Taking no prisoners

[dycer]

I've e-mailed Tom off-Forum but I understand the "crucified soldier" has been provisionally identified as Sgt Harry Plant 15th Canadian Scottish who was born in Montrose in 1885.I make no comment on the veracity of the incident.

I quote from Hugo Sebac-Montefiore's Book "Dunkirk".

"The East Lanc's gunfire stopped the men opposite(the 18 year old Soldier's) section,but to his right some six Germans crossed the canal.Four were shot down,but two appeared to be struggling to their feet."We should have allowed them to live,"wrote the Soldier,"for they were not in a position to put up any fight."But maddened by the noise of the shooting and the bloodthirsty cries of an veteran in his forties who had taken the young soldier under his wing,the young soldier leapt forward and bayoneted one of the two Germans in the groin while the older soldier despatched the other."I felt sick," wrote the young Soldier,"but in the heat of the moment,I was not sane.""

This incident took place in WW2 but I am sure similar incidents happened in WW1.To many, who have not experienced battle,including me,this description for the apparent disregard of human life may seem callous and cruel.

My Parents were born in 1900 and 1916 respectively and throughout their lives were regular Church attenders and ensured that I had a good grounding during my formative years by also attending and joining the various youth groups from Sunday School to Boys Brigade.

I m sure the majority of the generation that fought the First World had a similar background and knew the phrase "An eye for an eye,etc" but more likely ,lived by ""It is often better to turn the other cheek."

I can therefore only suggest that it was training,fervour.and anger that allowed men to do some unspeakable actions in battle but at the same time their deeper held beliefs allowed them to act with common humanity where possible.

George

[Borden Battery]

Rather than rely on producers of television and cinema as sources of reliable information, can anyone produce something from a recognized military historian or a published article which has been peer reviewed with real documentation. I have seen nothing of this sort in my years of personal study.

Here is a short piece from a well-researched website on the Canadian Expeditionary Force.

Borden Battery

================================================

Internet Source: http://gwp.marcleroux.com/transcripts/tran...amp;transNo=202

Crucified Soldier

The (London) Times

Monday, May 10, 1915

Transcribed by: marc

This story is the source for one of the most enduring legends of the war, the Crucified Soldier. "Canada's Golgotha", depicting this event, was sculpted by Derwent Wood, and is on display at the Canadian War Museum. The atrocity was denied by the Germans, who asked for any proof of it happening. General Sir Arthur Currie investigated the incident after the war and came to the conclusion that it had been fabricated.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Torture of a Canadian Officer

Paris, May 9

Last week a large number of Canadian soldiers wounded in the fighting round Ypres arrived at the base hospital at Versailles. They all told a story of how one of their officers had been crucified by the Germans. He had been pinned to the wall by bayonets thrust through his hands and feet, another bayonet had been driven through his throat, and, finally, he was riddled with bullets.

The wounded Canadians said that the Dublin Fusiliers had seen this done with their own eyes, and that they had heard officers of the Dublin Fusiliers talking about it.

[dycer]

Borden,

As you will appreciate Tom and I are very sceptical about this story.

I've just done a quick search on Plant on the CWGC Web-site but no trace.

The Book in which I found the name is at Home.It is merely a representative list of Scots and Scots-Dominion Soldiers who lost their lives at Ypres throughout the War.

I'll list its Title and the relevant extract tomorrow.

As I wrote earlier I feel this Thread has been spoiled by the insertion of what seems to be a spurious incident.

George

[Muskoka]

As I wrote earlier I feel this Thread has been spoiled by the insertion of what seems to be a spurious incident.

George

I beg to differ. I was quoting Robert Graves, who was writing about the perception of an atrocity and how it affected the troops. He says that he didn't believe it either, but if it was considered the truth by some, it surely affected how they reacted to the Germans when they had to deal with prisoners or the taking of them.

Graves' mother was German, and having spent time with his German relatives as a child, he would be particularly open minded, one would think.

[dycer]

First may I offer my apology to Colleagues.I quoted the incorrect Surname of the Canadian Soldier in my post yesterday.The only excuse I can offer is that I was recalling it from memory which at least proves I am human.

Borden,

The following extract is from a Booklet entitled-Scottish and Associated Battalions in the Ypres Salient 1914-1918.

"Also commemorated on the Menin Gate Memorial to The Missing is Sergeant 27286 Harry BAND of the 15th Battalion.48th Highlanders.He was born on 12.8.1885 in Montrose,Kincardineshire,Scotland and had been in the 1st Forfar Volunteers prior to emigrating to Canada.His next of kin is noted as "Martin Band".For years there had been a story of a Canadian Sergeant being found crucified to a barn door near St Julien in April,1915,having been "nailed" there by a number of German bayonets.In the autumn of 2005 the B.B.C. Television in the U.K. investigated this story and the programme which they broadcast seems to lend great credence that the story may well be true and that Sergeant Band was the unfortunate soldier."

Muskoka,

From the evidence that has been produced so far it is apparent that men on the point of capture or newly captured were killed.This could happen due to strategic development of the Battle or the heightened emotions of the men involved.

I referred yesterday to the importance of Religion to the WW1 Generation.As far as I am aware the same beliefs were held in the Kaiser's Germany.I would suggest,therefore,that any clear-minded German Soldier who witnessed such an event as described would view it as an act of blasphemy and do everything in his power to prevent or stop it.I do not deny,though,that stories such as this, if circulated among troops,may heighten their fighting ability.

George

[lionboxer]

From a letter from a Lancer present at Moy. ".....I wish to mention that in this charge one of the Germans threw his rifle down and begged for mercy, which was given him by one of our young NCO's, but no sooner had he passed him than he deliberately picked up his rifle and shot the young NCO straight through the back, but fortunately did not kill him; so it is not much good a German praying for mercy when we get near them now. It is an old saying, once bitten, twice shy."

War and fighting is terrible thing and brings out the worst and best in men. Who are we to say what should have happened? Yes, we would all like to think that we would behave in a gentlemanly way but when you're fighting for your life anything goes. Shooting prisoners out of hand after the heat of a battle is another matter, but I suppose one just becomes brutalised by it all. War - not a good thing!!

Lionboxer

[Borden Battery]

I will see if I can find my digital file on the Tim Cook article on "The Politics of Surrender" and post some relevant sections onto this thread.

In any war, be it truth or rumour, soldiers can be directly influenced and will act accordingly. For anyone who has worked in department being re-structured or down-sized, the role of rumours and "rumours of rumour" can become endemic and have a profound impact of many of the staff who get caught up in it - as they will respond as though it were true.

Borden Battery

[ian turner]

I am currently reading Hugh Sebag-Montefiore's excellent Book "Dunkirk" in which he describes the criminal execution of British Prisoners of War by certain Units within the German Army.

I have never read of similar actions by British or German Units in WW1 and would therefore suggest that most maltreatment of prisoners occurred in the heat of battle.

I would be interested to know if my opinion of British conduct of the War is correct and, if so, how this differed from German policy and whether their training methods may have instilled a different fighting quality?

George

George,

I'm not setting out to disprove or be 'smart' - I just came across a link to the Long Long Trail and an article there about the history of the Belgian army at the outset of the war, which seemed a bit relevant to the discussions:

I quote,

From: 'Brave Little Belgium' -

The action at Aarschot was notable for the violent reaction of the Germans. A single brigade of Belgian infantry, with one artillery battery, held up the German advance for several hours, but after suffering heavy losses and being attacked from three sides, they withdrew. Inevitably the Germans took prisoners, mostly wounded men. A large number were marched to the banks of the River Demer, where they were shot. Those that escaped were thrown in the river to drown.

Ian

[Tom A McCluskey]

Jack,

The Prisoner of War accounts are a good source of information. Here is an account of John McLuskie, captured at Loos:

Private John McLuskie, 18976, 12th Highland Light Infantry

Name, rank, No. and Regiment. McLuskie, John, Private, No 18976

Highland Light Infantry, 12th Battalion.

Home Address. 10, Wallace Street, Rutherglen.

Place and Date of Capture. Hill 70, near Lens, 25th September 1915.

Nature of Wound, if any. Right leg removed.

I was wounded at the battle of Loos by an explosive bullet from a machine gun; it entered the back of my right leg, blowing off the knee-cap.

I lay on the ground pretending to be dead when a German came up to me and kicked me on my wounded leg. I groaned and drew myself away, exposing to view a knife which I had in my belt. He asked me whether I had a knife and, not knowing that he had seen it, I replied “No”. He said “You English swine, you are lying.” and taking the knife from my belt, he cut my throat almost from ear to ear. I do not know the regiment of the man who did this, and can only describe him by saying that he was a very small man with a big red moustache. (Witness has still scars some three inches long on each side of the throat.)

I lay on the field for five days and nights, during which time the Germans were coming out whenever they could to pick up their own wounded and to loot the dead; they carried away the booty in sacks. They were driven away time after time by the firing of our artillery, who were trying to prevent them from digging trenches. Once or twice the Germans came to me and tried to lift me o carry me away, but the pain of being moved was so great that I begged them to put me down, which they did, promising to return with a stretcher. This they did not do. When they came they gave me a drink of coffee and some bread. Apart from this I had only the food and water which I took from the dead bodies lying all round. On one of the days, I cannot say which, I was crawling about when I met a wounded kiltie, who was also crawling; he said to me, “They are shooting the wounded over there.” I replied, “The sooner they put me out of the pain the better,” but I saw nothing of this and no one came.

On the 29th September I had managed to crawl to the Lens road; there I was picked up by a passing ambulance and taken to Lens Field Hospital which was a church. We were laid on bad smelling straw, there were no dressings; for our wounds, but the next morning we were taken in motor ambulances to Douai. There we were in the hands of the French medical men, who were themselves practically prisoners. In the Douai Hospital I was placed under chloroform and my leg removed by a French doctor; I was well treated by both the French doctors and nurses.

On the 13th October I was removed from Douai to Wesel, a journey of 26 hours. We were removed in cattle trucks, lying on straw. At the Wesel Hospital I was in No. 2. Lazarette. On the journey the sentries were kind to us and gave us a drink whenever we wanted one. It was all right on the journey until we got to the German border; then we were jeered at by the civilians.

I was fairly well treated by the doctors at Wesel. The first doctor I had was a good gentleman; his name was, as near as I could get it, Dr. Mallincroft. He afterwards went away and was succeeded by a doctor who was called “Money.” He was a brute. He was very fond of the knife and would use it on a man for any little thing. He was also very rough in handling one, and if one could not help crying out with pain, he laughed, and said that a British soldier never squealed.

I was at Wesel from the 13th October until the 9th February, and had another operation for abscesses on the stump of my leg. This operation was done by the German doctor, and it was under ether.

In the hospital at Wesel there were 100 British prisoners. We had beds as good as the one in which I am now lying, linen sheets and blankets, the sheets changed once a week; we also got a clean shirt once a week. There was nothing to complain of with regards to the beds at hospital. The diet in the hospital consisted of at 6 o’clock half pint of coffee and one pound of brown bread, which latter had to last for the day; 12 o’clock, a little soup with a particle of beef in it; at 2 o’clock, half pint of coffee, and at 4.30, soup with some kind of grain, which we called “Billposters’ paste.” On Fridays we got salt fish; that was the only change. If a man was not making good progress, the doctor might order him some extras; these would be potatoes, rice, marmalade, and sometimes a small pat of butter.

On the 9th February I was removed to the camp at Friedrichsfeld. This being only a short journey, we did in horse vans. The German Red Cross was very good to us each journey. We got coffee and bread from them and German sausage.

When I got to Friedrichsfeld camp my leg was still unhealed, but I was put with the ordinary prisoners. There was a camp outside, to which I could have gone to have my leg dressed, but I found they gave you only a bit of clean stuff to go next the wound and the dirty old bandage still on top. I sent home to my mother in Scotland for dressings for my leg. Having my leg off I was not asked to do any work in camp, but was given a red ticket to say that I was excused from duty.

In the camp at Friedrichsfeld there were 400 British, all of them were wounded; a very large number of French, 90 per cent., unwounded; thousands of Russians, wounded and wounded; also a few hundred Belgians, four Ghurkas; and two Sikhs.

Neither in hospital nor camp did I observe that the British were in any way worse treated than the French, or prisoners of any other nationality. The only difference was that in a camp with a British fatigue party they always put on about twice as many sentries as with one of any other nationality.

In the camp the beds were terrible; they were troughs filled with straw on which other men had lain previously. During the whole time I was there the straw was never changed. We had two blankets and no sheets.

In both camp and hospital the men of the same nationality were kept together as far as possible. In the camp 400 British were kept in two bungalows; each held 200 men; they were divided into eight sections each, each section containing 22 men and a N.C.O. The beds placed down each side of the section practically touched, and in the middle was a gangway of about three feet. A man on crutches would have to go sideways to get along; and to spread the blankets on your own bed you had to get on to someone else’s. There were two stoves in each bungalow in the passages, where we got our food. These stoves burnt coke. There was no other heating arrangements, and when the weather got warm the stoves were removed. The electric light was always on from dark to daylight. The water was bad; we could not drink it unless boiled, but we could boil it for ourselves on the stoves. The sanitary arrangements were quite satisfactory, both in camp and hospital.

In the camp the food was poor; one black loaf was served out for every eleven men; this we would never eat unless forced. It was sour, being made of old potatoes. The coffee was made out of acorns and a pinch of chicory. Some of the prisoners were engaged in gathering acorns, and I was told of Private Steel of the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders that these were used for coffee. He was one of the camp cooks. We had breakfast at 7 o’clock consisting of the black bread and half pint of coffee, and dinner at 12 o’clock consisting of sauerkraut; this we could not eat and they only wasted the potatoes by making it. I never had meat whilst in camp. About once a fortnight some sausage would come up at night. Sometimes we got some vegetables, but never any meat. There was no other food provided beyond these two meals. We had a small dry canteen in the camp. There one could purchase a little tin of pickled herrings or mackerel, like sardines; for this we paid pf. 90, for a very much larger one pf. 120. We could also get tinned milk for M. 1.50, and ginger, pf. 25 per bottle. German cigarettes 10 for 10 pf., and we could buy pipe tobacco; nothing else could be purchased. When I first went to the camp one could buy sugar, but that stopped after about six weeks. All the profits of the canteen were supposed to go to the prisoners; I was told that at Christmas time each man had received M. 2 by way of a dividend, but there was no further distribution during the time I was there. When money was sent us from home this was kept by the Germans, who gave us in exchange special stamps which could only be spent at the canteen. This method of issuing stamps was adopted whilst I was in camp. Formerly we had had ordinary money. Then if a British prisoner received money from home he was allo3wed to have it all, but a Frenchman was limited to M. 8 at a time. The reason for this was that so many French prisoners had been successful in getting away.

A little while ago for 10s. we could get stamps to the value of a little over M. 12, but now we only get M. 10.20.

The commandant of the camp was a general, whose name I do not know. We did not see a great deal of him, and he was frequently the worse for drink when he did come into the camp. The second in command was Captain Fischer; all the men in the camp were pleased with him. He was very particular as to having everything clean, and we all had a hot bath once a week. As far as I know no soap was issued, but I got soap from home.

In the camp we had corduroy trousers and an old jacket; if a man had no shirt they gave him two, also two pairs of drawers and socks; as soon as we got clothing from home they took from us those which they had provided. If a man needed an overcoat, they would give him one.

We were not allowed to smoke in the bungalows, but only outside in the open. This was never stopped while I was there, but I was told that previously it had been forbidden as a punishment for the prisoners not saluting the German N.C.O.s. By the time I had arrived they had given up trying to enforce this rule, but we had to salute the officers. If a man was caught smoking inside the bungalows, all parcels from home were stopped for fourteen days, so that the whole 400 men were punished for the crime of one man.

The parcels from home arrived with fair regularity, but were generally interfered with, and some article would be missing, such as a tin of condensed milk or tin of café-au-lait. The parcels were long on the road; this could be seen from the London post-mark. I have had a parcel that had been as long as seven weeks on the road. The quickest I ever got was one in 11 days. There was generally a list of articles supposed to be in the parcel written outside, so we could check that something was missing. We were never allowed to have cigarette papers, writing pads, flint and steel lighters, nor newspapers, but I am not aware of any prohibition other than these. When some clothes from my regiment were sent to me, they were kept for two months.

We got letters pretty regularly up to the end of March; we understood that this exchange was supposed to take place on the 7th April, and after that I got no letters for six weeks. I got some money in May. There was no restriction as to the number of letters or parcels received by any man. All the letters were opened and censored before we got them. There was a special place set apart in barracks for that purpose. We were allowed to write letters on the 1st and 16th of each month, and a postcard every Sunday. All letters had to be left open. I wrote a letter or a postcard every time I was allowed, but it was evident from the letters I received that not more than half my letters reached their destination.

We could get plenty of exercise. It was a large camp, with plenty of space to walk about. We had a football field and, and about five weeks ago the Germans gave a picture hall to the camp. The charges were M. ½, 3d. and 1d. They showed American and German comic films. We had plenty of books sent over from home; these we could read either on our beds or outside the bungalows. I believe our camp was the best in Germany.

As regard religious services, there was a French priest who held a service every morning for Catholics. I am a Catholic serving, and attended these always on Sundays. After the Catholic service was finished, Corporal Oliver held, in the same building, a service for Protestants. Occasionally a Protestant clergyman came and held a service; I think his name was Williamson.

Having lost my leg I was incapable of work; but the men who were getting better were examined every three weeks or month to see if they could work. If a man refused to go with the working party when he was ordered, he was taken away – we were told it was to another camp, but we thought it was to prison. I saw one man who was returned to our camp after having been for six months and two days in a fortress, he was nothing but a skeleton when he came back. I understood that the men received 3 1/2d. per day for work, and that they were engaged on farm work or in the brickfields. I never heard of anyone being asked to make munitions.

If anything happened in camp, of which the general disapproved – for instance, an attempt to escape, such as were frequent among the working parties – there was a general roll call, that is to say, that a bugle would be blown, all the men able to stand were formed up outside and counted; they would then be kept standing for two or three hours. Men like myself who had lost a leg were formed up inside and made to sit during the time until another bugle was blown.

The Regulations for Prisoners of War were printed in English and hung up on the wall. The German sergeant we had in our party was very good and very friendly; we had nothing to complain of from him.

The punishment for not saluting an officer was seven day’s solitary confinement in the guard room. I was never in the guard room myself. The man was not present when he was tried, and the first he knew that he was to be punished was when he was fetched and placed in the guard room. I know of no serious offences being committed during the time I was in camp. I know two men each got 14 days in a dark cell; this was for an offence committed before they reached camp – smoking in the hospital. They had been in the camp for a week before they knew they were to be punished. One man was Mathieson, who is now in this hospital; the other was a Ghurka. Both these men had unhealed wounds when they were put in the dark cell, and they had no doctor. When they came out of the dark cells they could not stand without assistance.

There was a hospital outside the camp for men who went sick, but I can say nothing of this from experience. There were neither epidemics nor serious disease whilst I was in camp.

I myself saw no cruelty or ill-treatment of any prisoners in the camp, nor any difference made between prisoners of British and other nationality.

While I was in camp 20 or 30 N.C.O.’s who refused to work were sent away. I afterwards read a letter from one of the sergeants to Sergeant James, this having been smuggled through. Sergeant James belonged to the Canadians and was in our camp. The letter stated that they had been sent to Minden and were confined in a place 75 feet by 85 feet, with barbed wire and sentries all round; when parcels arrived for them they were not given out and they had to fight for them; there was also barbed wire round the canteen to prevent them from rushing it. Sergeant James asked us to mention this matter when we got home.

About three weeks ago 40 British prisoners in our camp were inspected, their boots mended, and if very bad they were given new ones; they were told they were to be taken for a march around Germany, as the French and British were doing the same with the German prisoners. They were to take no baggage. They left, and later on the baggage was done up and sent away, the labels on the same being Libau. My authority for this is Company Sergeant Foy, of the King’s Own Royal Lancashire Regiment, who himself saw the labels and asked me to make the matter known at home. I saw the men leave the camp after they had been very carefully inspected by Captain Fischer.

About a month ago the commandant sent round to inquire for a list of all British prisoners who came from sea-coast towns; when they wished to know what this was for, they were told that something had gone wrong with the postal services of these places. The list was furnished and the commandant afterwards sent for these men singly and asked them questions concerning the fortifications, if any, of the towns from which they came. They all refused to answer him. Not coming from the coast, I did not experience this myself, but all the men told us this after they had been to see the commandant.

Either the American Ambassador or his representative came to the camp once whilst I was there. We did not know he was coming, but we thought some visitor was as there was a general clean up for two days. He did not speak to any of the prisoners as far as I know, but walked straight through the barracks until he came to the sergeants’ quarters. There was no improvement of conditions after his visit.

We had no visit in camp from Casement as far as I know. I never heard of him until today. The only visitor we had was the above-mentioned American Ambassador or his representative.

I would like to mention a man named French, of the 10th Gordon Highlanders, who lives at Motherwell. This man had lost a leg. He was in Wesel Hospital No.2 when the board was sitting with regard to the exchange of prisoners, and through Dr Money’s neglect it was not mentioned that he was ready for exchange, but before I left he was well enough to be discharged into camp.

I know of no cases of insanity among our men. There is one man named Tipper, a Private of the Dragoon Guards, who is 65 years of age; he enlisted in 1871, and has been a prisoner since shortly after the Battle of Mons. He was wounded, but is now all right. He is getting queer in the head. He is under the impression that something is being done in England for his release, and depends very much upon this. He threatens to commit suicide if he cannot get home.

Opinion of Examiner

Private John McLuskie, of the Highland Light Infantry, whose statement I took at Queen Alexandra Hospital on the 27th May 1915 [1916], appears to be an exceedingly intelligent man; he apparently speaks without bias, and shows no bitterness towards anyone. His statements impress me absolutely reliable. The deep scar on the throat speaks for itself.

Henry L Hopkinson

62, Sloane Street, S.W.

This was brought to my attention by Barrie Duncan, of the forum, as I was looking into 12 HLI at Loos. Having read other witness testimony, the Germans were no strangers to cruelty or killing defenceless men. That said I have read numerous first hand accounts, official history accounts, and diary entries of British soldiers killing Germans, who could have been taken prisoner, either because: they wanted to kill them; they were ordered to; or it was tactically necessary (in their view at the time).

Hope this has added something to the discussion; and I wonder what happened to old Trooper Tipper?

Aye

Tom McC

[lionboxer]

What an interesting and harrowing account of being a PoW. They were tough old B****** to survive that lot. Tough and resourceful.

Lionboxer

[dycer]

I'm not setting out to disprove or be 'smart' - I just came across a link to the Long Long Trail and an article there about the history of the Belgian army at the outset of the war, which seemed a bit relevant to the discussions:

Ian,

No offence taken.

I would suggest that, whilst the incident you describe may appear criminal, it was done in the immediate aftermath of fighting.

The incidents during the Dunkirk retirement took place many hours after fighting ceased.

George

[healdav]

He said he often asked himself whether the Argentinians simply did not understand English and so couldn't respond as they didn't know what to respond to. Quote Healdav

It makes you wonder what these guys live with, afterwards.

Kim

In fact, this guy transferred to the SAS and spent several years there doing who knows what. When I knew him he was a civilian (but the sort of bloke you would definitely not want to meet in a fight).

He and his family emigrated, and then there was a horrific divorce after he abandoned the family for his secretary leaving behind only his collection of VERY special videos.

His wife, an x- psychiatric nurse in the army reckoned that it all stemmed from his army and SAS service.

Great shame, he was a really nice bloke.

[4thGordons]

Just to add one more account to the mix. Another complex circumstance (Trench raid which was already in trouble)

From an account included in the 1/4th Gordons War Diary. The Diary also contains the Operational Orders for the raid which are very specific about the purpose - identify the unit opposite and examine the construction of the German front line and that the party should spend no longer time than it takes to do this...

What struck me was the relatively matter of fact description. I have marked the most directly relevant section in bold:

Report on Raid by 4th Battalion Gordon Highlanders on Enemy Trenches at

K23.d.75.50 16/17th October 1916

At 7.25pm the raiding party was in position in shell holes about 60 yds short of the German wire. At 7.30pm the 2” Trench Mortars opened and a good deal of small shrapnel and earth was thrown al around us though no one was injured. All of the men had been instructed to watch the point bombarded so as to go straight to the gap immediately the trench mortars ceased fire, the barrage opened and we went forward. There was practically no trace of wire cut and for a minute or two we searched to left and right I then decided to go through the entanglement which was about 12 yards in depth, 2 feet high and moderately thick. The ground was more uneven than we had anticipated and there was a good deal of concealed wire in dips in the ground and one large shell hole had been thoroughly wired all around. When half way through the wire we came on a path about a foot broad and followed it into the trench. It was impossible to keep closed up and we went in in single file at intervals of 2 to 3 yards some men tripped badly in the wire. Meantime there was no fire directed towards us even though we must have been visible by the light of the flames. In looking for a path through I found my torch extremely useful. (I believe this comment results from the fact that this was one of the first time electric torches had been issued- Chris)We halted for a few seconds on the parapet and threw bombs into the fire bays on right and left and into the CT on the right.

At the trench the party divided into two squads. I worked to the left and 2/Lt JB Anderson to the right. I had four altogether in my party and 2/Lt Anderson had three. It was impossible to wait till the whole party had got through the wire as it would have taken up too much time and given the enemy a chance of inflicting casualties. We decided that each party would clear three fire bays.

No 1 Squad. As we entered the trench a man disappeared around the corner of a traverse. One of my Lance Corporals bayoneted and shot him and he fell in the third bay. We passed a lighted dugout whence shots were being fired. I fired a shot into it from my revolver and ordered the man immediately behind me to throw bombs down, which he did. In the third bay I shot a sentry with my revolver as he was about to jump down from the fire step. We then turned back and on our way threw more bombs into the dugout. My party then returned crawling or leaping from shell hole to shell hole as there was continuous rifle and machine gun fire from the flanks.

No 2 Squad turned to the right and after looking down the CT bombed the first dug out. A German rushed out of it and we threw bombs after him and several more into the dug out. We went to the next bay and bombed a second dug-out. In the third bay was another dug-out from which a German came as he ran along the trench 2/Lt Anderson jumped on him and brought him down. He put up his hands but refused to get up and was bayoneted and shot we then bombed the third dug-out. We judged it best to remain no longer in the trench as our parties were so small that we could have been very easily cut off and to get our parties made up quickly was out of the question as we had so much wire to come through. Again had we any casualties I am doubtful if we could have brought them back. In the actual raid there were no casualties save one man slightly scratched.

Enemy Trenches. They are about 9 feet deep are slightly wider than our own and have slightly longer fire bays. They were excellently constructed revetted with wood and had a double wooden fire step. They are dry and well trench boarded. They showed no trace of having been damaged by shell-fire. The dugouts are dug forward into the parapet, have a single stair and appear to be about 12 feet down. They were very well lighted. The communication trench was narrow. The wire entanglement was close up to the trench and was quite low.

Retaliation. Our batteries were shelled and a barrage of shrapnel was put up in no mans land immediately in front of the stepping off trench to the left of JOHN COPSE. On officer who was in charge of the small reserve party standing by the advanced trench was mortally wounded and a Lewis gunner lying in s shell hole in front was also wounded.

JM Henderson 2/Lieutenant

OC Raiding Party

4th Gordon Hdrs

Obviously this takes place in enemy territory, an enemy combatant "surrenders" but remains a threat and refuses to comply with instructions (or is terrified, or fails to understand, or.....). As an insight to British combatant attitudes even as filtered through the stilted language of the report I I found this interesting as it would appear that there is no compunction in this context about killing (and officially reporting the killing) of a man "with his hands up."

Chris

[Tom A McCluskey]

Chris,

Great little anecdote you posted. Interestingly, it was also general policy to summarily execute captured Germans who were caught with ammunition that had been tampered with.

Aye

Tom McC

[Tom A McCluskey]

Hi All,

I was reading through the first few pages of: The Scots Guards in the Great War, 1914-1918, by F. Loraine Petre, Wilfred Ewart and Major-General Sir Cecil Lowther KCMG, CB, CVO, DSO. In it I found this related article on page 20:

It was while they were at Oeuilly that Lieutenant Sir E Hulse wrote the following account of some German attrocities which came to his knowledge:

"This is the true story of ------'s death. He was wounded, and together with some of our men and the Black Watch, and, I believe, a few Coldstream, had crawled into a pit to avoid further fire. The Germans came up and fired on this party of our men (30-40 in all), and all wounded - and a Black Watch officer put up a handkerchief as a signal to them, upon which the Germans walked in and shot the lot point-blank. Two men escaped - and one of them was ours - by feigning to be dead and crawling back by night to the lines; they had two wounds each. The rest, as I say. were butchered, although already incapacitated completely. Again, a Medical Officer, wounded, lay on the ground, and when the Germans came up, he handed them his revolver, upon which they took it and shot him through both hands, and left him. He is now in England".

The '------' of this letter was, as appears from a letter of Sir V MacKenzie, 2nd-Lieutenant Compton-Thornhill.

It appears, from the book (completed about 1925) that this happened between the 21-22 Sep 1914.

Hope it is of interest

Aye

Tom McC

[Aaron Pegram]

Interesting anecdote Tom. I came across a similar incident in the recollections of Australian prisoners captured at Bullecourt. Many German Red Cross men armed with 'revolvers' (i never knew the German army had revolvers, but pistols) were seen out and about in No Mans Land issuing the coup de grace to men with stomach, head, arm and leg wounds. At first I was ready to dismiss this as an isolated incident, but I keep coming across it in the interviews with repatriated Australian POW.

Interestingly enough, there were instances where the killing of wounded were thinly-veiled as permissible in the War Book of the German General Staff, the German Army's pre-war interpretation of the Hague Conventions. Although there was much propaganda surrounding the seemingly beastly Hun and his practices on the battlefield, I'm beginning to think that maybe these killings were seen by some men as knightly and soldierly and were delivered with an act of grace. There were degrees of course; the deliberate killing of the unarmed and vulnerable also went against the Germans' proud and well established battlefield ethic.

In one case, I have several examples of one particular Wurttemburg NCO force-feeding and poisoning Australian prisoners with parrafin/kerosene. Unless there is some medicinal purpose in making the wounded drink kerosene, I'm agreeing with the prisoners in suggesting that this was simply an act of bastardry.

I haven't read much of the other three pages of this topic, but we shouldn't kid ourselves that the British and Commonwealth forces didn't engage in these illegal killings. Yes the German army killed prisoners, but so did we.

[John Rice]

Apegram,

To a non military person, could you please explain the diference between a pistol and a revolver ??

Regards

John

[Aaron Pegram]

Hi John,

Generally speaking, this was the British Army service revolver.

and this was the German Army service pistol.

The notable difference is that revolvers have a revolving cylinder which feeds the ammunition into the breech, a pistol has a spring loaded magazine in the grip. My observation is probably one of nomenclature rather than anything of real significance.

Cheers,

Aaron

[John Rice]

Hi Apegram,

Thank you for your reply. I now know the diference. Thanks for your help

Regards

John

[eltoro1960]

I was going to post this elsewhere, but thought this a more approriate thread. In Joseph Persico's book 11th Month, 11th Day, 11 Hours, page 264 he came out with a , in my opinion, random statement that surrendering in number was safer than in small numbers.

"Earlier in the second summer of war, a badly mauled regiment, the Royal Scots, had finally overcome their tormentors near Ypres and reportedly slaughtered 300 prisoners."

There is no identification of date or the battalion concerned, or indeed the location where it apparently occured, or the German unit concerned. He also does not quote a source as to whom it was reported by. I have absolutely no doubt that men were executed on the battlefield by all sides, but 300 men seems barely plausible. His statement also appears to contradict his theory , if true. Can anyone shed any light, I doubt an incident of this magnitude could be overlooked / covered up.

John

[elle72]

Having read Pte McCluskie's account of being a POW in Germany, I can assure you he was about as well fed as the average German national was by 1918. Ethel Cooper was an Australian woman who was studying music in Germany before the commencement of the war and was unable to leave until 1919. By the beginning of 1918 she states in her book 'Behind Enemy Lines' that they have no meat, no milk, no fat, no salt, no sugar, no fruit. They are issued with ration cards for 3 pounds of potatoes and 3 lbs of bread a week but are lucky if they can find it and the bread is about 96% made of something other than wheat or corn (maybe sawdust With no candles, coal, gas or petrol for cooking she resorts to frying her potatoes in lamp oil. An intellectual, she states that 'at present the food question is of more importance than all the art and philosophy in the world'

[truthergw]

................

"Earlier in the second summer of war, a badly mauled regiment, the Royal Scots, had finally overcome their tormentors near Ypres and reportedly slaughtered 300 prisoners."

....................

John

Hi John. I think this has been discussed elsewhere but I can't recall what the consensus was. Two battalions of Royal Scots at 2nd Ypres. 9th were split in two halves and fought alongside Canadians and DCLI. In the thick of it but at no time in a position where they could have slaughtered 300 German prisoners. Later in reserve and fought again but ditto as far as killing prisoners. I am quoting from Dixon's " Magnificent but not War". 10th May, 1st Btn R.S. fought alongside Cameron Highlanders and bayonet charged Germans. Attack successful in forcing attacking Germans back. Withdrawn later that day. It is hard to see where this would lead to capturing 300 troops or slaughtering them afterwards. 300 prisoners would be a very large bag for any battalion. How they would then kill them or why they would wish to do so and how it would escape the attention of everyone except the author, is beyond my comprehension.

[eltoro1960]

Thanks for that Tom , 300 prisoners is a huge haul, particulary in the early part of the war, I do not think there would be the will or means of carrying out the wholesale slaughter of this scale. I am prepared to accept that they inflicted 300 casualties, some of were captured alive and subsequently killed for whatever reason, ie MG men, snipers, the slow to raise their hands, souvenir hunters etc.

I think if it had happened we would have heard long before now, even allowing for the fact that 'history books are written by the winners'.

John

[JMcCulloch]

Interesting topic.

I once interviewed-many years ago- a very old Scots Canadian veteran (last name Kirk) who had been taken prisoner by the Germans.

On the way back to the rear he knifed one guard, "kicked the other young one in the goolies" and then knifed him too.

Then he escaped back to the Allied lines.

This was all in very late 1918 when the Germans were retreating.

I doubt he made this story up as he told it to me with guilt: "I've never forgot the look on the young ones' face . The war was almost over".

A senseless waste.

[Doug Johnson]

On the way back to the rear he knifed one guard, "kicked the other young one in the goolies" and then knifed him too.

Then he escaped back to the Allied lines.

Which clearly illustrates the PoW problem. If you now put yourself in the position of the comrades of the Germans (or themselves if they survived) and you knew what had happened, would you escort other prisoners back or would you now not even take them prisoner? (not taking prisoners is not illegal though it might be considered immoral)

Although he escaped he may well have caused the deaths of others.

Doug

PS I am not saying he was wrong. This same problem crops up with escapers where their comrades left behind suffer the consequences and again some may have paid the ultimate price. Some people would escape and others would refuse to do so, all down to the individual.