Hubbry Logo
Charles FryattCharles FryattMain
Open search
Charles Fryatt
Community hub
Charles Fryatt
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Charles Fryatt
Charles Fryatt
Charles Fryatt
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Charles Algernon Fryatt (2 December 1872 – 27 July 1916) was a British merchant seaman who was court martialled by the Imperial German Navy for attempting to ram a German U-boat in 1915. When his ship, the SS Brussels, was captured by the Germans off occupied Belgium in 1916, Captain Fryatt was court-martialled under German military law and sentenced to death for "illegal civilian warfare". He was executed by firing squad near Bruges, Belgium. In 1919, his body was reburied with honours in the United Kingdom.

Key Information

Early life

[edit]

Fryatt was born on 2 December 1872 in Southampton, the son of Charles and Mary Fryatt.[1][2] He attended Freemantle School during the late 1870s.[3] In 1881, Fryatt's family lived at 22 Trinity Terrace, in St Mary's, Southampton,[4] but later relocated to Harwich, Essex where he attended the Corporation School.[1] He and his wife, Ethel Fryatt,[2] had seven children; six girls and one boy.[5] The children were Olive, Victoria, Doris, Vera, Mabel, Charles and Dorothy.[1] The younger Charles later followed his father into the merchant navy, training at HMS Worcester.[6]

After ending school, Fryatt joined the Mercantile Marine, serving on SS County Antrim, SS Ellenbank, SS Marmion and SS Harrogate. In 1892, Fryatt joined the Great Eastern Railway as a seaman on SS Ipswich. Fryatt's father had been the First Officer on SS Cambridge. Fryatt was promoted through the ranks, serving on various ships. His first command was SS Colchester. In 1913, he was appointed master of SS Newmarket.[1]

U-boat attack

[edit]

On 3 March 1915, Fryatt's command, SS Wrexham, a Great Central Railway ship,[7] was attacked by a German U-boat. The ship was chased for 40 nautical miles (74 km). With deckhands assisting the stokers, the vessel made 16 knots (30 km/h) when it would normally have been difficult to make 14 knots (26 km/h). Wrexham arrived at Rotterdam with burnt funnels. The Great Eastern Railway presented Fryatt with a gold watch for this feat. The watch was inscribed Presented to Captain C. A. Fryatt by the chairman and Directors of the G.E Railway Company as a mark of their appreciation of his courage and skilful seamanship on 2 March 1915. Later that month he was in charge of Colchester when she was attacked unsuccessfully by a U-boat.[1]

SS Brussels scuttled at Zeebrugge, October 1918

On 28 March 1915, as captain of the SS Brussels, he was ordered to stop by U-33 when his ship was near the Maas lightvessel.[8] Seeing the U-boat had surfaced to torpedo his ship, Fryatt ordered full steam ahead and tried to ram U-33, which crash-dived.[9] For this second action, Fryatt was awarded a gold watch by the Admiralty.[9] The watch was inscribed Presented by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to Chas. Algernon Fryatt Master of the S.S. 'Brussels' in recognition of the example set by that vessel when attacked by a German submarine on 28 March 1915. Fryatt was presented with a certificate on vellum by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty. He was also praised in the House of Commons.[1][10]

Capture

[edit]

On 23 June 1916[11][12][A 1] Brussels left Hook of Holland bound for Harwich.[1] Lights were shown from the beach and a flare was fired.[13] A passenger is reported to have remained on deck and signalled to shore.[14] Five German destroyers surrounded Brussels. The passengers were told to prepare to take to the lifeboats and the ship's official papers were destroyed. Brussels was then captured by the Germans, the radio was destroyed, and it was escorted into Zeebrugge and then to Bruges.[13]

Court-martial

[edit]
Bruges Town Hall, where Fryatt's court-martial occurred
Notice of execution in German, Dutch and French

Fryatt and his crew were sent to the civilian internment camp at Ruhleben, near Berlin. On 16 July 1916, the Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf reported that Fryatt had been charged with sinking a German submarine.[1] In reality, U-33 had not been sunk; at the time of the trial it was on active service as part of the Constantinople Flotilla.[15] The basis for the charge was the inscription on his gold watch from the Admiralty.[1] Fryatt was tried at a court-martial by the Imperial German Navy on 27 July 1916,[9] at Bruges Town Hall.[13] Captain Fryatt was found guilty of being a franc-tireur and sentenced to death. The sentence was confirmed by the Kaiser.[9] At 19:00, Fryatt was executed by a naval firing squad[13] at Bruges within the harbour grounds. The execution was witnessed by one of the town's aldermen.[16] He was buried in a small cemetery just outside Bruges that was used for burying Belgian civilians executed after being convicted of offenses involving guerrilla warfare or perfidy.[9] The grave was later visited by diplomat Sir Walter Townley (British Ambassador to the Netherlands from 1917 to 1919[17]) and his wife.[13]

An execution notice was published in Dutch, French and German announcing the death of Fryatt. It was signed by Admiral Ludwig von Schröder. A translation of the execution notice reads:[13]

NOTICE. The English captain of a merchant ship, Charles Fryatt, of Southampton, though he did not belong to the armed forces of the enemy, attempted on March 28th, 1915, to destroy a German submarine by running it down. For this he has been condemned to death by judgment this day of the Field Court Martial of the Naval Corps, and has been executed. A ruthless deed has thus been avenged, belatedly but just. Signed VON SCHRÖDER, Admiral Commandant of the Naval Corps, Bruges, July 27th, 1916.

German post-war confirmation of court-martial

[edit]

On 2 April 1919, a German international law commission, named the "Schücking Commission" for its chairman Walther Schücking, reconfirmed Fryatt's sentence:[18][19]

The execution by firing squad of Captain Charles Fryatt, ordered by the Court Martial of Bruges following judgment in the court-martial proceedings of 27 July 1916, involves no violation of international law. [However, t]he Commission regrets most deeply the haste with which the sentence was carried out.

The commission's ruling was not unanimous. Two members of the legal review panel, Eduard Bernstein and Oskar Cohn, dissented because in their opinion Fryatt's conviction and execution had been "a serious violation of international law" and "an inexcusable judicial murder".[20]

Reaction

[edit]
Memorial to Fryatt at Liverpool Street station

On 31 July 1916, British Prime Minister H. H. Asquith issued a statement in the House of Commons.[1]

I deeply regret to say that it appears to be true that Captain Fryatt has been murdered by the Germans. His Majesty's Government have heard with the utmost indignation of this atrocious crime against the laws of nations and the usages of war. Coming as it does contemporaneously with the lawless cruelty towards the population of Lille and other occupied districts of France, it shews that the German High Command, under the stress of military defeat, have renewed their policy of terrorism. It is impossible of course to conjecture to what atrocities they may proceed. His Majesty's Government desire to repeat emphatically their resolve that such crimes shall not, if they can help it, go unpunished. When the time arrives they are determined to bring to justice the criminals whoever they maybe and whatever position they may occupy. In such cases as these the authors of the system under which such crimes are committed may well be the most guilty of all. The question of what immediate action can be taken is engaging the earnest attention of the Government and I hope very soon to announce to the House of Commons what we can do.

Lord Claud Hamilton, MP, Chairman of the Great Eastern Railway, denounced the execution as "sheer, brutal murder". The Mayor of Harwich opened a fund to erect a permanent memorial to Fryatt. A similar fund was opened in the Netherlands.[1]

In the United States, The New York Times denounced the execution as "a deliberate murder".[21] The New York Herald termed it "The crowning German atrocity". In the Netherlands, the Nieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant described the execution as "arbitrary and unjust", while the Handelsblad Holland termed it "A cowardly murder inspired by hatred and revenge".[1] In Switzerland, the Journal de Genève said "It is monstrous to maintain that armed forces have a right to murder civilians but that civilians are guilty of a crime in defending themselves".[16] The Dutch branch of the League of Neutral States presented the Great Eastern Railway a memorial tablet which was erected at Liverpool Street station.[8] The memorial was unveiled on 27 July 1917, exactly a year after Fryatt's execution.[22] The scrap value of Brussels was donated towards the cost.[23]

The Great Eastern Railway awarded Fryatt's widow a pension of £250 per annum. The Government granted her an extra £100 per annum pension in addition to her entitlement. Fryatt's insurers, the Provident Clerk's Association, paid the £300 that Mrs Fryatt was entitled to immediately, dispensing with the usual formalities. The Royal Merchant Seaman's Orphanage offered to educate two of Fryatt's seven children. The King expressed his indignation and abhorrence at the execution of Fryatt in a letter to Mrs Fryatt.[1] In the letter, he also wrote: "The action of Captain Fryatt in defending his ship against the attack of an enemy submarine was a noble instance of the resource and self-reliance so characteristic of his profession."[16]

The incident inspired an Australian film, The Murder of Captain Fryatt (1917).

Funeral and reburial

[edit]
Fryatt's coffin departing from Antwerp, 6 July 1919.
The grave of Charles Fryatt at All Saints' Church, Upper Dovercourt

In July 1919, Fryatt's body was exhumed from the small cemetery near Bruges and returned to the United Kingdom for burial.[24] Fryatt was one of only three sets of British remains given a state funeral following the end of World War I, the others being the nurse Edith Cavell and The Unknown Warrior.[25] His coffin was landed at Dover, and transported in South Eastern and Chatham Railway PMV No.132 to London.[26] On 8 July 1919, his funeral service was held at St Paul's Cathedral. Hundreds of merchant seamen and widows of merchant seamen and fishermen attended. Representing the Government were many members of the Admiralty, the Board of Trade, the Cabinet and the War Office.[24]

The band of the Great Eastern Railway, augmented by drummers from the Royal Marines, played the "Dead March". "Eternal Father, Strong to Save" and "Abide with Me" were sung, and a blessing given by the Bishop of London. The route of the coffin to Liverpool Street station was lined with people.[24]

Fryatt was buried at All Saints' Church, Upper Dovercourt.[2] His coffin was carried from the station to the church on a gun carriage.[27] His widow was presented with the insignia of the Belgian Order of Leopold that had been posthumously awarded to Fryatt.[28] Fryatt was also posthumously awarded the Belgian Maritime War Cross.[29] In November 2018, Fryatt's grave was restored after years of neglect.[25]

Namesakes

[edit]
'Captain Fryatt' public house, Parkeston, Essex.

In Zeebrugge there is a street named after Captain Fryatt – Kapitein Fryattstraat.[30] A wing at Dovercourt Cottage Hospital – which is now known as the Captain Fryatt Memorial Hospital.[23] – was named in Fryatt's honour.[31] A public house in nearby Parkeston is also named in Captain Fryatt's honour.[32]

In Canada, the 11,027 feet (3,361 m) high Mount Fryatt (52°33′00″N 117°54′35″W / 52.55000°N 117.90972°W / 52.55000; -117.90972) was named in 1921 in honour of Captain Fryatt.[33] The 10,317 feet (3,145 m) high Brussels Peak (51°31′00″N 117°49′20″W / 51.51667°N 117.82222°W / 51.51667; -117.82222) was named in honour of his ship.[34]

Commemoration

[edit]

In 2016, an exhibition was held from 23 to 31 July at the Masonic Hall, Harwich, to commemorate the 100th anniversary of his execution.[35]

The local cottage hospital became known as the Harwich and District, Fryatt Memorial Hospital from about 1925. In 2019, the modern Harwich Hospital was renamed in his honour as the Fryatt Memorial Hospital.[36]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]

Sources

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Charles Fryatt

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Charles Algernon Fryatt (2 December 1872 – 27 July 1916) was a British merchant navy captain employed by the , best known for commanding the passenger ferry SS Brussels during the First World War and for his execution by the following an attempt to ram a German U-boat. Born in to a mariner father, Fryatt joined the Great Eastern Railway's continental service in 1892 and rose to captaincy through experienced service on cross-Channel routes, completing over 140 passages by the war's outbreak. On 28 March 1915, while navigating the Brussels near the Dutch coast, Fryatt encountered the German SM U-33; ignoring its signal to stop amid Britain's policy arming defensively against U-boat attacks, he ordered full steam ahead to ram the vessel, compelling it to dive and evade. Despite this act of earning acclaim in Britain as resistance to , Fryatt was captured on 25 June 1916 when German torpedo boats intercepted the Brussels attempting to slip the from the Hook of Holland; tried by in Bruges as a franc-tireur—an unlawful —for the prior ramming attempt, he was convicted and shot by firing squad that same day without appeal. The swift execution of an unarmed civilian mariner for a defensive action against a warship sparked widespread condemnation among the Allies as a breach of prize law and civilian protections under the Hague Conventions, fueling propaganda against German conduct and resulting in Fryatt's posthumous commemoration through memorials, plaques, and even a public house named in his honor across Britain and beyond.

Early Life and Career

Birth and Family Background

Charles Algernon Fryatt was born on 2 December 1872 in , , . He was the second son of Charles Fryatt (1839–1915), a mariner who held a first mate's certificate for home trade voyages, and Mary Jane Fryatt (née Brown). The family resided at 6 Marsh Lane in at the time of his birth and later at 22 Trinity Crescent. Fryatt had at least one older brother, John Algernon Fryatt (1864–1918), and additional siblings including Bessie Sophia, , May, and Percy. Shortly after his birth, the family relocated from to , where Fryatt spent much of his early years. In the late 1870s, he attended in , though the family's move suggests this may reflect an earlier period of residence. His father's maritime profession likely influenced Fryatt's own career path in shipping.

Entry into Maritime Service

Charles Algernon Fryatt, born on 2 December 1872 in to a seafaring family, entered maritime service in his youth, emulating his father, who served as a first officer with the Company. Upon completing school, he enrolled at the HMS Worcester nautical training college, a vessel-based institution dedicated to preparing cadets for the through rigorous instruction in , , and discipline. This formal training equipped him with essential skills for a professional career at sea. After HMS Worcester, Fryatt gained practical experience through an apprenticeship, serving on large sailing vessels with various shipping companies to fulfill the sea time requirements typical for advancing in the merchant marine. In 1892, at age 19, he joined the Company's continental ferry service as an , initially aboard the SS Ipswich on routes between and ports like or . These short-sea passenger and cargo operations marked his transition to steamship service under a major railway-owned fleet, laying the groundwork for his rapid promotions within the company.

Rise to Captaincy with Great Eastern Railway

Fryatt entered the maritime service of the Company in August 1887 as a seaman aboard the passenger steamer SS Norwich, following his father's career as a chief officer in the same fleet. The company operated cross-Channel packet services primarily from to continental ports such as , the Hook of Holland, and , carrying passengers, mail, and freight on scheduled routes. By 1891, at age 20, Fryatt was recorded in the census as employed as a seaman by the , indicating steady employment in its expanding steamer operations. Over the subsequent years, Fryatt advanced through the ranks by acquiring progressive certificates of competency, a standard requirement for merchant officers in the British service. His progression reflected the company's reliance on internal promotions for reliable captains familiar with conditions and European ports. He served as an officer on various vessels before attaining status, with his father having previously held positions such as first officer on ships like SS Cambridge. Fryatt received his first command as master of the SS Colchester, which operated the Harwich-Antwerp route, demonstrating his proficiency in handling packet steamers amid routine commercial demands. In 1913, he was appointed master of the SS Newmarket on the service to the , further solidifying his reputation within the company's fleet of around a dozen steamers. This steady ascent positioned him for larger responsibilities by the eve of the First World War.

World War I Service

Operations Amid U-Boat Threat

During , Captain Charles Fryatt commanded passenger ferries for the Company on the strategically vital route from , England, to (also serving ), transporting mail, passengers, and neutral travelers despite the escalating German in the . German began unrestricted attacks on shipping in , declaring armed vessels legitimate targets without warning, which heightened risks for unarmed ferries like those under Fryatt's command navigating minefields, unmarked channels, and patrols. These operations defied the German blockade, sustaining essential cross-Channel links amid reports of harassment from as early as December 1914. Fryatt's vessels, including SS and later SS , relied on speed and evasive maneuvers to counter threats, as the ships lacked armament but were fitted for rapid response per Admiralty directives. On 2 March 1915, while captaining en route to , Fryatt's ship was pursued by a German U-boat for approximately 40 miles off the Dutch coast; he ordered maximum speed exceeding the vessel's rated 14 knots—reaching 16 knots—which exhausted the engines and scorched the funnels, allowing escape to safe harbor. This incident exemplified the routine perils of the route, where captains faced demands to halt for inspection or risk torpedoing, yet Fryatt prioritized continuation of service. The Admiralty recognized Fryatt's seamanship in these hazardous crossings by presenting him a gold watch for gallantry in evading , underscoring the captains' role in upholding maritime commerce against U-boat interdiction. By maintaining over a dozen wartime passages on Brussels alone before his capture, Fryatt contributed to the resilience of Britain's ferry network, which faced mounting losses but persisted to support the through passenger evacuation and supply lines.

Attempt to Ram German U-Boat, March 1915

On 28 March 1915, Captain Charles Fryatt commanded the Great Eastern Railway's passenger steamer SS Brussels, outbound from , , bound for , , carrying passengers and mail across the amid escalating German . Near the Maas lightship off the Dutch coast, the German submarine SM U-33 surfaced and signaled Brussels to stop, in line with Germany's unrestricted submarine campaign policy that had intensified following incidents like the sinking of the previous year. Interpreting the submarine's actions as preparation to load and fire a —consistent with recent attacks on merchant vessels—Fryatt, guided by Admiralty directives encouraging unarmed merchant captains to ram surfaced U-boats when feasible to defend against torpedo threats, ordered engines to full ahead and steered directly toward U-33 in a bold attempt to collide with and potentially destroy the vessel. The maneuver forced U-33's commander to execute an emergency dive, averting the ramming but allowing to escape without damage or loss of life. This incident marked Fryatt's second evasion of German submarines that month, following a chase on 2 March aboard SS , and exemplified the defensive tactics promoted by British authorities to counter interdiction of vital supply routes, though it later factored into German accusations of Fryatt acting as an .

Continued Service and Admiralty Recognition

Following the 28 March 1915 incident in which Captain Charles Fryatt maneuvered the SS Brussels to ram the German SM U-33, thereby evading torpedo attack, the British Admiralty formally recognized his bravery. The Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty presented him with a gold , inscribed on the backplate: "Presented by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to Charles Algernon Fryatt, Master of [SS Brussels] for attempting to ram a in the on 28th March 1915". This award underscored the Admiralty's appreciation for merchant mariners resisting aggression, an act later cited by German authorities as evidence of belligerent intent during Fryatt's . Fryatt's conduct also received parliamentary acknowledgment in Britain, where his defiance was hailed as exemplary amid the German policy of targeting civilian vessels. The recognition highlighted the hazardous environment faced by British cross-Channel operators, who maintained essential links for passengers, mail, and commerce despite repeated threats. Undeterred, Fryatt resumed command of the SS Brussels for the Company, undertaking regular voyages from to the Hook of Holland. These crossings, critical to wartime in the , exposed him to ongoing perils, yet he completed multiple successful trips over the ensuing 15 months, sustaining vital maritime connectivity until the vessel's interception in June 1916.

Capture and Imprisonment

Seizure of SS Brussels, June 1916

On the night of 22–23 June 1916, Captain Charles Fryatt commanded the SS Brussels, an unarmed passenger steamer operated by the Company, departing from in neutral bound for , , carrying foodstuffs and refugees. The vessel entered the war zone off the Belgian coast, where heightened risks to Allied shipping. As proceeded, it was intercepted by German naval forces, including torpedo boats and , which surrounded the ship and demanded surrender. Fryatt ordered the destruction of confidential Admiralty documents and diplomatic bags in the ship's furnaces to prevent their capture, after which the crew complied with the German order to halt, lacking armament to resist. The Germans boarded Brussels, classifying it as a , and escorted it to the occupied in . Upon arrival at on 23 June, Fryatt and the crew were detained; the captain was placed under arrest due to prior British recognition for attempting to ram a , evidenced by a found aboard. The seizure marked the end of Brussels' regular service, with the vessel later repurposed by German authorities, while Fryatt faced transfer to inland custody for further proceedings.

Transfer to German Custody

Following the seizure of SS Brussels by German torpedo boats on 23 June 1916, approximately 12 miles east of the Maas Lightship, the vessel was boarded and escorted into Zeebrugge harbor, a key German naval base in occupied Belgium. Captain Fryatt, identified as the master, was immediately detained alongside his crew, with secret Admiralty documents and diplomatic bags destroyed prior to surrender. Fryatt was promptly separated from most of the crew and transferred by canal from to , about 15 kilometers inland, where he was placed in at the under direct German military custody. This isolation distinguished his treatment from civilian internees, reflecting German intent to prosecute him under military law for prior actions against U-boats. During initial interrogation in Bruges, German authorities uncovered a gold watch awarded by the British Admiralty in 1915, inscribed with commendation for Fryatt's attempt to ram UC-33 on 28 March 1915; this artifact confirmed his identity and bolstered charges of status. Fryatt and chief engineer faced further questioning, while the bulk of the crew—around 20 officers and men—were transported by cattle truck to on 26 June 1916, then by special train to Ruhleben camp near . Fryatt's retention in Bruges ensured proximity for the impending , held there on 27 July 1916.

Court-Martial and Execution

Charges of Franc-Tireur Status

The German military authorities charged Captain Charles Fryatt with the status of a franc-tireur, a term historically referring to irregular civilian combatants or guerrillas who engaged in hostile acts against armed forces without formal military affiliation, thereby forfeiting protections afforded to prisoners of war under the laws of war. In the context of World War I, German doctrine applied this classification to unarmed merchant mariners who undertook offensive actions, such as attempting to ram or attack submarines, viewing such conduct as piratical or treacherous rather than legitimate resistance. Fryatt's specific accusation centered on his actions on March 28, 1915, when, commanding the SS Copenhagen, he maneuvered to ram the German U-boat SM U-33 after it surfaced to torpedo his vessel, an attempt that forced the submarine to dive without firing. German prosecutors argued that this constituted an act of war by a not belonging to the armed forces, rendering Fryatt liable to as an . Evidence presented included a gold watch awarded to Fryatt by the British Admiralty in recognition of his attempt to sink U-33, interpreted by the as confirmation of his intentional hostile engagement. Additionally, British Admiralty instructions issued in , directing captains to ram U-boats when possible, were cited as transforming neutral or defensive operations into activities, thereby stripping participants of immunity. The charges emphasized that Fryatt's prior service evading U-boats did not mitigate the aggressive nature of the ramming attempt, which German naval described as an "insolent, treacherous attack." This classification aligned with German interpretations of , which distinguished between passive resistance—such as fleeing submarines—and active combat, the latter equating merchants to franc-tireurs akin to those encountered in the of 1870-71. Fryatt's lack of military uniform or commission was pivotal, as the tribunal maintained that only uniformed combatants qualified for POW status; civilians performing war-like acts were subject to the penalties of spies or saboteurs. The proceedings on July 27, 1916, formalized these charges, leading to a death sentence confirmed by Kaiser Wilhelm II, executed by firing squad that evening.

Trial Proceedings in Bruges

The trial of Captain Charles Fryatt commenced on July 27, 1916, , , before a German military convened by the Marine Corps. Fryatt, a mariner, faced charges of acting as a franc-tireur—a engaging in hostile military actions against German forces—stemming from his March 1915 attempt to ram the German submarine U-33 with the SS Brussels rather than heeding its order to stop. The proceedings highlighted evidence including a gold watch and plaque awarded by the British Admiralty to Fryatt for his anti-submarine action, which German authorities presented as proof that he had knowingly violated neutral merchant shipping protocols by prioritizing combat over surrender. Fryatt was represented by Major , a German attorney in civilian life, who served as his defense counsel during the . Despite this provision, the trial was expedited, lasting mere hours, with the court interpreting Fryatt's prior actions and Admiralty recognition as disqualifying him from civilian protections under the laws of war. The second officer of the , , was also tried alongside Fryatt but received a lesser sentence and survived. At approximately 4:00 p.m., the court pronounced Fryatt guilty and sentenced him to by firing squad, with execution carried out without appeal or delay later that evening. A formal documented the verdict, emphasizing the franc-tireur classification as justification for denying prisoner-of-war status. The German military tribunal classified Captain Charles Fryatt as a franc-tireur, or , under their interpretation of the laws of war, arguing that his attempt to ram the German submarine SM U-33 on 28 March 1915 constituted a belligerent act performed outside the protections afforded to uniformed combatants. According to the official German government statement issued on 10 1916, Fryatt's action was "not an act of self-defence, but a cunning attack by hired assassins," premeditated to destroy the surfaced in pursuit of a British Admiralty reward, as evidenced by the inscribed watch found in his possession commending the ramming effort. This classification drew on longstanding German military doctrine, rooted in experiences from the and extended to maritime contexts, whereby civilians engaging in hostile acts against armed forces forfeited prisoner-of-war status and could be subjected to immediate execution under to deter perfidious attacks. German authorities maintained that international norms, including principles akin to those in the and 1907 distinguishing lawful combatants (who must bear arms openly and wear distinctive signs) from irregulars, justified treating Fryatt as outside the or protections for non-combatants. The tribunal's verdict emphasized that merchant mariners, absent formal incorporation into naval forces, exceeded permissible defensive measures by initiating offensive maneuvers against warships, thereby committing a capital offense punishable by death to safeguard German sea forces from "nefarious franc-tireur proceedings." In a 1919 review by a , the sentence was reconfirmed, asserting alignment with wartime necessities amid British merchant shipping practices that blurred civilian-military lines. This rationale positioned the execution as a lawful deterrent rather than , with German press organs like the Weser Zeitung framing it as upholding "the international bounds of " against unpermitted aggression by non-combatants. The policy reflected broader Imperial German concerns over vulnerabilities, where resistance by armed or aggressively maneuvered merchant vessels threatened operations, prompting severe measures to enforce compliance without granting captor-side immunities.

Immediate Execution and Burial

Captain Charles Fryatt was executed by firing squad on 27 July 1916, immediately following his , . The execution occurred at approximately 7:00 PM local time, without the presence of a or any formal religious ceremony permitted by German authorities. Fryatt's body was interred the same evening in a small outside , designated by occupying German forces for the burial of executed Belgian civilians and others classified as traitors or franc-tireurs. The grave was initially marked only by a simple wooden cross, later adorned with flowers by unknown sympathizers, reflecting the hasty and unceremonious nature of the proceedings. No official records of the burial were provided to Fryatt's family at the time, contributing to the opacity surrounding the event under German military administration.

British and Allied Outrage

The execution of Captain Charles Fryatt on 27 July 1916 elicited immediate and vehement condemnation from the British government, which viewed it as a flagrant violation of and the usages of war. Foreign Secretary Viscount Grey promptly protested through diplomatic channels, characterizing the proceedings as a "judicial murder" conducted in secrecy and haste to deter merchant mariners from resisting submarine attacks. The official British statement emphasized that Fryatt's prior attempt to ram U-33 on 28 March 1915 constituted lawful , permissible under British, American, and even German prize regulations, rather than the franc-tireur activity alleged by the Germans. King George V personally conveyed his revulsion in a letter to Fryatt's , expressing "heartfelt and deepest and abhorrence" at the act, which he deemed an outrage against civilized norms. British parliamentary debate reflected this sentiment, with the addressing the event as "The Murder of Fryatt" on 2 August 1916, underscoring the perceived barbarity of executing an unarmed civilian mariner without or appeal. The British press amplified public fury with headlines decrying the execution as "murder" and an "atrocity," fueling efforts akin to those following Edith Cavell's killing, including songs, posters, and films portraying Fryatt as a . Allied nations shared this indignation, leveraging the incident to highlight German ruthlessness; international outlets, including those in neutral countries, echoed the outrage, with the New York Herald labeling it the "crowning German atrocity." Funds were raised in Britain and abroad to support Fryatt's family, while the event intensified resolve against across the Entente powers.

Neutral and International Press Responses

In neutral countries, press coverage of Captain Charles Fryatt's execution on July 27, 1916, largely mirrored Allied condemnation, portraying the act as a breach of civilized warfare and an affront to maritime norms. Dutch newspapers, reflecting the Netherlands' neutrality amid proximity to German operations, decried the proceedings as hasty and unjust. The Nieuwe Rotterdamsche Courant on July 29, 1916, labeled the execution arbitrary and unjust, arguing it would disgust neutrals and all decent people by equating defensive actions against submarines with franc-tireur sabotage under an overly rigid interpretation of prize law. Similarly, the Handelsblad described it as a cowardly murder driven by reprisal motives rather than legal necessity. American outlets, operating in a still-neutral United States, amplified outrage by framing the event as emblematic of Prussian militarism's excesses, influencing public sentiment toward the Entente. The New York Times on July 30, 1916, called the shooting "a deliberate murder," rejecting German claims of Fryatt's combatant status and decrying the lack of due process or appeal. The New York Herald went further, terming it "the crowning German atrocity," likening it to prior incidents like the sinking of civilian vessels and Edith Cavell's execution to underscore a pattern of barbarity. These editorials, drawing on reports of Fryatt's prior 1915 attempt to ram U-33 and the gold watch awarded by the Great Eastern Railway, emphasized that merchant self-defense did not forfeit civilian protections under the 1907 Hague Conventions. Such responses in neutral press contributed to broader diplomatic isolation for , as they highlighted inconsistencies in applying laws of war to armed auxiliaries versus passive traders, without endorsing reprisals. Scandinavian and Swiss publications echoed similar dismay but with less prominence in archived accounts, focusing on the risk to neutral shipping amid . The coverage prioritized factual reporting of the Bruges court-martial's brevity—lasting mere hours—and Fryatt's immediate burial, underscoring the trial's perceived perfunctory nature over substantive evidence of sabotage.

German Defenses and Post-War Reassessments

German military authorities justified the court-martial and execution of Captain Fryatt by designating him a franc-tireur, an unlawful combatant who, as a civilian, had engaged in hostile acts against German naval forces without wearing a uniform or otherwise complying with belligerent conventions. The key evidence cited was Fryatt's admitted attempt on March 28, 1915, to ram and destroy German submarine UC-5 while commanding the steamer SS Blaydes off the Dutch coast, an action deemed an illegitimate act of war that forfeited civilian protections under the German interpretation of the 1907 Hague Conventions' cruiser rules, which required unarmed merchant vessels to submit peacefully to visit and search rather than resist violently. German prosecutors further highlighted a silver-gilt cup awarded to Fryatt by the British Admiralty in recognition of this ramming attempt, presenting it as proof of systematic British encouragement of merchant seamen to adopt combatant roles, akin to disguised Q-ships that had sunk multiple U-boats under false pretenses of neutrality. In official communiqués following the July 27, 1916, execution, defended the proceedings as a necessary deterrent against escalating threats to operations, arguing that Fryatt's actions exemplified a broader British policy blurring the line between civilian shipping and , which necessitated summary to enforce compliance with unrestricted campaigns. A supplementary German statement on August 10, 1916, elaborated that the execution aligned with established principles of land and sea , extending analogies from armed resistance by civilians on land—punishable by death as or —to maritime contexts, and rejected comparisons to prior incidents like the 1915 sinking of unarmed passenger ships by dismissing them as irrelevant to deliberate attacks on warships. German naval legal experts contended that allowing such merchant vessel aggression without reprisal would undermine the ' intent to protect submarines from surprise assaults by ostensibly neutral or passenger-carrying ships, a vulnerability exacerbated by Britain's arming of over 1,200 merchant vessels by mid-1916. Post-war German reassessments largely upheld the original verdict, with an April 1919 commission of experts convened under the reaffirming the sentence's legality in a formal judgment: Fryatt had been rightly condemned for his 1915 ramming attempt, as it constituted an unauthorized belligerent act subjecting him to without delay, consistent with precedents for franc-tireurs in occupied territories. This commission's ruling, issued amid Allied demands for war crimes accountability, dismissed calls for reversal by emphasizing evidentiary consistency, including Fryatt's own testimony and the Admiralty award, and framed the case as a legitimate application of Kriegsbrauch (laws of war) rather than reprisal. Subsequent German historical and legal scholarship through the echoed this, attributing international controversy to Allied rather than substantive flaws, though some neutral observers critiqued the lack of proportionality given Fryatt's unarmed status during capture and the absence of equivalent penalties for German submarine crews violating prize rules. By the 1920s, the episode factored into broader debates over submarine warfare ethics at the , where German delegates invoked Fryatt's treatment to counter accusations of barbarism, arguing it exemplified reciprocal escalations in merchant-naval hostilities.

Legacy and Commemoration

Reburial and State Funeral, 1919

In July 1919, following the and amid post-war repatriations of Allied casualties, Captain Charles Fryatt's remains were exhumed from a small cemetery outside , , where he had been hastily buried after his execution in 1916. The exhumation process involved opening coffin number 29, confirming the identity through Fryatt's master's uniform and personal effects, as documented in local records from . His body was one of the few British civilian casualties repatriated post-war, reflecting the exceptional public and governmental attention to his case. The remains arrived in the via Dover, then proceeded to for a service at on 8 July 1919. The coffin, draped in the and adorned with wreaths including one from the Navy League of inscribed "To the who died that might live," was transported on a drawn by horses through streets lined with mourners. The ceremony drew cabinet ministers, military officials, and representatives from merchant shipping interests, underscoring Fryatt's status as a symbol of civilian resistance against German . After the London service, the cortege continued to , , for interment at All Saints' Church in Upper Dovercourt on the same day. The burial site, at the bottom end of Dovercourt Cemetery, received military honors, with Fryatt laid to rest near his home port, honoring his service with the Great Eastern Railway's cross-Channel fleet. This reburial marked a formal closure to the wartime outrage over his execution, affirming British narratives of his heroism without trial revisions.

Namesakes and Memorials

A bronze relief memorial to Fryatt, sculpted by H.T.H. van Goldberdinge and unveiled in 1917, stands at in , depicting his execution and inscribed with tributes from neutral admirers of his "brave conduct and heroic death" on July 27, 1916. In Bruges, , a plaque at the site of his execution—near the English —commemorates Fryatt alongside civilian victims killed by German forces, noting his death as an "atrocious crime against the laws of nations." A separate monument in Bruges or vicinity also references his case. Fryatt's reburied remains, repatriated in 1919, rest in the Cemetery at , , marked by a gravestone that serves as an enduring memorial. A plaque on the preserved hull of SS Brussels at Preston Docks, , honors his command of the vessel during the incident leading to his capture. Namesakes include the Captain Fryatt public house in Parkeston Quay, (near his operational base), opened post-war as a tribute to his defiance of attacks. The Captain Fryatt Memorial Hospital in Dovercourt, , established in the , further perpetuated his legacy in maritime communities. Mount Fryatt in the Canadian Rockies, , bears his name in recognition of his heroism. Local plaques exist in Harwich and Dovercourt, including one unveiled in in 2017 during a merchant navy commemoration, acknowledging Fryatt's service from that port.

Historical Interpretations and Debates

The execution of Captain Charles Fryatt has been interpreted by historians as emblematic of German interpretive expansions of the franc-tireur doctrine—originally applied to irregular land fighters who forfeited prisoner-of-war status by taking up arms without uniforms—to maritime contexts, amid the exigencies of . German military jurists justified the classification by citing Fryatt's prior receipt of a for attempting to ram U-33 on March 28, 1915, and his ship's armament, arguing that such resistance transformed mariners into unlawful combatants subject to immediate execution upon capture. This view aligned with Germany's 1916-1917 reprisals policy, which treated armed merchant resistance as equivalent to , but was rooted in pre-war debates over whether merchant vessels could defensively employ force without prior warning, a practice challenged by tactics that rendered traditional visit-and-search impossible. Legal scholars at the time and since have debated the doctrine's applicability at sea, with Allied and neutral analysts contending that Fryatt's actions constituted legitimate under , as Hague Convention V (1907) permitted merchant ships to resist sinking without formal combatant status. The German court's reliance on municipal ordinances over treaty obligations—evident in the Bruges tribunal's one-day proceedings on July 27, 1916—drew accusations of retroactive criminalization, as Fryatt was tried not for the 1915 attempt but as a continuing threat, bypassing protections for non-combatants. Critics, including James Brown Scott in the American Journal of International Law, deemed it an "inexcusable judicial murder," arguing the absence of or uniform distinguished it from true belligerency, while German apologists invoked necessity against British deceptions that blurred civilian-military lines. Post-war reassessments, particularly in naval law analyses, have framed the case as a catalyst for clarifying merchant vessel rights, influencing interwar discussions on armed auxiliaries and , though without formal adjudication at Versailles due to focus on land atrocities. Modern interpretations, such as those examining in asymmetric naval conflicts, revisit whether Fryatt's ramming—unsuccessful and reactive—warranted , often concluding it exemplified disproportionate rather than lawful adjudication, paralleling franc-tireur applications in occupied that fueled atrocity narratives. Scholarly consensus holds the execution eroded German moral standing, bolstering Allied recruitment, yet some analyses note it reflected genuine doctrinal ambiguity in evolving norms, predating the 1919 Paris Aerial Navigation rules on civilian protections.

References

  1. https://www.westernfrontassociation.com/on-this-day/27-july-1916-captain-charles-algernon-fryatt/
  2. https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Captain-Charles-Fryatt/
  3. http://www.mastermariners.org.au/stories-from-the-past/3666-captain-charles-fryatt-the-brave-ferry-captain-who-rammed-german-u-boats-in-ww1
  4. https://www.essexrecordofficeblog.co.uk/captain-charles-fryatt-100-years-since-his-execution/
  5. https://www.oldsaltblog.com/2017/07/captain-charles-fryatt-executed-ramming-u-boat/
  6. http://roadstothegreatwar-ww1.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-execution-of-captain-fryatt.html
  7. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-essex-36745439
  8. https://www.geni.com/people/Captain-Charles-Fryatt-SS-Brussels/6000000013236447609
  9. https://www.harwichanddovercourt.co.uk/a-local-hero/
  10. https://www.geni.com/people/Charles-Fryatt/6000000027432200992
  11. http://sotonopedia.wikidot.com/page-browse:fryatt-charles-algernon
  12. https://www.masonicgreatwarproject.org.uk/legend.php?id=1100
  13. https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/20325/charles_algernon-fryatt
  14. https://maritimearchaeologytrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Captain-Fryatt.pdf
  15. https://www.harwich-history.co.uk/captain-fryatt/
  16. https://www.warhistoryonline.com/world-war-i/captain-charles-fryatt-brave-ferry-captain-rammed-german-u-boats-ww1-x.html
  17. https://blog.railwaymuseum.org.uk/captain-fryatt-belligerent-merchantmen/
  18. https://liverpoolmaritimesociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Article-Captain-Charles-Fryatt-and-the-Brussels.pdf
  19. https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/30106827
  20. https://harwichanddovercourt.com/capt-fryatt-i.html
  21. https://www.nytimes.com/1916/08/20/archives/case-of-capt-fryatt-shot-as-franc-tireur-british-commander-of-the.html
  22. http://lynsted-society.co.uk/_assets/_PDFs/Captain_Charles_Algernon_Fryatt_Booklet.pdf
  23. https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/286875-ss-brussels/
  24. https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/24538410.captain-charles-fryatt-southampton-war-hero-rammed-u-boats/
  25. https://www.executedtoday.com/2012/07/27/1916-captain-charles-fryatt-illegal-combatant/
  26. https://www.gwpda.org/naval/pers0003.htm
  27. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2186938
  28. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-25244361
  29. http://www.harwich-history.co.uk/captain-fryatt/
  30. https://www.firstworldwar.com/source/fryatt_germangovt2.htm
  31. https://rqs.freeola.com/media/other/4247/BOOKLET-NB-CHARLESALGERNONFRYATT.pdf
  32. https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205196421
  33. https://roadstothegreatwar-ww1.blogspot.com/2021/10/the-execution-of-captain-fryatt-roads.html
  34. https://www.firstworldwar.com/source/fryatt_britishgovt.htm
  35. https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1916/aug/02/the-murder-of-captain-fryatt
  36. https://www.nytimes.com/1916/07/29/archives/holland-stirred-by-news-execution-of-captain-fryatt-compared-to.html
  37. https://warandsecurity.com/2016/07/27/the-execution-of-captain-fryatt-27-july-1916/
  38. https://www.nytimes.com/1916/07/30/archives/the-new-crime.html
  39. https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=SJMN19160730.2.11
  40. http://www.essexrecordofficeblog.co.uk/document-of-the-month-april-2014-papers-relating-to-repatriation-and-reburial-of-remains-of-captain-fryatt-1919-dp-174183/
  41. https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C390147
  42. https://www.britishpathe.com/asset/95131
  43. https://www.thebluejackets.co.uk/research/action/CaptainFryattFuneral/html
  44. https://www.nytimes.com/1919/07/09/archives/british-pay-honor-to-fryatts-memory-cabinet-ministers-in-throng-at.html
  45. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-essex-46131019
  46. https://www.harwichandmanningtreestandard.co.uk/news/17210770.restoration-captain-fryatts-grave-completed/
  47. https://victorianweb.org/sculpture/warmonuments/21.html
  48. https://www.londonremembers.com/memorials/fryatt-at-liverpool-street-station
  49. https://memorials.rmg.co.uk/m1690/
  50. https://collection.nam.ac.uk/detail.php?acc=1999-11-102-21
  51. https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attraction_Review-g186338-d13949155-Reviews-Monument_to_Charles_Fryatt-London_England.html
  52. https://redrosecollections.lancashire.gov.uk/view-item?i=217391
  53. https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/15512512.hundreds-gather-to-remember-merchant-seamen-who-gave-their-lives-in-war/
  54. https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3004&context=ils
  55. https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/1951/july/law-and-submarine
  56. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-0130.2006.00390.x
  57. https://www.ejiltalk.org/some-issues-in-the-law-concerning-naval-auxiliaries/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.