◆ SpookStack

THE SPIES The Government's White Paper $n the disappearance of Maclean ahd Burgess docs not really add rnuch to the story as the diligence of the news- | papers have built it up over the last four years, In the story of the flight the unsolved problem that remains is: Who “tipped” them off or, as the Government puts.it, “alerted them”? Did they just sense that the security service was on their track or did | someone fell them? Burgess had already becn asked to resign (the date of this is not given). Maclean was about to be closely investigated and his house searched. On May 25 the than Foreign Seeretary, Mr Herbert Matrison, sanctioned a proposal that thd security authorities should quds- tiof Maclean. On the evening of that day Maclean and Burgess fled the country. Who, if anybody, warned him? The White Paper says on this that after” searching interrogations “insullicient evidence was obtainable to form a definite conclusion or te warrant prosecution.” But has the Foreign Office no suspicions? And have there been any staff changes in the Foreign Office to make assurance doubly sure? Has anyone been got off on suspicion? The other point on which there has been criticism, largely in Amcrica, is that it should not have been possible for Maclean and Burgess to get away so easily. The White. Paper, with America in mind, says, rather caustically: Ty some countries, no doubt, Macltan wpuld have been artested first and aues- } tipaed afterwards. In this country [no afrest can be made without adeaubte + idence. “4 MacLEAN CASE (Bufile 100-37L183) — - HE MANCHESTER GUARDIAN SEPTEMBER 2h, 1955 {rye enough, but it is also evident | that the watch on Maclean wasynot | veily close. It was confined to London. | Onpe out of London, he could dq as} he pleased, even to getting out ofthe | country. The -security author were not acting with any urgenc for they were going to delay t proposed interview with Maclean until mid-June—three weeks after the | decision to interrogate him was taken This was putting touching trust in the! inadequacy of the Foreign Office grapevine. © The impression most people will form on studying the White Paper is that the security authorities did not tak} a very serious view of either Burgess or Maclean. They were per- hap right prima facie about Burgess, an “unreliable type had not apparently been in any closely ¢ dential relation. (Although that, not to say that he might not hkve gone to great lengths to steal dfeu- ments from the British Embassy at Washington when was there. ‘They were not, it would scem, moved by any great sense of urgency .about Maglean. There is a curious phrase in thefaccount of Maclean. He began as an officer of “exceptional qu he pnisbehaved and had a breakdow in Cairo. When he came back, p “Hounced as mediealiy fit, he was made head of the American Department of the Foreign Office. This, says the > White Paper, “since it docs not deal with the major problems of Anglo American relations, appeared to be within his capacity.” Here wasyan able person given a responsible ppsi. tion in the Foreign Office. Yet if is * nbw pretended that it was not a rehlly important position, and was therefore he 433 Mr M Boerdo - Microls .— ‘Tele, & sags,