CONVERSION OF MEMBERS OF A TRIBUNAL

From The Tribunal May 2nd 1918

This is a further update in a series of extracts from the No Conscription Fellowship’s journal, published in the UK between March 1916 and November 1918
For other extracts go to:_ http://nfpb.org.uk/tribunal

The following account has been sent to us by one of our members:

“On March 22nd. F. Edwards, one of the men in the N.C.F. Branch appealed before the Willesden Tribunal on conscience grounds for exemption from Military Service. There was very clear proof that his case was genuine, for the work he is doing in the post office is so important that he was told if he would agree to be in “Army Reserve W” he would not be called upon for military service. Edwards said that as a conscientious objector it was impossible for him to agree to this, and consequently received a calling-up notice. When he had stated his case before the Tribunal one member moved that his appeal be dismissed, and this was seconded. Then an unlooked-for incident occurred. One of the members of the Tribunal who has been particularly hard on C.O.‘s rose, and said very forcibly and deliberately that he wished to move an amendment, partly in justice to the applicant, who, he thought, has proved to them all that his objection was genuine, and that therefore he was as much entitled to exemption under the act as a Clerk in Holy orders, but also because he wished to protest against the continued imprisonment of C.O.‘s. He admitted his mistake in sending many men to prison, he regretted it, but he intended publicly to raise his voice against the injustice now whenever he had the opportunity. The men who have suffered imprisonment have won his respect and support, though he does not hold their views. His amendment was seconded by another member of the tribunal, who also spoke strongly against the repeated sentences of imprisonment meted out to the [email protected] for the same offence. One curious thing was that the military representative nodded his head during these speeches as if in approval. The amendment was not carried, and the case was dismissed, Edwards giving notice of appeal. Edwards went home rejoicing that the men in prison had accomplished this change of thinking in those two members of the Tribunal – his own case being quite a secondary thing to him.”

dove..