TOPIC:

I have a copy of my Grandfather's Militia Attestation application in 1888 when he was almost 17. I am sure it is him as his birth date and place are as I know it. His residence at the time fits an England Census address. His attestation was to the 3rd Royal Lancaster Battalion for 6 years. My grandmother said he served in India and South Africa. She also said: "After the war his condition required some time in the hospital, after which he was returned to England and honorably discharged." In 1901 they were married and immigrated to America.

Was the 3rd Royal Lancaster Btn part of the 5th Royal Irish Lancers?

Research showed that there was the regular army, militia and volunteers. It was said that the militia and volunteers were the "real" army as the regulars were not held in as high esteem. I felt that the regulars were career and aloof causing the disenfranchisement. Also that there ended up North, South and East Lancaster Battalions. How did this effect the 3rd Royal Lancaster Btn.

Can anyone point me in the right direction for more info on the 3rd Btn?

How much of the above was during the Boer War and how much during WWI.

This particular Thomas Slater joined the 3rd Militia Battalion of the Kings own Royal Lancaster Regiment, given the date he joined, he would be unlikely to actually be serving in the Militia during the Anglo Boer War.
The Militia Battalions of this regiment had nothing to do with the Army as such and take their name because of the regimental district that they were part of.
The 5th Royal Irish Lancers was a cavalry regiment in the Army and has nothing to do with the Kings Own or it's Militia.
When you say "research showed" can you tell us what this particular research is, anything to do with Thomas Slater, or are just referring to members of the Army/Militia/Volunteers in a general sense?
The Militia was just that, by definition, nothing to do with the Army, as such, with both their pay and organisation coming, in effect, from a different pot and what you say about them being the "real" soldiers is quite incorrect, the Empire could certainly not have not been held together by a bunch of part time teenagers, in actual fact, really the reverse is true, notwithstanding, members of the Militia did serve in the Anglo Boer War, in fact, whole battalions were sometimes embodied.
The Kings own Royal Lancaster Regiment is nothing to do with the Loyal North Lancashire, the East Lancashire and the South Lancashire Regiments whatsoever.
The Militia did not exist in the Great War, in fact, by then, it had been replaced by the Special Reserve.
Regarding the history of the Kings Own, any good copy of their regimental history or a visit to their museum will answer your questions regarding both their Militia Battalions.

[email protected] wrote: I ha.ve a copy of my Grandfather's Militia Attestation application in 1888 when he was almost 17. I am sure it is him as his birth date and place are as I know it. His residence at the time fits an England Census address. His attestation was to the 3rd Royal Lancaster Battalion for 6 years. My grandmother said he served in India and South Africa. She also said: "After the war his condition required some time in the hospital, after which he was returned to England and honorably discharged." In 1901 they were married and immigrated to America.

Was the 3rd Royal Lancaster Btn part of the 5th Royal Irish Lancers?

Research showed that there was the regular army, militia and volunteers. It was said that the militia and volunteers were the "real" army as the regulars were not held in as high esteem. I felt that the regulars were career and aloof causing the disenfranchisement. Also that there ended up North, South and East Lancaster Battalions. How did this effect the 3rd Royal Lancaster Btn.

Can anyone point me in the right direction for more info on the 3rd Btn?

How much of the above was during the Boer War and how much during WWI.

The further research was at the following web site:

www.lancashireinfantrymuseum.org.uk/the-...-lancashire-militia/

I didn't mean to ruffle any feathers but my impression was generated at the bottom of the right hand box.

The main body states the following:

"The South African War 1899-1902

In 1881 Militia battalions were redesignated as the 3rd (and sometimes 4th) Battalions of the new ‘localised’ infantry regiments, but without changing their Militia status.

The outbreak of the Boer War put the Militia under particular strain, for they were first stripped of much of their trained manpower to complete Regular battalions and were then asked to volunteer for overseas service as formed battalions, which to their credit they did. All three battalions saw active service in South Africa.

Among the first Militia units to be embodied, in December 1899, were the 3rd Battalions of the South Lancashire and Loyal North Lancashire Regiments. Both mobilised at Fulwood Baracks, from where the Loyal North Lancashires left for pre-deployment training at Shorncliffe and Lydd before sailing to Malta. The South Lancashires sailed from Liverpool for Cape Town in January 1900. They were followed in February by the 3rd East Lancashires, who were embodied at Burnley in January 1900 and stationed briefly at the Curragh Camp, near Dublin. The 3rd Loyal North Lancashires did garrison duty in Malta until March 1901, when they too sailed for South Africa.

In South Africa the main task of the Militia battalions was to protect the vital but vulnerable railway lines of communication from Boer raids and sabotage, but they were also engaged in more mobile operations. In a guerrilla war of patrols, mounted infantry, armoured trains and blockhouses, they were involved in numerous skirmishes. Six of the Lancashire Militia were killed in action and 14 wounded, but a further 81 died of disease or by accident."

I do not know what you mean by Thomas Slater "be unlikely to actually be serving in the Militia during the Anglo Boer War". The above article seems to imply that at the start of the Boer War the militia were stripped of men and then embodied as the 3rd Btn of the North Lancaster Rgmt, 3rd Btn of the South Lancaster Rgmt and finally the 3rd Btn of the East Rgmt all sent to South Africa as Militia. I am confused to say the least, but I am new at this.

Like how is the King's own different?

Okay, I now see what you meant, regarding research, you looked at the site you quote, the info is quite correct, members of the Militia did serve in the Army in South Africa and as I mentioned before, whole battalions served too, I did not know whether or not you were actually talking about Thomas Slater.
If you actually look at the dates shown in his papers and the service details, as you can see, he is unlikely to have seen service in the war, it was normally mentioned, as was any subsequent enlistment into the Army, whilst being a serving Militiaman.
As mentioned the Kings Own, the Loyals, the East Lancashire and South Lancashire are four separate regiments and not one of the same.

You certainly have not ruffled any feathers here by the way, not mine anyway.
To be honest what I'd do if I were you, is go and look at the surviving papers for every Thomas Slater, because, given his age and the date of 1888, he could certainly have joined the Army at some stage before the war and served in South Africa.

[email protected] wrote:
I do not know what you mean by Thomas Slater "be unlikely to actually be serving in the Militia during the Anglo Boer War". The above article seems to imply that at the start of the Boer War the militia were stripped of men and then embodied as the 3rd Btn of the North Lancaster Rgmt, 3rd Btn of the South Lancaster Rgmt and finally the 3rd Btn of the East Rgmt all sent to South Africa as Militia. I am confused to say the least, but I am new at this.

Like how is the King's own different?

I think I should also perhaps add that if the particular Thomas Slater under discussion here had actually served in South Africa during the Anglo Boer War, notwithstanding his statement of service in WO96, he would certainly have been entitled to the QSA.
I checked both their main roll and supplementary roll in WO100/168 and he is not shown on it, I must say though, I did find it very interesting, the number of Militiamen who did not return home is very sad indeed and I dare say would be quite surprising to many people.