Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

KR 392


shinglma

Recommended Posts

Looking at the medal rolls yesterday at Kew I found the following on the British War and Victory Rolls for

the Northumberland Fusiliers. I thought that KR 392 only went up to xxvii?

Anyone able to explain?

post-627-1136588268.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Typo??One Two Many "X"s or "i"s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Typo??One Two Many "X"s or "i"s

Thanks for the reply.

That's what I wondered. The trouble is that would make the most likely clauses;

xviii - At his own request after 18 years service (with a view to pension under

the Pay Warrant)

or xxvii - After 21 (or more) years qualifying service for pension, and with 5 (or

more) years service as warrant officer (with a view to pension under the

Pay Warrant)

which both seem unlikely for a Pte in the ASC and Northumberland Fusiliers born in 1892.

:huh:

Strange...

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike

I copied this from a previous thread - I can't find it at present, so I don't know which member was making the point - it follows a list of the clauses and their interpretation:

There appears to be no clause (xvii) and I have also come across clauses not listed here (xxva), (xxviii). I would assume that these were later additions to the regulations. If anyone out there in the ether can give me any further information on the clauses mentioned I would be most grateful.

Not sure whether anyone appeared from the ether to help!

Sue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the original - it doesn't answer the question though!

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...f=3&t=6812&st=0

Sue

Sue

Thanks very much for this. That's a very interesting thread. I wonder if the clause existed at a later date?

Would I be right in thinking that an additional clause would appear first in Army Orders? Does anyone know where I should look for this?

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike

I copied this from a previous thread - I can't find it at present, so I don't know which member was making the point - it follows a list of the clauses and their interpretation:

There appears to be no clause (xvii) and I have also come across clauses not listed here (xxva), (xxviii). I would assume that these were later additions to the regulations. If anyone out there in the ether can give me any further information on the clauses mentioned I would be most grateful.

Not sure whether anyone appeared from the ether to help!

Sue

Hello Sue,

My late grandfather was also discharged Para 392{xxviii}

I wrote to the NAM and received this reply.

After research I believe that Para xxviii KR comes from an amendment to the 1912 KR somewhere between 1914 and 1921 , which the museum does not havea copy of.From other sources I believe that this class was for soldiers who were to be discharged as they were no longer physically fit.

My grandfather was discharged 1921 but was not given a pension!

Hope this helps,

Regards,

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alan

Thanks for sharing that info. I had begun to wonder whether this was a later amendment. It would be interesting to see how it differed from KR392 xvi (if at all).

I think I need to dig deeper on this.

Thanks again

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Mike,

You know where the library doors are in the MIC room, on the left is the army lists and then on the right hand side there are naval lists, and then next to those are some book shelves which have Kings Regulations written on the top. Do you think that you might find your answer there? Seems to be quite a few books on those shelves. Just a thought.

Alie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Mike,

You know where the library doors are in the MIC room, on the left is the army lists and then on the right hand side there are naval lists, and then next to those are some book shelves which have Kings Regulations written on the top. Do you think that you might find your answer there? Seems to be quite a few books on those shelves. Just a thought.

Alie.

Alie

I didn't know that - I'll have a look this week (and maybe even tomorrow if the tube's running).

Thanks for the information - I'll let you know if it bears fruit.

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alie

I didn't know that - I'll have a look this week (and maybe even tomorrow if the tube's running).

Thanks for the information - I'll let you know if it bears fruit.

Mike

Hello Mike,

I would be very interested to see if your search for Para 392'bears fruit' Perhaps you could post please,

Regards,

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

post-7376-1136728483.jpg

This was the last of the KR 392's as it was in 1912 amended to 1914, but there would have been post war amendments to it. Infact amendments would have been entered continuously over the years.

Graham.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was the last of the KR 392's as it was in 1912 amended to 1914, but there would have been post war amendments to it. Infact amendments would have been entered continuously over the years.

Graham.

Graham

Thanks - As a general point how would such amendments be issued - via Army Orders?

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

post-7376-1136744968.jpg

Mike correct. Here is a section of KR's regarding Discharge that has been amended by a previous AO. This is why I personally find Regulation's, AO's and ACI's a godsend as they clear away the myth and legend.

Recently I obtained a genuine copy of Regulations for the Volunteer Force 1901 amended to 31st July 1904 and I discovered that the Territorials were basically carrying their regimental numbers over from the Volunteers and that amalgamated or new Corps, such as 7th Bn,NF created in 1908, would be renumbered entirely.

Graham.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graham

Thanks for clarifying that. I think I'll have a look at Kew tomorrow.

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I didn't get time to check the Army orders until late last week. However AO 367 of 1919 which was published on 28th October 1919 did add a class xxviii to the classes of discharge.

It simply means "on demobilization" and is "Applicable only to soldiers serving on a duration of war engagement, discharged from Class Z of the Army Reserve on its cessation, or discharged on demobilization after the cessation of Class Z".

It's attached below

Mike

post-627-1138530001.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't get time to check the Army orders until late last week. However AO 367 of 1919 which was published on 28th October 1919 did add a class xxviii to the classes of discharge.

It simply means "on demobilization" and is "Applicable only to soldiers serving on a duration of war engagement, discharged from Class Z of the Army Reserve on its cessation, or discharged on demobilization after the cessation of Class Z".

It's attached below

Mike

Hello Mike,

Well done! I am glad you have finally solved that query. It makes more sense now in my grandfathers case.

Regards,

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...