|
The Bulletin of the Birmingham Branch of the WFA Compiled by Bob Butcher |
|
June 2009 |
|
A BUTCHER On 12 June 1918 the Birmingham Conscription Tribunal heard the case of a thirty-eight year old butcher who had been passed fit for active service abroad but granted a three month exemption for his employer to find a replacement. This was about to expire and he made a fresh appeal. The butcher explained that when his temporary exemption was granted about two thirds of the meat he dealt with had been English, However during the past few weeks this had changed and all the meat he dealt with was imported and frozen. It was very hard to chop it up into manageable portions, and once it was defrosted it had to be cut up and sold within a day or two or it would go bad. Skilled, experienced butchers were needed for this work. The tribunal refused his application. However the butcher's representative said that the policy behind this refusal would be raised at a higher level as it was a general problem Domestic refrigerators had not been invented in 1918 meaning that the butcher's problem may have been a real issue. On the other hand itmay have been a cover for him not wanting to become a casualty himself. After all butchers know all too well what corpses look like. J.P.Lethbridge THE GENERALS A good general is one who wins battles with the fewest possible casualties: Field Marshal Montgomery. So, if two generals fight similar battles in the same area within a month or so of each other and 'A' gains six square miles at the cost of 3800 casualties per square mile and 'B' gains eighteen square miles at the cost 1500 casualties per square mile, and if 'C' fights a battle with the highest daily casualty rate of the war and 'D' fights a battle in which he outwits and thoroughly defeats his enemy, who were the best generals? It may surprise you, as it did me, to learn that 'A' was Plumer, usually reckoned to be the best army commander in France and 'B' was Gough the worst. (Flanders 1917) 'C' and 'D' were the same, Allenby (Arras 1917 and Palestine). Maxse emerged with a good reputation due to the record of the outstanding 18th (Eastern) Division which he commanded during 1916-17. However, question marks hang over his performance as a brigade and later, corps commander. It seems therefore that the same general may be good in some circumstances andlevels of command but not in others. I unhesitatingly name Plumer and Gough respectively as the best and worst army commanders in the BEF. I must admit. however, that this opinion is based on reputations and results rather than on a detailed examination of the various qualities that go to make a good general. Who can say, for example, what would have happened on the Somme if Plumer had commanded the Fourth Army or Gough had commanded in Palestine? Plumer was reputed to be considerate of his troops, methodical and to pay great attention to detail. Gough was held to be rash, pushed for attacks to be made before proper preparations had been made and expected too much of tired troops. Even corps and divisional commanders hated serving in his Fifth Army, such was his style of command. This has usually been attributed to his chief of staff, Malcolm, although this continued after he had left. On the other hand, Plumer was at his best when he had Harington as his chief of staff. Insofar as one can generalise about generals (pun not intended) it seems to me that the generals who took the BEF to France in 1914 were a fairly sound lot. There were exceptions of course, notably French the CinC. The average level dropped in 1915, 1916 and perhaps part of 1917 when to meet the needs of a greatly expanded army, some generals had been promoted to a level they would not have reached in peacetime and many retired generals who were past their best had to be re-employed. Later, weeding out and the emergence of leaders tested in the field meant that the standard was good. Bob Butcher
THE BUCK STOPS HERE Near the end of his Great War classic, The War the Infantry Knew, Captain JC Dunn, Medical Officer of the 2nd Royal Welch Fusiliers, writes about the 'Goat Business'. The affair of the regimental goat started on 29 May 1919 as the remnants of the battalion were embarking for home from Harfleur. Despite documents from the Board of Agriculture the skipper of HMT St George would not allow it to set foot in his ship unless there was authorisation from the port itself. Lieutenant Evans was passed from one person to another but finally received a chit. That was not the end of the affair because the goat was not allowed to land at Southampton the following morning. It did not matter as the animal was smuggled on to the dockside and onwards with the battalion. The men arrived at Wrexham and the officers returned from two months' leave to find that the goat had died! More local regimental mascots appear not to have made it across the Channel for The Times reported on 22 October 1915 that four Indian antelopes or black bucks of the Royal Warwickshire Regiment had been placed in Regent's Park Zoo for 'safe custody'. They were in a roomy pen just below the Mappin Terrace containing four black bears from various Canadian units. The bucks 'cast timid , pathetic glances at the few passers-by and made appealing little noises in their throats, which sounded rather greedy'. The antelope had been adopted in 1877 as the regimental mascot. It continues to be the mascot of the ft Battalion of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers—the current one is called Bobby and holds the rank of corporal. Alan Tucker |