Newspaper picture of Walter R Leigh - help please

[jim1]

Every man in the Army had a uniform.
The 24th. were Infantry so only had horses for transport & Officers.
A serving soldier wouldn't list himself as coachman, ostler or groom as these were civvy occupations, his occupation was a soldier & would put that, sometimes with rank & Regt.
I'm trying to come up with why he listed himself with a civvy occupation on one of the births (can't remember which). One possibility is that he had served his term by that time & was in reserve & was called back.
A reservist would go back to civilian life but could be recalled at anytime.
I believe after the Cardwell reforms (1870) a soldier could enlist for 6 years under the Colours & the other 6 in the Reserves.
It's possible his Batt. wasn't up to strength at the time.
Edit:
Based on his pension details (if that's what it was I was looking at on your other post) a quick calculation gives an attestation date of Oct. 1872. He did 6y 5d which is what his pension is calculated against bringing him up to Oct. 1878 when he went into the reserves. So in Dec. 1878 he would have had a civilian occupation. Any event (BMD) from Oct. 1872-Oct.1878 will show him as a soldier.
He then did 1y 250d after being recalled.

[loord74]

Based on computer modeling..I got these results...

[Deirdre784]

Thanks so much Jim, this is all really helpful and explains a lot. The previous posts are rather confusing, as they were 'works in progress' at the time.

If it helps, this is the situation as it stands...

Walter Robert Leigh, born 21 Jan 1845 in Southwark, Surrey. Mother died in June 1845, father in March 1851. Walter living with (unmarried) step-mother in North Cray, Kent, and as a boarder, working in a paper mill in St Mary Cray, Kent in 1861.

Crucially he cannot be (or hasn't yet been) found in 1871, and, apart from his marriage and eldest child's birth certs, there is no record of a Walter Leigh/Lee or Packman being in the army, other than the army discharge (Walter Packman), attached. 

Walter's sister Elizabeth Caroline Leigh married Henry Packman in 1864; the Packman family emigrated to Australia between 1872 and 1875.   

Walter's marriage, death and burial are in red, the children's births between 1877 and 1880 in black, and the 1881 and 1891 census details - where the family is recorded as Packman - in blue. Baptisms of all the children were in Brecon, parents Walter and Mary Ann Leigh.   

•   31 Oct 1876: Walter married Mary Ann Thomas. Walter: age 26 (should be 31), private 24th of foot, Barracks Road, Brecon (certificate)
•   22 Mar 1877: Walter Roberts Leigh born at Mount Street, Brecknock to Walter Robert Leigh, private 24th foot, and Mary Ann Leigh, formerly Thomas. Informant: W R Leigh, father, Barracks, Brecknock (certificate).
•   28 Dec 1878: John Richard Packman born at Rhosfach, Blaenporth, Llandygwydd to Walter Robert Packman, coachman, and Mary Ann Packman, formerly Thomas. Informant: M A Packman, mother (certificate)
•   31 Dec 1880: Thomas Henry Leigh born at Mount Street, Brecknock to Walter Robert Leigh, groom (domestic) and Mary Ann Leigh, formerly Thomas. Informant: M A Leigh, mother (certificate)
•   3 April 1881 (census): 8 Mount Street, Brecknock, Walter R Packman, age 32, born Alton, Kent, coachman (dom), married to Mary A Packman. Children: Walter R Packman (4), John R Packman (2), Thomas H Packman (4 months)
•   5 Apr 1891 (census): 27 Struet, Brecon. Walter Packman, age 40, born Foots Cray, Kent, groom, married to Mary A Packman. Children: Walter Packman (14), John Packman (12), Harry Packman (10), plus Elizabeth Packman, Charles Packman (6) and Albert Packman (2)
•   14 Jun 1891: Walter Robert Leigh died at 2 Aberfan Road, Merthyr Tydfil. Ostler in a coalmine. Cause: pneumonia 7 days; Informant: Sarah Ann Williams, occupier, present at death, 2 Aberfan Road (certificate).
•   17 Jun 1891: Walter Robert Leigh buried in Brecon (burial ground of St John and St Mary’s)

Again, many thanks for all your help and advice on this Jim, much appreciated.

The photos are brilliant too loord, many thanks.

Deirdre

[jim1]

So the only question mark is why he changed his name. One possibility is that he wanted to hide the fact that he was a reservist. May be he didn't want to do the training required or get called back & was happy to forego the pittance that he would have been paid.
Having been found out under the name Packman they had him back using that & he kept it afterwards for pension purposes.
By the time Thomas Henry was born he was out so he didn't have to use the name Packman anymore.
Could be wrong of course.

[Deirdre784]

Well until today, we were doubtful that he was ever in the army, and certainly not at Isandlwana given the children's births (would he not have been abroad for several years at a time... did they get home leave?). But the photo and story seems to be genuine enough.

We certainly assumed that he was trying to hide from something (had no idea about reservists), though it still seems strange to use the false name on the later census.

Will still hope to find the actual newspaper and see if the copy is any better.

[jim1]

You need to find out when the 2/2 went overseas.

[Deirdre784]

OK thanks Jim, it's been an interesting day
Deirdre

[eglejok]

Hello, It is unfortunate that a copy is poor quality. My try - free drawing, but this is not a restoration.

[Deirdre784]

Eglejok that is amazing, thanks.

Until 4 days ago we had no idea what he - or my husband's great grandfather, bottom right - looked like, so even the poor quality copy was great, but that picture is brilliant (i can't wait to show my husband).

Thanks again,

Deirdre