Some Ww1 Service Records Abbreviations Meanings?

[Dame Karmen]

Hi People,

 

So, am reading through service files again and trying to understand and transcribe some of the writeups in simple bio info which uses some abbreviations that I don't know the meanings of.

 

A couple of incidents by a WW1 soldier ... Left his post once without orders from his superiors and another time, in the trenches, failed to fully unload his weapon when cleaning it. It discharged one round and injured another soldier.

 

Question marks mean I don't understand or am not able to clearly read entries.

 

Leaving post: Tried and convicted by "F. G. M. C." ???

Sentenced to 90 days "F.P. NO1" ????

22-6-17

( 9th Canadian Infantry Brigade)

 

Neglecting procedures and someone hurt - (the Private and his service number is included. No mentions of how badly injured or anything)

 

4-2-18

Tried and convicted by F. G. C. M. of Wh on H. S. Neglect to the Pr?? of ?? G. O. I? 17.Q?

Sentenced to 40 days "F. P. # 1"???

(43rd Canadian Infantry Brigade)

 

 

Several months after the last incident, back in the field, he was wounded in the face and hand - "GSW" (gun shot wounds???)

 

 

Any help appreciated

A

[Dame Karmen]

PS:

 

Another entry related to last incident:

 

A.P.M. Cage? (for detention)

[Hittite Under The Bridge]

F.G.C.M. was "Field General Court-Martial" , so perhaps the initials were transposed?

 

APM is Assistant Provost Marshal

 

F.P. #1 is Field Punishment #1

 

"A/. He may be kept in irons, i.e., in fetters or handcuffs, or both fetters and handcuffs; and may be secured so as to prevent his escape.

 

B/. When in irons he may be attached for a period or periods not exceeding two hours in any one day to a fixed object, but he must not be so attached during more than three out of any four consecutive days, nor during more than twenty-one days in all.

C/. Straps or ropes may be used for the purpose of these rules in lieu of irons.

 

D/. He may be subjected to the like labour, employment, and restraint, and dealt with in like manner as if he were under a sentence of imprisonment with hard labour.

 

3/. Where an offender is sentenced to field punishment No. 2, the foregoing rule with respect to field punishment No. 1 shall apply to him, except that he shall not be liable to be attached to a fixed object as provided by paragraph of Rule 2.

 

4/. Every portion of a field punishment shall be inflicted in such a manner as is calculated not to cause injury or to leave any permanent mark on the offender; and a portion of a field punishment must be discontinued upon a report by a responsible medical officer that the continuance of that portion would be prejudicial to the offender’s health.

 

5/. Field punishment will be carried out regimentally when the unit to which the offender belongs or is attached is actually on the move, but when the unit is halted at any place where there is a provost marshal, or an assistant provost marshal, the punishment will be carried out under that officer.

 

6/. When the unit to which the offender belongs or is attached is actually on the move, an offender awarded field punishment No. 1 shall be exempt from the operation of Rule (2), but all offenders awarded field punishment shall march with their unit, carry their arms and accoutrements, perform all their military duties as well as extra fatigue duties, and be treated as defaulters. "

 

Here's a good guide to UK and Commonwealth Court Martial Records-

 

http://www.nationala...s-17th-20th.htm

Edited May 1, 2012 by Hittite Under The Bridge

[Dame Karmen]

Thank you so much for that!!! It really helps me understand and get a picture of how things worked.

 

That probably was me doing a dyslexic thing when typing it up

 

There is Court-martial for him listed in the NA Courtsmartials for Soldiers of WW1 (Archivianet) but I didn't see the term "Court Martial" mentioned anywhere in his service records, except now with your reference to the abbreviated terms

 

I already put his service files back in the suitcase, but want to mention a couple of things. Shortly after he'd done his last punishment he was given 14 days leave to the UK, which I assume was R&R downtime, so I'm glad to know he probably had some time out to just kick back a little because ... it wasn't too much longer after that that he was KIA in the field His brother was also KIA in WW1.

 

For the record, I searched the archives and Canadian Virtual Memorial Graves site and the wounded soldier (A Manitoban) isn't ilisted in there, so I'm glad to know he survived the injuries of the shooting accident and also survived the war, to go home ....

[R011]

Neglect to the Pr?? of ?? G. O. I? 17.Q?

This could be "Neglect to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline". That's kind of a catch-all charge for things for which there isn't a specific charge and sometimes used as an alternate to a more serious charge. If it was something he did as opposed tyo not doing somethign he was supposed to do it would be "Conduct to the Prejudice etc."

 

I came across this site just now. I don't know if you already know of it, but it may be of some use to you.

 

http://regimentalrogue.com/misc/researching_first_world_war_soldiers_part15.htm

[Archie Pellagio]

Tried and convicted by F. G. C. M. of Wh on H. S. Neglect to the Pr?? of ?? G. O. I? 17.Q?

Sentenced to 40 days "F. P. # 1"???

 

 

I would bet a sizable amount it is:

Neglect to the Prejudice of General Orders and Instructions

 

I forget the term, it is now known in most commonwealth militaries as 'Prejudicial Conduct' basically anything that can by act or omission bring the military into disrepute or acting with questionable conduct in general.

It is a catch all along with 'Failure to comply with lawful general order' they can stab you with.

[Dame Karmen]

You said: This could be "Neglect to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline". (Correct ... that's what it said! )

 

With his weapon, I think what happened was that he "neglected" to assure it wasn't loaded before starting to clean it and a shot went off, injuring one of the other soldiers.

 

I just checked out that link you gave me and its EXCELLENT. I'm going to save that resource for future reference!!!! Really simple to understand, even for this kid

 

I wasn't aware there were a couple of kinds of courtsmartial processes. His was the lesser serious "trial" in the field then, and thank god the other soldier was only injured and also survived the war to get home again!!! What would have happened if the soldier had been killed when that rifle went off?

 

Thank you!!!

[R011]

You said: This could be "Neglect to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline". (Correct ... that's what it said! )

 

With his weapon, I think what happened was that he "neglected" to assure it wasn't loaded before starting to clean it and a shot went off, injuring one of the other soldiers.

 

I just checked out that link you gave me and its EXCELLENT. I'm going to save that resource for future reference!!!! Really simple to understand, even for this kid

 

I wasn't aware there were a couple of kinds of courtsmartial processes. His was the lesser serious "trial" in the field then, and thank god the other soldier was only injured and also survived the war to get home again!!! What would have happened if the soldier had been killed when that rifle went off?

 

Thank you!!!

 

You are quite welcome!

 

I don't think it was much different then than today in principal. Depending on the offence and how his commanding officer wants to procede, there are two levels of military trials today. A summary trial can be conducted by a company commander. He can, up to a certain limit and I've forgotten what it was, give out fines, extra dutiers, and time in a military jaill. A court martial can give out up to the maximum listed in the book for that offence. It sounds as if a Field General Court Martial was intermediate.

 

As for what would have happened if he had killed the other guy, I wouldn't be surprised if they sent him away to a Federal Penitentiary, like Kingston, for a while. Even today, that would be criminal negligence causing death and a Candian soldier was sentenced to four years a few months ago for accidentally killing anoher soldier in Afghanistan.

 

http://www.ngnews.ca/News/Local/2011-11-17/article-2808532/Wilcox-convicted-of-negligence-in-Cpl.-Kevin-Megeneys-death/1

[Dame Karmen]

Tried and convicted by F. G. C. M. of Wh on H. S. Neglect to the Pr?? of ?? G. O. I? 17.Q?

Sentenced to 40 days "F. P. # 1"???

 

 

I would bet a sizable amount it is:

Neglect to the Prejudice of General Orders and Instructions

 

I forget the term, it is now known in most commonwealth militaries as 'Prejudicial Conduct' basically anything that can by act or omission bring the military into disrepute or acting with questionable conduct in general.

It is a catch all along with 'Failure to comply with lawful general order' they can stab you with.

 

I didn't notice until now that you posted while I was composing, so didn't see this until just now. Oops

 

I'll pull the service files from the suitcase again later to see exactly the phrases they used but it was similar or like what you and R011 said ...

[Dame Karmen]

You said: This could be "Neglect to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline". (Correct ... that's what it said! )

 

With his weapon, I think what happened was that he "neglected" to assure it wasn't loaded before starting to clean it and a shot went off, injuring one of the other soldiers.

 

I just checked out that link you gave me and its EXCELLENT. I'm going to save that resource for future reference!!!! Really simple to understand, even for this kid

 

I wasn't aware there were a couple of kinds of courtsmartial processes. His was the lesser serious "trial" in the field then, and thank god the other soldier was only injured and also survived the war to get home again!!! What would have happened if the soldier had been killed when that rifle went off?

 

Thank you!!!

 

You are quite welcome!

 

I don't think it was much different then than today in principal. Depending on the offence and how his commanding officer wants to procede, there are two levels of military trials today. A summary trial can be conducted by a company commander. He can, up to a certain limit and I've forgotten what it was, give out fines, extra dutiers, and time in a military jaill. A court martial can give out up to the maximum listed in the book for that offence. It sounds as if a Field General Court Martial was intermediate.

 

As for what would have happened if he had killed the other guy, I wouldn't be surprised if they sent him away to a Federal Penitentiary, like Kingston, for a while. Even today, that would be criminal negligence causing death and a Candian soldier was sentenced to four years a few months ago for accidentally killing anoher soldier in Afghanistan.

 

http://http://www.ngnews.ca...egeneys-death/1

 

I don't know how I'd react to things if my child had been killed accidentally or mistakenly. I would guess it would depend on hearing every circumstance and detail about how and why it happened. No death is easy to come to terms with but in situations like this it must be a bitter pill to try and understand and come to terms with on top of the grief. A kind of death you don't expect should ever happen. Ouch. I try to imagine how my great Uncle must have felt to have been responsible for wounding a buddy probably and the shock that he could have killed the other guy with his carelessness and thank god that didn't happen

 

I couldn't live with myself if I'd been at fault for something like that. Ouch again.

[Dame Karmen]

PS: I don't completely remember the whole story behind that A'Stan happening, but I do remember thinking the story of how it happened sounded hinky or something. Something ain't right here, sorta thing ...

[Archie Pellagio]

An ND/UD wouldn't be classed as prejudicial conduct though surely?

Doubly so if someone got wounded or killed by it.

Edited May 3, 2012 by Luke Y

[Dame Karmen]

An ND/UD wouldn't be classed as prejudicial conduct though surely?

Doubly so if someone got wounded or killed by it.

 

Hi Archie, so pleased to make your acquaintance Anonymity can be a good thing sometimes .............