On the Married Roll

[Chris_Baker]

Just looking at the service papers of a man who re-enlisted in 1914, having seen prior service as a regular soldier. He was married.

His attestion paper of 8 September 1914 shows that his wife was "placed on the Married Roll". Can anyone tell me the implications of this?

[gem22]

Chris

Being on the Married roll was very important. It meant you could live in Married Quarters, when you were in the Garrrison, at a rent considerably lower than the civilian equivalent; your wife was acknowledged by the Army/RN/RAF as your next of kin and would be eligible for any arrears of pay or pension on your death. Even your wages could be affected in that you would be paid a married man's allowance. I don't know the figures for those days and I doubt whether it was very much; but every little bit helped.

Garth

[michaeldr]

Even your wages could be affected in that you would be paid a married man's allowance. I don't know the figures for those days and I doubt whether it was very much; but every little bit helped.

Garth

Apropos married men's rates of pay; This issue led to problems in the RND where there was a difference between the Army rates and those of the Admiralty

Appendix I of Pat Francis' excellent book "A Quiet Life - a marine in the Great War"

is Maj-Gen A. Paris' observations on the RND (RMM, ARCH 7/17/5, n.d.)

in para 7, Gen Paris refers to

'In the early days we were competing with the Army recruiting & insufficient numbers were forthcoming. To meet this Deficiency an arrangement was made with the War Office whereby 4,000 "Kitchener" Recruits from the North were sent to the Naval Division - without any consent on the men's part. Few if any had ever heard of the Naval Division. This alone was sufficient to start a row but when they found out that the Naval Pay and allowances did not equal Army rates, one must admit the justice of their complaints! The situation was peculiar. The Admiralty had recently introduced Separation Allowances - the War Office increased their existing rate, the result was a Bachelor was better off under the Admiralty, a married man under the War Office & in some exraordinary way most of those "Kitcheners" appeared to have enormous families! It can easily be imagined how this grievance affected both organisation & training.'

In 1914 my grandfather was a bachelor: I wonder if this influenced him when he volunteered for the RNVR?

Regards

Michael D.R.

[Muerrisch]

Pre-war a regular soldier's family, if on the married roll, was fed, watered and housed when the family accompanied the soldier to, say, India.

And, for officers, considering marriage, the adage was

"subalterns may not, captains may, majors should, colonels must". This reflected the fact that a junior officer was deemed married to his regiment, had to live in, and subscribe heavily, to the mess.

Field officers' wives had a big welfare responsibility, a senior officer without a wife created a gap for a captain's wife to take on a 'Lady Bountiful' role.