December 28, 2001 - This refers to your major article (Casualties of shame, The Globe and Mail, December 22), concerning extension of 'regret'; by the Canadian government in regard to 23 soldiers executed for cowardice or desertion in World War I.

Who speaks for the 60,000 dead who remain in the battlefields of Flanders? Who speaks for the wounded? Example, Edwin Baker, who lost his sight at Mount Kemmel, France. Although an engineer he learned brail and founded the CNIB.

Who speaks for the famous Padre Sidney Lambert who suffered grievous wounds including the loss of his right leg at Vimy and came back to found The War Amputations of Canada?

Contrariwise, your author speaks for the soldier who deserted his listening post leaving his platoon of Royal Winnipeg Rifles open to attack by gas and bayonet (I still shudder listening to my father cough up his lungs from gas for 20 years. It was a blessing that he passed away at the age of 50.)

Your heading uses the word SHAME. Are we talking of the shame of the deserters; of the shame of the British Army who executed these people, including another 300 or so, including some of their own; of the shame some of the families suffered these many years, or of the shame of Minister of Veterans Affairs Ron Duhamel who made it a campaign promise to the relatives to try to clear the name of Stephen Fowles. As your article says, '... he (Duhamel) would work for a pardon for him and the others.'

The article by Shawn McCarthy should not be read in isolation. The SHOT AT DAWN campaign of J. Hipkin of England, who served in the Royal Navy in World War I, was a disaster. The British government refused pardons, but Hipkin raised enough money to put a shameful 'cemetery' in Surrey, with wooden crosses for all those who were executed. A blindfolded soldier is nailed to a giant cross at the gate. I have visited the area. The local inhabitants consider it an abomination.

We wonder whether Canada lacked the intestinal fortitude to challenge the British government. The New Zealanders did it, resulting in an Act of their Parliament granting pardons to the five New Zealanders who were executed. I was advised by Minister Duhamel's staff that no pardon was possible for Canadians as the executions were carried out under the British Army Act. Did New Zealand have the courage to do something that the Canadian government would not face?

This was a political move. Minister Duhamel made the announcement to a packed House of Commons on December 11, 2001, and the usual speeches of support followed. I spoke to several MPs afterwards. They thought they were sanctioning a 'humanitarian' act of the Veterans Affairs Minister.

To fully understand the situation I have extracted a few actual words from the official charge sheets of the Canadians who were shot. These lines follow:

COMPANY QUARTERMASTER SERGEANT ALEXANDER: .. accused .. was given orders to go up to the front .. failed to do so .. his platoon had to be taken on to the Blue Line by a corporal.

LANCE-BOMBARDIER FREDERICK ARNOLD: .. deserting his Majesty's service .. apprehended .. dressed in plain clothes.

PRIVATE FORTUNAT AUGER: .. left trenches without orders .. fell in for duty in the trenches again but disappeared on way up to the front .. had several times been warned of the gravity of the offence of desertion.. four minor cases of absence .. Commander-in-Chief would be compelled to confirm the death penalty.

PRIVATE HAROLD CARTER: .. while on a working party in the trenches the accused absented himself and remained absent until apprehended some miles behind the firing line five days later .. two earlier occasions left working parties in the trenches .. a similar offence he had been convicted of desertion and sentenced to ten years penal servitude, the sentence being suspended .. two months later while still on suspended sentence that this last offence (desertion) was committed. It was the fourth offence of the same nature.

PRIVATE GUSTAV COMTE: .. while on the way up to the trenches .. accused disappeared .. was discovered at a base port would naturally be treated as a very serious factor, indicating an intention to get out of the country.

PRIVATE ARTHUR DEGASSE: .. absented himself .. just as his unit was going into the line .. while awaiting trial, accused escaped .. accused's character was very bad .. thirteen convictions for absence and two for drunkenness.

PRIVATE LEOPOLD DELISLE: .. the accused failed to accompany his platoon .. found to be missing .. next seen .. when he was arrested .. the accused admitted his desertion .. this man's record was very bad .. he had had a conviction for refusing to go into the trenches and another for disorderly conduct in front of the enemy .. served 12 months imprisonment for striking an NCO .. 16 other convictions .. character of the marginally noted, from a fighting point of view, is as bad as can possibly be imagined .. at all times tried to shun duty in the trenches .. cowardly in the extreme.

PRIVATE EDWARD FAIRBURN: .. warned to act as company runner .. arrested .. nine months later .. continuously avoided service in the active operations .. offence, however, was held to have been deliberate and of a very flagrant character.

PRIVATE MAURICE HIGGINS: .. the accused left his platoon .. remained absent until apprehended by the French police behind the fighting area sixteen days later .. escaped and remained absent till again apprehended five days later.

PRIVATE HENRY KERR: .. the accused absented himself from the support trenches .. found in billets, some miles in rear, 24 hours later, thereby avoiding a dangerous duty .. this man's conduct was extremely bad .. on one occasion in the trenches only on threat of being immediately shot would he leave his dugout to carry out his duties .. comrades on the last occasion in the trenches .. asked that he (Kerr) might be left behind in future .. he continually threatened to shoot officers and NCOs.

PRIVATE JOSEPH LALANCETTE: .. when warned .. for a working party in the neighbourhood of the front line, accused absented himself and remained absent till arrested behind the line a month later .. apparently this was not Private Lalancette's first offence of the same character.

PRIVATE COME LALIBERTE: .. accused left the ranks on the way to the trenches .. saying 'I am not going to the trenches. I will not go even at the point of bayonet,' and threw down his arms and his equipment .. Corps Commander considered this a flagrant case and could see no extenuating circumstances.

PRIVATE NORMAN LING: .. convicted .. of desertion and sentenced to death. Sentence was commuted .. to imprisonment .. after five months .. was sent up the line to rejoin his unit .. absented himself and remained absent (over ten months) .. gave a false name and produced another man's paybook.

PRIVATE HAROLD LODGE: .. desertion .. while proceeding to the trenches .. remained absent until arrested at Boulogne (one month later) .. attempting to desert .. arrested on suspicion by the military police .. wearing the uniform of the British Red Cross Society .. found concealed in the forepeak of a steamship about to sail (after escape from confinement .. remained absent until (again) arrested at Boulogne) .. (twelve months later) .. (escaped from arrest and remained absent until arrested at Boulogne on January 14, 1918.)

PRIVATE THOMAS MOLES: .. accused .. was ordered, in writing, to report to his company which was in reserve trenches and about to take part in active operations .. did not do so but on his own went back to a village in the rear and remained there .. arrested three weeks later in connection with a theft. Accused's conduct sheet shows his previous character was bad, there being six convictions for absence in the field and six convictions for drunkenness and other lesser offences.

PRIVATE EUGENE PERRY: .. accused, after warned for trenches early in the afternoon, absented himself and remained absent until apprehended the same evening at a village in the back area twenty miles away .. he had impression that offence would only be punished by a long term of imprisonment .. man’s offence was deliberate and with the object of avoiding duty in the trenches.

PRIVATE EDWARD REYNOLDS: .. the accused's platoon - with others - was ordered up to the front line with all possible speed. On the way up the accused fell out .. refused to give any reason .. refused to fall in again when being ordered to do so .. was sent up with a ration party, but left them and returned to the transport lines shortly afterwards .. considered death sentence might be commuted .. Divisional Commander disagreed, considering that the offence was so gross and deliberate that the extreme penalty should be carried out.

PRIVATE JOHN ROBERTS: .. the accused .. having been dressed in plain clothes was doubtless a grave factor in determining his penalty, as such action on active service, combined with absence, is always prima facie evidence of a determination to desert and avoid service at the front.

PRIVATE DIMITRO SINIZKI: .. misbehaving before the enemy in such a manner as to show cowardice (all other persons were charged with desertion). The accused, when ordered to proceed to the front line, refused, saying he would rather be shot .. he sat down and refused to move .. this was one of the worst cases occurring in the Canadian Corps.

PRIVATE CHARLES WELSH: .. duly warned for parade, was absent .. not seen again until discovered by the military police living in a cottage near Poperinghe (six weeks later) .. sentenced to six months imprisonment .. sentence was commuted .. accused was convicted of desertion and sentenced to death. The sentence was commuted to one of five years penal servitude .. afterwards suspended. Accused was still on suspended sentence when the final offence (desertion) occurred. The man's Commanding Officer reported that as a fighting man accused's conduct had always been unsatisfactory.

PRIVATE JAMES WILSON: .. absented himself .. surrendered .. warned for trenches in an emergency .. absented himself .. remained absent .. since arrival in France in April 1915 accused had been convicted on different occasions of drunkenness, insubordination, breaking arrest, and absence and had received two court-martial sentences .. quashed on account of technical irregularities .. Commanding Officer reported his character as 'very bad' and stated he was the leader of seven or eight bad characters whose crimes were seriously impairing the good record of the battalion. Shot 9 July 1916.

PRIVATE ELSWORTH YOUNG: .. ordered to report to his Company Sergeant Major .. did not do so .. arrested by military police at Abbeville, a good many miles to the rear, disguised as a corporal of the artillery and after having given false details about himself. Conduct sheet contained five entries. Commanding Officer said the accused .. was undependable. Divisional Commander recommended commutation .. Corps and Army Commander disagreed on grounds that offence was deliberate, in order to evade fighting.

PRIVATE STEPHEN FOWLES: .. accused arrived from prison, under escort .. warned to accompany the ration party .. to the trenches .. was not seen again until he gave himself up to the military police .. sentence was commuted by Commander-in-Chief to one of 10 years penal servitude. The accused served six months and was then released on suspended sentence .. final case of desertion followed within a few minutes of arrival (at his unit) .. considered by all authorities that the sentence of death passed on this man should not again be remitted.

The Globe and Mail article ends with a quote by Linda Ballard, the niece of Stephen Fowles: 'We still don't know why he left, why he deserted, or why he came back. At the same time, did he deserve to be shot for that? In our day, no,' Ballard said.

It is not difficult to agree with the conclusion that, in the year 2001, soldiers executed in the field, no matter what the offence, would not be tolerated.

It must be considered, however, that this was World War I. The number of Canadians who fought in the front lines was nearly 300,000. As is stated at the start of this letter, who speaks for those who showed neither cowardice nor desertion?

Probably the most troublesome factor is that, by his own admission, Veterans Affairs Minister Duhamel has stated that he would seek a pardon on behalf of the family of Fowles, as a campaign promise.

In the 1930s, the Liberal member in Winnipeg South was Ralph Maybank. Bucky Buchanan, a member of my father's regiment, had suffered shell shock with deafness, trench feet and mustard gas exposure. The men who made up the remnants of the Royal Winnipeg Rifles appealed to MP Ralph Maybank for a pension for Bucky Buchanan. The answer was no and to rub salt in the wound, Mr. Maybank stated that the decision had been made by Brigadier General H. F. McDonald, who had lost an arm in France.

Sincerely,

H. Clifford Chadderton, CC, O.Ont., OStJ, CLJ, CAE, DCL, LLD
Chief Executive Officer, The War Amputations of Canada, Ottawa, ON
and Chairman of the 40-member National Council of Veteran Associations