THE personal aspect of what may now be termed the Basil Thomson affair may well be left to those who are already exploiting it. We may, however, be permitted to comment on one fact that emerges and is stated in its plainest form in Sir Basil Thomson’s own account of his functions and relations with the police and the Home Office. It would seem that Sir Basil was not a subordinate of the Commissioner of the Police, but answerable for his “special branch” to the Home Secretary direct. For the purpose, however, of utilizing the powers bestowed by law upon the police, he was co-ordinated with them. In other words, the “special branch” was a secret police force directly under the control of the political head of a department of State. In the minds of most English people, the secret police are associated with the old Tsarist regime, and the words have an ugly ring in English ears. We do not question the necessity that the Home Secretary should be accurately and promptly informed of the activities of all persons and bodies who openly or secretly are suspected of plotting against the State, but it is entirely another matter when the chief of such an organization has attained to such power that he can attempt, if not to veto, at least to influence an appointment to the office of Commissioner of Police. Secret police have in other countries had a way of becoming instruments of party intrigue, and though we do not for a moment suggest that the special branch has been improperly employed, we do perceive the danger of such an organization departing from its original and necessary purpose. Those who are now foremost in emphasizing the danger of leaving Sir Basil’s post vacant should consider their feelings if, at a turn of the wheel of fortune, a Labour or even Communist government were returned to power and inherited a strong secret police. They would then see the danger of the principle for which they are contending. We are aware of no reason why such special work as Sir Basil has done should not be entrusted to an assistant Commissioner subordinate to the Commissioner of Police, and we see every reason why an independent, and in a sense irresponsible, body should not be strengthened or made permanent.