By SEAN DOUGLAS Saturday, November 7 2009

click on pic to zoom in

Dr Eric Williams...

HISTORIAN Prof Selwyn Ryan said that on balance former prime minister, the late Dr Eric Williams, was a positive force for Trinidad and Tobago but had done negative acts which affect the country to this very day.

Ryan gave a talk on Williams as part of the University of Trinidad and Tobago (UTT) research fellow series of lectures on Thursday at the National Library, Port-of-Spain.

Ryan began by pointing out the complex personality of the “black French creole”, Williams, whose white mother suffered by not only being illegitimate but also by later being disowned by her family for eloping with the family’s black employee, who was to be Williams’ father. Suggesting that the bossy ways of Williams’ mother were later adopted by Williams in politics, Ryan said, “When she spoke, no dog must bark.”

Ryan suggested that the legacy of “genteel poverty” suffered by his mother gave Williams a chip on his shoulder which might have been expressed in venom in his famous “Massa day done” speech. He said Williams and his brothers used to be by their father to see a Vincentian obeah woman in Laventille, until their mother stepped in and instead had a Catholic priest visit them.

Ryan also painted a picture of an embarrassed Williams having to help deliver cakes around Belmont for his parents who were working desperately in many efforts to maintain themselves.

Ryan dwelt on the theme of whether historical events occur due to the character of great men, or due to the cumulative effect of the surrounding environment.

He said despite current speculation, there was evidence that Williams had in fact always wanted to get into politics, as he quoted a letter to Jamaican leader Norman Manley saying Williams’ autobiography would be a political manifesto.

Ryan said one of Williams greatest tasks was the decolonisation and reconstitution of the civil service. He said Williams liked “ad hocracy” involving his hand-picked mandarins, rather than people who had come up through the Public Service. These technocrats, said Ryan, enjoyed enormous power, even ahead of government ministers, such as sleeping at Williams’ house on Christmas Day.

“What puzzles me is how he turned on these people in the end, and the viciousness with which he treated them,” said Ryan. He speculated this might have been due either to demands upon Williams for morality in public affairs, or due the health of Williams. He recalled a speech by Williams accusing his technocracy of virtually wanting to have a coup.

“A number of civil servants were sent off to the ‘gulag’. They got too close to him...Some never recovered,” Ryan said.

Saying some were humiliated and lost their salaries, Ryan couldn’t understand how Williams could have so treated these people who had even virtually sacrificed their families for him.

“I looked for other explanations to Williams’ behaviour — something switched on or off (in Williams).”

Ryan said when top technocrats such as Frank Rampersad were “sent off”, it was assumed they had found out something explosive about Tesoro. He said the 1970s was the start of the “bypass system” of using technocrats ahead of the civil service.

Ryan said Williams was thought to know about corruption and may even have helped in cover-ups. He recalled being told Williams liked the jovial company of John O’Halloran through whom he may have enjoyed many things vicariously.