Masonlar.org - Harici Forumu

 

Gönderen Konu: WINSTON S. CHURCHILL  (Okunma sayısı 12121 defa)

0 Üye ve 1 Ziyaretçi konuyu incelemekte.

Ekim 30, 2006, 04:23:43 ÖS
  • Administrator
  • Uzman Uye
  • *
  • İleti: 9528
  • Cinsiyet: Bay
    • Masonluk, Masonlardan Öğrenilmelidir

WINSTON S. CHURCHILL

By Robert Morris

On a faded high school diploma dated June 28, 1940, one can still see the signature of the High School Principal, W.C. Scott. He was born shortly after the turn of the century and his full name was Winston Churchill Scott. While still in his twenties, Winston S. Churchill had achieved enough fame that parents were naming their sons after him forty years before he became Prime Minister of Great Britain on May 10, 1940.

Long before the advent of the automobile and airplane, Brother Churchill was born in Blenheim Place in Victorian England on November 30, 1874. He was from a distinguished family descended from the famous Duke of Marlborough. He was, however, only half English, his mother being Jennie Jerome, an American and daughter of Leonard Jerome, editor and proprietor of the New York Times.

At age 12, Churchill was admitted to Harrow, Britain’s prestigious school for boys. Upon graduation, he was admitted to Sandhurst, “Britain’s West Point,” from which he graduated as a Second Lieutenant in December, 1894. The following month, he was saddened by the unexpected death of his father at age 45. H he greatly admired his father and later to resolve to take over in Parliament, where his father had left off.

His first significant assignment was as an observer to a Spanish military force sent to Cuba in 1895. On the way there, he stopped by New York City to visit his American relatives. The next two years were spent as a war correspondent in India. In 1898, he volunteered to serve with General Kitchener in the latter’s attempt to re-conquer the Sudan and participated in one of history’s last great cavalry charges in which he came close to losing his life.

During the Boer War in South Africa, Churchill was a war correspondent for the London Morning Post. On November 15, 1899, he was captured by the Boers and became a prisoner of war. He soon made a daring escape and, with a price on his head, made his way back to the British lines. He was then commissioned a Lieutenant in the British Forces and helped in leading them to Pretoria, where he helped release his former fellow prisoners of war. He returned to England a hero in 1900.

Deciding to run for Parliament, he was elected in 1900. He had reached the ripe old age of 25 and had already seen military action in Cuba, India, Sudan, and South Africa. Before taking his seat in Parliament, he decided on a lecture tour of America. There he was introduced to Mark Twain and, later, both Vice President Theodore Roosevelt and President William McKinley. The fact that Churchill’s father and those three were all Brother Masons must have gotten him to thinking because upon returning to England he applied for the Degrees in Freemasonry. He was initiated in Studholme Lodge #1591, London, and raised to the Third Degree on March 25, 1902, in Rosemary Lodge #2851.

Prime Minister Asquith appointed Churchill as First Lord of the Admiralty, a position similar to that of the United States Secretary of the Navy. Churchill held this appointment from 1911 to 1915. He saw to the strengthening of Britain’s Navy, and when World War I broke out in 1914, the fleet was ready. Churchill, however, did get the blame for one unfortunate campaign. The defeat of the British forces at Gallipoli in 1915 resulted in his dismissal from the Admiralty. At age 41, his career seemed finished. Later analysis proved that not Churchill but others closer to the scene were the actual culprits. All was not lost though, because as a result of Churchill’s prior planning, the British Navy was later to give the German Navy a resounding defeat at the Battle of Jutland in June 1916.

In July 1917, just as the United States entered the World War I, Bro. Churchill was appointed Minister of Munitions. His American contacts were of inestimable value in working out various logistical support arrangements between the two countries. At the end of the war, Churchill became the only Englishman to receive the prestigious United States Distinguished Service Medal.

The period 1921-1922 was not a good one for Churchill. In 1921, he was saddened by the death of his mother, and the following year, he lost his bid for reelection to Parliament, a harbinger of things to come a generation later. Of all Britain’s statesmen, Churchill was by far the most prolific of writers. Already, since the turn of the century, Churchhill had been turning out volumes related to historical matters. Among them were works about the Malakand Field Force in 1898; his escape from the Boers in 1900; a biography of his father, The Life of Lord Randolph Churchill, in 1906; a five-volume history, The World Crisis, about World War I, in 1923 and, later, a four-volume biography of his famous ancestor, the Duke of Marlborough in 1933.

In 1924 at age 50, Churchill was again back in Parliament, this time appointed to the prestigious position of Chancellor of the Exchequer—similar to the American Secretary of the Treasury. This was the period when Mussolini had already taken over Italy and Adolf Hitler was agitating in Germany, finally becoming Chancellor in 1932, the same year that Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected President of the United States. To Churchill the handwriting was on the wall, and he perceived the Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain as a pacifist and appeaser. He railed against these policies, especially after Chamberlain returned to England from a conference in Munich waving a piece of paper and announcing that he had agreed to giving a piece of Czechoslovakia to Germany. The subsequent occupation of all of Czechoslovakia and the invasion of Poland by Germany finally caused both Britain and France to declare war on Germany in September 1939. Churchill was asked to reassume the position of First Lord of the Admiralty on September 21, 1939.

No sooner had Churchill been appointed than his Brother Mason Franklin D. Roosevelt wrote a congratulatory note to him beginning a series of personal letters which lasted until Roosevelt’s death in April l945.

When France fell in 1940, the Chamberlain government also fell, and Churchill was appointed Prime Minister at age 65. In his acceptance speech, he was candid with his countrymen in notifying them that “I have nothing to offer but blood, sweat and tears.”

Among Churchill’s activities during the period May 10, 1940, to April 12, 1945, was the deep personal relationship which had begun to grow with President Roosevelt. The first two years were spent in dealing with the United States as a non-belligerent and in finding ways to tap the seemingly inexhaustible war supplies of that country without violating America’s neutrality laws. In September, 1940, they successfully negotiated the trading of 50 U.S. destroyers for a 99-year lease of British military bases in the Atlantic and also the subsequent shipping of war supplies to Britain.

During a visit to Washington on December 26, 1941, Churchill became the first British Prime Minister to be invited to address a joint session of Congress. On May 19, 1943, he again addressed that august body, one of only a few foreigners ever to receive that distinct recognition. He noted that if his parents’ nationalities had been reversed, he might have gotten to Congress on his own.

In 1945, Clement Attlee replaced Churchill as Prime Minister. Although now out of office, Bro. Churchill was still the leader of the opposition in Parliament, and the growing intransigence of Stalin gave him great concern. Accordingly, he was pleased to accept President Truman’s invitation to speak at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, on March 5, 1946. There he gave his famous “Iron Curtain” speech, saying “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the continent.” This was, in effect, the beginning of the Cold War which was to continue long after Churchill’s death.

Between l948 and 1951, Churchill took time out to produce another of his historical masterpieces, a 6-volume history of the Second World War. On January 20, 1953, Churchill was again in Washington, where he visited Truman on his last day in the White House. Churchill then entertained Truman at a dinner at the British Embassy. The year 1953 saw his being knighted by the Queen into the Order of the Garter and thenceforth to be known as Sir Winston, his participation with President Eisenhower in the ill-fated Bermuda Conference, and his being awarded the prestigious Nobel Prize for Literature.

Age was now beginning to take its toll, and Churchill resigned as Prime Minister in April 1955. Although he maintained his seat in Parliament, he now began to take more time with his favorite pastimes, especially writing. Between 1956 and 1958, he produced his final epic masterpiece, the four-volume History of the English Speaking People.

In his personal life, he adored his wife, Clementine, and in addition to saying that “they lived happily ever after” noted that “what can be more glorious than to be united in one’s way through life with a being incapable of an ignoble thought.” They were married for over 56 years. His beliefs were also truly Masonic. Ever since the end of the Boer War, he had always advocated magnanimity for a defeated foe. He was a Mason for over 62 years.

When he died on December 12, 1965, at the age of 91, he had earned a respected and honored position on the world scene. No other leader in the Western World had done more to contain tyranny and despotism. To paraphrase one of his more memorable statements: “Never in the history of modern statesmanship have so many been influenced for so long by one man.” He truly was one of the great men of the century and one whose attitudes, beliefs, tenacity, and accomplishments will be noted for all time.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Sahsima ozel mesaj atmadan once Yonetim Hiyerarsisini izleyerek ilgili yoneticiler ile gorusunuz.
- Masonluk hakkinda ozel mesaj ile bilgi, yardim ve destek sunulmamaktadir.
- Sorunuz ve mesajiniz hangi konuda ise o konudan sorumlu gorevli yada yonetici ile gorusunuz. Sahsim, butun cabalarinizdan sonra gorusmeniz gereken en son kisi olmalidir.
- Sadece hicbir yoneticinin cozemedigi yada forumda asla yazamayacaginiz cok ozel ve onemli konularda sahsima basvurmalisiniz.
- Masonluk ve Masonlar hakkinda bilgi almak ve en onemlisi kisisel yardim konularinda tarafima dogrudan ozel mesaj gonderenler cezalandirilacaktir. Bu konular hakkinda gerekli aciklama forum kurallari ve uyelik sozlesmesinde yeterince acik belirtilmsitir.


Ekim 30, 2006, 04:28:21 ÖS
Yanıtla #1
  • Administrator
  • Uzman Uye
  • *
  • İleti: 9528
  • Cinsiyet: Bay
    • Masonluk, Masonlardan Öğrenilmelidir

Frequently Asked Questions

Q. While watching 'Young Churchill' the other day, I heard a reference to his brother. I have since learned he had a younger brother named Jack. I am highly surprised I have never heard about him before. Could you tell me something about him? 
A. John Strange Spencer Churchill, 1880-1947, known as Jack, a stockbroker. Wounded in action in the Boer War, 1899. Married Lady Gwendeline Bertie (1884-1941), daughter of the 7th Earl of Abingdon, in 1908. Major, Queen's Own Oxfordshire Hussars 1914-18. Served at Dunkirk, 1914; on Sir John French's staff 1914-15; on Gen. Sir Ian Hamilton's staff at Gallopili, 1915; on General Birdwood's staff 1916-18. Accompanied Churchill on his lecture tour of North America, 1929, with WSC's son Randolph and Jack's son Johnny. His surviving son, Peregrine, is a vigorous octogenarian. The rumor that Jack was not Lord Randolph's son, begun by biographer Ralph Martin, was put down when Martin lost a slander lawsuit, but occasionally still surfaces. Jack and Winston were very close; their descendants still are.
 
Q. Offered at a recent art auction was a pencil sketch of Winston Churchill done and signed by Sarah Churchill that was entitled "Iron Curtain." I believe that the bottom part of the piece also had some words from that speech and was embossed with a seal. The price of the piece started at $650 and it sold to a local banker for $750. I opened the bidding and wish now that I had continued with a bid, but presumably the purchaser would have prevailed. Can you tell me about this artwork, what the "going price" elsewhere is, and where I might find another one like it? It was new to me and I found it a very attractive rendering. -Ronald E. Keener, Glen Ellyn, Ill., USA 
A. Sarah Churchill published a number of sketches of her father signed by her, but apparently not all done by her, in large quarto size. The sketches also exist in a smaller format, about 8x10. The large ones, of which yours is one, often attract bids of $500, but some collectors tell us that they are not worth that much singly. The complete set is of course of considerable value. Comments from readers would be appreciated.
 
Q. What illness actually caused the death of Randolph Churchill, Sir Winston's son?
A. The best account is in Cousin Randolph by Anita Leslie (London: Hutchinson 1985, page 206: "After the usual examination Dr. Marshall said hesitatingly to Andrew [Kerr, Randolph's private secretary], who had loved Randolph and merited a truthful explanation, 'I will have great difficulty in writing out this death certificate to avoid an inquest. A doctor has to write the cause of death and with Randolph the answer is: everything. His liver and kidneys and lungs and guts have all packed up. He's worn out every organ in his body at the same time.'" The author adds, lyrically: "Randolph would have enjoyed that statement. And although one can never know exactly why he wanted to look out of the window in the early hours, it was as if he had been drawn by the beauty of his garden in the lonely light of dawn. Death filled him with curiosity. He knows now what happens."


Q. Did Sir Alexander Fleming save Churchill's life?
A. The Churchill-Fleming Non-Connection: The story that Sir Alexander Fleming or his father (the renditions vary) saved Churchill’s life has been roaring around the Internet lately. We must have had fifty emails about it. Charming as it is, it is certainly fiction. The story apparently originated in Worship Programs for Juniors, by Alice A. Bays and Elizabeth Jones Oakbery, published ca. 1950 by an American religious house, in a chapter entitled "The Power of Kindness."
According to Bays/Oakbery, Churchill is saved from drowning in a Scottish lake by a farm boy named Alex. A few years later Churchill telephones Alex to say that his parents, in gratitude, will sponsor Alex’s otherwise unaffordable medical school education. Alex graduates with honours and in 1928 discovers that certain bacteria cannot grow in certain vegetable molds. In 1943 when Churchill becomes ill in the Near East, Alex’s invention, penicillin, is flown out to effect his cure. Thus once again Alexander Fleming saves the life of Winston Churchill.

Dr. John Mather writes: "A fundamental problem with the story is that Churchill was treated for this very serious strain of pneumonia not with penicillin but with ‘M&B,’ a short name for sulfadiazine produced by May and Baker Pharmaceuticals. Since he was so ill, it was probably a bacterial rather than a viral infection as the M&B was successful.

"Kay Halle, in her charming book Irrepressible Churchill (Cleveland: World 1966) comments (p. 196) that Churchill ‘delighted in referring to his doctors, Lord Moran and Dr. Bedford, as M&B.’ Then, when Churchill found that the most agreeable way of taking the drug was with whisky or brandy, he commented to his nurse: ‘Dear nurse, pray remember that man cannot live by M and B alone.’ But there is no evidence in the record that he received penicillin for any of his wartime pneumonia. He did have infections in later life, and I suspect he was given penicillin or some other antibiotic that would have by then become available, such as ampicillin. Also, Churchill did consult with Sir Alexander Fleming on 27 June 1946 about a staphylococcal infection which had apparently resisted penicillin. See Churchill: Taken from the Diaries of Lord Moran (Boston: Houghton Muffin 1966), p. 335."

Official biographer Sir Martin Gilbert adds that the ages of Churchill and Fleming (or Fleming’s father) do not support the various accounts circulated; Alexander Fleming was seven years younger than Churchill. If he was plowing a field at say age 13, Churchill would have been 20. There is no record of Churchill nearly drowning in Scotland at that or any other age; or of Lord Randolph paying for Alexander Fleming’s education. Sir Martin also notes that Lord Moran’s diaries, while mentioning "M&B," say nothing about penicillin, or the need to fly it out to Churchill in the Near East.
 
Q. Where are the residences of Churchill in England?
A. Official residences (#) such as Admiralty House and Downing Street are are listed only for the periods the Churchills actually resided there. Asterisked (*) London addresses carry the blue historical plaque. (It is not clear whether the Churchills fully vacated Hyde Park Gate during the 1951-55 Premiership.)

See " Churchill's England" -  Residences
 
Q. Graham Taylor writes: "I should probably know the answer to this one, but what did Churchill find so fascinating about Napoleon? He didn't relegate him to the 'power-mad dictator' heap, so there must be something he found attractive.'
A. Surely it was his reverence for France, and for great war leaders (he wrote cogently about Caesar and Marlborough) that led Churchill to Napoleon, not to mention that the Corsican made quite an impressive comeback -- like WSC. Remember that as early as Harrow, he forecast to a schoolmate that he would lead the defense of London against a deadly foe. He also intended to write a Napoleon biography, but never found the time. From the editor’s next book, The Churchill Lexicon:"I certainly deprecate any comparison between Herr Hitler and Napoleon; I do not wish to insult the dead."—Commons, December 1940
"Is it really true that a seven-mile cross-country run is enforced upon all in this division, from generals to privates? Does the Army Council think this a good idea? It looks to me rather excessive. A colonel or general ought not to exhaust himself in trying to compete with young boys running across country seven miles at a time. The duty of officers is no doubt to keep themselves fit, but still more to think for their men, and to take decisions affecting their safety or comfort....Could Napoleon have run seven miles across country at Austerlitz? Perhaps it was the other fellow he made run. In my experience based on many years’ observation, officers with high athletic qualifications are not usually successful in the higher ranks."—Minute to Sec. of State for War Capt. H.D.R. Margesson, 4Feb41, The Grand Alliance(1950), p. 175.

"Some have compared Hitler’s conquests with those of Napoleon. It may be that Spain and Russia will shortly furnish new chapters to that theme. It must be remembered, however, that Napoleon’s armies carried with them the fierce, liberating and equalitarian winds of the French Revolution, whereas Hitler’s empire has nothing behind it but racial self-assertion, espionage, pillage, corruption and the Prussian boot."—Commons, 7 May 1941

"I always hate to compare Napoleon with Hitler, as it seems an insult to the great Emperor and warrior to connect him in any way with a squalid caucus boss and butcher."—Commons, 28 Sep. 1944
 
Q. Why was Churchill given the Nobel Prize for Literature for his work as a writer and speaker in 1953?
A. In a publication of the Nobel Prize Library, published under the Sponsorship of the Nobel Foundation and the Swedish Academy, Kjell Stromberg tells the story of the 1953 award.
Usually government leaders were not honoured, but Churchill had already been considered twice. Support for him had come from around the world, particularly from within Sweden. In 1946 a report found that Savrola was without literary merit, My Early Life was charming, but only Marlborough rough could serve as a basis for winning. The World Crisis was dismissed as history and historians did not win (only Theodor Mommsen was a previous winner).

In 1948 another report committee consulted G.M. Trevelyan who, despite their disagreements over Macaulay, endorsed Churchill. The World Crisis carried great weight this time because in no other work could "the true pulse of the age be sensed so well or the direct breath of the great events be felt so clearly."

This report called Churchill "the incomparable painter of the history of our time." Nevertheless, it was felt that the orator, without peer in his century, was needed to reinforce the written work. "It is, then, basically for his oratory that Churchill deserves the Prize; but his art as an orator is well framed by the rest of his production," said the report.

In spite of this extremely favourable report, the Academy eventually waited another five years before yielding to the appeals which came with ever greater urgency from all corners of the globe. The fact that he was still an active politician was probably influential in their reluctance to make the final decision.

Competition was not particularly fierce in 1953. The Swedish Pen Club supported E.M. Forster. Others, including Ernest Hemingway, were to win in subsequent years. On October 15th, the Prize was voted to Churchill "for his mastery of historical and biographical description as well as for brilliant oratory in defending exalted human values."

Winners are seldom consulted but this time the Swedish Ambassador asked Churchill if he would accept. He replied that he was honoured, particularly because of the recognition of his written works. He was required to be in Bermuda to meet with President Eisenhower so his wife, Lady Churchill, and his daughter, now Lady Soames, represented him. —John Plumpton, Toronto Ontario
 
Q. What horses did Churchill own?
A. We asked Katharine Thomson ("Churchill and the Lure of the Turf" Finest Hour 102) if she could list all the racehorses Churchill ever owned The chore was far more formidable than we would ever have imagined. Undaunted, Katharine gave us even more than we asked for.
All the Thoroughbreds Sir Winston Ever Owned by Katharine Thomson, Churchill Archives Centre

Brood mares:
Cedilla: bred 1951, sold 1962.
Comma: by Chamoissaire out of Cedilla, 1958; sold 1962.
Madonna: bred 1945.
Moll Flanders: bought 1949.
Pannikin II: bought 1948.
Pink Lady
Poetic: bought 1949.
Salka: bred 1950.
Sayala: bred 1951.
Sister Sarah: died 1955.
Turkish Blood: bred 1944, died 1961.
The Veil: by Abernant out of Sister Sarah, 1953.

Racehorses:
Aberdilla: by Abernant out of Cedilla, 1961.
Alba: by Abernant out of Salka, 1959; sold to stud in United States.
Aura: by Aureole out of Cedilla, 1956; sold 1959.
Collusion: by Colonist out of Moll Flanders, 1955; won 1956.
Colonist II: by Rienzo out of Cybele, 1946; bought as three-year-old in France, 1949. Won 13 races, including Winston Churchill Stakes, Bentinck Stakes and Kensington Palace Stakes and £11,937 in prize money. Sold to stud 1951 for £7,350.
Canyon Kid: bred 1948; won Speedy Stakes. Died 1950 or 1951.
Dark Issue: trained in Ireland; won Irish 1000 Guineas 1955.
First Light: bred 1953.
Galaxy: by Galcador out of Salka, 1956; sold 1958.
Gibraltar III: bred 1950; won twice 1952-53.
Great Winter (I suspect this should be Red Winter): trained in Ireland.
Halo: by Hyperion out of Madonna, 1956; won in 1959 and retired to stud at Newchapel as a brood mare.
High Hat: by Hyperion, out of Madonna, 1957; won four races, including Aly Khan Gold Cup and Winston Churchill Stakes, 4th in Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe. Syndicated to stud in Ireland and sold to Japan 1971.
Holiday Time: bred 1955; won three times as two-year-old.
Honeycomb: by Honeyway out of Madonna, 1961.
Kemal: by Never Say Die out of Turkish Blood, 1959; half brother to Vienna, won over hurdles and on the flat. Retired to stud in Denmark.
Loving Cup: by Holywell out of Pannikin II, 1949; won in 1952 and retired to stud at Newchapel as brood mare.
Lupina: by High Lupus out of Salka, 1961.
The Minstrel: by Abernant out of The Veil, 1960.
Non Stop: bred 1949; won twice 1952-53.
Novitiate: by Fair Trial out of The Veil, 1959: won as 2-year-old.
Pigeon Vole: by Fastnet out of Colombe Poignard~e, 1950; bought in France 1953, won Robert Wilmot Stakes, Windsor.
Pinnacle: bred 1953; won 1955.
Planter’s Punch: by Colonist out of Loving Cup, 1955; sold 1958.
Pol Roger: by Rienzo out of Coquetterie, 1949; won three times, 1952-53.
Le Pretendant: by Ocean Swell out of Cybele, 1953; half brother to Colonist. Won Winston Churchill Stakes, ran in Washington International. Retired to stud in Pakistan.
Prince Arthur: by King Legend out of Poetic, 1950; won three times 1952-54, including Winston Churchill Stakes.
Punctuation: bred 1956.
Release: by Court Martial out of Salka, 1957; won Ebbisham Stakes (£3,500) in 1960, second in Queen Elizabeth II Stakes, won twice 1961, retired as brood mare at Newchapel.
Satrap
Seraph: out of Sayala, 1957: won as 2-year-old and in Maypole Handicap following year. Retired as brood mare at New-chapel.
Sunhat: by Honeyway out of Madonna, 1960.
Sunstroke: by Hyperion out of Moll Flanders, 1955; won twice, sold to Spain for £2000, 1958.
Tudor Monarch: out of Madonna by Abernant, 1955; won two races worth £3,082, including Stewards Cup at Goodwood. Sold to stud in Queensland, Australia, for £1,520 in 1959 (named best-looking stallion in the state, 1963-64).
Vienna: by Aureole out of Turkish Blood, 1957; won twice 1960, three times, 1961; won Prix Ganay at Longchamps (£10,000). Retired to stud in Ireland.
Welsh Abbot: out of Sister Sarah by Abernant, 1955; won twice, the Challenge Stakes and Portland
Handicap, total of £6,882. Syndicated to stud in England for £20,000, 1959; successful sire of sprinters.
Welsh Monk: by Abernant out of The Veil, 1958; won at Newmarket.
Why Tell

The author welcomes addenda and corrigenda.

 
Q. What do the letters KG, PC, OM, CH, FRS after the name of Sir Winston Churchill represent? 
A. They are his chief honours in order of precedence: Knight of the Order of the Garter (KG), 1953; Privy Councillor (PC), 1907; Order of Merit (OM), 1946; Companion of Honour (CH), 1922; and Fellow of the Royal Society (FRS), 1941.
Q. I have been doing research on the name of Winston's dogs and have not come up with any information at all. I would appreciate any help that you can provide. The years in question would be 1939 to 1946. 
A. There were two poodles named Rufus and Rufus II. I'm not sure when Rufus arrived but I think it was in this period. Rufus was run over and killed while Churchill was attending the Conservative party Conference at Brighton in October 1947. Rufus was presented to Churchill by his sometime Private Secretary, Jock Colville. Rufus was brownish red and also responded to a nickname. Ronald Golding, a Scotland Yard bodyguard in 1946, testifies to having heard the command, "Come Paprika, Let Us Go Forward Together" on more than one occasion. Rufus II, his replacement received later in life, was the gift of Walter Graebner, Churchill's Life Magazine editor for the war memoirs. There is a famous picture of Churchill and Rufus II at Chartwell on page 1092 in the official biography, Vol. 8 (Never Despair) by Martin Gilbert (London, Boston, Toronto: 1988). There is rumor of a bulldog kept when he was a boy at Harrow, but this sounds almost too cute; have not seen any references.
Q. I have read variously that Winston Churchill suffered from dyslexia and that he stuttered.  Which of these is true?
A. Neither. Winston Churchill was not dyslexic, had no learning disability whatsoever. In his autobiography he played up his low grades at Harrow, undoubtedly to convince readers, and possibly himself, how much he had overcome; but in this he exaggerated. He was actually quite good at subjects he enjoyed and in fact won several school prizes. The best source on his actual school performance is Jim Golland's Not William--Just Winston (Harrow: 1988), still available from the Harrow School Bookshop.
The disability he did suffer from was a lisp (not a stutter, as some believe). He was unable to pronounce the letter "S." He fought to overcome this but never quite succeeded; instead he gradually made it a distinctive part of his oratory, turning a liability to an asset. This is certainly something young people should find motivating, but it is inaccurate to suggest that he overcame dyslexia or stuttering. His speeches sometimes contained a stutter or two, but this was more intentional than unintentional.

 
Q. We are looking into creating a menu in honor of Churchill and were trying to find information on his food preferences. The information on cigars, and spirits on Churchill FAQ page was quite useful. Where might one find similar information about food and menus? Any help would be much appreciated. --Best regards Jason Clevenger 
A. Dear Mr. Clevenger,
I am replying to the Churchill Listserv, some readers of which might be able to help you. If you are not a member of the Churchill Society/Churchill Center, send me your postal address and I will send you a copy of our journal and other information. The latter will shortly be adding a department on his favorite recipes, written with the help of his daughter Lady Soames.
The best source on Churchill's favorite foods is Georgina Landemare's RECIPES FROM NO. 10 (London:Collins 1958, reprinted 1959). She was the Churchill family cook and accompanied them to Downing Street. The book is scarce but may be obtainable from a large library or inter-library loan.

In brief, he was a fan of French haut cuisine. He was also partial to English traditional dishes like fowl, and roast beef with Yorkshire pudding. He preferred clear, "limpid" soups to thick, creamy ones. He enjoyed shellfish more than fish and Stilton more than sweet desserts, but he could easily be persuaded to take both of the latter. In dinners we have arranged at the Savoy Hotel in his memory, we have served menus he would have particularly enjoyed: raw oysters, Petite Marmite, Beef & Yorkshire, dessert (pudding) and Stilton. Indeed the Savoy still has people on its staff who cooked for him and could help you considerably.

He insisted that desserts be expressive. It is probably true, though not attributed, that he once demanded, "Take away this pudding, it has no theme."It is established that in 1915 he wrote his brother Jack from Hoe Farm, where he was spending the summer, that he had all the necessities of life:"Hot baths, cold Champagne, new peas and old brandy." This ought to get you going.

Best wishes
Richard Langworth
Editor FINEST HOUR

 
Q. From Maj. Gen. Ken Perkins (Celia Sandys's husband) in England comes a telephone request from Celia, lecturing in London on her grandfather: What commercial cigars and spirits did Sir Winston prefer?
A. Cigars: many were specially made up for him, bearing his name on the wrapper with no brand indicated. But his favorite commercial brands were Camacho and Romeo y Julieta, both Havanas, and therefore for the time being unavailable, legally, to denizens of the USA. (Wm. F. Buckley, Jr., speaker at the ICS 1995 Conference, wrote recently that the Dunhills he received from ICS were Churchill's favorites, earning an immediate e-mail riposte that the man from Dunhill was smoking something, likely not tobacco.)
Scotch: Johnny Walker Red. Churchill was a personal friend of Sir Alexander Walker, judging by a fine jacketed copy of INTO BATTLE inscribed to Walker, which we have just seen for sale. He apparently did not have much time for single malts.

Brandy: vintage Hine. An early issue of Finest Hour recalls that a London wine merchant, sent to appraise the cellar at Chartwell, pronounced it a "shambles," the only items of value being a large supply of vintage Pol Roger Champagne (regularly topped up by shipments from Madame Odette Pol-Roger in Epernay); the Hine brandy; and some bottles of chardonnay which Churchill had bottled with Hillaire Belloc and which WSC forbade anyone to touch. The merchant pronounced the chardonnay undrinkable, along with the rest of the cellar!

The editor asked General Perkins why Celia needed this cigar information. "Well, they're not for me, I don't smoke," he said. I replied, "In that case obviously they are for me, please tell her to strip them of their Cuban bands and send them in a plain brown wrapper." -RML

 
Q: I realize the Churchill quote, "I never did any sports," is a fake, but what is its source, Nazi propaganda?
A: It is almost certainly a fake, since it is flatly untrue. He played golf, indifferently, in his 30s and 40s. He rode to hounds until well into his 70s. He swam into his 80s. He played polo into his 50s. (See by Barbara Langworth in FH 72. It may arise from his famous crack that he got his exercise by serving as pall-bearer for his many friends who exercised all their lives, another false thread. (He had, and exhibited, prodigious energy.)


Q. What did Churchill think of Scottish and Welsh Devolution?
A. Many Churchillians tend to believe that Winston Churchill would have opposed the development of separate Scottish and Welsh Parliaments, which they see as spelling the beginning of the end of the United Kingdom. "Listserv Winston" engaged in some of this banter in December. Professor Paul Addison of the University of Edinburgh and Allen Packwood of the Churchill Archives Centre put the List straight on this matter, proving once again that what is widely believed of Churchill is not always what Churchill believed...

From:  (Paul Addison)

A word or two in response to the gentlemen summoning up the ghost of Winston Churchill when attacking Tony Blair's proposals for Parliaments in Scotland and Wales. Churchill himself before 1914 was a supporter of Home Rule for Ireland, Scotland and Wales. If his proposals for Irish Home Rule had been implemented before the First World War, the twenty-six counties might still be a part of the United Kingdom today. There was so little demand for Scottish and Welsh home rule after 1918 that the question of devolution disappeared for the rest of Churchill's life, but some of his comments suggest that he continued to favour a federal UK including regional Parliaments in England.

The main reason for the resurgence of Scottish nationalism in the 1980s was the determination of Mrs. Thatcher not only to reject Scottish home rule but to impose on Scotland policies which the majority of Scots plainly and repeatedly rejected at the polls. She behaved, in other words, more like an English nationalist than a custodian of a multinational Union. By the time Tony Blair came in the damage was done and it may now be too late to save the Union. But Home Rule offers a last chance of holding it together and it may just work, as Churchill hoped it would work in Ireland.


From: (Allen Packwood)

I was very interested to read about Churchill's hypothetical reaction to current political developments within the United Kingdom. I have been selecting material for an exhibition on Churchill to be staged next summer at the National Library of Scotland in Edinburgh. One of the items I am proposing to feature is the following speech, delivered by Churchill in his Dundee constituency on 9th October 1913:

"Another great reason for the settlement of the Irish question in the present Parliament and for disposing of the Home Rule controversy now, while we have the full opportunity presented, is that the ground is thereby cleared for the consideration of claims of self-government for other parts of the United kingdom besides Ireland. You will remember how, last year, I addressed a meeting in Dundee on this subject. I made it perfectly clear that I was speaking for myself. I made it clear that I was not speaking of the immediate future, but dealing with the subject which lay for the moment outside the sphere of practical politics and raising a question for reflection and discussion rather than for prompt action.

"I spoke of the establishment of a federal system in the United Kingdom, in which Scotland, Ireland and Wales, and, if necessary, parts of England, could have separate legislative and parliamentary institutions, enabling them to develop, in their own way, their own life according to their own ideas and needs in the same way as the great and prosperous States of the American Union and the great kingdoms and principalities and States of the German Empire."

Just a few years earlier Churchill had been advocating reform of the House of Lords. And who says politics does not go in cycles?

 
Q. Was Churchill offered a Dukedom?
A. The possibility of Churchill’s receiving a Dukedom after the war led to speculations about what his son would be known as. (Page references are from Sir Martin Gilbert, Winston £ Churchill Vol. 8, "Never Despair," London: Heinemann, Boston: Houghton Muffin 1988.)
In February 1947, Churchill acquired 120-acre Bardogs Farm, adjacent to Chartwell Farm, for £8700. About a quarter of it was rented in tenancies. In a letter to his barrister, Leslie Graham-Dixon, discussing a possible dukedom, WSC wrote with what we must think was tongue in cheek:

"Duke of Bardogs would sound well, and Randolph could be Marquess of Chartwell." (327 footnote 4; Churchill Papers, 1/34; Dixon to Gilbert, 15 Mar 82).

Earlier, George VI had offered WSC a knighthood, the Order of the Garter, to which he famously replied (but not to the King): "I could hardly accept His Majesty’s offer of the Garter when his people have given me the Order of the Boot."

1952: On 22 February Jock Colville and Lord Moran (Churchill’s private secretary and physician respectively) went to Lord Salisbury for advice: the PM was "not doing his brief" and was indifferent to business. He hated delegating anything, yet he quickly noticed and reacted against any plan to "kick him upstairs." Salisbury felt WSC might go to the Lords and remain Premier, with Eden leading the House as effective Premier.

Colville said: "He won’t do it. I did once suggest to him that he should go to the Lords, and thought at first he was taking it seriously, when he said: "I should have to be the Duke of Chartwell, and Randolph would be the Marquess of Toodledo." I saw that he was laughing at me." Salisbury agreed, saying, "He regards us in the Lords as a rather disreputable collection of old gentlemen."

They agreed that one person might persuade Churchill to go the Lords: The Queen. But soon he made another remarkable comeback with a great fighting speech, and the matter was laid aside. (703; see also Moran’s Churchill: Struggle for Survival, pp. 375-8, quoting Colville; and Colville, Fringes of Power, p. 642.)

1955: By the time Churchill resigned on 4 April, it had been determined that no further dukedoms would be offered except to Royal personages. Yet WSC was different from other Prime Ministers and an exception was considered. The Palace asked Colville if they could offer a dukedom, confident that Churchill would refuse it. Colville took some soundings. Churchill told him that he would never accept: "First of all what could he be Duke of?" Colville reported. "Secondly, even if he were Duke of Westerham, what would Randolph be? He could only be Marquess of Puddleduck Lane which was the only other possession he had apart from Chartwell. And thirdly, and quite seriously, he wished to die in the House of Commons as Winston Churchill."

The oddest thing then happened. On April 5th the PM donned his frock coat and top hat for his Audience, and Colville, knowing he was hopelessly in love with The Queen, feared that despite all WSC’s assurances he might accept out of his affection for her!

Churchill returned from the Palace with tears in his eyes: ‘Do you know, the most remarkable thing—she offered me a Duke." With trepidation Jock asked what he had replied. "Well, you know, I very nearly accepted, I was so moved by her beauty and her charm and the kindness with which she made this offer, that for a moment I thought of accepting. But finally I remembered that I must die as I have always been—Winston Churchill. And so I asked her to forgive my not accepting it. And do you know, it’s an odd thing, but she seemed almost relieved."

(1123-24; Colville to Randolph Churchill 8Jun65.)

 
Q: What is the history of Churchill's electoral wins and losses?
A. From Douglas J. Hall in Finest Hour 103:
6Jul99: By-election (Oldham) -lost

1Oct00: General election (Oldham) -won

13Jan06: General election (NW Manchester) -won

24Apr08: By-election (NW Manchester) -lost

9May08: By-election (Dundee) -won

18Jan10: General election (Dundee) -won

9Dec10: General election (Dundee) -won

29Jul17: By-election (Dundee) -won

14Dec18: General election (Dundee) -won

15Nov22: General election (Dundee) ~lost*

6Dec23: General election (West Leicester) -lost

19Mar24: By-election (Westminster, Abbey) -lost

29Oct24: General election (Epping) -won

30May29: General election (Epping) -won

27Oct31: General election (Epping) -won

14Nov35: General election (Epping) -won

5Jul45: General election (Woodford**) -won

23Feb50: General election (Woodford) -won

25Oct51: General election (Woodford) -won

25May55: General election (Woodford) -won

8Oct59: General election (Woodford) -won

Totals: 21 campaigns; 16 wins and 5 losses


* The 1922 election was lost to Ernest Scrymgeour who had fought and lost Dundee to WSC in the previous five elections.
** Woodford was a division of the former Epping constituency.

 
Q. I am looking for the brief speech that Churchill made to the graduating class of, I believe, Oxford or Cambridge. Memory serves that the speech was simply "Never give up, Never give up, never give up." Is this correct?
A. This is our most frequent quote request. The speech was made 29 October 1941 to the boys at Harrow School. " Never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.'' The full speech is contained in "The Unrelenting Struggle" (London:Cassell and Boston:Little Brown 1942, and is found on pages 274-76 of the English edition). It may also be found in "The Complete Speeches of Winston S. Churchill," edited by Robert Rhodes James (NY:Bowker and London:Chelsea House 1974).

 
 
Q.   President Kennedy, in presenting Churchill with honorary American citizenship, said, "He mobilized the English language and sent it into battle." I have heard this line was said earlier. If so, by whom?
A.   Edward R. Murrow, in his Columbia LP recording entitled "I Can Hear It Now" (and possibly elsewhere) actually coined that phrase. JFK borrowed it without attribution, but then again, Churchill often did the same with lines that appealed to him. The full quote occurs in Murrow's introduction to his Churchill war speech excerpts, as Churchill takes office in 1940: "Now the hour had come for him to mobilize the English language, and send it into battle, a spearhead of hope for Britain and the world. We have joined together some of that Churchillian prose. It sustained. It lifted the hearts of an island of people when they stood alone."

 
 
Q. Who was Lady Astor and what was her relationship with Churchill? 
A.  Nancy Witcher Langhorne Astor, Viscountess Astor, b.1879, first woman Member of Parliament (elected 1919, served until 1945) and wife of Waldorf Astor. She was an American, born in Greenwood, Virginia. You can find out more about her in an Encyclopedia.
Although a Conservative, like Churchill after 1924, she clashed often with him over Dominion Status for India and British relations with Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. She was a strong backer of the appeasement policies of Prime Ministers Baldwin and Chamberlain. The famous exchange between them is apparently not apocryphal, as we had previously believed: "Winston, if I were married to you I'd put poison in your coffee"...."Nancy, if I were married to you I'd drink it." This occurred during a weekend house party at Blenheim Palace in the early 1930s.

Another amusing encounter in the House of Commons is reported to have occurred as Churchill was orating about mankind, saying "Man" this and "Man" that. Every time he would mention "Man," Lady Astor would interject: "...And Woman, Mr. Speaker...And Woman!" Finally Churchill is supposed to have exclaimed, "In this context, Mr. Speaker, the understanding is that Man EMBRACES Woman." This did not improve his relations with the Noble Lady.
 
Q.  Did Churchill misunderstand Hitler?
A.  From  (Karl-Georg Schon):
Let me see whether I can start something with three theses (for the sake of the argument I will sharpen them, perhaps oversharpen them):

1. Churchill completely misunderstood Hitler. For instance he called WW2 "the unnecessary war." This is wrong because Hitler wanted war for war's sake (vide his saying in August 1939: "Hopefully there won't be someone to turn up with a mediation plan" or something to this effect; vide his disappointment that he was unable to crush Czechoslovakia by military force but had to do it with Munich). War was for Hitler the ultima ratio of life itself. Perhaps (only perhaps) war could have been avoided through military intervention during the Rhineland crisis‹when Churchill was conspicuously silent. From then on Europe was doomed. Another example is that Churchill saw in Hitler the (or at least some) embodiment of Prussian militarism. The reverse is actually true. Hitler crushed Prussian militarism forever. It was no historical accident that it was the truly Prussian element of the German officer corps who staged several attempts on Hitler's life. Hitler, indeed, established (albeit in a perverted way) civilian control over the military.

2. Churchill's greatness lies in his defeat‹if you measure defeat or victory in terms of the declared aims of an individual statesman. He said, "I have not become the King's first minister in order to preside over the liquidation of the British Empire," yet he precisely did so. But in the way of doing it he defeated the most evil system of modern times and thus gave to the "liquidation of the British Empire" (one is tempted to say to the Empire itself) a noble meaning. Liquidation became "Their Finest Hour." There is an element of tragedy in this. But is there greatness without tragedy?

3. Churchill did not and perhaps could not recognize that the British Empire was doomed anyway‹doomed from what Paul Kennedy calls over-extension. As an aside: it was doomed for this reason from its very beginning. Churchill's empire-mindedness prevented him from doing Britain the perhaps greatest service he (and at the time probably only he) could have done, i.e. to prepare Britain for integration into Europe. Churchill came, in my view, close to doing so in 1946-48, but he dropped his effort when he realized the implications of such a step for the fading empire.

A.From:  (Editor)

1. Did Churchill's term "the unnecessary war" have anything to do with whether or not Hitler was bent on war? Didn't Churchill argue that by timely action, through about 1936, France and Britain could have prevented war (whatever Hitler wanted) by preemptive action, e.g. over Germany's rebuilding the Luftwaffe, creating the Wehrmacht, reoccupying the Rhineland, etc.?

2. Numberless Chinese, Ukranians, Balts and central Asians might dispute whether Hitler's was the most evil system of modern times, although it was unmatched in its genocidal precision. But to the main point, which is very valid: William F. Buckley Jr. makes some parallel comments in our 1994-1995 Proceedings, words which I put among the twenty or thirty best passages about Churchill I've ever read: "Mr. Churchill had struggled to diminish totalitarian rule in Europe which, however, increased. He fought to save the Empire, which dissolved. He fought socialism, which prevailed. He struggled to defeat Hitler, and he won. It is not, I think, the significance of that victory, mighty and glorious though it was, that causes the name of Churchill to make the blood run a little faster....It is simply mistaken that battles are necessarily more important than the words that summon men to arms, or who remember the call to arms. The battle of Agincourt was long forgotten as a geopolitical event, but the words of Henry V, with Shakespeare to recall them, are imperishable in the mind, even as which side won the battle of Gettysburg will dim from the memory of men and women who will never forget the words spoken about that battle by Abraham Lincoln. The genius of Churchill was his union of affinities of the heart and of the mind. The total fusion of animal and spiritual energy..."

3. It was Clement Attlee, in the first phase, and Harold Macmillan, in the second, who presided over the dissolution of the Empire. But we often judge past history by present-day standards, not to mention hindsight. It is very clear today that Churchill failed to understand the strength of the anti-colonial movement; the desire of colonial peoples to be governed by their own rascals, even if the latter turned out to be worse than the British civil service; and the endgame of the Europe Unite movement. From WSC's point of view in the 1940s and 1950s, Britain and the Commonwealth were a viable Fourth World, and based on that mindset he took the view that Britain was "of" Europe, but not "in" it--a benevolent, interested partner, but not a party; and that European Unity depended primarily on the continental powers resolving "the ancient quarrels of Teuton and Gaul." Yet some historians continue to remark over how, with a remarkable lack of foresight or comprehension, or even perhaps a sense of self-preservation, Britain herself‹not simply Churchill, but the whole governing establishment‹allowed her moral and political force to decline. This is to a certain extent John Charmley's argument in his Churchill's Grand Alliance.

A. From:  (Dr. Robert J. Caputi)

I enjoy the intelligence and collegiality of the Listserv. In reply to Malakand's statements: It is offered how Britain's "whole governing establishment" allowed her moral and political force to decline in the postwar period. I submit that the two awful world wars and the crippling Depression era led to the unavoidable losses of both tangible and intangible overseas assets and had much to do with the "decline" of that moral and political force. I do not believe the British Lion relinquished anything willingly; instead it was forced into a reactive rather than proactive role after V-E and V-J Days. Economics, sadly, played a critical role. The enduring greatness of "Their Finest Hour" was that those immense sacrifices, the dissolution of the Empire and Britain's great power status, in the long run, was worth it to secure the defeat of the beasts from Berlin.
 
Q. What is the difference in the history of British intelligence between the "enigma secret" and "ultra."?
A. "Enigma" was the British codename for the German cypher machine (sometimes erroneously referred to as a code machine) while "Ultra" was the code name applied to intelligence derived from reading the Enigma. This roughly corresponds, in American usage, to the Japanese "Purple" machine and the "Magic" designation of intelligence derived from Purple. The Americans eventually came to recognize "Ultra" as an all purpose designation for sensitive intelligence from communications intercepts and used it virtually interchangeably with Magic during the last couple of years of the war. Breaking Ultra was an enormous coup. Kudos to the Polish, French, and British codebreakers who accomplished it. No reputable historian would argue that Ultra single-handedly won the war or anything like that,there is little doubt it shortened the war and saved many, many lives. Churchill deserves much of the credit for recognizing the importance of Ultra, for supporting Bletchley Park and its security requirements, and, ultimately, for its judicious use over the course of the war.

Although Churchill and Hitler never met, I understand that they nearly did so in a German hotel in the 1930s. But Hitler balked at the last moment. This event is portrayed in "The Wilderness Years" (a film documentary starring Robert Hardy as Churchill). Hitler is shown glaring balefully down on Churchill who is sitting in the hotel restaurant, Churchill being unaware of the presence of his future protagonist. Were Churchill and Hitler actually in the hotel at the same time, or did the portrayal in "The Wilderness Years" involve a large measure of artistic license?
They were not in the hotel at the same time and some artistic license was therefore involved. However, the meeting was definitely proposed. The best account of it is in the new biography of Randolph S. Churchill by his son, Winston S. Churchill MP, His Father's Son, London:Weidenfeld & Nicolson, published in mid-1996, pages 92-94).

Churchill, researching his life of Marlborough, had traveled to Europe on 27 August 1932 for a tour of Marlborough's battlefields, following his great ancestor's march to the Danube and visiting Munich in mid-September. Here Churchill was joined by his wife, son Randolph, daughter Sarah and Professor Lindemann. Randolph Churchill contacted a colleague, Ernst "Putzi" Hanfstaengl (a Harvard graduate acting as Hitler's press secretary) who suggested a meeting. Hanfstaengl wrote about this in his memoirs, Hitler, The Missing Years (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode 1957), quoted at length in His Father's Son.

Hanfstaengl attempted to persuade Hitler to join Churchill's dinner party at Munich's Hotel Continental, but Hitler was reluctant: "Don't they realize how busy I am? What on earth would I talk to [Churchill] about?" Hanfstaengl himself joined the party, suggesting that "Hitler might join us for coffee." It was at this point that Churchill made the famous remark: "Tell your boss from me that anti-Semitism may be a good starter, but it is a bad sticker."

Hanfstaengl sniffed at that comment, but was tantalized by another remark by Churchill: "How does your chief feel about an alliance between your country, France and England?" Hanfstaengl wrote that he was "transfixed" at this. (Remember, Hitler had not yet come to power; the quote sheds interesting light on Churchill's thinking at the time, already intent on preventing another war by a coalition that would presumably redress Germany's legitimate grievances over the Versailles Treaty.)

In a last-ditch attempt to get Hitler to change his mind and meet Churchill, Hanfstaengl excused himself and went in search of Hitler, finding him in the stairway of his apartment "in a dirty white overcoat, just saying good-bye to a Dutchman...'Herr Hitler...don't you realise the Churchills are sitting in the restaurant?...They are expecting you for coffee and will think this a deliberate insult.'" Hitler said he was unshaven and had too much to do. Hanfstaengl suggested he shave and come anyway. Hanfstaengl then returned to the Hotel and played the piano for the Churchills, hoping Hitler would arrive, but he never turned up.

Author Winston Churchill MP writes: "While it remains one of the interesting 'Ifs' of History, it is idle to imagine that, had such a meeting taken place, the course of history might have been changed. Hitler would never have considered an alliance with the French, nor Churchill an alliance without them and, at the time, he was without influence in the House of Commons." Hanfstaengl and Winston Churchill MP both suggest that Hitler's refusal to meet Churchill had to do with Hitler's feelings of lower class inferiority, Hanfstaengl writing that Hitler did "not have the social guts" to meet Churchill.

 
Q. Many authorities state that the Charge of the 21st Lancers at Omdurman in 1898, in which Churchill participated, and later romanticized in his brilliant history, The River War, was the last Cavalry Charge in British military history. Was it?
No. We went through this charge-by-charge in Finest Hour during1992-93. Despite several notable charges during World War I, the last significant recorded cavalry charge occurred much later. In a letter to The Times on 9 September 1974, Shamus O.D. Wade wrote: "Surely Sir Winston would have been last to deny greatness to Capt. Arthur Sandeman of the Central India Horse and the Indian Sowars of the Burma Frontier Force, who met their deaths charging the Japanese machine guns at Toungoo in 1942."
« Son Düzenleme: Ekim 04, 2007, 02:49:25 ÖS Gönderen: MASON »
- Sahsima ozel mesaj atmadan once Yonetim Hiyerarsisini izleyerek ilgili yoneticiler ile gorusunuz.
- Masonluk hakkinda ozel mesaj ile bilgi, yardim ve destek sunulmamaktadir.
- Sorunuz ve mesajiniz hangi konuda ise o konudan sorumlu gorevli yada yonetici ile gorusunuz. Sahsim, butun cabalarinizdan sonra gorusmeniz gereken en son kisi olmalidir.
- Sadece hicbir yoneticinin cozemedigi yada forumda asla yazamayacaginiz cok ozel ve onemli konularda sahsima basvurmalisiniz.
- Masonluk ve Masonlar hakkinda bilgi almak ve en onemlisi kisisel yardim konularinda tarafima dogrudan ozel mesaj gonderenler cezalandirilacaktir. Bu konular hakkinda gerekli aciklama forum kurallari ve uyelik sozlesmesinde yeterince acik belirtilmsitir.


Şubat 25, 2008, 05:46:56 ÖÖ
Yanıtla #2
  • Ziyaretçi

I always thought that Churchill actually "resigned" form freemasonry because a new lodge that he was trying to form was declined by the Grand Lodge or he let his dues lapse or something. Am I wrong?


 

Benzer Konular

  Konu / Başlatan Yanıt Son Gönderilen:
2 Yanıt
4321 Gösterim
Son Gönderilen: Eylül 11, 2010, 02:35:31 ÖÖ
Gönderen: Genius Loci
3 Yanıt
9642 Gösterim
Son Gönderilen: Ocak 09, 2011, 03:53:13 ÖÖ
Gönderen: MASON