journal of the churchill center and societies - Winston Churchill

Other World, continued
hands," is misquoted. Sian Phillips
plays Lady Lavery, who first taught
Churchill how to "attack the canvas,"
and succeeds much better than she did
playing Lady Churchill in "The
Wilderness Years." The Churchill
voiceover is not bad, but Robert Hardy
would do it better. Painting friends
Lady Birley and Montgomery are more
interested in talking about themselves,
and Monty is especially amusing—a
voice like that and he commanded
whole armies!
This film was produced in 1964,
and is showing its age. We hear that a
new documentary is in the works, and
we look forward to it. RML
RIDDLES,
MYSTERIES,
ENIGMAS
Send your questions
to the editor
QA writer at
Time Inc.
(actually Sports Illustrated,)
editing
an article on the
Sydney Olympics
asked us to confirm
a remark by
Churchill that he
did not want Australia's support during the war because Australians
came from "bad blood. " The writer did not know
where he got the quote.
AWe've heard variations of this but could not find it in
• any of the usual source books or our database, and
didn't have the TIME to track it down. Nor are we sure it's
accurate. Of course Churchill wanted Australia's support—
and spoke well of Aussie troops on numerous occasions. It
would be just like Time Inc., whose misrepresentation of
Churchill in their "Person of the Century" issue was despicable,
to dredge up the one negative he may have uttered
about Australia, just in time for the Olympics. Perhaps they
should stick to their January singsong about his opposition
to "women's rights." Clearly, they will print anything.
QWhere could I find information on the honorary degree
that Sir Winston Churchill received from the University
of Miami -Lourdes G. Castano, University of Miami Advancement
Research
AChurchill accepted an honorary degree at the University
of Miami on 26 February 1946, just two weeks
before delivering his famous "Iron Curtain" speech at Fulton,
Missouri. He spoke before a crowd of 17,500 in Burdine
Stadium and joked that: "I am surprised that in my
later life I should have become so experienced in taking degrees
when, as a school-boy, I was so bad at passing examinations."
-Allen Packwood, Churchill Archives Centre,
Churchill College Cambridge
QElizabeth Snell informs us that on February 7th The
Times of London ran an article tritely entitled, "How
did Winston Churchill manage to save the world while drinking
like a fish" Another reader sent us apiece by Matthew
d'Ancona, in Life & Times for 7 February 1992, who wrote
that Churchill's daily intake of alcohol was 22 units, more than
the recommended safe weekly allowance. How do we explain
this Was he impervious to the stuff
AHis capacity was exaggerated, by himself and latterday
reporters. Matthew d'Ancona said he drank a glass of
hock at breakfast, a bottle of Champagne and some brandies
at lunch, scotch and soda in the afternoon, more Champagne
and cognac at dinner, more scotch as he worked in
the small hours. In fact, morning hock was occasional, and
the Champagne bottles were Imperial pints (a small size
now extinct owing to EU regulations). The scotch in his
highball barely covered the bottom of the glass before it was
drowned with soda or water ("it was more like mouthwash,"
said Jock Colville). And the brandy count was sometimes
exaggerated. He had, undoubtedly, a formidable capacity;
but no observer ever saw him drunk.
QI am reading A Touch of Treason (1990) by Ian Hamilton,
the ringleader in the theft of the Stone of Destiny
from Westminster Abbey in December 1950. Is Churchill know
to have commented on the incident -Jim Kirk
AThe only evidence that I have found in the Churchill
Papers would suggest that Churchill did not want to
comment on the Stone of Scone theft. John Campbell from
Glasgow wrote to him on 10Jan51 complaining that "The
controversy aroused by the disappearance of the Coronation
Stone has led to much abusive criticism of Scots and
Covenant leaders....every effort has been made by Covenant
leaders to interview you and Mr. Attlee. Every path to
friendly discussion has been blocked by political intransigence.
Repeated appeals for realistic and statesmanlike approach
to Scotland's demand for revision of her Treaty have
failed. National feeling has been unwisely ignored and,
knowing the character of the Scots, you will scarcely expect
such cavalier treatment to be endured indefinitely." The letter
goes on to lay the blame for the theft on Parliament for
failing to meet the demands for Scottish Home Rule, and
urges Churchill and Attlee to enter into discussions with regard
to the revision of the Treaty of Union. Churchill simply
replied, "I have received your letter of January 10, the contents
of which I have noted. Thank you for writing to me."
(Reference: Churchill Papers, CHUR 2/113B/343-345).
-Allen Packwood, Churchill Archives Centre $
FINEST HOUR 108/41