What happens to those previously incorrectly identified?

[Tjap]

Having cross tabulated the list of identified soldiers againt the Missing Soldiers of Fromelles - Discussion Group list (derived from the names at VC Corner) I note that Albert Ernest Pratt and Robert Grieve Moncrieff Scott had originally been interred under named headstones at Pozieres and Rue Petillon cemeteries.

Since the soldiers now lying in these graves are now unknowns from the Fomelles battle and efforts to identify their comrades at Pheasant Wood have included tracing possible relatives, is there a case for exhuming them so that they may be correctly identified or should they be left to rest in peace as 'known unto God' ?

I note that the 6 other soldiers on the identified group who are not listed at VC corner were all commemorated on the Villers-Bretonneux memorial. They were however included in the lists of potential fallen in the Fromelles burials so this implies that the list of missing on the VB roll has been very carefully scrutinised.

Best,

Howard

[ianw]

A most interesting and important question, Howard.

One wonders how they were "identified" in the first place? Given the DNA work done on the Fromelles dead, is it logical to exhume and include them? One would probably have to review the full details of the Pozieres and Rue Petillon burials. I would imagine that the CWGC would be very reluctant to do this. However, I think it would be correct to exhume them if there is any reasonable chance that they can be identified.

I wonder if the Pozieres and Rue Petillon gravestones have been changed yet? Do you have the grave references for these? I would be interested in checking in September.

It's a good job that they were included in the recent ID exercise in the first place and not excluded because of the pre-existing named graves.

It would seem likely that Lt Burns whose story is elsewhere in the Fromelles section would have also ended up with a named headstone over a random set of remains had not a family friend attended his "exhumation". This was due to AGS errors and I suppose it likely that similar errors resulted in the Pratt and Scott mis-identifications.

[Peter Woodger]

Hi

The headstone of Lt A E Pratt, at III. N. 12, in Pozieres Cemetery is the earliest date for an Australian in the cemetery. The only other 53rd Batt troops there died in April 1917.

The Location sheet number for him is 12489, there is only 1 Australian with a Higher LS number which shows him to be a very late “identification”.

His Exhumation Group number is 21 which agrees with all the other Australians in his row.

There is an indication that a cross was found, the number is 87. These crosses are sometimes ones that were on a grave and got misplaced or can be memorial crosses never placed on a grave.

Pratt’s Mother was informed on 13th March 1925 that IWGC had identified his body.

Peter

[Peter Woodger]

Hi

My previous post recorded facts relating to the records that I have. This is opinion.

Exhumation Group 21 was carried out during the 1919 clearance exercise. There is zero chance that the body buried in III. N. 12 was exhumed from Fromelles. Consider whether it is feasible to suggest that a body found near Fromelles would be transported all the way to Pozieres.

I have come across many cases in other cemeteries where it is beyond all reasonable doubt that the headstone is wrong. The CWGC is looking at a case where the original W3372 form says 3 burials are Unknown British Soldier but a later hand written amendment to each ascribes the burial to soldiers who died very far away and at least 1 of them whilst the cemetery was in German hands. All 3 are of the same Regiment!.

Peter

[spof]

I agree - an interesting question. I would argue that they have to remain as Unknown Australians assuming the men were at least identified to a nationality to get even an incorrect name.

If these graves had been inscribed correctly in the first place, they would be some form of Unknown burial. In that case, you have to ask yourself what differentiates these 2 graves from the 100s of other Unknowns from the battle to warrant exhumation now?

Interesting to note 2nd Lt A E Pratt's name is on the Addenda panel at VC Corner now. So Peter's questions about transporting a body all that way must have been asked by somebody else too.

Glen

[ianw]

Thanks for that information , Peter. Is there any way of establishing exactly where the remains identified as Lt Pratt were found? I presume near where the 53rd Battalion was fighting in April 1917? If this is the case, involving these remains in the Fromelles ID process would obviously be a waste of time.

Does the fact that his name is on the addenda panel at VC Corner indicate that the Pozierre ID has previously been accepted as erroneous?

[Peter Woodger]

Hi

The other 2 53rd Batt men are buried, as are all the 1917 deaths, in Plot II which is the wartime section of the cemetery. The Australians were fighting near Warlencourt so too far away for post war clearances to be in Pozieres. A CCS supporting the Australians was at Pozieres hence the wartime burials.

If the CWGC still have either the Burial return numbered 21 or the W3372 form prior to the Comprehensive version the either will show the Map reference of the original burial.

Peter

[spof]

Pratt was originally recorded as being in Plot 3 Row N Grave 12. 3 N 7 is a 13th Bn AIF man killed at Pozieres on 13/8/16 which should give a more likely idea where the man was found.

[judy7007]

Hi

Pratt's Mother was informed on 13th March 1925 that IWGC had identified his body.

Peter

This led me to read Lt Pratt's service record and there are a number of letters there from his mother. Such letters are always so hard (emotionally) to read. It would seem that she chose an inscription for his headstone as she was given the address to send the money to. I am wondering if the inscription chosen by his mother is likely to be inscribed on the new headstone.

Judy

[Tjap]

This led me to read Lt Pratt's service record and there are a number of letters there from his mother. Such letters are always so hard (emotionally) to read. It would seem that she chose an inscription for his headstone as she was given the address to send the money to. I am wondering if the inscription chosen by his mother is likely to be inscribed on the new headstone.

Judy

I think that they most certainly should put any inscription she wished to be placed on her son's gravestone, since she paid for it. The fact that they put it on the wrong headstone was hardly her fault.

Cheers,

Howard

[judy7007]

I think that they most certainly should put any inscription she wished to be placed on her son's gravestone, since she paid for it. The fact that they put it on the wrong headstone was hardly her fault.

Cheers,

Howard

Howard

I couldn't agree more. Not only did she pay, but her joy when her son was 'found' was so great and her many years of heart break were so evident (and expressed in her letters). I do hope it can come about that her chosen words are inscribed on the new headstone. I think it is really important. (I'm assuming an inscription was placed - there was reference only to payment - but there would be record of this elsewhere)

Judy

[Peter Woodger]

Judy

The Inscription on the Stone is "Greater Love hath no man that he lay down his life for hls friends"

Spof

A risky surmise, the 11 men in the rest of his section of the row are, 46th Aus, RGA, Australian Medical, RFA, Canadian Medical, Australian Medical,, 13th Aus, 18th Aus, Unknown, Unknown, 25th Aus and Pratt.

Peter

[judy7007]

Judy

The Inscription on the Stone is "Greater Love hath no man that he lay down his life for hls friends"

Peter

Thanks for confirming that Peter. I thought it was almost certain that an inscription was placed (as there was information as to where the money should be sent).

Judy

[ianw]

Although the ID erroneous, it would appear from his service record that the Matilda took great comfort from the "finding" of his body in 1925. Personally, I am glad she had that comfort.

Please see below a picture of his new gravestone from the relevant photos thread in the Fromelles section courtesy of our Pal Pierre. And, happily as has been said, the inscription wanted by Matilda is indeed there.

Judy - I have read through his record. The contrast between the various official replies and her letters is heart-breaking. She would be so pleased that he really does rest in peace now.

[Tjap]

Many thanks all for your contributions to this thread. I am in awe of your comprehensive records. They are much more complex than I had imagined.

Subject to a check on where the body in Lt. Pratt's formerly identified grave came from, I think that whoever is in that place should be allowed to rest in peace.

What of RGM Scott?

Best,

Howard

Wonderful! - Very moving indeed.

H

[judy7007]

Although the ID erroneous, it would appear from his service record that the Matilda took great comfort from the "finding" of his body in 1925. Personally, I am glad she had that comfort.

Please see below a picture of his new gravestone from the relevant photos thread in the Fromelles section courtesy of our Pal Pierre. And, happily as has been said, the inscription wanted by Matilda is indeed there.

Judy - I have read through his record. The contrast between the various official replies and her letters is heart-breaking. She would be so pleased that he really does rest in peace now.

Ianw, This is so wonderful and thank you to you and to Pierre. I have read her letters with such a huge lump in my throat and could only be thankful that Matilda did indeed take such great comfort from hearing that her dear son was 'found'. She would have been able to carry that throughout her life here on earth. Thanks again

Judy

[spof]

What of RGM Scott?

H

Howard

His service record contains a letter from Germany in 1916 confirming this death. His file also has a letter from the IWGC in 1924 responding to ongoing enquiries from his family saying there is a cross on a grave in Rue Petillon (Plot 1 Row L Grave 46) with his details and the words "Believed To Be". The letter goes on to detail that a permanent headstone and the "Believed To Be" would be removed if the family wished. Of course, the family wished and the words were removed.

The 2 documents and the Rue Petillon grave

Glen

[Auimfo]

I had recent email conversations with Albert PRATT's descendant about this. He'd been made aware of the grave at Pozieres some time ago and realised it must be incorrect. He then set about researching it and was able to prove to the CWGC that it was not his ancestor (this was all prior to PRATT's identification at Fromelles). It's because of his research that PRATT's name was added to the addenda panel at VC Corner. Unfortunately he was not able to pinpoint the name of the man actually buried at Pozieres.

A few years ago Sandra (Fedelmar) and I discovered that there existed a grave for RGM SCOTT and yet at that time he appeared likely to actually be in the mass grave at Pheasant Wood. We looked into this case and also discovered a few others with existing named graves who quite likely were also buried at Pheasant Wood. We wrote an article about it that appeared in the FFFAIF 'Digger' magazine. Here's a transcript for you:

At Rest.....Or Are They?

A Case for Addition to the Pheasant Wood List.

At a quick glance, there is nothing obvious to suggest the name of 1046 Private Robert Grieve Moncrieff Scott is any different to the other names included in the Department of Defence’s working list of 191 Australians thought to be buried at Pheasant Wood, Fromelles. However, there is a little known fact about his interment that sets him apart from all the others.

A simple search of the Australian War Memorial’s Roll of Honour and the Commonwealth War Graves Commission online database reveals that Private Robert Scott already has an identified grave in the Rue-Petillon Military Cemetery, less than three kilometres from Fromelles.

So how is it possible that Private Robert Scott can be listed as one of those thought buried at Pheasant Wood yet also have an existing ‘named’ grave? A closer inspection of his service documents at the National Archives of Australia and the Australian War Memorial’s Red Cross Missing and Wounded files disclose some very interesting facts that suggest an unfortunate mistake may have been made.

Private Robert Scott went over the top with the 32nd Battalion on the 19th July, 1916 but the circumstances regarding his death have never been documented. What is known is that he was posted ‘missing’ after the battle until his name appeared on a German death list dated 4th November 1916, when the entry was amended to ‘killed in action’. Later in 1917 his identity disk was returned to his family from Germany clearly indicating they had at one time been in possession of his body.

It was after the war in 1919, that a search of the Imperial Prussian War Office records in Berlin by Captain Mills uncovered several death vouchers stating,

“The Australian Private Scott, R.G.M. No.1046, 32nd Bn, AIF, fell on 19/7/1916 in the neighbourhood of Fromelles.”

It was in this same period of time after the war that a Graves Registration Unit document attached to Scott’s file indicates the possible recovery of his remains but clearly states that a provisional cross was to be erected on the grave at Rue-Petillon Military Cemetery with the words ‘Believed to be’ inscribed on it. However, the most telling document was a letter written to Scott’s mother in 1924 from the Imperial War Graves Commission. It explained the process, by which Scott’s presumed resting place could be altered from being a questionable interment into a positively identified grave,

“The cross will in due course be replaced by a permanent memorial, and should no subsequent doubt have arisen as to the identity of the grave, the words, ‘Believed to be’ can be omitted, if you wish, from the inscription on this stone.”

Understandably as any mother who is grieving a lost son would do, Scott’s mother wished for nothing more than her son to have a recognized grave and therefore agreed to this offer. From that moment on, Plot I, Row L, Grave 46 at Rue-Petillon Military Cemetery was designated to contain the positively identified remains of 1046 Private Robert Grieve Moncrieff Scott.

What is fascinating to note from the IWGC’s letter is the lesser burden of proof required to determine the true identity of the grave’s occupant. Apparently it wasn’t necessary to locate evidence to support the presumed identity and only needed an absence of doubt. It must be said that if this was the standard required for proof of identification then it was very obviously open to serious error and fraught with potential mistakes.

In 2009 the Department of Defence with assistance from the Fromelles Descendant Database and FFFAIF (amongst others) assembled a working list of those Australians believed buried in the mass graves at Pheasant Wood. The basis for inclusion on this list stemmed largely from the existence of four different criteria (or a combination of these):

i. The name of the soldier was recorded as having appeared on a German death list.

ii. The location of German death vouchers in a soldiers records indicating he fell at Fromelles

iii. The soldiers identity disk was noted as having been returned from Germany.

iv. The evidence strongly suggests the soldier died in the German trenches.

As can be seen, Scott’s records clearly establish that the first three of these key elements are applicable to him and it’s also quite plausible to believe he may have reached the German lines. Therefore his inclusion on the list as having potentially been buried at Pheasant Wood is both substantiated and proper.

But the implications of such an error potentially having been made begged the question whether any further similar mistakes had been committed. Up until now, the search for these men has almost exclusively been taken from the files of the missing. Logically, nobody had ever thought to check the records of those with identified graves.

It was armed with this information, that members of the Fromelles Descendant Database team conducted a meticulous search through the files of each Australian killed at Fromelles who has a named grave. Given the rightful precedent set by the Scott case, the following names represent men that we believe should now also be added to the official working list.

715 Lance Corporal Ralph JOHNSON, 31st Battalion

- Pont du Hem Military Cemetery

Born in 1897 at Healesville, Victoria to parents Hubert and Alice Johnson, Ralph Johnson was educated at Camberwell Grammar School before leaving and gaining employment as a clerk. During this period he served four years with the Senior Cadets, attaining the rank of Sergeant.

He enlisted in July 1915 at the age of 18, joining ‘C’ Company, 31st Battalion with whom he embarked for Egypt in November 1915.

After further training in Egypt, Ralph set sail with the battalion from Alexandria, bound for Marseilles and the Western Front. Like many of the men from the 5th Division, Fromelles was to be their first and sadly in many cases, their only action on the Western Front.

Similarly to Scott, Johnson’s individual role in the actual battle has not been documented and the circumstances of his death are unknown. However his files tell the story of the subsequent confusion and misinterpretation surrounding the investigation into his burial.

Never listed as being missing even though his remains hadn’t been located, Johnson was recorded at the outset as having been killed in action on the 21st July 1916. Oddly, this date falls on the day after the battle and yet is still his official date of death according to both the Australian Roll of Honour and CWGC.

On a German death list received by the Allies and dated 4th November 1916, Johnson is noted to have died on the 19th July 1916, which differs completely from the official date recorded. The fact of the matter is that Johnson was one of a large number of 31st Battalion men who were incorrectly listed as having been killed on the 21st July and who’s names do not appear on the VC Corner Memorial but elsewhere instead. There has not been any verified reason discovered for this oversight but we can guess that it represents the soonest date after the battle that the battalion was able to check the roll and all those unaccounted for were nominally appointed that date.

To support this further, the Germans sent Johnson’s identity disk back to his relatives in 1917 and at the conclusion of the war, death vouchers were located in the Imperial Prussian War Office also indicating he had fallen in the neighbourhood of Fromelles on 19th July 1916.

But what happened next was inexplicable.

A letter written from Base Records to the Prime Minister’s Department in 1922 clearly indicates that there had been some prior discussions dating back to 1920 regarding the final resting place of Ralph Johnson. The content of these initial discussions are unknown but it can be gleaned that a belief had been formed that Johnson had died as a prisoner of war on the 21st July and subsequently buried at Beaucamps Communal Cemetery German Extension. This is at odds with all recorded German documentation and does not gel with other cases of this nature. We are able to refer to a number of confirmed cases of Australian’s who did die as prisoners of war shortly after the battle and in all their files the specific date and location of their burial in a German cemetery was accurately recorded. Then why not Johnson’s?

But further to this, the letter claims that the IWGC were able to locate the German soldier, Johann Fischer, who apparently buried Johnson and indicated the exact place of his burial at Beaucamps. Even if we were to ignore the implausibility of a young German soldier on a burial detail in the middle of the Great War recalling accurately the name of Lance Corporal Ralph Johnson six years later, when a search of the plot indicated was conducted, no remains were found at all. In fact, a later memorandum to the Prime Minister’s Department dated in 1924 further clarifies this,

“I have now to inform you that a further communication has been received from the Imperial War Graves Commission stating that all British bodies have now been exhumed from Beaucamps Communal Cemetery German Extension and reburied at Pont du Hem Military Cemetery, La Gorgue and that during the work of exhumation nothing was found which could be connected to the burial of Pte. Johnson.”

As a result of this, it was decided that a ‘special memorial’ be erected at Pont du Hem Military Cemetery to indicate the suspected circumstances of his burial. The text of this memorial was decided upon and his parents notified of the outcome,

“To the memory of this Australian soldier who died as a Prisoner of War and is believed to have been buried at the time in Beauchamps Communal Cemetery German Extension, but whose grave is now lost. Their glory shall not be blotted out.”

What is interesting to note is that although still being recorded as a special memorial, Johnson’s headstone no longer bears this inscription - if it ever even did.

It is our contention, supported by German documentation of the time, that 1046 Lance Corporal Ralph Johnson did not die as a prisoner of war on the 21st July 1916 and was never buried at Beaucamps Communal Cemetery German Extension to begin with. All the available evidence points to the fact that he is very likely to have been one of the 250 Australian and British soldiers buried in the mass graves at Pheasant Wood, Fromelles.

3006 Corporal Percy George Archibald Barr, 54th Battalion

- Rue du Bois Military Cemetery

Percy Barr was born in Oxford, England but in 1903, at the age of 6 years, he was brought to Australia by his parents who took up address at Dulwich Hill, Sydney.

After being educated at Arnold College, Petersham and serving four years in the Senior Cadets and another one with the Citizen Military Forces, Barr enlisted with the 10th Reinforcements, 2nd Battalion in July 1915.

Upon arrival in Egypt in February 1916, he was re-assigned to the 54th Battalion during the reshuffle of troops after the Gallipoli campaign. In the weeks just prior to leaving for France in June 1916, Percy was promoted to the rank of Corporal.

Less than a month after arriving on the Western Front, Percy Barr took part in the Fromelles battle and fortunately there is some record of what happened to him. In later statements taken by the Red Cross, fellow members of his battalion all stated that he had been killed by shellfire whilst in the German lines and that his body had to be left there when they retired.

A search of his files reveal the fact that his name was one of those recorded on the German death list dated 4th November 1916 and that his identity disk was located after the war in German possession. Further to this, German death vouchers were also found indicating that Barr had fallen at Fromelles on 19th July, 1916.

Everything at this point appears to fit the criteria with the possibility of Barr being one of those buried at Pheasant Wood but unexplainably in 1920 he is listed on a Graves Registration concentration report as being interred at Rue du Bois Military Cemetery. Enquiries made with the CWGC regarding their records for this cemetery proved fruitless as apparently many of the burial returns were scrapped during the Second World War, presumably as part of a recycling drive to aid the war effort. We are therefore unable to determine the circumstances surrounding his apparent recovery and cannot assess the veracity of its likelihood.

What has been established is that Barr’s grave has always only ever been inscribed as “Believed to be”, and never formally confirmed to actually contain his remains. Strangely, his mother was offered the same option of having those words omitted from his headstone and like Scott’s mother, she agreed, but for some unknown reason they never have been.

1137 Corporal Walter Godfrey Hughes, 54th Battalion

- Ration Farm Military Cemetery

Born in South Melbourne Victoria, Walter Hughes was a 43 year old station overseer/accountant living with his wife in Moore Park, Sydney when he enlisted at the very earlier stages of the war with the 1st Reinforcements, 2nd Battalion.

Joining the battalion shortly after they had arrived in Egypt, Walter Hughes then took part in the landing at Anzac Cove in April 1915 and served throughout the Gallipoli campaign.

Like Percy Barr, Hughes was re-assigned to the 54th Battalion after the withdrawal from Gallipoli and travelled with them to France in June 1916, taking part in the battle of Fromelles less than a month later.

Listed as missing after the battle, he was not confirmed as having been killed in action until his identity disk was returned from the Germans in 1917, even though his name had appeared on the German death list dated 4th November 1916.

The only narrative of his death comes from a single member of the 54th Battalion who stated he had seen Hughes killed by rifle fire just outside their own trench. This report was never verified by corroborating statements and therefore cannot be considered as entirely reliable. Indeed, German death vouchers located after the war at the Imperial Prussian War Office confirm their previous notifications that Hughes had been killed in the neighbourhood of Fromelles on 19th July 1916, all of which strongly indicate they had taken possession of his remains after the battle.

Again, enquiries with the CWGC revealed that the burial returns for Ration Farm Military Cemetery have been destroyed and we are none the wiser with regards to the supposed discovery of his remains. All we have is a Graves Registration concentration report in Hughes’ service file detailing his apparent burial at Ration Farm in 1920 and a note regarding a photograph taken of the headstone after his re-burial.

Without the burial returns, it is hard to determine whether the Germans might have given Hughes a separate battlefield grave that was later discovered and exhumed by the Graves Registration Unit. Nevertheless, in the absence of any evidence that either proves or disproves the circumstances of his burial, we must consider the established criteria for inclusion on the Department of Defence’s working list of names. Clearly, he falls into the first three of those categories and as such should be added to it as quite possibly being one of those buried in the mass graves at Pheasant Wood.

1916 Private Arthur Francis Engel, 60th Battalion

- Ration Farm Military Cemetery

Arthur Engel was born in 1893 at Echuca Victoria to New Zealand emigrants Arthur and Catherine Engel. Living with his parents in Prahran, Arthur was employed as a labourer until his enlistment with the 3rd Reinforcements, 23rd Battalion in June 1915.

After leaving Australia, he joined the 23rd Battalion in October 1915 and saw out the final months of the Gallipoli campaign with them until being admitted to hospital in December with trench foot, frostbite and influenza.

After their return to Egypt, Engel was taken on strength of the newly formed 60th Battalion and sent to France in June 1916.

Like so many others who fell during the Great War, there is no record of his final moments and immediately after the battle he was posted as missing in action. It was not until the 13th September 1916 that his name appeared on a German death list and notification was made that his personal effects were in German hands (his identity disk was returned to his family in 1921). Initially misinterpreted to mean he had died as a Prisoner of War in Germany, this was later rectified to show that he had been killed in action at Fromelles on the 19th July 1916. The German death vouchers and associated documents located after the war and reproduced in both his service file and Red Cross records, verify these details.

The first mention of a burial for Arthur Engel was in 1920 when the Graves Registration Unit noted it in his file. Subsequent notifications to family and headstone photograph offers substantiate that authorities thought him to be buried at Ration Farm. Unfortunately, as we have already seen, the burial returns for Ration Farm no longer exist and there is no way we can establish how his recovery and identification was made.

Like Hughes, it is possible that Engel’s remains may have been recovered from an unmarked individual grave set apart from those at Pheasant Wood, but without further evidence to prove this, and with the records sustaining the necessary criteria for inclusion, he also must be considered as potentially having been buried in the mass graves.

NB. The story regarding Ralph JOHNSON needs updating as we have recently discovered the communications to and from the German soldier, Johann FISCHER who claimed to have buried him. Although this adds a new twist to that particular tale, we believe it doesn't alter the conclusions above and that JOHNSON is likely to have been buried at Pheasant Wood.

I hope everyone found that interesting.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[ianw]

Absolutely fascinating , Tim.

Can I take it that Johnson, Barr, Hughes and Engel have been added to the Fromelles list? They obviously should be.

I do hope that the answer is "YES"!

It would be a travesty if they are denied the possibility of a correct known grave after all these years.

Regards Ian

[Auimfo]

Ian,

I submitted our findings to the Australian Fromelles Project Group and they agreed that these men should also be considered as likely candidates so in a nutshell, yes they were added to the list.

The added information about JOHNSON and the German soldier FISCHER is fascinating. I'll give you the short version....

After the war, Johann FISCHER wrote to JOHNSON's father (we have a copy of the transcribed letter). He told him that JOHNSON had died in his arms and with his last breath gave him some possessions and asked for them to be returned to his family and to inform them what had happened to him. This he did. FISCHER went on to say that he'd then taken JOHNSON's body to the German Military Cemetery at Beauchamps and given him a soldiers burial. But this is where we think things have come unstuck.

There can be no doubt that FISCHER was in possession of JOHNSON's belongings but whether he got them from the dying JOHNSON or from his body at some later stage is open for debate. The letter is couched in terms that makes one think FISCHER was writing it with a mind to ease the pain of relatives and that perhaps he was bending the truth a little for this well intentioned purpose. What he didn't expect was to then be caught up in his own story and forced to exacerbate the deception. As a result of the letter, JOHNSON's father, in his efforts to locate his son's body, wrote to base records and sent them a copy. FISCHER was then tracked down in Germany, interviewed and asked to pinpoint JOHNSON's grave on a map of Beauchamps German Military Cemetery. This he did but as we have seen, no body was located at that spot and nor was any evidence of JOHNSON's burial ever located at Beauchamps. It also seems highly improbable that a German private would be permitted to escort a single enemy body that far away from the battlefield in order to give him a proper burial when the mass graves were already in preparation nearby.

My belief is that FISCHER located the items on JOHNSON's body while they were searching all the remains for discs and personal items just prior to burial in the mass graves. (there is plenty of evidence that this was done by the number of items returned to families). Whether he initially thought to souvenir them with later remorse or whether he fully intended from the outset to return them himself is open to conjecture but when finally deciding to return them, I think he tries to defend his part in keeping the items by justifying them as an entrusted task after which he attempts to mask the true horror of what occured to JOHNSON by creating a noble death and honourable burial. He wouldn't have been the first to do that.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[ianw]

Tim,

Yes, I agree that it would be most unlikely that a single body would have been singled out to go to Beauchamps. Who knows what Fischer motivations were.

So I suppose all that could be done was to give him his chance of identification with the rest.

I breathed a sigh of relief when I read that your representations meant that they had been included.

I must say that personally, I am not surprised that these errors occurred and that they don't detract from the sterling work that was done in identifying the Fallen after the Great War. If anything , it is surprising that there were not more errors. That said, if we can correct a few now, we should do so.

[Auimfo]

Included yes, but not yet identified. Unfortunately we are yet to locate descendants of these men. The good thing is that when we do, any appropriate DNA will be accepted for testing and hopefully aid in providing these men with a correctly named grave. (wherever that may be)

Cheers,

Tim L.

[ianw]

Included yes, but not yet identified. Unfortunately we are yet to locate descendants of these men.

Tim L.

Best of luck with that, Tim. I am sure that if they are out there, you guys will find them.

[Pierre]

Here is the new stone in place of these of Robert Grieve Moncrieff Scott in Rue Petillon.

Cheers.

Pierre

[ianw]

I note that the unknown soldier is identified as a 32nd battalion man. I presume that this is because there was the relevant insignia with the remains. Is this unit ID absolutely safe? Should he be exhumed to be part of the Fromelles ID process?