dputto Posted 2 February Share Posted 2 February Hello. I am compiling my family's Royal Navy history and have a few questions I hope someone here has the expertise to answer. Does anyone know what the 'List' and 'No.' refers to in the column after ships/units? I can't make sense of the numbers. Why is the character marked VG and Sat by the same year? Have you seen this before? How do discern his service number? Finally, I can see he served 4 days in cells, but I can't seem to see the reason listed? Am I missing a clue? Thank you so much in advance. I look forward to discussing this with you. Daz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatio2 Posted 2 February Share Posted 2 February (edited) 9 hours ago, dputto said: Does anyone know what the 'List' and 'No.' refers to in the column after ships/units? I can't make sense of the numbers. These just show his number on the ship's pay list. If he is shown as List 5, that shows he is a member of the ship's company. Most other numbers show that he is borne as a supernumerary. 9 hours ago, dputto said: Why is the character marked VG and Sat by the same year? After 1911, when he was rated able seaman (AB), the Character column also records his Efficiency (max assessment Superior (Sup)) 9 hours ago, dputto said: How do discern his service number? His RN Official Number is at the top of his record - 230077. His Port Division (home port) is also shown as Devonport. 9 hours ago, dputto said: Finally, I can see he served 4 days in cells, but I can't seem to see the reason listed? Am I missing a clue? The offence for which he was sentenced to 7 days Cells in HMS FLORA in April 1910 is not recorded. Edited 2 February by horatio2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNCVR Posted 2 February Share Posted 2 February (edited) @dputto Daz -- A few more details that might be of use to you, to add to Horatio's information - Sidney Smith initially ent'd the RN as an underage 18 Boy (normal way of entering), then was rated as a Signalman in 1906 & he remained in that rate until being rerated as an Ordinary Seaman in Jan 1910, & AB in Nov '10. & Leading Seaman in 1915. His non sub rate also changed in 1913 to Acting ST (Seaman Torpedoman) then ST in July 1914 (presumably now trained), & LTO (Leading Torpedo Operator) in Nov '14, meaning he was now involved in the Electrical part of Torpedos, requalified in Apl '15. His Torpedo/Electrical training would have been at HMS Defiance. As Horation has mention he did a 7 day stint in cells during 1910, this would have disqualified him for the award of the RN Long Service medal. Otherwise his conduct record was VG (Very Good) exception one assessment of Good in '06. His servie during 1WW appears to be mostly on TB's 3 & 16 (Torpedo Boats) altho I am unable to make out all of the entries ie: Candy ?? something) He was initially Demobilized in 1919, but this was subsequently altered to "Colitis" in 1921 - see the note at bottom right of his ADM 188. Be interesting to check the census to determine if he eventually passed away from that disease. Its pretty serious & at that time it might have been a killer. Edited 2 February by RNCVR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatio2 Posted 2 February Share Posted 2 February 6 minutes ago, RNCVR said: Candy ?? something HMS CANDYTUFT. He survived her torpedoing in the Med on 18 Nov 1917. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNCVR Posted 2 February Share Posted 2 February Thanks Horatio! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dputto Posted 3 February Author Share Posted 3 February 17 hours ago, horatio2 said: These just show his number on the ship's pay list. If he is shown as List 5, that shows he is a member of the ship's company. Most other numbers show that he is borne as a supernumerary. After 1911, when he was rated able seaman (AB), the Character column also records his Efficiency (max assessment Superior (Sup)) His RN Official Number is at the top of his record - 230077. His Port Division (home port) is also shown as Devonport. The offence for which he was sentenced to 7 days Cells in HMS FLORA in April 1910 is not recorded. Thanks Horatio! So helpful! I really appreciate your help and expertise. I thought maybe 47912 was his service number, and P.I.C. something to do with where he enlisted. Indeed, you are right that's a 7 not a 4. I'll ask surviving family if he ever spoke about it! You're also right, HMS Candytuft. There was always family folklore that he survived being torpedoed twice, but we weren't sure if it was two ships or not. Now we know! From my research Candytuft was torpedoed both forward and astern by a U-boat. The limited accounts I could find seemed like it was pretty awful as you would expect, and there's two photos of her afterwards that show the damage. I can find no photos of Candytuft before she was damaged, only sister ships. It looks like after a little survivors leave Sidney was posted to another Q ship, Chrysanthemum. That ship, very interestingly, was used in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade in the speedboat scene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dputto Posted 3 February Author Share Posted 3 February 12 hours ago, RNCVR said: @dputto Daz -- A few more details that might be of use to you, to add to Horatio's information - Sidney Smith initially ent'd the RN as an underage 18 Boy (normal way of entering), then was rated as a Signalman in 1906 & he remained in that rate until being rerated as an Ordinary Seaman in Jan 1910, & AB in Nov '10. & Leading Seaman in 1915. His non sub rate also changed in 1913 to Acting ST (Seaman Torpedoman) then ST in July 1914 (presumably now trained), & LTO (Leading Torpedo Operator) in Nov '14, meaning he was now involved in the Electrical part of Torpedos, requalified in Apl '15. His Torpedo/Electrical training would have been at HMS Defiance. As Horation has mention he did a 7 day stint in cells during 1910, this would have disqualified him for the award of the RN Long Service medal. Otherwise his conduct record was VG (Very Good) exception one assessment of Good in '06. His servie during 1WW appears to be mostly on TB's 3 & 16 (Torpedo Boats) altho I am unable to make out all of the entries ie: Candy ?? something) He was initially Demobilized in 1919, but this was subsequently altered to "Colitis" in 1921 - see the note at bottom right of his ADM 188. Be interesting to check the census to determine if he eventually passed away from that disease. Its pretty serious & at that time it might have been a killer. Thanks mate, so interesting and very, very helpful! I feel like I know so much more about him now. I really appreciate this. Would it be imposing too much to ask if I posted my other great grandfather's service record that you help with the interesting details? Sidney actually lived into the 1970s, so luckily colitis didn't cause a premature death. He was apparently a lovely, lovely man and my father adored him (Sidney was his only grandfather, as his other grandfather died in 1945 before my father was born). It's interesting that in some years his conduct is marked both VG and Sat. He obviously did something naughty to get 7 days cells, though he managed a very good career afterwards it seems. Silly young foolishness I suppose! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatio2 Posted 3 February Share Posted 3 February 5 hours ago, dputto said: I thought maybe 47912 was his service number, and P.I.C. something to do with where he enlisted. That is the number of the Protection and Identity Certificate (PIC) which he was given on discharge. 5 hours ago, dputto said: It's interesting that in some years his conduct is marked both VG and Sat. Not so. Such an entry records Character (Conduct) = VG and Ability (Efficiency in Rate) = Sat. The possible assessments are different for each:- Character could be assessed as VG, VG*, Good, Fair or Indifferent, depending on the punishments awarded in the calendar year. Ability could be assessed as Exceptional, Superior, Satisfactory, Moderate or Inferior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNCVR Posted 4 February Share Posted 4 February Thanks mate, so interesting and very, very helpful! I feel like I know so much more about him now. I really appreciate this. Would it be imposing too much to ask if I posted my other great grandfather's service record that you help with the interesting details? @dputto Sure Daz, post it on here we will try to assist you in interpreting his ADM 188... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNCVR Posted 4 February Share Posted 4 February It's interesting that in some years his conduct is marked both VG and Sat. He obviously did something naughty to get 7 days cells, though he managed a very good career afterwards it seems. Silly young foolishness I suppose! Daz, Smith likely ran afoul of one or more of the many somewhat trivial(altho not always trivial, but to us today some may seem trivial) rules & regulations that governed the rating's daily lives in the RN. For 7 days cells it was not a major offence, likely something like refusing a minor duty, speaking improperly to his superior PO, breaking leave, dunkeness whilst on duty, or something along that line. Also it cost him in pay & allowances - he did not receive his daily pay when serving cell time, & he was deprived of his daily tot(rum) allowance as well. It also affected the award of the RN Long service medal, cell time debarred the rating from receiving his RN LS medal after 15 years service. Perhaps after this offence he learned his lesson as his Conduct was rated VG (Very Good) from 1910 until discharge in 1919. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dputto Posted 4 February Author Share Posted 4 February 6 hours ago, RNCVR said: It's interesting that in some years his conduct is marked both VG and Sat. He obviously did something naughty to get 7 days cells, though he managed a very good career afterwards it seems. Silly young foolishness I suppose! Daz, Smith likely ran afoul of one or more of the many somewhat trivial(altho not always trivial, but to us today some may seem trivial) rules & regulations that governed the rating's daily lives in the RN. For 7 days cells it was not a major offence, likely something like refusing a minor duty, speaking improperly to his superior PO, breaking leave, dunkeness whilst on duty, or something along that line. Also it cost him in pay & allowances - he did not receive his daily pay when serving cell time, & he was deprived of his daily tot(rum) allowance as well. It also affected the award of the RN Long service medal, cell time debarred the rating from receiving his RN LS medal after 15 years service. Perhaps after this offence he learned his lesson as his Conduct was rated VG (Very Good) from 1910 until discharge in 1919. Yeah fair call mate, things were very different for ratings at the time. My father has his medals I'll ask for a photo to see which ones he has. On 03/02/2024 at 14:31, horatio2 said: That is the number of the Protection and Identity Certificate (PIC) which he was given on discharge. Not so. Such an entry records Character (Conduct) = VG and Ability (Efficiency in Rate) = Sat. The possible assessments are different for each:- Character could be assessed as VG, VG*, Good, Fair or Indifferent, depending on the punishments awarded in the calendar year. Ability could be assessed as Exceptional, Superior, Satisfactory, Moderate or Inferior. Legend, thanks for that! It's becoming clearer now and I'm understanding more of what these records mean. Thanks again for helping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dputto Posted 4 February Author Share Posted 4 February On 03/02/2024 at 14:31, horatio2 said: That is the number of the Protection and Identity Certificate (PIC) which he was given on discharge. Not so. Such an entry records Character (Conduct) = VG and Ability (Efficiency in Rate) = Sat. The possible assessments are different for each:- Character could be assessed as VG, VG*, Good, Fair or Indifferent, depending on the punishments awarded in the calendar year. Ability could be assessed as Exceptional, Superior, Satisfactory, Moderate or Inferior. Legend, thanks for that! It's becoming clearer now and I'm understanding more of what these records mean. Thanks again for helping. My other great grandfather's record is attached. Anything significant that jumps off the page? I have his sea chest, which is a treasured item, but know little more about him apart from him being a stoker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatio2 Posted 5 February Share Posted 5 February (edited) His three WW1 medals were claimed and issued to him post-war in the rating of Chief Stoker. He also earned the RN Long Service and Good Conduct Medal - awarded to him after 15 years service with unbroken VG Character/Conduct un 1905 - "Tr[aced] Medal" in REMARKS. His WW1 service as a mobilised pensioner was all in depot ships and RN Barracks, Chatham (HMS PEMBROKE), which was his Port Division (home port). His service in EUROPA and ST GEORGE was at Stavros where these ships provided beach parties in support of the Salonika campaign. His early mobilisation in August 1914 was cancelled after a couple of months when he was discharged as "Not required", only to be re-mobilised in May 1915. His pre-WW1 service (1890-1912) falls outside the WW1 period of this Forum but shows an exemplary career from Stoker 2nd Class to Chief Stoker. Edited 5 February by horatio2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatio2 Posted 5 February Share Posted 5 February The movements and activities of EUROPA and ST GEORGE can be followed in their transcribed ships' logs:- https://www.naval-history.net/OWShips-WW1-05-HMS_Europa.htm and https://www.naval-history.net/OWShips-WW1-05-HMS_St_George.htm The men employed in the each parties at Stavros were borne on the books of HMS EUROPA II (based at Mudros) until 31 December 1916, on which date they were transferred onto the books of HMS ST GEORGE (at Salonika). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNCVR Posted 5 February Share Posted 5 February His pre-WW1 service (1890-1912) falls outside the WW1 period of this Forum but shows an exemplary career from Stoker 2nd Class to Chief Stoker. Other than his service on HMS Hood [Battleship] all of Ch Stoker Puttock's pre war service was in 1st & 2nd class Cruisers, all coal burners. He came up 'thru hause pipe' fairly quickly, with over 12 yrs of his career as a Chef Stoker. His Edward VII RN LS medal would have been awarded when he was on HMS Spartiate - (Medal) Traced -- 14/Feb/05 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNCVR Posted 5 February Share Posted 5 February Yeah fair call mate, things were very different for ratings at the time. My father has his medals I'll ask for a photo to see which ones he has. Back to Sidney SMITH - these would be the medals he would have rec'd for his 1WW service - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dputto Posted 7 February Author Share Posted 7 February On 05/02/2024 at 15:40, horatio2 said: His three WW1 medals were claimed and issued to him post-war in the rating of Chief Stoker. He also earned the RN Long Service and Good Conduct Medal - awarded to him after 15 years service with unbroken VG Character/Conduct un 1905 - "Tr[aced] Medal" in REMARKS. His WW1 service as a mobilised pensioner was all in depot ships and RN Barracks, Chatham (HMS PEMBROKE), which was his Port Division (home port). His service in EUROPA and ST GEORGE was at Stavros where these ships provided beach parties in support of the Salonika campaign. His early mobilisation in August 1914 was cancelled after a couple of months when he was discharged as "Not required", only to be re-mobilised in May 1915. His pre-WW1 service (1890-1912) falls outside the WW1 period of this Forum but shows an exemplary career from Stoker 2nd Class to Chief Stoker. Thanks Horatio, that's awesome! Much more than I was able to discern from looking this record over. Very interesting and so good to shed light on my family's service history. Those depot ships are interesting and something I had not heard of before. On 05/02/2024 at 21:02, horatio2 said: The movements and activities of EUROPA and ST GEORGE can be followed in their transcribed ships' logs:- https://www.naval-history.net/OWShips-WW1-05-HMS_Europa.htm and https://www.naval-history.net/OWShips-WW1-05-HMS_St_George.htm The men employed in the each parties at Stavros were borne on the books of HMS EUROPA II (based at Mudros) until 31 December 1916, on which date they were transferred onto the books of HMS ST GEORGE (at Salonika). There's very interesting reading in there, thank you! There's lots to look into and I appreciate you pointing me in the right direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dputto Posted 7 February Author Share Posted 7 February On 05/02/2024 at 21:16, RNCVR said: His pre-WW1 service (1890-1912) falls outside the WW1 period of this Forum but shows an exemplary career from Stoker 2nd Class to Chief Stoker. Other than his service on HMS Hood [Battleship] all of Ch Stoker Puttock's pre war service was in 1st & 2nd class Cruisers, all coal burners. He came up 'thru hause pipe' fairly quickly, with over 12 yrs of his career as a Chef Stoker. His Edward VII RN LS medal would have been awarded when he was on HMS Spartiate - (Medal) Traced -- 14/Feb/05 Thanks mate that's so interesting! I did see his service on Hood, must have been very cool for him. Well not literally while we was on watch! His career was rewarding enough that his son was inspired to become a stoker as well. I'm also in the midst of tracking his service down. On 05/02/2024 at 21:24, RNCVR said: Yeah fair call mate, things were very different for ratings at the time. My father has his medals I'll ask for a photo to see which ones he has. Back to Sidney SMITH - these would be the medals he would have rec'd for his 1WW service - Awesome, thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawryleslie Posted 8 February Share Posted 8 February On 02/02/2024 at 07:35, horatio2 said: After 1911, when he was rated able seaman (AB), the Character column also records his Efficiency (max assessment Superior (Sup)) Do you know when the Efficiency Assessment of Exceptional (Excp) was introduced H2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatio2 Posted 8 February Share Posted 8 February From memory (references not found) EXCEP was late 19th Century and was in use until abolished in the late 1920s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatio2 Posted 9 February Share Posted 9 February (edited) KR&AI (1913) - 831. Ability in Rating.-The ability in his rating or rank of every seaman or marine is to be carefully assessed and noted on his service certificate by the Commanding Officer in his own handwriting on the occasions laid down by Article 829, clause 4, for the award of character. The Commanding Officer's signature is to be written on the same line as the ability awarded. Before making the assessment the Commanding Officer is invariably to, consult the head of the department to which the man belongs. 2. Terms Used.-The terms to be employed in assessing ability are the following : Exceptional, to be written Ex. Superior Supr. Satisfactory, Sat. Moderate, Mod. Inferior, Inf. Edited 9 February by horatio2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horatio2 Posted 9 February Share Posted 9 February 3. Definitions of Terms.-As a guide to Commanding Officers when making their award the following definitions are given of the terms to be used : Exceptional = A man who performs the duties of his rating in a more efficient manner than the majority of men holding the same rating, and who is considered eminently fitted for special and early advancement. Superior = A man who performs his duties in an efficient manner and is considered fit for advancement in his turn but not for special advancement. Satisfactory = A man who performs his duties in an efficient manner but who-owing to inexperience or other causes is not considered fit for advancement at present. Moderate = A man who performs his duties in a fairly efficient manner and is not considered fit for advancement. Inferior = A man who performs his duties in an inefficient manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now