Information gathered from Medal Rolls

[escollay]

Hi

I'm not sure what all the information means on this card, can anyone give me more information?

Thanks
Eoin

Moderator comment: copyright image removed.

[escollay]

What is the reason of discharge?

[KGarrad]

King's Regulations, Paragraph 392 (xxva) says:
(xxva) Surplus to military requirements (Not having suffered impairment since entry into the service).

[escollay]

King's Regulations, Paragraph 392 (xxva) says:
(xxva) Surplus to military requirements (Not having suffered impairment since entry into the service).

His record said he had been shot in the arm and was taken as a pow, guess people made of sterner stuff!

[MaxD]

Seems that the medal card and his entry on the medal roll are different - admin mistake probably.  The medal roll has 392 Para xvi (a)  - Surplus to military requirements (having suffered impairment since entry into the service).  The same para is quoted on his record.

This then acknowledges his injury.  Thera are also  bits of correspondence still readable in his record where he asks for documentary evidence of his injury.

maxD

[MaxD]

escollay - are you content that despite the mistake on his medal card, the medal roll and his documents both have the correct KR para acknowledging his injury?

maxD

[km1971]

This is a card for the Silver War Badge not for his medals. If he served overseas there should be another card. Possibly recorded as Flannigan.

Ken

[escollay]

I have seen another card

[MaxD]

There is another SWB card, same service number and regiment and applicant details, with the name this time spelled Flanigan, that has no enlistment and discharge dates and no cause of discharge.

There is a Connaught Rangers British War and Victory Medal roll entry for the man also as Flanigan which has cause of discharge as Para 392 Para XVIa. (I haven't traced his BW and V card on Ancestry but there is one on the NA site of course).  His surviving service docs, as Flanigan, also refer to the same para and there are correspondence remnants mentioning his injury.

Hence the contention in my first post that the first SWB card posted has the incorrect cause of discharge and that the perhaps subsequent SWB card and medal roll entry correct not only his name but also the cause of discharge.  In any event, is it not anomalous to have a SWB award with a cause recorded as not having suffered impairment? 

Though I should learn not to speculate, given that according to his own signature on his docs his name was Flanigan, could it simply be that the Flanagan card was a mistake that should have been destroyed - name misspelled, cause of discharge wrong.

In sum, the system did acknowledge his war injury.

maxD