SECRET
EXECUTIVE BOARD
Friday, 13th June 1941

Ministry of Information War Diary.

draft by Parliamentary Secretary for week ending May 31st 1941

(l) The alleged letter from Hess to the Duke of Hamilton.

This question caused the Ministry considerable trouble. The facts were as follows:-

(a) A letter dated September 23, 1940 was sent through an intermediary in Lisbon to the Duke of Hamilton. This letter referred to previous correspondence in July of 1939 and suggested a meeting in Lisbon. The letter was unsigned but contained an indication that the reply should be sent, under cover of a Portuguese address, to “Dr. A.H.” The assumption was that these initials were those of Dr. Albrecht Haushover who was known to be in Hess's immediate entourage.

This letter had been intercepted by the Censorship and sent by them to M.I.5.

(b) The German wireless, in announcing Hess's arrival in England, stated that there was evidence to show that he had been trying to establish contact with the Duke of Hamilton. The Press, who had much resented the paucity of news released regarding, Hess, were clamouring for guidance. After consultation with the Foreign Office the Ministry informed the Press unofficially that “it could not be revealed” that Hess had “made an attempt to communicate with the Duke of Hamilton” some months previously. In order to safeguard the Duke's own position it was added that he had “immediately placed the letter in the hands of the security authorities”. Announcements to this effect were made in the B.B.C. bulletins of May 14 and 15.

(c) On May 22, the Secretary of State for Air, in reply to a Parliamentary Question by Major Lloyd stated that “contrary to reports 117 - 2 -which has appeared in some newspapers the Duke had never been in correspondence with the Deputy Fuhrer” and that “if Hess did write a letter to the Duke, no such letter from Hess ever reached him or any responsible authority.”

(d) The Press were naturally annoyed by this imputation that they had published a false statement. At the same time Mr. Vyvyan Adams put down a question for May 27 asking why the B.B.C. had broadcast an erroneous allegation. In reply to this question the Ministry sought to say that although the letter had not been signed by Hess it had been signed by someone in close touch with him. This answer was objected to by Sir Archibald Sinclair since it did not completely clear the Duke, and by Lord Swinton since it disclosed security sources of information and might compromise Haushover. The latter was supported by the Prime Minister and in the end the Ministry were obliged to take all the blame upon themselves and to apologise to all concerned.

Much resentment was felt in the Department.

(PQ 724, X 158, CV 438)

Tuesday, May 27th. Crete .

The Admiralty announced the naval losses in Crete and the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons, gave a dramatic account of the sinking of the Bismarck.

A motion on the adjournment made by Captain Cunningham Reid and supported by Mr. Granville urged a more intensive propaganda in the United States and the better provision of news at home.

During the whole of the week the public were prepared in every way possible for the loss of Crete.

(Hansard, DRG passim)

Thursday, May 29th. Pamphlets.

The Home Planning Committee considered the question of pamphlets put out by other Departments. The success of the “Battle of Britain” had incited other D.P.R.'s in other Departments to prepare and issue similar accounts of their own successes and achievements. A regular spate of such pamphlets were descending upon the Ministry, who were not consulted either as to the need for them or upon their general style and composition. It was decided that some control over these pamphlets should be exercised and it was felt that such control should in the first place be exercised by the Treasury.

(HPC 930)

Thursday, May 29th. Holidays .

It was agreed to assist the Ministry of Transport in a campaign to induce the public not to travel during the holidays.

(HPC 927)