The Courage of Cowards article

The Courage of Cowards Karyn Burnham considers the plight of those who stood by their principles against a tidal wave of national patriotism and refused to be involved in a war they didn’t believe in: the conscientious objectors of the First World War his August will mark 100 years since the start of the First World War. The intervening century has given us greater perspective and tolerance of pacifism, but in 1914 any man of fighting age seen walking the streets out of uniform was liable to accusations of cowardice.

There has been a great deal of misunderstanding of what it actually meant to be a conscientious objector.

COs were seen as cowards, shirkers and slackers who were happy to let their fellow man die while they took the ‘easy route’ through the war. It was also thought that if a man did happen to have a genuine

T

32

D I S C O V E R YO U R H I S TO RY • J U N E 2 0 1 4

conscientious objection, it was on religious grounds, whereas many conscientious objections were actually made on political grounds.

Young and principled Jack Foister was a 21-year-old student at Cambridge when war was declared in August 1914. He was a popular young man with a mischievous sense of humour, which would prove to be both his saviour and his downfall. A member of the Fabian Society, Jack had considered himself a socialist from the age of about 15. During the initial excitement of war, Jack, along with thousands of others, felt a huge swell

of patriotism towards King and country and planned to enlist at the earliest opportunity. He wanted to be a part of this war that would be ‘over

by Christmas’ before it was too late.

Jack’s father was a member of the territorial reserves and knew he would be called up soon and that Jack’s older brother was also planning to enlist. Jack’s father believed the war would last longer than most people anticipated and advised Jack to finish his studies before joining the army. It would also be hard on his mother, he warned, to lose her husband and two of her sons at once.

By the time Jack finished his w w w. d i s c o v e r y o u r h i s t o r y. n e t e t

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS – Jack Foister is 2nd from left, front row. Courtesy of Peace Pledge Union

studies in the summer of 1915, his views on the war had changed considerably. Of course, the fighting hadn’t been ‘over by Christmas’ and the number of casualties being reported was staggering – with almost 12,000 lives being lost in a single battle at Aubers Ridge in May 1915. Poisonous gas was now being used and Britain herself was under attack from the air as Zeppelin raids became commonplace. There had been a strong sense of pacifism among Jack’s peers at Cambridge and he found both voice and support for his socialist beliefs. Jack, along with many like him, was angry that millions of pounds were being spent on warfare when no money could be found to provide better living conditions for ordinary people and that the working men of Britain, who had no quarrel with the working men of Germany, were being ordered to shell, shoot and bomb one another by those in power. Jack had come to see the war as an obscenity and was no longer prepared to play any part in it.

Joining the army was still voluntary throughout 1915 so if a man objected to the war for any reason, he simply didn’t enlist, so when Jack left university he chose to take up a teaching post at a school in Peterborough.

Conscription was introduced in January 1916 with the passing of the Military Service Act. There had been many months of debate and argument in Parliament over this move; it was unpopular with many, particularly Liberal and Labour MPs and even with some military figures who believed that a man who volunteered for the army made a far better soldier than one who had been forced into it. This underlying principle prompted Prime Minister Asquith to allow a clause in the Act that would exempt a man from combatant service on grounds of a conscientious objection to war. The clause was both groundbreaking and controversial; critics argued that it gave the slackers and cowards an escape route, that it would be easy to claim a conscientious objection and shirk one’s national duty.

Throughout the country, local tribunals were set up to judge each claim of conscientious objection. A man who objected was questioned w w w. d i s c o v e r y o u r h i s t o r y. n e t

Social History The Courage of Cowards

DADDY, WHAT Did You Do In The War? Recruitment poster designed to shame men into enlisting. Library of Congress

about the sincerity of his beliefs; about whether he would be prepared to use violence to defend the honour of his mother or sister and whether he would serve in a non-combatant role such as the Royal Army Medical Corps, the Non Combatant Corps or the Friends Ambulance Unit.

appealed against the tribunal’s decision.

On 25 April, nearly a whole month before he was due to report for duty, Jack was arrested for desertion and brought before the magistrate in Cambridge, where he was found guilty of failing to abide by the laws of the land and sent to the county prison to await military escort. While in prison, Jack received a letter advising that his appeal was in two days’ time. Because his application for exemption had not been resolved at appeal, Jack was actually under no obligation to the army and should have been released but was instead escorted to Landguard Fort, a military garrison in Felixstowe. On arrival, Jack presented the letter, was released and allowed to travel back to Peterborough without escort. He lost his appeal and was returned to Landguard before being moved to Harwich Redoubt, an imposing edifice originally built to house French prisoners during the Napoleonic wars and now being used as a military prison. Although still not officially in the army until 23 May and with another appeal at County tribunal to go, Jack Foister

No easy way out When Jack received his call-up papers, he knew that in all conscience he could not take part in the war. His headmaster, unwilling to lose yet another talented teacher, offered to use his connections to ‘fix’ an exemption for Jack on grounds of poor eyesight. In truth, Jack was so short-sighted that he would probably have been rejected by the army in any case, but he wasn’t prepared to take a route that he felt was dishonest.

Jack appeared before his local tribunal in Peterborough and made it clear his claim for absolute exemption from military service was on political grounds and he was not prepared to support the war in any way whatsoever. His claim was rejected outright and he was ordered to report for duty on 23 May. Jack knew that life was about to get difficult and unpredictable so he left his teaching post to avoid causing embarrassment to the school and

MILITARY service Act 1916. Library of Congress

J U N E 2 0 1 4 • D I S C O V E R YO U R H I S TO RY

33

Social History The Courage of Cowards was nevertheless a military prisoner, with all the hardship that entailed.

On 8 May, less than two weeks after his arrest, Jack was shipped out to France along with 16 of his peers from Harwich Redoubt; they had no advance warning and were not allowed to inform family or loved ones, although they were advised to write their wills. In total, 34 men from various prisons and detention camps in Britain were shipped out to France in May 1916. Their departure was kept secret but it didn’t take long for rumours to circulate and questions to be asked in Parliament.

Had conscientious objectors been taken to France? Had they gone willingly? What was the purpose of taking them into a war zone? Most chillingly of all, the MP Philip Snowden, a campaigner for the rights of conscientious objectors, sought assurances that the military authorities abroad would adhere to the Military Service Act, which ‘does not allow the infliction of the death penalty on conscientious objectors for refusal to obey military orders.’

The men themselves were unaware of the furore breaking out at home over their situation and, to begin with at least, were unaware of the growing seriousness of their position. Jack spent his first few days at Cinder City, a huge encampment on former marshland that had been filled in with cinders and ash and occupied by recuperating soldiers who had ‘done their bit’. The army hoped that the soldiers who had fought would despise the COs enough to break their spirit. Ironically, the opposite happened and it would seem that some of the soldiers covertly admired the COs’ strength of character.

Soldiers wished the COs good luck and hoped they could beat the army, though added: ‘but nobody can.’

Jack and a fellow CO were marched onto the parade ground together, given orders to work and told that all the other COs were working. They had no way of knowing whether this was true and faced the dilemma of giving in or refusing and maybe standing alone.

They both refused to obey and consequently spent the night handcuffed in a cramped cell with seven other COs and a drunk. When Jack repeatedly refused to engage in 34

D I S C O V E R YO U R H I S TO RY • J U N E 2 0 1 4

A WARTIME poster portraying conscientious objectors as effeminate cowards.

any work that would contribute to the war effort, he was rewarded with Field Punishment Number One for his disobedience. FP No. 1 was nicknamed ‘crucifixion’ because it involved the fettering of a man to a fixed object such as a gun wheel, arms outstretched and legs together in the formation of a cross. The men were usually tied at a height where their feet only just touched the ground, so their arms took the bulk of their body weight. FP No. 1 lasted for two hours a day for a period of 28 days; the remaining 22 hours of each day were spent handcuffed in solitary confinement.

The men were then moved to a Field Punishment barracks near Boulogne, where the regime got steadily worse. FP No. 1 now involved being spreadeagled and roped onto a barbed wire fence on the perimeter of the site, in full view of all passers-by. The men were tied up so tight that they cut their faces on the wire when turning their heads.

Most of Jack’s days were spent on bread and water rations in cramped, overcrowded cells with a single bucket acting as latrine for 12 men.

Obey ... or die The men knew something more sinister was afoot when each in turn was brought before a panel of senior officers and told that the general would issue an order. If a man did not obey this order, he would be

court-martialled for disobedience, the punishment for which could be the sentence of death.

Jack Foister, along with every other man there, found the courage to stand by their convictions despite the full force of military authority being thrown at them.

Each man refused to obey the simple order to fall in, choosing instead to turn and walk away from the officers.

The men were each given a sheet of blank paper and told to prepare a defence. The crux of Jack’s defence was that his final appeal against conscription had not been heard and therefore he was still not officially in the army at all. Some of the men arranged for a cable to be sent to England on Jack’s behalf but it was stopped by the censor.

Inevitably, all 34 men were found guilty of failing to obey an order and, on the afternoon of 17 June, they were taken out to a parade ground packed with soldiers to hear their sentences. The adjutant read out each man’s sentence in turn: ‘Private Jack Foister, you have been found guilty of failing to obey military orders when on active service … tried by court martial and found guilty, you are hereby sentenced to death by shooting.’

The parade ground was filled with the heavy silence of a thousand men as Jack turned to look, wideeyed, at the man next to him. I

Discover more • The Courage of Cowards: The Untold Stories of First World War Conscientious Objectors, by Karyn Burnham, has been recently published by Pen and Sword Military.

Discover Your History readers can order it for £13.59 (20% off RRP), with FREE UK postage and packing.

• Call 01226 734222 and quote code 114013 or visit www.pen-andsword.co.uk and enter the code.

w w w. d i s c o v e r y o u r h i s t o r y. n e t