TOPIC:

Meurig
No; researching Lloyd's group is one of quite a number of projects for the future and I do hold quite a good precis of his service (ships, etc) as background. However, the Fevyer and Wilson roll does not show that he was issued with a replacement QSA - nor was it returned to the Mint. The naming on Lloyd's QSA is identical to that seen on many Army QSAs over the years. I don't think it is a replacement issue.
By contrast, Hutchinson is shown on the HMS MONARCH roll as being issued both the original and a duplicate.
Regards
IL.

LinneyI wrote: Meurig
No; researching Lloyd's group is one of quite a number of projects for the future and I do hold quite a good precis of his service (ships, etc) as background. However, the Fevyer and Wilson roll does not show that he was issued with a replacement QSA - nor was it returned to the Mint. The naming on Lloyd's QSA is identical to that seen on many Army QSAs over the years. I don't think it is a replacement issue.
By contrast, Hutchinson is shown on the HMS MONARCH roll as being issued both the original and a duplicate.
Regards
IL.

Thanks Ian.

Roll shows medal received at HMS Vivid 07-12-1904 - how does that date compare to the issue date for Hutchinson?

Meurig
Some time ago I asked Peter Singlehurst to research the Hutchinson group. The original QSA was "sent to Pembroke, 21 Mar., 1902". The "duplicate (apparently sent to) Woolwich, 26/2/13". The latter date is a bit blurred. Peter Singlehurst said in his summary of the Hutchinson group that "... in those days the RN was surprisingly easy going about ratings replacing "lost" medals - i.e., they had sold or pawned". "When he was recalled for the war, he appears to have got a new medal".
Regards
IL.

Thank you for these pictures. They make very interesting viewing and I was fascinated to learn that signing up again could be a trigger for a reissue.