"Permanently unfit" man re-enlists? 3rd line to front line?

[headgardener]

I've found a man who seems to have joined up in 1915, been discharged in 1916 - with pension - as 'permanently unfit' (without ever seeing active service), but who then appears to have enlisted in 1917 or 18 and was then killed in action.

Charles Horatio FOOTE

Chapter 1;

I found some online service papers which show him enlisting in the 3rd/7th London Rgt in May 1915. He was then posted to 100th Provisional Bn. So clearly he was placed in a low physical grade right from the start. Within a year he was obviously marked out as being unfit for service. In March '16 a medical board reported him as being "of poor physique and stammers badly. Under chest measurement. Has never been trained and is quite useless". 2 weeks later another medical report recorded that he "stammers badly. Falls out on the march and complains of being short-winded. Only done light duties and has never been trained...... Marked for discharge...... Permanently unfit". By then his discharge was simply a formality. Within 2 weeks he had been discharged, his character reference saying that he was an "Honest, sober, clean, willing & thoroughly trustworthy man". There is one note which says that the medical board rejected his pension claim, but another note states "Admitted to pension 18 May 16". (Chelsea No. 79326, later changed to 41132).

Chapter 2;

The next reference to a Charles Horatio Foote comes from an MIC. It's hard to be sure of the exact chain of postings, but he seems to have been a Pte., S/35236, 17th (Reserve) Bn London Rgt, he transferred to the 1st/17th Londons, then to the East Surreys (No. 29404), and was posted to 1st/23rd Londons. He was killed in action on 16th June 1918.

Firstly, I wanted to ensure that there was only one man with this name; can anyone help me out with this? The first Charles Foote's age is listed on one medical board's notes as 38 (birth year approx 1877-78), but on his discharge he was listed as being 28 (birth year approx 1887-88). The 2nd Charles Foote's age is given by CWGC as 29 (birth year approx 1887-88). The addresses listed in the discharge papers are about 10 minutes walk from the addresses for the next of kin of the man listed by CWGC.

Secondly, assuming that it's the same man, I wanted to ask for opinions as to the circumstances that led to such an apparently unfit man not only re-enlisting but actually getting to the front line. I've encountered other cases in which men were discharged due to illness from which they recovered and were able to return to service. But that doesn't appear to be the case with this man. 3rd line, and discharge, to front line within 2 years seems quite surprising. I know that medical grading changed as the war progressed, but it represents a very big change in this man's case. Also, would a man who was discharged, with pension, have subsequently been liable for conscription or would he have been a volunteer?

Can anyone comment on his service numbers? S/35236 seems like an unusual number for the 17th Londons. His East Surrey's number seems rather low for a late '16 to early '18 enlistment.

[Greyhound]

I can't help with any answers, but for a similar case, see William Gardener on my WM site. He has one record in the 'pensions' collection and a second in the WO363, remarkable that both survived. No doubt at all that it's the same man.

(Just noticed typo which I must get fixed: his service number should be 307437, it was previously 3/5070)

[The Inspector]

Hi

There is a public tree on Ancestry with Charles Horatio Foote born Sept 1888,killed 16.6.18 Father Charles Foote mother Emily Taylor. The tree lists SDGW 29404 formerly 211468 Rife Brigade. Also addresses and marriage in 1912 to "unknown"

Regards Barry

PS His wife would be either Ada Read or Alice Offer, Winchester,Hampshire. This does not concur with CWGC info. Also the Pension Papers for Foote show him as No.4648. and he received a gratuity of £25 as he was clearly unfit to serve and shouldn't have been accepted.

[headgardener]

Hi Greyhound,

Thanks for the link You really have made a very good job of your site. Well written, and visually much better than many RoH's that I've come across. I've come across several sets of papers for men who were pensioned out but re-enlisted, and they've generally the same pattern as your man; a fairly short period of service early in the war, followed by acute illness and discharge, then re-enlistment (presumably after they had recovered from the acute phase of their illness/disease). What's puzzled me about my man is that he didn't suffer any acute illness; his general 'condition' appears to have been unsuited to military service, hence his discharge.

Hello Barry,

Thank you for your efforts. I haven't looked at SDGW yet. Interesting that he had previous service in the Rifle Bde, at a guess I'd say that it looks like a late-ish 1917 enlistment. I noticed the reference to his gratuity in the service papers, the ref was undated but indicates that it was granted in 1917. Which appears to be close to the date that he re-enlisted.

Very curious...... Any further thoughts? (particularly his service numbers). His pension/gratuity would have meant that he was exempted from conscription, surely?

[Greyhound]

I've found the CWGC/SDGW chap in the 1901 census, ref RG13 Piece 224 Folio 81 page 14

26 Warburton Road

Charles E. Foote, head, 36, mathematical instrument

Emily, wife, 34

Eliza, 13

Horatio, 12 born London, Homerton

William, 10

Percival, 8

Frederick, 5

Ernest, 2

Elizabeth, 11 months

and his marriage, Q3 1910 Bethnal Green 1c 383

Horatio C. Foote

Frances Earp

I think it must be the same chap as on the pension record, he signs "H.C. Foote" and on the first page the age 38 has been amended to 28. I don't have full access to the 1911 census, but not found him in the search.

(Thanks for the kind words about my war memorial pages ... I take no credit for the presentation, all the work of my good friend Pete who owns the site, he designed the layout and uploaded everything.)

[headgardener]

Greyhound,

Thanks very much for that. I very much appreciate your interest and help.

And well done to your mate Pete!