|
Forgotten Soldiers:
The Irishmen Shot at Dawn: Book Review

A book entitled
Forgotten Soldiers: The Irishmen Shot at
Dawn written by BBC Northern
Ireland journalist Stephen Walker was launched in Belfast on Thursday the 25th October 2007.
The author
makes reference on many occasions to the Farr
case and it being a landmark case (legal) in a way that suggests the
Farr case
was the pre-eminent factor along with the effort of the British Shot
at Dawn Pardons Campaign in the final resolution of the pardons issue.
In consequence, the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl owe it to our support base
throughout Ireland and further afield to point out the following:
Note:
The Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl is not involved or linked in anyway with this
publication.
Publishers - Gill
& McMillan
In their embellished press
release promoting Forgotten Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn By Stephen
Walker, the publishers state:
Press Release:
Twenty-eight Irishmen were executed by the British Army during the First
World War for desertion and disobedience:
-
Private Harry Hendricks,
2nd Battalion, Leinster Regiment - Shot at Dawn on the 23rd August 1918.
Harry was born in America and had volunteered for service in
an Irish Regiment. Source
Shot at Dawn By Julian Putkowski and Julian Sykes
first
published 1989, Leo Cooper, page 254.
----------------------------------------------
Press Release: For
decades the full story of how the Irishmen died has largely remained a
secret, but now one of the most controversial chapters in British military
history can at last be told:
----------------------------------------------
Press Release:
Forgotten Soldiers is the first book to
chronicle how relatives and campaigners fought to clear the men’s names:
-
The chronicle of events
relating to the different campaigns has been on British and Irish websites
for many years. Taking into account that no formal interview took place with
those running the Irish campaign, ie the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl,
it is very difficult to comprehend as to how the publishers can make this
claim in the light of concerns. Forgotten Soldiers, the book, does not tell
the full story of the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl. For the record, our views
are outlined below:
The Shot at Dawn
Campaign Irl:
-
An
extract from
book Forgotten
Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn,
reproduced in the Belfast Telegraph on Friday the 26th
October 2007, states inter alia,
Peter Mulvany had recently established the
Irish branch of the Shot at Dawn group. Founded on the 27th June 2002,
The Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl
co-ordinated by the
Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46)
is an independent Irish based group and not part or an adjunct of the
British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign. To link the Irish SAD group with the
UK end in this way is perverse and untrue. The Shot at Dawn Campaign Ireland and the Shot at
Dawn Pardons Campaign in the UK are two separate and distinct groups; ie one
Irish campaign and one British campaign independent of each other, albeit in
pursuit of the same objective. Our unique Irish identity was a major
contributing factor and was one of the reasons why the Irish SAD Campaign
was so successful in attracting support.
-
In the book
Forgotten Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn, a
group image copyrighted to the Department of Foreign Affairs/Maxwell's has
the caption sanitized. In the original Maxwell's caption published in the
Irish
Times March 2006, one is described as
Peter Mulvany who heads the Irish Shot at Dawn
Campaign. In the book Forgotten
Soldiers, Peter Mulvany is now described in
the caption opposite page 115, as Peter Mulvany Irish Shot
at Dawn Campaigner with a photo of the British Shot at Dawn Campaign
founder neatly placed at the top of the page with his appropriate title. A
mischievous attempt by the author to link the Irish Campaign with the
British Campaign. Peter Mulvany is the coordinator of the
Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl
to give our independent Irish based group its proper title. We are not
associated with any British Pardons Campaign, Shot at Dawn Campaign or other
similar British group.
-
On Page 194
, the author states with reference to the then Minister for Foreign Affairs
Mr Brian Cowen TD that he examined the arguments and in November 2003
announced that the government was supporting the Shot at Dawn Campaign
and wanted the British government to pardon the twenty-six Irish-born
soldiers. The
Press Release Issued by the Department of Foreign Affairs on the 14th
November 2003 in support of the pardons for our 26 Irish born
soldiers, specifically expressed support
on behalf of the Minister for Foreign
Affairs, Mr Brian Cowen T.D., for the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign, and not
the Shot at Dawn Campaign, as stated by Walker. In his press release,
the Minister highlights correctly the two separate campaign structures ie
'The Shot at Dawn Campaign, based in Britain', and the 'The Shot at
Dawn Campaign (Irl), coordinated by Mr Peter Mulvany'. Walker is
again attempting to obfuscate the role of the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign
effort to the detriment of our Irish support base. Reading through the book
one is left with the distinct impression that the empire mindset still
pervades in some quarters. The Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign based in Dublin
was, is and has always been, a separate campaign to the British Pardons
Campaign, albeit with the same objectives... as Walker well knows. Indeed
one should put the question as to why the full
Irish Government Report is not included in
the appendix of his book along with all the Irish Government press releases
and extracts of Dail and Seanad contributions from Irish politicians who
showed their support for the efforts of the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign? After all, they are
also entitled to a share of the collective credit for their collective effort on
the pardons issue. Other publications written about world war one
subjects manage to include extensive appendices..interesting omission..never mind, we
have all the Irish political contributions recorded on this website at
Irish
Government Support.
-
On Page 200 the author states that as Peter Mulvany left the service he bumped into a
politician who was a supporter of the pardons campaign. When the subject was
raised Mulvany was told, 'The pardons are on the way'. An
interesting assertive comment of a fact. The author is referring to
a private meeting with an Irish politician which took place on the 1st July
2006 in the Irish National War
Memorial in Islandbridge, Dublin, at the Somme Commemoration. Firstly it should be noted that Walker does not have any
footnote attached to this statement to indicate his source. Irrespective, the politician
concerned is indeed a staunch supporter of the pardons campaign Irish and
British campaign efforts however he
was engaged in conversation with others when I introduced myself to thank
him for his support and not bump into him as stated by Walker. In contrast,
this politician advised that they will get the pardons in the end
referring to our families and not the fact that the pardons were on
the way. One never pursued him further to find out his
source or corroborate his comments. Statements like these were a regular
occurrence at the time as rumours were rife that the Farr case would have to
go to a full hearing in September 2006 because of the chinese walls being
put up by the Ministry of Defence to any amicable resolution to the pardons
issue.
-
Note:
In his book Forgotten Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn, by Stephen
Walker, Peter Mulvany is quoted in various interview notes by the
author. Although a meeting did take place in Dublin with Stephen
Walker, Peter Mulvany was never formally interviewed by Walker for his
book.
The Farr Case - A
Cause Célèbre ?
In a Pro Bono application in May of 2005, Mr Justice Stanley Burnton found that there was
'room for argument' that he (Private Harry Farr) had been wrongly
refused a conditional pardon. However Mr Justice Burnton also declared inter
alia that the family of Private Farr lacked the legal grounds for a free
pardon......thereby ruling out the
*free pardon/full pardon
option in a leading case which many observers believe to be one of the most
deserving of a free pardon/full pardon. Significantly, Mr Justice Burnton's
opinion effectively raised the legal bar by setting a precedent insofar as
future applications for pardons in world war one execution cases would only be
dealt with on the basis of the 'room for argument' principle via the
conditional pardon route...legally capping future British political
outcomes to the pardons issue. Consequently, the legal limitations of the
'room for argument' principle via the conditional pardon route first
enunciated by Mr Justice Burnton in the Farr case in May 2005, are now reflected
in the
2006 British Pardons Amendment.
*A free pardon/full pardon
is understood to mean a pardon not encumbered by any expressly stated constraint
or weighted legal, parliamentary or royal impediment narrowing its scope or
effect.
The Ministry of Defence did not lose
the Farr case as asserted by Andrew MacKinlay MP and others. The Farr case had
never reached a final
conclusion and had not gone forward for a full hearing, indeed the preliminary opinion of Mr Justice Burnton in the
initial application in May 2005 had already raised the legal bar to
any future action by the British Government/MoD. Rather than resolving the
issue the consequence of the Farr application in May 2005 effectively ruled out the full pardon option in all WW1 execution cases and
any expected British political response to the
Irish Government Report was re-routed and
parked down a British legal cul de
sac for nearly two years, and not several months as stated, thereby taking the pressure off the British Government at a critical
time in the Irish campaign. The introduction of the
PARDONS FOR SERVICEMEN EXECUTED FOR
DISCIPLINARY OFFENCES: RECOGNITION AS VICTIMS OF FIRST WORLD WAR
on the 7th November 2006
is the British Government's official response
to the
Irish Government Report
into the execution of the
Irish Shot at
Dawn 1914-18 encumbered by the
limitations set out in May 2005 by Mr Justice Burnton in the Farr
application.
It should also be
noted that in November 2003 following the initial Irish Government support for
the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl effort. A meeting took place in Newcastle, England
with the leader of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign. He gave his
assurance that no legal action was envisaged/considered or being taken in the
UK, as to do so in our opinion, would have frustrated future Irish Government
efforts and divert the Irish campaign down a British legal cul-de-sac. The Irish effort then proceeded on the
basis that no legal action was being taken in the UK by the Shot at Dawn Pardons
Campaign or the UK Families. The legal application in the Farr Case May 2005
(significantly
post the presentation of the
Irish Government Report
in October 2004) patently
breached that assurance. As a consequence:
-
the Irish Government
Report
was diverted down a British legal cul-de-sac before any political response could
be extracted from the British Government which suited the MoD agenda
at the time;
-
initiated the 'room for argument' principle
via the conditional pardon route...legally capping future British political
outcomes to the pardons issue;
-
legally and politically ruled out
any chance of ever achieving a full pardon for our Irish born Shot at Dawn, to
the detriment of our Irish families;
-
undermined the Irish Shot at Dawn
Campaign effort.
It is inconceivable that the British Shot at
Dawn Pardons Campaign were unaware of the preparation for the Farr case as
expert knowledge was needed to prepare the legal briefs which was only
accessible through the UK SAD
campaign effort. The facts are, the Farr
Pro Bono application in May 2005 is responsible for blocking the full pardon
route for all our world war one Shot at Dawn, thereby eliminating the
possibility of a full pardon for our Irish Shot at Dawn, to the detriment of our
Irish Families, leaving them in a British legal and political vacuum. The
Farr case had never reached a final conclusion or gone forward for a full
hearing to test their legal argument for a conditional pardon, and for Walker
and others in the UK to flag the Farr case as a Cause Célèbre is at the
very least imprudent and a British distortion of the facts.
-
On Tuesday 20th November 2007, the grandnephew of
Private Patrick Joseph Downey
one of our 26 Irish Born
soldiers, Shot at Dawn, submitted his application to Her Majesty, The
Queen, for a Royal Pardon for Patrick. He states
“In
our families opinion, without the added weight of the royal prerogative of
mercy such conditional pardon is meaningless”

----------------------------------------------
War Shame Ended Shame of Daughter an
article by Henry McDonald, Ireland
Correspondent,
The Observer,
Sunday October 28, 2007, with
extracts from Forgotten Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn. a book by Stephen
Walker, states inter alia
'For the first time, former War Veterans'
Minister Tom Watson has admitted his meeting with Harris in the summer of 2006
prompted him to force the MoD to change policy and grant her father and other
shell-shocked troops a pardon';
To state or imply that it was this meeting that
forced a change in British government policy on the pardons in isolation to all
other efforts, is incredibly naive at best and downright insulting to all
involved in supporting the campaign for pardons, in particular, the crucial role
of the Irish government's international diplomatic effort towards the final resolution of the pardons issue.
The British Pardons Campaign:
In 1998, the British Shot at Dawn Pardons
Campaign was effectively dead in the water as a result of John Reid's refusal to
countenance any pardons. It was the Irish campaign effort that made the
difference and but for the Irish governments input, the Farr case and the British Pardons Campaign would still be languishing in the cul-de-sac of the British
political and legal system ad infinitum. To claim or imply otherwise is perverse.
Irrespective, we have always been of the view because of the mosaic involving
various individuals, groups, organizations, politicians and governments etc, who
supported and became involved in the resolution to the pardons issue, that all
regardless of contribution, are fully entitled to their share of the collective
credit for their collective effort...and especially not forgetting the 76
year old Belfast pensioner and her elderly friends who deliberately crossed the
sectarian divide in 2004 to get support for our Irish petition to pardon our 26
Irish Shot at Dawn..the success and credit also belongs to them....bless em.
Are these courageous elderly ladies from Northern Ireland not also entitled to share
in the credit? There are many examples of elderly pensioners and
elderly veterans living throughout Ireland who supported the Irish campaign. Are
they not also entitled to share in the credit?...is their contribution to go
unrecorded?
The ability of Shot at Dawn
Campaign Irl to attract all Ireland support for pardons from all sections across
the sectarian divide for our 26 Shot at Dawn British soldiers, albeit Irish
born (and taking into account that we were coming out of a conflict situation
with the Irish troubles in our recent past), is a testament to the goodwill,
common sense and humanitarian approach of all the Irish people. The subsequent
involvement of the Irish government and the production of its own report into
the executions of our 26 British soldiers is a seismic
historical development and its affect on Anglo-Irish relations is apparently
still not fully understood by some British commentators and scribes etc.
The successful holding of the Somme Commemoration in
the National War Memorial Gardens, Dublin, on Saturday 1st July 2006 did not go
unnoticed by our British friends. In the absence of any agreement on the Irish
peace process, the unified support for the
Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl on the pardons issue,
promoted the principle of all Ireland agreement, albeit on a single issue.
Ironically the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign had achieved a consensus on the
island of Ireland for its objectives, in a divided political and religious environment where
no other subject matter had attracted such all Ireland agreement in
recent memory. All Ireland agreement which = Irish peace process which = final
settlement of the Irish question which = Tony Blair's place in history, as he
was about to leave office as British Prime Minister.
To suggest or imply that it was the
heartbreaking story from a wonderful old lady, accompanied by tea, tears and
sympathy courtesy of that very sympathetic organization, the British
Ministry of Defence, which was the tipping point that led to the pardons,
is stretching things, a wee bit. The Ministry of Defence have never been
intimidated by such niceties and have always battened down the hatches
when under pressure. So what was the real motivation? The British never
give anything away unless they get a benefit in return which must be in British
interests? It was all elementary dear Watson, elementary, the Irish
peace process and Blair's place in history with the final settlement of the Irish
question in place was the tipping point, ie the resolution of the pardons issue
in the context of the Irish peace process.................for slow learners.
We were assured from the outset by Walker that he wanted his book to
be a book of record, and it was on that basis that we gave our support. Regretably, far from being the tome of
record which one hoped it would be, Forgotten Soldiers, The Irishmen Shot at Dawn, a book by BBC Northern Ireland
journalist Stephen Walker, seems to be nothing more than another British spin to
suit a British audience......facile
largire de alieno.
Re an Irish Pardon for Irish born British soldiers Shot at Dawn:
Re an Irish Pardon for Irish born British soldiers Shot at Dawn: On the
pretext that such a measure would be persuasive in encouraging a British
Government to look more sympathetically at the pardons issue it was suggested
during the campaign particularly by Andrew Mackinlay MP and some individuals in the UK associated with the British Shot at Dawn
Pardons Campaign, that the Irish Government should independently proceed and
pardon all our Irish born executed British soldiers irrespective of any British
determination on the matter, effectively calling for an Irish panacea to a
British dilemma prior to any final adjudication in the Farr case and
significantly without consulting with the Irish campaign effort ignoring our
concerns. Those that mooted such a course of action should note the following. Constitutional
obstacles and political sensitivities would have dictated that any pardon an
Irish Government might have considered would only have effected those Irish born
in the Republic of Ireland, would have excluded those who were born in Northern
Ireland, would not have effected the soldiers courts martial file it being held by the Ministry
of Defence outside Irish jurisdiction, and taking into account
historical concerns would ultimately have been
divisive. Such an
Irish pardon is, and was, never worth a
penny candle, and if introduced would have
needlessly jeopardised the interests of our Irish families
during a very sensitive time in the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign.
It is to their inestimable credit that the Irish
Government took the advice of the Shot
at Dawn Campaign Irl resisted that pressure and disregarded those
UK representations on behalf of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, a decision later vindicated by the introduction of the
2006 British Pardons Amendment.
Other Issues:
-
On Wednesday morning of the 9th November 2005,
post a special preview of the first production
of
The Worthless Soldier,
a play about the
execution of Private Bernard
McGeehan in Londonderry/Derry, a Mr John McGeehan was closely questioned by students in the audience from the nearby school as to his
precise relationship to Bernard. Mr McGeehan did not answer the question put
insofar as he believed his father was a cousin of a cousin of Private McGeehan.
Indeed Mr McGeehan's response was met by a stoical and embarrassing silence from
the young audience and his answer was unconvincing to say the least;
-
On
Wednesday 16th August 2006 in the
South Wales Argus, Mr McGeehan is quoted, re
Private McGeehan, that he was 'elated' the name of his great-uncle
had been cleared;
-
On Wednesday 16th August 2006 a BBC News extract refers to John
McGeehan, as Pte McGeehan's second cousin. His second cousin,
John McGeehan, is a member of the Shot at Dawn campaign group;
-
On Friday, 21st August
2006 in the Derry Journal
Pardon for Derry man 'Shot at Dawn' Mr McGeehan' is quoted as being a cousin of Bernard McGeehan;
-
A letter published in the
Donegal Journal dated 31st March 2006 entitled
Shot at Dawn - The Donegal Connection
interestingly asserted that In the Public Records Office in Kew there was
only scraps of information on Private McGeehan, quoting an address in
Liverpool. A reference to a total lack of available information on
Private Bernard McGeehan.
-
November 2006: In a letter
formulated to reflect the Shot at Dawn families backing for the pardons
amendment, relatives were invited to append their support and indicate their
relationship to each Shot at Dawn soldier. Interestingly, Mr John McGeehan
described himself as being a relative of Private Bernard McGeehan.
This very wide description is totally
inconsistent to Mr McGeehan's previous emphatic assertions of relationship to Private
Bernard McGeehan.
-
On page 89 in the book
Forgotten Soldiers, the Irish men Shot at Dawn by Stephen Walker, the author
asserts that John McGeehan is a second cousin of Bernard's.
Where is the documentary evidence?
To state that ones father is
a cousin of a cousin of Private Bernard McGeehan, and then in the same breath to
describe Private McGeehan as being ones great-uncle, and then in another
instance as being a cousin of Private McGeehan, then a second cousin, is blatantly inconsistent and
plainly a genealogical impossibility. You cannot be a great-nephew and a cousin
second or otherwise of Private Bernard McGeehan at the same time. Just because
one appears to have the same surname does not necessarily mean a relationship
does exist, irrespective as to how desirable that is.
Regretably, there are just to many inconsistencies in Mr McGeehan's story,
raising doubts as to his relationship, if any, with Private Bernard McGeehan.
-
On page 85 in the book
Forgotten Soldiers, the Irish men Shot at Dawn by Stephen Walker. The author
asserts so the family (a reference to the McGeehan family) decided to leave
their home in the north and move south to a house in the North Strand Road,
Dublin. This information could only have been sourced from Mr McGeehan in
Wales. For the record, the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl sought to identify
the previous owners/tenants of a residence in Annesley Place, North Strand Road, Dublin, the
address given by Mr McGeehan as the previous domicile of Private Bernard McGeehan,
before he was supposed to have gone to Liverpool to join up. Ironically, as one of our
friends now owns this house we had no difficulty in cross checking the title
deeds and other documentation, which revealed, that no McGeehan's had ever
lived in this location. We rechecked other dwellings in the adjacent area for the time frame
and
only one name similar lived in Annesley Place, however, not of the same spelling
and importantly was not within the time frame given by Mr McGeehan.
Interestingly
when we communicated this to Mr McGeehan he then advised that there must be some
family living in Dublin perhaps the McGeehan's had lived in Howth, County
Dublin. Speculation is not corroboration. To preserve the integrity of our Irish
campaign effort, we owe it to our other genuine Irish relatives to have such
claims corroborated..
Irrespective as to whether
there are other McGeehan's who may have been domiciled in the area of the North
Strand (or domiciled in the greater Dublin area, or in Londonderry/Derry, or
in Donegal, or in Belfast or Cork, or the McGeehan's listed in the 1901 and 1911
census records or anywhere else in Ireland or the UK), it is the production of documentary evidence corroborating a
direct connection to the soldier in question which is the issue,
and it is up to Mr John McGeehan to produce that documentary evidence to support his
contention of a relationship between himself and Private Bernard McGeehan. Despite on several occasions putting it to Mr McGeehan that his
relationship to Bernard is very very watery,
he has to date, not produced one
shred of documentary evidence confirming his relationship to this Irish born
Shot at Dawn soldier.
Since 2005, Mr McGeehan from Northern Ireland and
now located in the UK, has continually represented
himself to the general media et al, as a relative of
Private Bernard McGeehan, thereby adroitly
attaching himself on the back of the
British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign and by default attaching himself via
the back door with
the independent Shot at Dawn Campaign Ireland
effort, to the
detriment of our Irish based support. Despite conveying our concerns, todate,
Mr John McGeehan has not proved to our satisfaction his relationship to any of the 26 Irish Shot at
Dawn. Consequently, we must advise caution in dealing with this source. Over
the years some individuals for various reasons have made claims of relationship
to the Irish Shot at Dawn, unfortunately, very few have been able to corroborate
such claims and such claims usually evaporate and come to nothing.
-
Note: The Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl reserve the right not to accept such
unsubstantiated claims of relationship to any of our Irish Shot at Dawn on face
value alone and furthermore we also reserve the right to advise our viewers,
families and support base, to exercise caution in dealing with any individual
who makes such unsubstantiated claims of relationship to our Irish Shot at Dawn.
Friday 30th
November 2007:
Although these questions about Mr McGeehan's
relationship to Private McGeehan were first raised in 2005 and noting that uptill Friday 30th November 2007, no documentary evidence has been produced by Mr McGeehan to substantiate
his claim, irrespective, if by the 1st January 2008, Mr John McGeehan can
substantiate to us through documentary evidence, his claim of relationship as
either a grandnephew, second cousin or cousin to Private Bernard McGeehan, the
Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl will issue a fulsome apology and note same on our
website, together with making a large monetary donation to an Irish cancer
charity of his choice. In the circumstances, we believe it is reasonable to
again put the following question, if there is a relationship to Private Bernard McGeehan, where is the documentary
evidence ?
|
Saturday
27th
June 2009: |
|
To date,
Saturday 27th
June 2009, despite communicating our concerns, not one
shred of documentary evidence has been produced by Mr John McGeehan to
corroborate his purported relationship to Private Bernard McGeehan,
one of our
26 Irish born British Soldiers,
Shot at Dawn for military offences during world war one. It is
noted that as a response to our criticism, a website linked to the
Shot at Dawn Wales
asserted (and one assumes with
the support of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign) that:
-
Mr McGeehan
is the second cousin of Private Bernard McGeehan, and
-
He is
asserting his right, as a family member, to participate in
activities compatible with the restoration of his cousin's good name
and honour.
We put the
question again to all concerned. Where is the documentary evidence
corroborating Mr McGeehan’s relationship as the cousin, second cousin,
family member, grandnephew, relative or whatever of Private Bernard
McGeehan? Asserting that Mr McGeehan was born in the Republic of
Ireland is a total irrelevance, a statement designed to link him with
the Irish campaign and obfuscate the issue. (Mr McGeehan has been
resident in the UK for some considerable time and is understood to be
a member, inter alia, of the British Labour Party and has no connections whatsoever
with the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl either through the front or the
back door.
Under no circumstances does Mr McGeehan represent the
Irish effort or our families, and in particular he does not represent
the McGeehan family).
One
would have thought that after three years Mr John McGeehan might now
be in a position to put forward documentary evidence to satisfy a
simple basic requirement, i.e. that all claims of relationship to our
Irish Shot at Dawn must be corroborated through documentary evidence,
in order to prevent spurious claimants passing themselves off as
family. Consequently we offer the following observations for
attention:
-
Is it not a moral imperative for such documentary evidence to
be produced?
-
Is it not therefore reasonable, in the circumstances, to put
this question to prospective claimants in order to ascertain their
bona fides?
-
Are the Shot at Dawn Campaign groups not under an obligation,
indeed a duty to our executed soldiers and our surviving bona fide
relatives, to seek the production of such documentary evidence in
order to validate claims of relationship?
Out of respect
to surviving families, the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign is not prepared
to accept an assertion of relationship to one of our Irish Shot at
Dawn soldiers on face value alone.
Incredibly Mr McGeehan’s uncorroborated claim of relationship to Private McGeehan
has clearly impressed others in the UK, which gave him an immediate
buy in to the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, to the extent,
that he is now the co-ordinator of the Shot at Dawn Wales group, is a
media contact/spokesperson for the British Shot at Dawn Pardons
Campaign, was a central part of a BBC Northern Ireland documentary on
the Irish Shot at Dawn in 2005, despite
communicating our concerns about Mr McGeehan to the programme maker
and to
others in the UK, has been interviewed extensively by
the world’s media quoting ad nauseam his uncorroborated relationship
to Private McGeehan, has been given unlimited access to the upper
echelons of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign and via the back
door the Irish Shot at Dawn Campaign, to the detriment of our Irish
support base, and interestingly is cited as being a second cousin
of Private McGeehan in the book Forgotten Soldiers Published
October 2007 by BBC Northern Ireland journalist Stephen Walker,
sourced from Mr McGeehan himself, again we
communicated our concerns
about Mr McGeehan to the author prior to publication We reiterate, so far, no bona
fide relationship has been established whatsoever by Mr John McGeehan
to Private Bernard McGeehan.
Those in the UK
and in particular
Mr Julian Putkowski who initially vouched for Mr McGeehan should
also be asked as to why Mr McGeehan's uncorroborated claim of relationship to
Private McGeehan was accepted so easily by the British Shot at Dawn
Pardons Campaign without firstly confirming his actual status? All our
other Irish relatives have proven to our satisfaction their
relationship to our Irish Shot at Dawn. Is Mr McGeehan to be treated
differently? We think not. Mr McGeehan's apparent inability to produce any
documentary evidence to substantiate his claim of relationship as a
second cousin or whatever of Private Bernard McGeehan is a matter of
great concern for the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl. Consequently, the
Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl has no alternative but to advise inter alia, that all
such claims and assertions by Mr John McGeehan of his bona fide
relationship to Private McGeehan, in the absence of documentary
evidence, should be treated as bogus, until proven otherwise.
Taking into account the above we believe the airing of this
matter publicly on this website is more than justified.
For the record, the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl
is not linked with any UK grouping styling itself as the Shot at Dawn
Campaign, Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign, Shot at Dawn Wales or Wales
Shot at Dawn and any such attempted linkage by others in the UK is
erroneous.
|
Over a
period of years and particularly since November 2007, the Shot at
Dawn Campaign Irl has through various channels of communication
advised Mr John McGeehan that he is required to produce the necessary documentary evidence
(as our other Irish families have done) to support his claim of relationship to
Private
Bernard McGeehan.
Consequently, as Mr McGeehan has failed thus far, to produce any
verification of relationship, we are now confirmed in the opinion,
that Mr McGeehan is not, and never was a second cousin, or a
relative of Private Bernard McGeehan, and that all such
uncorroborated claims by him, amount to an outrageous deception,
to the detriment of our Irish families and support base. Mr
McGeehan's inability to corroborate his relationship to any of our
Irish Shot at Dawn is of great concern. It is also of great
concern that an organisation such as the Pardons Campaign in the
UK which prides itself on high moral standards and the integrity
of its sources and members, should support and permit Mr McGeehan
such latitude. In the light of the above, are the criticisms by
Colonel John Hughes-Wilson and other opponents of the Pardons
Campaign in the British military and political establishment now
vindicated, when they point to some hidden agenda behind the
British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign effort ?
Unsurprisingly no cogent rebuttal has been issued by Mr McGeehan or the
British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign in
response to the above
and we doubt if there ever will be ? |
|
Postscript 1
Saturday 14th
March 2009: A person claiming to be a relative
made contact with the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl and presented documentary
evidence proving his direct relationship to Private Bernard McGeehan. This relative had no problem corroborating his
relationship to Private McGeehan and we are satisfied from our own
genealogical sources, that he is a bona fide relative of Private
McGeehan. To date, all our bona fide relatives have presented documentary
evidence confirming their relationship to our Irish Shot at Dawn, except
Mr John McGeehan of the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign.
Please note, there is a moral imperative on those who claim relationship to any of our Irish
Shot at Dawn to prove through documentary evidence their bona fides. The Shot at
Dawn Campaign Irl (to protect the integrity of the Irish Shot at Dawn
Campaign effort against spurious claimants), cannot and will not accept such claims
of relationship to our Irish Shot at Dawn without the appropriate
documentation being produced.
Postcript 2
Following the publication of a story extracted from
the book Forgotten Soldiers by Stephen Walker, in the
December 2007 edition of the Cork magazine, the Holly Bough, regarding the execution of
Private James Graham, one of our
26 Irish
born British soldiers, Shot at Dawn. A person claiming to be a relative of
Private Graham made contact. Subsequently an interview took place in Cork City
with a Mr McCarthy. Documentary evidence confirms that he is the
grandnephew of Private James Graham. Interestingly, ones maternal great
grandparents come from North Cork and we are descended from the same branch of
this Cork McCarthy family. See the
McCarthy Irish/Argentine Connection.
|
Compensation -
Irish Born Merchant Seamen - Slave Labourers - Germany - WW2 |
|
Unknown to the
Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46) until the 1st November 2007, an article
entitled
Payouts Hope For Ex-Seamen
had been published in the
Newcastle Journal on January 12th 2002 which asserted inter alia, referring to a Mr John Hipkin, that:
-
Hundreds of former merchant seamen could be
compensated over being forced to work for the Nazis thanks to a North-East war
veteran.
-
His evidence over how captured seamen were mistreated has led to a campaign to
extend the deadline on a compensation fund set up by the German government.
This is misleading and untrue.
Although the article goes on to elaborate on our involvement, it does
misleadingly give the impression that Mr Hipkin is somehow responsible for any compensation
that might have been procured for former merchant seamen held captive by the Germans and forced
to do slave labour. Mr Hipkin contacted us in the first instance in May 2001 as
a result of our article in the UK edition of the Irish Post. He did give
information regarding the fact that he had seen Irish born merchant seamen as prisoners in the
merchant navy internment camp, known as Milag Nord in Germany during
world war two, and we are grateful for
that information. However, the claim or suggestion that his evidence is
responsible in some way for our decision to
lead a campaign
to extend the deadline on a compensation fund set up by the German government,
is blatantly untrue. After extensive
consultation with other authorities in Ireland, the Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46)
initiated its own research project which was ultimately successful in achieving
large compensation for Irish born, British and allied merchant
seamen who
were captured during world war two while serving on British or allied vessels and forced to
work as slave labourers in the
Nazi Slave Labour Camp in Bremen-Farge. This research project is
still ongoing.
The
Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46) which also coordinates the Shot at
Dawn Campaign Irl, vigorously
rejects this unfortunate assertion by the Newcastle Journal. We wish to point out that
Mr John Hipkin also leads the British Shot at Dawn Pardons Campaign.
Note for Journalists BBC Northern
Ireland:
Regarding the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl effort.
Notwithstanding the immense debt of gratitude owed to the
Department of Foreign Affairs in Dublin and in
particular to the
Civil Servants in Iveagh House Anglo-Irish Division, a great debt of gratitude is
also owed to the NUJ/SIPTU and their members
for the critical role they played in the success of the whole Shot at Dawn
Campaign effort, Irish and UK. Without the attendant publicity of sympathetic and
constructive written analysis it would have been extremely difficult to pursue
the British Government down the line and exert the appropriate pressure. One
could point to Irish North and South, UK, USA, Canadian, Australian and New Zealand
newspapers in particular. Thank you folks. The collective efforts of all
concerned deserve a collective credit and you will not be forgotten by the Shot
at Dawn Campaign Irl or our Irish families some of whom must still remain
anonymous at their request.
That said, one has had very bad experiences with some radio and television
journalists, in particular from the BBC in Northern Ireland.
Following a previous unpleasant experience with a journalist from BBC Radio
Ulster/Radio Foyle we indicated our concerns on the website of the Irish
Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46)
see
BBC
Radio (Northern Ireland) programme entitled 'A Journey to Remember'.
-
In the light of the above,
under no circumstance should any journalist from the BBC in Northern Ireland Radio
or Television etc, consider making contact again. Indeed until Mr
McGeehan formally corroborates his relationship to
Private Bernard McGeehan
through documentary evidence, his inclusion
by any media
outlet in any programme or article etc, as a commentator, representative or other,
will immediately disbar the involvement of the Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl.
-
The Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl will not engage with the Shot at Dawn Pardons
Campaign, Shot at Dawn Wales or any other group within or associated with
the Pardons Campaign in the UK. We have learnt from our previous engagement
with perfidious albion and do not intend repeating those
mistakes again.
-
As a policy we
do not give out the contact details of our families. However, depending on source and relevance, an
enquiry is usually passed on and then left up to the relatives concerned to
initiate contact, at their discretion.
Taking into account that an Irish relatives email address was circulated
without his express agreement, families who wish to keep their
contact details private should be aware, that if they contact the Shot at Dawn Pardons
Campaign UK or their representatives directly, it is probable your contact details will be circulated
without your permission or knowledge.
Peter Mulvany B.C.L (Hon)., HDip Arts
Admin,
Chairperson Irish Seamen's Relatives Association (1939-46), Co-ordinator
Shot at Dawn Campaign Irl.
Previous
|