SIR,-1 believe I am the only regular reader of the
Spectator who knows that the Editor recently ran a grave risk of arrest and prosecu- tion under the Official Secrets Act. I only know of one man of letters who has been charged under this Act but his offence was trivial compared to our Editor's offence.
I doubt if any Spectator readers realised that the two correspondents who in a letter rexealed that, in a mansion in Belgrave Square, a retired Admiral and a moot of majors were scrutinis- ing typescripts and publications for disclosures that would endanger security, were uncovering a top-top-secret.
For four years I had been sleuthing to discover the credentials of the mystery men into whose hands a typescript of mine had fallen. Government officials were courteous and friendly but on this subject their lips were sealed. I tried my friends at my club. Some believed, or pretended to believe, that those I was seeking lived in a country house in a secluded spot. Some added barbed wire and fierce dogs to complete a Sapper setting. Some asserted that they wore disguise in public.
Now, thanks to the Spectator, I have come ui with my quarry, but with mixed feelings of relief that our Editor is still free and dis- appointment that their lair is so unromantic and that when de-mooted they are not more fairy-like. I could have saved myself those four baffling years if I had paid more heed to a story told me by the late Lord Norwich, when he was commenting on the exaggerated secrecy with which officials attempt to cloak activities of which everyone is aware. Strict orders had been given that the address of. MIS in St. James's Street was a top-secret. When he told a taxi-driver to drop him at Boodle's Club, the driver said, 'Is that the one right opposite MI5?'
All those wasted years! I only had to ask a taxi-driver.—Yours faithfully,
W. M. JAMES
The Road Farm, Churt, Surrey
Previous page
