WW2 Naval Courts

[Hazel Stringer]

I have a copy of my late father in laws CRS10 and the last entry reads:

EMPIRE BAIRN 21.12.44 Sealot 21494/227 Naples ** 3|45 11.6.45 sick for repatriation
Sealot 26688/177/Suez m.d.11/7/45
Sentenced two months imprisonment by Naval Court held at Marseilles to be imprisoned in the UK Ref M/.15400/44 ** 21/3/45
Tried at Naval Court Naples 12.3.45 admonished and cautioned as to future conduct Ref M.5140/45 ** 23/4/45

My questions are firstly where would I find records of these Naval Courts and how would I find out where he was imprisoned, if in fact he was, when he returned to the UK?

I know he returned to the UK he returned from the Mediterranean on the Monarch of Bermuda 10 July 1945 (travelling on conveyance orders)which docked at Liverpool. He gave his shore address as c/o M.N.Pool Liverpool.

Any help gratefully received

[Doc Vernon]

Don't know if this will be of any help!
But just trying!
Again I am sure Hugh will soon reply as well!
Cheers

How to find naval correspondence using the ADM 12 indexes and digests | The National Archives

[Hugh]

See - http://www.merchant-navy.net/forum/t...owers-ww2.html

[Hazel Stringer]

Going through my papers I realised I know far more than I thought about the Rome Naval court at least:
From the log of the Empire Bairn

12/3/45 Naval Court held at Naples to investigate complaint that Michael Stringer being a seaman lawfully engaged to serve on board British Ship Empire Bairn of Glasgow did at Maddelena, Sardinia on or about 24^th February1945 assault ??? Lieut. L. A. Clegg DSC RNVR thereby occasioning him actual bodily harm, being an offence which when committed in England is punishable on summary conviction under Section 47 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861.This same being an offence against the person which may be enquired into by a Naval Court under Sect. 483 (1) (8) of Merchant Shipping Act 1894. Court considered case to be of insufficient gravity to merit sending the accused for trial under Sect. 6899 of the Merchant Shipping Act and adjudged him to be admonished and warned as to his future conduct
Signed Jack Walters
Commander Royal Navy
President of Naval Court

Does this help anyone to guide to the full records of this episode? t is on this occasion that my father in law applied to the Irish Consulate for help and after an amount of correspondence it would appear that he received this help.

[Hugh]

Hazel, it is quite difficult keeping up with you when you post the answers to your own questions .

Naval Courts will be dispersed throughout series ADM and also MT at the National Archives so would probably require a visit due to the amount you would have to go through.

FOREIGN COUNTRIES (52): Naval Courts on Italy and Sardinia: proposal to convene courts... | The National Archives there are others that refer to specific seamen and specific ships but I can see no headline for your dad or his ship.

Incidentally it looks like the person he is alleged to have assaulted was Temporary Sub Lieut Leo Anthony Clegg D.S.C. RNVR who was decorated with the D.S.C. during the St Nazaire Raid in 1942, he served on ML307.
The Merchant Seaman's War by Tony Lane gives a little background to Naval Courts and Merchant Seamen.

Regards
Hugh

Added as Link above seems not to work??

This file was originally catalogued under more than one subject code. These subject... | The National Archives

[Ivan Cloherty]

Seems he got off lightly after assaulting someone like Lieut Clegg, surprised the other crew members didn't fix him

[Hugh]

Re Naval Courts.

Naval Courts (Code 91): Naval Courts - Mediterranean Standing Orders Nos 716, 717 and 718. | The National Archives

The Royal Navy, horrified at the apparent inability of merchant ships' officers to control their crews, took the institution of the Naval Court very seriously. Early in January 1945, the Commander-in-Chief, Mediterranean, had a 35-page detailed and printed statement on the conduct of Naval Courts inserted in his standing orders. See MT9/4043.

......................................

Ship masters generally regarded the provisions for Naval Courts as ones to be resorted to only in such extreme cases as murders, serious assaults on officers and strikes at sea. Because these events were rare, so too were Naval Courts. There was, however, a dramatic increase in the number of Naval Courts convened during WWII - but not because of individual acts of violence or strikes/mutinies. Under the wartime Defence Regulation 47A many offences, previously dealt with aboard ship as a matter of course, could now be dealt with by Naval Courts, especially in ports in the Mediterranean, and by magistrates' courts in the UK and Commonwealth countries. The Ministry of War Transport's ledger record of Naval Courts reveals that whereas only three were convened between 1930 and 1939, 505 were held between 1939 and 1944.

As regards cases heard by UK magistrates it appears that seamen appearing before Merseyside magistrates stood a three times higher chance of being jailed than men appearing before magistrates on the NE coast. For 1942 and 1943 the figures being 14% jailed (NE Coast) and 51% jailed (Merseyside), source The Merchant Seaman's War by Tony Lane

As cappy says there were good and bad officers and crewmen this is true of back then and it is true today.

For Hazel, as Dominic Michael Stringer was admonished and cautioned as per your post #1, I doubt you will find anything else of substance but that is only my opinion. However you may be interested in this concering Irish citizens - Naval Courts (Code 91): Naval Courts - Issue of Naval Courts Circular No 9. Procedure... | The National Archives - who knows what you might find in there.

Regards
Hugh

[Ivan Cloherty]

Re Naval Courts.



......................................

Ship masters generally regarded the provisions for Naval Courts as ones to be resorted to only in such extreme cases as murders, serious assaults on officers and strikes at sea. Because these events were rare, so too were Naval Courts. There was, however, a dramatic increase in the number of Naval Courts convened during WWII - but not because of individual acts of violence or strikes/mutinies. . The Ministry of War Transport's ledger record of Naval Courts reveals that whereas only three were convened between 1930 and 1939, 505 were held between 1939 and 1944.

A
Regards
Hugh

I should imagine it was quite logical for there to be more acts of misdemeanour during the 1939 to 1945 period, as all seamen were sailing under difficult conditions and no doubt many took to drink to help them through the voyage, many had seen things they would rather forget probably on the way out from the UK and knew that they had to run the gauntlet again on the return voyage. I would expect that many men who never said boo to a goose between 1930 and 1939 had their worlds turned upside down during WWII on ocean passages by sights they had seen and bad news from home, such as losing their families due to bombing etc, I often wonder how my father felt when he received news that we had been bombed out yet again (3 times!) wondering if the next news would bring notice that he had lost his family: many men received this news and turned to drink for solace and perhaps sometimes the only way to bring them back to normality was to take extra disciplinary measures for their own good and the safety of their crewmates.. I doubt lack of discipline aboard Merchant ships had anything to do with the cause of the increase, but the sights seen on the Atlantic/Pacific and Arctic oceans certainly made mild mannered men into something they would ordinarily not contemplate. I think ratings in the 30's/40's and 50's were old school and followed the rules and heirachy of shipboard life as we also did as junior officers on the bottom rung of the ladder and we also looked up to the bosun, chippie and good AB's who taught us the practical side of shipboard life as well as taking us under their wing whilst ashore, but also getting us into trouble at times, which we enjoyed of course. War experience at sea changed many men during that period, who knows how we would have reacted under similar circumstances, so it is only logical for there to be an increase in naval court instances during that period.

[j.sabourn]

#5. Hugh when you talk about Naval Courts are you referring to a Court Martial. If not as high up as this at what level would the Admiralty consider a Court Martial offence, apart from loss of a naval vessel which was I believe automatic, even during the war years when lost to enemy action. The 5 years or so I worked for the MOD the naval party 1007 which comprised over 50 percent of the crew, the naval party seemed to have less penalties than the MN crew on board. In fact the naval crew all round were better off in most ways. This however may have been due to the nature of the ship and occupation of the vessel. I also met a few of the naval crew who had been with when on trials for another ship being handed over to the Navy, who were filling in time before joining HMS Challenger ( think that was the name) a new build so called multi-purpose vessel, who incidentally didnt seem to enamoured about having to go back to the real thing. As said the naval party seemed to get away with a lot that MN personel didn't. However they were the Diving and underwater warfare crews some being very highly specialized I suppose. Cheers JS

[j.sabourn]

#10... Ivan when we started going to sea in the early 50"s, all of the older generation there then had seen service during the war years. These were the ones who taught us the arts of seamanship which we learned normally from the bosun or one of the leading ABs. Myself I found no information was forthcoming from the navigators on board and the only time saw the bridge was on the wheel or scrubbing it out. The class barriers were still there as from the war years, my first trip as 3rd. mate in 1957, was one of the worse trips socially I had seen and stood me in good stead to make my own judgements on in later life. I was constantly abraided for mixing with the engineers, and in no way was to mix with the crew. The lines of demarcation were there in bright red lines. This was how the ships must also have been run during the war years. Myself coming from a working background refused to make these concessions and was more or less sent to Coventry for the 11 month trip it turned out to be. Over a period of the next 10 years or so these older people with a different sense of loyalties retired and then it was our turn, I can honestly say for my part I did not carry on discipline wise as I had seen the previous generation perform with the loggings etc. at the drop of a hat. Nowadays this older generation we knew would not recognize the ships or crews and would not survive as would not accept their former way of life not being there anymore. Most of my time deep sea was always tramping and a lot of the time crews were signed on with various promises of short trips and regular overtime. Once the ship was off the berth all this changed and usually led to trouble. I know as many others the hard times some of these trampship owners caused their crews. We all look back and see it now through rose tinted spectacles, and imagine our memories must be wrong. We only remember what we want to I suppose. Cheers JS