Initial reports incorrectly gave him as "Patrick" rather than "John". But John is the right man.
CWGC gives J. MORAN, Private 8458 in 2nd Battalion Connaught Rangers Unit Text: 2nd Bn. Date of Death: 28/05/1916 buried at Niederzwehren Cemetery. And SDGW in addition Birth Place: Dungarvan. Residence: Dungarvan. Died of Wounds 28 May 1916. Enlistment Location: Dungarvan, CO. Waterford
1886 born Dungarven, Waterford
1901 Census Ballynacourty North (Ringville, Waterford) Moran, John, Farm Servant, Roman Catholic, Read only, Irish and English, Not Married
1905 Apr. For 8458, his regimental number would have him enlisting April 1905.
1911 Census 1st Battalion at Gough Barracks Ferozepore Punjab India: MORAN, John, Single, 24, 1887, Co Waterford Dungarvan
Excerpt from THE PRISONER OF WAR IN GERMANY by J. McCarthy.
The commandant stated that on May 28th a group of prisoners working on an Arbeitskommando at Langenseifexe, some little distance from Limburgy were taken by their guard to an inn and permitted to drink. Among the men was P. M of the Second Connaught Bangers. The men after a time spent in drinking in the inn were taken by the guard to the dwellings where they were quartered in the village. When in his quarters, M • suddenly became excited and violent, jumped about the room, screaming and crying out that he must have more to drink, and pounded upon the walls. The noise attracted the attention of civil- ianSy among them the burgomeister, who attempted to quiet the man. M — — then seized a piece of iron and made an attack upon the burgomeister, who escaped him. He then turned upon the guard and threw the iron at him, which the guard dodged, and this was repeated. Again he attacked the guard in the same manner, whereupon the guard shot him, the man dying in a few minutes. The commisindant stated that the guard was given a hearing before a board, and his act pronounced justified in self-defence. The commandant stated that M was regarded as having become suddenly mad or was intoxicated. The guard had stated that he had permitted the men to drink no more than men are commonly supposed to be able to drink without intoxication ; and in view of this, the commandant stated that if the man was to be regarded as having been drunk, he must have been abnormally sensitive to the action of alcohoL He stated that the man had given no trouble previously, was not known to be inclined to drink, and was not known to have given any signs of being queer or imbalanced. The commandant stated that the guard had violated his instructions and regulations in permitting the prisoners to drink and drinking with them as he had done. He stated that the body of M was given a military funeral at the place where his death occurred ; and that the death had been reported to the army corps to which the camp was attached. During our inspection the senior noncommis- sioned officer of the camp, Sergeant J. D of the Royal Connaught Bangers reported to us the death of P. M
In contradiction to the commandant's report, statements obtained from witnesses at the time, gave an entirely different version of this affair. It was stated that the shooting of the prisoner was entirely unjustified. He admitted that he had been drinking and was boisterous and had not obeyed immediately the order of the guard to turn in, who therefore shot him. It seems highly improbable that the four or five Germans present including the guard could not easily have subdued a man who was drunk and violent and who had no more deadly weapon than a tin wash basin. According to the witnesses present the piece of iron mentioned in the commandant's statement wai^ the innocent wash-hasin, referred to.
In the interest of this case the Central Government in Berlin made efforts to prevent the visit of Mr. Gerard and myself to Limbnrg and when they realized that the case was going to be investigated whether they liked it or not, sent a member of the Foreign Office on the train with ns to protest and reason with ns and when we arrived at limburg we fonnd the staff officer from the army corps head- qnarters at Frankfort, sent there with the avowed purpose of preventing any investigation either there or at the working camp. While nothing farther was done we obtained sufficient direct in formation not only in this case, but in the case which immediately followed it, to give ns a fairly complete case upon which to make a vigorous pro-test concerning the attitude of the German authorities to the Irish prisoners.
The copy of the trial report sent by the American Ambassador says that the shot was fired by Guardsman Vogt at Limburg, and that the Germans were taking no further legal proceedings against him. The German trial concluded that Vogt fired at Maran in self defence, having been continually attacked by Moran, who appeared to be drunk.