Jump to content
Great War Forum

Remembered Today:

ss002d6252

CWGC & Mercantile Marine

Recommended Posts

ss002d6252

I'm currently doing some bits and pieces around the Mercantile Marine and I'm wondering if anyone has the full details of the criteria for CWGC recognition of them in WW1 ?
 

Thanks in advance


Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
voltaire60

Craig- would you let us know how you get on regarding Naval Transport Service. I have a local casualty died Basrah 1916-before RNTS- and recorded as such on a local grave. Not CWGC- but, there again, where else was he likely to be buried?  (See threads re RNTS and George Anton Dinn) 

   Similarly, I have a man  lost but I cannot see any connection with war service- commemorated in Lagos-with others and on CWGC.  His ship, Porpoise, had been -I think- requisitoned by Admiralty (or local equivalent) and used in  river campaign in Cameroons.  But the ship disappeared without trace on a routine mail trip  to Calabar-his date of death is  the last date of expected arrival there. But there is not any indication that there was any war service involved at all-nor any hint of loss by enemy action.

 

    The thread  about those lost with HMS Cape of Good Hope-esp. the 16 native stokers recruited en route  south in 1914 should also have your head scratching-   Martime deaths and CWGC just seem to be all over the place if you find  some rationale for it all that makes sense, then you are a better man than I am Gunga Din

BROWN ALBERT E. A E     31/01/1917   Mate Nigerian Marine S.T. "Porpoise." Nigeria  

ST. SAVIOURS 

 

 

Lagos

 

 

Edited by voltaire60
CRAIG WAS TOO QUICK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ss002d6252
2 minutes ago, voltaire60 said:

Craig- would you let us know how you get on regarding Naval Transport Service. I have a local casualty died Basrah 1916-before RNTS- and recorded as such on a local grave. Not CWGC- but, there again, where else was he likely to be buried?  

If I come across anything relevant I'll let you know Mike.

Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
voltaire60
1 minute ago, ss002d6252 said:

If I come across anything relevant I'll let you know Mike.

Craig

 

   Hang on Craig-haven't finished yet!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ss002d6252
Quote

Similarly, I have a man  lost but I cannot see any connection with war service- commemorated in Lagos-with others and on CWGC.  His ship, Porpoise, had been -I think- requisitoned by Admiralty (or local equivalent) and used in  river campaign in Cameroons

Ships on service with the Admiralty (or equiv) weren't regarded as merchant mariners as far as pensions etc were concerned, they were regarded as coming under Admiralty /  War Office control. I suspect that this control has something to do with the CWGC side as well so, if we're lucky, we might both get an answer.


Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DavidOwen

Craig

 

Thinking backwards a search of TNA for Imperial Graves and Mercantile Marine brings back https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C5112972 and https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C9387725

Neither is digitised yet but may have some useful info.

 

I have tried searching Hansard archives but been defeated by the search engine - I either get thousands of hits or single figures (the latter were not useful at all)

 

Regards

 

David

 

Also, might it have to do with deaths in a designated war zone, i.e. the casualty would have been eligible for medals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David Tattersfield

Craig has kindly provided an article on his work with the Mercantile Marine cards which has been published on the WFA's web site here.

 

http://www.westernfrontassociation.com/world-war-i-articles/an-analysis-of-the-mercantile-marine-index-cards/

 

I am very grateful for Craig's continued work with these pension cards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ss002d6252
28 minutes ago, DavidOwen said:

 

Also, might it have to do with deaths in a designated war zone, i.e. the casualty would have been eligible for medals?

 

May well also be a complicating factor - in 1924 one of the Associations dealing with seamen mentioned that 17,000 merchant seamen had been killed whereas CWGC has 13,624.This is roughly 3,500 difference.

So far, from a rough sample of the Merchant Marine Index cards the figure in the roughly 4,300 cards kept in that index comes to a 60/40 split of deaths and injuries - so about 2,600 men.

The deaths, differences, CWGC criteria etc will hopefully help towards determining the reason as to why these particular cards were kept separate and why some were in the 'normal' card index (see link above)

Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
voltaire60

Thanks Craig-  I had not caught up with your article and have not dented Fol3 either-saving them up.

 

      Is it possible that some of the men not known to have been there may have had pension arrangements already?   I am teasing you with 2 local examples-both of them genuine war casualties  but where there is evidence of provision elsewhere- One is Captain Hugh Leopold Philips, lost when a Trinity House yacht went down to a mine while doing buoy work- I suspect that Trinity House pensions would have prevailed over these pensions.  Another is Captain Harry William Elgar- blown to pieces on the bridge when his ship hit a mine- his son had the benefit of education at the Merchant's Seamans Orphanage--which,by chance, was also local in Wanstead (now Bearwood College in Berkshire)

    And I would take a small bet that some of the difference will be for UK nationals who served with the Indian Marine (or like my man Brown above, with the Nigerian Marine)

 

       Just a thought :wub:

(I note that J.Edgar Hoover started out handling large data systems at the Library of Congress-ie walls full of filing cabinets..............I am a little worried for your  well-being,Craig!)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ss002d6252

Mods may need to institute a committee on non GWF activities...

 

The mercantile cards were printed in runs up to 21,000 in total. The highest card number I have seen is 19xxx yet we now have only just under 5k cards. This is very close to the number of claims the board of trade were paying in 1924 so I'm relatively confident this is the index as was in 1924.

 

Obviously the other 14,000 or so other cards are not in the index. Why, is the question. Where they weeded because the pensions were not due or was it because they were under admiralty/war office control and so subject to their scheme...

 

Hopefully the cwgc side can help clarify the background figures to work with.

 

Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...