Interesting - that explains it ! - thanks for flagging it up
The current Eliot Project might  possibly reveal more although it will probably be a few years before they get to the 1960's


On 25 October 2013 12:45, Rickard A. Parker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 19:02:59 +0100, David Boyd <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>On another matter, interesting, perhaps that he wasn't moved to testify at
>the Lady Chatterley trial, as did EM Forster and many other worthies:
>perhaps there is surviving correspondence about this which the Eliot
>Project may uncover, but with hindsight and no prior knowledge it does seem
>odd that he didn't speak up at the time - perhaps he was by then physically
>not up to it ?

An account of the trial is at
http://theamericanscholar.org/trial-and-eros/

Book Essay - Autumn 2010
Trial and Eros
When Lady Chatterley's Lover ran afoul of Britain's 1959 obscenity law, the
resulting case had a cast worthy of P.G. Wodehouse
By Ben Yagoda

The part about Eliot (below) reinforces what I've read elsewhere, Eliot was
waiting at the courthouse to testify:

Literally waiting in the wings for Penguin was 72-year-old T. S. Eliot, the
most distinguished man of letters of all. In the early 1930s, in his book
After Strange Gods, Eliot had offered a devastating critique of Lawrence and
especially Lady Chatterley’s Lover. His string of dashes made him seem to
sputter with fury: “The social obsession which makes his well-born—or almost
well-born—ladies offer themselves to—or make use of—plebeians springs from
the same morbidity which makes other of his female characters bestow their
favors upon savages. The author of that book [Chatterley] seems to me to
have been a very sick man indeed.”

But Eliot had changed his mind since then. He told Rubinstein he would be
willing to testify for the defense and sent a statement in which he took
back his earlier criticisms of Lawrence, calling them “too violent.” He
typed, but then crossed out, two paragraphs: “I should mention that there
were circumstances in my private life which I can see in retrospect,
affected my critical judgment and made me more sweeping and violent in my
assertions than I now feel.

“One of these particularly unhappy periods was from about 1929–1934 and
during this period when I lectured about Lawrence and prepared After Strange
Gods for publication in 1933, I should have realised that I as well as he,
should have been described as ‘a sick soul.’” (During that period, Eliot
contemplated and then em­barked on a separation from his wife Vivienne.)

Wisely, Rubinstein decided to hold Eliot “in reserve” as a witness (he would
confide to Forster), “in case the Prosecution cross-examined any of our
other witnesses upon After Strange Gods or any other of Mr. Eliot’s writings
about D. H. Lawrence or Lady Chatterley’s Lover, critical of him or of it.”