.The good men
Sir: I was saddened by the article by my erstwhile colleague Reg Bevins (February 3) whom I used to regard as a level-headed man with both feet firmly planted on the ground. This flight of political fancy ill becomes him.
As his article is entitled ' Where have the good men gone?' his inclusion of the late Randolph Churchill would seem to be somewhat out of place and gives rise to some speculation by those who knew him. (Wherever it is I hope I may go there too as his presence will certainly enliven the proceedings.) Having included Randolph, with some rather infelicitous references, Bevins might at least have awarded him the accolade, to which ha is entitled, of being the most stimulating political journalist of his day and an author of no mean repute.
Reg Bevins's remarks about the Prime Minister border on the inane and contradict his assertion that he is .keeping a wary eye on him: a green eye would have been a more accurate description. When he declares that Edward Heath is "bringing us nearer Fascism than Mussolini ever did," poor Reg seems to be suffering from historical myopia as well as political confusion.
He states that Heath's biographers are "slumped and lost for words " in assessing their subject. George Hutchinson, Margaret Laing and Andrew Roth, who have all performed this task admirably. have none of them experienced this literary embarrassment. He should read their books some time.
The consequence of this imbal
ance of judgement on Bevins's part does not enhance his championship of the cause of the "good men " whose absence from the Front Bench he regrets. He has a case but he damages it in the process. At the same time it puts a proper valuation on his remarks about the members of the present Government.
At the end of it all I was forced to ask myself, "Where has J. R. Bevins gone?" I must check up on the visiting hours.
Ian Harvey 43A Lonsdale Road, London W11
Previous page
