Two regimental numbers for same person

[AilsaFoote]

My grandfather's archival military records show him as having two regimental numbers. it shows him having joined the York and Lancaster regiment in 1912, and the records show his marriage to my grandmother in 1915 under this regimental number, but by 1916 he has a different regimental number which continues throughout the record including a record of the death of his daughter in 1917.  From what I can decipher through the records he seems to be listed as a private, however, his gravestone (see attached picture) shows him as a second Lieutenant in the machine gun corps and includes one of the two regimental numbers from his records. 

From some quick research on line, I gleaned that the Machine Gun Corps was established from the York and Lancaster regiment but I am not sure about the accuracy of this and whether it could explain the two regimental numbers on his record? 

[Michelle Young]

Welcome to the forum. Assuming you are in New Zealand by the style of grave marker? Officers did not have a regimental number during the Great War. 
Can you post images of the information you have please? 
 

[George Rayner]

Am I correct in assuming this is Albert Harry Morris Y&L #1603?

George

[George Rayner]

I think that the forms of two different soldiers named Albert Harry Morris have been filed together.

Numbers being 1603 and 240149. The first was a gas fitter the second a farmer according to the forms in Fold3 and Ancestry.

Neither appear to have been promoted to Lieutenant but both discharged/disembodied 1919.

We may need other family details to distinguish which one is your relative I'm afraid.

George

[kenf48]

1 hour ago, George Rayner said:

I think that the forms of two different soldiers named Albert Harry Morris have been filed together.

Numbers being 1603 and 240149.

The service record of 1603 Albert Harry Morris, York and Lancaster Regiment, a gas fitter, born 1886 has survived. He was renumbered 240149 on the renumbering of the Territorial Force. Shown as a gas fitter on attestation documents and a farmer on discharge.

3 hours ago, AilsaFoote said:

From some quick research on line, I gleaned that the Machine Gun Corps was established from the York and Lancaster regiment but I am not sure about the accuracy of this and whether it could explain the two regimental numbers on his record?

Welcome to the GWF

If new to researching soldiers of the Great War we always recommend you have a look at how to research a soldier on the Long Long Trail website.

This page describes the formation of the MGC https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/army/regiments-and-corps/machine-gun-corps-in-the-first-world-war/

The MGC (infantry) began numbering at 3000, the earlier numbers were allocated to the Motor Machine Gun Corps.

In this instance the renumbering of 1603 Albert Morris was an administrative consequence of the renumbering of the Territorial Force Infantry in 1917

https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/soldiers/a-soldiers-life-1914-1918/renumbering-of-the-territorial-force-in-1917/

It is not unusual for a soldier to have a number of regimental numbers either on transfer or as above due to one of the frequent reorganisations during the war.  It was not until 1920 a soldier was given a unique army number, but as Michelle has noted in the British Army officers did not have a  'service' number.    Wounded in October 1916, later in his service Albert was attached to 536 Agricultural Company Labour Corps but was not formally transferred and therefore retained his Y & L number. He never served in the MGC.

In other words Pte 1603/240149 Albert Harry Morris is probably not the same man as shown on the grave marker in your original post,  which one is your grandfather?  The TF soldier was married to Ada Elizabeth and as you have noted had a daughter named Alice who died in infancy on the 5th April 1918.

There is no 2/Lt A.H. Morris listed on the newly published MGC Database at TNA. I'd suggest the soldier whose grave marker you posted may have served in the New Zealand MGC

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

It is often best to sort out basic genealogy before trying to establish military service.

 

 

 

[George Rayner]

3 minutes ago, kenf48 said:

He was renumbered 240149 on the renumbering of the Territorial Force.

Thanks Ken-how did he move from being a gas fitter in 1902 to a farmer in 1912 I wonder?

George

[Matlock1418]

Ailsa,

Welcome to GWF.

3 hours ago, AilsaFoote said:

 

A cautionary note on NZ grave markers ... These markers were commonly implemented by the local Returned Servicemen's Association [RSA] and they could easily get their details mixed and or muddled when compiling such markers from unidentified sources 40 years after service.

[I know this since I have a relative, buried in the 1960s in the RSA plot at Pukehoe, and he is recorded as "N Z Military Forces" [with whom he did not serve during the GW] and with a British regimental number [under which he served in the GW] - a properly confusing pickle.  Hey ho!!  I have subsequently wondered if his NZMF details perhaps matched with some WW2 service ?? but I have not identifed this]

I wish you well in solving your mystery - probably worth looking to see if he also served in WW2.

M

Edited 17 April by Matlock1418
add

[kenf48]

22 minutes ago, George Rayner said:

Thanks Ken-how did he move from being a gas fitter in 1902 to a farmer in 1912 I wonder?

George

That is another mystery to be solved he is shown as a farmer on the daughter's death certificate in 1918 and his next of kin, wife's address in earlier papers is the farm at Highgate House Farm, Goldthorpe nr. Rotherham which was his address on discharge.  Perhaps he married into  farming(?).  As you say he was employed as a gas fitter by the Barnsley Gas Company when he attested on the 31 May 1912.

For clarity it looks like they were using old attestation forms. King George V  came to throne 1910 and the officer has struck through the '0'

(Image from FMP)

btw I made the same mistake on first glance 

[AilsaFoote]

3 hours ago, AilsaFoote said:

My grandfather's archival military records show him as having two regimental numbers. it shows him having joined the York and Lancaster regiment in 1912, and the records show his marriage to my grandmother in 1915 under this regimental number, but by 1916 he has a different regimental number which continues throughout the record including a record of the death of his daughter in 1917.  From what I can decipher through the records he seems to be listed as a private, however, his gravestone (see attached picture) shows him as a second Lieutenant in the machine gun corps and includes one of the two regimental numbers from his records. 

From some quick research on line, I gleaned that the Machine Gun Corps was established from the York and Lancaster regiment but I am not sure about the accuracy of this and whether it could explain the two regimental numbers on his record? 

 

1 hour ago, Michelle Young said:

Welcome to the forum. Assuming you are in New Zealand by the style of grave marker? Officers did not have a regimental number during the Great War. 
Can you post images of the information you have please? 
 

Thank you. 

Yes, I am in NZ.

He immigrated to NZ after the Great War.  

I have the file from https://uk.forceswarrecords.com

I did try to upload the file I have but it was too big. It does seem like the first page may be confused with another soldier. 

[AilsaFoote]

30 minutes ago, kenf48 said:

That is another mystery to be solved he is shown as a farmer on the daughter's death certificate in 1918 and his next of kin, wife's address in earlier papers is the farm at Highgate House Farm, Goldthorpe nr. Rotherham which was his address on discharge.  Perhaps he married into  farming(?).  As you say he was employed as a gas fitter by the Barnsley Gas Company when he attested on the 31 May 1912.

For clarity it looks like they were using old attestation forms. King George V  came to throne 1910 and the officer has struck through the '0'

(Image from FMP)

btw I made the same mistake on first glance 

I am interested in the fact that these were old forms- I had completely missed this detail at the bottom of the document. 

Yes he definitely married into farming and was a farmer here in New Zealand so he may have started out as a gas fitter. There is some general confusion about his date of birth and age across records including here it seems but his marriage and birth and death of his daughter match my records. Thanks for taking the time to respond  

[AilsaFoote]

48 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

Ailsa,

Welcome to GWF.

A cautionary note on NZ grave markers ... These markers were commonly implemented by the local Returned Servicemen's Association [RSA] and they could easily get their details mixed and or muddled when compiling such markers from unidentified sources 40 years after service.

[I know this since I have a relative, buried in the 1960s in the RSA plot at Pukehoe, and he is recorded as "N Z Military Forces" [with whom he did not serve during the GW] and with a British regimental number [under which he served in the GW] - a properly confusing pickle.  Hey ho!!  I have subsequently wondered if his NZMF details perhaps matched with some WW2 service ?? but I have not identifed this]

I wish you well in solving your mystery - probably worth looking to see if he also served in WW2.

M

That is helpful information, thank you. I did wonder about whether it had been incorrectly identified especially as he did not immigrate to NZ until 1920.  He did not serve in WW2. 

[George Rayner]

47 minutes ago, kenf48 said:

when he attested on the 31 May 1912.

He is listed, as 1603, as being 18years and 3months (b around 1894) but 

when he become 2410149 he is listed as 26 on 31-5-1912 therefore born 1886

George

[AilsaFoote]

2 hours ago, George Rayner said:

Am I correct in assuming this is Albert Harry Morris Y&L #1603?

George

That is what I have but his records have both numbers and the accompanying information matches our genealogy records. I think 

 

1 hour ago, kenf48 said:

The service record of 1603 Albert Harry Morris, York and Lancaster Regiment, a gas fitter, born 1886 has survived. He was renumbered 240149 on the renumbering of the Territorial Force. Shown as a gas fitter on attestation documents and a farmer on discharge.

Welcome to the GWF

If new to researching soldiers of the Great War we always recommend you have a look at how to research a soldier on the Long Long Trail website.

This page describes the formation of the MGC https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/army/regiments-and-corps/machine-gun-corps-in-the-first-world-war/

The MGC (infantry) began numbering at 3000, the earlier numbers were allocated to the Motor Machine Gun Corps.

In this instance the renumbering of 1603 Albert Morris was an administrative consequence of the renumbering of the Territorial Force Infantry in 1917

https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/soldiers/a-soldiers-life-1914-1918/renumbering-of-the-territorial-force-in-1917/

It is not unusual for a soldier to have a number of regimental numbers either on transfer or as above due to one of the frequent reorganisations during the war.  It was not until 1920 a soldier was given a unique army number, but as Michelle has noted in the British Army officers did not have a  'service' number.    Wounded in October 1916, later in his service Albert was attached to 536 Agricultural Company Labour Corps but was not formally transferred and therefore retained his Y & L number. He never served in the MGC.

In other words Pte 1603/240149 Albert Harry Morris is probably not the same man as shown on the grave marker in your original post,  which one is your grandfather?  The TF soldier was married to Ada Elizabeth and as you have noted had a daughter named Alice who died in infancy on the 5th April 1918.

There is no 2/Lt A.H. Morris listed on the newly published MGC Database at TNA. I'd suggest the soldier whose grave marker you posted may have served in the New Zealand MGC

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

It is often best to sort out basic genealogy before trying to establish military service.

 

 

 

Thank you. I appreciate the detail shared. This is very helpful and explains the confusion provided by the numbers. I was aware of the lonlongtrail site but will take a closer look at the details there to see what other insights I can gain. 

[AilsaFoote]

3 minutes ago, George Rayner said:

He is listed, as 1603, as being 18years and 3months (b around 1894) but 

when he become 2410149 he is listed as 26 on 31-5-1912 therefore born 1886

George

Yes. This was one of the things that I found confusing. There is still some work to do trying to solve the mystery of his birth date as it shows as different on different historical records - We have always had his birth as 1886 but still have some confusing records that makes me think there is more work needed.  I am slowly unravelling the pieces of the puzzle. thanks for your help. 

[Matlock1418]

1 hour ago, kenf48 said:

(Image from FMP)

23 minutes ago, George Rayner said:

He is listed, as 1603, as being 18years and 3months (b around 1894) but 

There is an Albert Harry MORRIS, born in Barnsley, 1894 - Mother's maiden surname may assist

From General Register Office - Digital image only £2.50

M

[kenf48]

There are three ages shown in his record

On31 May 1912 on attestation to the 5th Battalion Y&L (TF) in 1912 Albert Harry Morris declared his age as 18 years 3 months

this accords with the birth record above as noted by @Matlock1418

In his service record:-

The AF B2007  "Statement of Services" shows age on enlistment 18 years and 3 months

The AF Z 10 "Dispersal Certificate" states born in the year 1886 - as does his Protection Certificate AF Z.11

There are two A.F 103B which show enlistment 31.5.1912  age on enlistment 26 years and another which shows age 22 on enlistment then struck through and shows 26 years

What I believe may have happened is that he re-enlisted under the Bounty scheme, there is a document confirming this and the clerk completing the form has put the original enlistment date, i.e. 31. 5. 1912 which is correct and then 26 years as his age on re-enlistment. Whilst as a hypothesis that may seem reasonable i.e. 26 years in 1919 gives a birth year of 26 but born in 1886, as shown on the discharge documents makes him 33 years old in February 1919. Unfortunately trying to unpick what appear to be clerical errors from 100 years ago is futile. There is no doubt from the records that 1603 Morris 5th York and Lancaster was renumbered 240419 in the 1917 TF renumbering exercise. The number is consistent with the block allocated to the 5th York & Lancs. 

There is also a document apparently dated 1922 in which the soldier states his correct address is 44 Honeywell Barnsley but another note which states no receipt forthcoming for the medals. The Medal Rolls give no indication he did not receive his medals.

He married on 13 November 1915 I guess his marriage certificate shows his true age. 

Minor correction to previous post his record shows he was kicked by a horse rather than wounded in October 1916.

 

[Matlock1418]

1 hour ago, kenf48 said:

He married on 13 November 1915 I guess his marriage certificate shows his true age. 

One might hope so, but I think sometimes "Full" [i.e. age over 18 now - was it not 21 in 1915?] may perhaps be used instead - Clearly another document to peruse in detail [always assuming he correctly declared his age and/or the registrar correctly recorded it - neither of which are certainties!]

M

Edited 17 April by Matlock1418
qustion

[Tawhiri]

9 hours ago, Matlock1418 said:

There is an Albert Harry MORRIS, born in Barnsley, 1894 - Mother's maiden surname may assist

From General Register Office - Digital image only £2.50

This birth fits with his 1965 death registration in New Zealand, which gives his age as 71 so born around 1893/94. He was also apparently christened on 29 March 1894. Somebody has put together a fairly well documented family tree for him on FamilySearch, which gives a birth date of 16 February 1894. Given his birth was registered in the second quarter of 1894, it must have fallen outside the 42 days allowed to register a birth unless it was done on 1 April 1894.

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:N12L-B6Y

His will gives his wife's name as M'liss Anne Louise Morris, which seems to be at odds with the Ada Elizabeth mentioned above as the being the wife of the territorial soldier serving as 1603/240149 with the York and Lancaster Regiment. There is, however, a cemetery transcription for an Ada Elizabeth Morris, the wife of Albert Harry Morris, who died on 22 March 1955 at the age of 65 and who is buried in the Maungaturoto Anglican cemetery, which suggests he remarried after his first wife died.

In the 1911 England and Wales census his age is 17 and his occupation is given as gas fitter which is consistent with both a birth in early 1894 and his occupation on enlistment in 1912.

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XWV1-GR5

The mystery of where the 2nd Lieutenant comes from still remains though, as it is clear from the preceding discussion he only ever served as an enlisted man during WW1. I'd suggest an approach to the New Zealand Defence Force archives to see if he served in some capacity during WW2. It would have been home service only, as he doesn't appear in any embarkation rolls on the Auckland War Museum Online Cenotaph website. The serving with the Machine Gun Corps seems to be a complete fabrication, perhaps for the reasons noted above by Matlock1418, not done deliberately, but due to the passage of time and the difficulties of establishing the true service of a soldier who had served half a world away with the British Army.

Noting that he served with the 536 Agricultural Company Labour Corps in the latter part of the war, perhaps this was his entry route into farming. It certainly seems to fit with the occupation of farmer on his daughter's 1918 death registration.

Edited 17 April by Tawhiri

[AilsaFoote]

18 hours ago, kenf48 said:

There are three ages shown in his record

On31 May 1912 on attestation to the 5th Battalion Y&L (TF) in 1912 Albert Harry Morris declared his age as 18 years 3 months

this accords with the birth record above as noted by @Matlock1418

In his service record:-

The AF B2007  "Statement of Services" shows age on enlistment 18 years and 3 months

The AF Z 10 "Dispersal Certificate" states born in the year 1886 - as does his Protection Certificate AF Z.11

There are two A.F 103B which show enlistment 31.5.1912  age on enlistment 26 years and another which shows age 22 on enlistment then struck through and shows 26 years

What I believe may have happened is that he re-enlisted under the Bounty scheme, there is a document confirming this and the clerk completing the form has put the original enlistment date, i.e. 31. 5. 1912 which is correct and then 26 years as his age on re-enlistment. Whilst as a hypothesis that may seem reasonable i.e. 26 years in 1919 gives a birth year of 26 but born in 1886, as shown on the discharge documents makes him 33 years old in February 1919. Unfortunately trying to unpick what appear to be clerical errors from 100 years ago is futile. There is no doubt from the records that 1603 Morris 5th York and Lancaster was renumbered 240419 in the 1917 TF renumbering exercise. The number is consistent with the block allocated to the 5th York & Lancs. 

There is also a document apparently dated 1922 in which the soldier states his correct address is 44 Honeywell Barnsley but another note which states no receipt forthcoming for the medals. The Medal Rolls give no indication he did not receive his medals.

He married on 13 November 1915 I guess his marriage certificate shows his true age. 

Minor correction to previous post his record shows he was kicked by a horse rather than wounded in October 1916.

 

Thank you. This clarification around some of the documentation is very helpful. I had noted the same information but now have a better understanding of each document and the relevance of the info. The Honeywell address is something I need to explore as he and his family immigrated to NZ in late 1920 and his age on the ships passenger register is recorded as 34 which aligns with the birth date 1886. Thank you for all your help and expertise.