Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

FIELD GENERAL COURTS MARTIAL 1917


bluebonnet

Recommended Posts

A Corporal of the 6th Btn KOSB was "in arrest at Etaples from 1/4/17 to 6/4/17 awaiting trial. Convicted by F G C M on 7/4/17 and sentenced to be reduced to the ranks for" -and here the words on his Record Sheet are blurred and indistinct "W?O Q S Drunkenness.Sent. confirmed by Brig.Genl.A Graham Thornton Commdg 8? A D.Released by?Cont---

ed-Pte 8/4/17" I do apologise for the awful transcription, but it is the best that I can make of a bad job.

Can anyone offer an opinion of the W?OQS and the 8?AD along with the last word by? Cont---ed.All opinions will be welcomed as a consensus may then be reached.

the document is from Ancestry and and just was not fit for uploading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Cunliffe

The first one is almost certainly W O A S = while on active service. This enabled the court to award a heavier sentence: the usual punishment for drunkenness at home was a ten-shilling (50p) fine.

The second one could be E A D = Etaples Administrative District. I think this command was held by a brigadier-general, which fits.

Cont--ed could be conf--ed for confirmed, erspecially if "released by" is actually "reviewed &".

Handwriting wasn't their strong suit in 1917!

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By Jove that was fast Ron -"While on Active Service" perhaps he wasn't at Etaples-this was another subscribers guess; because he had been wounded on the Somme.

and was supposedly cleared to a Base Hospital at Etaples -Etaples Admin. Dist.certainly fits the bill though, but was he on Active Service at Etaples?? He was Released" I can see that word,then a small word at ,on by and etc.then plainly Cont- - - ed Pte 8/4/17

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cunliffe

You didn't have to be in the front line to be classed as being on active service. My grandfather was similarly charged for being absent for a few hours after celebrating the Armistice a bit too enthusiastically. He was at Aldershot at the time!

TR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That penny had dropped TR-but thanks anyway.Your GF was pretty unlucky- especially just after the Armistice.What do think the last words were ? "Released --Cont---ed"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could you post his details so that I can access his records on ancestry and see the original document?

TR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6877 Pte-Sgt Muir Robinson 2nd,3rd,9th and finally 6th Btns KOSB until 28/10/17 to Labour Corps (442667). Robinson was a coalminer from Motherwell, who had pre war, spent some time with 6/Scottish Rifles TF.He attested at Hamilton on 11/8/14 as a Regular soldier age 21 yrs 120 days-after Medical was assigned to KOSB (SR).He was wounded but no details in his Service Papers.He was awarded the WW1 trio.Will that suffice TR ?I am truly grateful that you are going to look into this matter and look forward to hearing from you again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cunliffe

This is the full transcription to keep it in context:

" In arrest awaiting trial from 1.4.17 to 6.4.17 and convicted by FGCM on 7.4.17 and sentenced to be reduced to the ranks for WOAS Drunkenness. Sentenced confirmed by Brigadier-General Graham Thomson commanding E A D. Released and continued."

Graham Thomson was Brigadier- General Andrew Graham Thomson who was Commandant, Etaples District and had to deal with the mutiny later in the year. Ron has covered WAOS and EAD. The final word is definitely "continued" but makes no real sense. I suspect it is just a clerical error.

Like Ron, I found it odd that a simple case of drunkeness should be dealt with by a FGCM, but looking at his record, he appears to have been a substansive Corporal. It required (and still does) a Brigadier to reduce a substansive NCO of Corporal and above to the ranks which may explain this.

TR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THank you TR for your good efforts; in providing me with a full transcropt of the findings of the FGCM; and your observation as to why he was courts martialled.One more question

would he have been involved in the ensuing Battle of Arras??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...