Change of Regiment, Military Tribunals, Military Medal

[Allan1892]

Hello Judith,

Thank you for posting the link to your blog. I really enjoyed reading it and I look forward to your next instalment.

[Judith Batchelor]

1 hour ago, Allan1892 said:

Hello Judith,

Thank you for posting the link to your blog. I really enjoyed reading it and I look forward to your next instalment.

Thanks so much Allan! I found I had so much to write about that I thought it best to create another instalment.

[Judith Batchelor]

18 hours ago, FROGSMILE said:

Yes the food security was immensely important, but I can understand why the government followed the policies that it did, and the women and Labour Corps agricultural companies (men of low medical grade) did a good job according to accounts.  Healthy men were needed to fight, and it’s worth remembering that less than a quarter of UK men of the official “military age” served in uniform during WW1, much less than in France and Germany.  There was always a friction between the need for soldiers while ensuring key industries continued to run.

By the time that Bertie completed his training there would be no other obvious reason why he joined the Manchester Regiment other than that they were in the most need at the time.  By that stage of the war men officially enlisted for “General Service”, as was laid down in the “Military Service Act” of 1916 (with subsequent amendments) and that was specifically so that men could be sent wherever they were needed, “in the Interests of the Service”.  It was commonplace for drafts (groups) of men to arrive at their regimentally affiliated Infantry Base Depot (IBD) in France (near to the channel ports) where they would ordinarily expect to spend a few weeks to acclimatise, only to subsequently be sent to an entirely different regiment because of unexpected and critical manpower losses.  The system had to be ruthlessly pragmatic and send men when and where they were needed.

Thanks for your insights, I am finding this so interesting. I imagine it was a disappointment for some to be sent to a different regiment if they knew friends already serving with their local regiment. However, the needs of the military obviously came first. 

[FROGSMILE]

On 15/11/2022 at 12:24, Judith Batchelor said:

Thanks for your insights, I am finding this so interesting. I imagine it was a disappointment for some to be sent to a different regiment if they knew friends already serving with their local regiment. However, the needs of the military obviously came first. 

Yes and it reflected a kind of cyclic system that became most pronounced in the last two years of the war.  There was always a shortage of infantrymen during that period and various measures were put in place to ameliorate that.  Healthy men were compulsorily transferred over from other corps and arms like the ASC, AOC, and often replaced by former infantry who’d not recovered sufficiently but who could work in logistics.  Such men also went to the Labour Corps.  Also men were poached periodically from training depots who had been intended for other arms.  Additionally medical standards were re-examined and made a little less stringent so as to drag more men in (a bit like freezing tax rates!).  Another measure was to upgrade battalions that had previously been rated as for garrison duties only.  They did that by transferring the least fit men to logistics and other duties, upgrading the moderately fit men including a few who were older but acceptable, and then drafting in some replacements from the various training depots and reserve battalions at home.  It was a seething mass of men, in a sense, with constant movement (‘churn’) on a ‘needs must’ basis and a lot of recovered wounded might have served under several different cap badges over the course of the war.

It’s important to keep in mind that “local regiment” wasn’t quite how it sounded.  Larger counties formed more battalions, and of two pre war pals one might end up in e.g. the 2nd Battalion, and one in e.g. the 20th Battalion.  They were in the local regiment, but not necessarily the local battalion.  The only truly local units were those for auxiliary soldiers in the Territorial Force who attended training locally in drill halls (training venues) usually close to their homes. These men went away to war together, but after a few months many would have become casualties and been replaced and, after 1916, the new men could be from anywhere.  Similarly, the Pals battalions of local men joining war raised units together from late 1914, and throughout 1915, were largely decimated, or worse at the First Battle of the Somme, in July 1916, and thereafter replacements increasingly came from wherever they could be found.

Edited 18 November , 2022 by FROGSMILE

[Judith Batchelor]

On 15/11/2022 at 12:35, FROGSMILE said:

Yes and it reflected a kind of cyclic system that became most pronounced in the last two years of the war.  There was always a shortage of infantrymen during that period and various measures were put in place to ameliorate that.  Healthy men were compulsorily transferred over from other corps and arms like the ASC, AOC, and often replaced by former infantry who’d not recovered sufficiently but who could work in logistics.  Such men also went to the Labour Corps.  Also men were poached periodically from training depots who had been intended for other arms.  Additionally medical standards were re-examined and made a little less stringent so as to drag more men in (a bit like freezing tax rates!).  Another measure was to upgrade battalions that had previously been rated as for garrison duties only.  They did that by transferring the least fit men to logistics and other duties, upgrading the moderately fit men including a few who were older but acceptable, and then drafting in some replacements from the various training depots and reserve battalions at home.  It was a seething mass of men, in a sense, with constant movement (‘churn’) on a ‘needs must’ basis and a lot of recovered wounded might have served under several different cap badges over the course of the war.

It’s important to keep in mind that “local regiment” wasn’t quite how it sounded.  Larger counties formed more battalions, and of two pre war pals one might end up in e.g. the 2nd Battalion, and one in e.g. the 20th Battalion.  They were in the local regiment, but not necessarily the local battalion.  The only truly local units were those for auxiliary soldiers in the Territorial Force who attended training locally in drill halls (training venues) usually close to their homes. These men went away to war together, but after a few months many would have become casualties and been replaced and, after 1916, the new men could be from anywhere.  Similarly, the Pals battalions of local men joining war raised units together from late 1914, and throughout 1915, were largely decimated, or worse at the Battle of the Somme, in July 1916, and thereafter replacements increasingly came from wherever they could be found.

Love the humour though the last one is sharp and sad. 

[FROGSMILE]

2 hours ago, Judith Batchelor said:

Love the humour though the last one is sharp and sad. 

Yes, I thought the humour in those particular cards quite enlightening/illustrative and agree with you regarding the last one.  It carries a sort of subliminal message cloaked in the humour of an old rhyme I think.

Interestingly the artists name was Sharp, an Able Seaman (Lance Corporal equivalent) in the Howe Battalion of the Royal Naval Division (a formation that although fighting as part of the Armies in France, was predominantly, but not exclusively made up from surplus reservists of the Royal Navy).

Edited 18 November , 2022 by FROGSMILE

[Judith Batchelor]

Here is a link to the next instalment of my article about Bertie. In Part II, I look at how Bertie met his death and the confusion over when he had died. I have concluded that if your ancestor has no known grave, it is worthwhile searching the archives of the International Committee of the Red Cross. You may just find some information on them.

Many thanks again for all the help I received from members of the forum.

http://genealogyjude.com/2023/02/04/bertie-tracing-a-first-world-war-soldier-part-ii/

[FROGSMILE]

4 hours ago, Judith Batchelor said:

Here is a link to the next instalment of my article about Bertie. In Part II, I look at how Bertie met his death and the confusion over when he had died. I have concluded that if your ancestor has no known grave, it is worthwhile searching the archives of the International Committee of the Red Cross. You may just find some information on them.

Many thanks again for all the help I received from members of the forum.

http://genealogyjude.com/2023/02/04/bertie-tracing-a-first-world-war-soldier-part-ii/

Thank you for posting the link to your interesting article Judith.

[Allan1892]

As Frogsmile has said, thank you for letting us read your interesting article