Tom Butterfield West Yorks.

[Jomot]

Yes, it's the same person.  His service No was 1859 when wounded.

[MaxD]

Yes this is the same man Sgt Thomas Butterfield of 1/6th West Yorks was number 1859, later 240336.  He is the same man that I (and I think Jomot) still believe is yours.

He appears:
On the 1914/15 Star roll as T Butterfield
On the British War and Victory medal roll as Thomas Butterfield
On the casualty list as Thomas.

He is the only Butterfield with the initial T in records that can be found for the West Yorks.  1/6th went to France on 16 April 1915 which is the date on his medal roll entry so he would have been at home in 1914/early 1915.

Although the boxes were destined for Christmas 1914, they were still distributing them in 1920 he could well have got one later as he wasn't in France until 1915.

Have you thought of the possibility that "he was always known as Tom" could well mean (after 100 years) that he "as always known as Tom in the family".  If he was actually baptised Thomas, the army may well have recorded him by his proper name rather than what the family called him.

MaxD

 

[sallyyorks]

Thanks again Jomot and Max.

I must admit I feel a bit daft now because when Ady posted the '1859' number in the other topic, I can see that at the time I thought Ady was posting a date of birth. I should have realised my mistake because it would have made that dob too old to serve.

Were the numbers given in any type of order / relation to a battalion ?
His brother in law , also in the 1/6 batt West Yorks, number was 1623.

I don't have a baptism record for Tom, or any of his siblings, I am not even sure they were baptised at all.
On the civil birth register he is 'Tom' but perhaps the recorders of the WW1 records just assumed his full name was Thomas?

Thanks everyone again because I do think what you have found may be him

[MaxD]

At the time that these chaps joined, numbers were simply dished out in order of them enlisting (they were still volunteers at this time) so the 1623 chap was 200 places in the queue in front of Tom/Thomas/T.

Such a pity his service record has not survived, that would have put it beyond doubt.  If you felt you wanted to know more about what 1/6th did in the war, the war diary is here http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C7354658 downloadable for £3.50

MaxD

[sallyyorks]

At the time that these chaps joined, numbers were simply dished out in order of them enlisting (they were still volunteers at this time) so the 1623 chap was 200 places in the queue in front of Tom/Thomas/T.

That's interesting. He could have enlisted around the same time his brother in laws did, especially the youngest one, who he was close to.

Such a pity his service record has not survived, that would have put it beyond doubt.  If you felt you wanted to know more about what 1/6th did in the war, the war diary is here http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C7354658 downloadable for £3.50

MaxD

Thanks for the link and I am really grateful for all the help.
I think I have all the link info about the 1/6th from the research I did on his brother in law.
I can't help feeling a bit emotional by Toms info and what might have happened here. I think it's quite possible that Tom and his young brother in law were together in some way in the trenches at Boezinge, Ypres.
Tom 'listed as wounded on the daily casualty lists published 18 Sep 1915' and then his young brother in law KIA a week later, on the 25th Sep 1915 (he was killed during 'a bombardment' while he was 'throwing bombs' (grenades?) at/into the very close proximity German trenches

[Jomot]

The daily casualty list does not give the date that they were wounded, just the publication date, which was usually several weeks after the event.   There was a thread about this subject a few years back, only I cant find it now, but I seem to think 3-6 weeks was the norm.

[MaxD]

The death of the brother in law is a sad illustration of the waste of war.  The grenade throwing was 1/6th's part in a "demonstration" by all the units of the 6th Corps.  A demonstration is an action designed to deceive the enemy while something concrete is happening elsewhere.  Success was achieved because the enemy thought a gas attack was on the way and donned their gas masks and took other precautions against a full attack which, in that sector, never came.  Much damage was caused to their  parapets so not a failure in military terms but three men were lost in the brigade that day.

MaxD

[sallyyorks]

Interesting info about his brother in law and what was going on. Thank you