Honoured At Last

[Waffenlandser]

Surely an insult to his memory if you are.

Shell shock is a psychiatric state of being a danger to oneself and to others. A state of mental imbalance. No insult. A medical diagnosis.

Please consult the DSM-1V-TR for the definition of acute stress disorder, formerly known as shell shock. Criteria for this diagnosis are.

1.A subjective sense of numbing

2. A reduction in awareness of surroundings

3.Dissociative amnesia (like losing one's way in the dark)

4.Clinically significant distress

5.Shows avoidance to the stressor causing the symptoms.

Diagnostic Criteria 308.3 Acute Stress Disorder

a. The person experienced, witnessed or was confronted by an event or events that involved actual or threatened death or serious injury.

b. The person's response involved intense fear, helplessness or horror.

I think most will agree that this was more than enough to explain why soldiers ran away or cast away arms. All punishable by death in WW1.

[John_Hartley]

Shell shock is a psychiatric state of being a danger to oneself and to others. A state of mental imbalance. No insult. A medical diagnosis.

So...are you suggesting that Stones was shell-shocked? And, if so, what is the evidence that has been discovered since his court martial?

I am genuinely interested to know what you consider the facts of this case to be (as it's one of the five cases of which I have more knowledge than others). Stones was one of the cases that was fundamental to the pardons campaign and I do not recall them making the claim that you now appear to be doing. Seeing as you mention him (and Dyett) in your original post, I assume you also have a particular interest.

Perhaps we could widen this particular civilised conversation that we're having to take into account the other events of 26 November as far as they affected 19/DLI. I have always found it interesting that, whenever this matter is discussed, it is always Stones that's mentioned and never Goggins and McDonald (I have to be honest and admit that I can't recall the names of the other four men who were convicted and sentenced to death but whose sentences were commuted.

What's your view as to why Stones is mentioned and not the other two?

My own view is that it's because there was insufficient evidence of Stones committing the crime for which he was charged (and therefore supports a pardons case) I'd suggest that, subject to any evidence you might bring to the discussion, shell-shock is a complete red herring here. On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence of the guilt of Goggins, McDonald and their four men (all in the court martial papers).

Thank you for the information about shell-shock. Surely you are not also suggesting that this applied in the cases of the two 18/Manchester men. Such a proposition runs counter to all known information about the cases - and, more to the point, stretches credibility beyond serious consideration.

I look forward to your further, hopefully factual, comments.

John

[Waffenlandser]

I agree. STONES Joseph Willia L/Sgt 19/647 19/Durham LI Casting away Arms 18/01/1917

seems to be constantly in the forefront of all discussions. His execution is no more shocking than

GOGGINS Peter LCpl 19/158 19/Durham LI Quitting post 18/01/1917

or MACDONALD Harry Pte 43665 12/W Yorks Desertion 04/11/1916

Au contraire, shell shock is the key issue here. I have had the dubious honor of seeing battle field stress. It turns normal and brave men into zombies. Totally incapable of performing their normal duties. They bolt like frightened horses. They are not accountable for their actions.

Guilt????? Guilty of what?? Volunteering for a war that turned out to be one of the greatest killing fields in history. Then becoming mentally incapable of performing duties because of acute battlefield trauma.

Who is the judge and jury here??

Stone's act of "casting away arms", IMHO was never proven. If a physically wounded soldier casts away arms it's ok. If a just as badly mentally wounded soldier casts away arms, its a crime punishable by death.

I wonder if anyone has the full story on this one.

AHMED Mahmoud Mahomed Labourer 385 71/ELC Conduct Prejudicial + 10/10/1917

or why is one shot at dawn for this one

BALL Joseph Pte L/1423 2/Middx Attempting to Desert 12/01/1915 [/b]

You have asked why I do not mention others besides Stones. Well here is probably the most apalling case of all. The execution of Pvt Fredrick Gore, shot at dawn for desertion on October 16th 1917.

Here was a young man who had an established history of shell shock.

In his own evidence before the FGCM he stated

"The reason why I deserted my Battalion because I cannot stand the strain of the shellfire owning to the very bad state of my nerves. I have been to the Medical Officer and he said nothing could be done for me and i have always tryed my best to carry out my duty: Before i came to France, where I have been for 15 months, i was rejected for service abroad owing to my nerves. I am sorry to think this has happened after my 3 years

The court never asked for expert medical testimony. Gore was not given defence counsel. Field Marshal Haig, a man responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, confirmed the death penalty.

So, unlike most of his comrades, Gore had not enjoyed a rest after a spell in the trenches, "At the end of July". Instead the nerve-wracked soldier had been subjected to an unremitting daily round of rigorous drill in full kit, tin hat and rifle and two hours' of being tied up to the wheel of a general service wagon or a Field Punishment post.

Instead of restoring his nerves before another spell in the front line, Gore would have been weakened physically and psychologically. It is consequently unsurprising that he ran away at the prospect of being sent back into the trenches on 10 August.

[John_Hartley]

OK. It seems as though you don't want to discuss the actual events of either the DLI or Manchester cases in any factual way but, rather, to again trot out your prejudices about the issue. You are, of course, entitled to attempt to do that but it makes for a rather one sided discussion - but perhaps that's what you intended.

It is, however, rather a shame for members who might have wanted a grown-up discussion on the subject but to assume that every one of the average 1000 desertions per month (nealry 50, 000 over the war) were due to shell-shock is nonsense. But, again, you're entitled to hold that view and other folk can judge its worth. Certainly I have.

On the subject of Ahmed, his case is well known. As mentioned up=thread, I have recently been involved in assisting the gathering of information to submit to the War Graves Commission for them to consider his acceptance on the Debt of Honour Register. You'll find the background via the Forum's search facility, if you are sufficiently interested in the facts of that particular case (although on the experience of your comments on this thread, I doubt that facts hold much interest for you)

John

[Ann Sinnott]

Just stumbled on this, realised it was a SAD and nearly put the lights out BUT the thread starter is definitely short on accuracy, or the source of the various quotations is.

The Shot at Dawn Ireland campaign (see link to its website I supplied previously) - affiliated to the UK Campaign and both worked closely together - provides a comprehensive account.

The campaign specifically excluded those found guilty of murder, rape and treason.

Armistice Day 2007:

French Honor Irish Born WW1 Soldier Shot at Dawn - 11th November 2007

Following the invitation of the Mayor of Mazingarbe, a meeting took place on Monday 26th February 2007 in Mazingarbe, France, between Mr Peter Mulvany, Chairperson of the Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46) and Co-ordinator of the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl, the Mayor and his officials, including a representative of the veterans of France, regarding our suggestion that the town of Mazingarbe might consider erecting a commemorative plaque in memory of Private JAMES GRAHAM: 9948 2nd Bn., Royal Munster Fusiliers, son of Mrs. Jane Graham, 16 Lavitts Lane, Old Market Place, Cork, aged 21, who was executed in the former Municipal Abbatoir, Mazingarbe on Tuesday 21st December 1915. [/b]

Something unspeakable about his being shot in an abbatoir...

Must say am shocked to find on this forum that the effects of shell-shock - post traumatic stress syndrome (on what I suspect were mostly volunteers who had no idea at all of what they had let themselves in for and who were totally unprepared, unlike regulars), is a matter of dispute. Did anyone see a recent TV programme on Wilfred Owen and Seigfried Sassoon? - the clips of shell-shocked soldiers unable to control the shaking of their limbs, and in some cases unable to walk unaided, was harrowing.

As for individuals, let's not forget Pte Patrick Downey, shot at the age of 19 for not putting on his cap!

I agree with Enfield Collector: 'History does not sleep' - nor should it.

Ann

[Ann Sinnott]

ADDENDUM

Dermot Ahern, the Irish Foreign Affairs Minister, said: "The files make heartbreaking reading. They refer to medical conditions, personal problems, deaths of family members and other extenuating circumstances that are simply not taken into account. In most cases, there are written notes from superior officers that bluntly call for an example to be made. Guilt or innocence was a secondary consideration."Dublin has also pointed to new evidence of anti-Irish sentiment among British officers that shows a disproportionate number of Irish troops were executed. The Irish represented 8 per cent of those condemned to death, but they made up just 2 per cent of the Army.

[dutchbarge]

Australia and South Africa outright refused to kill their own men....

(quote)

Neither did the US. The humane treatment of their soldiers certainly didn't adversely effect their offensive spirit either.

Re Australia:

The 1903 Australian Defence Act stipulated that the Governor General of Austrailia had to confirm the sentences passed by courts martial and he never endorced the sentences. Although Haig made strong representations for power to inflict the extreme penalty upon Australian soldiers the sanction was continually denied.

Cheers, Bill

[Ian grant]

Enfield

From a moral standpoint i agree with your sentiments, my views hinge on the fact that guilty or not these men were not given proper and fair trials even by the standards of miltary justice of those times. Indeed in my opinion many of them were downright railroaded.

However John Hartley basically asked you what evidence you have to support your statement that Sgt stones was suffering from shell shock your statement below confirms your opinion if i am reading it right, can you confirm with a yes or no that you believe Stones was suffering from shell shock ? and why you believe that to be the case.

Regards

Ian.

Stone's act of "casting away arms", IMHO was never proven. If a physically wounded soldier casts away arms it's ok. If a just as badly mentally wounded soldier casts away arms, its a crime punishable by death.

[Waffenlandser]

Here we have the true villain. A man who despite recommendations for mercy hammered the final nail into the coffins of the condemned.

The Independent UK.

In many cases, even when senior officers recommended mercy, Field Marshal Haig, the commander-in-chief of the British forces, authorised executions. There was a prevailing feeling that examples needed to be made.

It makes no difference if there is proof or not of shell shock. It can be assumed that most of the soldiers had PTSD. Neither my grandfather or great .uncle were ever the same after they returned. My grandpa was terrified at the slightest sound and became basicaly agorophobic.

Stone's case is particularly horrifying if one considers the circumstances in which he was murdered, with the approval of Haig.

Lance Sergeant Joseph Stones, 25, who walked into an ambush in which his companion, a Lieutenant Mundy, was killed. Lance Sergeant Stone ran back to his battalion HQ to summon help. He had lost his rifle. He was arrested, charged with throwing away his rifle and shot;

Then we have to remember with bowed heads the case of Private Joseph Byers, who had also lied about his age when he joined the Royal Highland Fusiliers at 16. A year later he was found guilty of being absent from parade. Some of the firing party were crying as they took aim and some fired wide. It took three volleys to kill him.

[John_Hartley]

Well here is probably the most apalling case of all. The execution of Pvt Fredrick Gore, shot at dawn for desertion on October 16th 1917.

Ahah. Not for the first time in this thread, I see you've come back and significantly added to your post. Althoguh it does rather make life difficult for those of us trying to have a converstaion with you, I am grateful to you for mentioning Gore.

As I'm sure you'll appreciate the book "Shot at Dawn" is often (and rightly) taken as being an advocate for the pardons campaign yet, as with the two Manchester men, the book has no defence or explanation to offer for Gore's actions.

You say he had an established history of shell-shock. I ask you directly to present some evidence to prove your statement or withdraw it accepting that you are wrong.The only "evidence" I can see in published works is his own statement - and he would say that, wouldnt he?

You say there was no medical testimony. What evidence do you have that? I note here that "Blindfold & Alone" confirms that he was medically examined before the trial. That information must be in the court martial file and would seem to contradict your assertion

You say that he had no defending officer. What is your evidence for that statement? Defending officers were commonplace at courts martial.

But, of course, what you fail to point is that Gore was a serial offender in the crime of desertion. Was it by accident or design that you fail to point this out?

He had deserted on two previous occasions. The first time, he had been sentenced to death but the sentence was suspended. The second time, another suspended sentence. (Source: Shot at Dawn).

If ever someone was finally going to face the firing party after deserting for a third occasion and already serving under two suspended death sentences it was Gore. It is difficult to think of what other conclusion the court martial might have come to.

[John_Hartley]

It makes no difference if there is proof or not of shell shock. It can be assumed that most of the soldiers had PTSD.

What complete claptrap!

I had suspected that this thread was nothing more than troll. Proof provided.

I'll leave you to carry on with your prejudices. Further attempts at rational discussion appear pointless.

[Waffenlandser]

Read the case of Pvt Gore. All the proof you need is there. A couple of minor offences and he is regarded as a candidate for the firing squad.

Same as you get a couple of parking tickets and caught jay walking and then you are caught shoplifting and you get life in prison......right???????

Most of those executed – or subjected to judicial murder, according to campaigners – were suffering from shell shock after months in the trenches. Many were of below-average intelligence and dismissed by officers as worthless.

from the UK Independent

and one more thing.........when you run out of rebuttals, call me a troll.

LOL.

[Kate Wills]

It makes no difference if there is proof or not of shell shock. It can be assumed that most of the soldiers had PTSD.

Men such as Pte Joseph Bateman or Drummer Rose, for instance?

[themonsstar]

Here is Pte Gore's Court Martial paper work.

next one

next 1

next 1

next 1

next 1

next 1

next 1

next 1

next 1

next 1

[Waffenlandser]

Ahhhhhh so. We have six, I repeat SIX handwritten pages of barely legible text that sends a man to his death. Today a moving violation contested in court is three times this.

I see the death penalty was confirmed by Haig.

Well its one of several hundred thousand he signed.

I also notice that there is no reference to the accused being represented by an officer as defence counsel.

The reason being. There was none.

[Kate Wills]

I see the death penalty was confirmed by Haig.

Well its one of several hundred thousand he signed.

Might the Germans might be implicated in this perchance?

[Waffenlandser]

Might the Germans might be implicated in this perchance?

Its not a matter if the Germans were implicated or not. Sure they took joint responsibilty for the terrible death toll.

My family did not fight for the Germans. They fought for England. Its England and her Generals I have issue with.

The Germans never shot any of our boys for so called cowardice. We did.

Haig is as responsible for the SAD heros as well as for the preventable deaths on the field of battle.

Sorry to be so obstinate, Mod.

[Kate Wills]

Enfield, you are entitled to your views, and I am entitled to mine.

This is a discussion forum, so please do not be disappointed to find your views challenged.

I note you have offered no comment on the cases of Bateman and Rose.

[Waffenlandser]

Mod, the real purpose of this thread was merely to draw attention to the latest newspaper article on the SAD boys. I never thought, with thinking like it is in the 21st century, that there are some who agree with the death sentence.

Pte Joseph Batemen was executed in 1917 for desertion. I have absolutely no comment on wether he had battle fatigue or not. Chances were he did. The soldiers in Flanders all had it to some degree as we had in Viet Nam and now in Iraq. There is a gentleman in the town of Wordesly, Graham Hodgson who is actively researching Pvt Bateman and the reasons he so often went AWOL. Mr Hodgson was one of those responsible for getting Pvt Bateman's name added to the town war memorial.

As a matter of interest these are the words of the son of Douglas Haig. As we say here, the apple never falls far from the tree.

The son of First World War commander Field Marshal Douglas Haig today attacked the Government's move to pardon more than 300 men who were executed for military offences during the conflict.

Ex-Colditz Prisoner of War George Haig, 88, whose father signed a number of the death warrants, said many of those executed were "rogues" and "criminals" who deserved to be shot.Speaking from his family country house in Melrose, in the Scottish Borders, the honorary president of the Royal British Legion Scotland added: "They had to be made an example of

I have no comment on Drummer Rose. I have not read enough on him as yet, but will do so in time.

[Kate Wills]

Mod, the real purpose of this thread was merely to draw attention to the latest newspaper article on the SAD boys. I never thought, with thinking like it is in the 21st century, that there are some who agree with the death sentence.

Pte Joseph Batemen was executed in 1917 for desertion. I have absolutely no comment on wether he had battle fatigue or not. Chances were he did. The soldiers in Flanders all had it to some degree as we had in Viet Nam and now in Iraq. There is a gentleman in the town of Wordesly, Graham Hodgson who is actively researching Pvt Bateman and the reasons he so often went AWOL. Mr Hodgson was one of those responsible for getting Pvt Bateman's name added to the town war memorial.

I can only assume it was a very slow news day, and The Independent's reporters and sub-editors have brought the paper into disrepute by describing the post in Poperighe as a new memorial - utter tosh!

Where have I said that I support the death setence? I am challenging the points you have presented in this thread - not the rights and wrongs of capital punishment.

I am not surprised you "have absolutely no comment on wether he (Bateman) had battle fatigue or not". I venture that Pte Bateman's only fatigue was occassioned by the physical strain of sloping-off 36 times within a few months, mostly in England.

As regards Drummer Rose, he was a regular soldier who deserted (if memory serves me correctly) in December 1914. He then lived fairly close to the front line with a local woman for over two years, easily within sound (and perhaps shake) of battle. The woman's neighbour, whose son or husband had recently been killed in action, reported Rose to the local gendarmes, who arrested him and handed him over to the British military police. Rose begged to be spared. I might well have granted his wish, but then unlike the officers involved, I had not spent several years watching my comrades blown to smithereens while Rose curled up cosily with with his lady-love.

[Ann Sinnott]

French Honor Irish Born WW1 Soldier Shot at Dawn

A large commemorative plaque was unveiled on Sunday 11th November 2007, Armistice Day, in the location of Private Graham's execution in Mazingarbe, France, circa 11.00hrs.

New Zealand Pardon for Soldiers of the Great War Act 2000

The purpose of this Act is to pardon 5 soldiers of the New Zealand Expeditionary Force who served as volunteers in the Great War and who were executed in 1 case for mutiny and in the other 4 cases for desertion

While the, fully referenced, report on Shot at Dawn Irl (based on courts martial documents) relates specifically to Irish men, there is no reason to suppose that its conclusions do not relate to others. Extracts:

In the face of the horrible reality of the trenches of the Western Front, the weak and the strong cracked in much the same manner. Erratic, uncontrollable behaviour and irrational actions were regular occurrences. The response of most soldiers to the overwhelming awfulness of the trenches was to grow an extra layer of skin and get on with whatever was required of them. Some were unable to do so. Some took their own lives; others succumbed to temporary or permanent insanity.

Many in the military establishment were suspicious of what appeared to be simple, rank cowardice to them. There was an impression that many of those exhibiting signs of trauma were simply malingering. The rejection of a shell-shock defence in three of the eighteen executions for cowardice reflected the widely held belief in the British army that it was pernicious to take such claims too seriously to prevent what they believed may have become a potential epidemic[7]. This was unwittingly expressed by Douglas Haig when he appended the remark ‘how can we ever win if this plea is allowed?’ in response to a recommendation for mercy in the case of a nerve-shaken soldier during the Battle of the Somme[8].

Throughout the duration of the war, the British Under-Secretary for War repeated in parliament that “the suspicion of shellshock at a courts-martial results in every possible medical advice being sought”[11]. As evidenced in the summary of the case files, this was most definitely not the case. There are clear examples in which mental instability, and other injuries, were recognised by a soldier’s commanding officer, but were ignored by the court and the confirmation process.

Another soldier claimed to be suffering from a wandering mind. His Commanding Officer stated ‘I consider he is not of normal medical development… he should be carefully examined by a specialist in mental diseases’. The soldier was never examined despite this statement, and was executed the day before the Somme offensive. In Babington’s own words, “there can be little doubt that many soldiers were executed without any attempt being made to assess the degree of responsibility they might have had for their own behaviour at the time of their offences”.

In addition, the courts-martial procedure ignored clear extenuating circumstances in which the actions of the accused were directly contributable to a particular private or family circumstance that caused significant emotional stress.

The courts-martial files indicate a trend among the accused of a lack of even a rudimentary understanding of their rights under military law. The absence of a ‘prisoner’s friend’ in the majority of cases, to safeguard those rights, further undermines the assertion that those facing courts-martial were afforded their legally entitled rights.

As referred to by numerous military historians since the release of the case files in the 1990’s, the preponderance of cases in which soldiers were shot for the sake of example undermines the very fabric of the military law to which these men were expected to adhere so rigidly.

The prohibition on applying the condition of shell-shock to enlisted men explains the absence of references to this or associated nervous disorders. The absence of such consideration in the extant files to medical conditions that were known at the time… – a failure of due process and a fatal flaw in the credibility of the death sentences passed and carried out. …medical officers were told not to diagnose lower ranks as shell-shocked[9].

Military justice in the field was dispensed in terms of simplistic philosophy; a soldier was dependable, or he was a funk, either he performed his duties at the front or he shirked them. The only factors which may mitigate a death sentence were either the prisoners good service record at the front, or the prospect that he would develop into a good fighting man in the future – peacetime values, as such, were almost entirely disregarded.

It is clear that the military hierarchy were interested mainly in two things when deciding on the fate of the accused; the state of discipline in the battalion to which the accused belonged, and the fighting character of the accused when in battle. There are eleven clear cases where, during the confirmation process, an example was thought to be necessary because of the bad discipline in the battalion of the accused man. This meant that some men were effectively executed simply to deter their colleagues from contemplating a similar crime, and not because they deserved their fate.

The recent release of information uncovered by historians Dr Gerard Oram and Julian Putkowski in a forthcoming book further substantiates the argument that officers received differential treatment at courts-martial than the lower ranks. [Also published: Gerard Oram Worthless Men: Race, Eugenics and the Death Penalty in the British Army During the First World War]

[Waffenlandser]

I can only assume it was a very slow news day, and The Independent's reporters and sub-editors have brought the paper into disrepute by describing the post in Poperighe as a new memorial - utter tosh!

Please help me out here Madame Admin. I am now thorougly confused.

Where have I even intimated that you support the death sentence. If you, and I mean here the generic you, support the death sentence, then I am refering to those such as the likes of Mr Corrigan who support the death penalty for so called "cowardice"

The article I quoted was NOT from any UK newspaper. It was plastered over just about every American daily a week a go. Let me assure you in today's world of post election America there are no slow news days. The New York Times has in no way fallen into disrepute over this article.

Tosh possibly. Shocking to others not so complacent.

perhaps you are confusing the new Popringhe monument with this that has been around for some time.

Your comments on battle fatigue, if I may be so bold as to comment on, do not surprise me. It reflects the similar ignorance displayed by British officers in 1917.

It has been estimated, and I have been in no small way involved in this, that over 60% of soldiers in battle develop some form of acute behavioral distress syndrome. This accounts for the huge volume of anti depressants prescribed in Iraq. During the Viet Nam conflict the incidence of battle fatigue or shell shock was very common. Fortunately appropriate medical attention was as urgent as physical injuries. The days of George Patton slapping shell shocked soldiers are history.

The recent wave of public condemnation of events 85 years ago is not coincidental. Its time has come and the noise is only getting louder.

One final question Kate.

Why were there no officers executed???? Same question I have for the Americans in WW2 about why so many African Americans were hung in a British prison. by British hangmen.

[stiletto_33853]

OK Enfield,

Once again you bring up the subject of WW2 African Americans, this is outside of my knowledge but I do not like the continued inference of "African Americans hung in a British prison by British hangmen" surely these men were tried by the US authorities?? if so take it up with the American authorities. Final point, this is a WW1 forum, I would ask you to remember that.

Please keep to the subject in discussion, i.e. Shot at Dawn in WW1, although it would appear that you have closed your eyes and ears to any other side of a discussion but your own viewpoint. This is a shame as it has been a civilised debate on SAD to date.

Andy

[keithmroberts]

I welcomed the governments retrospective pardons, and as a child in the fifties and a teenager in the early sixties can remember a veteran who spent half of his life in asylums after his experiences in the great war. The death penalty was an extreme act, and I have supported its abolition in this country, not least because in criminal cases we did occasionally it seems get it wrong; but I do feel that the decisions of the generals 90 + years ago have to be seen, not just in the context of the war, but also of their time.

My unresearched understanding, is that the death penalty was much more widely used in the developed world than it is now, and that those who authorised it were acting largely in keeping with the culture of the societies in which they had grown up. That their actions were not simplistic butchery is to some degree surely supported by the considerable number of death sentences that were not confirmed.

we make judgements all the time after our reading or discussions, but these must surely take into account the context.

If the comment about "several hundred thousand that he signed" is to be debated that is surely a "bunglers and butchers" argument, and has no bearing on the issue of the death penalties. The immense casualties on all sides in the war may even have had something to do with the governments that gradually inched their policies into positions and attitudes from which they could not be seen to budge.

Finally, I can only add that the front pages of most newspapers in this country need to be read with a healthy scepticism, as they are too often found to distort and exaggerate a story either for a headline, or to support the views of the owner of the titles. Is it any different in the USA? From my few visits to the US I have also formed the impression that US newspapers run many syndicated articles to save staff and to fill up space.

Keith

Remembering today George William Senior. Pte Royal Scots who was shell shocked as well as wounded at the time of his capture in 1918, and who suffered from the effects of the former until his death in the late 1960's.

[AlanCurragh]

One final question Kate.

Why were there no officers executed????

Three officers were executed, including Sub Lt Edwin Dyett

Alan