Hedley Malloch Posted 9 November , 2005 Share Posted 9 November , 2005 Can I bring this one back up again? Lt-Col Eaton (Buffs) was the CO of this Bn from March until May 1917. Can anyone tell me what happened during this time for Haig to send a signal that he didn't want him under his command again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Saunders Posted 9 November , 2005 Share Posted 9 November , 2005 Hedley - sorry of this is stating the obvious but do you realise that John French has also banished Eaton back to a Home posting with a similar comment. His reason being that Eaton had asked to be relieved of his command after the 6/Buffs had taken severe losses at Loos I think. Eaton wrote to say he didnt think he had the stomach to rebuild the Bttn. Myself and Michael were discussing this at the weekend - he is the expert on Buffs and might know more about Eaton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedley Malloch Posted 9 November , 2005 Author Share Posted 9 November , 2005 Jonathan, No I did not know that. I know Michael originally posted this question over a year ago. A matter which might be related in that this unit was for some time part of 37th Division, I believe. I understand that 37 Div was always regarded as something of a problem. Is there any truth in this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Posted 9 November , 2005 Share Posted 9 November , 2005 Hedley Eaton was brought out of retirement to build the 6th Buffs and took them to France in June 1915. They were badly mauled at Loos in October. Four days later Eaton wrote to the Brigade Major of 37th Brigade informing him that he didn't feel capable of reorganising and reforming the Battalion. This went up the line via Div and Corps commanders to the C in C who recommended that Eaton should not be given command of a Bn in the field again. The Regimental History notes that Eaton had a good send off from his men as he departed for home. There had been a mix up because he was meant to report for duties in the Lines of Communication. His service record indicates that he was invalided home with severe laryngitis. By November 1916 he was writing to the war office to tell them that he was much better and asking for another overseas command. This request was denied due to the circumsances surrounding his return to the UK. He then spent periods in command of training Bn's in the UK. Somehow he ended up in command of the 6th Leicesters overseas in March 1917 and he is invalided back home in May. I do not know what led to his return but the C in C requested that although he was a capable commanding officer, Eaton should never return under his command again. Once again he was placed in command of training Bns. Although I have some sympathy with Eaton (it was hardly his fault that the Buffs were sent in to take an objective following an inadequate barrage), I can't help feeling that if an OR had written a letter stating that he wasn't capable of doing his job, he might have been treated differently. I have some more info on the career of Eaton so contact me if I can help further. Unfortunately I haven't looked into the circumstances regarding the Leicesters. Maybe I'll get the diary out the next time I'm at Kew. Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Posted 9 November , 2005 Share Posted 9 November , 2005 Hedley Do you mean that there was a problem with their fighting abilities or their discipline ? Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now