Courts of Inquiry

[MelPack]

I was under the impression that the principal functions of a Court of Inquiry during the war years was to make findings of desertion, declarations of death for the MIA, an officer's conduct in the event of a surrender etc.

I was somewhat surprised to encounter a soldier's service papers where the subject matter of a Court of Inquiry was his ill fitting dentures!

The findings of the Court of Inquiry were that his dentures were, indeed, ill fitting and had to be replaced at the expense of the public purse.

The soldier concerned was obviously grateful and eventually made off with his new gnashers in a post armistice desertion.

What was precisely the remit of a Court of Inquiry?

Mel

[Ron Clifton]

Hello Mel

Courts of Enquiry were held for a number of different reasons, including those you quote. In the case of desertions, their main remit was to establish exactly which items of kit, paid for by the public, he had taken with him, so that, if caught, the cost of them could be recovered out of his pay.

The common factor seems to be, as in the case you quote, whether any item paid for by the public needed to be replaced, whose fault it was, and therefore who had to pay for it. Boards of Enquiry were also formed on changes of command or of quartermaster, and the members of the Board carried out stocktaking, for much the same reason.

Courts of Enquiry were also used in cases where a soldier had been wounded other than in action. This was to establish whether the wound was self-inflicted, inflicted by negligence of the man or a comrade, or purely accidental. Again, there were disciplinary reasons for this, but in particular it protected men who had genuinely been accidentally wounded from the likelihood of a court-martial.

Ron

[MelPack]

Ron

Thanks for the clarification.

I still find it extraordinary that a captain and two subalterns had to deliberate over dentures in a context where formal evidence had to be reviewed. The military mindset is a strange creature.

Mel

[joseph]

Mel,

Court of Inquiry was his ill fitting dentures!

Anything to do with the loss, damage or difficiency of stores had to be determined by COI, if the cost was more than £50 it was reported to the GOC. I have read a lot and that one takes the biscuit......

Regards Charles

[truthergw]

It's hard to stay serious about this but I think, if desertion is involved that stealing Government property was a compounding factor, maybe get you another year in the glasshouse. The CoI may have been establishing whether the wallies were his or the Army's. A subaltern's life was not all death and glory then, was it?

[MelPack]

Charles

Please do not mention biscuits! The poor soul probably couldn't bite on one unless he had a good dunk first.

Tom

Are wallies false teeth? I have never heard that expression before.

Anyway, the Court of Inquiry record for the gnashers ......... Paths to Glory and the rest.

[nigelfe]

The common factor seems to be, as in the case you quote, whether any item paid for by the public needed to be replaced, whose fault it was, and therefore who had to pay for it. Boards of Enquiry were also formed on changes of command or of quartermaster, and the members of the Board carried out stocktaking, for much the same reason.

I'm not up to speed on the AA and KRs for this period but was it not a 'Board of Officers' to stocktake on change of command? I had thought that a this period a Board of Enquiry dealt with lesser matters than a Court of Enquiry. Subsequently there were no 'Courts of Enquiry' only 'Boards of Enquiry' until the 2006 AFA when they became 'Service Enquiries'.

Perhaps the difference was that a CoI could determine guilt of a person and order restitution/punishment whereas a BoI could only establish facts, and its findings could not be presented as evidence in a Court Martial? It's certainly the modern case that a BoI findings could not be presented as evidence in a court

[truthergw]

I wonder if this was a case of a man refusing to wear dentures, claiming they were ill-fitting and he had reported them as such. Where it figures in a desertion, I can't imagine. Wallie is a West Coast of Scotland term for ceramic. A wallie close was a posh tiled entrance to a tenement, wallie dugs were china dogs, a pair of which, adorned the discerning person's fireplace. Wallies were a jocular and rather common expression for dentures. Not at all the sort of expression one would expect to hear in the refined areas such as Kelvinside.

[MelPack]

Tom

I think I may have misled you a little about the desertion. The gnashers Court of Inquiry was conducted in October 1917.

The soldier did not desert until April 1919 - perhaps he wanted to make sure that his new teeth had settled in.

Thanks for the explanation about wallies.

Mel

[Terry_Reeves]

The NA catalogue does not have any entries for "gnashers" but does have these documents:

WO 33/3282 Army (Courts of Inquiry) Act 1916: Court of Enquiry Case No. 1 case of Patrick Barrett, Second Lieutenant, Royal Welsh Fusiliers; report 1917 Jan 01 - 1917 Dec 31

WO 141/63 Courts of Inquiry under Army (Courts of Inquiry) Act 1916: case of 2/Lt P Barrett and Brigadier Thomas; question of undue influence brought by certain Senior Officers and Mr Cornwallis-West 1916

WO 161/97/75 Report of a Court of Inquiry. Pages 385-387 Includes accounts of interviews with: Rogers, D, Royal Irish Rifles. Bennett, W, King's Shropshire Light Infantry. Wills, R, Royal Army Medical Corps. Sewell, L, Rifle Brigade. 1915 Aug-1919 Jan

NB the first two items are particularly interesting if you get the chance to read them.

However, there were also Courts of Enquiry:

WO 32/4798 LEGAL AND JUDICIAL: Courts Martial (Code 67) Loss of money by requisitioning officer, 6th Cavalry Brigade: Court of Enquiry and legal opinions 1916-1917

WO 32/5471B LEGAL AND JUDICIAL: The Army Act: Rules of procedure under Army (Courts of Enquiry) Act, 1916 1916

WO 33/3282 Army (Courts of Inquiry) Act 1916: Court of Enquiry Case No. 1 case of Patrick Barrett, Second Lieutenant, Royal Welsh Fusiliers; report 1917 Jan 01 - 1917 Dec 31

WO 141/35 Court of Enquiry in Bombo, Uganda, on medical arrangements 1918-1919

WO 158/53 Cambrai: Action fought south of, 30 Nov. 1917; Court of enquiry 1918 Jan.17-

All I want for Christmas is my two front teeth.....

TR

[joseph]

I think his CoI was pretty much an open and shut case, as he was fitted with the new dentures shortly after being wounded in the face, and as time goes by the swelling went down and the bones healed. This would leave the dentures loose in the mouth and not able to perform the function they were intended. Good call they should be altered or replaced at public expence.

At least it remained at Company level and never went up the chain of command, I say that and the CO did chew over the evidence and agreed with the finding of the Court.

Regards Charles