Volunteer or conscript - Sherwood Foresters

[MaxD]

There are medal records and POW records for 96555 Pte Arthur Charles Cornwall who (from his medal roll entry and POW record) served overseas only with 1st Bn Sherwood Foresters and not before 1916.  .  His service record appears to have been among those lost in WW2.  He was 25 years of age in 1914.

 

I have been asked whether he was a volunteer or a conscript.  Can anyone help with this query please?

 

Max

[Guest]

Of course, volunteers continued after the MSA but the balance of probabilities has to be  conscripted-and early on.

A look at other service numbers (SWB,Service,Army Pension) does not add much-  there is another man with a lower number  with a SWB:

96530=  11^th December 1915  John Harry Smith

   This would suggest, on the fall of probable numbers coming in with conscription that Cornwall was not far forward on this date.

 

     On the other hand, I cannot trace any 965XX numbers beyond your man-and the nearest thereafter are in 1917.

 

The only extra I can thin of is that he may have had some reserved/semi-reserved occupation but I cannot identify which Charles Cornwall he is on the 1911 Census

[George Rayner]

Is this the same man on FMP?

First name(s)	Arthur
Last name	Cornwall
Year	1914-20
Service number	9655
Rank	Private
Regiment	Nottinghamshire And Derbyshire Regiment
Service record	Soldier Number: 9655, Rank: Private, Corps: Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire Regiment
Image link	http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=D6233500
Country	Great Britain
Medal type	British Army Medal Index Cards, 1914-1920
Archive reference	WO372/5
Archive reference description	Campaign Medal Index Cards and Silver War Badge Cards
Record set	Britain, Campaign, Gallantry & Long Service Medals & Awards
Category	Military, armed forces & conflict
Subcategory	Medal Rolls and Honours
Collections from	Great Britain, UK None

 

George

[MaxD]

 

George

 

Yes BUT FMP and National Archives have mistranscribed his number, the final 5 has fallen off the edge of the card, quite clear to see on the MIC on Ancestry and corresponding medal roll and POW records.

 

GUEST - I am chasing his previous and the Elizabeth on his POW record in Tunstall Staffs.  Married 1913 I think.

 

I had found a near number in 1st bn with a medical record who on 25 Mar 1918 had been at the front 21 days!.

 

We have his pension ledger/card also.

 

Thank you both.

 

Max

[MaxD]

GUEST

 

96559 Fenton, 1st Bn also, hospital 27 March 1918 (not 25th) under a year's service (no entry in the "years" column) and 21 days at the front.  Not sure it adds anything?

 

Max

[kenf48]

96531 Dodsley was a Derby Scheme attestation as was the SWB man mentioned above.  Pte Dodsley was mobilised to the Sherwood Depot in Derby on the 31 October 1917.

He was a railwayman. (Great Central Railway)

96560 Underwood Derby attestation December 1915 called up 29 October 1917 posted (and numbered) to the Sherwoods  1 November 1917 to BEF 29 March 1918 posted 2nd Bn 2nd April.

96561 Newman (records poor) another Derby man called up 1 November 1917

 

Assuming your man is the one mentioned in the 1939 Register he was by then a locomotive driver, so another railwayman. However we don't know his trade in 1917 but looks like he attested under the Derby Scheme and was called up end of October/beginning November 1918 assume 12 weeks training as an infantryman to France early 1918 which accords with Pte Fenton above.  They would have been posted to the 7th (Reserve) (TR) Bn.Ripon.

 

I'd say he was a railway employee who attested under the Derby Scheme and was mobilised as above.  You would need to look in the 1st Bn diary for drafts January/March 1918.

 

Ken

[Keith Brannen]

Agree with kenf48, most likely a Derby Scheme man.

 

If he is the Arthur Cornwall who married Eliza E Leeson in Sep Qtr 1913 in Stoke On Trent, then the GRO has two children born to the couple, Arthur, Sep Qtr 1914, Stoke Upon Trent, and Nellie, Dec Qtr 1915, Wolstanton. 

 

Just from that, I would say a Derby Scheme man. However, being in Staffordshire, would he have trained with the Sherwood Foresters, or would he have more likely been posted to them after his arrival in France? Unless he was deferred (as a railway man), under the Derby Scheme he would have been mobilized in April 1916 and may have had longer training before being posted overseas.

 EDIT: If posted to the Sherwood Foresters overseas, his number, based on kenf48's research, may suggest a posting overseas of late October 1917.

 

Edited 24 May , 2019 by Keith Brannen

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Keith Brannen said:

Agree with kenf48, most likely a Derby Scheme man.

 

If he is the Arthur Cornwall who married Eliza E Leeson in Sep Qtr 1913 in Stoke On Trent, then the GRO has two children born to the couple, Arthur, Sep Qtr 1914, Stoke Upon Trent, and Nellie, Dec Qtr 1915, Wolstanton. 

 

Just from that, I would say a Derby Scheme man. However, being in Staffordshire, would he have trained with the Sherwood Foresters, or would he have more likely been posted to them after his arrival in France? Unless he was deferred (as a railway man), under the Derby Scheme he would have been mobilized in April 1916 and may have had longer training before being posted overseas.

 EDIT: If posted to the Sherwood Foresters overseas, his number, based on kenf48's research, may suggest a posting overseas of late October 1917.

 

 

     October 1917-and further-would fit with the further  numbers from his own found on SWB records.

[MaxD]

1 Sherwood Foresters received just over 300 reinforcements in the Jan/Feb 1918 time frame (DAQMG diary) which indeed fits with all that you splendid folk have provided to date. (Ken - great idea jumping forward to the 1939!)

 

I am waiting confirmation of his marriage to Eliza Leeson and of his trade.

 

Meanwhile thank you all for your trouble and inputs.

 

Max 

[MaxD]

Sitrep.  His was the marriage to Eliza Leeson in 1913.  He was a canal worker up until late 1915 when he left the canals and worked in a coal mine.  Could this have been an occupation that led to deferment?

 

Max

[kenf48]

7 minutes ago, MaxD said:

Sitrep.  His was the marriage to Eliza Leeson in 1913.  He was a canal worker up until late 1915 when he left the canals and worked in a coal mine.  Could this have been an occupation that led to deferment?

 

Max

 

Underground workers at the coal mine were exempt from military service under the terms of the original Military Service Act.  However, the rules were subject to change as the war progressed, in August 1917 certain classes of underground workers were deleted from the exempt classes and their names put forward to the military if they were of an age which came within the provisions of the Act and the subsequent amending legislation.  At the same time men unfit for military service were being released from the Army to resume their peacetime occupation in the mines.

 

Again this fits with mobilisation (NOT overseas) at the end of October 1917.  The recruitment of miners and their exemption was separate from the Local Tribunal and certificates issued by the Colliery Tribunal.  The Trade Unions were involved and, as was predictable (and probably just, there was a suspicion that men went down the mines to avoid military service) they tended to follow the 'last in first out' principle as the status of workers in the industry changed.  The names would be put forward from the Colliery Tribunal to the Local Tribunal who seldom offered an exemption to the applicant.

 

As to why he was posted to the Sherwood Foresters, many of the men who were mobilised around the same time previously cited and, and others were from Staffordshire, e.g. Pte Underwood.  These men would report to the local Depot and from there were posted to a Training Battalion at that time it was the 7th Sherwoods who were receiving recruits, note Underwood's mobilisation date and his first posting.

 

I would still go with the Derby Scheme as he would be an outlier among the the records I found if he had not previously attested under the scheme.  It's worth noting married men who attested were told they would not be called until all the single men had gone to war, an impossible promise soon abandoned. 

 

Ken

 

 

[MaxD]

Ken

 

That comprehensive explanation is very much appreciated and I know will also be appreciated by the chap who up till a few days ago had no real knowledge of his antecedent's Great War service.  Thank you very much indeed and thanks too to everyone who contributed their expertise to this.  The great joy of GWF is that topic answers and discussion lead not just to solutions to a specific individual's query but also, certainly in my case, add greatly to the general knowledge store of those asking the question!

 

Max

[BRONNO]

Just had a look at the Sherwood Foresters Medal Roll that I hold and noticed that two consecutive numbers along there is a 96557 Pte Leonard Cornwall serving with the regiment, are they related? From the Norfolk area.

96555 Pte Arthur Cornwall 1st Battalion, joined Battalion on 6.3.18 and served with "B" company, missing 26.3.18.

[MaxD]

Probable coincidence of (near) names.  96555 Arthur Charles Cornwall (the subject of this) was from Fenton Staffordshire although his relative has said his name at birth was Cornwell - I shall enquire.

 

Max