The International Campaign for Real History
Quick navigation

Index

 

Schedule: file of Macmillan Ltd internal documents

Internal Office memoranda from the files of Macmillan UK Ltd.:

  • Alan Gordon Walker memo to Chris Patterson and Roland Philipps (David Irving's new editor), November 27, 1991
  • Steven Kennedy memo to Roland Philipps, December 6, 1991
  • Roland Philipps memo to Steven Kennedy, January 2, 1992
  • Roland Philipps memo to Ray Fidler and Alan Gordon-Walker, July 6, 1992 
  • Roland Philipps memo to Alan Gordon-Walker and Managing Director Felicity Rubinstein, July 6, 1992
  • Dr John Fox letter to the Editor published by The Daily Telegraph, April 18, 1996

David Irving's complaints to Macmillan Ltd about their Treachery:

Macmillan Ltd refuse to Show Contrition

  • Denton Hall (Macmillan's lawyers), write to David Irving, April 16, 1998, denying that their clients are liable to him in law.
  • Mr Irving warns Denton Hall (Macmillan's lawyers), March 2, 1999, that he will sub poena the documents

Return to Summary: "A Publisher's betrayal of their Author."

PRIVATE

BY FAX

TO: 

Chris Patterson 

CC: 

Roland Philipps 

FROM: 

Alan Gordon Walker 

DATE: 

27.11.91 

Please reply to fax no 071 373 9215 



DAVID IRVING 

The Macmillan publishing position is:  

1. Titles in print  

Published

Title

Imprint

Stock

Status

Pub 1987

The War Path

Papermac

1000

Licence expired

R/I 1989

Hitler's War (39-42)

.. ..

400

.. .. ..

R/I 1989

Hitler's War (42-5)

.. ..

316

.. .. ..

R/I 1990

Dresden

.. ..

678

348 sold 1991

Pub 1989

Trail of the Fox (Rommel)

.. ..

209

203 sold 1991

Pub 1989

Goring

Hardcover

1300

Sold to Harper Collins (Grafton)

2. Titles O/P 

Hess - hardcover: paperback sold to Harper Collins (Grafton) 

3. Contracts outstanding:  

Goebbels: Ms late: possible publication late 1992  

Comment from Roland Philips, editor: RP has read 2/3rds of script and so far it is a straight account of Goebbels based on his Diaries. If the finished script is non-controversial and accepted by outside experts, we will probably publish.  

If it is 'unacceptable' we will reject.  

4. Future Contracts  

We have turned down Roosevelt's War and will not publish Irving again.  

If you or others would like a meeting with me and/or RP, let me know.  
  
 

AGW 

Return to Summary: "A Publisher's betrayal of their Author."

 

 

INTERNAL OFFICE MEMO  

  
  

From: Steven Kennedy        Extn. 3364          06-Dec-91  

To: Roland Phillips  
  


I am afraid it looks like I won't get anywhere near Cavaye Place this side of the New Year. I hope you have a good Christmas and let's try to meet up soon after!  

Meanwhile, two points:  

1) Quite a number of people have recently commented unfavourably to me about Macmillan publishing David Irving following on from recent TV appearances in which (they say) he used his authorial status to lend credence to racist politics.[*] I think I have mentioned to you before that I have had the the occasional complaint but people are beginning to say to me (including an Oxford Professor of Politics) that they would be more inclined to publish with us if we were not publishing Irving.  

2) I have been reading Karel van Wolferen's interesting Enigma of Japanese Power which seems to be quite widely used on courses. Should you decide at some future stage that it is no longer viable in Papermac, do please let me know before reverting rights!

 

 * This was quite untrue. There had been no such appearances or remarks by Mr Irving; Macmillan Ltd have declined to identify to him the "Oxford professor" mentioned in the next sentence. From external sources it appears to have been a Professor Peter Pulzer.
Return to Summary: "A Publisher's betrayal of their Author."

INTERNAL MEMO 

TO: Steven Kennedy  

FROM: Roland Phillips  

DATE: 2nd January 1992  
  

Many thanks for your note of 6th December, and apologies for delay in replying. I've been away.  

1. David Irving. We have one more book under contract from Irving, and will have an expert reading of that that when it is delivered before going ahead with publications. We have turned down many other proposals from him and have no plans to continue publishing after the forthcoming book. If this helps you to reassure any prospective authors we are happy for you to say it (although not too publicly if possible); it is true to say that when Macmillan took him on (and the current book contracted) he was not nearly as extreme as he is now.  

2. I will remember your interest in Karel von Wolferen, but will say that it is extremely unlikely that we will be reverting rights!  
  

Happy New Year. 

Return to Summary: "A Publisher's betrayal of their Author.

INTERNAL MEMO

  

TO:  Ray Fidler  
cc.  AGW  

From: Roland Phillips  

Date: 6th July 1992  
  

David Irving 

Please arrange for the remaining stock of:  

                                               Stock  
Hitler's War 1939-1942   (0 333 49588 8)        358  
Hitler's War 1942-1945   (0 333 49589 6)        240  
The War Path             (03333 49587 X)        964  

to be destroyed.  
  

Many thanks

Return to Summary: "A Publisher's betrayal of their Author." 

M E M O R A N D U M  

To: AGW, cc: FR  

From: RP  

Date: 6th July 1992  
  



 

Re: David Irving 
  

  1. Here are the cuttings from the weekend papers, other than those you have.  
  2. I have asked for the WAR PATH and HITLER'S WAR stock (964 of the first, and 240 of the two volumes of the second) to be destroyed.  
  3. 3) I have talked to Michael Fishwick who has taken over the Goebbels paperback contract, and is happy to go along with our 'wait and see' line.  
  4. 4) I shall be writing to Irving with a final delivery date of end August, unless you disagree.  
  5. 5) Liz has the draft announcement for typing and further discussion.  

Thanks.

 

Return to Summary: "A Publisher's betrayal of their Author."

 

Letter from Dr John Fox to The Daily Telegraph published on April 18, 1996:

Sir,--

Rabbi Schmuel Boteach of Oxford University's L'Chaim Society somewhat judiciously tries to distance himself from those in the Anglo-Jewish community who have described the former Gert-Rudolf Flick benefaction as having been 'tainted' (report, April 17).
Nevertheless, his suggestion that Dr Flick's money should have been used to finance a chair in Jewish studies underlines the very point about the hypocrisy rampant in some sections of the Anglo-Jewish community on this matter. If the Flick money was supposedly 'tainted' for a Chair in European Thought, surely, it would likewise be 'tainted' for a Chair in Jewish Studies.
However, the Flick controversy has implication for other matters of academic freedom and the freedom of expression in this supposed democracy of ours, and the extent to which some narrow sectarian interests seem intent on dictating what ther est of us should put up with or even think.
The controversy immediately reminds one of how in the late 1980s Wolfson College in Oxford was 'forced' to cancel its invitation to Ernst Nolte to lecture there, because Nolte's views about the origins of Adolf Hitler's anti-Jewish exterminatory policies were not what some sections of the Anglo-Jewish community wanted to hear.
Likewise, in 1991, on behalf of a Jewish academic body, I was asked to exert direct pressure on Macmillan to stop its reported publication of the Goebbels biography by David Irving.
I refused, not because I agree with Irving's denials of the Holocaust, - I don't - but because this seemed an unethical and immoral attempt to deny him freedom of speech [...]

Dr John Fox, London, SE12

David Irving's complaints to Macmillan Ltd about their Treachery

Letter from David Irving to Ian Chapman, Managing Director of Macmillan Ltd.

London, November 11, 1997

Dear Ian,

I am as you know an author of books formerly published with modest success by Macmillan Ltd. Until 1991 we main-tained cordial relations. I have learned of a number of things which thereafter occurred behind closed doors at your firm which must give cause for alarm to any author, regardless of his views.

1. Steven Kennedy noted in December 1991 that people were putting pressure on Macmillan to cease publishing my works, including an Oxford Professor of Politics. Since you have seen fit to make all our private mutual correspondence available to third parties, without consulting me or inviting my consent, would you be so good as to identify the people and professor mentioned above, for the purposes of litigation. There is surely no need for me to subpoena these details?

2. In July 1992 my own editor Roland Phillips, in response to outside events, gave secret instructions to one Ray Fidler to destroy all remaining copies of my editions of The War Path and Hitler's War, around 1,300 volumes all told. I was never told of this. (Mysteriously, no order was given to destroy my Rommel biography). A few days later one Amanda Tolworthy confirmed that the order had been carried out, in the best Nazi fashion, and the books had been destroyed. I shall invite the newspapers, in due course, to draw some obvious parallels; here I shall comment only that your firm's action not only deprived me of royalty income but was a violation of my contractual right of first refusal when there is any question of disposing of remainders, inflicting actual financial loss upon me. Please inform me by return of post how you intend to redress this issue. I reserve all my legal rights accruing from our author's agreement.

To be frank, I believe that in 1991-2 your firm behaved in a shameful manner, unworthy of your great name.

 

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

 

Mr Ian Chapman
Macmillan Books
Macmillan General Books
25 Eccleston Place
London SW1W 9NF

Letter from David Irving to Ian Chapman, Managing Director of Macmillan Ltd.

London, December 14, 1997

Dear Mr Chapman,

You responded swiftly, on November 12, to the letter of November 11 in which I expressed my astonishment at my discovery that the Macmillan company secretly and precipitously destroyed all copies of my highly praised biography of Adolf Hitler, for whatever reason, one day in July 1992 without informing me. A month has however passed since then, with no further word.

2. You indicated that you were going to have the file retrieved to enable you to investigate this scandalous affair. I was puzzled to hear that the file was off site, as it is evident that your firm recently and secretly, and although under no compulsion to do so, made available the entire file of your firm's correspondence with me, your author, to my opponents in a major libel action which I am bringing, without any indication to me that you were proposing to do so. (I have of course nothing to conceal: it goes however to the root of publisher/author relations).

3. It may well be that your firm found itself in July 1992 faced with ugly outside pressures which you were not minded, or able, to withstand. But the people of this country - including my father - fought two world wars to preserve our freedom of speech and freedom of opinion, and it is shocking to see a firm with your great name so idly casting those values to the winds. Your action in destroying these books amounted to a substantial breach of contract, and I am advised that, under both that heading and others, I have grounds to claim substantial compensation. Please regard this therefore as a letter before action. Let us hope however there will be no need for me to take the seemingly inevitable next steps.

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

 

Mr Ian Chapman
Macmillan Books
Macmillan General Books
25 Eccleston Place
London SW1W 9NF

Letter from David Irving to Ian Chapman, Managing Director of Macmillan Ltd.

London, December 21, 1997

Dear Mr Chapman,

Further to my recent two letters, to which I am awaiting a full answer with mounting curiosity, it now seems on the basis of further evidence which I have seen unlikely that we shall be able to reach agreement without litigation on the damage inflicted by your company's extraordinary decision to destroy all copies of my books without informing me.

I have incidentally received also several letters which had until now puzzled me, like the enclosed, from fans and readers world-wide who have tried unsuccessfully to write to me c/o my books' publisher, namely your firm Macmillan Ltd. Somebody in your company has been refusing without explanation to forward these letters to me as author, and sending them back to the correspondents. Since several media companies received similar rebuffs, this too has inflicted loss on me.

I attach particular importance to an answer to one query in my letter of November 11, namely: "Steven Kennedy noted in December 1991 that people were putting pressure on Macmillan to cease publishing my works, including an Oxford Professor of Politics." May I once again request the identity of this illiberal academic gentleman? Would it not have been more proper and honourable to refer such critics either directly or indirectly to me as your author and invite my comments on their criticisms?

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

 

Mr Ian Chapman
Macmillan Books
Macmillan General Books
25 Eccleston Place
London SW1W 9NF

 

[Manuscript PS to effect that since I am aware of a 6-year limit for simple damages claim I shall not show undue patience]

Letter from David Irving to Ian Chapman, Managing Director of Macmillan Ltd.

London, December 23, 1997

Dear Ian

Thank you for your very full letter of December 22, which shows that you are taking this matter as seriously as I do. I do not accept your arguments, and you probably do not expect me to.

I am taking High Court action against two sets of defendants, as you may know (Penguin Books & Deborah Lipstadt; and The Observer & Gitta Sereny). In the course of these actions, which have both reached the stage of Discovery, and elsewhere, certain papers have come to light. In particular the lawyers acting for The Observer & Sereny have obtained copies of substantial numbers of original private letters passing between yourselves and myself, and of internal Macmillan memoranda.

These documents are, under the rules of the Supreme Court, still privileged until they are introduced into court, at which time they come into the public domain. That being so, I would prefer to discuss my complaint personally, and I would suggest a meeting with yourself or your legal representative as soon as possible after your return on January 6, to which I will bring the papers to which I am referring. This will enable you to prosecute your own inquiries. Notwithstanding what you say about Macmillan's policy, prima facie it would appear that Roland Phillips or your predecessor Ms Rubinstein turned over copies from your firm's files to outsiders, with the intended consequence of damaging me; but I may be doing them a grave injustice by even suggesting this possibility.

For my part I shall now challenge the defendants' lawyers to identify the provenance of these documents, which may bring us further in this unfortunate matter.

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

 

Mr Ian Chapman
Macmillan Books
Macmillan General Books
25 Eccleston Place
London SW1W 9NF

 

Letter from David Irving to Ian Chapman, Managing Director of Macmillan Ltd.

London, January 13, 1998

Dear Ian

I am sorry not to have heard from you after my letter of December 23. I am enclosing, in confidence, one of the items of which I have become aware, and you may understand my sense of rage at your predecessor. I expect that as an honourable publisher you will share my sentiments. I think it would be undesirable, given the circumstances, for an author to be given no recourse other than through the courts against one of this country's leading publishers.

Such an action would inevitably prove very costly. I can tell you, again in confidence, that, since our last letter, the defendants in one of the two High Court libel actions I have brought have approached me with a view to ending the litigation by settlement, rather than face the ruinous cost of continued court proceedings (they already face a legal bill of over £100,000).

Please read my letter of December 23 again.

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

 

Mr Ian Chapman
Macmillan Books
Macmillan General Books
25 Eccleston Place
London SW1W 9NF

Letter from David Irving to Ian Chapman, Managing Director of Macmillan Ltd.

London, January 22, 1998

Dear Ian,

Can I take it that you will be making a substantial reply to my letter? I have heard nothing from you since your return from the New Year leave. I am consulting legal advice on Monday afternoon, and it would be good to avoid having to issue proceedings which would bring the whole matter (namely the steps taken by Macmillan in 1992 to hound one of their own authors and secretly burn thousands of his books) out in public.

I expect that you will by now also have completed your inquiries into how your confidential files were delivered into the hands of third parties with this unfortunate outcome.

You will be interested to hear that the defendants in one of the actions I am bringing in the High Court have approached me with a view to a settlement.

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

 

Mr Ian Chapman
Macmillan Books
Macmillan General Books
25 Eccleston Place
London SW1W 9NF
fax to 881 8001

Letter from David Irving to Denton Hall, lawyers acting for Macmillan Ltd.

London, January 31, 1998

 

Dear Sirs

Macmillan Ltd

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Thank you for your letter of January 26 in the above matter. While conscious of the provisions of RSC, O.24, I am confidentially enclosing a copy of the index to that part of the Discovery in another action which reveals the evidently extensive compromising of your client's internal records which has somehow taken place.

I would ask that you in the first instance confirm that there is prima facie no case of the documents' having been forged. (I say this, as at least one of the other documents in the Discovery in question turns out to be counterfeit).

I have copies of all these documents in my possession now.

I see no reason why these documents will not all come into the public domain under O.14, r 14a, in the normal course of the litigation in which they have been discovered.

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

Denton Hall
5 Chancery Lane
Clifford's Inn
London EC4A 1BU

Letter from David Irving to Ian Chapman, Managing Director of Macmillan Ltd.

London, February 2, 1998

Dear Mr Chapman,

Thank you for your letter. Meanwhile you might like to send to Dentons the enclosures which I found last night while preparing my file on the case. All rights in at least one of the volumes which made up Hitler's War had reverted to me before the extraordinary 1992 incident - which included the right to expect that a publisher would not do the dirty on his own author behind his back! You will also find the scurrilous Mr Phillips assuring me that of course I would continue to be offered all remainders (note his wording!); not, of course, that it is true to describe the victims of this Book Burning as remainders - they were sacrificed on the altar of God Know's What, at a time when the book was enjoying perpetual heavy sales.

Of course my complaint, if it comes to one, will not merely be about destroyed remainders, but something rather more serious.

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

 

Mr Ian Chapman
Macmillan Books
Macmillan General Books
25 Eccleston Place
London SW1W 9NF

Letter from David Irving to Denton Hall, lawyers acting for Macmillan Ltd.

London, February 7, 1998

Dear Sirs,

Thank you for your letter of February 2. I am glad that a firm of, as my colleagues have given me to understand, your well known reputation for fairness are representing Macmillan; this should enable us to reach a swift resolution of this matter.

2. Given that the putative cause of action accrued in July 1996, notwithstanding that I learned of the "injury" only last year, any limitation period on my claim might be held to expire in July of this year; you will appreciate that I cannot allow matters to drift out of time, but might well have to issue a holding writ before then.

3. You ask for a copy of the Macmillan file to which I refer. With regard to some of the documents, I find myself in some trepidation, given the provisions of the rules about discovery, although there can hardly be any contempt in publishing a document to the party which first authored or received it (Macmillan or yourselves as their agent). May I however first invite you to give me what would seem to be a proper undertaking in this case, namely that mindful of the spirit of the above-mentioned rule you will not disclose to parties other than the authors any such documents which I provide. Once the documents are read out in open court, of course, this problem is removed: O.24, r 14a).

4. In case Macmillan have not yet forwarded them to you, I meanwhile invite your attention to a few pages to which the above strictures do not apply.

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

Denton Hall
5 Chancery Lane
Clifford's Inn
London EC4A 1BU

Letter from David Irving to Denton Hall, lawyers acting for Macmillan Ltd.

London, February 19, 1998

Dear Sirs,

Your ref SMG/cc/1233657.01/18990.00024: Macmillan Ltd

Thank you for your letter of February 12. On the basis of the undertakings implicit in your letter, not to show these documents to others than those who originated them, I am enclosing copies of a few of the papers which particularly disturb me.

They show your client as going behind my back, under nameless pressures from outside, to destroy the position of trust which I had established with them as an author of many years' standing; then issuing secret orders to destroy all remaining copies of my works, with the result that I lost substantial continuing royalties, was deprived of the reputation and prestige deriving from the continued publication at a time of particular controversy for me, and was also robbed of my rights, both contractual and implicit from all our previous contractual relationships, to purchase from your clients all such books due for remaindering or destruction (as explicitly confirmed by Mr Roland Phillips in a letter to me only shortly before this disgraceful episode.)

At the same time, which puts a particularly nasty "spin" on the episode, these same people were writing me oily and ingratiating letters and even inquiring when they could expect to see my next book! Thank God I took the decision only weeks later to retrieve all rights from your clients.

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

Denton Hall
5 Chancery Lane
Clifford's Inn
London EC4A 1BU

Letter from David Irving to Denton Hall, lawyers acting for Macmillan Ltd.

London, March 3, 1998

Dear Sirs

Your ref SMG/cc/1233657.01/18990.00024: Macmillan Ltd

It is now two weeks since I supplied those few documents to you. I shall cease to pursue this matter, and as I am shortly leaving for the United States I shall find it necessary to issue the writ which I mentioned in an earlier letter unless I hear from you very soon, as I do not intend to allow this matter to fall into abeyance. I take a dim view of this clandestine censoring of an author's works - particularly mine - by weak-kneed and faithless publishers, and I am confident the British public will be scandalised too.

The losses to me, of whatever nature, that I have incurred through Macmillan Ltd's actions, which were carefully concealed from me at the time, have been substantial. Please inform me of the current registered address of your clients in this matter. I ask, not only for the obvious reason, but because the firm has several times changed the registered address in recent years.

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

Denton Hall
5 Chancery Lane
Clifford's Inn
London EC4A 1BU

Letter from David Irving to Denton Hall, lawyers acting for Macmillan Ltd.

London, March 8, 1998

Dear Sirs,

Macmillan UK Ltd SMG/cc/1266447.01/18990.00024

Your letter of March 6. Under the special circumstances of this case I am reluctant to provide to you at this stage more documents than I have already, which are in my view adequate to indicate the substance of my complaint against your clients: namely that, succumbing and surrendering in a most shameful manner to outside pressures, they took unilateral actions to violate their covenants and contracts, by secretly and without informing me - like the Nazis of 1933! - destroying, at the insistence of outside parties, all stocks of my wellknown and highly praised biography of Adolf Hitler, with all the consequences that flowed from that action in terms of loss of material benefits and prestige to myself.

Instead of acting in their author's best interests at all times - and I was hardly a new author, having published works with them for some ten years - they acted in this manner.

The proper procedure under which further documents will be disclosed is under O.24, if it becomes necessary for me to commence High Court proceedings against your client, which I intend to do very shortly, given that the present climate of opinion seems to be somewhat against seemingly reputable publishers taking such secret actions under outside pressures.

Yours sincerely,

David Irving
FOCAL POINT PUBLICATIONS

Denton Hall
5 Chancery Lane
Clifford's Inn
London EC4A 1BU

Letter from Denton Hall, lawyers acting for Macmillan Ltd., to David Irving

London, April 16, 1998

 

DENTON HALL

 

 

MEMBER OF DENTON INTERNATIONAL GROUP OF LAW FIRMS

 

 

FIVE CHANCERY LANE CLIFFORD'S INN LONDON EC4A 1BU DX 242

TEL +44 (0)171 242 1212 FAX *44 (0)171 404 0087 +44 (01171 320 6161

EMAIL [email protected] http://www.dentonhall.com

  

LONDON BEIJING BRUSSELS
HONG KONG MILTON KEYNES
MOSCOW NEW YORK
SINGAPORE TOKYO

David Irving Esq.
Focal Point Publications
81 Duke Street
London W1M 5D3

 

 

ASSOCIATED OFFICES

BARCELONA BERLIN
CHEMNITZ COLOGNE
COPENHAGEN DUSSELDORF
FRANKFURT HAMBURG
MADRID MUNICH OSLO
PARIS VIENNA

16 April 1998

Our Ref: SMG/cc11270404.01/18990.00024

Direct Tel:

0171 320 6833

Your Ref:

 

Direct Fax:

0171 320 6694

 

 

E-mail:

[email protected]

Dear Mr Irving

HITLER'S WAR and THE WAR PATH

1. Documents

In spite of our requests, you have refused to provide a complete bundle of the documents which you say were passed by our client to a "third party". We assume that the "third party" to which you refer is the solicitor acting on behalf of the Observer. You have refused to provide those documents even though we have offered to raise this issue with the Observer on the basis that, as you yourself accept, there appears little reason why copies should not be provided to us, given that you say they are Macmillan documents. You will appreciate that the few documents you have sent to us need to be read in their context and to ask us to comment on them otherwise would not be helpful to you. In those circumstances we find it curious that you have not agreed to provide the full bundle of documents. We can only surmise as to your motives given that the conclusions you have sought to draw from the few documents you have provided are unsustainable when those documents are read in context.

As a result of your refusal to forward the documents to us, we have contacted the solicitors for the Observer and they have confirmed to us that the documents they obtained from our client, if not provided voluntarily, would have been subpoenaed. In circumstances where documents can be subpoenaed, it is not unusual to provide copies of documents without that formality being required. You clearly understand both the purpose of subpoenas, and the fact that they are not always required before a party will provide documents, as demonstrated by your letter dated 11 November 1997. Furthermore given the matters which are the subject of your case against the Observer, we question that you can be surprised that the documents have been disclosed.

2. Alleged Contractual Rights

The substance of your complaint against our client is however that copies of Hitler's War and The War Path were destroyed in breach of contract depriving you both of royalty income and of a contractual right of first refusal. The allegations are denied. We deal with each of the works in turn.

3. The War Path

3.1 The agreement relating to The War Path dated 2 March 1983 ("The War Path Agreement") came to an end in March 1991. The War Path Agreement was concluded with Michael Joseph Limited and granted rights for publication of the paperback. Therefore to the extent that any rights do accrue under the contract (which is denied), it is Michael Joseph Limited that has the right to pursue those remedies, not yourself Needless to say our client has received no complaint from Michael Joseph Limited.

3.2 Your letter to Macmillan dated 26 July 1990 states The War Path was written between 1963 and 1973 and indicates that you had revised (inter alia) The War Path. You complained that Macmillan continued to publish an "obsolete" edition, which was the only edition it had the right to publish. The fact that Macmillan's edition was old and that the new edition was available in Germany, Spain and at that time was soon to be available in Italy, France and "other countries" would have contributed to the downturn in sales in the old edition. It is hardly surprising therefore that sales had reached the level they had by the time the contract concluded in 1991. Furthermore, in circumstances in which a revised edition had been published, even if Macmillan had the rights to continue to publish, the market for the "obsolete" edition was of course non-existent.

3.3 We have a copy of your letter to Tim Whitfield at Michael Joseph Limited dated 11 December 1991 confirming that the rights to the original editions had reverted to you and that you had published the work (we assume the revised work) yourself. It is clear therefore that you were aware the contract had come to an end.

3.4 In July 1992 after the contract had expired, remaining copies of The War Path were pulped. The contract had come to an end and you were not deprived of any royalty income nor was there a "violation of your contractual right of first refusal", as there was no such contractual right.

Hitler's War

4.1 The agreement relating to Hitler's War dated 25 March 1983 ("Hitler's War Agreement") was concluded with Hodder & Stoughton Limited and granted to Macmillan the right to publish the paperback. To the extent that any rights do accrue under the contract (which is denied), it is Hodder & Stoughton Limited that has the right to pursue those remedies not yourself Our client has received no complaint from Hodder & Stoughton Limited.

4.2 Your letter dated 26 July 1990 referred also to Hitler's War and it is apparent that you had revised that work as well, that the old edition was "obsolete" and that the new edition was being sold abroad. By that time, sales of the Macmillan edition were small.

4.3 On 8 August 1990, Hodder and Stoughton confirmed that the hardback rights in Hitler's War reverted to you subject to any sub-licences. A manuscript note dated 11 August 1990 on the bottom of that letter, says that you propose that unless Hodder & Stoughton can sell the new "Hitler's War" hardback to publish it yourself "and offer Papermac (Macmillan) reprint rights perhaps?"

4.4 Whilst Macmillan retained the paperback rights, sales had been decreasing for some time and the work had ceased to be remunerative. This is no doubt because as you have admitted, the edition was "obsolete", a revised version having been prepared by you. The rights were reverted to Hodder & Stoughton in accordance with the contract and this was advised to Hodder & Stoughton at the time. The agreement did not provide any contractual right of first refusal for stock. Remaining copies were pulped in June 1992.

Opportunity to Purchase Stock

5.1 We refer to the letter dated 1 October 1990 from Roland Philips to you indicating that if books are remainded the author is given first refusal to purchase those books. Whilst that does happen particularly where Macmillan has a direct relationship with the author, that practice is not invariably followed nor is it a contractual right. You neither had a contract with Macmillan for either work nor did the contract with the hardback publishers in each case include such a right. If it was something Macmillan agreed to do contractually, it would of course be a term of the contract. It was not.

5.2 We refer to a letter from Macmillan to you dated 16 July 1992 (copy attached). That letter sets out the then available stock and prices and indicates that you would receive an author's discount if you chose to purchase. We do not have the correspondence surrounding this letter (and we would be grateful if you would send it to us from your files) however it is consistent with the fact that you did of course have the opportunity to purchase stock whilst Macmillan had stock.

Goebbels Contract

6. As you are aware Macmillan did have a contract to publish the Goebbels manuscript however, by your own admission, you were making slow progress with the manuscript and indeed, you knew that Macmillan were concerned regarding the lateness of the manuscript. As you are aware, in the end, the book was cancelled by agreement and although it was agreed that you would return the advance, Macmillan did not (after failure to pay back the advance) pursue it from you. Macmillan reserves its right to do so.

Publishing Considerations

7. You have asked who the "Oxford Professor" is who commented upon the fact that Macmillan published your works, in circumstances where, as you could not deny, your opinions had become, since your work was first published by Macmillan, extremely controversial. You will be well aware from your dealings over the years with publishers that publishers must come to a view as to whether publications will be successful. If they did not do so, they could not survive in business. In circumstances where complaints and comments were received particularly in and around 1992 when your views became

increasingly controversial and to some people unsustainable, not only is it likely that Macmillan's view was that your work would become increasingly uncommercial but, furthermore, that simply by publishing your work, Macmillan's ability to attract and keep other authors may be compromised. We deny that any criticism can be levelled at Macmillan for taking these issues into account in deciding whether publication of a particular work is viable.

Furthermore, you refer on many occasions in your correspondence to the reversion of your rights and to the possibility of buying back the rights to your works particularly following the commercial success of publishing Hitler's War under your own imprint, Focal Point. This you were happy to do, for example, with the Goebbels work.

Yours faithfully

DENTON HALL

On January 5, Mr Irving asked Macmillan to produce the complete file to him for his inspection. On March 1, 1999 Denton Hall replied refusing. Mr Irving responded:

As is plain I have a right to see this file in the circumstances.

1. Not only have your clients [Macmillan Publishers Ltd] wilfully and recklessly made this file available to a third party, namely the opponent of their author (myself) -- their entire file of correspondence with and about that author -- without his consent, for that opponent to use in libel litigation brought by their author, but they are now refusing to make substantially the same items available to their author either on the same terms or on any other.

2. It is plain from the documents I have seen and brought to your attention that your clients were brought under pressure in 1991 and 1992 from third parties to revoke and violate their agreements with me and with other publishers relating to my books. Your clients secretly destroyed all my books, under that pressure, without informing me. I am litigating against those parties and their agents. When the first case -- which Mr Justice Morland has set down for a twelve week hearing on January 12 -- comes before the High Court, Macmillan's part in these events will be subjected to due and proper scrutiny. If your clients elect to wait until a sub poena is served, so be it.

Yours sincerely,

David Irving

Return to top of page (File Index) | Return to Summary: "A Publisher's betrayal of their Author."

The case continues...

© Focal Point 1999 write to David Irving