Trying to make sense of my ancestor's army record

[MaxD]

With the help of friends on another forum and research into other 19 RB records, the reason for the non-eligibility for the Star for all those 19 RB men who first went overseas to Egypt on the formation of the battalion is that although they were all "on the books" of the Egypt Expeditionary Force on leaving UK (from Devonport) on 30 Dec 1915, they didn't arrive in Egypt (Alexandria) until 14 Jan 1916.  They were therefore not in theatre before 31 Dec 1915 and thus not eligible.  The "1" code for the theatre of war is simply a c**k up by the Rifle Brigade record office.
There is a war diary which includes 19 RB although it is not digitised, I have not found one for 812 Area Employment Company (unsurprising, few AEC kept diaries). 

MaxD

[John19Plas]

Hi Max,
I guess rules are rules. At least as far as the army is concerned. Presumably the error was spotted before the medals were awarded. Otherwise there would have been alot of disgruntled ex- servicemen! i've learnt so much about Samuel in the last week, thanks to your help. Do you know if the diary of the 19th is easily accessible.
Concerning Samuel's earlier military career, I've now discovered his obituary. From this, it appears that he first enlisted in RWF in 1889 and served seven years, first in Ireland and then India. He passed his exam as a telegraphist in 1891 and was assigned to the Telegraph Dept. Would this give a clue as to his company?He was discharged in 1896, presumably shortly after his time at the relief of Chitral. It then appears he remained in India and became a fireman on the Indian Midland Railway, before returning home after two years. Things were not too good for him as in August 1899, he was summoned before the magistrates for non payment of a shilling a week towards the maintenance of his aged father, who was being supported by the parish. This must have been shortly before he was called to the colours for service in South Africa. In March 1900, Samuel had left for South Africa, but his brother, Isaac, was summoned for the same misdemeanour. However, he escaped payment due to the fact that appeared in uniform accompanied by a lieutenant of the RWF who explained that as "the defendant having joined the Militia on embodiment, he was under the provision of the army act, he was exempt from payment". Can you explain the term "Militia on embodiment"?

[MaxD]

The war diary that includes 19 RB is this one http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C4557872 which includes a fair number of other units.  It would have to be copied by Kew or by one or other of the less expensive other copying services that exist.  Frankly, given that these were all essentially garrison troops guarding things, it will tell you little more than where they were and may be not even that.  You could ask a researcher to check the diary for the 19 RB part and advise, doesn't come free!

I have to pass on the Telegraph Department question.  This was a Indian (ie British!) civil service organisation but whether it included serving soldiers I don't know.  I note his entry in the Chitral medal roll shows him in the 1st RWF but the index page on Ancestry says Telegraph Department with no explanation.  There are documents at the British Library https://wiki.fibis.org/w/L/F/10_Records_of_Service_1702-1928 that may help?

The militia were a part time organisation which could be "embodied" ie called up for for full time service in times of national emergency.  It looks as if Isaac wasn't a member before but when he saw the local militia being called up, he joined up.

MaxD