This is a page within theStaffordshire Home Guard website. To see full contents, go to SITE MAP.




ON a dirty night in August 1940 Pte. Blank of "C" Coy., the 32nd Bn. The South Staffordshire Home Guard, singlehanded and utterly disregarding his own and other people's personal safety, engaged the Enemy on Chemical Hill, opening fairly rapid fire with the two rounds of s.a.a. which the Coy. had borrowed from a neighbouring battalion to show the troops what it looked like.

Neither Pte. Blank nor the bull was injured, but a rather forceful person of remarkably rude health was hurt in both mind and spirit. His display of brooding parental affection inclined the troops to think he was the father of Pte. Blank. But it was the bull he owned and loved. It is only fair to the animal to say it did not appear to reciprocate. Possibly it felt a bit under the weather, ruminating upon the stark fact that a bullet's first graze might have been its last.

However, having given full play to his affection, the bull's owner went on to express a not entirely unjustifiable concern

as to his pet's future life (in this world) and  even got as far as wishful thinking out loud about Pte. Blank's in the hereafter. His discourse, threatening to develop into a full-blooded Philippic, our inimitable Sgt. Heath judged the moment ripe for diplomatic intervention - "throwing the cat among the pigeons" as he put it later. More in pain than anger, he asked the owner what he had to complain about compared with we? It was us what had lost two ruddy bullets or was it? Them bullets wasn't in the animal so far as us could judge, was they? Right, then they was probably on or in his adjective farm. If so, he should by rights be shoved in the clink for illegitimate possession of Government property. If he wanted to start a bust-up here he had better ruddy start it somewhere else. If he wanted his (the Sergeant's) advice - not that he would waste his puff giving it to him - he would say to him: "Float now, while the going's good, you and your ruddy cow". This somewhat original legal argument obviously non-plussed the owner, but the insult to the bull was, so to speak, the unkindest cut of all. Man and beast drifted out of our lives into the dawn, silently and together, tails down.  (......continues.....)