Search for content in message boards

Pte W George, East Kent Regt -The Buffs

Pte W George, East Kent Regt -The Buffs

Posted: 18 Aug 2012 5:20PM GMT
Classification: Query
Seeking information on Private W George, of the East Kent Regiment, Regimental number 1928. Invalided home on 19th July, 1900. Awarded Queens South Africa Medal with bars for Orange Free State, Cape Colony & possibly (unconfirmed) Natal.
Where did he enlist? Where was 'home'?
Believe that he has a connection to our family, but cannot, as yet, find it. Would like to locate descendants.
Any clues anyone?

Re: Pte W George, East Kent Regt -The Buffs

Posted: 18 Aug 2012 8:57PM GMT
Classification: Query
Edited: 18 Aug 2012 9:05PM GMT
No 1928 William George, enlisted into the East Kent Regiment at Canterbury 16 Oct 1885
Age 24yrs 6 mths.
Born Parish of Sheldwick, Faversham, Kent

Transferred to 1st class Army Reserve 16.10.92
Final discharge from AR 15.10.97
Total service 12yrs

NoK listed as:
Father Henry, Mother Frances of Bacon Hill Faversham
Brothers, Charles, Alfred (51 foot), Frederick, Rich’d (51 foot), Edw’d
Sisters Harriett, Fanny [?], Keziah

Note with the lack of space on the page and the after thought notation in red, putting the 51st Foot was probably easier than the regiment’s post 1887 title of the King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry.

Ref WO 97/2870/72

The record doesn’t mention him receiving the QSA, but I have a copy of the Buff’s QSA medal roll and can confirm that:

Private 1928 George W, received the QSA with clasps Cape Colony & Orange Free State and was invalided home 19 July 1900.

Regimental numbers were not re-used and in any case what would be the odds be of a man of the same name getting the number if it was re-issued. I must admit I’m at a loss to explain it; all I can assume is the record is incomplete in that he must have either extended his 1st Class Army Reserve service or (less likely) re-enlisted to the regular battalion.

Note: the Natal clasp is ticked (but marking against all in roll is a tick rather than a / , the normal mark and the column may have been used during a checking) and appears to be the only column that is marked for every member of the regiment. The clasp isn’t listed for the Buffs in “Medals of the Regiments” on the North East Medals web site and if I’m reading their descriptions of the criteria for clasp awards correctly (on QSA medal page), the Cape Colony and Natal clasps are mutually exclusive.

Re: Pte W George, East Kent Regt -The Buffs

Posted: 19 Aug 2012 10:16PM GMT
Classification: Query
A very quick, and a very BIG thank you for that Jeff. I will give it all some thought and look up a few of the 'leads' here... and if - no, lets be positive - WHEN I find out more I'll re-post.
Thank You!!!

Re: Pte W George, East Kent Regt -The Buffs

Posted: 20 Aug 2012 2:27PM GMT
Classification: Query
Ok, have had a chance to look at this information and check out Williams family on the census - which throws up another conundrum..
If Pte (William) George enlisted in 1885, aged 24yr 6mnth - that gives us his birthdate being around April 1861.
Census 1861 shows the following:-
Henry George age 38
Frances - wife age 36
Charles age 14 Alfred age 12 Frederick age 10 WILLIAM age 8 Stephen age 5 Keziah age 7 and WALTER age 1mnth.
Census 1881 gives us WALTER age 21, in the Royal Victoria Hospital, Netley, Hampshire - an 'invalid' while WILLIAM appears to be an Ag Lab in Throwley kent
Census 1891 gives us WILLIAM age 30, at Canterbury Barracks, a private in the East Kent regiment. but if this IS WILLIAM, then he should be older than 30 (38)- WALTER would have beeen 30 in 1891
William?? Walter??? Can anyone throw any light on it?

Re: Pte W George, East Kent Regt -The Buffs

Posted: 23 Aug 2012 5:00AM GMT
Classification: Query
Census are full of anomalies of one sort or another that most people don’t see because they don’t have another document, like an army attestation, to contradict it; indeed I would suggest that many trees built on Ancestry aren’t even supported with primary documents, but have just been built on census and BMD Index entries. The enumerator only wrote what they heard and being human mistakes were made, even the people who were the subject of an entry didn’t always give correct information. Another possibility is the 1881 census people are different to the family you are looking at.

The 1891 census data for William fits with his record (you can obtain a copy of all 5 pages online, see http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/records/looking-for-perso... , so accepting there was no requirement to provide a birth certificate to enlist, it could be a mix up with names on the census.

You’ll have to cross-check births/baptisms (and perhaps deaths) against census for the children and if baptisms cannot be found online it will be a case of purchasing a few birth certificates to sort out parentage.

E.g. William vs Walter b 1861, the GRO Index to birth registrations gives:

GEORGE Walter James, Mar Qtr 1861; District Faversham; vol 2a, page 598

GEORGE William, Jun Qtr 1861; District Faversham; vol 2a, page 613

See if you can find a Walter George birth registration to fit his older brother, and look for candidate for the above Walter James in the 1861 & 1871 census, finally you should obtain a copy of William’s birth certificate; that should sort it out.

Re: Pte W George, East Kent Regt -The Buffs

Posted: 25 Aug 2012 10:11AM GMT
Classification: Query
Yes, Jeff, I agree with you, that census' are full of anomalies, and certainly I have found entries in the public trees on ancestry that have clearly not been cross referenced. I never accept that any one person is 'mine' until I have cross referenced several sources. I have recently tracked several 'possibles' for someone I was looking for, through all the census records to eliminate each one,(by finding them married to the wrong person in 1881) and narrow down my options. Its a long task sometimes but at least you 'get your man' (I must have some "Mountie" blood in my veins!) Anyway, I digress from the subject in hand,, Pte George. I have been cross referencing possible options for him, and have eliminated those that have the 'wrong' parents, so I am down to the original family who show up on the 1861 census, in Sheldwich with the William aged 8 and Walter 1 month, and with siblings whho match those listed on his enlistment record. Yes I have my doubts about the census enumerators entries, in the 1891 census where William is show ant Canterbury Barracks, the name immediately above him is also a William, and I wondered if the enumerator erroneously put William? but then you told me that he enlisted as William,so maybe not. Its frustrating to say the least, isn't it? especially when we don't even know if he really is 'one of us'. The search for him and his descendants has come about because we have in our possession - something which once belonged to Pte George, - found in a box of 'family stuff' which belonged to my late father in law. No one in the family knows why it should be there, and at the moment, no family connection with the George family is evident. Onward and upward as they say.
Thanks, (again) so much for the enlistment details. One day we'll uncover the connection .. perhaps!
per page

Find a board about a specific topic

  • Visit our other sites:

© 1997-2014 Ancestry.com | Corporate Information | New Privacy | New Terms and Conditions