Who is this "Tom"?

[Matlock1418]

Who is this?

obverse = Kings shoulder title

 

reverse = Photo taken by F B Wyles, Birch Studio, 124 Dickenson Rd, Rusholme [Manchester]

Signed: "Tom"and dated 1918-Sept-18

 

Note: the "Tom" signature is very like that on another photo from 1919 in the thread I've put up entitled "260 PoW Coy - La Chapelette" [see below]

Could it be the same man?

 

I have one possible / very speculative candidate based on provenance only [from the collection of a soldier from Rusholme who had a friend by the name of Tom Ward 88157 2nd Pl, 150 Labour Coy]

Was he perhaps also Cheshire Regt 8986 and Labour Corps 381244 [LC number would suggest 65 Coy created from 22nd Bn, Cheshire Regt and approx date of joining Sept-Nov 1917 - from Starling & Lee's No Labour, No Battle] and yet the card is dated 1918 ???

I know in LC there was often a lot of movement.  Did he end up with 260 PoW Company in 1919?

 

But the King's shoulder title has me especially scratching my head. ???

Assistance sought / gratefully received on trying to track his movements between Rusholme, Manchester (1917), and apparently La Chapelette, France (1919).

In hope ...

:-) M

 

Edited 29 November , 2019 by Matlock1418
Add poss. tags and clarification

[jay dubaya]

Certainly looks to have been written by the same hand, can I see the feintly written name ? Bagshaw ?

 

J

[Matlock1418]

24 minutes ago, jay dubaya said:

Certainly looks to have been written by the same hand, can I see the feintly written name ? Bagshaw ?

Yes you can. 

Oops - Discard that ? Bagshaw ? - that seems to be an erroneous later artefact collected along the way. :-/

Edited 28 November , 2019 by Matlock1418
clarification

[Pat Atkins]

For what it's worth, I think the repetition of the idiosyncratic "yours sincere chum" clinches it, surely the same Tom. 

[Keith Brannen]

I agree it is the same handwriting. Other than a change in writing the "r" it is extremely similar, including the placement of Tom and underlining stroke.

Superimposing one over the other definitely confirms it in my mind.

 

[Matlock1418]

On 28/11/2019 at 20:20, jay dubaya said:

Certainly looks to have been written by the same hand

 

On 28/11/2019 at 20:25, Pat Atkins said:

For what it's worth, I think the repetition of the idiosyncratic "yours sincere chum" clinches it, surely the same Tom. 

 

14 hours ago, Keith Brannen said:

I agree it is the same handwriting. Other than a change in writing the "r" it is extremely similar, including the placement of Tom and underlining stroke.

Superimposing one over the other definitely confirms it in my mind.

 

Thank you all for your observations, which match mine

 

On 28/11/2019 at 20:07, Matlock1418 said:

Assistance sought / gratefully received on trying to track his movements between Rusholme, Manchester (1917), and apparently La Chapelette, France (1919).

So what was his journey from the "Kings" [King's Liverpool Regiment], possibly via the Cheshires, to Labour Corps and it might seem to La Chapelette, France (1919) ???

 

 

[Matlock1418]

Hi Pals,

My thread took a bit of a tour to Badges and back here again [where it belongs - so happy days again].

We now think it's the same "Tom" [but an unknown surname]

Could it have been Tom Ward 88157 2nd Pl, 150 Labour Coy]?

Or Tom Ward Cheshire Regt 8986 and Labour Corps 381244?

Or ???

And how come the man in the photo / what was his journey from the "Kings" [King's Liverpool Regiment] (1918), possibly via the Cheshires (sometime), to Labour Corps and it might seem to La Chapelette, France (1919) ???

Hoping you can help me please.

M

[jay dubaya]

There may be a connection here, the dates on the two images make this very plausible, and the fact that one is an infantry soldier the other a POW camp with provenance of the unit. 
An extract from Now Labour No Battle’ reads thus - 

‘Three days after the Armistice the size of the PoW companies was increased... Despite the repatriation PoWs the Labour Corps did not have sufficient escorts and in February 1919 it was announced that infantry soldiers could be used as escorts. These escorts were not transferred to the Labour Corps but were retained in their Infantry Regiments.’

I will add that the book also gives the service numbers issued to men who were transferred from the 27 Infantry Labour Companies of the King’s into the new LC companies during May 1917 - these were renumbered 66th - 92nd.

I would perhaps pursue the former avenue first and look at the handful of Thomas Wards who appear in the MICs with the King’s 

Do the original owner of the images and ‘Tom’ share any similar wartime route?

 

J

[Matlock1418]

14 hours ago, jay dubaya said:

Do the original owner of the images and ‘Tom’ share any similar wartime route?

Not so far as I know - and extremely unlikely.

The chum [original owner] to whom the photos were apparently addressed / received was a soldier, also from Rusholme, who had Tom Ward 88157 2nd Pl, 150 Labour Coy as a friend and wartime correspondent. 

The service of the recipient friend/chum/original owner is very well known and definitely does not have any King's, Cheshire or Labour Corps time.

 

Edit: I just have noted another number and unit address for the recipient's friend Tom Ward 381244, 3rd PL, 166th Lab Coy in the same diary

Both addresses have Labour/Lab Coy

Might there be a small error in this? 

Should it be Labour Company, Labour Corps?

If Labour Corps

88157 gives a date of joining April/May 1917

381244 gives a date of joining Sept to Nov 1917

Two LC numbers do confuse me - but ... the 88157 address is crossed out in favour of a later 381244

And now there seems a potential problem with a 1918 photo from the King's

???

 

BIG moment has just come to me [doh!] - the later number 381244 LC matches the 8986 Cheshire given earlier - still got me scratching though - how come a King's photo?

Edited 3 December , 2019 by Matlock1418
Addition of a second set of military details for Tom Ward