WW1 Service John/Charles/James Collins - all the same person?

[Tickettyboo]

The man I am looking at was born in 1894 the 4th child to parents James Collins and his wife Mary Ann (nee Sinclair). His birth was registered as Jacob, he was baptised using the name Charles and then is down as John on the census returns. This is what I am up against :-)

I have a medal card for a John C Collins. Lists 4 Regt. nos
27239 R Innis Fus / 578050 Lab C / 101989 R Fus / 63547 Lincs R

I can find service records for the two numbers in bold, but nothing yet for the other two (if anyone else can I'd be really interested)

Even what I can find is contradictory, as far as I can see he repeatedly joined up, deserted, joined up again. He uses different names each time but is consistent with his n.o.k. He even seems to have re-joined in 1920 - though I believe that may well have been to try to avoid being prosecuted and jailed by the civil court for assault and stealing in Lincoln (report in Sheffield Daily Telegraph 28th Feb 1920, using the name John Charles Collins)
and after all that, the army gave him a pension of 7/6 a week for deafness !

Maybe I am misreading it all and what I have is for different men (maybe a brother?)

I've tried to go through all the images from the records I have found and put them into a chronological order in .pdf format. Hopefully that can be downloaded rather than display as its in landscape?


If anyone has the time/inclination to look through it, I'd appreciate opinions as to whether I am coming to the correct conclusions, though its so complicated I'll understand if no one feels up to it.

Thanks

Boo

[Jebber]

As I read your pdf.
The  first A1 as James is simply a duplicate of A, it is not unusual to find duplicates filed with the original records.

The second A1 with the name also as James is because, having discovered his  enlistment B in the Inniskilling Fusiliers as Charles was fraudulent, so he has been charged under his original name James.

The records relating to the Lincoln Regiment will still be held by the MOD as it cover 1920/21.

Others may have other ideas.

[Tickettyboo]

As I read your pdf.
The  first A1 as James is simply a duplicate of A, it is not unusual to find duplicates filed with the original records.

The second A1 with the name also as James is because, having discovered his  enlistment B in the Inniskilling Fusiliers as Charles was fraudulent, so he has been charged under his original name James.

Yes, the two record sets A and A1 were all in the same file on FindMyPast. The "2nd A1" is in fact the additional info that I found on the duplicate (within the same batch) but I logged it separately as I was attempting to see all the info chronologically.


The records relating to the Lincoln Regiment will still be held by the MOD as it cover 1920/21.

and that set C is also on FindMyPast.

Others may have other ideas.

The attestation in set C (when he joined the Lincs Regt- despite having just beaten up a robbed a Sergeant Major who was on his way back to the Lincoln Barracks!) 'says' that he had previously served in The Royal Fusiliers, no 107989, for 4 years before his demob on 16 July 1919. Oh how I'd like to see that record, but suspect its one that just didn't survive.

Do you think I am right (given the service number listing on the medal card) in thinking that all of these records are actually for the same man?

I have had these for 5 years now and look at them every now and then and just can't work out why, he apparently kept on repeating the scenario of deserting and then re-joining but fibbing about his name yet giving the same address and n.o.k. !

To be fair the rest of his family seem to be equally dysfunctional :-)

thanks for taking the time to look and help

Boo

[Jebber]

If the different numbers are all in the same card, then they will all refer to the same man, numbers changed as men moved between units. I forget the date, it was not until after WW1 that numbers were standardised and they kept the same number throughout their service.

[jim1]

His Lab. Corps number was amongst a batch allocated (1917) to the 22nd. Batt. Liverpool Regt. They became the 87th. Coy. L.C.
It's seems improbable for him to have been in the R. Fusiliers in between his other Regts.
He was overseas from 24/6/16 to at least 15/12/17 when he was discharged from hospital in Havre. All of his time prior to that is accounted for. He could have been transferred to the L.C. after his discharge from hospital & given an odd number which often happened.
He doesn't appear to have deserted again so was probably in France until he was demobbed.
He wouldn't have wanted any checks made owing to his conduct so when he joined the Lincs. he lied.
He would have to have told them something as no service prior to joining would have raised suspicions.

[Tickettyboo]

Thanks, I think lying was his default setting :-)

For his notes on my tree I'll include the records I can see as his service with a note saying he 'claimed' to have been in other regiments but that is unproven/unlikely.

I do my family history warts and all, it is what it is and can't/shouldn't be changed or sanitised, but this man was definitely a 'wart' :-)

Boo

[jim1]

The Army was always a good place to hide. Being posted overseas always prompted a rise in desertions even in peacetime. I suspect this is what's happened. It's difficult to get away with it in wartime & they've eventually caught up with him but don't lose sight of the fact that he did go & did do his bit.
In July 1916 the 2nd. I.F. were attacking Thiepval which was the start of the Somme Offensive.

[Tickettyboo]

Yes, I have a suspicion that his original enlistment using the name of James 'may' perhaps have been because he'd done some thing he shouldn't and wanted to hide before the police caught him. Nothing concrete just a guess.

and I do accept that he did serve and he had as much chance of being killed in France as the others.

Thanks for the help

Boo