Two Roles in Whitehall
Prejudice and Judgment. By P. J. Grigg. (Cape. 16s.)
BORN at Exmouth in December, 1890, the son of a journeyman carpenter, Sir James Grigg proceeded by way of the infants' depart- ment of the British School at Bournemouth (whither his family had migrated), and Bournemouth Secondary School to St. John's College, Cambridge, whence he obtained the first place in the Civil Service examination and, chdcising the Treasury, became in due course private secretiry to five successive Chancellors of the Exchequer— Robert Home, Stanley Baldwin, Austen Chamberlain, Philip Snowden and Winston Churchill. Of one of these he writes, "Of all the Ministers I have ever known he was easily the most popular with the Civil Servants who worked for him. This is not very surprising. In the first place he Wasthe ideal of what a Minister should be, in that he gave a clear lead on all questions of policy, interfered rarely, if at all, in matters of administration, gave decisions quickly and unequivocally and then defended his decisions against all corners with confidence and vigour—and nearly always with success. . . . When there is added personal charm, humour and real kindliness and, to his subordinates, gentleness as well as strength, can it be wondered that he is the most beloved of all ,the Ministers I have served or known." Which of the five does Sir James assess thus ? Not everyone would guess that right.
For ten years from 1921 the private secretary commanded what it is tempting—though the temptation must be resisted—to call a worm's eye view of current politics. Eschewing, as he must, any sort of party association or party sympathies, he knew everything, or next to everything, that was happening in successive Cabinets, Con- servative and Labour, and in many Departments beside his own. His record of that critical decade is consequently not merely full of interest, but of cobsiderable historical value. Another writer, the last of the five Chancellors named above has just dealt with incomparable authority, and in language such as few but he can command, with the same period. It would be absurd to put Sir
James Grigg's book on the same level as Mr. Churchill's—how many books could be ?—but it is by no means unworthy to be mentioned with it, and at many points the Civil Servant's recollec- tions and impressions instructively supplement the ex-Premier's.
After two years and a half es Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue, Sir James went to India in 1934 to serve for five years as Finance Member Of the Viceroy's Council, returning in 1939 to take up the Permanent Under-Secretaryship of the War Office from which he was elevated in 1942 by Mr. Churchill to the Secretaryship of State: The result of the General Election of 1945 , (particularly at East Cardiff, for which he had sat for three years) caused him to resume the existence of a normal human being. On India he developed strong views, going there as a Liberal and returning as an Imperialist—which he explains as meaning that he was profoundly impressed with the immeasurable services Britain had rendered to India, and with the supreme importance of slowing down the approach to Dominion status till the rift between the two great communities had so far narrowed as to bring unity in sight. His criticisms of Lord Wavell and Lord Mountbatten for pursuing an opposite policy would clearly have been much stronger if he had not imposed resolute restraint upon himself. But he is not necessarily ' right. Though the tragic events of 1947 seemed to justify all his fears it is possible to hope now that a peaceful accommodation may still be reached.
The military events of the years 1942-45 have already been vigorously canvassed from many angles. The man who was at that time Secretary for War can obviously speak of them from an • angle of his own, and Sir James's chapter headed "Secretary of State for War" is, not surprisingly, the most interesting and in many
• ways the racist important in the book: Regarding such matters as . the date of D-day and the strategy after the landing in Normandy, controversy is likely to rage long. On two points Sir James Grigg's. opinion is clear-cut. He does not think the operation could have been carried out before 1944, and he does think that if Montgomery, had been allowed to have his way the war might have been over by• Christmas 1944 and the Western Allies have got to Berlin before: the Russians. That is as may be. At any rate Sir James's discns- .. sion of the possibilities is as well worth study as' anything in this valuable and suggestive survey of the civil and military history of the last quarter-of-a-century.
The unidentified Chancellor in the first paragraph of this review
Previous page
