Virtual
War Memorial
Australia

A Harsh Penalty – The Sad Story of John Davis

In September, 1917, Private John Davis of the 8 Machine Gun Company was charged at Etaples, France with endeavouring to persuade others to mutiny, offering violence to a superior officer, and resisting arrest. Found guilty, he was sentenced to 10 years penal servitude. He was transferred to England to undergo sentence, before, in July 1918, embarking for return to Australia to serve the remainder of his sentence. 

Davis was an orphan who was ‘obtained from St Vincent de Paul Orphans when he was about 8 years old’ by John Daly of Cabowie Belt, east of Jamestown, South Australia who ‘looked after him for several years.’ Prior to enlisting in July 1915, Davis had been living for about 12 months with the Tolhurst family at Paruna, in the Murray Mallee, south of Loxton. He went to Loxton to enlist, and was given a ticket to Adelaide. At Keswick he gave his occupation as farm labourer, declared that both his parents were dead, and named a friend, Mr. Frank Eime of Loxton Police Station as his next of kin. He gave his age as 19 years, 6 months. In fact, according to statements he made when he was charged with mutiny, he was really 3 years younger, 16 years 6 months.

Davis became part of B Company in the 32nd Infantry Battalion. He sailed from Adelaide on 18 November,1915, arriving in Egypt a month later. For the 6 months he was in Egypt, his record was similar to most other men, with only minor offences recorded in his file. Twice he failed to keep his rifle clean, and once he was ‘improperly dressed.’ At some stage, a ‘tent mate’ of Davis wrote to his aunt, Mrs L. Knight of Walkerville, asking her to correspond ‘with this lad Davis …. who was friendless and alone in the world.’ She began to write regularly, and ‘the lad has written such nice letters in return that I feel almost as if he belonged to me.’

In June 1916, the 32nd Battalion sailed for France, and a month later was devastated at the Battle Fromelles. Davis’ unnamed tent mate was killed in the battle and Davis suffered a gunshot wound to the knee and admitted to hospital. He was able to re-join the battalion 3 weeks later. Soon after he was transferred to 8th Machine Gun Company. Apart from 3 days in hospital with cellulitis, there are no further entries in his file until August, 1917, indicating that he remained with the Machine Gun Company all through the bitter winter of 1916-17 and beyond.

A copy exists in Davis’ file of a letter he wrote on February 2, 1917 to Ted Daly, the son of John Daly who had taken him in as an 8 year old. In the letter, Jack Davis first reintroduces himself, and says that he has been wounded but has returned to the firing line. He then explains that he has named Ted as his next of kin. ‘as in the Military one has got to have someone for them to report if I get killed or wounded, so I hope you will take me as one of your relatives in that respect.’

He then gives a hint of some of the difficulties he may have had in the past, and perhaps regret that he left the care of the Daly’s. ‘I don’t no (sic) if I am imposing on your good character, as I will never forget the good home I had with you as a boy. I would like to have the same chance for a home over again. I would know how to look after it, but a fellow never knows this sort of things till it is too late, and until he has been in rough hands like I was a few years later.’ The letter shows Davis as an intelligent thoughtful young man, who expresses himself well, is well aware of the difficulties of being without any family support, and who is thinking of the future. Its tone gives an indication of why Mrs Knight came to feel such an attachment to the young soldier that she had never met.

After writing about the progress of the war, and about the beauty of France, Jack asks Ted to accept his allotment of 3/- a day, and to put it in the bank to keep for him until his return. ‘If I get killed, you are to keep it for yourself.’ This arrangement however, does not seem to have been formalised with the Army.

Davis’ world started to fall apart in August, 1917, when he overstayed leave in France for 6 days. He was given 14 days Field Punishment No 2. On 8 September he was diagnosed with VD, and on 9th Sept admitted to 51st General Hospital in Etaples, near Boulogne.

This was extremely unfortunate timing as this was the day that the Etaples mutiny began. The details of the mutiny are not completely clear, and written accounts are contradictory. The mutiny was kept secret during the war, and the records of the Etaples Board of Enquiry have been destroyed. But it is relevant to Davis’ case to have some knowledge of the context of his alleged crime and of his court martial.

Etaples was an enormous Base – port facilities, railway yards, stores, hospitals, prisons, training area, and, most importantly Infantry Base Depots. It was a notorious place, hated by the troops. It is undeniable that training regimes, even for battle weary, experienced men were harsh, and that accommodation was poor. The British poet, Wilfred Owen described ‘the very strange look on all faces in that camp, an incomprehensible look, which a man will ever see in England, nor can it be seen in any battle. But only in Etaples. It was not despair, or terror, it was more terrible than terror, for it was a blindfold look, and without expression, like a dead rabbit’s.’

From the 9th September, Etaples, was convulsed by a week of riots sparked by what appears to have been a relatively minor incident. Men poured out of the bases, attacked and dispersed military police, displaced officers and flooded through the town. The demonstrations were suppressed, although the English novelist, Vera Brittain, who was nursing in Etaples at the time, thought it did not really end till mid-October. In a footnote in her famous wartime novel, Testament of Youth, she wrote,"the mutiny was due to repressive conditions......and was provoked by the military police".

Davis did not become involved in the disturbances, at least as far as is known, until the evening of the 13th. By this stage, substantial reinforcements to enforce discipline and order had been moved to Etaples, and demonstrations on this day were much smaller than they had been on previous days. According to an article ‘Mutiny at Etaples Base in 1917’ (D. Gill & G. Dallas), in ‘Past and Present’ (No 69, Nov 1975) and later posted on the military history forum, ‘Militarian’, ‘only 200 broke camp on Thursday evening.’ However, on that evening, Davis was arrested, and 4 days later faced a court martial. He was charged with endeavouring to persuade others to mutiny, offering violence to a superior officer, and resisting arrest.

The court was told that Davis had broken out of hospital sometime after 3.30pm on the 13th.The Assistant Provost Marshall (APM) for the Abbeville Area testified that at about 7pm, a crowd of about 50 men, mainly from Scots Regiments but with a few Canadians, gathered outside the Town Hall, shouting and carrying sticks and stones. They believed that a few of their friends were being held in the Police Court. Davis was with them, and after saying, ‘Come on boys, let’s get them out’, and “If you were Australians, you would free them’, he approached the APM menacingly with his arm raised. ‘The accused said a lot to me, but I cannot remember the exact words. The substance of his remarks was to get the crowd to release the prisoners’. No arrest was made, ‘as it would have meant a fight and the use of unnecessary violence’.

‘About an hour later’ the APM saw Davis again, and tried to arrest him, but Davis ‘struck at me’ and got away. He called for Davis to be arrested. A Military Foot Policeman (MFP) testified that ‘about 9.20 pm’, he saw the accused running from a crowd of soldiers and arrested him, in spite of a struggle in which he was kicked in the left groin.

It must be assumed that 18 year old Davis was given support for his defence, but there is no evidence of this in the documents in his file. There was one occasion in which a witness was said to be ‘questioned by the accused’ when he asked the MFP ‘Was anyone with you when you arrested me? No.’ - and twice ‘the accused declined to examine this witness.’ On the other hand, after Davis made his statement, he was ‘cross examined by the Prosecutor.’

Davis did not deny that he had broken out of hospital or that he was with the crowd, but he denied all the other allegations. He claimed he was not part of the mob, had tried to extricate a drunk Canadian from the crowd, and had told the mob that the prisoner they wanted released had been taken away. He denied saying any of the statements he was accused of saying, or that he had approached the APM. He had gone into the YMCA before the mob dispersed, but agreed that he had broken away from the APM when he tried to arrest him, but stopped when he realised the police were after him and he was ‘arrested by 2 men when I was standing in the middle of the road. I offered no resistance, and did not kick the police.’

Remarkably, given the severity of the charge, and the fact that it should have been easily available, the prosecutor stated that he had not been able to obtain any evidence relating to the previous service of the accused. Davis, without any written confirmation, was able to truthfully state that he had been in the forces for 2 years and 3 months, and had a good record. He stated that he had enlisted as a 16½ year old, and wanted to be sent back to his unit to regain his honour.

Well, he would say that, wouldn’t he? It was a case of believing the police or believing Davis, and, particularly given the concern about the unrest at Etaples, Davis had no chance. He was found guilty of each of the three charges, inciting mutiny, offering violence to his superior officer, and resisting arrest, and sentenced to 10 years’ penal servitude.

Davis may have been guilty. He had broken out of hospital and was with the demonstrating soldiers, and events may have been just as the military police described them. But the lack of any corroborating evidence for the MP’s statements, (difficult though this may have been to obtain), and the inconsistencies in the evidence of the 2 MP’s, leaves room for doubt about the accuracy of their stories. For example, they differ significantly in their accounts of the length of time between the incitement and the arrest. Also the APM apparently tried to arrest Davis after the crowd had dispersed, but the MFP described Davis as emerging from a crowd of soldiers. Davis was adamant he had been arrested by two men – the police said by one man. If Davis’ incitement was so severe, why was an arrest not made immediately, or reinforcements called to affect an arrest. Was the APM (an hour later according to his account, nearly 2½ hours later according to the MFP) completely sure he had the right person?

Even if it is accepted that Davis had done everything the MP’s alleged, it is legitimate to ask whether his actions warranted the exceptional severity of the sentence. This incident happened on the 5th day of the riots, (the major disturbances had been on the 9th and 10th) when things were cooling down. There is no evidence that this relatively small gathering degenerated further (in spite of Davis’ alleged incitement). The APM under questioning confirmed he had not actually been hit by Davis.

It appears likely that the authorities were out to make an example as a way of reasserting control of a very tense situation, and that Davis was a relatively easy target. The others in the crowd were Scots and Canadians – the arrest of a lone Australian away from his unit (which was in the field in the days just prior to Polygon Wood), was less likely to provoke a crowd reaction. The court martial was quickly arranged. Davis was arrested on Thursday evening, and he was sentenced on the Monday. The failure of the prosecution to produce Davis’ service record, (and it might be added, the absence of any Australian involvement in the court or to speak on his behalf) seems to suggest that any other result was highly unlikely.

It is difficult to know how many other men were punished for the events at Etaples. There were rumours that the ringleaders had been executed, but it appears that just one British corporal was executed. The Wikipedia article on the mutiny says that 3 men were given the next highest penalty of 10 year sentences. It is hard to believe that given the scale of the riots, that Davis’ actions justified him being grouped with the main offenders.

 Davis still had VD, and was kept under guard in hospital until 27 October when he was transferred to No. 2 Military Prison in Rouen, before, after much paperwork, being transferred on 12 November to England to serve his sentence in HM Prison Winchester. (A letter in Davis’ file shows that AIF HQ was informed of this transfer in November. However, a letter from AIF HQ in March 1917, indicates that they had no record of where Davis had been detained since his return to England and ‘that a quantity of mail has accumulated for him.’ Had he, in addition to the disgrace and, in his eyes at least, the injustice of his sentence, had no mail delivered for over 4 months?)

Mrs Knight, who had communicated with Davis at the request of her nephew, had received a letter from Davis telling her of his situation and she wrote to the Army in January 1918, seeking further particulars. ‘I feel it is the duty of everyone to take an interest in the men who responded to their nation’s call, (especially the young lads) so do this to the memory of our dear lad who paid the supreme sacrifice and recommended this lad Davis to my care.’ Base Records could not help her, as they claimed to have not heard about any conviction.

Arrangements for Davis to be returned to Australia to serve the rest of his sentence again involved much paperwork, but he was eventually moved to HM Prison Portland prior to embarkation. While in Portland, Davis presented a petition for discharge from the Army. He maintained his innocence, (‘through no fault of my own being in prison’) and is acutely aware of his shame (‘being in the eyes of the army and my fellow countrymen utterly disgraced.’) A typed copy of his petition appears in his file. He had previously presented his case to Army Counsel requesting a reduction in sentence, and had been understandably puzzled by the answer of ‘Not at present’.

John Davis left England on 31 July 1918, disembarked at Melbourne on 28 September, and was then transported to Adelaide for imprisonment. This prompted the army, belatedly, to search for Frank Eime of Loxton Police Station, named as next of kin on Davis’ enlistment form. He was never traced. If he ever existed, it may have been just a name of convenience, as the February 1917 letter to Ted Daly seems to indicate.

Daly, on showing his Feb 1917 letter from Davis, was entered as next of kin in Davis’ file in May 1918, but angered by what he thought were Army insinuations that he was trying to profit from Davis’ allotments, he broke off all communication with the Army. The Army then realised Davis’ allotments had been going to the Tolhursts at Paruna, and contacted them. When they confirmed that Davis had been living with them prior to enlistment (and that they, at Davis’ request, had sent money to him about 12 months before), they were sent a letter saying that he had returned to Australia. It can only be hoped that someone took an interest in him and visited him on his return.

In Feb, 1919, Davis was informed that he had been given a remission of 8 years of his sentence, and that his discharge from the army would date from his return to Australia. Presumably he was released in late 1919. He was denied his wartime gratuity, and war medals. In August 1922, there was a request from the SA Soldier’s Fund for Davis’ wartime history, no doubt because of a request for a payment from the fund. It can only be assumed that Davis received no benefit.

From that time there is no indication of what happened to him.

There were men who left Adelaide with the 32nd Battalion in November 1915 whose record suggests that they may have been among the small number of ’hard cases’ and ‘ne’er-do-wells’ that Charles Bean said were in every battalion. There is no evidence that John Davis was one of these. He was a young man, already dealt a poor hand in the start of his life, who, until shortly before his arrest, had an unblemished record after 12 months in the trenches of the Western Front. There is no reason to doubt the sincerity of his expressed desire to return to the Front to ‘regain my lost honour’. His downfall came from being in the wrong place at the wrong time, aided by what may have been youthful exuberance and naivety, and perhaps being scapegoated as an easy target by a military system desperately trying to reassert control over a very volatile situation. There was to be no escape from his military record which no doubt remained a millstone around his neck for the rest of his life. - Gavin Scrimgeour