Criteria to be an Officer?

[Mark Trapnell]

This might be a straight forward question but I have never found out what criteria was used when deciding whether a man enlisting in September 1914 became an officer or other. My granfather became a 2nd Lt and was already at university - is it that fact which determined his rank - or other?

[Jonathan Saunders]

This might be a straight forward question but I have never found out what criteria was used when deciding whether a man enlisting in September 1914 became an officer or other. My granfather became a 2nd Lt and was already at university - is it that fact which determined his rank - or other?

Having thought about this I dont know how to answer your question but I was looking through the service file of 2/Lt CA Dawson of the RASC last Saturday - he had a famous brother which is how I ended up interested in looking through his file. I was looking on the off chance of references to his brother so didnt take as much notice as I should have done of the contents but roughly he was ...

... educated at Marlborough (or Malvern - memory knows it began with "M"), graduated from Oxford in 1915 and enlisted in the RASC shortly after. His rank was Private and his duty was "heavy driver". Having seen service in Mespot or Salonika he was eventually recommended for a commission by the C-in-C of the theatre. His commission was approved by the WO with the words (to the effect) "no man under 40 can be commissioned into the RASC by law 12??, (he was about 23 I guess) and this is the very last exception that will be made".

His brother, Bill Dawson DSO***, was arguably IMHO the best soldier the British Army has ever possessed, so why the WO did not get the younger Dawson commissioned into an infantry regiment as soon as he enlisted you can only guess at.

[Captain Dave]

The book 'A Call to Arms' gives an excellent description of the criteria required for selection as an officer throughout the war. Obviously young men with University educations were sought after keenly at the start, as were young chaps that had been to the 'right' private school. It was quite difficult for young men without the neccessary connections to move into the officer corp. (this obviously changed as the war progressed and casualtys needed to be replaced)

The rationale for the RASC ruling is that they were screaming out for young (and generaly fit) officers for the front line Battalions. A 23 year old would be probably wasted in a RASC enviornment and I belive that many were transfered to the infantry as the war progressed. In addition, it was recognised that a lot of older gentlemen had considerable business experience that could be transfered to the Service Corp enviornment, accumen that a 23 yr old may lack.

Read the chapter in the book, it's very good.

[armourersergeant]

Just to back up the 'Call to Arms' section on Officer selection. I am just reading this part and can recommend it to answer most of your queries and many more.

regards

Arm.

[Jonathan Saunders]

The rationale for the RASC ruling is that they were screaming out for young (and generaly fit) officers for the front line Battalions. A 23 year old would be probably wasted in a RASC enviornment and I belive that many were transfered to the infantry as the war progressed. In addition, it was recognised that a lot of older gentlemen had considerable business experience that could be transfered to the Service Corp enviornment, accumen that a 23 yr old may lack.

I understand the rationale ok but he had already served about a year or so in the ranks prior to commission. Previously he had been in the OTC at Marlborough/Malvern and again at Oxford. Presumably he enlisted in the ranks by choice but even allowing for this, he was particularly wasted in the RASC.

[PhilB]

Previously he had been in the OTC at Marlborough/Malvern and again at Oxford. Presumably he enlisted in the ranks by choice but even allowing for this, he was particularly wasted in the RASC.

It`s impossible to say at this range. He may have been excellent officer material but he could have been a twit whom you wouldn`t follow to the urinal, never mind over the top. Phil B

[Captain Dave]

Quite right. His men may have followed him out of idle curiosity to see what he would do next.

[armourersergeant]

His brother, Bill Dawson DSO***, was arguably IMHO the best soldier the British Army has ever possessed, so why the WO did not get the younger Dawson commissioned into an infantry regiment as soon as he enlisted you can only guess at.

Surely Jon you are not trying to imply that as his brother was a good officer that the youngster would be by default?

regards

Arm

[PhilB]

Surely Jon you are not trying to imply that as his brother was a good officer that the youngster would be by default?

regards

Arm

That was my reading, Arm. The worry is that it was probably how they saw things at the time. Phil B

[Jonathan Saunders]

It`s impossible to say at this range. He may have been excellent officer material but he could have been a twit whom you wouldn`t follow to the urinal, never mind over the top. Phil B

No I wasnt trying to imply that because his brother was an excellent leader of men that the younger brother would be the same. In reply to the original question I gave a fresh to mind example of someone that met all the criteria for a commission, including (rightly or wrongly but certainly a preferable consideration of the time) a brother with a proven record for outstanding ability.

Of course its difficult to say at this range but if he had been 10% the officer his brother was that would (IMHO) have made him an above average subaltern. Also his brother was one of his references for the commission board and I have found nothing in Bob Dawson's character that suggests he would have favoured his brother if he had not been up to the job, quite the contrary - admittedly the commission was for the RASC but as we appreciate, supplying the army was no easy or stress free job.

What other evidence exists to suggest that on paper he was exactly the sort that should make an excellent officer. He was in the OTC at both his public school and at Oxford, say a minimum of 6 years. I dont believe that indicates he was not a suitable candidate to lead men but the opposite - the OTC is how the officer corps were inducted and reading personal accounts, OTC training was exactly what wet-behind-the-ears schoolboys (for want of a better expression) fell back on when they suddenly found themselves in F&F leading veteran soldiers.

Strings were pulled by his Theatre GOC to ensure his commission so it must have been considered he had leadership credentials. Add this to his Oxford education which suggests he had a very capable brain.

So I think I gave a valid example of someone that did meet all the criteria who was not immediately commissioned.

With regard to twits you wouldnt follow to the urinal, I believe there were lesser "qualified" officers than Colin Dawson who were given greater responsibilities. Add it all together and I still cant work out why the WO let him waste his talents as a heavy driver in the RASC.