74. Fromelles: 59 Battalion – H GILFOY, V GRENVILLE, I J LEAR, A LIDDELOW, F A LIDGETT, L J NEIL & S SLEIGH

59 Battalion

The war diary for the battalion has only short entries for 19-20 July 1916 but the reasons for and extent of the casualties are clear:

19/7/16
7pm: 59th Battn. attacked enemy position in four waves, first wave going over parapet at 6.45 p.m. other three waves following at five minute intervals. Attack did not penetrate enemy trenches being held up by intense rifle and machine gun fire approximately 100 yds from enemy front line.
20/7/16
8 am: Enemy shelled heavily during early morning. Battn. relieved by 57 Battn at 8 am. Muster roll called in RUE DE BOIS. 4 officers and 90 other ranks answered. Battn moved to billets.

The next day (21/7/16) near Sailly, there was another muster roll called. This time it was … answered by 8 officers and 202 other ranks.

There was also an appendix (A2) which detailed more precisely the casualties sustained in action of 19th/20 July 1916. It gave 13 killed, 394 wounded, 274 missing and 13 died of wounds. The total casualty figure was 694 or more than two-thirds of the Battalion’s strength.

References

War Diary 59 Battalion

 

Herbert GILFOY 2641

Private Herbert Gilfoy was the last of the Shire of Alberton men to die at Fromelles. He died on 26/7/16, one week after the battle, from wounds he received on 19/7/16.

Herbert Gilfoy was another young man from England. He was born at Barton on Humber, Lincolnshire and came to Australia as a nineteen year old. At the time of enlistment he was working as a farm labourer in the Yarram area and had probably been doing so for at least one year, and certainly long enough to be identified as ‘local’. His name is on both the Shire of Alberton War Memorial and the Roll of Honor.

Gilfoy enlisted in Melbourne on 2/8/15 and at the time he was 21 yo. He gave his religion as Methodist. He had had his first medical at Yarram on 29/7/15 and was then re-examined in Melbourne. On enlistment, he was assigned to 23 Battalion. In Egypt, at the time of the AIF reorganisation, he was transferred first to 58 Battalion (23/2/16) and then to 59 Battalion on 15/3/16.

There was one minor charge in Egypt which was related to being improperly dressed on guard duty and destroying government property, for which he was fined 7/6 from his pay.

Private Gilfoy was wounded on the 19 July. He was shot in the head and someone must have managed to get him back to the casualty clearing station on the 20/7/16, most probably in the early morning.  The wound was described as GSW [gun shot wound]. Head & Hernia Cerebri (severe). The next day he was transferred to an ambulance train which transported wounded to the 30th General Hospital at Calais, some 100 kilometres from Fromelles. He was admitted to the hospital on the same day so he reached the hospital in Calais within two days of being wounded at the front. He died from the head wound five days later on 26/7/16. He was buried in Calais Cemetery on the same day. The Reverend Maurice R. Harby, the chaplain from the hospital, officiated.

The Report of Death of a Soldier was prepared within less than one month – 23/8/16 – and the parents in Lincolnshire would have received news of his death relatively quickly. It also appears that they were cabled that he was ‘dangerously ill’ when he was admitted to hospital. There is no correspondence from the family in the service file. However, the mother – Mrs Ellen Gilfoy of Lincolnshire – did complete the information form for the (National) Roll of Honour and on this she gave Yarram as the location with which her son was ‘chiefly connected’ She also gave Mr Jeffs as a contact in Australia who might be able to provide further information. This suggests that the son was working for Jeffs before he enlisted. There were several families of Jeffs who were farming in the Carrajung district.

The family received the following personal items: Disc, Letters, Wallet, Note Case, Belt, Pipe, Wooden Cross, Cuff Links, Photos, Pencil Case.

Private Gilfoy was one of the many young British immigrants to Australia who had enlisted in the AIF and returned to Europe via Egypt. But like so many of them, he did not have the chance to reunite with his family in England – or, for the others, Wales or Scotland or Ireland – before he was killed.

References

National Archives file for Gilfoy Herbert 2641
Roll of Honour: Herbert Gilfoy
First World War Embarkation Rolls: Herbert Gilfoy

Vincent GRENVILLE 1811

It is not clear if Vincent Grenville was born in Sale or Alberton. Nor is there not much to tie him directly to the Shire of Alberton. His name does not appear on either the Shire of Alberton War Memorial or Roll of Honor. Nor is his name on any local school honor roll. At the same time he gave his father’s address, as his next-of-kin on enlistment, as Yarram. More importantly, the Gippsland Standard and Albertonshire Representative, on 8/9/15, noted: Private V. Grenville, Yarram, is reported as killed in action.

He enlisted in Melbourne on 29/11/15 and acknowledged that he been rejected earlier on medical grounds (teeth). He was 32 yo and gave his occupation as labourer. His religion was Church of England.

After 59 Battalion had reached France, and only 2 weeks before he was killed, Private Grenville was charged with 2 offences. The first on 7/7/16 was for “not saluting an officer”. The second was on 16/7/16 for being … absent from Billet without leave. For this latter charge he was given 2 days Field Punishment No. 2, which meant that he would have finished this punishment the day before the fighting at Fromelles and the day before he was killed.

Private Grenville was killed in action on 19 July 1916 and his body was recovered at the time. He was buried on 21/7/16 in Rue du Bois Military Cemetery, Fleurbaix, with Rev. D S Brumwell officiating. The Report of Death was issued on 6/9/16. Personal kit was returned in May 1917: Identity Disc, Testament, Handkerchief, Postcards Wrist Watch & Strap.

As indicated, the father – George Robert Grenville – was given as next-of-kin on enlistment but the AIF was unable to trace him after the death of his son. Information about the death, burial were then sent to the mother – Rose Grenville – who lived at Welshpool. The mother also received the relevant medals once it was established that the father could not be traced.

The mother also provided the information for the (National) Roll of Honour, and in this she gave Pozieres as the place of death – evidence at the individual and personal level that Fromelles, for all its unique horror, was incorporated within the bigger picture of the fighting on the Somme.

References

National Archives file for Grenville Vincent 1811
Roll of Honour: Vincent Grenville
First World War Embarkation Rolls: Vincent Grenville [Greville]

note: 26/7/16 – information from Linda Barraclough confirms that Vincent (de Paul) Grenville’s birth was registered (6360) in Yarram in 1883. Pioneer Index. Victoria 1836-1888

Isaac James LEAR 4130

Isaac James Lear was born in Tarraville. He attended Tarraville State School. At the time he enlisted he 21 yo, single and he gave his occupation as boot maker. His religion was Church of England. He had his first medical in Yarram on 28/7/15, was issued with a railway warrant on the same day and completed the enlistment in Melbourne on 3/8/15. He joined 23 Battalion and left Melbourne on 7/3/1916.

Private Lear’s unit was involved in the re-organisation of the AIF in Egypt prior to moving to the Western Front and in April 1916 he was transferred to the newly formed 59 Battalion.

Private Lear was killed in action less than one month after reaching France. He had not seen service at Gallipoli and had not even been in front line trenches until Fromelles.

As with so many others at Fromelles, Private Lear was initially reported as missing and it was not until 28/8/17, more than a year later, that a court of enquiry determined that he had been killed in action on 19/7/16.

There is no Red Cross report for Private Lear and the paperwork in his file is sketchy. However, it is clear from the limited correspondence that the mother did pursue the circumstances of his death. The following letter from the mother in 1921 – five years after Fromelles – was written in response to the standard request to families for any information that could assist the work of the Graves Services Unit.

I am very sorry to have kept you so long waiting my reply, [the request for information was made on 27/7/21 and this reply was dated 3/9/21] but I have been trying to locate a returned Soldier (Private Long) who knows all concerning the death of my Son. But I cannot trace him. He is a South Richmond man but went to Wonthaggi to work. He was with my son advancing with fixed bayonets; after abandoning the Lewis Gun, which they were carrying and were tired of, they crossed a gully only to get on the level ground and my Son was shot in the throat. Private Long could give the exact place should we be able to find him, as he lost his leg a few minutes after he saw my son fall. This is the only information I can give, with the exception of a few articles that I am sure would be on his person should he be recovered without an identification disc. 1 shire medallion medal blue enamel presented by Alberton Shire (Gippsland) for duty done, a brooch made out of two sixpences, a blue enamel wristlet watch parcelled up and pinned in tunic pouch. The medal was initialled I. J. L on back.

I am sorry this is all the information I can give but hope it will be of some use.
Thanking you so much for all the trouble you have taken.

The Private Long referred to in the mother’s letter appears to have been William Joseph Long (4823) 59 Battalion who was seriously wounded – ‘GSW L Hip and R Knee severe’ – on 19/7/16 and who, after an extended period of hospitalisation in England, was returned to Australia on 4/8/17. He was discharged early 1918. Interestingly, information to families in relation to the wounded was reasonably prompt. Private Long’s family was advised by cable on 30/7/16 – ten days after Fromelles – that he was in hospital ‘seriously ill shell wound hip arm’ (sic).

As indicated, the court of enquiry that determined Private Lear had been killed in action on 19/7/16 was held more than one year later on 29/8/17. It is not possible to determine exactly when this information was conveyed to the family, but a letter of 6/11/17 suggests it was late October or early November 1917. The letter is also interesting in that it gives an insight on how clergy were employed to deliver the fateful news when it finally came.

I was absent from my home when the clergyman called and left the message with my daughter that her brother was killed in action. I have had nothing from the Defence department to confirm this message. If you would let me know the particulars I would be very much obliged.

The response from Base Records on 12/11/17 was not able to add any ‘particulars’.

In reply to your communication of 6th inst., I have to state the only information available at this Office to date regarding your son, No. 4130 Private I.J. Lear, 59th Battalion, is that contained in the brief cable message – Previously reported missing, now reported killed in action on 19/7/16. It is confidently anticipated however, that further particulars will come to hand by Mail, and these on receipt will be promptly transmitted to you.

However it is clear that no further details on the particulars of the death did emerge. Moreover, there was no kit returned to the family. This was unusual, because no matter how limited the personal belongings of soldiers were, there was generally something returned to the family. The mother wrote several times, and as late as February 1919, asking for the return of her son’s personal effects but to no avail. A formal response from Base Records on 12/7/18 – some two years after the Battle of Fromelles – is interesting for the directness of the explanation if offers.

As this soldier was posted missing for about fourteen months, it is probable his body was never recovered and anything he had with him at the time of his death would have disappeared. In the circumstances it is not likely that any effects will now come to hand.

However, the response is disingenuous because it does not address the issue of the soldier’s kit that was routinely handed in to the Company Quarter Master Sergeant before the troops went in to battle. As already noted, kit was returned to family even in cases where the soldier was listed as missing and there had not yet been any formal determination of his fate. Overall, in the case of Private Lear, after Fromelles there was literally no trace whatsoever. His name at least is recorded on the Shire of Alberton War Memorial and Roll of Honor and also at VC Corner Australian Cemetery and Memorial, Fromelles.

References

National Archives file for Lear Isaac James 4130
Roll of Honour: Isaac James Lear
First World War Embarkation Rolls: Isaac James Lear

Aubrey LIDDELOW Captain

Aubrey Liddelow appears on the roll of honor for Tarraville State School, as does his brother, Roy Liddelow.  He was born at Tarraville in 1877 and his father was a school inspector with the Education Department.  When his wife – Fannie T Liddelow – completed the information form for the (National) Roll of Honour, she noted that he had been a student of Scotch College and also South Melbourne College [closed in 1917]. She gave his ‘calling’ as school master and also noted he had attended Melbourne University.

The embarkation roll recorded that 2Lt. Liddelow’s occupation was state school teacher. It also gave his age as 38 yo. The wife at the time was living at East Malvern. His religion was Church of England.

There are missing papers in Captain Aubrey’s service file but it is likely that he was involved in the Citizens Forces in his role as a state school teacher because he was appointed as a second lieutenant when he joined 8 Battalion on 11/11/14. Subsequently, in 7 Battalion, he was made full lieutenant at Gallipoli and then promoted to the rank of captain in February 1916. He transferred to the newly created 59 Battalion in March 1916. At Gallipoli he had been wounded twice: bullet wound left ankle and injury to eye.

Captain Liddelow was posted as missing as of 19/7/16 until a court of enquiry held on 21/7/17 found him killed in action on the same date. To this point no remains have been identified and his name is recorded at VC Corner, Fromelles.

The Red Cross file for Captain Liddelow is extensive with no less that 13 witness statements. There are inconsistencies, as was common, There was a question over whether he was shot and killed outright or died shortly after being wounded. There was also inconsistency over how far into the attack he was killed. However, there is no doubt that he was killed in the attack on the enemy lines.

The witness statements also reveal that Captain Liddelow was well-regarded by his men.  Pte. J E Rice 59 Battalion was reported as stating that, Capt. Liddelowwas killed on July 19th. I was not an eye-witness but as I lay wounded several of my chums who passed me said “Poor old Liddelow is gone”. There was a similar sentiment evident in the witness statement by Pte. C H Saunders:

Saunders C. H. No. 4588, Ward 18. states he saw Capt. Liddelow wounded at Fleurbaix. Mr.[sic] Liddelow had been over to German trenches, and was coming back, he was severely wounded in forehead. Saunders tried to help Mr. Liddelow back, but being badly wounded himself Mr. Liddelow ordered him back., this was between one and two in morning of 19th & 20th. That is the last seen of Mr. Liddelow, who was nearer the German trenches than his Battalion … Saunders says it was a bad job, as Mr. Liddelow was very popular and much liked by his Company.

There is correspondence from family members seeking a final determination of Captain Liddelow’s fate so that his estate could be finalised. The family had accepted that he was dead long before the formal notification came. Indeed, whereas the formal notification took 12 months, personal items were despatched to the wife within 6 months of the point he was declared missing.

The amount of kit returned to the family in Australia for Capt. Liddelow, as an officer, was far greater than for ‘other ranks’. It was far too extensive to itemise but it included the likes of : 2 Revolvers, 3 Ancient Pistols, 2 holdalls, Civilian Suit, 9 prs. socks, slippers, pr. boots, 5 collars, Cane, 1 Fur Cardigan Jacket, 1 Tunic, 1 Khaki Drill Uniform, 1 pr. Khaki Drill Riding Breeches, 1 Pr. White Trousers … and items such as Brushes in Case, Metal Mirror, 1 Spirit Flask and polishing outfit. Clearly, commissioned officers, even in the AIF, represented, and were treated as, a higher ‘class’ of person.

References

National Archives file for Liddelow Aubrey
Roll of Honour: Aubrey Liddelow
First World War Embarkation Rolls: Aubrey Liddelow
Red Cross Wounded and Missing file: Aubrey Liddelow

 Archie Fred LIDGETT  4832

Archie Fred Lidgett enlisted in Melbourne on 3/11/15 and embarked for overseas service on 7/3/16. Initially he joined 7 Battalion but was transferred to 59 Battalion when its was formed in Egypt early in 1916. With the rest of the battalion he reached Marseilles on 29/6/16.

Archie Lidgett was another immigrant rural farm worker. He came from a small village, Springthorpe, near Gainsborough in Lincolnshire. His attestation papers indicate that his father, as next-of-kin, was still living in England and his mother was dead. At the time of enlistment he was 20 yo and therefore required the signed permission of his guardian to enlist. His papers are annotated with the comment ‘Father in England. Mother Dead. No Guardianship Available’ which is signed by him. His religion was given as Church of England.

Archie Lidgett was working in the Yarram area – most likely at Darriman – at the time of enlistment and had his first medical in Yarram on 18/10/15. He was re-examined in Melbourne on 3/11/15, the date of his formal enlistment. His occupation was listed as labourer. It is not clear how long he had been working in the district before his enlistment. However, the fact that he is on the Shire of Alberton War Memorial suggests that he was certainly known. Oddly, his name is not included on the Shire of Alberton Roll of Honor.

The record on Private Lidgett is very brief. Even though he was initially reported as ‘missing’ on 19/7/16, there is no Red Cross report. There is no family correspondence in his service file. Nor did the family in Lincolnshire complete the information for the (National) Roll of Honour. Yet, oddly, there is a picture of Private A Lidgett.

A court of enquiry held in the field in France on 29/8/17 finally determined that he had been killed on action on 19/7/16. His name is recorded on the memorial at VC Corner, Fromelles. To this point no remains have been found. He is another of the very many who effectively disappeared from history at Fromelles. It is also worth noting that, like other British farm workers who came to Australia pre WW1 and enlisted in the AIF, he was killed on the Western Front well before there was the possibility of leave to reunite with his family in Lincolnshire.

References

National Archives file for Lidgett Archie Fred 4832
Roll of Honour: Archie Fred Lidgett
First World War Embarkation Rolls: Archie Fred Lidgett

 

Leonard John James NEIL 2406

Leonard John James Neil was born at Port Albert and attended the state school there. His name is included on the honor roll for the school.

Neil enlisted at Foster on 28/4/15. At the time he was 21 yo and single. He gave his father – William Neil –  as next-of-kin, and he gave his father’s address – Oakleigh – as his own. However, his occupation was given as fisherman, and it appears that he was living and working at Port Franklin. He was single and his religion was Church of England.

He left Australia in 7 Battalion and served at Gallipoli. He was evacuated from there on 19/10/15 suffering from dysentery.

In 59 Battalion in France, he was appointed lance corporal on 6/7/16. He was first listed as missing (19/7/16); but the Report of Death was issued relatively soon after on 13/9/16, with missing changed to killed in action. There was no body recovered and on one of the forms there is a reference to the fact that he was ‘presumed buried in No Man’s Land.’ There was no Red Cross report but, judging by the promptness of the Report of Death, there must have been strong evidence that he had been killed. His name is recorded at VC Corner, Fromelles.

A small number of personal items were returned to the family in April 1917: Identity Disc, Wallet, Photos, 3 Coins and in July 1917: Scarfs 3, Cap Comforter, Kit Bag Handle, Belt, Handkerchief.

In the service file there is a letter from the father to Base Records in Melbourne in which he asks for the address of the sergeant of the company – C Company 59 Battalion – in which his son served. It shows yet another way families pursued the quest to find out what had happened to their sons. This letter was written not much more than a week after the family would have been informed that L/Cpl Neil had been killed. The father is keen to learn the precise details of his son’s death.

Could you let me no (sic) the sergeants name of the C Coy 59th Battalion 15 Inf. Brigade. I received word my son LCpl L J J Neil was killed on the 19th of July in France but have not had any particulars. I would like to no how he met his death.

In response, Base Records forwarded the address of the Officer Commanding,”C”  Company, 59 Battalion and suggested that the parent contact him. It also noted – and it would have been an unintended irony – that it was unable to … furnish the name of the officer acting in that capacity. Change in personnel was a constant on the Western Front.

References

National Archives file for Neil Leonard John James 2406
Roll of Honour: Leonard John James Neil
First World War Embarkation Rolls: Leonard John James Neil

Stephen SLEIGH 3244

None of the usual sources of evidence links Stephen Sleigh to the Shire of Alberton. His name does not appear on either the Shire of Alberton Roll of Honor or War Memorial. Nor does it appear on any local school or other community honor roll. His name is not on the electoral roll for the subdivision of Yarram Yarram.

However, there was a strong link. Stephen Sleigh does appear in the 1915 Rate Book for the Shire with land at Binginwarri. Further, on the embarkation roll his address appears as ‘c/o Bank of Australasia, Yarram’. Lastly, throughout his service file there is correspondence from B P Johnson, solicitor of Yarram, requesting relevant documentation from the AIF so that he (Johnson) can settle the estate of the late private S Sleigh. Johnson complained, repeatedly, about the length of time it was taking the authorities to issue the death certificate. He argued that this delay was costing the estate considerable amounts in interest and, worse, as Johnson put it, the land itself, with no one to manage it, was ’going back’. Finally in late December 1918, the property was able to be offered for sale. The advertisement appeared in the Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative on 24/12/18. The property was described as … the Estate of the late Stephen Sleigh, who was killed on active service. The ad continued:

100 acres of very rich grey soil, situate 12 miles from Gelliondale Station, with two-roomed hardwood house. Carrying capacity, 30 cows.

On the embarkation roll, Sleigh’s occupation was given as ’shunter’ and elsewhere there was a reference to him being a ‘railway employee’. His mother described his calling – on the (National) Roll of Honour – as ‘civil servant’. This occupational background does not, on the face of it, appear to line up with his land holding and dairy farming activity. However, it is definitely the same person. At the time he enlisted (16/7/15) in Melbourne, he was 28 yo and single. His religion was Church of England. He gave his mother – Mrs Mary Jane Sleigh – as his next-of-kin and her address was first Bunyip and then Koo Wee Rup.

Private Sleigh left Australia (26/11/15) in 23 Battalion. He shifted to 59 Battalion via 58 Battalion. He was reported as ‘missing’ as of 19 July 1916 and then ‘killed in action’, as of the same date, by a court of enquiry held 29/8/17. He was another soldier …  presumed buried in No Man’s Land. His name is recorded at VC Corner, Fromelles. When the mother completed the information for the (National) Roll of Honour she gave the place of her son’s death as either Fleurbaix or Pozieres. There was no Red Cross report for Private Sleigh.

There are 2 pieces of correspondence is the service file which give additional insights into how attempts were made to uncover details of those missing. The first was the standard form sent to families by the AIF asking if they had received any additional letters or other communication  … that contain any reference to the circumstances surrounding his death, particularly the exact location at which it occurred, or where he was last seen alive. This was sent to the mother in July 1921. Her reply, dated 3/8/21, noted that she had not received any letters – from mates or officers or the chaplain in the same unit – ’surrounding his death or burial’.   She was unable to contribute any information, but she did add a postscript to the effect that she believed that the death occurred at Fleurbaix.

The second piece of correspondence was a letter from Johnson, the Yarram solicitor, to Base Records in Melbourne. It was sent 17/9/17 – after the court of enquiry in France held on 29/8/17 that had found Private Sleigh ‘killed in action’ on 19/7/16 – and stands as an example of how locals back home carried out their own investigations, trying to uncover what had happened:

No 3244 Pte S. Sleigh 59th Battalion
Referring to previous correspondence as to this missing soldier I have received information that may be of use to a Court of Inquiry. There is a returned man (Pte. Lithgow) who is now living with his father Mr J W Lithgow of Hiawatha via West Alberton & who says he was in the same Battn. as Sleigh & about 20 yds from him when crossing a creek full of liquid mud & that if a man got hit there he was sure to fall in & get smothered. Lithgow says he never saw Sleigh afterwards & feels sure he came to his end in that creek.

In the case of Johnson, it is not clear if he was being paid for his service in trying to settle the affairs of Sleigh or if in fact it was pro bono work. The latter possibility relates to an agreement made by those on the Yarram Recruiting Committee in 1916 whereby the local professionals would assist men from the Shire who enlisted. For example, local doctors were to treat the families of enlisted for free. Under this arrangement Johnson had undertaken to represent the legal interests of enlisted men. There were qualifications but it was a genuine attempt to support recruitment in the Shire.

References

National Archives file for Sleigh Stephen 3244
Roll of Honour: Stephen Sleigh
First World War Embarkation Rolls: Stephen Sleigh

73. Fromelles: 31 Battalion – H MATES & H V WILLIS

31 Battalion

The war diary for 31 Battalion gave the casualties for 19-20 July 1916 as 573, with 67 killed, 421 wounded and 85 missing. Its succinct account of the action was:

(19th July) Bombardment on both sides during the day. Assault launched at 6pm. Enemy’s position captured & an attempt made to consolidate during the night. …
(20th July) Both flanks were broken & a general retirement to our original lines necessary. Casualties very heavy. Btn withdrawn from front line and re-billeted in FLEURBAIX.

There was also a more detailed report which highlighted the following: the casualties caused by the Australian and British artillery falling short on their own lines; the lack of command as the result of high casualty rates among the officers; the lack of materials – sandbags, shovels, picks etc- that could be used to make captured positions safe from enemy fire; the incorrect intelligence on the disposition of the German lines and defences; the devastating effects of German enfilade artillery and machine gun fire; and, pointedly, the impossibility of defending and holding the forward positions that had been taken, particularly after the flanks gave way.

The CO of 31 Battalion – Lt. Col. F W Toll – wrote:

To sum up under the hellish concentrated enemy fire the battalion did magnificent work in capturing and holding the positions for so long without reinforcements and necessary material to consolidate captured works, and it was only on the breaking of both flanks that it was finally forced to retire to its original attacking position.

The CO’s account of the last part of the action – the withdrawal to their own lines – was particularly graphic:

The retirement of both flanks had left us up in the air and it was apparent that we would have to retire. At 5.45 a.m. the remnants of our troops broke and retired and it was impossible to restrain them although an attempt was made to keep them at the point of the revolver. The C. O. was the last man to leave the enemy’s trench.

The enemy then swarmed in and the retirement across no man’s land resembled a shambles, the enemy artillery and machine guns doing deadly damage. Our own lines were reached at last, but the artillery bombardment was intense and even under shelter of our own trenches the casualties were awful.

Harold MATES 515

Harold Mates was born at Nyora, South Gippsland. He attended both Welshpool State School and Carrajung South State School. In July 1917, on Arbor Day, there was a tree-planting ceremony at Welshpool SS in honour of past students who had been killed up to that point in the War. The report of the event in the Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative (13/7/15) noted that the first tree planted was … in memory of Harold Mates, the first to fall. His name is also reported on the honor roll for Carrajung South SS. It appears that the family must have moved again because there is another reference (Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative, 23/816) to the father as a resident of Traralgon.

There was a brother – Roy Mates (1081) – who had enlisted earlier (August 1914) but his name is not included on the Carrajung South SS Roll of Honor.

It is difficult to uncover his movements round the time of his enlistment in July 1915. When his wife completed the information for the (National) Roll of Honour she gave his ‘calling’ as clerk in the National Bank, Melbourne. Yet he enlisted (21/7/15) in Brisbane. Moreover, when he enlisted he was single and gave his next-of-kin as his father – Richard Mates, Kyabram – but he must have married – Dorothy Edith Mates, nee Barnett – prior to embarkation for overseas service. Further, pension details in his file show that there was a daughter, Gladys Elizabeth Mates.

One version of events is that the marriage took place in Melbourne some time after early October 1915. This was when the part of 31 Battalion formed at Enogerra in Queensland moved to Broadmeadows and merged with the part of the same battalion formed there. The merged 31 Battalion then embarked from Melbourne for overseas service on 9/11/15 which meant that there was one month for the marriage. However, the embarkation roll still showed Harold Mates as single, with his father as next-of-kin. Possibly there had not been time to change the record. The wife’s address was the suburb of Camberwell.

At the time he enlaced, Harold Mates was 24 yo ands he gave his religion as Roman Catholic.

When in Egypt, Private Mates had several run-ins with military authority. In April 1916 he was charged with failing to report for duty and received 2 hours pack drill as punishment. In May, it was ‘breaking out of ranks without permission’ and the punishment was 24 hours F. P. No. 2. Finally, again in May, he was charged with being ‘(1) absent from parade’ and ‘(2) refusing to obey an order given by a superior officer’ and received a very punishing 168 hours F.P.No. 2. It was certainly not uncommon for those in the AIF to be charged for breaches of military discipline, but 3 charges in such a short period time would have drawn attention.

Private Mates was killed less than 1 month after landing in France.

Private Mate’s body was recovered after he was killed in action on 20/7/16. There was one reference to him as ‘missing’ from 19/7/16 and another to the effect that he ‘died of wounds’ but both of these were corrected to ‘killed in action’ on 20/7/16. He was buried at Eaton Hall Military Cemetery, Croix Blanche near Armentieres. Rev. G Cranston, who was attached to the battalion, officiated. Subsequently Private Mates was re-buried in the early 1920s at Rue-Petillon Military Cemetery, Fleurbaix.

The Report of Death was issued on 11/10/16. Personal items – Identity Disc, Religious Book, 2 Photos, 4 Coins, Book, Pencil, Religious Medallion –  were returned to the wife in June 1917.

References

National Archives file for Mates Harold
Roll of Honour: Harold Mates
First World War Embarkation Rolls: Harold Mates
War Diary 31 Battalion

 

Henry Victor WILLIS 983

Henry Willis was born in Alberton. He grew up in the Shire of Alberton and attended Alberton State School. At the time of enlistment his father was dead and so his mother wrote the formal parental permission for him to enlist. He was 19 yo and his occupation was listed as farm labourer. His religion was given as Presbyterian.

Alberton 10/7/15
Dear Sir
I am quite agreeable that my son may enlist for active service abroad.
Janet Willis

Private Willis had a medical examination in Yarram on 12/7/15 and then he completed his enlistment in Melbourne on 14/7/15. He joined 31 Battalion (D Coy) and left Melbourne for overseas service on 9/11/15, just 2 months after enlistment. After nearly six months in Egypt, the battalion left for the Western Front in June 1916 and reached France on 23/6/16. Like many others, Private Willis was killed less than one month after reaching France.

The local paper – Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative – carried a report on 25/8/16 that Private Willis was listed as missing.

The interesting feature in relation to Private Willis’ death is that the date of death is recorded as the 21 July. This is incorrect. There is sufficient documentary evidence to show that he was first reported ‘missing’ as of 20/7/16. Further, he appears on a German list of the dead as having been killed on ‘19/7/16 near Fromelles’. Additionally, eye-witness accounts prepared for the Red Cross make it clear that he was killed during the Battle of Fromelles – 19-20 July, 1916 – not the day after.

The following advice to the Red Cross was written on 5/12/16 by Private Albert Edmund Hickson MM, 872, 31 Battalion:

I knew Willis. He was in the same tent as myself. He was a stout fair man about 21. He came from Yarram Gippsland Victoria. He was killed at Fler Bay [sic] in No Man’s Land. I saw his body about 12 hours later lying dead. We had to retire and leave our dead there.

Additional advice came from Private Henry Irvine Rogers, 1560, 31 Battalion:

Informant states that on 19th July at Fleur Baix Willis was shot through the jaw. He was in same Machine Gun Section as Informant, but they were not together at the moment. He thinks that Pte. Ellis (nickname Paddy) is likely to know particulars.

Overall, there is no doubt that Private Willis was killed in the actual battle and not on the 21 July. It appears that the incorrect date was entered very early in formal records and then it effectively became ‘locked in’. The incorrect date probably explains why his name does not appear on the memorial in VC Corner.  Instead, it is recorded on the memorial at Villers-Bretonneux. However, this is all somewhat academic as Private Willis’ body was one of those identified by DNA testing (2009-2010) and has been re-interred at the new Pheasant Wood Military Cemetery at Fromelles in an individual plot. The date of death on the headstone is given as 19-20 July.

When the family in Gippsland received the reports from the Red Cross in February 1917 they wrote to Base Records, Melbourne (15/2/17) requesting contact information for Private Ellis who had been mentioned in the statement by Private Rogers.

Enclosed is letter we received from the Red Cross.

We would like to apply to Pte Ellis for further information. Will you kindly supply us with Ellis’ number & initials. You would greatly oblige. Thanking you in anticipation.

Such individual effort by the family to track down information about the death of the son was very common.  As well, in many cases soldiers from the same town or district back home would write to the family informing them about the death. The overall effect was that even though a formal notification of the death had not been received, the family often knew that their son had been killed.

In this instance, the response the family received from Base Records revealed that the AIF itself did not have access to the Red Cross information.  It undertook for the family to follow up the witness statement made by Private Hickson:

I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated 15th instant, with enclosure from Red Cross regarding No. 983 Private H.V. Willis, 31st Battalion, and to inform you the address of Private Ellis referred to therein appears to be:- [address supplied]

As it is noticed Private A. E Hickson gives a definite account of the fate of Private Willis, a cable message is being despatched to London with a view to obtaining confirmation of his report if correct. The reply when to hand will be promptly transmitted to his mother.

The irony is that by this point the name of Private Willis was beginning to appear on the death lists provided by the Germans. The first instance appears to have been on 4/11/16, which was at least two months prior to this series of communications and it is hard to see why the information had not been processed by then.

The Report of Death of a Soldier was finally issued on 28/3/17 and the identification disc, returned by the Germans, was sent to the family in June 1917. There is no record of any personal kit being sent to the family.

There is one final factor that made this particular death even more distressing for the family. A brother, David Geoffrey Willis, had enlisted at the same time as Henry. In fact, there were 4 brothers who enlisted. David was 5 years older and married with three children. Tragically, he died at the Alfred Hospital within six weeks of enlistment from ‘cerebro spinal meningitis’. The family lost two sons within one year.  Both brothers are featured on the Shire of Alberton War Memorial.

References

National Archives file for Willis Henry Victor
Roll of Honour: Henry Victor Willis
First World War Embarkation Rolls: Henry Victor Willis
Red Cross Wounded and Missing file: Henry Victor Willis
War Diary 31 Battalion

See this ABC report for the link between a good luck charm belonging to Private Willis and the success in locating the Australian bodies in Pheasant Wood, Fromelles.

72. Fromelles: 29 Battalion – R M COLE & D F LIVINGSTON

Reginald Maurice COLE 417

Reginald Maurice Cole was another of the young men born in England but living and working in the Shire of Alberton at the outbreak of WW1. He was born in St Ives, Huntingdonshire and both parents were still living there. He had his medical in Yarram and completed the enlistment in Melbourne on 13 July 1915. At the time he was 21yo. He gave his religion as Church of England. He was working as a farm labourer at Jack River, about 10 Km from Yarram.

His attestation papers indicate that he had served 3 1/2 years in 5 Bedfordshire Territorial Force in England before he migrated to Australia, suggesting that he could only have been in Australia for a short period of time. At the same time, he was sufficiently well-known in the district to be included on the Shire of Alberton War Memorial. He also received the Shire Medallion, at a farewell in Yarram in October 1915.

He left Melbourne for overseas service on 10/11/15. When he left Alexandria on 16/6/16 for the Western Front he was in 29 Battalion. He had had one run-in with military authority in Egypt. On 20/4/16 he was charged with and found guilty of … neglect of duty whilst on sentry duty: reclining on a heap of bags. He received 2 days field punishment No 2 for the offence.

In Egypt, there was a hospital admission for 10 days in May 1916 but there is no indication of what the illness or injury was. Then on 13/7/16 in France there is a reference to him being ‘wounded in action’ and ‘shrapnel’ given as the explanation. But there is no indication of any treatment or hospitalisation. In any case, he was still obviously on active duty when he was listed, one week later, as missing on 19/7/16. The war diary of the 29 Battalion indicates that he was one of 66 men missing.

The court of enquiry that determined he had been killed in action on 20/7/16 was held more than one year later, on 23/8/17, and the Report of Death of a Soldier was issued on 12/9/17. There is no family correspondence and therefore no way of determining when the parents learned of his fate. There was no grave and his name is listed on the memorial in VC Corner, Fromelles.

The only information provided by the parents was when they completed the information for the (National) Roll of Honour, where they gave Melbourne as the town with which their son was ‘chiefly connected’.

There is a detailed Red Cross report which highlights the confusion that so often surrounded the painstaking process of tracking missing soldiers. In battles such as that at Fromelles where the casualties were so great, the potential for confusion and error was correspondingly higher, precisely because there were so few men left to provide witness statements for the many missing or dead.

In the specific case of Private Cole there was a significant case of mistaken identity set in train when one informant – Sgt. F. H. Simpson 633 – suggested that the Cole in question was a sergeant who had been taken prisoner. He wrote to the Red Cross on 16/9/16:

This man is a Sargt and I think in D. Coy. I happened to see the letter he wrote to Lt. Stanton from Germany and have a list of men who were in the same camp with him…. I feel certain you will find Sargt. Cole is a prisoner.

There was a Sergeant Cole – Oliver Stanley Cole 1321 – who had been captured at Fromelles and who was a POW in Germany. It took several months to clear up the confusion with Private R M Cole 473.

At the same time, there were other witness statements that did have the right man but there was still confusion. Private Nash 303 wrote on 1/12/16 from his hospital in Boulogne, where he had been admitted with ‘chilled feet’ [trench foot].

Cole was in A.II and was wounded in the attack at Fromelles on July 19-20. We attacked at 6 p.m. and took three lines of trenches, but had to go back to our own line at 4 a.m. Cpl R. C. Adams of the same platoon, was with him, and told me that he saw him wounded in Fritz’ first line. He was left behind, and if alive must be a prisoner.

There was also another second-hand account that must have been closer to the truth. It was written a couple of months later by Pte R. Blake 173 – also recovering in hospital, from Trench Fever & Neuritis (severe)  in England – on 15/2/17. It certainly has the right Cole, whom the informant described as … a little dark fellow, Englishman from St Ives, Huntingdonshire. [According to his medical papers, Cole was about 5 foot 3 inches tall and of ‘sallow’ complexion.] Like the previous statement this one again relies on the memory of Corporal Adams.

Cpl Adams (29th A.I.F. A. Coy, VI Plat) told me R.M. Cole was killed on 19th July while they were retiring. He was in the first line, and I was in the 3rd (supporting line) and R.M Cole was killed as they came back.

While both statements rely on the testimony of Corporal Adams – one had Cole wounded, left behind and taken prisoner and the other had him killed – there was, unfortunately, no first-hand account by Corporal Adams himself.

Presumably, when Private Cole did not appear on list of the dead provided by the Germans and it was equally clear that he was not a prisoner of war he was effectively ‘signed-off’ as killed in action. This protracted process took just over one year.

References

National Archives file for Cole Reginald Maurice
Roll of Honour: Reginald Maurice Cole
First World War Embarkation Rolls: Reginald Maurice Cole
Red Cross Wounded and Missing file: Reginald Maurice Cole
War Diary 29 Battalion

note: Service Number for Embarkation Roll is 9, not 417

 

David Frederick LIVINGSTON 1168

David Frederick Livingston was born in Tarraville and attended Tarraville State School where his name is recorded on the school honor roll. However, on the school honor roll the surname is recorded, incorrectly, as LIVINGSTONE.

At the time of his enlistment in Kerang on 3/11/14 he was 38 yo which makes his the oldest name on the Shire of Alberton War Memorial.  His occupation was given as grazier, suggesting that at the time of enlistment he was living and working in the border region with NSW. However, there is other evidence also that ties him, at the same time, to the Shire of Alberton. His name appears on the local Presbyterian Charge and there is an entry for a D F Livingston in the 1915 Rate Book for land at Binginwarri. Moreover, his name appears on the Shire of Alberton Roll of Honor, on which he is recorded as having been killed; and as already indicated, his name is also on the Shire War Memorial.

He married – Lillie Maud Livingston – shortly after he enlisted and before he embarked for overseas service. His wife’s address over the time of his military service – and immediately after the War – was in Melbourne.

On enlistment he joined 8 Battalion but was subsequently transferred to 29 Battalion when this formed at Broadmeadows in August 1915.  He was in D company and was promoted to corporal on 25/4/16. His unit arrived in Egypt in December 1915, after the evacuation from Gallipoli, and then left Alexandria on 16/6/16 for France. 29 Battalion reached Marseilles on 23/6/16.

The War Diary of 29 Battalion indicates that D Company was heavily involved in the fighting at Fromelles, particularly when the Germans counterattacked very early – round 2 am – on 20 July. The fact that his identification disc was returned by the Germans suggests that Corporal Livingston was one of those who made it through no-man’s-land to the German trenches where he was killed. After the German counter attack early on that morning of the 20 July the front line re-established itself in the previous position. Corporal Livingston was buried by the Germans in a common grave.

The Report of Death of a Soldier for Corporal Livingston was issued on 13/9/16 at Rouen. This was a much faster time than for others killed at Fromelles. More surprising is the fact that the family was notified of the death even before this report was issued. There is a letter from Rev W. Borland of Scots Church, Melbourne – Livingston was Presbyterian – that shows he conveyed the ‘sad news’ of the death to the widow on 14 August 1916, which was one month before the official report was prepared. It appears that the cable of the death reached Australia on 8/8/16 and this was confirmed by mail sent from London on 18/8/16. Rev Borland made his visit to the wife about a week after the cable reached Australia.

The key point in this series of events is that even though Corporal Livingston was technically ‘missing’ – his body had not been recovered – the wife was advised that he been killed less than one month after Fromelles. The clue to the apparent inconsistency in procedure is contained in The Report of Death of a Soldier.  In the report there is reference to another form that carried notification of the death, and this form was completed on 21/7/16, the day after the battle. Unlike other ‘missing’ soldiers after Fromelles, Corporal Livingston was declared as ‘killed in action’ – and not missing or taken prisoner – immediately after the battle. There must have been strong evidence, presumably by way of witness statements from others in his company, to support the declaration.  To add to the mystery, there is a reference in Corporal Livingston’s file that has him buried at Fromelles.  Yet every other record points to the fact that the body was never recovered after the battle by the Australian troops and that it was in fact buried by the Germans in a mass grave, as it was presumably either in or behind their lines. Possibly, in the face of such staggering casualties after the battle and in the confusion of the first one or two days after, as various parties were trying to recover wounded from no-man’s-land and bury the dead, there was a case of mistaken identity. Whatever happened, there is no formal record of Corporal Livingston being buried by the AIF in an identified grave – his name appears as one of the twelve hundred and ninety-nine on the VC Corner Australian Cemetery and Memorial, Fromelles – and at the time he was declared ‘killed in action’ his body had definitely not been located. It appears that the earliest the Germans confirmed his death – they confirmed his death from his identification disc which they subsequently returned – could have been early August. The name was certainly on a German list of dead dated 4/11/16. It appears that the disc itself was returned earlier, on 12/10/16.

Corporal Livingston’s case points to the level of confusion surrounding Fromelles. His body was buried by the Germans in a mass grave and it was identified in 2011. Subsequently, Corporal Livingston was re-buried in the new (2010) Pheasant Wood Military Cemetery, Fromelles.

References

National Archives file for Livingston David Frederick
Roll of Honour: David Frederick Livingston
First World War Embarkation Rolls: David Frederick Livingston
Red Cross Wounded and Missing file: David Frederick Livingston
War Diary 29 Battalion

 

71. Fromelles

Twelve of the men associated with the Shire of Alberton were killed at Fromelles (19-20 July 1916), or Fleurbaix as it was commonly referred to at the time. Based on the research so far, this number represents the largest single loss of life for those from the Shire in any single battle of WW1.

Each of the 12 men is covered in following posts which are organised by battalion:

29 Battalion

Reginald Maurice COLE 417
David Frederick LIVINGSTON 1168

31 Battalion

Harold MATES 515
Henry Victor WILLIS 983

59 Battalion

Herbert GILFOY 2641
Vincent GRENVILLE 1811
Isaac James LEAR 4130
Aubrey LIDDELOW Captain
Frederick Archie LIDGETT 4832
Leonard John NEIL 2406
Stephen SLEIGH 3244

60 Battalion

Charles John CLAYTON 850

For an account of Fromelles see Beaumont (2013. pp 189-200). Fromelles featured the litany of military failures that characterised so much of the fighting on the Western Front. Beaumont notes the following: the military objective was compromised from the start and there was little if any chance of a successful strategic outcome; the Germans knew the attack was imminent; the planning was poor and rushed; the British and Australian artillery was not up to the task and failed in its pre-attack objectives; the Germans held the higher ground and their defensive fortifications had been well-developed over nearly 2 years; previous allied attempts to overcome the German lines – and in particular to neutralise the infamous ‘sugar loaf’ machine gun fortification – had failed, and only very recently; part of the attack plan involved troops moving over an expanse of no-man’s land that far exceeded the agreed maximum limit for such an operation on the Western Front; the troops, both British and Australian, were inexperienced in terms of the Western Front; communication failed at a critical point in the battle; and, finally, senior leadership was poor. Given this background, it was hardly surprising that the attack, which began late afternoon on 19 July and ended early morning the next day, was a failure. The level of casualties was unprecedented for the AIF. Beaumont writes of the 5th Division losses: 5533 casualties, of whom 1917 were killed or died of wounds, 3146 wounded and 470 taken prisoner.

Fromelles was the first major battle involving the AIF on the Western Front. Admittedly, it was overshadowed by Pozieres later that same month (July 1916) and everything that followed, but the remarkable feature of Fromelles was how little knowledge, or even awareness, of the battle and the scale of the casualties was known in Australia at the time. It was only after the War that the ‘truth’ of Fromelles emerged. For example, in its Saturday edition of 10 April 1920 (p.7 ) The Argus ran a story under the headline: Fromelles 1916! A Glorious Failure. What Really Happened. The last sentence read,

The Total casualties among the Australians from noon on July 19 to noon on July 20 were 178 officers and 5,335 of other ranks.

However, in 1916 the details were heavily censored. There were reports in the Australian press immediately after the battle, but the account was highly qualified. Bean’s official report was published in both The Age (p.7) and The Argus (p.7) as early as Monday 24 July 1916. Both papers did include Bean’s comment that, The losses among our troops engaged were severe. But ‘severe’ was not quantified. Moreover, other details in Bean’s report gave a contradictory picture. For example, when he described the efforts made to enable Australian troops trapped in the German trenches to return to their own lines Bean played down the level of casualties:

This work [cutting communication trenches through to the German trenches] enabled the troops to carry out the retirement with loss which was slight when the extraordinary difficulty of the operation was considered.

Given what Bean had heard, and seen for himself, the entire account was very disingenuous. Moreover, in both papers, the story of Fromelles was presented as part of the wider Somme offensive. The headlines, for example, in The Argus on July 24, 1916 for the section where Bean’s report was included were as follows: Australia’s Share In Great Offensive.  A Heavy Engagement. All is well on Somme Front. Important Russian Gains.

For Bean there was the obvious potential to make the connection between Fromelles, which was after all the first major AIF action on the Western Front, and the heroic story of Anzac. Fromelles presented the AIF with the opportunity to prove and strengthen their reputation from Gallipoli. This would have been a point of considerable interest for those back in Australia: the next chapter as it were in the story of Anzac. But Bean did not have the heroic style of an Ellis Ashmead-Bartlett. Moreover, his praise for the men was decidedly qualified:

Our troops in this attack had faced shell fire heavier and more continuous that was ever known in Gallipoli. Many of them were quite untried previously. The manner in which they carried it through seems to have been worthy of all the traditions of Anzac.

Overall, Fromelles was effectively ‘buried’. Presumably, the primary intention was to conceal the level of casualties and therefore it was important not to represent Fromelles as some separate and highly significant battle. And the idea of using the battle to position the Anzacs on the Western Front was, given the level of casualties and the total failure of the action, far too risky. At the time, Fromelles was little more than the AIF’s wretched introduction to truly industrial-scale killing. Fromelles had been a disaster and all involved needed to move on from it as quickly as possible.

One great irony of the reporting of Fromelles appeared in The Argus in the same edition of Monday 24 July 1916.  Immediately after Bean’s account – the one that had as its last sentence, The losses among our troops engaged were severe. – the paper included a very short article headed, A German Claim. It probably attracted very little attention, and would have been easily dismissed as enemy propaganda, but in fact the figures it quoted were remarkably accurate:

London, July 23.
The following official German communique was received in London on Friday night:-
“An English (sic) attack in the Fromelles region yesterday by two strong divisions was repulsed. We made prisoner 481 men, and counted 2,000 bodies in front of our lines.”

In the posts that follow, the protracted and generally unsuccessful efforts made by families back in Australia to uncover exactly what had become of their sons, husbands and brothers who had gone missing on either 19 or 20 July 1916 in France, highlighted the extent to which levels of mystery and confusion were allowed to mask the horror of Fromelles.

The Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative carried no report at all of the  battle at either Fromelles or Fleurbaix.

References

Beaumont, J 2013, Broken Nation: Australians in the Great War, Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest NSW.
The Argus
The Age
Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative

 

70. The girl and the young soldier

The first part of the following account is based exclusively on a series of articles that appeared in the Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative over the period late February to early March 1916. While relying so closely on newspaper articles calls into question the accuracy and scope of the evidence presented, it does at least position the modern reader as someone in the Shire of Alberton reading the same material 100 years ago.

Violet Freeman was a 19 yo working as a domestic (servant) for Mrs Ellen Barbara Alford of Commercial Street, Yarram. Violet’s step-father was Richard Cantwell, a farmer from Woodside. Violet had been working for Mrs Alford for ‘some three or four months’.

Violet was engaged to 21 yo Herbert Walter Tolhurst who had recently enlisted. The marriage had been organised for Monday 21 February (1916). Tolhurst was an English immigrant who had been working in the local area. He had met Violet when she was still living at Woodside and he had been working in the same area. It was suggested that Tolhurst … came from England for the purpose of gaining Colonial experience. His people are reputed to be well to do in the Old Country.

Tolhurst was to arrive at Yarram on the Saturday train (19/2/16) for the wedding on the following Monday (21/2/16) but he did not show. Nor was there any communication from him explaining his absence.

That Saturday evening, Violet left the Alford’s home at about 7 o’clock to meet friends. Mrs Alford saw that Violet was upset.

The next afternoon (Sunday 20/2/16), a group of children, down by Carpenter’s Bridge over the Tarra Creek, saw a body in the river. The police recovered Violet’s body from the creek at about 6.00pm that night. The body was found in shallow water. At the coronial inquiry held the very next day (21/2/16), Senior Constable McLeod stated that he

… could see no marks of violence, and from the appearance of the body she had evidently lay in the water and drowned. Her hands were clasped together. He was quite satisfied from the appearance of the body she had deliberately drowned herself. The body may have drifted to the shallower water. There was apparently no struggle, nor was the body in any way tied up.

In none of the reports was there any suggestion that any other person had been directly involved in Violet’s death. The focus was on the motivation for the suicide. There was no post-mortem carried out.

At the coronial inquiry, it emerged that … this was the second time he [Tolhurst] had disappointed the girl about marriage. The step-father claimed that he had not seen his daughter for about 4 weeks – when he had gone to Yarram to give his permission for the marriage – but he was aware that Violet was worried that Tolhurst would not marry her as promised. He stated that he believed Tolhurst’s rejection of his step-daughter was the cause of the suicide.

One of the articles, headed A Sad Case. Young Woman Commits Suicide. Disappointed By A Soldier, claimed that Violet had previously been to the camp at Seymour to confront Tolhurst over his true intentions, and that he had then promised to marry her. The same article attempted to sketch some picture of Violet’s disturbed state of mind on the Saturday after he failed to arrive. It noted that … On Saturday evening the young woman was seen outside the post office reading her Bible. The article concluded that that Tolhurst’s rejection of the planned marriage was the cause of Violet’s suicide:

The young woman had made arrangements for her marriage, having seen a clergyman and invited her friends. Keen disappointment had evidently driven her to the rash act. She is spoken of by those who knew her as a most determined girl, confiding in few, and keeping troubles to herself.

The coronial inquiry which sat on the Monday (21/2/16) – ironically, the day of the planned wedding – was adjourned for a week … in order to get Tolhurst interviews, also to ascertain if deceased had written to her relatives.

When the inquiry resumed (28/2/16), it was informed by Senior Constable McLeod that there was no evidence of any letter written to any relative. Additionally, the court heard that while Tolhurst had been given leave for Saturday 19 February, he had not reported back to the camp at Seymour and had been classed as ‘absent without leave’ since then. Therefore he could not be interviewed. The police constable who investigated Tolhurst’s movements at Seymour noted that the leave he had for Saturday 19 February did not extend beyond the week-end and that he … should have returned at latest Monday morning [21/2/16]. On this basis, Tolhurst did not in fact have leave to attend his wedding at Yarram on the morning of 21 February. The same police officer had also looked for but not found any letters for Tolhurst at the camp.

Faced with Tolhurst’s disappearance and no written communication, in any form, from Violet Freeman that could point to her motivation, the coronial inquiry closed and returned what amounted to an open finding.

To this point, all the articles were based on the open proceedings of the coronial inquiry, supported by witness statements from various locals who were directly involved. However, one week later (8/3/16), after the inquiry had closed, the paper published another story under the headline, Tarra Creek Suicide. Tolhurst’s Statement. Incredibly, this article was based on the witness statement that Tolhurst made to a police officer who interviewed him after he had been apprehended and returned to the Seymour camp (29/2/16). The statement would have been sent to Senior Constable Mcleod but, somehow or other, the editor ( A J Rossiter) of the local paper managed to obtain it and then reveal its contents in the paper. Perhaps Senior Constable Mcleod, even though the inquiry was closed, considered that it was in the local community’s best interest to learn about Tolhurst’s version of events; but it is hard to believe that he would have simply handed over the statement to the local press. Perhaps Rossiter was able to obtain the statement closer to its source at Seymour. The article in the paper is obviously based on the police report from Seymour:

I questioned him in reference to the suicide of Violet Freeman. Tolhurst was ignorant of the fact that the girl had taken her own life, and seemed terribly cut up when I made it known to him. He made the following statement, dated 29th Feb:- I broke camp at Seymour on 19th Feb. with the intention of going to Yarram to marry a girl named Violet Freeman. When I arrived in Melbourne I knocked about and spent about 10s or £1. I was robbed of the rest of the money I had, about 20s or £2. As I had no money I did not go to Yarram. I knocked about the city all last night, and had my meals at The Rest Rooms, St. Kilda Esplanade, and slept on the beach.

Anyone reading the above would form serious doubts about Tolhursts’s commitment to the marriage. Presumably, he kept ‘knocking about’ Melbourne until he was apprehended and returned to Seymour.

Tolhurst was also questioned about letters he received from Violet. The police would have been following up the issue of her motivation, keen to know if there was a final letter. Tolhurst’s comments point to Violet’s desperation for the wedding to occur:

The last letter I received from Violet Freeman was on the 17th inst. I also received a letter on the 15th inst. I received a letter about a month or six weeks ago, in which she said, “For God’s sake don’t slip me up.” She visited Seymour about a month ago. She had previously spoken of suicide.

In addition to the details presented in the local paper, people in the town would have also had background information on the couple. For example, it appears that Violet was Roman Catholic. At least her brother, Thomas Joseph Freeman, was. He enlisted just a few weeks after her death. Tolhurst, on the other hand, gave his religion, when he enlisted, as Church of England. Yet his name appears on the honor roll for the local Presbyterian Charge.  Violet was buried in the Alberton cemetery by Rev. Frederick A Hagenauer, the Presbyterian minister. Possibly, Violet was going to marry Tolhurst in the Presbyterian Church. Nothing is certain here, but it does appear that locals would have been aware that there was a religious dimension to the tragedy.

Clearly, at the time there would have been much conjecture and talk about what drove Violet to suicide. Equally, people would have made judgements about her character and certainly they would have had strong opinions about Tolhurst’s commitment, and his character generally. The possibility that Violet was pregnant – there was no suggestion of this in the newspaper reports – would certainly have been raised. Some would have taken Violet’s side, others might have felt that she was trying to force Tolhurst into marriage.

But beyond the personal tragedy of Violet’s suicide, the manner of how the case was reported is revealing. The whole story is presented as something of a morality play or even a ‘lesson’ for the local community: a story of what happens when people behave recklessly or irresponsibly. It also stands as a warning to others, with a clear message about trusting too much in young men enlisting and heading off to war. In this sense, whether intended or not, it was an apt counter to all the sermons of Rev Cox and others that focused exclusively on the image of the young soldier as ‘a soldier of Christ’. Clearly, not every young soldier was heroic, selfless and loyal. Perhaps there was even a message there about the need to be particularly careful with young, itinerants who were working in the community but who might not share the same set of values that the local community espoused.

What the people of Yarram probably never knew of Tolhurst after this episode was that he deserted.

Tolhurst’s service file shows that he was born in Maidstone, England. His mother as next-of-kin was still living there. The file also shows that he had had 2 years service in the Officer training Corps at Maidstone Grammar School, which does suggest a comfortable, if not privileged, social background. He gave as his address on his application to enlist as F Growse, Yarram [John Frederick Growse, farmer, Yarram], and he passed his first medical at Yarram on 3/12/15. The oath was taken in Melbourne on 13/1/16. Otherwise his file is very scant. The last entry consists of the proceedings of a … standing Court of Inquiry’ held on 13 April 1916 ‘for the purpose of inquiring into the illegal absence of HERBERT WALTER TOLHURST 18th. Light Horse Reinforcements. The inquiry established that Tolhurst…  had been absent without leave from 10/3/16 to the present date 13/4/16’. The finding was that ‘Private Herbert Walter Tolhurst is guilty of desertion from 10/4/16 and is indebted to the Government to amount of £10-1-10 for Kit issued and retained by him.

Like others, it is possible that Tolhurst re-enlisted under another name. It is also possible that he simply ‘disappeared’.

References

Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative

National Archives file for Tolhurst Herbert Walter

69. Maurice Edward O’NEILL 1960

This post on the death of Maurice Edward O’Neill needs to read in conjunction with Post 41: Pressed to enlist. Maurice O’Neill was one of the 3 O’Neill brothers from Woodside who were the target of anonymous letters to the Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative over the period  April to June 1915.  As far as ‘Patriot’ was concerned, not enough young men from Woodside had enlisted and the O’Neill boys typified this claimed lack of patriotism. The 3 brothers did in fact enlist – May/June 1915 – and they all served in 24 Battalion. Two brothers – Simon John O’Neill (1958) and Joseph Geoffrey O’Neill (2062) – survived the War but Maurice Edward O’Neill was killed in action (30/6/16).

Maurice O’Neill was born at Darriman. At the time he enlisted (18/6/1915) he was living at Woodside with his mother, Mrs Mary Jane Kerr. As a boy he attended the local state school. It appears that his father – William John Kerr – had died prior to his enlistment.

The O’Neill boys were Roman Catholic. Maurice gave his occupation as ‘labourer’. On his enlistment papers he noted that he had been in the Woodside Rifle Club for 3 years. At the time he enlisted he was 22 yo and single.

The initial medical was held at Yarram on 26/5/1915 and he was then given a railway warrant, dated 31/5/1915, to travel to Melbourne. The enlistment, including the additional medical examination, was not completed until 16/6/1915. He was posted to 24 Battalion and he embarked for overseas on 26/8/1915.

Private O’Neill served on Gallipoli from 11/11/1915 until the withdrawal. He was back in Alexandria in early January 1916. His battalion left Alexandria in March 1916 and was in France by the end of that month.

Private O’Neill was killed within 3 months of reaching the Western Front. He was killed in action on the night of 29-30 June 1916. He was in a raiding party on enemy trenches which set out at midnight (29/6/1916). The 24 Battalion was at Rue Marle, near Erquinghem. The battalion diary recorded the event. Private O’Neill would have been the ‘1 OR [other rank] killed’:

12 midnight. Battalion took part in combined Brigade raid on German trenches. 24 Btn party under Lts Carrick & Kerr penetrated German trenches. Killed about 20 and took 5 German prisoners. Lt Carrick went back twice for wounded. 1 OR killed. 2 wounded.

Private O’Neill’s body was returned with the raiding party and he was buried in … Ration Farm Cemetery near Bois Grenier 1 1/2 miles south of Armentieres.

The cable advising of his death was dated 11/7/1916 and details of his burial were forwarded in a letter to his mother dated 8/11/1916.

Two months after the death of her son, the mother wrote to the AIF asking for information on her son’s ‘money [deferred pay] and effects’. In the same letter she also sought information on one of her other sons – Simon John O’Neill – who had been wounded. Touchingly, but somewhat naively, she enquired,

I would like to know if he was sent to England or of he would be allowed to come home for a while till he recovers from his wounds.

Private O’Neill’s personal effects were returned in February 1917: Cards, Photos, Writing Pad, Leather Case, Turkish Bandolier.

When the mother completed the (National) Roll of Honour form she gave Woodside as the location with which her son was ‘chiefly connected’. Maurice O’Neill’s name is recorded on the Shire of Alberton War Memorial and the Shire of Alberton Honor Roll, where he is also recorded as ‘killed’.

References

National Archives file for O’Neill Maurice Edward
Roll of Honour: Maurice Edward O’Neill
First World War Embarkation Rolls: Maurice Edward O’Neill
War Diary 24 Battalion

68. Schooling, religion & Imperialism, Part A: a natural trinity

The last post looked at how political events in Ireland from the very start of the War affected the Irish-Australian community.  However, the tension between Irish Catholic and British Protestant went well beyond the immediate political situation in Ireland. There were several hundred years of division and conflict to draw on. There were fundamental differences in religious faith, identity and practice that directly affected people’s everyday lives, for example, in areas such as marriage or, as it was more commonly described, the particular case of ‘mixed marriage’. Moreover, the differences in faith were overlain with differences between class and culture, with the Irish-Catholic Australians generally characterised as working class and even represented as lower-order citizens. However, notwithstanding long established enmity between Irish Catholic and British Protestant, the start of the War and the promise of Home Rule did see an attempt on both sides to play down the differences and unite against the common enemy.

This particular post is the first of two to show how sensitive relations were between these 2 dominant religious and cultural groupings in the local community. The specific focus is on education. Differences over the provision of schooling in the local community demonstrated how deep the divisions went and how apparently insurmountable they were. The War focused even more attention on these differences.

The provision of schooling in rural areas in late 19C and early 20 C Australia was always a problem. Settlements and townships were small and isolated. Schools could be created overnight and disappear as quickly. Most were one-teachers schools and many were part-time. There was competition between communities for the provision of schooling. Schools were often not set up in purpose-built buildings but in local halls with very rudimentary facilities. It was hard to attract and hold teachers. It could be difficult for students to access the school and many parents were reluctant to forego their children’s labour.

If anything, the problems faced by the Shire of Alberton in setting up schools across its district were more challenging than in other rural settings in Victoria. This was particularly true in relation to the spread of settlement into the very difficult and isolated ’hill country’ of the eastern Strzelecki Ranges from the 1880s.

Analysis of the WW1 honor rolls of the local schools reveals that students often attended more than one local state school. In part, this represented the movement of rural working-class families across the district as they followed work opportunities. But it also highlights how the schools themselves opened but then closed, shifted from full-time to part-time, relocated to another site and so on. The following extract from the standard text on the local history of the Shire of Alberton (Adams, 1990) gives some indication of the situation. It is looking at the provision of state schooling in the specific location of Darriman round the turn of the century.

At Darriman two schools were opened in the 1890s, one at Darriman, no. 3013, in the kitchen of the public hall erected on an acre of E. Kuch’s selection, and opened in 1892, and the other at Darriman West, no. 3070, off the main Sale road in a building leased from Mr. Geddie, with Charles Barchan, the first teacher. Numbers were poor and in 1893 Darriman closed to be reopened in 1896 half-time with Darriman West. The Darriman school closed again in 1907 while Darriman West school no. 3070 was worked part-time with Woodside until 1911. (p. 169)

Clearly, the difficulties facing the individual local communities in establishing, maintaining and improving schooling – and it was essentially primary-level schooling – were major and constant. And this level of difficulty related solely to the provision of state schooling. If the provision of Catholic schooling were to be added to the equation, all the difficulties would be magnified considerably. Two systems of schooling in such a rural environment had to increase inefficiency and compromise viability.

The reality was that, with one exception, following the legislation covering the provision of state schooling in Victoria in 1872, there was no Catholic school in the Shire of Alberton, at least up to the period of WW1. The exception was the short-lived (1885-1890) initial iteration of St Mary’s primary school in Yarram. And even before 1872 and the ‘free, compulsory and secular’ legislation, there had only ever been very limited Catholic schooling in the Shire. Setting up another, stand-alone school system, particularly in small townships and settlements, was not a realistic option. Moreover, local politics would certainly have discouraged such moves as being wasteful of limited resources and unnecessarily divisive for the community.

Importantly, the lack of Catholic primary schooling in the Shire of Alberton meant that all the young men who grew up in and enlisted from the Shire had shared a common experience of schooling, in the state system. That system was explicitly and unreservedly Imperialist in outlook and practice. Whatever the boys were told at home – and most of the Irish-Catholic families in the district still had very close relations with wider family back in Ireland – at school they were given the full and glorious version of the history and greatness of the British Empire. In her comprehensive account of the critically important role played by the Victorian state school system in WW1, Rosalie Triolo leaves no doubt of the Imperial outlook that shaped the Department and its schools:

Tate [ Director of Education], Long [Editor of the Education Gazette and School Paper] and most members of the Department’s community, especially at leadership levels, were imperialist. They were products of their culture, educational background and era. They were ‘militarist’ before and during the war in allowing a surfeit of war-related material in the Education Gazette and School Paper, especially on the Empire’s strengths and successes. They encouraged school boys to join the navy, and… conveyed views to their community during the war that able-bodied men should enlist. They gave three main reasons for believing that Australia should be involved in the war: the greatest Empire the world had known was protecting Australia from Asia and possibly other invaders; it ensured the continuation and development of trade between Australia and many countries; and, it ensured that Australians could continue to enjoy what they considered to be a morally, politically, economically and culturally superior standard of life grounded in British ways, systems and institutions.  (p14)

Triolo also argues that the Department effectively backed conscription. She quotes Tate, after the 1916 referendum:

I think the ‘Yes” vote on the referendum in Victoria [it was successful in Victoria] was a good deal influenced by the war work of the State Schools. (p59)

While the legislation of 1872 had ostensibly provided for free, compulsory and secular education, all 3 ideals were compromised in serious ways. In terms of the idea of ‘secular’, while state funding had been withdrawn from all denominational schooling, the prevailing tone of schooling was certainly religious. There was no suggestion whatsoever that state schooling was non or anti-religious. Every Monday morning, round the flag pole, the children would recite: I love God and my country; I honour the flag [Union Jack]; I will serve the KIng and cheerfully obey my parents, teachers and the laws. In addition to the constant presumption of a Christian God shaping all moral instruction in the school, there was provision for ministers and priests to come into the school and take religious instruction.

Within this common or ‘non-denominational’ Christian ethos in the state school system, Protestantism enjoyed one highly significant advantage. Protestantism was the established religion of England and the assumed religion of the British Empire. Apart from the fact that Protestant missionary zeal was a key force driving the Empire, and the common conviction that the very success of the Empire was proof of the inherent worth and destiny of Protestantism, the Protestant faith had naturally assumed moral and religious ownership and control of the Empire. In Australian at the time, to the extent that the state school system presented the Empire as the bedrock of political and moral belief, it accepted Protestantism as the ‘natural’ religion of the school system. This reality was not lost on Irish-Australians and, in part, it explains the ‘sectarianism’ that became so evident during and after WW1.

The extent to which the interests of Empire, Protestantism and state schooling could effectively overlap and create a trinity of purpose and direction was certainly evident in the case of Yarram SS. At the start of WW1, Yarram SS was by far the largest school in the Shire of Alberton (180+ students) and it was lobbying for the creation of a higher, post-primary level. The three-way overlap was most obvious at Empire celebrations and other patriotic activities that either focused exclusively on the state school – concerts, fund raisers, unveiling school honor rolls etc – or relied on the participation of students from the state school.

Both the composition and dynamics of the management committee of the Yarram SS highlight the three-way interchange between the state school, the local Protestant faiths – primarily the Church of England, but also the Presbyterian and Methodist churches – and Imperial loyalty.

The committee itself was relatively small and, in addition to the head teacher – A E Paige – there were only another 5 or 6 members.

One member, until he enlisted in the AIF in August 1915, was Rev George Cox (Church of England). Cox was one of the most public Imperialists in the community. He was, for example, the driving force for having the 1915 Empire Day celebrations focused on the state school when, as he alleged, the Shire Council, to its shame, was unwilling to organise an appropriate celebration. Cox himself was a member of the local Recruiting Committee and the Belgian Relief Committee. He was also very active in the temperance movement as ‘Chief Ruler’ of the local Rechabite Tent. Temperance was strongly promoted by the Empire and the Royal Family at the time. Cox was also a regular speaker on Imperialism at the school. In short, the local Church of England minister was very closely identified with the local state school.

In something of a reciprocal arrangement, Alfred Edmund Paige, the head teacher, was on the Board of Guardians for the Church of England in Yarram. He was also a member of the Soldiers’ Farewell and Welcome Committee, and he regularly took groups of students from Yarram SS to soldiers’ farewells at the Shire Hall. The students would form a guard of honour. More importantly, they effectively made up the numbers at such occasions when too few townspeople made the effort to attend. Poor attendance at the farewells was a constant irritation for the committee.

Another member of the school management committee was Augustus John Rossiter, the editor of the Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative. Coincidentally, Rossiter was also a member of the Church of England Board of Guardians. He was another outspoken Imperialist and a member of both the local Recruiting Committee and the local 1916 National Referendum Committee – local committees set up all over Australia, at the urging of PM Hughes, to promote the Yes vote in the 1916 conscription referendum. Rossiter used his paper to promote all the patriotic causes, including conscription, with which he was associated. He was a keen backer of Rev Cox.

Thomas Whitney, the chair of the school committee, was the manager of the South Gippsland Creamery and Butter Factory. He was also on the 1916 National Referendum Committee.

Another member, George E Ruby, a local land and finance agent, was on both the local Recruiting Committee and the Soldiers’ Farewell and Welcome Committee. He was also a steward of the local Methodist Church. Whilst neither the local Methodist minister (Rev Walter Johns) nor the Presbyterian minister (Rev Francis Tamagno) was on the school committee, both clergymen appeared regularly at school functions and both were strong Imperialists. Rev Tamagno in particular was a leading and highly provocative Imperialist who served on the Soldiers’ Farewell and Welcome Committee, the Recruiting Committee and the 1916 National Referendum Committee.

The interconnections between all the relevant committees in the local community overlapped even more than this short description suggests, and they will continue to be explored in future posts. However, it is apparent that people at the time would have seen and assumed that there were common interests and associations between the local state school, Protestantism and the ideal of Imperial loyalty. While the school was ‘secular’, its Imperial identity inevitably cast it as a Protestant-like institution and the War itself intensified this perception. Given, as argued earlier, that Protestantism was the religion of the Empire, this state of affairs would have seemed perfectly natural to all true patriots and Imperialists. However, for Irish-Australians who, post Easter 1916, were becoming increasingly uncomfortable with calls for complete and unquestioning loyalty to the Empire, the state school was viewed with increasing suspicion.

Part B will look at the moves to establish a Catholic school in Yarram during the War and the tension that this challenge to the existing arrangements created.

References

Adams, J 1990, From these Beginnings: History of the Shire of Alberton (Victoria), Alberton Shire Council, Yarram, Victoria

Triolo, R 2012, Our Schools and the War, Australian Scholarly Publishing, North Melbourne

Synan, T 2003, A Journey in Faith: A History of Catholic Education in Gippsland 1850-1981, David Lovell Publishing, Melbourne

membership of local committees, boards etc taken from:

Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative

67. Ireland, Empire and Irish-Australians

From the beginning of the War, Australia’s involvement was seen through the lens of the British Empire. The British cause was just; the political, economic, social and cultural links between Australia and the Mother Country were seamless; and it lay in Australia’s strategic interest to defend the Empire. Yet, historically, this ‘defence of the Empire’ rationale would not have sat comfortably with the significant Irish-Australian minority, precisely because the Empire was seen as the source of Ireland’s problems. For the Irish-Australians there needed to be a circuit breaker that would enable them to embrace the Empire. It came in the form of Home Rule: the promise of political autonomy for an Ireland that, with its own Irish Parliament, would continue to function within the Empire.

Notwithstanding several hundred years of occupation, dispossession and persecution, political relations between Irish nationalists and Great Britain at the outbreak of WW1 were, apparently, positive. There was general agreement that the promise of Home Rule and the political influence of the Irish Nationalists in the British Parliament had shifted the balance of power in Ireland’s favour. Indeed, the general level of trust and mutual dependence were strong enough for Ireland to support Great Britain and the Empire in the war against Germany. In the first 12 months of WW1, 80,000 Irish volunteered, with equal numbers coming from Ulster and nationalist Ireland. In all, approximately 140,000 men enlisted in Ireland during the War. Added to this number were the thousands of Irish men already serving in the British army before the War began. The total number of Irish soldiers in the British army is disputed but it appears to have been approximately 200,000. (1)

Redmond, the leader of the Nationalist Party, and the person likely to become the first Prime Minister of the new Irish Parliament under Home Rule, actively campaigned for Irish recruits to join the British army. Incredibly, in September (25/9/14), the English PM, Asquith, addressed a recruiting meeting in Dublin itself. Speaking at the same meeting, Redmond was quoted as declaring:

Having been conceded autonomy, Ireland was in honour bound to take her place with the other autonomous portions of the Empire. He said to the people of England, “You kept faith with Ireland. Ireland will keep faith with you.”

Germany had become the common enemy, and the defeat of Germany the political priority. Ireland had to join the fight against the tyranny of Germany. As Asquith put it at the same meeting:

How could Ireland, hearing the cry of smaller nations, delay to help them in their struggle for freedom?

All this was reflected in Australia, right down to the local level – in this case the Shire of Alberton. Indeed, the 2 quotes above are taken from an article in the Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative dated 30/9/14 and headed, Mr Asquith In Dublin. Appeal To Irishmen.

However, not all nationalists in Ireland were prepared to support Redmond’s call for Irish volunteers to join the British army. At the end of September 1914, Sinn Fein issued a manifesto repudiating Redmond and his call for volunteers for the British army. The general response to such a call was dismissive. This was the case both in Ireland and in Australia. Again, as an example of how this played out at the local level – the Shire of Alberton, Gippsland – the following letter to the Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative (30/9/14) was written by the local Roman Catholic priest, Fr. Patrick Sterling, Yarram:

Sir – No importance is to be attached to the cables that have appeared in the press about the Sinn Fein manifesto in Ireland. Sinn Fein means “Ourselves,”  and the Sinn Fein movement was a breaking away by hot young bloods from the slow constitutional methods of the Irish Parliamentary Party. It was simply a toy revolution and was killed by ridicule. The Sinn Feiners cooly ignored British rule in Ireland, printing their own postage stamps, establishing their own Courts of Justice, appointing their own magistrates, etc. The boycott of all foreign manufactures was about the only sensible plank in their platform. In their young days (about six years ago) they ran a daily paper, which soon was reduced to a weekly, and this soon died. They ran a candidate for Parliament, but he was ignominiously defeated. At present the Sinn Feiners are a negligible quantity and only capable of making noises. Nationalist Ireland is to a man behind Redmond, and prepared to do and die for the Empire. No one has any need to be alarmed at the manifesto of the Sinn Fein tailors of Tooley street.

It is an incredible letter. As leader – spiritual, and in this particular case also political – of the local Catholic community, Fr Sterling was determined to trivialise and dismiss Sinn Fein, and re-pledge loyalty to the Empire. The fact that he felt the need to make the case, suggests that the local community – both Protestant and Catholic – were very aware that events in Ireland were watched closely in Australia. People knew that such events could influence attitudes and actions on both sides of the Catholic-Protestant divide in Australia. What happened in Ireland was of more than just passing interest.

But history was to show that Sinn Fein was neither spent nor impotent as a political force. Sinn Fein, in fact, was just one part of a wider, ongoing threat to Irish politics that sat uncomfortably behind the promise of Home Rule and the reassurances of support from Irish nationalists for the British Empire.

It is often argued (2) that in the immediate lead-up to WW1 Britain was distracted from what was unfolding in Europe by the threat of civil war in Ireland. This gives some indication of how significant the Irish problem was in British politics at the time. It also suggests that the spirit of co-operation that emerged very quickly when fighting broke out in early August was based more on conviction than realpolitik. In fact, the reality was that even then the promise of Home Rule was seriously flawed. Everything was to be placed ‘on hold’ for the course of the War. Ulster would almost certainly have to be excluded.  The Conservative Party in the British Parliament was passionately opposed to Home Rule. The Protestants in Ulster had formed a large, organised, trained and armed paramilitary force to oppose Home Rule, an arrangement they characterised as ‘Rome Rule’. Irish Nationalists were busy creating an equivalent force. And, arguably most significantly, the British army in Ireland had made it clear to the Liberal Government in Britain that its support could not be relied on, particularly if there was the chance of military conflict with the Protestant forces in Ulster. Against this background, the calls from Irish nationalists for support for the Empire were always compromised. Indeed, it is possible to argue that the most striking feature of Irish-British politics at the time was the desperation that characterised efforts to avoid armed conflict in Ireland. In terms of this desperation, it is significant that Asquith when addressing the recruiting meeting in Dublin – referred to above – was reported thus:

He did not wish to touch on controversial ground, but there are two things which become unthinkable – first that one section of Irishmen is going to fight another; and second that Great Britain is going to fight either. (Cheers). … The old animosities between us are dead and scattered like autumn leaves.

But at Easter 1916 the dreaded conflict did arise.

The initial Irish response to the Easter Rebellion in Australia was one of shock and outrage. On 5/5/16 the Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative published, in detail, Bishop Phelan’s response to the events under the heading, The Disturbance In Ireland.  Views Of The Bishop Of Sale. Phelan was highly critical of those involved. He claimed that they had been duped by German agents. Their actions threatened all the gains that Redmond and his supporters had won. But he concluded that it was also a ‘blessing in disguise’ that the plot had been suppressed in its infancy because the rest of Ireland would now redouble its support for Britain in the War:

… the outrage in Dublin will increase the resolve of the Nationalists, the overwhelming majority of the people, to contribute the last man in support of the flag [Union Jack] now defending the independence of Ireland, as of Australia.

Earlier, the Age (28/4/16) had carried Archbishop Carr’s response. Under the heading “An Outburst Of Madness.”, Carr had similarly claimed that the rebels had been the victims of German intrigue, supported by Irish-American extremists; and that the plot was designed to undermine Redmond’s power as much as it was to defeat the British. He also claimed that … there can be no doubt about the loyalty of the great mass of the Irish people. Carr finished by attacking the rebellion:

From every point of view I regard it as an outburst of madness, an anachronism and a crime.

The Age (28/4/16) also featured a series of telegrams from Irish groups in Australia to Redmond. The sense of condemnation was universal:

New South Wales Home Rule Executive – Sectional pro-German rioting disgusts Home Rulers here. Take heart. Our race is with you and your gallant countrymen at the front.

Celtic Club, Melbourne – Celtic Club views with abhorrence attempts of traitors to destroy good name of Ireland. Be assured of our lasting sympathy in your efforts for Home Rule and empire…

It is clear that at least to Easter 1916, in both Ireland and Australia, there was a shared understanding that Britain’s commitment to Home Rule would be repaid with Irish support for the War effort. This arrangement marked a new high point in Irish-British relations and promised a less contested future. In Australia, it also meant that support for Irish autonomy did not have to mean opposition to the Empire. At least in the first part of WW1, the Irish Question did not have to compromise patriotism. Individual power brokers in the local community, such as Fr Sterling, were determined that this new direction in Irish politics was to be encouraged and protected.

However, in the period immediately after the Easter Rebellion the promised future began to unravel. The tipping point came with the series of executions – 15 in total – of the leaders of the uprising. To some extent the criticism that those supporting Home Rule directed at the rebels encouraged the harsh treatment handed out by the military authorities in Dublin, acting under martial law. Certainly, as we have seen, there was little support for the rebels. Moreover, they had colluded with the enemy.

Very quickly, opinion in Australia turned dramatically and the behaviour of the British army in Ireland became as important as the uprising itself. The following telegram was sent by (Roman Catholic) Archbishop Duhig of Brisbane to the President of the United Irish League of Melbourne. The president had himself sent a cable to Redmond urging clemency for the rebels and it is clear that Archbishop Duhig is of the same opinion. The Archbishop also saw what the longer term consequences were to be. The report was in the Age of 11/5/16 (p.7) under the heading: The Appeal For Clemency

Congratulate you [President, United Irish League of Melbourne] on cable to Redmond urging clemency to Sinn Fein and other rebels. Assure you that Irish Queenslanders who have loyally and generously supported the cause of Empire and its Allies are grievously disappointed and saddened by hasty executions. Imperial Government should know we believe that General Maxwell’s execution policy is ill advised, and calculated to do immense injury to recruiting at a most critical time, and is sure to be used for enemy propaganda purposes. People are already contrasting the wholesale death sentences passed on the Irish revolutionary leaders with the clemency extended to rebels and mutineers elsewhere in the Empire.

In the Age 16/5/16 (p.7), Archbishop Carr of Melbourne – Mannix did not become Archbishop of Melbourne until 1917 – was also reported as deploring the executions. He warned that, once again, the British Government was misreading Irish history. Referring to the … lamentable state of things in Ireland, he stated:

I have not concealed my opinion of the criminal folly of the uprising. It has led, as every friend of Ireland at a distance could see, to a dreadful loss of life and destruction of property. Instead of advancing the cause of Ireland it has, I fear, thrown it back considerably. But while we deplore the act of rebellion and its sad consequences, we feel called on to deprecate the continued executions that are taking place in England and Ireland. There are some who advocate that the utmost severity of the law should be put in force against the captured rebels. They imagine that by this straining of the law the fear of punishment will prevent further insurrection. It is the old cry of vae victis – ‘woe to the vanquished.’ But these advocates of merciless punishment must have misread Irish history. In no other country has punishment been more ruthlessly resorted to, and in no country has it produced more unexpected and undesirable effects.

For Irish-Australians, the British Empire was proving, yet again, to be the oppressor of Ireland. Loyalty to the same Empire from mid 1916 was to become more problematic. Irish-Australian politics moved into a far more nuanced and ambiguous framework. It still had to be possible to support the War against Germany and it certainly had to be possible to support all those thousands of Irish-Australians who had volunteered. Inevitably, such support was increasingly filtered not through the lens of Empire but rather the lens of Australian Nationalism. The shift would open up a highly divisive fault line in Australian society.

As an illustration of this significant shift, consider the following report from the Gippsland Standard and Albertan Shire Representative (28/7/16) which covered the remarks made by Fr P Sterling at the welcome home at Yarram for Trooper William Sweeney. Sweeney, a Roman Catholic, and one of 3 brothers who enlisted, had been one the earliest volunteers. He had been badly wounded at Gallipoli and was repatriated to Australia for a medical discharge. It is questionable to read too much into comments like this made 100 years ago, but at the same time whereas other speakers would typically labour the themes of Empire, Sterling does appear to be deliberately identifying both himself and Sweeney as Australian. The ‘joke ‘ about the Irishman preferring to be shot could also have been a dark aside on the recent executions.

Rev. Father Stirling [sic] said trooper Sweeney had come back as one of the men who had found a new name, symbolic of greatness, the name of Anzac. We often read about the war, and stand dazed, not being able to realise that the men who did such deeds were from our own country. An Englishman, a Scotchman [sic] and an Irishman once met, and the Englishman said he would like to be a Scotchman, the Scotchman said he would like to be an Englishman, giving their reasons, but the Irishman said if he could not be an Irishman he would like to be shot. (Laughter). He (the speaker) happened to be an Irishman [Sterling was born at Nenagh, Co. Tipperary], and if not he would rather be an Australian. (Applause). Trooper Sweeney had returned practically a wreck. It is up to the people of Australia to see that the returned soldiers do not go in need. (Applause).

 

 

(1) For an overview of Irish enlistment numbers see Irish Soldiers in the First World War( Somme), Department of the Taoiseach

(2) See for example:

Hochschild, A 2011, To End All Wars: A Story Of Protest And Patriotism In The First World War, Pan Books, London. Chapter 6, On The Eve

J Connor, P Stanley, P Yule, 2015, The War At Home: Vol 4 The Centenary History of Australia And The Great War, Oxford University Press, Melbourne. Chapter 11, The Outbreak Of War And The 1914 Election.

References

Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire representative

Age

Of current interest:

State Library Victoria:

The Irish Rising: ‘A terrible beauty is born’  17 March to 31 July 2016

Honest History:

‘Across the sea to Ireland: Australians and the Easter Rising 1916 – highlights reel’

66. Percy Allen WALLACE 273

Lance Corporal Wallace was the first of the men form the Shire of Alberton to die in France.

Percy Allen Wallace was born at Glengarry, Gippsland. The family must have moved into the Shire of Alberton when he was a child because both Percy and his younger brother – Leslie Roy Wallace – went to Yarram SS and both feature on the school’s honour roll. Percy Wallace also appears on both the Shire of Alberton Honor Roll and the Shire of Alberton War Memorial.

At the time he enlisted, Percy Wallace gave his occupation as ’mill hand’ and also ‘butter maker’. He appears on the Electoral Roll as ‘butter maker’, with the address given as Yarram. His father – William Wallace – is also listed as a ‘sawyer’ of Goodwood Mills, via Port Albert.

The 2 Wallace brothers enlisted in late September 1914. It appears that Percy enlisted first, as one of the initial group at Yarram, on 21/9/14 and then Leslie went directly to Broadmeadows and enlisted 2 days later (23/9/14). Leslie served in the AIF until he was returned to Australia on Anzac leave in December 1918.

Private Percy Wallace’s first term with the AIF did not last long. He was discharged as ‘medically unfit’ on 19/12/14, just 3 months after enlisting. There is no indication what the medical issue was but when he re-enlisted on 8/2/15, just a couple of months later, he did acknowledge the earlier discharge – ‘medically unfit’.

Interestingly, the brothers appear on the Methodist Circuit honour roll, yet Percy’s religion was given as both Presbyterian (enlistment papers) and Church of England (embarkation roll), and Leslie gave his religion as Church of England. The anomaly points to the tendency to employ ‘CoE’ as the default Protestant denomination.

On his re-enlistment, Pte Percy Wallace joined 22 Battalion. He served on Gallipoli from late August 1915. In mid March 1916, the 22 Battalion left Alexandria and on 26/3/16 it disembarked at Marseilles. Within 3 weeks of arriving in France he was dead. He died of wounds – G.S.Wound Right leg & Left forearm – on 15/4/16.

22 Battalion had only moved into the front line trenches at Fleurbaix – about 10 Kms from Fromelles – the day before Lance Corporal Wallace was wounded. The entry in the war diary of the battalion details his fate:

Trenches (Fleurbaix). Sniping & observations, very little movement noticed. Patrol moved out from Sec 42. 1 officer 1 O/R. When returning at 11.20 PM when noticed & caught by M.G. fire. Lt McCAUL slightly wounded. L/Cpl WALLACE seriously wounded.

L/Cpl Wallace was taken to No. 8 Casualty Clearing Station but he died just over 12 hours later. He was buried at Merville Cemetery, with Rev. Anthony Fenn officiating.

The family back at Goodwood was informed of the death within 2 weeks. It took 2 more years before all the personal items – (1) Identity Disc, Letter, Photo, Testament, Cigarette Cards, Cigarette Case; (2) Cards, 2 Pieces Fancy Work, 2 Brushes – were returned to the family in 2 shipments.

There was extensive coverage of L/Cpl Wallace’s death in the local paper (Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative) from the end of April to late July 1916. Essentially, the coverage was based on 4 pieces of correspondence that the parents received in the weeks after their son’s death. The family must have provided this correspondence to the editor ( A J Rossiter) of the paper who then used the letters with their approval. As already noted – see Post 65 – Rossiter was a member of the 1915 Yarram Recruiting Committee and a key supporter of the War effort. The cumulative effect of the 4 letters definitely pitched L/Cpl Wallace’s death as a classic and instructive example of heroic sacrifice in a just war.

Letters such as the 4 considered here were common and, obviously, they would have meant a great deal to grieving families, desperate for any personal accounts of their sons’ final moments. However, extensive publication of such letters in the local press was uncommon. Arguably, the editorial decision reflected the reality that L/Cpl Wallace’s death was the first death of a local from the Shire of Alberton on the Western Front. The War had moved from the Gallipoli Peninsula to France; and while there had been a hiatus after Gallipoli, this first death on the Western Front reinforced for everyone back in the Shire of Alberton that the local boys were back in the firing line. There would be so many more deaths to come that it would prove impossible to devote the same amount of copy to each of them. The reporting and grieving processes associated with the dead – and injured – had, inevitably, to become more abbreviated and succinct.

The first news of L/Cpl Wallace’s death came in the ‘editorial’ written by Rossiter for the edition of 28/4/16. At this point it appears that Rossiter did not even appreciate that the death had occurred in France. He was keen to remind readers that Percy had been a star local footballer. In fact, L/Cpl Wallace had answered the call to the sportsmen – particularly the footballers – of Australia, well before it had been made public in the mid 1915 recruiting campaign.

The sad tidings reached Yarram this week of the death of one of our soldier boys, Private Percy Wallace, son of Mr. and Mrs. W. Wallace, of Goodwood. But meagre particulars are to hand, stating that he died from wounds in the legs and arms on 15th inst., probably received in a skirmish with the Turks. … Like others who have enlisted, he was a foremost footballer in this district, men who make good soldiers, of that virile type Australia can ill afford to lose.

In the edition of 3/5/16, under ‘Personal’, Rossiter revealed the contents of the official telegram sent to the family via the postmistress at Port Albert. The cause of death was given – died from gunshot wounds arms and thigh, 15th April – and the customary expressions of sympathy from the King and Nation noted.

Then in the edition of 23/6/16, 2 letters were published relating to L/Cpl Wallace’s death: one from a British nurse working the casualty clearing station where he died; and the other from a mate in the same unit (22 Battalion).

The British nurse – Sister Jean Todd – gave a detailed account of L/Cpl Wallace’s death. Interestingly, in her letter there is no attempt to attach any of the usual expressions of duty done and sacrifice made. Nor are there religious platitudes. Rather, it is short and direct, with a pervading sense of resignation. At the same time, because the letter itself was an act of kindness, the parents would have read into the letter her sense of compassion for their son and taken comfort from the fact that she was there with him when he died.

I am deeply sorry to tell you of the death of your son, 273 Lance-Corporal Wallace, A. I. F., in this hospital [ 8 Casualty Clearing Station, BEF] at 1 p.m. on the 15th. He was admitted before mid-day suffering from gun shot wounds, right arm, right thigh, and the popliteal artery had been severed. From this he lost much blood. The artery was ligatured and restoratives of all kinds applied. He was conscious while the surgeon was dressing the wounds and while injections into the blood stream to try and replace wastage were given. Soon after he became delirious, very restless, finally unconscious, and passed away at 1 o’clock. It is an abrupt tale to send so far, but what more can I say. If possible we grieve more for our overseas men than our home men, but it does not save them.

The second letter was written by L/Cpl Percy Davidson, 22 B. This second Percy was a 20 yo from Tasmania. He described himself as a very close friend of Percy – I mourn his loss very much, as we have been like brothers to each other – and he therefore felt the need to write to the parents to express …  the heartfelt sorrow I have for you at this time. This time there was the conventional appeal to God’s mercy: … I pray that God will comfort and bless you. It was His Will, therefore we must bow to it. There was also the reassurance that he had ‘died like a man’: It may be some consolation to you to know that he died like a man and an Australian. There was also the flash of stoicism when Wallace assured Davidson, as the doctors were working on him – they were talking about amputating his right hand – “Oh, I’m not too bad, Dave [sic], and will write as soon as I am able.”

It is important to remind ourselves of what is happening here. The parents have given permission for the local paper to publish the most intimate letters of their son’s death. Not all parents would do this and there is no way of knowing parents’ true motivation in matter like this; but the more important point is that such accounts augmented the official narrative of the War by filling out the personal experiences of soldiers and their families. This was a level of reality that local readers could not ignore and it was a reality that had a powerful moral force behind it, built on notions of duty, sacrifice, national and Imperial identity, and divine sanction. It was an extraordinarily powerful human narrative; and it would have been very difficult either to challenge or stand outside it.

The last detailed report of the death of L/Cpl Wallace appeared on 28/7/16. Under the heading, Late Private [sic] Percy Wallace. Particulars Of His Death., Rossiter featured another 2 letters. The first was from the sister of Lt. McCaul – the officer who had been with L/Cpl Wallace on the patrol where they had both been wounded – and the second from the chaplain with 22 Battalion.

The letter from Miss Nora McCaul of Glenhuntley Road, Elsternwick to the Wallace parents explains itself.

In case my brother has not written or has not your address, I am sending you the following. Your son was wounded on or about April 13th, and I hear he died of his wounds. My brother was intelligence officer for the 22nd Battalion, and about the middle of April was told to choose a man and find out certain information from the German trenches. He chose your son, and at the same time said to him, “There will be no V.C.s to D.C.M.s hanging to this; probably all we will get will be bullets.” Your son was most anxious to go, and I believe the two set out about 11.30 p.m. They got the information and were returning when the Germans opened fire on them. As my brother said, “We both stopped bullets.” They then had to climb through barb wire entanglements and swim some icy water 6ft. deep. The next my brother remembers was in hospital in Boulogne. In a letter dated May 16th from there my brother says: – “I only heard today that the Lieutenant [sic]-Corporal, who was with me, has died of his wounds. I am awfully upset about him, not only because he was one of my best men, but also because I took him with me. Some one, of course, had to go with me, and I naturally chose a good man. He was an awfully good chap. I can’t say how sorry I am at his loss.” I hope this will all interest you. My brother after a month in hospital in Boulogne was moved to London. We had a cable last week, and although doing splendidly he is still unable to put his foot to the ground. Sincerest sympathy in your sad loss.

It is interesting to note just how important – and common – letter writing was at the time. There was a vast ocean of correspondence touching on soldiers’ deaths and their war experiences. However, as noted earlier, this particular case, where such extensive correspondence on one individual soldier’s fate was published in the local paper, was rare.

The second letter, the one from the chaplain – F H Dwinford, Church of England – ran to a very predictable script. He gave the briefest account of the actual death from wounds, reassured the family that the grave was …  in excellent order and has on it a wooden cross with a metal inscription … and focused on the manner of and purpose of the death. The death had not been in vain:

But one can only say, what one feels so much, that death for one’s country is a fine death, and a life laid down for Australia is a grand and noble sacrifice. And it is on the lives laid down in this war that a new generation will be built up.

The chaplain concluded with the customary reassurance that there was indeed a higher level of reality and purpose to the horror that then engulfed the world:

I can only hope with so many other chaplains that the great truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ brings consolation and comfort to you. Death is simply the passing away from one state of existence into another, and the souls of the righteous are in the hands of God.

The parents – and the readers of the local paper – were meant to draw all manner of lessons from the tragic death of L/Cpl Wallace. He had lived and died the life of the good soldier and the true Australian. Interestingly, in the correspondence the Imperial references are not as apparent as the National ones. He was stoic in the face of suffering. There was meaning to his death and God would take him unto Himself. The tone of the British nurse is more problematic, but the overall effect of the letters is to gloss human tragedy. Of course, we do not know what effect the letters had on the family – both then and subsequently – although we would have to assume that they provided some support because, at the very least, they would have certainly raised the status of their son in the eyes of the local community. But, as argued, the effect on the individual family was only part of the story. Such reporting was fundamentally important in maintaining the uncritical and uni-dimensional narrative of the War, which had not changed in any substantive way since August 1914. It would be the same narrative that would inevitably support the introduction of conscription.

References

Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative

National Archives file for WALLACE Percy Allen

Roll of Honour: Percy Allen Wallace

First World War Embarkation Rolls: Percy Allen Wallace

War Diary 22 Battalion

 

65. Yarram Recruiting Committee, 1915

The last post looked at the key function organised by the 1915 Recruiting Committee. This post looks at the committee itself.

The committee was set up at a public meting in Yarram on 25  June 1915. The meeting was in response to the request from the Victorian Parliament to all local councils/shires to form a local committee to assist in the planned recruiting drive.

In the circular, headed State Parliamentary Recruiting Committee, Victoria which was sent to every local government area, there was the specific directive: It is desirable that these local committees should include representatives of all sections. Moreover, the list of suggested activities in the same circular made it clear that the committee was intended to represent and cover all social groupings or classes. For example:

5. Where there are large workshops, suitable men should interview the workers and speak to them during the mid-day meal. [emphasis added]
8. Football and race crowds should be appealed to by leading sportsmen.
10. The ladies of the various localities may be encouraged to form committees of their own.
11. Friendly societies, trade unions, and other gatherings should be attended to.

According to reports in the local paper, Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative, on 30/6/15, the public meeting to set up the recruiting committee was poorly attended. In fact, there were often reports on the difficulty of encouraging people to join such committees and the corresponding need to rely on the usual civic stalwarts. However, it was also possible that others did not volunteer their services because they knew who typically would serve on such committees. Whatever the reason, the people who answered the newspaper call to join the recruiting committee did represent a particular and restricted group within the local community. The Yarram Recruiting Committee did not ‘include representatives of all sections.’

The committee at Yarram was exclusively male and there was no equivalent female committee set up. The committee was also Yarram-based or Yarram-centric. Admittedly, several members had rural properties outside Yarram but even these members of the committee – most were local councillors – were regularly in Yarram for their council work and other civic duties. Yarram by the early 20C had become the capital town – commercial, retail, business, local government – of the Shire of Alberton. However, there were residual misgivings over the shift of power and influence from Alberton, the former capital. Equally, many of the small townships and centres some distance from Yarram – over difficult roads and terrain – were convinced that Yarram received preferential treatment in terms of development and facilities, and that it functioned to meet its own interests and not the wider interests of the Shire as a whole. So there was an underlying degree of animosity directed at Yarram from other locations across the Shire. For its part, Yarram simply assumed power for itself. For example, all the various recruiting committees over the period 1915-1918 were labelled as iterations of the Yarram Recruiting Committee, not the Shire of Alberton Recruiting Committee.

If the Yarram Recruiting Committee was exclusive in terms of gender and the Shire’s geography and local politics, its class bias was even more pronounced.

In all there were 18 men who were identified as being members of the Yarram Recruiting Committee in 1915. Eleven men attended the first public meeting (25/6/15) called to form the committee and subsequently, over the course of the year from July to December 1915, another 7 men either joined or were co-opted.

The first table gives the essential details for the members of the 1915 committee. Previous posts that have looked at soldiers’ farewells and other public meetings to do with support for the War have shown the extent to which the speakers came from the ranks of the local professionals, managers, proprietors and leading land holders. This group of men matches the same profile.

Four of those on the 1915 committee actually enlisted in the AIF. Henry Crawford Bodman (Henry Bodman jnr) – had even enlisted before the committee was formed. One of the men – Rev George Cox – was comparatively old (43yo) and married, with 3 children. Cox was one of the most vocal supporters of the War in the Shire. He had great difficulty in enlisting and served for less than one year. He was discharged on medical grounds. He completed all his service in the AMC in Australia in military hospitals. The youngest (20 yo) of the 4 to enlist, Cyril Johnson was student studying in Melbourne. Presumably, he attended the first meeting of the committee with his father because he was in Yarram at that time. He was killed in action on 14/5/18. Edward Gabbett was married and 34 yo. He was badly wounded and had a leg amputated. He returned to Australia for a medical discharge in February 1918. Henry Bodman jnr, 21 yo, was wounded, ‘dangerously’, but survived the War and was discharged as medically unfit in November 1919. Overall, it is a grim picture of 4 men who went beyond calling for enlistments and enlisted themselves.

The second table details the extent of the committee members’ wider membership of committees, boards and other executive bodies across the community. Clearly, the members of the 1915 Yarram Recruiting Committee were well involved in key institutions and associations –  Yarram and District Hospital (the hospital was opened in 1915), Yarram Mechanics’ Institute, Yarram Waterworks Trust, ANA Yarram branch, Yarram Agricultural Society, Y.M.C.A., even the Yarram Town Band – and this level of involvement would have identified the committee members as leading and influential citizens in the community. Additionally, many of them held significant positions of political power: several local councillors (including the 2 Shire presidents over 1914-1915), the editor of a local paper, and 2 justices of the peace who presided in the Police Court/Court of Petty Sessions in Yarram.  There were also several members of the Yarram Recruiting Committee who held executive positions in friendly societies and who would have been well-known in the local community for advocating positions of moral and social improvement, e.g. the Independent Order of Rechabites and its temperance platform.  Members of the committee were also involved in the local churches – with the apparent exception of the (Roman) Catholic church – and 2 members were very involved with the local Masonic Lodge (207).

The involvement of the local Roman Catholic church in committees and activities to do with the promotion of patriotism and support for the War will be examined in detail shortly. It was a complex issue.

Overall, the Yarram Recruiting Committee was made up of ‘leading citizens’ from the local professional and managerial elite of Yarram, supported by several large and successful land holders who also played significant political and social roles in the Yarram community. In fact, rather than representing all sections of the diverse community (communities) that made up the Shire of Alberton, the Yarram Recruiting Committee of 1915 was narrow and sectional in its membership. No doubt those on the committee would have responded that the committee was made up of all those who were prepared to become involved and commit to the effort required; and that such committees were always only ever made up of like-minded citizens prepared to take on the necessary responsibility.Moreover they could have also argued that it made little sense to duplicate committees across the entire shire and Yarram was the natural location to establish the committee.

The composition of the Recruiting Committee also supports previous claims that the narrative of the War – including the sub-narrative of recruitment for the War – was formally controlled by a particular elite within the wider community.

However it does not follow that because one particular group controlled the narrative of the War all other groups listened to and followed the narrative. As the last post showed, the Recruiting Committee’s monster recruiting drive staged in Yarram was, at least in terms of having people enlist on the spot, a failure. Also, as argued, it is highly likely that the intended target group for the recruiting meeting stayed away precisely because they knew the specific detail of the narrative that was going to be presented and/or they simply refused to identify with the types – leading citizens – who were presenting the narrative.

Again, the apparent failure of the Recruiting Committee to attract recruits through its specific activities cannot be taken as proof that enlistments at the time – July and August  1915 – were falling. Indeed the opposite was true. Consider the following 2 communications from the 3rd Military District, Melbourne to all local government areas. The first was dated 3 August 1915:

Owing to the unusually heavy enlistments for the A.I.F. at present tents cannot be supplied as rapidly as the recruits are coming into camp, therefore please do not send any more recruits forward until the the 12th instant except such as are out of employment and very anxious to go into camp at once.

The second was dated 10 August 1915:

Please continue enlisting for the Australian Imperial Force, but do not send any more recruits forward until after the 31st instant, except such as are out of employment and very anxious to go into camp at once, others may be granted leave until September 1st.

There were to be iterations of the 1915 Yarram Recruiting Committee over the next few years. As will become clear, when the enlistment surge finished in the second half of 1915, and recruitment targets could no longer be met, the members of the committee moved effortlessly to back conscription.

References

Background details of those on the 1915 Yarram Recruiting Committee have been taken from the Gippsland Standard and Alberton Shire Representative, the relevant Electoral Roll and Rate Book, as well as from:

Adams, J 1990, From these Beginnings: History of the Shire of Alberton (Victoria), Alberton Shire Council, Yarram, Victoria

Correspondence and communication between the 3rd Military District  and the Shire of Alberton (Shire Secretary) are from the Archives of the Shire of Alberton:

Shire of Alberton
File Number 703-0
War Files
“Recruiting Campaign 1915” (cover sheet)