Harry Pickering Labour Corps - Documentation

[henners1974]

Im trying to find out if anyone can help me understand more about the movements and work the 800th AE Labour Corps.  Harry was my Great Great Grandfathers brother and he died on 8 November 1918 and is buried in Egypt. His CWGC headstone carries the regimental number and crest of the The Kings Own Scottish Borderers so I cannot work out if he died whilst in that regiment or with the Labour Corps. I think it will be the Labour Corps as the war diary for TKOSB on the date he died are located in France. Do you happen to know where and what the Labour Corps were doing in Egypt in November 1918?

[mancpal]

Jenners,

I’m a bit confused. The pension card bears a different service number to that on the headstone and whilst it wasn’t uncommon for soldiers to have multiple numbers I wonder if you have details of 2 different men. 
I don’t have subscriptions to any of the research sites though medal index cards are free to view . The man with the number as per the card you show (549691 Labour Corps number) has a previous number of 7501 with the KOSB. 
Neither number tallies with the headstone and I can’t spot a medal index card for the man on the headstone (though it must be there). The indexing can be difficult to follow, in fact on Ancestry Pickering 7501 is transcribed as KOYLI as opposed to the actual card which states KOSB. 
Doubtless I’m missing something, good look with your research,

Simon

[mancpal]

I’ve just noticed on the pension card the DoB doesn’t match the age stated on the headstone. 549691 Pickering doesn’t appear to have a CWGC commemoration unless I’ve missed that as well !

Simon

[Michelle Young]

That’s his wife’s DOB. 

[mancpal]

I knew I’d miss something. Still can’t find an MIC that matches the headstone.

Simon

[Allan1892]

The service number on the pension card, i.e. 549691 was in the block of numbers 547900 to around 549850 which were issued in Egypt between May and September 1918 (courtesy of 'No Labour, No Battle' by Starling and Lee)

[Allan1892]

From the Birmingham Daily Mail, 2 December 1918 (courtesy of Find My Past)

[henners1974]

15 hours ago, Allan1892 said:

The service number on the pension card, i.e. 549691 was in the block of numbers 547900 to around 549850 which were issued in Egypt between May and September 1918 (courtesy of 'No Labour, No Battle' by Starling and Lee)

Thanks Allan. Thats great work.

[henners1974]

15 hours ago, mancpal said:

I knew I’d miss something. Still can’t find an MIC that matches the headstone.

Simon

Thanks for your help. I definitely have the correct man as I have other documents that tie all this together. Looks as though he had an earlier solider number as well. 7501. I've also located him in a couple of places due to a court martial in 1908 and a record of him in Egypt on the UK Worldwide Army Census. Thanks for your time and efforts.

[henners1974]

[Allan1892]

His pension card shows that he was with the Labour Corps 800th A.E. Company -- A.E. stands for Area Employment -- a search on the internet has failed to find anything on the 800th AE Company.

Looking at 'No Labour, No Battle' I found the following on page 186:

The first sixteen Area Employment Companies, numbered 800 to 815, were formed at the end of September 1917. Four companies were placed in a group. Each group was allocated companies shown below.

Location                       Group       Companies

Alexandria District           1            800, 801, 802, 803

Force in Egypt                  2            804, 805, 806, 807

Palestine                         3            808, 813, 814, 815

Palestine                         4            809, 810, 811, 812

This tells us that the 800th Company were based in the Alexandria District

 

 

[Allan1892]

The 1914/15 Star Medal Rolls shows that Harry was first with the King's Own Scottish Borderers and that he landed in Theatre of War 2b Balkan Theatre - Gallipoli and Aegean Islands on the 9th May 1915. His service number was indeed 7501 of the 1st Battalion, KOSB. Looking at Paul Nixon's web site (Army Service Numbers 1881-1918: Site Index) we find that the 1st / 2nd Battalions were allocating service numbers from the same 'block' --- number 7437 was issued on the 18th January 1901 and number 7802 was issued on the 20th January 1902 -- Harry would have enlisted in this period.

His Medal Rolls entry for the 1914/15 Star and also the Medal Rolls for the BWM and VM are under Labour Corps but as he was with the 1st Battalion KOSB when he entered a Theatre of War, the service number on his medals will be his KOSB number.

Images courtesy of Ancestry

[henners1974]

Thank you again Allan. That makes sense. Looks like on 1908 he managed to get a bit drunk and was held in Cairo, then on the Army 1911 census he pops in a place called Ranikhet, India. Moved back to Egypt (maybe with the Labour Corps) and died in Alexandria, hence his burial location?

[Allan1892]

10 minutes ago, henners1974 said:

Moved back to Egypt (maybe with the Labour Corps)

I would say that he moved to Egypt whilst still with the 1st battalion KOSB -- the LC unit he was in (800th Area Employment Company) was not formed until the end of September 1917.

Timeline for the 1st Battalion (courtesy of the Long, Long Trail):

King’s Own Scottish Borderers
Battalions of the Regular Army
1st Battalion
August 1914 : in Lucknow, India.
Returned to England, landing at Plymouth on 28 December 1914. Moved to Warley in Essex and came under orders of 87th Brigade, 29th Division. Moved to Rugby 19 January 1915.
Sailed from Avonmouth on 18 March 1915 and landed at Cape Helles on Gallipoli 25 April 1915.
8 January 1916 : evacuated from Gallipoli and moved to Alexandra in Egypt.
18 March 1916 : arrived at Marseilles for service in France.

I would suggest that perhaps Harry had been declared as medically unfit for front line duty when the 1st Battalion went to France in March 1916 and he stayed in Egypt, perhaps attached to the LC or another regiment.

[henners1974]

Yes that would make sense. Harry was one of my Great Great Grandfather's brothers. I'm going to go ahead and purchase the book you have referenced in these replies as I my paternal Grandfather suffered a GSW to his lower jaw at the battle of corcelette and was assigned to the LC afterwards. I managed to find his admission into CCS 34, Ambulance Train 8 and all the way to a hospital in Rouen.  Again thanks for your help

[FROGSMILE]

As he was given a specifically Labour Corps number he should in theory have switched his cap badge, but like some others that have been identified over the years he seems to have clung on to his KOSB insignia.  Some aspects behind that situation I can understand, but others less so.  In Egypt the wearing of General Service insignia (coat of arms), officially the badge to be used by Labour Corps, was probably less well organised, or insisted upon.  After all, there had been infantry Labour units since early in the war and it wasn’t until high Summer 1917 that the Labour Corps was formed by bringing together a wide range of Labour units from various arms.

When a new and discrete cap badge for the Labour Corps was introduced in 1918, the war had ended before some of their units ever received it.  What does puzzle me though is what the IWGC (CWGC) policy might have been, as this man and others like him died while specifically serving with the Labour Corps (as identified by regimental number), so why does his headstone not bear their insignia.  Presumably there was a rationale, as some men do have Labour Corps headstones, but what the criterion was seems entirely unclear.

Edited 24 November , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[henners1974]

Thank you very much.  It is a mystery as well to me about his CWGC headstone as that also displays the other regimental service number. Another mystery as to why his headstone displays a new number and not the original 7501. Anyway, this thread has been immensely useful to me soIm grateful. Along the way I have learnt more about the LCs, the numbering and also the way to review when blocks of the regimental service numbers were allocated so picked up a couple of good new websites to use as a reference.

[FROGSMILE]

6 minutes ago, henners1974 said:

Thank you very much.  It is a mystery as well to me about his CWGC headstone as that also displays the other regimental service number. Another mystery as to why his headstone displays a new number and not the original 7501. Anyway, this thread has been immensely useful to me soIm grateful. Along the way I have learnt more about the LCs, the numbering and also the way to review when blocks of the regimental service numbers were allocated so picked up a couple of good new websites to use as a reference.

According to the lowermost medal roll entry posted just above he for a period held the appointment of acting warrant officer I think (A/W.O.d2).  This doesn’t surprise me as he was a sergeant with some considerable experience of serving in overseas theatres dating back to the earlier decade.  One can imagine him being useful to the Labour Corps in that capacity, at least for as long as he remained medically fit.

[RussT]

5 hours ago, henners1974 said:

It is a mystery as well to me about his CWGC headstone as that also displays the other regimental service number. Another mystery as to why his headstone displays a new number and not the original 7501.

A couple of observations/suggestions:

Firstly, it is CWGC practice to commemorate those who fell whilst serving with the LC under their former Infantry Regimental details (if they had served previously in a Regiment). His CWGC records do state that he was later transferred to the LC (with number 549691).

On the basis of the above, the apparent mystery, as you observe, is then why he is not commemorated with his KOSB number of 7501 rather than this seemingly unknown KOSB number of 28497. I think there are two credible/possible reasons for that:

1) It is an error by CWGC. This is possible although I think it is unlikely. There is no other known man with the KOSB number of 28497 - if there were known to have been such a man, then an error would be more likely.

2) He was time-expired (T/E) from his Regular service commitment during the war - probably sometime in 1916 - and was conscripted back into the Army under the Military Service Act (coincidentally) into his old Regiment. Upon being newly called-up he would have been allotted a new number. The KOSB number 28497 comes from a block of KOSB numbers being allotted to conscripts in February 1917.

On the face of it, his prior Regular Service does not seem to tally with such a T/E discharge date given that, as mentioned above, his original enlistment would have been between 1901 & 1902 (for the standard 12 years). However, there are numerous reasons for why a Regular would have ended up serving more than 12 calendar years.

Service Records for men with KOSB numbers close to 7501 enlisted under so-called "Long Service" terms of conditions - i.e. all 12 years with the colours with no reserve obligation. You can explore the 1914 Medal Rolls for the KOSB and you can find plenty of examples of men who were discharged time-expired yet their service number and T/E discharge dates don't, on the face of it, tally with a simple calculation of a 12 year service duration between the estimated or known enlistment date and T/E discharge date written on the Roll.

If you wish, you could contact the CWGC and ask them to explain why they have commemorated Pickering with the KOSB number of 28497 when there does not, on the face of it, appear to be any evidence for such a number from any accessible records. I assume they have some accessible record for doing so, and my money is on some sort of record which supports the reason under option (2) above. If the reason ends up being Option (1), then your enquiry would have provided a prompt to CWGC to correct his commemoration.

If you don't wish to follow it up with CWGC, let me know as I will do it myself out of interest.

If you do follow it up and you receive a reply, perhaps you can post the gist of that reply here.

Regards

Russ

 

 

 

[mancpal]

I raised the anomaly with the service number in the first reply to this thread and  mentioned that the number on the headstone doesn’t appear to have a medal index card related to it. This is why I wondered if 2 Harry Pickerings had been confused though this would be a massive coincidence that they shared the same date of death and both in Egypt. I look forward to learning the reason.

Simon

[FROGSMILE]

6 hours ago, RussT said:

A couple of observations/suggestions:

Firstly, it is CWGC practice to commemorate those who fell whilst serving with the LC under their former Infantry Regimental details (if they had served previously in a Regiment). His CWGC records do state that he was later transferred to the LC (with number 549691).

On the basis of the above, the apparent mystery, as you observe, is then why he is not commemorated with his KOSB number of 7501 rather than this seemingly unknown KOSB number of 28497. I think there are two credible/possible reasons for that:

1) It is an error by CWGC. This is possible although I think it is unlikely. There is no other known man with the KOSB number of 28497 - if there were known to have been such a man, then an error would be more likely.

2) He was time-expired (T/E) from his Regular service commitment during the war - probably sometime in 1916 - and was conscripted back into the Army under the Military Service Act (coincidentally) into his old Regiment. Upon being newly called-up he would have been allotted a new number. The KOSB number 28497 comes from a block of KOSB numbers being allotted to conscripts in February 1917.

On the face of it, his prior Regular Service does not seem to tally with such a T/E discharge date given that, as mentioned above, his original enlistment would have been between 1901 & 1902 (for the standard 12 years). However, there are numerous reasons for why a Regular would have ended up serving more than 12 calendar years.

Service Records for men with KOSB numbers close to 7501 enlisted under so-called "Long Service" terms of conditions - i.e. all 12 years with the colours with no reserve obligation. You can explore the 1914 Medal Rolls for the KOSB and you can find plenty of examples of men who were discharged time-expired yet their service number and T/E discharge dates don't, on the face of it, tally with a simple calculation of a 12 year service duration between the estimated or known enlistment date and T/E discharge date written on the Roll.

If you wish, you could contact the CWGC and ask them to explain why they have commemorated Pickering with the KOSB number of 28497 when there does not, on the face of it, appear to be any evidence for such a number from any accessible records. I assume they have some accessible record for doing so, and my money is on some sort of record which supports the reason under option (2) above. If the reason ends up being Option (1), then your enquiry would have provided a prompt to CWGC to correct his commemoration.

If you don't wish to follow it up with CWGC, let me know as I will do it myself out of interest.

If you do follow it up and you receive a reply, perhaps you can post the gist of that reply here.

Regards

Russ

 

 

 

Hello Russ, thank you for taking the time to provide such a thoughtful and interesting reply.  I agree that your option 2 scenario seems the most likely and you’re quite right that there are a variety of reasons why an individual might not complete an exact 12-years but serve beyond it.  The most common is for discipline in that days served in confinement do not reckon towards service pension and so extra days must be completed to match the original commitment.  Having been time-served, but then compulsorily reenlisted under the MSA and issued a new regimental number seems to me to fit perfectly.

Edited 24 November , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[RussT]

4 minutes ago, mancpal said:

This is why I wondered if 2 Harry Pickerings had been confused

It's clear there is only one man of this name with all these numbers - the only apparent discrepancy is why CWGC has decided to use the number 28497, for which I have provided a credible reason. There would be no reason why a MIC would exist with number 28497 as he was entitled to his War Medals under the number 7501 and his Medal Rolls were administered by the Labour Corps under his number 549691.

Regards

Russ

[Allan1892]

Russ, thank you for your concise reply. Like Frogsmile, I would lean towards option 2 as being the reason for #28497. Hopefully we may see a reason from the CWGC in the future.

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

CWGC has this under Additional Information:

"

• Secondary Unit, Regiment transf. to (549691) 800th Area Employment Coy. Labour Corps
• Country of Service United Kingdom
• Additional Info Husband of F. Pickering, of 124, Wiggin, Ladywood, Birmingham.

Is the number on the gravestone an undocumented consequence of the 1917 renumbering of the TF?

Edited 24 November , 2023 by Dai Bach y Sowldiwr

[RussT]

56 minutes ago, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said:

CWGC has this under Additional Information:

56 minutes ago, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said:

Secondary Unit, Regiment transf. to (549691) 800th Area Employment Coy. Labour Corps

Which is what I stated in my Post:

3 hours ago, RussT said:

His CWGC records do state that he was later transferred to the LC (with number 549691)

 

56 minutes ago, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said:

Is the number on the gravestone an undocumented consequence of the 1917 renumbering of the TF?

No - the TF re-numbering scheme is well-known and well-documented (it's all on the LLT in tremendous detail) - to the TF Infantry (including the KOSB's 4th & 5th TF Battalions) it comprised the allotment of new 6-digit numbers, not 5 digit numbers. He was a pre-war Regular or possibly, although less likely, a pre-war Special Reservist (given the KOSB chose not to prefix the SR separate number series with a "3/").

Regards

Russ