Charles Pusey - Unjustifiably accused of being a shirker

[Steve Goodall]

I came across this letter from a chap called Charles Pusey while researching the family tree of a relative of his. Charles had been posted to the 84th Reserve Battalion in June 1917 but had been discharged from the Army two months later as he suffered from epilepsy and had been having fits. He should have been awarded a Silver War Badge but there seems to have been a delay or mix up, as according to this letter which he sent in October 1917, he had not received it.

Rather sadly, and unjustifiably, he testifies to having been called a 'Shirker' and had fingers pointed at him for avoiding the Army.

Picture courtesy of Ancestry.

[corisande]

His pension card on Fold 3

[corisande]

And his SWB seems to have been awarded on 8 Oct 1917

Edited 29 January , 2023 by corisande

[corisande]

The time frame seems to be quite reasonable in the midst of a war

• 1917 Aug 15 discharged medically
• 1917 Oct 8 SWB aproved
• 1918 Jan 4 he signs for it
• 

[Matlock1418]

21 minutes ago, corisande said:

His pension card on Fold 3

 

My reading of a £7.10 Gratuity suggests to me that the Army were likely only accepting 'aggravation' [likely of an existing condition] from short service.

17 minutes ago, corisande said:

And his SWB seems to have been awarded on 8 Oct 1917

Letter received and SWB awarded/possibly issued the same day [since a badge number was available] - Coincidence? Or was somebody suitably 'motivated'?

I rather hope he got it and got less/no more hassle thereafter.

M

Edited 29 January , 2023 by Matlock1418
tweak

[Matlock1418]

1 minute ago, corisande said:

1918 Jan 4 he signs for it

Well he certainly got it. 

M

[Steve Goodall]

6 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

I rather hope he got it and got less/no more hassle thereafter.

Indeed. It seems desperately unfair for anyone to have to suffer that type of abuse when in fact he had been exceptionally brave to enlist at all while suffering from such a debilitating illness. He appears on the 1939 Register in Hillingdon Hospital, so maybe his epilepsy got the better of him in later life?

[TEW]

I've seen similar letters.

TEW

[corisande]

28 minutes ago, Steve Goodall said:

Indeed. It seems desperately unfair for anyone to have to suffer that type of abuse when in fact he had been exceptionally brave to enlist at all while suffering from such a debilitating illness.

 I think that the question here is

• How long should the Army have reasonably taken to issue a SWB given that it in the midst of a War?

I would be interested in the views of forum readers on this.

[Matlock1418]

31 minutes ago, corisande said:

How long should the Army have reasonably taken to issue a SWB given that it in the midst of a War?

Just wondering - Was it not a standard part of the discharge process if being so discharged??  Edit: At that 1917 date??  Perhaps only later??

M

Edited 29 January , 2023 by Matlock1418
edit

[sadbrewer]

Incidentally...his brother Frank was wounded in 8th Middlesex Rgt reported on 7th July 1916. Another brother Walter was in the same Regiment.

Edited 29 January , 2023 by sadbrewer

[kenf48]

We do not know, or have not been told, under what provision of the regulations he was discharged.  Assuming he was not a TF soldier but a conscript or Derby man if he was discharged under the provisions of Para 392(iii) ‘Unlikely to become an efficient soldier” he was not entitled to a Silver War Badge. Under the original AO of September 1916 the eligibility was limited to wounds or sickness attributable to military service.

On August 11 1917 a further Army Order was issued stating the entitlement to the SWB was extended to include those men who - “After Service at home have been medically examined and finally discharged from liability to further military service under the provisions of sub section 5 of Section 1 Military Service (Review of Exceptions) Act 1917 as being permanently and totally disabled, other than for misconduct”  

So Pte Pusey was unlikely to have entitlement until the promulgation of the amending Order a few days before his discharge.  No doubt it took the bureaucracy a few weeks to catch up, especially as those who became eligible under the amendment were putting in applications.  I agree with @corisande  the time scale does not seem unduly long.  The badges were numbered, metal trades were committed to the war effort and there was increased demand around this time due to the badge being granted to merchant seamen.

A leaflet and application form for back dated issue and entitlement was available at the Post Office.  Application was made to the OIC Records Office for his unit. It was not issued automatically as part of  the discharge process for men who had not served overseas.  Men discharged after more than seven days Service as a consequence of disablement or sickness at home under the cited provision above had to have their Discharge Certificate authorised by a National Service Medical Board to say they were permanently unfit for military service before submitting the form with their application to the Record Office.

It seems to have been Pte Pusey’s misfortune to be discharged as the regulations for issue and entitlement were changing.  Prior to the amendment unless he could show his epilepsy was attributable to military service he would not have been eligible.   I don’t consider it ‘unfair’, the issue of the SWB was carefully guarded, we tend to underestimate it’s value, or cuurency.  Contemporary newspaper classifieds are full of appeals for the return of lost badges which, in the absence of medals etc. were the only recognition of service during the war.  He was not entitled to the ‘King’s Certificate’.

 

[Matlock1418]

49 minutes ago, kenf48 said:

We do not know, or have not been told, under what provision of the regulations he was discharged.  Assuming he was not a TF soldier but a conscript or Derby man if he was discharged under the provisions of Para 392(iii) ‘Unlikely to become an efficient soldier” he was not entitled to a Silver War Badge. Under the original AO of September 1916 the eligibility was limited to wounds or sickness attributable to military service.

On August 11 1917 a further Army Order was issued stating the entitlement to the SWB was extended to include those men who - “After Service at home have been medically examined and finally discharged from liability to further military service under the provisions of sub section 5 of Section 1 Military Service (Review of Exceptions) Act 1917 as being permanently and totally disabled, other than for misconduct”  

So Pte Pusey was unlikely to have entitlement until the promulgation of the amending Order a few days before his discharge.  No doubt it took the bureaucracy a few weeks to catch up, especially as those who became eligible under the amendment were putting in applications.  I agree with @corisande  the time scale does not seem unduly long.  The badges were numbered, metal trades were committed to the war effort and there was increased demand around this time due to the badge being granted to merchant seamen.

A leaflet and application form for back dated issue and entitlement was available at the Post Office.  Application was made to the OIC Records Office for his unit. It was not issued automatically as part of  the discharge process for men who had not served overseas.  Men discharged after more than seven days Service as a consequence of disablement or sickness at home under the cited provision above had to have their Discharge Certificate authorised by a National Service Medical Board to say they were permanently unfit for military service before submitting the form with their application to the Record Office.

It seems to have been Pte Pusey’s misfortune to be discharged as the regulations for issue and entitlement were changing.  Prior to the amendment unless he could show his epilepsy was attributable to military service he would not have been eligible.   I don’t consider it ‘unfair’, the issue of the SWB was carefully guarded, we tend to underestimate it’s value, or cuurency.  Contemporary newspaper classifieds are full of appeals for the return of lost badges which, in the absence of medals etc. were the only recognition of service during the war.  He was not entitled to the ‘King’s Certificate’.

Though subsequently much engaged with other matters outside of GWF today the 1917 dates and discharge/issue process had been niggling and avoiding me.  Thanks for your detailed reply. 

Practically it, August - October - January, doesn't seem very long in wartime [I believe it can take about that time/longer nowadays in peacetime to get a Veteran's badge]

However, I feel sure he, and other ex-servicemen, felt the lack of a SWB keenly if/when they were subject to judgement and unpleasantness.

Just an interesting matching of October receipt of chasing letter and award same day.  It does seem appropriate that he got it in the end.

M

Edited 30 January , 2023 by Matlock1418
comment

[corisande]

7 hours ago, kenf48 said:

 Assuming he was not a TF soldier but a conscript or Derby man

He was assessed on 23 May 1917.

May

And his discharge is as below

 

Edited 30 January , 2023 by corisande

[Matlock1418]

1 hour ago, corisande said:

20 hours ago, corisande said:

Thanks for posting these - Interesting differences amongst the paperwork.

Initially recorded as Not caused nor aggravated by military service and yet a week later it is recorded he was awarded a £7.10 Gratuity.

M

[kenf48]

5 hours ago, Matlock1418 said:

Initially recorded as Not caused nor aggravated by military service and yet a week later it is recorded he was awarded a £7.10 Gratuity.

This document evidences his entitlement - as with the SWB it seems there was a great deal going on at this time around the award of pensions and gratuities perhaps Craig @ss002d6252 has details of the Royal Warrant and in particular Clause 7 (2)

[Matlock1418]

11 minutes ago, kenf48 said:

This document evidences his entitlement - as with the SWB it seems there was a great deal going on at this time around the award of pensions and gratuities perhaps Craig @ss002d6252 has details of the Royal Warrant and in particular Clause 7 (2)

Once again thanks Ken.  You have access to documents that are not within my reach - but very good to see more of the explanation for the Gratuity. 

M

 

[Steve Goodall]

18 hours ago, sadbrewer said:

Incidentally...his brother Frank was wounded in 8th Middlesex Rgt reported on 7th July 1916. Another brother Walter was in the same Regiment.

Thanks sadbrewer, I found out that Frank was wounded while looking into Charles' background. I bought a medal pair for Private Arthur Morris, 8th London Regiment last week. I like to build up the family trees of the medal holders I buy on Ancestry as a form of commemoration and to try to get to know them a bit. That's what brought me to the attention of the Pusey's who were related by marriage to my chap. What I didn't realise at the time, was that the person that was selling my medals was also selling Frank Pusey's Victory Medal and 1914-15 Star. I think they were part of a house clearance, but I guess it's nice to know that they had remained in the family for quite some time before finding their way onto eBay.

With the newspaper cutting above, It's fascinating to read for example, that Frank worked in the bacon department of a local store. I have a Military Medal group from a chap who was a Barber. Bravery can be found in all walks of life I guess.

Edited 30 January , 2023 by Steve Goodall

[Matlock1418]

1 minute ago, Steve Goodall said:

Thanks M, I found out that Frank was wounded

@sadbrewer was responsible for that newspaper clip - credit for that due to him. 

M

[Matlock1418]

24 minutes ago, Steve Goodall said:

Incidentally...his brother Frank was wounded in 8th Middlesex Rgt reported on 7th July 1916. Another brother Walter was in the same Regiment.

Walter PUSEY, 19672, Army Pay Corps recorded on a disabilty pension card at WFA/Fold3 - has same 23 Orchard Place, Lancaster Rd, Uxbridge, address

Discharged/disembodied 29.3.19 = got 8/3 pw from 30.3.19 to 30.9.19 [that 8/3 pw is the 30% disability rate pension for a Class V/Private soldier]

DEAD 8.10.25 Claim considered dead, at or before.

MIC has him also/formerly 3827, Middlesex Regiment

M

[ss002d6252]

On 30/01/2023 at 15:19, kenf48 said:

This document evidences his entitlement - as with the SWB it seems there was a great deal going on at this time around the award of pensions and gratuities perhaps Craig @ss002d6252 has details of the Royal Warrant and in particular Clause 7 (2)

RW 1917


Craig

[kenf48]

33 minutes ago, ss002d6252 said:

RW 1917

Thanks Craig