COTR Dan Spry and the creation of 4RCR - 1970

[Dan Martel]

While going through some documents at DHH in Ottawa few years ago I ran across the following message from 1970 which had a very interesting suggestion from Major-General Dan Spry in his capacity as Colonel of the Regiment. 

As a bit of background, in mid-1970 Canadian land forces were about to go through a major re-structuring in light of the reductions announced the previous September.  The RCR was going to be increased to 3 regular battalions and at the same time absorb the personnel of The Black Watch (Royal Highland Regiment) of Canada (on July 1) and The Canadian Guards (on July 6).  This presented a bit of a dilemma to The Regiment as it already had a 3rd battalion, albeit in the Reserve Component.  Now even though the reserves were in The Regiment first, it had been determined that they would have to relinquish their seniority to the new Regular battalion and become the 4th battalion.

On 17 Feb 1970 the Commander of FMC, Gilles Turcot, sent a message to the VCDS, Michael Dare, advising him of the timetable for the changes that were to occur that Spring and Summer.  Turcot related in his message the details of a communication he had had with Dan Spry about the upcoming re-structuring as it related to The Regiment.  The relevant text is quoted below:

"In the case of the (sic) Royal Canadian Regiment, it is the expressed wish of Major-General D.C. Spry, Colonel of the Regiment that the Reserve Battalion retain its numerical designation as the 3rd Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment.  The main reason is that the present 3rd Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment has been able to attain a high standard inspite of the difficulties of reorganization in past years when the Canadian Fusiliers, the Oxford Rifles and the Perth Regiment were amalgamated.  They have also recently been presented with new colours as the 3rd battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment.  To redesignate the Battalion as the 4th Battalion would have a very detrimental effect on the high spirits and morale of the unit and would cause a number of administrative problems concerning disposition of colours, etc.  I consider that the numerical designation of Battalions in a Regiment is of primary concern to the Colonel of the Regiment and his Regimental Executive Committee.  For this reason, I recommend that the personnel of the 2nd Battalion, The Canadian Guards be remustered to form the 4th Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment.  Since this is at variance with the Minister's statement, approval for this change will have to be obtained."

In the annex to the message Turcot does in fact recommend The Canadian Guards be remustered as 4RCR.  Unfortunately I have not found a response from Dare to Turcot but I think it's obvious that Spry's recommendation was not approved, for whatever reason.

Personally I agree with the COTR's recommendation and it warms my heart to see his support for the red headed stepson Reserve Component of The Regiment.  The 3rd Battalion should not have had to relinquish their seniority and colours to a new Regular battalion but then, the Minister has very rarely asked me for my opinion even though I'm always ready to offer it.

Cheers,
Dan.

[ranrad]

A good read , Dan. Thanks for posting . An interesting bit of Regimental History..ranrad

[wheels]

To redesignate the Battalion as the 4th Battalion would have a very detrimental effect on the high spirits and morale of the unit and would cause a number of administrative problems concerning disposition of colours, etc. 

The re-numbering of 3rd Bn to 4th Bn, may or may not, have had a detrimental effect on high spirits and morale, but, I believe it was the right and proper decision. Regulars will take precedence over Reserves.

Besides the British had already set the precedence of re-numbering Militia / Reserve Battalions to a higher number, when the number of Regular Battalions, in the same Regiment, was increased.

What really affected our high spirits and morale was the decision to send our 3rd Bn Colours off to a taylor to have the number altered to, "IV", and the new 3rd Bn got brand new colours. That decision, stills bewilders the members of the Battalion, at that time.

via con Dios

JN Heddle

[Michael OLeary]

What really affected our high spirits and morale was the decision to send our 3rd Bn Colours off to a taylor to have the number altered to, "IV", and the new 3rd Bn got brand new colours. That decision, stills bewilders the members of the Battalion, at that time.

The Battalion's own Colours, those which had been formally presented to the Battalion, were altered to reflect the unit's new designation.  If they had been "handed off" to the new unit, and looking at it from the other side of the equation, how should the soldiers in the new battalion feel to receive what they might label "second hand" Colours?

[wheels]

 If they had been "handed off" to the new unit, and looking at it from the other side of the equation, how should the soldiers in the new battalion feel to receive what they might label "second hand" Colours?

Whose feelings are we trying to protect ? The new 3rd Regular Bn or a brand new 4th Reserve Bn for the Regiment ?

The new Battalion was not, ‘new’. There was a 3rd Regular Bn during the Boer War (1900-1902) and the Korean War (1951-1954), as well as the 3rd Reserve Bn (1958-1970). But this was the first time the Regiment had ever had a 4th Bn.

The Colours could have been ceremonially presented to the 3rd Regular Bn by the 3rd Reserve Bn, or the Regimental Colonel or Colonel-in-Chief, and new 4th Bn Colours presented to the new (for the first time in RCR history) 4th Bn.

Instead it was decided by, whomever, to present new Colours to the 3rd Bn and ship the Reserve 3rd Bn Colours off to a taylor to be altered from ‘III’ to “IV”.

It would have been more cost efficient, to present brand new, consecrated Colours, to the 4th Reserve bn, than paying for new 3rd Bn Colours alreadt consecrated) and paying for the alteration of the new, unconsecrated, 4th Bn Colours.

via con Dios

JN Heddle

[Dan Martel]

John,

Regulars will take precedence over Reserves.

Being the long serving Reservist that you are, I'm shocked to read you putting this idea forward!  Within The Regiment, Regulars, Reserves and the Retired are all equal.  (But this a topic for a separate thread.)

Besides the British had already set the precedence of re-numbering Militia / Reserve Battalions to a higher number, when the number of Regular Battalions, in the same Regiment, was increased.

I don't believe the British Army had ever done such a thing.  Militia and Territorial battalions retained their individual numbers when newer Service battalions were constituted during The Great War and the Second World War.  I don't believe that you can cite an example of what you have put forward.

In the Canadian Army however, there is precedent for the numbering of Active and Reserve battalions consecutively regardless of in which compoment they were found.  This occurred during the Second World War and was codified in General Order 42 (1941) 'Nomenclature of Active and Reserve Units' which stated "(Formations and Units) will be numbered in sequence commencing with the "Active" Formation or Unit, followed bye the existing "Reserve" Formation or Unit.  Any further "Active" Formation or Unit which is created as a counterpart of such a "Reserve" Formation or Unit, or any further such "Reserve" Formation or Unit which is created, will be numbered in sequence by reference to numbers already allotted to the "Active" or "Reserve" Formations or Units having the same nominal or numerical designation."

While I don't want to suggest that this G.O. was in effect in 1970 and should have been adhered to, I'm saying that it does show a precedent for having battalions numbered sequentially without regard to component.  There are numerous examples of this having happened during the war.  The Regina Rifles had a 1st (Active) and a 2nd (Reserve) battalion, followed by two more Active battalions numbered the 3rd and 4th.  It was the same for The Queen's Own Rifles and The Royal Winnipeg Rifles.  Many regiments had an Active home service numbered the 3rd after mobilizing an Active Overseas battalion (1st) and keeping a Reserve battalion (2nd).

Maybe this was one of the issues that Dan Spry was thinking of when he put forward his proposal to Gilles Turcot, the numbering precedence from the Second World War.  But this is only a supposition on my part.  I do agree that 2Cdn Gds should have been designated 4RCR and the Reserve battalion's title should have remained unaltered.

Cheers,
Dan.

[wheels]

Dan

1 - “Regulars will take precedence over Reserves.”
           You obviously misunderstood my writing, or I was not clear in my explanation. I was referring to the numbering of the
           Battalions within a Regiment, with Regular and Reserve Battalions - only.
           Of course all personnel in the same Regiment are on an equal bases, whether Regular; Reserve; ERE or Retired. This, is as it
           should be, as we are all one family, no matter what our actual status is.

2 - "Besides the British had already set the precedence of re-numbering Militia / Reserve Battalions to a higher number,
      when the number of Regular Battalions, in the same Regiment, was increased.”
          The example you are talking about was post, the 1908 Army Reforms, which did exactly what you said. But, as you can see
          in the following (below), my examples happened, pre 1908, when the Militia and Territorials were under a different
          numbering sequence.
          Of course, the Service Battalions were junior to the Militia and Volunteer Bns (which in their turn were junior to the Regular
          Bns).
          As a matter of fact, I can cite a few examples of British Militia Bns (of a Regular Regiment) being re-numbered to the next
          higher number, in the Regimental numbering sequence. Volunteer Bns had a different numbering sequence at this time
          period and there numbers did not change, until after 1908. The Regiments in question are the following :
               (7th Foot) Royal Fusiliers. [ 3rd Regular Bn was activated from 1898 to 1922 and 4th Regular Bn from 1900 to 1922 ]
                    3rd (Militia) Bn was re-numbered as 5th (Militia) Bn in 1898 & 4th (Militia) Bn was re-numbered as 6th (Militia) Bn in
                    1900. Both reverted to their previous numbers in 1922, when the 3rd and 4th Regular Bns were disbanded.

               (8th Foot) King’s Regiment (Liverpool).  [ 3rd & 4th Regular Bns were activated from 1900 to 1901 ]
                    3rd & 4th (Militia) were re-numbered as 5th & 6th (Militia) Bns in 1900. Both reverted to their previous numbers in
                    1901, when the 3rd and 4th Regular Bns were disbanded.

               (20th Foot) Lancashire Fusiliers. [ 3rd Reg Bn was activated from 1898 to 1906 and 4th Reg Bn from 1900 to 1906 ]
                    3rd (Militia) Bn was re-numbered as 5th (Militia) Bn in 1898 & 4th (Militia) Bn was re-numbered as 6th (Militia) Bn in
                    1900. Both reverted to their previous numbers in 1906, when the 3rd and 4th Regular Bns were disbanded.

               (57th/77th Foot) Middlesex Regiment.. [3rd & 4th Regular Bns were activated from 1900 to 1922 ]
                    3rd & 4th (Militia) were re-numbered as 5th & 6th (Militia) Bns in 1900. Both reverted to their previous numbers in
                    1922, when the 3rd and 4th Regular Bns were disbanded.

               (63rd/96th Foot) Manchester Regiment.. [ 3rd & 4th Regular Bns were activated from 1900 to 1906 ]
                    3rd & 4th (Militia) were re-numbered as 5th & 6th (Militia) Bns in 1900. Both reverted to their previous numbers in
                    1906, when the 3rd and 4th Regular Bns were disbanded.

3 - "In the Canadian Army however, there is precedent for the numbering of Active and Reserve Battalions consecutively....”
          This may have been a war-time expedient during WW II, but post WW II, this expedient was not adhered to. I cite for
          example, when the Regular Force was expanded, the following :
               Queen’s Own Rifles of Canada
                    This was a Militia Regiment which was activated Regular in 1953 when the 1st and 2nd Canadian Rifle Bns were re-
                    designated as 1st and 2nd Bns, The Queen’s Own Rifles of Canada, and the original Militia Regiment was re-designated
                    as 3rd Bn, The Queen’s Own Rifles of Canada. In 1970 the 3rd (Militia) Bn was designated as the 1st Bn when the 1st and
                    2nd Bns were disbanded.

               The Black Watch (Royal Highland Regiment) of Canada
                    This was a Militia Regiment which was activated Regular in 1953 when the 1st and 2nd Canadian Highland Bns were re-
                    designated as 1st and 2nd Bns, The Black Watch (Royal Highland Regiment) of Canada, and the original Militia
                    Regiment was re-designated as 3rd Bn, The Black Watch (Royal Highland Regiment) of Canada. In 1970 the 3rd (Militia)
                    Bn was designated as the 1st Bn when the 1st and 2nd Bns were merged and rebadged as 2 RCR.

               8th Canadian Hussars (Princess Louise’s)
                    This was a Militia Regiment which was activated Regular in 1957 and designated as 1st/8th Canadian Hussars (Princess
                    Louise’s), and the original Militia Regiment was re-designated as 2nd/8th Canadian Hussars (Princess Louise’s). In 1960
                    the 1st and 2nd numbers were discontinued and in 1993 the Regular Component was merged with the Reserve Component
                    to form the first Total Force Armoured Regiment in the Canadian Army.

               Fort Garry Horse
                    This was a Militia Regiment which was activated Regular in 1958 and designated as 1st Fort Garry Horse, and the
                    original Militia Regiment was re-designated as 2nd Fort Garry Horse. In 1960 the 1st and 2nd numbers were discontinued
                    and in 1970 the Regular Component was disbanded.

               Le Régiment de Trois-Rivières (RCAC)
                    This was a Militia Regiment, which was activated Regular in 1968 and re-designated as 12e Régiment Blindé du Canada,
                    and the original Militia Regiment was re-designated as 12e Régiment Blindé du Canada (Milice). They remain this, to
                    this day.

4 - This may have been what Maj Gen Spry was thinking of, as he was a Divisional Commander in the Second World War. However,
     as I stated above (in para 3), this war-time practice was not continued post WW II.
     There may be some other examples in both the British and the Canadian Armies to back me up, but, only a closer study of
     Regimental Evolution will elicit this information.

5 - If anyone finds what I have written above, to be in error, I welcome all comments; corrections and/or additions.

via con Dios

John

[aldi]

I just discovered this thread while surfing so pardon my johnny-come-lately insertion.

Whether the renumbering of the battalions should have brought different colours is an issue worthy of discussion, but I would offer this observation.  The Canadian Guards, with which I served for the last eight years of its 17-year existence, had NO battle honours.  Had the colours of the then-3rd Battalion been given to the new 3rd battalion, they would have been awarded battle honours they hadn't earned.  Having the newly-designated 4th battalion (Militia) retain their colours and simply change the number allowed them to keep the battle honours they'd earned while the new 3rd Battalion got the blank slate they deserved.  aldi

[Michael OLeary]

Battle Honours and Colours are two very different things. Battle Honours are held by regiments and any battalion of a regiment carries all honours earned by the regiment.

We should also keep in mind that, via perpetuation of six CEF units of the First World War, the amalgamation of The Oxford Rifles and the Canadian Fusiliers actually increased the battle honours carried by The RCR. Through this amalgamation, The RCR added nine First World War Battle Honours to its list of honours which were not "earned" by soldiers wearing the eight-pointed star.

Which battalion held which set of Colours is actually a red herring in this respect; each set of Colours would be identical for the emblazoned honours (except, of course, for the Battalion designation). In the case of the Regimental Colours of The RCR, the only change made following the amalgamation was the addition of "1915" to the emblazoned honour "Ypres, '17" for all battalion Regimental Colours.

[aldi]

Mike,

Thank you.  I stand corrected.  aldi

[wheels]

Michael

Quote : "Which battalion held which set of Colours is actually a red herring in this respect; each set of Colours would be identical for the emblazoned
           honours (except, of course, for the Battalion designation)."   Unquote

With your greater knowledge than I, could or would you speculate on the decision to present 'new' Colours to the 'new' 3rd (Regular) Bn and send the original 4th (Reserve) Bn Colours off to a tailor and have the numeral 'III' changed to 'IV' ?
This decision was the more expensive and I am still bemused as to why it was undertaken in this fashion.

atb and via con Dios
John

[Michael OLeary]

Good evening John,

While the cost of changing the numeral on the Colours presented to the Reserve Battalion from III to IV may have been considered, I believe the possible interpretations of taking a set of Colours that had been consecrated in front of and presented to one battalion and then giving it to another battalion would have been a serious misjudgment. Although the Colours are virtually identical, except for the numerals, once presented they "belong" in all respect to the receiving battalion. It could have become a point of antagonism between the battalions if someone chose to infer that the new unit (i.e., 3rd (Regular) Bn) was handed a "second-hand" set of Colours while the existing (i.e., 4th (Reserve) Bn) was presented a new set of Colours. To do so would also require the ceremonies to present two stands of Colours, for each battalion would be receiving a new (to them) set. Leaving the previously presented Colours in the hands of the Battalion which already possessed them, and having the numerals changed without ceremony, would, by far, be the solution with the least potential problems.

Michael

[wheels]

Good Morning Michael

Thank you for your reasoned answer. Any decision would not make everybody happy, a virtual certainty.
I understand the reasoning for brand new Colours for the new 3rd (Regular) Bn, but, personally I still
believe that 4th (Reserve) Bn should have been presented new Colours as well.
Be that what it is, I also understand some of the expenses involved and the decision taken by the Regiment
was the least expensive.

atb and via con Dios
John