The HARRY LUND investigation by 'Team Harry'

[Old Owl]

I couldn't agree more, but preferably opinions from people with in-depth knowledge in specific areas like the RAMC and the RND.

I have never researched a local memorial so accept what you say about inaccuracies creeping in. The problem for me is I am finding it difficult to reconcile that the family, or whoever else it was who put the wording forward for the memorial, would confuse someone serving on a hospital ship with being attached to an infantry division. It's the fact they were specific about the division rather than putting he was attached to the navy that I have doubts. That's not to say that they weren't confused but until I have absolute proof that there is no way Harry could have been attached to the RND it will always be an unanswered question to me, and one I will always seek an answer to, not just accept that it must be an error or a mistake and forget it. In fact I find it strange that any serious researcher would.

I think I'm done with this thread now, its been a great thread but as Robert says it does appear to be going round in circles. I will continue to ask ex-members and look out for references to anyone else serving as a Dispenser Clerk during the Great War whilst doing my own research. I will now also take special care of any information that might come my way about the Glenart Castle. I think Myrtle's suggestion about contacting the Royal Naval Museum is a good one, no one else appears interested so I will contact them myself - Thank you Myrtle

Hi BJay,

I, or should I say we, will be very happy to hear how you get on with the Royal Naval Museum and I sincerely hope that you can come up with a concrete explanation for the wording on the memorial.

All the very best and good luck.

Robert

[sutton-in-craven]

Well for my two penneth worth, I think it's fantastic that members of the 'Go Team Harry' are as dedicated as ever in gnawing away at this 'Harry' bone. There may not be much meat left on it, but while there are unanswered questions it seems this investigation will not settle.

As Headgardener said "I think we're pretty much there. Virtually every avenue seems to have been exhausted. But then again.......?"

The answer to why ATT. R.N.D. was put on the war memorial may yet be revealed, stranger things have happened during the course of this Harry thread.

Let's face it, if by some small miracle the above question could be answered it really would put the icing on the cake – actually, another layer of icing because the Harry cake has been iced several times already!

Great work all, Harry would be so chuffed, probably flabbergasted if he knew the extent to which a few dedicated researchers have gone to in uncovering this story 92 years after the event!

[sutton-in-craven]

But it leaves the question of how Harry was ID'd. His grave has a headstone, so there must be some reason why someone at some stage believed it to be Harry Lund and not one of the other men lost on the GC.

Would it be out of the question that the War Department contacted Harry's next of kin (probably his brother or sister) stated on his Attestation papers, asking them to travel down to Bristol to help identify an unknown body?

[headgardener]

Would it be out of the question that the War Department contacted Harry's next of kin (probably his brother or sister) stated on his Attestation papers, asking them to travel down to Bristol to help identify an unknown body?

No, not at all out of the question.

But..... in those days a body would be buried very shortly after death. A few days, at most. There weren't some of the more sophisticated ways of preserving bodies in the way that there are now. For the War Department to ascertain that a man was not amongst the survivors, and to then contact the relatives of as many men as could be found, and for them to travel to a relatively remote part of Wales was quite a logistical effort. Of course it could have been done, but I'm more tempted to think that ID would have been made by some identifying feature and that the body would have been buried almost straight away. There was little time for sentimentality in those days. I suspect that ID would have been based on the authorities saying that the body had particular markings, or he was wearing a particular type of watch or ring, etc.

But I'd be very interested to hear other opinions. The thing about the body being ID'd as a Corporal can be explained in a number of ways, but the fact of this body being ID'd as Harry is certainly an intriguing part of the jigsaw that we may never be able to uncover. But, then again....?

Thoughts?

[Andy Wade]

Andy,

As discussed, sadly we''ll probably miss each other on Saturday. I was hoping Robert could keep me company in the Volunteers until my dinner date arrived, but apparently not!

I take it this is the North Yorkshire County Record Office? In which case unfortunately I can't get up there on a weekday but I note that they're open 9.30am - 4.15pm on the first Saturday of each month, so I can try to get there at the beginning of November: the car could use a decent run.

I spoke with a very nice lady at CWGC today, who told me their records indicate that the grave was identified as Harry's right from the outset (1920s?). So we're back to the window between his death and the grant of probate in early 1919 when the ID must have taken place.

I also spoke to the GRO where they confirmed they can amend the DC to incorporate Harry's name given the right amount of evidence, so I've set out the case in a letter (enclosing a copy of the probate available on Ancestry) which has gone out in tonight's post.

Yes Louise, it's the North Yorkshire Record Office at Northallerton.

I found this information from the Parish Council Clerk for Sutton in Craven who answered a thread on the online forum for the village.

Here's the thread which details all the relevant information:

Sutton in Craven forum

I also suspect that Cap’t A.B. Clarkson & Cap’t N.B. Chaffers who were Directors of T & M Bairstow’s Mill' date=' Sutton along with Col Bateman may have been very influential in the design and listing of the names for the memorial.[/quote']

I note from the above quote that Andrew (forum member sutton-in-craven on the GWF) has said on there that it's likely that at least two local Army officers would probably have been involved with the war memorial committee, which, if true rather makes me wonder how an 'error' such as Att. RND could creep in to the conversation without being spotted as being incorrect, if indeed it was. You'd think, (I know, it's all a bit of an assumption) that two former Army officers might question it.

I'm still puzzled as to why someone lying dead in South Wales wasn't transported home to Sutton for a local burial. We have plenty of examples in local cemeteries of people being transported just as far to be buried locally. Not sure we'll ever get the answer to that one. But Headgardner's explanation about the time from death to burial may be the most likely one.

[Phil Evans]

Andy,

In answer to your last paragraph, Harry died 9 days before the DC was signed, a long period for those days, but still not identified.

I would guess that a serious attempt was made during that period to identify the body, but the period could not be extended further. Hence the comment on the DC about releasing the body for burial and at the hospital cemetery.

Phil

[Andy Wade]

I agree, but they must have definitely identified him beyond all doubt later or they'd have had to put 'A Soldier from the Great War' or 'A Soldier from the RAMC' on the headstone.

I wonder if it was just a simple ommission that led to them not correcting the DC after they had positively identified him enough to put a name to the headstone. He did have an identifiable injury (from the fall off his bicycle) that caused him to be unfit for front line service, I imagine it would have taken time to collate that information together.

[headgardener]

I note from the above quote that Andrew (forum member sutton-in-craven on the GWF) has said on there that it's likely that at least two local Army officers would probably have been involved with the war memorial committee, which, if true rather makes me wonder how an 'error' such as Att. RND could creep in to the conversation without being spotted as being incorrect, if indeed it was. You'd think, (I know, it's all a bit of an assumption) that two former Army officers might question it.

What reason would they have to question it?

They're simply processing a list of names submitted for inclusion. An alternative explanation might be that they were the ones who amended a poorly worded submission by the family.

[Andy Wade]

What reason would they have to question it?

They're simply processing a list of names submitted for inclusion. An alternative explanation might be that they were the ones who amended a poorly worded submission by the family.

I don't know what was discussed in the memorial committee meetings, they may have had a huge involvement in all aspects of the whole thing. They may have even known Harry personally. Or they had documentation to support it. Possibly supplied by the family from call up papers originally sent to Harry in late 1917 before he went on the same course as all the others seem to have gone on. There are a number of possibles, just trying to see if there are any ways we can definitely prove/disprove them.

[Old Owl]

What reason would they have to question it?

They're simply processing a list of names submitted for inclusion. An alternative explanation might be that they were the ones who amended a poorly worded submission by the family.

Indeed, what reason would they have had to question it? Also, the officers mentioned as being on the War Memorial committee, were, I believe, Army Officers and as such would have little knowledge of Naval matters, ranks and units, and as we all know 'a little knowledge can be dangerous'--- so this could well be where the enigma originated!!?

Lets also remember that in those days one could write almost anything and not worry about being sued. Today it would be a different matter and I would expect a great deal more care would be taken with the wording, for fear of being accused of things such as: discrimination, deformation of character or abuse of some sort!! Only joking--I think?

I would imagine that the committee would show or display their 'approved' version of the memorial prior to commissioning of same, in order that any amendments could be put forward by the families of the fallen? Of course these are all assumptions, but I feel that there must have been a fully democratic process which would have had to be followed?

I really do feel that this was an 'approved' wording, in as much as it seemed to 'fit the bill' rather than that it was correct, and that no one obviously questioned it?----that is until an 'Australian Yorkshireman' started the ball rolling some 90 or so years after the event!! Sorry Andrew:

Just a passing thought --or two!

Robert

[headgardener]

I think that Barbara has a point when she suggests that we shouldn't stop thinking about how we 'prove' our theories about Harry.

Today I stopped at a local library with access to Ancestry and tried to see what more I could wring out of his service details. A little while ago I said that we're at the point at which the law of diminishing returns is making itself felt....... I spent an hour and a half getting a tiny sliver of information to add, but it may help to provide some context to Harry's story.

I thought I'd see if anything could be found by looking at the service of those men with similar service numbers to Harry. His number was 115666, so I looked at RAMC men with numbers ranging from 115600 to 115700.

Out of that sample of 101 men, a total of only 58 served overseas, the rest didn't.

I was able to trace the enlistment dates of 3 men, one of them with a service number adjacent to Harry's (115667). They are;

115666 Harry Lund

115667 Peter Gerrard e. 10 Dec 1915

115682 Philip John Clarke e. 15 Feb 1917

115698 James Halkyard e. 11 Dec 1915 (e. under the Derby Scheme, mobilized 5 Apr 1916, returned to Reserve, remobilized 16 April 1917. Was graded 'B 2' & was discharged after 4 months due to chronic ulceritis of both legs).

Quite by chance, I came across another man just outside my 'sample'; 115510, who enlisted 2 Mar 1916.

If we combine these details with the results of the much wider 'sample' provided by Barbara in a previous post, we can see that the dates of enlistment vary widely between late 1915 to early 1917.

So what does this rather boring exercise tell us? Well, to be honest, not much that we don't already know, but there are a couple of snippets to be gleaned.

First of all, a relatively moderate to low ratio of men in this number range served overseas. This confirms that we're looking at a group of physically low-grade men (look at the medical condition of James Halkyard and the Glenart Castle men).

Secondly the dates of enlistment vary widely. Again this suggests that these men were graded as unfit for active service and were then 'held back' until they were needed to replace healthier men who had been re-graded and sent overseas.

Thirdly, James Halkyard was mobilized on 16 April 1917, so I think that it's a pretty safe bet to say that Harry was mobilized at the same time. Halkyard was sent to 'N' Co., RAMC at Ripon, and I suspect that Harry was probably on the same draft (if we look at the Glenart castle men, they appear overwhelmingly to have been drafted to the same depot).

Harry either enlisted in late 1915 under the terms of the Derby Scheme, or was conscripted during 1916, but in either case he was 'held back' due to his chronic shoulder problem. There is a gap of about 7 months between Harry completing his training and then being transferred to the Glenart Castle. Is it likely that a man who had been 'held back' on account of his physical grade would have been rushed to France shortly after completing his training? These men were replacing other, healthier, RAMC men who were being drafted into fighting units. So, on balance of probability, I think the answer is 'No'. This is borne out by whatever other service details we've been able to find.

I also spent about 15 minutes Googling "RAMC att RND", "RAMC attd RND", "RAMC attached RND", "medical corps attd royal naval", etc, etc, etc. Everything I tried kept leading me to.... this thread. Which suggests that the term itself is an anomaly. No-one else appears to have been "RAMC att RND" except Harry Lund.

The only likely further sources of information are;

checking service papers of any other Glenart Castle men (when was the ship re-commissioned? when did the crew join the ship?)

local newspaper reports - I don't know if anyone's trawled through the local paper, but obits can sometimes be followed by further reports (sometimes several weeks later - perhaps when Harry's body was identified?)

I wonder of any local Welsh newspapers would have a report about the previously unidentified body being identified?

family history - it sounds like Mona knows all the facts about Harry's case, but might any other family member know some other little snippet? Is it worth asking Mona about it? Does she know how his body came to be identified?

Can't think of any other viable avenues of research.

[Andy Wade]

local newspaper reports - I don't know if anyone's trawled through the local paper, but obits can sometimes be followed by further reports (sometimes several weeks later - perhaps when Harry's body was identified?)

I wonder of any local Welsh newspapers would have a report about the previously unidentified body being identified?

family history - it sounds like Mona knows all the facts about Harry's case, but might any other family member know some other little snippet? Is it worth asking Mona about it? Does she know how his body came to be identified?

Can't think of any other viable avenues of research.

I mentioned local Milford Haven newspaper archives earlier in the thread. I did a quick on-line search at the time and I think it would have been the 'Milford Mercury'. But nothing has come of this, perhaps because we haven't anyone (that has read this thread) who is living near enough to be able (or willing) to visit the archives. It would be nice to find this out of course as it could be a rich source of information. As Louise pointed out this afternoon, it would be a gift for any local newspaper to have survivors from the sinking of a hospital ship landing right on your doorstep. After all, even with regard to the tragic circumstances it's what newspapers do. Unless there were any reporting restrictions, but I can't believe that would be the case as the New York Times ran their article only two days after the sinking.

Louise and myself met Mona again this afternoon and she didn't really know anything regarding the death cert until today as she first saw it this morning on my display at the local history day. She's as puzzled as we are about how they identified the body and agreed about the possibility that it could have been a superior officer, or other survivors that travelled to identify some personal effects (if there were any). She didn't know if any family members had gone down there at the time. The information she has about Harry's damaged shoulder is a bit vague, mainly that he had 'a shoulder problem', but no real details.

The identification of Harry's body could have been simply a case of them matching up identifying characteristics of the body to details from his medical records that clinched it (would they have done dental record matches in those days?). But that doesn't answer the question of why the death cert wasn't corrected from 'an unknown man' to Harry Lund. I'm guessing they must have issued the DC before he was buried because this would be a legal (?) requirement for burial, so he went into the ground as an unknown.

Louise has very generously given Mona the original copy of the DC. We also asked Mona if she knew who it might possibly be that could have supplied any information to the war memorial committee and again, she didn't really have any solid suggestions for us. I'm hoping she'll ask family members if they know anything. The picture of Harry with the bicycle came from a different family member to the one who supplied the rest of the photos, so it's possible there's even more in somebody's attic. Mona will be asking around.

Hopefully Louise will find some juicy snippets of information from the war memorial committee minutes held with the parish council records. We do know they exist because the present clerk for Sutton in Craven Parish Council has told me that they are indexed as part of the archives, so we'll see. I've never seen anything regarding any war memorial committee decision making, so for myself it would be something new from a research point of view.

Incidentally, Mona has asked me to pass on her best wishes and thanks for all the work we've done to find out about Harry, she knew a fair bit about him before Louise first contacted her but nothing close to the fine details that have been uncovered by 'Team Harry'. I'll be giving her a full copy of the display materials, so she's delighted with everything.

A ten shilling note, four big shiny sixpences and two of those thirteen sided brass thru'penny bits are now behind the bar, so get your orders in quick.

[headgardener]

I mentioned local Milford Haven newspaper archives earlier in the thread.

Sorry, I missed that.....!

The identification of Harry's body could have been simply a case of them matching up identifying characteristics of the body to details from his medical records that clinched it

'Identifying features' on medical records tend to be pretty sketchy; 'mole left knee', 'tattoo right arm', that sort of thing. So, either a large, clearly identifiable 'feature' (plus colour of hair and eyes, etc) and jewellery are most likely.

would they have done dental record matches in those days?

No

I'm guessing they must have issued the DC before he was buried because this would be a legal (?) requirement for burial, so he went into the ground as an unknown.

Yes. Almost certainly buried as an unknown and identified afterwards.

A ten shilling note, four big shiny sixpences and two of those thirteen sided brass thru'penny bits are now behind the bar, so get your orders in quick.

A creme de menthe, please. Pint.

[Verrico2009]

I mentioned local Milford Haven newspaper archives earlier in the thread. I did a quick on-line search at the time and I think it would have been the 'Milford Mercury'.

Hi Andy,

Good to see you and Mona yesterday. Very impressive display. Had a swift one in the Volunteers and it was perfectly atmospheric (apart from the huge TV blaring the racing news).

I googled and found this thread: Rootsweb - so it looks like the local paper for that period was most likely the Haverfordwest & Milford Haven Telegraph. The Mercury's archives don't seem to go back far enough.

Edit - Also found this: Deep Wreck Mysteries from a few years ago. Shall be keeping an eye out. I read on one of the dive websites that she's largely intact and upright.

[Verrico2009]

... the RAMC survivors were Beveridge, Fulcher, Forbes and Pratt).

Returning to the question of whether all the men on the Parker have been accounted for, I have now been back over the Parker's original report and the following men are mentioned by name:-

1. Lance-Corporal ("Hospital Corpsman") Colin Beveridge

2. George Scarlet, the Navigation Officer who gave them most of their information about the sinking

3. Alfred Sale, Oiler

And the "unsolicited letter" provided by a suitably grateful man rescued by the crew of the Parker was signed by Joseph W Sadler - Greaser.

So I make that 7 in total:-

1. Beveridge

2. Fulcher

3. Forbes

4. Platt

5. Scarlet

6. Sale

7. Sadler

Giving us Harry as the "mystery man" to bring us up to the full complement of 8 still alive (and poor Jesse White's body) when the ship docked at Milford Haven.

And do we now have the man who may have donated his coat to Harry?

[headgardener]

I googled and found this thread: Rootsweb - so it looks like the local paper for that period was most likely the Haverfordwest & Milford Haven Telegraph. The Mercury's archives don't seem to go back far enough.

The Mercury didn't exist at that time. The 2 local papers were the Telegraph and the Gazette. Here are the papers together with dates from the BRITISH LIBRARY web-site.

That came up on a search for 'Milford Haven', and sometimes it pays to look at the less local, more regional papers (sometimes the locals are little more than versions of 'Loot', and they may be very limited in their reports). Pembroke would be the obvious one, particularly the Dock Gazette. HERE'S a list of 5, including the Telegraph (already mentioned). There's a couple from Haverfordwest; Pembroke County Guardian and the Pembrokeshire Herald

Returning to the question of whether all the men on the Parker have been accounted for,......

So I make that 7 in total........ Giving us Harry as the "mystery man" to bring us up to the full complement of 8 still alive (and poor Jesse White's body) when the ship docked at Milford Haven.

And do we now have the man who may have donated his coat to Harry?

Kelso and Vine were the only Corporals amongst the casualties, although we don't have rank for Fulcher and Forbes. It may seem like a pedantic point (although that never stopped me.....) but corporal's stripes would not have been worn on a coat, only on a uniform tunic. There are a few isolated examples of men wearing tapes on their greatcoats, but the unidentified man is unlikely to have been wearing a heavy outer coat with a badge of rank on it.

[Verrico2009]

The Mercury didn't exist at that time. The 2 local papers were the Telegraph and the Gazette. Here are the papers together with dates from the BRITISH LIBRARY web-site.

Good - the British Library's on my list of places to visit in due course so happy to add that to the list unless someone beats me to it.

Kelso and Vine were the only Corporals amongst the casualties, although we don't have rank for Fulcher and Forbes. It may seem like a pedantic point (although that never stopped me.....) but corporal's stripes would not have been worn on a coat, only on a uniform tunic. There are a few isolated examples of men wearing tapes on their greatcoats, but the unidentified man is unlikely to have been wearing a heavy outer coat with a badge of rank on it.

Happy to be picked up on that, all a learning process. Can't recall - do you have forenames or initials for Fulcher and Forbes? I'm perfectly comfortable with the idea that Harry just grabbed the nearest item in the darkness and confusion.

Edit - also note from the Parker's report that they picked the survivors up from "rafts" (presumably larger pieces of wreckage) in groups of 1 to 3 (and it's noted elsewhere that the only people to survive were in the boats or either on a piece of wreckage or clinging to it), so it's not impossible that Harry shared one of these with someone who realised that he was in a worse state and tried to help.

[Andy Wade]

Just looking through some of the service records I researched before from the casualties of Glenart Castle. They all had stated the reasons why the men weren't fit for the front line so I'm guessing that Harry's record (sadly lost it seems) would have had something similar, that might be used to identify a body. When talking with Louise and Mona I ventured that Harry might have even been weaker on that side due to his former injury. If this was the case, it could have been something to match up to his post mortem record for a positive identification.

Actually just thinking out loud here... that makes me wonder if a post mortem was carried out and if so, would any record of it exist today? Has this been mentioned before? I can't remember. It must be the pint of Creme de Menthe I pinched off HG.

Thanks for the link Louise. Good to meet up again yesterday. I actually know one of those scuba divers from way back. Never dived the Glenart Castle though. A bit too deep for my liking at 65m to the wreck and 74m to the seabed!

Hg, good work on the local newspapers. I must admit I only did a quick Google for them and didn't look any further than that so apologies about the Milford Mercury.

[headgardener]

Good - the British Library's on my list of places to visit in due course so happy to add that to the list unless someone beats me to it.

It's actually the British Library National Newspaper Library, which is Colindale, which is a very long way from the BL main site on Euston Rd.

Happy to be picked up on that, all a learning process. Can't recall - do you have forenames or initials for Fulcher and Forbes? I'm perfectly comfortable with the idea that Harry just grabbed the nearest item in the darkness and confusion.

I had completely forgotten that Fulcher and Forbes were both Corporals. Here's the details from earlier in the thread;

Cpl. H. FULCHER Princes Avenue, Hull

Cpl. W. FORBES Leighbank, Craigellachie, Banffshire

So maybe he came to be wearing Cpl's tapes because a comrade gave him his jacket as he was succumbing just before the rescue.

But the US seamen would have had him out of his wet clothes almost immediately. Maybe someone reported him after coming on board the Parker as being a Cpl.

It's an odd one.

[headgardener]

Just looking through some of the service records I researched before from the casualties of Glenart Castle. They all had stated the reasons why the men weren't fit for the front line so I'm guessing that Harry's record (sadly lost it seems) would have had something similar, that might be used to identify a body.

I doubt that a shoulder problem would be picked up on an examination of a corpse. Would have been identifying features, like those I mentioned before.

Actually just thinking out loud here... that makes me wonder if a post mortem was carried out and if so, would any record of it exist today? Has this been mentioned before?

There wouldn't have been a PM, there was no need for one.

[Andy Wade]

Talking of Corporal's stripes on a greatcoat, I had the same impression that rank badges weren't generally put on greatcoats. However, I've just posted a picture on the Postcards Thread of exactly that, so it seems it did happen:

I do think this greatcoat question may be a bit of a red herring.

[headgardener]

When talking with Louise and Mona I ventured that Harry might have even been weaker on that side due to his former injury. If this was the case, it could have been something to match up to his post mortem record for a positive identification.

While I'm here, just a couple of quick thoughts about Harry's injury.

The likeliest shoulder injuries sustained from falling off a bike would be a fracture, or a sprain/strain injury (basically a disruption of the joint, a semi-dislocation as it were). The fact that Harry carried a lasting effect from that injury indicates 3 possibilities to me;

he may have suffered a fracture which caused some damage to a nerve resulting in some form of limited paralysis in one or more muscles.

he may have damaged his shoulder in such a way (either fracture or sprain/strain) which healed in such a way as to limit his range of movement.

he may have dislocated his shoulder resulting in a permanently unstable joint (prone to slipping in and out)

Pure speculation on my part, but it's much more likely to the the 2nd or 3rd option (because a semi-paralysis would have meant he would have been in a much lower grade than B2). Most likely to be a shoulder instability, which would have meant he couldn't have done heavy lifting or putting his arm at awkward angles. He couldn't have carried a rifle, or a stretcher, or done push-ups, etc, etc. In any case, none of these would really leave identifying marks on a body. A scar which occurred at the same time as the fall is possible identifying feature, but not an instability or a restriction.

Edit; just seen your post re; the greatcoat. I did say unlikely rather than impossible. Overall, it is extremely rare to find images of men wearing badges of rank on a greatcoat. I suspect that this may have been mentioned on the other thread.

[NeilEvans]

I was in Pembroke last week. I only went there for the KSLI graves, soon changed my mind though.

[Verrico2009]

It's actually the British Library National Newspaper Library, which is Colindale, which is a very long way from the BL main site on Euston Rd.

It's fine - I need to go there too. At least I'm centrally based when I get there but I suspect both trips may have to wait until the New Year.

[quote name=headgardener' timestamp='1287311766' post='1488440'

I had completely forgotten that Fulcher and Forbes were both Corporals. Here's the details from earlier in the thread;

Cpl. H. FULCHER Princes Avenue, Hull

Cpl. W. FORBES Leighbank, Craigellachie, Banffshire

So maybe he came to be wearing Cpl's tapes because a comrade gave him his jacket as he was succumbing just before the rescue.

But the US seamen would have had him out of his wet clothes almost immediately. Maybe someone reported him after coming on board the Parker as being a Cpl.

It's an odd one.

Thanks for those details. Found Fulcher's MIC but not so sure about Forbes.

Definitely odd. Quite possibly. Something accounted for it being added to his death certificate. Maybe they couldn't get him out of his wet clothes as he was delirious at first: might have made him surprisingly strong. Or he'd already stripped off due to the "paradoxical undressing". We may never know.

[Verrico2009]

I do think this greatcoat question may be a bit of a red herring.

There's always an exception to prove the rule! I wouldn't want to take one of those into the water, but that said: it was February and they probably weren't expecting to be sunk. If you were out on deck at 4am you'd certainly wrap up.

I agree though: we're probably not going to get to the bottom of this aspect - but it would be nice if the hospital report popped up!

I was in Pembroke last week. I only went there for the KSLI graves, soon changed my mind though.

Nice to know Harry had a visitor on the back of this thread, ShropshireMad.