174 AWARDED FOR VALOUR
Graham proposed that the Army practice of requiring the written attestation
of two eye-witnesses for any act of heroism to win a VC be adopted for all
services.^31 The Air Force objected to a two-witness standard, perhaps mindful
that many air actions happened very quickly and often quite alone.^32 The
committee settled for rewording the clause to require ‘conclusive proof,’
a phrase stronger than the former proof ‘to the satisfaction’ of the recom-
mending officer in the field. Ponsonby proposed that the phrase ‘backed
by two witnesses’ be included after ‘conclusive proof,’ but it is not to be
found in the approved draft.^33 Regardless, the intent of the rewording was
to force field officers to vet their recommendations more thoroughly before
forwarding them.
Not all of the committee’s decisions narrowed the distribution of the
Victoria Cross. An extensive discussion took place concerning the official
inclusion of Dominion and colonial forces. The question here was not so
much whether such forces would be eligible, but rather the exact circum-
stances under which, say, troops from the Union of South Africa or the
Togoland Expeditionary Force could win one. Obviously Dominion troops
should get it – they had been winning Crosses since the Boer War – but
would it be only when acting on behalf of the United Kingdom, or fighting
directly alongside British troops, or under British command, or when on
their own, or what?
Graham stated that it had become standard practice to consider any colo-
nial or Dominion force under imperial orders eligible for Crosses. Other
formations, such as the Indian Imperial Service Battalions who drew their
wages from other sources, were qualified only when serving alongside
regular forces. He noted that the King’s African Rifles and the Punjab Fron-
tier Force were not eligible prior to 1911 (apparently he meant the white
officers of the latter of these formations) and would have been eligible on
an ‘alongside’ basis only. They were brought in (apparently in theory, as
they are not mentioned in the warrant) by the Indian extension of that year.
That no case had ever arisen in which a member of these formations was
recommended meant that there had never been an official determination
of their status ‘although I daresay if a case had arisen it would have been
given.’^34
Lambert of the Colonial Office was adamant that the Dominion forces be
included without the necessity of acting alongside British regulars or under
the command of British officers. This had been a point of contention for
the Colonial Office during the war. Lambert cited a War Office reply to
a query on the subject dated 21 March 1916, stating that the Warrant of
1867 (generated in response to the Heaphy case) included all native troops
lily
(lily)
#1