Interpreting Service Records

[Dave T]

I have just spent a very rewarding, but also frustrating, day at the National Archives and would be grateful for any Pals advice on a servicemen who I am researching, a James Charles Howard.

Its was believed that he was a pre-war territorial up until approx 1915/16 when he transferred to the MGC on its creation. Through his service number I was able to find his MIC, but it only showed his service with the MGC and no mention of his earlier service.

So I began a search of the burnt docs and think I found his service record for his territorial service, all the relevant details (Date and place of birth, Regt etc) match up - but he had a different service number which I expected. On this it records that in 1916 he was discharged from the 8th Londons, which again fits in with the known information. However the reason for discharge was "termination of engagement."

This is where I become confused, is this discharge comment normal, given that he was only 26 I would have expected to see "transferred to ....." but there is nothing else. Also I cannot find a MIC for the service with the 8th Londons.

I even checked the medal rolls for his service in the MGC and no mention is made of any previous service and the later service record was not one of those lucky enough to survive. Am I missing something really obvious?

Grateful for any advice

Dave

[Stebie9173]

Men in the Territorial Force serving pre-war signed up for 4 years. At the end of this period of engagement they were free to leave the Army - no questions asked. This was described as "termination of engagement". You generally see it for Territorials and some longer serving Regulars. Kitchener volunteers signed up for a period of engagement of 3 years or the duration of the War, whichever was longer.

They were, however, given the choice to stay in, take leave and rejoin their unit. Others went home and re-enlisted or were then subject to conscription. I am told that most opted to either rejoin their old unit or re-enlist.

The Medal Rolls would probably not mention prior service if he hadn't served overseas for whatever reason. That may have been a contributory factor to him rejoining a different part of the Army.

Steve.

[sjustice]

<snip>.......

Its was believed that he was a pre-war territorial up until approx 1915/16 when he transferred to the MGC on its creation

<snip>.......

However the reason for discharge was "termination of engagement."

This is where I become confused, is this discharge comment normal, given that he was only 26 I would have expected to see "transferred to ....." but there is nothing else.

.......<snip>

Dave

Dave,

If his MIC shows that he was awarded "TFWM" (Territorial Force War Medal) you have proof that he was definitely in the Territorials. Although it's absence doesn't prove he wasn't, of course (that would be too easy).

Regarding the reason for discharge, I believe this proves that this was a second or more period of enlistment as Special Instructions contained in Paragraph 392 Kings Regulation at 1st August 1914 state that:-

'A pensioner discharged on completion of term for which re-enlisted, the cause of discharge will be worded, "on termination of engagement."'

The Special Instructions were amended slightly in Army Order 245 (August 1918) to read:-

'In the case of a pensioner discharged on completion of term for which re-enlisted, the cause of discharge is to be worded, "on termination of engagement."'

I hope this helps and good luck!

Kind Regards,

Simon