Disparity of info.

[burlington]

Recently, I wrote to the CWGC as follows about one Frederick Farmer, whose memorial I had chanced upon in a churchyard:

I refer to the above, who is commemorated on Thiepval.

Attached is photograph of a family memorial headstone located in Carmel Congregational Chapelyard, Powys.

Your records show date of death as 18/11/1916. The memorial gives it as 11/09/1916. Also, the father's name does not show on your record.

The CWGC wrote back to me mentioning the need to get documentary evidence of the real date of death and family and suggetsing that I write to the Office of National Statistics.

As I have no connection with the deceased and only wrote to the CWGC because i found this disparity, I am loathe to get involved further. What should I do please?

[Terry Denham]

The only course of action open to you is to do as they say if you wish to discover the true picture.

From what you say, they will have checked their records and found that the date they have is the one supplied by the military. Therefore, they need definite evidence of any correction. The death certificate will do this.

CWGC is not empowered to undertake research to amend info given by the military and therefore, if you want something changed, the onus is on you to provide the evidence. CWGC is obliged to record the info they were given by the military until someone can prove otherwise.

Many headstones have incorrect dates and so there is no saying which date is correct without the death certificate. I know of many examples such as this.

CWGC is not obliged to record n-o-k info and only does so in most cases for those relatives that returned their Final Verification Forms. Not everyone did!

It is up to you whether you want to pursue this or not. Personally, I always try follow up any possible mistakes but not always with success. Many of these men no longer have relatives to take an interest.

[Smith 565]

Am I alone in finding this a very messy subject? A couple of cases to illustrate the complications:

Pte Lawton / Lawston, Tank Corps. I detailed on another thread on the Forum that I was researching the above, who is listed as LAWTON in SDGW, in the Tank Corps Book of Honour, on his death certificate and on his medals. However CWGC have his name as LAWSTON, both on their database and have recently confirmed to me that this is also on his headstone.

Before they will make a change, they want a copy of his birth certificate and some supporting evidence to show that the birth certificate relates to the man who has died. (They suggest a memorium card or obituary notice.) So much for the death certificate being taken as authority for anything! I did get the impression that after I listed the information which I had, they found something I didn't, and asked for that! To discourage me, I wonder?

In another case, however, I have found that the CWGC infomation is probably correct, whereas the death certificate is not! I have been researching a WW2 'blitz' casualty, who was killed on duty as a 'Home Guard' in the Treasury. His death certificate records his death as 26 October 1940. CWGC records it as 17 October 1940.

Having checked the Westminster archives, I find that a bomb did hit the Treasury on 17 October 1940 and a number of Home Guard were trapped / missing. There was no similar incident on 26 October 1940 in the immediate vicinity. I suspect that CWGC has recorded the first date from information supplied to it by the Home Guard. Either the death certificate was incorrectly recorded by a harrassed official, trying to deal with numerous casualties, or perhap his body was not recovered until the later date.

I confess that until I discovered the 'Home Guard' case, I was beginning to have reservations about the correctness of CWGC information in general. It was interesting to find a case where they seemed to have got it right.

Does anyone else know of similar instances?

Geoff

[Terry Denham]

Geoff

I have to say your impression is wrong.

CWGC take the correctness of the basic information information very seriously. That is exactly why they ask for so much evidence. There is a constant updating process.

CWGC did not generate the details in their database. They were provided by the military and next-of-kin. They had no means of checking their validity and could not do so.

Their policy is to stand by the information that they were given from these sources until otherwise given proof of something different. (This excludes errors made by their own staff or the scanning process some years ago - errors which are easily traceable and are corrected at once).

Unfortunately many people have a lower standard of proof and do not realise that you have to prove many things to get some items changed - not only the details of a death but also evidence that the person was the same as the person in the files.

The death and birth certificates can be crucial in this. The death certificate is usually taken as being correct though I have also seen incorrect certificates (we only ever see copies of a certificate anyway and the error can always have been made by the registrar or clerk in copying the details from the official register).

CWGC get literally thousands of communications per year containing possible amendments (hundreds from me!). These range from the well researched cases to the flimsy. They are quite right to insist on accurate and robust evidence for any changes. However when dealing with 1.7 million records which have passed through many hands before reaching CWGC, it is only to be expected that there are errors just as in any of the other sources - SDGW, war memorials, rolls of honour etc (plus the problem that some names were always spelt in different ways by people in the same family - sometimes by the person themselves!)

[burlington]

Going back to the Farmer case I would have thought that the family, who probably erected the memorial, would have known his date of death!

After all, there is a 2 month disparity here.

[John_Hartley]

I can't disagree with Terry here and accept the need for appropriate evidence, particularly with the passage of time. However, when it puts its mind to it, CWGC can border on the pedantic.

One of the chaps I have researched on the local memorial has his name misspelt by CWGC - it records him as Minchall, not Minshall. I submitted several pieces of evidence (mainly newspaper reports , but also a copy of the 1901 census). These all supported the Minshall spelling, except for one, which had a further typographical error (not Minchall). CWGC latched onto that error, saying there was doubt and I would need birth certificate and "official" documentary evidence proving person on birth certificate was casualty. This was, in my view, going to be well nigh impossible to achieve, so I had to draw a line under it.

So, James Minshall (KIA on 1/7/16 at Gommecourt, 1/5th Cheshires) will, no doubt be forever officialy recorded as James Minchall.

John

[Terry Denham]

You would have thought so but I have seen several private headstones with the wrong date - sometimes out by a year or so. I have also seen the name inscribed incorrectly!

I don't know how these cases come about - perhaps the mason got it wrong and could not be made to correct it - blaming the family!

This happens often and CWGC do not take memorial inscriptions as solid evidence unless backed by official documentation for this reason. However, in my experience, they do note such anomalies in the files to await any future corroboration.

In my own village we have one casualty stated by the family to have been at Jutland but the fact that he was buried in our local cemetery six months before it happened seems to leave them unmoved.

Memory is unreliable as we all know and when mixed with grief it can lead to all sorts of mistakes.

The only approach is to trust no information totally until it is backed up by something from a different source. You quickly learn which are the more reliable (not infallable) sources.

[Terry Denham]

John

Your point is exactly what I am getting at.

Your case may be correct but I would not say it is 'proven'. Newspapers are notoriously bad at getting names correct and the typo to which you refer only heightens suspicion. The records from military sources given to CWGC obviously disagree with your claim.

Obtaining certificates is so easy now with the on-line facility that this evidence can be obtained from your armchair - although with a small cost.

Of course, sometimes a certificate cannot be found by the authorities and so other official evidence has to be stronger. I am involved with one such non-commemoration case at the moment where no death certificate can be found and so we are relying on military records. The case is with MoD as we speak.

[paul guthrie]

CWGC changed the date of death of John Glass 87th Bn CEF at my request based solely on his Canadian Army record. His body is at Neuville St Vaast # 2 in VImy Park.

[John_Hartley]

Terry

I fully accept what you're saying AND the position taken by CWGC. They have their rules to follow.

The difficulty wasnt in trying to get a certificate but in making a documentary link that the chap on the birth certificate (Minshall) was the same chap lying in Gommecourt cemetery (Minchall). I suppose it's possible and if it was a family member, I would make "all efforts", but I took a decision to draw a line under it.

There were other cases to persue with CWGC (a couple of which you have advised me on)

John

[Terry Denham]

You are right, John. Nobody can follow up every possible case.

It is far better to concentrate on those where you have some chance of success.

[burlington]

Perhaps I should leave well alone.

After all, I am not family but a mere passer by. This soldier has been dead for many decades; I should leave him and his memory to rest in peace.

[robertb]

Hello,

Try the following website:

http://www.cwgc.co.uk/

Regards,

Rob

[Northern Soul]

Would this case be deserving of consideration.................?

[Northern Soul]

considering an extract from his service papers says this?

[Guest Hill 60]

Going back to the Farmer case I would have thought that the family, who probably erected the memorial, would have known his date of death!

You'd think so, wouldn't you? However, my family thought that one of my great uncles was missing in action and had no known grave - until I wrote to the CWGC and found out he had a grave.

The Farmer you mention interests me as my maternal grandmother's maiden name was Farmer (her father served in the 21st Bn CEF) and he grandparents came from Wales; her grandmother only spoke Welsh, and not a word of English!

However, I don't think 'your' Farmers are related to mine as I haven't heard of any of them serving in the Great War, let alone getting killed.

[robertb]

Hello,

The website I have suggested earlier is not the official Commonwealth War Graves site but one that investigates anomalies.

The URL is:

www.cwgc.co.uk

Rob

[Terry Denham]

Northern Soul

I have taken the liberty of reporting your example to CWGC. I'll let you know what happens.

[Northern Soul]

Thanks Terry. I don't think it necessary for the headstone to be replaced/recut but an update of the central register would be appropriate.

When I can find the time to put all of the documents/arguments together I have a non-commemoration to put to the CWGC - a man captured at Le Cateau who was exchanged via the Red Cross and died within a fortnight of repatriation. His Death Cert gives all his military details so, given the timeframe, it looks as if he was never discharged. Sadly he is now buried in an unmarked grave.

Andy.

[Terry Denham]

Andy

I heard back from CWGC this morning.

They say that all the documentation in their possession says the date of death was 07.01.17 and they cannot, therefore, change it without solid proof.

This will be a case of different official documents giving different details. Have you a copy of his death certificate?

If you need any help with your non-com, give me a shout.

[Smith 565]

Terry,

Your advice please!

I'm trying to change Lawston to Lawton where the former is, according to CWGC, the name they were originally advised. All the info I have so far supports the latter.

CWGC asked me to obtain the birth certificate and either an obituary or memoriam card. I'm off the Liverpool next month to try and sort the birth certificate and photograph the local war memorial. However, the obituary / memorium card are the sticking point. I am not 'family' and have no card with the medals I bought. Last weekend I tried the Newspaper Library in London for an obituary, but neither of the local papers seem to have reported him.

Is this 'failure ' likely to be fatal to my case? A previous contributor to this thread described the CWGC as being 'pedantic' when it wished, which does not inspire confidence that my efforts will be worthwhile...

Geoff

[Terry Denham]

'Pedantic' is not the right word. They are rightly careful of amending any info without proper evidence. Their starting point is that their info as given to them by the military and n-o-k is correct unless proven otherwise.

The trouble is that they get so many 'daft' applications based on flimsy evidence that they are very wary of any application that does not come well researched - quite rightly in my view. Many applicants take SDGW and/or their local war memorial as 'evidence' and we all know the flaws in that approach! Then, when told that the evidence is not strong enough, feathers get ruffled.

The list of requirements you were given is the standard list given for all cases and the lack of a particular item will not be fatal depending on the strength of the other material. I have never had an obituary for any case with which I have been involved.

You have to have evidence of his 'correct' name and be able to prove that your man is the same person as the man in their database. Many people overlook this latter requirement and sometimes make erroneous connections based on probabilities/possibilities.

You mention being 'off to Liverpool' to get a birth certificate. I assume you are aware that you can order both his birth and death certificates on-line from your armchair! These two documents are often the starting point for such case building.

If you email me off-Forum with the details of your case, I'll see if I can be of more help.

[Smith 565]

Terry,

Thanks for your reply.

I don't have the exact date of birth, only to within 6 months. That seems to rule out ordering on-line, as you need the GRO reference or an exact date according to the Family Records Centre website.

I do have other certificates to trace, as well as the memorial and his home address to locate, so it is not a wasted journey! I will get back to you 'off-forum' when I have assembled all the info I think I can get, and see if you have any suggestions at that point.

Regards,

Geoff

[Northern Soul]

Andy

I heard back from CWGC this morning.

They say that all the documentation in their possession says the date of death was 07.01.17 and they cannot, therefore, change it without solid proof.

This will be a case of different official documents giving different details. Have you a copy of his death certificate?

If you need any help with your non-com, give me a shout.

Terry,

Many thanks for the speedy reply. I'll scan some pertinent documents and email you off-line, including a newspaper report ! It definitely is a wrong date commemoration but it is anyone's guess when or how the mix-up ocurred.

Cheers.

Andy.

[MartinWills]

I am left to muse that the effort of many is seeking to ensure that those who died is a fine form of commemoration and in doing so we should take a great pride in ensuring that their names "liveth for ever more".

A couple of years ago I attended the installation of a new CWGC headstone to a soldier who died as a result of wounds some time after his discharge. Research by an individual who had no connection with the man other than a deep and abiding interest in local and military history had gone on over a period of twenty years or more. To be there when things were "put to rights" was a great privilege. Given the sacrifices these men made our endeavours today on their behalf seem miniscule in comparison.

On that note all I would say is that if you feel able to present the case for any form of change you should feel proud to do it - but it may take much time and effort and you may be forgiven for letting the case rest or passing it on to another generation.