Finding service records for F Croft

[Pam Downes]

I'm trying to help Brian Hobin with a query about F Croft in another thread (http://www.british-genealogy.com/forums/showthread.php/73113-CROFT-SCALES).
I've linked to the other thread but it's not necessary (or recommended! :biggrin:) that you read the thread in order to answer my query in this thread.

Brian has been sent one document, and I have found that plus another one on Ancestry's UK, Military Campaign Medal and Award Rolls, 1793-1949.

First the document I found, as it pre-dates Brian's one.
The data set breakdown is Africa> South Africa 1899-1902 > South African Colonial Corps > Duke of Edinburgh´s Own Volunteer Rifles.
It's a copy of a document at TNA, WO100/246, which is a Roll of Individuals entitled to the Kings South Africa Medal and Clasp, the Army order granting the medal being issued on 1 April 1901. It's for the Duke of Edinburgh's Own Volunteer Rifles.
F Croft has the regimental number of 1152, and in the 'Whether entitled to Clasp' list of places it has a mark in the Cape Colony column, followed by &01&02, and 'Issd to widow' 7/8/13 E/32664/2, and has Killed in action in the remarks column. The bits I've highlighted in blue are written in a different hand and must have been added to the doument at a later date as it's dated 15 July 1901 Cape Town and was signed by [L.M.?] Woodhead, Lieut Colonel D.E.O.V. Rifles.

The doument Brian has follows Africa> South Africa 1899-1902 > South African Colonial Corps > Cape Town Highlanders to Frontier Light Horse.

This is a copy of a document in WO100/360 at TNA, being a Roll of Individuals entitled to the Kings South Africa Medal and Clasps....granting the order on 1 October 1902.
Handwritten at the top of the document is Duke of Edinburgh's Own Volunteer Rifles (Corps).

Regimental number 1152 Lance Corporal F Croft was awarded the Clasp for 1901 and 1902, and in the 'Remarks' column it says 'Killed in action'. After that it has 16.10.99 - 18.2.02 which I first took to be the length of the war but which I have now realised are the dates he served, so I presume that means he died on 18 Feb 1902.
The document is dated 30 Jun 1903, and signed by [L.M.?] Woodhead, Lt Col.

Googling gives several references to the Corps, and a link to TNA.
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATID=4152544&CATLN=6&accessmethod=5
The TNA link implies to me that there might/should be a service record for F Croft somewhere within WO126/44, and possibly perhaps other details such as date of birth and next of kin.
Is my thinking correct? And if not, can anyone please point Brian to a series of documents that might help?

I'm not sure whether a third document makes things more complicated.
Same main data set on Ancestry. This time following Africa > South Africa 1899-1902 > South African Colonial Corps > 2nd Imperial Light Horse.
Roll of Individuals entitled to Queen's South Africa Medal, under Army order issued 3 October 1902, and headed 2nd Imperial Light Horse.
F Croft with two regimental numbers bracketed together - 1512 followed by 41525.
Application has already been made for Queen's South Africa Medal under Army order 94 of 1901, and it was submitted on the Roll for the 2nd Imperial light Horse. Five more columns about entitlements to various clasps.
The next column asks 'Any other Corps in which served in South Africa' and says W.P. Mtd. Rifles,
Column headed Regl. No. says 938.
Final column headed Remarks, says Prev Serv W.P. Mtd Rifles 14/6/01-17/2/02.
Document dated 22 November 1905 Cape Town, and is part of WO100/251 at TNA.

About the same time as I was typing W.P. Mounted Rifles Boer War into google, I had the thought 'Western Province', and some of the hits give transcripts of various forms giving details such as next of kin, age, etc, though sadly note for surnames beginning with C.
Those records are in WO126/167, so that's answered my question about that corps. :smile5:

There is another F Croft who appears to have been in an English regiment as he was invalided back to the UK in June 1901. Might ask about him in another post, but I would like to get possible answers to the first F Croft sorted to begin with.

Any help people can supply will be gratefully received as my knowledge of searching military records is zero.

EDITED TO ADD: Just noticed that the regimental number for the 2nd Imperial Light Horse is 1512. So is this a completely different bloke to the Duke of Edinburgh Volunteer Rifles, or is it the same one but his number has been incorrectly entered on one document and then the error continued on further documents? (Do we have a 'tearing hair out' smilie? )

p.s. Yes, Brian and I are aware of entry for F Croft on FMP, thank you. :smile5:
Pam

[Coromandel]

Pam, I can't help when it comes to service records at Kew, but while googling in the hope of inspiration I came across a few bits and pieces which may be relevant. I'm not sure if I should post them here or on the other thread though.

From the very first post of Brian's other thread, started in 2005, I see that he already has some other information about the F. Croft in the Duke of Edinburgh's Own V.R.:

[/indent]Ten years ago I corresponded with Terrence Wheatley of South Africa who wrote as follows.
"Terrence Wheatley writes: re. Duke of Edinburgh’s Own Volunteer Rifles Regiment
- Lance Corporal Frederick Croft #1152 joined the Regiment on 10 October 1898 at the age of 21 years(no date of birth)
-promoted to the rank of Lance Corporal on 1 March 1901
-his mustering was Driver (possibly mule or horse)
-killed in action at Danielskuil on 18 February 1902
-Wife’s name Mrs. L Croft of Bloemhoff Street, Cape Town
-previous service was with the Cape Garrison Artillery from 14 November 1895 to 1 September 1897 ( The C.G. A. Has now been disbanded)" [/indent]

However, Brian then goes on to say that another document 'has the name of surviving spouse as Mrs E.M.W. Croft with an address of 2 Blosmhoff St. Cape Town. (I may have mispelled the Street name slightly)'.

I wonder if this document is a death notice to which Brian refers on an Ancestry message board:

http://
boards.ancestry.com/localities.britisles.england.esx.general/2857/mb.ashx?pnt=1

I note also that Brian has also received this advice from 'Captain (retd) E.A. Gray':

"2. No.1152 L/Cpl Frederick Croft cannot possibly be one and the same as your maternal grandfather. According to your mother's birth certificate, her father was a "Reservist on Active Service". He had therefore been recalled at the time of the South African War and was serving in a regular regiment of teh British Army."
"3. L/Cpl Croft served not with a regular regiment but with the Duke of Edinburgh's Own Volunteer Rifles, which was a locally raised regiment of volunteers recruited solely for service in South Africa. He ws attested [ie. sworn-in] in Cape Town adn that fact alone is evidence enough that he cannot be identical with your mother's father, who was a Regular Army reservist."
4. If your grandfather died during the South African War, his name may be expected to appear in the casualty returns in the PRO classes WO 108/89-91 and 338. If, however, he was discharged at the end of the war, a discharge document may exist for him in the collections (class WO 97) at the PRO. From 1883 onwards they are filed in alphabetical order of surname for the whole of teh British Army, and it may not be too difficult a task for details of any men named Frederick Croft to be extracted, in order to see whether any can be linked to Ilford."

That's from

http://
archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/ESSEX-UK/2000-06/0960947174

which sounds like a convincing argument that the Frederick Crofts in the DEOVR is not the right man.:(

Yes, where is that 'tearing hair out' smiley?

[Pam Downes]

Thanks, Coromandel, for reminding me of some of the stuff about F Croft that was written in Brian's other thread (and in other places). And, yes, it is much better to post it here, because the other thread is already a dog's dinner with so many (in my opinion) totally wrong people researched. :smile5:
The only reason I said 'don't read the thread' is because there's a lot of posts in it, most of which have nothing to do with F Croft! :smile5: Perhaps I should have listed the relevant posts in the thread, but I was also trying to approach the problem with a clean sheet because I found in the other thread that there were what I considered to be a lot of red herrings as regards Kathleen Croft, and I didn't want the same thing to happen with F Croft! Though of course, you're correct in realising that the details found so far - even if they do turn out to have no relevance - should be given.

It was unfortunate that I couldn't put the medal roll documents on Ancestry into Photobucket, but it seems that I would have to print them out first, then scan them back on to my computer, etc, - and my brain just doesn't do techie! Hence the over-long descriptions.

Pam
who's off to have a much-needed cup of tea :smile5:

[Brian Hobin]

thank you both for your conversation.
Regards

[Pam Downes]

Brian,
I think if you want to take this any further you need to access any records that Kew might possibly have regarding the records on Ancestry and FMP, plus any other relevant ones, e.g. the WO126/167 I mentioned in post #1.
Unless you're planning to come over yourself :smile5: you need to employ someone who's an expert in military stuff.
Refer them to this thread and obviously give them all the other stuff about F Croft that you've acquired over the years. The dates you obtained those details may be useful, as records are now more freely available and much easier to find than they were 10, 20, 30 years ago.

Pam

[Brian Hobin]

Again, thank you Pam. You are an excellent ear and mentor.
Regards
Brian