Broznitsky Posted 29 December , 2003 Share Posted 29 December , 2003 I found a lad Robert McEtchin who enlisted into the CEF on February 25th, 1919. Anybody else ever found a man who enlisted at such a late date? Why would the CEF still be taking in men 3 months after the Armistice? Did this happen in the BEF or other Imperial forces? I would have thought the recruiting offices would have been wound down by then . . . Puzzled Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 29 December , 2003 Share Posted 29 December , 2003 No no. Absolutely not. The Armies had a continuing need for recruits, even with a shrunken commitment. Hundreds of thousands were due for earliest demobilization, and many pre-war regulars had served their full engaged periods. Indeed the British Army had to make strenuous efforts to keep the right type of man, and encourage new recruits, in 1919 and 1920. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ian Bowbrick Posted 29 December , 2003 Share Posted 29 December , 2003 In addition to what david has said, a number of post 11 November 1918 enlistments went with the Army of Occupation and were also involved in battlefield clearance. The situation in Ireland also required a substantial number of men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Posted 29 December , 2003 Share Posted 29 December , 2003 involved in battlefield clearance. A horrendous task I reckon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christine liava'a Posted 29 December , 2003 Share Posted 29 December , 2003 Not only that, there was fighting still in the Middle East and northern Russia, as a result of the Russian revolution. Check out his record and see where he went Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ian Bowbrick Posted 29 December , 2003 Share Posted 29 December , 2003 involved in battlefield clearance. A horrendous task I reckon Mick, One of my great-uncles did it serving with the Labour Corps, mainly re-burials. We had a good thread about it a while back, but I always think we should remind ourselves that the job wasn't over when the guns fell silent! Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Posted 29 December , 2003 Share Posted 29 December , 2003 should remind ourselves that the job wasn't over when the guns fell silent! For sure ! They would have dealt with disease, unexploded ordnance, gas and all manner of terrible sights. You've got to be a special person to be able to deal with that, especially when you know that the war is over for so many people and they are on their way home. Here's to your great uncle and all the other unsung heroes. Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CROONAERT Posted 30 December , 2003 Share Posted 30 December , 2003 Not only that, there was fighting still in the Middle East and northern Russia, as a result of the Russian revolution. Check out his record and see where he went ...and India (NW Frontier, Mahsud, Afghanistan, Waziristan,Malabar, Burma, Mohmand - all between 1919 and 1933). Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhill Posted 30 December , 2003 Share Posted 30 December , 2003 I have found quite a few post-war enlistments among the Canadian Attestation Papers. I too am curious about this. One point of interest is that many, if not most, of these are second enlistments; the man presumably having been discharged for some reason the first time. This leads one to speculate that this post-war enlistment may have something to do with establishing entitlements to some veterans' benefit. The army may have conived at this. I do not really know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will O'Brien Posted 30 December , 2003 Share Posted 30 December , 2003 One point of interest is that many, if not most, of these are second enlistments; the man presumably having been discharged for some reason the first time. This leads one to speculate that this post-war enlistment may have something to do with establishing entitlements to some veterans' benefit. The army may have conived at this. James I can't comment on Canadian re-enlistment but I am aware that many post war UK re-enlistment had a lot to do with a lack of/ difficulties in obtaining work when back in civilian life...........One of the few areas it was reasonably easy to secure a job was in the Armed Forces........I can only presume men went back to the Army rather than face being on the bread line. 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