John_Hartley Posted 1 November , 2006 Share Posted 1 November , 2006 In July, I made a submission to CWGC that they had a possible error in the naming of a local man. The name they had was A MacLachlan. All of my research indicated that Archie's name was spelt McLachlan. So I emailed CWGC indicating my sources being his MIC, the 1901 Census and the inscription on two local war memorials. The Commission today confirms that they also have a document with the correct spelling and have now changed the spelling on the Register. Moreover, they confirm that, in due course, the correct name will be put on Archie's headstone at Hautmont Cemetery. Archibald McLachlan, 1885-1918. NOT FORGOTTEN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 1 November , 2006 Share Posted 1 November , 2006 Well done John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Hesketh Posted 1 November , 2006 Share Posted 1 November , 2006 Well done John - an excellent result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyspiller Posted 2 November , 2006 Share Posted 2 November , 2006 John Brilliant - well done Rgds Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisharley9 Posted 4 November , 2006 Share Posted 4 November , 2006 Always good to get the job done Well done John Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max (UK) Posted 4 November , 2006 Share Posted 4 November , 2006 I think that's great. However, I would just point out that the Census spellings of names are unreliable.....I have found all manner of mistakes in my research. I have also seen names spelt incorrectly on MIC's. Just thought I'd point these two things out - although I'm sure your correction is quite right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 5 November , 2006 Author Share Posted 5 November , 2006 Just thought I'd point these two things out - You're absolutely right. It would have been entirely reasonable (and more than a little irritating) for CWGC to have required me to produce a birth certificate and somehow connected it to the soldier. A previous attempt to get another chap named correctly failed because, whilst I could I have obtained birth certificate, there was no way to prove, to their satisfaction, that he was the man in their records. In this case, they had the documentation themselves, but had overlooked it. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 7 November , 2006 Author Share Posted 7 November , 2006 Chapter 2 just received..... CWGC records showed Pte A Turner as serving with 15/KLR when he was killed abroad. Pointed out to CWGC that this was training battalion which didnt leave the UK and his correct unit (as evidenced by SDGW and "burnt records") was the 19th. Record now changed - CWGC accepted that there was a scanning error and I didnt even have to send the evidence. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marina Posted 7 November , 2006 Share Posted 7 November , 2006 Well done, John. Marina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now