There are no 'clever' words or profound research which can match first hand
experience in any sphere of human history. Even the clumsiest of revelations
from one actually involved in a history-making event is worth far more than any
academic attempt to write history in retrospect, especially when the author was
not involved and in so many cases, was not even born when the event took place.
Had the naval warrant officers of Nelsons time and the greater part of the
19th century recorded their experiences, likes, dislikes and attitudes, we would
have a better understanding of their rank and how it interfaced with other
officers of the navy and of the fleet. For obvious reasons [education,
influence, ego, cost of publishing, eager audience, grateful nation, etc] many officers
wrote autobiographical accounts in-situ which were either published under the
authors name, or integrated by historians into authoritative books of
learning. Regrettably, much of the so-called historical input from the
lower deck and from the "middle deck" was either recorded by officers [taken from an officers perspective]
or wholly anecdotal passed from raconteur to raconteur, both naval and civilian.
Had it not been for Warrant Officer [Gunner] Henry Capper in the last
quarter of the 19th century [see Warrant Officer Part III] nothing of substance
would be known until the first decade of the 20th century. He started the Warrant Officers' Journal, which became a responsible
publication from which all warrant officers' complaints were made known.
As a rank, warrant officers had much to be grateful to him for his shrewd
editorship over a very long period.
When the new naval warrant officer was introduced it was considered to be an
event which had been poorly staffed, and despite the enthusiastic welcome given
to the new rank there were many misgivings and disappointments. Who better to
tell us about that event than the very first promoted Fleet Chief Petty
Officers. I am convinced that as a group, the spokesman for all FCPO's in
the navy [were there to have been such a person] would have said what each
spokesman for each branch said, and for that I look to my own branch, namely to
the communicators. The communicators view can be fairly assumed to be that of
every branch and therefore of every FCPO in the fleet.
I am grateful to two FCPO's for their time and assistance, namely to John
Eilbeck [second batch] whose data, advice and assistance is already incorporated
into the story of the warrant officer - thank you John, and now to Dennis
Alderson [first batch] who has kindly contributed all that follows below from
his direct experiences in the years 1971-1974 - thank you Dennis. As John
left the navy to seek a new career in the South African navy, Dennis left to
join the Careers Service and was subsequently promoted to Lieutenant R.N., in
that branch.
THE FOLLOWING
PAPERS ARE OWNED BY DENNIS ALDERSON, LIEUTENANT [CS] RN RTD., WHO HAS GIVEN HIS
PERMISSION TO HAVE THEM REPRODUCED HERE.
The paper are in date order.
Although very little altered in the status of the FCPO until the mid 1980
period [some 15 years after the poor to bad staffing of the project], what did
alter must in some part [and I rather think great part] be attributable to men
like Dennis Alderson and his peer group - the original warrant officers of the
post 1970 period, who recorded and articulated their problems and
dissatisfaction with some skill.
1 
2
3
4
1 
2 
3 
4
1 
2 
2T 
2B 
3 
3T 
3B 
4
1 
2 
3 
4 
5
5T 
5B
1 
2
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7
1T 
1B 
2T 
3T 
3B 
4T 
5T 
5B 
6T 
7T
1 
2 
3 
4
1 
2
