When Tunku almost didn’t want S’wak in
Published on: Sunday, January 23, 2022
By: David Lim
Text Size:
Sandys speaking to a Field Force member.
He also observed, and this might be quite significant as we shall see, that Sandys had suffered a leg injury in a car accident during the war, and was often in pain, took painkillers, limped around in a walking stick but pressed on with life regardless.
Lee would have been greatly amused if he had read the headlines on The Guardian on the 10th August, 2000, “ Unidentified lover of the Duchess of Argyll divorce case exposed, not one but two men – a cabinet minister and a swashbuckling movie star” to find that the cabinet minister mentioned was none other than Duncan Sandys.
The divorce case between the Duke and the Duchess of Argyll which came up in the High Court in March 1963 was described as “the longest and most sensational divorce to occur in Britain.” The judge, Lord Wheatley, described the Duchess as “a highly sexed woman who had ceased to be satisfied with normal relationship and had started to indulge in disgusting sexual activities.”
The Duchess, born Margaret Whigham (1912 – 1993) was the daughter of a wealthy industrialist, and was reported to be a beauty with a penchant for picking up lovers, the total of whom the Duke alleged in court, numbered to 88, which at that time was probably a record.
While only 16 she was said to have been made pregnant by the actor David Niven, and was engaged (to be married) at one time or another with three of the world’s most eligible bachelors; Prince Aly Khan, son of the famous Aga Khan, Max Aitken, the newspaper mogul, and the 7th Earl of Warwick.
She finally married Charles Sweeney, another heir to a great fortune, but they divorced in 1947. The 11th Duke of Argyll who was divorced by his second wife at the time, had met her on the Paris to London train and the two had fallen for each other. It was her second marriage and his third.
The marriage trundled along for some time, for she found later that the Duke had problems with drinks and drugs, and he, on his part, subsequently learned of her wayward ways with men. He sued for divorce, and the case, Argyll vs Argyll became the most sensational case in Scottish legal history, due, in no small part to the evidence produced by the Duke. He had broken into his wife’s private quarters and found the incriminating photographs.
The public was intrigued by the production in court of the photographs, which were described as “sexually explicit Polaroid snaps”, of two men, the identities of whom were much speculated upon as the photographs showed only the torsos. One of the candidates was said to be Duncan Sandys. The case was in March, 1963.
The reports let to a “stormy” cabinet meeting on June 20, 1963, in which Sandys confessed that he was the person “rumoured to be the person in the erotic shots”, and offered his resignation.
Harold Macmillan the then Prime Minister persuaded him to stay on, assuring him that Lord Denning who had been commissioned to investigate into the Profumo scandal had also been tasked to look into the case of the identity of the “headless men” in the photographs.
If Lee had not been amused at the time, he must have felt a twinge of regret about not knowing that there was a storm in the British Cabinet over Sandys involvement in the divorce case at the time when he was negotiating with both him and the Tunku over the terms of the merger. After all Sandys was rather put out with him for insisting on declaring independence for Singapore on the 31st of August and going on from there to hold an election.
Sandys had complained to the Prime Minister that Lee was, “unashamedly exploiting the delay to further his political ambition, his objective being to show up the Tunku as being feeble and wooly minded…” (British End of Empire papers)
Ironically, Lee’s knowledge of that part of the anatomy of Sandys’ and he being injured, and walking with a limp, might have confirmed the public’s suspicion at the time whether Sandys was one of the “headless men”. One of the photographs showed a man’s torso shown together with the Duchess in what the trial Judge, Lord Wheatley, described as “a gross form of sexual relationship.”
The other four showed a man pleasuring himself, but only his torso, together with handwritten captions; “before; during; thinking of you – oh, and finished.”
Lord Denning (Master of the Rolls, 1962 – 1982) proceeded with his investigation, calling four possible candidates for the part of the headless man (he had assumed, or deliberately decided, that the torsos in the two photographs were of one and the same man). He had conceived of a neat little stratagem of having them write on his visitors’ book to get samples of their handwriting. He later engaged an handwriting expert to determine whose had matched with the writing on the photographs. He then concluded that the handwriting and the torso, belonged to Douglas Fairbanks jr. one of the Duchess’ lovers, thereby implicitly acquitting Sandys.
Nevertheless, the Prime Minister ordered all the papers pertaining to the case to be sealed for 30 years. In 1993, John Majors, the then Prime Minister, extended the period for another 70 years, though Sandys had died in 1987. It is not idle speculation to think that if Sandys had resigned in June, 1963, because of the scandal, the new federation of Malaysia might not have been realized, or achieved by September of that year.
In a lead story on the19th December, 2021, The Observer asks, “Is the Government still hiding the truth about Britain’s “Dirty Duchess” 60 years on?” It is most likely that politics is behind the decision to keep the papers under wraps, and Malaysia may figure in it.
Sandys’ role in 1962 – 63 was crucial. He had to deal with the political and regional implications of an abrupt formation of a federation of former British colonies in the security sensitive region in Southeast Asia to the powers in conflict in the region. Moves had to be made in Washington to assuage the American suspicion of the creation of a neo-colony, and also to allay the fears of the close neighbors, Indonesia and the Philippines.
Sandys had misgivings over the Tunku’s concession to the two countries in the Manila Accord, to have the United Nations send observers to the two Borneo states. Nevertheless he managed to fix the date for the formation of the new federation, regardless of the finding.
“When the full history of the formation of Malayaia comes to be written, I think the part played by Sandys, and especially the crucial support which he gave the Tunku in Kuala Lumpur immediately prior to its formation, will be found to have been highly significant.” Alastair Morrison (Fair Land Sarawak, Southeast Asia Program, Cornell University, 1993)
Macmillan in writing to advise The Queen on ‘the complicated story of Malaysia’, informed her of Sandys successfully keeping “the parts together” despite the Tunku “acting in his characteristic impulsive way, and Mr Lee trying the exploit the difficulties to his own advantage.”
Macmillan had written to ask for The Queen’s permission to appoint a new Cabinet Minister to go out to represent “Your Majesty’s Government at the celebration.” Could this indicate a slight discomfort on the part of the Prime Minister of having a Cabinet Minister who was at the time the centre of a controversy over an involvement in a divorce case? It would certainly not do for a potential co-respondent in a divorce case to represent Her Majesty and Her Majesty’s Government to pass the Sovereignty of Her Britannic Majesty over the two colonies to a newly minted Federation.
By a strange twist of fate, however, Duncan Sandys was to remain The Queen’s representative at the ceremonies. On the day the letter was sent to The Queen, Sandys reported to the Prime Minister that “a potentially explosive situation had ‘required him to remain in the area until the successful inauguration of Malaysia”.
The “explosive situation” turned out to be the appointment of the first Governor of Sarawak. The members of the Alliance in the Council Negri, particularly the Iban members wanted Temenggong Jugah. The Tunku on the other hand insisted on the appointment of a Malay, the reason given being that the Chief Minister was an Iban, and that his federal cabinet would not agree to the choice. Moreover, he said it would be ridiculous to have in that position an illiterate person.
Caught in between, Sandys had to call an urgent meeting for all in Kuala Lumpur, including all 15 members of the Sarawak Council with the Chief Minister and the Temenggong himself. He could see the reason, he said, for the Temenggong to be appointed.
He wrote, “ For my part, I was not prepared to make the recommendation to The Queen which ran directly contrary to the interests of the Dyaks (sic) upon whom our troops are so dependent for information on the Indonesian movements, and for guidance through the jungle”“
Ghazali Shafie, in the “Finale” of his book, ‘Memoir on the Formation of Malaysia” expressed surprise at the appointment of Stephen Kalong Ningkan as the Chief Minister before Malaysia Day, an appointment he suspects, was made with the “connivance” of the colonial administration. He thought it might be an acceptable arrangement in the interim period while Ningkan would be an “understudy” in the colonial administration. Things changed however when the Chief Minister nominated the Temenggong as the first governor of the state.
Shafie reports, “The Tunku after hearing the British proposal was livid with anger and immediately called an emergency Cabinet meeting.”
The Tunku considered the nomination as interference by the colonial administration, and threatened to proceed with the formation of Malaysia on the 16th September, without Sarawak, saying that if that was the case, he would rather not have Sarawak in Malaysia. The Tunku was reported to have said of Sandys, “He came as a friend, and became a nuisance.”
According to Ghazali he managed to get the Iban members of the Alliance to agree to the Tunku’s demand with a ruse. He had separate meetings with the various groups in the alliance, he first hinted, and then convinced Ningkan and his supporters that they were in the minority. He said that Sandys on hearing the news of the consensus was estatic, and pronounced him, “a King-maker”.
However, Sandys himself reported, “After a variety of meetings and many (rough? words) on all sides the matter was finally settled on the basis of a compromise which I suggested.”
The agreed terms were:
- That a Malay be the 1st Governor for 2 years
- That it be understood that the Agong shall appoint as the successor whosoever the Chief Minister shall recommend (i.e. a Dyak) and,
- That Temenggong Jugah be made a Federal Minister. (He was subsequently appointed Minister for Sarawak Affairs).
And so it was that on the 16th September, 1963, the man who was at the centre of a scandal of “the headless man” in Britain attended the flag raising ceremony in Kuching and passed on the Sovereignty of the country on behalf of his Queen to the new Federation.
Morrison who witnessed the celebrations commented that the inauguration of Malaysia did not get off to a very auspicious start, the new Governor Datu Abang Haji Openg almost collapsed during the inauguration ceremony. Perhaps the time has come for all to redress the situation and see that promises are kept.
- David is a lawyer and avid Sarawak,
Sabah historian.
Last Sarawak Governor Sir Alexander Waddel saying farewell to successor Datuk Abang Haji Openg.
ADVERTISEMENT
