- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
There`s lots of arm chair quarterbacking going on here.
One reader has said if it was all up and up - where are the records? For example there are numerous cases on the archives microfilms of court martials of WW1 in the UK - awol, desertion and all sorts of offenses which didn`t get this level of treatment. Many visited His Majesties Prisons.
The executions were briefly an issue in the early 1920s and we should not forget that Australia would not let it happen to their soldiers as I believe they`d been through the mill over the Breaker Morant case in the Boer War.
In the case of Pte Thomas Moles of 54th Bn CEF - his Brigade Comd urged no execution. The file seems to have jumped straight to FM Haig - who wrote "confirmed." But the notes of the trial are non-existant or purposely blurred out. However - his mother`s questions to the authorities of the day are on the file. She was treated very poorly, first learning that he had "died" then being jerked around as to why he "died." There are very clinical SHOT stamps on his paper work.
Arguments that it was war don`t hold water as the Germans did not shoot their own soldiers on near the scale of the Brits.
As for officers pushing swine into battle - I won`t touch that - records of 54th Bn and the 102nd Bn units which I am most familiar with, show high morale throughout. Volunteers don`t need to be pushed - or have I missed something?
My theory goes like this -
The mobilisation was disorderly
The Army to Army Agreements were haphazard. (Canadians couldn`t deploy without massive help from the the UK Forces despite years of encouragement.)
I doubt if Parliament accepted blanket submission to the British Army Act Scale of Punishments.
The Army to Canada links were weak until PM Borden shook up the Canadian HQ in the UK. (and fired Defence Minister Sam Hughes)
The Brits didn`t agree to more Canadian control until it got the push from the PM.
23 shot for crimes and service mis demeanours were not even on the radar.
I am only speculating that
The papers detailing the Canadian cases have been found and are awaiting publication.
Far better for governments to accept a blanket pardon and let "now it can be told" stories die a quiet death.
If you have access to a library with a microfilm reader you should be able to get the Archives microfilms to review and draw your own conclusions. They offer far more than the brief but still very useful Godefroy book. I say very useful because its a very good start point.
PM me for more on how to get the microfilms. Maybe Desmond Morton can study the legal framework of WW1 Army to Army links - and find the gaps - it would be very interesting as there is probably a lot that was never written down.
One reader has said if it was all up and up - where are the records? For example there are numerous cases on the archives microfilms of court martials of WW1 in the UK - awol, desertion and all sorts of offenses which didn`t get this level of treatment. Many visited His Majesties Prisons.
The executions were briefly an issue in the early 1920s and we should not forget that Australia would not let it happen to their soldiers as I believe they`d been through the mill over the Breaker Morant case in the Boer War.
In the case of Pte Thomas Moles of 54th Bn CEF - his Brigade Comd urged no execution. The file seems to have jumped straight to FM Haig - who wrote "confirmed." But the notes of the trial are non-existant or purposely blurred out. However - his mother`s questions to the authorities of the day are on the file. She was treated very poorly, first learning that he had "died" then being jerked around as to why he "died." There are very clinical SHOT stamps on his paper work.
Arguments that it was war don`t hold water as the Germans did not shoot their own soldiers on near the scale of the Brits.
As for officers pushing swine into battle - I won`t touch that - records of 54th Bn and the 102nd Bn units which I am most familiar with, show high morale throughout. Volunteers don`t need to be pushed - or have I missed something?
My theory goes like this -
The mobilisation was disorderly
The Army to Army Agreements were haphazard. (Canadians couldn`t deploy without massive help from the the UK Forces despite years of encouragement.)
I doubt if Parliament accepted blanket submission to the British Army Act Scale of Punishments.
The Army to Canada links were weak until PM Borden shook up the Canadian HQ in the UK. (and fired Defence Minister Sam Hughes)
The Brits didn`t agree to more Canadian control until it got the push from the PM.
23 shot for crimes and service mis demeanours were not even on the radar.
I am only speculating that
The papers detailing the Canadian cases have been found and are awaiting publication.
Far better for governments to accept a blanket pardon and let "now it can be told" stories die a quiet death.
If you have access to a library with a microfilm reader you should be able to get the Archives microfilms to review and draw your own conclusions. They offer far more than the brief but still very useful Godefroy book. I say very useful because its a very good start point.
PM me for more on how to get the microfilms. Maybe Desmond Morton can study the legal framework of WW1 Army to Army links - and find the gaps - it would be very interesting as there is probably a lot that was never written down.