Arthur Rose, ASC: Service in the United Kingdom Only?

[Crofters11]

Hi

Would a soldier who enlisted for Short Service in 1918 have to show proof that he was signing up in his birth name.

I did read through Fraudulent Enlistment but that mostly appeared to deal with false statements about age.

 

 

 

[RussT]

We know that 1000s joined under an alias and no birth certificate or any other proof was needed during enlistment.

Most people did not have a birth certificate in any case.

It's possible I suppose that the requirement changed during the war and by 1918 some sort of proof was required - I doubt it but others might know differently.

Regards

Russ

 

[Crofters11]

Thank you for your quick reply.  I thought if he had to prove his real name then I could stand a chance of finding out more about him and tracing back any other paternal ancestors.

I have my grandfather's Army record, he enlisted in the name of Arthur Rose, I have a photograph signed Arthur Rose, postcards to and from Arthur Rose, census records are in the name of Arthur Rose.

My problem is that he married in the name of William Henry Barclay, on the 1939 September register his is listed as William Henry Barclay and his children's births are registered with surname of Barclay, however I can find no record of a birth for either Arthur Rose or William Henry Barclay, nor any marriage for Arthur Rose to my grandmother,.

All of which I appreciate this forum can't really help with but just wanted to know what documentation if any a person might have to have had to enlist.

[Crofters11]

Following on from the above, I have actually found my paternal grandfather's records. It would appear that he was only in service from 8th April to 26 November 1918. He enlisted under the name of Arthur Rose, Service Number 399180, ASC - MT.

Shown below is the Casualty Form Active Service page from his discharge papers which states service in the UK only.  Can anyone please tell me why this might be.

 

[RussT]

I've merged your two threads - I will also change the Title.

2 hours ago, Crofters11 said:

Shown below is the Casualty Form Active Service page from his discharge papers which states service in the UK only.  Can anyone please tell me why this might be.

He enlisted in April 1918. Men did not not just enlist into the Forces and then immediately go off to war to fight etc - they had to be trained etc first.

The war ended in November 1918 so there was not much time even if he were to have been super capable. But he was 44 years old and suffering from rheumatism. He was classified as medical category B1 on enlistment. This did not automatically rule out overseas service but he was evidently not prioritised to serve overseas and he was probably usefully employed on home service. It does seem his condition worsened and he was discharged as being no longer physically fit for war service on 26/11/1918.

Regards

Russ 

[Matlock1418]

Arthur ROSE, M/399180, Army Service Corps

He has a MIC - but only for a SWB listing.

I also found a disability pension index card record at WFA/Fold3 so it would seem that his condition was actually considered to have been attributable to or aggravated by his service

Discharged 26.11.18 he was awarded 5/6 pw from 27.11.18 to 2?-2-19 [the 20% degree of disability rate for a pension Class V soldier/Pte under the prevailing 1918 Royal Warrant.]  Address 73 Boisett Rd, Walworth SE 17 [Possibly Borett Rd or Boirett?? or ????]

M

Edited 22 April by Matlock1418
correct/update

[Chris_Baker]

He was enlisted under terms of Army Council Instruction 156 of 1918. This is one I do not have to hand, but it would certainly be checking on what this was and the implications it might have.

[Crofters11]

Once again many thanks for explanation and information. It is really appreciated.

With regard to checking ACI 156, having done a little 'googling' it would appear that there is no listing of Army Council Instructions online, or at least not that I could find, so will add to my list of documents to investigate on next trip to Kew - whenever that might be, not sure. 

Not sure of any relevance or interest but I now know my grandfather's birth name and most likely the reason for 'assumed' names,  .. just not sure why he chose Arthur Rose, I guess some things in life just have to remain a mystery! 

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

On 19/04/2024 at 17:11, Crofters11 said:

Following on from the above, I have actually found my paternal grandfather's records. It would appear that he was only in service from 8th April to 26 November 1918. He enlisted under the name of Arthur Rose, Service Number 399180, ASC - MT.

Shown below is the Casualty Form Active Service page from his discharge papers which states service in the UK only.  Can anyone please tell me why this might be.

 

Is this from Find My Past? As it is not included in the service record on Ancestry. 
It does however document his marriage (as Barclay) to Mabel Lilian Jewson in 1898 in Southwark.

Do you have a copy of the certificate? The marriage certificate should contain his father's details?
If not you can instantly download  a  digital copy of the entry in the GRO record for £2.50 once registered.

The location was Christchurch Parish Church, Southwark London (not Surrey). [It was London between 1889-1901].
The registration district was St. Saviour, Vol 1d, p49

This link will take you the GRO page:
https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/indexes_search.asp#Results

The GRO site also confirms the maden name of the Barclay children was Jewson.

His service record shows he served in the following ASC companies  from April 1918:

11/4/1918-8/5/1918 Training at Sydenham

8/5/1918-16/5/1918 Isleworth

16/6/1918-9/7/18 - 6 MT Coy - According to Michael Young's book, this company was a Horse Transport company that served on  both the Western Front and in Italy. Presumably this entry is incorrect .  A look at the diaries would help clarify things.

9/7/1918 - 23/7/1918 - 776 (MT) Coy. =45 Local Auxiliary (MT) Coy, Chatham & Tonbridge.

23/7/1918 - 22/11/1918 - 623 (MT) Coy. Home based (but for the Mediterranean). At various times it was 3 Kite BalloonSection and 31 Local Auxiliary (MT) Company in the London area and "Railway Assistance". It mentions "Bricklayer's Arms" which I think must mean the railway station and goods yard of that name in Southwark:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bricklayers_Arms_railway_station

 

 

[Crofters11]

Thank you for the clarification of dates / service etc, it has been very helpful to put the facts in order.

Also appreciate info regarding certificates and GRO. I do have birth and marriage certificates for him and both have the name William Henry and I have been able to trace back through the generations, just haven't yet discovered any information relevant to the name of Arthur Rose, only connection so far is to his first son being called William Arthur and his first daughter being called Mabel Lilian Rose.

I am hoping that when, or even if, I get to finding out more about the previous generations there may be an explanation or just an educated guess but I have a feeling that it is just a case of some things we may never know.

 

[kenf48]

On 19/04/2024 at 17:11, Crofters11 said:

Shown below is the Casualty Form Active Service page from his discharge papers which states service in the UK only.  Can anyone please tell me why this might be.

The Government introduced the Military Service (No 2)Act 1918 in April 1918.  This extended  the age limits for conscription from 41 to 50 years.  There were other provisions regarding extensions and exemptions and what was politically the most controversial, extended conscription to Ireland. Although this provision was never implemented.

In much the same way as when the original 1916 MSA was introduced and young single men were encouraged to enlist voluntarily before March 1916 in March 1918 men over the age of 41 were encouraged to volunteer and enlist for Home Service. 

I don't know if ACI 156 is the ACI referred to in this widely syndicated news item (this example from the Leicester Mail March 11 1918) but it was:-

"An Army Council Instruction issued last night  states that arrangements have been made with the Ministry of National Service for the recruitment of men over military age, and who are not at present employed on Government work  or in agriculture for service at home only in the Royal Garrison Artillery and Army Service Corps, motor transport.

Applications for enlistment may be submitted by ex-soldiers of any age who have served overseas during the present war, and have been discharged.

Enlistments will be for the duration of the war, and the age limit 50."

The RGA was engaged on coastal defence throughout the war, and the ASC had a number of Depots in the UK as listed by Chris on the LLT 

https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/army/regiments-and-corps/the-army-service-corps-in-the-first-world-war/army-service-corps-mechanical-transport-depots/

The men recruited under this scheme could not be sent on overseas service, nor transferred to any other Corps without their consent as noted on his record.

As ever it was a carrot and stick approach to recruitment.  Although it predates the German Spring Offensive this provision seems to have been honoured for those who volunteered, certainly in this man's case. It appears Pte Rose took advantage of this scheme.

Further instructions followed, for example men who enlisted in the RGA were allowed to do so in groups of 10 or 20 and to be posted near their homes and it was 'guaranteed' they would be kept in that unit. I can't find a similar provision for the ASC but it would not be in the Army's interest to send them too far from home.

 

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

So his father was a Barclay then, not Rose?

And he was born Barclay, married as Barclay, had children as Barclay, but by 1918 was Arthur Rose?

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

This is the family in 1911. The Roses of Finsbury Park:

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/discoveryui-content/view/40117862:2352?_phcmd=u('https://www.ancestry.co.uk/search/categories/1911uki/?name=mabel_rose&birth=1879_london-london-england-united+kingdom_85535&birth_x=2-0-0&residence=_london-london-england-united+kingdom_85535&successSource=Search&queryId=a7add8bc-4533-4215-a1ac-f0c88a29a91a','successSource')

(Image courtesy Ancestry)

Edited 22 April by Dai Bach y Sowldiwr

[Crofters11]

Many thanks, but I really have got all necessary information on my grandfather just needed clarification on latest relevant army information.

As stated I have already gone back several generations, but thanks again for your interest and information. 

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

...and in 1901 at 27 Whittlesey Road, Lambeth.

So the surname has changed from Barclay in 1898 to Rose in 1901. Rose in 1911 & 1918, Back to Barclay in 1939.

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/discoveryui-content/view/3245595:7814?_phcmd=u('https://www.ancestry.co.uk/search/categories/1901uki/?name=Mabel+Lilian_Rose&birth=1879_London&birth_x=2-0-0&name_x=_1&residence=_London&successSource=Search&queryId=82057b61-0b7a-49cc-acc5-d59e1bcd03d1','successSource')

2 minutes ago, Crofters11 said:

Many thanks, but I really have got all necessary information on my grandfather j

You may have, but none of the forum members will know what you know.

Can you give his father's details please?