Character, Discipline, Law: Courts Martial in World War I

Abstract

Courts martial were as ubiquitous in the experience of World War I as criminal courts in civil life, yet they remain largely neglected in the Australian war historiography. Their remarkable evidentiary record, transmitted from the field of battle into the custody of the Attorney-General, has been used to highlight wartime dimensions of individual character and collective discipline. In this article, we review the uses of the courts martial in those respects.We note the significance of Australian exceptionalism in this military domain, and consider the potential of an approach that treats the court martial as a legal event.Australians serving abroad in World War I as part of the British Imperial forces were in a privileged position. Frequently criticised for their indiscipline, Australian soldiers were immune from the death penalty, even where the sentence was awarded at court martial for offences under the Army Act, including mutiny, desertion and treating with the enemy. 1 Immunity followed from the Commonwealth government's insistence that Australian soldiers serving in the British Army would be subject to the Imperial Army Act, except when this was inconsistent with the Defence Act 1903. That legislation not only restricted the number of offences for which the death penalty might be applied, but made execution dependent on the approval of the Governor-General, effectively subjecting that decision to the advice of We would like to thank Lee Butterworth for research assistance; Tim Sherratt (University of Canberra) for his expertise and generosity in sharing the archive metadata that got us started; and

Establishment of Childhood's Discipline Characters in a Clean and Healthy Life Behavior in The Pandemic Covid-19

“…Character Discipline of children in following one of the rules that apply. With discipline in this rule, it will support the implementation of educational processes and activities run smoothly (Finnane & Smaal, 2020;Pratama et al, 2021). The current learning system or method is very dependent on how severe or light the spread of COVID-19 in the area around the school is, so that learning methods can be easily changed.…”

‘Upholding the Cause of Civilization’: The Australian Death Penalty in War and Colonialism

“…What is not in doubt is the importance of this provision in the later conduct of military justice in World War I. Alone of the imperial and dominion forces comprising the British Expeditionary Forces during the war, the Australian Government insisted that no soldier would be executed as a consequence of a death penalty awarded after conviction at court martial for offences against military law or discipline (Finnane and Smaal 2020;Wilson 2016, 217-222).…”

“…Further, it was maintained in the face of very persistent pressure from Army Command. More than 120 Australian soldiers were sentenced to death at court martial during the war (1914)(1915)(1916)(1917)(1918), but not one was executed in consequence (Finnane and Smaal 2020;Lambley 2012) Three aspects are worth noting about this assertion of Australian distinctiveness.…”

Ambivalent Abolitionism in the 1920s: New South Wales, Australia

“…Opponents of the law (which had led to the execution of over 300 British and Imperial servicemen in World War I, primarily for cowardice and desertion) tried to use the annual review of the Army Bill in parliament to remove the death penalty for military infractions (Corns and Hughes Wilson, 2005). For British MPs, the fact that no Australian serviceman had been executed in the Great War (although some were sentenced to death by courts martial) suggested the penalty was not required to instil discipline (Finnane and Smaal 2020). During a debate on the Army Bill in 1925, Labour backbencher, Ernest Thurtle, put this question to the British minister of defence:…”