10844 Cpl D E Murray, E Lancs

[Michelle Young]

This really has opened up a can of worms! 

[MelPack]

J

I think that the possibility of a successful identification in this case centres entirely on the recovered Corporal stripes. Given that this is a Le Cateau casualty and the BEF was in retreat then it is surely a matter of eliminating other East Lancs Corporals KIA in the material period and location?

I fully accept that anomalies are thrown up in other Exhumation Reports but do they have any bearing on this specific case?

[jay dubaya]

I don’t think it will be that straight cut and yes the other reports hold great weight over this particular case. Evidently two officers tunics are associated with the remains of other ranks whilst the grave in question produced a pair of trousers belonging to another. Because of these anomalies the association of the corporals tunic to the remains creates a stumbling block. We have another L/Cpl who may have ranked up in the days prior to his demise and the likelihood of finding other corporal’s who were taken PoW and relieved of their tunics due to wounds isn’t implausible. A reasonable explanation needs to be found for the two officer tunics as well as no L/Cpl stripes on Dickinson’s tunic.

Submitting a case like this needs to be compelling in its evidence from the start. Choosing Cpl. Lock as the only possible candidate at this stage won’t cut the mustard. But, as mentioned above, I haven’t given up yet.

J

[MelPack]

J

Is it worthwhile asking the CWGC if they have the Special Exhumation Reports for the Unknown graves? I note that there are 150 WW1 burials in the cemetery, only 70 of which are named.

I am still of the view that this particular case is sui generis given that the exhumations were of existing graves bearing crosses marked 145 Englische Krieger 26.8.14 and all of the deadhad to be of that date from Le Cateau.

[jay dubaya]

At present anything is worth while to keep this on the rails, although I doubt there will be any further reports for the unknowns here it has to be worth an enquiry if anyone wants to pick that up. There are three others named from the mass grave at Ligny-en-Cambresis all with dates of death recorded as 15th January 1915. I'm not familiar with the battle here and need to do some reading. 

J

[jay dubaya]

Oh dear... this is a can of worms that keeps on giving. We now have case of identifiable criteria presented from an exhumation being betrayed and carelessly adjusted to fit a casualty.

The exhumation report (posted earlier) identified as East Lancs by numerals (on tunic) and 10854 on boots has actually been identified as Pte 10845 WH Rhodes, KOYLI, KiA 26th August 1914 (incidently one of my hometown boys). A subsequent search for any others with the number 10854 reveals Pte N Gaskell, KORL, KiA 26th August 1914 and now remembered on the La Ferte-sous-Jouarre Memorial and I can see six unknown KORL at Fontain-au-Pire.

I fear more similar examples are going to surface and will not in any way help with Michelle's opening case. I think it is very plausable to suggest many items of kit were discarded in random graves by the Germans who buried these soldiers.

J

[LDT006]

Sorry for coming in late. I had already typed a reply but managed to lose it....

Just my 2 cents:
The body was recovered from a German mass grave and identified as a Corporal from the East Lancs. The number on his trousers could have been misread or was not a service number (I have never seen this before, a soldier identified by trousers number..)
This mass grave was made to bury all the dead from the nearby battlefield.
I agree that Corporal Lock is the prime candidate for this grave but some work needs to be done to exclude others.

The 2 officers Cowan and Kent were buried in a single grave, not the mass grave. This indicates that they could have been treated medically and buried later individually.

On 16/05/2024 at 22:20, jay dubaya said:

There are three others named from the mass grave at Ligny-en-Cambresis all with dates of death recorded as 15th January 1915.

Jay,
some identifications there are also wrong but I don't see how this can be a problem for this case, there's no need to correct all errors made in the past to build a solid case?

Luc.
 

[jay dubaya]

I am working on this case at present and there's a lot to sift through and although 2 cents is a lot in these parts my money is elsewhere. Ligny just helps illuminates the hectic nature of the burials and has little no bearing on this case. 

Here's where I'm at currently -

Fontaine-au-Pire Communal Cemetery, 171 graves – 101 unknowns and 70 named (includes one Special Memorial Believed to be buried in cemetery, one buried near this spot and 2 believed to be, all relate to 1914 casualties).

By the end of August 1914 what is now Plot I contain a mass grave of 129 unknown British, what is now Plot II contained a further mass grave of 16 unknown British along with 3 individual graves for Major Rickman (Rifle Bde) and two unknown British officers. A total of 148 individuals buried by the Germans after the Battle of Le Cateau, by the Armistice a further 22 graves had been added; 15 during 1917, 7 during 1918. Plot II also contained German dead.

During October 1920 the two large graves marked by the Germans as ‘145 English Warriors 26/8/14’ were exhumed for identification purposes. The two unknown officers were also exhumed at this time and identified as East Lancs by their regimental buttons, Major Rickman nor any post 1914 graves were exhumed. Of the 145 exhumations 12 were identified by name at the time; 5 small book, 3 correspondence, 3 ID disc and 1 engraved watch.

By 23^rd February 1927 a further 27 graves had been identified, the names of 5 soldiers appear on the typed list for the La Ferte memorial, 3 of which would be identified prior to 1936. With the exception of 1 who was identified by rank all these identifications were based on regimental numbered artifacts although 7 numbers were adjusted to fit a casualty. These items were; trousers 12, boots 9, caps 3, cardigan 2, tunic 2, holdall 1, towel 1, shirt 1, spoon 1, underpants 1 (in 3 instances the number was repeated on more than one item). Several of these identifications conflict with other regimental insignia and rank associated with the remains which create some anomalies.

Between 11^th and 12^th March 1936, 13 graves were exhumed from Plot II and reinterred in Plot I, it’s unclear why only these graves were ‘regrouped’, perhaps they had encroached onto private civilian plots. This included the two unknown East Lancs officers, who had been buried side by side along with Major Rickman who again remained in-situ with the remainder of Plot II and III.

When the two officers were exhumed on 12^th March 1936 they were found to have Hampshire buttons on their tunics, perhaps an easy mistake to make at the time (both a laurel wreath, East Lancs surmounted by a crown and Sphynx in centre and Hampshire, tiger above crown in centre).  Both were buried in coffins wrapped in great coats, the Lieut with East Lancs numerals and the 2^nd Lieut with Warwicks cap badge in pocket. A further search of the Lieut revealed a compass marked ‘934’ and a cuff link, These remains are believed to be those of Lieut Kent. Inside the coffin of the 2^nd Lieut under the scull was a greatcoat with Rifle Bde numerals and black buttons, the remains are those of 2^nd Lieut Cowan.

Erroneous identifications noted so far -

Doc 2002434 identified as GS uniform with Rifle Bde numerals and buttons, No. 9396 on holdall. Later identified as 9396 Pte Harris, 1^st SLI reported missing/KiA 26^th August 1914.

Doc 2002345 identified as GS uniform with E. Lancs numerals and No. 10854 on boots. Later identified as 10845 Pte Rhodes, 2^nd KOYLI. A surprising choice given the numerals found on the tunic and 10845 Pte Halstead, 1^st East Lancs reported missing/KiA 26^th August 1914. This also highlights 10854 Pte Gaskell, 1^st KOR Lancs, missing/KiA 26^th August 1914. Both these soldiers are remembered at La Ferte.

Doc 2002394 identified as GS uniform with Somerset numerals and No. 7964 in cap. Later identified as 7362 Pte Edmunds, 1^st SLI reported missing/KiA 26^th August 1914. The cap most probably belonged to 7964 Pte Chapman, 1^st SLI, missing and taken prisoner on 24^th August 1914.

Doc 2002395 identified as GS uniform with Somerset numerals, corporal stripes and No. 9407 in trousers. Later identified as 9607 Pte Williams, 1^st SLI reported missing/KiA 26^th August 1914.

Doc 2002419 identified as GS uniform with Somerset numerals and No. 6797 SLI in cardigan. Later identified as 6797 Pte Baker, 1^st Hants, reported missing/KiA 26^th August 1914. Cardigan may belong to 6997 Pte Gillespie, 1^st SLI taken prisoner 26^th August 1914.

Doc 2002422 identified as GS uniform, Somerset cap badge and No.5959 in cap. Later identified as 5959 Pte Whettleton, 1^st SLI  missing/KiA 26^th August 1914.

Doc 200428 identified as GS uniform, Sergeant and Somersets. Later identified as 4663 Sgt Brooks.

Doc 2002450 identified as GS uniform with Rifle Bde numerals and buttons, No. 8997 stamped on spoon, Later identified as 8997 Pte Hiles, 1^st SLI reported missing/KiA 26^th August 1914.

Doc 2002469 identified as GS uniform, E. Lancs numerals, Corporal stripes and No. 10844 in trousers. Later identified as 10844 Cpl Murray, 1^st East Lancs, KiA 13^th May 1915, 90km away near Ypres.

There are potentially over 100 Special Exhumation sheets missing for the unknowns (which may include a Captain) plus 11080 Pte Turner, 1^st KORL, 2210 Pte Watts, 1^st Warwicks and 6921 Pte Vincent, 1^st SLI (albeit this grave is marked by the special memorial). All the remaining unknowns appear to have been identified through regimental numbers, insignia or rank only with no lasting names attributable to these graves.

The context of a mass grave containing casualties from several regiments is fraught with difficulty when it comes to identification. The relationship of artifacts with individual remains in this situation is outlined above with doc 200394, a number was adjusted to fit a known casualty but the original number belonged to a casualty that was taken prisoner at the same time evidently minus his cap. Other docs listed above illuminate the presence of loose items of kit being associated with the wrong remains particularly caps and tunics which are easily dislodged or removed from wounded men. Its unlikely that men would be found in the wrong trousers at this early stage of the war and I therefore believe the number 10844 has been mis-transcribed from either 10845 (1 candidate) or 10854 (2 candidates) and the corporal's tunic is a red herring.

I agree that 10170 Cpl Lock is a candidate but he is my least favored at present, 3 further candidates identified are 10854 Pte Rhodes KOYLI, 10854 Pte Halstead East Lancs and 10845 Pte Gaskell KORL.

Edited 23 May by jay dubaya
spelling... it's getting worse

[Michelle Young]

Thanks Jay, just catching up with this. Away at the moment with rather patchy WiFi. 

[glassblower]

Reading this reminds me of a similar case.

2048 Pte. William Andrew Barber. 2/Lancashire Fusiliers. Killed in action. Presumed dead: 3rd November 1914. Burial given to be Naves Communal Cemetery Extension which is approximately 90 kilometres from the 2/Lancs Fus. location on 3/11/14. This is closer to the Le Cateau battlefield and a map reference is given on the concentration report that I haven't checked yet. ID was by a name in paybook.

https://www.cwgc.org/find-records/find-war-dead/casualty-details/307710/william-andrew-barber/

Could he be a Le Cateau 26/8/14 death with a final decision made about his fate on 3/11/14?

Could this also be the case for 10844 Murray making the burial ID correct but the current recorded date of death wrong?

GB

[glassblower]

Naves contains a number of burials from the nearby fighting at Le Cateau on 26th August 1914 and the Red Cross PofW record for him (actually under 2048 J.Barber) shows him officially missing 26th August with the war office casualty listing of Sept. 1914 also showing him as 'missing'. His GRO death certificate however shows 3/11/14.

[jay dubaya]

On 24/07/2024 at 12:00, glassblower said:

Naves contains a number of burials from the nearby fighting at Le Cateau on 26th August 1914 and the Red Cross PofW record for him (actually under 2048 J.Barber) shows him officially missing 26th August with the war office casualty listing of Sept. 1914 also showing him as 'missing'. His GRO death certificate however shows 3/11/14.

I think he's very much a 26th August casualty... I'll add this to the can of worms, but for now back to the OP

 

A request to the CWGC regarding further details for Fontaine-au-Pire Communal Cemetery has been returned with nothing more than a link to the cemetery, their claim is no further information is available, disappointingly, not even a spreadsheet… so I made one.

I apologise to the reader from the outset, the following is a ramble of my current thoughts regarding this case.

It is beyond all reasonable doubt Cpl. 10844 Murray, East Lancs is not buried here, he was killed in action nine months later some 50 miles away. It is inconceivable to suggest his body was carried here to be buried, besides which, the remains are one of 129 known to be buried in the original Plot I. Given the context of the burial the grave must belong to a casualty of August 1914 and there is absolutely no evidence to suggest Murray died during this period. This glaringly obvious misidentification uncovered by Michelle has revealed a catalogue of similar errors with other burials in Plot I.

To base an understanding on the identification of Murray it is important to look at all the burials of 1914 and the criteria used to determine them. This case offers two avenues of thought to examine a possible identification for the remains buried in I.A.64. One looks at the East Lancashire corporal’s tunic which offers possible candidate, the alternative route follows the number 10844 marked in the trousers.

The cemetery contains 171 CWGC graves (148 of August 1914 and 23 post 1914) –101 unknowns (all 1914) and 70 named headstones. The 1914 graves include two which are ‘believed be’ and one ‘buried near this spot’, plus one special memorial ‘buried in this cemetery actual grave unknown’. With the exception of Major Rickman, 1^st Rifle Bde, who died of wounds on the 27th, all the 1914 burials were buried under similar circumstances as unknowns, albeit two officers received notable treatment.

Today the graves of 1914 can be broken down into the following –

55 Somersets – 19 known (1 special memorial and 1 buried near this spot), 36 unknown.

22 Rifle Bde – 6 known, 16 unknown.

12 Warwicks – 8 known (1 believed to be), 4 unknown.

12 East Lancs – 2 known, 10 unknown (includes a Captain).

10 Hampshires – 4 known (1 believed to be), 6 unknown.

9 Lancs Fusiliers – 4 known, 5 unknown.

7 KORL – 1 known, 6 unknown (includes a Lieut).

1 KOYLI – 1 known

1 RE – 1 known

1 Royal Scots – 1 known

18 completely unknown

 

By the end of August 1914, in what is now Plot I, there were two parallel trench graves containing 129 unknown British soldiers. In what is now Plot II, was a further trench grave of 16 unknown British, nearby were three individual graves belonging to Major Rickman and two unknown British officers. A total of 148 individuals buried by the Germans shortly after the Battle of Le Cateau, by the Armistice a further 23 graves had been added; 15 during 1917, 8 during 1918, these 23 graves are not included in this report.

During October 1920 the two officers and the three large graves marked by the Germans as ‘145 English Warriors 26/8/14’ were exhumed for identification purposes. The available documents for the cemetery include the Grave Registration Report Forms (complete), Headstone Schedules (complete) and 44 Special Exhumation Reports (SER) three are missing for named graves which includes the special memorial and all are missing for the 101 unknowns. A regiment was associated with 119 sets of remains and various artefacts marked with numbers were associated with 73. The 16 buried together in Plot II offered no identification of any description. 12 sets of remains were identified by name during the initial process, five by small book, three by correspondence, three by ID disc and one by an engraved watch.

By 23^rd February 1927 a further 31 graves had been identified by name and three more would be identified prior to 1936. With the exception of one who was identified by rank and regiment all these identifications were based on regimental numbered artifacts. These items were - trousers 12, boots 9, caps 3, cardigan 2, tunic 2, holdall 1, towel 1, shirt 1, spoon 1, underpants 1 (in 3 instances the number was repeated on more than one item recovered with the individual). Several of these identifications conflict with other regimental insignia and rank associated with the remains which creates some anomalies. Seven numbers have been adjusted to fit casualties

Between 11^th and 12^th March 1936, 13 individual graves that had originally been buried amongst the German dead were exhumed from Plot II and reinterred in Plot I. This included the two unknown East Lancs officers, who had been buried next to Major Rickman who again remained in-situ with the remainder of Plot II and III. It is unclear why only these graves were ‘regrouped’, perhaps they had encroached onto private civilian plots. When the officers were exhumed on 12^th March 1936, they were found to have Hampshire buttons and collar badges on their tunics and not East Lancs. Perhaps an easy mistake to make for a war time only commission officer of the time being betrayed by his ignorance or regimental insignia. Both buttons - a laurel wreath surmounted with crown, in the centre a Hampshire rose and a Sphynx for the East Lancs, collar badges - a Hampshire rose surrounded by a laurel wreath which is omitted for the Lancashire rose.  Both had been buried in coffins wrapped in great coats, the Lieut with East Lancs numerals and the 2^nd Lieut with Warwicks cap badge in pocket. A further search of the Lieut revealed a compass marked ‘934’ and a cuff link, These remains are believed to be those of Lieut Kent, the alternative being Lieut Griffith who has no known grave. Inside the coffin of the 2^nd Lieut under the scull was a greatcoat with Rifle Bde numerals and black buttons, the remains are those of 2^nd Lieut Cowan.

 

The error with the initial identification of the officers holds a clue to the burials as a whole and how regimental insignia from tunics and caps has been associated with the wrong individual in several instances.

The cemetery contains four named and two unknown Somerset serjeants, the battalion lost four on 26^th August. Three of these named serjeants were initially identified by the rank on their tunics (one buried near this spot) when exhumed, the other by number marked in trousers. There’s potentially too many Somerset serjeants tunics.

A number marked in a Somerset cap has been altered to identify a casualty of the same regiment when the number can be traced to a prisoner taken by the Germans on the same day. There are potentially similar examples of numbers relating to men from various regiments having been taken PoW which relate to those unknowns with lost/missing Special Exhumation Reports, nine probable instances of this have so far being identified amongst ICRC records.

Besides the two officers that were erroneously identified by regimental insignia in 1920 there are four examples amongst the named graves where regimental insignia does not accord with the named identifications. All four cases involve numbers marked on items of kit –

1.     A cardigan marked with a SLI number and tunic with Somerset numerals has been identified as a Hampshire casualty as the number corresponds to him, a SLI soldier cannot be identified by this number.

2.     Boots marked with a number and a tunic with East Lancs numerals has been identified as a KOYLI casualty with the number slightly adjusted to fit the casualty.

3.     A number marked on a holdall (similar to a ‘housewife’) along with a tunic with Rifle Bde numerals and buttons has been identified as a SLI casualty who matches the number.

4.     A number marked on a spoon along with a tunic with Rifle Bde numerals and buttons has been identified as a SLI casualty who matches the number.

Of the 101 unknown burials 2 are recorded with number, rank and regiment, 35 recorded with number and regiment, 10 by rank and regiment, 36 by regiment only, the remaining 18 offered no identification at all. Since all these burials are missing the SER we cannot say with any confidence what items of kit were marked with numbers nor how regimental and rank particulars were ascertained. There is one casualty amongst these burials where two similar numbers are marked on the GRRF, this strongly infers there was some doubt of its accuracy during the exhumation for identification purposes in 1920. Given none of these burials could be identified by name suggests there are many examples of the numbers not being recorded accurately and/or do not accord with any regimental insignia also recovered.

Perhaps a glaring example of this is Pte 10854 Rhodes, KOYLI. He was identified by 10845 marked in boots and an East Lancs tunic, he is the only KOYLI casualty buried here and is one of only three named KOYLI burials from this period (48 in total), the other two are buried eight miles away at Le Cateau. Whilst adjustment of the number to fit the casualty may be acceptable it is difficult to accept the choice made by the DGR&E when the same adjusted number fits an East Lancs casualty who clearly matches with the tunic. However, the number originally recorded does fit a KORL casualty with no known grave, the cemetery contains seven KORL graves with only one named. A further example are the remains initially identified as 9407 marked in trousers, tunic with Somerset numerals and corporal chevrons, later identified as 9607 Pte Williams, Somersets. Again, the adjustment of the number to fit the casualty can be accepted, but a private’s tunic certainly would not be identified as a corporal’s. This also leads to two unknown Rifle Bde serjeants recorded on the GRRF, we can only speculate the identification perhaps came from a tunic marked as such, however, the Rifle Bde did not loose any serjeants at Le Cateau and both headstones are marked today as unknown serjeants.

This study has illuminated an abundance of evidence to suggest loose pieces of kit, especially items that are easily removed  such as caps and tunics have been associated with the wrong remains. If the examples above are deemed to be correct in their final identification, how can the presence of regimental insignia from another regiment or conflicting rank be explained?

Beyond the identifications ascertained by pay books, correspondence and ID discs (which in all but one case included corresponding numbers or insignia on artifacts), the pattern of identification holds more weight with numbers associated with the individual remains over regimental or other indicators. However, on what artefact the number was marked depends on the veracity of these individual identifications.

Given the timeline being very early in the war, it seems unlikely items of numbered kit would be in the possession of anyone other than the owner. Unlike trousers, boots and under garments which were likely still with their owner, caps and tunics are easily removed especially during the summer heat and chaos of August 1914. I note one image showing the East Lancs at Le Cateau, soldiers can be seen firing rifles from a trench position minus their caps and tunics. It is reasonable to suggest many British soldiers who died at Le Cateau were not wearing caps or tunics at the point of their demise. This proposition opens the door to  bodies being collected (perhaps by the local civilian population), those dead without tunics may well have had the nearest discarded tunic or cap placed over the body as is common for transportation and burial. Unlike boots and trousers which I believe were still being worn by their owner, we have no knowledge of the association to artifacts such as caps and tunics and their relation to the individuals in this grave environment.

 

Conclusion.

Cpl 10844 Murray, East Lancs. The identifiable criteria recovered with the remains does indeed identify this man – trousers marked 10844 and an East Lancs corporal’s tunic. Both the numerals and corporal chevrons on the tunic are distinctive and cannot be confused with another regiment or rank. But it cannot be Murray, he has no known grave and should be remembered at the Menin Gate. He was never posted as missing nor was their any presumption surrounding his date of death.

Cpl 10170 Lock was the only corporal from the regiment reported killed on 26^th August 1914 which appears to make him the prime candidate for the tunic. However, the number marked in the trousers 10844 is unlikely to be mistaken for 10170, the only other explanation being Lock was wearing Murrays’ trousers. This appears an unlikely proposition given these two soldiers had been overseas for three days, marching for most of that time with short periods of rest before facing the advancing Germans. The timing of soldier wearing another’s trousers belonging to the same unit doesn’t hold much value in this case. It presents a difficult avenue to pursue in search of evidence to suggest this is the grave of Cpl Lock. 

In my opinion a corporal of the East Lancs has removed or had his tunic removed either to battle with the temperature or being tended to due to wounds. Later the same tunic has been associated with another individual who was eventually buried at Fontaine-au-Pire. This now infers the number 10844 has been recorded incorrectly as no other candidate with this number exists for this timeframe, and we cannot say with any confidence the tunic or regiment was associated with the remains prior to death.

Simple adjustment of 10844 gives the following candidates who have no known grave - 10845 Pte Halstead, East Lancs, 10841 Pte Bolton, KORL and 10854 Pte Gaskell, KORL, also 10845 Pte Rhodes, KOYLI should not be dismissed. It is also noted there is an unknown East Lancs grave recorded with 10874 but we cannot say which artifact this was marked on.

The identity of the remains purported to be Cpl 10844 Murray will remain a mystery, no single name can be attributed to the grave. The presence of the number marked in the trousers is the most likely candidate, but it cannot be Murray and the number can only have been recorded incorrectly. This creates a most unfortunate position since the grave should be marked as an UBS, the principles of the IWGC/CWGC charter should bear this burden and accept a historical error was made in the identification of Cpl 10844 Murray and amend the records accordingly.

 

 

[Ronnie]

Hi I believe David Ernest Murray was my great uncle. My mother, his niece, has information and pictures of him. My email is deleted

[kenf48]

 

3 minutes ago, Ronnie said:

Hi I believe David Ernest Murray was my great uncle. My mother, his niece, has information and pictures of him. My email is deleted

Please use GWF personal message system just click on the name and open the dialog box Message

email addresses on the open forum will be deleted to avoid spammers etc

[glassblower]

On 27/08/2024 at 22:51, Ronnie said:

Hi I believe David Ernest Murray was my great uncle. My mother, his niece, has information and pictures of him. My email is deleted

I have his British War and Victory medals. The star is missing.

[Ronnie]

David Ernest Murray

[jay dubaya]

Always nice to put a face to the name. Two lots of Victory and BWM then… one wonders where the Star is.