Dinner With Churchill: Policy-Making at the Dinner Table

by Cita Stelzer

  What are we to make of Churchill’s massive consumption of cigars? First, it is clear that either by virtue of genetic inheritance or plain luck, he could take the strain his smoking imposed on his health. On 29 August 1944, nearing his 70th birthday, Churchill returned from Rabat in the grip of a high fever – 103°–104°. He reported to Roosevelt26 that “a small patch on his lung was diagnosed”,27 possibly either caused or exacerbated by his heavy smoking. The Prime Minister made astonishingly rapid progress. According to Colville, by 30 August “The P.M. was better and did a certain amount of work in bed”; by 31 August “a very marked improvement” allowed plans for the Second Quebec Conference to proceed; and the next day “The P.M., with temperature normal, is in tearing form.”28 On 5 September 1944, although his daughter Mary characterises her father as “barely recovered”, he left London to board the Queen Mary for the voyage to Halifax, Nova Scotia, and the Second Quebec Conference.29

  Second, his lack of compunction about accepting expensive gifts would, in our later age of tabloid and investigative journalism, have mired him in scandal: fine cigars and cases of champagne, as well as cigar cutters and other trinkets arrived regularly and in profusion. But this was of a piece with Churchill’s attitude to gifts and hospitality in general. Clementine Churchill did not like to see him “accepting hospitality from the very rich and, in her opinion, not always very suitable people”.30 Jock Colville observed that Churchill “drank their flowing champagne, and basked in the beautiful surroundings of their villas and yachts, without asking himself if he was accepting what they supplied for the wrong reasons”. Whether or not Churchill fully understood Clementine’s “scruples, he felt no obligation to be bound by them”.31

  Third, Churchill ultimately played by the rules, as we shall see in the next chapter on rationing. There are many minutes in the Churchill Archives that instruct his staff to check on the prices of cigars before ordering, to fill out the import licences required by the Board of Trade, and to pay the duty required of others.

  In one telegram, Churchill wittily asked his New York agent when the “relief column”32 would arrive. When the agent cabled the arrival date, Churchill cabled back: “Many thanks. No need for vanguard.”33

  Last, as F.E. Smith put it, Churchill was “easily satisfied with the best of everything and the larger the better”. Churchill was satisfied that fine, large Havanas added pleasure to his days and evenings, contributed to his image as a defiant war leader, and allowed him to extend dinner parties and the conversations he so relished. As we would say today, the cigar was Churchill’s brand, instantly recognised throughout the world. Picture the Prime Minister walking through bomb-shattered areas, cigar in hand, exuding defiance and the confidence that Britain’s plight would eventually end, and the war would be won: a more reassuring image would be difficult to imagine.

  Notes

  1. Acheson, Dean, Sketches From Life Of Men I Have Known, p. 63, after a working lunch with Churchill at the British Embassy in Washington in 1946

  2. Welsh, Peter, “A Gentleman of History”, Cigar Aficionado, Autumn, 1995, p. 1

  3. Hough, Richard, Winston & Clementine, p. 69

  4. CHUR 1/351/50-52

  5. Howells, p. 94

  6. Wingfield-Stratford, Esmé, Churchill: The Making of a Hero, p. 95

  7. Acheson, Dean, Present at the Creation, p. 596

  8. McGowan, Norman, My Years With Churchill, p. 93. Howells contends that Churchill did indeed smoke his cigars to the very end. p.35

  9. That is the estimate of his valet, who precedes the “nine a day” estimate with the word “only”. McGowan, p. 92

  10. Photo of letter, preserved at J.J. Fox

  11. Golding, Ronald E., “Did You Fly? Hmph!”, Finest Hour 34, p. 4

  12. Gilbert, Churchill, Vol. IV, 1916-1922, p. 139

  13. McGowan, p. 93

  14. Welsh, p. 2

  15. CHUR 1/351/50-52

  16. Howells, p.37; McGowan, p. 92, reports that the matches were “specially imported from America”, not Canada

  17. Howells, p. 36

  18. Howells, p. 35. This ashtray traveled with Churchill.

  19. Welsh, p. 1

  20. Hirshson, Stanley P., General Patton: A Soldier’s Life, pp. 299-300

  21. Packwood, Allen, “Cigars: Protecting the Premier,” Finest Hour 106, p. 1

  22. Rose, Kenneth, London, 2003, p. 73

  23. Hall, Douglas, The Book of Churchilliana, p. 50

  24. Vines, C. M., A Little Nut Brown Man, My Three Years with Beaverbrook, p. 28

  25. West, Bruce, The Man Who Flew Churchill, p. 105

  26. Gilbert, Volume VII, p. 921

  27. Soames (ed.), Speaking for Themselves, p. 504. Clementine Churchill described it in a letter to her daughter as “a small shadow on one lung, but he himself is well …” Soames, Clementine Churchill, p. 357

  28. Colville, p. 507

  29. Soames, Speaking For Themselves, p. 504

  30. Soames, Clementine Churchill, Revised Edition, p. 502

  31. Colville, John, pp. 215-216

  32. CHUR 1/15/169

  33. CHUR 1/15/167

  CHAPTER 13

  Rationing

  During both of Churchill’s terms as Prime Minister, stringent food rationing was in effect in Britain. And during both those terms, Churchill presided over a number of glamorous and lavish dinner parties, both at home and abroad. How was he able to provide for the dinners at which he entertained important British and overseas visitors? And what was the reaction of a public that was doing without many perceived necessities, much less the luxuries on which Churchill and his guests dined? Finally, how was it that rationing and the Prime Minister, who escaped some of its consequences, and his Minister of Food, Lord Woolton, all remained highly popular?

  The answers lie in Churchill’s shrewd approach to the problem of food shortages. He had two basic goals: to maximise supplies for all, and to make sure that the public remained broadly supportive of any rationing schemes that had to be put in place.

  To maximise supplies, Churchill had to encourage food production at home, and do everything possible to keep up the flow of imports. No easy chore, especially when three-quarters of a million American troops would be arriving in advance of D-Day1 – these troops are “great addicts of ice cream, which is said to be a rival of alcoholic drinks”, minuted the Prime Minister2. Churchill also insisted that German prisoners of war receive the same number of calories as British civilians, lest the Germans retaliate against British PoWs by cutting their rations.3

  An increasingly successful German U-boat campaign in the early days of the war, and the diversion of ships to military purposes and to the transport of supplies to the Soviet Union, meant that food imports were seriously reduced. The Prime Minister coped with this problem in a variety of ingenious ways. He:

  insisted that food – and later tobacco4 – be included on the list of Lend-Lease goods available from America on favourable financial terms;

  increased the allotments programme that enabled the public to grow more of its own food on communal plots, which eventually included Victory Gardens on any open space, and dug up tennis courts; growing cabbages in Kensington Gardens; and giving Hyde Park its own piggery;

  increased domestic grain allotments to permit individuals to keep chickens “to give [them] … something to talk about” and to “produce their own eggs and thus save shipping and labour”;5

  expanded the Women’s Land Army, initially established in June 1939 on a volunteer basis in anticipation of the war. It included, by 1943, some 80,000 Land Girls, young women from cities and towns who learned farming skills;

  urged the Ministers of Shipping, Agriculture, Fishing and Food constantly to do all possible to maximise domestic supplies and imports.

  Churchill did succeed in maintaining public support for the broad rationing scheme: a support so firm that many British housewives favoured continuing rationing in peace time.6 (Men, perhaps because thei
r work required more calories, were less keen).7

  Churchill’s plan rested on three strategies. First, the rationing scheme had to be and be seen to be fair. So when the access of upper-income diners to restaurants at which ration coupons were not required threatened to cause a loss of support for the scheme, the government subsidised some two thousand non-profit restaurants established by local authorities to provide lower-income families with an opportunity to dine out. Home Intelligence Reports suggested that the popularity of these restaurants was due to the fact that, by offering a meal for less than a shilling, “they gave poorer folks a chance to do what the rich have always been able to do – have a meal without giving up coupons”.9 On 21 March 1941, the Prime Minister wrote to the Minister of Food, Lord Woolton:

  I hope the term “Communal Feeding Centres” is not going to be adopted. It is an odious expression suggestive of Communism and the workhouse. I suggest you call them “British Restaurants”. Everybody associates the word restaurant with a good meal, and they might as well have the name if they cannot get anything else.8

  Churchill’s suggestion was adopted and these establishments became the proudly patriotic “British Restaurants”.

  Second, Churchill knew that in order to maintain support for the rationing programme, he himself had to abide by the scheme’s rules. So he subjected his own requirements to the rationing plans, meticulously requesting extra coupons when entertaining official visitors and listing their names. The Churchill Archives are replete with formal requests for extra rations of tea, sugar and other foods, with the prominent visitors indicated. When these requests became so numerous as to be burdensome to the Ministry of Food, the requirement that guests be listed was waived by the Ministry, and extra coupons were issued to Churchill’s cook, Mrs. Landemare.

  By staying clearly within the rules – even returning unused food coupons to the Ministry of Food,10 – Churchill reduced the opportunity for critics to claim the rules that existed for them did not apply to him. Adherence to the rationing rules extended beyond foods: witness a letter received by his secretary on 7 March 1945, in response to a request for coupons for items that included five pairs of socks and a Royal Air Force vest:

  You asked me the other day if a further 72 coupons could be supplied to cover the purchase of uniforms, etc., required by the Prime Minister in connection with the Crimea Conference. You will be glad to hear that the Board of Trade have been graciously pleased to approve of the issue of these coupons, which are enclosed herewith.11

  Some more, please

  Soap was another item in short supply. When Churchill was living at the White House in January 1942, his secretary meekly requested some soap from the housekeeper for his bath. He was asked: “What kind would you like?” “Oh, any kind, just soap,” the Secretary responded, sounding as if he couldn’t believe that different kinds could be provided.12

  None of this means, however, that the Prime Minister led a life anything nearly as austere as the ordinary Briton. One of his biographers wrote: “In reality he suffered less than any other people from the exigencies of war.”13 Like other well-to-do people, he could dine in restaurants and clubs that had access to finer produce and at which coupons were not needed.

  Churchill also benefited from gifts from well-wishers around the world and from those in Britain who had access to home-grown foods, such as fish and game from their estates. There were food parcels from Roosevelt and other Americans with whom he worked, and from Stalin, who sent tubs of caviar, and from Lord Beaverbrook, who, when in Moscow after a long meeting, “sent out his secretary to buy twenty-five pounds of caviar for Mr. Churchill”.14 The Soviet Ambassador in London, Ivan Maisky, sent the Prime Minister a gift of onions.

  Game came from Sandringham and Balmoral, as personal gifts from King George VI.15 Labels were used to ensure that the game, freshly shot, arrived in the kitchens at Downing Street. Hare, partridge, grouse and two woodcock arrived from Lord and Lady Davies of Llandinam.16 Sir Hanson Rowbotham sent a brace of pheasant and hares from the Isle of Wight – these, killed on 9 December 1942, were shipped to London the following day.17

  Labels for game from the King

  Fish, although never rationed, was sometimes in short supply. One of Churchill’s shortest instructions (perhaps his shortest) was to a senior official at the Admiralty, who had asked what fishing policy was to be. Churchill’s two-word reply: “Utmost fish”. His first concern was for the British people’s diet, not himself.

  Fish was always a most welcome gift from those close to the Prime Minister, or those who wanted to thank him for his service to the nation. Joan Bright, a well-respected staff member, responsible for many of the complex administrative logistics on his overseas journeys, told the author that really good Dover sole was a Churchill favourite. One piscatory gift, marked “by express train, deliver immediately” to Downing Street, came from the Duke of Westminster’s lodge, Loch More, in Sutherland; the nearby Laxford River, its currents described as “merry”,18 is famed still for its superior salmon-fishing. Other gifts came to Downing Street on a regular basis – including oranges from US General “Hap” Arnold,19 and chocolates from the Prime Minister of Quebec.20 One parcel of champagne and pheasants, in honour of Churchill’s 68th birthday, came from the brick manufacturer, Sir Percy Malcolm Stewart, with thanks to the Prime Minister for his inspiration “to win in the darkest days”. He went on: “… may you be spared to lead us to triumphant victory.”21 Clementine Churchill was most grateful for “a small bag of tangerines” that Averell Harriman brought for her from Lisbon,22 and was also named as the designated recipient of one of the eight uncooked Smithfield hams “wrapped individually” that Harriman sent to Commander Thompson for distribution to her and others, including the First Lord of the Admiralty, A.V. Alexander.23

  Long after the war, Montgomery would arrive at Chartwell “lugging a case of plum brandy he had brought from Marshal Tito as a gift to Churchill, or a case of port from the Portuguese Prime Minister, Salazar”.24 The Portuguese Ambassador in London gave Churchill six cases of port,25 a drink the young Churchill had been warned off by Dr Hunt years earlier.

  Although Churchill was careful to obey all the rules, there was an occasional assertion of privilege. Historian Max Hastings, never one to minimise what he believes to be Churchill’s failings, notes that at one dinner party at the Savoy the Prime Minister, to the consternation of “the ascetic” Canadian Prime Minister Mackenzie King, contravened rationing regulations by ordering both fish and meat courses.26But this must have been a rare event. Hastings also notes that the “Prime Minister’s wife often found it no easier than her compatriots to find acceptable food”.27 Which explains Commander Thompson’s previously cited recollection that Churchill, when in America, “enjoyed roast beef or steak so much that, with rationing in force at home, he often saved half his portion at dinner-time and had it for breakfast next morning”.28 It also explains why, when entertaining Eleanor Roosevelt and other visiting Americans at the No. 10 Annexe – Churchill’s wartime above-ground home and office – Mrs. Churchill apologised for the food: “I’m sorry, dear, I could not buy any fish. You will have to eat macaroni.” Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau, after another dinner, noted without enthusiasm: “They gave us little leftover bits made into meat loaf.”29

  Finally, in his campaign to ensure that rationing was accepted, Churchill focused relentlessly on keeping regulations to the bare minimum necessary to support the war effort. Rationing is inherently intrusive on daily lives, and the Prime Minister knew that regulators had a tendency to make it more intrusive than necessary. In July 1941 he minuted Lord Woolton:

  Though rigid rationing might be easier to administer, some system which left the consumer a reasonable freedom of choice would seem much better. Individual tastes have a wonderful way of cancelling out …30

  Are you getting enough to eat?”

  J.J. Llewellin, who replaced Lord Woolton as Minister of Food in December 1943, rec
eived a similar minute urging him to “cut out petty annoyances … [in] the private lives of ordinary people”.31 As the Cabinet Secretary Norman Brook (later Lord Normanbrook) noted: “There was in fact a strong bond between Churchill ‘and ordinary people’. Their interests lay close to his heart, and he was always concerned to promote their welfare.”32

  As the Prime Minister understood those interests, they included some rather specific dietary requirements. Understanding the British love of beef and his own preferences for it (“personally I am a beef-eater,”33 he wrote in 1933) might have been among the reasons he pressed his ministers to include in British diets beef, beef and more beef. He advised Lord Woolton:

  Almost all of the food faddists I have ever known, nut-eaters and the like, have died young after a period of senile decay. The British soldier is far more likely to be right than the scientists. All he cares about is beef … The way to lose the war is to try to force the British public into a diet of milk, oatmeal, potatoes etc., washed down on gala occasions with a little limejuice.34

  If beef was not to be had, there was always pork:

  The only point in doubt is whether you have asked for sufficient pork. America would find it difficult to provide us with beef or mutton, but pork supplies can be rapidly expanded and, if necessary, imported in non-refrigerated tonnage.35

  And if neither beef nor pork, there were always rabbits. In June 1941, Churchill minuted Lord Woolton:

  Have you done justice to rabbit production? Although rabbits are not by themselves nourishing, they are a pretty good mitigation of vegetarianism … what is the harm in encouraging their multiplication in captivity?36