June 21, 2013

Finest Hour 137, Winter 2007-08

Page 7

Datelines

Quotation of the Season

2024 International Churchill Conference

Join us for the 41st International Churchill Conference. London | October 2024

More

The Middle East is one of the hardest-hearted areas in the world. It has always been fought over, and peace has only reigned when a major power has established firm influence and shown that it would maintain its will. Your friends must be supported with every vigour and if necessary they must be avenged. Force, or perhaps force and bribery, are the only things that will be respected. It is very sad, but we had all better recognise it. At present our friendship is not valued, and our enmity is not feared.”
—WSCTO ANTHONY MONTAGUE BROWNE, 1958.
FROM AMB’S LONG SUNSET LONDON: CASSELL, 1995,166-67.

UK CURRICULUM (AGAIN)

LONDON, NOVEMBER 17TH— Our last issue (7-8) doubted that the freed-up UK curriculum, no longer recommending coverage of figures like Churchill, Hitler, Gandhi and Stalin, could cause Churchill to be edited out of the Second World War. Not buying it is Chris McGovern of the History Curriculum Association (the group protesting the curriculum changes) who wrote as follows in a letter to the editor of the London Daily Telegraph: “A government spokesman claims that nobody

‘with any sense could teach the Second World War without covering Winston Churchill.’ Why then did the government’s video packs on the 50th anniversary of VE Day, sent to every school in the country, confine Churchill’s role in the Second World War to that of losing the election?” Good question! Perhaps we assumed too much “sense” among teachers.

Professor Paul Addison writes: “The national curriculum website is fairly baffling, but offers two videos about Churchill listed as valuable resources for teachers on world history from 1900. I think these and other related materials show that there is no Whitehall attempt to marginalise or belittle Churchill. But I have to admit that the whole question is complicated. Suppose the curriculum compels teachers to give prominence to Churchill. They cannot be ordered what to think about him, or what line to take—that would be Stalinism in a new guise. So there is no way of ensuring that a prominent place in the curriculum translates into a just appraisal for WSC in the classroom.

“My own concern lies elsewhere, in the fact that history is no longer a compulsory element in the national curriculum for children over the age of 14. I feel that the older they are, the more they are likely to benefit from the study of history, and of course the more likely to pursue it at University and beyond.”

WORLD WAR WHO?

LONDON, AUGUST liTH— Possibly apropos the above, it was announced today in the Daily Mirror that 38 percent of British children are not aware that Britain and Churchill were involved in a fight to crush Hitler’s Nazi Germany.

Ordinarily this would pass our desk with a large ho-hum, on the presumption that history isn’t seriously being taught very much anymore. Not so! Most students “were aware of major events such as the Gunpowder Plot, the Viking invasion, Henry VIU’s wives, and the Egyptian pyramids. And many said history was their favourite subject.” Hmm.

There’s more. Would you believe that 87 percent of the students know the Roman Legions were from Italy? (WelL.duh!) Or that 90 percent perceive that the Vikings were Scandinavian?

Some 97 percent are aware that the plague was spread by rats in the 17th century, and 92 percent know the Egyptians built the pyramids.

Better still: a rollicking 95 percent agree that Margaret Thatcher was once Prime Minister. A similar number have heard of Guy Fawkes, and know that he failed, though one percent thought—wished?—that his target was the Millennium Dome.

Seventy-two percent say they “love” history. They are just a little fuzzy on World War II. And whose side the Germans were on.

BAMBI AND THUMPER AT CHEQUERS

LONDON, NOVEMBER 18TH— Churchill Centre director David Boler bumped into a Sunday Times reporter and told him about the diary he had uncovered, listing all the films that were shown to Churchill at Chequers, the PM’s official residence, during the war. “They wanted to do an article, and I sent them the diary on disc (which Royal Mail lost), then emailed the full contents from my own photocopy, along with quotes from Phil Reed (Churchill Museum) and Allen Packwood (Churchill Archives Centre). The disappointing result is attached. They even misquoted me.”

The Sunday Times article, by Richard Brooks, solemnly announced diat WSC enjoyed “Bambi, the tear-jerking Disney cartoon.” It did mention WSC’s more serious favorites: “Lady Hamilton,” witli Vivien Leigh as Lord Nelsons lady; “The Young Mr. Pitt,” “Across the Pacific,” “In Old Chicago” and “Goodbye, Mr. Chips.”

In America “The People’s Radio” (NPR) read the Sunday Times and lurched into action. We are advised that they interviewed an academic on the subject a week later. The media run in packs—do these people ever say anything original?

CHURCHILL’S OFFICES: THE OFFICIAL TALLY

Finest Hour 114:46 contained a comprehensive list of the government offices Churchill held, but some of the dates were later corrected. Other sources, such as Wikipedia.com and Leslie Frewen’s Immortal Jester, give differing dates. Our editors have reviewed the entire subject anew and offer the following revise.

Sources on precise dates of office disagree because there are no consistent parameters. Dates cited include when the job was offered (or when he was sacked); when he “kissed hands” with the Sovereign; when it was announced in the press, etc. To be as consistent as possible, we assign preference to: (1) the date formally appointed; (2) the date the King approved; (3) the date announced in Parliament; (4) the date announced in the press (the “quality press” considered this the only sure indication). We have to avoid dates when he was offered a job (or sacked), or when his name was sent to the King, both of which would precede the dates he actually took office (or left).

An additional complication is that Churchill sometimes stayed on awaiting his replacement for several days after the change was official. For example, he was appointed to the Duchy of Lancaster on 27 May 1915, but his first letter from Duchy of Lancaster Office is on 1 June (Gilbert, Winston S. Churchill, Companion Volume III, Part 2, 976), followed by a detailed note on the situation the same day. The next day, 2 June, WSC wrote privately to Lieutenant-Colonel Hankey, datelined Admiralty and on Admiralty notepaper. From the above, it is fair to assume that WSC did not leave the Admiralty for the Duchy of Lancaster until 31 May.

Churchill’s only non-Cabinet office was Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies; he held no other offices which lacked Cabinet rank. In all, he held eleven Cabinet posts counting the Premiership and sixteen distinct terms of office. He was First Lord of the Admiralty twice. He was Prime Minister (First Lord of the Treasury) and Minister of Defence technically three times each: in the wartime Coalition, the Conservative caretaker government of May-July 1945, and the 1951-55 premiership. Of his sixteen posts, seven were in national or coalition governments, five Conservative, and four Liberal.

“Minister of Defence” requires its own explanation. Churchill created and took the position, without trying to define it too precisely, in 1940, in order to preside over all the fighting departments. The post was not formalised until the Ministry of Defence Act of 1946. From that point on, the Minister of Defence attended Cabinet meetings in place of the Secretaries of State for War and Air and the First Lord of the Admiralty, who remained in operational control of their respective services. In 1952, Churchill was succeeded as Minister of Defence by the Earl Alexander of Tunis.

Our thanks for their kind assistance in research to Ronald Cohen, James Lancaster, Paul Courtenay, and Allen Packwood.

NON-CABINET OFFICE

Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, 13 December 1905 to 12 April 1908. Government: Liberal (Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman resigned for health reasons on 5 April 1908 and was replaced by H.H. Asquith).

CABINET OFFICES

1. President of the Board of Trade, 12 April 1908 to 14 February 1910.* Government: Liberal (H.H. Asquith).

*This appointment was announced on the 10th and effective the 14th, but WSC probably stayed on a few days; a note of his to Asquith is dated 18 February, after he left the Bo T.

2. Secretary of State for the Home Department, 14 February 1910 to 25 October 1911. Government: Liberal (H.H. Asquith).

3. First Lord of the Admiralty, 25 October 1911 to 26 May 1915 Government: Liberal (H.H. Asquith).

3a. Second Term, 3 September 1939 to 10 May 1940. Government: National (Neville Chamberlain).

4. Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, 27 May 1915 to 12 November 1915. Government: Coalition (H.H. Asquith).

5. Minister of Munitions, 18 July 1917 to 9 January 1919. Government: Coalition (David Lloyd George).

6. Secretary of State for War,* 9 January 1919 to 14 February 1921. Government: Coalition (David Lloyd George).

7. Secretary of State for Air,* 9 January 1919 to 1 April 1921. Government: Coalition (David Lloyd George).

*Although sometimes rendered as “War and Air, ” these were separate ministries. Note that WSC held the Air six weeks longer than the War Office pending appointment of his successor, which may also have happened with other offices.

8. Secretary of State for the Colonies, 14 February 1921 to 19 October 1922.* Government: Coalition (David Lloyd George).

*Date Lloyd George resigned. Offices automatically lapse on the date a Prime Minister resigns, although Ministers may attend to transitional matters.

9. Chancellor of the Exchequer, 7 November 1924 to 4 June 1929.* Government: Conservative (Stanley Baldwin).

*Date Baldwin resigned.

10. Prime Minister, 10 May 1940 to 23 May 1945. Government: Coalition (WSC).

10a. Second Term, 23 May 1945 to 26 July 1945. Government: Conservative (WSC).

10b. Third Term, 26 October 1951 to 5 April 1955. Government: Conservative (WSC).

11. Minister of Defence, 10 May 1940 to 23 May 1945. Government: Coalition (WSC).

11a. Second Term, 23 May 1945 to 26 July 1945. Government: Conservative (WSC).

11b. Third Term, 26 October 1951 to 1 March 1952. Government: Conservative (WSC).

TRUMAN PAINTING WILL BREAK RECORDS

LONDON, NOVEMBER 13TH— Over lunch at 10 Downing Street in 1951, Churchill presented his painting “Marrakesh,” (Coombs 434), a vibrant image that captures the exotic colour and light of the Moroccan desert, to U.S. President Harry Truman. The President was overwhelmed, saying that he would treasure it as one of his “most valued possessions.” It has remained in the family ever since, but his daughter, Margaret Truman Daniel, is now selling it for financial reasons.

The painting, which dates from about 1948, was the highlight of a sale of 20th-century British art at Sotheby’s in London in December. With its unbroken provenance to an important historical figure, its appearance on the open market was expected to attract strong interest, and buyers may well ignore the £500,000 estimate, just as tliey ignored the £200,000 estimate in July when Sotheby’s auctioned “Chartwell Landscape with Sheep” for a record price, nearly double the previous figure for a Churchill painting.

Frances Christie, Sotheby’s specialist in the 20th Century British Art department, said that such prices had emerged recently. “It is only in the past two years that he’s broken the £100,000 barrier,” she said.

Although “Marrakesh” is comparable in colours and tones to another Morocco painting,”View of Tinerhir,” which sold in December 2006 for £612,800, this work is arguably superior in both composition and provenance.

Winston Churchill spoke modestly of what he called “my daubs,” but his friend Sir John Lavery, an official artist in the First World War, said: “Had he chosen painting instead of statesmanship, I believe he would have been a great master with the brush.”

Churchill gave his most prized paintings to people he admired and wanted to honour with the most personal of gifts. Presidents Roosevelt and Eisenhower, Viscount Montgomery and General George C. Marshall were among those who received such tokens of friendship and respect.

With his gift to Truman, Churchill enclosed a note: “This picture was hung in the Academy last year and is about as presentable as anything I can produce. It shows the beautiful panorama of the snow-capped Atlas mountains in Marrakesh. This is the view I persuaded your predecessor [Roosevelt] to see before he left North Africa after the Casablanca Conference [in 1943]. He was carried to the top of a high tower, and a magnificent sunset was duly in attendance.”

Truman wrote back: “I can’t find words adequate to express my appreciation of the beautiful picture…I shall treasure the picture as long as I live and it will be one of the most valued possessions I will be able to leave to Margaret when I pass on.” He hung the painting in his living-room, where it remained until his death in 1972. Since then, it has been in the New York apartment of his daughter, who was 27 when Churchill gave the painting to her father. Her son, Clifton Daniel, told The Times: “It’s hard for her to give up something of his, but she always has the memories. She loved Sir Winston, not only as a politician and world leader, but being around him.” —DALYA ALBERGE, THE TIMES

NO SMOKING AT NO. 10

LONDON, JULY 1ST—From this date the entrance of 10 Downing Street will display a No Smoking sign. All visitors to the Prime Minister’s residence will be warned that smoking inside is banned. Similar signs will be at Buckingham Palace, “but not on entrances which are used by members of the Royal Family only.” (Aha! Feet of clay!)

Really it is too silly. The ordinary public can no longer get close enough to Number 10 to blow a puff of second-hand smoke anywhere near it. Is there a camera trained on the famous black door, like there is on everything else in Britain? “It’s doubtful whether [the sign] would have made Winston Churchill stub out his cigar or Harold Wilson extinguish his pipe,” writes Andrew Buckwell, presumably straight-faced, in The Mail on Sunday.

TECHNION CARRIES ON

LONDON, SEPTEMBER 6TH— Winston Churchill said that his grandfather would have been delighted at a new project to revamp the Churchill Auditorium at Israel’s Technion Institute. Members of the Churchill family helped launch a fundraising drive to support the £1.5 million renovation, underscoring their longstanding association with the institution.

In 1958, the auditorium was opened by Randolph and Sarah Churchill, and WSC wrote: “I have been a Zionist for many years, and I view with admiration the maturing of the State of Israel. So to increase the technical aptitude of your people is indeed commendable.”

Mr. Churchill also launched a scathing attack on those behind boycott moves: “I cannot condemn too strongly this new fascism in the academic world in the UK and among the student body. I think they have a very tenuous understanding of history. We are seeing a creeping revival of fascism in Europe, and to see it coming here is appalling even though those who are responsible for it would be horrified at the idea that they are being tainted….But that is precisely what they’re doing. They seem to be much more eager to condemn Israel than the suicide bombers who murder innocents.’