Charlie wrote: > My soldier had married my Aunt Mabel in September 1914. At about the same > time he voluteered for the 13th Battalion of the Essex regiment (West > Ham).. His will was made out and signed on 9th November 1915 and he left > everything to his mother, not his young (19 year old) wjfe. This strikes me > as odd, but I know from other information in the will that it's the right > man, What do others make of that? He would have had precious little to > bequeeth. > Perhaps he thought his mother needed the money more, as his wife could go back to her parents if he died. Did he have younger siblings still dependent and was his mother a widow ? Did war widows get an allowance/some other sort of payment in WW1 ? -- Anne Chambers South Australia anne dot chambers at bigpond dot com

On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 15:57:02 +0930, Anne Chambers wrote: > Charlie wrote: > >> My soldier had married my Aunt Mabel in September 1914. At about the same >> time he voluteered for the 13th Battalion of the Essex regiment (West >> Ham).. His will was made out and signed on 9th November 1915 and he left >> everything to his mother, not his young (19 year old) wjfe. This strikes me >> as odd, but I know from other information in the will that it's the right >> man, What do others make of that? He would have had precious little to >> bequeeth. >> > > Perhaps he thought his mother needed the money more, as his wife could go back to her parents if he died. Did > he have younger siblings still dependent and was his mother a widow ? Did war widows get an allowance/some > other sort of payment in WW1 ? He did have younger (and older) siblings. His father was alive when he married in 1914, but his employment, casual dock labourer, was certainly precarious. His wjfe, my aunt, did return to live with her parents for a while, and their only child died early in 1915. Pretty tragic all round. I'm following every lead I can think of regarding my aunt. I didn't even know she existed until I found her on the 1901 census. My father never mentioned her although I know they lived in the same small home until sometime in the 1920s. I found a witness to that, now dead,. some years ago. I could write a book about the small mysteries in that family, Mabel is just one item! Roy

Gordon Adshead wrote in reply to my:       >At 21:29 01/09/2013, Chris Dickinson wrote: > > There is an article in the online FT today that may interest some of you (see the subject headline). I don't know whether you can access this, as I am a subscriber: > > http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/380c2bd4-116b-11e3-a14c-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=uk#axzz2dfsPfWBo > You are right:  that FT prefer you to pay or register. > However if you Google <scrapping the census> > there are several free articles of relevance     Drat. So, to summarise:     The headline is:   "Internet survey could replace census. ONS looks at alternative data instead of once-a-decade questionnaire"   A consultation by the ONS is to propose two options to replace the census. This, unlike a previous report, won't keep the existing arrangement. The two options are to be: an internet survey or a collation of alternative sources.   Objections are that these options may not provide the existing richness of data ('granular data'),  government may not be given enough information to formulate policy, and vulnerable groups may be most impacted.     So there you are.     Chris 

At 21:29 01/09/2013, Chris Dickinson wrote: >There is an article in the online FT today that may interest some of >you (see the subject headline). I don't know whether you can access >this, as I am a subscriber: >http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/380c2bd4-116b-11e3-a14c-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=uk#axzz2dfsPfWBo You are right: that FT prefer you to pay or register. However if you Google <scrapping the census> there are several free articles of relevance Best regards Gordon +Z [+Z] <http://www.adshead.com/> Gordon Adshead <gordon@adshead.com> [+Z] Beaumont House, 2 Goodrington Road, Handforth, Cheshire, SK9 3AT, UK [+Z] Tel:Fax:Msg:+44-1625-549770 Mob:+44-777-6145602

>> Wrong! > No - Right ! :- Reminds me of.. http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/myl/llog/duty_calls.png

On 30/08/2013 00:09, Tickettyboo wrote: > > A few years ago a friend of mine died. The funeral took place in the > North of Scotland where she had lived for many years. Her father and > brother were to travel by plane from London. They had a real problem, as > even for internal flights the airlines now require photo id before they > will check you in and allow you to board. Granpa was in his 90s and > almost blind and in a wheelchair. Hadn't had a passport for years and > (obviously) no driving licence, not even a bus pass with his photo on. > They did eventually allow him to travel (can't honestly remember now how > they got around it) but it can't be an uncommon problem. The airline > maintained that it was needed for 'security' purposes but I suspect its > more to do with the fact that they charge to transfer a flight ticket > and if they have no photo ID we could all transfer tickets if we were > unexpectedly unable to travel rather than lose the money we paid for the > fare :-) Also a problem for children. The list of acceptable photo ID is quite limited and I think a passport is the only acceptable photo ID actually available for a child. Some airlines will accept an expired passport as long as it's only recently expired (two years?)

"Tim Powys-Lybbe" wrote in message news:mpro.msh24q0un65xg0g1x.tim@powys.org... On 1 Sep at 15:13, "Gordon" <gordonwb@argonet.co.uk> wrote: <snip for brevity> > This not unusual as there are three "types" of rank. > > 1. Substantive which means the rank was permanent and he was paid for > that rank. Only lost by being demoted for committing an chargeable > offence against regulations. > > 2. Acting which means as it says, usually paid at that rank but could > be lost on posting. If he behaved well and performed well at the rank > it could easily become substantive. > > 3. Local which is unpaid and lost on leaving the unit where the rank > was held. > > I too ordered a will which came in a couple of days. My soldier too > only wrote a couple of lines leaving all to his mother. This does not > surprise me as most youngsters would not have owned much in those days > and only married (and/or older) men would have possibly made more > detailed wills. Scouring through the London Gazette for my father's military service, I found he had a: 1. A substantive rank, 2. An acting rank, 3. A war substantive rank, 4. An honorary rank. And to that must be added local (above) and brevet, though I am not sure if brevet had any currency in WW2 let alone now. Sounds like six types of rank. I've heard of brevet rank, it might have been a temporary commission as an officer given to "other ranks" which would be taken away when it was no longer required by the military, unlike a full commission, others might know for certain. This certainly happened quite a bit in wartime. War substantive is what it says, for the wars' duration only. Honorary is as it says, it is not a "working" rank given to serving soldiers. Good hunting Gordon

On 02/09/2013 06:36, melanie chesnel wrote: > Thanks very much for all the comments on rank, they have helped me understand what went on. On the subject of a young married man leaving all to his mother I would suggest he was just coping the "standard" will of his squaddie mates without really thinking of what it meant. If they were all unmarried and leaving their meager possessions to their mothers then he did too without thinking that in his case it was more appropriate to leave all to his wife > > regards melanie > "What do I do here Sarge? Leave it to yer Mum! -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail. Railway Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail>

In message <vfidnctiDtloGr7PnZ2dnUVZ8sudnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, CWatters <colin.watters@NOturnersoakSPAM.plus.com> writes: >On 01/09/2013 17:07, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: >> Like sibling for brother-or-sister (and of course parent for >> mother-or-father)? [] >Nearest I could find... > >http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pibling > >pibling > >a gender neutral term for aunt or uncle, based on the phrase "parent's >sibling." generally used collectively, as a term for aunts and uncles >together, similar to the word niblings for nieces and nephews together. > > I rather suggest someone is making that up; the "-ling" ending doesn't seem appropriate somehow. But thanks! (I've also seen "neplings" for nephews-and-nieces; it's in moderately common use in UMRA.) -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf The summit of Everest is marine limestone.

On 1 Sep at 15:13, "Gordon" <gordonwb@argonet.co.uk> wrote: <snip for brevity> > This not unusual as there are three "types" of rank. > > 1. Substantive which means the rank was permanent and he was paid for > that rank. Only lost by being demoted for committing an chargeable > offence against regulations. > > 2. Acting which means as it says, usually paid at that rank but could > be lost on posting. If he behaved well and performed well at the rank > it could easily become substantive. > > 3. Local which is unpaid and lost on leaving the unit where the rank > was held. > > I too ordered a will which came in a couple of days. My soldier too > only wrote a couple of lines leaving all to his mother. This does not > surprise me as most youngsters would not have owned much in those days > and only married (and/or older) men would have possibly made more > detailed wills. Scouring through the London Gazette for my father's military service, I found he had a: 1. A substantive rank, 2. An acting rank, 3. A war substantive rank, 4. An honorary rank. And to that must be added local (above) and brevet, though I am not sure if brevet had any currency in WW2 let alone now. Sounds like six types of rank. -- Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

Thanks very much for all the comments on rank, they have helped me understand what went on. On the subject of a young married man leaving all to his mother I would suggest he was just coping the "standard" will of his squaddie mates without really thinking of what it meant. If they were all unmarried and leaving their meager possessions to their mothers then he did too without thinking that in his case it was more appropriate to leave all to his wife regards melanie

Thank you. I have seen most of these links and was trying to find when he was at Summerdown Camp. But like his grandson I have drawn a blank. Thanks though for everyone's help. On 01/09/2013 20:18, CWatters wrote: > On 01/09/2013 19:44, CWatters wrote: >> On 31/08/2013 12:25, Jerry wrote: >>> Looks like this will remain a mystery but thanks to all who helped. >>> >> >> Google found some discussions about this person from 2007 but perhaps >> its known to you already.. >> >> http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=265395.0 >> >> http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=101886 >> >> Extract >> >> Hi, can anyone help with information regarding the Preston Pals, my >> grandfather Joseph Pownall (12835) enlisted in the 7th Battalion Loyal >> North Lancashire Regiment Aug?Sept 1914, he arrived in France 17/7/1915, >> know he was wounded at some point as he spent time at Summerdown Camp, >> nr Eastbourne, whilst there he met his future wife(my grandmother) they >> got married in December 1917, on the marriage certificate his residence >> is given as serving in France. So I'm uncertain as to whether he was >> wounded, went back to France then came back to marry my grandmother, or >> did he marry her at the end of his convalescence, (family didn't know) >> if it was the latter would it say serving in France. When he was >> discharged to class Z on 4th April 1919 he was a L/cpl in the 13th >> Garrison Battalion North Staffordshire Regiment(57160). I have no idea >> of his wounds, I knew him when I was younger and nothing was visible, I >> have a vague memory that my father mentioned shrapnel, but none of the >> surviving family members can recall anything. Any ideas or information >> that could help me move my research forward would be much appreciated. > > More googling.. > > http://faq.wo1.be/QuestionDetail.aspx?genericid=41 > > "My grandfather was Joseph Pownall 12385 of the 7th Battalion Loyal > North Lancashire Regiment. Great War Research speculate that he may have > been wounded at Messines, Hollebeke or Ypres in 1917. > > http://www.1914-1918.net/nstaffs.htm > > "This page is dedicated to the memory of men like <snip> and Joseph > Pownall, originally of the Loyal North Lancashire Regiment and posted to > 13th (Garrison) Battalion. All of these men were researched in detail by > Chris Baker at http://www.fourteeneighteen.co.uk/" > > > http://www.1914-1918.net/loyals.htm > > "The Loyal North Lancashire Regiment > Battalions of the New Armies > 7th (Service) Battalion > Formed at Preston in September 1914 as part of K2 and came under > command of 56th Brigade in 19th (Western) Division. Moved to Whitchurch > in December 1914. > 17 July 1915 : landed at Boulogne. > 10 February 1918 : disbanded in France." > > > >

There is an article in the online FT today that may interest some of you (see the subject headline). I don't know whether you can access this, as I am a subscriber: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/380c2bd4-116b-11e3-a14c-00144feabdc0.html?siteedition=uk#axzz2dfsPfWBo Chris

On 01/09/2013 19:44, CWatters wrote: > On 31/08/2013 12:25, Jerry wrote: >> Looks like this will remain a mystery but thanks to all who helped. >> > > Google found some discussions about this person from 2007 but perhaps > its known to you already.. > > http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=265395.0 > > http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=101886 > > Extract > > Hi, can anyone help with information regarding the Preston Pals, my > grandfather Joseph Pownall (12835) enlisted in the 7th Battalion Loyal > North Lancashire Regiment Aug?Sept 1914, he arrived in France 17/7/1915, > know he was wounded at some point as he spent time at Summerdown Camp, > nr Eastbourne, whilst there he met his future wife(my grandmother) they > got married in December 1917, on the marriage certificate his residence > is given as serving in France. So I'm uncertain as to whether he was > wounded, went back to France then came back to marry my grandmother, or > did he marry her at the end of his convalescence, (family didn't know) > if it was the latter would it say serving in France. When he was > discharged to class Z on 4th April 1919 he was a L/cpl in the 13th > Garrison Battalion North Staffordshire Regiment(57160). I have no idea > of his wounds, I knew him when I was younger and nothing was visible, I > have a vague memory that my father mentioned shrapnel, but none of the > surviving family members can recall anything. Any ideas or information > that could help me move my research forward would be much appreciated. More googling.. http://faq.wo1.be/QuestionDetail.aspx?genericid=41 "My grandfather was Joseph Pownall 12385 of the 7th Battalion Loyal North Lancashire Regiment. Great War Research speculate that he may have been wounded at Messines, Hollebeke or Ypres in 1917. http://www.1914-1918.net/nstaffs.htm "This page is dedicated to the memory of men like <snip> and Joseph Pownall, originally of the Loyal North Lancashire Regiment and posted to 13th (Garrison) Battalion. All of these men were researched in detail by Chris Baker at http://www.fourteeneighteen.co.uk/" http://www.1914-1918.net/loyals.htm "The Loyal North Lancashire Regiment Battalions of the New Armies 7th (Service) Battalion Formed at Preston in September 1914 as part of K2 and came under command of 56th Brigade in 19th (Western) Division. Moved to Whitchurch in December 1914. 17 July 1915 : landed at Boulogne. 10 February 1918 : disbanded in France."

On Sun, 01 Sep 2013 18:36:45 +0200, Mike Fry <mikefry@iafrica.com> wrote: >On 2013/08/31 19:44, Charles Ellson wrote: > >> In case FMP hasn't got it, the closest match in Ancestry is George >> BULL, 27y, clerk, arriving on the Andania at Port of London (i.e. >> anywhere between Teddington and the North Sea) on 29 Jun 1914 but he >> is unaccompanied. > >Wrong! Port of London has always been defined as that part of Thames from London >Bridge out to the North Sea i.e. the navigable (for tall-masted ships) part of >the river. The Tideway extends up to Teddington Lock. > No - Right ! :- Schedule 1, Port of London Authority Act 1968 :- Section 2 DESCRIPTION OF PORT LIMITS 1. In this Schedule- " the landward limit "means a line drawn across the Thames from a stone pillar erected at grid co-ordinates T.Q. 16361 71912 on the Surrey bank by the Port Authority and the Thames Conservators to the nearest point of mean high water level on the Middlesex bank; Here's a photo from the vicinity of the OS reference :- http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1178805 The "Port" is an area not any particular place within it so the absence of landing/boarding facilities at a location does not mean any place is not in the Port. While the average ocean-going passenger vessel is unlikely to have reached Tower Bridge, smaller vessels and tenders might on occasion have had reason to proceed further upriver with passengers or OTOH have gone to various parts of the Thames Estuary further from London in the other direction. The relevance to the matter in hand is that many passengers recorded as arriving/departing in (the Port of) London might never have been in London at all and any of their own records/recollections of such events might make no reference to London. The common example will be those using Tilbury in Essex; someone later matching their description of the event to the lists in Ancestry, FMP etc. might not know that e.g. descriptions of "[Port of] London" in those lists and Tilbury elsewhere are dealing with the same event.

On 31/08/2013 12:25, Jerry wrote: > Looks like this will remain a mystery but thanks to all who helped. > Google found some discussions about this person from 2007 but perhaps its known to you already.. http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=265395.0 http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=101886 Extract Hi, can anyone help with information regarding the Preston Pals, my grandfather Joseph Pownall (12835) enlisted in the 7th Battalion Loyal North Lancashire Regiment Aug?Sept 1914, he arrived in France 17/7/1915, know he was wounded at some point as he spent time at Summerdown Camp, nr Eastbourne, whilst there he met his future wife(my grandmother) they got married in December 1917, on the marriage certificate his residence is given as serving in France. So I'm uncertain as to whether he was wounded, went back to France then came back to marry my grandmother, or did he marry her at the end of his convalescence, (family didn't know) if it was the latter would it say serving in France. When he was discharged to class Z on 4th April 1919 he was a L/cpl in the 13th Garrison Battalion North Staffordshire Regiment(57160). I have no idea of his wounds, I knew him when I was younger and nothing was visible, I have a vague memory that my father mentioned shrapnel, but none of the surviving family members can recall anything. Any ideas or information that could help me move my research forward would be much appreciated.

On 01/09/2013 17:07, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > Like sibling for brother-or-sister (and of course parent for > mother-or-father)? > > [I was just emailing someone and wrote "Was the above text part of an > email to someone other than me - presumably your parent or aunt or > uncle?" (in response to "I am surprised your father can remember > anything of his time in the Workhouse", which she'd accidentally {I > presume!} put in an email to me), and it occurred to me that I had > "parent", but nothing for the second option.] Nearest I could find... http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pibling pibling a gender neutral term for aunt or uncle, based on the phrase "parent's sibling." generally used collectively, as a term for aunts and uncles together, similar to the word niblings for nieces and nephews together.

On 2013/08/31 19:44, Charles Ellson wrote: > In case FMP hasn't got it, the closest match in Ancestry is George > BULL, 27y, clerk, arriving on the Andania at Port of London (i.e. > anywhere between Teddington and the North Sea) on 29 Jun 1914 but he > is unaccompanied. Wrong! Port of London has always been defined as that part of Thames from London Bridge out to the North Sea i.e. the navigable (for tall-masted ships) part of the river. The Tideway extends up to Teddington Lock. -- Regards, Mike Fry Johannesburg

Like sibling for brother-or-sister (and of course parent for mother-or-father)? [I was just emailing someone and wrote "Was the above text part of an email to someone other than me - presumably your parent or aunt or uncle?" (in response to "I am surprised your father can remember anything of his time in the Workhouse", which she'd accidentally {I presume!} put in an email to me), and it occurred to me that I had "parent", but nothing for the second option.] -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Have the courage to be ordinary - people make themselves so desperately unhappy trying to be clever and totally original. (Robbie Coltrane, RT 8-14 Nov. 1997.)

On Sun, 1 Sep 2013 15:13:10 +0100, Gordon wrote: > I too ordered a will which came in a couple of days. My soldier too only > wrote a couple of lines leaving all to his mother. This does not surprise me > as most youngsters would not have owned much in those days and only married > (and/or older) men would have possibly made more detailed wills. My soldier had married my Aunt Mabel in September 1914. At about the same time he voluteered for the 13th Battalion of the Essex regiment (West Ham).. His will was made out and signed on 9th November 1915 and he left everything to his mother, not his young (19 year old) wjfe. This strikes me as odd, but I know from other information in the will that it's the right man, What do others make of that? He would have had precious little to bequeeth. Sadly he died of wounds in the base hospital at Etaples in May 1917. Just another tragic loss and a family shattered like so many millions of others.......