James Kelly's son, Ernest Albert, born at Totterdown on the 15th of December 1877, was registered as the son of James Kelly of West View, and his wife, Sarah Jane, nee Doodad.
There is a copy of his birth certificate in the "Certificate's file.
He enlisted into the King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry as Ernest Kelly, No. 4499, in January 1894, at the age of 18 years 1 month. A Labourer by trade, his next of kin was shown as his mother, Sarah Kelly, of Cossham Street, St. George's, Bristol. This confirms that the family had moved house either before or around the time of the death of his father.
His career was, after the first four years, a stormy one, with a range of "crimes" seemingly in general connected with drunkenness: "insubordinate language to his superiors, leaving his post as sentry without being properly relieved, escaping from confinement, striking a superior officer", culminating in a trial by a Field General Court-Martial in February 1902, "for conduct whilst on active service prejudicial to good order and military discipline" (the actual charge seems obscure, or not actually stated).
He was sentenced to serve a term of one year in a Field Punishment Centre, to be discharged with ignominy, and to forfeit the medals awarded to him for service in South Africa during 1899 to 1902.
The sentence of "discharge with ignominy" was reversed by the Commander-in-Chief, however, as was the un-expired portion of his sentence of imprisonment, but the forfeiture of his medal (or medals) stood.
He had served with the 2nd Battalion in the Tirah campaign on the Punjab Frontier in 1897-98 and this medal does not seem to have been affected, there being no mention of any forfeiture, nor for that matter, is there anything on the South African War medal rolls either. (These show him as being entitled to the clasps for Belmont, Wittenbergen, Modder River and Transvaal). There is no entry for him on the King's South Africa medal rolls, so one can only assume that having forfeited the Queen's SA medals he was not considered eligible for the former.)
Marriage registered
Ernest Kelly [son] married Annie Thornley, December Quarter 1903, Bristol.
Finally being discharged from Colour service on the 20th of December 1904 he re-engaged for a further four years on the Army Reserve until the 2nd of January 1910 to end a total service of 16 years.
1911 Census
2, Stallards Buildings, St Phillips, Bristol.
Ernest Kelly [son], 34, Lead worker, White Lead Factory, born Bristol.
Annie Kelly, 27, born Bristol.
William, 6, born Bristol.
Frederick, 4, born Bristol.
Ernest, 2. born Bristol.
After serving in France from February of 1915 for 3 months (most of which was spent in hospital for "old G.S. wounds" [sic] was sent to Haslar Hospital in England where he was employed as a Postman.
Back in France at the middle of 1916 he was several times in hospital again at Rouen and was finally discharged on medical grounds under Para. 392 of the KRs on the 13th of April 1917. His conduct now seemed to have improved, the only entries on his charge sheet relating to not returning from leave on time.
There is an entry on his documents relating to his first term of service - "Restoration of forfeited medals approved in accordance with AO383/1915" and a stamped date, 28 Feb 1947. This would seem to be the date when his medals were restored to him.
His "medal cards" (as is usual for men who had served overseas) at the PRO have no printed details on them allowing for the written entry of any WW1 medals awarded, yet his entry in the records of the Silver War Badge award gives the number of this as being 170749, being issued to him at Warwick on the 26th of April 1917, confirms his period of service during WW1, reason for discharge, and in the "Served Overseas Remarks" column as "Yes."
Why there is no entry for any World War One medals cannot yet be discovered, but one would presume they would have been the 1914/15 Star and the War and Victory. A search of the medal rolls of the regiment for the 1915/16 medal shows no mention of him, however, and because of this the much larger ones for the War and Victory medals have not been researched.
A further entry has the word "Chelsea", and what can only be "Admitted" and the stamped date of 12 Dec 1946, and a separate sheeted entry dated the 21st of June 1951 which gives the date of his death, the 1st of June 1951, details of the sending from the Hospital of his Pension Order Book and other documents to the Ministry of National Insurance and the name of his next-of-kin and Legatee. The family had believed that he had entered the Royal Hospital Chelsea, as an In-Pensioner some time after 1933 and, dying there, was buried in Brookwood Cemetery.
Enquiry of the Royal Hospital Chelsea, brought a very confusing reply. Their original reply letter shows that an Ernest Alfred Kelly, an former-member of the King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry Regiment, was admitted as an In-Pensioner on the 4th of May 1948, with a total service of 18 years 7 months> He died there on the 1st of June 1951 at the age of 74 and was buried in Brookwood Military Cemetery on the 8th of June in Grave No, 214491-0-66 Old Plot (No longer extant).
He is recorded at the Family History Centre as dying in the Surrey Mid. E. District during the April-June quarter of 1951, aged 74 years.Death registered
Ernest A Kelly [son], aged 74, June Quarter 1951, Surrey Mid. E.
His medal entitlement was said to be the Queen's South Africa Medal 1899-1902, with clasps for South Africa 1901, Cape Colony, Transvaal and the Orange Free State and a Long Service and Good Conduct Medal (George V series). These medals were bequeathed to the Royal Hospital and are on display in the Museum.
A visit there, however, revealed something rather different and cannot yet be fully explained. Whether the records of the period were correctly kept or not at the time, it is impossible to say, but the Museum has only a card system which shows an Ernest Albert Kelly, late of the Gloucesters, age 74, but with the same other known details, and nothing else.
The medals however, tell a different story. The Long Service & Good Conduct medal is said to be to a Colour Sergeant Ernest Kelly of the KOYLI's, but with no Regimental number and the South Africa medal is un-named. The medals are, with others, enclosed in a glass case and cannot be examined, so it is thus not possible to say whether the Regimental number has been erased from the Long Service & Good Conduct medal and the South Africa medal completely in a deliberate manner.
What is very confusing is that the known-of Hospital records do not contain the Regimental number which might have provided more evidence, although the letter sent from the Hospital to the Pension Department does contain the Regimental No, 4499 and name of Private Ernest Albert Kelly of the King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry. (There are copies of the reply letter from the Hospital and the card index held by the Hospital in the 11th Hussar files.)
A further check of the Queen's South Africa medal roll shows no one named "E. Kelly" in the KOYLI's apart from 4499 Ernest Albert Kelly, and he is not shown, as one would have expected on the King's South Africa roll, but because he had forfeited his Queens South Africa medals, would not have been shown on the former, it not being awarded until after his forfeiture. Long Service & Good Conduct medal records are not available at the PRO after 1901/2, so it is impossible to say just whose was the Long Service & Good Conduct medal. Said to be a George V. issue, this covers some twenty-five years and only the Army Estimates would provide the answer. The South Africa medal, being un-named as it is, could been awarded to any one of thousands.
That No 4499 in the KOYLI's and No 2545 in the Gloucester Regiment, Ernest Albert Kelly, was an In-Pensioner of the Royal Hospital and died there and that he is buried at Brookwood can now be considered as certain, in spite of there being a number of things seemingly difficult to explain.
It is obvious from the letter sending back his National Pension papers that he was there under his own original regimental title and number (Regimental numbers are of no concern to the Hospital, all inmates having only a local one) but still unexplained how he managed to persuade the authorities into letting him be there in the first place.
Copy of the letter from the Hospital authorities:
"3612/L/RS. 21st June 1951.
Sir,
Re KELLY, Ernest Albert.
No. 4459. PRIVATE K.O.Y.L.I.
I am directed by the Lords and others Commissioners of this Hospital to return for custody the Retirement Pension Order Book No, 013/14/141006, together with the Tobacco Relief Duty Tokens of the above In-Pensioner who died on the 1st of June 1951.
I would add that the registered next-of-kin and Legatee is his daughter [name and address in archive].
I am, Sir.
Your obedient servant,
The Controller,
Ministry of National Insurance,
Central Pensions Branch,
Newcastle-upon-Tyne."
The known-of card index on him gives but few basic details and a book entry showing the details of medals said to have been his bequeathed property would seem only to be acquisition records of items in the Museum inventory, and not a detailed previous military service, admission and subsequent record as one would have expected to find. The documented date of his admission on his service records and the later one of his given hospital admission could be that the first was the date from which he could have been admitted from and the second because of a vacancy not arising until then.
The discrepancy in the medals he is said to have worn whilst there and those said to have originally awarded to him could be explained in that those he had forfeited were re-issued to him at a later date than that of his entering the Hospital and that knowing of the requirement of the time that he should be in possession of a good character he purposely concealed them and obtained those that he must have worn there and the truth about them not being revealed until after his death and their subsequent handing over to the Museum.
But here again, the known-of letter telling of his demise, refers to his daughter being his Legatee, so surely anything that belonged to him should have been given - or sent - to her, so, was it decided to keep the medals when it was found that they did not really belong to him. The present known of descendant claims to have knowledge of what medals he was awarded and which she says was told her following correspondence with the Royal Hospital Chelsea, but they say they have no knowledge of any other medals other than those recorded by them. (No copy of any will (if indeed one was actually made by him) can be found lodged at Somerset House so nothing is known of its contents.)
A check of his required documentation should surely have revealed just what he was entitled to, and should have worn. The feeling by the present authorities at the Hospital was that had he turned up with all of the medals to which he was entitled then they might have enquired more deeply, but here again, with what he did have, the question of any pension (in this case it can only be presumed that he had a disability pension) having to be forfeited on entrance should have realised the truth of his claim to be there. All very mysterious, and not a little embarrassing, but excuses for him getting away with it range from that at the time things had not really settled down after the war, to his having a friend in the Hospital who may have wangled it for him.