Retrospective VCs

[domwalsh]

I know there has been fierce discussion on this tricky subject before but thought I'd post this. The only one I'm familiar with is Rudd. I can't see any basis for him to get a retrospective VC as his actions at Zeebrugge were no more meritorious than any number of fellow sailors/marines. He missed out in the ballot and there is no suggestion he almost pipped AB McKenzie. If he had truly merited a VC, then surely Keyes would have ensured that, like Harrison and Bradford, he got one after all.

FED:Tribunal to consider 13 retrospective VCs

1104 words

19 April 2011

Australian Associated Press General News

AAP

English

© 2011 Australian Associated Press Pty Ltd. All Rights Reserved

VC By Max Blenkin, AAP Defence Correspondent

CANBERRA, April 19 AAP - Four of the 13 Australian servicemen to be considered for retrospective award of the Victoria Cross are sailors who remained at their guns in the face of devastating Japanese air attacks. Three didn't survive.

Three were aboard the tiny sloop HMAS Yarra which took on an entire Japanese battle fleet in the hope of allowing the merchant ships they were escorting time to escape. They too didn't survive.

Three of those on the list already have Collins-class submarines named in their honour.

One of those nominated was an Australian sailor who died aboard a US military helicopter conducting ground-attack operations over Vietnam.

One was a Briton serving on an Australian vessel. Another was an Australian serving aboard a British ship.

Under an inquiry announced on Saturday, the independent Defence Honours and Awards Appeal Tribunal will consider the vexed issue of the retrospective award of the VC to long-dead servicemen, some of whose brave deeds occurred almost a century ago.

It will specifically consider the case of 11 former sailors and two soldiers from three wars. Despite an abundance of gallantry, none of the 98 VCs awarded to Australians has ever gone to a sailor.

The inquiry will take around a year and once that's done, it will consider submissions for consideration of the VC for others beyond the 13 listed.

But it may stumble before that point on difficult constitutional and diplomatic issues.

Until 1991, the VC was awarded to Australians through the Imperial honours system. In 1991, Australia adopted the VC for Australia, an identical medal but awarded through the Australian honours system.

However, the VC for Australia can still only be awarded "with the approval of the Sovereign".

Of the 13 names listed, there's just one household name.

* Private John Simpson Kirkpatrick, 22, a British-born soldier who achieved lasting fame on Gallipoli. Day and night, braving enemy fire he and his donkey carried wounded to the aid station. He was shot dead on May 19, 1915. He was recommended for the VC but but that wasn't supported by then director of medical services, Australia's first VC winner Colonel Neville Howse.

* Gunner Albert Cleary, 22, was a prisoner of war who sought to escape after the infamous Sandakan death march in 1945. He was recaptured by Japanese guards and brutally beaten over a period of days before dying.

* Midshipman Robert Ian Davies, 18, was an Australian-born sailor serving aboard the British battleship HMS Repulse. Attacked by Japanese aircraft off the coast of Malaya on December 10, 1941, he was last seen firing at the attackers as his gun position submerged.

* Leading Cook Francis Bassett Emms, 32, was a cook aboard HMAS Kara Kara, a boom gate vessel stationed in Darwin harbour at the time of the Japanese air attack on February 15, 1942. Despite severe wounds, he continued to fire a machinegun at attacking aircraft. He died en route to a hospital ship. His actions were considered comparable to British sailor Jack Mantle, awarded the VC for defending his ship from German air attack in 1940.

* Lieutenant David John Hamer was gunnery officer aboard HMAS Australia during operations off the Philippines in 1945 when the ship came under repeated Japanese air attack. Over nine days, he calmly directed anti-aircraft defences. One attacking suicide aircraft passed within five metres of his head. Like his brother, Victorian premier Dick Hamer, he went into politics, serving in the federal parliament. He died in 2002 aged 78.

* Lieutenant Commander Robert Rankin, 36, commanded the sloop HMAS Yarra escorting a convoy of merchant ships back to Australia ahead of advancing Japanese forces. Spotting three Japanese heavy cruisers on March 4, 1942, he turned to attack in the hope of allowing the convoy to escape. Yarra's situation was hopeless and Rankin was killed shortly after ordering surviving crewmen to abandon ship. He received no award, although his situation was regarded as comparable to that of British Commander Fogarty Fegen of HMS Jervis Bay who took on a German battleship. Rankin has a Collins submarine named in his honour.

* Able Seaman Dalmorton Joseph Owendale Rudd was one of 11 Australian sailors who participated in the attack on Zeebrugge, Belgium, on April 22-23, 1918. Essentially a commando raid, this was designed to seal off a canal allowing German submarines access to the sea. Eight VCs were awarded to British participants and Rudd was unsuccessful in the ballot for a VC for his unit. He was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal but that was taken away for his part in the 1919 mutiny over conditions aboard HMAS Australia. He died in 1963 aged 90.

* Ordinary Seaman Edward Sheean, 18, was a gun-loader aboard the Corvette HMAS Armidale which was attacked by Japanese aircraft off northern Australia on December 1, 1942. Although wounded, he shot down one Japanese bomber and was last seen still firing as Armidale disappeared under water. A Collins submarine is named in his honour.

* Leading Aircrewman Noel Shipp, 24, was an Australian sailor attached to the Australian navy helicopter flight in Vietnam, then operating with a US helicopter unit. On May 31, 1969, he was a door gunner aboard a US helicopter gunship which came under intense enemy fire, with its pilot hit. Shipp was observed to continue firing on the enemy position right to the moment of impact which killed all aboard. He received no award.

* Lieutenant Commander Francis Smith, 33, was killed while serving as a gunnery officer aboard HMAS Yarra while directing a one-sided battle with superior Japanese warships.

* Lieutenant Commander Henry Stoker was a British naval officer who commanded the Australian submarine AE2 when it successfully penetrated the Dardanelles at the same time as Australian troops went ashore at Gallipoli. AE2 sank in the Sea Marmara and all aboard were taken prisoner. British commander Norman Holbrook who also penetrated the Dardanelles but managed to escape was awarded the VC. Stoker died in London aged 81.

* Leading Seaman Ronald Taylor, 23, was a sailor aboard HMAS Yarra who remained alone at his gun, firing continually until killed shortly before the ship sank.

* Captain Hector Waller, 41, was commander of the cruiser HMAS Perth which encountered a superior Japanese force in the Sunda Strait on February 29, 1942. Perth fought until all ammunition was gone and the ship was struck repeatedly by torpedoes. Captain Waller went down with his ship. A Collins submarine is named in his honour

[Staffsyeoman]

With a heavy heart, I can't but feel uneasy about all this. Rightly or wrongly - at least in the British/Commonwealth system, if they did not get one (at least in the modern era, I know there are Victorian exceptions),

the time has gone. This feels like the American practice of retrospective Medals of Honor for (what are effectively) political reasons and purposes.

Just my two penneth, no more, no less.

[Heid the Ba]

Out of curiosity, what is a naval gunner supposed to do? Surely if the ship is afloat the choice is to do his duty or run?

As a general principle I agree with Staffsyeoman, as they were considered at the time there is no point in reconsidering them now.

[David_Underdown]

I believe that particularly in the case of WWI awards there was a declaration by a previous monarch that no more gallantry awards were to be considered - previous attempts to get a retrospective VC for Kirkpatrick have foundered on that. I don't know if a similar declaration was ever made for WWII.

[truthergw]

Landmines and pitfalls, everywhere I look. I suspect that this is all about modern politicians. The very idea that any particular serviceman ' ought ' to have been awarded a VC or any other medal is ludicrous. There is no criterion by which one could exclude anyone who served.

[Piorun]

While these were all gallant men, a retrospective VC for an already-known action would appear to be a retrogade step. Antony

[squirrel]

I am unable to see the sense in this. For whatever reasons, medals were not awarded at the time when the incident(s) were investigated and a decision taken. Posthumous awards I can understand but the reasoning behind retrospective awards is beyond my comprehension. Where will it stop? Retrospective DSO's, MC's, DCM's, MM's, GC's AM's and Mid's?

[Steven Broomfield]

While they're at it, I'm pretty sure my old dad saved Montgomery's life in 1940. At least, he told me he did, and that's evidence enough for me.

Oh, and while they're at it, could I suggest they go through the list of every medal ever awarded and remove those that weren't really worth it? I mean to say, what did Gobson do except fly around while others dropped the bombs? Gort - pcha! Only got his VC, DSOs and MCs because he knew the King. Beharry? He was in a ruddy armoured vehicle - how dangerous can that be?

Seriously? Ropey idea. Forget it. Now.

[David B]

As far as I am aware if you die at your post it is a VC, MID or nothing. At the time of all these incidents it was thought that the award of the VC was not merited and therefore I believe that the status quo should remain.

All these men are long since dead and who will it belefit. I also believe awarding a mass of VC's would only tend to cheapen the award and we don't want that to happen.

[Dolphin]

I, too, am of the mind that the time to award a VC, or any other award for valour, is during or immediately after the conflict concerned. If a particular service person missed out at the time, then (unfortunately) it's just bad luck. As it was good luck when an undeserved award was made. When there are no living witnesses, or other people who were involved in the decision to award, or not award, a decoration available for interview, then it seems pointless, we don't know all the circumstances prevailing at the time.

Gareth

[David_Underdown]

As far as I am aware if you die at your post it is a VC, MID or nothing.

That was true up until 1973 or thereabouts (GC could also be awarded posthumously), but from then on it was decided that all decorations could be awarded posthumously

[Staffsyeoman]

That was true up until 1973 or thereabouts (GC could also be awarded posthumously), but from then on it was decided that all decorations could be awarded posthumously

Not sure... I think it might have been 1975, when the Queen's Gallantry Medal was instituted (following the kidnap attempt on Princess Anne). But the DSO has never been available for posthumous award as it is an Order as opposed to a decoration (strictly you are a Companion of the Distinguished Service Order) - and Orders are not awarded posthumously.

[David B]

David,

you are probably right of course, but as I was talking about ww1/2 - should have emphasized that - I think my answer still stands as correct. I am sure that

a lot of men who deserved medals (or awards) missed out because they were KIA. Ergo I also think that any one who stuck their head above a trench deserved

more than a campaign medal.

Cheers

[auchonvillerssomme]

While they're at it, I'm pretty sure my old dad saved Montgomery's life in 1940. At least, he told me he did, and that's evidence enough for me.

Oh, and while they're at it, could I suggest they go through the list of every medal ever awarded and remove those that weren't really worth it? I mean to say, what did Gobson do except fly around while others dropped the bombs? Gort - pcha! Only got his VC, DSOs and MCs because he knew the King. Beharry? He was in a ruddy armoured vehicle - how dangerous can that be?

Seriously? Ropey idea. Forget it. Now.

I agree, I certainly deserved an award for escorting a page 3 model and her mum on a tour of NAAFI's!

I have made my feelings known on another post, you cannot re-write history and no matter how much you dress it up thats what it is.

[truthergw]

I agree, I certainly deserved an award for escorting a page 3 model and her mum on a tour of NAAFI's!

I have made my feelings known on another post, you cannot re-write history and no matter how much you dress it up thats what it is.

Unfortunately, this proposal has already accomplished its goal. It gave publicity to the person proposing it and that is all that was required. No publicity is bad publicity is the motto for all politicians. The fact that a forum the other side of the world is debating the idea will have a publicity agent rubbing his hands with glee and renegotiating next year's fee upwards.

[David B]

So far I believe it is a lot of huff and puff, with a few people pushing their own agendas, least of all the press who can see a story in it. I note that the committee has been

given a year to report back and recommend their findings. In some cases there is probably merit but as far as I am concerned most of these events took place nearly

a century ago and I believe sleeping dogs should be allowed to lie.

[domwalsh]

I think we have a broad consensus. Most of us would agree that at least some of these men should probably have got a VC but they didn't and that's that. Awarding medals is not a precise science. No matter how many rules and regulations and guidelines that are provided, it will always be down to the judgment of those who witnessed the acts and were in a position to make recommendations. An officer who was fresh into the trenches and who saw an act that was beyond the call of normal duty might rush to pen a gushing recommendation, whereas a hard-bitten officer on his fifth stint in the frontline might feel he'd seen it all before. And if he didn't like the soldier for wahtver reason then there was no way he'd make a recommendation.

As we all know, the criteria for the award of the VC have changed markedly over the years. In the early years, they were sometimes awarded for what might now be seen as lesser acts of gallantry. Should all those be retrospectively removed? Of course not.

There could be other factors at play. Keyes effectively blackmailed the admiralty into putting forward all his Zeebrugge/Ostend decoration recommendations by refusing to accept his own peerage until they had been approved. He got his way. History tells us that political factors often came into play.

The history of the awarding of the VC is far from a perfect one, but I don't think any of us would ever say that this had in any way diminished the value of the medal. However, it is clear to me that this is exactly what would happen if Australia decided to make retrospective awards.

[centurion]

There is a further can of poisonous worms that this could open

You have soldiers A, B, C and D in the same action. B gets awarded a VC, A, C and D are considered but not awarded. Soldier D was from the dominion of Fourecks and there is pressure from various groups in that country that he should have been so awarded. A special commission is constituted and retrospectively awards the medal to Private D, so what about A and C? Should their case also be reopened? Will there be pressure in their countries on the grounds that if D was awarded why not them? Worse still might someone start to say "it was D that performed the act of gallantry and B shouldn't have got his" or " B's medal should have gone to C" which would be invidious. Some things are best left lying

[Steven Broomfield]

Some things are best left lying

So we're back to politicians again...

[David_Underdown]

I had forgotten the wrinkle of the DSO being an order, and it seems the change wasn't actually made until 1979 (see the present incarnation of the Wikipedia page on the MC and Anthony Staunton's comment on the talk page). In fact it wasn't until the 20s that the Royal Warrant for the VC was explicitly amended to mention posthumous awards though policy had changed some years before when the families of several men previously gazetted with the comment that they would have been awarded the VC had they lived were sent actual VCs. There's also often confusion between the strict meaning of posthumous awards ie died in the action for which the decoration was awarded and cases such as that of Wilfred Owen where the recommendation for an earlier act was still going through channels when he was killed, and only gazetted after his death.

[AnthonyStaunton]

I had forgotten the wrinkle of the DSO being an order, and it seems the change wasn't actually made until 1979 (see the present incarnation of the Wikipedia page on the MC and Anthony Staunton's comment on the talk page). In fact it wasn't until the 20s that the Royal Warrant for the VC was explicitly amended to mention posthumous awards though policy had changed some years before when the families of several men previously gazetted with the comment that they would have been awarded the VC had they lived were sent actual VCs. There's also often confusion between the strict meaning of posthumous awards ie died in the action for which the decoration was awarded and cases such as that of Wilfred Owen where the recommendation for an earlier act was still going through channels when he was killed, and only gazetted after his death.

There were twelve so called 'memoranda' cases of which three were granted in 1902 and six in 1907. There was never a notice in the gazette for the other three, all from the Indian Mutiny, to say that the next of kin had received the Victoria Cross. In addition to these twelve official posthumous awards the son of Lord Roberts was just one of 14 other recipients whose award was gazetted after the death of the recipient.

[auchonvillerssomme]

But again my point is that the The Victoria Cross for Australia was created by letters patent signed by Elizabeth II, Queen of Australia, on 15 January 1991. 1991, so therefore it did not exist prior to that date, it is a seperate award from the Victoria Cross. In my very humble opinion you cannot make a retrospective award of a medal that did not exist at the time of the action.

[David B]

So in actual fact it would have to be the VC full stop. A select committee has been formed to study the various claims and report back within a year their findings. It will be an interesting exercise I think.

Somehow in the last few years I feel we have gone 'gong 'happy.

[auchonvillerssomme]

But the creation of the Victoria Cross for Australia would prohibit the award of the 'other' VC to Australian's so that doesn't work either.

[MrEd]

. Beharry? He was in a ruddy armoured vehicle - how dangerous can that be?

yeah his body was in the vehicle, but he poked his head out the hatch as his periscope wasnt working, took incoming small arms fire, and unloaded the wounded under fire all while driving a crippled warrior through a RPG ambush - this got him a citation, and then he did it all again later on (about a month later in a similar incident) except this time he took an RPG inches from his head, yet even with life threatening injuries he continued to drive the warrior past the ambush to save his colleagues before losing consciouness. he needed brain surgery to sort him out that time and thats what he won his VC for. I dont think you should play down what he did, armoured vehicle or not.

but i do agree with the retrospective VC's being an ill-advised idea