Posted on 04/23/2006 4:29:48 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter
It is unfortunate that the fate of Charles Upham's Victoria Crosses involves a public spat, writes The Press in an editorial.
The legacy of so honourable a man should not be exposed to such a wretched dispute. Upham, in death as he was in life, is the epitome of the brave and honourable New Zealander _ a man who twice displayed conspicuous gallantry in the face of the enemy and lived the rest of his life in unassuming modesty.
He counted his own survival as inconsequential in the fight for a free and decent world, and when he had helped secure that world he made no special claims for himself. He was greatly esteemed for that and his reputation remains untarnished.
Upham's is a record that animates the essence of the New Zealand soul because it accords with deeply held expectations _ somewhat contradic tory expectations _ of how we should live our lives. We Kiwis expect mod esty, but we admire exceptional achievement when it contributes to the common good and does not set the achiever apart.
Upham precisely exemplified this formula. He is therefore likely to remain a great New Zealand hero for as long as we hold to our national identity. What happens to his most potent material legacy, the VC and Bar, is thus of national importance.
In this context, Minister of Defence Phil Goff's forthright objection to the sale of the Upham medals is understandable. He was expressing the reality that the passage of the decorations into a private overseas collection would be the loss of a national treasure and a slight on the man who won them.
Goff's anger is also explainable by Upham's explicit statement that his winning of the VC was recognition of the men who supported him and whom he led, and of the fortitude of the entire New Zealand Division. In effect, in so speaking, Upham was spiritually bequeathing his medal and bar to the nation.
That is not contradicted by the fact that he left them to his family. Whatever their defenders say, the bequest did not mean Upham was acquiescing to an eventual sale. More likely he was intent on keeping within the family its greatest possession.
Sale to a private collection is at odds with everything known about how Upham regarded his winning of the awards and his notion that they recognised the achievements of his fellow countrymen.
The family's wish to sell would be understandable were it in penury, but there is no knowledge that this is the case. Its stated motive, to avoid disputes as another generation stands to inherit, is unconvincing. A simple legal trust could avoid such disputes and keep the VC and Bar in family hands.
The large sums evidently being offered for the awards must be tempting and might induce a sale. In that case, the Government would be right to invoke the antiquities legislation to prevent the medals from leaving the country. If they are not taonga, what is? But it would be regrettable if the dispute reached such a messy low point. It would tarnish Upham's legacy, distress the family, and make the Government appear dictatorial. If would be far better if a compromise were worked out.
Goff seems firmly set against buying the VC and Bar, on the grounds that they should be given to the nation; he probably is also concerned that purchase would encourage the families of other VC winners to seek cash for the medals they have lent for display in various New Zealand museums. But he might have to modify his stance. If the family remains committed to a sale, they could sell within New Zealand to a private collection and thus avoid the antiquities export ban, which would leave a cash offer from the Government as the only way of keeping the medals out of a private vault.
The tone of the statements from both sides suggests discussions between them have broken down, or never got under way. Such negotiations need to take place. There is room for a compromise satisfactory to all, and the valiant legacy of Charles Upham should not be further eroded in a demeaning dispute.
He was a quiet and unassuming shepherd from Canterbury, who answered the King's command with ferocity and valor, retiring quietly after the war to a very low public profile.
The Victoria Cross is the highest medal awarded to soldiers of the British Commonwealth, preceding all other medals and titles. Its rough equivalent in America is the Medal of Honor.
What a novel idea the kiwi govt should have to buy the medal from the family and not use some silly antiqities law that does not apply. the man won the medal from the govt,and was not on long term lease.you would think if it belonged to a twotime awardee that the govt would pay well for it. cheap bastards...
I'm sure that if the sale were more widely known an even higher bid could be obtained.
I'm thinking here that there are some very wealthy devotees of the bravery of the fellows in WWII who could pay a very good price, and go so far as to put it on public display as a loan to the Smithsonian for Americans to see how New Zealand honors its war heroes.
No, we don't.
Myself, I think it's sad they're being sold but Upham left them to his heirs and the decision is therefore theirs.
> I'm thinking here that there are some very wealthy devotees of the bravery of the fellows in WWII who could pay a very good price, and go so far as to put it on public display as a loan to the Smithsonian for Americans to see how New Zealand honors its war heroes.
Sad but true. Maybe we, as a Nation, need to be Shamed into doing the right thing. What is happening with Charles Upham VC's medals is a national disgrace!
> Myself, I think it's sad they're being sold but Upham left them to his heirs and the decision is therefore theirs.
I disagree. His heirs did nothing to deserve making a windfall from his heroism. They are a National Treasure. His VCs must never be allowed to leave these shores.
Pay them off if filthy lucre is what they are wanting. For shame that they don't turn the medals over as a matter of good citizenship to Te Papa.
Upham's medals deserve to be admired by future generations of Kiwis.
(Te Papa is the NZ equivalent of the Smithsonian)
We may not think they are being put to a worthy disposition (I certainly don't) but that doesn't give us the right to override their property rights. Upham could have left them to the Museum or could have left strict non-disposal instructions. He didn't. He bequeathed them and therefore the authority to control, own, hold and /or dispose of them
I don't want to see the family get any money from the Government. I'd rather the cash went to the vets who haven't been adequately recompensed or to easing the medical situations of NZ Veterans.
> We may not think they are being put to a worthy disposition (I certainly don't) but that doesn't give us the right to override their property rights.
I disagree, and respectfully acknowledge your point.
The Victoria Cross should not be considered "property". No soldier can "buy" one or even "earn" one. It is awarded to *a* specific soldier for *a* specific act of Valor.
It has meaning in that context for as long as that soldier lives, and for as long as one of his descendents honors his/her Memory by wearing it on the right breast at ANZAC day or on other special occasions.
Once the medal has lost that family connexion, it should belong to the Crown as Taonga.
The Victoria Cross is not like a car, or a dog, or a beach bach: something that has a specific monetary value. Each one is Priceless. These medals should not be subject to the indignity of being "collected" by people who did not earn them.
Upham's VCs belong in our Nation's museum. The Government should feel free to seize them without compensation or regret, for the benefit of future generations.
The current custodians of this Taonga clearly do not value these Taonga with the respect they deserve.
For shame that matters have come to this.
Oh, and yes: I do believe in the sanctity of private property, and would die in its defense if need be. But, like I said, I do not believe that Honors such as the VC are "property" -- they are Honors.
I can sympathise with your feelings and agree that your idea re their not being 'Owned" is a good one. But while I believe that is a good idea, it is certainly not something that was mooted previously as policy so would have to commence henceforth letting all new medal holders understand it when they are given the medals that they are holding them only in trust.
Personally, I like the idea that the medals, on the death of the winner, are then passed onto another m,edal-winner rather than simply casting new ones so that they acquire great histories and traditions.
I don't feel we can apply this retrospectively.
On a minor note, the argument could easily be advanced that the medals should revert to the British government in this case given their provenance.
> Personally, I like the idea that the medals, on the death of the winner, are then passed onto another m,edal-winner rather than simply casting new ones so that they acquire great histories and traditions.
I think this is a beautiful idea! It's not unlike what the Japanese used to do with Samurai swords.
> On a minor note, the argument could easily be advanced that the medals should revert to the British government in this case given their provenance.
No... to the *Crown*, which is whom Upham served. The NZ Government, as agents of the Crown, have a clear right to claim this Taonga, under such circumstances.
It's a sad situation this has come to. Let's hope it's resolved with a little dignity remaining for the Uphams...thanks for an enjoyable debate.
> thanks for an enjoyable debate.
And likewise! You have a high standard of debate and your arguments are very persuasive.
Happy ANZAC Day, mate
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.