Pt. Harry Farr. shot at dawn, Carnoy, Oct. 18th. 1916

[TEW]

Have obtained the APM's Officer File from TNA. Definitely the right man, see image/s. What I think is odd is that he was appointed Assistant APM to the 6th Division AFTER the board had decided the extreme penalty should be carried out. He left his position as CO of 228 Coy. 29th Div. Coy. to join 6th Div. as APM on 12th October 1916.

Had formerly been 1st Class District Inspector, Royal Irish Constabulary. in 1900

Can't help but wonder whether his new appointment was directly related to his up coming task.

Also 'present' at executions of:

Sapper F. Malyon (4/4/1917)

Pte Wilfred Clarke (9/2/1918)

Pte Joseph Nisbet (23/8/1918)

Anyone like to comment on the List 320, List 327 & Trans. to General List 16/10/16.

WO95/2297/4 ANCESTRY

TEW

[TEW]

No great progress to report but a few points to make.

CAFTET WOOD

I’ve looked through enough diaries to be able to say that Caftet Wood (or the area around it) was used extensively for bivouacs and training for troops out of the line. Time frame wise this certainly seems to be the case through the summer and early autumn of 1916. Some diaries refer to being bivouacked at Caftet Wood and others say bivouacked on south side or rear of Caftet wood.

I can’t say if it was still being used as such during Oct 1916 once the weather set in. If it was, the north side of the wood is still an option for the execution depending on ‘public openness’. If it had ceased to be used as such then perhaps there’s an argument for using a former training area for the purpose.

LaPree Wood

I can conclusively state that Lapree Wood was taken over and used as a walking wounded station from 7^th Oct 1916 and was still in use on the 21^st Oct.

I should confess that I only became aware of the Plateau Branch Line adjacent to LaPree Wood about a week ago. Lapree Wood was chosen as a WWCS due to its proximity to the Plateau Siding.

Map supplied by Croonaert.

I’m still plugging away at plotting graves for Carnoy, but keep finding conflicting info from CWGC web search/download for Carnoy and the GRRF information eg I don’t think there are two men in AI, three in B3, two in RI, 2 in X1 and one in I7 (no such row). So I have to base correct grave locations from the GRRFs for these men. Email sent to CWGC.

There are three men who died on 18^th Oct 1916 who are buried in Carnoy:

2^nd Lt Haldan

22947 O'Beirne

3/6895, Butman (or Beetman).

Normal searches for MICs, MRs, SDGW, Casulty List, Soldiers’ Effect all concur that details are correct.

And the Rev. C B Plummer 4th Class Chaplain who died 12/3/17, grave A5. Died while with 7/KOYLI, formerly with 12th KLR. 61st Infantry Brigade, 20th Division.

TEW

[TEW]

Have found some details on another 6^th Division SAD event within 4 months of Harry Farr’s. I’m going to mask some of the details to avoid putting my foot in it. PM me if you want the missing details.

It was there all along in one of the 6^th Div. diaries but it’s such an awful diary I missed it before. The diary runs in reverse sequence that occasionally has months out of sync that get squeezed in at some random point. Doesn’t help that whoever wrote it went from Dec 1915 to Jan 1915 then Feb 1916.

Anyway, the other SAD event has two entries because the diary is actually two diaries in one. Entries are 144 pages apart.

Entry 1 reads:

Interviewed M/O [x Regiment] who is detailed to attend a military execution at [x.xx]am tomorrow morning just outside [xxxxxxxxxx]. Arranged with OC 16 Field Ambulance to send a temporary relief for him and to put a motor ambulance at his disposal.

Entry 2 reads:

Wrote orders for OC 16 Field Ambulance to send temporary relief for Capt [xxxxxx] on night of xx/xx/1916 – to MO [x Regiment] to report to APM 6^th Division at [x.xx] on [date given] for which duty a motor ambulance will be placed at his disposal to convey him from his billet to the place of meeting. Also informed OC [x Regiment] of this order to MO [x Regiment].

X regiment is always the same regiment and the one the SAD was with. By chance there is also a unit dispositions given for the same month which places all the HQs including APM in the town. 16 Field Ambulance have their HQ about 5 miles away as the crow flies.

The man was buried in the Military cemetery in the same town, no mention of SAD case on CWGC Historical Background page for Cemetery. GRRFS give no indication of anything different.

It does at least give some indication of the logistics for this event i.e. that the MO had to be interviewed and that he had to report to the APM and that they had a motor ambulance at their disposal.

I’m sure some may be able to work out which diary it’s in and who the man was, if not then feel free to PM me.

TEW

[themonsstar]

TEW great research well done (You're like a dog with a bone)

Roy

[Ron Clifton]

Hello TEW

No names, no pack drill, but I think the man's number began with 4/?

Ron

[TEW]

Ron,

Yes, that's the man. Do you want the diary ref by PM?

Still plugging away at CWGC download file for the 826 men buried in Carnoy. Having spotted a few date of death problems against other sources I felt compelled to x-ref all 826!

Sometimes GRRFS are wrong and CWGC have corrected that and sometimes CWGC have a typo. Am letting them know.

Taken from CWGC for Peronne Rd:

CARNOY COMMUNAL CEMETERY EXTENSION, in which 36 French soldiers and one from the United Kingdom were buried in March 1918.

Getting side-tracked sometimes, 77660 George Reeves, RHA is the one man who makes up 'Carnoy Extension', being buried across the road from the Cemetery (later concentrated into Peronne Rd). His unit was probably the last British unit in Carnoy in March 1918 trying to hold back Operation Michael. His battery location is described in the unit diary as pretty close to his burial spot. Spotter planes kept finding the battery and shells followed fairly swiftly. Given how quickly the enemy overran Carnoy and how far they had advanced by 6 pm the following night. I suspect that Reeves' battery had to high tail it out of there with the enemy almost on their heels. Perhaps the enemy buried Reeves where he lay, not sure his unit would have had the time to dig a grave or the inclination to be standing in one spot to do so. They certainly didn't even want to cross the road to take him into the cemetery.

However, it does indicate that the enemy were shelling Carnoy pretty severely in March 1918, which . Reeves' battery tried to set in in Lapree wood but were found and shelled before getting set up. They then set up around Carnoy before being spotted again.

Not sure where the 36 French from 'Carnoy Extension' came from. Can't see 1915 French Burials taking place in the same location, far too exposed, perhaps at night. Or are these 36 1918 burials but if so why not in the cemetery.

Oddly, there is also a Special Memorial to a Coldstreamer buried in Carnoy MC 1916, the Special Memorial (not the man) was also concentrated into Peronne Rd from the same gid ref as Reeves, which happens to be where a CDMS was located in 1916. Checked a few diaries for the Coldstreamer and the Carnoy CDMS was in the chain of evacuation for his unit. Concentrating a Special Memorial to a man seems a bit odd in itself and why not just add it to Carnoy where he was buried, and why put up a memorial to one man adjacent to the CMDS?

Seems plausible that the CMDS may have been burying some men adjacent to them rather than the cemetery - how many??

TEW

[Ron Clifton]

TEW

No, that's fine. I have a spreadsheet with a full list of all the SADs from Putkowski & Sykes' book, and a quick search, plus your clues, gave it to me with only a small margin of error.

Ron

[20th Division]

Great stuff TEW. I continue to be amazed at the knowledge all you contributors continue to share. The eventual summary of results from your work on Carnoy M.C. will be invaluable and not just in trying to locate a possible ( or even probable) final resting place for Harry Farr. Best wishes Dave.

[seaforths]

Great work TEW! I am still away. Where I am, I don't have internet or landline phone and I have a very limited to non-existent mobile signal. I am currently in a library piggy-backing their wi-fi with an iPad and it's painfully slow and I've just managed to read my emails but it isn't letting me reply to any - very frustrating. I have a few leads to follow up when I get back but that won't be for another 10 days or so.

[20th Division]

Hello, A couple of weeks ago I was "20th division"----now suddenly I am "Iceniman" not sure why! I suspect I must have pushed some wrong buttons during the recent changes on The Forum's website. Any Pals out there know how I can get my i.d. back? THANKS. Dave.

[Bardess]

Dave, I've reported your post as only Mods can change your name back. BTW there have been countless incidents due to the upgrade

[keithmroberts]

Sorted the username.

 

 

Keith

[20th Division]

Keith---You are a gentleman. Thank you. Regards. Dave. 

[clk]

Hi,

 

Towards the bottom of this linked article may be of interest to Pals following this thread.

 

Regards

Chris

[Myrtle]

Dave

I have sent you a message with some good news.

 

[20th Division]

Thanks for the good news Maggie-----will follow up at BBC  and will post any relevant info from the other taped recordings of interviews with Gertrude. Really appreciate  all your work along with others who are beavering away in the background on this subject. Hopefully we can summarise the results when it all comes together.

 

   Chris---thanks for the link re the series of lectures at YORK. The third one re Harry Farr sounds "a must". I will find out date of third lecture and probably book a slot. Regards. Dave. 

[20th Division]

Just to let you know that I  applied to IWM for all tapes in July. I am still awaiting their arrival and will feed back all relevant info once I have listened. Dave.,  

[bob lembke]

An appeal to all and sundry.

 

I have been a participant in the Forum for about 10 years, and have posted and participated a great deal, but there is something I don't understand. Years ago I posted something along the SAD class of topics, and was admonished that there was some sort of ruling or legal problem hanging over the Forum that limited discussion of the topic of British execution of their own. Recently, peeking into this thread, I think I encountered another trace of such a phenominom. (Sp?) But I have never understood what this was, if in fact it exists.

 

It seems like something like the Valdimort business in the Harry Potter adventures. "He who not be mentioned." Or am I all wet about this?

 

I am mostly interested in the Hunnish side of things in the Great War, my father and grand-father both served in the Prussian Army, and in fact at different times in the Prussian Guard, but the seeming UK thirst for executions has always fascinated me. The Germans almost never executed soldiers. My father once, in company with with others, shot and killed his company commander (a very bad sort), and the regiment's officers knew it, but he and no one else were not ever tried. Instead, he never received a promotion, although he sometimes led a small unit, and therefore should have been a junior NCO, and he never received a medal, except for his wound badge. (He got his Iron Cross in 1921, from the Ministry of War, I have the paperwork.) I cannot imagine in the UK Army of 1914-1918 a number of men shooting an officer well behind the lines and after a detailed investigation no one being punished, besides the strictures mentioned above.

 

So what is the Voldimart issue? Sensitivity for or litigation by survivors' or persecutors' families? UK legislation? (The US Congress has recently passed a law restricting the dissemination of information about the number of German-Americans and Italian-Americans placed in concentration camps during WW II, but not surprisingly did not do so to a lot of fanfare.) 

 

 

Edited 30 August , 2016 by bob lembke
Spelling correction

[Chris_Baker]

It;s quite straightforward, Bob. The subject was made off limits when I owned the forum, and was reinstated at a point after it was handed over to Great War Forum Ltd.

[Gibbo]

17 minutes ago, bob lembke said:

An appeal to all and sundry.

 

I have been a participant in the Forum for about 10 years, and have posted and participated a great deal, but there is something I don't understand. Years ago I posted something along the SAD class of topics, and was admonished that there was some sort of ruling or legal problem hanging over the Forum that limited discussion of the topic of British execution of their own. Recently, peeking into this thread, I think I encountered another trace of such a phenominom. (Sp?) But I have never understood what this was, if in fact it exists.

 

It seems like something like the Valdimort business in the Harry Potter adventures. "He who not be mentioned." Or am I all wet about this?

 

I am mostly interested in the Hunnish side of things in the Great War, my father and grand-father both served in the Prussian Army, and in fact at different times in the Prussian Guard, but the seeming UK thirst for executions has always fascinated me. The Germans almost never executed soldiers. My father once, in company with with others, shot and killed his company commander (a very bad sort), and the regiment's officers knew it, but he and no one else were not ever tried. Instead, he never received a promotion, although he sometimes led a small unit, and therefore should have been a junior NCO, and he never received a medal, except for his wound badge. (He got his Iron Cross in 1921, from the Ministry of War, I have the paperwork.) I cannot imagine in the UK Army of 1914-1918 a number of men shooting an officer well behind the lines and after a detailed investigation no one being punished, besides the strictures mentioned above.

 

So what is the Voldimart issue? Sensitivity for or litigation by survivors' or persecutors' families? UK legislation? (The US Congress has recently passed a law restricting the dissemination of information about the number of German-Americans and Italian-Americans placed in concentration camps during WW II, but not surprisingly did not do so to a lot of fanfare.) 

 

 

 

A thread on the subject became very heated, culminating in one of the people who were then campaigning for these men to be pardoned asking the then owner of the forum for the name of his lawyer. As he had set up and ran the forum at his own expense he decided to ban further discussion in order to save him from being sued for comments made by a third party on his website.

 

Subsequently, the pardons have been granted, ownership of the forum has been transferred to the current moderators and discussion on this topic is permitted. Post the granting of the pardons it is much less heated.

[keithmroberts]

Chris Baker's decisions at that time were entirely understandable and reasonable. The Great War Forum Ltd  is on occasion obliged to remove content  for similar reasons. We are not resourced to fund legal actions and will take whatever action is required to protect the GWF as a whole. 

 

Keith Roberts

[bob lembke]

Thanks to all for the explanations. I fully understand why a legal conflict should be avoided at all costs, having seen a presentation of Bleak House. I also understand that the libel laws in the UK are so written as to make litigation  a very attractive option in some circumstances, and despite the distance I know of a few interesting examples of such legislation over historical writings, including examples of authors being successfully sued for writing what seems to have been historical truth. Thanks for satisfying my curiosity.

[Hedley Malloch]

AIR the legal issues had nothing to do, per se, with Harry Farr who, incidentally and at the time, was the subject of a legal challenge brought by Shot at Dawn against HMG.  It was to do with what individuals on this Forum were saying about each other.

[Chris_Baker]

As Hedley quite rightly says, it had no connection with the Farr case per se. I still have a copy of the material that was removed from the forum, and the legal threat arose in connection with discussion regarding third parties who were connected to the campaign but who were not members of the forum at the time.

[Gibbo]

I changed my opinion on the subject at least twice, maybe three times, whilst following the thread in question. Every time this was not because of the strength of the arguments being put forward by the people supporting the view that I was changing to but because of the rudeness of the people arguing for the one that I was moving away from.