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

Remembered Today:

Men of the Volunteer Force Battalions


John84

Recommended Posts

I think this one may be for Terry Denham. Could anyone please tell me are deaths of members of the then Volunteer Force battalions for home defence recognised by the CWGC. I found this lads death recorded in the local newspapers, Oct 1917, but can find no reference to him on the CWGC site.

The death of Pte. R. Reed of "C" Company, 12th Battalion Durham County Volunteers, was reported with regret. and he was accorded a funeral with military honours at Hetton Cemetery. Capt. F. Best followed with his Company, and a firing party was in attendance, under the direction of R.S.M. Atkinson, and gave the usual salute of three volleys. The "Last Post" was then sounded by Bugle Major A. Smith.

Thanks

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would depend on whether or not his death was the result of enemy action. If he died naturally then he wouldn't be seen as a war casualty.

I know that men of the regular army and service battalions, etc, get war grave recognition no matter what their cause of death was, as long as their deaths occurred while still in service, and they died within the qualifying dates of 04.08.14 to 31.08.21. I also know, and I am sure others do, of men dieing from influenza, accidents, and even of suicide, that met the criteria of the CWGC and are now on their databases and have a war grave headstone.

I believe the Volunteer Force battalions of World War One were the forerunners of the Local Defence Volunteers (Home Guard) of World War Two.

Hundreds of men of the WW2 Home Guard are commemorated by the CWGC, surely all of these were not killed by enemy action, there must be some natural causes, etc, amongst them. So I was just wondering, are the Volunteer Force men of WW1 also commemorated by the CWGC, and if not, why not.

Thanks

John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Home Guard men of WW2 do not automatically get CWGC recognition.

They were one of the Recognised Civilian Organisations who had to die on duty and of a war related cause or a cause due to the increased threat brought on by war (NOTE: Not necessarily due to enemy action - being shot in error by a comrade whilst on sentry duty would count - dying of natural causes off duty would not - dying of a heart attack brought on by a bomb explosion whilst on duty would). Therefore, those Home Guard men with war grave status died on duty and of a war related cause.

The volunteers of WW1 were not accorded such status as the list of Recognised Civilian Organisations for that war was much more limited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canadian Militia deaths are recognized; most of them are accidents or sickness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Canadian Militia were regarded as a military unit by Canada and different rules apply. Each dominion decided which civilian organisations would qualify under the 'on duty' and 'war cause' rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Home Guard men of WW2 do not automatically get CWGC recognition.

They were one of the Recognised Civilian Organisations who had to die on duty and of a war related cause or a cause due to the increased threat brought on by war (NOTE: Not necessarily due to enemy action - being shot in error by a comrade whilst on sentry duty would count - dying of natural causes off duty would not - dying of a heart attack brought on by a bomb explosion whilst on duty would). Therefore, those Home Guard men with war grave status died on duty and of a war related cause.

The volunteers of WW1 were not accorded such status as the list of Recognised Civilian Organisations for that war was much more limited.

Thanks Terry for a very informative reply.

I wonder (I am using my imagination here) what would have been the situation with regards to CWGC status if German Forces had landed men on the North East Coast and Pte. R. Reed and other men of the 12th Battalion Durham County Volunteers had been killed in the ensuing fighting.

Or perhaps somewhere in the Country one or more of these Volunteers while on duty may have been killed in zeppelin raid, etc....what would their CWGC status be.

All seams a little bit fickle to me, these men took up arms for their King and Country (albeit for home defence) and I am presuming that they took some short of oath, the same as other soldiers enlisting/conscripted did.

Thanks again

John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John

Your 'what ifs' are very valid.

Decisions on which civilian organisations should qualify were made by the military (and not CWGC) after the war and it seems they were made on a case by case basis. Those that do qualify (but under different rules to military personnel) seem to be organisations which worked closely with the military or under their control/guidance and who came into contact with enemy action or large groups of military personnel. I suspect the decision would have been different if the invasion scenario you invisage had actually come about.

There are few such qualifying organisations in WW1 but when WW2 came along a new and much longer list was drawn up by each of the dominions. Obviously during that war more civilians found themselves in the front line along with the military. However, there are still odd exclusions - such as the Royal Observer Corps.

It is easy with hindsight to say so-and-so should have been included but we do not know the thinking behind the decisions of the day. Also, many more organisations may have qualified but did not actually suffer any deaths which fitted the criteria. As I said, I think each case was decided initially on its merits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terry

It doesn't seem fair that it was possible for a man who enlisted into a service battalion, then seconds later after joining up as he walks out of a recruitment office suffers a heart-attack and dies then gets CWGC recognition, but a man that may have served under arms with the volunteers for fours years and dies under the same circumstances (same for WW2 Home Guards)or is killed while on volunteer service by a zeppelin dropping a bomb on him doesn't. I wonder if the military or whoever made/makes the rules for inclusion ever gets round to changing the criteria for been remembered as a war casualties. Saying that, I know that WW1 civilians are not on the CWGC database and civilians for WW2 are. Terry, can you tell me please was this also a military decision.

Like you say, 'It is easy with hindsight to say so-and-so should have been included but we do not know the thinking behind the decisions of the day.'

In my own personal opinion, I don't think those that decided the criteria for inclusion had really sat down and thought it out. If I were a relative of one of the dead civilians during the bombardment of Hartlepool, Dec, 1914, or one of the scores of civilian killed during zeppelin raids, etc, or even a relative of R. Reed, of the Durham County Volunteers, I would feel very bitter. Thanks again for your help Terry, all very much appreciated.

John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I take it we are talking about the "Volunteers/Volunteer Training Corps/Militia" and NOT the second and third line Territorial Force units?

Kent's volunteers were originally known as the "Kent Volunteer Training Corps" and then the "Kent Volunteer Fencibles" and finally were split into Volunteer Battalions equally between the Buffs and the West Kent's. I have never found a member of any of these quasi-military organisations commemorated by CWGC. That said, any man killed during training or as a direct consequence of the war should appear as an official war casualty. It would be well to point out that their members wore Buffs and West Kent cap badges and wore identical uniform of their regular, territorial and new army counterparts. To view them so differently seems a bit harsh to me.

It's very interesting seeing how the different Commonwealth countries classify their militia in terms of commemoration status - not always fairly it must be said. As someone has already pointed out, members of the regular army or the new army volunteers and Territorial Force got "across the board" recognition providing they were serving soldiers at the time of their demise. Perhaps it would be a good idea to merely record these men's deaths on a roll of honour like civilian casualties of WW2? This way the expenses would be minimal.

I wholeheartedly agree with John's comments above re the unfairness of it all...

Neil

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...