Married Men Spring 1916 - How did they enlist?

[Alan24]

I have a relative who "enlisted" 4 Apr 1916 and reached the depot on 7th Apr 1916.

By Enlisted, I assume he means Attested, but that's how he wrote it in his diary. He could of course meant "[deemed to have] Enlisted" or " Enlisted" but the speed at which he arrived at the depot is consistent with a man who had volunteered.

As a married man aged 30 with dependant child, he was too late to have attested under the Derby Scheme which closed to Single Men on 1st March 1916 and conscription of married men didn't start until May 1916.

I've seen a lot of posters from Jan/Feb 1916 urging single men to 'do the right thing' but I've not seen anything aimed at the married man other than the 'Prime Minister's Pledge' posters from late 1915.

So the questions are:

1. Under what terms could a married man volunteer between 1st March 1916 and May 1916? Was it on the same Short Term 'Duration of War' terms that those who volunteered in the first half of 1915.

2. Did the Derby scheme continue for married men after 1st March 1916 until married men were included in the Military Service Act in May 1916?

3. What was the exact date that married men were included in the MSA?

Regards

Alan.

[johnboy]

This might be of help if you follow the links.

http://www.1914-1918.net/results.htm?cx=000206519056447404021%3Amsjzldhacnc&cof=FORID%3A11&ie=UTF-8&q=enlistment++Search+the+site%E2%80%A6&sa=GO

[kenf48]

The first proclamation for married men under the scheme after the 'Prime Minister's Pledge' was broken, was dated the 7th March for men in Groups 25 - 32 to mobilize on the 7th April.

Aged 30 he should have been in Group 35 which was in the next batch to be called. This proclamation was issued 29th April for mobilisation on 27th May for Groups 33 - 41 inclusive (married men aged 27 - 35 years old).

On the same day as this second proclamation for married men was issued (29th April), a War Office telegram was sent to all Recruiting Offices stating. "Instruct all concerned at once that all enlistments under the group scheme are to cease forthwith. All married men of military age who have not attested can only now be accepted for immediate service with the colours".

This telegram post dates your relative's mobilisation but in any event less than a week later on May 4th the scheme was reopened for married men only and continued until the 7th June, when recruitment through the scheme ceased completely.

As to your specific questions:-

1. A married man could attest under the extended group scheme until the 7th June 1916.

2 The extended group scheme, for married men only, closed at midnight on the 7th June 1916.

3. The Military Service Act (No2) received Royal Assent on the 25th May 1916 and the 'appointed day' when every male between the ages of 18 and 41 was deemed to have enlisted was one month later on June 24th.

In general the procedure under the scheme was that a proclamation was issued giving notice then each man would receive a notice telling him to report locally to appear before a medical board, if passed fit he would then be given a rail warrant and sent with his comrades and usually an escort to the Regimental Depot.

What your man meant by "enlisted" can only be guessed at, but it seems more likely he was a group scheme volunteer who received a notice on the 4th (or had his medical) and then reported to the Depot on the 7th.

I can't explain why he was apparently called up a month earlier than his group, unless he had given a different age when he attested under the scheme. The date seems too much of a coincidence to explain any other form of enlistment.

Ken

[Alan24]

Johnboy,

Thanks for taking the trouble. I had looked at several sites regarding Derby Scheme and Conscription, but could not see anything referencing married men in March and April 1916, they seem to fall into the gaps.

Ken,

Thanks, looks like you may have filled in a few of those gaps. I need to read it over a few times later tonight and digest it properly.

Regards

Alan.

[Chris Noble]

Hi Ken.

I had a look at some enlistments the other evening. Where does the term 'Enrolement' figure? I myself thought it was rather a 'grey' area between Group Enlistment or Military Services Act. The majority were single admittedly that I looked at, but some it would appear are married men, birth 1890.

Best wishes.

Chris.

Just thinking here. These men that fall into this criteria are posted to respective battalions April 1916.

[kenf48]

Chris

Contemporary accounts refer to 'Lord Derby's scheme of enrolment'.

Single men were canvassed and encouraged to enrol in the scheme. Once enrolled they could opt for immediate service or seek deferment (and placed in a Group). They were issued with a group card and the khaki armlet. They signed for the armlet and these documents were retained with their 'enrolment' papers. Often there would be enrolment days at local recruiting offices where dozens of single men were enrolled into the scheme. Many turned out to be unfit or unsuitable when eventually called up for service. As noted above following Asquith's pledge married men were also encouraged to enrol in the scheme.

I think we tend to regard this as 'attestation' or enlistment as that's what is on the form. That's my understanding I hope this helps as a little unsure as to your query.

Ken

[Alan24]

Hi Ken,

Here's another one you may be able to answer regarding another one of my Great Grandfathers.

153445 William Bramble RAMC (Service Record Exists) was deemed to have enlisted on 24/06/16 which is spot on for MSA No.2 as per your answer above.

However, I'm puzzled as when he was called up on 11/06/18 he was aged 44 and 2 months, therefore having already reached the aged of 41 by either date 25/05/16 or 24/06/16 why was he included in the reserve?

He married in April 1916 but prior to that had been a widower with dependent children which is why he was exempt as at 2nd March 1916. I assume he had obtained his 'Certificate of Exemption' prior to 2 March.

Can you tell me when the aged group 41-51 were included into the reserve and is it possible that their 'deemed to have enlisted' date was back dated to all the other married men's dates?

Regards

Alan.

[kenf48]

The relevant Act is the Military Service (No2) Act 1918. Paraphrasing, under the provisions of the Act a man who at anytime since 14 August 1915 has been, or for the time being is, in Great Britain and is aged 18 and who has not attained the age of 51 on the date of the passing of this Act shall have deemed to have enlisted. The date of the passing of the Act was 19th April 1918.

It was later announced older men would be directed towards 'Auxiliary service' at home or abroad, including the RAMC (so far, so good!).

The Act was an enabling Act and a number of orders were made almost immediately withdrawing occupational certificates of exemption, especially to young men up to the age of 23.

I don't know why his 'deemed to have enlisted' date was back dated to that of the previous Act. If it's a clerical error it's repeated throughout his record so that seems unlikely. According to legislation if he was aged 44 years and 2 months his 'deemed to have enlisted' date was the 19th April 1918 (unlike the earlier Act there was no period of grace) and this was announced by Royal Proclamation. Once again it was announced men would be called up according to their age with the first group being those men born in 1874 and 1875.

The proclamation for men born in 1872 and 1873 was made on the 11th May 1918, unlike previous call ups these men were told that they would not be called up until the fifteenth day after their medical.

Again your man is text book according to his age and the mobilisation process under the Act in that his proclamation is the 11th May. His notification to attend his medical is dated the 15th May, the medical board is on the 22nd May and then he's called up on the 11th June and posted to the RAMC on the 15th June.

I've thought of a couple of scenarios as to why he should be given the earlier 'deemed to have enlisted' date, most likely a previous attestation and then exemption secured on grounds of age, but it's not a comfortable fit.

So the short answer is I don't know!

However I'm intrigued so I'll keep digging.

Ken

[Chris Noble]

Hi Ken.

Many thanks for a most informative reply.

Best wishes.

Chris.

[Alan24]

Thanks Ken,

You've given me some great background information here.

Going back to my first great grandfather, I had always looked at the April 7th date being coincidental with one of the mobilisation dates. I assume he joined on 4th April and elected to serve immediately with the colours. His diary records arriving at the Great Yarmouth RGA Depot at 4am on the 7th, so perhaps he arrived on a special train from Leeds with other men and an escort. I did find it odd that he travelled through the night. He had served 4 years with Hants RGA 1908-1912 and have read somewhere you could serve blocks of 4 years without time in reserve - but need to double check that one. He was in France 6 weeks later.

The other coincidence is that 4 April was his 30th birthday - he must have been under pressure to join and maybe it was a conscious decision to go on that day - we'll never know.

Regards

Alan

[kenf48]

The 7th April may be coincidental, even if he enlisted under the Derby Scheme in April he could have opted for immediate rather than deferred service.

The Hants RGA was a TF unit with HQ at Southampton. In 1908 service with the TF was for four years in the United Kingdom, with no reserve obligation.

Quite a few service records have survived for this unit (I don't know if your g-f continued to serve with them -probably not on what you've said so far) but as an example Joseph Freeman, married aged 29 attested on the 29th November placed on the Army Reserve the following day mobilised on the 25th March and posted to Hants RGA the same day.

Ken

[Alan24]

Hi Ken,

The period with No. 7 Coy Hants RGA TF was only 1908 to 1912 in Southampton and I'm assuming he served the full 4 years as by July 1912 the family had moved to Leeds. KEVROW has previously helped with a lot of the detail here. His entire war was spent with 125 HB, being sent to France 19/05/16 and KIA 12/04/17.

Thanks for clarifying the NO RESERVE bit as this will explain why he had not been recalled to the colours in 1914. He was SR/8101 S. T. Bungey and as you can see was allocated a Special Reserve number. He is remembered on the Southampton Cenotaph Glass Wall.

Many Thanks

Alan.