Charles Litton, DLI

[kiersn0610]

Hi I'm just trying to find a family member of the Durham light infantry.Charles richard litton,he died on the 10th of April 1918 6049 and 301713 any info would be great tia 

[Matlock1418]

Welcome to GWF,

https://www.cwgc.org/find-records/find-war-dead/casualty-details/280437/c-r-litton

https://www.cwgc.org/find-records/find-war-dead/casualty-details/280437/c-r-litton/#&gid=2&pid=1 - Concentration burial in 1919 from 31 R10 A Central - I'm not sure how to map that, but perhaps @WhiteStarLine can please help.

The sad aftermath was that he left a widow [born 22.8.86] and three children - here's the main pension index card for their pension claim

Image thanks to WFA/Fold 3

Hence from children's birth registrations at GRO gives mother's maiden surname as PHILLIPS and birth locations as Islington [youngest daughter appears registered as Alice Mary] - so this seems his/their marriage:

Surname	First name(s)		District	Vol	Page
Marriages Jun 1909   (>99%)
LITTON	Charles Richard		Islington	1b	322
PHILLIPS	Annie		Islington	1b	322

Details thanks to FreeBMD

Two other pension index cards show that a J. HAYES of 7 Munster Sq., Regents Park, London, seems to have also made a later claim [relationship and outcome are not indicated - ??? had his widow perhaps remarried ... or had she died - possibly in Dec 1918 aged 32 ???]

M

 

Edited 13 April by Matlock1418
add

[PRC]

Hi @kiersn0610 and welcome to the forum

301713 Private Charles Richard Litton was serving with the 1/8th Battalion, Durham Light Infantry, when he died on the 10th April 1918. He was probably originally recorded as Missing - if you check out his webpage on the Commonwealth War Graves Commission website your will see there is an additional attachment called a Concentration Report. This shows his body was recovered from the battlefield in October 1919 along with a number of unknown British soldiers - Edit  see @Matlock1418 has already linked it.

Unfortunately his service records appear to have gone up in flames when German bombs in WW2 burnt out the London Warehouse where they would have been stored.

His Medal Index Card, (literally that, an index card raised an the relevant records office post war to assist the clerks in keeping track of the documenatation and correspondence around issuing service medals), shows that Charles was entitled to the Victory Medal and British War Medal. This combination of medals means he did not serve in a Theatre of War until at least the 1st January 1916 at the very, very earliest. As the 1/8th Battalion had been in France & Flanders since April 1915 this means he must have gone out as part of a reinforcement draft, and also that he must have done his training in the UK with another unit.

Soldiers Died in the Great War, an HMSO publication from the 1920's, recorded him as Killed in Action. He was stated to have been born and resident St Pancras, London, and enlisted London. Unfortunately no original units details given, but that wasn't mandatory.

War Diaries for units serving in France & Flanders can currently be downloaded for free. You do need to sign in with your account, but if you don't have one, even that can be set up for free as part of placing your first order.  Just click on "sign in" on any page of their online catalogue and follow the instructions - no financial details are requested.

The part of the War Diary covering March and April 1918 can be found in the catalogure here https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C14055749

Unlikely to mention him by name but hopefully with give some idea of where they were and what they were up to.

The Battalion was part of the 151 Infantry Brigade of the 50th Division. https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/army/order-of-battle-of-divisions/50th-northumbrian-division/

The British Army during this period did not take individual photographs of soldiers for identification purposes, and the large panoramic pictures of whole battalions are more a peacetime thing. If he arrived with them as part of a draft there was also have been little opportunity and probably also little desire, (think of the effect on morale to being visibly reminded of all the faces that were no longer with the battalion - dead, wounded or captured), as well of course as no place to display it. The British Army was the most restrictive of the main protagonists in allowing private cameras to be taken to war.

The most likely place to sourced a picture is going to be in local newspapers although be advised not all titles are currently digitised and online and so it could be a case of visiting a local archive. A quick check of the British Newspaper Archive isn't bringing up any likely matches.

Cheers,
Peter

[WhiteStarLine]

Hi @kiersn0610 and welcome to the forum.  The unit war diary has a very detailed account of April 1918 and has a few pages devoted to 10th April.  The vicinity of the location where he was exhumed from, Pont Riquel Post and Pont Riquel, is mentioned multiple times in the war diary.

Quote

At 1:30 am on 10th the Enemy made a strong attack on the Bridge head at POINT RIQUEL under a barrage of Field Guns at close range.  Most of the garrison were killed & wounded & the enemy in some considerable force gained a footing in the Bridge head defences.

All of the places mentioned on pages 42 - 45 of the diary can be seen by clicking on this image to get a large map of Lestrem and the various Le Marais posts.  The presence of 8 DLI soldiers in the same location with no cross suggests a hurried German burial.  The modern cemetery is just under 4km south of this spot.

For @Matlock1418 and @PRC, the map sheet reference on the October 1919 burial return is incorrect.  Sheet 31 puts him in the SE part of Brussels.  Sheet 36a puts him exactly where they were on the day.  Cheers, Bill

[Matlock1418]

3 hours ago, WhiteStarLine said:

the map sheet reference on the October 1919 burial return is incorrect.  Sheet 31 puts him in the SE part of Brussels.  Sheet 36a puts him exactly where they were on the day. 

Thanks Bill.

Sheet 31 certainly had me scratching my head!  Your look at the WD has solved the mystery 

M

[Matlock1418]

10 hours ago, Matlock1418 said:

Much on the PIC is probably self-explanatory but a few interpretations for you and to help avoid potential mis-interpretations:

His widow made an initial claim for a war pension for herself and for pension allowance(s) for her children under the prevailing Royal Warrant [which in this case would initially have been the 1918 RW] - Article 11 [widow] and Article 12 [child(ren)]

This pension index card was in the soldier’s name and there was another briefer card in the widow’s name so they could be cross-referenced/accessed.  These came from/lead to a ledger page(s) via the claim case references and then to an awards file. Unfortunately, the initial ledger is lost [probably destroyed] and the awards file probably deliberately destroyed once its use was passed [as was the common case]

Form 104-88 received  = Death notification of a married man sent from the man’s Record Office to the War Office.

Date of notification of death: It is rather unclear as to whom this notification was being made but one might think it is likely to his widow

Form 104-76 received = Declaration made by the Widow of a Soldier in support of claim to pension for herself and children

Date of birth: 22.8.1886 = his widow’s - required because her pension could be age-related/supplemented if she was >45 [which she obviously was not]. Such an age banding of pension is believed to address the less likely possibility of re-marriage with increasing age.

The standard pension initially paid to his widow was 29/7 per week from 4.11.18 [there usually was an approx. six-month gap between death and paying of a pension [to allow six months for any presumption of death and for calculation] - in the meantime standard Separation Allowances continued to be paid – so, unlike what many observers think when they first see such a card, there was not a complete absence of monies in the intervening period]. 

S.A. means Separation Allowance - A portion of a soldier's pay which was matched by the government and sent to his dependants to make sure they were not left destitute while he was on active service.  SA were often slightly more generous than pensions and children’s allowances because a wife had to maintain a home in the same level of comfort as before ready for her husband’s return whilst a widow did not have such a need and costs – after all, apparently, she could then cut back and down-size her home!  Typically, the No. for whom SA is paid on the card reflected the number of children – as we can see here and with further clarification: SA ceases 3-11-18 rather unusually added to this card [i.e. the day before the pension started - this is not a typical annotation on the majority of such cards]

50F, 5.10.18 is Form 50F used to cease the Separation Allowance and start the pension.

1918 RW 13/9 pw for a widow <45y plus increments of 6/8 [80d], 5/- [60d], 4/2 [50d] = 29/7 pw. The rounded figures in pence for the children make you wonder if those figures really were the cost of raising a child(ren) or if they just made things simpler for the pension clerks [I suspect the latter]

The child(ren)'s allowance(s) were paid to their mother, typically until they reached 16 when such payments ceased [occasionally up to 21 if they were in some form of further vocational training or sometimes if they had impairment/disability] - then the child(ren) would certainly be expected to go out to work to earn their keep. Or paid until the earlier death of a child. Hence their recorded dates.

She also got £5 Grant - a grant to cover urgent expenses arising from her husband's death - often for mourning dress [though not worn much at that time of the war], sometimes for moving home [typically downsizing as she would no longer be expected to keep a home in the same level of comfort as her husband might have expected had he returned!] - commonly used for local newspaper death notice inserts [these quite often had a photo = so a good place to search, e.g at British Newspaper Archive or through Find my Past - though this is by no means a certainty]

N/S is thought to potentially mean 'Non-Standard’ / 'Not Simple' or somethng like that i.e. special treatment/calculation required.

I think the WBH.3065 was possibly a certificate identity number to allow for the collection of the pension and allowances from a Post Office - but I am rather more cautious about that.

DEAD,1930 indicates the claim became dead eventually - likely because her youngest child reached 16 in 1930.  This raises the question had his widow remarried [and lost her pension in favour of a one-off remarriage gratuity/bounty] or had she died by then.  As I noted above I think there is a distinct possibility that Annie LITTON had died in 1918.  [This raises the possibility that J. HAYES, and it does rather look like Mr J. HAYES, on the other cards was a guardian of some sort for the children - if so, different 'motherless children's' rates would have applied]

An additional observation: 

His widow would later typically get the balance of her late husband’s pay/’Effects’ and a War Gratuity [based on the length of his War Service - handy as a back calculation to month of enlistment is usually possible] – possibly distributed through a soldier’s Will or as NoK.  But surely those, like her relatively small pension [often well below his former income], wouldn’t have really made up for the loss of a husband and children's father – Look out for his Army’s Register of Soldiers’ Effects entry [RoSE = A financial ledger - From the National Army Museum now typically available via Ancestry - unfortunately I cannot access]

I hope of wider value/interest to you.

M

[Matlock1418]

Photo of his grave headstone available from The War Graves Photographic Project https://www.twgpp.org/photograph/view/3457338 

M

[Eoin Gallacher]

17 hours ago, PRC said:

Unfortunately his service records appear to have gone up in flames when German bombs in WW2 burnt out the London Warehouse where they would have been stored.

Apologies if already stated, but he does have a few pages... but doesn't say much about his service unfortunately. (Image from Ancestry)

Eoin

[PRC]

3 minutes ago, Eoin Gallacher said:

Apologies if already stated, but he does have a few pages... but doesn't say much about his service unfortunately.

Thanks Eoin - always good to have another set of eyes take a look

So we have another service number  - 5746.
Presumably this was a home service only battalion number with a prefix, although as usual the prefix has probably been dropped.
We then have 6049, (or more likely 8/6049), followed by 301713.

Cheers,
Peter