Can't find MIC or Roll

[spud4210]

Merchant navy did not get victory medal and only qualified for war medal if sailed through a war zone.

The mercantile marine war medal was issued as well if sailed through war zone

If transferred to army and only served at home then not entitled to victory medal. He may have been injured at home or in Ireland hence the hospital blues.

Hi James,

William enlisted on 13/05/15 with The KIngs Liverpool Reg. Service number was 4134-4136 (through a little detective work) his post March '17 number was 266508.

He war invalided sick back to UK Jan '18

Paul

Edited 20 March , 2016 by spud4210

[spud4210]

Took this from TNA website on Merchant Navy entitlement:

British War Medal -automatically awarded to all recipients of the Mercantile Marine Medal.

Paul says there was only ever the Mercantile Marine Medal. I'd go with what Craig said about the MN assuming the army issued or would issue the BWM.

Still can't get my head around the fact that he must have given an address when he attested which would be the default address for automatic sending out of Victory. But it's such an odd thing for BWM & Victory to be (badly dealt) with by two different services. Maybe his name being absent from KLR roll for BWM entitlement or showing as a duplicate ie 'BWM issued MMO Liverpool' made the medal office think he either had a Victory via the MN (not possible) or that the lack of BWM information obscured him for the Victory.?

Had he chased it up I'm sure they would have been issued. But away at sea, maybe not concerned, who knows.

Paul, did you have this on his other ships?:

142717 Minnedosa

135583 Aquitania

136791 Metagama

You could try another post in Ships & Navies on this forum, it's not so much as 'Can't find the MIC or Medal Roll' it's more, 'there isn't one, why not!!'

Someone with more knowledge on MN medal issuing practice may be able to help.

TEW

This has been playing with my mind for some time now!!!

I think I will try and have the medals "issued' as they don't to have been, as you say there may have been a mix up between the two departments. I can only provide the evidence in front of me and see how it goes.

As for the other ship I do have those records thanks.

Just as an aside William was involved in an accident on the Liverpool docks in 1927 when a gale reported to be 100 mph came through knocking him and three others into the waters in Gladstone Dock. And just before the war he survived the sinking of The Empress Of Ireland in Canadian waters.

Tough old codger

Paul

Edited 19 March , 2016 by spud4210

[TEW]

James,

We can place this man serving in France as infantry. MN possibly to May 1915 then army and back to MN.

TEW

[roughdiamond]

Paul

You may want to amend the date on your post #51, shouldn't it be 1915?

Sam

William enlisted on 13/05/17 with The KIngs Liverpool Reg.

[spud4210]

Paul

You may want to amend the date on your post #51, shouldn't it be 1915?

Sam

Thanks Sam :-)

[ss002d6252]

Looking at his number #266508 in the numbering sequence of early 1917:

The 7th Bn was allocated 265001 to 305000

The general way of re-numbeing was in numerical order (so pretty much 'seniority') with the lower 4 digit numbers being allocated the lowest 6 digit numbers.

Looking at the pre & post 1917 numbers

3249 265990
3250 265991
3252 265992
3253 265993
3258 265997
4127 266503

4129 266504
266508
4149 266514
4150 266510 (possibly should be 266515)

4142 266511
4151 266516
4153 266517

This suggests that #266508 lies between #4127 & #4149 which allows us to get a time-line on a possible enlistment for Murphy.

If we look at #266504 Holding's service record we can see he enlisted 12 May 1915 at Bootle and appears to still be in the UK when he was re-numbered to 6 digits.

If we look at #266511 Vogel's service it stated 14 May 1915 and proceeded to France on 16 May 1917. his 6 digit number was allocated whilst still in the UK.


I would propose therefore that Murphy enlisted probably in early May 1915 at Bootle and possibly did not go to France before he was re-numbered in early 1917.

Craig

[TEW]

Yes, I looked at the numbering sequence and came up with 4145 based on men on the same diary sheets as him. Paul's 4134 is possible as were some others. But 2 or 3 men on same sheets with high 2664** or low 2665** made it pan out that 266508 should be 4145.

Also noted last night that the 10903 man must have enlisted into regular battalion circa 1910, so not territorial.

TEW

[ss002d6252]

Yes, I looked at the numbering sequence and came up with 4145 based on men on the same diary sheets as him. Paul's 4134 is possible as were some others. But 2 or 3 men on same sheets with high 2664** or low 2665** made it pan out that 266508 should be 4145.

Also noted last night that the 10903 man must have enlisted into regular battalion circa 1910, so not territorial.

TEW

The date's tie in nicely with your possible reading of him being released to enlist on 11 May 15 or shortly after.

Craig

[spud4210]

Looking at his number #266508 in the numbering sequence of early 1917:

The 7th Bn was allocated 265001 to 305000

The general way of re-numbeing was in numerical order (so pretty much 'seniority') with the lower 4 digit numbers being allocated the lowest 6 digit numbers.

Looking at the pre & post 1917 numbers

3249 265990

3250 265991

3252 265992

3253 265993

3258 265997

4127 266503

4129 266504

266508

4149 266514

4150 266510 (possibly should be 266515)

4142 266511

4151 266516

4153 266517

This suggests that #266508 lies between #4127 & #4149 which allows us to get a time-line on a possible enlistment for Murphy.

If we look at #266504 Holding's service record we can see he enlisted 12 May 1915 at Bootle and appears to still be in the UK when he was re-numbered to 6 digits.

If we look at #266511 Vogel's service it stated 14 May 1915 and proceeded to France on 16 May 1917. his 6 digit number was allocated whilst still in the UK.

I would propose therefore that Murphy enlisted probably in early May 1915 at Bootle and possibly did not go to France before he was re-numbered in early 1917.

Craig

Hi Craig,

With my limited research ....

4130 - 266505 Joseph Allen 2/7th

4131 unknown

4132 unknown

4133 Samuel Ferris transferred R.E 29/04/1916

4134 -

4135 - 266508 William Bristow Murphy

4136 -

4137 - 266509 unknown

4138 - 266510 James Harrison 1/7th KIA 09/08/1916

I have an excel spread sheet of most of the 2/7th collated from the diaries and the medal roll

Paul

[TEW]

Yes, but the original 413* numbers may have come from any of the territorial battalions. The KLR seem to have quite a few territorial units. Each battalion could have had a 4134 in it. As they got transferred to from one battalion to another you could easily get 2 or maybe more men in a battalion who had an identical early 4 digit number but were re-numbered with a unique 6 digit number later.

So, some of the men on your spreadsheet eg '4137 - 266509 unknown' may have joined the 5th KLR with number 4137 but transferred to 7th later and was re-numbered according to their sequence. Meanwhile, another man may have joined the 6th with 4137 and also transferred to 7th later.

If you take the men with 6 digit numbers from the diary and find their earlier 4 digit number for them from eg service record you'll see different matching sequences for the 6 and 4 digit numbers.

I did a quick spread sheet and put the 6 digit numbers in and in next column would be based on finding a man with that number and his 4 digit number. But the next man you find doesn't match that sequence, so I did a new column for his number match and so on.

​4135 is a possibility but when you find eg 4149 = 266514 then 266508 could = 4143. In fact this sequence match came up more than once on my spreadsheet.

Other possibilities I had for 266508 were - 4135 3980, 4186, 4115.

I think we pretty much have his enlisting date from other thread so we can at least safely say that the block 4135-4143 was issued close to 11/5/1915.

TEW

[spud4210]

You are right TEW in saying that each of the territorial battalions had the same running numbers eg:4131 W.E.Evans 10th KLR also John Love 5th KLR kia 18/09/1916. Don't know if they would have kept two men in the one battalion with the same number,interesting question. On the original service papers when they enlisted actually has the territorial battalion to which they assigned 5th KLR, 6th, 7th, 8th,9th or 10th. On some it is written 2nd line or 3rd line so they pretty much knew where they were off to. When William signed the 1/7th were already in France. Some of the lads around his number went to France December 1915.

Some of the missing men may have signed on the day were allocated a number eg 4135 and were found not to be fit for service and discharged therefore the sevice number was used and not reallocated later.

Paul

[spud4210]

Some of the missing 266xxx numbers might be men in the 3/7th who stayed at home therefore no medal entitlement

Edited 21 March , 2016 by spud4210

[ss002d6252]

You are right TEW in saying that each of the territorial battalions had the same running numbers eg:4131 W.E.Evans 10th KLR also John Love 5th KLR kia 18/09/1916. Don't know if they would have kept two men in the one battalion with the same number,interesting question. On the original service papers when they enlisted actually has the territorial battalion to which they assigned 5th KLR, 6th, 7th, 8th,9th or 10th. On some it is written 2nd line or 3rd line so they pretty much knew where they were off to. When William signed the 1/7th were already in France. Some of the lads around his number went to France December 1915.

Some of the missing men may have signed on the day were allocated a number eg 4135 and were found not to be fit for service and discharged therefore the sevice number was used and not reallocated later.

Paul

If two men with the same number 4 digit ended up in the same battalion then whichever had come from another battalion was supposed to have their original battalions prefix ('3/' etc) added to differentiate the numbers.

Apart from an odd exception with some battalions then numbers were not reissued (and there were only specific situations where two men should have the same number) but some did occasionally not issue numbers directly in sequence.

Craig

[spud4210]

If two men with the same number 4 digit ended up in the same battalion then whichever had come from another battalion was supposed to have their original battalions prefix ('3/' etc) added to differentiate the numbers.

Apart from an odd exception with some battalions then numbers were not reissued (and there were only specific situations where two men should have the same number) but some did occasionally not issue numbers directly in sequence.

Craig

Thanks Craig that makes sense.

[kathleen donaldson]

I am currently extracting all those who are recorded as being absent voters from the 1919 voters registers for the City of Liverpool. I have the following entry

Polling district: 2

Ref: "AB"

Parish: Kirkdale

Division: Two

Entry number: 2546

House No: 19

Street: Othello Street

Surname: Murphy

Forename: William Bristow

A=Absent

NM-Naval or Military

Ward: Sandhills.

The date of the 1919 Voters Registers in October 1919, so I assume it covers 1918. He was recorded as being absent and serving in a Naval or Military capacity.

[spud4210]

I am currently extracting all those who are recorded as being absent voters from the 1919 voters registers for the City of Liverpool. I have the following entry

Polling district: 2

Ref: "AB"

Parish: Kirkdale

Division: Two

Entry number: 2546

House No: 19

Street: Othello Street

Surname: Murphy

Forename: William Bristow

A=Absent

NM-Naval or Military

Ward: Sandhills.

The date of the 1919 Voters Registers in October 1919, so I assume it covers 1918. He was recorded as being absent and serving in a Naval or Military capacity.

Kathy,

Many many thanks for this little piece of info on William.

I have tried to get a voters list or even the AV for him to no avail. This is my William.... 19 Othello St :-)

Is there any chance of finding where he was serving by any chance? I know he was invalided to England in Jan 18, but the trail goes cold after this until Jan 1919 when he was back in the Merchant Navy.

I contacted the records office in Liverpool quite awhile ago but they were unable to help me, so once again many thanks.

Paul

[kathleen donaldson]

The best thing to do Paul is try and locate the Crew List for the S.S. Mendosa for 1919 and work back from there. There should be a record of previous ships he served on. If he was invalided home he may have started going away as a seaman, not long after.

The crew lists for this ship are at Newfoundland.

https://www.mun.ca/mha/holdings/viewcombinedcrews.php?Official_No=142717

You can get a copy of the list but there is a fee.

[kathleen donaldson]

Hi Paul,

I have just carried out a search on FMP and I have located a few pages of service records for William B Murphy 10930 King's Liverpool Regiment

He enlisted on 3rd September 1914 and his age on enlistment was 34 years old. This should rule him out as being your William B Murphy. I can't locate this record on Ancestry, but there are pages on FMP.

[spud4210]

Hi Paul,

I have just carried out a search on FMP and I have located a few pages of service records for William B Murphy 10930 King's Liverpool Regiment

He enlisted on 3rd September 1914 and his age on enlistment was 34 years old. This should rule him out as being your William B Murphy. I can't locate this record on Ancestry, but there are pages on FMP.

The best thing to do Paul is try and locate the Crew List for the S.S. Mendosa for 1919 and work back from there. There should be a record of previous ships he served on. If he was invalided home he may have started going away as a seaman, not long after.

The crew lists for this ship are at Newfoundland.

https://www.mun.ca/mha/holdings/viewcombinedcrews.php?Official_No=142717

You can get a copy of the list but there is a fee.

Hi Kathy,

Once again thanks for the info, I have seen WB Murphy10930 before and ruled him out. I will try with the records at Newfounland and see what I get.

Many thanks

Paul

[spud4210]

Hi Paul,

I have just carried out a search on FMP and I have located a few pages of service records for William B Murphy 10930 King's Liverpool Regiment

He enlisted on 3rd September 1914 and his age on enlistment was 34 years old. This should rule him out as being your William B Murphy. I can't locate this record on Ancestry, but there are pages on FMP.

Looks as though he re enlisted with the 16 York & Lancs 43313 on Ancestry. Enlisted as William Murphy don't know what the B stands for

Paul

[spud4210]

Hi all,

Just revisiting the number sequences again and following up on FMP

New fellows in red

4130 - 266505 Joseph Allen 2/7th

4131 - 266506 unknown

4132 - 266507 unknown

4133 - Samuel Ferris transferred R.E 29/04/1916

4134 - John H Norman E. 12/05/1915 Dis. 12/08/1915 Underage

4135 - 266508 William Bristow Murphy

4136 - Phillip Tebbit E.13/05/1915 Dis. 22/05/1915 Medically unfit Epilepsy

4137 - 266509 unknown

4138 - 266510 James Harrison 1/7th KIA 09/08/1916

These all seem to fit into place and leaves my William(blue) as 4135

Paul