dravin Posted 18 July , 2018 Share Posted 18 July , 2018 Hi all I am seeking to identify the regiment the man in the photo served in Its a poor quality photo unfortunately I would say its post war, he has two wound stripes and fours overseas chevrons Would anyone like to make a guess as to the regiment please I won't say what I think it might be as I don't want to muddy the waters Sadly no name for him either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragoon Posted 18 July , 2018 Share Posted 18 July , 2018 Hello Queens West Surrey Regiment by the shoulder title, Hope this helps Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dravin Posted 18 July , 2018 Author Share Posted 18 July , 2018 Many thanks Chris, your eyes are better than mine ;-) But the S on the end is clearer now so I think you may be right I will pursue that and see where it takes me, much appreciate your input Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoppage Drill Posted 18 July , 2018 Share Posted 18 July , 2018 Four overseas chevrons, two wound stripes and ribbons for Queen's South Africa and King's South Africa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dravin Posted 18 July , 2018 Author Share Posted 18 July , 2018 27 minutes ago, Stoppage Drill said: Four overseas chevrons, two wound stripes and ribbons for Queen's South Africa and King's South Africa. I couldn't make out the ribbons, so that is very welcome information Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dravin Posted 18 July , 2018 Author Share Posted 18 July , 2018 From family information it appears this man may be one William MAHONEY 851 3rd Battalion The Queens West Surrey Regiment He appears in the medal rolls for the 2nd Boer war medals There is also a William MAHONEY in the Queens 6437 who attested 21st Aug 1915, his MIC shows he was later in the Labour corps 373665 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie962 Posted 18 July , 2018 Share Posted 18 July , 2018 44 minutes ago, dravin said: his MIC shows His MIC shows BWM and VM only. Would he have been able to accumulate 4 overseas service chevrons if he didn't go overseas until 1916 ? Charlie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 18 July , 2018 Share Posted 18 July , 2018 (edited) 18 minutes ago, charlie962 said: His MIC shows BWM and VM only. Would he have been able to accumulate 4 overseas service chevrons if he didn't go overseas until 1916 ? Charlie Not by any means an expert on it but I would raise the same point - could have have accrued the chevrons from 1916 onwards service only? What was the cut -off date for qualification? Craig Edited 18 July , 2018 by ss002d6252 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dravin Posted 18 July , 2018 Author Share Posted 18 July , 2018 19 minutes ago, charlie962 said: His MIC shows BWM and VM only. Would he have been able to accumulate 4 overseas service chevrons if he didn't go overseas until 1916 ? Charlie Yes that point hadn't been missed, I was working on that very thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 18 July , 2018 Share Posted 18 July , 2018 (edited) From what I can see the eligibility period ended in 1922 so there was scope to get 4 chevrons in from 1916. Craig Edited 18 July , 2018 by ss002d6252 grammar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordon92 Posted 18 July , 2018 Share Posted 18 July , 2018 See Overseas Chevrons for the rules. He would have received one chevron upon leaving the UK and an additional chevron for each year thereafter. Thus he could have accumulated four chevrons by serving abroad into 1919. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dravin Posted 18 July , 2018 Author Share Posted 18 July , 2018 11 minutes ago, ss002d6252 said: From what I can see the eligibility period ended in 1922 so the there was scope to get 4 chevrons in from 1916. Craig Yes that was my findings also, so if he served overseas in 1916, he would only have to serve until 1919 to gain the four chevrons So its still possibly the right man, everything else stacks up so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoppage Drill Posted 19 July , 2018 Share Posted 19 July , 2018 8 hours ago, dravin said: Yes that was my findings also, so if he served overseas in 1916, he would only have to serve until 1919 to gain the four chevrons If that's the case, then by the time he qualified for his fourth chevron, you'd expect to see a BWM ribbon up. What reason is there to think that he didn't go overseas until 1916 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bootneck Posted 19 July , 2018 Share Posted 19 July , 2018 According to The Queen's rough register of recruits c. 1914-1916, held at the Surrey History Centre, 6437 W Mahoney, aged 33, enlisted on 21 August 1915; unfortunately there are no other details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoppage Drill Posted 19 July , 2018 Share Posted 19 July , 2018 All the indications are that it’s the other chap, 851 Mahoney, who was very likely to have been a recalled reservist and as such would not be required to attest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dravin Posted 19 July , 2018 Author Share Posted 19 July , 2018 2 hours ago, Stoppage Drill said: If that's the case, then by the time he qualified for his fourth chevron, you'd expect to see a BWM ribbon up. What reason is there to think that he didn't go overseas until 1916 ? He enlists 21st Aug 1915, but does not appear to have been entitled to the 1915 Star, his MIC has no mention of it and he does not seem to be listed in the 1915 medal rolls So suspect he went overseas in 1916 at the earliest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie962 Posted 19 July , 2018 Share Posted 19 July , 2018 Qualification for stripe was 'outside UK', not neccesarily in a Theatre of War. So he could have been in say India in late 1915 and thus started his qualification? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dravin Posted 19 July , 2018 Author Share Posted 19 July , 2018 22 minutes ago, Stoppage Drill said: All the indications are that it’s the other chap, 851 Mahoney, who was very likely to have been a recalled reservist and as such would not be required to attest. I suspect both records are for the same man plus one more William MAHONEY 851 3rd Queens Embodied 12th Dec 1899 to 7th Feb 1902 A note states absent 1903 Then a man of the same name and age enlists in the Lincolnshire regt William MAHONEY 6386 Lincolnshire regt 9th March 1903 Absconded on route 11th March 1903 There are descrepancies in that he says he has not served previously but is presently in the 4th Btn East Surrey regt militia The signatures on each of the above look remarkably similar As it does on his marriage in 1905 And again in 1911 with wife and children Then he enlists again in 1915 So I strongly suspect they are all the same man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 21 July , 2018 Share Posted 21 July , 2018 Brilliant detective work, I think you’ve got him ‘bang to rights’. Fraudulent re-enlistments were a constant problem throughout the period between Victoria’s reign and up to WW1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dravin Posted 21 July , 2018 Author Share Posted 21 July , 2018 10 hours ago, FROGSMILE said: Brilliant detective work, I think you’ve got him ‘bang to rights’. Fraudulent re-enlistments were a constant problem throughout the period between Victoria’s reign and up to WW1. Well it was all looking rosy Until I found what I think is the man who married and was in the 1911 with the same signature as on the enlistments, in the 1939 National Identity Register The man in the family died in 1923 you see A little more research required methinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 22 July , 2018 Share Posted 22 July , 2018 20 hours ago, dravin said: Well it was all looking rosy Until I found what I think is the man who married and was in the 1911 with the same signature as on the enlistments, in the 1939 National Identity Register The man in the family died in 1923 you see A little more research required methinks Well the signatures were certainly remarkably similar so I can understand why you thought the way that you did. 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