the churchill center international churchill societies · the the churchill center business office....
TRANSCRIPT
T H E C H U R C H I L L C E N T E RI N T E R N A T I O N A L C H U R C H I L L S O C I E T I E S
UNITED STATES • UNITED KINGDOM • CANADA • AUSTRALIAPATRON: Till- LADY SOAMES, D.HM • WWW.WINSTONCIIURCIIILL.ORG
rm>
The Churchill Center is a non-profit organization which encourages study of the lile and thought of Winston SpencerChurchill; fosters research about his speeches, writings and deeds; advances knowledge of his example as a statesman; and, by
programmes of teaching and publishing, imparts that learning to people around the world. 1 he Center was organized in 1995 bythe International Churchill Societies, founded in 1968 to educate future generations on the works and example of Winston
Churchill. The Center and Socielies jointly sponsor Finest Hour, special publications, symposia, conferences and tours.
JOINT HONORARY MEMBERSThe Lord Black of Crossharbour OC(C) PCWinston S. Churchill • The Lord Deedes KBE MC PC DLSir Martin Gilbert CBE • Grace Hamblin OBERoberr Hardy CBE • Yotisuf Karsh CCThe Lord Jenkins of Hillhcad OM PCWilliam ManchesterThe Duke of Marlborough JP DL • Elizabeth NelSir Anrhony Montague Browne KCMG CBE DECColin I.. Powell KCB • Wendy Russell RevesAmbassador Paul H. Robinson, Jr.The Lady Thatcher LG OM PC FRSThe Hon. Caspar W. Weinberger GBE
THE CHURCHILL CENTERBOARD OF GOVERNORSRandy Barber • David Boler • Nancy H. CanaryD. Craig Horn • William C. Ives • Nigel KnockerRichard M. Langworth " John H. Mather MDJames W. Mullcr • Charles D. Platt • John G. PlumptonDouglas S. Russell
OFFICERSJohn G. Plumpton, President130 Collingsbrook Blvd., Toronto, Ontario M1W I M7Tel. (416) 495-9641 • Fax (416) 502-3847Lmail: [email protected]
William C. Ives, Vice President20109 Scott, Chapel Hill NC 27517Tel. (919) 967-9100 • Fax (919)967-9001Email: [email protected]
Nancy H. Canary, SecretaryDorchester, Apt. 3 North, 200 North Ocean Blvd.Delray Beach FL 33483Tel. (561) 833-5900 • Email: [email protected]
D. Craig Horn, Treasurer8016 McKenstry Drive, Laurel MD 20723Tel. (888) WSC-1874 • Fax (301) 483-6902F.mail: [email protected]
Charles D. Platt, Endowment Director14 Blue Heron Drive W., Greenwood Village CO 80121Tel. (303) 721-8550 • Fax. (303) 290-0097E-mail: [email protected]
BOARD OF TRUSTEESWinston S. Churchill • Laurence Geller • Hon. Jack KempGeorge A. Lewis " Christopher MatthewsAmb. Paul H. Robinson, Jr. • The Hon. Celia SandysThe Hon. Caspar W. Weinberger GBERichard M. Langworth CBF, Chairman181 Burrage Road, Hopkinton NH 03229Tel. (603) 746-4433 • Email: [email protected]
BUSINESS OFFICESLorraine C. Horn, AdministratorDebby Young, Membership Secretary8016 McKenstry Drive, Laurel MD 20723Tel. (888) WSC-1874 • Fax (301) 483-6902Email: wsc_ [email protected]
CHURCHILL STORES (Back Issues & Sales Dept.)Gail Greenly, PO Box 96, Contoocook NH 03229Tel. (603) 746-3452 • Fax (603) 746-6963Email: [email protected]
WWW.WINSTONCHURCHILL ORGWebmaster: John Plumpton, [email protected]: [email protected] host: [email protected]
CHURCHILL CENTER ASSOCIATESWinston Churchill Associates:
ICS Unired States " The Churchill CenterThe Annenberg Foundation • David & Diane BolerColin D. Clark " Fred FarrowMr. & Mrs. Parker H. Lee HIMichael & Carol McMenamin " David & Carole NossRay L. & Patricia M. Orban • Wendy RcvcsElizabeth Churchill Sncll • Mr. & Mrs. Matthew B. WillsAlex M. Worth Jr.
Clementine Churchill AssociatesRonald D. Abramson " Winston S. ChurchillJeanerte & Angclo Gabriel • D. Craig & Lorraine HornJames F. Lane " Barbara & Richard LangworthDrs. John H. & Susan H. Mather • Linda & Charles PlattAmbassador & Mrs. Paul H. Robinson Jr.James R. & Lucille I. Thomas
Mary Soames AssociatesSolveig & Randy Barber • Gary J. BonineDaniel & Susan Borinsky " Nancy Bowers • Lois BrownNancy H. Canary • Dona 8c Bob DalesJeffrey & Karen Dc Haan • Ruth & Laurence GellerFrederick C. & Martha S. Hardman • Glenn Horowitz.Mr. & Mrs. William C. Ives • J. Willis JohnsonMr. & Mrs. Gerald Drake Kambcstad • Elaine KendallRuth J. Lavinc • Mr. & Mrs. Richard A. LeahyCyril & Harriet Mazansky • Michael W. MichclsonMr. & Mrs. James W Muller • Earl & Charlotte NicholsonBob & Sandy Odell • Dr & Mrs. Malcolm PageRurh & John Plumpton • Hon. Douglas S. RussellShanin Specter • Robert M. StephensonRichard & Jenny Streiff • Peter J. Travcrs • Gabriel UrwitzDamon Wells Jr. " Jacqueline & Malcolm Dean Wirrcrr
BOARD OF ACADEMIC ADVISERSProf. Paul K. Alkon, University of Southern CaliforniaSir Martin Gilbert CBE, D. Lite, Merton College, OxfordProf. Barry M. Gough, Wilfrid Laurier UniversityProf. Christopher C. Harmon, Marine Corps UniversityCol. David Jablonsky, US Army War CollegeProf. Warren E Kimball, Rutgers UniversityProf. Paul A. Rahe, University ofTulsaProf. John A. Ramsden,()ueen Mary dr Westfield College, University of London
Prof. David f. Stafford, University of EdinburghDr. Jeffrey Wallin, President, The American AcademyProf. Manfred Weidhorn, Yeshiva UniversityProf. James W. Muller, Chairman,University of Alaska Anchorage1518 Airporr Hrs. Dr., Anchorage AK 99508Tel. (907) 786-4740 • Fax. (907) 786-4647Email: afjwm@\iaa.alaska.cdu
AFFILIATEWashington Society for ChurchillCaroline Hartzler, PresidenrPO Box 2456, Merrifield VA 22] 16Tel. (703) 503-9226
Members also meet regularly in Alaska, California,Chicago, New England, Norrh Texas and Northern Ohio.
INTERNATIONAL COUNCILOF CHURCHILL ORGANIZATIONSAmbassador Paul H. Robinson, Jr., Chairman208 S. LaSalle St., Chicago II, 60604 USATel. (800)621-1917Email: [email protected]
INTERNATIONAL CHURCHILLSOCIETY OF CANADAAmbassador Kenneth W Taylor, Hon. Chairman
Randy Barber, President4 Snowshoc Cres., Thornhill, Ontario I.3T 4M6Tel. (905) 881-8550Email: [email protected]
Jcanettc Webber, Membership Secretary3256 Rymal Road, Mississauga, Ontario L4Y 3ClTel. (905) 279-5169 • Email: [email protected]
Charles Anderson, Treasurer489 Stanficld Drive, Oakville, Ontario L6L 3R2
The Other Club of OntarioNorman MacLeod, President16 Glenlaura Court, Ashbirrn, Onrario LOB 1A0Tel. (905)655-4051
Winston S. Churchill Society of Vancouver (Affiliated)Dr. Joe Siegenberg, President1 5-9079 Jones RoadRichmond, British Columbia V6Y 1C7Tel. (604) 231-0940
INTERNATIONAL CHURCHILLSOCIETY OF THE UNITED KINGDOMChairman:Nigel Knocker OBEPO Box 1257, Melksham, Wilts. SN12 6GQTel. &Fax. (01380) 828609Email: [email protected]
TRUSTEESThe Hon. Celia Sandys, ChairmanThe Duke of Marlborough JP DLThe Rt. Hon. Earl Jcllicoc KBE DSO MC FRSDavid Boler • David Porter • Geoffrey Wheeler
COMMITTEENigel Knocker OBE, ChairmanWylma Wayne, Vice ChairmanPaul H. Courrenay, Hon. SecretaryAnthony Woodhead CBF. FCA, Hon. TreasurerJohn Glanvill Smith, Editor ICS UK NewsletterEric Bingham • John Crookshank • Geoffrey FletcherDerek Green well • Michael Kelion • Fred Lockwood CBEErnie Money CBE • Elisabeth Sandys • Dominic Walters
NORTHERN CHAPTERDerek Grccnwell, "Farriers Cottage," Station RoadGoldsborough, Harrogate, North Yorkshire HG5 8NTTel. (01432) 863225
The staff of" Finest Hour, published byThe Churchill Center and International ChurchillSocieties, appears on page 4.
JOURNAL OF THE CHURCHILL CENTER & SOCIETIES
SPRING 2002 • NUMBER 114
5 HM Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother 1900-2002
14 The Atlantic Takes a DiveWe shouldn't be upset abut the shrill cries of the muckrakers.They give us such great material! • Richard M. Langworth
18 "For Valour": King George VIA Remembrance of His Late Majesty • Winston S. Churchill
20 Churchill's Women: Sir Martin Gilbert Recalls Who Made the Man
"My stick as I write carries my heart along with it." • Precis by Robert Courts
23 Bletchley Park: What's New in 2002 • Douglas J. Hall
26 A Silent Toast to William Willett"Why doesn't everyone get up an hour earlier?" • Winston S. Churchill28 Winston Churchill: A Leadership Model for the 21st CenturyThe Queen Mary Fellows Program • John G. Plumpton
40 Leading Churchill Myths: "He let Coventry burn..." • Peter J. Mclver
BOOKS, ARTS & CURIOSITIES:30 "The Great Courses" video is a fearsome ordeal, says the Editor ... JohnPlumpton praises Roy Jenkins's Magnum Opus ... Leon Waszak on deGaulle and the Anglos ... Eisenhower and Churchill, says RichardLangworth, need more scrutinizing ... David Freeman suspects "Bobbety"and his father put Churchill in office; John Ramsden is not so sure. G. WSimonds on Churchill and Hayek. Andy Guilford poses the race question.
Despatch Box 4 • Riddles, Mysteries, Enigmas 6 • Wit & Wisdom 6 • Datelines 7Calendar 10 • Local & National 11 • Around & About 13 • Action This Day 16Inside the Journals 37 • Eminent Churchillians 42 • Recipes from No. Ten 43Woods Corner 44 • Ampersand 46 • Churchilltrivia 47
Cover: Winston S. Churchill, 1941, an oil painting by Martin Driscoll commissioned by TheChurchill Center and presented to Hotel Queen Mary. For fine canvas reproductions see page 29.
Number 114* Spring 2002ISSN 0882-3715www.winstonchurchill.org
Barbara F. Langworth, Publisher([email protected])
Richard M. Langworth, Editor([email protected])
PO Box 385, Contoocook,NH 03229 USATel. (603) 746-4433
Senior Editors:
James W. MullerJohn G. PlumptonRon Cynewulf Robbins
Associate Editor:
Paul H. Courtenay
News Editor: John FrostFeatures Editor: Douglas J. Hall
ContributorsGeorge Richard, Australia;Randy Barber, Chris Bell,Barry Gough, Canada;Inder Dan Ratnu, India;Paul Addison, Winston S. Churchill,Robert Courts, Sir Martin Gilbert,Allen Packwood, Phil Reed,United Kingdom;David Freeman, Chris Harmon,Warren F. Kimball, Cyril Mazansky,Michael McMenamin, Mark Weber,Manfred Weidhorn, Curt Zoller,United States
• Address changes. USA, Australia,Western Hemisphere and Pacific: send tothe The Churchill Center business office.UK/Europe and Canada:send to UK or Canada business offices.All offices are listed on page 2.
Finest Hour is made possible in part throughthe generous support of members of TheChurchill Center and Societies, and with theassistance of an endowment created by TheChurchill Center Associates (listed on page 2).
Finest Hour is published quarterly by TheChurchill Center and International ChurchillSocieties, which offer various levels of supportin their respective currencies. Membershipapplications should be sent to the appropriateoffices on page 2. Permission to mail at non-profit rates in USA granted by the UnitedStates Postal Service, Concord, NH, permitno. 1524. Copyright 2002. AH rights reserved.Designed and edited by Dragonwyclc Publish-ing Inc. Production by New England FoilStamping Inc. Printed by Twin Press Inc.Made in U.S.A.
DESPATCH BOX
THE PLEASURE WAS OURSI am overwhelmed by the honour conferred
on me by The Churchill Center with its 2001Farrow Award. The plaque was very welcomeand the generous cheque took me completely bysurprise. It is a truly wonderful and inspiringstart to the New Year for me. My deepest thanksfor an honour that is all the greater when I con-sider the distinguished company I am joining.
Since September 11th I have often foundmyself reflecting on the vital importance of in-telligence in world affairs and on Churchill'sgreat prescience here, as in many other fields. Ashe also insisted, and as events have once againdemonstrated, strong transatlantic relationsmust lie at the heart of any successful defence ofwestern and democratic values.
I am very pleased to be attending the 2002Conference on the theme, "Churchill and Intel-ligence." It will be nice to see many old friendsagain. With warmest and sincerest thanks, andwith all best wishes to The Churchill Center foranother successful year.
—DR. DAVID STAFFORD FRHS
CENTRE FOR SECOND WORLD WAR STUDIES
UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH
BANNING THE CIGARWhen going through the English-Speaking
Union magazines here in London, I came acrossa piece of doggerel on the vexed question ofwhether the Washington statue of WSC shouldhave a cigar. It appeared in the Yorkshire Post,1965, from a correspondent signing himself"Postilion." It might amuse the readership.
—PROF. JOHN RAMSDEN
QUEEN MARY & WESTFIELD COLLEGE, LONDON
Aesthetics was not offered—Blood, toil, and sweat, and tearsWere all that Churchill proffered,In Britain's darkest years.It heartened all, the free cigar,Throughout that bitter war—The hand that made the V-sign,Held also a cigar.Drop his cigar? Have at you!What can this nonsense be?As well de-torch the statue,That stands for Liberty1.
BURN AND GLOWI have often meant to send a note of thanks
for the magnificent quarterly, Finest Hour, andam finally compelled to do so by your stirringessay in the Autumn 2001 issue, "Our Qualitiesand Deeds Must Burn and Glow." Thank you somuch to you and Barbara for your work in keep-ing our hero's memory fresh. Even if your workis not always acknowledged as it should be, it isalways important and appreciated.
—CHRIS POWELL, MANCHESTER, CONN.
Best pay we get, Sir, many thanks. —Ed.
CONFERENCE APPRECIATION(To Judy Kambestad) Can it be that two
months have passed since the conference inSouthern California wherein Solveig and I andindeed, the entire Canadian contingent enjoyedourselves? The organization, programme and allthe hundreds of other "little things" were seam-less to all of us, yet appreciated so much at thesame time. I don't think attendees were movedas much to different locales to enrich our experi-ence since the Calgary/Banff conference in1994, and not one of your buses had a flat tire!The Hotel Del Coronado was truly a historicand beautiful destination, but the phrase, "itnever rains" was proven wrong and was the onlything you didn't make perfect for we northern-ers. I know you would want to share our thanksand appreciation with your team and ask you topass these remarks along to each of them.
—RANDY BARBER, PRESIDENT
ICS CANADA, THORNHILL, ONT.
ATTRIBUTIONIn an Erratum (FH 112:15) it is suggested
that Churchill did not acknowledge Dr. John-son as the author of the quotation: "Dependupon it, when a man knows he is going to behanged in a month, it concentrates his mindwonderfully." Churchill most certainly did: thequotation and attribution are on page 162 ofTheir Finest Hour, second volume of The SecondWorld War (Houghton Mifflin Co., 1949).
—RAFAL HEYDEL-MANKOO, OTTAWA, ONT.
TRANSCRIPTSThe panel discussion at George Washing-
ton University {FH 113, page 11) seems very in-teresting. I would like to know more about it.Fortunately there's our own Churchill Proceed-ings to look forward to, but would it be possiblefor members to get copies of handouts from var-ious events reported on in "Datelines"?
—ANNE BURTON, DOWNER'S GROVE, ILL.
That's a very good point. Chris Harmon, whoorganized the event, tells us that the GWU panelwas more a conversation than a formal seminar, sotranscripts don't exist. But audiotapes were made,and we are trying to obtain some. If anyone elsebesides Mrs. Burton would like a cassette, please letme know when you read this.
We usually try to get hard copy summaries orpapers for the academic events we report. Some-times authors don't make transcripts available be-cause they are raw material for a book. This is thecase for the London Churchill conference("Churchill in the Twenty-first Century," FH111), and our abstracts are the only ones in print.Associate editor Paul Courtenay laboriously wrotethese based on his personal attendance, and gotthem approved by each speaker. Paul is not the au-thor of the forthcoming book based on the Londonconference, but when it is published it will be of-fered through our book service. —Ed. $5
F I N E S T H O U R I H / 4
HM QUEEN ELIZABETH THE QUEEN MOTHER1900 - 2002
In an age when retired leadersstrive vulgarly to create "lega-cies" it is sobering to reflect
that the most genuinely lovedwoman in England secured herplace with a casual remark oversix decades ago. Asked if shewould remove her two youngdaughters from London duringthe Blitz, Queen Elizabethreplied: "The girls will not leaveunless I do. I will not leave unlessthe King does. And the King will not leave under any cir-cumstances whatsoever."
Her closeness to the people was unprecedented in amonarchy renowned as aloof and hidebound. The RoyalFamily in the late 1930s was divided between those whoadmired Hitler and those who supported Chamberlain;the King and Queen threw a gala reception for the latterwhen he returned from Munich waving his bit of paper.All that was washed away by her courage during theBlitz. Historian David Cannadine, no great admirer oftradition, said: "She brought a particular kind of charmand public appeal the like of which no authentic memberof the royal family ever quite seems to have had."
The Queen Mother's charm lay in small acts whichbecame legendary. The beat near Clarence House, her of-ficial residence, was patrolled by a policeman to whomshe took a liking; often she -would pass him a bag of hisfavorite sweets, from Harrod's, when her car drove by.Nor did this highly traditional royal personage exhibitthe accepted intolerances of her generation. Unable onenight to get a free line out of Clarence House, she cut offa conversation between two famously homosexualcourtiers: "If you two young queens don't mind, there'san old Queen here who needs to use the telephone."
As 1940 proved, there was tough fibre beneath herfeathery, pastel image. Born a commoner on 4 August1900, Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon had never expected tobe Queen; she was forced into it when "Bertie," her shyand stuttering husband, became King upon the abdica-tion of his brother in December, 1936. She told herhousehold, "We must take what is coming and make thebest of it," but she never forgave divorcee Wallis Simpsonfor precipitating the crisis.
Undoubtedly this affected her view in 1955 that hersecond daughter, Princess Margaret, should not marry adivorcee she deeply loved, Group Captain PeterTownsend. The memory of what another divorcee hadrecently done to the monarchy and her family was tooclose. More divorce was to come, thankfully much later:
VE-Day, 8 May 1945.
Princess Anne and MarkPhillips after nineteen years ofmarriage; Prince Charles andPrincess Diana after eleven;Prince Andrew and DuchessSarah after six. She sailedthrough it all, includingDiana's shocking death in1997, and her daughter Mar-garet's death barely a monthbefore she herself departed.
Like Churchill's, her finest hour was in 1940, whenshe, the King, and the Prime Minister rallied one nationto keep liberty alive. Ensconced at Buckingham Palace asthe bombs rained, she remarked that this allowed her tolook East Londoners in the eye. Her defiance causedHitler to brand her "the most dangerous woman in Eu-rope," which politically correct obituaries muddled into"most dangerous person." We all know whom Hitler re-garded as the most dangerous person in Europe.
Those two dangerous people shared several traits.Both had a fondness for spirits, though Churchill's tipplewas Johnny Walker Red, hers Beefeater's. Both took moreout of alcohol than alcohol took out of them; no oneever saw either of them the worse for drink. Horse-racingwas another shared interest, though her favorite hobbywas salmon-fishing, while WSC preferred the brush.
For sixteen years the devoted consort of George VI,the Queen Mother outlived him by half a century. Shewas the rock of support behind her daughter, passing toElizabeth II her resonant devotion to duty, honour andcountry. "Duty was important to the Queen Mother,"wrote one observer, "and despite illness and various oper-ations she was still one of the hardest-working royals, car-rying out 130 engagements in her 80th year."
In a "low dishonest decade" when the Queen andPrince of Wales were regularly excoriated for their wealth,it is remarkable that such envy never attached to theQueen Mother, who once bounced a £4 million chequeand was well known for extravagance. It made no differ-ence. The crowds would always gather outside ClarenceHouse on her birthday, waiting for her smiling appear-ance, dressed as usual in her pastels and pearls.
Her devotion is a model not yet obsolete, as provenby the worldwide sadness at her passing, at Windsor onMarch 30th, where she will now lie, beside Bertie at last.Even when her health had finally failed, what WendellWillkie said in 1941 was still valid in her case: "TheBritons are almost miraculously fortunate in their presentleaders." —Editor M>
F I N E S T H O U R I H / 5
RIDDLES,
MYSTERIES,
ENIGMASSend your questionsto the editor
Q % Did Churchill play golf? If so,• where? I once noted his sup-
posed description of the sport in abook of quotations: "a game where youput a small ball in a small hole withtools singularly ill-designed for thepurpose." —Mike Campbell
(The Editor is preparing a book ofChurchill quotes and would be gratefulif someone could provide attributionfor this quotation, which I think Mikehas right.)
A^ He played golf into the Teens,• but it wasn't really his game,
needed too much precision. Polo suitedhim better: live opposition, a muchbigger ball, and a real mallet to smackit with. See FH 111:7 for a photo ofWSC setting off on the links withMaxine Elliott in Cannes, February1913. See also Randolph Churchill-Helmut Gernsheim, Churchill: His Lifein Photographs (1955), photos #62(same as above) and #63 (apparentlytaken the same day). Randolph's cap-tion: "He fails to keep his head downand foozles his drive. Mr. Churchillhad little aptitude for golf and so heabandoned it quite early in life."
Robert Courts adds: "He certainlyplayed with Asquith in his Liberal days:Violet Bonham-Carter, in WinstonChurchill as I Knew Him (1965) recallsthat it was quite easy on the golf courseto get WSC onto one of his favouritesubjects (e.g., Dreadnoughts), afterwhich he would not play another shot,much to Asquith's delight!"
a# I am researching the history of a• British Army base in GermanyHohne (Bergen-Belsen) and I
have been told that Churchill paid avisit to the camp for a couple of days inMay 1956. Can you provide me withany information?
A^ The visit followed his trip to• Aachen to receive the Charle-
magne Prize. Sir Martin Gilbert's Vol-ume VIII {"Never Despair, "p. 1197)mentions the visit but gives no details.Anthony Montague Browne's LongSunset mentions the visit on page 207,specifically the visit to Celle, nearHanover, but is also scarce on details.—Gregory B. Smith
Q ^ After a lifetime in business a• Canadian friend writes of his
experience as a young child in theBlitz. He has retired to Charlottetown,Prince Edward Island. Is PEI its ownprovince, or is it part of another, largerone? How long has that bridge beenthere? —Scott Mantsch
Wk&Wisdom
A:Prince Edward Island, the site of.•the creation of the Canadian
Confederation in 1867 (though PEIdid not join the provinces that formedCanada until 1873), is a province in itsown right. It can be reached by carferry from Nova Scotia, as well as bythe new bridge from New Brunswick.Our drive from Halifax, N.S. to Char-lottetown was easily done in a day, tak-ing the ferry. There are many intrigu-ing Churchill sites in Halifax and rec-ollections of his visits in the archivesthere. On PEI we were most interested,having a daughter then seven years old,to visit the Anne of Green Gables sites.—James W. Muller
More on P.E.I....It's a great summer vacation spot
(the northern shore of PEI is basicallyone long beach), and is the site of myancestors' first landing in North Amer-ica from Scotland. I'd say the drivefrom Halifax to Charlottetown via theConfederation Bridge is about 3.5hours. I believe the bridge was com-pleted in 1997; I recall taking the now-defunct ferry along the course of thespan as it was being constructed. Theferry from eastern PEI to Nova Scotiais still in operation. —Mike Campbell
And does everyone know that theauthor of Anne of Green Gables, LucyMaud Montgomery, was born (readyfor it?) on 30 November 1874?—Todd Ronnei li
Wisdom of the MomentA selection of Churchillian remarkssuitable to the present situation,compiled by Laurence Geller.Concluded from last issue.
"The British and Americans donot war with races or governments assuch. Tyranny, external or internal, isour foe, whatever trappings or dis-guise it wears, whatever language itspeaks or perverts."
"There is only one answer to de-feat, and that is victory."
"I never worry about action, butonly about inaction."
"Difficulties mastered are oppor-tunities won."
"We are firm as a rock against ag-gression, but the door is always opento friendships."
"Wickedness is not going toreign."
"It is a crime to despair. We mustlearn to draw from misfortune themeans of future strength."
"What we require to do now isto stand erect and look the world inthe face and do our duty without fearor favour." $5
F I N E S T H O U R 114/6
DATELINESQUOTATION OF THE SEASON
"Tnink or tne long, wearying montns in wnicli we nave been tramping rruitlessly on the blood-stained treadmill in Palestine, because ministers could not make up tlieir minds either to act or
to go....Solutions tbat were possible two years ago nave been swept away."
Off to a Flying StartLONDON, JANUARY 6TH—Win-
ston Churchill comfortablybeat "William Shakespeare(second) and Lord Nelson(third) in a BBC poll of thegreatest Briton of all time.While figures such as JohnLennon made it into the topten, Churchill, Shakespeareand Nelson saw off a chal-lenge led by a contingent ofworld-renowned scientists.Programmes about the topten will be broadcast by BBCradio this year.
The presence of two war heroes inthe top three partly reflects the timing,according to the BBC. The September1 lth terrorist attacks were uppermost inpublic consciousness. [Notice howquick the BBC is to imply that, of icourse, war heroes wouldn't rate so highin a "normal" situation... —Ed.] Wellbefore the survey closed on December31st Churchill was so far ahead that hecould not be beaten.
Despite Churchill's undisputedgreatness, however, his latest biogra-pher, Lord Jenkins, is uncertain that hedeserves the title of greatest-ever Briton:"When I was writing my Gladstone bi-ography, I summarised that he had theedge on Churchill," said Jenkins, a for-mer home secretary and chancellor. Butwhen I did Churchill I put him slightlyahead of Gladstone. I suppose I tend tothink whoever I'm writing about at thetime is best."
Jenkins said he would haveplumped for Shakespeare at the top.
—Condensed from an articleby Richard Brooks
Lady Churchill and Mr. Speaker after theunveiling of the Oscar Nemon House ofCommons statue on 1 December, 1969.
Statue-itisLONDON, MARCH 28TH—Not only is therecontroversy over the brooding IvorRoberts-Jones statue of Churchill in Par-liament Square, particularly since it be-came a target for celebrants of freedom |of expression {FH107:5). From the be-ginning, former Minister of PublicBuildings Charles Pannell detested theNemon statue of Churchill at the en-trance to the House of Commons. Indocuments recently made public, Pan-nell said that Churchill was too large,towering over Lloyd George and makingthem look like "man and boy." Otherssaid the size was in proportion to theirsignificance. The rule that a politicianmust be dead for ten years before gettinga statue in Parliament was waived for theChurchill bronze—which today has ahighly polished shoe. MPs entering theCommons like to touch it for luck,which maintains the shine.
FINEST HOUR 114/7
—WSC, ALBERT HALL, 21 APRIL 1948
Churchill himself didn'tthink much of statues. Askedif he wanted one to commem-orate his efforts after WorldWar II, he said he would pre-fer a park in the blitzed EastEnd for children to play in.Hundreds of statues laterwe're still waiting for the park.
Ignoratio Elenchi (2)FINEST HOUR 113, p. 7—The exam-ple we cited of "IgnoratioElenchi" (obfuscating the realissue with a side issue) was di-rected at David Irving's book,Churchill's War, and not at An-
drew Roberts, who reviewed the book inFH 112. We regret any confusion.
Easton: Nyet onCompanions, EssaysNORWALK, CONN., JANUARY 11TH—We d i d
everything but get down on our kneesand sing "Mammy"—even offered tohelp finance—a six-volume version ofthe three ultra-rare Companion Vol-umes to Vol. 5 of the Official Biogra-phy, which contain all the significantdocuments compiled by official biogra-pher Sir Martin Gilbert for Churchill'slife from 1922 to the outbreak of war in1939. We also asked Easton to considerreprinting the now-scarce Collected Es-says of Sir Winston Churchill, publishedonly in a 1975 limited edition—theonly collection of Churchill's periodicalarticles ever published in volume form.But Easton's executive vice-presidentand trade books manager, MichaelHendricks, sent a disappointing reply:
"As you know, the audience for
continued overleaf
DATELINES
leather-bound books is a limited onedue to the high prices. While the worksyou suggest are clearly worthy ofleather-bound treatment, at this pointwe cannot project sufficient sales to ourgeneral audience to warrant going for-ward with them."
We will keep knocking on doorsuntil these two jobs get done. If anybenefactor would like to sponsor, with atax-deductible donation (or as a re-coupable investment) either or boththese two admirable projects, we arelooking at costs in the range of $20,000for either the Companions or the Es-says. Please contact the editor.
Freeman to "Journals"FULLERTON, CALIF., JANUARY 11TH—Follow-ing the unt imely death of ChrisHanger, Finest Hour is pleased to an-nounce that David Freeman of Califor-nia State University, Fullerton, will con-tinue Chris's popular column of articleabstracts, "Inside the Journals." Thefirst installment is in this issue, a majorabstract of Prof. Larry Witherell's "LordSalisbury's Watching Committee andthe Fall of Neville Chamberlain, May1940," English Historical Review, No-vember 2001. Chris left us with a smallbacklog, which will appear in duecourse under his own byline.
Stamps on the WebThe "WSCstamps" list has been up forabout six months now and is off to agood start. The group has fifteen mem-bers from the United States, Canada,Sweden, and Denmark. If you're evenslightly interested in Churchill philat-ely, visit their homepage. Most recentlyadded is a database link to the page,which lists all new Churchill stamps is-sues since 1998 (forty-one entries):http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WSC-stamps.
Archives on the WebCAMBRIDGE, NOVEMBER—The ChurchillArchives Centre has made a pilot ver-sion of the electronic catalogue of theChurchill Papers is now available onlineat: http://www.chu.cam.ac.uk/churchill_pa-pers/ The Churchill Papers, comprisingoriginal documents sent, received or
From childhood letters to state papers, theChurchill Archives are a priceless resource.
composed by Winston S. Churchillduring the course of his long and activelife, contain everything from his child-hood letters and school reports to hisfinal writings. They include his personalcorrespondence with friends and family,and his official exchanges with kings,presidents, politicians and military lead-ers. Some of the most memorablephrases of the twentieth century arepreserved in his drafts and speakingnotes for the famous war speeches. TheChurchill Papers, purchased for the na-tion in 1995 with Heritage Lotteryfunds and a grant from the John PaulGetty Foundation, include an estimatedone million documents.
Unable to locate Churchill's 1956correspondence with Eisenhower (seereview of Eisenhower and Churchill thisissue), we queried Churchill ArchivistNatalie Adams about whether it waspossible actually to read documents onthe web. "The catalogue is a finding aidto the files which are held," she ex-plained, "so it is not possible to access
images of the documents online. Thecatalogue's main function is to enableresearchers to plan their research farbetter than they were able to previously,and to gauge the amount of relevantmaterial." Thus the website is not acomplete resource in itself, but an im-portant and vital tool which will savereserchers many hours when they actu-ally set out on their research.
Some direct access is possible, Ms.Adams continues: "Visitors to our site,http://www.chu.cam.ac.uk/archives/ canaccess some images of actual documentsby viewing online educational resources,the "Churchill Era" (http://www.chu.-cam.ac.uk/churchill_era) and "Churchill:the Evidence" (http://www.churchill.-nls.ac.uk/), or by visiting the website'simage gallery area (http://www.chu.-cam.ac.uk/archives/gallery/). Most ofthe Churchill papers have been de-scribed at file level so the catalogue de-scriptions cover a whole file of papers(the precise extent of the file is indicatedin the 'physical' field at the bottom ofthe descriptive record). This is the case,for example, for all the references re-trieved by a search for Eisenhower be-tween 1955 and 1956.
"The catalogue does, however, con-tain descriptions of about 64,600 indi-vidual documents in key classes whereresearch interest is likely to be extremelyhigh. These sections of the catalogue arerich in detail. A search for 'Eisenhower'(without a date range of 1955-1956) re-trieves many references to individualdocuments (mostly contained inChurchill's wartime Prime Ministerialmaterial, references beginning 'CHAR20').
"One of these entries is a descrip-tion of Eisenhower's report as SupremeCommander of the Allied Expedi-tionary Force to the Combined Chiefsof Staff on the operations in Europe ofthe Allied Expeditionary Force, 8 June1944 to 8 May 1945—a key documentfor Second Word War historians (refer-ence CHAR 20/244/2).
"The cataloguers have taken ac-count of documents which have beenpublished by Martin Gilbert in the Of-ficial Biography and its CompanionVolume or speeches which were pub-
FlNESTHOUR 114/8
DATELINES
lished by Rhodes James in Winston S.Churchill: His Complete Speeches" Ms.
Adams continues, "so the catalogue canalso be used as 'way-in' to publisheddocuments. For example, references inCHAR 9 and CHUR 5 (Churchill'sspeech notes) include references to therelevant pages of Rhodes James."
Rafal Heydel-Mankoo of Ottawa,Ontario is one satisfied member whohas used the new website: "ResearchingChurchill's dealings with the PolishGovernment-in-Exile, I was able to findeighty documents dealing with, ormentioning, Stanislaw Mikolajczyk inless than thirty seconds. Each docu-ment is accompanied by a descriptiveparagraph and a citation/reference.
"This is a very encouraging startand will undoubtedly be of profoundassistance to researchers outside Eng-land. The search engine is user-friendlyand, most importantly, fast. Too oftenpilot projects utilizing search mecha-nisms are slow and awkward. This doesnot appear to be the case for theChurchill Papers catalogue."
On a parallel project, the ChurchillPapers are being microfilmed and pub-lished by the Gale Group, Inc. (For de-tailed information visit their websitehttp://www.galegroup.com/ and searchfor "Churchill.") Gale's first unit isshortly to be published on microfilmand should mean that the papers be-come a great deal more accessible tothose who are not able to consult theoriginals at the Archives Centre.
The cataloguing of the ChurchillPapers has been going on now for oversix years. The catalogue now containsover 70,000 entries and the pilot Inter-net version allows you to search for cat-alogue descriptions using "free text,""keyword" and "date range" fields.Searching methods will be improvedand refined over the forthcomingmonths but the Centre is interested inComments and suggestions.
Comments are most welcome byNatalie Adams, Archivist/InformationServices Manager, Churchill ArchivesCentre, Churchill College, CambridgeCB3 ODS, England, email [email protected], telephone(01223) 336222, fax (01223) 336135.
"Nothing is settled either foror against us. We have no reason
to despair; still less haw we anyreason to be self-satisfied."
r
Strategic Hotel Capital's Churchill Ad Grows to a SeriesCHICAGO, DECEMBER 3 IST—Strategic HotelCapital has expanded its Churchill ad-vertisement (see back cover, FH 112)into a series, the second and third ofwhich, produced by Daly Gray, a Hern-don, Virginia-based communicationsfirm, are shown herewith. The first ad("An optimist sees the opportunity inevery difficulty"), the first commercialadvertisement ever to appear in FinestHour, was published not for commer-cial reasons but for its artistry and rele-vance. Finest Hour contributed thequote and attribution to the third ad.
"We created the first ad to provideencouragement to the hotel industry,which was in the midst of the effects ofan economic slowdown," said SHCchief executive officer Laurence Geller."Like much of what Sir Winstonvoiced, however, the enduring quota-tion lent itself equally well to the after-math of the September 11th terroristattacks." Geller noted that followingthe recent horrific events, Churchill'swords frequently served as the greatestsource of inspiration for an array of po-litical figures.
The response to the ad from thehotel industry was overwhelmingly pos-itive, which led Strategic Hotel Capitalto expand the series. "We intend peri-odically to invoke the sage words of SirWinston in advertising to provide addi-tional encouragement and inspirationfor the industry," adds Geller, an avidreader of history, student of the life of
Churchill, a Mary Soames Associateand a Trustee of The Churchill Center.
Headquartered in Chicago, Strate-gic Hotel Capital currently ownstwenty-seven luxury and upscale hotelsand resorts in North America and Eu-rope. The company acquires and asset-manages properties with 200-plusrooms in markets with unique, hard-to-duplicate locations and high barriers toadditional competition. SHC's portfo-lio includes the Essex House in NewYork City; the Ritz-Carlton, LagunaNiguel in Dana Point, California; theFour Seasons Mexico City; the HyattRegency Embarcadero and Park Hyattin San Francisco; the Hyatt Regenciesin New Orleans and on Capital Hill,Washington; the Marriott Hamburg,Germany; the Hotel Inter-ContinentalPraha in Prague, Czech Republic; andthe Marriott Champs Elysees in Paris.SHC (www.shci.com) is a privately heldlimited liability company whose majorstakeholders include the Whitehallfunds and Prudential Insurance Co. ofAmerica.
New Paintings Catalogue:An Appeal for HelpLYME REGIS, DORSET, MARCH 10TH—I am
working with David Coombs, compilerof the 1967 catalogue, Churchill: HisPaintings, on a new updated edition.The original was mainly in black andwhite; the intent for the new edition is
continued overleaf
F I N E S T H O U R I H / 9
DATELINES
CHURCHILL CALENDARLocal events organizers: please send upcoming event notices to the editor for posting here.
If address and email is not stated below, look for it on inside front cover.
21 July: Washington Society for Churchill picnic-book discussion.Contact: Caroline Hartzler, tel. (703) 503-9226
19-22 September: 19th International Churchill Conference, "Churchill andthe Intelligence World," Lansdowne Resort, Leesburg, Va.Contact: Nigel Knocker, Chairman, ICS/UK (see page 2).
30 November: Sir Winston Churchill's 128th birthday will be celebratedwith black tie dinners in Boston, Mass, and Anchorage, Alaska. Contacts:
Boston, Suzanne Sigman ([email protected]), tel. (617) 696-18330;Alaska, James Muller (af)[email protected]), tel. (907) 786-4740.
6-10 November 2003: 20th International Churchill Conference, Hamilton,Bermuda, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Bermuda Conference.Contacts: David Boler ([email protected]), tel. (0207) 558-3522;
and Randy Barber ([email protected]), tel. (905) 881-8550.
2004: 21st Intl. Churchill Conference, 60th Anniversary D-DayPortsmouth, England, sponsored by ICS, UK
New Paintings Catalogue...to achieve all reproductions in colour.This will be the definitive catalogue ofSir Winston's over 500 canvases and weare trying to trace them all and obtaincolour transparencies for reproduction.We have now traced over 450 paintings,discovering some that were not in theoriginal catalogue, which is very excit-ing. We are presently trying to tracethose paintings that have disappeared.
If you own one of Sir Winston'spaintings, or know of the whereaboutsof any—even though you might feelthat we know about it—please contactus. We will treat all information, own-ership and location in the strictest ofconfidence. For publication purposes,paintings can be, if requested, creditedas, for example, "in a Canadian collec-tion" or similar wording.
—Minnie S. Churchill,Churchill Heritage Ltd., Ware House,Lyme Regis, Dorset DT73RH, England,([email protected]).
Painting at Madeira, 1950
David Coombs writes: "You mightbe interested in hearing about some ofthe things I have found. At Chartwell, Idiscovered a large and uncataloguedcache of black and white photographsrelating to Churchill's painting. Theseinclude a number of him working at hiseasel (both before and after WW2) aswell a larger number of photographswhich he used for making paintingsdown the years. The latter were espe-cially interesting. I have made a selec-tion from both categories which I hopewe will be able to include in the newcatalogue.
"A number of lost paintings haveturned up: one for example is that auc-tioned at Balmoral Castle in 1927 forKing George V and Queen Mary. Theson of the original purchaser now ownsit. Only recent extensive correspon-dence with an American owner has re-vealed another painting by Churchill:one that nothing was known of before.This was a gift in 1928 to the artist whopainted the picture that hangs overChurchill's bed at Chartwell: a view ofhis mother's dining room."
Peregrine Spencer ChurchillVERNHAM DEAN, HAMPSHIRE, MARCH 19—
Henry Winston Peregrine Spencer-Churchill, who died today after a shortillness aged 88, was a nephew of SirWinston Churchill and a trustee of theChurchill Archives, containing the per-sonal papers of Sir Winston, his brotherJack, and members of their family.
Peregrine, as he was always known(along with the nickname "Prebbin"),was born 25 May 1913, the second sonof John Strange Spencer-Churchill(1880-1947) and the former LadyGwendeline Bertie ("Goonie"), fourthdaughter of the Seventh Earl of Abing-don. Although six years Winston's ju-nior, Jack was devoted to his brotherand their wives, Clemmie and Goonie,became close confidantes.
In the First World War the twofamilies shared Jack and Goonie's housein Kensington. Peregrine, with his elderbrother Johnny and sister Clarissa, grewup in close proximity to Sir Winston'soffspring and were frequent visitors toboth Lullenden and Chartwell. Johnnywas born in 1909, and Clarissa, whomarried Anthony Eden, followed in1920. Peregrine was educated at Har-row and Cambridge and, in 1954, mar-ried Patricia Ethel Louise of Chesham,Buckinghamshire. She died in 1956,and his second marriage, in 1957, wasto Yvonne Henriette Marie of Rennes,France. There were no children from ei-ther marriage.
In 1993, Peregrine Churchill wasinstrumental in arranging the agree-ment between the Churchill heirs andthe Government over the acquisition ofthe Churchill Papers by the nation.
FINEST HOUR 114/10
DATELINES
Whilst attending the funeral of hiselder brother in 1992, Peregrine, a civilengineer, was shocked at the conditionof the family graves in Bladon, Oxford-shire, not only those of Sir Winston andLady Churchill but of his parents, andhis grandparents, Lord and Lady Ran-dolph Churchill. He proposed to usesome of the profits from the sale of thearchives for the £250,000 restorationwork at the famous country churchyard.He made good his promise, and lived tosee a service of rededication after com-pletion of the work.
Peregrine took a powerful interestin the work of The Churchill Centerand Societies, and was instrumental toresearchers, notably assisting Dr. JohnMather's medical research, whichproved among other things that LordRandolph Churchill did not die ofsyphilis {FH93).
Finest Hour editor Richard Lang-worth has fond memories of his visitsto Peregrine and Yvonne Churchill,who were devoted to each other and totheir forebears: "I well remember Pere-grine showing me the rows of LadyRandolph's diaries, teaching me to lookbeyond the rumors and misstatementsfor the real truth—that Winston's par-ents took far more interest in him thananyone believed, and that Winston didmuch better in school than he preferredto let on. I still routinely quote Pere-grine's words: 'Winston was a verynaughty boy and his parents weredeeply concerned about him.'
"Peregrine had a burning loyalty tothe truth, which he often saw as over-whelmed by innuendo and bad re-search. He was instrumental in movingthe Southampton project and lived tosee its first fruits. He was a great man,self-made and self-reliant. Devoted tohistory, he saw Sir Winston in a bal-anced way, virtues and faults together.And he banked his treasure, as his unclewrote of F. E. Smith, in the hearts of hisfriends."
Peregrine Spencer Churchill wasprivately cremated, and a MemorialService is planned for a later date. He issurvived by his sister Clarissa, Countessof Avon, and by an extended family ofnephews and nieces. —Michael Rhodes
Local and National Events
Meeting at Dallas, November 30th: British Consul Paul Martinez, Barbara Willette, JohnWilliams, John Restrepo and Paula (seated), Dot and Asa Newsom, Jim Brown, Nathan Hughes,Ann Martinez, Charlotte and Earl Nicholson.
DallasOCTOBER 2 IST—Members of TheChurchill Center and their guests gath-ered at the home of Richard and AnneHazlett for a stimulating program byChris Hanger. The program was espe-cially poignant in the wake of Chris'suntimely death a few months later {FH113:8). The program opened with avideotaped message of welcome fromour Patron, Lady Soames, and a video-tape of the launching in Maine of theUSS Winston S. Churchill, and her sub-sequent commissioning in Norfolk,Virginia. The videos were augmentedwith verbal commentary by Chris, whoalso read an e-mail just received that af-ternoon from the ship's Commander,Captain Franken. Winston S. Churchillwas at the time south of Ireland, hergoodwill visits to ports in the UK hav-ing been canceled following the Sep-tember 11th attacks (see "We Stand ByYou," FH 112:10). The program wasfollowed by a reception with wine andhors d'oeuvres.
NOVEMBER 30TH—The 127th anniversaryof Churchill's birth was celebratedtonight with a formal dinner in theMcKinney Room at the Cooper Aero-bics Center. A social hour preceded the
FINEST HOUR 114/11
dinner and various pieces of Churchillmemorabilia were on display. TheBritish Consul, the Hon. Paul Martinezand his wife graced the occasion.
The speaker was Lt. Col. JimBrown, who shared some of the wit andwisdom of Sir Winston Churchill. Thiswas followed by a toast given byNathan Hughes, who fascinated us bydiscussing the precise location of SirWinston on each decade of his birth-day. About thirty members and guestsattended.
Both functions were arranged byour faithful North Texas directors,Paula and John Restrepo.
New Chartwell, N.C.HIGH POINT, NORTH CAROLINA, NOVEMBER
I5TH—One of our loyal members isdoing his part to spread the word. SteveArnold's Arcon, Inc. has recently com-pleted a small residential project knownas "New Chartwell." Steve has namedits three streets Blenheim Court,Chartwell Drive and Number Ten Way:"I have yet to find someone who imme-diately recognizes the significance of allthree names. I am quite certain I won'thave to tell you." (Steve, what's themeaning of Blenheim Court, hey?)
continued overleaf
DATELINES
Errata, FH112More than the usual number of clangers got by us last issue,for which we are mortified, and offer apologies. —Ed.
• Page 12: Churchill visited the United States fifteentimes, not fourteen as we stated. We omitted a key visit:June 1942 when, visiting Roosevelt, he first heard of theloss of Tobruk. Thanks for this to Dr. R. I. MacFarlane.Nobody else saw this?
• Page 14, righthand column: Eric Bingham remindsus that Sedbergh School, famed for its association withBrendan Bracken, is in "Cumbria," not Lancashire. Wemaintain, and believe Bracken would agree, that Sedberghis in the traditional county of Westmoreland, not some po-litical contrivance like "Cumbria."
• Page 17, righthand column: Penelope Dudley Wardwas, of course, mistress to the Prince of Wales, later EdwardVIII; not the Prince of Wales, later Edward VII. Thanksfor this to Paul Courtenay.
• Page 31: Curt Zoller informs us that Orange CountyChurchillians, which sponsored an ad for the San DiegoConference, was omitted from the list of sponsors and sup-porters.
• Page 36: Stupidly, the editor omitted HMS Cossackin describing Churchill's speech to the crews of HMS Ex-eter and Ajax on 23 February 1940 (top of middle col-umn). Of course it was Cossack, not the other ships, which,off Norway, liberated British seamen aboard the Germanprison ship Altmark. Thanks for this to Robert J. Brown.
PAGE 5: ARRRGH!So help us, it was there! The third column of
"Despatch Box" was exactly where we put it, on the left-hand side of page 5, when we last saw the proofs. The finalmagazine showed up with the first column of letters (frompage 4) reprinted in its place! We know what happened,and it will never happen again because we are changing filetransfer methods. Here are the missing letters which wereomitted from page 5:
Vanishing National Anthems (FH 111)Enjoyed your National Anthems article and so will my
Canadian cousins, who know only two verses of "OCanada." Surely no one living ever heard of "Roger Young"and no one (possibly not even yourself because you are tooyoung) knows all the words—except for yours truly!
GERALD LECHTER, FORT LEE, N.J.
For the record, Gerald...
O they've got no time for glory in the infantry,And they've got no use for praises loudly sung,But in every soldier's heart in all the infantry,Shines the name, shines the name of Roger Young.
chorus:Shines the name...Roger Young,Fought and died for the men he marched among.Yes in every soldier's heart in all the infantry,Lives the story of Private Roger Young.
It was he who drew the fire of the enemy,That a company of men might live to fight,And before the deadly fire of the infantry,Stood the man, stood the man we hail tonight.chorus: Stood the man....etc.
On the island of New Georgia in the SolomonsStands a simple wooden cross alone to tellThat beneath the silent coral of the Solmons,Sleeps a man, sleeps a man remembered well.chorus: Sleeps a man....etc.
—Not bad from the eighth grade! Ed.
Holland's "Wilhemus" Preceded "God Save the King"Though I count myself a loyal subject of the Queen
and carry British and Canadian passports, Linda Colley(FH 111:31) is wrong: "God Save the King/Queen" waspreceded by more than a century by the Dutch "Wilhe-mus" song. The "Wilhemus" was adopted in the 1580s asthe Dutch fought their way out of the Spanish Hapsburgempire. Probably written by Philip Marnix (1540-98), itbecame a little more familiar in England after the DutchStatholder, William III, arrived in England in 1688 andwas crowned King the next year. William reigned until1702 and fought with Churchill's ancestor, John Duke ofMarlborough, since the War of Spanish Succession, inwhich the Duke won his glory, was just beginning.
JOHN F. BOSHER, OTTAWA, ONT.
Unadulterated PraiseI bumped into Hugh Segal ("Churchill as a Moder-
ate," Churchill Proceedings 1996-1997) today and he pulledme aside to tell me how much he enjoys FH. From the arti-cles to the recipes, he thinks it's a bang-up job. He wasreading it on a plane and a seatmate asked about it and hetold him it was a secret and he wouldn't tell him how to getone! Of course, I shot him on the spot! I told Hugh Iwould share his plaudits, so consider it done.
RANDY BARBER, PRESIDENT, ICS CANADA
Randy, the immoderates still claim, in the wake of Hugh'sspeech, that WSC was always immoderate, like them. —Ed.
F I N E S T H O U R I U / 1 2
DATELINES
TorontoFEBRUARY 28TH—Toronto's venerable Al-bany Club again served well for "AnEvening with Winston Churchill," thepopular lecture series staged by TheOther Club of Ontario. The speakerwas John Plumpton, President of theChurchill Center and past-President ofICS Canada, who remarked eloquentlyon the continuing relevance ofChurchill in today's world, especially inthe context of September 11 th. He alsomade a moving plea for educational in-stitutions to return to the study of tra-ditional history and not let future gen-erations grow up ignorant of our ownstory. Mr. Plumpton concluded with abrief explanation of the mission of theChurchill Center and Societies, and in-formed us of various initiatives in plan-ning for the future.
During the second half of theevening Garth Webb, a Juno Beach vet-eran, and Don Cooper introducedmembers of the Other Club and theirguests to the fascinating Juno BeachCentre project. The Juno Beach Centrewill open on the site of the CanadianD-Day landing in Normandy, and willserve as a permanent memorial to thisgreat Canadian contribution to worldfreedom. The project will cost severalmillion dollars, part of which is to befinanced by the sale of "donor andmemorial" bricks which will form partof the museum. Following the address,ICS Canada President Randy Barberannounced that a titanium donor brickhad been purchased by ICS-Canada,which will be on display in perpetuity.
A very pleasant evening ended withlight refreshment and a chance to exam-ine several more artifacts from Randy'sbottomless chest of Churchilliana.Thanks go to Norman MacLeod, Presi-dent of the Other Club of Ontario, andhis team for putting the successful eventtogether. Congratulations are also dueto Norm's wife Jean, who is to be in-vested as a member of the Order ofCanada for her services to volunteerism:an award of great distinction presentedto a most deserving lady. Our next"Evening with Winston Churchill" willoccur in the autumn.
—Rafal Heydel-Mankoo ®
AROUND & ABOUT
"Shave his head, pack a hundred or so extrapounds on him, pop a cigar in his mouth,trick him out in a waistcoat with a watch fobstretched across his substantial tummy and—voila!—you've turned George W. Bush intoWinston Churchill." (Thanks to David Ste-jkowski for passing us this cut from the
March 28th Chicago Tribune) Belated
recognition by the French occurred in theJune 2000 issue of France's Historia maga-zine, which spent thirty pages naming Churchill Statesman of the Century. Thefirst article was by Francois Kersaudy, author of Churchill and de Gaulle
(1981), entitled "A Monument of Contradictions." Mike Campbell reportsthat it's "a somewhat frustrating piece: one long list of Kersaudy's ideas on howChurchill was full of contradictions. It's also weirdly written: one long string ofthoughts separated by semicolons. Ultimately positive, Kersaudy does use the'I-word' (Iroquois) and I think there are at least a few questionable pointsraised." Kersaudy concludes: "Under this mass of apparent contradictions, thereexist numerous keys to Sir Winston Spencer Churchill. If they do not open allthe doors, it's because each man guards his part of the mystery. But, followingstep by step, since very young, the peripheries of this fabulous existence, is
something that should enrich all of ours." Okay, if you say so Repeat a lie
often enough and gullible people will believe it. Thus Peter Carlson in theWashington Post Outlook ofMarch 26th. Writing admiringly of The Atlantic
Churchill attack by Christopher Hitchens (see next page), Carlson saidHitchens's "revelation" that an actor delivered Churchill's war speeches over theradio left him "slack-jawed." Replying nastily to our own Chris Dunford, Carl-son said he had "no vested interest in perpetrating [a myth] if it isn't true." Sowe wrote and referred him to "Leading Churchill Myths (2): An actor readChurchill's wartime speeches over by wireless,'" by the late Sir Robert RhodesJames (FH112:52-53): "If we told you the yarn about how Churchill causedthe 1929 stock market crash, would you go slack-jawed again?" Mr. Carlsondid not reply (surprised?)... .And you'll love this one, from The Atlantic's web-site: "We (mistakenly) advertised in the April Atlantic that this Flashbackwould include two articles by Winston Churchill, written early in his career:'Modern Government and Christianity' (January 1912) and 'Naval Organiza-tion, American and British' (August 1917).... Further research turns up the factthat there was in fact another Winston Churchill, an American who lived from1871-1947...." Sometimes you just gotta laugh!... Former U.S. presidentialcandidate Al Gore rallied his party faithful in Florida with a semi-quote fromChurchill's famous quote Never give in—never, never, never, never." But Aladded two "nevers" to his version. Maine Governor Angus King, at the launchof USS Winston S. Churchill, believed WSC's seven words comprised the en-tire speech—will they ever get it right?... HBO's presentation "The GatheringStorm: with Albert Finney as Churchill and Vanessa Redgrave as Clementinehas had rave reviews—and will get one from us next issue. Don't miss it! M>
FINEST HOUR m / 1 3
DATELINES
THE ATLANTIC TAKES A DIVEWe shouldn't be upset about the shrill cries ot the muckrakers.
They give us such great material!
RICHARD M. LANGWORTH
Perhaps in self-defense, The Atlanticwebsite has now posted links to other ar-ticles about Churchill from its archives.See: http:llwww. theatlantic. comlun-boundlflashbkslchurchill. htm
The cover story on the April issueof The Atlantic Monthly—"Churchill Takes A Fall: The
Revisionist Verdict: Incompetent,Boorish, Drunk, and Mostly Wrong,"by Christopher Hitchens—was not sobad as the title suggests.
Hitchens, a paid iconoclastwho regularly skewers phonies ofthe left and right, takes proper aim atthe politicians who've wrapped them-selves in Churchillian rhetoric sinceSeptember 1 lth. The pols are still at it,and unless they begin seriously to mo-bilize the citizenry it's going to take an-other attack to make us realize whatwe're up against. Instead of friskingdowagers at airports and showing uscolored disks to define the currentthreat level, they should have declareda state of war with "the nation of ter-rorism," financed it with War Bonds,plugged porous borders, invaded Iraq,and started discriminating againstMiddle Easterners boarding airplanes.Call it racism—or call it survival. Takeyour pick.
Unfortunately, Hitchens larded his10,347 word critique with every accu-sation against Winston Churchill ex-cept the one about how he caused thestock market crash in 1929. AsChurchill once remarked, "I have neverheard the opposite of the truth statedwith greater precision."
The trouble with this sort of bunkis that unless it is refuted, after awhilepeople believe it. That's already started,with columnists bearing IQ's no higherthan their body temperature going"slack-jawed" at Hitchens's "revela-
"Around and About" onthe preceding page). So here is a re-sponse—only to The Atlantic's mostegregious errors:
1. Actor Norman Shelley's ridicu-lous notion that he deliveredChurchill's war speeches over the BBChas been laid to rest by eyewitness testi-mony for years. What Shelley recorded,apparently in 1943, was an obscure,unpublished Churchill speech, the ori-gin of which has eluded even theChurchill Archives. Neither the PrimeMinister's 13 May speech ("Blood,Toil, Tears and Sweat") nor his 4 Junespeech ("Fight on the Beaches") waseven broadcast by anyone purportingto be Churchill. Sir Martin Gilbert'sofficial biography does quote a letterby Vita Sackville-West of 4 June, im-plying that at least part of that speechwas repeated by the BBC announcer{Winston S. Churchill, London: Heine-mann, 1983, VL469). Shelley mayhave recorded the "Beaches" speechlater, possibly for the BBC overseasservice, but no one has ever been ableto track this.
2. Amusingly, Hitchens even getsthe lie wrong: Shelley's role in "TheChildren's Hour" was "Dennis theDachshund," not "Winnie the Pooh."Poor Mr. Shelley can't win.
3. Undoubtedly the "military andeconomic support of Canada, Aus-tralia, India, and the rest of a gigantic
empire," not to mention thefighting Greeks, comprised a
monumental consolation tothe British during the Blitz.
"Keep low, men, we still havethe Greeks with us."
4. But Hitchens wants Greeceboth ways. He condemns
Churchill for trading Greek free-dom for Stalin's dominance of the
Balkans; then he rabbits on aboutGreece's resistance to tyranny. A morerational view is that saving Greece wasthe best Churchill could make of asorry situation, allowing Greeks toenjoy postwar the liberties they de-fended in 1941.
5. The first air force to bomb civil-ians was the Luftwaffe over Warsaw(and later Rotterdam)—not the RAFover Berlin. In March 1945, Churchillwas the first to question the carpetbombing of Dresden and other Ger-man cities (see Christopher Harmon,"Are We Beasts?", Newport: Naval WarCollege, 1991).
6. The silly charge that Churchillran and hid in the country whenwarned in advance of air raids on Lon-don is almost as old as the accompany-ing canard that he let Coventry burnrather than tip the Germans that he'dread their codes. On the night of theCoventry attack Churchill, headed forthe country, turned round and returnedto London after reading decrypts whichincorrectly held London the target.There he sent his staff to safety andmounted the Air Ministry roof to awaitthe bombers that never came.
Hitchens has "never seen [this] ad-dressed by the Great Man's defenders."Really? It was addressed in The Timesby John Martin on 28 August 1976; byJohn Colville (The Churchillians, Lon-don: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1981).Norman Longmate, Ronald Lewin,Harry Hensley, and David Stafford—
FINEST HOUR I H / 1 4
DATELINES
none of them whitewashes—are justfour historians who, as early as 1979,dismissed the Coventry story for themyth it is. Yet it lives on, a dark seamof treacle emerging regularly from thefever swamps and conspiracy nuts.
7. In cabinet discussions in May1940 Churchill said at one point (not"more than once") that he'd consideredwhether it was part of his duty "toenter into negotiations with That Man
[Hitler]." Onthis slim
X thread
CARTOON BYRALPH SALLON
Hitchens assures us that Churchill didnot want to fight! Numerous historians(e.g., Sheila Lawlor, Churchill and thePolitics of War, Cambridge UniversityPress, 1991) conclude that at thatpoint, Churchill's political position wastoo unfirm overtly to dismiss Halifax'scry for negotiation. By the end of MayChurchill had convinced his cabinet tofight on. History turned on thatachievement.
8. Churchill did not skip Roo-sevelt's funeral out of "pique at Roo-sevelt's repeated refusal to visit Britainduring the war"; in fact he agonizedover missing it. Mr. Hitchens forgetsthat there was a war on. The Allieswere closing on Berlin, the end mightcome any day. There were more press-ing things than funerals to occupyheads of government.
9. "Unless fresh informationcomes to light," Mr. Hitchens will be-lieve the fable that Churchill set up theLusitania sinking to entice the Ameri-cans into World War I. Well, okay, ifhe wants to...but that particular redherring was exploded 20 years ago byHarry V. Jaffa {Statesmanship, Durham:Carolina Academic Press, 1981), andby others since.
10. There is not a shred of evi-dence that Churchill knew in advanceabout the Japanese attack on PearlHarbor and this, again, has beenbroadly rejected, most recently byDavid Stafford {Churchill and SecretService, London: Murray, 1997).
Mr. Hitchens is an able pot-stirrer, but he should bereading the more balanced
historians: Norman Rose, HenryPelling, Warren Kimball, Paul Addison,Robert Rhodes James.
Churchill's faults were on a grandscale, and Mr. Hitchens has managedto list almost all of them, including theimaginary ones, which continue to im-press the irrational. The overridingpoint is that the virtues outweighed thefaults. If his "lapidary phrases" and"gallows humor" have reacquiredrenown, it is because Churchill craftedwords to express what free people werethinking—and because last Septemberthose words proved starkly relevant.
In the 1930s—the period whenHitchens finds him particularly con-temptible—Churchill said: "The worstdifficulties from which we suffer donot come from without. They comefrom within... .They come from a pe-culiar type of brainy people alwaysfound in our country, who, if they addsomething to its culture, take muchfrom its strength."
Brainy people have been celebrat-ing Churchill's feet of clay (and theywere big feet) for half a century. Theirsis an error of proportion. They forgetthat at the key moment in the 20thcentury, as Charles Krauthammerwrote, one man proved indispensable.How sad to find a good writer likeChristopher Hitchens suffering fromthe same amnesia.
FINEST HOUR \UI 15
From the Archives
1. There is no proof that any ofChurchill's famous broadcasts weremade by Norman Shelley. This claim ismade by David Irving in the first vol-ume of his book, Churchill's War, basedapparently on conversations with Shel-ley [although Irving's footnote for saidconversations is dated after Shelley'sdeath! —Ed.]
As far as I can establish, Shelleydid claim to have recorded as Churchillduring the war, but (in public at least)never claimed that he broadcast the fa-mous 1940 speeches contemporane-ously. He may have claimed to havebroadcast the June 4th "Beaches"speech at a later date. The only proofthat his family have been able to offeris a BBC recording of Shelley speakingas Churchill and delivering an addressthat seems to relate to 1942, and doesnot seem to equate with the text of anyChurchill speech held here.
There is no doubt that Churchilldelivered the speeches in the House ofCommons (at least there are hundredsof witnesses to that). However, wherethe argument really falls down, is thatthe speeches of 13 May and 4 Junewere only delivered by Churchill in theCommons and were not broadcast byhim or anyone else at the time (althoughafter the war WSC recorded them forDecca). The speech of 4 June was re-peated by the BBC radio announcer.
2. We have the evidence thatChurchill's speeches were set out by hisprivate office secretaries in the blankverse style that they referred to as"speech form" or "psalm style," so thisdid not originate with William Man-chester's books. Anyone can come tothe Archives Centre and consult theoriginal speaking notes.
3. It is not really my place to com-ment on the "revisionists" as theArchives Centre exists to provide accessto all, and to make the Churchill Pa-pers available for this type of historicaldebate. But I think it is fair to say thatsome of these works are much betterresearched than others.
—Allen Pack woodActing KeeperChurchill Archives Centre, Cambridge M>
125-100-75-50 YEARS AGO
Michael McMenamin
125 Years Ago:Spring 1877-Age 2"Dressed...Like a Girl"
Aletter from his mother describedlife in Dublin with her young son:
"Winston is flourishing tho rather Xthe last 2 days more teeth I think. Ever-est has been bothering me about someclothes for him saying that it was quitea disgrace how few things he had &chow shabby at that." Churchill's grand-daughter, Celia Sandys, offers this por-trait: "Winston had arrived in Dublin amonth after his second birthdaydressed, as was the fashion, like a girl.At that time children were dressed alike,making boys and girls indistinguishableone from the other, for the first fewyears of their lives."
It was early days in Ireland forChurchill's 28-year-old father. In his bi-ography of Lord Randolph, Churchillwrites of the routine into which his fa-ther soon settled: "Five minutes' walkfrom the Viceregal Lodge, on the roadto the Phoenix Park, there stands, amidclustering trees, a little, long, low, whitehouse with a green verandah and a tinylawn and garden.
"This is the 'Little Lodge' and theappointed abode of the private secretary[Lord Randolph] to the Lord-Lieu-tenant. By a friendly arrangement withthat gentleman Lord Randolph waspermitted to occupy it; and here, forthe next four years, his life was mainlylived. He studied reflectively the jerkycourse of administration at the Castle.He played chess with Steinitz, who was
Lady Soames, who published this photoin her Family Album (1982), believes it
to be the earliest of her father.
living in Dublin at this time; he ex-plored Donegal in pursuit of snipe; hefished the lakes and streams of Ireland,wandering about where fancy took him;but wherever he went, and for whateverpurpose, he interested himself in thepeople and studied the questions of thecountry."
100 Years Ago:Spring 1902-Age 27"The Politics of the Future"
In April, Churchill and the otherHooligans voted with the Liberals
against the Tory Government in sup-port of a British journalist namedCartwright who, after serving a twelve-
month sentence in South Africa forcriminal libel over an article critical ofKitchener, was denied the right to re-turn to England. The reason the Gov-ernment offered was: "it seemed inex-pedient to increase the number of per-sons in this country who disseminatedanti-British propaganda."
Speaking in the House, Churchillsaid, "What reason has the governmentto be afraid of Mr. Cartwright? Thereare many people in this country whospread what is called anti-British propa-ganda, but does that alter the opinionof the British people? Has it in any wayimpaired the security of the BritishGovernment? No Government has ben-efited so much by the strong supportand opinions of the masses of the coun-try as this Government. No Govern-ment has less right not to allow thosemasses to receive any opinion withinthe law which may be properly ex-pressed to them. This is a great consti-tutional principle."
Dining with the Hooligans thatevening, after the Liberal Party's motionhad been defeated, Joseph Chamberlaincriticized the young Tory MPs for theirlack of support: "What is the use ofsupporting your own Government onlywhen it is right? It is just when it is inthis sort of pickle that you ought tohave come to our aid."
Churchill records in My Early Lifethat at the conclusion of the dinnerwhere Chamberlain had been "most gayand captivating," he offered this partingadvice: "You young gentlemen have en-tertained me royally, and in return Ishall give you a priceless secret. Tariffs!There are the politics of the future, andof the near future. Study them closelyand make yourselves masters of them,and you will not regret your hospitalityto me." Indeed, it was Chamberlain'sand the Conservative Party's support fortariffs and opposition to Free Tradewhich would lead Churchill out of hisparty in less than two years. At thetime, however, Churchill gave no ap-pearance of courting the Liberals' favor.
The Liberal Parry's motion on thatoccasion had been placed by John Mor-ley, whom Churchill had sharply criti-cized, along with Liberal leader Sir
FlNJ-STlIOWR 1 1 4 / 1 6
125-100-75-50 YEARS AGO
Henry Campbell-Bannerman, at a Con-servative Party dinner in Manchester amonth earlier: "I admire those who dis-play a great deal of patient toleration.Some people are violent for war; othersare violent for peace. People in Man-chester recently listened to one of themost bellicose peacemakers of the time,Mr. John Morley. (Laughter.) I disagreefrom Mr. Morley in almost every singleimportant particular, but I have great re-spect for Mr. Morley. Although Mr.Morley's views are pernicious—wouldbe pernicious if they attained to an elec-toral majority—it must nevertheless berecognized that his are the views of anhonest man, a man who, somehow, inspite of his views, one does not alto-gether dissociate from the fortunes ofhis country. (Hear, hear.)
"One would not like to say thesame about Sir Henry Campbell-Ban-nerman. (Laughter.) One cannot saythat he is an honest exponent of theviews of a strong man. (Renewed laugh-ter.)....The words a great satirist of thelast century applied to Sir Robert Peelmight be brought up to date and madeto read (in the phraseology of thesatirist's last will and testament), 'I giveand bequeath to Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman my patience. He will wantit all before he becomes Prime Ministerof England. But in the event of SirHenry Campbell-Bannerman's becom-ing Prime Minister of England my pa-tience is then to revert to the Englishpeople.' (Loud laughter.)"
75 Years Ago:Spring 1927 • Age 52"Buoyant Mischievousness"
Churchill's third budget represented,in his own words, "the limits of
what could be done by way of taxationwithout checking a trade revival."Churchill was opposed to further taxincreases. As he wrote privately on 16April after presenting his budget: "Wehave assumed since the war, largelyunder the guidance of the Bank of Eng-land, a policy of deflation, debt repay-ment, high taxation, large sinking fundsand Gold Standard. This has raised our
credit, restored our exchange and low-ered the cost of living. On the otherhand it has produced bad trade, hardtimes, an immense increase in unem-ployment involving costly and unwiseremedial measures....This debt and tax-ation lie like a vast wet blanket acrossthe whole process of creating newwealth by new enterprise."
Nevertheless, Churchill's budgetwas well received. Prime Minister Stan-ley Baldwin wrote to the King describ-ing Churchill's presentation to theHouse: "Mr. Churchill as a star turn hasa power of attraction which nobody inthe House of Commons canexcel....There is in Mr. Churchill anunder current of buoyant mischievous-ness which frequently makes its appear-ance on the surface in some picturesquephrase or playful sally at the expense ofhis opponents."
Lord Winterton, who as EdwardTumour was an original member ofThe Other Club, wrote in a private let-ter on 6 June: "The great Parliamentaryevent was Winston's Budget speech, Ithought it a masterpiece, and about thebest I have ever heard. Winston is awonderful fellow...head and shouldersabove anyone else in the House (not ex-cluding Lloyd George) in Parliamentaryposition, and both oratorical and debat-ing skill he has suddenly acquired,quite late in his Parliamentary life, animmense fund of tact, patience, goodhumour and banter on almost all occa-sions; no one used to 'suffer foolsungladly' more fully than Winston,now he is friendly and accessible toeveryone, both in the House, and in thelobbies, with the result that he has be-come what he never was before the war,very popular in the House generally—agreat accretion to his already formida-ble parliamentary power."
50 Years Ago:Spring 1952-Age 77"He Hated Yes-Men"
In a cabinet meeting on 13 March,Churchill's proposals on three defense
issues—the sale of arms to India andPakistan; priority over civil production
FINI-ST HOUR I H / 17
for certain defense equipment; and theenlargement of industrial capacity fortank production—were all overruled.Martin Gilbert quotes Lord Alexander,the Minister of Defence, on how WSChandled disagreements: "Winston lovedargument. Whenever I saw him andBrendan Bracken together they werequarreling. That's what Winston liked;he hated yes-men—he had no use forthem. What he wanted was people whowould stand up to him. Winston wouldput forward some point of view andBrendan would say straight out, 'That'sall wrong.' Then Winston would ques-tion him at length, probing his position.Once, in Cabinet, when I was Ministerof Defence, Winston began runningdown the Army. I got very angry andburst out: 'That's all nonsense. You don'tknow anything about the Army....' I wasvery outspoken. Winston just grunted.When I had finished my outburst Ithought, 'That's done it. I've over-stepped the mark.' That same night wewere to dine together at a mutualfriend's house. I was rather anxious.Winston came up to me, and I began toapologize. Then a smile came over hisface. 'Dear boy,' he said, you said whatyou felt had to be said.' And we satdown to dinner. He bore no malice."
Churchill continued to be con-cerned about the after effects of hisstroke, telling Lord Moran on 23March: I have noticed a decline in men-tal and physical vigour. I require moreprodding to mental effort....I'm asquick at repartee in the House as ever Iwas. I enjoy Questions there. Do youthink I ought to see Brain?" The suit-ably named Sir Russell Brain wasChurchill's neurologist.
On April 29th, his daughter Sarahwas in the United States and read amessage from her father at CarnegieHall upon the fourth anniversary of thecreation of Israel: "As a Zionist from thedays of the Balfour Declaration, I havewatched with admiration the coura-geous effort of Israel to establish her in-dependence and prosperity. May thisand future anniversaries be celebratedwith growing confidence and good willby Israel's friends throughout the
®
f-"KOMTf[fiCA\O\• ( I )
LOUR "In Remembrance or His Late Majesty ana
to Commemorate tne Golden Jubilee 01 Her Majesty Queen Elizabetb II
WINSTON S. CHURCHILL
In this year of the Golden Jubilee, when acts of com-memoration for King George VI have occurred across theCommonwealth, we publish, at the suggestion of RafalHeydel-Mankoo, Churchill's moving and eloquent tributefrom fifty years ago. "Churchill's eulogy," Rafal writes, "is oneof the finest ever made. His passage: 'The King walked withdeath...' is most moving and his closing homage to the newQueen is inspiring." Most moving of all were Churchill'swords on his floral tribute to Britain's wartime King, takenfrom those on the Victoria Cross: "For Valour."
When the death of the King was announced to usyesterday morning there struck a deep andsolemn note in our lives which, as it resound-
ed far and wide, stilled the clatter and traffic of twentieth-century life in many lands, and made countless millionsof human beings pause and look around them. A newsense of values took, for the time being, possession ofhuman minds, and mortal existence presented itself to somany at the same moment in its serenity and in its sorrow,in its splendour and in its pain, in its fortitude and in itssuffering.
The King was greatly loved by all his peoples. Hewas respected as a man and as a prince far beyond themany realms over which he reigned. The simple dignity ofhis life, his manly virtues, his sense of duty—alike as aruler and a servant of the vast spheres and communitiesfor which he bore responsibility—his gay charm andhappy nature, his example as a husband and a father in hisown family circle, his courage in peace or war—all thesewere aspects of his character which won the glint of admi-ration, now here, now there, from the innumerable eyeswhose gaze falls upon the Throne.
We thought of him as a young naval lieutenant inthe great Battle of Jutland. We thought of him when
This broadcast of 7 February 1952 was published by BBC's The Lis-tener a week later. Single-volume editions (Woods A135) were pub-lished in 1952 by The Times Publishing Co. and in miniature formby Achille ]. St. Onge, Worcester, Massachusetts. Reprinted by kindpermission of the copyright holder, Winston S. Churchill.
calmly, without ambition, or want of self-confidence, heassumed the heavy burden of the Crown and succeededhis brother whom he loved and to whom he had renderedperfect loyalty. We thought of him, so faithful in his studyand discharge of State affairs; so strong in his devotion tothe enduring honour of our country; so self-restrained inhis judgments of men and affairs; so uplifted above theclash of party politics, yet so attentive to them; so wiseand shrewd in judging between what matters and whatdoes not.
All this we saw and admired. His conduct on theThrone may well be a model and a guide to constitution-al sovereigns throughout the world today and also infuture generations. The last few months of King George'slife, with all the pain and physical stresses that heendured—his life hanging by a thread from day to day,and he all the time cheerful and undaunted, stricken inbody but quite undisturbed and even unaffected in spir-it—these have made a profound and an enduring impres-sion and should be a help to all.
He was sustained not only by his natural buoyancy,but by the sincerity of his Christian faith. During theselast months the King walked with death as if death were acompanion, an acquaintance whom he recognized anddid not fear. In the end death came as a friend, and aftera happy day of sunshine and sport, and after "good night"to those who loved him best, he fell asleep as every manor woman who strives to fear God and nothing else in theworld may hope to do.
The nearer one stood to him the more these factswere apparent. But the newspapers and photographs ofmodern times have made vast numbers of his subjects ableto watch with emotion the last months of his pilgrimage.We all saw him approach his journey's end. In this periodof mourning and meditation, amid our cares and toils,every home in all the realms joined together under theCrown may draw comfort for tonight and strength for thefuture from his bearing and his fortitude.
There was another tie between King George and hispeople. It was not only sorrow and affliction that theyshared. Dear to the hearts and the homes of the people isthe joy and pride of a united family. With this all the trou-
FlNHSTl lOt . 'K 1 14/ 18
bles of the world can be borne and all its ordeals at leastconfronted. No family in these tumultuous years was hap-pier or loved one another more than the Royal Familyaround the King.
No Minister saw so much of the King during thewar as I did. I made certain he -was kept informedof every secret matter, and the care and thor-
oughness with which he mas-tered the immense daily flowof State papers made a deepmark on my mind.
Let me tell you anotherfact. On one of the days whenBuckingham Palace wasbombed the King had justreturned from Windsor. Oneside of the courtyard wasstruck, and if the windowsopposite out of which he andthe Queen were looking hadnot been, by the mercy ofGod, open, they would bothhave been blinded by the bro-ken glass instead of beingonly hurled back by theexplosion. Amid all that wasthen going on, although I sawthe King so often, I neverheard of this episode till along time after. TheirMajesties never mentioned itor thought it of more signifi-cance than a soldier in theirarmies would of a shell burst-ing near him. This seems tome to be a revealing trait inthe royal character.
There is no doubt that of all the institutions whichhave grown up among us over the centuries, or sprunginto being in our lifetime, the constitutional monarchy isthe most deeply founded and dearly cherished by thewhole association of our peoples. In the present genera-tion it has acquired a meaning incomparably more pow-erful than anyone had dreamed possible in former times.The Crown has become the mysterious link, indeed I maysay the magic link, which unites our loosely bound, butstrongly interwoven Commonwealth of nations, states,and races....
For fifteen years George VI was King. Never at anymoment in all the perplexities at home and abroad, in pub-lic or in private, did he fail in his duties. Well does he deservethe farewell salute of all his governments and peoples.
It is at this time that our compassion and sympathygo out to his consort and widow. Their marriage was a love
match with no idea of regal pomp or splendour. Indeed,there seemed to be before them only the arduous life ofroyal personages, denied so many of the activities of ordi-narv folk and having to give so much in ceremonial pub-lic service. May I say—speaking with all freedom—thatour hearts go out tonight to that valiant woman, withfamous blood of Scotland in her veins, who sustained KingGeorge through all his toils and problems, and brought up
with their charm and beautythe two daughters whomourn their father today.May she be granted strengthto bear her sorrow.
To Queen Mary, hismother, another of whosesons is dead—the Duke ofKent having been killed onactive service—there belongsthe consolation of seeinghow well he did his duty andfulfilled her hopes, and ofknowing how much he caredfor her.
N!
The PM bids good-bye to the King and Queen after aluncheon at No. 10 Downing Street, 28 October 1941.
"ow I must leave thetreasures of the pastand turn to the
future. Famous have been thereigns of our queens. Some ofthe greatest periods in ourhistory have unfolded undertheir sceptre. Now that wehave the second QueenElizabeth, also ascending theThrone in her twenty-sixthyear, our thoughts are carriedback nearly four hundredyears to the magnificent fig-
ure who presided over and, in many ways, embodied andinspired the grandeur and genius of the Elizabethan age.
Queen Elizabeth II, like hei predecessor, did notpass her childhood in any certain expectation of theCrown. But already we know her well, and we understandwhy her gifts, and those of her husband, the Duke ofEdinburgh, have stirred the only part of theCommonwealth she has yet been able to visit. She hasalready been acclaimed as Queen of Canada.
We make our claim too, and others will come for-ward also, and tomorrow the proclamation of her sover-eignty will command the loyalty of her native land and ofall other parts of the British Commonwealth and Empire.
I, whose youth was passed in the august, unchal-lenged and tranquil glories of the Victorian era, may wellfeel a thrill in invoking once more the prayer and theanthem, "God save the Queen!" M>
FINEST HOUR 114/19
CHURCHILLS WOMEN
ast October 23rd,hundreds gath-
ered in a marqueein the Royal Geograph-ical Society's groundsto hear the official bi-ographer speak of thewomen who matteredin Winston Churchill's
life. Churchill, we weretold during the introduc-
tion, is a subject thatarouses strong passions. In-
deed, no sooner than the dayafter the announcement of Sir Mar-
tin's lecture, an indignant answer-phone message was leftwith the RGS claiming that the title of the talk was an"insult to the great man"!
The indignant caller need not have worried: whereChurchill is concerned, such a title carries no puerile im-plications, particularly given the speaker, and the presenceof Sir Winston's daughter, Lady Soames. As we have cometo expect from Sir Martin, the session was gripping, fre-quently funny, and filled with fascinating glimpses intothe human side of Churchill.
Of the women in Churchill's early life, the first was ofcourse his mother, Lady Randolph Churchill. Winston,she wrote, was a "demanding son," and Sir Martin gaveplenty of examples to show what she meant.
Mr. Courts is a member of the International Churchill Societyof the UK and is is training to work as a barrister. He lives in BalsallCommon, near Coventry in Warwickshire.
Sir Martin Gilbert Recalls
tke Women Wko Made tke Man
PRECIS BY ROBERT COURTS
"I am a pretty dull and paltry scribbler,but my stick as I write carries my heart along with it."
—Sir Winston to Lady Churchill, 1963
Ever first: Elizabeth Everest, left, whom he loved all his life; hismother Jennie (oval), who advanced his causes (sketch by Sargent).
Even at the early age of twelve, Winston was a greatletter-writer, possessed of a precocious talent, whowrote to get others to do what he wanted them to do.In addition to frequent appeals for visits, he wrote tohis mother at the time of Queen Victorias Jubilee,explaining how much he wanted to see Buffalo Bill.
Unfortunately, this would require that he leaveBrighton, where he was at school with the Thompson sis-ters. He wanted his parents to demand that he be releasedto the Jubilee, and went so far as to draft their proposedletter. The request did not, unsurprisingly, cite Buffalo Billas a reason! Winston followed up by saying he was "intorment" over the delay in his mother's reply. Needless tosay, he got his way.
Churchill unashamedly used his mother's influencewell into his twenties. His letters are full of phrases like"please exert yourself," "it is no use to preach the gospel ofpatience," and "leave no stone unturned." It was LadyRandolph to whom he turned to in order to further hiscareer. On his plans to go to Egypt as part of the Omdur-man campaign, he exhorted her to "strike while the iron ishot" and to leave "no cutlet uncooked."
A major influence in Churchill's young life was hisgreat-aunt, the Dowager Duchess of Marlborough. Whileconsidering Winston "affectionate, not naughty," she alsofelt that he was too "excitable," which he made worse bygoing out too much. His school reports frequently dis-agreed with this generous appraisal, and his parents sug-gested the idea of a tutor for the school holidays, an ideawhich was greeted with opprobrium. "Some enemy hassown fears in your mind," he wrote to his mother: "pleasegive me a chance [to acquit myself] of the evil of which Iam accused." He wrote to the woman he called his"deputy mother," Lady Wilton (a friend of his parents),"my mother is incensed against me."
His true "deputy mother" was probably his nanny,Elizabeth Everest, the dominant female influence of hisyouth. He held her in affection long after boys were sup-posed to leave their nannies behind. Sir Martin quoted an
FINEST HOUR J H / 2 0
Relatives. Left: Grandmama Fanny andsister-in-law Goonie wedding brother Jack,1908. Oval: "Deputy Mother" Lady Wilton.
occasion when he asked forhelp with his teeth, whichwere giving him trouble. Mrs. Everest replied with a num-ber of well-intentioned but bizarre remedies, includingpulling socks over his head when he went to sleep. Hismother replied more practically, telling him that heshould brush them!
Once the prima facie reason for her employment waspast, Mrs. Everest was peremptorily dismissed as theChurchills' nanny. Aghast, Winston wrote to his parentsappealing for her better treatment. His appeal was in vain:she was dismissed by letter, without even the customarycourtesy of an interview with her employer. The fate ofMrs. Everest, and so many of her class, had a great effecton Winston, and influenced him during his radical yearsas a crusading Liberal MP. It was through Mrs. Everestthat he saw the working class, with whom he would other-wise have had no contact.
To the women in his life Churchill confided,amongst other things, the realities of warfare. Hewas critical of the new dum-dum bullets which
caused such horrific injuries. These, he said, were "not [tobe] alluded to in print." To his grandmother he explainedhis disgust, but his mother was not wholly impressed byhis letters, which she felt were too boastful. Not for thefirst time, he had to apologize.
Flames. Left: Ethel Barrymore, who said she turned him down.Above right: first love Molly Hackett. Above: Muriel Wilson as"Vashti." Top (overlapped): Pamela Plowden, "the most beautifulgirl that I have ever seen." Photographs from the official biography.
Perhaps one of the most profound influences onChurchill, albeit not one of the most obvious, came fromLady Gwendoline ("Goonie"), his sister-in-law. It was shewho in 1915 introduced him to painting, which wouldprovide him with so much solace and enjoyment for therest of his life. Another woman, Lady Lavery, taught himhow to attack a canvas. "Wallop, smash, clean no longer"was her approach, and Winston wholeheartedly adoptedit: "I fell upon my victim with berserk fury," as he charac-teristically put it.
Churchill had a number of lady friends before hemarried Clementine, the first being Molly Hackett, a rela-tionship cut off when she married someone else. Next wasMuriel Wilson, who tried to help Churchill cure himselfof his lisp, the speech impediment that caused him muchirritation. Repeatedly she practiced with him the line,"The Spanish ships I cannot see for they are not in sight."Engagement was discussed, but Muriel wanted someonewith good financial prospects, and this Winston could notoffer. Actress Ethel Barrymore also turned him down.
Pamela Plowden, whom Winston held "the mostbeautiful girl that I have ever seen," was the most seriousearly love, and they had a lifelong friendship: fifty yearslater he was to write to her, "I cherish your signal acrossthe years....I was a freak, but you saw some qualities." >>
FINI-ST HOUR I H / 2 1
Their relationship did not work: in 1900 Pamela com-plained hat he was "incapable of affection." Churchill re-sponded: "Perish the thought. I love one above all others.And I shall be constant. I am no fickle gallant capriciouslyfollowing the fancy of the hour. My love is deep andstrong....Who is this that I love. Listen—as the Frenchsay—over the page I will tell you." Over the page hewrote: "Yours vy sincerely, Winston S. Churchill."
Ultimately, of course, as Sir Martin continued, hiswife Clementine was the "rock for his career."Their relationship had an odd start: when they
first met he was too shy to speak to her. A few weeks afterthis meeting, the young Assistant Secretary for theColonies was present at a colonial states meeting in Lon-don, where a rumour emerged of his engagement withHelen Botha, daughter of the South African general. TheManchester Guardian presented its compliments, and for-mer love Muriel Wilson spoke of her hope for "littleBothas." But there was no engagement.
Shortly after, Winston was sat next to Clementine at aparty, but spent his time talking to the girl on the otherside of him. At the end of the dinner he noticed her, andasked if she would read a copy of his new book. She saidshe would, if he would send it round. He forgot!
Despite these false starts, fate intervened and their re-lationship blossomed. Clementine would witness at firsthand the great strains of Winston's political life, and wasalways the greatest support to him. He feared that he wasa "dull companion" and said, "I wish I were more varied."But politics was his life, and he knew that one has to be"true to oneself."
In time Churchill was to become a loving husbandand then a father, cautioning Clementine, "...do not let[the children] suck the paint off" their new toys. Despitehis affection for his family, he frequently caused Clemen-tine pain and anxiety. He loved flying, but three of his in-structors were killed, one in a machine that Winston him-self had frequently used. Clementine begged him to de-sist, which eventually he did ("this is a wrench"), admit-ting to her that he was sorry to have enjoyed himself "atyour expense."
After his resignation over the Dardanelles campaignin 1915, a period in which Clementine thought "hewould die of grief," Churchill went to the trenches inFrance, writing Clementine a letter to be opened in theevent of his death. It is a revealing document. She was tobe his sole literary executor; she was to get hold of his pa-pers relating to the Dardanelles, and to ensure that "thetruth be known." Randolph, he wrote, would carry on hiswork. Touchingly he told her: "do not grieve...death isonly an incident...I have been happy." Clementine hadtaught him to know "how noble a woman's heart to be."
As we know, Churchill survived six months on theWestern Front, after which he needed to rebuild his ca-
Family. Upper left: ClementineHozier at the time of her engage-ment to Churchill, 1908. Above:Clementine with their daughterDiana, 1910. Left: WSC withRandolph at the seaside, 1912.Official Biography photographs.
reer. Crucial to Churchill over the next twenty years werea number of secretaries whom he worked hard but gen-uinely cared for. A key secretary during the wildernessyears was Mrs. Violet Pearson; Churchill provided for herand paid for her daughter's education after her retirement.There was Katherine Hill, who was the first to be residentat Chartwell and who served throughout the SecondWorld War. There were Miss Holmes and Miss Layton(now honorary member Elizabeth Nel), who, as Sir Mar-tin said, "saw him in all moods and lights." In addition topolitical work, they were vital in Churchill's massive out-pouring of books.
He wrote Clementine a ceaseless stream of letters.Even in his eighties, he would still write to her, albeit atthis point with great difficulty. On her seventy-eighthbirthday in 1963 he wrote her a birthday letter in his ownhand, as he had every year for fifty-five years: "I am apretty dull and paltry scribbler but my stick as I write car-ries my heart along with it."
Sir Martin concluded with a reference to some of themost important women in Churchill's life, his children.Diana, Sarah and Mary offered him support when he was"up" and comfort and encouragement when he was de-pressed, especially towards the end of his life, when blowsand disappointments came his way and the first criticalbooks began to be published. In the presence of hisdaughter Mary, Sir Martin quoted her own words to herfather, which sum up better than any others whatChurchill did for the world: "In addition to all the feel-ings a daughter has for a loving, generous father, I oweyou what every Englishman, woman & child does—Lib-erty itself." »
: I N H S T H O U R 114/22
BLETCHLEY PARK: WHAT'S NEW IN 702A tribute to tne perseverance and dedication or Rita and Jack Darran
DOUGLAS HALL
Taken with friends atChartwell, this is Jack's
favourite photo of Rita,whom we all mourn deeply(FH113:8-9). Jack tells usthat when he first took aninterest in collectingChurchilliana, Rita enthu-siastically immersed herselfin the distaff side of thefamily, on which shequickly gained expertise.Together they created thebrilliant display that wel-comes visitors to Bletchley,recounting the saga in theartifacts of the Churchillyears. Herewith FH Fea-tures Editor Douglas Hallrecounts the move of Jack'scollection to larger quarterson the premises.
In "History Lives at Ditchley and Bletchley" {FH 85)we outlined the Second World War role of the top se-cret code-breaking establishment at Bletchley Park,
Buckinghamshire, and its inestimable value to WinstonChurchill in securing victory. "Bletchley Park Bloomswith Churchilliana" {FH 91) described the superb Dar-rah-Harwood collection of Winston Churchill memora-bilia which had been installed in two rooms of the Bletch-ley Park Mansion in time to celebrate the 50th anniver-sary of D-Day.
In the years since, thousands of visitors have stoppedat Bletchley (it is now open every weekend and by specialarrangement during the week) to view the ever-growingassemblage of exhibitions, displays and reenactments il-lustrating the rich and diverse history of the site and itsinvolvement in military intelligence, electronics and com-puting, cryptography and code-breaking, telecommunica-tions, radar and air traffic control. The vast majority ofthose visitors have been enthralled by Jack and Rita Dar-rah's magnificent exhibition of Churchill memorabilia,and the sad recent loss of Rita {FH 113:8) reminds us thatan update is in order.
The various attractions at Bletchley Park are largelyrun by an enthusiastic band of volunteers, but to securethe long-term future and continued development of allthe historic exhibitions the Bletchley Park Trust is aiming
to achieve fully funded charitable status and to create apermanent living memorial to all those fine achievements.The Mansion will generate a significant income whenconverted to a Conference Centre and so, to make way,Jack and Rita moved their Churchilliana exhibition into alarge refurbished room in "A" Block— an operation in-volving, according to Jack, much "blood, toil, tears andsweat." The bonus is that there is now more space inwhich to display the collection to even greater effect.
"A" Block was the first "permanent" building to beerected at Station "X"—the earlier wartime overflow fromthe Mansion had been accommodated in a collection ofwooden army huts—and was heavily constructed in 1941of concrete reinforced with more than 200 bracing steelgirders. The fear of a gas attack by the Luftwaffe was stillvery real at the time and the building was provided withhermetically sealing doors, a much reduced window areaand heavy, airtight window blinds. The original use of theroom now occupied by the Churchilliana exhibit was tohouse large wall charts of the Atlantic, on which the posi-tions and movements of German U-boats were plotted asthe intercepted signals traffic was decrypted and analyzed.After the end of the war "A" Block was taken over by theCivil Aviation Authority for use as its training school,which kept it in an excellent state of repair until the CAAvacated the site in 1991. continued overleaf.
FINEST HOUR 114/23
From fencing at Harrow to the Admiralty in WW1, painting and horse racing to "Winsome Hats," Jack's glass cases tell the whole story.
Winston Churchill himself visited the code-break-ing operation at Bletchley Park on 6 September 1941.Sixty years later, on 23 September 2001, an impressiveturnout of younger Churchills descended upon the Parkto open the relocated Churchilliana exhibition. Threegreat-grandchildren of Sir Winston and progeny of hisgrandson Winston were in attendance: Randolph, Marinaand Jack, with Randolph's two small daughters, attractingmuch attention centre stage, as great-great-granddaugh-ters of Sir Winston and the fifth generation.
Randolph revealed that he was born on 22 January1965, just two days before Sir Winston died, and that hisgrandfather (also called Randolph, in the family traditionof using Winston and Randolph alternately) wrote toClementine telling her the news: "In the midst of deathwe are in life." Jack Darrah had asked Randolph to pro-vide a photograph of himself, preferably in his naval uni-form, to be added to the burgeoning gallery of distin-guished visitors to the exhibition; but Randolph explainedthat his naval career had been short, modest and suffi-ciently long ago that his uniform no longer fitted him! In-stead he presented Jack with a 120-year-old photograph ofhis great-grandfather, aged seven, in a sailor's suit.
Presiding over the re-opening ceremony was SirChristopher Chataway, Chairman of the Bletchley ParkTrust, best remembered by many present as having repre-sented Great Britain at the Olympic Games in 1952 and1956 and for holding the world 5,000 metres record in1954. A Member of Parliament from 1958 to 1974, SirChristopher recalled that his "finest hour" had probablyoccurred in 1955 when he was a very young and callowMP and Sir Winston came and sat next to him on aHouse of Commons smoking room sofa: "I had to keeppinching myself," he said, "to make sure I wasn't dreamingand it really was my great hero, the Sir Winston Churchill,sitting beside me."
Christian and Danielle Pol-Roger donated a case ofWinston Churchill cuvee Champagne to ensure that thetoasts were drunk in an appropriate fashion and, at thelast minute, decided to come over from France themselvesto see the exhibition. Christine Large, chief executive offi-cer of the Bletchley Park Trust, welcomed the visitors—well over 100 invited guests were substantially augmentedby members of the public. ICS UK was represented byformer chairman and trustee David Boler and by mem-bership secretary Eric Bingham.
PINHST HOUR m/24
WW2 gets heavy coverage, with fascinating souvenirs and chinaware, and a bit of Hitleriana to remind us of who the enemy was.
SUNDAY JUNE Z8IIFOR SEVEN a.
A fascinating moment occurred during the showingof a short film of Winston Churchill's wartime exploits.Little Zoe Churchill, seated on her mother's lap, viewedthe jerky, grainy, black and white pictures and asked in astage whisper, "Mummy, which one of those men is mygreat-great-grandfather?" "Shush," Catherine replied, "he'sthe one in the white suit." I wonder what thoughts thoseevocative images had conjured up in that little girl's mind?
Churchill'sGeese
In com-memoration ofthe opening ofthe newChurchill Room,Bletchley ParkPost Office has created its own little piece of art and his-tory in the form of a postal cover. A key feature is thespecially commissioned portrait of Churchill by localartist Danny Rogers. A set of 1974 Churchill Centenarystamps has been added to each cover and cancelled onthe day with Bletchley Park Post Office's unique date
stamp. Only 1000 of these hand finished covers were is-sued.
This new Churchill portrait is on a backgroundrepresenting the Atlantic Ocean and the Stars and Stripesof the United States. The latter symbolizes Churchill'sAmerican heritage and the strong bonds that exist be-tween the USA and the UK. The shadowy "geese" at hisshoulder are looking westward towards their vital task.The "golden egg" is their achievement in cracking the"unbreakable" U-boat Enigma code. On 28 Septemberthe Enigma film based on Bletchley Park's race to crackthe code and save a vital convoy from destruction was re-leased.
The cover is available, inclusive of post, direct fromBletchley Park Post Office at £9.95 ($15 US) or £17.95($30 US) for a specially mounted version that includescopies of the artist's working sketches. Contact the PostOffice for more information through their website(www.bletchleycovers.com) or at The Mansion, BletchleyPark Milton Keynes, MK3 6EB, United Kingdom. Theproceeds from sales of the cover will now be donated toNew York disaster fund charities on behalf of BletchleyPark Trust and its volunteers. $
FINEST HOUR iw/25
FROM THE CANON (2)
A SILENT TOAST TO
WILLIAM WILLETT
On a morning ride through PettsWood, Willett was struck hy the tactthat the minds or houses were closedeven though the sun was rully risen."Why," he thought, "doesn'teveryone get up an hour earlier?
WINSTON S. CHURCHILL
It is one of the paradoxes of history that we shouldowe the boon of summer time, which gives everyyear to the people of this country between 160 and
170 hours more daylight leisure, to a war which plungedEurope into darkness for four years, and shook the foun-dations of civilization throughout the world.
I was one of the earliest supporters of DaylightSaving. I gave it my voice and my vote in Parliament ata time when powerful interests and bitter and tenaciousprejudices were leagued against it, and while the mass ofthe population was either indifferent or scornful.
The movement to secure this great public reformwas launched by Mr. William Willett (1865-1915). Helived at Chislehurst, and the idea of saving daylightoccurred to him in his early morning rides on St. Paul'sCray Common and in the adjoining Petts Wood, whichis now the Willett Memorial Park.
He adopted this cause as, in an earlier generation,Samuel Plimsoll devoted himself to a crusade for the sav-ing of life at sea, and, like Plimsoll, won an enduringname. His tireless exertions, vision, enthusiasm and dri-ving power kept the movement alive in the face of everydiscouragement. But had it not been for the EuropeanWar it would never have attained success. In the crush ofthat war people were forced to give up old prejudicesand shut off the sluggish inertia of their minds. So,
Obscure among the "potboilers" from his Chartwell "factory" duringthe Wilderness Years, Churchill's salute to the creator of SummerTime was published in the Pictorial Weekly for 28 April 1934 (WoodsA232/1) and in the 1975 Collected Essays (ICS A145). Reprinted bykind permission of the copyright holder, Winston S. Chutchill.
O -cLJ- CJ>
if
when in 1925 the emergency daylight saving of wartimewas made permanent by Act of Parliament, there wasvirtually no opposition.
By then, of course, the country was able to appre-ciate, from experience, the benefits of summer time.These are indeed widespread; rich and poor, young andold, country and town dwellers, all alike enjoy the extrahours of daylight.
The greatest beneficiaries, however, have been theworking classes, and particularly those who live in thetowns. Agriculturists, in spite of their bad life, very oftenpoor wages, and an absence of interests and variety, havethe one great consolation that they are in close touchwith Nature from day to day and year to year.
Such is not the fortune of the urban population.They live in artificial conditions, and summer time,which gives them an opportunity to correct the disad-vantages of these conditions, is therefore of immeasur-ably greater value to them. To the swarms of workers inmines and mills, factories and shops, these 160 hoursmore daylight leisure in which to make use of parks andgardens, and to indulge in some healthy and restful formof recreation, mean much more than most of us realize.
It is not only the increase in the hours of daylightleisure which is a benefit; it is the increase of the blockof leisure which has been secured by working classes.With two hours a man might do something to get intothe country, or to the playing-fields, but that left practi-cally no time for exercise or amusement. But with threeor three and a half hours much more can be done.
Then there is fine work, which imposes a strain onthe eyesight of those engaged in it. In so far as this isdone in daylight, there is probably a saving of the eye-sight of the workers. There is also the clear and obviousadvantage in economizing the use of artificial light.
These advantages seem so clear and obvious today,that it is difficult to realize and recapture the mood in
FINEST HOUR 114/26
which the idea of summer time was received when, earlyin the 20th century, Mr. William Willett wrote his pam-phlet, The Waste of Daylight, and Mr. Robert Pearceintroduced it into the House of Commons a Bill to giveeffect to his proposals.
It is instructive to recall some of the argumentswhich were advanced against the measure. It wasopposed, by one section of the community which foundspokesmen in Parliament, on moral grounds. The Houseof Commons was told that it was in danger of adoptinghypocritical time—of departing from truth in matters oftime; and the hope was expressed that we should notbegin lying about this subject.
As I pointed out in a speech on the second readingof the Daylight Saving Bill of 1909, the evil was donealready. In this matter the country had begun lying along time before. When local times which varied in dif-ferent parts of the country were assimilated, a greatdeparture from truth was undoubtedly made.
This moral argument was, indeed, absurd,although I believe that its echoes still linger in someremote districts, where rustic "last-ditchers" refuse toalter their clocks and watches throughout the summer. Itis not very easy to discover ultimate sanctions for anyhuman or temporal arrangements. Our arrangement oftime is conventional, and was probably fixed accordingto what was considered to be the general convenience.
There can, indeed, be no natural disharmony intrying to make the waking hours correspond as closely aspossible with the hours of daylight and the hours ofsleep with the hours of darkness. In countries farthernorth than ours the hours of daylight are so long thatthere may be no necessity for altering the clock. In coun-tries farther south there is so little difference between thewinter and the summer hours that no such step may becalled for. Even so, summer time has beenadopted extensively in other lands.
But in these latitudes there is animmense variation between the extreme sea-sons of the year, and, in spite of thatimmense variation, there was, until thepassing of the first Summer Time Act in1916, practically no change in the hours ofwork and leisure. Looking at it from thispoint of view alone, there can be no ques-tion that general advantage results frommaking the hours of work and leisure corre-spond more closely to the seasons of theyear.
It is quite impossible for an individualto make alterations in the hours at which hedischarges particular duties, while everyoneelse remains unchanged, without subjectinghimself to a great deal of inconvenience, The wi|lett Memorial> near London Loopand the fact that a number of firms had y/^ an<j petts wood Station, Bromley.
already adopted this early-rising system, in spite of theenormous inconvenience which attends all alterationsfrom the regular habits of the community as a whole,before the first Summer Time Act, was very good evi-dence of the real, natural pressure behind the measure.
Another objection was that our change of clocktime would come into contact with unchanged times inother countries, and that there would thus be frictionand discordance. Difficulties regarding the Continentalmails and the Stock Exchange were exaggerated out ofall proportion to their real seriousness, and much wasmade of the inconvenience which would result to thosewho, in Liverpool, gambled in cotton, or in Londondealt in the American market.
All these matters, however, were capable of adjust-ment. Another point raised was the question of harvest-time. But harvest hours are always irregular hours, andagricultural hours generally tend to correspond with thenatural hours of sunlight.
Perhaps the most extraordinary criticism of all con-cerned restaurants. It was urged in opposition to the1909 Bill that wealthy people liked to dine late, and thatladies preferred artificial light.
Another argument, from a very different angle, butwhich also reads strangely today, was that while daylightsaving would be a great boon to the working classes, thatboon might be taken away by an increase of overtime.
This gloomy prophecy has not been realized.Indeed, it should have been obvious from the first thatovertime is regulated, not by daylight, but by thestrength of the worker and the strength of the workers'organizations.
Reading the debates which took place inParliament on daylight saving in 1908, 1909, and 1911,one marvels that so feeble a case should have been sus-
tained so long, and that a measure whoseeffect has been to enlarge the opportunitiesfor the pursuit of health and happinessamong the millions of people who live inthis country should have met with so frigida reception. Let us, then, as we put forwardour clocks for another summer, drink asilent toast to the memory of WilliamWillett, who spared neither labour normoney over a long period of his life in hisadvocacy of this great reform. He did notlive to see success crown his unselfishefforts; he died in 1915, a year before thepassing of the wartime Act. But he has themonument he would have wished in thethousands of playing-fields crowded witheager young people every fine eveningthroughout the summer and one of the
finest epitaphs that any man could win:He gave more light to his countrymen. $
FINEST HOUR n4/27
WINSTON CHURCHILL A LEADERSHIP
MODEL foR THE 2 1 S T CENTURYThe Queen Mary Fellows Program, November 2nd & 3rd, 2001
JOHN G. PLUMPTON
How can a man born into the 19th centuryBritish aristocracy, most famous for his achieve-ments in the middle of the 20th century, be rel-
evant to students in the 21st century? That was our chal-lenge to the Queen Mary Fellows and other college stu-dents at our seminar aboard The Queen Mary (formerlyRMS Queen Mary) in Long Beach, California on No-vember 2nd through 4th, 2001.
Fortunately many of the lessons from the life andachievements of Sir Winston Churchill are timeless, as re-vealed by Professor James Muller, chairman of TheChurchill Center Academic Advisers, and his corps ofteachers: Sir Martin Gilbert, Steven Hayward, Vice Admi-ral James Stockdale (Ret.), Max Arthur, and Larry Kryske.
On Friday evening, November 4th, Jim Muller ad-dressed the Fellows on "The Education of WinstonChurchill," while Steven Hayward spoke on "Churchillon Leadership," the title of his well-received book.
On Saturday, the Queen Mary Fellows had twoninety-minute discussion sessions on Churchill's autobi-ography, My Early Life. During the first session, moder-ated by Professor Muller, they focused on Churchill's ac-count of his schooling and his self-education in India,asking what guidance it might give today's students inpreparing for careers in public service, politics or war.
Many Fellows were struck by Churchill's embraceof the British Empire, and his enthusiasm for war. Somedefended and others attacked the idea that Western Civi-lization should be preferred to native rule.
The second session, moderated by Sir MartinGilbert, applied this question to Churchill's experience inQueen Victoria's little wars. The Fellows observed thatChurchill deepened his appreciation of war in the lastfive years of the 19th century, and they also consideredhis account of late Victorian politics to see how it differsfrom political life today.
Most of the talking was done by the students, butSir Martin Gilbert made some tantalizing observationsabout how Churchill composed his autobiography. TheFellows program concluded with a moving address byAdmiral James Stockdale on the meaning of courage,
Mr. Plumpton is President ofThe Churchill Center.
Above: Scholars and sponsor representatives. Front row, 1-r: Prof. JamesMuller, Larry Kryske, Dr. Steven Hayward. Back row, 1-r: AdmiralMike Ratliff, Jeff Cain, Admiral James Stockdale, John Plumpton,Max Arthur, Sir Martin Gilbert. Below: Sir Martin leads a discussion.
based on his own experience as a prisoner of war inHanoi for over seven years.
The Fellows had been sent My Early Life prior tothe seminar, and they had read it with care. The modera-tors had only to launch the discussion with a question ortwo and then conversation flowed among the Fellows. Itwas an exciting program, observed by an audience of sev-eral dozen Churchill Center members.
On Saturday, the Fellows and Churchill Centermembers joined a group of almost 100 other studentsand professors for a series of speakers on the seminartheme. Steve Hayward opened with a repeat of his Fel-lows lecture on Churchill and Leadership, challenging hislisteners with this question: is Churchill a relic of a by-gone era, or a mere curiosity? He gave several examples ofthe renewal of interest in Churchill and pointed out thatthe battle between civilization and barbarism is not new,and that the values we defend are timeless.
Sir Martin Gilbert followed with an outline of sev-eral historical cases in which Churchill showed his leader-ship talents. Sir Martin told the students of a letter writ-
F : I N I - S T H O U R 114/28
ten to Churchill when he was in his twenties, in whichthe writer predicted the Churchill would become primeminister some day because he combined "genius andplod." The genius was obvious; the plod was his willing-ness to work hard.
Many years later, Randolph Churchill complainedto his father that his obligations to produce articles for anewspaper were interfering with his enjoyment of life.Winston replied, paraphrasing the poet Clough: "Theheights achieved by the men of Kent were not achievedby sudden flight; for they, while their companions slept,were toiling upwards in the night." The phrase becamepart of Randolph's lexicon, and he recited it frequently—in later years he would recite it as a pep talk to the"Young Gentlemen," including Martin Gilbert, whomRandolph hired as researchers on the official biography.
After lunch Larry Kryske gave his unique presenta-tion, which uses painting to show how an understanding
of Churchill can lead one to develop his or her own po-tential to the fullest. Mr. Kryske makes this presentationto student and corporate leaders throughout the nation.It is illustrated in his book, The Churchill Factors, whichis available to members through our CC Book Club.
The program was developed and hosted by TheChurchill Center with generous support from the Inter-collegiate Studies Institute. The Center's contributionwas donated by Duvall Hecht of Books on Tape; Ambas-sador Paul H. Robinson, Jr. of Robinson Inc.; andRichard Langworth ofChurchillbooks.com.
Representing The Churchill Center at this confer-ence were this writer and Professor James Muller. Repre-senting the Intercollegiate Studies Institute were RearAdmiral Mike Ratliff (Ret.), Vice-President of Programs;and Jeff Cain, Director of Membership. Ruth Plumpton,Raili Garth and David Garth handled registration andmanaged the day's activities. $S
COVER STORY
Martin Driscoll's New Painting for theChurchill Suite, Hotel Queen MaryYou can own a fine canvas reproduction;
reserve your copy without obligation now.
Readers who have visited the Churchill Suite on theQueen Mary are familiar with the quite dreadfulpainting that had decorated one of its bulkheads
lo these many years. Observing that this representationfell far short of a fitting memorial to Sir Winston, JohnPlumpton had a chat with Martin Driscoll, whose artstudio is aboard the ship. The upshot was the commis-sioning of the new Churchill oil shown with Mr. Driscollat right, and reproduced on our cover.
The Churchill Center, which retains the copyright,will shortly produce a high quality, oil-on-canvas repro-duction of this fine painting, which will be available tomembers only in a limited edition of only 100, signedand numbered by the artist before the final coat of var-nish preservent is applied. Thanks to Churchill CenterAssociate Jeanette Gabriel for help in the arrangements.
Paintings will be on canvas with a foam core back-ing in the same approximate size as the original, 14x16inches—a standard size allowing the owner to supply aready-made or custom frame as preferred individually.
* We haven't yet finalized it but the price willbe modest—in the region of $175-195postpaid. If you wish to have first refusal
on one of these fine reproductions, which will quicklysell out, contact the editor ([email protected])telephone toll free (888) 454-2275.
As recounted by journalistMax Arthur at the QueenMary seminar, the greatliner played a central role inthe life of Churchill, whomade the following eightjourneys aboard RMSQueen Mary.
•5-11 May 1943: Gourock,Scotland to New York forThird Washington Confer-ence.
• 5-9 August 1943: Scotlandto Halifax, Nova Scotia forFirst Quebec Conference.
• 5-10 September 1944: Scotland to Halifax for SecondQuebec Conference.
• 20-25 September 1944: New York to Scotland.
• 21-26 March 1946: New York to Southampton afterthe "Iron Curtain" and other speeches in America.
• 31 December 1951 — 5 January 1952: Southampton toNew York to meet President Truman.
• 23-28 January 1952: New York to Southampton afterthe meetings.
• 31 December 1952 - 5 January 1953: Southampton toNew York to meet President-elect Eisenhower and Presi-dent Truman. $9
FINEST HOUR I U / 2 9
Alto-StaccatoRickard M. Lanswortk
w Great Courses
ChurchillPmfraorJ Rufm Fan
THE TFJW;HING COMPANY
The GreatCourses:Churchill, byProf. J. RufusFears. Audioand video-tapes withguidebooks.The TeachingCompany,4151 La-fayette Cen-ter Drive,Suite 100,
Chantilly VA 20151-1231, telephone(800) 832-2412. Three videocasettes$149.95; six audiocassettes $89.95.
One is always grateful to membersof the academy for paying posi-
tive attention to Churchill, but Icouldn't get through these tapes. Prof.Fears is a kind of right-wing CornellWest, pontifical, self-satisfied, and con-vinced that he is right. Churchill neverputs a foot wrong and is described asalmost God-like. This is exactly thetype of worshipper who sets Churchillup for ambushers like ChristopherHitchens (see pages 14-15).
We begin with Churchill in 1940at "the House of Parliament," changinghis country's mind about fighting Ger-many. Fears says that the French andBelgians had surrendered, "not becausethe soldiers wouldn't fight but becauseof a collapse at the top." (Wasn't itboth?) If Churchill had taken a poll inMay 1940, he would have found that80% of Britons thought Britain shouldnegotiate with Hitler. (Where is the ev-idence of that?)
ifoOKS,
& CURIOSITIESA shining moment is Fears's com-
parison of Churchill with Pericles andLincoln, who together, he says, com-prise history's "three outstanding states-men." A statesman has "bedrock prin-ciples, a moral compass, and a supremevision"; a politician has none of theabove. Unfortunately this is accompa-nied by veiled references to Bill Clin-ton, which date the performance.
All this is by way of introductionto the first lecture, which is all aboutJohn Duke of "Marlburrow" and theSpencer-Churchills—which I fast-for-warded when I started to learn how SirWinston was related to Princess Di.There is none of the interpretation oneis entitled to expect—e.g., about howthe writing of Marlborough influencedChurchill's World War II actions andspeeches, or the salient lessons thatbook offers for our time.
Lecture #2 is about Lord Ran-dolph and Jeanette Jerome ("Jenette").Fears, who has read all the chatter, be-lieves Jenny "slept with 200 men." Sheis at Blenheim, seven months pregnant,when her labor begins: "They marriedin April" (wink-wink, nudge-nudge).She doesn't make it to her bedroom be-cause "the library at Blenheim is thelongest room in England" (longer thanthe "House of Parliament"?).
Lord Randolph is "a powerfulman with a huge drooping mous-tache," which put me more in mind ofJack London's Wolf Larson than theslight, stooped Randolph. I quit thefirst tape when Lord Randolph's "ToryDemocracy" was described as a verita-ble Victorian New Deal, complete with"social security, unemployment insur-ance, health care, and pension plans."If only Franklin Roosevelt had studiedTory Democracy, he wouldn't have hadto hire all those whiz kids in 1932.
I skipped ahead to the two WorldWars where, hiking up his trousers,
Prof. Fears launches into a kind of alto-staccato. He correctly notes that Kitch-ener, who at first approved and later re-fused the Army's help at the Dard-anelles, "set up Churchill at the cost of213,000 lives"; that Lloyd George waspartly responsible for Churchill's 1915overthrow; that Fisher first promotedthe Dardanelles attack and then re-signed over it; that there was nothingwrong with Churchill defending him-self in a book (today politicians do thatall the time); and that Churchill wasdisliked in part because "genius invokesdistrust," and because he was too im-petuous and lacked political antennae.
But Fears spoils it with a string oferrors: Jenny died in 1922; Churchillserved in the "calvary"; he drank"strong, robust scotches" (actually hedrank scotch-flavored water); he builtthe Chartwell lakes "with his ownhands"; and he wrote eleven books and400 articles (it was over forty and 1000respectively).
In the 1930s, Fears goes on,Hitler refused to meet Churchill be-cause WSC was politically finished.The "whole Nazi regime would havecollapsed" had the Allies opposed itsoccupation of the Rhineland. Halifax,Baldwin and Chamberlain were notdecent men; they were politicians inthe most odious sense, interested onlyin power. A map showing the 1939 as-sault on Poland indicates it all went toGermany (actually Russia got a bigpiece) and shows a "front" where noneexisted. Robert Rhodes James's book (AStudy in Failure) is dismissed as insuffi-ciently admiring; it tries to explain whyWSC was "ultimately a failure." (Thebook only goes to 1939.)
My problem is that I'm too closeto the subject, too critical and too cyni-cal. The world is full of slapdash por-traits of Churchill, from the sloppy cri-tiques of left-wing revisionists to thehagiography of the right. Others maysee qualities in this production that Ifail to see. But so help me, any one ofthe last twenty speakers at ChurchillCenter events could have done a betterjob. If the publishers of such materialwould call upon experts to vet the stuffbefore publication, it wouldn't start offlife flawed. $
N E S T H O U R 114/30
Magnum opwwtfh
gems de haut en hasJohn G. Plumpton
Churchill: A Bi-ography, by RoyJenkins. NewYork: FarrarStraus &Giroux, 1002pages, illus. inb&w and color,regular price$40, memberprice $27.
"' I ^here are times," wrote the great_L Cambridge scholar, Sir Geof-
frey Elton, "when I incline to judge allhistorians by their opinion of WinstonChurchill—whether they can see thatno matter how much better the details,often damaging, of man and career be-come known, he still remains, quitesimply, a great man."
Sir Geoffrey would have likelyjudged the new Churchill biography byRoy Jenkins favourably. The octogenar-ian Jenkins, a biographer of Attlee,Asquith, Baldwin and Gladstone,among others, and a political colleagueof Labour leaders since World War II,concludes with a startling admission:"When I started writing this book Ithought that Gladstone was, by a nar-row margin, the greater man...I nowput Churchill, with all his idiosyn-crasies, his indulgences, his occasionalchildishness, but also his genius, histenacity and his persistent ability, rightor wrong, successful or unsuccessful, tobe larger than life, as the greatesthuman being ever to occupy 10 Down-ing Street."
As good as this biography is,Jenkins's is not the final, definitiveview. In his Churchill: A Brief Life,Piers Brendon, a former Keeper of theChurchill Archives Centre in Cam-bridge, England, predicted that"Churchill's place in history is about to
Mr. Plumpton is a FHsenior editor.
become still more of a battleground."The computerized catalogue of the pa-pers has been completed and the entiremicrofilmed and digitalized archivewill eventually become available toscholars throughout the world. Sinceonly ten percent of the papers are nowin print, the result of this digital revo-lution will be, according to Brendon,"an explosion in Churchill studies."
The torrent of Churchill bookscontinues even while we await this ex-plosion, and students of Churchill's lifeshould approach each new book askingwhat new facts or insights can begleaned from yet another addition tothe towering pile. The answer to read-ers of Jenkins is: not many new facts,but a great deal of new insights.
Jenkins does not appear to havedelved into the archives himself. He re-lies on the classics, particularlyChurchill's autobiographical works,Hansard, and the primary research ofSir Martin Gilbert. Mary Soames'sSpeaking for Themselves has become aninvaluable resource to biographers.Jenkins uses the full diary of LordAlanbrooke and he has profited fromthe splendid study by Geoffrey Best.He has a thorough knowledge andmakes judicious use of the prolificdiary material. Unfortunately, we haveonly one reference to the diary of hisfather, Arthur Jenkins, a parliamentaryprivate secretary to Clement Attleeduring the war and a junior minister inthe 1945 Churchill coalition govern-ment. I suspect that there are manymore diary comments by the seniorJenkins that would greatly interest us.
The most important thing Jenk-ins brings to this book is Roy Jenkinshimself. There are many parallels be-tween the lives of Jenkins andChurchill: writer, politician, cabinetminister, longevity of production.Jenkins is one of the few remainingstudents of Churchill's life who ob-served him in the House of Commons.A Member of Parliament for the lastsixteen years of Churchill's career, herecalls that "It was like looking at agiant mountain landscape, which couldoccasionally be illuminated by an un-forgettable light but could also descendinto lowering cloud, from the terraceof a modest hotel a safe distance away."
FINEST HOUR I H / 3 1
MEMBER DISCOUNTSTo order: list books and prices,
add for shipping ($6 first book, $ 1each additional in USA; $10 mini-mum elsewhere, air more). Mail withcheque to Churchill Center , POBox 385, Contoocook NH 03229USA. Visa or Mastercard welcome;state name, numbers and expirationdate and sign your order.
Jenkins's most useful insights re-late to Churchill's political career.Throughout the entire account we arereminded that Churchill was first andforemost a politician: "Throughout hislong marriage [Clementine] was to ex-perience no more than the most mildand infrequent gusts of feminine ri-valry. But she was nonetheless upagainst a most formidable competitionfor his attention, and that was his at-tachment to what was always to himthe great game of politics."
One strong feminine presence wasChurchill's lifelong friend, Violet Bon-ham Carter (nee Asquith). LadySoames, the former Mary Churchill,encouraged Jenkins to write by saying,"I would much like another Liberalstudy of my father." Although Jenkinsseems to have taken up the task withalacrity, he was also aware of the chal-lenge. He calls Bonham Carter's Win-ston Churchill as I Knew Him "one ofthe best and most perceptive of themany Churchill books."
Bonham Carter's book ended in1916 so Jenkins's could be consideredsomething of a sequel. His handling ofChurchill's Liberal years and continu-ing Liberal connections is deft and bal-anced. He writes that Churchill freelyaccepted "a role as [Lloyd George's]number two in a partnership of con-structive liberalism, two social reform-ing New Liberals who had turned theirbacks on the old Gladstonian traditionof concentrating on libertarian politicalissues and leaving social conditions tolook after themselves."
Having faced the same life anddeath decisions as Churchill in the of-fice of the Home Secretary, Jenkins wasparticularly impressed by the atten-dance of Home Secretary Churchill atJohn Galsworthy's proselytizing play"Justice," with its "indictment of thedead hand of penal policy." Most >»
Churchillhy Jenkins...noteworthy to Jenkins is that Churchilltook the chairman of the Prison Com-missioners with him in order to influ-ence the development of a more liberaland humane penal policy.
As much as Churchill sympa-thized with the deserving poor, Jenkinsreminds us that he did not get tooclose: "Churchill's approach, althoughliberal, was high patrician—he did notpretend to understand from the inside,merely to sympathize from on high."Nor did WSC forget his aristocraticorigins: "He was pleased but not daz-zled by becoming a senior minister atthe age of 33. He thought it, if not ex-actly his birthright, at least a proper re-ward for his individual talents buildingupon an hereditary propensity to rule."
Churchill's comment to KingGeorge V that there are "idlers andwastrels at both ends of the social lad-der" not only reflected a complex rela-tionship with the Royal Family; it alsosaid much about his views on Britain'ssocial structure. "[Although he] was aninstinctive and somewhat romanticmonarchist," writes Jenkins, "Churchillwas essentially a Whig in his attitude tomonarchs. He believed himself to befully their social equal."
As strong as he is on the earlyyears, Jenkins does not ignore the later,better known years and issues. Instruc-tively, he titles the chapter on the IndiaBill "Unwisdom in the Wilderness."He clearly thinks that Churchill waswrong on India and that he shouldhave known better than to take on theparty leadership on that issue, becauseit separated him from supporters likeEden, Macmillan and Duff Cooper.
Jenkins analyzes Churchill's tacti-cal errors with regard to the Commit-tee of Privileges and subsequently tothe Commons after Sir Samuel Hoareand Lord Derby were exonerated of ex-erting improper influence over Indiaon the Lancashire cotton manufactur-ers. What he does not do, and shouldhave, is to tell us that, notwithstandingthe tactical misjudgments, Churchillwas right: Hoare was, quite simply,guilty of a gross abuse of office.
But the India issue was notmerely political tactics. India was amatter of principle for Churchill, as il-
lustrated in a letter that Jenkins cites asChurchill's "total rejection of the opti-mism, which was a feature of bothGladstonian and Asquith Liberalism.Thomas Hobbes has replaced JohnLocke as the presiding philosopher."The letter included this comment byChurchill: "In my view England is nowbeginning a new period of struggle andfighting for its life, and the crux of itwill be not only the retention of Indiabut a much stronger assertion of com-mercial rights."
While considering the larger na-tional issues Jenkins is never far fromthe political, including Churchill's con-stituency problems at the time. Hepoints out a potential irony: hadChurchill won on the issue of EdwardVIII, "he might have found it neces-sary in 1940-41 to depose and/or lockup his sovereign as the dangerously po-tential head of a Vichy-style state."
Due consideration is given to theChurchill-Halifax dispute over negoti-ating with Hitler in May 1940, butJenkins is equivocal about "ProfessorLukacs's two most important asser-tions—Chamberlain sat on the fence,and, Churchill, at least momentarily,thought that he had to make somekind of concession to Halifax. The bal-ance of likelihood however seems to beon Luckas's side on both statements."
Jenkins is particularly good onChurchill's relationship with politicalcolleagues both foreign and domestic.Churchill's appraisal of Eisenhower (asPresident) was hostile; he had aguarded ease with Roosevelt; for Tru-man he probably had the most respectof the three Presidents. Among hisBritish colleagues, Nye Bevan nevercommanded Churchill's admiration orliking; with Amery he was instinctivelyimpatient; Ernest Bevin and Attleewere treated with a wary respect; Edenand Sinclair, being closest to him, re-ceived the most rebukes.
The fact that Beaverbrook andBracken had far too much influence,often on issues they knew nothingabout, led to a famous letter of remon-strance (often ignored by other histori-ans) from Clement Attlee on the con-duct of the government. Only the sageadvice of others prevented a major rup-ture between the two party leaders.
All of these people were treatedwith less attention than was the Houseof Commons. Churchill's self-descrip-tion, "I am a child of the House ofCommons," continued throughout themost trying days of the war. "What wasalso noticeable," writes Jenkins, "wasthe extent to which he applied himselfto some at least of the routine businessof leadership of the House. He did notcocoon himself in the raiment of a re-mote war leader who could only makeepic pronouncements."
While Jenkins's similar experi-ences significantly enhance his accountof Churchill's political activities, thereare too frequent references to personaland later non-Churchill events. It isunlikely, for example, that the January1945 correspondence between Attleeand Churchill over the conduct of gov-ernment benefits from our being toldthat in the middle of it Attlee was at-tending Jenkins's wedding. Nor is it ap-posite to compare the military's reac-tion to a Churchill speech in 1914 tothe Conservative party response to aMichael Portillo speech in 1995. Thecomment that Churchill's weapons ofchoice were knives and forks is useful,but does it matter that Champagneand oysters at Chartwell and the SavoyGrill foreshadowed Harold Wilson'sbeer and sandwiches approach at TenDowning Street? Since one reviewercompared this book to Toscanini writ-ing about Beethoven, perhaps this criti-cism (and other nit-picking) focusestoo much on individual notes andmisses the melody.
Like many other readers, I sus-pect, I had to make frequent referralsto a dictionary in order to understandthe "fissiparous nature of the opposi-tion" or how Jenkins varied "the fruc-tiferous metaphor." He also has a fond-ness for Latin and French phrases,which with Churchillian hauteur he as-sumes all his readers understand; butthat certainly does not prevent this bi-ography from being a magnum opuswith wonderful gems de baut en has.
With one anecdote Lord Jenkinsputs these quibbles into perspective.Churchill returned from America in1943 to face domestic criticism. Hesaid that press criticism reminded himof the "tale about the sailor who
H O U R 114/ 32
Jenkins, continued...jumped into a dock, I think it was atPlymouth, to rescue a small boy fromdrowning. About a week later thissailor was accosted by a woman whoasked, "Are you the man who pickedmy son out of the dock the othernight?" The sailor replied modestly,"That is true, ma'am." "Ah," said thewoman, "you are the man I am lookingfor. Where is his cap?"
The book has a couple of notablefeatures I particularly liked. There is aglossary of parliamentary terms thatwill be useful to many readers and, inaddition to the usual photographs, ithas a splendid collection of pho-tographs of Churchill paintings.
Andrew Roberts, a master biogra-pher himself, thinks that "it will be abrave, if not to say foolhardy, author
who will attempt to write another lifeof Churchill for at least a decade, per-haps longer." With the explosion fore-cast by Piers Brendon, I expect that weare likely to witness many intrepidsouls eager to engage on the Churchillbattleground. (Aspiring biographerstake note: Churchill, The Liberal Yearsstill needs to be written.) Future bi-ographies will be better because of RoyJenkins, who here stands on the shoul-ders of Sir Martin Gilbert, Violet Bon-ham Carter, Lady Soames and Sir Win-ston himself.
Because, as Elton said, Churchill"remains quite simply, a great man"and, in the words of Isaiah Berlin, "thelargest human being of our time,"there will never be an end to assess-ments of his life. May they all be asgood as this one. <i
Trilateral IndispositionLeon J. Waszak
Allies at War: TheBitter Rivalryamong Churchill,Roosevelt, and de
*«Km.wsrat.««ij Gaulle, by SimonBerthon. New York:Carroll & Graf,354 pages, illus.,published at $26,member price $23.
ALLIESAT WAR
Ibecame acquainted with SimonBerthon's book at the Chartwell
Bookshop, while rolling through theEnglish countryside last summer with agroup of like-minded friends. TheBritish edition, which first caught myattention, appeared to be a companionbook to complement a BBC2 docu-mentary series of the same name. Therecently published American edition,by contrast, is currently being mar-keted as a stand-alone work. I am notfully aware of the book's utility vis-a-vis
Dr. Waszak is Assistant Professor of History atGlendale College and the author of Agreementin Principle: The Wartime Partnership of Gen-eral Wladyslaw Sikorski and Winston Churchill.
the BBC program (to be seen in theU.S. on PBS), so this is an assessmentof the book in its own right.
Whatever medium proves to bemore noteworthy in the long schemeof things, Mr. Berthon (who is also theproducer of the BBC series) has foundthe stuff of great drama to mold in thisSecond World War setting, against thelarger-than-life personalities of Win-ston Churchill, Franklin Roosevelt andCharles de Gaulle. His study revealsnot only their celebrated leadershipabilities in waging a successful coalitionwar, but their clashing interests andegos, with a hint of pettiness and mu-tual distrust.
The title deliberately conjures upthe duality of the principal actors, whoare as much at war with one another asthey are with the Axis. As far as I cantell, Berthon is the first to deal withthis trilateral relationship. After muchof the initial curiosity over theChurchill-Roosevelt relationship hadbeen explored, followed in the early1980s by Francois Kersaudy's Churchilland de Gaulle and Raoul Anglion's Roo-sevelt and de Gaulle, this new workshould either make the cycle completeor give the proverbial dead horse a fewmore lashes.
The author's claim, however sin-cere, that "never-before-seen" archivalinformation is being utilized for the
FlNHSTllOUR 114/33
Trilateral Indisposition...book, is hard to confirm, given the lackof footnotes. Berthon does, however,provide the reader a somewhat vaguechapter-by-chapter summary of sourcesin back pages of his book.
I draw from his bibliography thathe has consulted many of the standardworks that are familiar to readers ofthis journal, who will note thatBerthon visited most of the relevantarchival repositories in the UnitedStates and Great Britain. He plumbedthe Roosevelt Library, and collectionsrelating to Churchill's wartime govern-ment at the Public Record Office inLondon, and various other manuscriptand diary collections. Only one Frencharchival source is cited, the private di-aries found in the Leon Jon Teyssot Es-tate in Paris.
Yet despite what seems to be awork based on primary documents, itstrikes me as a rehash of previouslyraised points of discussion by Berthon'spredecessors in the field, together witha generous supply of personal swipes,or insults, as quoted in the book.
Churchill appears, as usual in thisparticular triangle, the man in the mid-dle, torn between the increasingly exas-perating de Gaulle, whom he supportswith rhetoric, money and political cap-ital as a symbol of French resistance,and President Roosevelt, whose nation'smight and manpower are needed towin the war. It might surprise somereaders to see FDR's image taking moreof a beating than those of the others.
De Gaulle, for all his ravingsagainst the treachery of the "Anglo-Saxons" and his acknowledged ego-isms, appears the victim who justifiablyfeared a secret Anglo-American deal todrive him off center stage. The strangeU.S. relationship with the collabora-tionist Vichy government (which theUnited States recognized officially aslegitimate, while snubbing the FreeFrench completely) was at the core of along list of "betrayals" that hardenedde Gaulle's personal resentment. DeGaulle's long memory of these, arguesthe author, would carry over into thepostwar era. Churchill's initial admira-tion for the French leader wore thintoo, but rather than blame de Gaullethe Prime Minister's Cressida-like >>>
Trilateral Indisposition...maneuverings are seen as equally dam-aging to the relationship.
One of the interesting twists to thestory—indeed an example of role re-versal for Churchill and Roosevelt vis-a-vis de Gaulle—was over how the FreeFrench should be utilized in OperationDragoon, the invasion of southernFrance. In this instance Roosevelt isportrayed as more supportive thanChurchill in helping the Free Frenchtake an active role: Churchill protestedthat this would harm British strategy inItaly by creating an unnecessary dis-traction. According to Berthon, FDR'ssupport was critical in "restoringFrance as a military power, whereas, ifChurchill had his way, this would, atthe very least, have been delayed."
It seems that after D-Day, Roo-sevelt's sparring with de Gaulle ended,or at least was mitigated somewhat, byFrench leader's de facto legitimacyamongst the French. Roosevelt, whoonce ridiculed and despised him, nowhad to recognize the French leader'sstatus. Churchill, by contrast, as thewar in Europe was ending, referred tothe once-admired de Gaulle as "one ofthe greatest dangers to Europeanpeace" in a letter to Roosevelt's succes-sor, Harry Truman—this after theFrench leader had to be forced out of azone of occupation in northern Italywhich he had refused to leave.
If Berthon's book is not quite thein-depth study that we might expect, itremains thoroughly entertaining and aworthy introduction to the PBS docu-mentary series. Certainly it is well writ-ten. Those unfamiliar with the subjectmight appreciate the easy-to-read proseas useful in negotiating the politicalcomplexities that these key wartimepersonalities embodied. If the televi-sion production is anything like thebook, it should have a successful run.
Admirers of Churchill might notfind Berthon's analysis to their liking,but neither would partisans of FDR.De Gaulle comes off looking betteronly because his character flaws werepart of an overall mystique; and thereis not much more that the authorcould add to change drastically ourperception of the French leader, oneway or the other. The net effect is nil.
It all comes at the expense of Churchilland Roosevelt.
To those to whom it matters, thereare minor differences between the edi-tions. The British edition has no index,the American edition does. The hard-cover binding on the U.S. version issewn with a cloth spine, the Britishedition (also a hardcover) is glued orpressed with cardboard covers and
spine. Although the British edition ap-pears heftier in appearance than itsAmerican counterpart, they are identi-cal in size, page count, photos, andtypeface. The paper shade in the U.S.edition is easier on the eyes and thedust cover is nicer. Readers of FinestHour will therefore be pleased to knowthat the U.S. edition is the one beingoffered by the CC Book Club. M>
Praise without CriticismRichard M. Langworth
EISENHOWERAND
CHURCHILL
Eisenhower andChurchill: ThePartnershipThat Saved theWorld, byJames C.Humes. NewYork: PrimaPublishing,2001. A ForumBook, with aforeword by
David Eisenhower. 268 pages, pub-lished at $25. Member price $19.
Many books have been publishedon Churchill and the military—
Fisher, Alanbrooke, de Gaulle, Mont-gomery, the Admirals, the Generals. Itis surprising that a book on Churchilland World War II's supreme comman-der, flung together as they were by cir-cumstance and geography, has beenlong in coming. There was, of course,Peter Boyle's The Churchill-EisenhowerCorrespondence (FH69:27 and 71:26);but until now there has been no bookon the two individuals.
This is not a detailed analysis ofthe byplay between two key leaders,like Kersaudy's Churchill and de Gaulleor Kimball's Forged in War onChurchill and Roosevelt. Rather it is apaean to both, juxtaposing their bi-ographies up to 1942, then delvinginto their relationship in the supremeordeal of World War II.
David Eisenhower's foreword es-tablishes the rationale: "No two mendid more than Winston Churchill and
FINEST HOUR I I4 / 34
Dwight Eisenhower to combat thetwin evils of tyranny: fascism and com-munism.. .if Churchill was the voice offreedom, Eisenhower provided the im-plementing tools." Fair enough, as faras it goes, but the subtitle still seemsexcessive. If there was any partnershipthat "saved the world" it was that ofChurchill and Roosevelt, who madethe plenary decisions—Eisenhower inWW2 may have formulated tactics,but strategy was that of the Presidentsand Prime Ministers. Even then, whatthey saved was the West—as NormanLash put it in his Churchill-Rooseveltbook, and as Churchill and Eisenhowerlater sadly admitted. Ask the Romani-ans, the Poles or the Estonians aboutsaving the world.
By way of full disclosure, thiswriter has been a friend of JamesHumes for a quarter century; if Ipulled my punches, critics would claima buddy system. So I will not, knowingthat Mr. Humes will perfectly under-stand what I trust is constructive criti-cism. The book lacks, above all, thatvery quality: criticism—not that suchworks need always be critical. Butwhen two protagonists come down onopposite ends of an issue, as Churchilland Eisenhower often did between1942 and 1956, one of them must beright and the other wrong; so a bookabout them really requires judgments.
The great issues that separatedChurchill and Eisenhower, at leastwhen equals (as world leaders in 1952-56) get little space here. The 1956 SuezCrisis, shortly after Churchill left of-fice, gets barely a paragraph. It deserves
a chapter, since it involved Churchill'slast act as a world statesman. Sir Win-ston's eloquent letter to Eisenhower,imploring the President not to sacrificeAnglo-American rapport over "An-thony's action in Egypt," was first re-vealed in Macmillan's memoirs in 1971(see next page). Macmillan believedthat this, and Ike's reply, began theprocess of rapprochement that he had tocomplete when he became Prime Min-ister in 1957. This exchange deservesto be pondered by any book aboutChurchill and Eisenhower.
Likewise, many of Eisenhower'searlier letters to Churchill as PrimeMinister are almost painful to read;Humes should have offered an appreci-ation, from his vantage point as a Presi-dential speechwriter, of how much theyrepresented Ike's views, and how muchthe Dulles State Department's. Eisen-hower's considerate treatment ofChurchill on WSC's final extendedvisit to America in 1959 should havehad more ink. There is almost nothingabout the cut and thrust of Churchill'spost-Stalin efforts to reach what hecalled a "final settlement" with Russia,Eisenhower's adamant refusal, and theirony by which Eisenhower reversedhimself just as Churchill was despon-dently retiring. Nor is there anythinghere on why Churchill privately pre-ferred Eisenhower's opponent in 1952and 1956—why he remarked after the1952 American election, "I am greatlydisturbed. I think this makes war muchmore probable." The history of all thisremains to be written.
Humes devotes considerable spaceto the war and ably outlines the issuesover which Churchill and Eisenhoweragreed and argued during 1942-45.The chief arguments were over the in-vasion of the south of France ("Dra-goon"), Roosevelt's Teheran promise tolet the Red Army enter Berlin first, andthe sidelining of the Italian campaignso as to devote maximum resources tothe Normandy invasion ("Overlord").On each of these issues Ike was infavor, Churchill against—thoughHumes provides several statements sug-gesting that Eisenhower was as clear-eyed about Soviet intentions asChurchill. If that is so, the book needs
exonerating evidence to show how Ike'spreferred policies and strategies wereoverruled by his superiors.
There are some eye-openers in thisbook that you may not expect, in-
cluding several excerpts from Ike's let-ters professing devotion to his absentwife. "Lots of love—don't forget me,"went one letter, when it has been fairlywell established that he (temporarily, tohis credit) forgot her. Another is Eisen-hower's apposite and eloquent speechat the ceremony Churchill arranged forhim at the Guildhall in June 1945.Like Churchill, Humes notes, Eisen-hower wrote that speech himself, andThe Times compared it to the Gettys-burg Address, which certainly soundsun-Timesian. The speech was a modelof humility and of Anglo-Americanbrotherhood, and one rarely reads suchwords by Britons to Americans, exceptby Winston Churchill.
There are a lot of real clangers.Among these are the assertions thatChartwell had been sold during thewar; that Churchill spurned the post-war honors of Norway, Denmark, Bel-gium and the Netherlands; that WSCwanted the North African landings in-stead of Normandy; that one of the D-Day beaches was called "Neptune";that de Gaulle's military rival wasnamed Gen. "Gerow." Earlier chaptersclaim that Lord Randolph Churchillwould not have entered politics had henot been snubbed by the Prince ofWales in the Aylesford affair, and thathe died of syphilis; that Churchill wasborn in the palace of the Ninth Dukeof Marlborough; that as Minister ofMunitions in World War I, Churchill"flew to France every day to examinewhere supplies were needed"; thatEisenhower named Camp David afterhis father; that the Democrats regainedcontrol of Congress from the Republi-cans in 1956; and that Churchill's Dar-danelles debacle in World War I was adisappointment comparable to Eisen-hower's "never getting to go to Franceand see battle."
Every one of these assertions isdemonstrably wrong—as is the old ca-nard that Churchill planned his ownfuneral, which Humes calls "Operation
Hope." The funeral was planned by the"Hope Not Committee," presided overby the Duke of Norfolk, and never in-cluded Churchill.
The book is bedizened withChurchill quotations, most of whichare said to have been made to Eisen-hower when they patently were not. "Iboth drink and smoke and am 200%fit" was said privately in WSC's firstmeeting with Montgomery. Anotherquip about Monty—"In defeat, in-domitable; in advance, invincible; invictory, insufferable"—was certainlynot said to Eisenhower. If said at all(there is some dispute) it was likely ex-pressed with a smile to Monty himself,when its stark frankness had lost theability to wound.
Other quotations are misquoted soas to come out worse than the original.Churchill did not tell Ike, in the war,"Well, General.. .You are speaking tothe result of an English speakingUnion." What he said was in reply toAdlai Stevenson after the war, whenStevenson asked if he had any messagefor the English-Speaking Union: "Tellthem you bring them greetings froman English-Speaking Union."
When Wilfrid Paling, MP, calledChurchill a "dirty dog," WSC did notreply, "My reaction to his charge wasthat of any dirty dog toward any pal-ings." It was: "Does the Hon. Memberknow what dirty dogs do to palings?"
Churchill's famous remark whensomeone (but not Lady Astor) referredto Chamberlain as "The Prince ofPeace," was not, "I thought the Princeof Peace was born in Bethlehem, notBirmingham, England"—WSC wastoo good for such wordy rejoinders.What he said was: "I thought Nevillewas born in Birmingham." Why editthe great man's words when it invari-ably renders them less effective thanthe way he expressed them?
The book provides an illuminatinglook at the remarkable parallels in theearly lives of Churchill and Eisen-hower. It focuses on Eisenhower'shomespun, plain spoken honesty, andargues convincingly that the Generalmay have known there was more toChurchill's strategic concepts late inthe war than Ike's superiors would >»
FINEST HOUR I H / 3 5
Churchill and Eisenhower...admit—always assuming, of course,that the reader agrees with Churchill.
But it needed proofing by someoneconversant with the saga to comb outinaccuracies and fix the quotations. <
Suez: The Churchill-Eisenhower Letters"Dear Winston" researched by Daun van Ee for Craig Horn
Churchill to Eisenhower, 23 November1956, in Macmillan, Riding the Storm(London, 1971), pp. 175-76:
My Dear Ike,There is not much left for me to
do in this world and I have neither thewish nor the strength to involve myselfin the present political stress and tur-moil. But I do believe, with unfalteringconviction, that the theme of Anglo-American alliance is more importanttoday at any time since the war. Youand I had some part in raising it to theplane on which it has stood. Whateverthe arguments adduced here and in theUnited States for or against Anthony'saction in Egypt, it will now be an actof folly, on which our whole civiliza-tion may founder, to let events in theMiddle East come between us.. .and itis the Soviet Union that will ride thestorm. [They are] attempting to moveinto this dangerous vacuum, for youmust have no doubt that a triumph forNasser would be an even greater tri-umph for them.. .1 know where yourheart lies. You are now the only onewho can so influence events both inUNO [United Nations Organization]and the free world as to ensure that thegreat essentials are not lost in bicker-ings and pettiness among the nations.Yours is indeed a heavy responsibilityand there is no greater believer in yourcapacity to bear it or well-wisher inyour task than your old friend,
Winston S. Churchill.
Eisenhower to Churchill, 27 November1956 (excerpts). Daun van Ee is a His-torical Specialist in the Manuscript Divi-sion, The Library of Congress, Washing-ton, DC.
Dear Winston:I agree fully with the implication
of your letter that Nasser is a tool, pos-sibly unwitting, of the Soviets, andback of the difficulties that the free
world is now experiencing lies oneprincipal fact that none of us can af-ford to forget. The Soviets are the realenemy of the Western World, implaca-bly hostile and seeking our destruction.
When Nasser took his high-handed action with respect to theCanal, I tried earnestly to keep An-thony informed of public opinion inthis country and of the course that wewould feel compelled to follow if therewas any attempt to solve by force theproblem presented to the free worldthrough Nasser's action. I told him thatwe were committed to the United Na-tions and I particularly urged him, in aletter of July thirty-first, to avoid theuse of force, at least until it had beenproved to the world that the UnitedNations was incapable of handling theproblem
Sometime in the early part of Oc-tober, all communication betweenourselves on the one hand and theBritish and the French on the othersuddenly ceased. Our intelligenceshowed the gradual buildup of Israelimilitary strength, finally reaching such astate of completion that I felt compelledon two successive days to warn thatcountry that the United States wouldhonor its part in the Tri-Partite Declara-tion of May, 1950—in short, that wewould oppose clear aggression by anypower in the Mid-East. But so far asBritain and France were concerned, wefelt that they had deliberately excludedus from their thinking; we had nochoice but to do our best to be preparedfor whatever might happen....
The first news we had of the attackand of British-French plans was gainedfrom the newspapers and we had no re-course except to assert our readiness tosupport the United Nations, beforewhich body, incidentally, the BritishGovernment had itself placed the wholeSuez controversy.
Nothing would please this countrymore nor, in fact, could help us more,
Gettysburg, 1959. (DwightD. Eisenhower Library)
than to see British prestige andstrength renewed and rejuvenated inthe Mid-East.. .All we have asked inorder to come out openly has been aBritish statement that it would con-form to the resolutions of the UnitedNations. The United Nations troopsdo not, in our opinion, have to be asstrong as those of an invading force be-cause any attack upon them will be anattack upon the whole United Nationsand if such an act of folly were com-mitted, I think that we could quicklysettle the whole affair.
This message does not purport tosay that we have set up our judgmentagainst that of our friends in England.I am merely trying to show that in thiscountry there is a very strong publicopinion upon these matters that has, Ibelieve, paralleled my own thinking. Icontinue to believe that the safety ofthe western world depends in the finalanalysis upon the closest possible tiesbetween Western Europe, the Ameri-can hemisphere, and as many allies aswe can induce to stand with us. If thisincident has proved nothing else, itmust have forcefully brought this truthhome to us again. A chief factor in theunion of the free world must be inde-structible ties between the BritishCommonwealth and ourselves...
So I hope that this one may bewashed off the slate as soon as possibleand that we can then together adoptother means of achieving our legiti-mate objectives in the Mid-East. Noth-ing saddens me more than the thoughtthat I and my old friends of years havemet a problem concerning which wedo not see eye to eye. I shall never behappy until our old time closeness hasbeen restored.
With warm regard and best wishesfor your continued health,
As ever, Ike $
FINEST HOCR 114/36
INSIDE THE JOURNALS
Before the Fall, 1939. The ChamberlainWar Cabinet. Seated, left to right: Lord Halifax,Sir John Simon, the Prime Minister, Sir SamuelHoare, and Lord Chatfield. Standing, left toright: Sir Kingsley Wood, Winston Churchill,Leslie Hore-Belisha, and Lord Hankey.
Wko Really PutCkurckill in Oikice?Abstract by David Freeman
Witherell, Larry L, "Lord Salisbury'sWatching Committee and the Fall ofNeville Chamberlain, May 1940." Eng-lish Historical Review, November 2001:pp. 1134-66.
In early 1940 the 4th Marquess ofSalisbury (son of the late Prime Min-
ister) established a self-styled "Watch-ing Committee" to monitor the do-mestic political scene and press for thecreation of a true National Govern-ment. While the existence of this com-mittee has long been known, it has re-ceived insufficient scholarly attention.The collection of Committee materialsin the Salisbury and Emrys Evans pa-pers provides the first detailed exami-nation of its formation, membershipand activities, and establishes that Sal-isbury's Committee played an essentialrole in the political drama of 1940.
The principal figures responsiblefor the Committee's formation in-cluded Lord Salisbury; his son Vis-count Cranborne (known as "Bobbety"and subsequently the 5th Marquess);Robert, Viscount Cecil of Chelwood(brother of the 4th Marquess); and Vis-count Wolmer (later the 3rd Earl ofSelborne and a nephew of the 4th Mar-quess). Thus, the core of the Commit-tee consisted entirely of Cecils, one ofEngland's oldest and most respectedaristocratic and political families.
Prof. Freeman earned his Ph.D. in ModernBritish History from Texas A&M University,and presently teaches at California State Uni-versity Fullerton.
The Cecils had been among thefew calling for British rearmament inthe late 1930s. In the days prior toMunich, Salisbury characterizedChamberlain's foreign policy as flawed,dangerous and morally repugnant.After Munich, the rhetoric becameharsher, with Lord Cranborne sarcasti-cally asking, "Where is the honour?" inthe Prime Minister's "peace with hon-our." Following the German invasionof Czechoslovakia, Lord Cecil of Chel-wood denounced Chamberlain for sac-rificing the Czechs. The Prime Minis-ter replied by raging against thosewhom he called the "glamourboys...particularly Bobbety Cranborne,who is the most dangerous of the lot."
Chamberlain did bring Churchilland Eden into the Government, butthis also had the effect of decapitatingthe two main dissident groups withinthe Tory ranks and muzzling their lead-ers. Salisbury then feared that Cham-berlain would fall back on his unac-ceptable policies. As the autumn of1939 wore on, the Cecils began to at-tract other malcontents, and Cran-borne proposed to organize their activ-ity by establishing "a small commit-tee...of very respectable Conserva-tives...who would exercise pressure onthe Cabinet." Numerous respectedConservatives were quickly recruited.
The Watching Committee held itsfirst meeting on 4 April 1940 and re-quested that Salisbury, now electedchairman, impress upon the PrimeMinister their desire to reform and re-construct the cabinet along lines set
FINEST HOUR I U / 3 7
out by Leo Amery: a small War Cabi-net of non-departmental ministers toformulate and supervise policy unen-cumbered by the burden of administra-tive responsibilities. The energeticRichard Law, son of the late PrimeMinister, set the Committee's focus: "Isubmit we ought to continue [to attackthe Government] The more weweaken the Government, I honestlybelieve, we strengthen England."
Chamberlain met with Salisburyon 10 April and rejected the Commit-tee's proposed reform of the War Cabi-net, commenting that "if people didnot like the administration of the pre-sent Government they could changeit." Salisbury reported the disappoint-ing results to his colleagues, who weresoon joined by other leaders outsidethe Committee. Clement Davies, Lib-eral MP for Montgomeryshire, pro-vided the Marquess with a sweepingbut penetrating assessment of the Gov-ernment's conduct of the war. Daviesalso believed in the need for a trulyNational Government which includedLabour and added: "I think the situa-tion demands a change even of theCaptain of the Team."
Next, Salisbury arranged to meetwith Churchill on 19 April. The FirstLord of the Admiralty, however, was"resolutely opposed to any changewhich would deprive him of this greatposition of authority and usefulness inorder to be a mere chairman withoutpower." Salisbury explained that hisCommittee contemplated no diminu-tion of Churchill's authority and >»
INSIDE THE JOURNALS
Churchill in Office....prophetically warned that "if the Alliesmet with a reverse in Norway, thatwould be fatal to the Government."
Salisbury then headed a delegationto the Foreign Secretary, Lord Halifax,on 29 April to present their grievances.Halifax remonstrated, but as anotherattendee (Amery) recorded, "the ever-courteous Salisbury" replied bluntly:"we are not satisfied."
Faced with the adamant refusal ofthe Government to reform its policies,the Committee now was forced to ad-dress the issue of Chamberlain's pre-miership. An unsigned documentfound among General Spears's Watch-ing Committee papers expresses therecognition that since "the Conserva-tive Party made the present Govern-ment only the Conservative Party candestroy it." As the Committee met on30 April, the Government was prepar-ing to evacuate troops from Norway.Nicholson recorded the "general im-pression is that we may lose the war."
As the date for Chamberlain'sstatement to the House on Norway ap-proached, Salisbury designated aagroup of hard-liners to be ready tomeet on short notice should exigenciesrequire their "special attention."
The group consisted of Amery,Viscount Cecil, Hastings, Home,Lloyd, Macmillan, Spears, Swinton,Trenchard, Emrys Evans, Wolmer,Cranborne and Salisbury—all unsym-pathetic to Chamberlain. After thePM's disappointing presentation inParliament, discussions about alterna-tive ministries began. But all the namescontemplated managed to raise objec-tions in some quarter. Nicholsonlamented: "We always say that our ad-vantage over the German leadershipprinciple is that we can always find an-other leader. Now we cannot."
Efforts continued. Davies was nowserving as intermediary between Salis-bury's Committee and the LabourParty leaders. The issue was whetherthere was "a sufficient possibility ofagreement for a joint move to replaceChamberlain." Davies solicitedLabour's front bench to force a no-con-fidence vote during the Norway de-
bate, but Attlee and Greenwood lackedfaith that Conservative rebels could berelied upon to vote against their PrimeMinister and feared an attack wouldmerely provoke Tory backbenchers torally round the Government.
In fact, the Watching Committeehad effectively collected Conservativediscontent in one group and provideda constructive outlet for members' en-ergies and ideas. When their reformproposals had been brusquely rejected,their frustration intensified. The Nor-way Debate would provide them withtheir first opportunity to challenge thePrime Minister directly.
The debate went badly for theGovernment. Committee ally AdmiralSir Roger Keyes delivered a melodra-matic but effective attack in full-dressuniform. Committee zealot Amery fol-lowed with the Cromwellian cry, "Inthe name of God go!" These perfor-mances, and the continued representa-tions by Davies, convinced Attlee toforce a vote of confidence.
Meeting early on 8 May, the Com-mittee agreed to support a "change ofGovernment," i.e., the departure ofChamberlain. The question waswhether members should vote directlyagainst the Government or merely ab-stain in the confidence vote. Theyagreed to vote against the Government.
When the House divided on theevening of 8 May, the core Conserva-tive opposition came from the Watch-ing Committee: Amery, Cooper, EmrysEvans, Keeling, Law, Macmillan,Nicholson, Spears, and Wolmer. Theywere joined by close friends and allies,including Keyes, Lady Astor (wife of aCommittee member), H.J. Duggan,Quentin Hogg (son of Lord Hailsham,another Committee member), MarkPatrick, and Ronald Tree. This en-larged group then brought along seven-teen more Conservative backbenchers,including several in uniform, leadingto a total of thirty-three Tory votesagainst the Government, while anothersixty-five Conservatives abstained.Chamberlain still prevailed but by thevastly reduced margin of 281-200,which left his followers in disarray.
The Watching Committee had
pushed the PM into a corner, and withLabour unwilling to serve under him,his options became ever more re-stricted. After presiding over his Com-mittee on the morning after the vote ofconfidence, 9 May, Salisbury met withHalifax to convey its terms to the Gov-ernment: "Neville should now resignand either Halifax or Winston form areal War Cabinet on National lines."
Halifax actually concurred, andthey discussed a successor. The ForeignSecretary stated that "he himself is theobvious first choice...he looked uponhimself as fully responsible for all Mr.Chamberlain's policy, and secondlythat Mr. Churchill must if he himself isPrime Minister, be the leader of theHouse of Commons. Such a combina-tion would turn out to be impractica-ble with the Prime Minister nominallyin the Lords."
Although Salisbury politely dis-abused Halifax of such a conclusion,the meeting nevertheless ended withHalifax firmly excluding himself asChamberlain's successor.
When word arrived on 10 May ofthe German invasion of the LowCountries, Salisbury promptly sum-moned a meeting of the WatchingCommittee to consider both this newsand the ongoing political crisis. Shortlyafterwards Law, Nicholson and EmrysEvans learned that Chamberlain nowintended to remain in office "until theFrench battle is finished." Emrys Evanstelephoned Salisbury, who declaredthat the Committee must maintain itsresolve: Chamberlain must go, and"Winston should be made Prime Min-ister during the course of the day."
Chamberlain was warned that theCommittee would not allow him tohang on and delay reconstruction be-cause of the invasion. The Committeeinsisted that the House approve a newgovernment by 13 May. Later the sameday Salisbury twice met with the King'sprivate secretary, emphasizing that theCommittee was adamant about Cham-berlain's immediate departure.
The outmaneuvered Prime Minis-ter submitted his resignation that after-noon, and Churchill was promptlysummoned and charged with forming
INEST HOUR I U / 3 8
INSIDE THE JOURNALS
a new government. The following day,11 May, Davies learned that Churchillwas considering Chamberlain forChancellor of the Exchequer. Hepassed this to Amery, and asked LordSalisbury to intervene with the newPrime Minister. The Committee hadpreviously agreed that Chamberlainought not to remain in government.But Salisbury pressed through a com-promise whereby the disgraced Con-servative leader would remain asymbolic member of the Gov-ernment as Lord President ofthe Council.
Lord Salisbury had not , «sought the overthrow ofNeville Chamberlain when hefirst began to assemble "asmall body of consultativecounselors." He hadmerely complied with theobligation to public ser-vice long shouldered by hisfamily. This, however, is notto deny what they judged to bethe lack of Chamberlain's abilities andthe failure of his policies. By establish-ing the Watching Committee and se-lecting its membership, Lord Salisburyprovided substance, leadership, legiti-macy and energy to a previously lethar-gic if not impotent faction of Conserv-ative critics.
But the Committee was more. Itrepresented a synergistic coalition ofpolitical talent intentionally assembledfor the purpose of influencing the Gov-ernment and enhancing Britain's secu-rity. When, however, the Committee'sconstructive efforts were summarily re-buffed, the laws of political motion ne-cessitated a new objective: the removalof Chamberlain from office. The Com-mittee waited only for the requisite op-portunity, which they found in theNorway debate. While the final pushrequired the collaboration and votingstrength of the Labour opposition, theWatching Committee—the advanceguard—nevertheless prevailed.
OpinionsProf. David Freeman:
Professor Witherell sheds newlight on our understanding of how
Churchill became Prime Minister. Thetraditional view has been that, in theend, Labour made Churchill PrimeMinister by refusing to serve underChamberlain. Additionally, accordingto Churchill's memoirs, Halifax tookhimself out of the running at the lastminute in a meeting with Chamberlainand Churchill on the morning of 10May. Now we learn that Halifax had
already done as much the day before,and for the same reason, in a
meeting with Lord Salisbury.Halifax may, never-
theless, have hesitated tospeak on 10 May (Churchill
recalls a "very long
pause") in a last-ditchhope that Churchillmight still defer tohim. But even if
Churchill had notoutlasted the Foreign
Secretary during thathistoric moment of silence,
it seems clear from Salisbury's rec-ollection that the Watching Committeechairman's insistence on the 9th thateither Halifax or Churchill becomePM was merely pro forma. When Hali-fax excused himself, the "ever-courte-ous" Salisbury made a further proforma statement to the effect thatbeing a Peer was no bar to being PrimeMinister but also perfunctorily endedthe conversation because Halifax hadarrived at the "right" choice. The con-clusion that I reach from this article isthat, while Labour did serve as themechanism for replacing Chamberlainwith Churchill, the real driving forcewas the cabal of true-blue Conserva-tives led by Lord Salisbury.
Churchill's elevation to the pre-miership depended on many variablesbeyond his own control for his destinyto have been inevitable. But there is norule that says history had to happen theway it did. Nor is there any require-ment that the best qualified person willalways—or indeed ever—be selected forthe position of supreme leadership.
After the war, with Churchill a na-tional hero, everyone wanted to claimproprietary interest in his success. Forthe Conservatives this was easy. Chur-
FlNIiSTHOUR 114/39
chill remained their party leader for al-most fifteen years. Labour had a strongclaim as well: its leaders had servedwith distinction in the Churchill coali-tion. But after the generation of warleaders had passed from the scene, itbecame more politically expedient forLabour to assert that it was their partythat had come to the rescue in May1940 against the intransigent Tory es-tablishment, in effect "liberating"Churchill from the shackles of his ownparty.
This interpretation cannot be sus-tained. In reality, well-entrenched lead-ers of the Conservative establishmenthad been the driving force behind theGreat Change. As General Spearsrecorded: "The Conservative Partymade the present Government [and]only the Conservative Party can de-stroy it." Labour's interest remainsrooted, not only in the war service ofits leaders, but in the millions of rank-and-file Labour supporters. We need toremember what Churchill told thecheering crowds of London on V-EDay: "This is your victory!"
Prof. John Ramsden:Professor Witherell's paper is im-
portant testimony to the patriotic roleof Salisbury and his Committee. I tendto agree with those who have consid-ered that this new information is some-what less than revolutionary, and somore or less does Witherell. His papertells us quite a bit about how Cham-berlain fell, but much less about howChurchill, rather than someone else,came to replace him. It's particularlyweak in suggesting that Salisbury andhis committee ensured that Chamber-lain did not become Chancellor of theExchequer in the Churchill Govern-ment, since Churchill gave him a big-ger job instead, as effective deputyPrime Minister and supremo of thehome front, something he could nothave done if Chamberlain had beendrowning in the financial detail of trea-sury work. While Larry Witherell hasmade a fine contribution to our under-standing of the events, I don't believehe would wish us to exaggerate the im-portance of his revelations. M>
KEEPING THE MEMORY GREEN.
LEADING CHURCHILL MYTHS(3) "Churchill let Coventry burn to protect his secret intelligence."
PETER J. MdVER
For twenty years, most recently in a piece by Christo-pher Hitchens in The Atlantic Monthly, it has be-come a matter of accepted fact that on the night of
14-15 November 1940, rather than compromise a deci-sive source of intelligence, Winston Churchill left the cityof Coventry to the mercies of the German Air force.
This story has appeared in many books, articles andletters to the press, but its origins date back over a quartercentury to three books, by F. W. Winterbotham, AnthonyCave Brown, and William Stevenson.
The originator of the "prior warning" theory wasformer RAF Group Captain F. W. Winterbotham in TheUltra Secret (New York: Harper & Row, 197'4). This wasthe first book to reveal that the Allies had broken the Ger-man codes—a fact that was until then a closely guardedofficial secret.
According to Winterbotham, who wrote entirelyfrom memory, the name Coventry came through in cleartype on a decrypt of German messages (codenamed "Boni-face," later "Ultra") at 3PM on 14 November, the after-noon before the raid, and Winterbotham himself immedi-ately telephoned the news to one of Churchill's private sec-retaries in Downing Street {The Ultra Secret82-84).
Much the same tale was told by Cave Brown in histwo-volume work, Bodyguard of Lies (New York: Harper& Row, 1974). But Cave Brown wrote that Churchill hadthe message a full two days ahead of time. The Coventryraid, he wrote, was one of three under the code name"Einheitopreis," against Midlands cities coded "Umbrella"for Birmingham, "All One Piece" for Wolverhampton,and "Corn" for Coventry {Bodyguard of LiesT.38-44).
Picking up on these 1974 books, William Steven-son in A Man Called Intrepid {New York: Harcourt, Brace,Jovanovich, 1976), wrote that the Germans sent the orderto destroy Coventry in the second week of November.Unlike previous "Boniface" messages, which had alwaysgiven the name of the target in code, this message gave thename "Coventry" in clear type. Thus, wrote Stevenson,within minutes of the order being given, it was placed infront of the Prime Minister. Faced with the prospect ofleaving the people of Coventry to die or evacuating them,
Mr. Mclver, of Nuneaton, Warwickshire, penned this article eighteenyears ago in Finest Hour 41. We have brought it up to date by addingor quoting additional, more recently published material.
Churchill turned to Sir William Stephenson ("Intrepid"),who advised that "Boniface" was too valuable a source ofintelligence to risk. By evacuating the city, the Prime Min-ister would expose the source and endanger its usefulnessin the future—so "Intrepid" told Churchill to leaveCoventry to burn and its people to their fate.
While at first glance all three writers seem to agree,there are considerable differences between them. For ex-ample, Winterbotham claimed that he telephoned the in-formation to Downing Street, while Stevenson said thenews was given to Churchill by "Intrepid." Cave Brownasserted that Churchill knew about the raid forty-eighthours in advance; Winterbotham said Coventry was iden-tified as the target only a few hours before the attack.
All three authors cannot be correct, though as I willshow, all are certainly wrong. Cave Brown's ac-count has several errors independent from the dif-
ferences with the other writers. The code name for theWolverhampton raid was "All One Price," not "All OnePiece." Its significance was not lost on the Air Ministry,which quickly realized that it referred to the "Everythingat One Price" sales slogan of Woolworth & Co.—ergoWolverhampton. "Umbrella," the Ministry concluded,meant Birmingham because Neville Chamberlain, a fa-mous carrier of umbrellas, was a former mayor of Birm-ingham. But nothing connected "Corn" with Coventry.
By mid-November the Air Ministry had learnedthat the Germans were having difficulties with theirKnickebein radio direction beam, used to direct bombersto their targets; it seemed likely that they would use themore accurate X-Gerat system installed in Luftwaffe unitK. GR100, which would act as a pathfinding fire raiser forless experienced pilots. The Air Ministry reached this con-clusion from reports that the Germans had been attackingisolated targets in England with flares instead of bombs.
On 11 November the Air Ministry decoded a Ger-man message referring to a raid codenamed "MoonlightSonata." This was the message in which the word "Corn"first appeared. Because of where the word appeared in themessage Dr. R. V. Jones, one of the Air Ministry scientists,concluded that "Corn" referred not to a target but to theappearance of radar screens when jamming was present.According to Jones's book, Most Secret War, aka The Wiz-ard War (1978, 201), the code name "Moonlight Sonata"
: I N ( ; S T l l O ( ' R 1 1 4 / 4 0
.AND THE RECORD ACCURATE
was believed to mean that the raid would take place on anight of a full moon, indicating the period 15-20 Novem-ber. "Sonata" suggested a three-part operation; based ontheir knowledge of Luftwaffe guidance systems, the Min-istry concluded that the first part would be a fire-raiser,the other two parts normal bombing raids (Public RecordsOffice AIR2/5238).
No one at the Air Ministry believed that "Sonata"referred to three separate nights. The 11 November de-crypt referred to four targets, and mentioned that MarshalGoering himself had been involved in the planning, anindication of how important this particular raid wasviewed in Berlin.
In an appreciation of this message, considering notonly Goering's involvement but other intelligence, the AirMinistry concluded that the four targets were in the southof England, particularly London. The other intelligenceincluded a captured German map which marked four tar-get areas, all in the south; and an interview with a prisonerof war suggesting that the Midlands cities were targets fora future raid unconnected with "Moonlight Sonata"(P.R.O. AIR2/5238).
In the early hours of 12 November, Dr. Jones re-ceived a decrypt of a new German message which indi-cated that there was to be a raid against Coventry, Wolver-hampton, and Birmingham. But there was nothing in thisnew message to connect it with "Moonlight Sonata," andno such connection was made (P.R.O. AIR20/2419). Asearly as the morning before the raid, the Air Ministry werestill expecting a raid on London.
What of Winterbotham's alleged telephone call toDowning Street at 3PM the afternoon of November 14th?Dr. Jones, who was given copies of all "Boniface" decrypts atthe same time as Winterbotham, states that there was no suchmessage. In his book, Jones recalled traveling home that nightwondering where the raid was actually going to be!
What did Churchill know and when did he knowit? The most succinct summary came from one ofChurchill's private secretaries, John Colville, in his book,The Churchillians (London, 1981), page 62:
All concerned with the information gleaned from the in-tercepted German signals were conscious that Germansuspicions must not be aroused for the sake of ephemeraladvantages. In the case of the Coventry raid no dilemmaarose, for until the German directional beam was turnedon the doomed city nobody knew where the great raidwould be. Certainly the Prime Minister did not. The Ger-man signals referred to a major operation with the codename "Moonlight Sonata." The usual "Boniface" secrecyin the Private Office had been lifted on this occasion andduring the afternoon before the raid I wrote in my diary(kept under lock and key at 10 Downing Street), "It is ob-viously some major air operation, but its exact destinationthe Air Ministry find it difficult to determine."
That same afternoon, Thursday 14 November 1940,Churchill set off with [private secretary] John Martin forDitchley, Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Tree's house in Oxford-shire, generously made available to the Prime Ministeronce a month when the moon was full and the PM's offi-cial residence, Chequers, was vulnerable. Just beforeChurchill left, word was received that "MoonlightSonata" was likely to take place that night. In the car heopened his most recent yellow box and read the Germansignals in full. He immediately told the chauffeur to turnround, and went back to Downing Street.
On arrival he decided that due precautions must betaken, for he assumed the operation to be aimed at Lon-don and to be a more massive assault than had ever beenmade before. He ordered that the female staff be senthome before darkness fell. He packed John Peck and meoff to dine and sleep in a sumptuous air-raid shelter pre-pared and equipped in Down Street underground stationby the London Passenger Transport Board. They made itavailable to the Prime Minister as well as to their own ex-ecutive. Churchill called it "the burrow," but used it him-self on only a few occasions.
John Peck and I dined apolaustically in "the burrow." Icommented, with a blend of gratification and disapproval,"Caviar (almost unobtainable in these days of restrictedimports); Perrier Jouet 1928; 1865 brandy and excellentHavana cigars." Meanwhile Churchill, impatient for thefireworks to start, made his way to the Air Ministry roofwith John Martin and saw nothing. For on their way toCoventry, the raiders dropped no bombs on London.
There is not even the thinnest shred of truth in GroupCaptain Winterbotham's story of Coventry. It is to behoped that neither this incident nor a score of others withwhich Mr. Stevenson's book about "Intrepid" is gaudilybedizened are ever used for the purpose of historical refer-ence. To dispel such an unacceptable hazard is my excusefor this long digression.
Colville was not the first to reveal the truth. Formerprivate secretary, John Martin, who had been withChurchill in London on the fateful night, await-
ing the bombers that never came, recalled the facts in TheTimes on 28 August 1976, when the charge was first cir-culating. A quarter century later, Christopher Hitchens inThe Atlantic wrote that no Churchill defender has everchallenged the story. Historians Norman Longmate,Ronald Levin, Harry Hensley, and David Stafford are justfour historians who as early as 1979 explicitly dismissedthe Coventry story for the nonsense it is.
Colville's hopes were in vain. The Coventry liehardily endures, probably forever, periodically resurrectedand solemnly proclaimed by those who have convincedthemselves of Churchill's perfidy. $
FINEST HOUR ii4/41
EMINENT
CHURCHILLIANSNancy Canary ana Craig Horn:
The Center's Secretary ana Treasurer
N ancy Canary isan attorneyalternatively
operating out ofCleveland, Ohio andDelray Beach, Florida.She has long been anadmirer of WinstonChurchill and has readmany of his writings.Many of her clients overthe years have been veter-ans of World War II, including a Canadian whose fatherserved in Churchill's wartime Government.
Nancy joined The Churchill Center five yearsago after hearing a speech by Michael McMenamin (cen-ter above right), fellow Cleveland attorney, contributorof Finest Hours "Action This Day" column, delivered atCleveland's Rowfant Club. After discussing with Michaelher admiration for Churchill, he suggested she join theCenter and attend meetings of Northern OhioChurchillians, of which he was and still is President. Thefollowing year she attended her first conference inWilliamsburg, Virginia, where she met our Patron, LadySoames and Trustee, Celia Sandys. It was here thatNancy learned of Celia's intention to take a group ofChurchillians to South Africa in June of 1999. Sheinquired about the trip and in fact was one of the last tosign up before the list was sold out. She also attendedthe pre-South African trip through parts of Englandhosted by Barbara and Richard Langworth, which cul-minated at the 16th International Conference in Bath,England. During this trip she came to know theLangworths and was later asked by Richard to considerserving as a Governor of The Churchill Center. InJanuary 2002, Nancy relieved John Mather as executivesecretary of the Center, which also places her on theExecutive Committee—that portion of the Boardcharged with handling day to day operations betweenmeetings of the Governors. Her fellow Governors arepleased to welcome Nancy to the team.
Craig Horn, left, with Michael McMe-namin ("Action This Day") and Barbara
Langworth, San Diego Conference, 2001.
Craig Horn,57, waselected to
the ChurchillCenter's Board ofGovernors in 1998,and became ourtreasurer two yearslater. Craig is also amember of the gov-erning board of ourDC affiliate, TheWashington Societyfor Churchill.
Involvement with The Churchill Center is afamily affair. Lorraine Horn is the Center's volunteeradministrator, overseeing day-to-day activities and assist-ing in membership, financial and record-keeping chores.Craig & Lorraine also played large parts in the 1998International Churchill Conference in Williamsburg,Virginia, in 1998, and in the theme conference,"Churchill and Eisenhower at Gettysburg," in 1999.They work in a variety of capacities on upcoming eventsand Craig is program chairman for the 2002 edition,"Churchill and the Intelligence World," at LansdowneResort, Leesburg, Virginia on September 19-22th.
Born in Iowa, Craig joined the United StatesAir Force in 1962. Following Russian language schoolsat Indiana University and Syracuse University, he servedboth in Europe and the Middle East as a linguist inSecurity and Intelligence work from 1963 to 1969.
Craig began his career in the food business in1969 with Oscar Mayer & Co. In 1972, he entered thefood brokerage business, and in 1978 became vice presi-dent and founding partner of HSH Sales in Maryland,one of the largest food service brokerage companies inthe USA, with about seventy employees.
Elected to the city council in Laurel, Marylandfor three terms and twice elected president of the citycouncil, Craig has held leadership posts in civic, politicaland professional organizations. He is past president ofthe Laurel Lions Club and an honorary member of theworld champion Laurel Volunteer Rescue Squad.
Craig has lived in Maryland for over 30 years.He and Lorraine have four grown children and sevengrandchildren. Like Winston Churchill, Craig has anabiding interest in the American War Between theStates. He has a large collection of civil war memorabiliaand books, and is a member of various round tables ofmilitary history. It was his study of the American CivilWar that led Craig to a profound interest in the life,writings and leadership of Winston Churchill. M>
FlNliST HOHR 114/42
Recipes irom No. 10: Madras Eggs
by Georgina Landemare, the Churchill family cook, 1940s-1950s,updated and annotated for the modern kitchen by Barbara Langworth([email protected]).
CC01 nly a very short lettert,'this. Here I am in
camp at this arid place—bare as a plate & hot asan oven. All the skin is burnt off my face and my com-plexion has assumed a deep mulberry... "
—WSC to his mother Rajankunte Camp, Madras, India,21 January 1897 {Winston S. Churchill, Companion Volume I,Part 2, edited by Randolph S. Churchill, London: Heinemann,1967, p. 726; also available from Churchill Archives,http://www.chu.cam.ac.uk/Churchill_papers/
MADRAS EGGS (SERVES FOUR)
4 hard-boiled eggs, sliced6 small tomatoes, skinned, seeded & sliced4 oz. chopped cooked ham2 small shallots, finely chopped6 Tb curry sauce*4 oz. cooked riceSalt and pepperButter
Butter a one-quart fireproof dish well. Using half theamounts place first a layer of tomato, then of eggs sprin-kled with shallot, pepper and salt, next a layer of currysauce and of chopped ham. Repeat these layers and coverthe top with boiled rice and knobs of butter. Bake in amoderate oven [350 °F] for 1/2 - 3/4 hour.
* Curry Sauce3 medium-sized onions, diced2 oz. butter1 dessertspoon [2 tsp] curry powder1 blade [clove] garlic1 oz [scant 4 TB] flour1/2 pint [10 oz.] meat stock (or broth, bouillon)Salt and pepper
Fry onions in melted butter until soft. Add curry powder,garlic, flour and seasoning and fry slowly until it leavesthe sides of the pan. Gradually stir in stock and cook for30 minutes. Strain [use coarse sieve] and use as required.
Curry isnot onespice but a mixture of many. I was amused by authorBrent Thompson's explanation on the Curry House web-site: "The term curry itself isn't really used in India, ex-cept as a term appropriated by the British generically tocategorize a large set of different soup/stew preparationsubiquitous in India. [It] nearly always contains ginger,garlic, onion, turmeric, chile, and oil (except in commu-nities which eat neither onion nor garlic, of course)which must have seemed all the same to the British,being all yellow/red, oily, spicy/aromatic, and too pun-gent to taste anyway." $
Churchillin India(Bangalore),1895.
FINEST HOUR J H / 4 3
WOODS CORNER
About Books
CHURCHILL AND HAYEKG. W. SIMONDS
Alan Ebenstein's recently pub-lished biography* of FriedrichHayek, 1974 Nobel price win-
ner and possibly the 20th century'sgreatest political thinker and econo-mist, shows that he was a longtime ad-mirer of Winston Churchill, althoughbest known for his influence on Mar-garet Thatcher. Churchill's portraithung over Hayek's desk for many years,even when in later life he returned tohis native Austria to work.' Those whobelieve that the four foremost conserva-tive political thinkers of the 20th cen-tury were Reagan, Thatcher, Goldwater,and Churchill may be interested toknow that all four were, in differentways, influenced by Hayek.2
Frederich Hayek, born in Austriain 1899, came to the London School ofEconomics in 1931 and, with the wors-ening situation in Germany, later of-fered his "considerable knowledge ofAustrian affairs" to the Ministry of In-formation.3 His offer declined, he re-mained at L.S.E. throughout the war.Consequently he and Harold Laski,with Lionel Robbins, became theprominent influences there and, whenthe wartime evacuation to Cambridgetook place, he came into close contactwith John Maynard Keynes.
In the May 1945 electionChurchill made oblique reference toHayek,4 one presumes because of hav-ing read Hayek's 1944 book, The Roadto Serfdom. Ebenstein quotesChurchill's 1945 campaign speech: "Nosocialist system can be established with-out a political police. They would haveto fall back on some form of Gestapo, no
Mr. Simonds ([email protected]. -co.uk) is a member of the Churchill Society(UK) in Doncascer, England. Woods Corner isa bibliophile's department named for the lateChurchill bibliographer Fred Woods.
doubt very humanely directed in the firstinstance."
This same speech excerpt is quotedcritically in Kramnick and Sheerman'sbiography of Laski.5 The words in ital-ics come from a little later in thespeech, after "No Socialist governmentconducting the entire life and industryof the country could afford to allowfree, sharp, or violently-worded expres-sions of public discontent"—as can beseen from Churchill's war speech vol-ume, Victory (1946).
Laski's biographers, and many oth-ers over the years, claimed that the"Gestapo" remark contributed to theelection of a majority Labour Govern-ment and Churchill's loss of the Pre-miership. Certainly maximum use wasmade of this remark by Attlee and oth-ers. Clementine Churchill, who hadread her husband's speech in draft, ad-vised this sentence be dropped: not thefirst time her instincts were correct.
This point apart, it is clear thatboth Churchill and the ConservativeCentral Office thought highly of TheRoad to Serfdom: Hayek was offeredprecious rationed paper for an abstract,prior to the election, but it could notbe printed in time. At this time Laski,as chairman of the Labour Party, ob-jected to Churchill's invitation to Attleeto go with him to the Potsdam Confer-ence with the election as yet undecided,saying, "the Labour Party shall not becommitted to any decision not debatedin the Party Executive." So Churchillmay have had a point.
In the first, founding meeting ofthe Mont Pelerin Society, Hayek wasunwittingly and incorrectly described asbeing Winston Churchill's adviser oneconomic affairs.7 It may be that At-tlee's riposte to the "Gestapo" speechcontributed to this misunderstanding.
In a later biographical interview
Hayek commented that Churchill be-lieved at one time that cabinet secretshad been leaked to Harold Laski, butthat this was untrue: Laski had justguessed.^
Much later in life the young Mar-garet Thatcher admitted she had readHayek's books, particularly The Road toSerfdom, and, during his time at the(London) Institute of Economic Affairsembraced him as one of her majorphilosophical influences.9 Hayek isprobably now best known in Britain forthis; indeed it is believed that despitehis political leanings, Tony Blair is alsoan admirer.
* Friedrich Hayek: A Biography, by AlanEbenstein. New York: St. Martins Press.References below refer to Ebenstein's bi-ography unless otherwise indicatedl .p . 316.2. p. 209.3. p. 104.4. Winston S. Churchill, Victory (Lon-don: Cassell, 1946), pp. 186-92, espe-cially the second and third paragraphson p. 189.5. p. 138, footnote 37.6. Mary Soames, Clementine Churchill(London: Cassell, 1979), p. 382.7. p. 144.8. p. 182.9. p. 291.
RACE, ISLAM
AND THE
RIVER WAR
Thanks to Gregory Smith forfinding the powerful quotationThe River War ("Quotation of
the Decade?", FH 113:5). I have a one-volume paperback (Prion: London1997) and cannot find it, or passages Iremember hearing on the Books onTape production. I must add that I re-
FlNHST HOCK 1 1 4 / 4 4
main troubled by passages like this:"The indigenous inhabitants of thecountry were negroes as black as coal.They displayed the virtues of bar-barism....The smallness of their intelli-gence excused the degradation of theirhabits." —Andy Guilford
Editor's response:The Prion paperback edition is a
further abridgement of a previousabridgement first published in Frontiersand Wars. (See my Connoisseur's Guideto the Books of Sir Winston Churchill,page 37.) But the 1902 Longmans,1915 Nelson, and 1933 Eyre & Spottis-woode one-volume editions also fail toproduce Mr. Smith's highly relevantquotation. The Books-on-Tape audioversion, which is based on the sametext, also lacks this quotation.
The quotation falls in Volume II,Chapter XXII, "Return of the BritishDivision," which Churchill omittedstarting in 1902. Likewise culled wasChapter XXI, "After the Victory,"which contains some of Churchill'sfinest writing on the meaning of war forthe common soldier, particularly theDervishes. We republished this in FinestHour 85, still available for $5 postpaidfrom Churchill Stores, PO Box 96,Contoocook NH 03229.
The bad news is that unabridgedoriginal copies of The River War (1899-1900) cost from $1000 up. The goodnews is that an entirely new two-vol-ume edition is coming, thanks to Pro-fessor James Muller and The ChurchillCenter. Look for it in our new bookservice in 2003.
Churchill's prejudices were those ofhis time; but compare his "negroes asblack as coal" remarks to what he wrotein My African Journey about the nativesof Uganda (Chapter 5): "...an amiable,clothed, polite, and intelligent racedwell together in an organized monar-chy....More than two hundred thousandnatives are able to read and write. Morethan one hundred thousand have em-braced the Christian faith. There is aCourt, there are Regents and Ministersand nobles, there is a regular system ofnative law and tribunals; there is disci-pline, there is industry, there is culture,
WOODS CORNER
there is peace. In fact, I ask myselfwhether there is any other spot in thewhole earth where the dreams andhopes of the negrophile, so oftenmocked by results and stubborn facts,have ever attained such a happy realiza-tion." Patronizing? Yes, but consideringtoday's Uganda, one is forced to wonderwhat its people got in place of theBritish Empire.
Churchill defies pigeonholing. Inthis passage, as in his stubborn defenseof the native African in London to Lady-smith (see sidebar), he is neither racistnor reformer. Anthony MontagueBrowne said years ago that Churchillnever flinched from criticizing thosewhom he thought deserved it: thus theZionist Churchill railed against Zionistterrorists who blew up the King DavidHotel in Jerusalem, and with it hisfriend Lord Lloyd. When Churchill sawAfricans he thought were degraded, hesaid so—and vice versa. But politiciansof Churchill's stripe were as scarce in1900 as they are in 2002.
A few eerily relevant quotes aboutthe original work from my book, writ-ten long before 11 September 2001...
The West and Islam{Connoisseur's Guide, page 27, on TheRiver War)
Arguably the most aestheticallybeautiful of original trade editions ofChurchill's books, The River War is abrilliant history of British involvementin the Sudan and the campaign for itsreconquest: arresting, insightful, withtremendous narrative and descriptivepower. Though published 100 yearsago, it is uniquely relevant to our times:combined with Churchill's personal ad-venture, there are passages of deep re-flection about the requirements of a civ-ilized government of ordered liberty.
Far from accepting uncritically thesuperiority of British civilization,Churchill shows his appreciation for thelonging for liberty among the indige-nous inhabitants of the Sudan; but hefinds their native regime defective in itsinadequate legal and customary protec-tion for the liberty of subjects. On theother hand, he criticizes the Britisharmy, and in particular its commander
Lord Kitchener, for departing in itscampaign from the kind of respect forthe liberty and humanity of adversariesthat alone could justify British civiliza-tion and imperial rule over the Sudan.
Churchill and Race{Connoisseur's Guide, page 51, on Lon-don to Ladysmith)
I often wish modern writers whosay Churchill was a racist would readhis conversation with his Boer captorsin London to Ladysmith. This was, re-member, 1899, when every Englishmanalive supposedly believed in the uttersupremacy of the white race, Englishbranch. "Is it right," the Boer guardasked Churchill, "that a dirty Kaffir[native] should walk on the pavement[sidewalk]—without a pass? That's whatthey do in your British Colonies.Brother! Equal! Ugh! Free! Not a bit.We know how to treat Kaffirs....Theywere put here by the God Almighty towork for us. We'll stand no damnednonsense from them. We'll keep themin their proper places."
Churchill remarks: "What is thetrue and original root of Dutch aversionto British rule? It is the abiding fear andhatred of the movement that seeks toplace the native on a level with thewhite man. British government is asso-ciated in the Boer farmer's mind withviolent social revolution...the Kaffir isto be declared the brother of the Euro-pean, to be constituted his legal equal,to be armed with political rights...nor isa tigress robbed of her cubs more furi-ous than is the Boer at this prospect."After the statements of his captor,Churchill concludes, "[he and I had] nomore agreement...Probing at random Ihad touched a very sensitive nerve."
Now it is accurately said thatChurchill's view of native Africans wasnot that of, say, Martin Luther King, Jr.half a century later. Churchill was pa-ternalistic, and held, if not in thesepages then in the African Journey, thatimmediate equality was impractical andunworkable. But his views in the Lady-smith are in striking contrast to those ofmost contemporary Britons. Of course,whatever improvements might haveevolved in a South Africa under >»
FINEST HOUR IW / 45
About Books...pure British government, the Union of South Africa in 1910led to something different. By combining the Boer domi-nated Transvaal and Orange Free State with the British CapeColony and Natal in a Union where only whites could voteand Boers outnumbered Britons, Great Britain establishedthe Boer patrimony which the Boers had failed to achieve byarms; and from that Union grew the policy of Apartheid. Itis interesting to find Churchill in 1899 representing the sameessential approach to native emancipation as the SouthAfrican reformers of the early 1990s—and agreeable to knowthat Nelson Mandela is an admirer of Winston Churchill.
*A Connoisseur's Guide to the Books of Sir WinstonChurchill is available for $36 postpaid from the ChurchillCenter Book Club, PO Box 385, Hopkinton NH 03229. $
AMPERSANDA compendium of facts eventually toappear as a reader's guide.
CHURCHILL'S POLITICAL OFFICES, 1906-1955Compiled by the Editor
Undersecretary of State for the Colonies9DecO5-24AprO8. Chief assistant to the Colonial
Secretary with responsibility for directing all colonial affairsworldwide. Since the Colonial Secretary at this time wasLord Elgin, Churchill was the nominal spokesman (muchto Elgin's angst) on colonial matters in the Commons.
President of the Board of Trade24Apr08-25Octl 1. Equivalent to U.S. Secretary of
Commerce. Appointment date is the official one, but per therule of the day, Churchill had to refight his Manchester seatto confirm this Cabinet office. He lost on 23 April, but waselected MP for Dundee on 9 May.
Secretary of State for the Home DepartmentFebl0-25Octl 1. Responsible for police, prisons and
the state of criminal law (and some odd archaic roles suchas looking after wild birds in Scotland and determining ifEnglish and Welsh towns are cities), but once much larger.Roy Jenkins calls it "a plank of wood out of which all otherdomestic departments have been carved," including today'sAgriculture, Environment, and Employment ministries.
First Lord of the Admiralty25Octll-28Mayl5, 3Sep39-26May40. Civilian head
of the Navy; Secretary of the Navy in U.S.
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster28Mayl5-l 1NOV15. An office unique to Great
Britain: a sinecure appointment whose only serious duty isappointing County magistrates.
REMEMBER WINSTON CHURCHILLWill future generations remember?
Will the ideas you cherish now be sustained then?Will someone articulate your principles?
Who will guide your grandchildren, and your country?There is an answer.
The Churchill Center Associates (page 2) are people whohave committed $10,000 or more, over five years, all tax-
deductible, to the Churchill Center and Society Endowmentfunds earning interest in the United States and Canada.
With their help—and yours—those earnings guaranteethat The Churchill Center will endure as a powerful voice,
sustaining those beliefs Sir Winston and you hold dear.Now. And for future generations.
If you would like to consider becoming aChurchill Center Associate, please contact
Richard M. Langworth, Chairman, Board of Trustees(888) 454-2275 • [email protected]
Minister of Munitions16Jull7-15Janl9. Supplying adequate ammunition to
forces at the front was so important during the Great Warthat the task was given Ministerial status.
Secretary of State for War15Janl9-l4Feb21. Civilian head of the Army;
Secretary of the Army in the U.S.
Minister of Air15Janl9-lApr21. Civilian head of the Air Force.
Secretary of State for the Coloniesl4Feb21-Oct22. Head of the Colonial Office.
Churchill's work was largely devoted to the Middle Eastand Ireland (which was not a colony), rather than tradi-tional areas like Africa and the West Indies.
Chancellor of the Exchequer7Nov24-30May29. Equivalent to U.S. Secretary of the
Treasury; considered to be the next office down from thePrime Minister, housed at No. 11 Downing Street.
Minister of Defence10May40-26Jul45, 26Oct51-5Apr55. Roughly like
U.S. Secretary of Defense but Churchill purposely left it ill-defined, with war, navy and air ministers under him.
Prime MinisterCoalition PM 10May40-23May45; Conservative PM
23May45-26Jul45; Conservative PM 26Oct51-5Apr55.Head of government (but not also head of state as withU.S. Presidents) and leader of the majority party inParliament. (Trick question: how many times was WSCPrime Minister? Technically three, not two.) $
FlNHSTflOl.'R 114/46
CHURCHILLTRIVIA
By Curt Zoller ([email protected])
7 'ESTyour knowledge!Most questionscan be answered in back issues of
Churchill Center publications but it's notreally cricket to check. Twenty-four ques-tions appear each issue, answers in the fol-lowing issue. Categories are Contemporaries(C), Literary (L), Miscellaneous (M), Per-sonal (P), Statesmanship (S) and War (W).
1231. About whom did Churchill com-ment, "He thinks he is Joan of Arc butmy bishops won't let me burn him"? (C)
1232. In Roosevelt's first correspondenceto WSC, which Churchill book did FDRsay he'd enjoyed reading? (L)
1233. In 1942 Churchill's parliamentaryopponents called for a vote of no-confi-dence. What was the pretext for the par-liamentary vote? (M)
1234. What name was originally given tointercepted German codes? (P)
1235. Who on WSC's staff said, "Wehad been at war with Germany longerthan any war power, we had sufferedmore, we had sacrificed more, and in theend we would lose more...Yet here werethese God-awful American academicsrushing about, talking about the FourFreedoms and the 'Atlantic Charter'"? (S)
1236. During WW2 Churchill and Roo-sevelt were advised by what three Chiefsof Staff Committees? (W)
1237. Who was the leading free trader inthe Edwardian Conservative Party, andChurchill's best man at his wedding? (C)
1238. In his first dispatch from Cuba in1895, how did Churchill describe howinsurgents destroyed sugar crops? (L)
1239. How were Churchill and FranklinRoosevelt related? (M)
1240. What did Churchill call theBletchley codebreakers? (P)
1241. The priorities of Allied bomberswere Germany's synthetic oil productionfacilities, oil depots, and tank factories,which two additional target areas wereadded in January 1945? (S)
1242. The Africa Star was authorized for
service on only one Mediterranean is-land. What island was it? (W)
1243. Who assumed the Premiershipupon Churchill's 1955 retirement? (C)
1244. On 21 March 1900 Churchillwrote to his mother: "make sure that Iget £2000 on account of the royalties."Which book was he referring to? (L)
1245. How old was Lord RandolphChurchill when he died in 1895? (M)
1246. Anthony Bevir, who looked afterpatronage matters at No. 10 DowningStreet, recommended Churchill's nameto King George VI's private secretary.What did he recommend? (P)
1247. In July 1944 Churchill asked for a"dispassionate report on the militaryaspects of threatening to use lethal andcorrosive gases on the enemy, if they didnot stop the use of indiscriminateweapons." What was the response? (S)
1248. Who was the Major General com-manding the Malakand Field Force, a de-scendant of a Colonel who attempted tosteal the Crown Jewels in 1671? (W)
1249. Who was the fellow subaltern whoaccompanied WSC to Cuba in 1895? (C)
1250. What was Churchill's original titlefor The World Crisis? (L)
1251. What military rank did Churchillhold when he joined the Imperial Yeo-manry (Oxfordshire Hussars) in 1902? (M)
1252. When was Churchill first ap-proached by the Conservative Party tostand as Tory candidate for Oldham? (P)
1253. Name three of the major issuesdiscussed during the Yalta conference byStalin, Churchill, and Roosevelt. (S)
1254. When Churchill flew to Cairo inAugust 1942 he decided ;t,o replace Gen.Auchinleck, commander of the EighthArmy. Who was selected first, and whofinally got the job? (W)
ANSWERS TO LAST TRIVIA
(1207) Without seeking his father's approval,Randolph ran as an Independent Conserva-tive in Conservative stronghold Wavertree,
and lost. (1208) Mr. Siwertz comparedChurchill to the British statesman and novel-ist, Benjamin Disraeli. (1209) Churchill re-ceived notice of his selection for the NobelPrize for Literature on 16Oct53. (1210)When Churchill became a Knight of theGarter in spring of 1953 he was addressed asSir Winston. (1211) Churchill stopped theevacuation of children when the City ofBe-nariswas torpedoed and seventy-seven chil-dren lost their lives. (1212) Churchill com-mented: "No country in the world is less fitfor a conflict with terrorists than GreatBritain. That is not because of her weaknessor cowardice; it is because of her restraint andvirtues, and the way of life in which we havelived so long on this sheltered island."
(1213) Randolph announced his intention toput forward a candidate for Norwood, chal-lenging the National Government's India pol-icy. Churchill was furious and did not sup-port his son. (1214) American historianHenry Steele Commager abridged the origi-nal edition of Marlborough. (1215) JosephGrew was the American ambassador and SirRobert Craigie represented Great Britainwhen Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. (1216)Churchill received £12,093, tax free, with theNobel Prize for Literature. (1217) Churchillwarned of aerial vulnerability in a speech inthe House of Commons on 7Feb34. (1218)Churchill sent Duff Cooper to Singapore toprovide him a personal report. UnfortunatelyDuff Cooper issued no warnings of Singa-pore's military weakness during the threemonths before its invasion.
(1219) Lord Lothian was British Ambassadorto the U. S. from 1939 till his death on12Dec40. (1220) Churchill intended to enti-tle his first and only novel Affairs of State.(1221) The quote about a book "all abouthimself" called "The World Crisis" is ascribedto Samuel Hoare. (1222) Churchill was 76years old when he again became PM in 1951.(1223) FDR wanted to take over the defenseof Northern Ireland. (1224) The Blenheimvictory was in the 18th century, 13 August1704.
(1225) Neville Chamberlain suggested mak-ing WSC "Ambassador to Timbucto." (1226)The woman in Savrola is Lucile. (1227)Churchill said: "In the present age the Statecannot control the Church in spiritual mat-ters; it can only divorce it." (1228) Abouttyranny WSC said: "It is not a question ofopposing Nazism or Communism, but of op-posing tyranny in whatever form it presentsitself." (1229) In 1901 Churchill predicted"...a European war can only end in the ruinsof the vanquished and the scarcely less fatalcommercial dislocation and exhaustion of theconquerors." (1230) "Operation Sledgeham-mer," which proved unachievable, was theplan for landing in France in 1942. 43
FINHSTHOUR H4/47
"The Britons are almost miraculousl\fortunate in their present leaders. "
_ —Wendell Willkie