Complaints - Please scroll to the bottom of the page
« Business, As Usual! | Main | Economic Development Committee »

WW1 25 Pounder Artillery Piece Restored

That was a wonderful piece of news put out on 4 January, and faithfully reproduced in the HH.

But it seems that all may not be as it appears - though if you read the piece closely you may notice some inconsistency that could result in this particular task causing embarrasment.

Juat try and reconcile these two paragraphs from the puff-piece:

"The 1800kg 87.6mm calibre artillery piece had been on show outside the Thames Civic Centre since it was gifted to Thames by the National Army Museum, but was taken away for restoration at the end of last year," he says.

Originally on long term loan to the Thames RSA before it closed down, the 25-pounder had been the standard field gun for all of the British and Commonwealth Forces during World War II, and was later used by the Kiwis in Korea."

Now I am no expert in the law of ownership, but it seems to me that the ultimate ownership of this piece of history may have been glossed over in the interests of getting a good story to air.

It seems on good authority, and the above story appears hazy on the matter, that the gun still belongs to the Waiouru Army Museum, and that unless its permission has been sought to undertake the 'renovation,' that it may have something to say about that small matter. Of course, it is quite possible that appropriate permissions have been sought, and obtained, but in the absence of any reference to such in the article, that seems highly unlikely. It is understood that the Museum never relinquishes ownership of these relics - rather they are always on extended 'loan.'

If Council have proceeded in this manner without establishing provenance it would seem a somewhat presumptuous action on its part, but we shall see. Perhaps seeking retrospective permission may be appropriate, and welcomed by the Museum.

As owner, if that is established, the Museum may quite rightly question this whole process, and while admiring the wonderful restoration undertaken through the good offices of Thames Sand-blasting Ltd, there may well be concerns about this action being undertaken in a manner that may not be in accordance with the standards required by the Museum.




PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>