TOPIC:

The medal attached to the man in this story is in a sorry state. When acquired it was as you see it now, the clasps missing and the swivel supender removed to be replaced by a WWI British War Medal one. It was probably found as a disc and partially restored but, no matter, what it conceals is the story of the man behind it. In a previous era we would have denounced him as a bounder and a cad. Here is his story

Patrick Bradley

Private, 8th Hussars (Kings Royal Irish Hussars)
3rd Class Trooper, South African Constabulary – Anglo Boer War

- Queens South Africa Medal with clasps CC; TVL; OFS; South Africa 1901 & 1902 (all missing)

Pat Bradley was a bad lot.

He didn’t start out that way, even creating a stir in Parliamentary circles when at a young age, but it’s how you live your life to the end that people remember you for and, sadly, he will be remembered by history for all the wrong reasons as events will show in the narrative that follows.

Born to Hugh and Ellen (born Rourke) in the Parish of St. George, Dublin, Ireland on 9 September 1874 he originally enlisted with the Royal Dublin Fusiliers at some point in 1891 but, after only 64 days, his father purchased his discharge on 27 March 1891. He then attested for service with the 8th Hussars in Dublin on 25 February 1892 claiming to be 18 years and 7 months old. This created quite a stir in parliamentary circles the Enlistment Law being brought under the microscope and debated in the House of Commons as a direct result of Bradley’s attestation. The Huddersfield Daily Chronicle of Wednesday, May 11 1892 described the matter thus,

“In reply to Mr. P. O’Brien, Mr Broderick said there was no minimum age fixed by law for recruits, but under the army regulations recruits were not enlisted before 18, unless they possessed the physical equivalents of that age. If a boy enlisted under false pretences his parents could not claim his discharge. In the case of the boy Bradley, who joined the 8th Hussars in Dublin, then 17 ½ years of age, the Secretary for War did not intend to interfere, as he was physically equivalent to 18 ½ years of age”

The Birmingham Daily Post of the same day ran the same article.

So what had transpired that caused the enlistment of a young chap in far away Dublin to be discussed in the hallowed corridors of Imperial Power? We don’t know for sure but can imagine that Bradley’s father had tried to claim his discharge on the basis that he wasn’t old enough to enlist only to be foiled by the regulations stating that he appeared, physically, to be of age.

The matter settled Bradley continued his service however, for a moment, let us return to his attestation papers to learn more about the boy – he claimed to be an Engine Cleaner by occupation and was 5 feet 7 inches in height weighing 134 pounds and with a fresh complexion, grey eyes and dark brown hair. He had no scars about his person and was a Roman Catholic by denomination. The Doctor had passed him as Fit for the army and he was awarded the rank of Private with no. 3461.

This service too was destined to be short lived and Bradley exited the military scene on 24 May 1892 after only 90 days, his discharge being purchased by his father for £10. He had been in the “wars” in that short space of time, being admitted to hospital at Norwich on 4 March 1892 for a “Wound”. He was discharged on 10 March after 7 days and was thereafter the subject of a Court of Inquiry where the Surgeons held that his injury would not “incapacitate him from further service as a soldier.”

From 25 April until 30 April he spent a further 6 days in hospital with Rheumatism before rejoining his unit.

The old adage of “once bitten twice shy” obviously never registered with Bradley as, on 29 November 1900, a year after the advent of the Anglo Boer War, he strolled into the Inns Quay Police Courts in London and completed the South African Constabulary Application Forms confirming that he was resident at 1 Eccles Street, Dublin and that he was 26 years 2 months old. His height was now put at 5 feet 11 inches and his weight at 146 pounds.

He provided several testimonials and his Discharge Certificate from his previous effort in uniform and claimed to be a Stereotyper by trade. He provided his mother Mary Ellen Bradley as his next of kin confirming that his parents had purchased his discharge from the 8th Hussars.

The testimonials produced showed that he had been a personal servant for most of his working life. The first from a Mr. O’ Keefe ominously from Mountjoy Prison and dated 31 October 1894 read as follows,

“Patrick Bradley has been employed by me for over two years as an indoor servant. During this time I have always found him to be honest and sober.”

Another dated February 1897 from Ada Meade of St. Michael’s, Ailesbury Road, Dublin, read,

“P Bradley has lived in my service as an indoor man for one year and seven months during which time I have found him sober, honest and steady. He understands his duties thoroughly (cleaning of silver, lamps etc.) and can wait at table nicely. He is much useful at doing odds and ends about a house. He leaves at his own request.”

The third and last testimonial came from the pen of Captain Pilcher of 14 Ely Place in September 1897 and read thus,

“Captain Pilcher can recommend Patrick Bradley, who is leaving here, for no fault as an indoor servant.”

On 29 December Bradley signed the Articles of Agreement and became the S.A.C.’s newest 3rd Class Trooper with no. 5048.
Having arrived in South Africa he was put to work and, on 10 February 1901, signed a fresh Attestation Paper at Modderfontein in the Transvaal where he was based. Interestingly where he claimed to be single this was now crossed out to be replaced by the word “Married”.

On 16 April 1901 he was promoted to 1st Class Trooper although he was reduced back to 3rd Class Trooper on 9 June 1901 before being transferred to the Reserve “B” Division on 1 October 1901 with no. B1022. On 1 January 1902 he was transferred to No. 10 Troop at the Depot before, on 16 December 1902, some six months after the Boer War had come to an end, he took his discharge from the S.A.C. to join the Town Police (a shortened name for either the Johannesburg or Pretoria, in Bradley’s case, local Police Force.) His character was described as Good and he was credited with service of 1 year and 310 days.

His sojourn with the S.A.C. had not, despite his character rating, been without incident and his name appeared more than once in the Defaulter’s Register. The first time was at Modderfontein on 11 May 1901 where he appeared on two charges, Disobeying of orders and Making use of improper language to a Senior NCO. He was Severely Reprimanded on this occasion. On 8 June 1901 he was found guilty of Conduct to the Prejudice of Good Order and Discipline and reduced to the rank of 3rd Class Trooper (previously alluded to). His final act of defiance came on 12 October 1902 at Proclamation Hill outside Pretoria where he was guilty of “Not handing in his pass at the guard room when returning to camp.” A fine of 5/- was levied for this offence.

It will be remembered that Bradley had claimed to be single on enlisting with the S.A.C. but what he had failed to mention, in a deliberate act of deception, was that he had in fact married “Ellen” at St. Joseph’s in Berkeley Road, Dublin on 12 July 1898. This was finally revealed in a letter he directed to the Officer Commanding “C” Troop, Reserve Depot at Modderfontein in June 1901. It read as follows,

“Sir

I beg to make the following statement with reference to my being shown on the S.A.C. books as a single man while I have a wife living, and ask that this may be kindly forwarded by you to the proper Authority with a view to my wife being taken on the strength at some future date.

I joined the S.A.C. under the following circumstances. I was living in Dublin and saw the advertisements relative to men joining the S.A.C. One of the conditions said that a certain percentage of married men would be taken. I applied to the Recruiting Officer in Dublin to join as a married man, but was told by the Recruiting Officer that no married men would be sent out on the S.S. Canada – a boat I wished to come out on with friends I knew were joining. I then applied to the London Office and joined as a single man.

I now desire to be shown as a married man, and trust that the Inspector General will see his way clear to overlook this irregularity on my part.”

On 6 June the Chief Staff Officer wrote to Bradley’s O.C. stating that “he should be required to produce a copy of his marriage certificate certified by a minister of religion as well as a certificate from a police officer that his wife is alive and living at the address shown. On receipt of these the entry on his attestation papers should be amended in accordance with the facts.”

The C.O. went on to say that, “I am afraid that there will be other cases like this – Lance Corporal Bradley has done his work well since he attested – But of course he is guilty of a False Declaration on attestation.”

The upshot of all of this was that Bradley could not be placed on the married establishment “until all other properly enlisted married men are on it”

Health-wise Bradley was making hay while the sun shone; in the absence of his wife he was certainly not leading a celibate life. At Johannesburg on 21 November 1901 he was admitted to hospital with a dose of Gonorrhoea, being transferred to the S.A.C. Hospital at Heidelberg for “local and constitutional” healing being discharged.

The temptations of the flesh were often top of mind to Bradley who succumbed again at Heidleberg and spent from 7 December until 20 December (14 days) in hospital before being transferred to “B” Division Hospital in Pretoria on 21 December for the same complaint. He was discharged just before Christmas.

On 12 December 1902 the Staff Officer “B” Division wrote to the Staff Adjutant stating that “Tpr. Bradley wishes to join the “Town Police” and I can recommend him as a good and reliable man” With those words Bradley and the S.A.C. parted company but this “good” and “reliable” man was to be heard from again.

For his efforts Bradley was awarded the Queens South Africa Medal with the three State clasps and the two Date clasps.
As previously mentioned Bradley was a bad lot and he continued in his ways purposefully “disappearing” from view, at least as far as his wife and children were concerned. On 20 March 1903 Mary E. Bradley wrote to Mr Joseph Chamberlain from 1 Eccles Street, Dublin as follows,

“Dear Sir

I have been recommended to write to you, my husband, Trooper P. Bradley, 1022 B Division joined the South African Constabulary in January 1901 and I have been informed by the Crown Agents he has been discharged.

I have had no money since January last, and as I haven’t heard since July last I would be thankful if you would give me his address. I have two children aged 4 ½ and 3 and we cannot exist on nothing.

If there are any funds to meet such a case as mine I would be thankful if you would consider my case. I have written to the Captain of his Company also to the Officer Commanding since November and never received a reply.”

Chamberlain’s secretary, H. Bertram Cox, wrote back to Mrs. Bradley from Downing Street on 27 March 1903,

“Madam

I am directed by Mr Secretary Chamberlain too acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 20th of March and to state in reply that as your husband Mr Bradley was discharged from the South African Constabulary on the 16th of December last it is not possible to assist you except by asking the Governor of the Transvaal to endeavour to ascertain the address of your husband, which will accordingly be done. As he is no longer in the service of the Government he cannot be compelled by the Transvaal Government to contribute to the support of his family”

This was cold comfort for a destitute Mrs Bradley. Nevertheless Chamberlain wrote to Viscount Milner, the Governor of the Transvaal on 28 March stating that he “should be glad to learn whether he (Bradley) gave any address on quitting the South African Constabulary and whether he can be traced.”

The reply came on a letter dated 24 April 1903 from Milner stating that,

“I have the honour to inform you that Mr P. Bradley, late No. B 1022, Trooper in the South African Constabulary, is now employed as a Fitter in the Maintenance Works of the Centraal South African Railways, Pretoria.”

All went quiet on the Bradley front after this, his family, now that they had tracked him down, seem to have joined him and he settled down to employment in Pretoria as a policeman and thereafter, a Boilermaker with the Railways but this was all about to go horribly wrong for him and his family. On 8 May 1912 aged 38 he appeared before Sir William Smith in the Supreme Court of South Africa, Transvaal Provincial Division, to answer to a charge of Rape. Electing to defend himself he entered a plea of “Not Guilty” and the case, with the jurors sworn in, commenced.

The fact of the matter was that the case didn’t take very long to decide and Bradley might well have been advised to seek Counsel because on the very next day, 9 May, a verdict of Guilty was brought in and the Judge sentenced him to 6 years with hard labour. Bradley had called two witnesses; Dr Savage and Mr Willis, a Time Keeper at the Transport Department of the Railway – neither of them had done him any good.

What was he guilty of? The Charge Sheet read as follows,

“In that on or about the 28th day of February, in the year 1912, and at Pretoria aforesaid, the said PATRICK BRADLEY did wrongfully and unlawfully assault Alice Blonson, there residing, and her, the said Alice Blonsen, then and there wrongfully, unlawfully, violently, and against her will did ravish and carnally know, she, the said Alice Blonson, being there and then a girl of tender years and under the age of consent, to wit, of the age of ten years or thereabouts. (The attack had taken place in Fountain Lane, Pretoria)

In the case of conviction, the said Fredrik William Beyers, prays for judgement against the said PATRICK BRADLEY according to law.”
With this conviction Bradley was sent down to Pretoria Gaol to serve out his sentence.

The Star newspaper on 8 May 1912 under the heading “Shocking Charge/ Trial at Pretoria” reported:

“Pretoria, Wednesday: - Today the trial of Patrick Bradley, a one time member of the police and since then a boilermaker, on a charge of rape on a little girl of ten years, is proceeding in at the Criminal Sessions today, the alleged offense being alleged to have taken place on the 28th February. The accused is conducting his own defence.

Evidence was given by witnesses, who said they saw the accused with the child at an empty space at the back of the skating rink off Pretorius Street.

Medical evidence testified to permanent injuries inflicted on the child. The accused was, according to police and other evidence, under the influence of liquor at the time of the alleged offense.

The accused called various witnesses, who testified to the accused’s intemperate habits and his demeanour when under the influence of liquor at the time of the alleged offense.

Another witness testified that accused some years ago had met with a serious accident, after which time accused’s conduct had been more erratic than formerly.”

The same newspaper, the following day reported:

“BRADLEY CASE/Sentence of Six Years

Pretoria – Wednesday – This afternoon the jury brought in a verdict of guilty of rape in the case where Patrick Bradley was charged, at the Criminal Sessions, with committing the above offense against a little girl in Pretoria.

The Judge, Sir William Smith, sentenced the prisoner to six years imprisonment with hard labour. At the time the jury returned the verdict, and again when the Judge passed sentence, the prisoner’s wife caused annoyance to the Court by attempting to address the Court and by loudly contending that the prisoner had not had a fair chance of working up his defence.”

Bradley’s troubles weren’t yet over, after five years apart and plenty of time to reflect on her married state – on 1 May 1917 his wife, Mary Ellen Bradley (born Clark) appeared in the Supreme Court in a quest to have her marriage ended. The grounds were:

• Divorce on the grounds of adultery
• Custody of the minor children – issue of the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant
• Costs of suit
• Other and further relief

Bradley had been served summons at the Pretoria Central Prison the previous December. The plaintiff’s Declaration read as follows,

1. The Plaintiff is Mary Ellen Bradley (born Clarke) residing at Johannesburg and domiciled in the Transvaal, the Defendant is Patrick Bradley at present in the Central Gaol Pretoria and also domiciled in the Transvaal.
2. The said parties were married at Dublin on July 12, 1898, which marriage still subsists.
3. There are four minor children of the marriage, three boys, aged 15, 12 and 5 years respectively, and one girl, aged 17 years.
4. On the 8th of May 1912 at the Criminal Sessions held at Pretoria on that day, defendant was convicted of the crime of rape, the indictment alleging that he had the carnal connection with one Alice Blomson, a girl of tender years on February 28th 1912
The Judge granted the motion and the Bradley’s marriage was no more.

Once released from prison he resumed employment as a Boilermaker and, at some point, entered into a liaison with a Bessie Bradley. Whether or not they ever married is not known but she took his name and bore him three children, Mary Margaret Bradley (15.8.1921), Dennis Ray Bradley (28.3 1924) and Sheila Violet Bradley (25.10.1926) They were his beneficiaries when he died in the Far East Rand Hospital in Springs on 6 February 1937 at the age of 62. Interestingly his names are given , for the first time, as Patrick Joseph Bradley and he was recorded as being Divorced (for the second time?) The cause of death was lung cancer and he was resident at 18 Jones Avenue, Brakpan. He was still a Boilermaker on the Surface of the Gold Mines by occupation. A condition of his Will was that the children mentioned should all be “brought up in the Roman Catholic religion”

On 12 March 1939 his divorced wife (or so presumed) wrote to the master of the Supreme Court from her domicile at 320 Congella Road, Umbilo, Durban as follows,

“Dear Sir

Enclosed please find form duly completed for my three children’s maintenance for term ending March. I would be glad if you will send it as soon as possible.

On the 22nd May I am going overseas for four months as a companion, and would like to ask you if it would be possible for me to have the balance of the money before I go to enable me to get the children properly looked after. My parents are willing to look after them, but they are old and have very little means, therefore I would have to advance the money. I believe there are only two more instalments to come.

You would assist me very much indeed if you could do this. I might mention that my health is not too good and this trip overseas will probably enable me to carry on for the next few years to support my children. I would give you the name of the lady I am going with, if necessary, also proof that the children will be properly looked after in every way.

Bessie Bradley”

What had become of the “original” children born to Bradley’s first wife? They are not mentioned in his Will and seem to have been estranged from their father. As a caveat to the story of Bradley’s inglorious life along comes one of the “original’s” to redeem his honour in the best possible way – a Death Notice in respect of Patrick Joseph Bradley (junior) appears in the Transvaal Archives with the date of death being 24 October 1942. What was so significant about the date? Simply this – a 38 year old Lance Corporal Bradley had perished at the Battle of El Alamein fighting for the very survival of civilisation as we know it. Perhaps this sacrifice atoned for the sins of his father? We will never know.

Hi Rory

Thanks for a very interesting post. I loved the story, it amazes me where you guys dig up all the background information. Are you going to restore the medal or leave it as is?

Chris

Thanks Chris

I think I'll leave it as is. The previous owner might have had it partially restored or might have been, like myself, on the receiving end of the medal as you see it now.

Either way I think it's "quaint" the way it is.

Regards

Rory

Hi Rory

For me, it depends on the medals condition and if its viable. I picked up a Def of Mafeking (disk only) and I felt I couldn't just leave it like that. It took me a while to find a bar, but eventually I did and I felt (still do), that it would make the recipient proud that his medal is still out there to be enjoyed.
But that is just my opinion, still a nice medal with an exceptional story.

Chris