Jonathan Saunders Posted 23 June , 2008 Share Posted 23 June , 2008 Jonathan, "He was for five years an apprentice in the Mercantile Marine" Thanks for that, he was not an officer, that why the RNVR. The RNR was short of officers and at the time and transfer from the army was not hard. Charles - strange his transfer was not granted if there was such a shortage. He obviously had 5 years experience of seamanship and I assume with his social background he would have enjoyed the same privileges onboard as if he was a Merchant Navy officer. Needless to say his apprenticeship would have been with a view to becoming a Merchant Navy officer. His education and social status was obviously considered suitable for a commission in the RNVR. I cant find my volume 16 of RND, which profiles Dyett, as i would be interested to know if this throws any more light on wat this "apprenticeship" actually meant in real terms. Regards, Jonathan S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Saunders Posted 23 June , 2008 Share Posted 23 June , 2008 I'd just like to reiterate my earlier point that someone with undiagnosed shell shock may "run" more than once and consequently be tried a second or third time for the same offence. Regards, Jonathan S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph Posted 23 June , 2008 Share Posted 23 June , 2008 Jonathan, "i would be interested to know if this throws any more light on wat this "apprenticeship" actually meant in real terms." In real terms nothing, as he had not passed any of the Board of Trades Tickets which would allow him to serve and command at sea as an officer. So he would not be classed as a Professional Seaman. If he had joined the sailing fleet he would have to start as a midshipman. I wouldn't be suprised if he wasn't indentured to his Father. Regards Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Saunders Posted 23 June , 2008 Share Posted 23 June , 2008 Jonathan, "i would be interested to know if this throws any more light on wat this "apprenticeship" actually meant in real terms." In real terms nothing, as he had not passed any of the Board of Trades Tickets which would allow him to serve and command at sea as an officer. So he would not be classed as a Professional Seaman. If he had joined the sailing fleet he would have to start as a midshipman. I wouldn't be suprised if he wasn't indentured to his Father. Regards Charles Many thanks for your reply. Regards, Jonathan S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiegeGunner Posted 23 June , 2008 Share Posted 23 June , 2008 Charles - strange his transfer was not granted if there was such a shortage. A man I've researched had 10 years of mercantile experience up to 1st Officer, and his Master's Ticket in his locker, but served in 'D' Company of the Hawke Bn, RND, as an AB machine-gunner at Gallipoli. On recovery from dysentery and after a spell on secondment to the Ministry of Munitions, he was eventually commissioned into the RNVR in 1917 – and was killed four months later with the RN Siege Guns in Flanders. I've never been able to discover why he wasn't combed out of the Hawke and given a sea-going commision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 23 June , 2008 Share Posted 23 June , 2008 I'd just like to reiterate my earlier point that someone with undiagnosed shell shock may "run" more than once and consequently be tried a second or third time for the same offence. Regards, Jonathan S I think you have just proved my point that many of these deserters were serial offenders. Had they been shot for one offence it would have been a very harsh regime. Many had received field punishments, imprisonment, and finally the death sentence (sometimes more than once). They knew exactly what they were doing. Gunner Bailey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swellal Posted 23 June , 2008 Share Posted 23 June , 2008 I find it interesting that there can be this many messages posted on a subject that was banned for quite some time because of the fear of .......... well what ever. My point some time ago that it made no sense to ban the topic instead of banning the posters seems to have proven itself to have been a good one. I was not alone in my opinion. Richard also put the same arguement forward, but until yesterday, our message had gone on deaf ears. I commend the new owners for doing the right thing, and by doing so, have proved our point that there was no need to ban the topic in the first place. All that needed doing was to enforce the rules that were already in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph Posted 23 June , 2008 Share Posted 23 June , 2008 Mick, I have the opposite nearly a full company of the 5th Bn East Yorkshire Regiment (home service) transferred to sea, mind most came from Hull and Grimsby. Regards Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Clay Posted 23 June , 2008 Share Posted 23 June , 2008 I find it interesting that there can be this many messages posted on a subject that was banned for quite some time because of the fear of .......... well what ever..... ....All that needed doing was to enforce the rules that were already in place. Good to see you back again, Al, and good to know that this topic is now open again for discussion. However, as I understand it and as Chris could and did explain, the rules that were already in place could not have protected him and the forum from the threatened legal action on the part of supporters of the pardons case - the 'what ever'. And, what ever we think, it was Chris's neck - and wallet - on the line, hence the draconian measures. Now, as Bob Dylan sang on The Wonderboys soundtrack, 'things have changed'. Cheers Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiegeGunner Posted 23 June , 2008 Share Posted 23 June , 2008 My man came from Garston, Charles, and with years on the Wilson Line's routes to India, would have made a fine officer for your lads. It all just goes to show that we stand very little chance of ever really understanding the decisions that were and were not made in those days ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kate Wills Posted 23 June , 2008 Share Posted 23 June , 2008 Unfortunately anonymity did not extend to the families or stop the shame (or injustice) they felt. Regards, Jonathan S How many men or families could you name prior to the publication of SAD Jon? By their own admission, some famies were unaware that a forebear had been executed. Remember the interview that Ian Hislop conducted on his Channel 4 series? Once again a blanket response is proferred to cover this many-faceted issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Baker Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 a subject that was banned for quite some time because of the fear of My friend, you are so far off beam. One day I might send you copies of the correspondence I received. Had you been in the position of ownership of the Forum at that time, you might have done exactly the same as I did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will O'Brien Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 Charles - strange his transfer was not granted if there was such a shortage. He obviously had 5 years experience of seamanship and I assume with his social background he would have enjoyed the same privileges onboard as if he was a Merchant Navy officer. Needless to say his apprenticeship would have been with a view to becoming a Merchant Navy officer. His education and social status was obviously considered suitable for a commission in the RNVR. Jon - Been thinking about this. I can't profess to any great knowledge about the Dyett case other than what is in the usual books & what you, me & Arm have discussed previously over a beer (or two). However I keep going back to wondering if it had something to do with aptitude (of lack of it). Is there any documented comments regarding Dyetts 'sea faring' abilities. Was he deemed a good or proficient sailor or not (Not would give possible indication why he was unable to secure a transfer)................Would like to stress I'm not suggest this WAS the case, just exploring logical explanations for the problems Dyett encountered trying to transfer to sea duty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baorbrat Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 I have for a while been curious as to what happened to some of the soldiers sentenced to death, but not executed. The only record of one such soldier I have been able to trace happened much later. After WWII, he was in the KAR, his name was Idi Amin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 Mick, We don't intend opening old threads as you can still read them. If they are not there then they were deleted and therefore gone forever. There has never been a ban on Haig. Peter That explains why I can't find the interesting ones then, which strangely enough contains the references to Haig I wanted. Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Saunders Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 How many men or families could you name prior to the publication of SAD Jon? By their own admission, some famies were unaware that a forebear had been executed. Remember the interview that Ian Hislop conducted on his Channel 4 series? Once again a blanket response is proferred to cover this many-faceted issue. And some families were very aware of their “SAD” ancestors and the pain it had caused through the family. It was their prerogative to obtain answers and to seek justice. Whether justice has been obtained by this blanket pardon is another discussion. It has nothing to do with how many SAD I could name but with the families themselves and restoring the dignity of those SAD who were executed by what was little more than a lottery system. Best regards, Jonathan S Jon - Been thinking about this. I can't profess to any great knowledge about the Dyett case other than what is in the usual books & what you, me & Arm have discussed previously over a beer (or two). However I keep going back to wondering if it had something to do with aptitude (of lack of it). Is there any documented comments regarding Dyetts 'sea faring' abilities. Was he deemed a good or proficient sailor or not (Not would give possible indication why he was unable to secure a transfer)................Would like to stress I'm not suggest this WAS the case, just exploring logical explanations for the problems Dyett encountered trying to transfer to sea duty. I will see if I can find out. Regards, Jonathan S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Baker Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 Jon - an interesting view. What evidence is there that any of the serial offenders were suffering from shell shock or indeed any other form of mental imbalance from the time of their first offence to their last? Any? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Saunders Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 Jon - an interesting view. What evidence is there that any of the serial offenders were suffering from shell shock or indeed any other form of mental imbalance from the time of their first offence to their last? Any? Chris - not sure why its an interesting view. If someone had shell shock and it had not been diagnosed as such I think it understandable what might happen when they were sent back up the Line. I'll see if I can dig up anything. Regards, Jonathan S Can one of the Moderators tell me why my reply to Gunner Bailey has been deleted please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Baker Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 I always find you interesting, Jon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KevinEndon Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 Kevin excuse my ignorance, but where exactly is the memorial, i have never heard of it before Nick its in the national arboretum at Alrewas in Staffordshire, its just off the main road from Burton on Trent to Lichfield. about 2 1/2 hours from Wigan but you are guaranteed a brilliant day out http://www.nationalmemorialarboretum.org.u...etum-1136.shtml I have done the pink walk, blue walk, yellow walk, but i've never done the orange walk, some forum members will have a little snigger at that one, it is just posted as a tongue in cheek comment. Kevin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Saunders Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 I always find you interesting, Jon. Well Id be interested to find out why my reply to Gunner Bailey was deleted. As a Moderator perhaps you could tell me the reasons as common courtesy of an explanation does not appear to be forthcoming. Regards, Jonathan S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Baker Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 I'ne no idea, Jon. Not guilty. I am really only an Honorary Moderator nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Saunders Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 I'ne no idea, Jon. Not guilty. I am really only an Honorary Moderator nowadays. Obviously you saw nothing wrong with it as you responded to it! Still no explanation. Pretty shameful way to treat a regular contributor to Forum costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Saunders Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 Jonathan, There is only one other Mod on the Forum at the moment looking at another thread. Give them a chance, the question was only put an hour and ten minutes ago. I am sure they will get back to you within twenty four hours which I think is a reasonable time. How's about a tinnie at the bar while we wait? Chris Chris if they can remove it in 5 minutes they can send an explanation in 5 minutes too. I said I felt a viewpoint was shallow and limited. I do not consider that abusive to an individual. I can think of no other reason why the post was pulled. I have never had a post pulled before. If the Moderators want to destory the Forum they are going the right way about it. Regards, Jonathan S Crunchy - looks like you've been pulled too. For what reason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kate Wills Posted 24 June , 2008 Share Posted 24 June , 2008 Obviously you saw nothing wrong with it as you responded to it! Still no explanation. Pretty shameful way to treat a regular contributor to Forum costs. Jon, I don't know why you had a post pulled. I did not moderate it, as we normally have a policy of not moderating threads in which we have participated, unless it is abusive etc. Since you mention it, I had no idea that you contribute to Forum costs, nor do I wish to know; I thankyou sincerely for doing so, but are you saying that donors should be immune from intervention when necessary. If you could pm me with the content of your post, I will do what I can to help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now