Corroboration of Establishment Scheme 

The existence of an Establishment scheme was corroborated by two responses to my enquiries.

The more revealing disclosure occurred when in October 1985 I called by appointment to see the late W.L. (Bill) Leake, Grand Secretary, at Mark Masons' Hall, London.  I had sent him some papers in advance.  There, in his office looking out on the roofs of St. James, I got from him some very interesting comments about the processes I found abhorrent.

Referring to my papers, he said that what I was describing were standard Establishment practices - though he could not understand why they had gone on so long in my case.  He added that they were run from offices like his.  When I asked what he meant by Establishment, he did not answer directly but said “You know who I work for”.  I said “Yes”.  He said “Well, then”. Clearly he was reluctant to give a name and I felt I could not pursue that point further.  It should not be assumed that he was referring to the Mark Grand Master (HRH Prince Michael of Kent) for in Bill Leake's position in society some people wear more than one hat.

When, next, I said I could understand such practices being used in a totalitarian State such as the USSR but not in a free society such as Britain, he responded vehemently that if I thought we were free in this country I was a fool.  He added that the Russians were more honest about it, that was all.  He also expressed surprise when I said there was a malevolent element in what had taken place.

Meanwhile in June 1984 I had written at the suggestion of Lord (Asa) Briggs to Uwe Kitzinger, a distinguished economist who was President of Templeton College, Oxford, describing in general terms the practices I had encountered.  He replied on 6th July 1984 (see entry in Journal of 1984) that "these matters were known to those who adopt the radical approach towards the topics I had outlined".  Was he showing the same reticence as Bill Leake by using the term "radical" as a euphemism.  If so, to what grouping, organisation or ideology did it refer?

Although both Bill Leake and Uwe Kitzinger were reluctant to name the organisation or persons responsible, their reaction shows that the practices I had described were being applied.