60 replies to this topic

[Pete Wood]

The Memorial Plaque was, as most of the forum will know, presented to the next of kin of those who died in the Great War.

I have been doing some research into the subject, based on the earlier work of Philip Dutton (Imperial War Museum).

My research has uncovered a fair amount of intrigue, mismanagement, and myths with regard to the production of these medallions - often referred to as the 'Death Plaque,' and 'Dead Man's Penny.'

I'm hoping that members of this forum can set the record straight, and pool knowledge about an item that is still to be found tucked away in the drawers of hundreds of thousands of houses around the world.

So I'll start off with the fact that the Government ran a competition to produce a design for a memorial plaque, announced in The Times newspaper on Monday 13th August 1917.

What more do you know??

[Paul Reed]

There are two types; one made by the Plaque Factory in Acton, which is - I understand it - was pretty much pure bronze, and is usually of a darker colour because of this. This company went bankrupt and the Woolwich Arsenal took on production - these plaques are marked with a 'WA' symbol on the back: in fact it is a large W with a line across the central peak creating an A.

I remember reading in some PRO papers that there were approx 1.1 million such plaques issued.

Plaques to the Chinese Labour Corps were issued; but with no name, just the soldiers number.

There were approx 650 plaques to women.

Of the plaques to men, there are at least two types of H used in the legend 'He Died...'. Some are common to types of regiments.

The number stamped near the lion's paw apparently relates to the batch number, and is not related to a regiment/unit.

Plaques could be issued on their own - i.e. to a soldier who died at home and was not entitled to any medals.

The plaque came in a brown four-tongued box, which was posted in a light brown envelope and sent via registered post.

If I can help any further let me know?

[Hill_60]

I was told that plaques awarded to the Army & RN can normally be differentiated by the size of the letter H in 'HE' to the letter H in 'HONOUR'. The ones issued to the RN has a narrower H in 'HONOUR' than in 'HE' whereas the H's on Army plaques are the same width.

Saying that, I could be following duff information and Paul has more experiance than me, so I stand corrected if I'm wrong!

Lee

[Pete Wood]

Good summary Paul.

But from which source did you get the fact that the Memorial Plaque Factory went bankrupt. It was not a business that had to make a profit - or maybe you know different? There were certainly worries about the costs.....

I had heard about differences in the lettering. However I was led to believe that it was not for different regiments, but for different services - i.e. some/all (?) of the Navy's memorial plaques were of a slightly different design than that of the army?

As for the colouring. This is also news to me. I understood that all batches varied, not because of a difference in the quality of the bronze, but because chemicals were used (by the factory at Acton and Woolwich) to give a 'patina.' The 'pickling' effect varied, and colour of the plaque, depending on the strength of the chemicals. Many people later removed this patina by polishing the plaque.

Once again, perhaps you know different and can set the record straight??

[Hill_60]

I've just remembered reading somewhere that Acton couldn't cope with the vast amount of Plaques needed so Woolwich was pressed into service.

Lee

[Pete Wood]

I've just remembered reading somewhere that Acton couldn't cope with the vast amount of Plaques needed so Woolwich was pressed into service.

That was my understanding as well. The manager of the Memorial Plaque Factory was Roy Manning Pike (he was later to be responsible for printing the early copies of TE Lawrence's book, Seven Pillars of Wisdom) and my findings suggest that he was having difficulties with production, and staff, at Acton.

Manning Pike appeared to have the support of a number of influential people (including George Francis Hill, keeper of the Coins and Medals department at the British Museum), but there are letters in the PRO which show that MP admitted he couldn't cope with his fiscal promises and day-today running of the factory - and, after a 'tribunal' the contract was eventually handed over to the Woolwich Arsenal's Brass foundry.

It appears that the Woolwich Arsenal staff had actively built up a case against Manning Pike, in order to secure the contract to make the plaques. Reports by the Arsenal's staff, attached to the Acton factory (against the wishes of Manning Pike!!), were put into written allegations of fraud, waste and mismanagement. These allegations were presented to Pike and led to him losing the contract.

In Manning Pike's defence, he stated that he had sacked his toolroom foreman, Hoffman, who had been "doing outside work on the premises" along with a number of accomplices (not named, but who were also sacked). The assistant manager, Strang, was give the choice to resign or leave on a month's notice - for failing to notice what Hoffman and his accomplices had been doing.
It must have been some operation, by Hoffman. According to an expert at Woolwich Arsenal 25 tonnes of bronze (out of 150 tonnes) could not be accounted for!!

In November 1920, the Acton accountant, Mr Moore, resigned "after the canteen cashier embezzled around £100 from the canteen funds" - a huge sum in its day.

See what I mean about intrigue?

[Paul Reed]

You've obviously done a lot more research on this than I have, so I wait to read the result of your work.

I really don't remember where I read that about the Acton factory going bankrupt; I thought it had something to do with the fact that they used such pure bronze that the sheer cost put them out of action, which is why WA took over and the later plaques were not quite the same pure bronze. However, I am happy to be corrected on this fact.

Many people over the years have tried to trace the records of the Plaque Factory - and failed - perhaps you have succeeded?

And has for the letter H - it is true that the on the whole Navy and Army Hs are different, but I know that at least RA plaques share the same size H as RN ones do.

I look forward to more comments on this fascinating subject.

[Pete Wood]

And has for the letter H - it is true that the on the whole Navy and Army Hs are different, but I know that at least RA plaques share the same size H as RN ones do. I look forward to more comments on this fascinating subject.

                    Paul this is great evidence. I am not fortunate enough to own a memorial plaque to a RA man. Do the differences in the letter 'H,' on the RA version, apply to the plaques made by both Acton and Woolwich?

Can anybody also confirm that the memorial plaques produced at Woolwich were (as stated by Manning Pike) inferior to those made at Acton - and if so, how?

Some of my most frustrating times have been following the so-called evidence trail about plaque production; statements that we've all come to regard as being correct.

For example, everything I had ever read stated that the Memorial Plaque factory was set up in the premises of a former laundry in Acton. But when I went through the Kelly's (business) directory, I found that the building was, in fact, a former brewery. A photo in the Acton library, confirms the building's status as a brewery. It was located in Church Lane, Acton. Sadly the building was demolished in the 1960s.

I then trawled through factory records at the PRO, in the hope of coming up with something about the Memorial Plaque factory, and came up with.... nothing. This didn't make sense, so I went through every record with the keyword 'Memorial.' After a couple of hours I found some records on 'The Memorial Plague Hospital, Acton.' Order those records and you'll find that a clerical error, at the PRO, has been made - this is where some of the 'missing' records are to be found. It makes for fascinating reading about the equipment involved.

For example, Manning Pike really knocked the building about in order to put the plaques into production. The factory was about 1000 sq ft in size, with a coke store (for melting the bronze) of 240 sq ft. A 2ft gauge, light railway linked the moulding room, 2 drying ovens, foundry, and yard (with a turntable, for the wagons, in the foundry). The cost of modifying the former brewery into a foundry was £6415 13s 3d, and that is before one plaque had been made.

Most of the factory workers were women - many of whom, it was reported in one Acton newspaper of 1920, "had sadly to make the memorial plaques for their own [deceased] husbands."

I'm still uncovering facts about the memorial plaques all the time, which is why I hope that the forum experts can add to the story.

[Paul Reed]

This is fascinating stuff, and I do hope you will consider publishing (in some form) the results of your research.

I have always been fascinated by memorial plaques since I first bought one as a child for a few pence in the 70s. I once knew two collectors in Sussex who had at least 600+ each (!); but their sample was useful in working out things like this. As far as I know both of them are still out there, with their collections.

If you contact me by email I will see what I can delve up in my own archives; if of any use?

battlefields1418@hotmail.com

[Ivor Lee]

What a fascinating story.  Thanks for putting it on the Forum.

Can anyone explain a bit more about the smaller (half size?) plaques?  Were they produced soon after the war or are they a modern item?

[Hill_60]

With regards to the smaller plaques, of which I have two, I believe them to be fairly modern. I also believe that a medal dealer is supplying full size plaques with no name.

With regards to the Acton Plaque Factory I have asked my father if he knows anything of it's whereabouts. His family come from the Southall area, although a few were born/lived in Acton and he spent 25 years in the London Fire Brigade, mainly in Acton. He says he can't recall any mention about the factory, either from his family or during his service (he was an expert on the history of the main buildings on Acton's ground).

I also agree with Paul & Ivor that this is a fascinating subject, I for one would love to see the results.

Lee

[Pete Wood]

Ivor

Believe it or not, I think I tell you about these miniature plaques as, again, there are correspondence about these plaques in amongst the paperwork of the full size plaques at the PRO (T161/161).
The miniature plaques (3.5 inches in diameter) were produced by Messrs Wright & Sons of Edgeware, Middlesex. The cost was 13s 6d + 9d postage and you could request any name to be engraved on the plaque. When you consider that the government was paying the Memorial Plaque Factory around 4 shillings for the full size example, it shows how expensive the miniatures were – or how cheap(?) the plaques were.
Adverts appeared in newspapers in January 1922 for the plaques. A Mr BB Cubbitt, of the War Office, wrote to the Controller of the Stationary Office as Cubbitt felt that copyright of the Memorial Plaque had been infringed. The matter was then referred to the Treasury Office solicitors who, after consulting with the Sir Cecil Harcourt Smith (a director of the National Gallery and on the board of the Memorial Plaque committee), who was representing the interests of Edward Carter Preston – the designer of the Memorial Plaque – no one could find a copyright infringement.
Wright and Sons were contacted by the Stationary Office and asked who had given permission for the miniatures to be produced. In a letter dated 24.2.1922, Wright and Sons wrote to the Stationary Office to say that they had “never needed to obtain permission before, to make miniatures of any medals. Indeed we have been commissioned by the government to make some miniatures.” Also, it was argued, the miniature had a surrounding wreath of their own registered design.
In April 1922, the Treasury Solicitor wrote to Cubbitt to say that there was no case against Wright and Sons, “under the patents and designs acts of 1907 and 1919, or under the provisions of section 22 of the copyright act 1911.”

I admit I have never seen a miniature plaque, so I hope the above description - with wreath - fits. Anyway this leads me to another question on the memorial plaques. I have read some notes which state that Woolwich Arsenal experimented with engraved memorial plaques, in the same way as the miniatures. Has anyone ever seen a memorial plaque with engraved lettering (rather than the normal raised, cast, letters)??

There is a foundry (in the west country), with a name like Toad Hall Medals(?), which sells a copy of the memorial plaque - and yes, the name has to be engraved on the blank name-plate area.

[Myrtle]

The account of the competition to find the best design for the Next of Kin Memorial Plaques on the IWM site is also worth reading. It appears that Manning Pike was recalled to save the situation when production of the medals foundered at Woolwich and the other munition factories, that had taken over from Acton.

Myrtle

[Bob Coulson]

I think I read somewhere that there was a cash prize for the winning design.

[Pete Wood]

The article you refer to on the Imperial War Museum site (Memorial Plaque) is that written by Philip Dutton. It is an excellent article but, I promise you, I have never found anything to suggest that any other munitions factories made the Memorial Plaques – just the factory at Acton, and the Woolwich Arsenal. If anyone knows otherwise, please(!) contact me.
There are also many figures which have been given for total production; some people state that 900,000 plaques were made (this is from a letter, found in the PRO, dated December 1918, ordering this many sheets of paper for the scrolls to accompany the plaques). However a committee was formed early on in WW2, where a proposal to manufacture a ‘new’ memorial plaque was discussed (WO 32/4678) and it is here that we are told that the total production figure amounts “to nearly 1,150,000 plaques and scrolls issued.”
1n 1922 Manning Pike says that Acton manufactured 200,000 plaques (years later, in the 1930s, he claims that this figure was 300,000). My personal opinion, having studied Pike for some time, is that the lower figure is probably closer to the truth.

Woolwich state the following numbers “for total production of the plaques”:
Up to 30.6.22                      (669,334)
1.7.22 to 30.6.24                 (31,244)
1.7.24 to 31.3.30                 (7,509)

Unfortunately we don’t know if Woolwich included the Acton production figures. Assuming that the Acton total was not included, we therefore get 708,087 + Acton’s production. We should (?) also include production from 1930 to 1942. No figures have been found to date so, as a pure guess, I will assume it was no more than 15,000 (using the 1924-30 figures to arrive at this figure). So, by my reckoning, memorial plaque production was approximately 923,000 (or 1,023,000 if you use Manning Pike’s revised, 1930s, figures at Acton).
So where are the missing 100,000 plaques (200,000 plaques if you take Manning Pike’s lower production figures)?? Was there another factory making the plaques? Did the WW2 committee make an error or, perhaps, were their figures based on the number of plaques made (rather than issued)? There was a fair amount of wastage………

But what theories or evidence do you have??

I realise that I have made a mistake in an earlier posting. The correct address for the Memorial Plaque Factory was 54/56 Church Road (not Lane, sorry), Acton, London W3.

[Ivor Lee]

Thanks for the information on the minature plaques.

I managed to purchase one a couple of years ago.  From its almost perfect condition I suspect it is a modern copy but, of course, could be wrong.

[Myrtle]

Would it have been possible that the Munition factories at Enfield and Waltham could have produced some of the plaques?

Another thought - have you checked the possibility that a factory in Belgium was used after the war ? I saw that the Raid on Zeebrugge 1918 plaque designed by de Soete was produced in Belgium in 1927 and as Belgium has been renowned for its bronze craftmanship is it  possible that they would have taken over some of the manufacturing post 1918.

Myrtle

[ianw]

This is indeed a fascinating story but I wonder why anyone would spend a vast sum converting a brewery into a foundry rather than using a foundry in the first place.

Also I do not buy the "too pure bronze" thoery for the demise of Acton - bronze is a relatively cheap material - used for "copper" coinage -though I suppose it may have been in shorter supply after the war due to demand for statuary etc.

The demise of Acton due to massive fraud and dubious practices does certainly ring true and the activities of Woolwich to torpedoe Acton to get all the work is similar to the recent story of the Royal Mint acting to take work away from a commercial mint.

[Sullivan]

Greetings from Brisbane Australia. I recently registered to this forum. I am the son of a Royal Munster Fusilier soldier, an Irish regiment of the British regular army, disbanded in 1922.

An abbreviated history of the WW I memorial plaques, including images is featured on my web site. Racing Teapots advised me about the 1914-1918 forum and discussion that is taking place regarding these plaques. I have viewed the current postings and must say am impressed with the information content, I hope I can contribute some useful information.

Plaques issued in Australia. Information source Australian War Memorial (AWM)

Approximately 60,000 plaques were issued in Australia

In early 1920 it was announced that the next-of-kin of all Australian servicemen and women whose deaths were attributable to the First World War would receive a memorial plaque and scroll "as a solace for bereavement and as a memento".

Because of the late arrival in Australia of the plaques many scrolls were sent out separately accompanied by the letter from King George V.

The first plaques were distributed in Australia in 1922. Each plaque was sent out from Base Records Office at Victoria Barracks in Melbourne by second-class mail.

Plaques issued in Australia were accompanied by a letter from Base Records Office, the form of letter as follows -

"Base Records Office, Victoria Barracks, Melbourne 12.4.22

Always state Regimental Number, Rank, Full name, and Unit of Soldier in your Communications. Next of Kin should always notify Change of Address to Base Records, Melbourne

Dear Madam

I am directed to transmit, per separate parcel's post, the Plaque issued by His Majesty's Government as a memorial to those who made the supreme sacrifice in connexion with the war of 1914-1918, which I trust reaches you safely.

The King's Message, which is issued with the Plaque, is enclosed herewith.**

It is to be noted that the name inscribed on this memorial is that under which the deceased served and died, and no variation to this rule is permissable.

The Plaque, being second-class mail matter, may take a little longer to reach your address. If the delay is excessive would you kindly inquire at your local post office before communicating with the office.

The favour of the early return of the attached receipt form (which can be torn off) would be appreciated.

Yours faithfully,

Major

Officer i/c Base Records "

Note: (** Sometimes this sentence deleted)

[Sullivan]

Memorial Plaque Scroll.

On January 30th 1918 'The Times' stated that the Memorial Plaque Committee was to seek approval from King George V for the winning design.

At about the same time the design of the Memorial Scroll and it's Text was being sought by the Committee, Philip Ditto mentions in his article "The Dead Man's Penny", IWM journal 'Review page 63 -

"The minds of the contemporary literary world were ransacked in an effort to obtain a satisfactory formula."

He goes on further in his article to say -

"The elderly stay-at-home poets in England singularly failed; suggestions from Kipling, New bolt, Bin yon (an exception insomuch that he had served in France with the Red Cross in 1916) and even the Poet Laureate himself, Robert Bridges, were received and judged inadequate."

Finally at the suggestion of Sir Vincent Baddeley, the Admiralty representative on the Committee, the Provost of Kings College, Cambridge, Dr. Montague Rhodes James was consulted. After some minor changes and an alteration at request of King George V, that the Sovereign be specifically mentioned, a suitable text for the scroll was agreed on.

It appears that scroll(s) bearing a differing Royal Arms to the agreed design may have been initially used, some years ago I was made aware of this by an interested party who had sighted my Memorial Plaque web pages, and followed up with an image of the scroll in his possession.

I would be interested in learning from other Forum Members if they have ever come across this scroll, and if so what is the history if any.

The hyper link under will transfer you to my web page to compare the two differing scrolls.

Scroll Images

[Pete Wood]

Sullivan

Your 'alternative' scroll is very interesting. The name at the bottom looks as though it is printed - is that right?
In the PRO, I have come across an example of a scroll that had smaller "GV" letters. There is a letter from the King's secretary, Ponsonby, stating that the King would like to see the letters made bigger. The King's wishes were noted and the wooden block was altered so.
The wooden block is now at the Imperial War Museum, presented in 1933 by the Central School of Arts and Crafts.
The records of the Stationary Office, in a letter dated 19.10.18, show that the cost of the paper, based on 500,000 sheets (DO note the figure) was £855 plus £200 for printing. On the 5.12.18, the figure (for the amount of sheets required) was amended to 900,000 scrolls.
The handwritten name and regiment at the bottom of every scroll was carried out by students/scribes at the Central School, under the supervision of Mr FH Burridge. The students used red ink for the army and blue ink for the Naval services. The government paid the princely sum of 1 1/2d (1.5 old pennies) for each scroll to be inscribed.
Burridge complained constantly about the difficulties in obtaining ink for the job. But, because the Memorial Plaque Factory was running so far behind schedule, the scrolls were still completed long before the plaques. This is why most scrolls were sent separately - as confirmed by the letter from the Australia records office.
Now here's a possible link between the original scroll and your version (which must have been produced after the conventional scroll). Following Manning Pike's spectacular fall from grace, when he lost his £1500 per annum job after the closure of the Memorial Plaque Factory, he threatened to sue the government because of the patents he had taken out on the manufacturing process of the plaque. MP was, as I stated in an earlier post, supported by George Francis Hill, who 'leaned' on the committee (and Edward Carter Preston - the plaque designer) to maintain Manning Pike's involvement in the plaques' production. So a deal was struck between the government and Manning Pike. He was offered a job as an advisor to Woolwich.
Manning Pike tried to negotiate a large sum in compensation for the patent rights. This was turned down and he was offered £1000 per annum to go to Woolwich, but only if he gave up the rights to his patents. MP accepted the proposal. But once at Woolwich, Manning Pike was then ousted in a bitter confrontation which even his supporters could not prevent and, 12 months later, Manning Pike walked out of the Arsenal gates for the last time.
Here's the good bit. Manning Pike then enrolled at the Central School of Arts and Crafts to study printing. This led to him meeting TE Lawrence and publishing the Seven Pillars of Wisdom. This is pure speculation (at present) but, Manning Pike would have had access to the wooden printing block for the scrolls, and to Burridge who surely would have been enamoured at teaching the man responsible for producing the plaques. I am guessing that Manning Pike may have produced the printing plate, for the 'alternative' scroll, in the course of his studies.
It would be interesting to find out if the person named on the scroll (I can't make out the name) had any connection (maybe a relation?) to a fellow student of Manning Pike's acquaintance.
I am due to visit the Central School's museum collection in a few weeks. I will see if there is any information/leads to be found.

[Paul Reed]

At some point whoever was responsible must have passed round some blank scrolls for approval - I have one that come from the collection of a London artist which was given to me by a book dealer friend many years ago. I will have to dig it out to see if it is different to any of the other ones - I never thought to look before!

Sadly I don't know the name of the artist from whom it came.

Incidentally, on the matter of small plaques - I saw one back in the 80s to an Indian Army officer. It was part of a group offered for sale to Christies by the family, so had not been on the market before - so I have no reason to believe it wasn't 'genuine'. It was ingraved.

[Pete Wood]

Paul, there must have been dozens of blank scrolls produced. Every single department which had an interest in the memorial plaque wanted their say, with regard to the plaque and scrolls.

The chairman of the memorial plaque committee, RM Brade, was moved to say "The views and wishes of the interests represented on my committee and sub committee was a long and rather troublesome business."

There were two blank scrolls in the PRO two years ago; one with the large GV letters and one with the small GV letters. Sadly, I noticed (about 12 months ago) that one has gone 'missing.' (I say this as an observation and not an accusation against Paul by the way!!).
There were 14 photographs taken of the winning design - and the runners up. Only one copy, taken by the photographer at the Victoria and Albert Museum just after the results of the memorial plaque competition, is known to have survived. That was in the 'safe hands' of the PRO. Sadly that too has now disappeared.

The wording of the scrolls did, as pointed out on earlier posts, require many subtle changes before approval. The secretary of state for war, Lord Derby, had a few choice words to say to Rudyard Kipling (who was still mourning the loss of his son, and was not at his 'best') at his proposed wording. The King also wanted to have his name included, which was ommited on the earliest pre-production (and never issued) versions of the text.

Paul, any chance of sending me a digital image of your blank scroll please?

Many thanks to the forum for all your private emails. I will try to write a decent article on the subject, I promise. There are just so many loose ends. But I think, with your help, we'll get there.......

[Sullivan]

Memorial Plaque.

Link to images below.

Images of batch numbers, Woolwich Arsenal stamp on reverse of plaque, E. Carter Preston's initials, have you noticed they are stamped as E. Cr. P. and not E. C. P. as I would have expected.

I have three plaques as follows -

1) Stamped Woolwich Arsenal.  Batch number 2,  name and details -

ALFRED JOHN HUXTABLE  Private 14987,  7th Bn., Lincolnshire Regiment.
who died on Saturday 23 March 1918 . Age 24 . Born 8th June 1894.

Son of Mr. and Mrs. John Huxtable, of 32, Turin St., Bethnal Green Rd., Bethnal Green, London.

ARRAS MEMORIAL Pas de Calais, France,   Bay 3 and 4. (no known grave).

With Scroll, a 'With Compliments' slip from Secretary of War Office, photograph of Huxtable, birth certificate extract.

According to the compliments slip, the scroll and plaque were despatched to next of kin on 20th June 1919.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Stamped Woolwich Arsenal.  Batch number 22, name details -

RICHARD HENRY ANDREW  Private 45606,  2nd Bn., Devonshire Regiment.
who died on Friday 31 May 1918 . Age 26 .

Son of the late William and Thurza Andrew; husband of Lilian Andrew, of Amble St., Kew, Wadebridge, Cornwall.

SOISSONS MEMORIAL Aisne, France. (no known grave).

No Scroll, or other paperwork.
------------------------------------

3) No stamp on reverse.  Batch number 21, name details -

James Thompson.

Unable to identify person named, as there are numerous James Thompson's on various biographical databases I have researched.

The quality of this plaque is not to same standard as the two Woolwich plaques, evidence of pitting on both face and reverse of plaque (not corrosion). Also the alloy composition of the plaque may differ from the Woolwich plaques, in terms of colour, the composition of the alloy may be higher in copper, the Woolwich plaques have a gun metal bronze appearance, more like a 60/40 copper, zinc, tin alloy.

Comments appreciated.

Link to images.

[Sullivan]

Commercially made frames to mount the plaques were produced by a variety of manufacturers.

Two such frames are featured in Philip Dutton's article 'The Dead Man's Penny" on page 67, an octagonal and a round frame, one in Bakelite the other of metal.

I have loaded images of two other designs to my web pages for your interest, they are both metal and based on a cross theme.

Memorial Plaque Commercial Frames link.