Wandering Medal Index Card ?

[danlyon]

Gordon John Lyon served in the ranks with 1/14 London Regiment (1 London Scottish) until he was commissioned into 5 Royal Fusiliers on 27 Nov 1917. I have found a Medal Index Card for him on the Ancestry website, listed under "Gordon J Lyon" but it does not record any medals at all, nor any theatre of war. However, there is a note in the Remarks heading that he is "On R&F roll TP 14/102B/128".

I may well be misreading "R&F" - it is a disproportionately small ampersand in the middle, if that is what it is. I suppose it could just be RF for Royal Fusiliers, or even RAF, since he was actually training as a pilot at the Armistice.

I have his RAF service papers, which do not mention any medals. I also have his Army service papers, which do not mention any medals either. He must have qualified for the Pair, since he served in France from 24 Feb 1917 to 26 Jun 1917.

Can anyone translate the note in the Remarks column, please, and does it point to another Medal Index Card lurking somewhere else ?

If there is/was a second card, I am wondering if it went diffy because they took his medals off him : they certainly took his hon rank off him in 1929, when he was sent down for 18 months hard labour after a civilian career of fraud.

Dan

[KevinBattle]

R & F is probably Rank & File.... i.e. the "Other Ranks - privates etc.... so it refers to him earning his medals BEFORE he was commissioned.27 November 1917.

Did he serve in India in 1922 on the North West Frontier?

Maybe a look up of the actual Medal Rolls may give a better answer.... another MIC, perhaps but why would the clerks create two?

I'd think if some action was taken in 1929 it might have been recorded on this card.

[LarsA]

I'd say it's short for "rank and file roll".

ATB,

Lars

[Terry_Reeves]

As Lars has said, it is Rank and File roll. He was commissioned on 27.1.17 and the R&F note is to show that his medal entitlement was earned in the ranks and will not appear in the Officers roll.

TR

[keithmroberts]

The TP etc is a reference to the Medal Roll concerned.which can be found at this reference in the National Archives.

WO 329/1930 heres a link http://www.nationala....x=0&image1.y=0

Edit: To amplify my post. The reference will show the war and victory medals. It is just that the medal roll reference is in an unusual location.

Keith

[KevinBattle]

He was commissioned on 27.1.17

?

- see post #2. Medal Index Card clearly shows 27 11 17, not January

[danlyon]

Thanks Keith, et al. Rank and File it is : he didn't go back overseas after he was commissioned.

Just for info, this was an officer but not a gentleman. Apart from the conviction for 46 charges of theft and fraud, he also appeared twice in the Divorce Courts, having in one case committed adultery in various London hotels on 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 25, 26 and 27 Feb 1927. So a bounder, but clearly a very fit one.

Dan

[danlyon]

Sorry to come back on this one, but have learned the hard way that it is dangerous to assume anything at all : there is one aspect which is still puzzling me.

Does anyone have access to the actual Rank & File Roll, to confirm that he was entitled to the WW1 pair in the first place ? (He must have been - he was definitely in the trenches in 1917) As mentioned above, there is a Medal Index Card which doesn't actually show any medals at all. I don't understand how he could be on the Roll yet have a blank Card.

What I was actually expecting to see was the appearance of the WW1 pair on the Card and then a note or a crossing out to indicate that because of his later conviction HMG had then forfeited them as well as cancelling his honorary rank. If he is on the Roll but not on the Card, would it be a cogent inference (as opposed to a bald assumption) that he was entitled to the medals but that for some reason they were never issued/claimed in the first place ?

[CGM]

Officers had to apply for their medals, they were not automatically issued.

CGM

[Chris_Baker]

Dan, I have taken a look. It is not a blank card: it is the same as everyone else's, except that the roll reference is written in 'remarks'rather than in the box. For his medals to be issued against an R&F roll does not imply that he did not serve overseas after being commissioned.

[danlyon]

CGM - absolutely right, of course ! This would be the position if he never bothered to claim, since he spent his time after the Armistice being very busy chasing other people's wives and defrauding old widows.

Chris - I'm grateful, as ever. I was being a bit careless when I said it was blank - I had of course seen the reference in the "wrong" column, and it was the "right" column that was blank. I wasn't getting the home service inference from that : I have his service papers (thanks to the 1927 trial at Exeter Assizes!) and they show he went straight to 5RF which was of course a training battalion which never left UK, and then transferred to the RFC and only finished his training as a bomber pilot 4 days before the Armistice, still in the UK. Hence the R&F being how he qualified. I shall try to get OMRS to publish his story - sterling service in the trenches of the London Scottish then proceeded to go completely off the rails. I wonder if one led to the other ...!

Thanks again both.

[Loader]

If the offenses he was charged with were committed after he was out ot uniform would he stll be deprived of his medals? I can see rank taken away as an officer but no gentleman but medals too? I'm totally ignorant of the regs on this one so hoping someone can clarify this. Thanks.