John Amey

Oldham Tribunal 8 March 1916
Reported Oldham Standard 11 March 1916

[In this report the brothers are called Ainley but it is certainly a mistake]

John Ainley, a clerk in the Oldham County Court and his brother Samuel Ainley, employed in the Education Offices, both objected on conscientious grounds. Both are members of the Union Street Congregational Church and both had joined the No-Conscription Fellowship.

One of them said that it was the teaching of Christ not to take part in the war.
Councillor Frith: Not even to save life?
- Yes.
Not to attempt to heal?
- That is a different thing.

Councillor Schofield: Where does Christ tell you about that in his teachings?
- In the Sermon on the Mount.

Councillor Schofield asked other questions and eventually exclaimed, "I asked you a plain question, don't beat about the bush." Later Councillor Schofield said the applicants put themselves behind the shelter of the army and the navy. If it was not for the navy today, where would they be? It was not often Councillor Schofield was ashamed of his fellow townsmen but he was sometimes.

One of the applicants said he was ashamed of the other side.

At the end of the hearing one of the applicants asked to know the decision so they would be able to appeal and Councillor Frith advised them to appeal at once "for chances".

One of the applicants: I suppose we are prejudged.

Councillor Schofield resented the comment and said the speaker deserved turning out of the room for the observation ….

…. The Tribunal decided that all the conscientious objectors should be put in the non-combatant class.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

South East Lancashire Appeal Tribunal at Manchester Town Hall 30 March 1916
Reported Oldham Chronicle 1 April 1916 (the following is an extract)

The South-east Lancashire Appeal Tribunal sitting at the Town Hall Manchester on Thursday afternoon heard appeals for total exemption from service made by a number of young men of Oldham, conscientious objectors, who had been sent to non-combatant service in most cases by the Oldham Tribunal and in a few cases to combatant service ….

…. John Amey of 8 Trinity-street, a clerk employed at the County Court, wrote in his appeal that war was contrary to the teaching of Christ. When loyalty to country came into conflict with loyalty to Christ, he held that as a Christian loyalty to country must come second. He could not make any distinction between combatant and non-combatant duties, for in the latter case he would be helping in the prosecution of the war.

A letter written by the Rev M Ph Davies concerning John Amey and his brother and two other young men named Smith and Taylor [Ralph Robert Smith and Charles Henry Taylor both of whom also appeared at this Tribunal] was read. The writer was sure that their objections against service was founded on clear religious convictions. The Union Street Congregational Church, to which they belonged, had sent 100 young men to the army or to munitions work. Was it too much to ask that these four young men should enjoy the exemption which the law allowed?

Chairman: We don't propose for a moment to send you people to combatant service you know.

Amey: Cannot I appeal against non-combatant service? If I were willing to undertake that I should be quite willing to go to the trenches straight away. They are doing their duty as they see it and I am trying to do mine as I see it.

He was sent to non-combatant service.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

John Amey, Samuel Amey, Charles Henry Taylor, Harry Palmer, James Hill, Ernest Hill

Oldham Magistrates' Court 28 April 1916
Reported Oldham Chronicle 28 April 1916

A special session of magistrates was held this (Friday) morning at the Oldham Town Hall to deal with six cases under the Military Service Act. The men charged were:
Samuel Amey (27) of 83 Burlington Avenue, clerk
Charles Henry Taylor (24) of 5 Studley Street, cop packer
Harry Palmer (25) of 370 Huddersfield Road
John Amey (23) of 8 Trinity Street, clerk
James Hill (24) of 217 Horsedge Street, tinsmith
Ernest Hill (19) of 217 Horsedge Street, clerk

In the public gallery a large number of friends and relatives of the defendants gathered and the Rev M Ph Davies also sat there.
The justices on the bench were Mr John Grime (in the chair) and Mr Albert Horrobin.

The Chief Constable said the six men were charged with being absentees under the Military Service Act 1896. They had all had notices sent to them by the military authorities to report themselves at the Swan Hotel on the 25th and they had failed to report.

The Clerk (Mr Hesketh Booth) asked the elder Amey whether he admitted that.
Amey: Yes
The Chief Constable: That you have had the notice?
- Yes
The Clerk: What excuse have you?
Amey: I claim that there is a conscience clause in the Act and owing to its maladministration we have been denied our right under it. Members of the Oldham Tribunal, and Alderman Hirst in a letter to the press, stated that they could not grant absolute exemption for conscientious objection but later on, a letter was issued by Mr Walter Long stating that they could and I think we should have a retrial. When we came before Judge Mellor at Manchester he referred us to the Pelham Committee and we have had no opportunity of appearing before the committee to see what work of national importance could be found for us.

The Clerk: I don't know that the magistrates can do anything to give effect to your objection. You have lost your appeal in both cases.
Amey: The local tribunal gave us exemption from combatant service and, if they had been rightly informed as to the law, they might have given us total exemption.
The Clerk: The magistrates have no power over that.
Amey: I don't think we have had a fair trial.
The Clerk: I have no doubt that some of the tribunals have conducted their business in a way I should not approve of myself but I don't think the magistrates can interfere with it.

Amey: With regard to Judge Mellor referring us to the Pelham Committee, the military authorities have not given us time to find work of national importance and I think the case might be adjourned for that purpose. If the military authorities will suspend this warrant we may possibly get some redress from that source.

The clerk (to Sergeant Major Bailey): What do you say to that?
Sergeant Major Bailey: I think they had better be handed over to the military authorities and let them deal with it.
The Chief Constable said that Captain Aked thought that was the proper course.
The Clerk said he was not sure of that. He did not agree with everything the military authorities did. They were very often wrong.

Amey said that if they were handed over to the military authorities they would not have the bench to appeal to and they would not be likely to get any redress. He thought, in view of Judge Mellor's remarks, they ought to have a postponement to enable the committee to state what was work of national importance.

The Chairman: I think you have had two chances and you ought to go now. You have been before two courts.

Amey said there were some of them who would have to resist if they were forced into the army, but they felt they could undertake certain work of a civil character of national importance but not to release another man to go to fight.

The Chairman: I have no sympathy with you. Others have had to go before you and at a time like this the question of conscience --------
Amey: But the Act provides a conscience clause for us and the tribunal was under a misapprehension.
The Clerk: Yes, I know they were and there has been a decision of the Court of Appeal against you on that point, a decision that I don't agree with.

Taylor, on being asked what he had to say, said that he associated himself with what Amey had said. Palmer did likewise and went on to add that Judge Mellor at the Appeal Tribunal told them that they were beyond him and that he handed them over to the Pelham Committee, that they should trust the government who had said that they would find them work of national importance. If they were handed over to the military authorities now, they would never be permitted to get before that committee.

The Clerk: I don't know. I should think you could. Do you say that they would say you have no right to go before that committee?
Taylor said he knew that it had been done and men had been told that the Pelham Committee had no standing and that they had to report themselves.
The Clerk: You are all in the non-combatant section?
- Yes.
The Chairman: Isn't it all trying to waste time?
- No.
The Chairman: I think it is.

Amey said he was a clerk in the Education Committee's office and, as far as the Pelham Committee had reported, education was included as a work of national importance.
The Chief Constable: He would keep his job here.

James Hill, when asked what he had to say, said they claimed the same right as a Christadelphian who was before the magistrates on the previous day. He was a Primitive Methodist and he claimed to have the same right to exemption as a Christadelphian. He did not think a member of one denomination should be exempt and others not.
The Chief Constable said that that case had not finally been disposed of but had only been withdrawn pending consideration.

Amey said he thought a similar course ought to be taken in the present cases.
The Clerk: How long do you want it adjourned for?
Amey: I don't think the Pelham Committee have finally reported yet. He said he could produce a copy of the report in the "Daily News" of Judge Mellor's remarks.

Mr Horrobin: That is not an official report.
Amey: No. but it is proof positive that the remarks were made. ----- Amey was unable to find his copy of the report but a friend in the gallery called out to say that he had one and this was brought down by the constable who was on duty in the gallery.

It was handed to the Clerk who perused it and read aloud a passage in which Judge Mellor, presiding at the Appeal Tribunal in Manchester, was reported to have said: "Parliament had done its best to meet such cases as theirs and had established a committee to consider what useful service they could be put to. He did not understand it, but it rested with that committee."
Amey: Yes that's it.

The defendants as nothing further to say and the Clerk and the justices had a somewhat lengthy and apparently heated consultation, in the course of which Mr Booth appeared to be emphasising a view which was not held by the magistrates. When the consultation concluded:

The Chairman said they were of the opinion that the defendants ought to have surrendered themselves and they would be fined 40s each and handed over to the military escort.

The defendants were then marched out of the court in charge of a sergeant, a corporal and a private of the Manchester Regiment and several police officers. There was a good deal of handshaking and farewells in the corridor, after which the defendants were taken downstairs to the police cells and shortly afterwards they were escorted to Clegg Street Station en route for Ashton Barracks.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The WO 363 records for John Amey survive (held at The National Archives, available online via Find My Past):

He was 5 ft 7 ins tall and weighed 8 sts 4 lbs.

He was enlisted in the 1 - 4 Western Non Combatant Corps at Ashton under Lyne on 29 April 1916, regimental number 812. He refused to cooperate with a medical examination.
He was posted to Kinmel Park on 30 April 1916 and put in the Guard Room awaiting a Court Martial.
At the Court Martial he was charged with disobedience and sentenced to 112 days with hard labour. He was transferred to Wormwood Scrubs.
On 12 August 1916 he was released from prison because he had been irregularly enlisted and sent on furlough on 15 August 1916. He was sent to the army reserve on 22 September 1916.
On 31 March 1917 he was posted to 5 Western Non Combatant Corps.

Example Pages from John Amey's Military Service Records
Record of Service	Extracts from Proceedings of Court Martial, 10th May 1916	Statement of Services

He has an entry on the Pearce List HERE.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1911 census :
With parents and brother
1, Trinity St., Oldham
Occupation: Clerk with the County Council

1939 Register :
83 Burlington Avenue, Oldham
With wife Alice, no children listed
Occ: Solicitor managing common ? [last word obscured by ink blot].

Contributed by Dorothy Bintley