28 replies to this topic

[GRUMPY]

Nobody has commented on his two Good Conduct chevrons. These are highly suggestive of a regular soldier, as the minimum qualifying period for two was 5years. Thus, there is a need to identify his previous regiment, as the MGC was formed during the war?

[FROGSMILE]

GRUMPY, on 24 July 2012 - 01:47 PM, said:

Nobody has commented on his two Good Conduct chevrons. These are highly suggestive of a regular soldier, as the minimum qualifying period for two was 5years. Thus, there is a need to identify his previous regiment, as the MGC was formed during the war?

An interesting point.  He enlisted in Nov 1914 and was not discharged until 1919.  Perhaps he was a pre war Militiaman, or it might be that the photo was taken in 1919 right at the end of his service, when he presumably just about qualified.  He looks quite unwell.

[GRUMPY]

Thank you. The regulations regarding wearing of GC badges by TF men and SR men are not exactly clear but rulings were made to allow these to be accrued during the war. The other complication is the wearing of such badges "already earned" by regular or reserve service AFTER recall, or after embodiment. The principle [as with substantive rank] seems to have been to bring it forward with the soldier, as is only right and proper.

Here I quote me, from an article what I wrote, please excuse annotations.

<a name="OLE_LINK1">From 1889 at the latest, Regulations for the Militia prescribe badges, ‘re-enlistment stripes’ to be worn on the left arm below the elbow, point upwards. By the regulations of 1893 their use had been extended to re-engagement, which implied continuity of service, four years at a time. This arrangement was continued in 1896 but ended in 1901 when the ledgers of the Royal Army Clothing Department recorded that this use was to be superceded by the use of a four-pointed white star to be worn on the right arm, hitherto a mark of a proficient sergeant of the Volunteer Force. At the same time, 1901, militiamen came under the Regular Army rules for good conduct badges and the extra pay that went with them, but this pay probably did not last long after the regulars lost their own extra pay in 1903.


To return to the regulars, the warrant of 1898 made an important provision for those rejoining the colours from the Reserve (as, for example, in war): for the first time ‘regard shall be had to the entries in his regimental defaulter sheet during his service in the reserve’. The meaning is not clear, but it can be read as counting good conduct during regular reserve service in full. In 1914 those soldiers recalled to the colours retained (at least) their substantive rank and conduct badges accrued with the colours.


In 1903 there was a major and unpopular change in the way soldiers were rewarded and paid. Various AOs of that year removed the association of extra pay with good conduct, and also for most skill-at-arms badges. Thus the next warrant, of 1906, continued to call the badge ‘a high distinction’ for those under the rank of corporal or equivalent, but removed the 1d per day per badge from all except non-Europeans. The periods for Europeans were 2, 5 (a change), 12, 18, 23 and 28 years, with the usual proviso for earlier qualification for later badges. The loss of pay was not uniformly bad news, as ‘Service Pay’ found a way of rewarding longer service at the same time. Within a few years, Proficiency Pay replaced Service Pay except for those with reserved rights, but monetary rewards for good conduct were not renewed, and were retained only by non-Europeans.

Were it not for this, it would have been logical to remove considerations of rewards for good conduct from the Pay Warrant, and place them in King’s Regulations, but this change did not occur for many years. The next warrant, 1907, stated that service actually in the Reserve would not count, but changed little else, as did those of 1913 and 1914.

[Don Don]

Thanks guys your both fantastic experts and I value your help.I enclose a couple of docs That I came across in a 1917 magazine called OTC.