Central Index Register
c.1919 to 1941
The
following discusses the introduction of this register in perhaps more detail
than is strictly necessary. However, some readers may find this interesting.
Certainly
by the last year of the 19th century there was discussion within a
committee on manning for re-introducing a ‘register of seamen’. In part this
led to the issue of books of continuous discharge
certificates
as of October 1900. As well as another committee again advocating this in 1904,
there were various questions asked in the House (of Commons) by an ex-mariner,
trade union official and Member of Parliament, Havelock Wilson. Taken up by the
Merchant Shipping Advisory Committee in 1907 (courtesy of the newly passed
Merchant Shipping Act of the year before) it’s report
favoured also such a register. The unions wanted this to protect their
membership’s interests, partially so that mariners with good records were not
unduly penalised on the loss, or destruction of their discharge books. It
should be noted that the Shipping Federation (representing a significant
proportion of ocean-going shipowners) also wished to see such a register: in
order to more easily look into the backgrounds of mariners and potentially keep
persistent deserters and troublemakers off their vessels.
By
this time the President of the Board of Trade was Winston Churchill, who no
doubt on the recommendation of the most senior civil servants within the Marine
Department of the Board of Trade and the R.G.S.S. (who were vociferous in their
opposition), called for a Departmental Committee into this subject in May 1909.
Although its terms and membership were heavily weighted against reintroduction
of such a system, in 1910 this Departmental Committee also found for a ‘register of seamen’. Even with
continued pressure, still the Board of Trade refused to budge.
Some
of the grounds for this opposition are not only intriguing - they are bizarre.
Apart from all the extra work involved by the office of the R.G.S.S. and the
Local Marine Boards, which was judged to be excessive, there was also an
important cost implication. Time and again it was cited that the 19th
century systems had failed because individual mariners could not be identified
and this one might fail too. (A fingerprinting scheme was looked into but
regarded as too expensive.) Significantly, it was maintained that feckless and
illiterate mariners, who misused their documents and did not co-operate in
making the system work, had led to a large number of mistakes by civil servants
and to the eventual abandonment of the 19th century system. This
apparently high rate of errors and inability to identify masters,
mates
and engineers also was said to have
led to their service not being recorded in the mid to late 1880s in the
registers of certificates. (Of course this same information continued to be
supplied by the R.G.S.S. to Lloyd’s of
London
for the maintenance of their ‘Captain’s
Registers’:
but then this was a business arrangement after all. Additionally, the office of
the R.G.S.S. itself already carried out searches of the crew lists to produce certificates of service for shipowners, ship
managers and mariners - for fees.) The illiteracy aspect is worthy of comment.
One can see that this would have been a distinct problem in the mid 19th
century, but to cite the same over forty years after the introduction of
mandatory primary education in Britain and if
taken at face value is a real indictment of the standards of the British
educational establishment. While, I believe British education was poor, (and unfortunately, remains so) study of
crew-lists show very few mariners by the turn of the 20th century
‘making their mark’, rather than signing their names.
Anyway,
pressure continued to be applied by the Advisory Committee through 1910.
Interestingly, even though the senior civil servants had been arguing their
case on apparent legal grounds for over decade, when this was finally placed
before the Government’s foremost legal officers, they came down in favour of a
register in August 1911. However, this was not the end of the matter by any
means and it was not until October 1913 that the Central Index Register, often
referred to as the ‘Fourth Register of Seamen’, came into being. Even then, this only recorded the least amount of
information possible and in no way addressed the issues of both shipowners and
trade unions.
The
above almost entirely came from various files of Board of Trade correspondence.
(See TNA: PRO MT 9/843 and MT 9/923.) With many hundreds of pages of memos and
correspondence the above is merely a glance into this subject and requires
proper investigation.
Unfortunately,
virtually all C.R. 1 and C.R. 2
cards for the years 1913 to about 1918, or 1919 have been destroyed - in modern times apparently on the advice of the Public Record Office’s
management. A tiny percentage of cards that give information from the First
World War period do exist, but it must be
realised that the chances of finding one’s forebears from this are next to nil.
However,
the surviving post war cards now in the form of microfiche,
are well copied, organised and presented.
Potentially
much information can be found on these records. Disappointingly often this was
not entered by clerks. One potential reason for this is in something I saw
within internal P.R.O. correspondence when researching an academic paper. This
states that only voyages on foreign-going vessels were recorded in this body of records.
For
modern researchers, probably the most important information dealt with sea
time. This was recorded by vessels’ names, or official number and the date of
joining. The Mercantile
Navy Lists
of this era unfortunately do not have a decode section for ships’ official
numbers. However, a relatively high percentage of vessels can be identified
through Registers of Changes of
Masters
(held at the P.R.O.). In cases of difficulty the R.G.S.S. should be contacted.
The
surviving parts of the system are split into three main sections. These I
describe only briefly, since their use becomes relatively clear with use. One
point that I came across purely by chance when studying old, internal P.R.O.
correspondence for another purpose, it is important to note that only foreign-going voyages were supposed
to be entered into the C.I.R.
From
1918 to 1921 a ‘special index’ was compiled. It would appear that this was made
necessary through an amendment to the Defence of the Realm Act 1914: enacted by
Order in Council number 992 issued on 2nd August 1918. The Shipping
Controller and Board of Trade were jointly required to ensure that all merchant
mariners in British service carried certificates of identification and service,
with the authorities (that is the R.G.S.S.) providing a system of
‘registration’ for those holding certificates. The result seems to have been
another index of cards (C.R.10) filed alphabetically. As well as sea service
these should show place and date of
birth and rank, or rating. They may give more, showing
details of physical appearance (including photographs), union membership and
even health insurance provision.
This
was maintained until 1920 in relation to the findings of the ‘Cave Committee’.
This was a study into the ‘Continuance of Emergency Legislation after the
Termination of the War’ and reported to the War Cabinet in March 1919. It was
thought that this was required while the shipping industry continued to be
controlled through the Ministry of Shipping.
From
1921 until 1940 C.R. 1 and C.R. 2 cards were also used. The C.R. 1 cards are again
filed alphabetically. These in turn lead to C.R. 2 cards filed by discharge
number. It seems only photographs of foreign mariners are to be found as
separate cards with C.R. 2s. This may have been a result of the growing racial
tensions of all sorts in Britain post war.
The
third series, for a reason as yet not understood, combines C.R. 1, C.R. 2 and
C.R. 10 cards. Unfortunately, this is filed by discharge number. Therefore,
this series is impenetrable without already knowing relevant mariners’ discharge
numbers. But, in cases where some sea-service is already known, these all
important numbers can be gained from crew-lists.
(Sources for the special index are primarily
the Statutory Rules and Orders other
than those of a local, personal or temporary character, issued in the year 1918 and TNA: PRO MT 25/24/63039/1918.)
In
1941 a new series was produced, officially named the Central
Register of Seamen, but often known as the ‘Fifth Register of Seamen’. As per
the Registration for Employment Order the cards of mariners then currently
active, or who had been active since 1936, were removed from the C.I.R. and
transferred onwards to the C.R.S.
Although
there are literally millions of cards in the C.I.R., a great many are missing.
This can partly be put down to the removal of large numbers of cards for the
production of the C.R.S. It is currently thought that the earlier C.I.R. cards
were generally retained in the ‘seamen’s pouches’ as part of the C.R.S. But
this is not always the case by any means. (I have more than once found cards
both in the C.I.R. and the C.R.S. So, it may well be prudent to check both
systems.)
There
are a number of other reasons why men just cannot be found serving in the
inter-war period. As well as potential administrative failures within the
system, importantly there were the severe economic depressions of the era.
Nevertheless, from cases where additional information is known about
individuals, some cards simply seem to be missing.
As
an additional source related to the C.I.R. within a precedent book (TNA: PRO BT
167/18) is a most interesting list of men that the Board of Trade wished to
contact. Operative between 1913 and early 1915, superintendents at Mercantile
Marine Offices were required to inform the Marine Department in London if seen.
The entries give all sorts of insights into individuals - wanted from
everything from failing eyesight tests to murder and alleged insanity!
Within
the next precedent book (TNA: PRO BT 167/19) there is also another potentially useful listing for genealogists. This is a
breakdown of identity card numbers and the ports these were issued by.
There
is an important difference between the C.I.R. and the earlier 19th
century systems though. In the 20th century register foreign nationals
were entered. This can be useful, especially to social historians. Not only do some ex-enemy Europeans show as openly serving on British
vessels as early as 1919 once again (although illegal under wartime
legislation); large numbers of non European mariners (from within and without
the empire) can also be seen to have been active within the labour market: or
at least registered if not actually in work. (It might also
be of interest, that section five of the Aliens Restriction (Amendment) Act of
1919 meant that foreigners were not allowed to be seamen officers or engineers
in British mercantile service without official sanction as to their
suitability.)
It
is also clear that the C.I.R. only covered mariners who served on British (or
Colonial) registered vessels who touched British
ports. For instance, those who signed onto British (or Colonial) registered
vessels trading between Australasia and the western coast of North America will
not show up in this British system.
And,
from internal Board of Trade correspondence it is clear that after the Irish
Free State came into existence after their War of Independence (1919-21), that
a Central Index Register was continued there: probably in Dublin. Up to now I
have not found out whether any of this is still in existence though. Some cards
also indicate that there was a Canadian C.I.R., but again I have found no
evidence of any of this surviving.
Go to the Certification of Seamen officers
Go to the Certification of Engineering Officers