Bingo794 Posted 1 January , 2009 Share Posted 1 January , 2009 Hi, Just doing some look ups and found a case of where an original pre-war serviceman with a lowish regimental number, awarded the 1914 Star with clasp/rosette, is later given another number in the New Army range for very late 1914 and early 1915. The chap in question was discharged from the service in Febraury, 1915. Likely due to wounds/sickness/fitness to perform, as many were at that time. This is the first time I have seen this happen. Would there be a reason for this? All the men I have come accross from the same unit kept their pre-war numbers, and mainly men from the TF units, returning wounded, or men going from TF to the New battalions, were re-numbered in the 1917 reshuffle. This jumped out at me as being a little different. Can anyone she any light on this? The man was No.8639 and No.13969 Pte. A.E. Chesterton 1/Lincolnshire R. Cheers, Dick (.............and a Happy New Year to one and all) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBettsMCDCM Posted 1 January , 2009 Share Posted 1 January , 2009 Having been discharged I suspect he re~enlisted in the new army & received the new number Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBettsMCDCM Posted 1 January , 2009 Share Posted 1 January , 2009 This other card is possibly his Son/Brother/Cousin,etc; & possibly he re~enlisted with him????[only 5 digits under] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 1 January , 2009 Share Posted 1 January , 2009 But under the rules he should not have been discharged, being obliged to do an extra year for King and Country ..... unless he had been held overseas to do an extra part-year, as sometimes happened with the trooping season. Bit of a mystery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bingo794 Posted 1 January , 2009 Author Share Posted 1 January , 2009 Having been discharged I suspect he re~enlisted in the new army & received the new number Oh, I didnt spot that one, thats interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bingo794 Posted 1 January , 2009 Author Share Posted 1 January , 2009 But under the rules he should not have been discharged, being obliged to do an extra year for King and Country ..... unless he had been held overseas to do an extra part-year, as sometimes happened with the trooping season. Bit of a mystery. This is what I thought to be the case. Maybe the term of his engagement/service time expired or something like, would have been completed on or before the arrival in France. Though, once there, he would have to have seen his time out for the duration of hostilities. Or the year 'for the Colours'. I had a look through a manning list for 1912-13 when the 1/Linc.R were at Portsmouth and can find no entry for him with them, or the 2/Linc.R. Then there is the discharge date of 20/2/1915 for the man in question and qualifying date of James Chesterton of 16/4/1915. Yes, a bt of a mystery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Nixon Posted 1 January , 2009 Share Posted 1 January , 2009 Your man would have joined the Lincs Regt in Jan 1909. The next man along, 8640 Frederick Henry Dyer, joined on 18th Jan 1909 for 7 & 5 and he sailed with the 1st Bn on the 13th August. Assuming that your man also enlisted for 7 & 5 he wouldn't have been time expired, although he obviously didn't sail with the battalion in August as his MIC indicates a disembarkation date in late October 1914. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bingo794 Posted 1 January , 2009 Author Share Posted 1 January , 2009 Your man would have joined the Lincs Regt in Jan 1909. The next man along, 8640 Frederick Henry Dyer, joined on 18th Jan 1909 for 7 & 5 and he sailed with the 1st Bn on the 13th August. Assuming that your man also enlisted for 7 & 5 he wouldn't have been time expired, although he obviously didn't sail with the battalion in August as his MIC indicates a disembarkation date in late October 1914. Paul January 1909 tallies with the rest of the men I have been going through. However, A.E.Chesterton's number(8639) is also allocated to a Pte. John Morgan 2/Linc.R., but AEC is listed as 13969, on the Medal Rolls. (There again the James E Chesterton is not on the Medla Roll at all.) Would this be anything to do with the Special Reserve number allocation, I wonder. Anyway, James E.C. and Albert E.C. could have been related, they were from very close areas of Barleston/St. Margeret's, Leicestershire. Just have to keep digging....................... Dick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Nixon Posted 1 January , 2009 Share Posted 1 January , 2009 Paul January 1909 tallies with the rest of the men I have been going through. However, A.E.Chesterton's number(8639) is also allocated to a Pte. John Morgan 2/Linc.R., but AEC is listed as 13969, on the Medal Rolls. (There again the James E Chesterton is not on the Medla Roll at all.) Would this be anything to do with the Special Reserve number allocation, I wonder. Anyway, James E.C. and Albert E.C. could have been related, they were from very close areas of Barleston/St. Margeret's, Leicestershire. Just have to keep digging....................... Dick Dick As you are probably aware, the Special Reserves were numbering in the mid 8000s and then into the 9000s by September 1914 so your assumption looks to be correct that either A E Chesterton joined the SR at that time and was then posted to the 1st Bn in time to land in France by 26th Oct 1914, OR he joined in 1909 and Pte John Morgan was the Special Reservist etc etc. If you knew their ages you might be able to eliminate one or the other of them as the 1909 enlistment. Of course, none of this helps you with the second five digit number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purley Posted 1 January , 2009 Share Posted 1 January , 2009 Dick As you are probably aware, the Special Reserves were numbering in the mid 8000s and then into the 9000s by September 1914 so your assumption looks to be correct that either A E Chesterton joined the SR at that time and was then posted to the 1st Bn in time to land in France by 26th Oct 1914, OR he joined in 1909 and Pte John Morgan was the Special Reservist etc etc. If you knew their ages you might be able to eliminate one or the other of them as the 1909 enlistment. Of course, none of this helps you with the second five digit number. What is much more likely is that he joined in 1903 and had a regular number, did his 7 years and transferred to the Special Reserve to get his SR number, was called up just after the outbreak of war and joined his regiment with his SR number (should be prefixed by 3/ ie 3/8639) was discharged when his 12 years was up - had two months at home and then re-enlisted to 'do his bit' and got a later regular number 13969. The Army were very good about not requiring men who had served their time to have to serve again but an awful lot did re-enlist. regards John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bingo794 Posted 1 January , 2009 Author Share Posted 1 January , 2009 Dick As you are probably aware, the Special Reserves were numbering in the mid 8000s and then into the 9000s by September 1914 so your assumption looks to be correct that either A E Chesterton joined the SR at that time and was then posted to the 1st Bn in time to land in France by 26th Oct 1914, OR he joined in 1909 and Pte John Morgan was the Special Reservist etc etc. If you knew their ages you might be able to eliminate one or the other of them as the 1909 enlistment. Of course, none of this helps you with the second five digit number. Paul Neither of the Chesterton men (Albert b.1886 & James b.1878) or John Morgan have 'SR' or '3' prefix with their regimental numbers. Morgan does not appear in the manning list for 1912/13 either, this is a bit of a stinker. Dick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bingo794 Posted 1 January , 2009 Author Share Posted 1 January , 2009 What is much more likely is that he joined in 1903 and had a regular number, did his 7 years and transferred to the Special Reserve to get his SR number, was called up just after the outbreak of war and joined his regiment with his SR number (should be prefixed by 3/ ie 3/8639) was discharged when his 12 years was up - had two months at home and then re-enlisted to 'do his bit' and got a later regular number 13969. The Army were very good about not requiring men who had served their time to have to serve again but an awful lot did re-enlist. regards John John If I am correct with the man I think he is and I am not 100% on this, born 1886, I do not think he would have been old enough to have joined up, unless joining as a boy in 1903. I can see your point about the re-enlisting after 'the fun had started', with the initial clamour to get into the war, the war that would be over by Christmas etc.etc. I have not seen any prefixes which denote Special Reserve, apart from SR on Medal Rolls and MIC's. I thought the '3' prefix stood for membership of the 2nd Battalion in the Lincs area. I think that came from the Williamson book on WW1 medals and as far I have seen it stands up. (Though I have only got one 14-15 Star trio and a couple of single BWM's with a '3' prefix.) I will get to the bottom of this one. Cheers lads, Dick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purley Posted 2 January , 2009 Share Posted 2 January , 2009 John If I am correct with the man I think he is and I am not 100% on this, born 1886, I do not think he would have been old enough to have joined up, unless joining as a boy in 1903. I can see your point about the re-enlisting after 'the fun had started', with the initial clamour to get into the war, the war that would be over by Christmas etc.etc. I have not seen any prefixes which denote Special Reserve, apart from SR on Medal Rolls and MIC's. I thought the '3' prefix stood for membership of the 2nd Battalion in the Lincs area. I think that came from the Williamson book on WW1 medals and as far I have seen it stands up. (Though I have only got one 14-15 Star trio and a couple of single BWM's with a '3' prefix.) I will get to the bottom of this one. Cheers lads, Dick Dick Boy soldiers would have enlisted at age 14 and could convert to full soldiers at 17 or 18 and certainly a 17 year old would have been accepted in 1903. The 3/ prefix was for the 3rd (Special Reserve) Battalion and used within the regiment to differentiate reservists from regulars - It was not often used on medals but does occur on official papers occasionally. I dont know specifically about the Lincolns but I have several thousand for the Royal Berks and as most county regiments followed similar procedures I would bet the Lincolns did likewise. regards John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Nixon Posted 2 January , 2009 Share Posted 2 January , 2009 Just to clarify, the Army Reserve and the Special Reserve were two entirely different entities. A regular soldier, having served his time with the colours, was then placed on the Reserve, to be called upon if needs be. The Special Reserve replaced the Militia under Haldane's reforms in 1908. The Long Long Trail explains the differences between the Reserve and the Special Reserve in detail: http://www.1914-1918.net/reserve.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bingo794 Posted 2 January , 2009 Author Share Posted 2 January , 2009 Thanks for your help and more gems for the memory on SR and Reservists. I did not know boys were so young either, that certainly surprised me. Cheers, Dick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_davies Posted 7 April , 2009 Share Posted 7 April , 2009 Missed this first time around. Couple of points; Chesterton's MIC would appear to show an entry for SWB "On SWB list F/20". Thus his terms of engagement would have nothing to do with his discharge. SWB will show his enlistment date. The SWB listing for 8639 John Morgan, (notice the number) give an enlistment date of 18 Jan 1909. To me this would suggest that Chesterton was actually in the Special Reserve, enlisting on or about 1 Sep 1914. Due to probable previous service he goes out to France quickly. The "second" number is actually part of the draft of Aug-Sep 1914 Leics Regt men transferred to the Lincs in late Nov 1914. And thus a number issued prior to his discharge. Also the "second" number was actually assigned to Bernard Chapell. Chapell (according to the 1914-15 Star Roll) went to France, (2nd Lincs) on 6 Mar 1915, later transferring to the Labour Corps). Chappell's MIC is available online. I would suggest that the number "13969" does not relate to a service number. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now