Returned medals notation on medal rolls interpretation

[dravin]

Hi all

 

I am trying to correctly interpret the annotation on the medal rolls

 

My reading of it is :-

 

Ret'd CRV/466B a/d 21.12.23 KRs 1743 1912 8153/ADT

 

Same details same dates

 

(KRs 1743 1912 I know is Kings Regulations 1912, pertaining to disposal of unclaimed medals after ten years)

 

The same annotation is on a few of these medal rolls , one or two say reissued

 

Can anyone enlighten or correct my reading of it 

 

It is for the Royal Irish Regiment which may or may not be relevant

Edited 29 August , 2019 by dravin

[rflory]

Not an expert on this but I would say that the medals in question were issued to all five individuals on the list, but the first, second and last listed medals were returned probably due to being unable to deliver (although could be other reason). The first listed medal(s) was/were reissued in March 1930. It appears that the medal(s) in the second and fifth rows were never reissued.  The CRV notation is the date the medals were returned.  I stand to be corrected

 

[rksimpson]

Yes you are right CRV = Certified Receipt Voucher. So only the first one was sent out again, the other two would have been scrapped.

 

regards

 

Robert

[HarryBrook]

This topic and posts in reply from 2010 also answers the same query in some detail.

 

[Alan24]

9 hours ago, dravin said:

It is for the Royal Irish Regiment which may or may not be relevant

Is this connected the the Paul Merton episode of WDYTYA shown on Wednesday?

His GF was in the RIR and his medals were returned. They put this down to the fact that he joined the IRA after the war.

Tried to find his MIC but there are about 12 men called James Power in the RIR, so difficult to get the right one.

 

Alan. 

[dravin]

3 hours ago, rflory said:

Not an expert on this but I would say that the medals in question were issued to all five individuals on the list, but the first, second and last listed medals were returned probably due to being unable to deliver (although could be other reason). The first listed medal(s) was/were reissued in March 1930. It appears that the medal(s) in the second and fifth rows were never reissued.  The CRV notation is the date the medals were returned.  I stand to be corrected

 

 

(try again, first reply disappeared into the ether)

 

Thanks for yours

 

More or less as I understood it, bar the date which surely must be the date the clerk processed the returns, it would be a large coincidence if all men returned them on the same day

 

 

2 hours ago, rksimpson said:

Yes you are right CRV = Certified Receipt Voucher. So only the first one was sent out again, the other two would have been scrapped.

 

regards

 

Robert

 

Thank you for reminding me what the CRV stood for, I could not recall the exact wording

[dravin]

1 hour ago, HarryBrook said:

This topic and posts in reply from 2010 also answers the same query in some detail.

 

 

Thanks for that, although it discusses a similar subject it doesn't go into enough detail

[dravin]

1 hour ago, Alan24 said:

Is this connected the the Paul Merton episode of WDYTYA shown on Wednesday?

His GF was in the RIR and his medals were returned. They put this down to the fact that he joined the IRA after the war.

Tried to find his MIC but there are about 12 men called James Power in the RIR, so difficult to get the right one.

 

Alan. 

 

Well spotted Alan it was prompted by the narrative in the program

 

The return of medals was used as a sign of his loyalty to the IRA, which prompted me to think how do they know he returned them, rather than they were returned undeliverable

 

Over the years I have come across KR 1743 many times, the usual explanation being medals returned as they were unable to be delivered (as in man or his widow had moved since the address was given on the mans records)

 

So I was a little sceptical when they stated *he* had returned the medals to show his loyalty to the IRA rather than the government

 

I have seen many such notations on mens index cards and or medal rolls, they cannot all be due to being returned by the men, hence my question, to see if there was anything anywhere to note the reason or cause for return etc

 

The CRV date must surely be the day the clerk processed the returns rather than the day of return, they cannot all have been returned on the same day

 

The man in question was James POWER Royal Irish Regiment  8783

 

A further item mentioned in the program, it seemed to be implied that ADT on the medal card stood for Adjutant, I have always believed it to be for adjustment 

 

 

 

[Ken Lees]

54 minutes ago, dravin said:

A further item mentioned in the program, it seemed to be implied that ADT on the medal card stood for Adjutant, I have always believed it to be for adjustment 

 

 

 

 

You are correct.

 

It did annoy me that they made up the story of the return of the medals without any evidence and didn't seek any clarification or explanation of the notation on the medal roll.

[dravin]

7 minutes ago, Ken Lees said:

 

You are correct.

 

It did annoy me that they made up the story of the return of the medals without any evidence and didn't seek any clarification or explanation of the notation on the medal roll.

 

Thank you

 

The program does do this on a regular basis, making assumptions on the flimsiest of evidence

 

I suppose they have to build a story line but do wish they would base it on fact not assumption and guesswork

 

I was surprised the military researcher in the program passed by the comment without questioning it

 

At the end of the day they may have come to the right conclusion but I would like to see some evidence of it

[corisande]

8 minutes ago, dravin said:

I was surprised the military researcher in the program passed by the comment without questioning it

 

I have done a lot of work with them in the past on Irish questions in the program, but have refused to do any more since the Mrs Brown Boys  actor's grandfather's story was so contrived.

 

They spoke at length to 2 other researchers as well who told them exactly the same as I did, but they put out the story they wanted regardless

 

12 minutes ago, dravin said:

I suppose they have to build a story line but do wish they would base it on fact not assumption and guesswork

 

I am there all the way with you . But one can say the same is true on historical dramas which can be a mix of fact and fiction. The problem with WDYTYA is that people think it is fact

 

Having said all that I will wander of and see if I can get anything more on Merton's grandfather !

[Open Bolt]

Corisande, could you remind us of the story behind the actor? This doesn't seem to quite cover it https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/216492-capt-jocelyn-lee-hardy/ and I am looking for 217116...

[TEW]

Not that I'll be able to find him again but I have seen a Card/Roll to a YMCA man who returned his medals. The card or roll did state something along the lines of medals returned by ********, not required.

 

TEW

[corisande]

25 minutes ago, Open Bolt said:

Corisande, could you remind us of the story behind the actor

 

That thread you link to covers most of it .My post #6 covered among other things what I had given the TV company. The info below was never brought out

 

These things are never straightforward in Ireland. Spin was used by both sides. And murder was used by both sides - using a definition of shooting an unarmed man in cold blood.

In the case of Mr O'Carroll's grandfather, it would be wrong to present him only as a 66 year old shopkeeper minding his own business and refusing to give his sons up to the British.

If you read his son Liam's WS 314 and WS 594

Liam O'Carroll says My father and his father were members of the Irish Republican Brotherhood. Through my father, I became associated with the Nationalist Movement. ... We had a fair number of Lee Enfields. We were buying them at that time from British Army men. As a matter of fact, my father bought quite a quantity. He had a shop in Manor Street. These fellows, when they wanted a few drinks, would take anything out of the Barracks. The usual thing was that they would bring a parcel around; and he would give them five shillings in any case; it might be a pair of old boots; it might be two .45's. On one occasion, there was delivered to him a lorry load of petrol in two-gallon tins.

Being a bit cynical of journalists, I will be interested to see if they bring that out in the programme."

 

We have an opportunity today to present Irish history in a fair and balanced way , I just wish TV companies would try , rather than going for the story. They go for the story and as they say in Ireland "never let the truth get in the way of a good story"

[Open Bolt]

Thank you very much - good information.

(It still bothers me I cannot find topic 217116 though, even if it is covered in the found topic!)

[collectorsguide]

The card entry reads: RECEIVED ON CERTIFIED RECEIPT VOUCHER NO 466B DATED 21.12 1923  FOR AMENDMENT (ADT)….(normally for naming correction)

KR (1912) PARA 1743 relates to medals unclaimed after 10 years to be sent to Woolwich for scrapping.

8153/adt is the reference code for this enquiry'

The Officer I/C Records for the regiment was charged with finding the recipient  or next of kin and sending them to them.

                best w, Howard

[Retlaw]

On 29/08/2019 at 21:29, dravin said:

Hi all

 

I am trying to correctly interpret the annotation on the medal rolls

 

My reading of it is :-

 

Ret'd CRV/466B a/d 21.12.23 KRs 1743 1912 8153/ADT

 

Same details same dates

 

(KRs 1743 1912 I know is Kings Regulations 1912, pertaining to disposal of unclaimed medals after ten years)

 

The same annotation is on a few of these medal rolls , one or two say reissued

 

Can anyone enlighten or correct my reading of it 

 

It is for the Royal Irish Regiment which may or may not be relevant

All tha gibberish Medals Ret KR 1912  THEY were NOT returned by the recipient or his family, they were retuned to the depot as undelivered, either address unknown or no next of kin, They were held for 10 years and then sent back to the manufacturers, I got that info on good authority from a Lt/Col at Fulwood when I worked there. I was also told that one batch had been found locked in a cupboard in the late 970's

[Trav]

Can anyone shed any more light on this one for me, My Grandfather's... BW and VM Ret'd I understand but for amendment or adjustment too?

 

[Jervis]

10 hours ago, Retlaw said:

All tha gibberish Medals Ret KR 1912  THEY were NOT returned by the recipient or his family, they were retuned to the depot as undelivered, either address unknown or no next of kin, They were held for 10 years and then sent back to the manufacturers, I got that info on good authority from a Lt/Col at Fulwood when I worked there. I was also told that one batch had been found locked in a cupboard in the late 970's

 

Given the huge volume of soldiers involved, we can be certain that a small percentage of men rejected their medals - for whatever reason - personal or political. 

 

So when a solider rejected the medals, what would one expect the medal roll to say? 

 

The rolls are very terse. I imagine the clerks updating the medal rolls lived in a very binary world - the medal was either (a) delivered or (b) not delivered. 

 

The soldiers service records may contain more details as to why the medal was not received. But I would not expect any detail in the medal roll.

 

Jervis

[rksimpson]

12 hours ago, Trav said:

Can anyone shed any more light on this one for me, My Grandfather's... BW and VM Ret'd I understand but for amendment or adjustment too?

 

 

Hi

 

This is what I have for -

"Kings Regulation 1923

990. Medals left behind by a soldier who absents himself without leave, and is declared by a court of enquiry to be illegally absent, will be forwarded to the officer i/c of records. If the man does not rejoin within one year, the medals will be disposed of as unclaimed.

991. An officer in charge of medals will arrange for their safe custody and will account for them as public stores in accordance with such instructions as may be issued from time to time by the Army Council.

992. Medals which, at the end of one year, still remain unclaimed, will be sent to the Secretary, The War Office."

So no amendment or adjustment (I don't agree with that anyway, but who knows what it means, those who do are all dead).

If you have no IV (Issue Voucher) and a date after it, then they were sent back and destroyed.

 

regards

 

Robert

Edited 1 September , 2019 by rksimpson

[Retlaw]

14 hours ago, Jervis said:

 

Given the huge volume of soldiers involved, we can be certain that a small percentage of men rejected their medals - for whatever reason - personal or political. 

 

So when a solider rejected the medals, what would one expect the medal roll to say? 

 

The rolls are very terse. I imagine the clerks updating the medal rolls lived in a very binary world - the medal was either (a) delivered or (b) not delivered. 

 

The soldiers service records may contain more details as to why the medal was not received. But I would not expect any detail in the medal roll.

 

Jervis

I have nigh on 3000 sets of service records,  and not seen any which show medals refused, there are some which have no known kin.

Whilst on the subject of what went on at the end of the war. Death Certificates, C.W.G.. say they can't do any thing for a soldier not on a memorial without one, but I have a papers which states to a fathers request about his  son, A Death Cerificate will Not be supplied. I've done a check against S.D.G.W & death cerificates, there are a hell of a lot missing.

Edited 1 September , 2019 by Retlaw

[Trav]

On 01/09/2019 at 11:05, rksimpson said:

 

Hi

 

This is what I have for -

"Kings Regulation 1923

990. Medals left behind by a soldier who absents himself without leave, and is declared by a court of enquiry to be illegally absent, will be forwarded to the officer i/c of records. If the man does not rejoin within one year, the medals will be disposed of as unclaimed.

991. An officer in charge of medals will arrange for their safe custody and will account for them as public stores in accordance with such instructions as may be issued from time to time by the Army Council.

992. Medals which, at the end of one year, still remain unclaimed, will be sent to the Secretary, The War Office."

So no amendment or adjustment (I don't agree with that anyway, but who knows what it means, those who do are all dead).

If you have no IV (Issue Voucher) and a date after it, then they were sent back and destroyed.

 

regards

 

Robert

 

Thanks Robert,

 

I have looked for KR 1923 but didn't find anything acesssible online.

 

I assume 991 and 992 both refer to the absent soldier as defined in 990, but in my Grandfathers case this doesn't seem to make much sense. My GF was discharged in 1919, discharged from the reserves in 1920 and awarded a disability pension that same year. KR 1923 wouldn't have applied to him whilst serving.

 

If however 992 stands alone, then I suppose it's possible (his medals were returned) somehow, but his British army pension record appears to follow him as he moves South to Ireland in 1922 and there is no mention of any disciplinary procedures, absences etc in his army file, on the contrary "Character: Very good". Maybe it was around this time his addresses were confused?

 

 

[rksimpson]

Hi

 

I think they are 3 different entries, so 992 stands alone. Certainly him moving around, they may not have caught up with the paperwork in time when the medals were sent out. Maybe also he refused to accept them, I understand a lot did not, probably including my Grandfather.

 

regards

 

Robert