Award Walter Tull his WW1 posthumous Military Cross

[barrowford29]

Walter was the first black outfield player in football's top flight and the first black soldier to become an infantry officer in the British army.

2nd Lieutenant Walter Daniel John Tull led his men on dangerous missions behind enemy lines and returned without loss or injury. For these acts of bravery, he was cited for his "gallantry and coolness" under fire by Major General Sir Sydney Lawford, his commanding officer and recommended for the Military Cross. Untypically, for officers with his service record and commendation, he never received it. Was it because he embodied a contradiction? The Manual of Military Law forbade men not of 'pure European descent' from becoming officers.

Please join us in demanding the government right this historical injustice by signing this e-petition to posthumously award Walter Daniel John Tull his Military Cross.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/41209

Thank you.

[charlesmessenger]

Please produce the primary source evidence that he was recommended for an MC. Also, why should he be singled out when many other brave men were recommended for awards which they did not receive?

Charles M

[JimSmithson]

I agree with you Charles - the number of citations either not awarded or downgraded must be countless - why should one be singled out for change? I can appreciate the sentiment but this is dodgy ground and maybe not well enough thought through.

Jim

[stiletto_33853]

Groan not again surely!!!

Use the search engine Barrowford

[JimSmithson]

Bad pennies Andy!

Jim

[stiletto_33853]

Could be Jim,

As Charles says, produce the primary evidence or just shut up pretty please

[Kate Wills]

Walter was ... the first black soldier to become an infantry officer in the British army.

But no campaign for Bemand?

[T8HANTS]

This is utterly disgusting positive discrimination against, against hundreds of other officers and thousands of men who may have also merited some award or other. Even if evidence is produced for a recommendation he didn't get then, he doesn’t deserve it now.

This is what happens when you unleash the mad dogs of political correctness.

Let’s retrospectively free all the slaves and have done with it, the advantage would be we could claim there never were any slaves within the British Empire

[Steven Broomfield]

Could we just not award everybody a gallantry medal? Then we could award everyone who already had one another, and so on.

Take a leaf out of the Dormouse's book in Alice in Wonderland

[maxi]

Walter Tull was not only a Spurs player but also played for Northampton Town who have erected a memorial in his honour.

As a Spurs fan, I wish that we would do something like a statue but no more. I am done with this modern day righting of wrongs with pardons here and apologies there.

I am sure there were many good souls who have not received the recognition they deserved but we are where we are.

Maxi

[MartinWills]

I believe the only suggestion that he was recommended for an MC comes from a letter home from another which is inaccurate in a number of instances. There is, to my knowledge, no indication in official records or in any other reliable source that such a recommendation was ever made by Lawford or anyone else..

It is not the case that a recommendation generally resulted in an award - in many cases this did not happen.

This many years on from the events of the war and in the face of nothing more than unreliable and uncorroborated "hearsay" it is difficult to conclude that Tull was even recommended for an MC.

To re-open this case could open the floodgates of requests for declined recommendations to be revisited and awarded on the slightest of evidence.

All of this takes nothing away from what Tull, Bernand and many many other officers did during the war. People of many nationalities, origins and backgrounds served with many of the armies and other units of the Great War and they should all be remembered equally.

Maxi, I think, is quite right to note that he also played for Spurs, indeed his achievements in the cause of equality there were as important as elsewhere. To record the service of all players from that team who served would be a positive step. Likewise one might hope that Northampton Town would see fit to "memorialise" all of its players and officials who served and, in some cases, made the ultimate sacrifice.

[MichaelBully]

Barrowfield, as you probably have gathered the issue of Walter Tull has been debated here at the GWF and generates strong feelings.

<<<Please join us in demanding the government right this historical injustice>>>>

Another way of looking at this to campaign for the government to re-write history. The verdict of Walter Tull's time was that he was not entitled to the MC. That should stay. I can think of a local officer who died taking part on the Zeebrugge Raid who I personally think deserved the VC, He did not get the honour that I personally think he should have received. But that was the decision of the time and this has to be kept to.

I hope that you don't mind what is hopefully constructive criticism. Pals who don't agree with the Walter Tull campaign have pointed out the lack of reference to source material and the fact that Tull campaign websites tend to 'cut and paste' from each other. What you have offered to us is basically a 'cut and paste ' of a petition. You haven't offered your own view .I genuinely want to read what your own view is as a Great War Forum pal.

Regards

Michael Bully

Slightly edited after posting

[maxi]

MartinWills

I will contact the press officers of both clubs to see how they will commemorate the centenary (if at all).

Maxi

[hazelclark]

What everyone here seems to be missing is that to grant Tull the MC at this stage would be doing the man a disservice. He would be getting it strictly BECAUSE of his race and in the face of all those other men who, though equally deserving are being ignored. In my mind, anyone who served in that war was deserving of the very highest award anyway. Well, almost anyone!

Hazel

[keithmroberts]

Barrowford

I'm another who must differ with you. History happened. I'm all for learning from it, understanding it and respecting the efforts and sacrifices of earlier generations, but I really don't want to change its outcomes.

Argue ay that some decisions or actions (if they happened), were bad, some were wrong, whatever, but that is not a basis for altering the historical record.

Wars involve countless acts of courage, a few of which are recognised by awards soon after they happen. I suspect that the number of men who acted with courage that I find it hard to imagine runs into hundreds of thousands, if not millions.

To try to change the facts, rather than trying to help people to understand and interpret them has to be just plain wrong.

Keith

[KevinBattle]

<sigh> Should we now relocate all these numerous Walter Tull threads into their own separate sub forum, with access restricted a la Skindles to only those who want to rewrite history and campaign for ONE medal for ONE man?

I'm fed up of finding another Tull thread virtually every week. Did no one else fight in WW1?

Even if there was a case, to honour one man not for his bravery being more than any other comrade, but simply because he's a current "pet" topic, would demean that very award into a "token" which surely is what you want to avoid?

Go off and complain to F1 that Hamilton doesn't win every race 'cos he's black!

Have you really nothing better to do in your life but latch on to other peoples causes?

Did you really think that with less than 100 postings YOU would be the only one to have first thought of putting such a post up?

I may as well start a campaign to ensure posters use the Search function, and do a little ORIGINAL research of their own

Now, THANK YOU, too, go off and produce some of your own research to support your call.

[Old Owl]

Michael and Keith,

I agree 110% with your comments, but I must point out that these should be directed at Barrowford1914 and not Barrowfield! They don't have quite the same impact when addressed to the wrong person--sorry!!

Robert

[Lancashire Fusilier]

I am not sure I understand the purpose of this petition, as during WW1 there must have been many, many thousands of instances where fine brave British officers carried out acts of bravery, followed by a recommendation for an award, which like Lt. Tull's, were subsequently not granted. With only 37,081 Military Crosses awarded between August 1914 and May 1920, the Military Cross is a prime example.

Obviously, there was no real discrimination against Walter Tull due to his being black, as despite being black, he was a star football player with Tottenham Hotspur, and he was also a British officer, something many men may have wished for, but very few got to experience and enjoy.

This petition on behalf of Tull seems to be a particularly perverted form of ' Reverse Discrimination ' as it is motivated not on any real merits, other than he was black, and so does a grave disservice to the many, many thousands of other brave British officers, who only because they are white, are not being included in the petition.

The petition would have far more credibility, if it petitioned for all officers who were recommended for the Military Cross, or indeed any other award for bravery, but did not subsequently get that award, to be given that award.

Tull has already received far more recognition, attention and acclaim both as a Tottenham player and a British WW1 officer than most, so it can hardly be said that he has been overlooked or neglected!

With only some 2000+ persons bothering to sign the petition, it has no chance whatsoever of succeeding, with Tull never getting his Military Cross, and that would be the correct outcome.

For Tull to pick up the Military Cross just because he was black, and all those same British officers, who like Tull were also recommended for the Military Cross and were also not granted the M.C., to still not get their Military Crosses, that would indeed be the real injustice.

LF

[roughdiamond]

There are subjects that polarises opinion and may cause some at those poles to make forthright comments that others may find offensive. The case of Walter Tull and his perceived slight has been one of those subjects on numerous occassions, a simple search will find them.

Is it time to add this subject to that of politics and religeon and whenever it rears it's head again as it inevitably will, have the mods lock the thread and point the person to the mutitude of threads that already exist?

Sam

[Kate Wills]

Sam,

There was a time when shot at dawn was banned from this Forum. I won't elaborate on the sturm und drang that led to the ban; but it was a decision that was forced upon us by the unacceptable actions of a few. Time moved on, and in keeping with our feeling was that no Great War subject should be off-limits, SAD was brought back into the fold.

Personally, I would hate to see a ban on Tull, as it would be an insult to his memory. To avoid that, all sides simply need to uphold the usual courtesies of spirited debate.

[Dragon]

To avoid that, all sides simply need to uphold the usual courtesies of spirited debate.

I agree with you, which is why I'm surprised to see that statements telling a fellow member to "shut up", "Have you really nothing better to do in your life but latch on to other peoples causes?" and "Now, THANK YOU, too, go off and produce some of your own research" are apparently considered acceptable, alongside virtual sighs and angry tones.

People who profess themselves utterly bored by threads on Walter Tull seem peculiarly riveted by them and quite incapable of ignoring them. Whatever one thinks of the petition, the original poster did at least address readers politely.

Gwyn

[auchonvillerssomme]

This is such a huge bandwagon the facts have been trampled under its hooves and wheels.

[keithmroberts]

Robert

Thanks for pointing out my error. Now corrected.

Keith

[redbarchetta]

People who profess themselves utterly bored by threads on Walter Tull seem peculiarly riveted by them and quite incapable of ignoring them.

Very well put, Gwyn! I didn't respond to the original posting when it came up, not wanting to contribute to starting a whole new thread on the subject, and thinking that others would do likewise and the thread would simply wither and die, but it seems people simply cannot resist...

(And now I've added a further reply... )

James

[David Filsell]

Tullmania only gets worse - just recieved for review

Walter Tull Scrapbook, “11.99, Francis Lincoln Children’s Books, London, 32pp. ills throughout in scrapbook style, ISBN 978-1-84780-212-5

This rather strange children’s book - with blood spattered pages - purports to offer “the true story of Water Tull’s life presented as a fictionalised scrap book”. Certainly it contains fiction. Tull was a pre-war professional footballer with Clapton FC, Spurs, and Northampton; 1914 volunteer in 17^th Middlesex; he was commissioned; killed in action on March 1918. Other than that he was one of very few black soldiers to gain a commission, his military career and tragic death were both unremarkably usual.

Sadly amongst the fictionalized are unforgiveable errors - not least Tull was recommended for an MC - Minstry of Defence has stated that there is no evidence for the assertion on file.. The inference that he was the only black man to gain commission is incorrect . The 1914 Christmas Truce is given as 1915 - a year in which GHQ warned that participants in any truce would be crimed (and two Guards officers were court martial for the offence). The whizz-bang was not a “cannon”, Shrapnel was not “jagged bits of cannon shell”.

Picky? No, both Tull and young readers deserve better, so get it right or don’t bother..

Only my opinion of course

Edited 26 February , 2013 by Keith Roberts
Font size only - was too small