Question Over Holding Up Of Correspondent's Message In reply to a question at yesterday's Japanese conference, as io why a 15-hour delay had been experienced in the censorship of a message filed on Sunday evening by Mr. H. J. Timperley, correspondent of the "Manchester Guardian," the spokesman stated that, "since the occupation of Shanghai by the Japanese Army, censorship is the right and prerogative of the Japanese Army Censorship in the first instance was done by civilians in the employ o' the Japanese Government, but as a last resort the Army had the final word.
Mr. Timperley did not raise the question, which had been voiced by another correspondent, but in reply to an invitation to speak privately to the Embassy spokesman, M, Okimura, he stated that this was impossible as he had already taken up the matter officially with Embassy and Consular officials. It then was stated that His Majesty's Consular officials had approached Mr. Okimura, who replied that he would speak with Mr. Timperley regarding the censorship. The er? put no further ying to another question, the spokesman stated that there had been some misunderstanding about a report that the correspondent in question had been summoned to the Japanese Military Headquarters—as Mr, Tim-berley had reported—it was meant as an invitation to discuss the telegram with the military attache. They regretted the misunderstanding; what was meant was to discuss it with a competent military official.
Timperley then asked if the ge had been sent, the reply being, "The message was to have been sent if the correspondent and the military had come to see the matter eye to eye—in spite of his efforts to get in touch with the correspondent, the censor had not been able do so," Mr. Timperley replied, "I home until 1230 as p.m., to-day.
Other correspondents asked whether this was meant to infer that no open censorship existed, ie, that the press representatives would be formed whether the censors stopped a message, The spokesman replied that it was the Japanese intention to maintain an open censorship, but as this correspondent had refused to discuss his telegram with the military, no open censorship could exist in his case. This decision did not apply to other correspondents 1t has been stated that incorporated in Mr. Timperley's message were statements that 300,000 Chinese civilians had been executed following the Japanese occupation of the Shanghai-Nanking area
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.