Paul Kinney says, "While the quota system exists for British awards the system will continue to be unfair. If the Australian government bites the bullet and gives the Pom awards the old heave ho, then it is possible that Australian service men and women might be in with a show of having their gallantry recognised when it occurs. From my understanding > of the current situation the Australian government can award the Australia Victoria Cross." ******************* Hey Paul, read the newspaper once in a while Australia has had it's own Awards system in place for quite a while. Do you seriously believe that a quota system will not be applied? What is the benefit, so far, of the Australian Awards system? We have awarded medals to hundreds of thousands of National Servicemen who did 94 days training in the 1950s, we have made tens of thousands of men who did buggar all, eligible for the Australian Service Medal 1945/75, we have medals for this medals for that and the end result is that they become almost meaningless. If you want an American opinion of the situation go to http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-medals/too-many.htm ----- Original Message ----- From: "Annie and Wal" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 7:19 PM Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #34 > Hi Paul, > HEAR HEAR !!!! > We had a few Officers too. > One being threatened to be thrown overboard from the Sydney on our way home. > We never saw him on the boat (ship). > Many lives saved through courage of mates (mine included), but alas these > are non events in the eyes of the egotists. > Regards > Wal > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Kinney" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:26 PM > Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #34 > > > > Ms Val Harris. > > Dear Val, > > The Victoria Cross has never had a 'lesser value' at any time. It > > has always been for Conspicuous Gallantry above and beyond the Call of > Duty > > at the highest level. The reason the man did not get his medal is possibly > > due to the quota system instituted by the British. Only so many awards of > > the Victoria Cross could be awarded to the Colonies. > > Many is the man who deserved the Victoria Cross while fighting for > > Australia and few are the men who have recieved it because of the quota > > system. The same applies to other gallantry awards issued by the British > and > > available to Australian servicemen. I well remember a platoon commander in > > Viet Nam who told his men he would get his Military Cross no matter how > many > > of them died while he was earning it. > > He managed to get 3 of them killed and 3 of them seriously wounded, he got > > his medal and is spending his life in a wheel chair, hoping to never meet > > any of his former platoon, they want to kill him. The one thing you will > > notice about award systems is that they favour officers, not enlisted men. > > The reason for this is that officers write up the recommendations for > > awards. The system is open to abuse, and is abused. The American officers > > who wrote each other up in Viet Nam is a classic example. Gallantry awards > > are a major boost to an officers or NCO's career, my own section commander > > informed us that he was desirous of obtaining a Military Medal. We > > collectively wished him good luck and told him he was on his own. We > > survived, he survived, without his MM. > > There are thousands's of recipients of gallantry awards in this > > country who have thoroughly deserved their awards and the recognition that > > go's with them, equally, their are thousands more who deserve awards who > > will never get them, the dingo's who have received awards they didn't > > deserve become known. While the quota system exists > > for British awards the system will continue to be unfair. If the > Australian > > government bites the bullet and gives the Pom awards the old heave ho, > then > > it is possible that Australian service men and women might be in with a > show > > of having their gallantry recognised when it occurs. From my understanding > > of the current situation the Australian government can award the Australia > > Victoria Cross. Whether it is made from the metal of the Sebastapol cannon > > or not I don't know. > > Hope this information is of some use to you. > > Respectfully > > Paul Kinney > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: [email protected] > > >Reply-To: [email protected] > > >To: [email protected] > > >Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #34 > > >Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 14:00:01 -0700 > > > > > ><< message2.txt >> > > ><< message4.txt >> > > ><< message6.txt >> > > ><< message8.txt >> > > ><< message10.txt >> > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to > > http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp > > > > > > ==== AUS-MILITARY Mailing List ==== > > The Military Historical Society of Australia > > http://www.pcug.org.au/~astaunto/mhsa.htm > > >

This is a "lift" from the FAQ page (1 of 4) on www.diggerhistory.info the particular page is http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-help/faq2.htm ############################################### Is the method of awarding medals fair? No. It never has been, never will be and CANNOT be. Awards can only be given to a relative few. Many acts of extreme bravery go unreported and sometimes unseen. Different Officers have differing views on what constitutes "bravery". It is a matter of record that some senior WW1 officers considered that in their battalion "uncommon bravery is expected" and refused to process paperwork recommending awards. Sometimes it is a matter of luck that a piece of work attracts attention. On other occasions senior officers have been accused of trying to "cook the books" to make their unit look good by recommending many persons for awards. For these and a dozen other reasons most recipients of awards recognise, both publicly and privately, that they are representatives of the many. ############################################### While I understand the bitterness expressed by some contributors I can assure them that it will do them no good and that the "system" will always be seen as flawed by those who did not get an award and as perfect by those who did. Another VERY interesting page is the one about medals for Long Tan http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-medals/longtan-medals.htm ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 4:00 AM Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #35

Hi Would like to make contact with any who served in D Company - 66th Battalion BCOF 1946/1947 who may have been based in Eta Jima or Kurehiro and worked in the clearing of Arsonal Tunnels and Sheds. Thankyou Suzanne Griffin

Hi, Does any member have the contact details of the Victorian (the state, not era) military researcher Carl Johnson ? Thanks Brenton _________________________________________________________________ MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp

Ms Val Harris. Dear Val, The Victoria Cross has never had a 'lesser value' at any time. It has always been for Conspicuous Gallantry above and beyond the Call of Duty at the highest level. The reason the man did not get his medal is possibly due to the quota system instituted by the British. Only so many awards of the Victoria Cross could be awarded to the Colonies. Many is the man who deserved the Victoria Cross while fighting for Australia and few are the men who have recieved it because of the quota system. The same applies to other gallantry awards issued by the British and available to Australian servicemen. I well remember a platoon commander in Viet Nam who told his men he would get his Military Cross no matter how many of them died while he was earning it. He managed to get 3 of them killed and 3 of them seriously wounded, he got his medal and is spending his life in a wheel chair, hoping to never meet any of his former platoon, they want to kill him. The one thing you will notice about award systems is that they favour officers, not enlisted men. The reason for this is that officers write up the recommendations for awards. The system is open to abuse, and is abused. The American officers who wrote each other up in Viet Nam is a classic example. Gallantry awards are a major boost to an officers or NCO's career, my own section commander informed us that he was desirous of obtaining a Military Medal. We collectively wished him good luck and told him he was on his own. We survived, he survived, without his MM. There are thousands's of recipients of gallantry awards in this country who have thoroughly deserved their awards and the recognition that go's with them, equally, their are thousands more who deserve awards who will never get them, the dingo's who have received awards they didn't deserve become known. While the quota system exists for British awards the system will continue to be unfair. If the Australian government bites the bullet and gives the Pom awards the old heave ho, then it is possible that Australian service men and women might be in with a show of having their gallantry recognised when it occurs. From my understanding of the current situation the Australian government can award the Australia Victoria Cross. Whether it is made from the metal of the Sebastapol cannon or not I don't know. Hope this information is of some use to you. Respectfully Paul Kinney >From: [email protected] >Reply-To: [email protected] >To: [email protected] >Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #34 >Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 14:00:01 -0700 > ><< message2.txt >> ><< message4.txt >> ><< message6.txt >> ><< message8.txt >> ><< message10.txt >> _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp

Hi Paul, HEAR HEAR !!!! We had a few Officers too. One being threatened to be thrown overboard from the Sydney on our way home. We never saw him on the boat (ship). Many lives saved through courage of mates (mine included), but alas these are non events in the eyes of the egotists. Regards Wal ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Kinney" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:26 PM Subject: Re: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #34 > Ms Val Harris. > Dear Val, > The Victoria Cross has never had a 'lesser value' at any time. It > has always been for Conspicuous Gallantry above and beyond the Call of Duty > at the highest level. The reason the man did not get his medal is possibly > due to the quota system instituted by the British. Only so many awards of > the Victoria Cross could be awarded to the Colonies. > Many is the man who deserved the Victoria Cross while fighting for > Australia and few are the men who have recieved it because of the quota > system. The same applies to other gallantry awards issued by the British and > available to Australian servicemen. I well remember a platoon commander in > Viet Nam who told his men he would get his Military Cross no matter how many > of them died while he was earning it. > He managed to get 3 of them killed and 3 of them seriously wounded, he got > his medal and is spending his life in a wheel chair, hoping to never meet > any of his former platoon, they want to kill him. The one thing you will > notice about award systems is that they favour officers, not enlisted men. > The reason for this is that officers write up the recommendations for > awards. The system is open to abuse, and is abused. The American officers > who wrote each other up in Viet Nam is a classic example. Gallantry awards > are a major boost to an officers or NCO's career, my own section commander > informed us that he was desirous of obtaining a Military Medal. We > collectively wished him good luck and told him he was on his own. We > survived, he survived, without his MM. > There are thousands's of recipients of gallantry awards in this > country who have thoroughly deserved their awards and the recognition that > go's with them, equally, their are thousands more who deserve awards who > will never get them, the dingo's who have received awards they didn't > deserve become known. While the quota system exists > for British awards the system will continue to be unfair. If the Australian > government bites the bullet and gives the Pom awards the old heave ho, then > it is possible that Australian service men and women might be in with a show > of having their gallantry recognised when it occurs. From my understanding > of the current situation the Australian government can award the Australia > Victoria Cross. Whether it is made from the metal of the Sebastapol cannon > or not I don't know. > Hope this information is of some use to you. > Respectfully > Paul Kinney > > > > > > >From: [email protected] > >Reply-To: [email protected] > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: AUS-MILITARY-D Digest V03 #34 > >Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 14:00:01 -0700 > > > ><< message2.txt >> > ><< message4.txt >> > ><< message6.txt >> > ><< message8.txt >> > ><< message10.txt >> > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to > http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_mobile.asp > > > ==== AUS-MILITARY Mailing List ==== > The Military Historical Society of Australia > http://www.pcug.org.au/~astaunto/mhsa.htm >

Thanks to all the people who pointed out that the DCM was available in the Boer War. Anyone who reads what I wrote will have to agree that the DCM was not then and never was available to junior Officers and other ranks, which is what I said.. It was/is available ONLY to Warrant Officers and below. The DSO was not available to other ranks being usually awarded only to Majors and above. As for the MID, you really should read a report written by someone much cleverer that I. It is at http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-medals/history-mid.htm and makes it clear that the "mention" was not considered in the same light as it was in later years. Until WW1 the soldier did not even receive a certificate to acknowledge that he had been mentioned. You are correct in saying that there was no outward sign of the fact that the praise had been made. In the absence of post nominals and any outward indicator it is hard to make the case that it was an award. In later years the "award" of the MID changed, an outward indicator was instituted and being "mentioned" was not actually necessary. Weary Dunlop was one person who was awarded the MID after being recommended for the OBE. We have to be careful not to rewrite history using rules applicable 50 or 100 years after the event. And as for saying that an award was easier to win but was held in the same degree of honour appears to me to be a counter argument. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Anthony Staunton" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 12:51 AM Subject: RE: "The Featherbed Soldiers"/ VC non-award > Ross Mallett on Tuesday, 11 February 2003 quoted Val Harris: > > >When talking of the VC in the period of the Boer War, it is well to keep in > >mind that it was the only award available to junior officers and "other > >ranks" for bravery. It had not yet assumed the degree of importance or > >status that it now commands. Now, of course, there is the DCM, MC, MSM, MM, > >MID and a dozen other methods of recognising gallantry and or superior > >service. > > > >That was not so in 1899/1902. > > Ross commented. > > The DCM was available during the Boer War and was awarded to Australians. It > dates back to the Crimean War, being instituted in 1854. Being mentioned in > Dispatches (MID) was also possible. > > I endorse the comments of Ross and add that as well as 62 DCM awards to > Australians the same number of DSOs, the award having being instituted in > 1886, were also awarded to Australians. The MID of WWI and later actually > originated in the Boer War when an Interdepartmental Committee gave the > award its present definition although there was no emblem on the QSA and/or > KSA. > > More gallantry decorations were awarded per head to Australians troops in > South Africa than in Vietnam. > > I also believe that by the Boer War the VC had assumed the degree of > importance and status that it now commands. However, despite how difficult > it was to win in the Boer War it became much more difficult in WWI and > later. > > Anthony Staunton >

Ross Mallett on Tuesday, 11 February 2003 quoted Val Harris: >When talking of the VC in the period of the Boer War, it is well to keep in >mind that it was the only award available to junior officers and "other >ranks" for bravery. It had not yet assumed the degree of importance or >status that it now commands. Now, of course, there is the DCM, MC, MSM, MM, >MID and a dozen other methods of recognising gallantry and or superior >service. > >That was not so in 1899/1902. Ross commented. The DCM was available during the Boer War and was awarded to Australians. It dates back to the Crimean War, being instituted in 1854. Being mentioned in Dispatches (MID) was also possible. I endorse the comments of Ross and add that as well as 62 DCM awards to Australians the same number of DSOs, the award having being instituted in 1886, were also awarded to Australians. The MID of WWI and later actually originated in the Boer War when an Interdepartmental Committee gave the award its present definition although there was no emblem on the QSA and/or KSA. More gallantry decorations were awarded per head to Australians troops in South Africa than in Vietnam. I also believe that by the Boer War the VC had assumed the degree of importance and status that it now commands. However, despite how difficult it was to win in the Boer War it became much more difficult in WWI and later. Anthony Staunton

Hi Ted, Thanks for that. This is turning into quite an interesting mystery. It seems that much fuss was made about Tom Morris being recommended for a VC, both in England and in Australia - apparently there were civic receptions and interviews after his arrival home, so I should be able to check the local papers and find out more. Then there's the mystery of why he never actually received it. I finally read "The Featherbed Soldiers" at the library today - it suggested that the whole episode started with a joking remark to his brother and that the rumour of his recommendation then took on a life of its own! Cheers Jan >When talking of the VC in the period of the Boer War, it is well to keep in >mind that it was the only award available to junior officers and "other >ranks" for bravery. It had not yet assumed the degree of importance or >status that it now commands. Now, of course, there is the DCM, MC, MSM, MM, >MID and a dozen other methods of recognising gallantry and or superior >service. > >That was not so in 1899/1902. > >details available at >http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-medals/00-medals-cat-index.htm > > >Ted

Val Harris wrote: >When talking of the VC in the period of the Boer War, it is well to keep in >mind that it was the only award available to junior officers and "other >ranks" for bravery. It had not yet assumed the degree of importance or >status that it now commands. Now, of course, there is the DCM, MC, MSM, MM, >MID and a dozen other methods of recognising gallantry and or superior >service. > >That was not so in 1899/1902. The DCM was available during the Boer War and was awarded to Australians. It dates back to the Crimean War, being instituted in 1854. Being mentioned in Dispatches (MID) was also possible.

When talking of the VC in the period of the Boer War, it is well to keep in mind that it was the only award available to junior officers and "other ranks" for bravery. It had not yet assumed the degree of importance or status that it now commands. Now, of course, there is the DCM, MC, MSM, MM, MID and a dozen other methods of recognising gallantry and or superior service. That was not so in 1899/1902. details available at http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-medals/00-medals-cat-index.htm Ted ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jan Glasby" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 9:20 PM Subject: RE: "The Featherbed Soldiers"/ VC non-award > Many thanks to those who replied to my post. I've since found out that the > National Library have a copy of the book. > > I have part of a letter from Tom's brother, Percy, dated 24/12/1899, which > said: "I have not seen Tom yet, but word came yesterday that he and a man > named Moore are recommended for Victoria Crosses for rescuing an officer > who was wounded and subsequently died. When the news was received her the > New South Wales Troops gave me three ringing cheers in compliment of being > a brother of one who had won a Victoria Cross - the officers also warmly > congratulated me." > > It must have been very disappointing for him not to receive it! > > Cheers > Jan > > >> Does anyone have a copy of this book? I've just learned that Trooper Tom > >> Morris of the NSW Lancers was supposed to be awarded a VC during the Boer > >> War. There's mention of it at: > >> > >> > >http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~pbtyc/ILN_1899-1900/Trooper_Morris _ > >> VC.html#top > >> > >> However, a review of "The Featherbed Soldiers" by Neil Smith and Cameron > >> Simpson says that it coveres "the non-award of a VC to Trooper Tom > >Morris." > >> > >> I was wondering why he didn't receive it? > >> > >> Cheers > >> Jan > > > > ______________________________

The British held Bencoolen on the west coast of Sumatra from 1685 to 1825, and held Java from 1811-16. They had also had trading posts at Bantam and a few other places (where there would have been an East India Company garrison). Hope this helps fill in some gaps, Justin Corfield Geelong, Australia > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Heal [SMTP:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, 10 February 2003 6:07 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: 26th Regiment of Foot > > Hello Mike, > > the British did in fact take control of Batavia/Java for a period > around 1800-1812 > while Holland was controlled by Napoleon. As they did in Mauritius > and South Africa. > > Eventually they gave Java back to Dutch control. > > Singapore was started by English at the time they were forced to leave > Java due to it being given back to the Dutch. > > Not sure of exact dates. > > > Hope this helps > > Robert Heal > > -- Message protected by MailGuard: e-mail anti-virus and content filtering. http://www.mailguard.com.au/tt

Many thanks to those who replied to my post. I've since found out that the National Library have a copy of the book. I have part of a letter from Tom's brother, Percy, dated 24/12/1899, which said: "I have not seen Tom yet, but word came yesterday that he and a man named Moore are recommended for Victoria Crosses for rescuing an officer who was wounded and subsequently died. When the news was received her the New South Wales Troops gave me three ringing cheers in compliment of being a brother of one who had won a Victoria Cross - the officers also warmly congratulated me." It must have been very disappointing for him not to receive it! Cheers Jan >> Does anyone have a copy of this book? I've just learned that Trooper Tom >> Morris of the NSW Lancers was supposed to be awarded a VC during the Boer >> War. There's mention of it at: >> >> >http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~pbtyc/ILN_1899-1900/Trooper_Morris_ >> VC.html#top >> >> However, a review of "The Featherbed Soldiers" by Neil Smith and Cameron >> Simpson says that it coveres "the non-award of a VC to Trooper Tom >Morris." >> >> I was wondering why he didn't receive it? >> >> Cheers >> Jan >

Hello Mike, the British did in fact take control of Batavia/Java for a period around 1800-1812 while Holland was controlled by Napoleon. As they did in Mauritius and South Africa. Eventually they gave Java back to Dutch control. Singapore was started by English at the time they were forced to leave Java due to it being given back to the Dutch. Not sure of exact dates. Hope this helps Robert Heal ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Boyd" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2003 9:07 PM Subject: Re: 26th Regiment of Foot > Gail > My understanding of the term "east Indies" meant what is now Indonesia. > > However, if my high school geography is any good from 40 years ago, Britain > was never in Indonesia, as it was a Dutch Colony. >

Mike Morris' Commanding Officer never wrote nor submitted a recommendation. British Commanders in Chief in South Africa only ever received six VCs relating to Australian soldiers including James Rogers and forwarded all to London. I know of no case where any British Commander in Chief ever knocked back an Australian VC recommendation. Anthony -----Original Message----- From: Mike Boyd [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, 09 February 2003 4:03 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: "The Featherbed Soldiers"/ VC non-award Jan I was in the RSL Club at Cairns in June last year. They had a list of all the Australian VC winners from 1900 to 1967? You might like to see if your RSL Club might also have such a list. I think that there were 6 for the Boer War. When you said "the non-award of a VC to Trooper Tom Morris." could it have been that he was recommended by his Commanding Officer but turned down by the British Commander. Mike Boyd Brisbane ----- Original Message ----- From: Jan Glasby <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 12:16 PM Subject: "The Featherbed Soldiers"/ VC non-award > Hi all, > > Does anyone have a copy of this book? I've just learned that Trooper Tom > Morris of the NSW Lancers was supposed to be awarded a VC during the Boer > War. There's mention of it at: > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~pbtyc/ILN_1899-1900/Trooper_Morris_ > VC.html#top > > However, a review of "The Featherbed Soldiers" by Neil Smith and Cameron > Simpson says that it coveres "the non-award of a VC to Trooper Tom Morris." > > I was wondering why he didn't receive it? > > Cheers > Jan > > > > > ==== AUS-MILITARY Mailing List ==== > First AIF Order of Battle 1914-1918 > http://www.adfa.edu.au/~rmallett/index.html > ==== AUS-MILITARY Mailing List ==== Please support RootsWeb who make this list possible http://www.rootsweb.com/rootsweb/how-to-subscribe.html

Dear Group, The book can be purchased through these two sites; http://dogbert.abebooks.com/abe/BookSearch http://www.bookfinder.com/ Have fun, Claude.... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Graham & Vera McKenzie-Smith" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, 9 February 2003 14:47 Subject: Re: 2/15 Field Regiment > Sharon > > They published a history in 1983 "Gunners in the Jungle" by Cliff > Whitelocke. ISBN 0 9592123 0 2 > > Published bt 2/15 Field Regiment Association and their address in 1983 was > Secretary W Cook, 4 Winston St, Eastwood 2120. > > Good luck > > Graham > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sharon McBride" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 10:56 AM > Subject: 2/15 Field Regiment > > > > Hi All, > > Can anyone tell me if there is a 2/15 Field Regiment Association or if a > > regimental history has been written. > > Thanks, > > Sharon > > > > Sharon McBride > > Perth, Western Australia > > > > mailto:[email protected] > > Research Interests > > http://members.iinet.net.au/~mcbride/ > > > > > > > > ==== AUS-MILITARY Mailing List ==== > > Replies to queries on AUS-MILITARY should generally be sent to the list as > well as the sender > > Please use the "reply to all" function of your mail program > > > > > ==== AUS-MILITARY Mailing List ==== > Anzac Research > http://anzacresearch.tripod.com/index.htm > >

Hi there I am trying to unsubscribe from this list and am obviously under more than one email address. Could you please take note of the alternative email addresses below and unsubscibe me please. Then I wil re- subscribe under my default email and hopefully eliminate so many email repeats. [email protected] [email protected]

Sharon McBride Dear Sharon, I have looked for a unit history of this Regiment and none seems to be extant. There is a military band in Victoria using the unit designation. I contacted them and asked if they had a history of the unit whose name they where using, no such luck. There is information on the Australian War Memorial site, www.awm.gov.au it is under Biographical Databases - P.O.W.s in S.W.P.A. (Prisoners of War in the South West Pacific Area). There are 703 individual records of members of the 2/15 Field Regiment. To bring up the 703 in alphabetical order type in the unit designation only, and begin your search. This unit was never reformed after the war. As a unit they where surrendered by the British when Singapore fell in February 1942. Hope this is of some help. Best Regards Paul Kinney _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

Mr William Moppett Dear William, This may or may not help you to understand the military way of doing things. In Viet Nam I was posted to the 1st Australian Reinforcement Unit (1ARU). Had you gone looking for me in the fourth week of my posting at 1ARU you would not have found me. I was on the strength of that unit, but I was serving with the RAAF, Air Defense Unit at Vung Tau air base. Basically, I had been seconded to the RAAF while remaining on the strength of 1ARU. Why has your Dad got Fort Scratchely on his discharge papers? The answer would be that he was on the posted strength of the unit at Newcastle, which was the headquarters of Coastal Command Artillery. His discharge would have been organised through the headquarters unit as it was the Command unit. The fact that your Dad never served in Newcastle, would not alter the fact he was on the posted strength of Coastal Command Artillery Headquarters at Newcastle. As a medical officer your father's records would be kept at Command Headquarters not at his serving unit as he would have been posted from the Australian Army Medical Corp to the Command Headquarters then seconded to the sub-unit he served in at Sydney. None of this would have required your father to go to Newcastle, the Army tells you where to go and administratively does it's own thing to suit itself. Could I suggest that you contact the North Fort Artillery Museum on (02) 9976 3855 or the Army Museum of NSW, at Victoria Barracks on (02) 9339 3330. From experience the North Fort mob charge like wounded bulls for any information they research for you. Tis cheaper to go there, Scenic Drive, Manly is the address. I have not contacted the Victoria Barracks mob, but again it might be cheaper to go there. The Artillery Museum should be able to confirm all of the information you require. Should neither of these sources prove useful you might try contacting the Army History Unit. Any or all three of these units should be able to confirm what you want to know. Good Luck and Good Hunting, Paul Kinney _________________________________________________________________ MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral

Jan I was in the RSL Club at Cairns in June last year. They had a list of all the Australian VC winners from 1900 to 1967? You might like to see if your RSL Club might also have such a list. I think that there were 6 for the Boer War. When you said "the non-award of a VC to Trooper Tom Morris." could it have been that he was recommended by his Commanding Officer but turned down by the British Commander. Mike Boyd Brisbane ----- Original Message ----- From: Jan Glasby <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 12:16 PM Subject: "The Featherbed Soldiers"/ VC non-award > Hi all, > > Does anyone have a copy of this book? I've just learned that Trooper Tom > Morris of the NSW Lancers was supposed to be awarded a VC during the Boer > War. There's mention of it at: > > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~pbtyc/ILN_1899-1900/Trooper_Morris_ > VC.html#top > > However, a review of "The Featherbed Soldiers" by Neil Smith and Cameron > Simpson says that it coveres "the non-award of a VC to Trooper Tom Morris." > > I was wondering why he didn't receive it? > > Cheers > Jan > > > > > ==== AUS-MILITARY Mailing List ==== > First AIF Order of Battle 1914-1918 > http://www.adfa.edu.au/~rmallett/index.html >