Silver discharge badge found

[RussT]

I think there is a difference here that perhaps I've failed to explain - I'll have another go.

You might still be correct but you seem to assert correctness without specific evidence - I've decided to remain dubious until such evidence is forthcoming - some ideas at the end.

Millions of men became sick and/or wounded during their service. They received excellent medical attention and a high proportion returned to service although some were medically downgraded which might have resulted in a transfer to a less arduous unit. These men were eventually demobilised after the end of the war but before they left they were medically examined and given Army Form Z22, which allowed them to make a claim for any form of disability arising from their military service. I think it is fair say that all these men were transferred to the Army Reserve Class Z upon their discharge.

Some men were unfortunately so afflicted by sickness and/or wounds that, even following (possibly extensive) medical attention, they were assessed as being no longer capable of further service. They were thus discharged prematurely - in effect the Army made the decision, via an appropriate medical board, that they were for all intense and purposes permanently unfit and were accordingly discharged under KR Paragraph 392 xvi - which means the man was no longer physically fit for war service - with sub-clause (a), as in the SWB Roll above, additionally meaning that the man was surplus to military requirements (having suffered impairment since entry into the service). Only after being discharged in such a manner did a man become eligible for claiming a Silver War Badge. So it is not surprising that the date on the SWB Roll is after the date a man is so discharged. These men also used Army Form Z22 to set in motion any Pension claim/entitlement. The question now being posed is whether this category of men, being prematurely discharged, were transferred to Class Z. I am saying they were not - but I could be wrong. Others believe they were - predominantly it seems because there is a Z/ prefix to the Pension claim reference. But Z/ prefices were being used extensively for all manner of war-end administrative activities (see image). Does it follow that they also somehow refer to Army Class Z?

If, on the other hand, men discharged prematurely under KR 392 xvi were indeed transferred to the Class Z Army Reserve, then surely there must have been some criteria that further differentiated these men into those who did not transfer to Class Z and those that did. This further differentiation would be made I suppose upon the degree of disability - I can't see a double leg amputee being transferred to Class Z. This would in turn require a further level of assessment, which I assume would be set out in some form of regulations. What I am trying to say is that the differentiation has already been made by virtue of the man being prematurely discharged under KR 392 xvi.

It would be good see some form of documentation e.g. a service record that both records a man being prematurely discharged under KR 392 xvi and being transferred to Army Class Z. Additionally, there seems to be a prediction that a man who was discharged under KR 392 xvi and not having a Z/ prefix on his Pension Claim would imply he was not transferred to Class Z. So it would be useful if an example of that could be found i.e. do such examples exist and, if so, do they show that the man had such severe disability that we could all readily agree he wasn't transferred to Class Z.

Regards

Russ

 

[ss002d6252]

As it was intended, the pension branch would use the Z scheme specifically for those being demobilised in to class z, and where they used z22 to claim a disability. All men by mid November 18 should have been completing a z22 on discharge to declare any illness, if they weren't being dealt with via another type of discharge.

Men discharged other than via class z were given one of the other types of pension reference if they claimed a disability (depending on the time period of the discharge).

Rightly or wrongly the man was put through the class z scheme and his case was looked at through that scheme.

Part of the issue was that there were massive delays both in pension and medical- about 1.9 million men between Nov 18 and Apr 19. To the point where a temporary pension class z branch was created to speed things along.

The whole system was creaking to the point of collapse. There's a big debate in contemporary reports that men were being examined and found to be 50 and 60% disabled, but had been put out through the Z scheme (which really shouldn't have happened under the basis of the class z scheme).

A man who was in hospital was supposed to be assessed for discharge and not under the class z scheme, so in the 'traditional route' but many men with quite high level of illness and injury slipped through to discharge under the z scheme, and claimed that way (a scan through cards for ones with z references can show some of the rates).

Craig

[RussT]

Thanks for the background - what a shambles - but that's the Army for you !

14 minutes ago, ss002d6252 said:

Men discharged other than via class z were given one of the other types of pension reference if they claimed a disability (depending on the time period of the discharge).

I would be interested in seeing examples of a different pension reference where they were discharged under KR/392/xvi.

Browsing through the LC Medal Roll I saw some PIC/Ledgers showing a Z/ Ref and > 50% disability - incredible that these men were put on the Z Reserve if that is what you are confirming. I wonder if the man knew that to be the case?

Walter Bitmead (510914 Labour Corps) is on the same SWB Medal Roll page as Fred Brown and was discharged on 24/03/1919 also under KR 392 xvia. He has a Service Record, which contains his Z/22 dated 19/02/1919 and he was given an Z/ prefix Pension code - Z/Lab/4682. His particulars were assessed on Army Form AF 179A dated 05/08/1919 by the Pensions Medical Board. The header to the Form was apparently to be forwarded to the Ministry of Pensions only in cases of discharge under KR 392 xvi and xvia (or other Reserve Classes - but not for Class Z for some reason).

There is no mention in his record of him being transferred to Class Z. Of course, we don't have every page of his Service Record but it seems he was indeed so transferred - but did he know? As you say, it seems it was a means to an end in using the Z-scheme to administer men through a system creaking at the seams.

Regards

Russ

 

[Matlock1418]

3 hours ago, RussT said:

You might still be correct but you seem to assert correctness without specific evidence

Not quite sure to whom the "you" refers but I wish I had inserted "apparently on his transfer to the Army Z Reserve" in my earlier post!  Because that was how it appeared to me.  Though I did offer the pension card as my source document [even if not full "evidence"] for my belief.

Valid for you to query, always good to help drill down and get better understanding and I think a valuable discussion has followed. 

3 hours ago, ss002d6252 said:

As it was intended, the pension branch would use the Z scheme specifically for those being demobilised in to class z, and where they used z22 to claim a disability. All men by mid November 18 should have been completing a z22 on discharge to declare any illness, if they weren't being dealt with via another type of discharge.

Men discharged other than via class z were given one of the other types of pension reference if they claimed a disability (depending on the time period of the discharge).

Rightly or wrongly the man was put through the class z scheme and his case was looked at through that scheme.

Part of the issue was that there were massive delays both in pension and medical- about 1.9 million men between Nov 18 and Apr 19. To the point where a temporary pension class z branch was created to speed things along.

The whole system was creaking to the point of collapse. There's a big debate in contemporary reports that men were being examined and found to be 50 and 60% disabled, but had been put out through the Z scheme (which really shouldn't have happened under the basis of the class z scheme).

A man who was in hospital was supposed to be assessed for discharge and not under the class z scheme, so in the 'traditional route' but many men with quite high level of illness and injury slipped through to discharge under the z scheme, and claimed that way (a scan through cards for ones with z references can show some of the rates).

Thanks Craig for responding so quickly even though Edinburgh appears to have featured earlier in your day.

For others - I believe the "rates" mentioned in Craig's post (a scan through cards for ones with z references can show some of the rates) are probably intended to refer to the rates of/degrees of disability on transfer or discharge.  Even if not shown on a pension card the financial rate/quantum per week can be back-worked to the degree of disability, according to Pension Class/Rank, as provided in the relevant RW's guide [most typically the 1918 RW, up to early Sept 1919 I think].  I feel pretty sure Craig has previously posted such a guide on the forum.

2 hours ago, RussT said:

I would be interested in seeing examples of a different pension reference where they were discharged under KR/392/xvi.

There are plenty of pension cards with the 'other' sort of Chelsea No. reference with late 1918 and 1919 dates [Edit: I have previously kept for various purposes/not specifically for this task, copies of a small number of these 'other' and 'Z' cards - in a quick and limited study of these cards the 'others' had typically seemed to have had higher quantum awards i.e. higher disabilities whilst the also previously but more frequently but still randomly saved 'Z' cards seemed to have had lower quantum awards i.e. lower disabilities and these 'Z' seemed more commonly being dated 1919.  But I'll admit it certainly was not a scientific or statistically-robust evaluation of my records or overall] - and yet I don't have access to SWB and SR so as to cross-check but I feel reasonably sure those with access and the time could probably valuably follow up.

2 hours ago, RussT said:

Walter Bitmead (510914 Labour Corps) is on the same SWB Medal Roll page as Fred Brown and was discharged on 24/03/1919 also under KR 392 xvia. He has a Service Record, which contains his Z/22 dated 19/02/1919 and he was given an Z/ prefix Pension code - Z/Lab/4682. His particulars were assessed on Army Form AF 179A dated 05/08/1919 by the Pensions Medical Board. The header to the Form was apparently to be forwarded to the Ministry of Pensions only in cases of discharge under KR 392 xvi and xvia (or other Reserve Classes - but not for Class Z for some reason).

There is no mention in his record of him being transferred to Class Z. Of course, we don't have every page of his Service Record but it seems he was indeed so transferred - but did he know?

Thanks Russ for chasing up BITMEAD amongst those other SWB recipients I listed above.

Edit: His 5/6 pw represented 20% disability [probably about appropriate for Flat Feet and Hallux vularis {I had to look the latter up - deviated toes/bunions as recorded on the report it seems}] - possibly a bit generous as a pension was to accommodate loss of employment potential, previously in wall paper packing, so??  And, to me, he wouldn't seem totally unable to be recalled from Z to some sort of duty.

It is probably always questionable if the all soldiers wholly understood the whole Transfer/Discharge process in late 1918 and 1919 [so we can't be 100% sure if BROWN or BITMEAD did] - Probably most soldiers just hoping to get out of uniform just as quickly as they could and they didn't read/enquire particularly deeply.  That said, I find it hard to think that they didn't at least superficially understand they could be clawed back from Z Reserve if needs had required it [thankfully not]. 

The Z.22 form is pretty clear on the point about disability so many were needing or savvy enough to try for a pension claim and a bit more cash if they could get it through - we can see from other pension cards that many others were rejected

As I said, an interesting discussion - questioning and exploring such matters adds to our combined knowledge   And of course our understanding might evolve as we discover/learn more.

Great thread, with a great return of a SWB.  Well done all. 

M

Edited 18 March , 2023 by Matlock1418
expand and typo

[RussT]

Just to add some further observations on this subject ......

I've been going through the Labour Corps SWB Roll looking for further Service Records (SR) for men who were prematurely discharged under KR/392/xvi with a view to finding a SR that states the man was transferred to Class Z. I have yet to find one. On the other hand, in looking at random SRs for men who were not prematurely discharged under KR/392/xvi, I often find a reference to the man being so transferred.

Here is 510914 LC Walter Bitmeads's final page of his Statement of Services Form, B103 - the stamp just shows he was demobilised on 24/03/1919, which correctly tallies with the date he was prematurely discharged as per his SWB Roll.

On the other hand here is a similar page from a random SR - for 506788 LC Pheasant who was "normallly" discharged on 17/02/1919 . The stamp on his B103, which is very commonly seen in SRs, states that he was transferred to Class Z. Whilst the man might not of known about his transfer to Class Z, his SR is clear as to his legal obligation in future if needs be.

So far in every SR I find for a man who was prematurely discharged under KR/392/xvi, I have yet to see such a stamp or any other evidence that they were transferred to Class Z. On the other hand SRs for men who were not prematurely discharged under KR/392/xvi are littered with these stamps showing just that.

When you look at a SR, especially from the so-called unburnt series, WO364, which were records stored at the Ministry of Pensions, the front cover often looks like this for post war discharges (from the SR of 541990 Harry Walker, prematurely discharged under KR/392/xvia on 28/03/1919 and awarded an SWB and Pension Claim Ref. Z/Lab/55125):

A couple of observations on this cover sheet:

(i) Towards the bottom of the Form there is a huge Z in a box which the text above tells us refers to the fact that there is an AF Z22 Form among the documents. Could it be that this is the actual reason which precipitated a man acquiring a Z/ prefix pension claim?

(ii) The option "Transfer to the Reserve" is struck out. Given the Form was printed in January 1919, does this refer to Class Z - or at least include that type of Reserve?

If anybody has a counter example I would be interested - it would save me the trouble of scouring through more and more SRs just for the interest !

Regards

Russ

[ss002d6252]

41 minutes ago, RussT said:

i) Towards the bottom of the Form there is a huge Z in a box which the text above tells us refers to the fact that there is an AF Z22 Form among the documents. Could it be that this is the actual reason which precipitated a man acquiring a Z/ prefix pension claim?

The Z was to donate those men, as indicated on the sheet who completed a Z22. The z22 was mandated for any man discharged under the Z scheme.

The Z pension reference was for any man who claimed a pension on this basis of the Z22 form. So, all Z pension men should be a Class Z discharge via a Z22 form, whereas men who didn't claim a disability on a Z22 shouldn't have a Z reference.

It should be noted that in respect of the actual pension paid the Z reference was only a procedural issue, with no difference to the ultimate pension.

By Jan 19 the only discharge 'to the reserve' that I'm aware of (other than perhaps regulars to class B ) was the class z reserve.  I think all other reserve classes (W, P,T) etc had been ceased.

Craig

[Matlock1418]

20 hours ago, ss002d6252 said:

Part of the issue was that there were massive delays both in pension and medical- about 1.9 million men between Nov 18 and Apr 19. To the point where a temporary pension class z branch was created to speed things along.

The whole system was creaking to the point of collapse. There's a big debate in contemporary reports that men were being examined and found to be 50 and 60% disabled, but had been put out through the Z scheme (which really shouldn't have happened under the basis of the class z scheme).

A man who was in hospital was supposed to be assessed for discharge and not under the class z scheme, so in the 'traditional route' but many men with quite high level of illness and injury slipped through to discharge under the z scheme, and claimed that way (a scan through cards for ones with z references can show some of the rates).

20 hours ago, RussT said:

Thanks for the background - what a shambles - but that's the Army for you !

I don't have Craig's or Russ' depth of knowledge or access to many types of documents but to me it seems that, though it certainly seemed a challenging situation at the time, I am not sure it was a shambles.  And I wouldn't want to 'blame' the Army outright.

After all, only an Armistice had been initially signed and whilst awaiting formal signing of the Peace Treaty there was always a possibility, however likely or remote, that hostilities might resume.  The Army needed to have a Reserve and the Z Reserve seems to me to have been a useful way to ensure that trained men could legally be quickly and easily be recalled, even if only for a medical which then decided if they were fit/not fit enough for some sort of useful military duty. 

Not withstanding some of the high degrees of disability we can find, and obviously some were very high and perhaps not appropriate for any potential recall, some of these disabilities though severe at the time may have been ones which would improve/resolve in a relatively short time.  As a hypothetical example, which I speculatively offer for consideration, a broken leg or something like that in hospital at discharge time would pretty much be a 100% disability in the short term but usually be likely resolved relatively soon thereafter - and a man thus kept on the Z could be better later recalled for another medical and likely returned to some sort of useful duty.

=  To me, Z largely seemed to have been pragmatic and expedient holding solution, even if it wasn't perfect, to a possible future urgent need by the Army.  Pensions to be decided seperately by the MoP.

M

Edited 19 March , 2023 by Matlock1418
typo

[Matlock1418]

9 hours ago, RussT said:

In the interest of discussion and to further illustrate this Harry Hinton WALKER example where there is a Z/Z.22 reference and Cheslea No.

I dont have access to the file illustrated above.

However, the relevant Pension Index Card ...

Image thanks to WFA/Fold3

Chelsea No: Z/Lab/055125 [or thereabouts]

The award of 6/6 pw from 29.3.19 reflects the rate for a Sgt [which we can see he was on both documents] rated for a degree of disablement of 20% - So in the scale of things to be considered at the lower end of the disability scale [so seemingly potentially within the scope of transfer to the Z Reserve].

His claim appears to have become DEAD in or before 1927

Remarkably fortunately, given the rarity of such files, he has a PIN 26 file at TNA = 

Sergeant Harry Hinton WALKER, Labour Corps. Regiment No: 541990 = Nature of Disability: lumbago and sciatica. https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C3400194

I hope of interest.

M

 

 

Edited 19 March , 2023 by Matlock1418
remove unrelated images

[Matlock1418]

On 18/03/2023 at 18:11, RussT said:

I would be interested in seeing examples of a different pension reference where they were discharged under KR/392/xvi.

Here are a couple of quick examples that might help our discussions [??] - I don't full know the cause and/or mechanism for discharge for these men [I don't even know if they have further documents, SR or Pension records, at Ancestry or Find My Past since I don't have access]

Alfred Henry MATTHEWS, 230473 Labour Corps

- the award of 21/- pw represents the 70% disability rate for a Cpl [70% commonly used for a short thigh amputation of leg or a right arm above or through the elbow] - so I  might suspect fully discharged [no SWB indicated on  his MIC]

- claim appears DEAD in or by 1925

- no PIN 26 files TNA

- no further PIC or Pension Ledger pages at WFA/Fold3 so hard to say, but to me he probably was quite likely have qualified for a KR 392 xvi discharge

William KNIGHT, 375290, Manchester Regt.

Images thanks to WFA/Fold3

- the award of 27/6 pw represents the 100% disability rate for a Pte - so again I might usually suspect fully discharged [no SWB indicated on  his MIC]

- No PIN 26 files have been retained at TNA

- there is a Pension Ledger page(s) at WFA/Fold3 - showing Amputation Right Thigh and Left Leg below knee so unsurprisingly rated at the 100% degree of disability - it seems extremely unlikely this chap would have been considered for the Z Reserve - so I would presume a KR 392 xvi discharge

Edit: As a further aside for KNIGHT

Images thanks to WFA/Fold3

Interesting to note that before service KNIGHT was a Brass Moulder's Apprentice and hence the APD [Alternative Pension Disabled] award of a consequentially higher pension rate of 60/10 pw. [100% rate in 1920 being 40/- pw] End edit.

I can't interpret either of the Chelsea No. references but perhaps @ss002d6252 may be able to do so.  Lots of other MoP internal 'admin' references and the like too.

I wonder if informative SR/Pension files can be found to clarify/confirm the mechanism used. ???

M

Edited 20 March , 2023 by Matlock1418
Edit

[ss002d6252]

6 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

Here are a couple of quick examples that might help our discussions [??] - I don't full know the cause and/or mechanism for discharge for these men [I don't even know if they have further documents, SR or Pension records, at Ancestry or Find My Past since I don't have access]

Alfred Henry MATTHEWS, 230473 Labour Corps

- the award of 21/- pw represents the 70% disability rate for a Cpl - so I  might suspect fully discharged [no SWB indicated on  his MIC]

- claim appears DEAD in or by 1925

- no PIN 26 files TNA

- no further PIC or Pension Ledger pages at WFA/Fold3 so hard to say, but to me he probably was quite likely have qualified for a KR 392 xvi discharge

William KNIGHT, 375290, Manchester Regt.

Images thanks to WDA/Fold3

- the award of 27/6 pw represents the 100% disability rate for a Pte - so again I might usually suspect fully discharged [no SWB indicated on  his MIC]

- No PIN 26 files have been retained at TNA

- there is a Pension Ledger page(s) at WFA/Fold3 - showing Amputation Right Thigh and Left Leg below knee so unsurprisingly rated at the 100% degree of disability - it seems extremely unlikely this chap would have been considered for the Z Reserve - so I would presume a KR 392 xvi discharge

 

I can't interpret either of the Chelsea No. references but perhaps @ss002d6252 may be able to do so.  Lots of other MoP internal 'admin' references and the like too.

I wonder if informative SR/Pension files can be found to clarify/confirm the mechanism used. ???

M

Those reference numbers are standard pension numbers issued at that time for men not given a Z number.

Craig

[Matlock1418]

1 minute ago, ss002d6252 said:

Those reference numbers are standard pension numbers issued at that time for men not given a Z number.

So what Russ wanted I guess - now to hope SR are available

M

[RussT]

No SRs available for these men.

I'm doubtful it's really going to the help unless by extreme pure luck in posting random PIC examples given the general lack of Service Records available - the thread could go on forever.

The other way round is far more efficient  - go to the SWB Rolls, look for men discharged under KR/392/xvi and then look for a SR. Given that one knows up front from the SWB Roll immediately, there is then a good chance he claimed a pension and then a half decent chance there might be a SR available in, say, WO/364. One can very rapidly go through an SWB Roll - and as noted I am finding plenty of SRs for men on these SWB Rolls that were so discharged and all of them have either or both of:

1) A lack of evidence of being transferred to Class Z

2) Positive evidence of not being transferred to Class Z

I've learnt that the "Z Scheme" was at least a combination of:

(i) A transfer to Class Z

(ii) The submission of AF Z/22

(iii) A pension claim assessed under a Z/prefix.

As noted, the scheme was set up as a more expedient mechanism given the huge numbers of men that were going to be demobilised as part of their normal terms of engagement as the armistice was approaching and for the year or two afterwards.

For men being prematurely discharged under KR/392/xvi they were self-evidently in need (pension-wise) more than most, so it is arguable that they would require/prefer the most expedient mechanism available. The hypothesis I've put forward, based on the available evidence, is that these men were permitted to use the Z-Scheme to facilitate their claim despite not being transferred to Class Z. I'll be more than happy for the hypothesis to be demolished with evidence. I accept that other pension claim mechanisms were available which resulted in a different pension claim Reference code.

The Army (WO) and the Ministry of Pensions were different beasts - I find it difficult to accept that the Army did not record, in a SR, that a man discharged under KR/392/xvi had transferred to Class Z - this being an extension to his ToE (as evidenced by the millions of SRs for men who were indeed recorded as being so transferred), whereas as I am more than happy to accept that the Ministry of Pensions processed these men's pension claims as a matter of expediency via a Z/22.

I'm not sure we can take this discussion further - unless someone can just post an example of positive evidence that a man so discharged was indeed transferred to Class Z (or some other form of evidence stipulating this explicitly).

I'll keeping looking for such a SR every now and again but I must have looked at 100+ or so SRs over the last few days to no avail, so I think I've done my bit.

Regards

Russ

[Matlock1418]

1 hour ago, RussT said:

No SRs available for these men.

I'm doubtful it's really going to the help unless by extreme pure luck in posting random PIC examples given the general lack of Service Records available - the thread could go on forever.

The other way round is far more efficient  - go to the SWB Rolls, look for men discharged under KR/392/xvi and then look for a SR. Given that one knows up front from the SWB Roll immediately, there is then a good chance he claimed a pension and then a half decent chance there might be a SR available in, say, WO/364. One can very rapidly go through an SWB Roll - and as noted I am finding plenty of SRs for men on these SWB Rolls that were so discharged and all of them have either or both of:

1) A lack of evidence of being transferred to Class Z

2) Positive evidence of not being transferred to Class Z

I've learnt that the "Z Scheme" was at least a combination of:

(i) A transfer to Class Z

(ii) The submission of AF Z/22

(iii) A pension claim assessed under a Z/prefix.

As noted, the scheme was set up as a more expedient mechanism given the huge numbers of men that were going to be demobilised as part of their normal terms of engagement as the armistice was approaching and for the year or two afterwards.

For men being prematurely discharged under KR/392/xvi they were self-evidently in need (pension-wise) more than most, so it is arguable that they would require/prefer the most expedient mechanism available. The hypothesis I've put forward, based on the available evidence, is that these men were permitted to use the Z-Scheme to facilitate their claim despite not being transferred to Class Z. I'll be more than happy for the hypothesis to be demolished with evidence. I accept that other pension claim mechanisms were available which resulted in a different pension claim Reference code.

The Army (WO) and the Ministry of Pensions were different beasts - I find it difficult to accept that the Army did not record, in a SR, that a man discharged under KR/392/xvi had transferred to Class Z - this being an extension to his ToE (as evidenced by the millions of SRs for men who were indeed recorded as being so transferred), whereas as I am more than happy to accept that the Ministry of Pensions processed these men's pension claims as a matter of expediency via a Z/22.

I'm not sure we can take this discussion further - unless someone can just post an example of positive evidence that a man so discharged was indeed transferred to Class Z (or some other form of evidence stipulating this explicitly).

I'll keeping looking for such a SR every now and again but I must have looked at 100+ or so SRs over the last few days to no avail, so I think I've done my bit.

Thanks for looking - I admit it was only a stab in the dark to post those two lads but they helped to show some of the other types of references to you and I felt they were interesting in that they also certainly showed the upper end of the degree of disabilty scale so seemingly less likely to go to the Z Reserve and to be KR 392 xvi cases.

I agree not a good general type of route for greater searches/success.  Sadly I can't see SWB Rolls and SR like you can so it will have to be over to others should they wish to continue.

Your observations have been of great interest to me and I'm certainly now keeping a somewhat more open mind on this and will try to use rather more careful language in the future posts - a useful exercise for me at least - whilst awaiting, hopefully, more evidence of course.

As for doing your bit - you certainly have done a good shift - many thanks. 

M

Edited 19 March , 2023 by Matlock1418

[Matlock1418]

For information also see 

 

which further discusses the topic of Class Z and KR392xvi discharges = Many thanks to @ss002d6252 for his pensions expert insight.

 

M

Edited 21 March , 2023 by Matlock1418

[Dave1340]

Just a update. Zoe the niece got the Darlington papers to do a write up. Here’s the link lads 

https://www.darlingtonandstocktontimes.co.uk/news/23415973.detectorists-reunite-northallerton-family-first-world-war-badge/

[Allan1892]

Thanks for the update Dave

[Interested]

Excellent newspaper article.  Well done to all those involved.

 

[ilkley remembers]

Well done Dave been following your efforts on the Darlo DIAL 1880-1980 FB page.