You are now standing in front of the Foreign and Commonwealth Offices at Whitehall which once housed the Colonial Offices. The buildings that used to deal with Foreign and Colonial affairs on Downing street in the 1850s had become inadequate in dealing with the growing bureaucracy of colonial dealings and a new building needed to be constructed.[1] Therefore, the section of Whitehall that you are looking at was erected in the 1860s and used to encompassed four of the five governmental departments that dealt directly with Britain's oversea power, these included the Foreign, War, Colonial and India houses.[2] Although this section of Whitehall represented Britain's Colonial policy, the architectural style of Whitehall is void of any imperial reference. Notably, the architectural style characterized by Whitehall was a 'battle of styles' whereby there was considerable debate on whether Whitehall should feature Classical or Gothic architecture.[3] The architectural style reflected Victorian discourses which considered Classical architecture as traditional, while gothic architecture was seen as progressive.[4] Notably, the middle-classes that advocated for gothic architecture associated the progressive element of gothic architecture with developing and civilizing colonial subjects.[5] Nonetheless, Whitehall's architectural appearance ended up being an Italian Renaissance style, with no reference to Classical or gothic styles. As historian Bernard Porter states, the style was accidental and seen as a compromise, therefore, very little can be read into it.[6]

The Colonial Offices in Whitehall and its civil servants was an immense bureaucratic machine. By the 1930s, the Colonial Offices held the General, Legal, Medical, Agricultural and Financial departments, their staff, and numerous subdivisions concentrating on colonial affairs.[7] Furthermore, during the interwar period, many began to complain about the lack of space and the increased levels of noise.[8] In 1947, the Colonial Offices moved out of Whitehall and merged as a single department in 1966 with Foreign affairs which created the department of Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs.[9] In the 1970s, there was debate regarding the destruction of Whitehall's government buildings. Nonetheless, the destruction was halted by the objection of amenity groups that sought to preserve London's Victorian heritage.[10] Due to these efforts, Whitehall and these government buildings still house the Foreign and Commonwealth Offices.

[1] Alex Bremner, "Nation and Empire in the Government Architecture of Mid-Victorian London: The Foreign and India Office Reconsidered," The Historical Journal 48, no. 3 (2005): 704.

[2] Bernard Porter, "Architecture and Empire: the case of the 'Battle of the Styles,' 1855-61," British Scholar 2, no. 2 (2010): 182.

[3] Porter, 182.

[4] Porter, 189.

[5] Alex Bremner, "Nation and Empire in the Government Architecture of Mid-Victorian London: The Foreign and India Office Reconsidered," The Historical Journal 48, no. 3 (2005): 720.

[6] Bernard Porter, "Architecture and Empire: the case of the 'Battle of the Styles,' 1855-61," British Scholar 2, no. 2 (2010): 183.

[7] D. J. Morgan, The Official History of Colonial Development Volume I: The Origins of British Aid Policy, 1924-1945 (London: Macmillan Press, 1980), xix.

[8] Keith Hamilton, "Accommodating Diplomacy: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Debate over Whitehall Redevelopment," British History 18, no. 3 (2004): 200-201.

[9] Hamilton, 201.

[10] Hamilton, 199.

The greatest event to destabilize the colonial service and its administration of empire during the interwar period was the Statute of Westminster (1931) and the growing independence of Dominions in the realm of foreign policy. Following World War, I, empire was in decline and the concepts of identity and empire were being increasingly challenged by dominions. World War I had certainly forced dominions and the British government to re-evaluate the imperial relationship. For instance, in 1921, The Times reported that Canadians were suspicious of Mr. Churchill's appointment as Colonial Secretary since he might believe that his post has authority over the dominion of Canada.[1] The 1920s had created a problem of legitimacy for the Colonial office, and its civil servants no longer knew how to coordinate colonial and dominion policy. In 1925, dominion affairs became a separate department and was no longer integrated with the department of Colonial Affairs. At the imperial conference of 1926 dominions such as Canada and Australia demanded self-assertion and equal status without subordination in domestic and external affairs.[2] Finally, in 1931 the Statute of Westminster granted dominion parliaments full autonomy in domestic and foreign policy of its affairs. The Statute was overtly criticized by those in Britain since they had not been consulted in a decision that 'divided and destroyed as a unit in the family of nations"[3] Following the loss of imperial prestige and identity, British politicians and populations began to look for a scapegoat and found it in the Colonial Office's administration. Editorials in The Times frequently blamed civil servants in the Colonial service for governing from Whitehall and not making efforts to reinforce British-Colonial relationships. An editorial in 1938 even argued that French colonial administration was superior to that of England's and explained why France still maintained the majority of their colonial holdings.[4] Therefore, in the context of imperial decline, the department of Colonial Affairs began to appear as ineffective and became a burden of financial upkeep. For this reason, the Colonial office merged with the Foreign and Commonwealth Offices to deal with the context of decolonization.

[1] "Canada and the Colonial Office, The Times, January 27, 1921.

[2] Ruth Teer-Tomaselli, "Empire and broadcasting in the interwar years: towards a consideration of public broadcasting in British dominions," Critical Arts: North-South Journal of Cultural and Media Studies 29, no. 1 (2015): 80

[3] Fergal Davis, "Brexit, the Statute of Westminster 1931 and Zombie Parliamentary Sovereignty," King's Law Journal 27, no. 3 (2016): 350.

[4] "The Colonial Office," The Times, July 21 1938.

Primary Sources:

"Canada and the Colonial Office." The Times, January 27, 1921.

"The Colonial Office." The Times, July 21 1938.

Secondary Sources:

Bremner, Alex. "Nation and Empire in the Government Architecture of Mid-Victorian London: The Foreign and India Office Reconsidered." The Historical Journal 48, no. 3 (2005): 703-742.

Davis, Fergal. "Brexit, the Statute of Westminster 1931 and Zombie Parliamentary Sovereignty." King's Law Journal 27, no. 3 (2016): 344-353.

Hamilton, Keith. "Accommodating Diplomacy: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Debate over Whitehall Redevelopment." British History 18, no. 3 (2004): 198-222.

Morgan, D. J. The Official History of Colonial Development Volume I: The Origins of British Aid Policy, 1924-1945. London: Macmillan Press, 1980.

Porter, Bernard. "Architecture and Empire: the case of the 'Battle of the Styles,' 1855-61. British Scholar 2, no. 2 (2010): 181-196.

Teer-Tomaselli, Ruth. "Empire and broadcasting in the interwar years: towards a consideration of public broadcasting in British dominions." Critical Arts: North-South Journal of Cultural and Media Studies 29, no. 1 (2015): 77-93.