STANSGRANDS Posted 13 September , 2015 Share Posted 13 September , 2015 Hello would anyone know if a soldier was signed off as unfit in 1903 could he enroll prior to the great war again ? and if so would he retain his old service number Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clive_hughes Posted 13 September , 2015 Share Posted 13 September , 2015 Yes, he could indeed re-enlist providing he met the current age/fitness criteria. No, he would not resume his former number - he'd be issued with a current one. Clive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STANSGRANDS Posted 13 September , 2015 Author Share Posted 13 September , 2015 Ah Thank you unfortunately that puts a spanner in the works for my investigation on my G/G Grandfather .but , thank you for informing me Kind regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldstreamer Posted 14 September , 2015 Share Posted 14 September , 2015 not always true, the Coldstream Guards I know for a fact on many occasions gave old soldiers their number back - even if it was already given to another man - a B prefix was used on the old soldiers number. There is always the exception to the rule. A specific example is a man discharged due to canine of teeth in 1900 - in 1914 he renlisted and got his old number back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STANSGRANDS Posted 14 September , 2015 Author Share Posted 14 September , 2015 Thank you coldstreamer so would that mean that the service number can be identified from where he was enlisted - renlisted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldstreamer Posted 14 September , 2015 Share Posted 14 September , 2015 generally speaking yes - if you mean when not where post all the details you know inc name regiment number etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dai Bach y Sowldiwr Posted 14 September , 2015 Share Posted 14 September , 2015 A specific example is a man discharged due to canine of teeth in 1900 Do you mean "caries of teeth"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 14 September , 2015 Share Posted 14 September , 2015 it was a canine tooth! Seriously, please may I have the B prefix number reissued to the Coldstreamer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldstreamer Posted 14 September , 2015 Share Posted 14 September , 2015 Look, its old hand writing! Well I always thought he must had had dog teeth or something ! Thanks for correcting me - really did LOL the one I refer to (Pte Dogtooth) is 2407 Stephenson if you want a B number then 8702 Large (enlisted 1890ish) was serving in ww1 art same time as 8702 Garnett (at one point I had medals to both men) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 14 September , 2015 Share Posted 14 September , 2015 Coldstreamer. Yes I can see again why a prefix was needed: The following is from Paul Nixon's invaluable site. To a purist it is as it were not a number reissued but a consequence of new series reached at 9999. So in my mind it is 1881/8702 then later 1895/8702. I expect you know all this but others less well-informed might be interested. 5166 joined on 16th August 18815243 joined on 30th January 18825426 joined on 27th January 18836058 joined on 8th March 18846469 joined on 20th January 18856846 joined on 3rd March 18867113 joined on 7th March 18877391 joined on 6th March 18887628 joined on 31st January 18898039 joined on 28th March 18908438 joined on 14th April 18919095 joined on 1st June 18929498 joined on 24th June 18939727 joined on 12th February 1894 The Coldstream Guards reached number 9999 in 1895 and so, in accordance with Queen's Regulations, immediately commenced a new series from 1. 130 joined on 22nd June 1895400 joined on 7th February 1896773 joined on 22nd January 18971327 joined on 8th January 18982521 joined on 6th March 18993212 joined on 10th January 19004036 joined on 28th January 19014526 joined on 8th January 19025068 joined on 2nd April 19035314 joined on 1st January 19045969 joined on 3rd January 19056617 joined on 14th February 19067106 joined on 23rd January 19077617 joined on 13th January 19088251 joined on 9th January 19098577 joined on 10th January 19109086 joined on 25th April 19119438 joined on 22nd January 19129934 joined on 6th January 191310549 joined on 14th January 1914 The First World War11147 joined on 25th August 191411366 joined on 1st September 191413101 joined on 5th October 191413547 joined on 9th November 191414067 joined on 5th December 191414531 joined on 5th January 191515220 joined on 1st February 191515619 joined on 2nd March 191515944 joined on 3rd April 191516068 joined on 13th May 191516269 joined on 2nd June 191516508 joined on 31st July 191516584 joined on 3rd August 191516844 joined on 9th September 191517066 joined on 3rd November 191517592 joined on 9th December 191517778 joined on 17th January 191618296 joined on 7th April 191618393 joined on 24th May 191618410 joined on 1st June 191618554 joined on 19th July 191618737 joined on 14th August 191619091 joined on 7th October 191619959 joined on 3rd November 191620546 joined on 7th December 191621276 joined on 9th January 191721553 joined on 10th February 191721775 joined on 2nd March 191722174 joined on 14th April 191722261 joined on 6th June 191722443 joined on 16th July 191722495 joined on 5th November 191722524 joined on 10th December 191722532 joined on 8th January 191823117 joined on 16th March 191823563 joined on 10th April 191828053 joined on 13th May 1918 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldstreamer Posted 14 September , 2015 Share Posted 14 September , 2015 I didn't know the older ones as only recently moved into other areas of coldstream history. Any way, we digress and await standsgrand telling us who his man is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 14 September , 2015 Share Posted 14 September , 2015 For info there have been/ are seven organic infantry-wide number series for the regular soldiers. The following is the work of Langley & Stewart. NB Because different regiments had different and varying numbers of battalions, and recruiting rates varied with time, the intro. of a new series under one of the seven umbrella series varied widely 1829. Introduced by Horse Guards Order November. To number by length of service in corps, starting at 1., but at least one regiment continued an old series from c. 1805. 1856. Circular 1238 9th September. New series from 1st October 1856. No attempt to renumber old soldiers. Numbers are battalion numbers, not regimental, hence duplication within a regiment. 1873. QR section 23. paragraph 25. ‘Brigade numbers’ …. eg 35B/xxxx for new recruits, and a regimental prefix eg 23/xxxx for those soldiers numbered in the previous series. These prefixes not universally used, even on medal rolls. Very dificult to pick bones out of this series. 1881. 1st July 1881. Numbers 1. to 9999. No renumbering. The 1881 Order has not been traced but GO 44 February 1882 repeated the change. A few regiments extremely late to change. Top limit raised to 19999 by KR 1904 provisional Paragraph 2144. Army Order 453 of November 1914 amended this again, to run the regimental numbers series to 39999. This limit was not, in fact, applied. 1920. AO 338 of 9th August 1920 introduced ‘army numbers’, allocated in blocks to corps, no distinction between regular, Militia or Territorial Army. Every soldier serving on that date renumbered. Number retained even on transfer to a different corps. 1942. Introduction of General Service Corps (GSC) Special AO 18th February 1942. All new entrants to pass into GSC and be given a GS number, starting 14200001. No renumbering of serving soldiers. Large blocks issued to various corps and locations, and no strict time sequence. 2007 Introduction of Joint Personnel Administration on 1st April, one series of numbers, issued in sequence to all new entrants of all three services. Starting at 30000000. Officers included in series for first time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STANSGRANDS Posted 14 September , 2015 Author Share Posted 14 September , 2015 Ok here go,s I hope there is some logic to this .My G. Grandfather Franklyn Walker Mackenzie was discharged in 1903 his service number was 15259 however .we the family were told he died in India as records show a Frank Mackenzie of the 1st Garrison Cameronians service number 24126 was buried in a graveyard near Deli in 1918 aged 43 .now here where it becomes confusing 24126 mackenzie was 10 years older than 15259 franklyn Mackenzie (is this a clerical error) secondly franklyn mackenzie 15259 did move to isle of sheppey to marry my G Grandmother .so is it possible that he did re enlist . finally would anyone know what regiment service number 15259 belong to ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldstreamer Posted 14 September , 2015 Share Posted 14 September , 2015 Could be any one, numbers not unique until the 1920s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STANSGRANDS Posted 15 September , 2015 Author Share Posted 15 September , 2015 would anyone know where the 1st garrison battalion cameronians were based please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin kenf48 Posted 15 September , 2015 Admin Share Posted 15 September , 2015 Soldier's effects show L/ Cpl 24126 Mckenzie died at Meerut and his administration was dealt with by the 7th (Meerut) Division. Meerut was an established garrison town to the North of Delhi so I guess that's where they were stationed although Garrison Battalions would undertake duties across a wider area within the District. His widow was Mildred Beatrice. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STANSGRANDS Posted 15 September , 2015 Author Share Posted 15 September , 2015 thank you Ken can you tell me how you obtained his widows name (my G Grandmother) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldstreamer Posted 15 September , 2015 Share Posted 15 September , 2015 probably off the soldiers effect s details on ancestry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin kenf48 Posted 15 September , 2015 Admin Share Posted 15 September , 2015 probably off the soldiers effect s details on ancestryConfirmed, thanks. Incidentally you can use the information therein to find his enlistment date.If you have access this is the link http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/60506/42511_6129999_0146-00152?pid=203882&backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk%2f%2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3findiv%3d1%26db%3dUKArmyRegistersEffects%26gss%3dangs-d%26new%3d1%26rank%3d1%26msT%3d1%26gsfn%3dFrank%2b%26gsln%3dMcKenzie%26MSAV%3d1%26uidh%3dyi4%26pcat%3d39%26fh%3d6%26h%3d203882%26recoff%3d3%2b4%26ml_rpos%3d7&treeid=&personid=&hintid=&usePUB=true I suspect it was influenza, or pneumonia as a consequence that caused his death. You should be able to obtain a death certificate to confirm. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STANSGRANDS Posted 15 September , 2015 Author Share Posted 15 September , 2015 Thanks gentlemen silly as it sounds seeing these details brought a lump to my throat Thanks GWF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 15 September , 2015 Share Posted 15 September , 2015 His war gratuity shows £24 was paid - this indicates 50 months qualifying service of at the time of death and would suggest September 1914 for enlistment. Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CROONAERT Posted 15 September , 2015 Share Posted 15 September , 2015 For info there have been/ are seven organic infantry-wide number series for the regular soldiers....1829......1856....1873....1881.....1920.....1942.....2007.... No October(?) 1950 number change - 22000000 and upwards in chronological order??? Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STANSGRANDS Posted 15 September , 2015 Author Share Posted 15 September , 2015 Wow Thanks Craig god knows how you guys can work out these things brilliant Thanks again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 15 September , 2015 Share Posted 15 September , 2015 Wow Thanks Craig god knows how you guys can work out these things brilliant Thanks again I have a website on it, if you're interested - http://wargratuity.wordpress.com/ What I should have added to the previous post is that there can be an error of up to 1 month short in the estimate (due to the way it was calculated) which can push it back to August 14 on occasions. Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STANSGRANDS Posted 15 September , 2015 Author Share Posted 15 September , 2015 Thanks Craig interesting stuff, hell of a difference in gratuity form my old G Grandads and what the generals got considering the amount of blunders they caused 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