walter tull bbc east 22.3.18 6.30pm

[Heid the Ba]

As has been said upthread, letters to bereaved family are not the most reliable sources of information. 

[roughdiamond]

On 29/03/2018 at 21:20, Moonraker said:

A reproduction of a letter from Second-Lieutenant Pickard to Tull's family does use the word "recommended".

 

Daily Mail

 

We now need David Lammy et al to produce evidence of the MID, and of course the MP is mistaken in writing that "Walter's race was clearly a factor in explaining why he was never awarded a Military Cross".

 

Moonraker

 

I'd said "deserved" when the letter said "earned", I should have been more accurate, especially on this subject, but each is an antonym of the other, I had read the letter but the mention of the "recommendation" again has no documentary evidence to  back it up.

 

What I find fascinating is the nuanced choice of words in his Wikipedia entry, also the references that are included and more importantly absent.

 

It states: - 

"in a letter of condolence to his family. The commanding officer of the 23rd Battalion, Major Poole and his colleague 2Lt Pickard both said that Tull had been put forward for a Military Cross."

it references Pickard's letter but has no reference for a letter from Major Poole.

 

it also states:-

"He was cited? for his "gallantry and coolness" by Major-General Sydney Lawford, General Officer Commanding (GOC) 41st Division, having led 26 men on a night-raiding party, crossing the fast-flowing rapids of the Piave River into enemy territory and returning them unharmed, and in a letter of condolence to his family."^[

Note that it states "citation needed"!

 

This one quoting Pickard's letter is a masterpiece of nuanced words and LIES!

"It would have been against army regulations for serving officers to inform an officer's next of kin that their relative had been recommended for, and refused, an honour; it was a court-martial offence."

At no point in Pickard's letter does it state the recommendation was "refused"! Also someone with a copy of the MML may confirm there is no such "court-martial offence"?

Unsurprisingly this is referenced to Phil Visili. 

 

This quote below has been nuanced with the insertion of "Infantry" to justify the use of the word "first", it also states "regular British Army regiment", the Regt maybe "regular" his Bn certainly was not!

"When Tull was commissioned as a second lieutenant on 30 May 1917, he became the first mixed-heritage infantry officer in a regular British Army regiment,".

There is however a note on this entry that when clicked mentions George Bemand, Allan Mills and David Clemetson another Black Officer whose Commission predates Walter Tull's.

 

Finally there's this piece of complete and utter tripe attributed to Ed Aarons of the Guardian.

"If he had been recommended for a Military Cross, his status as an officer of non-European descent might have meant to award him the honour would validate his status, leading to more mixed-heritage officers being commissioned.^"

This has an added reference that when clicked on states:-

"But Allan Noel Minns, also of Afro-Caribbean descent, was awarded both DSO and MC".

 

We all have a dig sometimes at Wikipedia's accuracy but as I said the nuances and references can change the meaning.

 

Sam

[Heid the Ba]

If the claim has slid from black to "mixed heritage infantry officer" I think there were a number of Anglo-Indians who served in the British Army in the nineteenth century.  There were plenty in the Indian Army but I think some, including various Skinners, ended up in the British Army, though perhaps not in the infantry.

[Chris_B]

The sad thing about all this is that those who seek to play the “cause” and not the man, may actually detract from Walter Tull’s legacy. For those who’ve been on this particular roundabout before (see BBC TV 2008, Walter Tull Forgotten Hero) and who question the claims made and motives of those seeking to politicise any campaign related to Walter Tull, the reaction to more proselytising may be negative. I’m probably guilty of that.

 

In the 2008 programme is was said that Walter Tull had been forgotten because he was black, a statement that went unchallenged. The possible contrary explanation that Walter Tull was no different to thousands of other dead officers whose stories languished in obscurity was never considered. The complexities of cultural memory are often boiled down to “WW1 bad, WW2 good” - outside the immediate family circle, Great War amnesia ruled.

 

In the 2008 programme, the late Richard Holmes made the most common sense comment when asked by the presenter about the possible reaction of other soldiers to Walter Tull, a black man in their midst, when Tull was first on the Somme. To paraphrase, he replied that it is then that men grow close in a way only fellow combatants can really know, where every strength and weakness is laid bare. The qualities of the footballer turned soldier were soon obvious.

 

Somehow the memory of Walter Tull needs to be rescued from the toxic mix of racial politics.

[Buffnut453]

16 minutes ago, Chris_B said:

The sad thing about all this is that those who seek to play the “cause” and not the man, may actually detract from Walter Tull’s legacy. For those who’ve been on this particular roundabout before (see BBC TV 2008, Walter Tull Forgotten Hero) and who question the claims made and motives of those seeking to politicise any campaign related to Walter Tull, the reaction to more proselytising may be negative. I’m probably guilty of that.

 

In the 2008 programme is was said that Walter Tull had been forgotten because he was black, a statement that went unchallenged. The possible contrary explanation that Walter Tull was no different to thousands of other dead officers whose stories languished in obscurity was never considered. The complexities of cultural memory are often boiled down to “WW1 bad, WW2 good” - outside the immediate family circle, Great War amnesia ruled.

 

In the 2008 programme, the late Richard Holmes made the most common sense comment when asked by the presenter about the possible reaction of other soldiers to Walter Tull, a black man in their midst, when Tull was first on the Somme. To paraphrase, he replied that it is then that men grow close in a way only fellow combatants can really know, where every strength and weakness is laid bare. The qualities of the footballer turned soldier were soon obvious.

 

Somehow the memory of Walter Tull needs to be rescued from the toxic mix of racial politics.

 

Chris,

 

Entirely agree with your comments, particularly the last one.  Rather than continually returning to the subject of Tull's race/skin colour, and hence contributing to that toxic mix, surely our time would be better spent trying to correct the apparent misinformation that's being peddled about him. 

 

Cheers,
Mark

[Guest]

   Entirely agree with the outlook of the last 2 posts. Whatever happens in the debate over Walter Tull and  whether or not memorialisation should take any particular course, we must never lose sight that he was representative of a lot that was lost in the Great War- that he rendered good service both as an OR and junior officer and that he lost his life in the process. There is no way that the man himself should be attacked for what he was- one of a large number of casualties of a horrible war. Honour is due to him, as all others, for their services. 

  GD- I am with you in being confused at to what the state of play is re. MID and recommendation for MC for Walter Tull.

   I have not as yet read Mr. Vasili's latest edition of his book but it seems that what he references cannot be taken at face value-and will have to be thoroughly checked. Back to basics on that- Everything about this so far has a distortion and half-life of truth that I,for one, would prefer that we got the "facts" of the matter established without having to give credence to the writings and sayings of Mr. Vasili and Mr. Lammy-et al.

 

     I have had a go at Walter Tull's officer file at Kew this afternoon. Bearing in mind that this is not (like all other officer files) the original but a bringing together of other bits and pieces from other sources.  Walter Tull's file  is largely notable for what is not there:

 

1) There is NO reference in his service file to either MID or to any recommendation  for MC. It is quite usual in officer files for there to be an A4 sheet giving the date and approval of the Gazette- usually by date-stamp- both the approval and a note of which issue of the Gazette the notice will appear in. There is none in the file for Tull but that is not conclusive evidence in itself-they are often missing.

 

2) His service record has no reference to MID- usually there would be something else somewhere saying that it existed.

   

   Tull's file has been summarised in extenso in the book about him by Gwynn. There is one item that I find a little troubling- there is one draft/copy response to a letter to an unknown- I believe it is Tull's next of kin- saying that no news had been received as to what happened to him. This is dated(Ooh-didnt write it down) either 11 or 12th  April 1918-which indicates a NOK had written in. Nothing surprising in that but it strikes me as a little odd that NOK would not have pursued a MC recommendation by further correspondence. As I say, I am not up to snuff with Mr. Vasili and what family papers he has used but the absence of any reference to further campaigning at the time makes me suspect that if the "Daily Mail" letter is true (I think it likely), then the family accepted at the time that any "recommendation" would have died with him-as had happened to so many other ofifcers. Here, I note that the Daily Mail letter indicating a recommendation does not say that this had been officially progressed.   My reading of the letter is that any recommendation is likely to have been for a much more recent event in France and not any previous  gallantry in Italy. Just my suspicion.

 

    

 

 

[Guest]

  Still stumped by the Tull MID.  Mr. Vasili did an interview for Sky ,put up on 23rd March in which,it is reported:

"He was cited for his "gallantry and coolness under fire" by Major General Sir Sydney Lawford, commanding officer of the 41st Division and recommended for the Military Cross"

 

     This may narrow down an MID but I am confused  as to whether the (alleged) MID is linked to the alleged recommendation for the MC.  

i) It would be unusual for a man getting an MID to get an award for the same act twice over. 2 different citations doesn't ring right. Still not sure if I should be looking for an MID from Lawford for Italy 1917 or France 1918.

 

ii)  The letter from the "Daily Mail" is prime evidence- but would an MC recommendation for an action in Italy in 1917 be so long in the tooth that the Die Hards and Tull were back in France months later?  To me, the Daily Mail letter suggests that a recommendation was more recent.

 

iii) Does anyone have either a picture or text of the Poole letter that Mr. Vasili refers to?   Picture preferably- Text quotation  and citation does not seem to be Mr. Vasili's strongest virtue.

 

 

[Moonraker]

Phil Vasili's own website

 

which I don't have time to look at (am about to meet a friend), but doubtless others will find it interesting. Looking forward to reading  your comments later on!

 

Moonraker

[Guest]

  Thanks Moonraker- enjoy your day. 

 

 

[Moonraker]

See ARRSE post 49:

 

Major Robin Wheeler, Army Legal Services, email to John Simkin (8th February, 200?

"Just to alert you to the fact that there were NOT military regulations ‘forbidding “any negro or person of colour” from being an officer.’ The Manual of Military Law 1914 (p.471) has regulations regarding aliens and their enlistment into the British Army, which prevent them holding any other than an honorary commission, but Walter Tull was not an alien, he was a British citizen. His father came to England from Barbados in 1876 and married a girl from Kent; Walter Tull was born in Folkestone in 1888. He was a British citizen entitled to hold an active commission, which he did. He did remarkably well to rise from private to Lt. in the space of 2 years – there was no military legislation to prevent him doing that.@

 

Moonraker

Edited 30 March , 2018 by Moonraker

[593jones]

12 minutes ago, Moonraker said:

See ARRSE post 49

 

Moonraker

 

Very interesting, perhaps someone should send the link to Mr Vasili and the Daily Mail.

 

Getting away from medals and MID's, could anyone tell me the procedure for commissioning someone from the ranks?  Did the individual apply personally for a commission, was he suggested by a superior who had spotted a likely lad or was there some other procedure?  The only time I have seen anything in print referring to this was in 'Not For Glory' by PW Turner and RH Haigh, referring to a local man, Gilbert Hall.  Hall enlisted in the 13th York and Lancaster Regiment and served as a private in that battalion.  His company commander suggested he apply for a commission, and, after training, Hall was duly commissioned in the KOYLI.  Would that have been the usual procedure, and would it have been likely to have been the case with Tull?

Edited 30 March , 2018 by 593jones

[ss002d6252]

Quote

Did the individual apply personally for a commission, was he suggested by a superior who had spotted a likely lad or was there some other procedure?

KR1914 states (in respect of an OC recommending):


The KR also states that the Royal Pay Warrant governs commissions so there should be further information in there regarding the commissions. As I understand it a man could be recommended by his OC or he could apply himself for commission.

Craig

[Guest]

  Tull's service file has his commission application- which is normal and straightforward. Describes himself as British. On next question says Jamaican descent. All the rest- references for education and good character are signed off in good order. I cannot see that any rules could have been broken.

[Terry_Reeves]

On 26/03/2018 at 08:49, Hedley Malloch said:

 

Umm, ... Walter Tull?

Hedley

 

That doesn't wash I'm afraid. If Walter Tull was refused an award on account of his colour,   then please explain why he was commissioned.

 

TR

[593jones]

5 hours ago, ss002d6252 said:

KR1914 states (in respect of an OC recommending):


The KR also states that the Royal Pay Warrant governs commissions so there should be further information in there regarding the commissions. As I understand it a man could be recommended by his OC or he could apply himself for commission.

Craig

 

Thanks for that, Craig,  very interesting.  So if Tull followed that route, he would have been seen by the Brigade commander and received his approval.

[ss002d6252]

1 minute ago, 593jones said:

 

Thanks for that, Craig,  very interesting.  So if Tull followed that route, he would have been seen by the Brigade commander and received his approval.

It would appear so (unless there was a war time Army Order to alter the process). The OC recommended a NCO and he was then interviewed and approved by higher powers.

Craig

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, ss002d6252 said:

It would appear so (unless there was a war time Army Order to alter the process). The OC recommended a NCO and he was then interviewed and approved by higher powers.

Craig

 

      The only query I can see in the process that there was an enquiry as to whether he was Lance-Serjeant or Sergeant at the time of his commission-simply for the purpose of his being discharged from the army at the correct former rank..

    I could not see a senior officer interview note on his file-not unusual.  The key to this is that he was gazetted. The surviving "gazette" sheets seem to have been kept with care- that a record of a gazette coming up- or when it was published- was an indication that all the paperwork had been done correctly. Although we do not have the original file, all evidence from elsewhere suggests that the listing of gazette entries was a confirmation that all army checks had been carried out and the commission was in order to go forward.

[Buffnut453]

47 minutes ago, ss002d6252 said:

It would appear so (unless there was a war time Army Order to alter the process). The OC recommended a NCO and he was then interviewed and approved by higher powers.

Craig

 

One of my relatives was commissioned from the ranks and he followed the process as outlined.  His personal file includes a form signed by the CO of the 80th Brigade certifying that he was suitable for commissioning.  The form includes a series of personal questions to be completed by the candidate, one of which asks if the candidate is "of pure European descent" which clearly contradicts claims that it was somehow   Although it clearly conflicts with modern sensibilities, it also demonstrates the inaccuracy of Mr. Lammy's statement about rules preventing commissioning of non-white soldiers. 

[Chris_B]

32 minutes ago, Buffnut453 said:

 

One of my relatives was commissioned from the ranks and he followed the process as outlined.  His personal file includes a form signed by the CO of the 80th Brigade certifying that he was suitable for commissioning.  The form includes a series of personal questions to be completed by the candidate, one of which asks if the candidate is "of pure European descent" which clearly contradicts claims that it was somehow   Although it clearly conflicts with modern sensibilities, it also demonstrates the inaccuracy of Mr. Lammy's statement about rules preventing commissioning of non-white soldiers. 

It's question no.7 on Army Form MT393 A - Application for Admission to an Officer Cadet Unit with view to appointment to a Temporary Commission in the Regular Army for the period of the War, to a Commission in the Special Reserve of Officers, or to a Commission in the Territorial Force. 

 

Form to be completed by the candidate along with character ref and evidence of attained standard of education.  Requires counter signature of candidate's CO if being commission from the ranks. 

[Loader]

Might the citing by the GOC 41st Div be referring to one of those Divisional Card of Honor notifications?

Would such have been listed in his records? I know many times they led to decorations but I also know that many times they did not & the card was all the recognition the man got. Long shot but might be possible.

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Loader said:

Might the citing by the GOC 41st Div be referring to one of those Divisional Card of Honor notifications?

Would such have been listed in his records? I know many times they led to decorations but I also know that many times they did not & the card was all the recognition the man got. Long shot but might be possible.

 

   Hopefully, Mr. Vasili will provide answers for all.

[Buffnut453]

3 hours ago, Chris_B said:

It's question no.7 on Army Form MT393 A - Application for Admission to an Officer Cadet Unit with view to appointment to a Temporary Commission in the Regular Army for the period of the War, to a Commission in the Special Reserve of Officers, or to a Commission in the Territorial Force. 

 

Form to be completed by the candidate along with character ref and evidence of attained standard of education.  Requires counter signature of candidate's CO if being commission from the ranks. 

 

Yep, that's the form.  Intriguingly, my relative's form is not signed by his CO...but he does have a recommendation from the Commander of the 80th Brigade. 

[stiletto_33853]

Right, lets get back to a few of the erroneous claims shall we.

 

There are others that can find no record of an M.I.D. awarded to Tull, however that is not the question here.

 

Was he the First Black officer?? Most certainly not, soldiers of colour have been commissioned into the British Forces for hundreds of years i.e. Nathaniel Wells, commissioned into the Yeomanry in 1818. Captain John Perkins, Royal Navy, commissioned in the 1700's. Was he the first officer of colour in WW1, also certainly not, first officer of colour  awarded a gallantry medal, once again certainly not although there is once again no record of any recommendation for Tull, the finest award I have seen for such is Captain Allan Timms, DSO & MC, his citation for his MC is incredible.

Other officers of colour served in the Army pre Tull and been killed in action prior even to Tull's commissioning date i.e. the Bemand brothers.

 

The argument being put forward was that he led his men into action! Tull commanded 26 men in a large raid of a few hundred men and eleven officers. Tull's party played no part in the raid and waited back by the river whilst all other parties advanced towards the enemy.

 

So we have a heavily manipulated version of events being put forward by Lammy and Co. if not actual falsehood's

 

Since when has Tull been a Company Commander and since when has a Company consisted of 26 men??

 

On page 471 of the Military law Manual it states

"any inhabitant of any British Proctectorate, and any negro or person of colour, although an alien, may voluntarily enlist in pursuance of this part of the Act, and when so enlisted, shall, be deemed to be entitled to all the privileges of a natural born British subject'

 

Was not Tull born in the United Kingdom???

 

All of this rubbish being spouted by Lammy and Co, as previously stated, does nothing for the man's legacy, it is to the mans detriment, an undoubtedly brave man who's memory is being used for political and possibly racial motives?. How many of the hundreds of thousands of men killed during the war have statue's and plaques erected individually to them, not many.

 

 

 

Oh well ho hum!!!

 

Andy

 

 

Edited 31 March , 2018 by stiletto_33853

[Steven Broomfield]

Well said, Andy

[Chris_B]

I’ve never given much credence to what Lammy says on any subject, let alone the industry that has sprung up around Walter Tull’s memory. But as Mark Twain said: "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes."  

 

When a so-called academic institution can print this kind of stuff http://hiddenhistorieswwi.ac.uk/uncategorized/2014/09/beyond-walter-tull/   you can see how far things have gone.  It would be an uphill battle to get the kind of clarity Andy and others seek.

 

Of course, Lammy is unlikely to ever champion the memories of Allan Noel Minns DSO, MC of the RAMC, who was also has two MID (whose father became the mayor of Thetford, the first black man to be the mayor of an English town), or of 2/Lt. George Edward Kingsley Bemand RFA, KIA on Boxing Day 1916 (brother of Gunner Harold Leslie Bemand KIA 7/06/1917).  One a medical student trained and qualified at Guy’s, the other educated at Dulwich College and an engineering student at the University of London. They simply don’t fit the profile that matches Lammy’s own political prejudices.   

 

Isn’t the Lammy school of thought guilty of the very thing they accuse others – writing people out of history?