Lions Led By Donkeys

On The Northern Front, Russia

The previous page was: "Zeebrugge Raid"

James Wills, a newspaper reporter, wrote on 20/05/2011:

"July 1st, will mark the first day of the battle of the Somme. So confident were the First World War generals of success, some regiments were told they would be able to shoulder arms, light pipes and walk across no-man's land without seeing a German."

"Almost 20,000 British soldiers died in a single day, with 57,000 wounded. It was, as is all too often the case, an example of lions led by donkeys."

I have printed this, because I believe what he says is, how life in those circumstances is often seen from the outside.

However, earlier, War Correspondents for Newspapers did report the scandalous treatment of wounded soldiers in the desperate winter months on the Russian Front; which was a fact.

Zeebrugge Raid

Russian Front And The Somme

Many people do not realise the connection there is between, the Russian Front and the last battle of the Somme. There were actually three battles of the Somme between 1914 and 1918, and the Royal Marines represented themselves exceptionally well in all three battles.

In 1918, the Germans threw 60 Divisions against the British and the Allied Armies fighting in France. They were able to do this because, Allied Russia was betrayed by Lenin and Trotsky, they signed a shameful peace treaty whereby they betrayed their country and falsified its engagements to their Allies.

Following the Russian Revolution in early march of 1918, the Bolshevik coup brought Lenin to power in October of that year. Lenin had signed the peace treaty with Germany to gain time for his own cause to take hold.

The peace treaty released one-million German soldiers to fight on the Western Front in France. The Revolution in Russia divided the people into Red Russians who agreed with communism and the White Russians who wanted democracy.

The Northern Front, Russia 1918/19

Some Newspapers stated 'Marines mutiny' but then as we've seen above, sometimes, they do not completely understand the whole picture and what they are announcing to the public.

Nobody has the right to "MUTINY" and the law makes this perfectly clear; but, "Everybody" should have the right to "Object" should their need be necessary. But there was; in their day; little legislation for them to do this.

There were two incidents, the first by the "Royal Marine Field Force" and the second incited by the first, was the "6th Battalion Royal Marines Light Infantry".

Understanding Words Used

MUTINY: the word means: an "OPEN REBELLION" against the proper authorities; especially by soldiers or sailors against their officers.

Mutiny cannot possibly be interpreted in any other way than; "OPEN REBELLION" and be absolutely correct. so there can be no clearer understanding of the correct terminology of the word.

Lieutenant P.R. Smith-Hill, said: "there was 'NO' case of any man refusing to obey a direct order to return to the line." Smith-Hill eventually rose to the rank of Brigadier R.M.

Royal Marine Field Force 1918

The Government wanted British troops to send to the Russian Front. The Army unable to raise the men required, they turned to the Admiralty and asked for Royal Marines; which was not unusual.

One of the Army's greatest Genrals, the Duke of Wellington, his success in the battle of the "Line of Torres Vedros" was partly due to the Marine Gunners.

The Army authorities stated that the Marines were required to support the military forces, for a few months, while the Army made its arrangements for their own units to relieve them.

Other Units from Russia, France and Italy proved to be totally useless against the Bolsheviks. Here the British Army comes in for some questioning; why were there only Royal Marine casualties on the Front Line during this period?

An Ad Hoc Unit

On 5th May 1918, the 'Royal Marine Field Force' was formed at Eastney Barracks, and it sailed on the "SS Porto" from Newcastle, and arrived in Murmansk on 29th May.

This 'Detachment' was raised extremely quickly. 17-days of organisation with very little time for training, which certainly did not permit the opportunity for cohesion as a properly organised fighting Unit. Which of course, would be a major requirement for action on the Russian Front Line.

They were to form part of the North Russian Expeditionary Force, with the aims of defending the port and, by supporting local forces, to secure over 400-miles of railway-line south of the town of Kem on the White Sea.

They were given to believe that they would be relieved within three, to four months by another military unit of the British Army; and then they would be repatriated back to the United Kingdom.

The Royal Navy who sanctioned the agreement, was completely of the same understanding, the Detachment would only be used as back-up troops; and who 'ordered' that the Detachment was to be sent home on completion of the agreed time.

The Army authorities did not stick to their part of the agreement, and they appeared not to have any intention of doing so. The Admiralty repeatedly ordered for the return the R.M. Detachment every three months following.

The Men

The Marines became the first artic-trained British soldiers, who became proficient skiers; and could fight in any terrain. In the spring of 1919, there was a sudden change, the Germans had been defeated the previous year; and World War I, was over.

But instead of repatriation; the Detachment now found themselves in action against the Bolsheviks. They were suddenly supporting White Russians who were fighting Red Russians?

This episode, until then had been regarded as a most satisfactory example of Royal Marine adaptability and prowess in the most atrocious of conditions.

The constant unreliability of supplies was scandalous; some were caused by the Bolsheviks, but not all. And the ill-treatment and total disregard for the men was unbelieveable. No consideration by the Army authorities, for the Royal Marines well-being was ever shown at any time.

The Royal Marine Field Force were just dumped on the Russian Front Line and left there for "FOURTEEN-MONTHS" without any relief, any "LEAVE" any "PAY" or equipment and stores being regularly supplied.

All-in-all, they'd had enough of the unfair treatment, but only some of them stood-up to be counted. They "OBJECTED" (to do something) and were hastely court-martialled for 'Mutiny'.

One has to ask: "How can this be; when treachery was not in their eyes?"

Others not intending to defy orders obeyed the wrong orders and they too were also court-martialled for 'Mutiny'. Poor leadership and confusion abound; all the way down from the very "TOP".

"No" other "British Army unit" had served anywhere near that same amount of "TIME" or were "MIS-TREATED" so "BADLY" or were supplied so "POORLY"; and had been "PLACED" in such "ATROACHIOUS CONDITIONS" for so "LONG" While "FIGHTING" under the command of the inept "British-Army officers" of the day.

Common sense should have prevailed, but it didn't; that's the Army's way?

Their 'objection' was not cowardice; they had been fighing for fourteen months on the Russian Front Line; while some had been fighting all through the war before that. This was, clearly a stand for justice, against 'injustice' which they'd had enough.

When World War I, was officially over. Those same Army officers who charged them, claimed the magnificent work these Royal Marines carried out was invaluable.

They had continued fighting on the Russian Front; for many months longer than they should have been there. It is a crime to treat soldiers that way now; and I believe it was a crime then.

Russia An Unwelcoming Land

Russia was a remote and inhospitable land, war had not been "declared" on Russia - so why was the British soldier asked to fight the Russians?

Britain was seen as the "country fit for heroes" but in reality, it was turning out to be one of mass unemployment, and a prey for revolutionary propogandists. Communism was creeping in all around the world at an alarming rate.

Churchill, mis-trusted as the "gambler of Gallipoli", had stated that "ONLY VOLUNTEERS" would be sent to Russia; some were. Others were not, these included many who were too young to fight on the Front Line by British law.

There was also much confusion, Royal Marine officers would give an order only for it to be counter-manded by an Army officer. Some Royal Marines who had seen action all through the war felt let-down; by the Army authorities dishonourable behaviour.

The Marines maintained, that they had been worked much more harder than any of the other Army units ever were. And that because of their state of exhaustion at that time, these things should have been taken into consideration.

Especially, when there were rested Army units available. There can be no question their health should have been taken more seriously into account.

Some Royal Marines not knowing who to obey? And by obeying one order found they were disobeying another order, and for that they were put on a charge of 'Mutiny' in the name of British Army discipline.

Because of that, the inept "General Maynard" circulated an unjust and shameful report condemning some Royal Marines of mutiny and cowardice; neither was true in the slightest way.

Under The Same Army Authority

The 6th Battalion Royal Marine Light Infantry (RMLI), was also hastily formed in 1919, but only to carry out ceremonial duties during the direct voting of all members of the electorate on an important public question; whether to accept communism or not.

These Royal Marines were informed their main task was going to be, to police and man, the polling booths of the election.

Before boarding the troopship they were informed of a change of plan. They were told that they were now to sail to North Russia to bolster the forces covering the evacuation of British troops from the area.

Again, the 6th Battalion Royal Marines Light Infantry, was not a trained-up battlion, prepared for war. Morale sunk quickly, for many men had already served in ships, and had fought courageously all through World War I; they were known as Ship's Marines.

The Battalion also contained a number of raw recruits, many of whom were under the age of nineteen. They were at the legal age to make them exempt to fight in war. Also the ship's Marines in the battalion had only ever fought at sea and never on land.

Others were former "Prisoners Of War" who had only recently been returned from the German concentration camps. They resented being used to make up the numbers, and they'd had neither leave nor pay.

One marine wounded at Gallipoli and who had a permanently disabled arm also sailed with them; along with anybody else they could grab hold of to raise the number. Not one was ever given the option to volunteer for themselves.

On Arrival At Murmansk

They would have found out what conditions were like; and more than likely, would have learned how the Royal Marine Field Force had been mis-treated, by the Army Authorities. They would have known the situation right from the start.

Lieutenant P.R. Smith-Hill's company arrived on foot at Kapaselga to learn that the previous night the Portsmouth Company had unsuccessfully attacked the village of Koikori, they lost three men and had eighteen wounded.

After only a week's, preparation his company was ordered to form the first wave of an attack on the same village. The commanding officer knew that these men were not geared up for an attack like this, and the poor condition of his men who were extremely tired and footsore.

He brought along a doctor and asked him to check the men over. The doctor informed him that in his opinion that having only examined 50% of the Marines, that the unit, as a unit were quite unfit for any strenuous exertion. They were definately not in a state of health to carry-out the work they were being called upon to do.

However Smith-Hill's company was led into the attack by a Russian guide who betrayed them; he ran off leaving the Marines in a vulnerable position before dissapearing.

The Bolshevik forces' machine-guns caused a number of rapid casualties, especially among the senior officers. After two hours of desperate fighting, now in charge of his company, Smith-Hill was ordered to retire.

The next morning, faced with the prospect of another attack on the same village, the men of Smith-Hill's company refused to obey orders to fall-in.

They did refuse to fall-in, no other order had been given; 'faced with a prosect' is not an order; only an assumption.

Clearly They Did Object

They did nothing else. "Disobey" was one of the words used at the "FIELD GENERAL COURT MARTIAL" when a number of Royal Marines did "DISOBEY" to carry out orders directed at them. There is no question that they were guilty of disobedience; Of which they have accepted as true.

But, they were charged with the added words "MUTINY" and some with "COWARDICE" a charge or charges of which they were not guilty of; many had fought all through World War I, from the start of the war; they weren't cowards.

13 Royal Marines were sentenced to death by the Army; for charges they were never guilty of. And another twenty-men were sentenced to five years prison and hard labour, by the Army; for a charge they were never guilty of.

The remainder were sentenced to two years penal service with hard labour in prison, all were charged with mutiny and some with cowardice; of which none were guilty of any such crimes.

Those words were wrongly stated. They were deliberately used to create alarm and dispondency, and to put a slur on the Royal Marines.

The Army Genral had to cover up his shameful mis-treatment of men under his command. The Army had two incompetent Senior Army Officers Commanding the Front General Maynard and Brigadier-General Price.

Before that date, it was not unheard of people being shot by firing squad or hung instantly or at dawn for mutiny or cowardice, on the Front Line, let alone both.

Possibly the only reason these sentences were not carried out so quickly, there, and then, were, because, there were some sane and sensible Army officers present who themselves were not convinced the charges were correct.

Senior Naval Officers Present At Inquiry

The Senior Naval Officer at Murmansk convened a Board of Inquiry to investigate the Army allegations against the Royal Marines.

Which resulted because of a damning paragraph in Major Genral Maynard's telegram. The members were 2 Captains Royal Navy and a Captain Royal Marine Artillery.

Of the first incident the Inquiry dismissed all the Army charges against the Royal Marine Field Force.

"Though the the Court do not consider there is any excuse for refusing duty, they are of the opinion that the primary cause for this refusal of duty was due to 'no definate orders' being issued by General Maynard the General Officer in Command."

"Concerning the Royal Marine Detachment being sent home. And General Maynard having no intention of ever sending them from Medvejya Gora, despite definite orders of the Admiralty and the War Office, which, were, explicitly clear Orders."

"The result of which led some Officers and men of the Royal Marine Detachment to consider they were being exploited, in the interests of other Military Units.

And the Court are of the opinion that if the good work of the Royal Marine Detachment, as testified for by various Army officers including General Price." Who states: "Up to 24th June their conduct had been everything that could be desired."

"Had their work been fairly recognised by those in command and some consideration shown to the Royal Marine Detachment who had been on continuous active service in North Russia without leave and pay, for fourteen-months and longer than any other military unit, this unfortunate incident would not have occurred.

Taking these six specific cases as the cause of Major General Maynard's telegram to the War Office, the Court are of the opinion that General Maynard is to blame for sending this report which they do not consider is just to the officers and men of the Royal Marines.

Adjutant General Royal Marines To Naval Law

"I agree with the remarks and findings of the Court. It is submitted for consideration that as Genral Maynard's original telgram which was circulated not only to the War Office, (and widely distributed) but also to the War cabinet and possibly other Government departments, the War Office should be informed of the result of the Inquiry with a view to the withdrawal of the original telegram."

"It is clear from the evidence that no fault can be found with this Detachment up to 24th June, and that the regrettable incidents which occurred after that date were due in a very large measure to unsympathetic handling by the Army authorities, particularly on the part of Brigadier-General Price."

"It was not contemplated they should remain in Russia more than, three-or-four months when they were to be relieved by Army troops."

"Repeated applications were ordered as to the return of the Detachment, but the G.O.C. General Maynard always replied that he could not spare them in view of their value."

Naval Law To First Lord

The general train of events indicates the undesirability of placing a Naval detachment under the command of Military Officers who show "DISINCLINATION", to execute orders from the Admiralty as to withdraw by a certain date.

The Admiralty To The War Office

Sir,

1. I am commanded by My Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to transmit herewith, for the information of the Army Council, a copy of the minutes proceedings of a Court of Inquiry into conduct of the Royal Marine Detachment in North Russia.

In respect of whom General Maynard's telegram to the War Office of the 24th June, reporting that they had shown such exceedingly bad spirit that he was sending them home.

2. Their Lordships much regret that the incidents now dealt with should have occurred, and while there may be faults on both sides, they regret that this Naval Detachment was placed under the command of military Officers who show "DISINCLINATION" to execute "ORDERS" from the Admiralty as to withdraw by a certain date.

3. It seems to them unfortunate that the Royal Marine Detachment was broken up and that the Platoon whose conduct gave rise to this correspondence, should have been left to face an Artic Winter under the command of a temporarily promoted Warrant Officer with a temporary young subaltern under him.

4. Under the conditions that obtained in June last, it was scarcely surprising that some expression of discontent should be made by the men under Maj Willes, when they found that the promise of their return was not likely to be kept.

Major Willes appears to have been placed in a very difficult position, and in Their Lordships' opinion there is no ground for the allegation made against him that he had lost his nerve; but he should most certainly have never attempted to resign while on active service, and Their Lordships will take steps to see that he be so informed.

5. It will be remembered that this force was collected at the urgent request of the War Office in May 1918, and sailed a few days later.

6. My Lords agree generally in the finding of the Court of Inquiry and desire me to invite the Army Council to state whether they will consider the withdrawal of General Maynard's telegram, which their Lordships do not consider just to the Royal Marine Detachment concerned.

The War Office Replied

I am commanded by the Army Council to acknowledge receipt of your letter......and to say that they have considered the proceedings of the Court of Inquiry.....They much regret that these incidents have occurred and agree that there may have been faults on both sides.

It is clear, however, from the proceedings of the Inquiry the principle charge against the Royal Marines, viz, that two platoons refused to go on outpost duty is proved.

Therefore, the Army Council consider that General Maynard's report was substantially correct and that he was justified in the action he took.

In these circumstances they regret that they do not see their way to order the withdrawal of his telegram.

'In conclusion I am to say that not withstanding these unfortunate incidents, of which notice had had to be taken in the interests of discipline, the Army Council much appreciate the good work done by the Royal Marines Detachment, especially in the earlier part of their service in North Russia.'

Copy Of False Wording

This is a copy of false wording from above; "It is clear, however, from the proceedings of the Inquiry the principle charge against the Royal Marines, viz, that two platoons refused to go on out-post duty is proved."

Refusing to fall-in is not refusing to go on out-post duty. They were not ordered to go on out-post duty. Looking back; Lieutenant P.R. Smith-Hill, said: "there was 'NO' case of any man refusing to obey a direct order to return to the line."

The Great Deception

The Adjutant General Royal Marines had allowed an ad hoc unit, to be formed to carry out administrative duties for the Army, to be sent to Russia. Of the only men available, none were eligible for the purpose they were intended for, and none were volunteers.

Whether the AGRM knew the real purpose no one can be sure. But the Government of the day did, as well as the Army Authorities, especially those at the War Office. Both deliberately decieved the Admiralty and the Royal Marines, they kept their intentions very secret until the very last moment.

Summing Up

One common factor for most of the Royal Marine officers was their lack of experience in land-warfare. Major Barnby had spent his entire career in ships until 1907, when he became a pilot, serving with the Royal Naval Air Service until 1919.

It was stated there were no definate orders; causing confusion with men not understanding the decisiveness of which orders they should obey? Army junior officers gave orders counteracting higher ranked Royal Marine Officers orders.

The Royal Marine Detachment considered they were being exploited. This was 100% true; they were being used unfairly, unjustly, wrongfully, unreasonably and dishonestly etc.

We learned after, some Army units were not being used because they could not be trusted, having had men that had already absconded. Others were in a privilaged position where their commander's used their influence in the Officers Mess, to avoid going to the Front.

one Army company went on patrol at night, the men were so exhausted that they fell asleep whenever they halted. Another in very close country, when they were ambushed, a large number took flight.

And there were numerous other cases not mentioned here; we are not trying to slag-off the Army, just highlighting a few facts. We must not forget, why were there only Royal Marine casualties on the Northern Front for long periods?

Obviously here, the Army was covering-up their inadequacies by abusing the good conduct of the Royal Marines with their bias and prejudice treatment.

"There was a large measure of unsympathetic handling of these men by Army Authorities of the highest ranks." This statement, was an understatement; if ever there was one.

Lieutenant-Colonel Guard says that "British Troops" had run into the woods, and that his remarks did not refer to any particular lot of men. He then goes on to praise the Royal Marines. This gives a hint of the confusing conditions, and the ill-feeling between the Armies own military services.

The good work and the value of it, is mentioned more than any other unit serving on the Russian Northern Front. There are records of their outstanding contribution.

Here we must remember these incidents involve far less than 0.01% of Royal Marines that have served in this Great Corps; which still has a record second to none.

The Royal Marines

The Army Authorities contempt for the Royal Marines was clearly displayed by the fact; when dumped on the Front Line to face the harsh Artic Winter they put a temporary Warrant Officer in command.

The Royal Marines serving stated they had not had a square meal since arriving in Russia and complained about the half-rations they were on at Kem.

Their quarters by the canal were damp and cold, inferior to those of the Army units. Whom were in all probability, never without their full rations. We must also remember at this time every Army officer was entitled to one bottle of wine per day.

"On another occasion Major Willes whose men had volunteered to go to an outpost for four days, found themselves deserted by the Army for fourteen days without a change of any clothing; this incident alone, upset the men very much."

Major Willes R.M. claimed that some men were several months overdue for demobilisation, those with early numbers should have been demobbed; those in the army with early numbers were no longer serving in the Forces. He also refers to lies, broken promises and victimisation by his Army superiors.

Weapon For A Just Cause

In both cases the only weapon available to them to express their true and honest feeling was to "OBJECT". There is or was no other weapon at their disposal for their just cause.

Those men would have known the risks; "death by firing squad" or a long term with hard labour in prison; but as we have seen at the "Spithead Mutiny" in 1797, there comes a time when a real man will stand up for his rights.

There existed in these islands the "Tom Paine" school of thought and a law the: "rights of man" which very few people were aware of; not that this played any part in the affair.

The Spithead Mutiny from 16th April to 15th May 1797 was in law a 100% mutiny but it triumphed on the grounds of the common sense used by the seamen and all involved. (Unlike the Army)

The seamen rounded-up and put the officers ashore and formed a ship's committee. Now, that really was mutiny of the highest order. But they wrung from the Government of the day their dues.

Mutiny can never be condoned in any Service, but it is impossible not to feel or having regards to both the men's moderation and to the enormity of their grievences.

Disloyalty was not in their hearts when they sqeezed from the Government a pay increase, the previous one being later in the 1600's well over one-hundred years before.

But, there was more to it than that: the navy's rations were maggoty and underweight, their medicines were being embezzled by the ship's surgeons; and their leave and pay were in arrears, as well as being insufficient. Parliment quickly voted in a pay increase, and made other concessions, including a general pardon.

Modern-day Pages Fast Boats Pages Joe Wezley Pages

Return To Summing Up

"Other ranks suffered the most and deserved the least. Those who were sent to penal servitude and those who were wounded or killed were the real victims of the ineptitude of senior Army officers."

"Some of the R.M.L.I. were transported two-thousand miles by sea and 450 miles by rail: they fought a minor action lasting two-and-a-half hours and then returned home! They achieved absolutely nothing and for what reason?"

"They were disgruntled men, not vicious people in a strange land far from home. If an unbiased inquiry had been held in England into the whole affair, the battalion might well have shown up as second rate but not as was insinuated by the Army Senior Ranks involved.

The fact that, in the event, the 13 death sentences were never carried out, and all were released from prison within two years, raises many unanswered questions in those authoritarian days?

The blame is attributed to the tactless handling of the men by the Army Authorities. The contempt or jealousy of the Royal Marines by the Army officers present is easy to perceive.

I a trained Royal Marine have personally witnessed this type of behavior by Army officers and non-commissioned officers, in North Africa.

It was unacceptable then, but if you have nothing to back you, then you have no option but to accept whatever they dish-out.

It is obvious that in saving its and their general's face, the Army Authority have shown their guilt by backing these pitiful Officers.

The skeleton of Objection or Injustice; will rattle amongst the empty ammunition boxes in their cupboard until they retract General Maynard's disrespectful telegram and so let this case sleep.

One cannot leave this saga without reference to the endurance, leadership and bravery of the bulk of the Naval service through World War I, both on land and sea.

We should recall that sterling work was done by Royal Marines and Royal Navy in Russia itself at the same time as the above events took place; but they were not under Army command.

Captain Drake-Brockman, a member of the Field Force remained in Russia, eventually became C.O. of the Olonetz Karelian Regiment. He died at their head on May 10th 1919, and was highly praised for his leadership and bravery.

Colonel Sam Bassett, then a junior officer, was instrumental in the saving and evacuation of White Russians from Novorossisk.

In the South a small naval force from the East Indies squadron with some 160 Royal Marines reached the Caspian Sea via the Tigris, and for a year held the Bolsheviks in check.

Finally we must remember the Royal Marine Detachment from "H.M.S. Kent" who, landing their 6" naval gun at Vladivostock in April 1919, set off for the battle front 4,000 miles away.

Every single man from the detachment volunteered for this venture, less the man in cells who was not offered a choice.

They opted not to return with the ship, and, with complete uncertainty about what lay ahead, set off across country in the grip of the Siberian winter, faced with famine, disease and revolution.

With their 14-ton gun mounted on a railway flatcar, and occasionally on river barges or ships. They fought many actions and covered some 10,000 miles before rejoining their ship.

This is a sterling example of good leadership, improvisation and high morale under the most trying and unpredictable conditions, in the best traditions of the Royal Marine Corps.

Wellington's Marines, helped him hold the enemy back, fighting against Napolean's French forces in Spain. But then they had a great leader of whom they would be proud to serve: sadly we cannot say the same for any of the Military Officers here.

Perhaps here are those officers James Will's, the newpaper reporter was talking about; "It was, as is all too often the case, an example of lions led by donkeys."

There is however one last act of decency that could quite easily be carried out; the withdrawal of that shameful telegram!

The next Link below will be: "Napoleonic War Marines"

Lions Led By Donkeys Napoleonic War Marines

"Pirates Trilogy" $20