LETTERS Proto-sceptic
Sir: The last paragraph of Richard Lamb's letter on Churchill (15 May) does not make sense. Lord Beloff does ('Would Churchill have signed Maastricht?' 8 May).
Churchill displayed no 'ambivalence' over Europe. He wanted Europe to unite, but without Britain. The exchange of corre- spondence of December 1951 to which Lamb refers makes this perfectly clear. The Conservative delegation at Strasbourg had appealed to him 'to take some positive action designed to restore British prestige in the Consultative Assembly [of the Coun- cil of Europe], and to show that His Majesty's Government mean to play their part in the military defence and economic development of a united Europe'. (DBPO, Series II, Vol 1, WU10712/621, No. 406, pp.769-70.) In reply, they received a copy of Churchill's note to the Cabinet of 29 November 1951. The relevant part reads: 'Mr Churchill is not opposed to this but does not support integral membership of either the United Kingdom or Common- wealth . . we help, we dedicate, we play a part, but we are not merged and do not for- feit our insular or Commonwealth-wide character . . . Our first object is the unity and consolidation of the British Common- wealth . . . Our second, the fraternal asso- ciation of the English-speaking world; and third, United Europe, to which we are a separate closely- and specially-related ally and friend.' (DBPO Series II, Vol I, Note to the Cabinet, Calendar to No. 406, p.770.) Churchill's opposition to British mem- bership of the Common Market was later reported by Field Marshal Montgomery when he visited the former premier in hos- pital in August 1962. According to Mont- gomery, Churchill 'was sitting up in bed smoking his cigar, shouting for more brandy and protesting against Britain's pro- posed entry into the Common Market.' (Report of 1962 Cabinet papers in the Sun- day Telegraph, 3 January 1993.) Alan Sked and Mark Deavin
The London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London WC2
Previous page
