KR 484 1920's

[stiletto_33853]

Does anyone have Kings Regulation 484 regarding discharges in the 1920's. It involves regular numbered Rifle Brigade men staying on after the war, so is WW1 related.

 

Andy

Edited 20 April , 2020 by stiletto_33853

[MBrockway]

After our chat, the equivalent to our much loved KR Para 392 in the 1935 King's Regulations is Para 383.

 

I've built a handy PDF of this 1935 table of Reasons for Discharge, which will help with any extremely old Old Sweat who made it past 1935 before discharge  - see attachment.

 

KR 1935 also contains a table cross referencing the 1935 Para numbers to their equivalents in the 1928 KRs.  It maps 1935's Para 383 back to Para 370 in the 1928 Regs and that ties up with the example discharge documents you sent me for men who left the RB in the late 1920s or early 1930s.

 

No luck so far with finding an actual copy of that 1928 Para 370, so no idea how much the discharge reasons had been altered.

 

I've also been unable to complete the chain all the way back to our old familiar Para 392.  Para 392 was still the label for the Reasons for Discharge table as late as July 1921 as it figures as such in the 1916-1921 KR Amendments volume in the BL.

 

If anyone has a copy of the 1928 KRs Andy & I would love a copy!

 

Also if anyone knows publication dates of the full editions of the King's Regulations from, say, 1912 to 1935, it would be very handy to clear that up.

 

Mark

 

 

KR 1935 Para 383 - Reasons for Discharge.pdf

[stiletto_33853]

Mark,

Many thanks for this, there are certainly a lot of different KR's popping up unknown to me from the late 20's mid 30's. I will send you a copy of everything when completed as I am quite sure the KRR's story will be the same.

 

Andy

[MBrockway]

Still looking into the different flavours of the Reasons for Discharge table through the various editions of the King’s Regulations.  

 

Here's what I have so far.

 

We’re all very familiar with the table as KR Para 392 during the War.

KR Amendments in July 1921 still refer to Para 392 and I have found a Discharge 31 Mar 1922 under Para 392.

In 1923, it seems to have become Para 363.

In 1928 – “       “      “      “  – Para 370

In 1935 – “       “      “      “  – Para 383

However, you and I have found discharges referencing Para 484 from Dec 1923, 1924, 1925 and 1926, where one might have expected Para 363.

 

Will report back as I make headway.

Mark

 

 

[MaDo]

My great-uncle Cecil Williams, No. 1009148, RH RFA, had on his Discharge Certificate "Discharged in consequence of termination of first period of engagement para 484 VII KR 23". His date of discharge was 28 April 1925. Can anyone provide any information on this KR?

Many thanks.

[FROGSMILE]

On 03/03/2023 at 22:47, MaDo said:

My great-uncle Cecil Williams, No. 1009148, RH RFA, had on his Discharge Certificate "Discharged in consequence of termination of first period of engagement para 484 VII KR 23". His date of discharge was 28 April 1925. Can anyone provide any information on this KR?

Many thanks.

A regular army engagement of that time comprised two parts.  The first in full time service, wearing uniform and subject to military discipline 24/7.  The second was at home on the regular army reserve, in civilian clothes and free to take up civil employment but with an obligation to be returned to the colours (mobilised) by an act of parliament in the event of any perceived threat that required such an action.  The period of each stage varied depending on the Army’s and nation’s needs, but at that time was usually 7-years active duty followed by 5-years on the reserve.  The “discharge” that you referred to will relate to his completion of that first period.

Edited 5 March , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[MaDo]

Many thanks for the information FROGSMILE, Much appreciated.