Call up papers

[Paul-E]

My Ggrandfather was until recently know by the family as a deserter from WWI. However through my own research I can now confidently say he was never a WWI deserter, infact he never fought during WWI and I think here lies the confusion and where the rumour possibly originated from...................................

My Ggrandfather was married in 1815 after which he had several children with his wife Ethel. However before his marraige between 1905 and 1909 he had three children, and no one could tell me if Ethel was their mother. Today the birth certificates arrived to confirm that they were indeed Ggrandads and GGrandomther Ethels children.

So the reason for not joining up during WWI..........................Marraige. As I understand it if men were married they had the option of either going to war or staying home (Please correct me if this is wrong) Obviously my Ggrandad married to avoid going to war, or at least that's how it looks. Hardly a reason to be called a coward, deserter whatever.

Anyways my question really is: were call up papers sent out for WWI or did men go and sign up somewhere? Surely if for some reason men did not or could not to go to war there was paperwork involved giving reasons etc. If there was paper work involved are WE able to read it about individuals, to confirm reasons for not joining up during WWI. If I could find such paper work (if it exists) it will confirm my theory of my Ggrandad and allow me to be 100% on the reason he never joined up.

Hope thaats understandable!

Paul.

[apowell]

Hi Paul,

Well we've got a few questions to look at here so let's break them down but firstly I'll need you to clarify when your Gt Grandfather was married 1815 . I know it must be a typo error should it be 1915 .

You're right that your Gt Grandfather couldn't have been a deserter because if he didn't serve in the Armed services it would be impossible for him to be classed a deserter and if he had he would have been imprisoned or even shot.

Your Gt Grandfather wouldn't have been under any legal obligation unless he was a member of the Armed, Territorial or Reserve services to serve with the Military from 1914 until Conscripton was introduced into Britain in 1916. However pressures from the population to enlist prior to 1916 was huge and people were ostracized and shunned from society if they didn't. This may have been the reason some of the terms used by family members about him and some of those family members may have lost loved ones which caused emotions to run high.

I copied below some information on The Military Service Act:

The Military Service Act 1916 and recruitment by Class (27th, January 1916)
All voluntary enlistment was stopped and all British males were now deemed to have enlisted - that is, they were conscripted - if they were aged between 18 and 41 and resided in Great Britain (excluding Ireland) and were unmarried or a widower on 2 November 1915. Conscripted men were no longer given a choice of which service, regiment or unit they joined, although if a man preferred the navy it got priority to take him. This act was extended to married men on 25 May 1916.

If he married in 1915 it seems very possible he was attempting to avoid conscription but it was extended to married men in May of that year anyway, so marriage wouldn't have exempted him from conscription. The figures show 93,000 men failed to appear when called up and 748,587 claimed some form of exemption due to war occupation, illness or conscientious objection and maybe your relative claimed exemption on one of these grounds. When was your Grt Grandfather born and what was his trade, If you wanted to investigate further check the national archive website with his details to see if any documents are held.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

The Goverment would from the national register require all men (by post) that qualified under the Conscription Act to report on a certain date to serve their military service and if they failed to appear they would be arrested charged and usually imprisoned but to my knowledge the death sentence was only given to serving soldiers. I'm not sure of the exact procedure but upon receiving their call up papers they could lodge an appeal which would have been heard by a tribunal.

Hope this helps

Regards
Adrian

[Paul-E]

Thanks for info Adrian, very helpful indeed.

Sorry for the typo yes 1915 (March)

James Bloomer Teall was born Sub District of St Martin Birmingham in the county of Warwick 26 April 1884

His trade was Iron Worker ( listed on his daughters birth certificate 1906)

Will have a look at records and see what turns up.

Would the fact he was an Iron Worker make any difference? What I mean is surely they needed men at home making ammunition, guns etc. Were there any exemptions for certain trades men during WWI?

He never seemed to fill out any census forms (or at least I have not found one yet) so that is as close as I could get with date-trade

Thanks
Paul.

[Paul-E]

Just checked a marraige certificate of his son (my Grandad) and on the 1941 marraige certificate JB Teall is listed as steel worker. Looks as though he was in steel industry all his working life.
Paul

[MarkCDodd]

Did you know that every Australian soldier in WWI was a volunteer? They tried to introduce conscription twice during the war via referendum and it was defeated both times. The Australian soldiers in the trenches voted against conscription!

By the end of 1917 the loss of Australian troops was far outstripping the number of volunteers. Mainly because they were sick of dying at the whim of British Generals. When Monash was put in charge and most of the British officers replaced the numbers of volunteers increased again.

The percentage of my Australian relatives who saw action in WWI is higher than my British.

When I looked at this I found the answer to be simple.

Many of my British relatives were unhealthy by their late 20's after working in the mines and smelters so many of them simply failed the medical.

It also appears that many who worked in the smelters and ironworks were deemed to be working in an "essential service" and of more use to the war effort by keeping industry ticking over.

I can understand others getting upset if their loved ones went and "did their duty" and they suspected others of avoiding theirs.

For that reason an effort was made to educate that there was work to be done at home as well as the front line.

[apowell]

Hi Paul,

During my research of my family during the war I've found a number of them being found medically unfit for service after passing the initial medical and most of those like Mark previously mentioned were working in the iron factories and coal mines. I did find another relative who had enlisted with the army only to be transferred back to the iron works for war service.

I think due to James's age of 32 and no previous military experience he wouldn't have been a top priority to receive his call up anyway because an element of the Military conscript act was divided into ages and from the information below he would have been in mid-late class and deemed not likely to be A1 fit.

Classes

Men were allocated into a Class, which was connected with the year of their birth, and were notified that they would be called up by Class.

Class 1 was for those born in 1897. They were 18 years old. They were told they would not be called up until they were aged 19. Class 2 was for those born in 1896, Class 3 for 1895 and so on up to Class 23 for those born in 1875.

It could have been that James was never called up anyway so no documentation was ever issued.

Regards
Adrian

[apowell]

Hi Mark,

Would I be right in thinking that the Australian military services didn't have the death penalty unlike the British and any idea about the other countries like New Zeland and Canada etc.

I'm also interested in what the chain of command was for the Empire troops would they be under the control of the British High command or could they refuse to obey or disagree with some of the suicidal tatics that where employed during the war.

Regards
Adrian

[MarkCDodd]

Death penalty did apply to the "colony" troops.

For most of the war the Australian divisions were under the control of several British Generals.

There was no way to "veto" the commands given.

When Monash was put in charge of the Australians he could protest against commands given and rely on the Australian War Cabinet to give the final yes or no.

By this stage all allied troops were under the command of the French General Roche and General Haig had been relegated to a simialr position to Monash. General Gough, the biggest idiot of the war, has been sent to North Africa.

General Monash was brilliant and it was the effort of the AUstralians, Canadians and newly arrived Americans under his command that made the crucial breakthrough in late 1917.