Typed Letter Signed ('Randolph S. Churchill') from Randolph Spencer Churchill to Mrs Webb of London publishers Hutchinson & Co., regarding serialisation of Ursula Bloom's 'Hitler's Eva' in Rothermere's 'Sunday Dispatch'. With copy of letter by him.

Both items in good condition, on lightly aged and creased paper. Item One: Original Typed Letter Signed from Churchill to Mrs. Webb, c/o Messrs. Hutchinson & Co., Hutchinson House, Stratford Place, Oxford Street, London, W1. 11 November 1953. 1p., 8vo. Lightly scored through by recipient. He apologises for stating in the 'Recorder' of 27 October that 'Mrss Ursula Bloom's current series in the Sunday Dispatch, "Hitler's Eva," has been curtailed'. He has since learnt that, 'on the contrary, the series is to be extended by another six instalments'. He has written to Bloom, and to the Recorder, who will be publishing his letter on the following day. 'I draw this to your attention since I understand that your firm is shortly to publish these articles in book form, as a novel. I gather that Miss Bloom is apprehensive that what I wrote might, in spite of my very full withdrawal and apology, affect the sale of her book.' He would be 'most distressed if she should suffer in any way as a result of any inaccuracy on my part, and I therefore think it might do to send you a copy of the letter I have written to the RECORDER.' Item Two: Carbon copy of Typed Letter from Churchill to the Editor of the Recorder, 58 Farringdon Street, London, EC4. 10 November 1953. 2pp., 8vo. The second paragraph reads: 'I gather also, that Miss Bloom feels that the context in which the inaccurate paragraph appeared made it seem that the alleged curtailment of the series was part of Lord Rothermere's new policy of cleaning up his papers. It was not my intention to give this impression. Since hearing of her complaint I have read her whole series, as thus far published, and this has conirmed the view I had that her serial is in no way open to the charges that have so often been preferred against other serials in the SUNDAY DISPATCH.' He asks for his apology to be published 'with a prominence equal to that which you gave to my original article, as I feel that I owe your readers, no less than Miss Bloom, an apology for having inadvertly [sic] misled them.'