TOPIC:

Reading through a section of "Murray", the other day, I noticed that in relation to Victorian Imperial Bushman Contingent that this formation also contained a formation of Victorian Mounted Rifles within the VIB and that they have also been referred to as the Victorian Imperial Battalion.

When it comes to the naming on medals, was it common to name up as VIB? or were some medals named up as VMR? (I assume as a parent unit before the war).

I have recently picked up a VMR named medal with service in 4TH VIB.

At present I do not have access to my library, so just putting this out there

Regards

Simon

Simon
A good question - that I had pondered in the past and revisited just now. I can only say what I have seen and noted or else reported. That said, QSAs to any of the Victorian contingents are quite scarce on the ground. Two examples with unit impressed as "Victorian M.R" have passed through my hands over the years; one to a man who served with the 4th Imperial Contingent, and the other who served with the 5th VMR.
I have not kept the vast number of catalogues which have passed through my hands (!) - but falling back on an old favourite (the Lovel Sale, 11/78), I see in the final session just three examples described as awarded to Victorian Contingents; one with clasps Rhod/Tv (to the Victorian Bushmen), one with clasps CC/Rhod/OFS/ Tv (to the Victorian MR -probably with an IB contingent) and the last just described as being impressed to Victorian Mounted Rifles.
Not much to go on. However, I think that men who served with the Victorian Mounted Rifles Contingents received medals marked "Victorian M.R.", those who served with the Victorian Bushmen received medals marked "Victorian Bushmen" and those who served with the Imperial Bushmen received medals marked to "Victorian M.R.".
I would be very pleased to hear of contrary opinions.
Regards
IL.

Thank you LinneyI for your reply.
Your last comment about Imperial Bushman named as Mounted Rifles fits in with what I have.
My chap is Cornelius Thompson/Thomson 4th Victorian Imperial Bushman QSA named as Victorian Mounted Rifles. It would appear he received the clasps CC and Rhodesia with this unit and decided to stay on after their return in June1901, at which time July 1901 he signed up with the Bushveldt Carbineers earning the OFS and Transvaal clasps.

Whilst the listing at auction showed that he was entitled to a KSA, this may be incorrect. I took this to a dear friend who has collected & studied the BVC/PLH for the last 45years. his read on it was that my man was put forward for the date bars in a PLH return 1 of 12 such returns up to 1908 and that my man is listed on a return for 1904.
Obviously the cross referencing was have been a total nightmare for those such engaged and that on that return there is a tick mark against both dates (which he has seen before on confirmed bars being issued and not the medal). Thompson obviously didn't have 18 moths service up and had 1 month out of service between resigning from the VIB and attestation with BVC in July 1901. My man resigned from the unit BVC/PLH on February 26 1902, the day before Morant and Handcock were executed so there may be a further story there regarding the timing.
For some reason the original source for the claim that he was entitled to a KSA by Neil Smith as stated on the OZ Boer War site and forming part of the listing would therefore be erroneous and that clasp entitlement was confirmed for the QSA. The return states in the notes ‘Cannot verify V.I.B. service here’ no further reference is made and no confirmation that medal was issued. The Date clasps have been ticked so the clasps were probably issued and as with the QSA clasps not affixed contemporaneously.
It is my desire to reconstitute this medal to reflect fully Thompsons service and as such will will have it reconstituted with the 6 bars once confirmation that a KSA has not been issued..

Regards

Simon

Simon
Regarding Thompson's entitlement to a KSA, WO100/364 page 234 (PLH) shows such an award and cross indexes with his time in 4VIB. Do you think the KSA was not issued/unentitled?
Regards
IL.

how it was described to me is there is no evidence to suggest it was ever issued.

I append the relevent sections from my BVC researcher, The XXXXX indicate a redaction which has to do with a numbering theory which is not mine to disclose.

"So far as Cornelius Thompson is concerned, sadly the majority of my research and all my books are in store, but I do have a card index of all the original BVC enlistment docs at the National Archives. He doesn’t seem to have one, which is not particularly unusual, as they only exist for about 60% of people. I also have the medal roll here, which confirms what you already know, although his is actually a six bar medal, CC, OFS, T, Rhod, 01 and 02.

The entry on the Queen’s clasp roll gives the following: ‘305 Cornelius Thompson, BVC and PLH’ (showing he was one of the ones who stayed on when the BVC was forced to disband). Then we have a couple of notes: ‘CC and Rhod - m and clps issd from AG2/M/1839 V.I.B.’ and a second note – ‘OFS and T issd AG2/M/17820’. In the Remarks column is: ‘4th Vic I.B. 362 Tpr’.

These AG2/M numbers refer to all the rolls sent to the Adjutant General’s Dept/Medal section and each roll had a different number (often several per regiment, depending on how many rolls were sent. The PLH sent lots and the rolls are a real mess!) Most were four digits and five numbers are unusual, relating (I believe) to later claims. This 17820 number is not a normal BVC/PLH one, but these things are very complicated and extremely confusing. Despite quite a lot of effort. I think, however, that you could be reasonably confident thinking that he earned two clasps for his service with the 4/VIB and the other two with the BVC/PLH. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx If Thompson was issued a medal only with CC and Rhod bars, then we know the other two were definitely issued and could theoretically be loose, unless the 4/VIB roll states something else which, given the hugely confusing BVC/PLH roll, would not surprise me.

Thompson’s date bars appear on the 4th Portion of the PLH King’s clasp roll, dated 30 November 1904. The PLH put in a total of 12 portions, the latest in 1908, which just goes to show how many people must have been employed after the war ended, trying to sort out all the claims from thousands of muster rolls and the like. Anyway, the roll says – ‘305 Tpr Thompson, C – SA01, SA02. Previous unit 4th V.I.B., 362.’ Under Remarks are these notes: ‘Cannot verify V.I.B. service here’ then, very indistinct, are what I think says ‘23/5/00 to 22/5?/01’. On the next line we have: ‘Service in PLH 3/7/01 to 26/2/02’ (all these calculations were to see if the man was entitled to a KSA or just bars on the QSA). There is no mention on the roll of these clasps actually being issued, but there are a couple of ticks, which I think suggests they probably were."

Your thoughts appreciated

Regards

Simon
Having a look at the PLH KSA roll, I see the marginal note reading "cannot verify VIB service here" and in a marginal note the initialled dates 23/5/00 and 22/6/01. Which means someone did check . And the PLH service ran from 3/7/1901 to 26/2/1902.
In BBM 7th edition, the KSA qualifications are: "Authorised by Army Order 232, 1902, this medal was awarded to all who were serving in South Africa on or after 1st January 1902 and had completed 18 months service before 1st June 1902". It appears on the face of it that your man was serving on or after 1st January 1902 and had served well over the stipulated eighteen months. It appears that the officer of the SAMIF signing the KSA roll thought so.
Now, something or some one may have intervened to prevent the award of the KSA or else require its' recall. I would have thought that the KSA medal roll would have reflected that; I do have an example in my own collection to illustrate where an officer serving with Rimington's Guides appeared to be entitled to a KSA - but his detached service with the Governer in Pretoria disqualified him. The notation is clearly shown on the KSA roll. However, in Tompson's case he may have just slipped through the cracks. Whether or not your man was issued a KSA, you still have an interesting QSA there.
Regards
IL.