 749, cols 1185-1194, 1217-1221, 3 July 1967; (b) Home Office records—H.C. Deb., 4th series, vol. LIV, col. 16, 25 February 1898; H.C. Deb., vol. LX, col. 22, 24 June 1898; (c) Foreign Office papers—H.C. Deb., 5th series, vol. 738, cols 972-976, 19 December 1966; H.C. Deb., vol. 695, cols 599-603, 14 May 1964; H.C. Deb., vol. 696, cols 917-919, 15 June 1964.

87 H.L. Deb., vol. 282, cols 1657-1658, 11 May 1967.

88 E.g. The Observer, 31 December 1967, 3.

89 The Times, 6 January 1966, 13.

90 The Times, 13 April 1878, 9 (leading article).

91 E.g. the speech of Mr George Brown, the Foreign Secretary, H.C. Deb., vol. 758, cols 107-117, 5 February 1968. The speech was concerned with a report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration.

92 Rowat, Donald C., “How Much Administrative Secrecy”, (1965) XXXIGoogle Scholar Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 479.