BEF 1st Royal West Surrey Regiment Battalion 1914

[Gb627]

Hello all,

I'm come here for a final roll of the dice. I've spent many hours trying to find more information about my grandfather time in the BEF 1914. I have managed to find out the below but believe his service record was destroyed in WW2.

I'm desperate to find out more information about his battalion during the retreat from mons, battle of Marne, battle of Aisne and Lagamarack.I recently visited the location of the Queens during the battle of Aisne and am desperate for more information.

I was wondering if anyone knows of first hand accounts from the 1st Queens during this period or might have anymore information about him?

Many thanks for any assistance,

Guy Bennett

 

What I know so far

Name Henry George Bennett
Born 31 october 1889
Enlisted Royal West Surrey Regiment 19th January 1906 
Numbered L/8797
Lance Corporal 2nd Battalion 2 April 1911
I think he then turned into a reservist untill 1914

Lance Corporal 1st Royal West Surrey Regiment
Left for Le Harve, France August 1914

Became a Sergeant during his time in France
Wounded and in hospital in London 28th October 1914

[Gb627]

Medal Record

[PRC]

Hi @Gb627 and welcome to the forum

You don't mention whether or not you have the War Diary. If not it can currently be downloaded for free from the National Archive. You do need to sign in with your account, but if you don't have one it can be set up as part of placing your first order. Just click on "sign in" on any page of the National Archive catalogue and follow the instructions - no financial details are requested.

The 1st Battalion War Diary covering August to December 1914 can be found in the National Archive catalogue here https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C7351917

A transcript of the daily entries is also available on a website dedicated to the Surrey Regiments. https://www.queensroyalsurreys.org.uk/war_diaries/local/1Bn_Queens.shtml

And if you have subscription access to Ancestry the War Diary can be seen there.

Cheers,
Peter

[charlie962]

Going back a bit, I am assuming HG Bennett originally served in the militia before joining the Regulars. 

In your very old thread you said this:

Henry George Bennett

Born: 30th oct 1889 in southwark, surrey

Married Millicent Sansom : 28th Nov 1914 in Bermondsey, Surrey

Born:1891

This Militia record looks to be him, courtesy Findmypast 

 

 

His Regular Army record doesn't appear to have survived.

Can you confirm that his Nov 1914 marriage cert gives him as a soldier of the RWS?

Here's a note of his wounding as published in the newspapers 1914:

Forename H R (sic)

Surname Bennett

Casualty Status Wounded - 3rd London General Hospital, Wandsworth

Rank Lance Corporal

Service Number 8797

Regiment Royal West Surrey Regiment

Category Nco's and Men

Daily List Date 2nd December 1914

Report Received Date 28th October 1914

Source Daily Casualty Lists  

 

The Surrey Advertiser 14/11/14 phrases it thus:

Courtesy Findmypast newspapers 

 

[Gb627]

Hello Charlie,

Thank you so much for your help! Its fantastic to see those pre ww1 records! My best guess before was that he was India. Is there any chance you have a clear image of the the second picture?

I'm struggling to find the marriage certificate on ancestry, however, I can find the index which isnt very useful. Do you have any suggestion as to where I should look?

I never found his The Silver War Badge so I've always wondered if he stayed on as an instructor.

Thank you again!

Name	Millicent Sansom
Spouse Surname	Bennett
Registration Year	1914
Registration Quarter	Oct-Nov-Dec
Registration district	Bermondsey
Inferred County	London
Volume	1d
Page	511

Household members

Name	Age
Henry G Bennett
Millicent Sansom
Joseph R Worden

Close

[Bordercollie]

From the 1911 Census it looks as though he was in Gibraltar with the 2nd Battalion at that time.  Images courtesy of Ancestry

[58 Div Mule]

Might be worth reading Paul Kendall’s book ‘Ainse 1914. The Dawn of Trench Warfare.’? Good first hand accounts throughout and 1 Queen’s get a fair amount of coverage.

Published in2012

ISBN 978 0 7524 6304 9.

58 DM.

[Bordercollie]

He probably enlisted in 1906 for seven years with the colours and five years on the reserve but because he was serving overseas his colour service was probably extended to eight years.  That would mean that he would have completed colour service in January 1914 and transferred to the reserve.  He would then have been recalled in August 1914 and posted to the 1st Battalion in Bordon.  Colonel H C Wylly's history of the Regiment in the Great War  records that the battalion at a total strength of 998 embarked for France on 12th August 1914.  He also relates that on 4th October 1913 the battalion, 381 strong all ranks, was taken by special train from Bordon to Guildford for the unveiling of a window in Holy Trinity Church commemorating the 250th anniversary of the formation of the Regiment.  So it seems likely that your grandfather was far from the only reservist embarking on 12th August. Interestingly the ship that took the battalion across the Channel, SS Braemar Castle, was the same ship that had taken the 2nd Battalion (presumably including your grandfather) to Gibraltar in December 1909.

[Michelle Young]

Link to previous thread

 

[PRC]

3 hours ago, charlie962 said:

Casualty Status Wounded - 3rd London General Hospital, Wandsworth

The full list, dated 28^th October 1914, of the admissions into the 3^rd London General Hospital, Wandsworth, can be found on page 4 of the edition of The Times dated December 2^nd, 1914.

 

Image courtesy The Times Digitial Archive.

Other members of The Queens on the same list are and who might give a pointer as to when Henry was wounded:-

8848 Lance Corporal G. Anderson. No obvious MiC or Service Record that number.
8720 Private A.R.W. Collard. 2 x MiC for L/8720 Albert Edward Collard & L/8720 Albert Collard subsequently 160357 Labour Corps. No obvious service records.
6330 Private H Dance. MiC for L/6330 Herbert Dance and SWB card for L/6330 H. T. Dance. Surviving service records.
8017 Sergeant H. Deacon. MiC for L/8017 Henry J. Deacon. No obvious service records. Henry James Deacon would die on the Somme in July 1916 serving with the 1^st Battalion.
8348 Private F. Howe. MiC for L/8348 Frederick C. Howe. No obvious service records.
9877 Private F. Smith. MiC for L/9877 Frederick Smith, subsequently 11395 Royal West Kent Regiment and Q/7583 Military Foot Police. Surviving service records.
8082 Private C. Spiers (isn’t this the Spicer on the Surrey Advertiser List?).  MiC as L/8082 Charles Spiers. Also received the Silver War Badge. Surviving service records.

I don’t subscribe to FindMyPast , Fold 3 or Ancestry so can’t check them out further.

Up till the 8^th November 1914 the 1^st Battalion Queens (Royal West Surrey Regiment), were part of the 3^rd Brigade of the 1^st Division. https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/army/regiments-and-corps/the-british-infantry-regiments-of-1914-1918/queens-royal-west-surrey-regiment/

The other Infantry Battalions that made up the 3^rd Brigade were:-

1^st Battalion, South Wales Borderers.
1^st Battalion, Gloucestershire Regiment.
2^nd Battalion, Welsh Regiment.
http://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/army/order-of-battle-of-divisions/1st-division/

That same London Hospital admission list has 4 men of the South Wales Borderers and 2 men of the Welsh Regiment so could be worth checking to see if any of them have surviving service records.

Cheers,
Peter

[charlie962]

3 hours ago, PRC said:

8082 Private C. Spiers (isn’t this the Spicer on the Surrey Advertiser List?).  MiC as L/8082 Charles Spiers. Also received the Silver War Badge. Surviving service records.

Actual wounding 23/10/14 1st Bn.

[PRC]

49 minutes ago, charlie962 said:

Actual wounding 23/10/14 1st Bn.

Thanks for checking Charlie - from the War Diary the 1st Queens were in action on that day and the casualties ran to 16 NCO's & men killed, 35 wounded and 89 missing.
Units mentioned are Northamptons, Camerons and Loyal North Lancashire - there are men from all three Regiments in the admissions to the Wandsworth Hospital.

Cheers,
Peter

[charlie962]

I did check the other two you highlighted, Peter, but exact date not evident.

Charlie

[PRC]

27 minutes ago, charlie962 said:

I did check the other two you highlighted, Peter, but exact date not evident.

No problem Charlie - hopefully with the information given @Gb627 will be able to look for newspaper reports relating to those individuals and their wounding, plus by reviewing those three service records, (and potentially any others on the same admission list if they survive), identify the medical evacuation route that led from the frontline to a London hospital. If the field ambulance and casualty clearing station \ hospital can be identified then war diaries should be available for them as well. Unlikely to mention a particular soldier who passed through but will expand the picture a bit and hopefully also give a more precision as to their whereabouts. It might also be possible to fill in the gaps - were they moved between each stage by motor convoy, ambulance train \ ambulance barge and which hospital ship \ transport carried them back to UK, sailing from where and landing where.

Do I take it they were actually admitted on the 28th and this wasn't just an administrative date?

Consulting the War diaries for the other units involved in the fighting on the 22nd / 23rd October 1914 as well as the Brigade one may also throw up more details on the actions of the 1st Queens. Their diary does have both a British Army Map and a more specific sketch map of the action on the 23rd.

Here's a crop of the map, note the arrow below "EE" and the associated note "Queens advance The INN was at crossroads".

and the sketch map. (Note the date 4 XII 1914 may have been a subsequent addition - a copy of the war diary should have been submitted to the Brigade in the opening week of November). Rail line on the sketch appears to tie in with the one in square 9, (to the right and below "EE") and everything else can be orientated from that.

Both images courtesy the UK National Archive.

Cheers,
Peter

[charlie962]

18 hours ago, PRC said:

8720 Private A.R.W. Collard. 2 x MiC for L/8720 Albert Edward Collard & L/8720 Albert Collard subsequently 160357 Labour Corps. No obvious service records.

RWS attestation ledgers on FindmyPast (I hadn't seen them before) show he** was wounded 23/10/14 ie same as Spiers.

** as Albert Edward Collard L/12039 and LCorps 160357. Strange renumber but fits?? 

 

First name(s) Albert Edward

Last name Collard

Year -

Service number 6076731

Rank -

Regiment as transcribed The Queen's Royal Regiment (West Surrey)

Description Enlistment register book 1 listing army numbers 6076001-6077002.

Series -

Archive Surrey History Centre

Edited 20 September , 2023 by charlie962

[Gb627]

Thank you all so much for your help on this. You have uncovered so much information that I have missed and I have now so many angles of exploration.

I have decided to enter a submission to the Surrey in the Great War: collection with all this new information. I will put the link here when completed.

Many thanks again,

Guy

[PRC]

On 19/09/2023 at 12:40, Gb627 said:

Lance Corporal 2nd Battalion 2 April 1911
I think he then turned into a reservist untill 1914

As has already been noted by @Bordercollie, the standard short service enlistment was 12 year, split between a period in the colours, (i.e. in uniform, in barracks, subject to military discipline 24/7, receiving full board, lodgings, clothing and medical care) and a period in the reserves, (i.e. back in civvy street, subject to military discipline only while attending refresher training, receiving half pay, with access to healthcare via approved local GP’s and hospitals on the Army list and liable for immediate recall in the event of a national emergency such as war).

While in theory there were a variety of splits available, at any one time the Army had a preference and this would be the default unless a man pushed for anything different.

As he signed up in 1906 there is a possibility that some of his contemporaries may have been discharged prior to August 1914, in which case their records were held separately and not affected by the WW2 bombing. These in National Archive terms are the WO97 series and are available on FindMyPast and Genes Reunited.

8759 Robert Summerfield attested at London on the 6^th December 1905, enlisting for a short service 12 years, split 9 and 3. He was then serving with a Militia Battalion of the Kings Royal Rifle Corps. He was posted to The Depot on the 8^th December 1905 for his initial training, and then the 2^nd Battalion on the 29^th March 1906. He was posted to the 1^st Battalion on the 5^th February 1907 and sent out to India – the British interests in Aden then came under the India Office. He returned from Aden and was discharged at Netley Army Hospital on the 25^th January 1910 having been found medically unfit for further service.

8777 Henry Richard Kemp attested at Stratford on the 14^th December 1905, enlisting for a short service 12 years, split 9 and 3. He was then serving with a Militia Battalion of the Royal Fusiliers. He was posted to The Depot on the 16^th December 1905 for his initial training, and then the 2^nd Battalion on the 29^th March 1906. In April 1907 he was tried by District Court Martial and received 42 days in the Dentention Barracks. On release he continued to serve with the 2^nd Battalion. On the 9^th July 1907 he was discharged at Colchester for Misconduct. All of his service was in the UK.

L/8797 Henry George Bennett

8803 Edwin Johncock attested at Guildford on the 2^nd February 1906, enlisting for a short service 12 years, split 9 and 3. He was then serving with a Militia Battalion of the The Queens. He was posted to The Depot on the 2^nd February 1906 for his initial training, and then the 2^nd Battalion on the 7^th June 1906. He went absent without leave in October 1908 and March 1909. with the second period only ending when he was apprehended by the civil police. He was discharged from the 2^nd Battalion on the 26^th May 1909 at Colchester for Misconduct

8813 Frederick Charles Freeman attested at the South Western Police Court on the 15^th February 1906, enlisting for a short service 12 years, split 9 and 3. He had no previous military service. He was posted to The Depot on the 17^th February 1906 for his initial training, and then the 2^nd Battalion on the 14^th July 1906. He was posted to the 1^st Battalion on the 18^th December 1907 and was sent out to India. He returned from Agra, India and was discharged at Netley Hospital on the 24^th November 1908 having been found no longer physically fit for service.

8819 William Nolan attested at Guildford on the 26^th February 1906, enlisting for a short service 12 years, split 9 and 3. He had no previous military service. He was posted to The Depot on the 26^th February 1906 for his initial training, and then the 2^nd Battalion on the 14^th July 1906. Disciplinary issues started in September 1906. Eventually he was tried by District Court Martial in August 1908 and was sentenced to a years detention with hard labour. On the 31^st March 1909 he was discharged for Misconduct.

Paul Nixons’ Army Service number website notes “The L/ prefix - which appears to have been inconsistently used for regular enlistments up until August 1914, continued to be used (inconsistently) for men enlisting for regular service from August 1914.” https://armyservicenumbers.blogspot.com/2009/07/queens-royal-west-surrey-regiment-1st.html

(Which probably explains why it doesn’t turn up for any on the paperwork for Summerfield, Kemp, Johncock, Freeman and Nolan.)

So if Henry went for what appears to be the default split at the time of his enlistment of 9 years in the Colours and 3 in the Reserves, there would not have been a period prior to Britain joining the Great War in which he would have been a reservist.

Cheers,
Peter

[Gb627]

I have been reading Jerry Murland "Battle on the Aisne" book where he references 1st hand accounts from Cuthbert S Avis, corporal in the 1st Queens Battalion. If I can get hold of this diary, which isn't exactly clear where Jerry Murland found it, I'[ll have a great insight into their movements and a personal understanding of what was experienced. 

Best wishes,

 

Guy

 

I'll certainly take a look into this. Thank you.

46 minutes ago, PRC said:

As he signed up in 1906 there is a possibility that some of his contemporaries may have been discharged prior to August 1914, in which case their records were held separately and not affected by the WW2 bombing. These in National Archive terms are the WO97 series and are available on FindMyPast and Genes Reunited.

 

 

 

[Michelle Young]

@Jerrymurland is a member of the forum, hopefully, my tag will alert him to your query. I’ve got the book with me in France (been on the Aisne, now on the Marne) but it’s in the car and it’s pouring with rain, so can’t cross check. I know my late father helped Jerry with the book. I’ve still not sorted through all his papers properly. 

[Gb627]

Its a fantastic book and I'm really enjoying it. Thank you!

[Bordercollie]

On 21/09/2023 at 14:08, PRC said:

As has already been noted by @Bordercollie, the standard short service enlistment was 12 year, split between a period in the colours, (i.e. in uniform, in barracks, subject to military discipline 24/7, receiving full board, lodgings, clothing and medical care) and a period in the reserves, (i.e. back in civvy street, subject to military discipline only while attending refresher training, receiving half pay, with access to healthcare via approved local GP’s and hospitals on the Army list and liable for immediate recall in the event of a national emergency such as war).

 

While in theory there were a variety of splits available, at any one time the Army had a preference and this would be the default unless a man pushed for anything different.

 

Thanks @PRC for putting me straight on the army terms of enlistment available in 1906 although that was a short lived experiment that lasted barely a year.  Army terms of enlistment are specified in subordinate legislation made by the Army Council.  For most of the period up to the First World War the standard short service engagement for line infantry was seven years with the colours and five years on the reserve.  This was changed in 1902 to three years with the colours and nine years on the reserve.  It was expected that this would improve recruiting based upon experience with the Foot Guards who could already enlist on those terms. At the same time improvements to pay were made with the expectation that a man would voluntarily increase his colour service thus avoiding problems with retention.  This approach proved a disaster as the expected impact on retention from improved pay did not materialise.  So in 1905 the standard term of service was altered to nine years with the colours and three years on the reserve in the hope of correcting the impact of the 1902 experiment.  However this had such an adverse effect on recruiting that in 1907 the standard engagement was put back to the original seven years with the colours and five on the reserve.

Interestingly the attestation paper for Robert Summerfield which you flagged appears to be from stock printed in 1904 for the three and nine experiment which has then been altered in manuscript to be used for a nine and three engagement.  However the note at the bottom of the form makes clear that this amendment should have been made and initialed by a JP and so one wonders whether Robert Summerfield's enlistment was entirely lawful. 

 

This extract from Mr Haldane's speech during the debate on Army Estimates 1906-7 on 12th July 1906 outlines the changes in line infantry terms of enlistment between 1902 and 1907

"The terms of enlistment are very important, and we have given close consideration to that. As the Committee I knows, Mr. Cardwell originally proposed in the short service scheme as it first stood, that the terms should be six years with the colours and six with the reserve. Afterwards it became seven and five. Then there was the unfortunate three years experiment, with nine, from which a jump had to be made to the other end nine and three, to increase the men with the colours. That is too large, in our opinion, and after very great consideration the Adjutant-General, to whom I cannot express my obligations sufficiently deeply for the immense amount of work; he has thrown into this part of my proposals, has presented me with these recommendations, which are adopted by the Army Council and the Government. The terms of enlistment for the infantry of the Line will be, as a general rule, seven and five, with the extra year. The Guards will remain three and nine; they do not go abroad." 

Edited 26 September , 2023 by Bordercollie

[Colin W Taylor]

Avis' papers are held by the Imperial War Museum. You'd need to arrange an appointment at their reading rooms to view or photograph them.

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/1030004072

Edited 28 September , 2023 by Colin W Taylor

[Gb627]

Hello All,

Just wanted to say thank you again for all your help on this.

I have since been doing a fair amount of digging and managed to get hold of Sargent Avis papers and the diary of John Dopping Boyd (Colonel J D Boyd (queensroyalsurreys.org.uk)). John Dopping Boyd diary from 1914 mentioned my Grandfather as a L./CP who was in section 7 of his platoon. My next move is to go through each person in this section and do a little bit of research but I was wondering if anyone could shed some light on a couple of questions:

1. Why is it in section 7 was there no Sergeants? I know during this period Grandpa was made a Sergeants do you think this may have happened at the start?

2. How often would soldiers be moved from section to section or from company to company? Is it likely that Grandpa would have stayed in D company section 7?

3. If you were me where would you look next for information?

Many thanks again,

Guy

[Bordercollie]

The answer to your first question is that there would not be enough sergeants to provide one for each section.  This is the establishment for an infantry company at the time:

There are four platoons in the company and four sections in each platoon; a total of sixteen.  There are eight sergeants and ten corporals.  Four of the sergeants are second-in-command of a platoon which leaves four sergeants and ten corporals for employment as section commanders.  As there are sixteen sections it appears that two of the sections in each company would have been commanded by a lance-corporal.  I have omitted the complication of some corporals possibly being lance-sergeants for clarity.