AndyJohnson Posted 15 May , 2008 Share Posted 15 May , 2008 Does the attached show that the medals were returned (992 KR 1923) ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralphjd Posted 15 May , 2008 Share Posted 15 May , 2008 Andy, That is how I would interpret it. Ralph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldstreamer Posted 15 May , 2008 Share Posted 15 May , 2008 returned for adjustment/amendment ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyJohnson Posted 15 May , 2008 Author Share Posted 15 May , 2008 I've now found 2 explanations already on the forum 1/ That ADT means adjustment (as in returned for adjustment). In this case of the medals being for a casualty, why would they be being returned for adjustment in 1923 or beyond? 2/ That ADT stand for Audit which was the department responsible for those medals undeliverable. I'm maybe more inclined to believe this one because of the time delay. The more I look, the less I know! Regards Andy Extracted from a reply from mhifle Kings Regulations 1923 Para 992 (a.) An officer receiving medals for issue will arrange for their safe custody. (b.) When medals are presented to individual’s receipts will be obtained from the recipients. 992. Medals which, at the end of one year, still remain unclaimed, will be sent to the Secretary, The War Office." If Medals were undeliverable, they were sent Registered Postage by the General Post Office, as was; after repeated attempts at Delivery and if no notification of a change of address had been given by the Recipient to the War Office /Records Offices & or the GPO then they would have been returned to the Record Office concerned and after a period of Ten Years "Broken Up" to use their terminology. Medals that were however returned by Recipients for "Adjustment" on a number of occasions which usually meant for alterations to the wording and numbering, in which case they would be Amended & then returned to the recipient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Jones Posted 16 May , 2008 Share Posted 16 May , 2008 Hello Andy, You have got some of the story but not all of it. If you put "992" into the search box at the bottom of the page, lots of references come up. The Enoch Johnstone case explains it best and saves me a lot of typing. Your man lost his medals as he went absent for more than a year. There was a general amnesty in the early 20's. I dont think your man tried to re-claim his medals under this. The "Adt" cannot stand for adjustment. Since the medals were forfeit, there is no point in any adjustment. Also, every K.R. 992 that I have seen (I have seen a lot of them now) has the "Adt" and a number after that. It must follow that not every K.R.992 set of medals needed adjustment. By the way, the term "Returned" does not mean returned from the soldier in question. They never got as far as him anyway. Regards Mike Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyJohnson Posted 18 May , 2008 Author Share Posted 18 May , 2008 Mike Thanks for the reply, I think that this is a case of being unable to find anyone to give the medals to! Elisha Cox was killed at Delville Wood July 1916, and I get the impression that he moved around a bit before the war, so the Army could well have lost track of a next of kin and hence been unable to deliver them. I presume it would be impossible for a relative (I'm not!) to make a claim on the medals now! Regards Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldstreamer Posted 18 May , 2008 Share Posted 18 May , 2008 its too late now to claim ww1 medals now 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