HOSPITAL RECORDS

[smitten]

Dear All,

I know that my grandfather was hospitalised during 1917 for 3 months or so and also know there is a reference to him in these records but can anyone confirm where I can access them please?

I'm hoping one of the many resource web sites now has them as the prospect of perusing the records at Kew is rather daunting!

For reference his name is George Smitten, 1st Btn Gloucestershire Regiment/ 36672 and his record apparently confirmed that his injury was a 'self inflicted' contusion!

Kind Regards

Colin.

[seaJane]

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/hospitalrecords/ may help, but you do have to know the hospital. Retention of Great War records was very random and, if the reference to his records dates to quite a long time ago, I'm afraid it may no longer be accurate.

sJ

[smitten]

Just to add that previously I raised a topic surrounding why he was never issued with a SWB given that his MIC is the type used for soldiers who were medically discharged and that I'd always been led to believe by the family that he suffered his injuries as a result of a gas attack.

However having perused the SWB records at Kew I could find no trace of him ever being awarded one, even though his MIC has some form of reference to the SWB, possibly his application reference but now perhaps referring to his medical record of him suffering a self inflicted injury?

I'm not sure how somebody could be hospitalised for 3 months with a contusion (bruise) so maybe this term was a euphemism for instances where soldiers took matters into their own hands.

Kind Regards

Colin.

[smitten]

I know that WW1 hospital/casualty records do exist and are in the public domain as I did briefly have access to them but can no longer remember which WO file they are in at Kew or which web site I viewed them from previously as my subscription has now expired.

Hope this helps.

Kind Regards

Colin.

[seaJane]

I am trying to recall whether MH106 is your magic number (might be worth searching the forum to check).

[Ron Clifton]

MH106 is the correct class, but the records are only a small selection of the original total. I don't think they have been digitised but I could be wrong.

Ron

[TEW]

He has a MH106 record on Forces War Record.

TEW

[smitten]

Dear All,

Thank you, I'll now take out a brief subscription with the Forces War Record site to obtain/download a copy of his record.

However it still leaves me wondering why he was hospitalised with a contusion/bruise for 3 months which seems a rather long time for such an injury, so perhaps this was a well used term at the time for covering instances where self inflicted wounds or mental stress were involved?

Given that his wound and reason for discharge were due to such an event it would certainly clarify and resolve the enigma as to why he was never awarded a SWB even though his MIC is the style used for soldiers who were medically discharged and also has an oblique and unknown SWB reference number and date under the SWB official stamp.

Presumably SWB's were only ever granted to soldiers who were considered to have suffered as a direct physical result of enemy action given the less enlightened attitudes of the time?

Kind Regards

Colin.

[seaJane]

If it was a big bruise to the head they might have been waiting on any evidence of brain damage which can take a while to appear.

[ss002d6252]

Dear All,

Thank you, I'll now take out a brief subscription with the Forces War Record site to obtain/download a copy of his record.

However it still leaves me wondering why he was hospitalised with a contusion/bruise for 3 months which seems a rather long time for such an injury, so perhaps this was a well used term at the time for covering instances where self inflicted wounds or mental stress were involved?

Given that his wound and reason for discharge were due to such an event it would certainly clarify and resolve the enigma as to why he was never awarded a SWB even though his MIC is the style used for soldiers who were medically discharged and also has an oblique and unknown SWB reference number and date under the SWB official stamp.

Presumably SWB's were only ever granted to soldiers who were considered to have suffered as a direct physical result of enemy action given the less enlightened attitudes of the time?

Kind Regards

Colin.

A SWB would be given for a range of discharges - injury, wounds, sickness etc. It wasn't necessary to have been as a result of enemy action.

Craig

[smitten]

Thank you - my enigma is that he was never awarded an SWB even though he was medically discharged in 1917 and his MIC is of the type used in these circumstances - plus it has a stamp for the SWB with a date but with a completely unknown reference number that nobody has been able to shed any light on to date (but it is definitely not a medal roll reference).

I won't re-publish his MIC as this was extensively covered in my previous posts but for some reason he never received the SWB so I'm having to assume that there were certain criteria that would preclude it being granted? On the basis that his medical record refers to his injury being 'self inflicted' then I can only presume that what ever his wound was it was not as a result of combat and that this would then exclude him from the SWB process.

In reality I suspect I will never know the full truth and will have to use some element of supposition, however what is clear is that the family/anecdotal story of him being discharged due to suffering the effects of a gas attack seems to be at odds with a self-inflicted injury.

This is no way diminishes my utter and complete affection and respect for my grandfather who died shortly after I was born, in fact quite the opposite. Fortunately due to his bravery and sense of duty, and that of so many others, I've never had to face the trauma and absolute horror of being involved in such a dehumanising conflict.

Kind Regards

Colin.

[ss002d6252]

I won't re-publish his MIC as this was extensively covered in my previous posts but for some reason he never received the SWB so I'm having to assume that there were certain criteria that would preclude it being granted? On the basis that his medical record refers to his injury being 'self inflicted' then I can only presume that what ever his wound was it was not as a result of combat and that this would then exclude him from the SWB process.

I would imagine that a discharge due to 'self inflicted' wounds was invalidate the SWB entitlement - there's a good chance the application was made and rejected. The missing SWB roll may well be a rejection list for 'self inflicted injuries'.

In most cases I'd imagine that 'self inflicted injuries' were a call for help rather than a deliberate attempt at malingering.

Craig

[smitten]

Craig,

Thank you, this tallies with my own thoughts on the matter.

Sadly at the time there seems to have been no official awareness or acceptance of the sheer mental torture that soldiers at the front were suffering, and the effects this had on them, just a robust and simplistic approach which in extreme examples resulted in extremely harsh consequences.

Having visited the graves of souls who were summarily executed for such indiscretions I can only be grateful that my grandfather's situation was viewed in a different light, my only regret being that I never had the chance to meet him before he passed away in 1961.

Kind Regards

Colin.

[TEW]

His MIC shows medal roll for BWM and Victory as L101/B25 p4418 which equates to WO329/1150. There is an additional annotation of 2682/2/b under the date 13/11/1917. Other posts for Smitten and this ref. No. sort of concluded that this is an application for a SWB on that date and not a ref. to a SWB roll.

He must have been discharged under KR392 but there are 38ish sub-clauses. xvi is probably the most common. But:

Not likely to become an efficient soldier

The termination of his ____ period of engagement.

Are other possibilities, I doubt if being discharged due to giving a false age or penal servitude would get you a SWB!

Not sure about this man who may have had a SWB for being put into Class P reserve.

The FWR MH106 may well explain some of this but it will be a single line entry in a ledger. There are some special ledgers for self-inflicted wounds or his entry may say self-inflicted. I think I'm right in saying that there would have been a court of enquiry into this and it may or may not have been proved and/or officially confirmed as such.

Whatever the cause of his injury if he was discharged as 'xvi No longer physically fit for war service.' he would be entitled to SWB. If he was discharged:

(xi) For misconduct.
(xii) Having been sentenced to penal servitude.
(xiii) Having been sentenced to be discharged with ignominy.

Then probably not.

I could show a man who deserted in the UK 1916 after being wounded and managed to avoid going back to France. Discharged April 1918 KR392 xvi, received a SWB and pension even though some of his service was forfeited. Down to the discharge board really.

The SWB had to be applied for, it was not an automatic issue. We don't know if he did actually apply or not.

Lets us all know what the MH106 says.

TEW

[smitten]

TEW,

Thank you.

There appear to be a huge number of records under MH106 at Kew, all very confusing for me as a relative novice, so I've no idea where to begin in order to find my grandfather.

I therefore suspect I will have to engage the services of a researcher to do the digging for me, on the assumption of course that the information/record details contained will be over and above what is already shown on the Forces War Record site record which I understand to be a translation of the original record, or this not the case?

Kind Regards

Colin.

[ss002d6252]

TEW,

Thank you.

There appear to be a huge number of records under MH106 at Kew, all very confusing for me as a relative novice, so I've no idea where to begin in order to find my grandfather.

I therefore suspect I will have to engage the services of a researcher to do the digging for me, on the assumption of course that the information/record details contained will be over and above what is already shown on the Forces War Record site record which I understand to be a translation of the original record, or this not the case?

Kind Regards

Colin.

The online MH106 records are a transcription of the original registers held at the National Archives.

Craig

[smitten]

Craig,

Thank you, I thought they were so in which case there would be nothing extra to gain from paying someone to find the original record at Kew only to obtain what I already now have - of course unless I've missed something possibly in all of this?

Kind Regards

Colin.

[ss002d6252]

Craig,

Thank you, I thought they were so in which case there would be nothing extra to gain from paying someone to find the original record at Kew only to obtain what I already now have - of course unless I've missed something possibly in all of this?

Kind Regards

Colin.

From what I understand there wouldn't be - unless someone can add more ?

Craig

[TEW]

I thought with FWR you'd get an image of the original rather than just a transcription. I'm intrigued to know what his entry says either way. At present it could be a Field Ambulance, a CCS or Hospital, date? Location? type of wound? discharged to?

FAs, CCS and Hospitals have war diaries so part of his evacuation process might be discernible.

If he is recorded in a FA ledger then it's possible he's also recorded in a CCS or Hospital Ledger that's not been transcribed yet.

Small chance I know as MH106 is only a 5% sample of the original (the other 95% was destroyed).

I don't think FWR have transcribed any UK hospitals as yet. He could be in MH106/2298 Hospitals operating in the United Kingdom: Medical Board Reports including self-inflicted wounds M-T. Or MH106/2299 S-Y (as above).

TEW

[ss002d6252]

I thought with FWR you'd get an image of the original rather than just a transcription. I'm intrigued to know what his entry says either way. At present it could be a Field Ambulance, a CCS or Hospital, date? Location? type of wound? discharged to?

Just the a transcription.

Admitted from 36 CCS to no 2 ambulance Train with a self inflicted contusion to the right foot in Sep 1916. Admitted to 36 CCS on 5 Sep 1916.

He had 2 weeks service at the front and 3 months service overall. Treated for 37 days. (has the 3 months been confused with the length of time he was hospitalised ?)

Craig

[ss002d6252]

The surviving CCS records are generally sparse but you can order the 36 CCS war diary here http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/311b1b9964a741a381cd392aeac5c71e- chances are though that there will be nothing mentioning him personally.

Craig

[TEW]

Craig,

I'm not seeing either of those units with a MH106 record on Discovery. 31, 34 and 39 CCS and only 31st Ambulance train. Do FWR give a ref?

TEW

[ss002d6252]

The reference on FWR is mh106/808 - the N/A title for this reference is 'British other ranks, self inflicted wounds' - http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C544361

Craig

[TEW]

Ah!! That's 39 CCS not 36 CCS.

Always a minimal chance he may be in MH106/2298 or 2299 as a UK patient.

Thanks

TEW

[timbo58]

Interesting.

I'll have the original image checked to see if it states 36 CCS as per the transcription.

The transcription is as faithful as it can be to the source -it will have everything that's on the page of the register.

The only other information that may be within MH06 somewhere is surgical notes which we are not including in our collection.

These images differ in clarity but normally the from/to units are reasonably clear.

It will be mid next week before we get a chance to do this check however.

The whole of MH106 we have on FWR are transcriptions, we do all of this work in our Wiltshire offices, we have not licensed the images however so we cannot show them.

Edited 6 April , 2016 by timbo58