John(Jack) Beauchamp Wakefield 1/8th London Regt. Post Office Rifles

[Jean M]

My Great-uncle, John Beauchamp Wakefield, was killed on 7.June 1917 at Messines Ridge.

I believe he joined up with the 6th East Surrey Regiment but he died as a corporal  (373405) with 1/8th City of London Battalion - Post Office Rifles. He has no known grave but his name is on the Menin Gate. I would like to know more about what his regiment was involved in on 7th June 1917.

I also have a photograph of him as a corporal with a fellow soldier whose name is unknown.

(alance corporal),

 

I imagine that someone, somewhere, may have a copy of the same photo and be wondering who my g-uncle is! JBW is seated.

[jonbem]

Hi Jeam, welcome to the forum

the war diary covering that period is in the National Archives HERE for a £3.50 fee

140 Infantry Brigade: 1/8 Battalion London Regiment (Post Office Rifles). Diaries

Reference:	WO 95/2731/4
Description:	140 Infantry Brigade: 1/8 Battalion London Regiment (Post Office Rifles). Diaries for Sept-Dec 1916 and Apr-May 1917 not included, reported August 2010.
Date:	1916 Aug 1 - 1918 Jan 31
Held by:	The National Archives, Kew

 

if you have Ancestry access then June 1917 starts HERE

 

regards

Jon

 

[jonbem]

His CWGC Entry

http://www.cwgc.org/find-war-dead/casualty/1627624/WAKEFIELD, JOHN B

 

His previous service number appears o be

Soldier Number: 6483, Rank: Corporal, Corps: London Regiment

[Jean M]

Thank you for taking the trouble to answer. That is a little extra bit of info. The photograph was a long shot! Jean

[jonbem]

Here is the MIC on Ancestry

 

and the medal roll on Ancestry

 

and soldiers effects record on Ancestry

Edited 25 June , 2017 by jonbem

[Jean M]

Sadly JBW's medals have gone awol! We think they ended up with his younger brother, Harry, who survived the war and lived to 100+. He had 5 children and none of them knows what happened to them.Harry, visited the Menin Gate with his four sons and I'll add a photo

. 

I am attending the Passchendaele Commemoration at the end of July and would have loved to wear his medals. J

[clk]

Hi Jean,

 

Unfortunately John doesn't appear to have surviving service papers. Looking at his Soldiers' Effects record you can use though the amount of war gratuity paid to calculate that he enlisted circa June 1915. His Soldiers Died record says that he enlisted in Kingston, and had previously served with the 6th Battalion East Surrey Regiment. His Medal Roll though shows that John only served overseas with the 8th Battalion London Regiment, arriving in France/Flanders on 1st September 1916. He initially served with the London Regiment as number 6483, but was later renumbered in 1917 as 373405.

 

It might be useful to look at men with near service numbers who do have surviving papers, to see if any inferences can be made. For instance, there was a chap called Henry Garland who was transferred from the 6th East Surrey Regiment to the 8th London Regiment on 26th August 1916. His initial London Regiment number was 6487 before being renumbered to 373409. The closeness of service numbers points towards John being transferred on the same date. 

 

Regards

Chris

[Jean M]

Thank you. That is very interesting. I believe Jack's service records got destroyed in WW2. He would have been 18 in Sept 1915, so I've imagined that was when he joined up. There is a family "story" that Jack was invalided home with appendicitis and then went back. Are there any medical records that one can trace? They might have been kept in a different place to the service ones? Any help very gratefully received.

Jean

[clk]

Hi Jean,

 

The National Archives has a representative sample of hospital admission/discharge registers - see here. Forces War Records are in the process of transcribing them, but they haven't completed the project. If Jack were to be in one of the registers, his record hasn't been transcribed yet.

 

As a bit of a long shot, it might be worth joining and posting on the British Medals Forum to see if anyone there knows where his medals are.

 

Regards

Chris

[Jean M]

Very kind of you. You clearly have access to lots of reference sites. I'll post if I have success on any front. J.M.S

[Drew-1918]

Hello Jean,

 

The following is from A History of the Post Office Rifles, 1914 - 1918.

 

"About the beginning of May, 1917, the whole of the 140th Brigade were withdrawn to a training area near St. Omer to rehearse the projected attack on the Messines Ridge ... 

 

The Battalion was billeted at Quercamp during the training period; their portion of the attack was very thoroughly rehearsed on a dummy trench system constructed to represent the enemy trenches. In the last week of May the Battalion returned to the forward area and moved into the line on the night of June 3rd-4th for the grand attack timed for 3.10 a.m. on June 7th. The journey to the line was distinctly unpleasant. All usual routes were assiduously deluged with H.E. and gas, but by selecting a somewhat devious route the Battalion, in spite of several warm moments, arrived with practically no casualties.

 

The plan of attack, so far as the infantry were concerned, was as follows:- 

 

The 47th Division was to attack astride the Ypres-Commines Canal with two Brigades-the 140th Brigade south, and the 142nd Brigade north of the Canal- the 141st Brigade being in support. Each attacking Brigade had two Battalions in front to attack and consolidate the first four lines of enemy trenches, including certain strong points and enemy positions on the Canal banks. Three hours after zero the remaining Battalions of the attacking Brigade were to pass through and capture further enemy positions to a depth of about 1,000 yards.

 

The 1/8th Battalion, under command of Lieutenant-Colonel A. Maxwell, were included in the first phase of the attack, and formed the right flank of the 47th Division. On their right was the 11th Queen's (41st Division), and on their left the 1/7th Battalion London Regiment. Their objectives comprised portions of the four lines known as Oak Trench, Oak Support, Oak Reserve, amd Oak Switch, and included, in addition to a number of communication trenches, a formidable strong point constructed at the northern end of a road known as the Dammstrasse.

 

During the three days immediately preceding the attack the bombardment of our artillery was intense, and as ascertained later, exceptionally deadly. So much was the morale of the enemy affected that our men could look over the top in broad daylight without the smallest danger except from fragments from our own shells ; most platoon commanders were able to take their men to their jumping-off positions, and show them objects in the Hun lines to guide their advance. On the night of June 6th-7th the Battalion was assembled waiting for the anxious moment of zero. Gradually the bombardment died down, until at 3.10 a.m. on the 7th, along the battle front of ten miles, nineteen large mines were exploded as the signal for attack. Some of these mines had been under construction for more than two years; those nearest the Battalion were at St. Eloi on the right and Hill 60 the left. The effect of these huge explosions was terrific, and never likely to be forgotten by those who took part in this fight. If the first sensation was almost paralyzing to our own troops, the shock to the enemy was overwhelming. The barrage opened at the same moment, and the attack commenced, while the enemy batteries were being neutralized by torrents of gas shells. It is hardly a matter of surprise that under these conditions the enemy resistance was feeble in the earlier objectives, even the much-dreaded Dammstrasse being captured without serious opposition. Many of casualties of the Battalion were due to machine gun fire from the White Chateau, one of the objectives of the 7th Battalion. This was a naturally strong position, and so well fortified that a determined garrison might hold out for a long time. Some of the 1/8th took part in the attack on this Chateau, and materially assisted in its capture. Corporal Bottomley, of the 1/8th made his way into the place through deadly machine and gun and rifle fire, and, capturing one of the machine guns which was doing most of the damage to our men, proceeded to use it on the enemy themselves. Unfortunately, he was not long to survive this heroic act, for when the place was finally taken his dead body was found across the very gun he had so gallantly captured and used. By this time the enemy was thoroughly demoralized, and no difficulty was encountered in capturing, consolidating and holding all the objectives, although the enemy kept a continuous bombardment on the whole of the sector causing several casualties. So ended for this Battalion an historic fight, one remarkable for the extraordinarily careful organization and preparation of every detail. For the next five days the Battalion remained in the captured area until the Division was relieved, when they proceeded to Reninghelst, and then to Lynde to rest and refit.

 

From June 3rd to 12th the Battalion had lost two officers killed (Captain A. T. Davis and 2nd-Lieutenant E, Henderson) and six officers wounded (Captain C. B. Fenwick, Lieutenant T, C, H, Berry, 2nd-Lieutenants Foster, Billham, Peters, and James). The casualties to other ranks were about 200, of whom about 40 were killed..."

I hope this helps to build on the picture others have started to bring out. 

Regards,

Chris

[Drew-1918]

By the way, I have a more detailed account of the attack on the White Chateau, if you want. It is from a book, The Long Carry, by Frank Dunham. He was a stretcher bearer with the 7th Londons. Send me a PM if you would like more info. 

 

Chris

[Jean M]

Sorry for the delay in thanking you for your very informative post. I am fairly ignorant when it comes to military matters, so I am not sure how many men would have been in the 12th Battalion and, therefore, what proportion of the men the 200 figure represents. I suppose I'm wondering, if it was mass slaughter or if my G'uncle was just unlucky to be one of them.

If your copy of "The Long Carry" is digital and you can just copy and paste the relevant bit, I should, of course be interested but not if you have to type it out!

 

Gratefully, Jean

[Drew-1918]

Hello Jean,

 

Apologies, I am not sure what you mean by "12th Battalion". The book stated, "From June 3rd to 12th [June] The Battalion [i.e. The 1/8th Battalion Post Office Rifles] lost ... 200 men of

whom a out 40 were killed." 

 

That's a very good question about the proportion of men this figure represents, but difficult to answer. Actually, the very next sentence after the section I quoted said, "Compared to the casualties on the Somme, these were extremely light."

 

I think that about 1000 was the official figure for the strength of a battalion. However, in books and memoires I have read, it rarely seems to hit more than 800 after reinforcements at this time of the war. In many books the figure given for "fighting strength" at this time is often 600 or even 400. At least, that's my impression. I am not an expert though. In this sense then, the proportion could vary quite a bit. Despite the book saying casualties were "comparatively" light, the proportion could be as much as 50% at that time. On the other hand, they had been training for about a month and may have received a number of reinforcements. It all depends. If I come across any figures, I will post here. 

 

My copy of the Dunham book is actually a folder of photocopies so not easy to put up here. I would have just photographed it and posted, but I was a little unclear about copyright issues since it is quite a long section. I will try and look into that too. 

 

Regards,

 

Chris

 

 

 

 

Edited 29 June , 2017 by Drew-1918

[Jean M]

I think I saw the 8th June and knew that Jack was 1/8th London Regiment ..... Afraid I am so ignorant about regiments and battalions etc ( my husband did Nat. Service in the Artillery and he is trying to educate me, but not with huge success!)

 

Please don't go to a lot of trouble over copyright.

 

It's such a shame that Jack's records seem to have been destroyed. His mother had died when he was 10 and his father in 1924, so any letters/photos/medals got scattered among his 10 siblings, all of whom lived well into their 90s and two to 100+. I have registered with British Medals Forum as recommended by "clk" but the registration hasn't been "approved" yet.

[Drew-1918]

I agree. It's a real shame about the 'burnt' records. I know what you mean because my own relative's seem to have been destroyed too, and in addition, any family correspondence, and such like, was destroyed in the second world war when a bomb fell on my family house. In my Nan's words, "Everything was blown to Kingdom Come". On the other hand, it served to crystalise everything in our memories.  

 

Had a look into the copyright and think I'm ok, as the book is out of print. Also, please don't worry about me having to type, as I can scan everything with my iPhone and it is no trouble for me. Id like you and your husband to read the extra detail-especially as he did National Service. I think Dunham's story is very interesting. Give me a day or two to sort it out. 

 

Regards, 

 

Chris

Edited 30 June , 2017 by Drew-1918

[Jean M]

Thank you, Chris. It's bad luck to have been bombed out in the Blitz. Perhaps having stuff scattered round the family has ensured something of Jack survived!

 

Can you explain to me why I have "Lance Corporal" under my username ? You have "Lieutenant Colonel". There must be a reason....

Cheers, Jean

[ss002d6252]

3 minutes ago, Jean M said:

Can you explain to me why I have "Lance Corporal" under my username ? You have "Lieutenant Colonel". There must be a reason....

Cheers, Jean

It's based on the number of posts made.

 

Craig

[Jean M]

So how many posts are needed to promote me to Corporal?!

[ss002d6252]

Quote

So how many posts are needed to promote me to Corporal?!

That's how many posts, Sir ! I'm not specifically sure how many you need to get to any of the ranks.

 

The war gratuity would indicate Jack had 23 months service enlisted in Jun/Jul1915.

 

#373409 Garland was previously #6487 with the 8th Londons so his number ties in time-wise with Jack's number. Garland was transferred from the 6th East Surreys to the 8th London's on 26 Aug 1916. I suspect therefore that Jack joined the East Surreys in Aug 1915 and then was part of a bulk transfer to the 8th London in Aug 1916.

 

#3266 was allocated to the 6th East Surreys on 10 May 1915 so I'd have expected that #3267 was allocated very closed afterwards but that doesn't fit the amount of war gratuity he was paid... Taking May 1915 as the date would give a war gratuity of 25 months - a difference of 2 months service somewhere.

The shortfall can usually be explained by one of a few reasons;

1) He had deserted for a couple of months.

2) He was released to civilian work for a couple of months.

3) He had been imprisoned for a couple of month.

4) There's been an error (which is unusual).

Craig

Edited 30 June , 2017 by ss002d6252

[Jean M]

Forgive me, I am a bit confused by all the dates in 1915. Is there a period between enlisting and joining a regiment? For training?

Might the two month discrepancy be accounted for by the apocryphal appendicitis that he suffered from? Would a two-month illness be "docked" from a gratuity?

 

Jean

[ss002d6252]

50 minutes ago, Jean M said:

Forgive me, I am a bit confused by all the dates in 1915. Is there a period between enlisting and joining a regiment? For training?

Might the two month discrepancy be accounted for by the apocryphal appendicitis that he suffered from? Would a two-month illness be "docked" from a gratuity?

 

Jean

They didn't dock people for illness etc - I'm sure they'll have at least considered it though !
 

We know what Jack's service numbers are but the not the dates as he has no real surviving records. We do in cases like that is to look at men with close by service numbers, as they'd have been allocated around the same time, to give us an idea.

We know #3266 with the 6th East Surreys was allocated 10 May 15, so this gives us a close date for when Jack was allocated #3267. Numbers were usually allocated when a man joined the battalion, the actual enlistment date could be before that and the man had to be wait to join up (that 'waiting period' wouldn't count for the gratuity). Jack would have started training once he joined the battalion.

We know that #6487 was allocated in August 1916 to man who transferred from the 6th East Surreys so we know that Jack's close London number must have been issued around the same time - possibly on the same day as it looks like there was a bulk transfer of men.

Using the details of other men gives us the handle on Jack - apart from the one issue over the war gratuity which I need to have a think about (I did wonder if he;d been paid as a lance corporal rather than a corporal but that wouldn't fit the calculations without adding in even more 'what if's')

Craig

[Jean M]

I am most grateful to you for giving this so much attention. Another question occurs to me, which you might be able to answer - would not the records of soldiers with such close numbers be archived together? In which case, why have Garland's records survived and not JBW's?

I see that you have an interest in DLI. Coincidentally Jack's younger brother, Harry Wakefield (pictured in an earlier post with his 4 sons at the Menin Gate) was with the DLI, although I've never known why, as he had never moved outside Surrey.

 

Jean

[ss002d6252]

Records were always being pulled in and out of storage and moved around so it wouldn't be uncommon to find adjacent numbered records having different fates (There were also duplicate records created which can effect the survival rates)

 

If a man was posted to a regiment that seems to be 'out of area' then it's usually just down to the needs of the army. They'd post a man wherever they needed him.

 

Craig

[Jean M]

On ‎26‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 10:24, clk said:

Hi Jean,

 

The National Archives has a representative sample of hospital admission/discharge registers - see here. Forces War Records are in the process of transcribing them, but they haven't completed the project. If Jack were to be in one of the registers, his record hasn't been transcribed yet.

 

As a bit of a long shot, it might be worth joining and posting on the British Medals Forum to see if anyone there knows where his medals are.

 

Regards

Chris

I followed up on your suggestion of joining the BNF but my registration got caught up in a computer glitch (theirs) so I have only just been "approved" and have posted about JBW's medals. I'm not optimistic but miracles sometimes happen. Thanks for the advice.