Author Topic: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment  (Read 49106 times)

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #30 on: June 28, 2017, 04:38:44 PM »
PLEASE NOTE
All of the information on this thread is taken from different sources most are copyright of groups or individuals, I have checked the use of sections on all the sites. I understand that if they are being used for non profit or non commercial use it is OK to put them on our site.
Please bear this in mind if you use any of the information on this thread.
Thank-you

If anything does infringe copyright let me know and I will gladly remove it.

I now have written permission to reproduce alot of the articles on this forum. The rest are covered by the statement above.

Neil (Timberman)



ALLEGED ILLEGAL ARREST.

HC Deb 15 April 1889 vol 335 c480 480

 MR. JOHN O'CONNOR (Tipperary, S.)
asked the Secretary of State for War if he was aware that Private J. Smith, Manchester Regiment, was, on the 10th of March last, induced by Sergeant Griffin, Royal Irish Constabulary, to go to the entrance of the police barrack at Bansha, and that, without having committed or being charged with any offence, he was forced into the police barrack, knocked down by Sergeant Griffin, and forcibly prevented by him and Constable Spillane from leaving the barrack; and, if Private Smith has since been sentenced by Court-Martial to imprisonment with hard labour for nine months in respect to the above occurrence?
 THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (Mr. E. STANHOPE,) Lincolnshire, Horncastle
It is true that the private, smith, was sentenced by a Court-Martial to nine months' imprisonment in respect of the occurrences mentioned in the question; but on the evidence coming before the Judge Advocate General, he upon the 6th of this month quashed the conviction.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman
« Last Edit: July 01, 2017, 09:46:13 PM by timberman »

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #31 on: June 28, 2017, 04:39:50 PM »
Title: Re: snippets of Manchester Regiment articles
Post by: harribobs on January 23, 2009, 02:26:43 PM
________________________________________
Quote from: timberman on January 23, 2009, 02:03:10 PM
SOLDIERS' GRAVES (INSCRIPTIONS).

3 1/2d in new money is  ??? ??? ??? about 1 1/2 new pence

Timberman

not if you factor in inflation for the last 90 years!!

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #32 on: June 28, 2017, 04:40:33 PM »
MANCHESTER POST OFFICE VOLUNTEERS.

HC Deb 28 May 1900 vol 83 c1494 1494

 MR. SCHWANN (Manchester, N.)
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether employees of the Manchester Post Office, who are also Volunteers, have been refused fourteen days leave to attend camp at Whitsuntide (although they offered to forfeit their wages and regular holidays), and, further, are even denied their customary seven days leave for attendance in camp; and whether arrangements could be made so that the Government offices should set an example to private employers of giving opportunities to Volunteers for attending camp.
 MR. HANBURY
Every effort consistent with the exigencies of the service will be made to allow Post Office employees at Manchester who are Volunteers to attend camp; but as there are 107 members of the Manchester staff now serving in South Africa, and as Whitsuntide is one of the busiest seasons in the year for local telegraph work, it would not be possible to allow all the Volunteers, numbering over 100, to be absent at that season. The annual leave arrangements have not been disturbed, and anyone whose holidays were fixed for Whitsuntide will be able to take them.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #33 on: June 28, 2017, 04:41:01 PM »
MILITIA—FURLOUGHS IN AGRICULTURAL COUNTIES.

HC Deb 28 May 1900 vol 83 cc1494-5 1494

 MR. JEFFREYS (Hampshire, N.)
I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the scarcity of agricultural labourers in the country 1495 districts, he will arrange that furloughs to non-commissioned officers and men of Militia battalions belonging to agricultural counties shall be granted during the months of June, July, and August, instead of during the winter, to enable farmers to gather in their harvest.
 MR. WYNDHAM
Military considerations are, of course, paramount; but every effort will be made to enable the men to have furlough during harvest-time.


© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #34 on: June 28, 2017, 04:41:29 PM »
MILITIA—FAMILY ALLOTMENTS. HOME AND FOREIGN SERVICE.

HC Deb 28 May 1900 vol 83 c1495 1495

 MR. YERBURGH (Chester)
I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, seeing that a Militiaman when on active service or garrison duty abroad is obliged to make an allotment from his pay to his wife and children, but when called up for service and doing garrison duty in the British Isles is under no such obligation, whether he can say what reason there is for the different treatment in the two eases, and whether, as relief funds are in consequence called upon to contribute more to the support of the family of a Militiaman serving at home than to the family of a Militiaman serving abroad, the Militia when on service at home may be brought under the Allotment Order; and whether he can make arrangements to enable Militiamen desirous of doing so to make allotments in favour of their widowed mothers.
 MR. WYNDHAM
The system of allotments was established to meet the difficulty a soldier would otherwise experience in forwarding money to his family from abroad. At home the same difficulty does not arise. If, however, a soldier fails to remit money, his wife can, under the Army Act, obtain a compulsory stoppage from his pay. There is no reason to believe that such a measure of compulsion is generally necessary. The Militiaman abroad can allot a portion of his pay to his father or mother.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #35 on: June 28, 2017, 04:41:57 PM »
WORCESTERSHIRE AND MANCHESTER REGIMENTS.

HC Deb 20 March 1900 vol 80 c1308 1308

 GENERAL LAURIE (Pembroke and Haverfordwest)
I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War where the third and fourth battalions respectively of the Worcestershire and Manchester Regiments were raised; where they are now stationed; what is the strength of each battalion; what number of men in each battalion are effective soldiers, and of age and physique for foreign service; and whether there are any, and if so what, number in each battalion of non-effectives left behind when the first and second battalions went on active service.
 MR. WYNDHAM
The battalions referred to are at Aldershot. Their formation has only just begun, and they probably do not yet number 100 men apiece. If my hon. and gallant friend will repeat his question later in the session I shall be happy to tell him what progress has been made.


© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #36 on: June 28, 2017, 04:42:26 PM »
MAGAZINE RIFLES.

HC Deb 20 March 1900 vol 80 cc1306-7 1306

 MR. HEDDERWICK (Wick Burghs)
I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War the reasons inducing the War Office to prefer arrangements for loading in connection with the service rifle which necessitate the refilling of the magazine by the insertion of a single cartridge at a time to arrangements which enable the whole magazine to be recharged by a single movement of the hand, as in the case of the rifle in use by the Boers.

 MR. WYNDHAM
The present magazine rifle was adopted into the service on the recommendation of a special Small Arms Committee after trials had been carried out with all available magazine rifles. It would be impossible within the limits of an answer to recapitulate the reasons which led to the decision arrived at.


© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #37 on: June 28, 2017, 04:42:55 PM »
HOSPITAL STORES—TENDERS FOR WINES.

HC Deb 20 March 1900 vol 80 cc1305-6 1305

 MR. LODER (Brighton)
I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War whether wines are included among the hospital stores sent to South Africa; and whether tenders are invited for these wines; if so, whether tenders for Cape wines as well as foreign wines are called for.
 MR. WYNDHAM
Champagne and port are sent for hospital use. Tenders are invited for them. Tenders for Cape   wines are not called for, but if any should be required by the medical officers purchase could be made on the spot.

© Parliamentary copyright

Wonder if the Champagne and port where for the Soldiers ;D

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #38 on: June 28, 2017, 04:43:23 PM »
Ashton-under-Lyne Barracks—Cost of Construction and Repairs.

HC Deb 25 March 1903 vol 120 c168 168
 
 MR. HERBERT WH1TELEY (Ashton-under-Lyne)
To ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state the original cost of the Ashton-under-Lyne Barracks; the amount spent in alterations, additions, and repairs to them during the last ten years; and the number of men recruited in the Ashton-under-Lyne district during the same period.
(Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The original cost of the barracks at Ashton-under-Lyne was £45,077; the amount spent on subsequent alterations, additions, and maintenance in the last ten years was £5,754. The average take of recruits for the last ten years in the 63rd Regimental District, of which Ashton-under-Lyne is the headquarters, for the Regular Forces and Militia amounted to 1,373 and 1,973 respectively, but these figures include 1,151 and 1,645, respectively, raised in the Manchester recruiting district.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #39 on: June 28, 2017, 04:47:21 PM »

COMMUNIST COUNTRIES (DETAINED BRITISH CITIZENS)

HC Deb 11 December 1950 vol 482 cc101-3W 101W

 Major Beamish
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will publish a list of British citizens known to be held against their will by any Communist-dominated country which is a member of Cominform, giving details of date of arrest and stating whether the Governments in question have given permission for these persons to be visited by relatives, the British consul or British officers.
 Mr. Ernest Davies
Following is the list, which includes only those cases where we have conclusive evidence of detention.
102W
I.—U.S.S.R.
The Soviet authorities have admitted detention of three British soldiers in Germany. These are:
(1) Private F. W. J. Kelly, 133, Parachute Field Ambulance, who was arrested in September, 1946, and sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment for alleged espionage. His Majesty's representatives have not been able to obtain permission to visit him.
(2) Private D. Eggleton, 1st Manchester Regiment, who has been absent from his unit in Germany since October, 1947. The Soviet authorities admitted in February, 1948, that they were detaining him, but have never granted facilities to His Majesty's representatives to visit him.(3) Private A. Baker, 2nd South Staffs. Regiment, who has been absent from his unit since December, 1947. The Soviet authorities admitted his detention in February, 1948; but no satisfactory reply has been received to repeated requests for facilities to visit him.
In addition to these three cases:
(4) Major R. J. Squires, R.A.E.C., has been absent from his unit in Germany since September, 1947. There is reliable evidence that he was detained by the Russian authorities at Schwerin, but inquiries as to his whereabouts and requests for permission to visit him, have met with no satisfactory response.
II.—POLAND.
(5) Mrs. Blakeley, a British subject present in Poland at the outbreak of war, was arrested soon after the termination of hostilities. Inquiries by His Majesty's Embassy in Warsaw have produced no information as to her whereabouts, or the circumstances of her arrest.
(6) Mr. C. H. Turner (a former Air Attaché at His Majesty's Embassy, Warsaw);
(7) 2nd Officer H. Upperton, and
(8  3rd Officer G. Elmes were all arrested on 17th May, 1950, for allegedly attempting to smuggle a woman out of Poland. They are still held by the Polish authorities, who gave permission for the British consul 103W to visit 2nd Officer Upperton and 3rd Officer Elmes on 6th December.
(9) Mrs. Halina Firth, a British subject of Polish birth, was arrested on 13th May, 1949, and sentenced on 9th March, 1950, to three years' imprisonment for sheltering an escaped prisoner. She has been visited in prison by the British consul.
III.—CZECHOSLOVAKIA.
Dr. Pinkas, employed for many years as a clerk at His Majesty's Embassy in Prague, and granted British nationality early in 1950, was arrested on 25th May, 1950, on a charge of being concerned in activities against the State. The Czech authorities have denied that Pinkas had ceased to be a Czech citizen, despite documentary evidence of his release from Czechoslovak nationality, and the British consul in Prague has been refused permission to visit him.
IV.—HUNGARY.
Mr. E. Sanders, of the Standard Electric Company, was arrested on November 22nd 1949, and sentenced to 13 years' imprisonment for alleged espionage on 21st February, 1950. His Majesty's representatives have not been allowed to visit him.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #40 on: June 28, 2017, 04:47:53 PM »
DISABLED SOLDIERS.

HL Deb 16 May 1916 vol 21 cc1048-53 1048

 THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether they can now state precisely what provision will be made for disabled soldiers upon their discharge from hospital pending the payment of their pension.

 The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I do not desire in putting this Question to detain your Lordships with any lengthy remarks, because I have already felt it my duty to address the House more than once upon this point. Shortly stated, the situation is this. When soldiers are discharged from hospital disabled—that is to say, discharged not only from hospital but from the Service as well—there is an interval before their pension is fixed and begins to be paid. That interval ought to be short, but it is sometimes long. In any case it is absolutely necessary that some provision should be made during the interval for the soldier's livelihood and for the livelihood of his dependants. Certain concessions have already been made by His Majesty's Government, but we all thought they were inadequate. I am given to understand that, having taken time to consider the matter, the Government are prepared to go further than they have done hitherto. I therefore put this Question to my noble friend in order to give him an opportunity of stating exactly the position which the Government take up at the present moment, and how far they are prepared to go.
LORD BERESFORD
My Lords, this is the third time that this matter has been brought before the notice of your Lordships' House. On March 15 I asked my noble friend opposite whether disabled soldiers received pay until such time as the pension was awarded. The noble Lord replied— Pension dates front the time of discharge. There should be no period of time during which a man is not in receipt of pay or pension. I further asked my noble friend whether the gratuity of £2 awarded under Royal Warrant No. 1117 was given to the men. He replied— The £2 gratuity on discharge is credited to the man's account by his paymaster and issued as part of his balance. It is provided that a man going on pension shall have at least 20s. in his pocket on discharge, even though the account is in debt. All men should be settled up with on discharge. I may point out that the position is still very unsatisfactory. I give every credit to the Chelsea Hospital Pensions Committee for doing their best, but it appears to me that they are totally understaffed.
I would like to state a few cases to your Lordships. Private H. Walker, late of the Scots Guards, was discharged on April 28. On May 11, although he had written to the paymaster for arrears, he had had no money, nor even an answer to his letter. He has had no money since his wife's separation allowance stopped on April 28. This man had twenty years' service. The next case is that of Private F. J. Ardley, aged 20, of the City of London Regiment. He was wounded in the spine, and is paralysed in one arm and one leg. At the end of March be was discharged from the London General Hospital; yet on April 26 he had not received back pay or pension, and was without any means at all. His father is in the Army and his mother is living on the separation allowance. The next case is that of Trooper J.J. Impleton, of the 1st Life Guards. He had been receiving 25s. a week—now reduced to 10s. a week—and ls. 3d. a week for his child for life. This is all he has to live upon. I may mention that his left leg has been amputated, and he is suffering great pain in the stump. Then there is the case of Private H. A. Clarke of the 8th Royal West Kent Regiment. He lost a leg at Loos; he was discharged from Millbank Hospital, but has not yet had any pension. The only money he has received was £2 paid on February 23, since which time he has not received a penny or any reply to his letters. Private Samuel Wood, of the 1st Lancashire Regiment, was discharged from the London Hospital, and sent to the "Star and Garter" with injured spine. He is very worried about his wife and children. It is five weeks since his wife drew the separation allowance. He has no pension, and nothing to send to his wife. The last case with which I will trouble the House is that of Private H. Power, of the 8th Manchester Regiment. He has received no pay since his discharge on March 16. He is now in the Lewisham Military Hospital with asthma. He tried to get civilian clothes, but had not the 17s. 6d. to allow him to pay for them and return his khaki. If he got pay and arrears of pay he might be able to push along until he secured employment. At the present moment his wife is penniless, and he is still wearing his uniform.
Though the Chelsea Committee is very much overworked, I submit that it is our duty in both Houses of Parliament to see that these things do not occur. These men were told that they would never suffer for their patriotism, and that, if wounded, they would get a good pension and be well looked after. I can vouch for the eases which I have read out, and I hope my noble friend will be able to tell us something to prove that the Government are going to put a stop to this sort of thing. There may be many of these cases of which none of us are aware, for unless a man has a powerful friend he cannot get his case known. Consequently there may be many of these men suffering the greatest distress at the present moment. I hope that we shall get a satisfactory answer from the Government.
LORD SANDHURST
My Lords, I can assure the House that the Secretary of State deplores the existence of these cases, the hardship of which is patent to us all; and if the noble and gallant Lord will be so good as to send me particulars of the cases he has mentioned I will look into them myself at Chelsea and see that as little delay as possible occurs in regard to relief. Some time ago when, at the instance of the noble Marquess opposite, I explained the system of pensions, there was one matter which rather perplexed him, and I was not in a position at the time to give any satisfactory reply. The noble Marquess will remember that I stated that a man who lost a leg received 25s. a week for two months after discharge, but if he had lost an arm he received only 20s. a week. The noble Marquess wanted to know why a leg was valued at more than an arm. That matter has been gone into, and I am pleased to inform the noble Marquess that an arm is now to be regarded as of the same value as a leg, and whichever of these limbs a man loses he will receive the 25s.
I think I am right in assuming that this Question of the noble Marquess's arises out of one or two replies which I have given, and also owing to representations that have been sent to me from various sources as to delay in paying pensions when pay has ceased on discharge. I have been the recipient of a great number of these cases and have done my best to hurry matters up, sometimes, I am pleased to say, not entirely without success. But now I am glad to be able to tell the noble Marquess that the Secretary of State has made new arrangements by which the discharged soldier will be kept in touch with and a payment will be guaranteed to him every week from the date of discharge until the Chelsea Commissioners have settled his claim for pension. The main new departure is as follows. If by the date of the man's discharge the Pensions Issue Office have not received the decision as to pension 1052 from the Chelsea Commissioners, they will on the date of discharge issue to the man 10s. if he has no dependants, and 20s. if there are dependants, and the payment of this sum will be repeated weekly until the pension question is settled. When the Chelsea Commissioners have decided the pension, if it is more than the 10s. or 20s., as the case may be, the Pension Issue Office will refund the balance. That is to say, if the pension in the ease of a single man should be 15s.—namely, 5s. more than the weekly temporary allowance of 10s.—the extra 5s. will be refunded to the pensioner; but if the pension should turn out to be less than 10s. per week, a refund on the part of the man will not be required. And, further, a man who has been waiting some time for his pension will receive the arrears of the 10s. or 20s. unless he has been receiving aid from the Soldiers' and Sailors' Help Society. But the soldier will not be called upon to refund money to the Soldiers' and Sailors' Help Society.
In reply to the point raised by the noble and gallant Lord opposite I may explain that when a man leaves, the officer in charge of the hospital provides him with plain clothes, advances £1 of the pay warrant gratuity that becomes due to him on discharge, and gives him a railway warrant to his home, which the man should reach twelve or thirteen days before his formal discharge. The officer in charge of the hospital notifies the soldier's paymaster, who arranges (1) for rations for the soldier between leaving the hospital and his discharge; (2) for a cash allowance instead of clothes if the man already has a suit of plain clothes; and (3) for his approximate balance of pay. If the soldier is in debt to the public no deduction is made from the rations or from the clothes allowance, so that the position will be materially improved.
The noble Marquess referred to the delays that had taken place at Chelsea. Nobody deplores those delays more than the Chelsea Commissioners themselves. But the work which has been thrown on the Chelsea Commissioners has been very heavy. Cases have come in at the rate of nearer 6,000 than 5,000 per week. Each case has to be tabulated, various references have to be made, and very often the papers are sent up incomplete; but when, which unhappily seldom is the case, the missing documents are not important, the case is proceeded with and adjudicated upon. To show how great has 1053 been the work, I may mention that some of the clerks at Chelsea have been working often up to three and four o'clock in the morning to expedite the cases. The noble and gallant Lord opposite said that more staff is needed. He is quite right. We want more room and additional staff. Construction has either begun or will be immediately begun to increase the accommodation, and a much larger staff will then be employed, which we trust will result in more prompt dealing with the cases. In the meantime there is this provision for ready money to be given to the soldier immediately on his discharge, and it will be continued until the pension is payable. It is hoped that in this way delays may he prevented in future, and that these men who have done such good service will no longer have this suffering imposed upon them.
LORD BERESFORD
My noble friend said that the money, a very large sum, advanced to the men by the Soldiers' and Sailors' Help Society will not be deducted from the man's pension when it is given. Are the Government going to refund the money to the Soldiers' and Sailors' Help Society?
LORD SANDHURST
I believe that some arrangement has been come to on this matter between the War Office and the society.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #41 on: June 28, 2017, 04:48:32 PM »
COMPULSORY MILITARY SERVICE.

HC Deb 28 July 1915 vol 73 cc2395-457 2395

this is a very small part of the debate.

 Mr. NEEDHAM
I venture to introduce a new subject to the attention of the House. I put questions from time to time to the Financial Secretary in regard to proficiency pay for members of the old Volunteer force who in their membership of that force were efficient, and who since the War have re-enlisted in His Majesty's Forces. These excellent Volunteers do not get paid proficiency pay, which is given to members of the Territorial force. The answers the Financial Secretary has given are to the effect that they are not able to revise the decision to continue the present system, and therefore they continue to refrain from giving this proficiency pay. I think this is a very great hardship on a large number of old Volunteers who made themselves proficient according to the standard demanded by the War Office in their time, and whose Volunteer service to the country is now not regarded as having been given at all. The provisions of the Army Orders that exist to-day are that a man who has been in the Territorial Force and has been present) at two camps of fifteen days is entitled to proficiency pay. There are many many thousands of Volunteers in this country in the service to-day who in their time as Volunteers served fifteen-day camps, and particular injustice is done to many of the Manchester Battalions who during the last years of the Volunteer force were year by year going to fifteen-day camps for a period, I think, of seven or eight years, and I am quite sure the same remark can be made with equal definiteness with regard to other battalions throughout the country. I have had, and I expect many other Members have had, many letters on the subject. I might say I have been deluged by letters from old Volunteers on the point, but I content myself with reading one case. This is from a man in the 3rd/7th Manchester Battalion Regiment: As matters now stand I am denied proficiency pay, with a record of practically twenty-seven years' service, while a man who joined this unit in July 1913, attended training in August 1913 and May 1914, draws proficiency pay, with less than one-tenth of my service. This is a special injustice to Manchester Volunteers, as from 1900 to 1907 they were doing precisely the same training as the Territorials have since done. This hardship is all the greater because the arrangements and conditions for Territorials have only come into existence since the War commenced, and I think the House can give its cordial assent to the request of the old Volunteers that their case should be still once more reconsidered with the expectation that reconsideration will bring a favourable answer to their request. I hope the Financial Secretary to the War Office may be able to indicate some hopes in that direction. 

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #42 on: June 28, 2017, 04:49:06 PM »
Annuities for Crimean Veterans—Case of Ex-Sergeant Major John O'Connor.

HC Deb 31 May 1905 vol 147 c322 322

 MR. HATCH (Lancashire, Gorton)
To ask the Secretary of State for War whether the medals and annuities for distinguished or meritorious service have yet been issued to all the Crimean veterans; and, if not, whether, in view of the services of these old soldiers and the fact that many of them are in straitened circumstances and feeble health, he will give instructions for the immediate issue of the medal to at least all ex-non-commissioned officers, notably to John O'Connor, late sergeant-major and military clerk, late of the 63rd Manchester Regiment, whose case has on several occasions been commended to the favourable notice of the War Office by high officers.
(Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The amount allotted for annuities being limited, such rewards can only be given as vacancies occur. The grant is confined to soldiers or ex-soldiers above the rank of corporal, who must be recommended by the officers commanding the regiments to which they belonged. Since 1st April, 1904, when the sum allowed for these rewards was increased, forty-nine Crimean vetcrans have been granted the annuity and medal, but there are still several recommended who have not yet been provided for. Special consideration is, however, given to their cases when annuities fall vacant, due regard being had to the amount of the grant held by the corps to which they belonged. Sergeant-Major John O'Connor was granted an annuity of £10 from 1st April, 1904, with a medal for meritorious service.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #43 on: June 28, 2017, 04:49:43 PM »
Allotment of South African War Trophies.

HC Deb 08 August 1904 vol 139 cc1345-6 1345

SIP. THOMAS DEWAR (Tower Hamlets, St. George's)
To ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state to what public bodies trophies of the late war have been allotted.
(Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) In accordance with the recommendations of the Trophy Committee, the guns captured in the late war have been See page 970. 1346 allotted to districts, and have been distributed by the General Officers Commanding as follows: the towns being in most cases either district or divisional headquarters:—
Great Britain and Ireland.
1st Army Corps Area   Aldershot.
2nd Army Corps Area   Tidwith.
Dower.   
Devonport.   
3rd Army Corps Area   Dublin.
Cork.   
Belfast.   
4th Army Crops Area   Colchester.
Rochester.   
Guildford.   
Not included in Army Crops Area.   York.
Chester.   
Manchester.   
Edinburgh.   
Glasgow.   
Perth.   
I have no further information to show to what public bodies the trophies have been allotted. These are in addition to those allotted to the Colonies and India, which are being dealt with by the Colonial and India Offices respectively, and to those presented to certain units in recognition of specific acts of gallantry. Jersey and Guernsey have also each received a captured gun. A certain number of captured rifles have also been allotted to public bodies at home, to the Colonies and India, and to regimental messes.


© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman

timberman

  • Guest
Re: Snippets of the Manchester Regiment (1-100)
« Reply #44 on: June 28, 2017, 04:51:13 PM »
COURT-MARTTAL SENTENCE.

HC Deb 22 December 1916 vol 88 c1833W 1833W

 Mr. JOWETT
asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Private A. I. Goldberg, No. 46962, 3rd Battalion Manchester Regiment, a conscientious objector, was court-martialled at Cleethorpes on 12th December, 1916, and sentenced to six months' hard labour on 14th December, 1916; whether he is aware that this man's colonel on 15th December ordered him to dig trenches, which order the man declined to obey, with the result that on 15th December the colonel imposed the sentence of twenty-one days' bread and water; and whether he will inform the House of Commons under what powers this procedure was adopted by the colonel and under what regulation is it possible to sentence a man to twenty-one days' bread and water at all, and/or after sentence by court-martial?
 Mr. MACPHERSON
Inquiries are being made, and I will inform my hon. Friend of the result in due course.

© Parliamentary copyright

Timberman