Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders (79th Regiment of Foot)

[Darren1]

Hi folks,

Hopefully some military history buffs could help me out here! My ancestor served with the 79th Regiment of Foot (or what it was later called the Queen's own Cameron Highlanders). After obtaining his service record I can see he served in Gibraltar, Canada and the Crimea, I can see he served in between 1845 to 1856, when he returned from the Crimean War (although serving until 1866 when he was discharged). As well as this I recently purchased a book regarding the history of the regiment ('Historical Records of the 79th Queen's Own Highlanders), which has proved to be an invaluable source of information in establishing his whereabouts throughout his service.

However, upon reaching 1857 in the book, the 'Indian Mutiny' is referred to and focuses on this event beyond 1866 (past his discharge) and nothing else. There is no references of him serving in India, further more in 1857 his daughter (2 x great grandmother is born in Whitburn, West Lothian and James is employed as an Iron Works lab. and not serving), however he reappears with his family living in Stirling as a Private with the regiment.

What I would like to know is:

a) Were soldiers in 19th century regiments such as this, sometimes employed in other occupations and therefore not a full time soldier?
b) Did some recruits from this regiment remain at home, rather than serving abroad e.g. India?

Any pointers would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you for your help! 

Darren

[ShaunJ]

The depot company of the 79th would have remained in the British Isles while the main part of the regiment was overseas. The locations of the various regiments and their depot companies were published monthly in newspapers under the heading "Stations of the British Army".

In October 1859 (as an example) the newspapers reported that the 79th was in India but its depot company was in Stirling:

[ShaunJ]

As to the occupation on the 1857 birth record, I think some wives  preferred not to record the father's occupation as "soldier" in their child's birth record. 

[Darren1]

Thanks for the info Shaun.

That is interesting about the wives not wanting to record their husband's occupation as soldier.

I have double checked my 2 x great grandmother's birth cert and it is James who is the informant. 

Two years later in 1859 when his son was born, he is back to being a Private with the 79th and serving at the Perth Barracks.

It is a pity the book doesn't give details of the depot recruits during the 'Indian Mutiny'.

One other query I had, James married Elizabeth upon his return from Canada and his service seems to be in Stirling until around 1853, when (according to this book) the regiment moved to Bury and thereafter Cobham and Portsmouth. Would his wife (Elizabeth) and there children have remained at Stirling or travelled with and then once James had left for the Crimea, returned to Stirling?

Loads of information to process! 

[jim1]

A married man could apply to have his family "put on the Strength"
So where he went they went & were fed & housed by the Army.
With overseas postings around 10% of families were allowed to
travel & these were drawn by lot.
With regard to his civvy job he may have re-joined, many did.

[Darren1]

Thanks Jim.

I am beginning to think that may be the case, as his service record states that he served in Gibraltar, Canada and the Crimea. However when viewing his 'Statement of Services', this begins from 1858, however on discharge it states he served just over 21 years in 1866.