new zealand expeditionary force

[john w.]

A point of information please...

The Five New Zealanders who were shot... were they convicted under the British Army Act or their own rule book?

John

[Guest Ian Topham]

They were convicted under British disciplinery courts, but confirmed by NZ Government.

There is a move at the moment to get their convictions overturned

This has long been a major discussion point why NZ personnel were subject to British Military Law, it was not the same in WWII.

Australians in WWI were subject to their own Military Law and not British

Ian Topham

[john w.]

Therefore it was only confirmed by the New Zealand government and not Haig or another of the British commanders.

Thanks

John

[Guest stevebec]

I was told somewhere that two of these men were Australians who were in the NZ Army. I can not confirm that but?

Thankfuly the Australian expirence with British Military law in the Boer War made it sure that we would not put our selves under that again.

Dispite the fact that there were a number of cases were we should have.

S.B

[Alan Lines]

Dispite the fact that there were a number of cases were we should have.

Steve, do you mean should have executed a few? Although the average Australian soldier may have been a bit more boisterous than some I've always thought their record in combat has spoken for itself. Do you think shooting some of them would have helped improve this record?

[Guest stevebec]

Alan,

In my reseach we Australians suffered from the same problems as any army has with its soldiers.

There are murders, theifs and cowards who purhaps should have been treated different then say the poor British infantry lined up against a wall and shot.

Our offenders got to sit the war out in His Majesty's Prison's.

Although I neither defend or agree with capital punishment, only some times are are people who realy need it.

S.B

[Andrew P]

The recent addition of the AWM magazine 'Wartime' had an article on an Australian soldier based in England who was either hung or shot as a result of being tried by a civil court.

I read somewhere that two of the New Zeland soldiers who were executed were actually Australians serving in the New Zealand Army.

[CROONAERT]

I read somewhere that two of the New Zeland soldiers who were executed were actually Australians serving in the New Zealand Army.

Tpr.John Sweeney was a Tasmanian and the other Australian was Pte "John King" (an alias). A third "New Zealander", Pte John Braithwaite, was also Australian born.

Dave

[Andrew P]

Cheers Dave.

Just to add a bit more info to my previous post, the Australian soldier who was hung was called Cpl Verney Asser.

He had shot Cpl Joe Durkin, but claimed that Durkin committed suicide. Asser's story didn't add up to the authorities and after further investigation found that Asser had killed Durkin.

As the crime was committed in England, the Australian authorities let him be tried under a civil court where a conviction of the death penalty could be carried out unlike the Australian military court.

Asser was hanged at Shepton Mallet prison on 5th March 1918 and was buried in an unmarked grave.

The victim, Joseph Durkin is buried at St John's Churchyard, Sutton Veny, Wiltshire.

Information Taken from article 'Murder at Sutton Veny' by Peter Burness in AWM magazine 'Wartime' Issue 21

[Frank_East]

I think the five NZs shot on military charges have recently been pardoned by the NZ Government after a prolonged campaign.

Regards

Frank East

[Geoff S]

As has been noted the death penalty did not apply to the A.I.F. in the Great War. The maximum penalty that could be applied to Australian offenders was imprisonment. Most of those Australians sentenced during the war were pardoned shortly after the Armistice.

I understand the The British Commons abolished the death sentence for desertion in about 1930.

"During the debate it was said that one of the limits beyond which they might not go, even for the sake of military necessity, was to have a man shot in cold blood by his fellow countrymen because his nerves failed to stand the strain of modern warefare.

"if it can be demonstrated", it was argued, that the Australians could fight as gallantly as they did without the death penalty, then it is a libel on the courage of other British troops to say they won't fight without it"

I believe the average Australian 'digger' in the Great War would not have fought any differently with or without Capital punishment.

Cheers

Geoff S

[Hedley Malloch]

As has been noted the death penalty did not apply to the A.I.F. in the Great War. The maximum penalty that could be applied to Australian offenders was imprisonment.

Geoff,

A technical point: my understanding is that a verdict of death could be given to Australian soldiers, and indeed was given in 113 cases, but the Australian High Command commuted all such sentences as a matter of policy.

Is my understanding correct?

Hedley

[Rosemary Clarke]

I think the five NZs shot on military charges have recently been pardoned by the NZ Government after a prolonged campaign.

Regards

Frank East

Royal Assent was granted to the New Zealand Government's Pardon for Soldiers of the Great War Bill on 14 September 2000.

This was a Private Member's Bill presented by Mark Peck MP for Invercargill.

Following the successful outcome of his bill, he returned to his desk to find a white feather had been place on it.

Rosemary

[charlesmessenger]

Alan,

In my reseach we Australians suffered from the same problems as any army has with its soldiers.

There are murders, theifs and cowards who purhaps should have been treated different then say the poor British infantry lined up against a wall and shot.

Our offenders got to sit the war out in His Majesty's Prison's.

Although I neither defend or agree with capital punishment, only some times are are people who realy need it.

S.B

SB

Your words echo those of the CO of 1st Australian Infantry Bn, 122 of whose men were court-martialled for mutiny after refusing to take any further part in an initially successful attack on 21 September 1918. He noted that the ringleaders were men with bad records, including one who was under suspended sentence of imprisonment. Lt Col Stacy, the CO, wrote in his report on the affair: `I consider the lightness & suspension of sentences in the past for desertion as greatly responsible for the trouble.'

It is worth pointing out that the battalion had been at rest for the first part of September and had made a successful attack on the 18th. The plan was to relieve it on the night 20/21 September , but this was cancelled on 20 September and it was ordered to make this second attack.

Charles M

[Guest stevebec]

Charles,

I don't what to defend capital punishment so your use of Stacy is strange to me.

My grandmothers sister married a famous man from the 1st Bn AIF (Snowy Howell you may of heard of him) . So my family knowns well what Stacy was like and disliked him.

But when I alude to the use of the death penelty, I was more refering to murders. Yes even now their are women and men who commit murder should, if guilty? get the hot seat.

It should not be used for the exustion mutiny like the 1st Bn or units such as the 60th Bn in refusing to disband. Like wise in the camel corps we had a mini mutiny when the CO refused the soldiers the use of the British wet canteen while at Sollum.

Of All these only a small number of men from the 1st Bn got jail time during the war but released after the war. But the hurt of the men of the 1st Bn about Stacy was shown to me even in 1967 when I was at their reunion, even from men who were not with the Bn at the time of the incident.

S.B

[Geoff S]

Hedley,

I was unaware of the 113 death sentences being commuted for members of the A.I.F. I would be interested to know if you could verify the source for me please? It was my understanding the death penalty did not apply to the A.I.F. Irrespective, of whether it technically could be applied or not, I am fairly confident many Australian troops of the First A.I.F felt they operated under ‘different’ application of military rules.

On the subject of problems with the application of military law with some battalions in the A.I.F. in 1918. It is my opinion that many of the battalions were simply exhausted. A Lieutenant of one A.I.F battalion was quoted as saying when his battalion refused an order to return to the line. “This is the only way the poor beggers can get across to the higher command that they’re bushed”

Many incidents can be traced to the fact men did not want their unit disbanded due to lack of reinforcements and casualties being incurred. In fact the 25th battalion notified that they wanted to volunteer for the most dangerous task on offer. The idea being that they would be totally wiped out or would leave such a great victory that no one would dare disband them.

Some Australians could be, and were guilty of serious crimes.And I am not suggesting that A.I.F were saints, but I also refuse to believe they were all sinners!

Can you guess my nationality?

Kindest Regards

Geoff S

[Hedley Malloch]

Geoff,

It is one of the many things you reads, says to yourself: 'oh, that's interesting, I must make a note of that.' and two days later you can't remember where you saw it. I am sure it is right - the figure of 113 sticks in the mind. I will have another look through my standard sources. But as you say it was a technicality; the Australian High Command made it clear from the outset that it would not be applied and this fact was known to all concerned.

Kind regards

Hedley

[john w.]

The names will be and I have just looked but not counted, in Gerard Orams book.. Death sentences passed by military courts of the British Army 1914-1924

e.g. Private OR Frederick 49 Australian IF 29/08/17 Desertion 15 years penal servitude

and so on

John

[john w.]

In addition William Moore's book The thin yellow line recounts this very topic Chapter 13 Australian Exception

John

[Guest stevebec]

Of cause being wiped out or gain such a rep they wouldn't disband didn't work either.

If you know the story of the 54th Bn AIF who was warned for disbandment before being sent into the Battle at Mont St Quentin.

There they forced there way across a brigde under fire and help captured St Quentin.

In the process won two VC's for the action and suffered almost two hundred casulties.

But on the 23rd September 1918 the battalion was ordered disbanded but the order was cancelled so the battalion could fight one last battle and suffered a furthur hundred losses on the Hindenburg line.

The disbandment order was then put into effect and the battalion was broken up 12th October 1918.

I am not aware that this battalion put up any mutiny to this disbandment.

S.B

[Guest stevebec]

Also I take exception to the use of the words "The AIF operatated under different Military".

We may have been part of the Commonweath but were an indipendant country and so should have there own rules and reg's.

S.B

[michaeldr]

Steve makes a valid point: the decision on the death penalty in respect of Australians was Australia's to make alone and her political echelon exercised that right (though the commanders in the field did not always agree)

On 26 July 1917 Monash wrote home thus

"As you no doubt know, the Australian government will not agree to the death sentence being carried into effect in the A.I.F. This is having a very bad effect upon discipline. I have no single case in the 3rd Division, but now, while acting as corps commander, I have recently confirmed six death sentences in the 4th Division, but they have had to be commuted to 10 years' penal servitude. Only to-day I had a long talk to the army commander (Sir Herbert Plumer) about it, and I am writing to Pearce (Australia's Federal Prime Minister) to urge strongly that in some clear cases of cowardly desertion, the law should take its course."

For once the politicians were ahead of the field

Regards

Michael D.R.

[Geoff S]

John/Hedley,

Thank you for the information you provided. I will look them up in the near future.

Steve,

I fail to see why you took exception to my opinion. - Perhaps you misunderstood my meaning.I believed many Australian soldiers of the A.I.F. felt the APLLICATION of military law would be more lenient towards them than the English. In the circumstances of those 113 death sentences being commuted- that certainly appears the case.

I am not an expert in Australian and British military law of the Great War. But I would think that the bulk of the Australian rules & regulations were taken verbatim from the British Code. Most certainly there would have been some exceptions, but I wonder how many?

It is interesting that Australian political leaders of the day recognised the importance of community support for the sacrifices being made by the Australians troops on behalf of the Empire. This is evident to me in the policy the Australian government introduced during the later part of the war, that Australian commanders should be given preference to lead Australian troops when and where possible. And perhaps the Australian politicians during the war should be given credit for allowing the opportunity for Australians to reject conscription twice. On the issue of Australia being an independent country and being capable of making on regulation & rules I could not agree with you more.

Cheers

Geoff S

[Guest stevebec]

Geoff,

Sorry don't get me wrong. I was only trying to impart that Australia like NZ or Canada were indepentant countries and should have their own Laws and Reg's.

But you are most certainly correct in that all Military and Civil Law in based on British Law and as a commonweath Coutry we took what was best from the British System then added our own special parts to make it for our selves.

Its only within the last twenty years that we have now gone away from the British System of Military Law by intruducing new Australian Military law books.

S.B

[Guest stevebec]

In line with my above statment I was wondering what if any soldiers were shot by Canadians.

I remember seeing a movie long ago about a Mutiny in the UK when the soldiers were returning home.

Some soldiers were shot during this sad part of History.

Did Canada also have its own Military law? And did Canada shoot any of her soldiers.

S.B