A nice constitutional point is raised in a Times leader
of last Monday, in which Mr. Churchill is encouraged virtually to select a successor to himself and to indicate to the King in advance that successor's name. It has been suggested that this is rather like the method adopted by Hitler, who nominated Goering to succeed him and (a little unfortunately), failing him, Rudolf Hess. But I think it is sound constitutional procedure. When a Government is defeated and resigns, the obvious course is to invite the Opposition leader to form a Ministry. But today there is no real Opposition, and no such contingency as the defeat of the Prime Minister in the House is contemplated. But the perils of this mortal life in war-time are not to be ignored, and if ever (quod Deus avertat) Mr. Churchill had to be replaced the King ought not to be faced with the immense responsibility of deciding whom to send for. As The Times puts it, with considerable delicacy, "He [the Prime Minister] can do much, while he is still at the head of affairs, to guide the choice which it will fall to others finally to make." That seems good sense. Mr. Churchill himself, of course, is where he is because his predecessor advised the King to send for him.
Previous page
