Navy / USMC MOH recipients before WWI

[emccomas]

A thought has occurred to me...

 

Were there any Navy / USMC personnel that were awarded the Medal of Honor between 1919 and 1940 for an action that occurred prior to World War 1?

 

And is it possible that ANY of these recipients would have received the Tiffany Cross version of the Medal of Honor?

 

Yes, I am grasping at straws. I prefer to think of it as covering all bases.

 

In the rocket science world, we call it attention to detail.

 

Thoughts?

 

Ed

[Garnet54]

Someone may correct me, but I think the rescue of men from the Squalus earned some of the rescuers the MOH. I think that was pre-1940.

[Mark Costa]

Ed:

 

I researched this aspect years ago and found that Hobson and David Dixon Porter were the only medals that were presented after the institution of the Tiffany Cross for actions earlier. Both medals presented were of the Star variety. I always looked for the date of the General Orders as they listed the actual award approval date. There might have been more but based on the official records these are the two that I found. I am pretty confident that the 22 that have been listed thus far are going to be the final list. But I am still trying to locate the info on the supposed presentation to Hanneken.

 

Mark Costa

[Mark Costa]

I went back to my original files and forgot to add the names of Robert Semple, Niels Drustrup, George Bradley, Charles Wiley, George Rud, Claude Jones, and of course Frank Crilley who were all Vera Cruz period recipients. They all were awarded stars, some whom were awarded years after the last TC presentation was made to Schilt.

 

Mark

[Mark Costa]

There is also the possibility that PRE-WWI living navy recipients may have requested a Tiffany Cross, such in the same manner that army recipients did when the Gillespie 1904 version was issued, but I believe this to be highly unlikely and of course no one instance has ever appeared.

 

The one thing that has puzzled me about the TC is why dates 1917-1918 were ever designed on the medal itself. My belief is that the medal was designed to be presented to WWI combat recipients only and that the awards to Byrd, Bennett and Schilt were accidents, because no one knew which medals to present. And that is why no other TC's were presented, although there were other instances of combat heroism after Schilt. Why put dates on the medal at all? Is it also possible that, if the medal had not been abolished, would the Tiffany company then produced a TC with the dates 1941-1945 for WWII?? I don't believe the Navy ever thought that far ahead about future wars, and I believe it was intended for WWI recipients only.

 

Mark Costa

[FFZFlyer]

In addition to the nine already named who earned their MoH prior to the institution of the Tiffany Cross design but received their award after WWI, these four also fall into that category: Hiram Bearss, Robert Cox, Isidor Nordstrom, and Robert Cary. I have photographs showing Bearss and Cox with the five-pointed star MoH around their necks. In addition, photographs exist of Hobson, Porter, Bradley, Crilley, and Jones with the five-pointed star. I have not been able to locate a photograph of any of the other six wearing their MoH. They probably exist, I just haven't found them.

 

I think their is some validity to Mark's thesis on the intentions of the Navy Dept for presentation of the TC. That's probably why Siegel got a TC replacement since, although his deed was strictly non-combat, it occurred during the 1917-1918 kperiod and the clerk in the awards department 20 years later didn't comprehend the difference in design intentions.

[emccomas]

Thanks Mark, your analysis makes perfectly good sense to me.

 

I think we are at 22 Tiffany Cross recipients, with Corry as still unknnown.

 

I sent an email to Naval Historical and Heritage Command to see if anyone can identify the origin of the "28 Tiffany Crosses awarded, 21 Navy, 7 Marines". Just sent the email, so stay tuned....

 

As for Siegel's Medal of Honor, I believe that we already have proof that both his original Medal of Honor, and his replacement Medal of Honor were both Tiffany Cross medals.

 

I content that the picture of Siegel's medal is the book "Call of Duty" is a picture of a DIFFERENT medal than the medal pictured in the collection of the Museum of Natural History in Los Angeles.

 

If you look at both photos, the ribbons are clearly different. The pendant "appears" (at least to me) to also be different, but the differences are very slight. Look for yourselves and see what you think.

 

Now, we know that the original Siegel medal was lost in a fire in 1934, or was it? Technically, it was "reported" lost in a fire in 1934, and that is the assumption that we have been going on.

 

We also know that Siegel got a replacement Medal of Honor, and that Medal of Honor is a Tiffany Cross, so he is one the list as a recipient. That part is a done deal.

 

But what if Siegel's original Medal of Honor was not lost in a fire; not lost at all. What is Siegel just reported his MOH lost in a fire, or he thought it was lost in a fire, but is was really stolen or something like that.

 

Lot's of speculation here, and all of it is based on my belief that the two photos of Siegel's Medal of Honor are of TWO DIFFERENT medals.

 

Take a close look, and you decide.

[emccomas]

Ed:

 

I researched this aspect years ago and found that Hobson and David Dixon Porter were the only medals that were presented after the institution of the Tiffany Cross for actions earlier. Both medals presented were of the Star variety. I always looked for the date of the General Orders as they listed the actual award approval date. There might have been more but based on the official records these are the two that I found. I am pretty confident that the 22 that have been listed thus far are going to be the final list. But I am still trying to locate the info on the supposed presentation to Hanneken.

 

Mark Costa

 

Mark;

 

I am pretty much convinced that Hanneken received a STAR Medal of Honor. I know that William Button got a STAR Medal of Honor, and I know that Button and Hanneken were both awarded their MOHs at the same time, by the same person, and for the same action.

 

Do you have some reason to believe that Button did not get a STAR MOH?

 

Ed

[Mark Costa]

Ed:

 

I based my info on the late Evan Kerrigan's assessment of the TC back in the 1960's. Kerrigan was one of the first serious researchers of US medals and he claimed that Hanneken was a recipient. I have been looking for confirmation ever since. Button received a Star but we have also seen that Schilt and Truesdale who received medals for the same action, also received different medals, although at different presentations. I can't rule out Kerrigan's statement until I can find out more.

 

in regards to the "28" recipients -- this is simple math -- there were 21 WWI navy recipients and 7 Marines in WWI. They just assumed that all the navy/Marines recipients in WWI received TC's. They excluded Stockham as his was an army medal. They never did any real research as to who received what.

 

I agree that Siegel received two different TC's. Again I think his original receipt of a TC was a mistake. The whole combat versus non-combat criteria was just too confusing and that is why Siegel, Byrd and Bennett received a TC instead of a star version.

 

Mark

[emccomas]

Ed:

 

I based my info on the late Evan Kerrigan's assessment of the TC back in the 1960's. Kerrigan was one of the first serious researchers of US medals and he claimed that Hanneken was a recipient. I have been looking for confirmation ever since. Button received a Star but we have also seen that Schilt and Truesdale who received medals for the same action, also received different medals, although at different presentations. I can't rule out Kerrigan's statement until I can find out more.

 

in regards to the "28" recipients -- this is simple math -- there were 21 WWI navy recipients and 7 Marines in WWI. They just assumed that all the navy/Marines recipients in WWI received TC's. They excluded Stockham as his was an army medal. They never did any real research as to who received what.

 

I agree that Siegel received two different TC's. Again I think his original receipt of a TC was a mistake. The whole combat versus non-combat criteria was just too confusing and that is why Siegel, Byrd and Bennett received a TC instead of a star version.

 

Mark

 

Mark;

 

Do you have anything in writing from Kerrigan about this? Kerrigan's reputation is well known, but I would like to see the evidence that he had.

 

I don't see Truesdale and Schilt as "the same action", except in the vaguest terms. Schilt is also believed to be the last recipient of the TC, so Truesdale's award sometime after April 1932 would have been much later. See excerpts from MOH citations below.

 

Also, remember that we are using the "same time, same place, from the same person" logic to make the assumption that Ingram and Hammann were both awarded the Tiffany Cross.

 

Can we now go back and say that this logic does not apply to Button and Hanneken. They are even more closely related than the 11 in the newspaper article of 11/11/20.

 

The recipients named in the article of 11/11/20 were awarded the MOH BY THE SAME PERSON, AND AT THE SAME TIME - BUT NOT FOR THE SAME ACTION.

Button and Hanneken were BY THE SAME PERSON, AT THE SAME TIME, AND FOR THE SAME ACTION.

 

Hanneken is definitely a mystery, as is Ingram and Hammann, and let's not forget Corry, who is still unidentified as type of MOH.

 

Truesdale:

 

For extraordinary heroism in the line of his profession above and beyond the call of duty at the risk of his life, as second in command of a Guardia Nacional Patrol on 24 April 1932, engaged, at the time, in active operations in the field against armed bandit forces in the vicinity of Constancia, near Coco River, Department of Jinotega, Northern Nicaragua,.

 

 

Schilt:

 

During the progress of an insurrection at Quilali, Nicaragua, 6, 7, and 8 January 1928, 1st Lt. Schilt, then a member of a marine expedition which had suffered severe losses in killed and wounded, volunteered under almost impossible conditions to evacuate the wounded by air and transport a relief commanding officer to assume charge of a very serious situation.

[emccomas]

Ed:

 

I based my info on the late Evan Kerrigan's assessment of the TC back in the 1960's. Kerrigan was one of the first serious researchers of US medals and he claimed that Hanneken was a recipient. I have been looking for confirmation ever since. Button received a Star but we have also seen that Schilt and Truesdale who received medals for the same action, also received different medals, although at different presentations. I can't rule out Kerrigan's statement until I can find out more.

 

in regards to the "28" recipients -- this is simple math -- there were 21 WWI navy recipients and 7 Marines in WWI. They just assumed that all the navy/Marines recipients in WWI received TC's. They excluded Stockham as his was an army medal. They never did any real research as to who received what.

 

I agree that Siegel received two different TC's. Again I think his original receipt of a TC was a mistake. The whole combat versus non-combat criteria was just too confusing and that is why Siegel, Byrd and Bennett received a TC instead of a star version.

 

Mark

 

I didn't even think about the simple math of WWI for the numbers of TC recipients. Nice catch sir.