West Riding - different uniforms

[bsachris]

I had three great-grand Uncles, all born and raised in Salterforth around the turn of the century. They all joined the West Riding Regiment (Duke of Wellington's) I've only been able to find significant records for John Baxter, who was killed in action near Ypres Dec 17 1915; the other two, his brothers-in-law, Stephen and William Dodgson, I have found no army records, except the medal cards (thanks to a lead here which narrowed down the many Dodgsons I'd been scouring to these two). They both survived the war, Stephen lived until 1941 and William lived to 1963. Both were gone before my time, unfortunately.

In any case, I have a question about uniforms.

Please see the attached photo of my three uncles. You will notice that John Baxter's uniform is quite different from his brothers-in-law, the Dodgsons. I don't know the battalions or join dates for the Dodgson brothers, but I gather they were close in time because their uniforms match each others and the sequence numbers on their photos line up. John Baxter's uniform has gusseted pockets a seam or stitching above the breast pockets, no belt, and he carries no stick. I have no pictures of John Baxter's legwear or boots, they might be the same as the brothers-in-law.

So my question is - can anyone help explain the difference in uniform? I have many theories, none of which I have any real basis for, just guessing! Different battalions, with different purposes, different point in time, ?

John Baxter joined the 6th reserve bn of Duke of Wellington's in November 1914, and was deployed to France June 1915. He died in the 1/6th bn, after working for 2 months in the 3rd Entrenchement battalion which I gather was not unusual for 1/6th bn men. The only other information I have about the Dodgsons is that William joined the Northumberland Fusiliers at some point (19196 West Riding, then 40968 Northumberland Fusiliers)(or maybe it was the other way round?); and Stephen is only listed with the West Riding, as #267535. The brothers were 4 to 6 years older than John Baxter, but I don't know if that played a part in when they signed up.

Thanks very much for any information you can provide!

[Old Owl]

Hi Christine,

Although I am not 100% sure I think that William is a Service Bn number, so most likely 9th or 10th Bn, as they recruited around Earby and Salterforth areas, amongst others. Stephen on the other hand has a Territorial(post 1916) number, so he is most likely 1/6th or 2/6th Bn.

Hope this helps,

Robert

[tipperary]

Hi Christine the pleats and shoulder reinforcing was dropped from tunics early in the war as an economy measure.If he joined in nov 1914 there would have been shortages of lots of things lack of a belt is not something id read to much into although his tunic has the mark of one.Swager stick an option and sometimes provided by the photographer as a prop.john

[bsachris]

Hi Christine the pleats and shoulder reinforcing was dropped from tunics early in the war as an economy measure.john

Thanks JOhn - That thought crossed my mind, the pleats etc being an expensive and more time-consuming feature. So, this suggests that the two brothers signed up after John Baxter. But probably not very long after.

[bsachris]

Hi Christine,

Although I am not 100% sure I think that William is a Service Bn number, so most likely 9th or 10th Bn, as they recruited around Earby and Salterforth areas, amongst others. Stephen on the other hand has a Territorial(post 1916) number, so he is most likely 1/6th or 2/6th Bn.

Hope this helps,

Robert

Robert, thanks - that's helpful. There's so much terminology to learn - fascinating. I spend so many hours digging about, and its a big relief to come here and get some fresh new clues & info!

Thanks

[mmm45]

Christine

Have you seen the nominals in Cravens Part in Great War for 1/6th and 2/6th West Ridings?

Its online to view

Cant see the Dodgsons listed in the original nominals...theres also Harold Dodgson from Salterforth in the casualty lists on CPGW

Ady

[bsachris]

Christine

Have you seen the nominals in Cravens Part in Great War for 1/6th and 2/6th West Ridings?

Its online to view

Cant see the Dodgsons listed in the original nominals...theres also Harold Dodgson from Salterforth in the casualty lists on CPGW

Ady

Thanks Ady - yes, Harold was my two Dodgson's cousin. I have the printed book, what a phenomenal piece of work it is. I had never found the brothers in there, but I did find Harold, and also John.

[high wood]

The photographs of William and Stephen Dodgson were taken on the same day as they have consequtive negative numbers, 150B and 151B. I wonder if they are of the same man.

[Muerrisch]

Hi Christine the pleats and shoulder reinforcing was dropped from tunics early in the war as an economy measure.If he joined in nov 1914 there would have been shortages of lots of things lack of a belt is not something id read to much into although his tunic has the mark of one.Swager stick an option and sometimes provided by the photographer as a prop.john

Regiments with self-esteem INSISTED that soldiers Walking Out carried a regimental cane. Not optional at all, as far as I know. Can you support your assertion please?

Whereas the start date of the simplified jacket is a known quantity, there was no formal end date. Also, a conventional jacket could [so far as a photograph could show] just as easily be before the simplified, during the simplified, or after the simplified period of issue. A big grey area.

[FROGSMILE]

Swagger sticks were indeed a requirement of an infantry regiment's (and also many Corps) 'walking-out-dress' and as such this was laid down in battalion standing orders for observation when at home, but not of course when at the front. Mounted regiments observed similar protocols, but with a riding whip as opposed to a cane.

As regards James Baxter's SD jacket it is an extraordinarily bad fit with the chest pockets far too low down for what was intended. It shows how clothing was sometimes poorly fitted, depending on what was available.

[tipperary]

Grumpy and Frogsmile may i stand corrected on Swager Stick.john. High Wood i dont think photos are same man is there a differnce in the belt in the two pics.john

[bsachris]

The photographs of William and Stephen Dodgson were taken on the same day as they have consequtive negative numbers, 150B and 151B. I wonder if they are of the same man.

No, they are not the same man - if you had a larger copy you would see steely blue eyes on Stephen and dark brown eyes on William. The faces tie back to known and named family photos of them earlier in the century. But they are very similar indeed from a distance! I had William's photo for a couple of years before Stephen's was uncovered in a box, and it was a happy moment to realize that it was indeed a different man posed there.

Here's a circa 1908 shot of the two brothers - you'll see the difference in mouth and head shape echoed in the uniformed photos, William on the left and Stephen on the right.

[bsachris]

As regards James Baxter's SD jacket it is an extraordinarily bad fit with the chest pockets far too low down for what was intended. It shows how clothing was sometimes poorly fitted, depending on what was available.

Thanks Grumpy and Frog! James' signup forms indicate he went into the 6th reserve battalion, I think (the stamp on the form looks like 6th Res) - could we infer by this and his uniform that his two brothers-in-law joined not into a reserve battalion but into an active battalion (by active, I don't know my terminology, but I mean one that would have been almost immediately deployed to the theatre of war?)?

[Grovetown]

Whereas the start date of the simplified jacket is a known quantity, there was no formal end date.

Ack-chully the other way round. According to Joe, the pattern book encompassing the Simplified is lost, so the best we can say for introduction is Oct-Nov 1914 (based on the introduction of the Simplified Trouser).

However, the Simplfied was superceded (i.e. replaced) on June 5th 1915 by Pattern 8407/ 1915, which was essentially a return to the Pattern 5081f/ 1908 (which the Simplified itself had replaced) but with modifications (linings especially).

Cheers,

GT.

[Chris Foster]

[Here's a circa 1908 shot of the two brothers - you'll see the difference in mouth and head shape echoed in the uniformed photos, William on the left and Stephen on the right.

Christine, what a cracking photograph , do you have any of their cousin Harold ?

Regards

Chris

[bsachris]

Christine, what a cracking photograph , do you have any of their cousin Harold ?

Regards

Chris

It is a great shot, isn't it! I have another of William and his dad (my great great granddad I think that makes him) Thomas Dodgson and one of their massive canal barge horses, its my favourite family photo of all time - but no Harold in it unless the horse's name is Harold!

However, I do have this one of Stephen sat with several young men about his age, Harold may be one of those lads. If we are ever so lucky perhaps you'll see Harold or some other contributing Craven boys in here. Stephen is the first on the right, sat in the front row - and now that you mention the boy immediately next to him has a bit of a resemblance, perhaps a cousin. William is not in this photo. I think every one of these young men would have been of the correct age to be drawn into WWI.

*** afterthought - this group picture looks quite formal, given the mill & canal work most of the family & friends were doing at the time. I have an inkling it may be a wedding day photo, and that the man on the far left, back row, with his hand on another man's shoulder, may be Fred Dacre. He is one of the Craven men who gave his life in WWI - he married William & Stephens youngest sister, Emma prewar. Comparing this to the newspaper photo of Fred on CPGW, if you factor in being nervous, it could be the same man. Fred was killed in action April 1918, his young widow died 3 yrs later in the sanatorium @ Keighley.

Edited 9 November , 2011 by Christine Smith

[Muerrisch]

Ack-chully the other way round. According to Joe, the pattern book encompassing the Simplified is lost, so the best we can say for introduction is Oct-Nov 1914 (based on the introduction of the Simplified Trouser).

However, the Simplfied was superceded (i.e. replaced) on June 5th 1915 by Pattern 8407/ 1915, which was essentially a return to the Pattern 5081f/ 1908 (which the Simplified itself had replaced) but with modifications (linings especially).

Cheers,

GT.

Yes, I have Joe's notes which I ignored!

However, I hope you will concede that the simplified soldiered on, on real soldiers, long after 5 June 1915, which is what I meant ...... there must have been many in use and in stores and on the supply line. Dateable photos show it lingering into 1916 at least, surely?

[Grovetown]

Yes, I have Joe's notes which I ignored!

However, I hope you will concede that the simplified soldiered on, on real soldiers, long after 5 June 1915, which is what I meant ...... there must have been many in use and in stores and on the supply line. Dateable photos show it lingering into 1916 at least, surely?

Concede absolutely. Obviously, like many patterns, items already issued were 'worn out' and existing supplies used up (for a good example of this, you want to see how many different jackets the RAF were sporting by the end of 1918). In the particular, I've seen it being worn well into 1918 too, although not especially commonly.

Cheers,

GT.