september 2015 • volume 6, issue 3
MoRning in aMeRiCa
Randolph ChuRChill &
Jennie ChuRChill RepaRd
Through the generosity of Dr. and Mrs. Monroe Trout, the UpsilonUpsilon Chapter of Phi Alpha Theta, the National History Honor
Society, was honored to host Mr. Randolph Churchill and his sister,
Jennie Churchill Repard, on October 7, 2014. Mr. Churchill and Jennie
are the great grandchildren of Sir Winston Churchill, the World War II
era British Prime Minister (1940-45; 1951-55).
The following is an adaptation from a speech presented by Mr.
Churchill and his sister at University of the Cumberlands. This is the
second installment of the lecture for Morning In America.
the american connection to winston churchill
My sister Jennie and I are absolutely thrilled
to be at the University of the Cumberlands.
What a crowd! We’re thrilled to see a packed
hall. Thank you on behalf of all our family
for making this possible today. We’ve loved
seeing all of you, the architecture, the setting
here is just stunning and the smoky hills were
smoky today.
Dr. Taylor remarked over dinner about the
many biographies that have been written on
my great-grandfather. Winston actually wrote
so much himself. He completed some fifty-four
books. His volumes of his great ancestor, the
Duke of Marlborough, comprised over a million
words. As Winston very clearly said, “History will
judge me well because I shall write it myself.”
This talk will be slightly different from those
you may have heard on Churchill. I’m not a
historian and I’m not an impartial observer
either. I am family. My own career encompasses
stints in the Royal Navy and in banking, including
a period living in New York. It was there where,
25 years ago, I took the plunge and proposed
to my bride-to-be. I didn’t want to offer her any
illusions of grandeur, so I proposed on a 25 cent
ferry ride to Staten Island.
I did not know my famous great-grandfather.
I was born only a couple of days before he
died. But ever since I could remember, I have
been aware of his influence, not just from those
around me but from the people all over the
globe and especially here in the United States.
I was raised by those who knew him best
and surrounded by many of his treasured
belongings. I now live a stone’s throw from his
beloved home at Chartwell. Since my father’s
death, I’ve gotten fully involved in the Churchill
legacy, allowing me to meet a wonderful range
of fascinating people.
No evening is complete without some of
Churchill’s humor and wit. A female reporter
once asked Churchill, “Doesn’t it thrill you to
know that every time you make a speech, the
hall is packed and overflowing?” Churchill
replied, “It’s quite flattering. But whenever I feel
this way, I always remember if, instead of making
a political speech I was being hanged, the
crowd would be twice as big.”
At Churchill’s home, Chartwell, in Kent, a
Mormon delegation visited in the 1950’s. Winton
offered them whiskey and soda. A Mormon
asked, “May I have water, Sir Winston? Lions
drink it.” Winston said, “Asses drink it, too!”
The Mormon retorted, “Strong drink rageth and
stingeth like a serpent.” Winston responded,
“I’ve long been looking for a drink like that.”
And finally, one of Churchill’s more glorious
quotes: “The Americans can always be
trusted to do the right thing once all the other
possibilities have been exhausted.”
On a more serious note, it’s impossible for any
of my generation to comprehend the scale of the
sacrifice that was made in securing victory in not
was just one, but two world wars. Churchill only
became Prime Minister after it became clear that
the appeasement policies of the British Prime
Minister, Neville Chamberlain, had failed.
Appeasement was born of a desire to avoid
another war. But in the end, it gave Adolph
Hitler all he needed to dominate Europe.
Churchill later reflected, “I saw it all coming and
cried aloud to my fellow countrymen and to the
world, but no one paid any attention.”
Churchill became Prime Minister on the 10th
of May, 1940. He noted in his memoirs of the
Second World War, “I felt as if I was walking
with destiny and that all my past life had been a
preparation for this hour and for this trial.”
On the day that Churchill took office, Hitler
invaded France and the Low Countries. Within
weeks, all had surrendered. No one foresaw
such a colossal military defeat. An extraordinary
evacuation at Dunkirk, in which 340,000 British
soldiers were rescued in small ships that crossed
the English Channel, resulted in saving the
entirety of the British army. Had those soldiers
been captured on the beach at Dunkirk, it would
have changed the whole course of history.
Churchill’s first speech as Prime Minister on
those crucial days in May 1940 illustrated his
determination to lead and put heart back in the
nation. This is what we miss today in leadership.
Winston spoke these words to the nation: “You
ask ‘what is our aim?’ I can answer in one word.
It is victory, victory at all cost, victory in spite of all
terror, victory however long and hard the road
may be; for without victory, there is no survival.”
2
morning in america
He continued, “I have nothing to offer other
than blood, toil, tears, and sweat.”
Britain was alone, supported only by her
empire and the commonwealth. She resolutely
endured the Blitz of the Nazi onslaught until the
Germans foolishly invaded the Soviet Union.
Japan decisively changed the course of the
war with the appalling attack on Pearl Harbor in
December of 1941.
Churchill knew from that moment that the
Great Republic, as he called your country, would
come to the liberation of the old world and their
mother country. He felt confident that the result
would not be in doubt.
It might be inspiring to any struggling
student to know that for four years of school,
Churchill was near the bottom of his class. He
was held back and, finally, he was admitted into
the Royal Military College Sandhurst on his third
attempt. We have some of his school reports;
they are quite shocking. Churchill’s parents
initially saw few signs of greatness in their son.
In the Victorian Age, it was all about discipline.
Churchill rebelled against authority even after
being viciously beaten at school. At nine-yearsold, he was caned 30 times on the back and the
bottom. And even after he had been caned, the
following night, he went into the headmaster’s
office and destroyed his straw boater.
Winston refused conventional learning, but
he loved poetry and he loved doing his own
things. One of his school reports read, “He was
only consistent in his inconsistency.”
In 1893, when Winston was 19 years old, he
received the following letter from his father, Lord
Randolph. The letter read,
My dear Winston,
I am rather surprised by your tone of
exultation on your inclusion on the
Sandhurst list. There are two ways of
winning an examination: one, credible,
the other, reverse. You have unfortunately
chosen the latter method and appear to
be much pleased with your success. The
first extremely discreditable feature of your
performance was missing the infantry. For
in that failure is demonstrated beyond
refutation your slovenly, happy-go-lucky,
harum-scarum style of work for which you
have been always distinguished at your
other schools. Never have I received a
really good report of your conduct and
your work from any master or tutor you’ve
had from time-to-time. You’re always
behind, never advancing in your class.
Incessant complaints of total want of
application and dis-character are constant
in your reports. The results are clearly on
display in your last army examination.
John Kennedy bestowed honorary citizenship
on Churchill. At that occasion, Kennedy
famously quoted your remarkable reporter,
Ed Morrow, who proclaimed: “Winston had
mobilized the English language and sent it
into battle.”
Sadly, Lord Randolph died only a year later
Last autumn, our family had an immensely
when Winston was only age 20. He assumed
proud day. Churchill’s bust was unveiled at
his son would just be one of those upper class
the National Statuary Hall at the United States
wastrels who had abandoned an opportunity.
capital in the presence of the Secretary of State
Yet, with the responsibility of being the head of
John Kerry. At that ceremony, we succeeded
the family, Churchill rose to the challenge.
in bringing your four congressional leaders
As a cavalry officer in the British Army,
together for once. The Speaker of the United
Winston saw action in Cuba, India, and Africa.
States House of Representatives, John Boehner,
It is extraordinary to think that this man, who
stated, “Winston Churchill was the best friend
lived to see Yuri Gagarin travel into space from
America ever had.”
Russia, also participated in one of the last cavalry
The National Churchill Museum at
charges in history at the Battle of Omdurman in
Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri marks
Sudan in 1898.
the spot where Churchill delivered one of his
But some things change and some do
most famous speeches. In 1946, accompanied
not—it is perhaps even more extraordinary to
by President Truman to his home state, Churchill
remember that young Winston fought in those
unequivocally warned the world of the dangers
valleys of Afghanistan and Pakistan where British of the Soviet Union: “From Stettin in the Baltic
and American forces are serving today.
to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has
In the First World War, when Winston was in
descended across the continent.”
charge of the Admiralty and Navy, he decided
The trustees of Westminster College
to create a new front. On the Western front,
have been truly visionary. In the 1960s,
because of the barbed wire and trenches,
they transported stones to Fulton from a
soldiers were being aimlessly
bombed and ruined London
Editor
killed. Unfortunately, the Gallipoli
church designed by the famous
Christopher Leskiw, Ph.D.
Campaign, the effort to secure the
English architect Sir Christopher
narrow strait connecting the Black
Wren. The church has been
Contributing EditorS
Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, was
reconstructed as a remarkable
Bruce Hicks, Ph.D.
Christopher Leskiw, Ph.D.
a complete disaster. Winston had
monument.
to resign his office. He joined the
But the greatest thing that
AdviSory CommittEE
army and went into the trenches of
has happened in my lifetime is
M.C. Smith, Ph.D.
the First World War.
the fall of the Berlin Wall and the
Winston was a man of action
freedom of the people in Eastern
StAff ASSiStAnt
and he understood how the
Europe. And there at Fulton,
Fay Partin
ordinary man and solider felt. That’s
they have one of the largest
Copyright ©2015
something that very few politicians
sections of the Berlin Wall and
UNIVERSITY of the CUMBERLANDS
today understand--how to work
wonderful sculptures of people
with the person who’s doing the
walking through the wall as
The opinions expressed in
work at the bottom. Winston
testament to the fact that walls
UC Morning in America® are not
always believed in his own destiny
cannot hold people back.
necessarily the views of
and, in his twenties, he wrote, “We
We are really proud that in 2015,
UNIVERSITY of the CUMBERLANDS
are all worms, but I do believe that I
we are creating a Churchill library at
Permission to reprint in whole or
am a glow worm.”
George Washington University. As
in part is hereby granted, provided
Winston was also a man
a result, Winston will be recognized
the following credit line is used:
“Reprinted by permission from
of words. He delivered an
in the heart of your great capital.
UC Morning in America®,
extraordinary speech to a joint
The library will be a wonderful
a publication of
session of the U.S. Congress
UNIVERSITY of the CUMBERLANDS.” resource for students and
after the Japanese attack on
researchers. Winston’s memory will
Pearl Harbor. Years after that
stand as a beacon of how precious
attack, in April 1963, President
our liberties are to us all.
morning in america
3
the eighth amendment
excessive bail shall not be required,
nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual
punishments inflicted.
To whom are the Bill of Rights directed? What
are their purpose? The responses given by
the average American to these questions are
likely to be less than inspiring. At worse, it gives
ready cause for alarm. Typical responses include
misconceptions that there are ten rights in the
Bill of Rights, and they are rights given to citizens
by the Constitution. A reading of the first three
Amendments alone reveals ten distinctive rights.
More important, however, is the realization that
Amendments do not give rights at all. From the
Founder’s perspective, no man-made covenant
can endow citizens something that by their very
nature they already have. The words used in the
Declaration of Independence bear repeating
here, “…that they are endowed by their Creator
with certain unalienable Rights.” Consequently,
the Bill of Rights do not create or award rights,
they put the government on notice that they
exist. The Amendments constrain government
and point to the nature of humanity. In that light,
the 8th Amendment should be read as another
element in the armor of protection highlighted
by the Constitution.
The 8th Amendment reads as follows:
excessive bail shall not be required, nor
excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and
unusual punishments inflicted.
The overriding language of the Amendment
is one of degree. The Amendment indirectly
establishes the fact that as a collective, society
can punish citizens who violate another’s rights
or the laws of government. Attention then
turns to the measure of such punishments.
How is the line established that identifies
levels that are deemed acceptable and those
that are excessive? The simple beauty of this
Amendment is that it entitles all citizens to the
basic notion of dignity.
English Common Law is a rich source for
many of the principles in American legal
tradition. The concept that the ‘punishment
should fit the crime’ dates to the writing of the
4
morning in america
Magna Carta in 1215. The concept was further
refined when the practice of purposefully setting
bail to an unreasonable amount that didn’t
necessary fit the crime was halted with the
adoption of the English Bill of Rights in 1689.
While recent scholarship has called into question
the historical meaning and impact of the Magna
Carta, our Founders clearly used that document
and others to undergird their reasoning. The
8th Amendment elevates the right to bail which
in turn recognizes the notion that the accused
is innocent until proven guilty. A significant bail
amount, however, can be set by the government
as long as “the fixing of bail for any individual
defendant … [is] based upon standards relevant
to the purpose of assuring the presence of that
defendant” (Stack vs Boyle, 1954). The weight
of the Supreme Court case law on the topic
more often sides with the government than
with the plaintiff who claims an 8th Amendment
violation. The Court uses a balancing test in
judging whether or not different levels of bail are
appropriate to the level of potential harm faced
by society if the accused is set free.
It’s interesting to note that today in America,
circumstances similar to those that prompted the
English into action in 1689 may still be in play. In
big cities and rural areas alike, citizens are being
incarcerated with high bail amounts for minor
misdemeanors that far exceed their ability to pay.
Current academic research deem this process the
“bail trap,” and find it disproportionally applied to
the poorer Americans and minorities. Worse yet,
research also illustrates the fact that the mere threat
of high bail induces defendants to plead guilty to a
lesser offense rather than wait in jail until a full trial.
The 8th Amendment is probably better known
for its proscription against cruel treatment of
the accused. Yet, is cruelty in the eye of the
beholder? Is the definition of cruelty tied
to a particular time and geographic place,
or does it ascribe to some higher principle?
When thinking about the original intent of the
Founders, evidence for either interpretation is
ample. For instance, the experience of colonial
rule under a despotic king was in recent memory
when the words of the 8th Amendment were
penned. The Declaration of Independence
states that the King “… is at this time
transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries
to compleat the works of death, desolation and
tyranny, already begun with circumstances of
Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most
barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head
of a civilized nation.” The Founders wanted to
ensure that their newly instituted government
would not treat its citizens in like fashion.
Should the standard of what actions constitute
cruelty be set on a philosophical level or as a
practical matter? Again, the Founders echoed
the spirit and actual words of the English Bill of
Rights: no ‘cruel and unusual’ punishments. The
modern reader may assume that the phrase
‘cruel and unusual’ would eliminate extremely
harsh or tortuous punishments. Yet, the
context of this phrase did not preclude some
rather gruesome types of punishments from
being applied. A cursory glance at the types
of physical punishments deemed acceptable
under the 1689 English Bill is not for the
squeamish. In the English context, the limitation
basically meant only those punishments that
were considered lawful by Parliament would
be acceptable. So it is clear the US has moved
beyond the original context and intent of the
English Bill of Rights’ prohibition against ‘cruel
and unusual’ punishments.
One case that provides some insight on what
constitutes ‘cruel and unusual’ is the Supreme
Court case of Trop vs. Dulles (1958). The case
revolved around what sort of punishments the
US military could affix to the crime of desertion
during wartime. The Court recognized the
long Western tradition that wartime desertion
could be punishable by death under certain
circumstances. The Court, however, stated
that just because execution is one acceptable
method of punishment, the government does
not have a blank check in dealing out sentences
short of death. The petitioner, Albert Trop, had
deserted his unit in Morocco in 1944 during
WWII and subsequently turned himself in the
next day without resistance, and had in no way
sworn allegiance to a foreign power. He was
sentenced by a military court to three years
of hard labor and a dishonorable discharge.
Under the stipulations of the Nationality Act of
1940, this rendered Trop in effect a non-citizen.
The Court found this action crossed the line in
terms of acceptable punishment. The Court
stated that the 8th Amendment “must draw
its meaning from the evolving standards of
decency that mark the progress of a maturing
society.” Furthermore, the Court found
that denationalization as a punishment was
“obnoxious” and that no civilized nation finds
this punishment acceptable.
The debate over capital punishment sees
perhaps the most notable invocations of the 8th
Amendment in modern history. In Furman vs
Georgia (1972), the Supreme Court reviewed
state laws concerning the death penalty. It
found the arbitrary manner in which the death
penalty was handed down to be in violation of
the 8th Amendment protections against cruel
and unusual punishments. In some states, if a
police officer was killed in the committing or
aftermath of a crime, the death penalty was
automatically invoked as the only punishment
option. Elsewhere, the Court found the
application of the death penalty was not
equal across the full spectrum of society, as
its recipients were overwhelmingly poor and
minorities. As a result, nearly 40 states had to
revise their laws to address the Court’s concerns.
The operative rule that emerges from this
case was offered in a concurring opinion by
Justice Thurgood Marshall were he states that
in “... judging whether or not a given penalty
is morally acceptable, most courts have said
that the punishment is valid unless it shocks
Chaining
offenders in
stocks is a
punishment now
considered cruel
and unusual.
morning in america
5
the conscience and sense of justice of the
people.” The metric of proportionality, that the
punishment fits the crime, has continued to be a
guiding principle of the 8th Amendment.
The boundaries of what can be considered
‘proportionate’ were most recently tested
against California’s Three Strikes Law. Under this
state law, violators convicted of their third felony
faced a sentence of 25 years to life regardless of
the severity of the crimes. In the case of Ewing
vs. California (2003), the defendant was found
guilty of shoplifting three golf clubs, and as a
third offender received this substantial sentence.
The Court eventually upheld the conviction and
sentence. Specifically, the Court balanced the
gravity of the accused’s punishment with the
public good served to society in deterring career
criminals from committing repeated felonies.
The Court found that such punishments would
only be in violation of the 8th Amendment
protections if they were grossly disproportionate
to the crime. Four dissenters in the case
disagreed with the opinion of the Majority,
stating that cases that don’t involve bodily harm
or outright murder should not be subject to
such large and automatic sentences. Given how
divided the Court was on this case, it is very likely
to be revisited in the near future.
In sum, the 8th Amendment does much to
promote the basic dignity of man when faced
with the machinations of the legal system.
While the prohibition against excessive bail
is more or less settled law, the same cannot
be said of issues involving “cruel and unusual
punishment.” Recent cases such as Baze vs
Rees (2008) – which questioned the use of a
three chemical drug cocktail in executions –
bring to light the method of capital punishment
and question whether certain execution
methods are too painful to be considered
humane. The Court thus far has upheld this
and other methods of execution. What is
beyond the control of the legal system however,
are drug companies themselves refusing to
manufacture these specific agents, as they see
these methods as robbing the individual of their
humanity. The public is still strongly in favor of
capital punishment– roughly 63% support it in
the most recent Gallup polls – but support has
been on the decline, dropping almost 20% in
the past two decades. A shift is underway, as six
states have banned capital punishment since
2007. Clearly, defining what constitutes dignity
is still part of the national conversation over 225
years after the creation of the 8th Amendment.
6
morning in america
choose
cumberlands
Chartered in 1888, University of the
Cumberlands is an institution of regional distinction providing an educational experience for the people of the
Appalachian area and beyond.
We offer four undergraduate degrees in more than 40 major fields of
study, including ten pre-professional
programs. We also offer advanced
degrees in the areas of business administration, Christian studies, clinical
psychology, educational leadership,
information systems security, physician assistant studies, and professional
counseling, as well as certification
programs in education. Many of our
graduate courses are taught online.
Do you know of someone who would
benefit from an educational opportunity where learning and volunteerism
go hand-in-hand? And at a university
where each student completes a community service requirement prior to
graduation? If so, please visit our website at ucumberlands.edu. You may
also contact our Director of Admissions,
Erica Harris, at 800-343-1609 or email
her at [email protected].
She will be happy to provide you with
information and an application for
admission. We look forward to the opportunity to serve you.