Deserters of the First World War

The Home Front

Andrea Hetherington

• Publisher: Pen and Sword Military
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781526748003
• Topic: Historia
• Subtopic: Primera Guerra Mundial

The story of First World War deserters who were shot at dawn, then pardoned nearly a century later has often been told, but these 306 soldiers represent a tiny proportion of deserters. More than 80, 000 cases of desertion and absence were tried at courts martial on the home front but these soldiers have been ignored. Andrea Hetherington, in this thought-provoking and meticulously researched account, sets the record straight by describing the deserters who disappeared from camps and barracks within Great Britain at an alarming rate. She reveals how they employed a range of survival strategies, some ridding themselves of all connection with the military while others hid in plain sight. Their reasons for desertion varied. Some were already living a life of crime whilst others were conscientious objectors who refused to respond to their call-up papers. Boredom, protest, troubles at home or physical and mental disabilities all played their part in men deciding to go on the run. Andrea Hetherington’s timely book gives us a vivid insight into a hitherto overlooked aspect of the First World War.

Chapter 1

Desertion and the Transition to War – Amnesties and King’s Bad Bargains

I am willing to serve my country still, but what chance has a man got when he gives himself up to be put on a shilling a week until he pays for the kit?

Letter to the Yorkshire Evening Post,

11 August 1914

Desertion had always been a problem in the British Army. Traditionally recruited from the lowest classes of society and with harsh conditions and poor rates of pay, the army was not an attractive choice of career for men who could aspire to be no more than ordinary soldiers. In the years between 1868 and 1898, between 1,500 and 2,000 men were charged with desertion each year. The actual figures of desertion are likely to be much higher than this – perhaps three times as high – as many men were not caught or desertions not recorded as such.1 In those less bureaucratic times, identification documents were not required and the most that could be done to find a deserter was to publish his details in the Police Gazette and visit his family periodically to see if he had returned home.

Desertion on active service was technically punishable by a death sentence, though this rarely occurred. Imprisonment or penal servitude of various lengths was the usual penalty at a court martial, and, after 1906, detention was also introduced as a less serious level of incarceration. Until the latter part of the nineteenth century deserters could also be branded and flogged.2 Victorian recruits signed up for twelve years so arguably the most meaningful punishment for a deserter was that the service clock started at zero on his arrest. The erasure of previous service would represent a significant deterrent to those who had been in the army for some years and may explain why most deserters were those with less than two years’ service.3 A deserter could have his punishment commuted wholly or partly by being taken back into the fold for general service and potentially transferred to a different unit.4 For soldiers who committed offences in the United Kingdom, the use of this power could mean transfer abroad in cases where there was ‘a prospect of his being converted into a good soldier’.5 A number of army reforms were informed by the need to reduce desertion figures. ‘Short service’ was introduced in the 1870s, though this still entailed signing up for a period of six years. Improvements in barracks facilities, deferred lump sums payable on discharge and education programmes were all introduced to keep soldiers in the army. In 1898 there were 4,107 men struck off the strength as deserters: by 1913 the number had fallen to just under 3,000.6

The Manual of Military Law (MML) rather unhelpfully defined desertion as ‘deserting or attempting to desert His Majesty’s service’. Essentially, the offence was all about the intention of the soldier. If he left his unit with no intention to return at all, or to avoid some specific duty, he would be guilty of desertion. Other aspects of the offence, like the distance he had travelled and the length of time he had been missing, were mere evidential aids to a tribunal in deciding whether a man had deserted or not. The MML used the example of a man found in plain clothes on a steamer for America as one where desertion would clearly be made out. Equally however, a man who did not even leave the barracks but concealed himself there until his regiment left for overseas service would be guilty of desertion though he had travelled no distance at all. The MML specified that a man should not be charged with desertion unless there was evidence of such intention to quit, and if there was any doubt he should be charged with the lesser offence of absence. Absence without leave was defined as:

Such short absence, unaccompanied by disguise, concealment, or other suspicious circumstances, as occurs when a soldier does not return to his corps or duty at the proper time but on returning is able to show that he did not intend to quit the service, or to evade the performance of some service so important as to render the offence desertion.7

The distinction between absence and desertion was a fine one and was not applied consistently. In many cases the two terms were entirely interchangeable depending on the attitude of a man’s commanding officer, the specifics of the offence, the abilities of the soldier, the make-up of a court martial and many other random considerations now lost from the records. The benefit of the doubt was to be given to the soldier, absence without leave to be preferred to desertion if there was room to do so, and room was very often found.

Men who left their original corps and enlisted in another were technically deserters, but the instructions to commanding officers in the MML were clear that generally such men were not to be charged with the offence of desertion unless there was evidence of this. Instead they should be charged with fraudulent enlistment, as they had lied on their attestation forms when asked about previous military service. It was also a criminal offence, punishable by the civilian courts by up to three months’ imprisonment, to pose as a deserter.8 This may on the face of it seem like a very strange thing to do, but destitute and homeless men sometimes did so to obtain a few days’ accommodation and food until the army determined that they did not belong there and kicked them out again.

Once a man had been missing for twenty-one days, the army would hold a court of enquiry to establish that he was a deserter, then he would be struck off the strength and his details passed to the Police Gazette for publication. Once arrested the man would be taken to the local Magistrates’ Court (also known as Police Courts) where he would usually be declared a deserter and handed over to the military authorities. An escort would be sent to collect him and he would then return to his regiment and await his punishment. The ‘Form of Descriptive Return’ (Army Form O1618) was issued to the civilian courts dealing with deserters. In addition to the usual questions about the man’s name and physical characteristics, the form asked whether the man was apprehended in uniform or in plain clothes, and whether he had surrendered or was arrested. The ‘fullest possible details’ were to be provided to enable the army to decide what charge, if any, should be preferred and to assist at a court martial should one take place. It was incumbent on the prosecution at court martial to outline the circumstances of a man’s arrest in full as this may have a bearing on whether he was convicted of desertion or absence without leave. The clerk of the civilian court at which the deserter appeared was paid 2s. for every descriptive return form sent to the army to encourage them to provide this information.

Soldiers arrested for desertion regularly pleaded that they were absentees, not deserters. The death penalty was not available for the offence of being absent without leave. Absentees were much less likely to have to face court-martial proceedings in the first place as the summary powers available to both a company commander and the next level up, the commanding officer, allowed for a range of punishments to be given that stopped short of imprisonment. An absentee could receive no more than twenty-eight day’s detention under these powers of summary disposal with the other punishments available being Field Punishment (being tied to an object either outside for a few hours a day in the case of No. 1, or inside for No. 2), confinement to barracks (known as ‘C.B.’ or ‘Jankers’) and forfeiture of pay.9 Short sentences of detention – less than seven days – would be served in cells at the barracks, whilst soldiers serving longer periods were shipped out to military detention facilities dotted around the country. Soldiers guilty of absence only, unlike deserters, were not liable to have their previous service wiped out. For the army volunteer signing up from August 1914 onwards for the duration of the war, this would be less of a concern but for a Regular army soldier it was very important.

Summary disposal could be applied to charges of desertion, but the offence would have to be downgraded by a superior officer to being absent without leave before this could be done.10 It was also possible to dispense with a court martial where a signed confession to desertion or fraudulent enlistment was made and the merits of the case could be met by the exercise of these summary powers of punishment.11 Both deserters and absentees had their pay forfeited for every day of absence, and for every day of detention, Field Punishment, imprisonment or whilst in the custody of a civilian court. They were also liable to pay for every piece of their issued kit that was missing and for the cost of an escort to collect them.

Soldiers charged with desertion or absence and dealt with by a court martial on the home front were likely to face a District Court Martial where the maximum sentence for any offence was two years’ imprisonment. ‘Very aggravated offences’, and all offences for officers, had to go before a General Court Martial where the available range of punishments was wider, including penal servitude for a minimum of three years and the death penalty.12 There were almost 138,000 District Court Martials at home between August 1914 and April 1920. Only 3,120 General Courts Martial were held, the vast majority of them being for officers.13 Abroad, all ranks were dealt with at a Field General Court Martial which had the same wide powers as its domestic equivalent. Punishments for being absent on the home front in practice ranged from docking of pay to imprisonment with the need to recycle manpower as the war went on determining the approach taken. Sentences of imprisonment or detention were reviewed by senior officers and often reduced or remitted to return men to service more quickly. Offences which looked very much like desertion were turned into absence instead so that they could be dealt with more expeditiously. Theoretically, whilst the country was at war, the death penalty existed for deserters whether they had walked away from a trench in France or from a parade ground in Aldershot, as the designation of being on active service applied to both situations. In practice the death penalty was not imposed for desertions that took place on home soil except in very limited circumstances to a few unlucky men.

Given the small size of Britain’s peacetime army it was imperative to secure as many recruits in as short a time as possible when war was declared in August 1914. British Army reservists, some of whom were far from home, were immediately recalled to the colours. In Canada alone there were 3,232 British Army reservists of whom 153 serving in the standing Canadian Army were allowed to remain in the Dominion. Before the end of August 1914, 2,006 reservists had embarked on passenger steamers bound for England.14

The recall of the reservists went hand in hand with the massive recruiting drive for new soldiers that has been well documented. Less well known are the efforts the army and navy made to take back those who had deserted the forces in years gone by. With raw recruits taking months to train up, these experienced men could be extremely valuable if they would return. However, as things stood at the beginning of August 1914 they would face prosecution for desertion, potential imprisonment and the loss of their accumulated years of service if they came back. The answer was simple – an amnesty for all deserters if they handed themselves in.

On 8 August 1914 the following notice appeared in newspapers nationwide: ‘The King has been pleased to approve of pardons being granted to soldiers who were in a state of desertion on August 5 and who surrendered themselves at home before September 4 and abroad before October 4’. Posters to this effect were displayed prominently all over the country to attract the eye of as many of these men as possible.

It should be noted that this pardon only applied to soldiers at this stage, not sailors as the Admiralty took its own course and did not announce an amnesty until 11 August. The cut-off date for the naval amnesty would later be extended in an acknowledgement that many sailors had jumped ship thousands of miles from their home bases.15

Instructions had already been given to the courts to send soldiers who had surrendered off to their regiments armed with a free railway pass rather than have them wait for military escorts. The police were now told not to take these men to court at all but to send them to their unit in the same manner. A telegram was to be sent to the commanding officer of the depot so he knew to expect the deserter’s return.16

With the prospect of punishment no longer hanging over them, thousands of men returned to the colours from all over the world. Their motivations were mixed – some were no doubt fired up with patriotism now the country needed them, many re-joining before the official pardon was even announced. On the day war was declared deserters were reported as turning up at barracks and police stations nationwide, some having been missing for a long period of time. The Hull Daily Mail reported four men at Grimsby that day handing themselves in.17 On 5 August 1914 Fred George Strong attended Dover Police Station and declared that he was a deserter from the Royal Marines. He had left HMS Forth in Plymouth in July 1913 and was now living with his wife in Margate. On the declaration of war he had sent his wife back to Plymouth and walked 20 miles from Margate to Dover to surrender himself.18 In August 1914 1,776 non-commissioned officers and men returned to the army from desertion with a further 755 re-joining in September. These were the only two months of the entire war when the numbers returning from desertion exceeded those being struck off the strength for the same offence. The figure for returning soldiers plummeted to 401 in October, indicating that the boost in the earlier numbers was heavily influenced by the amnesty.19

For some returnees it appears that economics rather than patriotism was their motivation and their return was not always welcomed. Thoma...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Plates
• Introduction
• Chapter 1 Desertion and the Transition to War –Amnesties and King’s Bad Bargains
• Chapter 2 Training Camp Troubles
• Chapter 3 The Restless, the Feckless and the Brave
• Chapter 4 Arrested in Britain, Shot at Dawn
• Chapter 5 Safe Harbour
• Chapter 6 Alternative Employment
• Chapter 7 Scamps in Khaki
• Chapter 8 Conscription – The Net Tightens
• Chapter 9 Irish Issues
• Chapter 10 Wild Colonial Boys
• Chapter 11 After the War – Amnesties and Bad Army Characters
• Conclusion
• Notes
• Bibliography
• plates1