TOPIC:

Thank you for the clarification, Ian. You must always give in to your impulses when such opportunities arise! I will look forward to seeing the forms.
Regards
Brett
PS I am pleased that there is another member of this forum who must sometimes resort to using a magnifying glass. My eagle eyes sharpened by the search for fossils are now good only for spotting the bones of large dinosaurs.

Brett
Unfortunately, the form pages I photographed did not come out at all well. Not the camera's fault; the images on the CD are NVG. I will have to transcribe the contents of the DMT example by hand. As I am in Tas next week, it will have to wait until I get back. The contents of the CD are really quite interesting inasmuch as each Colonial Contingent had it's own headed enlistment form. The various conditions of service are also interesting. Of course, the forms are blank!!
Best regards
IL.

Hi Brett, IL & djb, thanks for responding to my question on TG's and DMT's - very useful.

I think TG & DMT are essentially the same; "civil defense", (as per Ian's evidence too, they are both "Class C"), except for their geographic operating remit (town vs surrounding area) as has been touched on previously in this thread.

For a number of years there has been a major project re TG & DMTs, I hope it sees the light of day this year.

Regards
Meurig

Class C SAMIF did not include District Mounted Troops or indeed, any Town Guard, in fact, they had been raised for general service in South Africa, quite unlike the TG/DMT and came under the direct control of the Assistant Adjutant General at Army Headquarters, Pretoria which was actually at Melrose House.

SWB wrote: I think TG & DMT are essentially the same; "civil defense", (as per Ian's evidence too, they are both "Class C"), except for their geographic operating remit (town vs surrounding area) as has been touched on previously in this thread.

For a number of years there has been a major project re TG & DMTs, I hope it sees the light of day this year.

Regards
Meurig

Forum members
I had intended to add to this particular topic before now; however, things intervened.
Frank
Thanks for pointing out my error in describing TGs and DMTs as "Class C" units. When I slip up, I don't make excuses (an old habit). I was working from what is best described as a 3rd generation reproduction of a document titled "Conditions of Service, South African and Overseas Contingents" HMSO 1904. The original copying was not done well and "E" looked like "C". A reason, but no excuse.



The abovementioned document is really quite interesting; amongst other things, it gives sample attestation forms for various Contingents - plus an amount of information about them. If any forum member has access to an original, I think many collectors would value a properly scanned and reproduced copy. Attached is a half-reasonable pic from my 3g copy. The terms of service of TGs and DMTs are clearly stated.



Personally, I would not describe TGs and DMTs as being a "civil defence" asset. That description sounds like the civilian disaster relief body formed here in the 1950's during the Cold War. That body certainly had no military aspect whatsoever. I might refer to TGs and DMTs as "Home Guard"; except that that evocative title was not coined for another 40-odd years. How about simply classifying them as "Local Volunteers"? During the Napoleonic wars when invasion of GB was threatened (1805), the Government passed the "Levy en Masse Act" (July, 1805) whereby all fit men between 17-55 years were liable for training and call-out in emergency. However, when a District was able to form a Volunteer unit of a certain strength, that District gained exemption from the "Levy en Masse". The levy was conscription, volunteers are quite different.. Sounds like TGs and DMTs to me.
What do others think?
Regards
IL.