lifeasdaddy

Why was HMAS Sydney (II) sunk?

The wreck of HMAS Sydney (II) has been found, and can be assumed to be the final resting place for most of her 645 crew.

The decades old query about why she was sunk has resurfaced and the controversy continues in an item from today's Sydney Morning Herald:

Professor Tom Frame, a former Anglican bishop to the Australian Defence Force and author of HMAS Sydney: Loss And Controversy, stepped into the latest row on Friday to defend the honour of the boat's commanding officer.

Dr Frame said Captain Joseph Burnett had been "terribly defamed" by a survivor from the Kormoran, the German armed merchant "raider" that on November 19, 1941, sank the Australian light cruiser in the Indian Ocean, killing all 645 crew.

Ludwig Ernst, 89, the president of the Kormoran Survivors' Association, told The West Australian newspaper that Burnett's actions during the fateful encounter were "incompetent" and "criminal".

"Eventually Australians will have to comprehend that the guilty party for Sydney's sinking is Captain Burnett," Mr Ernst said.

Well, what do the archives say?

Commander (later Captain) Emile Dechaineux was sent to Perth to coordinate the investigation and particularly the interrogation of the POW Kormoran survivors.  He arrived in Perth on 28 November 1941.

On 30 November 1941 Sir Dudley Pound the First Sea Lord of the Admiralty in London sent a signal to the Australian Commonwealth Naval Board:

When you have been able to collect from prisoners all available information regarding action between SYDNEY and raider, grateful if you would let me know what happened so that we can deduce any lessons for the future.

[ Naval War Diary, message 1st Sea Lord to ACNB, 1115A/30 November. Naval Historical Branch { from Captain Peter Hore's fine book HMAS Sydney II: The cruiser and the controversy in the archives of the United Kingdom}]

The response can be found in the National Archives of Australia as Interrogation of German survivors ex Raider 41 "Kormoran" [ NAA:  MP1049/5, 412871 ]

Here's page 4 of 36 pages from the online document:

This was sent to the Admiralty from the Naval Board on 23 December 1941.

At point number 1. close to the bottom of the page it states,  "CAPTAIN OF "SYDNEY" WAS DECEIVED AND PLACED HIMSELF IN TACTICALLY UNSOUND POSITION."

For the sake of completeness, here is the next page of the 2 page communique. (page 5 of the 36 page online document)

The file next shows Commander Dechaineux's draft, as an internal Minute Paper. (page 6 of 36 pages in the online document)

The next page of his draft (page 7 of 36 pages in the online document) has as the corresponding point number 1. in lessons learnt as:

1.  Captain of "SYDNEY" was deceived and placed himself in tactically unsound position.  The contributory cause of this is the admitted inefficiency of Merchant Ships in challenge and reply procedure.

We see also the signature Dechaineux at the bottom of the typescript.

There is another significant matter to consider.  The way in which the Official History of the Royal Australian Navy in WWII was written. The official naval war historian was Mr. G. Hermon Gill.  His two volume history is the starting point for any serious reader about WWII RAN naval history.

There's a very interesting correspondence relating to Gill's writing about the sinking of HMAS Sydney II, which has been highlighted by Richard Summerrell:

An interesting postscript to the official inquiries into the loss of the Sydney is revealed in the correspondence of R B M Long, the former Director of Naval Intelligence with G Hermon Gill, the official navy war historian in 1953. It appears that Gill referred to Long for his comments copies of his draft chapters of the official war history (including chapter 12, the chapter in which Gill deals with the loss of the Sydney).

In Long’s reply of 23 November 1953 he remarked that chapter 12 ‘is the best one you have done so far’. He went on to comment on Gill’s treatment of the story, particularly the conjecture as to why Burnett appeared to have put the Sydney in a position of vulnerability.

‘I think you handle the subject with great tact, very fairly and with literary skill. It is a part of the History that will be closely read and as Joe Burnett’s two sons are now rising in rank as Naval Officers it is important that they should be able to read that section without distress. I don’t know who it was who said that we all make mistakes and the man who doesn’t makes nothing. Burnett’s mistakes and the loss of the Sydney of course must be his responsibility (whether he happened to be sick or dead at the time of the action is of little consequence) and his reputation must be carried by his sons, but I think that you have given such a decent slant to the matter that they need never be even embarrassed.’

Commenting on other sections of the draft Long noted

‘The search for the Kormoran films commenced as a military expedition, certainly within six months of the Kormoran prisoners being put into stir. It continued intermittently until 1945... You probably know that I, personally, continued for over two years, a world search and on the flimsiest stories, for some indication as to the Sydney’s end. I well remember an expedition that was outfitted for me on the Gold Coast and bunged up country into Vichey/French Territory on a statement that some nine Germans, mostly officers, with two British prisoners, had gone inland from Dakar. I just can’t remember the full extent of the search but I remember it also took in Kerguelan [sic] and there was a case of the “Two Sailors” in the mountainous country back in Natal. It is correct to say that “not a stone was left unturned”.’

Part of Long’s response appears to have been used by Gill in the official history. At page 460, Gill states

‘Australian naval intelligence continued for some years a search for any information which would throw light on the fate of Sydney’s company. The flimsiest stories were followed up, and the search ranged from Central Africa to Kerguelen, but without success.

[ I have removed Richard Summerrell's footnotes from this excerpt, but the full text can be read online here. ]

SUMMARY

Firstly, Dechaineux's report on the sinking of HMAS Sydney, mainly arising from POW Kormoran survivor interrogations, stated that the Captain of HMAS Sydney was deceived and allowed himself to be placed in a tactically unsound position.

Secondly, the official historian was praised for writing about HMAS Sydney's demise so as not to cause distress or embarrassment to the sons of the Captain who were themselves in rising RAN careers.

 

What was the Unknown Sailor of Christmas Island wearing? Part Four.

Part One was here.

Part Two was here.

Part Three was here.

Here I shall give online resources I have referenced and relied upon thus far.

With renewed interested in HMAS Sydney (II) consequent to announcement of the discovery of Kormoran's wreck together with battle debris belived to be from HMAS Sydney (II), this will assist some people landing on this  blog.

USEFUL LINKS about the Unknown Sailor of Christmas Island:

National Archives of Australia Recordsearch.

--------------------------------

Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, Completed Inquiry: The loss of HMAS Sydney, Report.

-------------------------------

The Sinking of HMAS Sydney A guide to Commonwealth Governement Records by Richard Summerrell (1999).

-------------------------------

ABC 7.30 report story 28 July 2000 - Govt agrees to fund search for Unknown Sailor.

--------------------------------

Australia's Forgotten Son by Glenys McDonald.

----------------------------------

Western Australian Museum HMAS Sydney reading list.

----------------------------------

An analysis of the HMAS Sydney / HSK Kormoran engagement.

----------------------------------

RAN History - Archives HMAS Sydney / Kormoran documents: Documents confiscated from repatriated Kormoran POWs afte there arrival in the UK on SS. Orontes.  RAN Naval Intelligence had sent a request to the RN to have the former prisoners searched upon arrival in the UK.

-------------------------------

RAN History archives summary of HMAS Sydney (II) and Kormoran - Lifeboat Workshop  23 - 24 APR 03.

-------------------------------

Australian Defence Report 3 October 2006 giving details of expedition to Christmas Island to locate the remains.

----------------------------------

Defence Media Briefing 26 October 2006, Remains of Unknown Sailor located on Christmas Island.

------------------------------

Defence online media room brief report including several photographs of the search for the remains, and relics deposited with the Australian War Memorial for analysis and safekeeping.

--------------------------------

Article from Defence Magazine issue November/December 2006 giving general summary of search status prior to the DNA analysis.

--------------------------------

Media release on 17 December 2006 by Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence: Findings of initial ballistics analysis relating to unkknown sailor.

----------------------------------

18 December 2006 ABC news story detailing the metal fragment in unknown sailor's remains was shrapnel, not a bullet as was first thought.

---------------------------------

Media release on 12 February 2007 by Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence detailing the metallurgical analysis of the shrapnel fragment found in the exhumed remains of the Unknown Sailor.

-------------------------------

Media release on 23 June 2007 by Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence detailing phase one of search for surviving relatives for DNA match and that the corpse had been wearing white overalls.

---------------------------------

Navy paper 12 July 2007 Bid to identify unknown sailor.

---------------------------------

Media release on 06 August 2007 by Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence detailing conclusion that the corpse had been wearing white overalls and phase two of search for survising relatives for DNA match.

----------------------------------------

The bone sailor - The Bulletin, September 4 2007, p.23

---------------------------------

Details of the Mutiny on Christmas Island in March 1941 and the Japanese invasion of the island.

--------------------------------

BBC Radio 4 podded broadcast of interview with the son of Captain Leonard Williams who was murdered during the Christmas Island mutiny in March 1941.

--------------------------------

Discussion forum entry by melliget (surely Martin Elliget a frequent corresspondent to Mackenaie Gregory) wherin he canvasses many identical questions which I have raised about the conflicting evidence regarding blue coveralls versus white coveralls.

--------------------------------

Digger History 3:  German Naval Uniforms.

--------------------------------

What was the Unknown Sailor of Christmas Island wearing? Part One.

Part Two is here.

Part Three is here.

Part Four is here.

This blog post (part one) will address some factual matters surrounding identifying the body of an Unknown Sailor which was found off shore Christmas Island on 7 February, 1942. Many believe him to have been a member of the crew of HMAS Sydney (II).  Some background is required to gain an understanding of the issues.

(Photo from RAN)

HMAS Sydney (II) was lost at sea on 19 November, 1941 a victim of the German raider Kormoran.  All hands perished.  No survivor of the 645 crew members was ever found.

The pain felt by relatives of Sydney crew members has endured even as the decades have passed. There are strong emotions involved relating to the sense of loss, a perceived inaction and lack of care by our Government about appropriately commemorating the loss of the crew, indeed how best to commemorate and memorialise the loss, and how best to deal with the case of the Unknown Sailor of Christmas Island with respect to finding and identifying his remains, and then a re-interment.  There have in the past been accusations of a cover-up by the Government which have hopefully now been allayed.

The Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade mentioned these quotations in Chapter 8 of it's 1999 Report on The Loss of HMAS Sydney :

It seems inconceivable that a nation such as Australia, with its magnificent military history, can permit the fate of one of its most famous warships to remain shrouded in mystery and for the fate of 645 of her crew to remain unverified. It is, in short, a national disgrace and a scandal ... When a country such as Australia refuses to engage in a search for its lost heroes just off the shore of its own continent, it defies belief.1

What we say is that it is irrelevant how the Sydney was sunk. It will not change history ... What I, my mother, her brothers and sister (and I am sure all the wives, children, brothers, sisters and loved ones - plus one surviving mother of one of the Sydney's crew) would like to know is where the wreck of the Sydney is lying on the ocean floor, and if the body on Christmas island is that of one of the Sydney's crew.2

In  November 2004 the Shrine of Remembrance in Melbourne held an exhibition in tribute to the lost crew of HMAS Sydney.  My friend MacKenzie Gregory was a member of the organising committee for that exhibition and noted these emotional reactions to the exhibition:

"... Captain Burnett's daughter was one of our visitors, only 4 years old when her Dad died.

This lady, naturally enough became quite tearful when talking about the action which claimed her Father, she indicated that she was not in favour of finding the wreck, and would prefer to let her lay where ever she may be in peace.

On the other hand, many relatives with whom we talked would like to know the last resting place of their individual loved ones. "

With respect to the Unknown Sailor of Christmas island, the 1999 Parliamentary Report noted that,

For many who made submissions to the inquiry, the body on Christmas Island was a central concern.  If the body was indeed that of one of HMAS Sydney's crew, there was a strong feeling that it should no longer lie in an unmarked grave in a remote part of the Indian Ocean.

In October 2006 a Royal Australian Navy search team led by Captain Jim Parsons visited the Old European Cemetery of Christmas Island.  After an exhaustive yet targeted search they successfully located the grave of the Unknown Sailor, exhumed the remains which included a complete skeleton, and the ability to identify dental work via fillings and missing teeth. The remains were transported to the Shellshear Museum at the University of Sydney and they have subsequently been subject to dental, anthropological, pathological, ballistic, metallurgic and DNA analysis at a variety of locations.  Here's a transcript of the Media conference given on 26 October 2006 by Captain Jim Parson, Commander Matthew Blenkin, and Jo Button.

Capt. Parsons:

"Yes there's one other point that I missed, with the recovering of the remains, there were a couple of things we found.  One was press-studs - certainly what appears to be press-studs. they're badly corroded but that's what they look like.

Again, history tells us that when the sailor was recovered he was wearing blue overalls, bleached white by the sun, with press-studs down the front.  Again, another piece of evidence that suggests it's the right person."

and

"These are all part of the artifacts that we handed over to the Australian War Memorial earlier this week for analysis because it appears that both the eyelets and the press-studs have some minute traces of material still jammed between where they're pressed together and we're hopeful that we might be able to analyse something out of that."

In the photo at left (supplied by the Defence Department) Captain Jim Parsons, team leader for the Christmas Island Project, hands over artifacts found at the gravesite of the unknown sailor to the Australian War Memorial's Assistant Registrar Georgina Cunningham.  click on photo for larger image, and see one of the press studs in the sealed clear plastic bag closest to camera.

Since the remains of the Unknown Sailor were exhumed in October 2006 much work has been done by the team and associated scientists and technicians.

METALLURGICAL ANALYSIS OF SHRAPNEL FOUND IN THE SKULL

This indicated that the shrapnel was of German origin, not Japanese as it contained silicon and manganese which were known to be used by the Germans to harden metals in 1941.  The shrapnel did not contain either nickel or copper, which were characteristically used in Japanese hardening techniques in 1941.  The implication is that this is consistent with the attack by the German raider Kormoran on HMAS Sydney (II), and also seems likely to rule out the Unknown Sailor being a victim of a Japanese attack.  Some historians have postulated that the ship was sunk by a Japanese Submarine, however this is a minority view.

PATHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION

This has shown that death occurred between 50 and 100 years ago, again consistent with the skeleton being that of the Unknown Sailor from 1942.  It has also revealed shrapnel struck the front of the skull and lodged in the left forehead.  Additionally there was a second major skull injury with bone loss on the left side of the skull, above and behind the left earhole believed to have occurred around the time of death.  There were multiple rib fractures, but these may have occurred post mortem due to settling of the grave.

DNA ANALYSIS

Scientists at Adelaide Research and Innovation  and the Australian Centre for Ancient DNA at the University of Adelaide extracted and analysed DNA from the teeth according to this report in NAVY.

FABRIC ANALYSIS

"White fabric and the particular weave of that fabric found within an overall stud recovered with the body pointed to an engineering officer from Sydney II" according to this report in NAVY.

Forensic odontological reports and anthropological reports excluded more than 500 of the crew of HMAS Sydney (II) according to this Defence Department media release.

Breaking those numbers down in this media release, we see that "... post mortem dental  examination of the remains was carried out.  Regrettably only half the crew dental records are available, the remainder having been lost with the ship.  While no positive match was achieved, this analysis resulted in more than 300 of the crew being excluded."

"The next stage involved an anthropological examination of the skeleton.  This effectively excluded a further 200 members on the bases of indicative age at death and height.  This left about 100 of HMAS Sydney II crew as potential matches for the remains. "

SEARCH FOR DNA MATCHING AMONGST POSSIBLE SURVIVING RELATIVES BEGINS

On 23 June 2007, the Defence Department announced that the attempt to match DNA was commencing with a search for surviving relatives of 3 Engineering Officers from the crew.  There were also widespread announcements in Australian media at that time.

The announcement also mentioned:

In particular Australian War Memorial (AWM) analysis of cloth fragments found within press-studs resulted in the assessment the man had been buried wearing white coveralls.

Historical research by the AWM and the Navy's Sea-Power Centre-Australia concluded that the sailor was therefore most likely to be an Officer or Warrant Officer from one of the technical categories.

Mike Cecil of the Australian War Memorial said this conclusion is based on the assumption that the sailor was dressed in accordance with Naval regulations and indeed was wearing his own coveralls.

"it must be noted that it remains quite possible that these assumptions may prove to be incorrect," Mr. Cecil said.

There is no doubt that all concerned in finding the remains of the Unknown Sailor and in attempting to effect an accurate identification are discharging their Sacred duty in a very thorough manner.

SEARCH FOR DNA MATCHING AMONGST POSSIBLE SURVIVING RELATIVES CONTINUES

On 6 August 2007, the Defence Department issued an update announcing that the attempt to find matching DNA with relatives of 3 short-listed sailors had been unsuccessful. Hence the search was being widened to locate surviving relatives of 11 other Officers and Warrant Officers who were entitled to wear white coveralls and 2 civilian canteen workers who may be potential matches due to uncertainty of what they may have been wearing during battle stations.

It was hoped that relatives may be able to provide additional biographical, physiological or medical information which would further assist the identification process.

Again, this received wide media coverage.

Again, admirable thoroughness.

Shortly after this release on 6 August 2007 Australia entered Federal Election mode, and due to caretaker government provisions few media announcements occur during that period.  However as at time of writing today, there seems to have been no further information released about the search.

My problem with this?  I think that the historical record in the National Archives of Australia show the Unknown Sailor was found off Christmas Island wearing blue coveralls which were bleached white by exposure.  Consequently the team striving to identify the remains should be concentrating on a different segment of the crew.  Those who would have been most likely to wear blue coveralls.

Let's explore that in Part Two. 

 

Swing Low Sweet Chariot

I stumbled across a podcast on iTunes of Joe Carter singing Swing Low Sweet Chariot.  It's quite simply the best version of this spiritual I've heard.

Carter  sings a slightly shortened version, but I love the way he and his piano accompanist pick up a bit of strut/swing in the second verse.  Don't know the name of the accompanist but he or she does a great job.

To double check, I listened once again to the Paul Robeson version, and still think Carter beats him out.

Other notable covers of Swing Low Sweet Chariot are this one by Kathleen Battle, and this by UB40.

lifeasdaddy - Online reviews and ratings: Do they stack up?

There's a general lack of transparency about various sites which rank products and services online.  A lack of transparency about how the exact ranking is decided that is.

The Wall Street Journal's Numbers Guy runs his slide rule over the online rankings issue here.

There's lies, damned lies, and statistics.

lifeasdaddy - Errol Morris: The best blog post ever?

Jason Kottke reckons that this piece by Errol Morris may well be the best blog post he has every read.

Morris is blogging there on the New York Times site, and there are more than 700 comments to the post.

He talks about two almost identical photographs taken by Roger Fenton in 1855 during the Crimean War.

It's interesting. 

lifeasdaddy - Sloppy journalism from the Sydney Morning Herald.

UPDATE - See note at bottom of blog post.

Today's Sydney Morning Herald has a minor editorial piece, "Giving Sydney the green light." (Previous link has now rolled over to a newly dated editorial) It's on page 30 of the paper.  It's meant to be a snide article about the traffic disruption being caused in Sydney wherever President Bush goes.  Specifically the (traditionally) anonymous writer refers to yesterday's journey by President Bush  "to the National Maritime Museum to visit the bell from HMAS Canberra ..."

However as you know from my piece here, and Mackenzie Gregory's account here, the bell Pres. bush visited is the ship's bell from the USS Canberra, a United States Ship named at the direction of President Roosevelt in honor of the HMAS Canberra.  HMAS (His Majesty's Australian Ship) Canberra  was sunk in the Battle of Savo Island on the 9th of August, 1942 with the loss of 84 Officers and Men.

The ship's bell of HMAS Canberra can be safely assumed to be resting in the ship's watery grave at

09 degrees 12 minutes 29 seconds south

159 degrees 54 minutes 46 seconds east

off the Solomon Islands.

U.S. destroyers remove the crew from the fatally-damaged HMAS Canberra, off Guadalcanal at about 0630 on the morning of 9 August 1942, following the Battle of Savo Island. USS Blue (DD-387) is alongside Canberra's port bow, as USS Patterson (DD-392) approaches from astern.

Official U.S. Navy Photograph, now in the collections of the National Archives

Photo #: 80-G-13488

Here is today's erroneous bit from the Sydney Morning Herald:

ADDED:

Trevor Cook gives this issue some oxygen.

Someone has been doing some Google searches about "hmas canberra bell" today, bringing them to this blog entry, and also to the US Embassy in Canberra's site for this snippet.

UPDATE: The Sydney Morning Herald has corrected the error in response to my complaint emailed to their readerlink section. You can see the corrected item online at:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/editorial/for-a-distracted-superpower-apec-looks-like-a-nuisance/2007/09/06/1188783417364.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

Thanks, Thea and Justine at the Sydney Morning Herald!

Added on 18 September 2007:  Here's a photo of President Bush visiting the bell of USS Canberra at Australia's National Maritime Museum on 5 September, 2007.  The ship's name "U.S.S. CANBERRA" can be clearly seen in the photo taken by Charles Dharapak for AP.

lifeasdaddy - Some Fisher-Price toys recalled in Australia, USA and elsewhere due to lead coating

Here's the story about US recall.

Here's the story about Australia recall.:

Mattel Australia recalled 43,000 Fisher-Price toys today after characters including Dora the Explorer, Sesame Street's Ernie and Barney the Dinosaur were found to be coated in dangerous levels of lead.

Here's the Fisher-Price Australia product safety recall page, however the information does not yet include this latest recall - as at 3.45pm August 2, 2007.

IMPORTANT:

Here's the USA product recall site, with some relevant information.

lifeasdaddy - 55 essential articles every blogger should read.

Matt Huggins has scoured the 'net to bring you these.

[ tip from Joe Wikert ]

lifeasdaddy - What happens when a bunch of famous dead people get together?

They get CMG Worldwide to be their agent. 

And a few of the living famous and talented too.