Help identifying officers in group photo of 2/5th Lancs Fus in Bedford, 1/5/1915, "B" Coy, Hill, Abbotts, H. Waterhouse

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

5 hours ago, SamCurt said:

or the same Register, Betty Ellen WATERHOUSE was a patient at the Manchester Royal Infirmary, Private Patient's Home, Lorne Street (DoB 19 MAR 1902).  She died 2 MAY 1974 with Probate effects to the value of £63,472 - home address 27 East Beach, Lytham.

Ah yes, that makes sense, I was wondering if it was something like that. Looks as if the complaint wasn't too serious fortunately, as she lived for another 35 years.

Best wishes,

Tricia

[PRC]

Now we have a clearer picture of the Officers at Southport at the end of 1914 I thought I'd take a look to see if it made it easier to confirm the identity of any  of those in the Bedford picture.

I started with Malcolm Henry Young who is currently believed to be Officer 5 on the Bedford image. Unfortunately even with the latest picture he looks to be one of the individuals hardest to use as a comparison. While looking for more images I stumbled on a blog piece on his older brother Edmund Turner Young who died serving with the Manchester Regiment at Gallipoli. The blog piece has quite a lot on the family. Edmund apparently went tio Rugby School. The multl-volume Memorial of Rugbeians Who Fell in the Great War has Edmund but no other Young's, so seems Malcolm didn't study there. https://agraveannouncementnews.wordpress.com/2018/09/04/this-gallant-brigade-gallipoli-marple-and-lieutenant-edmund-turner-young/

The 1911 Census of England & Wales has the 16 year old Malcolm Henry Young, born Stand, Lancashire, recorded as a Schoolboy. So unless he was on a school holiday then likely he was a day student, probably at a local grammar school. he was living in his parents household at Stand Hall, Whitefield, Lancashire.

In case it adds anythin there are also twio pictures of brother Edmund.

No new IP is claimed for the above, and all image rights, if any, remain with the current owners.

Picture sources

a] Malcolm Henry Young sourced www1cemeteries com fillihttps://www.ww1cemeteries.com/fillievres-british-cemetery.html

b] 2nd Lieutenant Edmund Turner Young Manchester Regiment sourced IWM reference HU 125346 https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205391256

c] Edmund Turner Young sourced Memorials of Rugbeians who fell in the Great War Volume II  https://rugbyschoolarchives.co.uk/PDFViewer/web/viewer.html?file=%2fFilename.ashx%3ftableName%3dta_ephemera%26columnName%3dfilename%26recordId%3d2

Cheers,
Peter

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

@PRC my GF pasted an obituary of Malcolm Young into his memoir. The obituary had in it the photograph labelled a) in your post. To me the "pout" on the face appeared so distinctive that I felt the only candidate was Officer 5. Please do put me right if I have got this wrong!

You are right that the photo of Young in the Southport photo is not much help, though I don't think it gives any cause to revise the identification as Officer 5.

The obituary states that Young went to Marlborough School. and appears on their Roll of Honour, though the narrative about his death in the ROH is extremely brief, and there is no biography.

I see that the Fillevres website also includes a photograph of Captain L.H. Bloy, which again is a photograph which was pasted into his memoir by my GF, and I hope that, based on that, you agree with the identification of Captain Bloy as Officer 19.

I will include the details that I have for these men from their obituaries in my resume to be posted on the Forum shortly.

Tricia

 

[PRC]

1 hour ago, A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy said:

The obituary had in it the photograph labelled a) in your post. To me the "pout" on the face appeared so distinctive that I felt the only candidate was Officer 5. Please do put me right if I have got this wrong!

The angle of the head and hatless state of the known named picture makes it difficult to be sure he is the same man on the Southport picture and as Officer 5. But while I would normally say comparing near relative in the hope they have similar features is potentially unwise, in this case with brother Edmund I believe there is some merit. So much of Edmunds' face in the picture from source 'b' ties up with Officer 5, and I believe it gives some insight into how the facial proportions and features of Malcolm might look if we could revolve the head a little bit clockwise. Both I think have a comparatively broader head at the eye-socket level, diminishing down to the chin, and with swept back cheekbones making the face seem wider on the side than from the front. I think Officer 5 is still very much in the frame, but the Southport picture doesn't add anything to the percentage of certainly. I'm assuming that's a belt buckle behind his head rather than elephantine ears.

That last point is also an issue for Bloy.

No new IP is claimed for the above, and all image rights, if any, remain with the current owners.

Picture sources

1914 & 1915 courtesy this thread.
[a] Laurence Henry Bloy sourced www ww1cemeteries com fillievres
https://www.ww1cemeteries.com/fillievres-british-cemetery.html

Other than nose shape I'n not entirely convinced all three picture align - of course not helped by the low resolution of the Southport image. However for any one feature I can see at least two of the images tie up - the chin in the 1914 picture and picture 'a', the ears in the 1915 picture and picture 'a' and so on - that I could go for Bloy as the identity of Officer 19 in the absence of any better match.

I am starting to wonder if with the Southport picture it is only a few of the faces around the periphery that might provide a useful comparison. Too many of the heads along the back row are little more than blobs, and those in the middle quite often have visual noise like those belt buckles that distract from facial features.

Cheers,
Peter

[FROGSMILE]

17 minutes ago, PRC said:

The angle of the head and hatless state of the known named picture makes it difficult to be sure he is the same man on the Southport picture and as Officer 5. But while I would normally say comparing near relative in the hope they have similar features is potentially unwise, in this case with brother Edmund I believe there is some merit. So much of Edmunds' face in the picture from source 'b' ties up with Officer 5, and I believe it gives some insight into how the facial proportions and features of Malcolm might look if we could revolve the head a little bit clockwise. Both I think have a comparatively broader head at the eye-socket level, diminishing down to the chin, and with swept back cheekbones making the face seem wider on the side than from the front. I think Officer 5 is still very much in the frame, but the Southport picture doesn't add anything to the percentage of certainly. I'm assuming that's a belt buckle behind his head rather than elephantine ears.

That last point is also an issue for Bloy.

No new IP is claimed for the above, and all image rights, if any, remain with the current owners.

Picture sources

1914 & 1915 courtesy this thread.
[a] Laurence Henry Bloy sourced www ww1cemeteries com fillievres
https://www.ww1cemeteries.com/fillievres-british-cemetery.html

Other than nose shape I'n not entirely convinced all three picture align - of course not helped by the low resolution of the Southport image. However for any one feature I can see at least two of the images tie up - the chin in the 1914 picture and picture 'a', the ears in the 1915 picture and picture 'a' and so on - that I could go for Bloy as the identity of Officer 19 in the absence of any better match.

I am starting to wonder if with the Southport picture it is only a few of the faces around the periphery that might provide a useful comparison. Too many of the heads along the back row are little more than blobs, and those in the middle quite often have visual noise like those belt buckles that distract from facial features.

Cheers,
Peter

As another opinion for the mix I think that they are all three images of the same officer.  Your side-by-side comparators are always enormously useful.

Edited 10 April by FROGSMILE

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

Thank you @PRC and @FROGSMILE for you comments.

In preparing my resume I reminded myself that a long time ago PRC posted a thumbnail of an obituary for Whateley Abbotts in the Staffordshire Advertiser for 28 January 1922, but we had never actually seen what it said, so far as I can recall. @brianmorris547has now supplied a copy, so I post it here, courtesy of the British Newspaper Archive. It does give us a little more information about Abbotts that I was not aware of before.

Th

The fact that he served in Egypt and then France after October 1916 would suggest that when he rejoined the Regiment he went to the 1/5^th Lancashire Fusiliers rather than the 2/5^th, as the 2/5^th Lancashire Fusiliers were never in Egypt, while the 1/5^th were there from September 1914 until they proceeded to France on the withdrawal from Egypt in February 1917. The Supplement to the London Gazette issue no. 30247, page 8684, records that wef 17 May 1917 Abbotts was seconded to be in charge of a Prisoner of War Company, with his appointment as acting captain from that date confirmed retrospectively in a much later Gazette, issue no. 30710 page 6319, published on 28 May 1918, more than a year after the event.

Later, wef from 24 June 1918, according to the Supplement to the London Gazette issue no 30843, page 9546, presumably after he had been gassed for a second time in February 1918., he moved to the Labour Corps. My grandfather also served in the 1/5th LF, but not until June 1917, after Abbotts had gone to command Prisoner of War Camp, so they were not in the 1/5th at the same time.

Finally the Supplement to the London Gazette issue no. 31508, page 10445, announced that wef 17 August 1919 Abbotts relinquished his commission on account of ill-health contracted on active service, and was granted the rank of captain.

Meanwhile, with regard to Claude Worsley Boyce Hill, his granddaughter has very kindly sent me three more photographs, with permission to post them on here.

I understand that Claude is the dark haired man on the right in the first of these photographs, and the granddaughter thinks that the other two would have been taken in about 1912 in view of the ages of the children,. I believe that that means that they would have been taken in Canada on Vancouver Island where Claude had gone to try to make a living in farming. His garnddaughter has told me that the ship taking all the family's possessions to Canada was shipwrecked on the way across the Atlantic, which she thinks may be why she doesn't have a wedding photograph. 

When the family got to Vancouver Island they had to live in a tent while they built a house for themselves, so it must have been tough.

The outbreak of WW! interrupted the farming venture, as Claude joined initially the Canadian Army, and then came to Britain, where he was allocated to the 2/5th LF.

Claude's wife, Alfreda, known as Freda, stayed behind in Canada with the children, but when Claude was wounded she and the children came back to England so she could nurse him. They eventually returned to Canada where Claude tried to resume his farming career, but it was too much for him to manage on his own. He also tried his hand at shopkeeping, but that was also too much for him, so they returned to Britain, where he found employment with the Singer Sewing Machine Company. A third child, another daughter, had been born while they were in Canada.

The granddaughter understands that the meningitis which Claude eventually died of was caused by fluid collecting under a metal plate in his brain.

Do these photos help with identifying Claude in the group photo? I am wondering whether, on the basis of these photographs, Claude is a match for Officer 10?

 

     

 

Edited 12 April by A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy

[PRC]

11 hours ago, A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy said:

Do these photos help with identifying Claude in the group photo? I am wondering whether, on the basis of these photographs, Claude is a match for Officer 10?

Oh so very tempting

Unfortunately Officer 10 has lost so much detail being photoshopped in, and then has suffered further damage particularly to the face on his left side. Nose is a possible and ears look a closer match to the man in the beach pictures than they do to the officer studio portrait. I've tried editing out the worst of the damage, but that means errors can inadvertently slipped in, plus I've left the left hand side of his mouth completely alone as attempting to repair that element of the picture would be complete and utter guesswork. I'm also troubled by the heavy top-lid of the right eye of Officer 10.  If the picture of Claude in the striped bathing costume is from later on, that area of his face is too dark to be sure of detail in attempting to ascertain whether that was something that became more pronounced as he aged.

But being photoshopped in means we also don't know how contemporary it is. And we have a known studio portrait of a moustached Claude, believed to date from 1915. While it's quick to lose a moustache it takes a while to grow, so unless the moustached picture of Claude was taken in France it it would appear to pre-date the officer picture at Bedford.

Isn't Hill believed to be one of the officers that made up the advanced party, and I previously speculated that he might have been too busy to be present for the picture, even if it was taken earlier in the day before the advance party left? Identifying him as Officer 10 would support that, but at the moment my heart says yes but my head says not enough evidence.

I've not included the picture of him looking down at the two young children as there is so little detail that by the time I scale it up to the same size as the other pictures it becomes little more than a blur without adding anything useful. Similarly scaling the others down to a level where that picture remains in focus makes it difficult to pick out individual features.

No new IP is claimed for the above, and all image rights, if any, remain with the current owners.

Big thank-you to @Walker21 for allowing use of the family pictures.

Cheers,
Peter

 

Edited 12 April by PRC
Typos

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

 

On 12/04/2024 at 12:02, PRC said:

Oh so very tempting

Unfortunately Officer 10 has lost so much detail being photoshopped in, and then has suffered further damage particularly to the face on his left side. Nose is a possible and ears look a closer match to the man in the beach pictures than they do to the officer studio portrait. I've tried editing out the worst of the damage, but that means errors can inadvertently slipped in, plus I've left the left hand side of his mouth completely alone as attempting to repair that element of the picture would be complete and utter guesswork. I'm also troubled by the heavy top-lid of the right eye of Officer 10.  If the picture of Claude in the striped bathing costume is from later on, that area of his face is too dark to be sure of detail in attempting to ascertain whether that was something that became more pronounced as he aged.

But being photoshopped in means we also don't know how contemporary it is. And we have a known studio portrait of a moustached Claude, believed to date from 1915. While it's quick to lose a moustache it takes a while to grow, so unless the moustached picture of Claude was taken in France it it would appear to pre-date the officer picture at Bedford.

Isn't Hill believed to be one of the officers that made up the advanced party, and I previously speculated that he might have been too busy to be present for the picture, even if it was taken earlier in the day before the advance party left? Identifying him as Officer 10 would support that, but at the moment my heart says yes but my head says not enough evidence.

I've not included the picture of him looking down at the two young children as there is so little detail that by the time I scale it up to the same size as the other pictures it becomes little more than a blur without adding anything useful. Similarly scaling the others down to a level where that picture remains in focus makes it difficult to pick out individual features.

Thank you for your comments and for posting the images side by side, Peter.

You are correct that we have hypothesised that Lieutenant Hill, as MGO, would be a good candidate for being one of the photo-shopped men, on the footing that he might have been too busy getting ready for departure that night to attend the photoshoot.

While the portrait photo gives a very different impression than the beach photos, we do know that both the portrait photo and the beach photos are Lieutenant Hill, and I can see elements of both in Officer 10, so am happy to go along with that probably being him.

Although the definition of the beach photos is not brilliant, the impression given of the shape of the eye sockets is more consistent with Officer 10 than the portrait photo. The apparent difference between the portrait photos and the others might be capable of being explained by the fact that it was the job of a studio photographer to get the best image possible of the subject, including fully opened eyes gazing directly into the camera.

By the way, as there are no children present in the picture of Claude with the striped bathing suit, I had rather assumed that that photo was taken before the children were born, perhaps at around the time of the engagement or marriage of Claude to Freda, so about 1910.

I agree that the photo without the moustache is likely to have been taken after the studio portrait, and certainly doesn't seem to have been taken in a studio. Perhaps it was from another group photo, For example, we know from my GF's memoir that both Hartington and Hill attended a machine gun course at Wisques in early June 1915.

As you may have seen, I have now posted my long awaited resume of where we have got to so far, and what might still be done, on a separate thread, and in that I have designated Lieutenant Hill as Officer 10.

The link to the new thread is https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/310415-where-we-are-with-identifying-the-men-in-a-group-photo-of-the-25th-lf-on-151915-and-the-mystery-of-the-30th-man/ The thread is rather unwieldy, I am afraid, but should enable people are searching for relatives of 2/5th officers who went to France with that unit in May 1915 to find a summary of the information known about the man in question, with links to specific posts. If anyone wants to consider the overall picture, I have also made it possible to download pdfs of the tables, where it should be slightly easier to read the entirety of the available information.

My next question regarding the men dealt with on this thread is whether we are able to make any further progress with William Duckworth, given that we have no less than three known images of him, all included in the first post on this thread (though we now have a clearer version of the Southport photo, of course). It is likely that he is Officer 9, 16 or 17, or possibly Officer 6 if that is not Hartington.

 

Edited 15 April by A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy

[Walker21]

If it’s any help I’m pretty sure all the beach photos of Claude Hill were taken 1914.

wendy

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

On 14/04/2024 at 11:10, Walker21 said:

f it’s any help I’m pretty sure all the beach photos of Claude Hill were taken 1914.

Thank you, I thought that they were all pre-war, but I wasn't sure.

I have looked again at my grandfather's diary for 1 May 1915, and find that I didn't quote quite enough of it in my earlier post https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/309235-help-identifying-officers-in-group-photo-of-25th-lancs-fus-in-bedford-151915-b-coy-hill-abbotts-h-waterhouse/page/3/#comment-3276839

Here is the full passage that I ought to have quoted:

In the early morning orders were received that the Transport would move at 11.00pm from the station. They loaded during the morning, taking our valises. General Service Wagons, Tool Carts, Machine Gun Limbers, Field Kitchen, Maltese Cart, Machine Gunners, nine Cyclist Signallers, and Water Carts all paraded at 9.00pm under Major Milnes, Lieutenant Abbotts, and Lieutenant Hill (Machine Gun Officer). … In the morning we had our photograph taken.

I have added the underlining and bold print, but it is now evident that the loading for departure and the taking of the photograph tok place at the same time, in the morning, so it seems almost beyond doubt that the two officers who couldn't make it for the photoshoot were Lieutenants Abbotts and Hill

[FROGSMILE]

2 hours ago, A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy said:

Thank you, I thought that they were all pre-war, but I wasn't sure.

I have looked again at my grandfather's diary for 1 May 1915, and find that I didn't quote quite enough of it in my earlier post https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/309235-help-identifying-officers-in-group-photo-of-25th-lancs-fus-in-bedford-151915-b-coy-hill-abbotts-h-waterhouse/page/3/#comment-3276839

Here is the full passage that I ought to have quoted:

In the early morning orders were received that the Transport would move at 11.00pm from the station. They loaded during the morning, taking our valises. General Service Wagons, Tool Carts, Machine Gun Limbers, Field Kitchen, Maltese Cart, Machine Gunners, nine Cyclist Signallers, and Water Carts all paraded at 9.00pm under Major Milnes, Lieutenant Abbotts, and Lieutenant Hill (Machine Gun Officer). … In the morning we had our photograph taken.

I have added the underlining and bold print, but it is now evident that the loading for departure and the taking of the photograph tok place at the same time, in the morning, so it seems almost beyond doubt that the two officers who couldn't make it for the photoshoot were Lieutenants Abbotts and Hill

To give a visual impression here are the vehicles you describe.  The MG ammunition was in the limbers.  The officers mess cart was aka the Maltese cart and carried the RMOs stores when packed for war.

Edited 15 April by FROGSMILE

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

5 hours ago, FROGSMILE said:

To give a visual impression here are the vehicles you describe.  The MG ammunition was in the limbers.  The officers mess cart was aka the Maltese cart and carried the RMOs stores when packed for war.

Thank you, Frogsmile, these illustrations are of great assistance in visualising the scene. 

[FROGSMILE]

7 hours ago, A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy said:

Thank you, Frogsmile, these illustrations are of great assistance in visualising the scene. 

They are evocative I agree.  The entire battalion transport on the move was a veritable wagon train that John Wayne might have been proud of!  Here is an contemporary image of a one time regularly used water point at Couin, Pas-de-Calais, where the water carts would often refill.

Edited 16 April by FROGSMILE

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

On 16/04/2024 at 06:47, FROGSMILE said:

They are evocative I agree.  The entire battalion transport on the move was a veritable wagon train that John Wayne might have been proud of!  Here is an contemporary image of a one time regularly used water point at Couin, Pas-de-Calais, where the water carts would often refill.

Thank you, it does bring home just what a mammoth task it must have been to supply the burgeoning (at the beginning of the war) units with equipment and horses, and to keep the men and horses fed an accommodated, not to mention supplied with arms.

rses