Enlisting Under A Publicly Known Alias

[At Home Dad]

Hallo all

I wonder if you can help me to understand something

I have noticed with one of the volunteers to the West

Ham Battalion.

J Matthews is named in the local paper as living at 8

Date Street in Walworth and a volunteer to the Battalion

but next to his name it says "under the alias Stephen Whatley".

Pte 17286 Whatley was subsequently discharged from the Army on 16/5/17

and awarded the SWB.

What could be the reason behind enlisting under an alias when your

real name is also published with it?

Many thanks for any assistance

[Ron Clifton]

Hello At Home Dad

The most usual reason for men enlisting under an alias was to avoid their families finding out, especially if they enlisted uinder age. It also happened where the man came from a family or community which disapproved of soldiering, such as the Quakers, and I have known it happen with Jewish families. The Army accepted this and there was a recognised official procedure for adding your true name to your army documents.

You do not mention how soon after his enlistment Pte Whalley was "outed" as being J Matthews, but it may have been after he was wounded. It is unlikely that his real name would have been disclosed at the time of enlistment, since if he gave both his real name and his alias he would have been enlisted under his real name, or become liable to "giving a false answer on attestation", for which he could be court-martialled.

Of course, he could have declared Whalley to be his real name, but added that he was sometimes known as Matthews! This might in fact have been true, if his father had died and his mother had remarried.

Ron

[At Home Dad]

Hallo Ron

Thanks for that helpful information. What is odd about this chap is that on 23rd January,

the local paper printed a list of the first three hundred volunteers to the battalion.

His entry states "J Matthews, 8 Date Street, Walworth, under the alias Stephen Whatley"

So, there's no attempt at hiding it.

confusing

Unless he tried to hide it and was inadvertantly 'outed' by clerical error!

Thanks for the help!

[ulsterlad2]

AHD

I think, as Ron says, the timing of his real identity becoming known is a key factor. What year is the newspaper report of January 23rd?

I see that he entered (1) France in November 1915. If the report was 1916, that's a couple of months in theatre + a few more back home before leaving when he's managed to keep his identity concealed.

Difficult to know what his personal reason was for using an alias. We can only guess. And as for the truth coming out? Perhaps it's as simple as someone recognising him.

[At Home Dad]

Yes, it was january 1915. He was among the first batch of volunteers.

I had wondered if "under the alias of" was more common than I thought.

best regards

[ulsterlad2]

Yes, it was january 1915.

Oh, that''s really early on. Perhaps it was a case of someone recognising him and revealing his true indentity.

[jdajd]

I had the same question when I saw this on the Menin Gate:

[centurion]

At the time of Cardwell is was estimated that ten percent of all soldiers were serving under an alias. Reasons given were

Trying to avoid irate fathers and brothers with shotguns

Trying to avoid irate husbands

Deserting wives

Avoiding creditors

Breaking apprenticeship indentures

Avoiding the police

Deserter from the RN

Deserter from another Regiment

Keeping it from the family

Already in disgrace

Most of these could still apply in WW1 but some might be short term ie after you were safely in the army and things had cooled down you might not mind your name being known

[At Home Dad]

Hallo Centurion

very helpful, thank you especially for the breakdown of likely reasons

kind regards