New Zealand Medal Rolls for The 96th Regiment of Foot

[timberman]

The New Zealand Medal was instituted in 1869. While it is British, the medal can be described as New Zealand's first indigenous campaign medal. It was awarded for service in the New Zealand Wars of 1845-47 and 1860-66.  The Medal was awarded to members of the British Army, Royal Navy, Royal Marines, and to colonial volunteers.

The Manchester Regiment 96th Regiment

A copy of the roll for this Regiment is in America and known as the COUTTS roll - the following Note regarding the 96th Regiment is on the roll.

It is stated that the Headquarters of the Regiment was stationed at Launceston, Tasmania in 1843 and that in March of that year a detachment under Lieut. Col. Hulme proceeded to Auckland, New Zealand. In 1845 this detachment was subsequently engaged with the natives at Koroanika in the Bay of Islands on March 11th where forty men under Lieut. Barclay were engaged with the whole of the native forces and compelled to re-embark and sail to Auckland, having had five killed and three wounded. On the 27th April the Company again proceeded to the Bay of Islands under Lieut. Col. Hulme together with reinforcements from Sydney which had arrived to support the small force of a single Company of the 96th Regiment, who had been exposed for the last 12 months to the attacks of the whole body of natives. On 8th May they were engaged at Keke's Pa and had 6 killed and 9 wounded, and soon after at the second assault of the same place when the detachment lost 5 killed and 3 wounded. August 1846 Headquarters proceeded to Hobart's Town, Tasmania, to re-organise the Corps which had been so much detached since arrival in Australia.

Roll of claimants for the New Zealand medal - kindly furnished by Lieut. G L Usher, the Manchester Regiment.

Captain  William Archibald Eyton.

Ensign Charles Octavious Eardley Wilmot.

Privates

    1791 Henry Barnes , 544. William Blyth , . 671 Robert Baalam  , . 1545 Henry Brighton - Beighton at Royal Hospital Chelsea  , .1089 John Blake  , .

    1740 George Dobie

    541 John Foster

    426 James Grace

    1741 James Gill

    1621 George Hudson

    1744 Edward Kellington

    805 Joseph Myers  , . 1254 John Moy  ,

    1520 John Nuttall - Coutts list No. 1502

    805 W Parkes - Coutts list Parker, William

    1479William Quantrill - Coutts list No. 1474

    1629 William Short , .    1028 W Scarrow - Scarron in Coutts list , . 137 Richard Sunter - Smith in Coutts list 1445 John Stewart , .  751 William Skipper , .  783 Francis Squire , .

    170 Thomas Walton - without date sold Sotheby's 20/2/79


Timberman

[sphinx]

Also:-

770 Thomas WIGGLESWORTH
154 Thomas WELTON

[bandireed]

Hi , am new to this so could appreciate any guidance in right direction please. Have relatives medal, on my mums side, undated N.Z.   INSCRIBED EDGE RIM .....Pte. I.Horth 96th foot    1635, thanks bandireed.

[sphinx]

Bandireed,

A am interested to hear of this medal.  Below are the rules for the issue of the medal.

1. The medal was issued to survivors only.

2. Effectives at the time of distribution had their dates of NZ service impressed in relief on the obverse of the medal, namely "1845-1846".

3. Non effectives had no dates on the reverse.

There were only 3 medals issued to officers and 24 to NCO's and men.

As Pte. Horth is not on the roll, I can only imagine he didnt survive and the medal was unofficially acquired by the family and named up.

Good photos of the naming would help in this regard.

Do you know whether he survived the campaign or not?

regards

[themonsstar]

1635 Private Issac Horth joined the 96th of Foot 10th August 1841 he served 12 years and 297 days being discharged 15th of July 1854.  He served in the following countries:

Australia, New Zealand 7 years

India the remainder

He was granted the medal for services in New Zealand 1846  (19/63/910)  War Office  21/Oct/1898.

He received 50 lashes for breaking out of barracks and disorderly conduct

His service record is on (Find my past)

if you can get to the National archives he is mentioned in the regimental pay lists July-Sept 1845 (WO12/9618)

[themonsstar]

I suppose if anyone wanted to do some research into the 96th Foot and the first issue of the New Zealand medal, they could start by cross referencing service records and nominal rolls in WO12 at the National archives.

[sphinx]

It looks like the late issue of 1898 some 50 years after the event, when he was either in his 70's or dead via his family, was the reason Usher didnt have him on his roll.  I will add him to mine.

I would still like to see the naming if possible please.

regards

[bandireed]

Hi, thanks again , I sent some photos via e. mail to garry.smith1 (at) tameside.org.uk  

Replace (at) with @ changed to stop spam
        
If you know him he may let you see them
cheers Bandireed.

[bandireed]

Hello, and thankyou for info. can you tell me why the medal was not dated, hav some good photos if I can get them to you ,showing medal , and edge rim inscription , cheers Bandireed.

[Bob.NB]

The September 2012 issue of the Journal of the Orders and Medals Research Society included an article on New Zealand Medals to the 40th Foot and the research covered indicated that undated New Zealand Medals, named to the 40th Foot, were issued to those who were no longer with the regiment, primarily because no-one could accurately confirm their dates of service in New Zealnd.
This may well have been the case here, especially as this medal was issued some 50 years after the acton!
Bob B

[themonsstar]

Hi Bob
His service record shows he was in New Zealand & WO12 Pay lists also show him there.

[Bob.NB]

Yes I'm sure the information is there to confirm exactly when he served in New Zealand but possibly no-one was too interested in digging up the old muster rolls some 50 years after the event.
Much easier just to get confirmation that he was in New Zealand and then give him an undated medal.
I have in the back of my mind that most, if not all, the New Zealand Medals to the 96th had the undated reverse.
I don't suppose that all the recipients were "non-effective" when they were awarded their medals so it would be interesting to know why some of them didn't get dated reverses.
Possibly because the 96th were first in action in 1844 and the earliest dated reverse is "1845-1846"?
Bob B

[bandireed]

Bob, thanks , all adds to the info, will let you know any further details , thanks Bandireed.