Anthony Bagshaw Posted 3 October , 2004 Share Posted 3 October , 2004 Hello, I have recently downloaded the MIC for a 32649 CPL H H Needham Notts & Derby Regt. I have had a medal of his for some time now. It appears that he was discharged on 6/6/18 cause of discharge stated as: a o 265/17 Anyone have any ideas? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 4 October , 2004 Share Posted 4 October , 2004 Hello Anthony I'd be interested in this also as I have just downloaded a card with exactly the same notation apart from I think it may read (it does on mine anyway) R 0 265/17 Can anyone help? Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jock Bruce Posted 4 October , 2004 Share Posted 4 October , 2004 AO is Army Order i.e. this is a reference to Army Order 265 of 1917. Can't help on the detail of the specific AO. Jock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ian Bowbrick Posted 4 October , 2004 Share Posted 4 October , 2004 JB - Correct if I am wrong but does this refer to being 'time served'? Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Bagshaw Posted 4 October , 2004 Author Share Posted 4 October , 2004 does this refer to being 'time served'? Does this mean he would have been awarded a SWB though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 4 October , 2004 Share Posted 4 October , 2004 JB - Correct if I am wrong but does this refer to being 'time served'? Ian This would certainly fit in with my man as he appears to have been a territorial and have served his four years. What would have happened to him after? Would he have been called straight back up? Forgive my lack of knowledge in this area but James is the first "live" member of my family that I have researched all the rest having being killed in action. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ian Bowbrick Posted 4 October , 2004 Share Posted 4 October , 2004 does this refer to being 'time served'? Does this mean he would have been awarded a SWB though? In theory NO - HOWEVER Marc Thompson has in his research come across time served men who were awarded silver war badges. I have also come across a time served RE (discharged 1917) who was awarded a silver war badge. My answer to the original question was that this COULD be a time served man - I need to refer to my paperts at home to get a definitive answer. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 4 October , 2004 Share Posted 4 October , 2004 Thanks Ian, I appreciate it. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmsk212 Posted 4 October , 2004 Share Posted 4 October , 2004 Hi I have certainly come across lots of Machine Gun Corps Cavalrymen who were awarded Silver War Badges reason given " Granted Pension" in fact I have one in my collection. However, on Andy's (Max) scan it does look like there is the letter W underneath which usually infers wounds. You will need to get a copy of the War Badge Roll Listed on the card to see why he was discharged. Also what does his other Medal Index Card in the name of James A Daughtry indicate? Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Bagshaw Posted 4 October , 2004 Author Share Posted 4 October , 2004 Thanks Ian I'm guessing that he served in a Service Battalion (9th,10th or 11th i think) of the Sherwood Foresters then if he was discharged after 3 years service. If i remember rightly didn't service Battalions consist of men who were serving three years? (don't think many did serve all three years though) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jock Bruce Posted 4 October , 2004 Share Posted 4 October , 2004 By 1917 the option for TF men to leave at 'Termination of Engagement' no longer applied. And the 3 year enlistment was actually '3 years or duration of war'. Men did not leave at the 3 year point. I think we need the text of the AO to answer this one. Jock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 4 October , 2004 Share Posted 4 October , 2004 Also what does his other Medal Index Card in the name of James A Daughtry indicate? Steve Hello Steve Its fairly bog standard and bland really. What does surprise me is that there is no 1914-15 Star showing in his entitlement. He enlisted in 1913 and the 4/KOYLI arrived on the continent in April 1915. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Matthews Posted 4 October , 2004 Share Posted 4 October , 2004 I'm away from my notes at the moment but I'm fairly sure that AO265/17 refers to Army Order No. 265 (September 1917 I think!) which provided amendments to the conditions governing the award of the Silver War Badge. I should be able to add more later. Rgds Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 4 October , 2004 Share Posted 4 October , 2004 Thanks Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ian Bowbrick Posted 5 October , 2004 Share Posted 5 October , 2004 What does surprise me is that there is no 1914-15 Star showing in his entitlement. He enlisted in 1913 and the 4/KOYLI arrived on the continent in April 1915. Pte Daughty or Daughtry could have been a relief and employed on base duties in the UK until 1916. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 5 October , 2004 Share Posted 5 October , 2004 Pte Daughty or Daughtry could have been a relief and employed on base duties in the UK until 1916. Hello Ian You are probably quite right. I have James birth certificate and it shows that he was not 19 until early 1916, maybe this is the reason he did not move with the rest of the battalion. Thanks for your input Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ian Bowbrick Posted 7 October , 2004 Share Posted 7 October , 2004 Interestingly in his book 'Tommy', Prof Holmes mentions pre-war Territorial soldiers who did not sign the imperial service agreement either never going to France or only going when there was an acute manpower shortage. This may apply here? - anyway more food for thought. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPotter Posted 7 October , 2004 Share Posted 7 October , 2004 Hi, I have a trio to a Dorsetshire soldier who enlisted in November 1902. He was discharged time expired during the course of the war after serving his 12 years plus 1. On 10th July 1916 he either re-enlisted voluntarily (maybe after reading about the losses on the Somme) or was conscripted. I have not been able to establish which, as I have only been able to locate his Militia service record. He was discharged due to wounds in September 1917 aged 33, when he was awarded a War Badge. Note that his previous discharge DID NOT entitle him to the badge. I wonder whether he faced the 'white feather' from those who were unaware of his previous service, as at that time he would have nothing to show for it? Regards Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jock Bruce Posted 7 October , 2004 Share Posted 7 October , 2004 Interestingly in his book 'Tommy', Prof Holmes mentions pre-war Territorial soldiers who did not sign the imperial service agreement either never going to France or only going when there was an acute manpower shortage. This may apply here? - anyway more food for thought. Ian When conscription was introduced provision was made for TF men who had not signed the ISO - effectively they were regarded as civilians for the purposes of the Military Service Act and were subject to exactly the same conscription rules as a civilian. There were some minor get out clauses. ACI 301/16 has the detail. Jock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 7 October , 2004 Share Posted 7 October , 2004 Thanks Ian and Jock It gets so complicated that it makes my head hurt. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ian Bowbrick Posted 7 October , 2004 Share Posted 7 October , 2004 JB, So a pre-war terrier who had not signed the ISO could manage to 'avoid the draft' until conscription was introduced in 1916 and therefore his medal entitlement would have been a pair only as in this case - if I have understood your post. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jock Bruce Posted 8 October , 2004 Share Posted 8 October , 2004 Ian, that's it - of course, there are lots of 'honourable' reasons why a prewar TF man might not have gone out until after 1 Jan 16 but ACI 301/16 certainly closed a loophole. No idea how many men were actually affected - I've noted 4 cases of this in 5th Seaforth. One was also medically unfit, one went to the RNR Trawler Section and I can't connect the other 2 to a later record of service. Say 0.5% of pre-war TF on my sample ?????? JB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 8 October , 2004 Share Posted 8 October , 2004 AO 265/17 of September is entitled Silver War Badge, and amends the issue to those who served after 4 Aug 1914 and, having been disabled/ill health and discharged and regardless of whether still being of military age. It also states that the badge could be issued to those whose service was at Home only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbie Posted 8 October , 2004 Share Posted 8 October , 2004 Can anyone help with these causes of discharge? 30/12-13-1-19 Disc. from Hosp to Fur & Rep 1/CD. Authority IB 640/38-19. The entry following this is: 15/5/19. Disc. AIF 2nd MD x "Lan'shire" MU (14th Bty). Authority M 41/184. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now