The Canadian Grenadier Guards (CGG) perpetuation War of 1812-15.

[Chispa]

The Emblazonable Theatre Honour “DEFENCE OF CANADA – 1812-1815 – DÉFENSE DU CANADA” to be emblazoned  or embroidered onto perpetuating unit regimental colours.

Historic Unit Awarded the Theatre Honour. Current Unit Inheriting the Theatre Honour through Perpetuation.

The Canadian Grenadier Guards

2nd Battalion, Select Embodied Militia,  and 1st Militia Light Infantry Battalion?


The Non-Emblazonable Honorary Distinction
“DEFENCE OF CANADA – 1812-1815 – DÉFENSE DU CANADA”The Honorary Distinction is non-emblazonable and cannot be embroidered onto perpetuating unit Colors, Guidons, or Standards. It may, however, be placed on unit accoutrements such as letterhead, drum major’s sashes, drums and websites. In the latter case, there is no associated symbol or image to the Honorary Distinction and will be displayed in full, italicized text, as “DEFENCE OF CANADA – 1812-1815 – DÉFENSE DU CANADA”.

Historic Units.
Corps of Canadian Voyageurs
Montreal Incorporated Volunteers
Montreal Militia Battalion
Provincial Commissariat Voyageurs
1st Battalion (City of Montreal) “British Militia” (1812-15)

Perpetuating Unit.
The Canadian Grenadier Guards.



It's my understanding Sedentary Militia’s were registered, incorporated companies in Canada, at times causing confusion in historical accounts?

1st Militia Light Infantry Battalion. 1st, MLIB, does not appear in Bas Canada Militia registry as incorporated company or that it ever existed?

2nd Battalion, Select Embodied Militia, HQ was "Prairie de la Madelaine."

The 1st Battalion (City of Montreal) “British Militia” (1812-15), By the names in the muster roll
for those years all English Montrealers, meaning "English Militia."

In the Bas Canada’s Militia Battalions registry from 1795-1830 by enlarge registered French names while
only one English; “Eastern Townships, Six Divisions." They write Battlion instead of Batallion for all its Divisions,
which were Battalions.


1812-1813; “Premier Bataillon de Montréal," CO. Lieut.-Col. James McGill, consisting of 5 Captains and Coys.




I'll be back to finish sorry.

 

[Lightguns]

I can't wait for the "Defense of New France" and "Braddock's Massacre" battle honours to come out.  There be some unit out there claiming descendent from the militia of New France.

 

[Chispa]

The CGG claim their roots traced to 1764. Owing to the fact First Coy and Battalion raised in Montreal and by the Act 1855. According to Wiki CGG page "This company was raised in status to a battalion in 1807, becoming the 1st Battalion, Montreal Militia under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel The Honourable James McGill." In 1807 or when transformed into a Battalion. McGill was not the CO.

My question is who was “1st Militia Light Infantry Battalion?” And how were the CGG connected to 2nd Battalion, Select Embodied Militia?

 

[Chispa]

I can't wait for the "Defense of New France" and "Braddock's Massacre" battle honours to come out.  There be some unit out there claiming descendent from the militia of New France.

Le Parti Québécois, aka P.Q. would be thrilled if they could pull that off.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Was there a question being asked here?

 

[Chispa]

Was there a question being asked here?

1st Militia Light Infantry Battalion. 1st, MLIB, does not appear in Bas Canada Militia registry as incorporated company or that it ever existed?


Trying to see if others can provide information concerning the CGG perpetuation war of 1812.
Might be I overlooked something?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Might be I overlooked something?

Yeah, you overlooked telling us what the purpose of your thread was before you started posting all this stuff.

 

[Remius]

Yeah, you overlooked telling us what the purpose of your thread was before you started posting all this stuff.

Agreed.  I have no idea what you are trying to get at here.

 

[Chispa]

Agreed.  I have no idea what you are trying to get at here.

My question is who was “1st Militia Light Infantry Battalion?” And how were the CGG connected to 2nd Battalion, Select Embodied Militia?


The CGG trace their lineage due to the fact they were always 1st  Coy or Batallion raised.

 

[Lightguns]

"In 1911, Lieutenant-Colonel J.W. Carson (later Major General Sir William Carson) was asked to reorganize the regiment, he agreed on the conditions that he be given a free hand in the selection of his officers; that the regiment should be renamed and become a Regiment of Foot Guards while still preserving its identity as the First Regiment of the Active Militia of Canada; and that it should be provided with an armoury of its own."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Canadian_Grenadier_Guards#Inception_and_pre-20th_century

 

[Michael OLeary]

In any case, do not look too hard for any connection between modern units and War of 1812 units beyond geographical coincidence, which was the principal factor in selecting which regiments would perpetuate the War of 1812 units. There is no official lineage going back that far. The local connections preserve what is, in many cases, very strong local heritage connections, and, in some cases, matches declared oral narratives claiming lineage, but the grounds for the perpetuations awarded in 2012 are much simpler in the way they were declared by the Government.

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/ol-lo/vol-tom-3/par2/cgg-eng.asp

The Canadian Grenadier Guards originated in Montreal, Quebec on 17 November 1859, when the 'First Battalion Volunteer Militia Rifles of Canada' was authorized to be formed.1 It was redesignated 'The First (or Prince of Wales's) Regiment of Volunteer Rifles of Canadian Militia' on 7 September 1860.

 

[Chispa]

"In 1911, Lieutenant-Colonel J.W. Carson (later Major General Sir William Carson) was asked to reorganize the regiment, he agreed on the conditions that he be given a free hand in the selection of his officers; that the regiment should be renamed and become a Regiment of Foot Guards while still preserving its identity as the First Regiment of the Active Militia of Canada; and that it should be provided with an armoury of its own."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Canadian_Grenadier_Guards#Inception_and_pre-20th_century

I take the CGG Wiki page with a pound of salt, as for the First Regiment of the Active Millitia?

The first duly authorized battalion of the Active Militia was the "Montreal Light Infantry" which was formed on 30 October 1856. This battalion was a Sedentary Militia unit that was embodied as a "Class B" volunteer unit, which meant that its soldiers were not paid for their services. It was disbanded in 1868. No other battalion was created until 1859 when the "First Battalion Volunteer Militia Rifles of Canada" (now the Canadian Grenadier Guards) were authorized.

Source; A-DH-267-000/AF-003, The Insignia and Lineages of the Canadian Forces, Volume 3, Part Two - Infantry Regiments, 2010. p.1-3.

The Montreal Light Infantry date back to 1837 nor was it ever disbanded, last nominal roll, 1869.

Cross referencing; according to Lower Canada Militia Registry and Nominal Roll 1856-57, for the Montreal Light Infantry, Military District 9 L.C.=Montreal consisting of 29 Officers and 528 file, CO., C. Dunkin; Lieut.-Col. May 14 1857, H. H. Whitney; Maj. Jul. 3rd, 1856, with Capt., J. M. Ross;  Sept. 23rd, 1553.
.

In the Annual Volunteer and Service Militia List of Canada, 1st March 1867, p. 23 the authorised date for the Montreal Light Infantry Oct. 30, 1856.

However is this fact? according to Chambers 1907 writes as fallows:-

Long before the passing of the amendment to the Militia Act in 1859, providing officially for the brigading of the independent companies of volunteer rifles into battalions, steps had been taken for the reorganization of the old Montreal Light Infantry on a regimental basis. The original “regulations” for the reorganized corps were submitted December 6th, 1856, for the sanction of His Excellency, the Commander-in-Chief, and sanctioned December 18th, 1856. According to these regulations the corps was to consist of six companies, each of seventy-five men, besides a bugler, and the due compliment of officers and non-commissioned officers.

.

 

[Chispa]

In any case, do not look too hard for any connection between modern units and War of 1812 units beyond geographical coincidence.

Colonel O’Leary or dare I say; VRI Magazine incognito, that’s my understanding and fully agree with you. However Chambers, Meek and others 100 years ago stated there are few regiments that date back pre militia act 1855.

DHH is clear on Lineage of CF. Regiments

Act of 1855, which came into effect on 1 July of that year, for the Province of Canada is the immediate origin of Canada's army regiments. However, no regiment carries an organization date of 1855 for the 22 volunteer units formed under the Act of that year were all independent companies.

I found out who was "1st Militia Light Infantry Battalion" forgot I had the original documents on old disc as backup now use stick. Will post later have to look over and scan before I post.

Both Bn's. were CO. by Lt.-Col. Hercules Scott,  of the 103rd.

1st Militia Light Infantry Battalion, that's Lt.-Col. G. MacDonnell's GLI formed at Kingston.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Can I ask if English is your second language?

 

[Chispa]

Can I ask if English is your second language?

Certainly you may; one can say any variation of English is not my mother tongue.
Can you kindly elaborate, could be word play or like I stated could be something
I misunderstood.

 

[Chispa]

The Invasion of Canada: Battles of the War of 1812
By Ronald J. Dale. p.55.

The Encyclopedia Of the War Of 1812
By Spencer C. Tucker p.437.

Gives breakdown of numbers ect, mentions flank Coy’s no mention of the "1st Militia Light Infantry Battalions."



By a General Order of 12 April 1813, the flank companies of the first five battalions were ordered grouped into two Militia Light Infantry Battalions, but the actual formation appears to have dated only from 30 june. The companies from the battalions contenued to be identified as belonging to their own corps and wore their own battalion uniforms. At the battle of Chateauguay, they were seen in 'red coats with white cross-belts'. These temporary light infantry battalions were dissolved on the 25 november 1813, and the companies went Back to their respective battalions

British Forces in North America 1793-1815
By René Chartrand 1998, p.34.



PBA, the 5th SEM did not wear Red Coats.


At times hard to remember all the details; I’ve read some of Mr. René Chartrand’s compilations, a respected historian, in my neck of the woods; even though few inaccuracies from secondary sourcing. Out of all books ect., pre 2000 I referenced seems to be the only mention? Two 1st & 2nd, Militia Light Infantry Battalions or MLIB ordered grouped consisting of the flank Coy’s of five SEM Battalions (only). It’s a shame he provides no footnote on main source and by he’s wording, especially G.O. 12 Apr. 1813 dated only from 30 June; sometime after downed on me, could’ve used a secondary source using parts of the original source. On old forgotten backup disc I found, published by an English Liberian in Ottawa 1908, painted with a fine brush, good source, on a few occasions uses the French name as written in lower Canada M.R. LAC Nominal rolls and paylists state the names given could have spelling or variation of name and no nominal roll that I found 1st MLIB? All war 1812 militia corps registry for Bas-Canada, registered and incorporated with French names, the MLIB does not appear in the Militia registry, all other corps were registered.



THE MILITIA LIGHT INFANTRY BATTALIONS. §
Lt.-Col. Hercules Scott, 103rd.

1st Battalion.
Engagements :—Chateauguay, 26th Oct., 13.

Lt.-Col. William Smelt, 103rd, 24 May, 13. See 2nd Batt.
Lt.-Col.  George R. J. Macdonell, G. L. I., 14 June, 13.
Lt.-Col.  Robert Macdouall, G. L. I., 11 Nov., 13.
Maj. Jean Baptiste P. D'Estimauville, Jr., 3rd S. E. M.
Adjt. John Tupper Connell, Lieut. 1st, 1 April, 13.
Adjt. George Jackson, Lieut. 1st, 23 May, 13.
Q.M. John Duncan, Sgt. 1st, 24 May, 13.


The right and left flank Companies of the Select Embodied Militia were by
G.O. 12 April, 13, incorporated with the Light Infantry of the Line into two Light
Battalions. Disembodied 25 Nov., 13.

The First Battalion was formed at Kingston, U.C., and was composed of the
two flank companies of the 2nd and 5th S.E.M., and the first flank company of
the 3rd S.E.M. (G.O. 30 June, 13.)

Source; L. Homfray Irving, honorary Librarian 1908. p.116.


Therefore 2nd, 5th SEM, and the 3rd ? emblazonable 1st Militia Light Infantry Battalion. (1er bataillon d’infanterie légère de la milice).

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Will you, please, start using proper grammar and punctuation.

 

[Chispa]

Will you, please, start using proper grammar and punctuation.

Well no spelling mistakes? I'm not English nor in school, and since I'm certainly no writer what's all the fuss?
Canadian English, British grammar, and punctuations in American as my languages are not same.
The above was written by a Ph.D, not me.


This is what I wrote and my Canadian "Word Document" on Grammer, punctuation says only one mistake on "Coy's."


At times hard to remember all the details; I’ve read some of Mr. René Chartrand’s compilations, a respected historian, in my neck of the woods; even though few inaccuracies from secondary sourcing. Out of all books ect., pre 2000 I referenced seems to be the only mention? Two 1st & 2nd, Militia Light Infantry Battalions or MLIB ordered grouped, consisting of the flank Coy’s of five SEM Battalions (only). It’s a shame he provides no footnote on main source and by he’s wording, especially G.O. 12 Apr. 1813 dated only from 30 June; sometime after downed on me, could’ve used a secondary source using parts of the original source. On old forgotten backup disc I found, published by an English Liberian in Ottawa 1908, painted with a fine brush, good source, on a few occasions uses the French name as written in lower Canada M.R. LAC Nominal rolls and pay-lists state the names given could have spelling or variation of name and no nominal roll that I found 1st MLIB? All war 1812 militia corps registry for Bas-Canada, registered and incorporated with French names, the MLIB does not appear in the Militia registry, all other corps were registered.




It's a shame you poke a stick, when not warranted or just trolling for an argument to band me or provide more - points.
I should be applauded, at the mere least, in attempting to write in English.


To Administration; the comment by your staff member are bad form indeed, especial if the individual is not English,
considered discriminatory remarks.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

It's a shame you poke a stick, when not warranted or just trolling for an argument to band me or provide more - points.
I should be applauded, at the mere least, in attempting to write in English.

I am terribly sorry you're so upset over a polite request. You certainly didn't seem to have much trouble with your above retort.

You will have to go and read the Guidelines. I am a Staff member here and part of our job is to enforce those Guidelines.

The majority of the members here are professional military members. It is part of the job as members of the profession of arms to write, read and communicate in said professional manner. They expect much the same from other posters.

Again, please go read the Site Guidelines, and attempt, as best you can, to communicate here in accordance with them.

---Staff---

 

[George Wallace]

Well no spelling mistakes? I'm not English nor in school, and since I'm certainly no writer what's all the fuss?
Canadian English, British grammar, and punctuations in American as my languages are not same.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To Administration; the comment by your staff member are bad form indeed, especial if the individual is not English,
considered discriminatory remarks.

You have been asked nicely by a member of the Staff to please use proper grammar and spelling.  Your attitude, and feeling of entitlement, in your response does not go over well here.  Your sensibilities being 'offended' enough to complain about a simple and polite request to use proper grammar and spelling as per the site rules is in itself 'offensive'.

If you are going to quote someone, it is usually good form to include the link to where you found the quote; as well to indicate what is a quote to differentiate from what is your own words.

Should you persist in the direction you are going, you will be introduced to the Warning System.


George
milnet.ca Staff