Jump to content
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

What a life


peter Hearn
 Share

Recommended Posts

researching my family on my Mother's side ,my Great Uncle john Clancy was in a Workhouse  St Woollos Newport Monmouthshire, age 7 with his Mother and younger Brother aged 5 that was 1891, in 1911 john was in Kirkee India with overseas millitary, 82nd Battery Royal Field Artillery, Glad to see he survived the war through Europe, in 1929 he Boarded a ship called the"Maryland" and went to Boston Massachusetts, cant find anything else on him after that, What stories he could tell, a hard life and all brave men in them times, respect to anyone who wears a uniform Past and Present

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure it's the same man on The Maryland? He's a member of the crew and his Union Card states he was a Londoner by birth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

42 minutes ago, peter Hearn said:

will put on what I got, says immigration date, I have not seen any paperwork about the crew or Union

CCF11092021.pdf 460.93 kB · 6 downloads

Looking at the list - and image of the original on Ancestry - List or Manifest of Aliens Employed on the Vessel as Members of Crew  Br Vessel Maryland - Arriving at Boston January 8th 1929 from port of London 22 December 1928

CLANCY, John, 789219 [seaman's ID], 30 [years service at sea], "do" = Trimmer [position], 45 [age], English [race], British [nationality], 5/10 [height], 182 [weight] - it is certainly a crew list - so this JC is a seaman/crew member.

:-) M

Edit: Here's the extract - not sure what the First in first column is [?? possibly first entry to US ??]

1508641670_CLANCYJohn.png.c762559f0d6daaa0b22dad4ad960a08a.png

Image courtesy of Ancestry

Edited by Matlock1418
edit and add image & correction
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi M, I don't know if that is a crew list I have got as it is only that page, so if it is I have got the wrong person, as My John was in the army so could not be one you say who was at sea for so long, so I will edit that post, thanks for helping with info M

Peter 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter - Have just edited my post above to add more detail.

:-) M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, peter Hearn said:

researching my family on my Mother's side ,my Great Uncle john Clancy was in a Workhouse  St Woollos Newport Monmouthshire, age 7 with his Mother and younger Brother aged 5 that was 1891, in 1911 john was in Kirkee India with overseas millitary, 82nd Battery Royal Field Artillery,

Have some questions on this aspect as well. The most likely birth was that of a John CLANCY, registered with the civil authorities in the Newport, Monmouthshire District in the July to September quarter of 1884. The relevant law allowed 42 days after the event for the birth to be registered and then what appears in the published index is the quarter registered - which is not necessarily the same as quarter born. So in theory you are looking at a child born between mid-May 1884 and the 30th September 1884. However even the General Registrars Office website doesn't tell me the mothers' maiden name.

But the John ClancEy who is in the Carleon Workhouse on the 1891 Census of England & Wales, was aged 9, although he is down as born Newport, Monmouthshire. There is also a 7 year old John ClancEy, born Newport who was recorded as a visitor at 4 Potters Parade, St Woollos, along with a widowed woman Margaret ClancEy, (aged 26) and a 5 year old Richard ClancEy. No way of knowing from that the relationship between the three of them. All were born Newport, Monmouthshire.

Working our way through that lot, as well as the birth of the John Clancy already identified:-
No obvious match in the birth records for John Clancey born circa 1881 in Monmouthshire
No obvious match in the birth records for John Clancey born circa 1883 in Monmouthshire
This is a Richard Clancey, (but not Richard Clancy), whose birth was registered in the Newport, Monmouthshire district in the October to December quarter, (Q4), of 1885. Mothers' maiden name is once again not shown on the General Registrars Office website.

On the 1901 Census of England & Wales there is no likely match for either John Clancey \ Clancy's. The 15 year old Richard CLANCEY, born Newport, Monmouthshire, a Farm Labourer, was recorded living in his employers household at Morley Farm. Inskip with Sowerby, Lancashire. No obvious match for Margaret Clancey \ Clancy on Censuses after 1891. One possible explanation is the death of the 29 year old Margaret CLANCY in the Newport, Monmouthshire District in Q4 1894.

What we appear to have next is a Militia attestation in Somerset on the 14th October 1902 of a John CLANCEY, born in the parish of St James, Newport, Monmouthshire and then aged, he says, 19 years and 6 months. He was living then at Burnham, Somerset, working for a Mrs. Thomas of Burnham as a Groom. He enlisted for 6 years in the 3rd Battalion, Somerset Light Infantry.  He had no previous military experience. However on the 20th October 1902 he was released from his enlistment as he had joined the Regular Army - specifically the Royal Field Artillery.

The normal terms of enlistment in the Regular Army was 12 years and 21 years. The 12 year term was normally split between a period in the Colours, (i.e. in uniform, in barracks, subject to military discipline 24/7 and receiving full pay and subsistence) and a period in the Reserves, (back in civvy street, receiving occasional training and on half pay). Most common splits were 3 and 9, 7 and 5 and 9 and 3 in the infantry and I believe 6 and 6 in the Artillery. Once in the colours a man could request to extend his time in the colours and do less in the reserves or even switch to the full 21 years in the colours to qualify for a pension.

I suspect John CLANCEY, the Somerset Militiaman who joined the RFA on the 20th October 1902 and the 28 year old Acting Bombardier John CLANCY recorded at Kirkee, India  with the 82nd Battery, Royal Field Artillery on the 1911 Census of England & Wales, (taken 2nd April 1911) are one and the same man.

Whatever the split was he'd opted for, a 12 year enlistment would mean he was liable for service in August 1914 at the outbreak of the war, while a 21 year commitment would have seen him in the colours anyway. A 12 year man whilst in the colours could have his term extended by another 12 months in wartime, so the earliest John could walk away from the Army would be October 1915.

If he stayed with the 82nd Battery he would have gone with the Expeditionary Force to Mesopotamia in November 1914, and if he was very, very unlucky he would have still been with them when the force became besiged at Kut-el-Almara at the end of 1915 and were finally forced to surrender on April 29th 1916 as a result of the starvation and illness brought about by the siege. It is generally estimated that of the European soldiers who surrendered to the Turks, 75% of the other ranks did not survive captivity. However the records of the International Red Cross do not appear to have him recorded under either surname spelling as a prisoner in any part of the campaign.

Even if he had stayed in India as part of the Garrison he would have qualified for at least one Medal, the British War Medal, and so there should be a Medal Index Card, (MiC). But of the four MiC's for John CLANCY's, three have a middle initial, while the fourth, a Wheeler Corporal. appears to be a Territorial Force man, rather than in the Regular Army. He went to France at the start of October 1915 so all in all unlikely to be the same individual.

But there is only one MiC for a John CLANCEY and he only qualified for the Victory Medal and British War Medal, so did not serve in a Theatre of War until on or after the 1st January 1916.

So all a bit of a mess unless I'm missing something. Random spellings of surname and ages that don't quite tie up. Your relative could have been home service only in the UK, (so no MiC), or was discharged early from his pre-war engagement, (health \ discipline). If he didn't volunteer in 1914/15, (and a health \ discipline issue could have prevented that), then conscription from 1916 could have seen him posted to any unit.

So what is the firm evidence from the family side for your Great Uncle John being the artillery man - do you have papers, family stories \ legends, etc.

Cheers,
(Another) Peter

 

Edited by PRC
Typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi M, I don't know if that is a crew list I have got as it is only that page, so if it is I have got the wrong person, as My John was in the army so could not be one you say who was at sea for so long, so I will edit that post, thanks for helping with info M

Peter 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, peter Hearn said:

I don't know if that is a crew list

It is - your list, though double entries, matches the handwritten [with the exception that on the handwritten Wheatley and Bryan are struck through].  

The list was pre-prepared at London 20 Dec 1928 [it appears Wheatley and Bryan probably did not sail as was intended]

:-) M

Edited by Matlock1418
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Peter, Wow how do find all this so quick it takes me ages, the name Clancy is spelt different on several things I have seen within the same family, and the Birth years sometimes vary by a year or so, I am impressed with what you have posted, I would like to edit my post but dont know how to, I had been told through family members that Margaret Clancy was in a workhouse with 2 sons, on some paperwork they got Monmouthshire England on other it is Wales so boundaries must of changed,                                                                                Thanks for all the info Peter

Cheers Peter Hearn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, peter Hearn said:

I would like to edit my post but dont know how to

Go to the post you want to edit and in the top right of the box there are three dots in a line - as you started the thread they are beside the box that says "Author".

Click on the dots and the options available to you, which should include "Edit", will pop up.

Cheers,
The other Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, peter Hearn said:

Hi Peter

it does not say Author next to post, I can only share or Report, should I delete it if I can ?

Original poster Peter

I have a feeling that you either have to have a certain number of posts or have been a member for a certain number of days before you can edit your own posts. I know I had the same issue when I first joined the forum last year.

Edited by Tawhiri
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, peter Hearn said:

it does not say Author next to post, I can only share or Report,

"Edit" is my number one friend here at GWF, well almost any way.

You should be able to do it so long as you are hitting one of the three dots in one of your own posts.

You should get Report/Share/Edit/Hide

I suggest you log out and then log back in - that might re-boot your access etc. [?]

:-) M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Peter

it does not say Author next to post, I can only share or Report, should I delete it if I can ?

Thank you Tawhiri & M will try

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tawhiri said:

I have a feeling that you either have to have a certain number of posts or have been a member for a certain number of days before you can edit your own posts.

I can't remember that far back [!] but I note the first reply was from ajsmith, someone with 498 posts, and they don't have Author next to their post either

[EDIT: and I don't have next to mine and I can still edit, and neither do PRC or you as other respondents].

And yet OP has Author next to later posts, though not the first ???

I can't explain it - maybe if re-booting by logging out/in again doesn't work then a report might be necessary = ???

But why edit? - we are where we are ???

I feel sure we can work with things.  Or perhaps post a reset resume of where we think we are. ???

OP's choice - PH your choice. ???

:-) M

Edited by Matlock1418
a few edits
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tawhiri said:

I have a feeling that you either have to have a certain number of posts or have been a member for a certain number of days before you can edit your posts. I know I had the same issue when I first joined the forum.

Thanks @Tawhiri and apologies @peter Hearn wasn't aware of that little quirk. Having said which it may just need crossing through the bit about sailing on the Maryland in 1929 rather than deleting it, otherwise the whole thread could become even more confusing. :) Not sure but I believe the delete button on the opening post will get rid of the whole thread.

24 minutes ago, peter Hearn said:

I had been told through family members that Margaret Clancy was in a workhouse with 2 sons, on some paperwork they got Monmouthshire England on other it is Wales so boundaries must of changed, 

A few hard won tips from the gospel of genealogy :)

Be respectful to other peoples transcriptions, written or verbal - then politely ask to see the original "to help create a family resource".
Respect family legends and hear them out - and then check them from bona fide primary sources.
Never ever underestimate the power of co-incidence. At this point the Acting Bombardier at Kirkee in 1911 could be the young man in the Carleon Workhouse in 1891 just as easily as he could be the son of Margaret Clancy. Or different Margaret Clancy's could be the mother of the 9 year old and the 7 year old from the 1891 Census.

If you have something that shows how John and his parents fit into your mothers family tree and feel able to share it, drop it to me on a PM - you have enough posts now to be able to use the private messaging system.

(PC\ Laptop - hover cursor over my user name and a pop out box will give you options including in the bottom left hand corner "message".
Mobile \ Tablet, click on my user name and it will take you to my profile oage. Banner acros the top includes the option to message).

Cheers,
The other Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi All,

Sorry if I got some parts wrong, just following paper trails, thanks for all help off everyone

I will try to Edit and correct it, if I cannot then please bear with me

Thanks

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all the computer froze, when I tried to attach a file with submit reply, it said saving and that was it nothing else happened,, saying error code 200, so went to bed

Peter Hearn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, Family members had known about Margaret Clancey and 2 boys being in a Workhouse, my mother had told me her Father and Brother were in a Workhouse with their Mum and her Uncle had joined the Army, I don't know anything about their Father, no one ever mentioned him,  my Mother died in 96 so cant ask anyone else now as they are all passed, but some cousins have confirmed bits of it to me when asked. As for John the file I have tried to upload is from 1911 Census says he is 27 in Kirkee India Overseas Military , at bottom it says 82nd Battery Royal Field Artillary, will keep trying to upload the file, Thanks all.

Peter Hearn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, peter Hearn said:

As for John the file I have tried to upload is from 1911 Census says he is 27 in Kirkee India Overseas Military , at bottom it says 82nd Battery Royal Field Artillary, will keep trying to upload the file

Peter

The existance of 28 year old artilleryman who goes by the name of John Clancy on the 1911 Census of England & Wales isn't really in dispute.

1558576660_JohnClancy1911CensusEandWcropsourcedGenesReunited.jpg.f1bdb759538a089dd6ba4e44321f800a.jpg

Image courtesy Genes Reunited

Like that crewman aboard the Maryland in 1929, the question is whether he ties back to the son of Margaret Clancy \ Clancey or whether it's just a co-incidence.  The absence of any obvious Great War era records for the artilleryman is a bit of a puzzler. If he was the man who joined from the Somerset Milita then unless he was discharged or died there should have been some Great War service. But there is also a second John Clancy \ John Clancey to take into account, who definately spent part of his younger life in the workhouse and could potentially also be the artilleryman.

Will give it some more thought and see what I can come up with.

Cheers,
Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi all,

Perhaps I was Letting " HOPE " rule me on some of the Research rather than hard facts, sorry if this has caused any problems, but thanks to the helpful people on here I now know that I need to dig a lot deeper than I have been doing, so good lesson learnt,

Thanks everyone

Peter hearn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...