Wound stripe/ badge for the wounded.

[Muerrisch]

I may be the only member surprised.

Whist combing AOs 1919 for something entirely different:

AO 116  issued 6th March "extension of eligibility .....occasions wounded  in Former Wars* "

Same criteria, same badge, to those "who have been wounded in any of the campaigns*  prior to 4th August 1914".

Thus the belief that the number of badges worn is the number of occasions wounded in the Great War is unsound in photos after that 1919 date. The Boer War veterans and a fair number in "small wars" could well qualify,

 

* is verbatim, both wars and campaigns mentioned.

[charlie962]

Thank you. Interesting to note for photos. I blame Churchill.

That AO did lead to questions in the House.

 

Hansard 19/3/19.

Colonel ASHLEY

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the wound stripes, which may now be worn for wounds received in campaigns fought before August, 1914, will be allowed to count towards the three wound stripes required for early demobilisation under Army Order 55, of 1919?

 

The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR

(Mr. Churchill)

The answer is in the negative.

 

Colonel ASHLEY

Why is more importance attached to wounds received in this case than to wounds received in previous wars?

 

Mr. CHURCHILL

I think I was responsible for raising the question of allowing officers and men who sustained wounds in previous wars to mount wound stripes in addition to those allowed for this War. The Regulations framed regarding the retention or release of men from the Army were based on the principle of two or more wounds received in this War, and we are not proposing to alter that in the direction the hon. Member desires

[FROGSMILE]

17 hours ago, charlie962 said:

Thank you. Interesting to note for photos. I blame Churchill.

That AO did lead to questions in the House.

 

Hansard 19/3/19.

Colonel ASHLEY

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the wound stripes, which may now be worn for wounds received in campaigns fought before August, 1914, will be allowed to count towards the three wound stripes required for early demobilisation under Army Order 55, of 1919?

 

The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR

(Mr. Churchill)

The answer is in the negative.

 

Colonel ASHLEY

Why is more importance attached to wounds received in this case than to wounds received in previous wars?

 

Mr. CHURCHILL

I think I was responsible for raising the question of allowing officers and men who sustained wounds in previous wars to mount wound stripes in addition to those allowed for this War. The Regulations framed regarding the retention or release of men from the Army were based on the principle of two or more wounds received in this War, and we are not proposing to alter that in the direction the hon. Member desires

A very interesting case of unexpected consequences!  Thank you both for illuminating this obscure but significant change in the regulations for clothing adornments. 

Edited 20 January by FROGSMILE