Gunner L/15574 WILLIAM JOHN McDONALD

[KONDOA]

Having already established with the help of Greenwoodman that the two sections of 182 C Bty became part of 180 Brigade in August 1916, I am a little confused regarding W.J. Mc Donalds death (25 April 1918). He is commemorated on the wall at Tyne Cot but the war diaries I have for 180 Brigade covering the relevant period show them elsewhere on the Somme. Any clues or references would be of assistance in tracking down the correct Brigade/Battery for W.J. McDonald or a War diary reference.

[rflory]

I can't answer your questions but I can make a couple of comments.

1. McDonald died of wounds rather than being killed in action so we do not know when he was actually wounded only when he died.

2. There is something wrong with the CWGC data on McDonald. It lists him as a member of C/182 Brigade but that brigade was broken up in August 1916. Why would the CWGC list a unit that was broken up in 1916 for a gunner who DOW in 1918?

3. As you indicate, on 27 Aug 16, 1 section of C/182 joined B/180 and another section of C/182 joined C/180. Your assumption that he was still with 182 Brigade when he was killed in 1918 could be correct but it could also be wrong, especially because 180 Bde was not located near where he died.

4. Another possibility is that he transferred to another brigade before his death and that the CWGC has an incorrect unit listed. It wouldn't be the first time.

Regards. Dick

[KONDOA]

Dick,

Thanks again for your valued input. Just a question then, how do we determine he was killed of wounds? His death citation which unfortunately we no longer have suggested he was killed and was found " at his gun , the others having retired" or words to that effect. Presumably this was a salve for the relatives. Would CWGC be able to resolve this issue at this late stage??

I note that is actually two questions

[rflory]

My information that McDonald died of wounds comes from the Royal Artillery volume of [/i]Soldiers Died in the Great War (the book, not the CD). There is always the possibility that it is in error, but I have found it to very accurate in the past. Regards. Dick Flory