Hitler's British Slaves (9 page)

When fights broke out – usually over the theft of food or winter clothing – they were bitter brawls. Seldom were punches pulled, instead the men waded into each other, knowing that in the ‘dog eat dog’ world of the prison camp they could afford to show no mercy. Trading blow for blow they would keep punching until one man was down and the last man standing could claim the spoils of victory.

For some thieves retribution was swift – they were dragged to the latrines and dumped unceremoniously into the foul-smelling
pits of excrement. As they attempted to claw their way out men stood on their hands or kicked at them, forcing them back into the filth until their humiliation was complete. For others the punishment was more drawn out. Some of those caught stealing were taken before ‘kangaroo’ courts. Trials were held and the sentences read out. In some cases the perpetrators of the crimes were tied across tabletops and flogged. Sometimes whole groups of men joined in the beatings and prisoners reported hearing terrifying screams as the gangs exacted revenge for having condemned fellow prisoners to hunger. Yet not all the retribution was so overt. When one man suffered the attentions of bread thieves on a number of occasions he decided to exact punishment on the offenders. He hid a razor blade inside the loaf ensuring a bloody revenge upon the culprit.

Some attempted to make public their disdain for the thieves. Describing theft as ‘a crime second only to murder’ the editor of the handwritten ‘Snips’ newsletter, produced by prisoners at a copper mine during 1944, set out his opinion of those who were responsible for this ‘base, sordid stealing’. In the December issue he wrote:

He is considerably worse than the ordinary common thief, who steals from strangers for one thing, and does not reduce his victims to extreme want which cannot be relieved for another. No, our bright fellow walks and talks with his victims, they are his comrades in misfortune, and he leaves them no remedy: nothing can replace that bread or those cigarettes – the victim, a man living under exactly the same conditions as the unprincipled wretch who has robbed him, is quite unable to make up his loss.

In his conclusion the writer almost seemed to extend pity
towards those among them who had fallen so low as to commit such crimes: ‘there are individuals here so devoid of all sense of decency and honour, so lacking in every honest and manly feeling, that they stoop to acts which must take away whatever self respect they have forever’.
²⁴

Yet justice was not always done and some of the victims of crime dared not claim what was rightfully theirs in the face of the violent reputations of some of their fellow prisoners. In some Stalags vicious gangs were formed who exerted their authority with the slash of the cut-throat razor. They terrorised their fellow prisoners, taking food and clothing as they wanted, knowing the NCOs were almost powerless to control them. Weaker men were forced to submit as the gangs took anything they wanted. It was little wonder the prisoners soon learned they should carry any treasured possessions with them at all times, never leaving anything unattended for even a second for fear it would be pinched. Only those with a mate they felt certain they could trust would ever let their food or fags out of their sight. Clothing was also a target for thieves, resulting in many POWs walking around in summer carrying their greatcoats. It was depressing for them. As they carried their coats day after day, they realised time was passing them by and the summer was being wasted as they awaited a winter that would inevitably see them still in captivity.

In the atmosphere of fear and uncertainty it didn’t take long for most men to adapt. There was nothing like the fear of losing food and clothing to thieves to ensure the prisoners grew tough. It was no longer the discipline of the army that counted, rather it was the discipline and comradeship among small groups of men who banded together to protect themselves. Les Allan remembered life in the Stalags:

Discipline was non-existent. Just self-discipline. You had your groups of mates, it was usually four who mucked in together, because contrary to popular belief you didn’t get one Red Cross parcel per man it was shared between groups of us. After a couple of weeks the average POW became very tough. He would never allow anyone to bully him unless he had a rifle. Discipline was for self-preservation. If a man was caught stealing he’d be very severely thrashed by the people he was stealing from.
²⁵

There was another dark side to activities within the Stalags. Some men accused their fellow prisoners of being overfriendly towards the enemy. This was more serious. Indian POWs at Stalag XIId reported their ‘Man of Confidence’ for encouraging recruitment to the Indian Legion, the unit recruited from among prisoners to fight against the British Empire with the aim of securing independence for India. This individual was also accused of causing friction among his men by favouring those of his own religion. At one camp where members of the Legion turned up on a recruitment drive, they were stoned by fellow Indians disgusted by their treachery.

It was not just soldiers from the Empire who changed sides. There were also a number of British POWs suspected of working for the Nazis and they, along with English-speaking Germans masquerading as POWs, were infiltrated into the Stalags. Some were pre-war fascists whilst others were simply opportunists who, certain the Germans would be victorious, decided cooperation would make their lives easier. Men in Salonika found themselves under the command of CSM Storer. He ate, slept and drank with the guards. He also spoke fluent German and was reported to be assisting them in every respect, whilst offering no help to the prisoners. Instead he spent his time telling them Germany would win the war.
Later he was reported to have been issued with a revolver for his own protection and eventually it was rumoured he had joined the German army. Whenever possible the treatment such men received was swift and bloody. Some were killed by their fellow prisoners, their bodies being dismembered and dumped piece by piece into the foetid mess of the latrine pits. One prisoner recalled the process: ‘We did have a method of exacting punishment if it was deserved. If they were caught their life was in danger. Punishment was extreme and quick. On one occasion, I know for a fact, one was caught and condemned and he ended up face down in the water tank where he was found the next morning. Discipline to that extent was most severe.’
²⁶
At Lamsdorf prisoners fishing in the pool found both a complete corpse and a dismembered human thumb, despite no one having been reported missing. In all such cases the Germans failed to make any effort to find the killers for fear of revealing how they used informers within the camps.

One of the collaborators who survived the violence was Sergeant Styles. Styles had been captured in France in 1940 and appeared in various guises at a number of camps. He was known to report both on the activities of his fellow prisoners and on any guards who were considered friendly towards them. He was also seen wearing a German uniform and on one occasion he was forced to draw his revolver to defend himself from prisoners. One prisoner later reported that Styles was thought to be a bit ‘simple’ and how he was invariably discovered and beaten up.

The social strata that existed among prisoners led to a degree of displeasure for some. Since the NCOs were not forced to work they became important figures within the Stalags, able to use the system to their advantage. Most of the senior NCOs did a solid job in protecting prisoners and
representing their complaints. When asked about their experiences in post-war debriefing questionnaires thousands of prisoners replied how their NCOs had played a vital role in sustaining them during the darkest hours in captivity. One of these highly valued leaders was Sergeant Arthur Mills who was seen coolly taking a rifle from a German who was about to shoot a prisoner. Yet the respect of the men was something that had to be earned. Among the NCOs were some who did little for those they should have been helping. These were men whose self-serving deeds never became part of the POW myth. There were plenty of prisoners, especially in the period immediately following the defeat of the BEF, who had no intention of continuing to follow military discipline. These were often men who had been called up, had just a few weeks of training, then witnessed the appalling shambles of a defeated army. To them, playing any continuing part in what had seemed such a farce was an anathema. Why should those who had led them to defeat continue to lead them once they were behind wire? It was a simplistic argument, but one that suited the minds of men who had experienced the humiliation of an army in disarray. To such men saluting or standing to attention seemed totally out of place, as one explained: ‘We did everything we could to make sure there was no discipline. There were no officers, just NCOs and us. We had no thoughts about the NCOs. Everyone was equal – we were all just prisoners – we weren’t soldiers. We would do our duty with regard to sabotage, but that was it. I think we’d have told a general to shove off if he’d asked us to do something we didn’t like.’
²⁷
For their defiance they were often greeted by displays of military authority where their NCOs called in the German guards to deal with offenders. At Stalag VIIIb the situation deteriorated to such a degree that the camp leader admitted he had ‘some difficulty’ upholding his authority
over the 6,500 POWs nominally under his command. Theft and violence were rifle with the razor gangs reportedly terrorising the weaker prisoners. To combat the gangs vigilante groups were formed to beat up anyone attempting to steal from vegetable plots. Finally the problems within the camp were only solved by the formation of a camp police force consisting of senior NCOs.

In some cases such actions helped to deepen the divisions. Why, some among the prisoners asked themselves, were British soldiers joining with the enemy in disciplining fellow Britons? The answer was simple. Senior NCOs could only control the activities of the more violent prisoners with the help of the guards, yet this relationship between captors and captives caused resentment. Many of the prisoners at Lamsdorf were annoyed that the NCOs of the ‘police force’ were accepting extra rations from the Germans in exchange for their efforts at subduing the prisoners. The situation was mirrored at Marienburg where a sergeant major took charge of a squad that enforced punishments on fellow prisoners. Offenders were given starvation rations and forced to march double time under the watchful eye of senior NCOs. Those prisoners hostile to the continuation of military discipline were mistrustful of such behaviour and hated to see their NCOs hand in hand with the Germans, despite their undoubted success in controlling the more wayward elements.

Though the majority of prisoner soldiers didn’t hold their NCOs in such disregard there was certainly recognition of how some appeared to be living a life far better than those prisoners who were shunted around farms and factories. Prisoners heard rumours about senior NCOs who were given extra food and access to women within Stalags, which stirred up resentment. Some watched the NCOs doling out food from behind the safety of windows and became convinced
that the barrier between themselves and the NCO with the ladle was a sure sign he must be stealing their rations. However, in the most part the men envied their NCOs rather than felt animosity towards them. Like all among the prisoners they did not choose their role, rather the Germans had allotted it to them. Many prisoners later realised their animosity towards the NCOs was generated as much by confusion and the enforced deprivations within the Stalags as by any real misdeeds by their NCOs.

That NCOs were at times able to carve a ‘cushier’ life for themselves was therefore something most among the prisoners could accept. What really mattered to them were obvious abuses of privilege. One man recalled his experiences: ‘At the end of the shed – where about 300 of us slept – was a kitchen. Our daily ration was potato and barley soup with a tiny bit of horsemeat. You’d lay there at night and you could smell our cooks cooking the meat for themselves in the kitchen. They were stealing our rations, which were poor enough anyway. So that didn’t go down too well.’
²⁸

The divisions were even evident between the senior NCOs and their more junior comrades. At Stalag VIIIb Philip Simon, a South African NCO, considered the behaviour of the senior NCOs as collaboration. He reported how he and his fellow prisoners were denied access to stores of new clothing unless they volunteered for working parties. Another South African, Hugh Glynn Baker, was blunt in his appraisal of the NCOs: ‘The British prisoners put in charge of the camp refused to give clothing to men who refused to work for the Germans and generally made things unpleasant for the men who would not work.’
²⁹
Similarly, a New Zealander POW reported on poor management at Lamsdorf. NCOs were discovered trading German issued supplies for cigarettes. These were supplies supposedly issued for the comfort of prisoners, instead
they were being used to ensure the NCOs could control the tobacco market. Worse than that, the inmates found the contents of Red Cross parcels were being openly traded before they were issued.

Such offences were seen throughout the camps. A group of men from one Stalag were sent on a three day train journey with just two-thirds of a loaf each as rations. This was despite CSM Allen, in charge of the Red Cross store, having plenty of spare parcels. At Stalag XXIb Sergeant Major McLeod was repeatedly accused of stealing food. He also used the Germans to punish prisoners and reported a Private Vine, who was caught in the middle of an escape attempt. In some camps there appeared to be a conspiracy among the senior NCOs. At Stalag IIIa RSM Tracey of the clothing store and Sergeant Lindsay and Bombardier Short of the camp post office were all suspected of theft. Lindsay and Short were believed to have stolen from personal parcels destined for the men. When prisoners insisted the post office be put in charge of men with postal experience Lindsay intervened to frustrate their plans. He went to the commandant and asked to be put back in charge. The plan worked and he was able to return to the job, once more continuing to exploit the prisoners.