Category Archives: UK local history

Trial by Jury

Among the musical works I enjoy are Gilbert and Sullivan’s comic operas. My first encounter with them was their 1875 ‘Trial by Jury’. The plot concerns a “breach of promise of marriage” lawsuit in which the judge and legal system are the objects of light-hearted satire.

In 1881 The Graphic noted that when considering such cases, “the Court has to decide whether any promise has ever been made, and this entails the reading of many love-letters which, however amusing to people in general, cannot but be exceedingly painful to both of the parties concerned, while occasionally it is an absolute waste of public time.” One such case, in early 1906, concerned New Malden (Surrey) undertaker Frederick Paine, then aged 35.

Was this sad case of interest to anyone outside the NW Surrey area? Apparently so: amongst the many newspapers carrying the story were the Hartlepool Daily Mail, Drogheda Conservative, Derby Daily Telegraph and Halifax Daily Guardian. The Dublin Evening Mail helpfully told its readers that Mr. Paine was “a gentleman of very ample proportions and a gentle voice” whilst Laura Mills was a “young lady of great literary gifts”. The Belper News rated it an amusing breach of promise case. Most news reports ran to several hundred words (probably from agency copy), but the Surrey Comet’s report ran to nearly 3,000!

Reynolds News, Sunday 04 February 1906, reported the case thus:

LAUNDRESS OBTAINS DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF PROMISE

In the King’s Bench Division on Monday. before Mr. Justice Darling, and a jury, Miss Laura Charlotte Mills now of Merton-road, Southfield, sued Mr. Frederick Owen [William] Paine, an undertaker and house and estate agent. of New Malden, Surrey, for damages for breach of promise of marriage.

Defendant pleaded that the relations between him and Miss Mills were purely platonic. Counsel for the plaintiff stated that the latter assisted her brother in a laundry, and defendant in partnership with her mother, carrying on the business of an undertaker, ironmonger. and house agent. The parties became acquainted in 1894, where they were both living at the time. He became “struck with her,” said counsel, and asked her to marry him. The reaction came in May, 1904, after “hundreds of letters” had passed between the lovers, and the undertaker had put off the marriage several times. He became very cold and terminated the engagement.

The lady’s counsel then gave the Court a number of glimpses into the voluminous correspondence of the pair. In one of the first the swain signed himself, “Scorcher.” ”

“A Lot of Humbug”

Here is a note dated January 4, 1901 :

My Dear – I expect you will be looking for a letter from me, so I must not disappoint you. I well know what it is waiting for the post coming in. I think there is nothing more trying.

I have a very bad headache. I have been to chapel twice and church once this week. At the latter I was present at a christening. It struck me as being a lot of humbug, and I wondered whether I should ever be called upon to play a similar part in a similar ceremony. It was the first baby of a newly-married couple. The Vicar … said it was a beautiful baby, and ever so good.—

With love, yours faithfully. FRED

A letter of his, in a different strain, ran thus. Its date was May 25.1905 :-

Madame, I have received a letter from your solicitor. l am astonished at audacity. After all the kindness and sympathy I have shown you, and after all I have done, you threaten to blackmail me because you failed to inveigle me to marry you. Since you abuse what intended for a purely platonic friendship, I feel justified in making use of your letters, all of which I have kept and also if I find certain relatives are assisting are you, I shall feel justified in giving them certain statements you made concerning their moral character.

Mr. Moyses, for defendant, said Mr. Paine would deny that he made a promise to marry. He was an undertaker, and a funeral was more in his line than a marriage. In the witness box Mr. Paine emphatically denied that he ever made a promise. The jury, after deliberating for a quarter of an hour, awarded plaintiff £50 damages and costs.

Two things surprise me about this case:

Firstly, before writing this piece I would have expected such cases to be the preserve of the upper and upper middle classes, perhaps where an engagement had been announced in The Times or The Lady and then broken off, but here we have a laundry assistant and undertaker in the High Court. Virtually all the cases thrown up by a search on ‘Breach of Promise’ in the British Newspaper Archive concern ‘ordinary’ people: a housekeeper and baker, a nurse and grocer, a parlourmaid and electrician and so on. Confining the search to ‘London Evening Standard’ and ‘1906’ pulls up 125 reports, no doubt all lapped up by a prurient audience.

Secondly, the verdict. In his summing up his Lordship said that “in the letters there was not one word about marriage. If there was a promise of marriage it was remarkable that it was not mentioned in the letters.” I read this as a strong hint to the jury to dismiss the claim, but they didn’t. The £50 damages (+ costs) would have equated to around a year’s wages for Miss Mills, a not insubstantial amount.

What do you think? Let me know in the comments.

P.S. About what happened to Laura Mills. I know nothing. Do you? Frederick Paine went on to marry but the marriage ended in divorce. On his death in 1945 his undertaking business, then one of the largest in the country passed to his sister, then in turn to London Necropolis, Alliance Property, Great Southern Group, SCI and then Dignity plc. Breach of promise lawsuits in UK were abolished from 1 January 1971 (More).

Mills v. Paine, 1906 – Surrey Comet report

Mills v. Paine: Surrey Comet Saturday 03 February 1906

Taken from the British Newspaper Archive with minor editing and paragraphing for readability

NEW MALDEN BREACH OF PROMISE.

New Malden Undertaker, “With a Heart of Stone”

Lady Gets £50 Damages.

A curious plea was put forward by Frederick William Paine of Coombe-road, New Malden, when in the King’s Bench Division of the High Court of the High Court of Justice, on Monday, before Mr. Justice Darling and a common jury. He was sued by Miss Laura Charlotte Mills, of 406 Merton-road, Southfields, who alleged that after a long courtship he refused to marry her. Defendant stated that although he walked out with the plaintiff and affectionate letters passed, the relationship between them was merely platonic, and he had declared all along that he never intended to marry her.

Mr. Alan Macpherson appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. Moyses for the defendant.

Mr. Macpherson in opening the case, said the plaintiff assisted her brother in a laundry business, and kept house for him, and the defendant was a partner with his mother in a business as an undertaker and also as an ironmonger and house agent. In 1898 the plaintiff and her brother were living at Malden, where defendant carried on his business, They were about to leave for Fulham, and the parties became acquainted through the plaintiff going to the defendant’s shop to purchase goods.

The defendant was struck with the plaintiff and wrote asking her to give him her address at Fulham. She did so and the defendant wrote and asked to be allowed to come and see her and walk out with her. The plaintiff consented, and, although they walked out together the plaintiff did not see her way to become engaged to the defendant. The plaintiff told him so, and the defendant said he thought the acquaintance had better terminate and it did. In 1899 the defendant wrote several letters, of which the plaintiff took no notice, but at the end of that year she wrote and told him he might call again.

Another Lady in the Story

In 1900 the defendant, continued counsel, told the plaintiff that he had become engaged to another lady, and she said that in that case there was no point in continuing the acquaintanceship, and it was again broken off. In the summer they met, and the defendant spoke to the plaintiff. She wrote reproaching him for doing so, and he replied and asked her to see him. When they met he told her that his engagement with the other was at an end. He asked that the acquaintance should be renewed, and she said she was willing to renew it on terms of friendship, but that there must be no engagement.

Defendant came to see the plaintiff in October, and in December asked plaintiff to become engaged to him, telling her that the marriage would not take place for some time. That was on Boxing-day, 1900. The lady’s parents were dead, but the defendant spoke to her brother who offered no objection, although the defendant told him that the marriage could not take place for two years, and Mr. Mills said that personally he was against long engagements.

In 1901 there was unfortunately a dispute about some business matter, but, notwithstanding that the relations between the plaintiff and the defendant were undisturbed. The defendant came to see the plaintiff twice a week and took her out. A very large number of letters passed between them and he (the learned counsel) had about a hundred on each side in his possession.

Although the lady had no mother, she had an aunt, a Mrs. Gaskin, and the plaintiff often took the defendant to the house of that lady. The plaintiff told Mrs. Gaskin of their engagement, and the lady asked Mr. Paine about the marriage. In 1902 when they were at the Gaskins’ house, the defendant said, “By this time next year we shall have a house of our won, and I hope you, Mrs. Gaskin, and your daughter, will come to see us.” The relations between the plaintiff and defendant continued till the beginning of 1903, when the defendant suggested another year’s delay, to which the plaintiff assented,

A Miserable Bank Holiday.

At the beginning of 1904, said Mr. Macpherson, the defendant suggested a further postponement, and the plaintiff assented, the relations of the parties remaining the same. In the middle of 1904 the plaintiff observed a change in the defendant’s manner towards her. On August Bank-holiday he did not take her out. She wrote to him and said if she had done anything wrong she was very sorry. The defendant did not reply, although until the end of the year from time to time he came to see her.

In the beginning of 1905, unfortunately, she was late for an appointment through missing a train. After that defendant came to see her again. As she did not hear from him in May, she went with her cousin, Miss Gaskin, to see him, and told him that he was treating her very badly. She asked if he intended to break off his engagement with her, and he said “Yes.”

Counsel proceeded to read extracts from letters written by the defendant. He. had begun with “Dear Miss Mills,” and then by easy stages he got to “My dear Laura,” “dear Laurie,” and “My Darling.” At an early age in the courtship he signed himself “The Scorcher.”

One letter ran :- “My dear Laurie, – I expect you will have been looking out for a letter from me. I well know what it is to watch the post. I have been to chapel twice and church once lately. On the latter occasion I was present at a christening and I wondered whether I should ever have to take part in a similar ceremony. It was the first baby of a young couple. The people said it was a beautiful baby, and ever so good. With love, yours truly, Fred”

Mr. Macpherson tantalised his audience by reading only the beginning and end of a letter: “My dear little funny little girl…. Yours faithfully, The Rum ‘un.”

Writing to his sweetheart about prospects, Mr. Paine said: “Keep your pecker up, pet. I can see a good thing coming on. I have been paying special attention to laundries.”

Advice to Brides.

“I am hanged if I can write love letters” said the young undertaker in another epistle. Sympathetically. he referred to her toil in the laundry:

“I do hope you are not fatiguing yourself with the **** laundry work. It won’t be for ever, and by placing our trust in Him who does all things well I have trust in the future.”

After having had a lecture, he wrote:

“You mean to give me a piece of your mind and I deserve it. I am afraid I am more like the thing that makes bacon than the little thing that bills and coos.”

In one of the letters a cutting from a newspaper giving advice to brides was referred to:

“Immediately after the wedding promise one another never to wrangle and never to have any secrets from one another. Then your souls will grow together as one.”

This, said counsel, showed, he supposed, that one might get excellent advice even from the halfpenny Press (Laughter).

The Learned Judge: I am not going to make any judicial pronouncement about it. (Laughter)

He also gave the lady a ring, but made the stipulation that she should not wear it on the “engaged” finger, and once when she did so, there was a tiff. But the relationship went on and Miss Mills was so satisfied that she was to be married that she accepted a present of house linen from her sister. Then came the falling away of Mr. Paine, his failure to write to Miss or to see her, an attempt at an understanding the gentleman blunt repudiation, and then this extraordinary letter sent to the lady :-

New Malden, May 25th, 1906.

Without Prejudice.

To Miss L. C. Mills:

Madame – I have received a letter from a solicitor, Mr. Lay. I am astonished at your audacity. After all the kindness and sympathy I have shown you, after all my endeavours to sweeten your miserable existence, you threaten to blackmail me because you have failed to inveigle me into marriage, which you know well I have never desired. Have I not reproached you for persisting in these endeavours? As far as I am concerned you are as virtuous as when I first knew you, but this is through no wish of yours. When you have tempted me, I remembered what you have you told me about a certain relation of yours and knew your object. When you induced me to visit your aunt and cousin, I soon expected a trap; but still out of kindness of heart, I allowed the friendship to continue at the same time pointing out to you times out of number how useless it was to continue is with the object you had in view for reasons you persisted in turning a deaf ear to.

It is most painful to me to have to write to one for whom I have had the kindest regard but since you abuse what was intended for a purely Platonic companionship, I am reluctant, but feel justified in making use of your letters, which fortunately I have retained or have not destroyed since the first commencement of our acquaintance; also, if I find that certain relatives are assisting you, I shall feel justified in to them certain statements you have made to me concerning their moral character.

I am instructing my solicitor to deal with the matter, and to whom I am handing the whole of your letters for the purpose of defending the action I am threatened with.

Yours faithfully,

F. W. PAINE

The Lady’s Appeal.

A few extracts from Miss Mills’ letters were also read by counsel:

Dear Fred – “You are a curious article. I feel like a fish out of water. Just give me a tip what to do to make things right. I have just been thinking that you have got a heart of ice in you. If this is so, I shall have to melt it. Had you heart turned to show that there is no there is no way of touching it? I have not even had one little letter for months. Let us try and be happy again.

Plaintiff was then called, and in bearing out the opening statements aid that on Boxing Day they went out together. Defendant asked her if she liked him well to be married to him in a year or two, and would wait, and she promised she would. Defendant told her he was in partnership with his mother. He had had a business in the Waterloo-road, and had sold it when his father died, and had put money in the Malden business. He said he was worth about £1,000. In the spring of 1901 the defendant gave her a ring.

Plaintiff then produced a gold turquoise ring and handed it to his lordship who passed it to the jury. Plaintiff said the defendant asked her not to wear the ring as an engagement ring, as it was not good enough

Mr Moyser: Whenever there was any talk about marriage did not the defendant always refuse to consent to a marriage, and whenever you approached it did it not cause a little difference between you for the time being? – I never spoke of marriage unless he spoke first. Is it not a fact that up to this day you have never been introduced to defendant’s mother? – Yes.

When the acquaintance between you was renewed again, was it not renewed at your special request? – I don’t remember it. Did he not ,whenever the subject of marriage cropped up, give you to understand his means would not permit it? – No, never.

Did you not often refer to your hard work at the laundry? – No, I did not. Did you not speak of you hard times, and say you were in want of money, and did he not give you a few shillings? – No, I never borrowed money.

Did he not say the ring was given him by a customer, and that he would give it to you? He said the ring was made a present to him by a person for whom he had made a valuation. When he gave it to me he said it was not good enough to wear as an engagement ring. I did, however, once wear it on my engagement finger, and as he was cross about it took it off.

Why did you write him a letter soon after saying: “I hope you are not cross with me for the trick about the ring. Do just forget it, and I won’t do it any more”? He seemed cross, and I thought I would write him. He asked me if I could forget him, and I said, ”No I could not.”

I must put it to you, did you say anything about using mouse or rat poison? – Plaintiff did not reply.

His Lordship: Did you say anything about trying to forget him with the assistance of rat poison? – I might have said it.

Mr Moyses: In a letter written to the defendant on May 18th, 1901, you say: “Hope you found your black girl. You don’t say anything about her, Is she very nice?” What did you mean? – He wanted me to go out with him and I said I could not, and he then said he would find a black one if I did not.

You signed that letter, as you did many others, “Yours sincerely”? – Yes. I told him should sign them no different. In another letter you write: “I believe you have someone down there. I shall have to run down and see.”

His Lordship: If this is only a platonic friendship with her, why should he not have another platonic friendship?

Mr Moyses: Why should he not? (To plaintiff): I see in another of your letters you say: “I went out on Sunday and met such a nice gentleman.” Who was the gentleman? It was a nautical friend of both.

I put it to you that it was an extraordinary thing for a lady to write to a man who was to be her husband. – He was known to both of us.

About this time you went away to the country on a visit and you write him: “Just off to see a young farmer. He is single, so there may be a chance yet. (Laughter) Do you say in the face of that letter that there was an engagement that you should be husband and wife? – Yes

The Defence

Mr Moyses, for the defendant, contended that the letters which had been read negatived the idea that the parties contemplated marriage. “This,” he said, “is not the first time a man has made a fool of himself over a woman, and it will not be the last. You, gentlemen of the jury , know that as well as anyone.”(Loud laughter). The defendant was carrying on a correspondence with Miss Mills, but he was an undertaker; he was averse to marriage; probably a funeral would have been more in his line. (Laughter)

The defendant, who said he was 35 years of age and gave evidence affirming what had been put to the plaintiff in cross-examination and denied by here. There was, he said, simply a friendship between them, and he positively denied that he had ever promised marriage. He had always tried to avoid being drawn into such an action as this. The business was his mother’s, and although his name was used he was not a partner. The plaintiff’s representatives could have seen the books but had not done so.

Cross-examined, he denied calling the plaintiff his darling though sometimes he signed himself “with fondest love”. The friendship warmed up about 1903. The plaintiff made a great fuss of him and he liked that. (Laughter) He did not always kiss the plaintiff on meeting and parting but sometimes he did, though not in the presence of others. The relationship was one of companionship.

Did you have any affection for her? – I had a sincere regard for her. One would not go to see a person he did not like. (Laughter)

Did you love her? – Oh, yes, I loved her.

Do you say you absolutely made it clear to her that you would never marry her? – Yes.

Cross-examined. – The letters about future happiness were merely letters of sympathy. The relationship was purely platonic.

Summing up, his Lordship said that in the letters there was not one word about marriage. If there was a promise of marriage it was remarkable that it was not mentioned in the letters. The jury had no right to award damages just because the defendant had made love to the plaintiff. They must be satisfied there was a promise. If the relationship had been an immoral one it would be easy to understand but it was not. This sort of liking was common in the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Women who could write then – there were very few – used to write affectionate letters and there was no suggestion of immoral association. Was that sort of thing done and gone in the twentieth century? According to defendant it was not. He found the woman unhappy and wrote her friendly letters.

The jury, after a short deliberation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff with £50 damages. Judgement accordingly with costs.

Who was Mr Bridges?

Leave a Reply

From a young age I was keen on making things using odd bits of wood. The Showmax hardware shop on Waldegrave Road had a box of timber offcuts, sixpence each, more than a few sold to me. Other boys got footballs and cricket bats as Christmas and birthday presents; I was thrilled to receive a hand drill for my ninth or tenth birthday. What I dreamed of, though, was the day when I would be old enough, responsible enough and strong enough to have an electric drill. In the years before this milestone was reached, I had to make do with the small ads all promising a wonderful assortment of ‘freebies’ since discounting was not then allowed.

The first portable handheld drill was created by in 1895 by Stuttgart brothers Wilhelm & Carl Fein whose company still makes top class power tools. In 1917 the first trigger-switch, pistol-grip portable drill was patented by Black & Decker USA. In the UK the first DIY drill seems to have been Wolf’s Cub, introduced in the late 1940s; my dad owned one with a number of attachments, but I don’t remember him ever using it.

Which? magazine published its first report on electric drills in December 1963. They tested 15 models from these makers: Black & Decker (5); Stanley-Bridges (3); Wolf (2); Speedway (2) and one each from Miller Falls, Selecta and Winfield (Woolworths own brand). Two only were two-speed drills and none had a hammer option. Nearly 13 years later, the February 1976 Handyman Which? carried a report on 14 drills, all double-insulated, all but three two-speed. Makers: Black & Decker (6); Stanley-Bridges (4); and one each from Bosch, Makita, Metabo and Wolf. For domestic scale construction mains drills are now rarely seen; cordless drills sourced from the far east dominate the market.

In 1957 Harold Macmillan told UK voters that they’d “never had it so good”. British industry was thriving. During the 1960s manufacturing accounted for 27% of London’s economic output; (it’s now just 1.8%). The big three’s drills were all made in London: Black & Decker UK had moved to Harmondsworth (near Heathrow) in 1940, Wolf to Pioneer Works in Hanger Lane in 1935, and S.N.Bridges to York Road, Battersea, SW11 in 1959.

From here I’ll focus on Bridges. For more on Wolf and Black & Decker check out these links on Ultimate Handyman and Progress is Fine blog.

S.N.Bridges & Co. was founded in 1937. By the time they moved to Battersea they had 600 employees. Alongside power tools, in the early 1960s they also made domestic appliances: food mixers, hairdryers, electric blankets, heaters etc.

An October 1959 ad reminds us of office work in pre-computer days: “S. N. Bridges & Co. Ltd., manufacturers of the world-famous range of Portable Electric Tools, have now moved into their new spacious premises at York Road, London, S.W.11 Vacancies on the permanent staff can now be filled for the following: Senior Secretaries; Senior and Junior Shorthand-Typists; Dictaphone Typists; Comptometer Operators; Sales Ledger Clerks; Export Shipping Clerks; Cost Analysis Clerks; Invoice Clerks. Only ladies of proved ability and experience, who are desirous of obtaining permanent worthwhile employment, should apply. Applications in writing, with copy references, stating fully qualifications, age, experience and salary, should be addressed to the Company Secretary….”

In 1961 Bridges was acquired by Stanley, the long-established hand tool manufacturer, the power tools now being branded as Stanley-Bridges.

In 1963 the company needed “Temporary Female Assembly Operators. Normal hours of employment, 42-hour week. Company offers attractive rates of pay together with excellent conditions of employment”.

A 1966 advert was looking for capstan setter operators, milling setter operators, machine minders and other workers for the night shift, four nights 9.30p.m.-8.00a.m. followed by a long weekend, 8.00a.m. Friday to 9.30p.m. Monday.

In 1968 there were still no laws against age or sex discrimination: “Managing Director’s Secretary: A secretary is required for our Managing Director. She should possess an efficient and pleasing personality, be a competent shorthand-typist, and should be able to operate at senior executive level for extended periods without close supervision. Age from 23 years.”

But for Bridges employees there was more to life than work. The South Western Star, 5 February 1960 recorded*:

“The sports and social club of S. N. Bridges & Co. of Battersea entertained 196 children of members to a tea and entertainment in the works restaurant on Saturday. After tea the youngsters were entertained with magic and a Punch and Judy show by Clown Will Kindred, assisted by Mrs. D. Fisher, a member of the club. … Another member filled the role of Father Christmas and each child received a present, fruit and chocolates. Visitors included Mr. D. G. Bridges and Mr. S. R. Kilner, directors of S. N. Bridges …”.

The South Western Star, 9 December 1960, reported* on the firm’s dinner dance held at the company’s sports and social club at Kensington. 300 staff members and wives from round the UK were invited for an expenses paid weekend with the 80 out-of-town visitors being given a Saturday morning factory tour. Mr. G. N. Bridges, managing Director and Mr. D. G. Bridges, Financial Director, hosting.

Was London getting too expensive or staff too hard to find? A decade after moving to Battersea, another move was afoot. The Newcastle Journal – Wednesday 17 June 1970 reported*

“Why Stanley-Bridges picked Cramlington”

“The world’s leading manufacturer of hand tools is running down London plant and settling up on the Nelson Industrial Estate at Cramlington. “We are doing this to meet our future expansion programme,” said Mr. Derek Mills, managing director of Stanley-Bridges, product of a merger in 1961 between United States-based Stanley and the London family firm of S. N. Bridges and Co. Stanley-Bridges has other plants in Sheffield but it is closing down in Battersea and settling In the North-East principally because the labour pool Is greater than in the South.

Wills, in Cramlington yesterday, said other facts that influenced the move were the North East’s excellent schools. living accommodation and communications and the persuasive powers of Northumberland County Council and the Board of Trade. By August upwards of 300 people, two-thirds of them men and almost all locally recruited, will have the plant In full production on hand and power operated tools for industrial and domestic markets. Main production area of the £500,000 plant is a 72,000 sq. ft. unit.”

After another ten or so years, Stanley-Bridges was no more. Several forum posts suggest that they were taken over by Bosch and then closed down. Anyone know more? Please respond in the comments. And does anyone know anything about Mr. S.N.Bridges? For someone who set up a company that employed nearly a thousand people at its peak and traded for sixty or so years, he’s apparently left no virtual footprint. Or perhaps I’ve yet to find it?

* Links to British Newspaper Archive ($$$)

Stanley-Bridges DR2T drill advert (TalkTenPin)

Stanley-Bridges XL330 drill (Handyman Which?)

Stanley-Bridges XJ422 drill (Handyman Which?)

The road that never was

1 Reply

Back between the wars a new arterial road was planned running from Chessington to Sutton. It was never built but the route was still being safeguarded when I joined RBK in 1974. We had a map of it in the RBK planning office. While I was working there (c.1976?) the safeguarding was lifted but legacies of this plan remain.

The road (see the Sabre roads website Lost Arterial A24 for more detail) entered New Malden just south of the A3 then would have run along what are now Sheephouse Way and the end of South Lane – now you know why they have such generous grass verges. It would then have run across Malden Park and the railway. The line on the map above (from freemap.org) gives a rough idea of the intended route.

Look at the map and you’ll see a green swathe between Pembury Avenue and Risborough Drive. This was left undeveloped in the when Wates developed this area as the Worcester Park Station Estate in the 1930s and is now called Risborough Green. Rumour has it that its elevated ground level is down to the site being used as a dump for WW2 bomb site rubble.

The site between 133 Pembury Avenue and 200 Kingshill Avenue was also set aside for the new road – it’s now been infilled with a block of flats, Primrose Court. The houses on the other side of the road are much newer too.

Hopefully someone reading this knows a lot more about this road than I do. If so, please add a comment.

Sheephouse Way, New Malden - note the verge width — Sheephouse Way, New Malden – note the verge width

Green Lane footpath - this might have been an arterial road — Green Lane footpath – this might have been an arterial road

Wates chalet spotting

Leave a Reply

Homes with “an exterior of outstanding loveliness”*.

Last month I wrote about Wates-built houses in New Malden, mainly in the area south of the A3 Kingston Bypass. Drive around the side streets and you can’t help noticing all the chalets, most built by Wates. At a quick glance you might think them all the same but not so.

The first chalets in Malden date from c.1932 – they are semi-detached and the roof slopes rise to a common ridge. Pictures (A) and (B) show two variants: I’m fairly sure that (A) with the front facing entrance door is the earlier and (B) with the side facing entrance door and Dutch gable (the small vertical tile-hung triangle at ridge level), later.

What came next – the semi-detached SC chalets or the more common link-detached variant? Once again we really need the RBK archive to tell us. My hunch is that the link-detached came first. Why? The 1935 Wilverley Park brochure offers buyers both options, promoting the semi-detached chalet as ‘New’:

C4 detached 3-bed chalet: “This wonderful Wates Chalet retains the sweeping roof lines which are so charming a feature of Wates original Chalets. Fully Detached with all its accompanying advantages of peace and privacy – a complete absence of ‘neighbour noise’ – the grand feeling that you really ARE in a house of your own – these are considerations which affect your personal comfort as a discerning Homeseeker.
Come and see for yourself the charm of these new wonder Chalets with their wide bays extending right to the eaves, mellow faced brickwork and smooth rendered walls blending into a delightful harmony – the new Wates Detached Chalet representing a standard of unrivalled value in planning, equipment and beauty.

SC3 Semi-detached Chalet: … For many years now Wates have been famed for their Chalets …. The New Semi-detached Chalet retains all the beauty of design, the bold sweeping roof lines and pleasing elevation which characterises every Wates-Built Chalet. With its newly revised arrangement of rooms it has won the approval of all purchasers. Come and see the improved planning, generous equipment and delightful appearance of these new semi-detached Chalets.

Urban legend had it that the link-detached option gave the advantages claimed above whilst allowing the house to be rated as semi-detached since it was (if only by the brick arch) connected to another house. True? I don’t know.

3-bed link-detached (C) and semi-detached chalets are by far the most common variant but there are others too. Two-bedroom chalets (D) – recognisable by the entrance door being towards the front of the flank wall – were created by deleting the front ground floor third bedroom. 4-bedroom chalets (E) are identifiable by a two-storey section at the rear; most also have a ground floor WC. Lastly, and very rare, are the detached chalets with integral garage (F) – this variation doesn’t work for me – and the corner chalets (G) which do.

Some chalets have a round porthole window lighting the first floor box room, others don’t. Some have a flat front-facing window to the ground floor third bedroom, others have an oriel window. Were these extra cost options?

Buyers were offered the option of buying freehold (FH) or leasehold (LH), the latter making housing more affordable. Here’s a summary (all 3-bed):

Detached chalet: FH £929, LH £749, weekly outgoings £1:12:9d/£1:10:11d, TFA ~95m2, lounge 14’3”x13’0” (4.34×3.96m)
Semi-detached chalet: FH £819, LH £639, weekly outgoings £1:8:11d/£1:7:1d, TFA ~95m2, lounge 14’3”x13’0” (4.34×3.96m)

And for comparison, traditional Wates ‘Tudor’ semis:

TDL Tudor Deluxe: FH: £729, LH: £579, weekly outgoings £1:5:9d/£1:4:3d, TFA ~98m2, lounge 14’3”x12’3” (4.34×3.73m)
TDL Tudor Major: FH: £649, LH: £499, weekly outgoings £1:2:11d/£1:1:6d, TFA ~79m2, lounge 13’1”x10’9” (3.99×3.28m)

Thus it can be seen that 1930s buyers paid a premium for chalets, justified by the space and architecture.

Ground rent, included in the LH weekly outgoings, was £9 a year for chalets, £7.10 for Tudor SDs, equating to a 5% return to Wates. I wonder how many people took the leasehold option, given that the saving was less than two shillings a week. Perhaps the reduced deposit was the key attraction. There was also an option to rent: in the 1930s many working class people had an aversion to going into debt even though we now see mortgage debt as ‘good’ debt.

Dormer additions: As built, chalets have a large under-roof box room next to the front bedroom. It’s relatively simple to build this out as an extra bedroom and many owners have done this (H). During my BCO days (1976-84) two local builders, Malcolm Carter and Tony Forte, did little else. Malcolm’s reputation was such that he ran an eighteen month waiting list. You didn’t decide whether to appoint him or not; he decided whether or not he wanted you as a customer. Another common alteration was adding a ground floor WC under the stairs: the space is tight but it can be done.

Other comments: Given Malden’s shrinkable clay subsoil, subsidence problems requiring underpinning were not unknown across my patch. Wates built houses were almost immune to such problems – the filed plans showed them as being built on Twisteel reinforced concrete rafts.

The plan above (for a chalet in Streatham, so may not reflect what was done in Malden) is interesting in that it shows cavity walls on three sides and a one-brick solid wall for the wall facing the mirrored chalet. When I was in primary school we were taught that cavity walls were introduced to improve insulation. They do, but the real reason was to eliminate the problem of driving rain finding its way through the wall. The facing walls are not, obviously, subject to driving rain.

1930s Wates houses also show the durability of concrete roof tiles: they were only introduced in the late 1920s so when these houses were built they were a new and untried innovation. Most roofs are original and still in excellent condition.

Click on an image to enlarge it; click again or press [Esc] to return. Please excuse the quality of the pics: I only had one day free when last in the UK and it was a wet, grey one.

* Weekly Dispatch (London) – Sunday 21 January 1934

Wates: The brothers who changed New Malden

3 Replies

In my September 2022 piece I noted the dominance of developer Wates in shaping modern New Malden, especially south of the A3. This month I’m writing about the firm; next month I’ll concentrate on their archetypal chalets with their “exterior of outstanding loveliness”*.

The Wates business began around 1900 when Edward Wates (1873-1944) set up a furniture store in Streatham, South London, his brother Arthur joining him in 1902. The store, E & A Wates, sold furniture and furnishings and handled removals. It closed in May 2021 and the buildings are now being converted into flats under the name Wates Yard. Younger brothers William and Herbert, who were builders, joined the firm in 1904 and persuaded their older brothers to invest in some land in Purley to speculatively build two new houses. Wates was in the housebuilding business and by 1914 they’d built 139 houses.

During the 1920s Edward’s three sons, Norman (1905-69), Ronald (1907-86) and Allan (1909-85) joined the firm, progressively taking over from the first generation. Norman was the dominant figure: in 1926 under his leadership it embarked on ‘what was then an enormous speculation’, an estate of 1,000 houses in Streatham Vale, which took five years to complete. Ronald trained as a surveyor and took responsibility for site acquisition, later pursuing a second career as a borough and LCC councillor, for which in 1975 he was knighted. Allan joined the firm in 1930; from 1936 he was responsible for the contracting side of the business. All three brothers took an active role in community and philanthropic activities, something which younger members of the family have continued: since it was formed the Wates Foundation has made grants totalling over £100 million, which have provided vital support to thousands of charities.

The period up to WW2 saw enormous expansion, though activities were largely confined to a relatively small geographic area to the south of London from Twickenham in the west to Sidcup in the east. By doing this Wates could maintain a permanent workforce rather than using casual labour. By WW2 Wates had completed 30,000 houses, 1500-2000 a year.

During the 1930s Wates built more homes in Malden than any other developer. From memory the first houses built by Wates in Malden were some terraced houses on the south side of Kingston Road – built around 1930 IIRC. After this Wates moved on to build many of the houses in Cromwell Avenue estate. Kenneth Bland (1909-83) joined Wates as chief architect in 1933 and would be there until 1970s – he may be responsible for the Dutch gables found on later Wates houses (they’re not exclusive to Wates of course). Estate layouts, road and utility service design and the like were generally handled by Chart, Son & Reading, a Croydon firm of architects and surveyors.

With the opening of the Kingston Bypass (A3) on 28 October 1927 the land to its south was fair game for development and between 1928-34 Wates bought up multiple parcels of land. During the 1930s they were building houses by the hundred – Wilverley Park, Motspur Park, Barnfield and Wendover estates, the Worcester Park Station estate and several infill developments such as Burford Road.

From 1936 speculative house building in Greater London started to wind down. Most easy-to-develop land had been developed and the flow of new buyers had probably slowed down. The last Wates houses built in Malden before WW2 were for the most part larger detached houses pitched at a slightly different demographic.

As with other pieces in this occasional series, some of the information given here is drawn from memories of my time (1976-84) working at R.B.Kingston upon Thames Building Control and may be incorrect. If you can add anything or see any errors in what I’ve written please add a comment. Unfortunately the British Newspaper Archive has yet to digitise copies of the Surrey Comet for the period covered by these pieces.

* Weekly Dispatch (London) – Sunday 21 January 1934

The title I’ve given this page is a bit tongue in cheek. Wates were responsible for most of the interwar housing between the A3 and the Chessington railway line but a number of other builders were active in the Malden & Coombe BC area including

E&L Berg: Notable for their halls-adjoining semis in the High Drive area and their Berg Sunspan houses in Woodlands Avenue.
Crouch Group: Builders of many semis in the Kenley Road area.
Gleeson: Built lots of houses between the large Wates developments and the Hogsmill river. Their attempt to copy Wates chalets doesn’t IMO come off.
R.Lancaster (Wembley): Kingston Vale estate, SW15 (Bowness & Ullswater Crescents, Derwent, Grasmere and Keswick Avenues, Windermere Road). Large houses for better off buyers.
Lavender and Farrell: Developed the Worcester Park end of M&C: Manor Drive, Highdown and Leyfield. For a detailed history see Worcester Park Life, Dec 2012, Local History article.
New Ideal Homesteads: Set up in 1929 and grew to be the largest homebuilder in the 1930s. Undertook development to the north of Clarence Avenue
For more information see ‘Dictionary of British Housebuilders‘, Fred Wellings, 2015

The Book(let) I wish I’d written

Leave a Reply

Two months ago I wrote about my eight years working as a Building Control Officer (Building Inspector) in what had been the Malden and Coombe Borough Council area in S.W.London. Over that time I really got to know the area and its history. It was always fascinating to look at the archived plans and peruse old maps – many of the old hand-tinted plans drawn on linen were real works of art. It wasn’t really part of our jobs but we regularly got phone calls from estate agents asking when a property they were to sell had been built, our pre-computer era card index quickly providing the answer. If I’d thought about it, I could have spent my lunch hours compiling ‘Malden and Coombe, Street by Street’, giving a potted history of each street. Too late now! But since I left RBK in 1984 lots of other information has become available. Here’s some:

New Malden’s early development owed much to the railway: New Malden station opened in 1846, with the remaining section of the Kingston loop line from New Malden to Kingston following in 1869. Then just before WW2 the Chessington branch opened, with Malden Manor station serving the new estates south of the A3 Kingston bypass (opened 1927). Although outside the municipality, Motspur Park (1925) and Worcester Park (1859) stations also serve the SE area.

New Malden was transformed by inter-war suburbanisation as described in Alan Jackson’s excellent book ‘Semi-Detached London’. Although published in 1973, copies are readily obtainable through AbeBooks. The Medical Officer of Health’s reports available on the Wellcome Library website show the M&C population growing from 7,199 in 1903 to 15,366 in 1923 to 39,930 in 1939.

Various developers were at work in the area during this period including R.Lancaster, New Ideal Homesteads, Lavender and Farrell, E & L Berg, Crouch and Gleesons, but the biggest of them all was Wates, whose built their distinctive chalets and more conventional Tudor-style semis by the hundred – check out their Wilverley Park estate brochure here.

Whilst preparing this page I found a vast collection of OS maps digitised by the National Library of Scotland. Check out these extracts from the 1911 and 1933 OS maps, the latter showing part of the Wilverley Park estate. The kink in Malden Road provides a reference point. In the 1933 map you also see the A3 clipping the top corner.

New Malden OS extracts 1911 and 1933 reproduced with the permission of the National Library of Scotland

What’s interesting to me is that I’m now seeing this story being replayed to the north of Melbourne, with consent being given for fields to be turned into new housing states at a rate that is hard to believe.

More resources on Malden history:

Maldens and Coombe Heritage Society web site

Village Voice and Worcester Park Life – each issue contains a very good history feature

Alan Godfrey maps: Sy0713: Coombe and Norbiton 1911; Sy1301: New Malden 1911 – hopefully at some point they’ll publish Sy1305 and Sy1306 to cover a lot more of New Malden.

Chapel Next The Green – Into Print

Leave a Reply

Chapel Next the Green cover

As described last time, I started with the idea of a simple update to a 25-year-old church history and ended up doing much more. Reading church minute books led to investigating denominational records, the site history, local newspapers and much else. Now it was time to turn my copious notes into a book we could afford to print and which people would find interesting. Having unpicked the story of the dissolution of the church in 1879 and its re-formation in 1882, I suggested a Centenary weekend whose highlight would be the release of my finished history. Now I had a deadline to work to.

In 1979 I was one of the first people to get a home computer, a Commodore PET. I bought a word processing program, name long forgotten, written in BASIC, so customisable. It allowed text to be edited, saved to and retrieved from cassette tape. Output was limited to a monospace font with full space justification. Very limited – the superscript references to footnotes were written in by hand using a Rotring pen – but what a step change from repeatedly retyping manuscripts. Over many weeks I typed up my notes creating the first rough draft.

Centre spread pictures of ministers

I approached a printer near my office, Emberbrook Print, and explained what I had in mind – a saddle-stitched (stapled) A5 book. Just their sort of job. The church agreed to underwrite the print cost on the basis that selling the print run would return this. This all led to settling on a 72-page book (including covers). The extra cost of the four-page centre photo section was met by a former member. After allowing for prelims, pictures and footnotes, each section would, on average, be limited to around two pages, 800 words. Impossible given the extent of my notes!

For several years my best friends Brian and Margaret Pearce had made me welcome for coffee on Sunday evenings. Now these turned into editorial meetings. Brian, when not working as a college librarian was a writer and poet, and Margaret acted as a fearless editor of his work. Just what I needed! I took the decision to divide my account up by pastorate. A few people criticised this, as placing too much emphasis on the part ministers play in the life of a church, but I hope that my text has the balance right. Over several months, each Sunday morning I handed over a dot-matrix printout of the latest section, vastly over-long yet containing nothing that could be left out (or so I thought). The same evening over coffee I was presented with my edited text, English and punctuation corrected as necessary by Brian, large chunks marked for deletion in red by Margaret. A healthy discussion followed! With some sections this process was repeated several times.

Finally the text was complete but eight lines over length! On a beautifully edited text finding any content that could be removed was hard work, but we managed it. In the meantime a friend’s father, Edmund Heller, took professional photographs of the inside and outside of the church building and my good friend Arthur Burgess organised copies of the obit pictures of former ministers originally printed in Congregation Yearbooks.

Body text (note the handwritten superscripts!)

Now to the final stage. To keep the price down, the book was to be offset printed from camera-ready copy. This was produced on a Qume daisywheel printer, hired at vast expense from a firm in Old Street, carbon ribbon onto coated paper. I took a week off to produce the page masters. The body text was relatively straightforward, but each page took about ten minutes to print – I watched patiently as the WP program fathomed out each line’s justification. The double column appendices were harder work: the sheet was loaded into the printer and its position carefully marked with a process blue (invisible to a litho camera) pencil before printing the left-hand column. Then it was a question of reloading the paper, lining up the marks and printing the right-hand column. Any previously-missed error on the output meant another ten minute wait but eventually I had a set of page masters.

The front cover uses an enlarged extract from the 1863 OS map. The cover text was supplied by Emberbrook in the form of Letraset-style strips (one per line) which removed the need to manually space letters.

Page masters delivered, I waited with a mixture of expectancy and apprehension. I need not have worried: I was (and still am) very pleased with the result, though of course it reflects the technology available to me at the time. For the centenary weekend we invited back all those former members we had contact with and it was a great occasion, with Rev Richard Hall, URC Thames North Moderator preaching at our Sunday morning service. I was touched that with the book being just hours old, he quoted from it in his sermon.

Will a future church history ever be published in book form? 2035 will mark the 200^th anniversary of the formation of the church. But the reality is that it’s much easier to assemble a body of knowledge as a series of web pages which can be updated as new information becomes available and which are readily searchable.

Twickenham United Reformed Church website history pages

Chapel Next The Green – Research

1 Reply

Chapel Next the Green cover

Forty years ago my history of the Twickenham Congregational Church (Twickenham United Reformed Church from 1972), Chapel Next the Green was published. This post and the one that will follow are about the researching and production of the history respectively, not the history itself. For this refer to the book itself or the church website.

I always had an interest in local history and having grown up in the church I had heard all sorts of stories of its past. Back in 1951 the then church secretary, Reg Peirce, had put together a history to mark what was though to be the church’s triple jubilee (150 years).

Some time in the 1970s I thought that it was time for an updated history and the church meeting agreed to me producing this. I had no background in historical research – at the time I was a council building inspector – and my original plan was to do a relatively quick update to Reg’s history. But I’d started on a journey which would last a good few years.

My starting point was with the church archives, such as they were. These included copies of leaflets, reports and other items of interest (including a programme for the 1902 Centenary Bazaar) and, most importantly, Church Meeting and Deacons Meeting minute books starting with the re-formation of the church in 1882 after a very testing few years. I soon realised I would need to read through these minutes twice: on the first read you get the facts, but because you don’t know what will happen next it’s hard to tell what is or isn’t significant. Needless to say, all this reading and note taking took an extended period.

By now I had a picture of church life from 1882. My next step was to visit the United Reformed Church History Society’s library. Congregation Yearbooks furnished obituaries of the church’s ministers back to the 1850s and sundry other information.

But now I had a problem. Reg’s history (probably based on Andrew Mearns’ 1889 London Congregational Church Directory: “1800 Church formed by B.H.Kluht assisted by Lady Shaw and Dr Leifchild“) left me puzzled. Debrett’s Peerage had failed to provide a suitable Lady Shaw. There was no Rev Kluht active at that time – only one who wasn’t born until 1816. And I’d also found that First Cross Road where the church stands was a result of the 1818 Enclosure Award; before this it was part of Twickenham Common.

Lady Shaw’s School registered as a place of public worship

And then the penny dropped. What if Reg’s history was wrong? Yearbooks from 1862-1884 stated that the church was founded in 1838. All fell into place: Lady Shaw became such on her 1834 marriage to Sir Robert Shaw at Twickenham Parish Church. Benjamin Kluht came to the church as its first minister in 1840. During his seven year pastorate the first chapel was built on land at the rear of Sir Robert and Lady Shaw’s garden.

Then as I widened my research I found the December 1835 certificate of registration of Lady Shaw’s school room as a place of worship which can be taken as the birth date of the church. Now it all made sense.

My research took me to the Greater London Record Office, the Congregational Library at Caroone House, Dr Williams Library, the Guildhall Library, the Public Record Office and British and Foreign School Society Archive. And I made a visit to the elderly Rev Harold Bickley who had become the church’s minister in 1916. The more I knew the more there was to discover. But given that the aim was to publish an updated history, I had to stop somewhere. The decision was made to have a special weekend marking the centenary of the re-formation of the church on 27th April 1882 and so work switched to assembling all my research into a coherent account. Next month I’ll try and recall how this was done.

1960s Sunday School memories

Leave a Reply

Although they weren’t churchgoers, my parents – like many others at that time – wanted me to go to Sunday School. A fellow school-gate mum told my mum that the Twickenham Congregational (now United Reformed) church had a good Sunday School. So late in 1959, aged six, I was enrolled. At that time well over 100 children attended each week, most like me having been sent rather than brought.

Each Sunday morning we met in the hall and paraded into church where we sat in our designated pews. Following two hymns and the children’s talk, we adjourned to our classes. After nine months in the primary class I moved up to the junior department which met in the main hall. Demountable screens split the hall into classrooms, each class having around eight children – boys’ classes one side of the hall, girls’ the other. In due course we graduated to the young people’s class, where boys and girls were allowed to mix!

The Sunday School had its own calendar which superimposed the following special events on the regular Sunday morning classes. Roughly speaking it looked like this:

Early in the year those of us who wanted to, participated in the National Sunday School Union’s Scripture exam. For six weeks we would study the year’s exam theme and had to learn a memory passage. Then on a Friday evening we all turned up to sit the exam paper. Later a district awards presentation, preceded by a tea, was held at Twickenham Baptist Church. A member of the Baptist church was an amateur printer and produced beautiful Twickenham & District-specific certificates – sadly none of mine survive but here’s an example from Norwich (ack Leo Reynolds)
One highlight of the year was the Sunday School festival marked by a fully costumed and staged play. Maurice Stockdale, then Sunday School superintendent, took great pride in producing this. Parts were found for every child who wanted to take place with, by tradition, teachers taking the parts in the last act. We went to rehearsals on six Monday evenings, followed by a Sunday afternoon dress rehearsal (then the obligatory tea!), the performance itself in front of church members and proud parents being on the Monday evening. I just remember playing Elisha’s servant in the play ‘So Small a Thing’ – the healing of Naaman.
To June and the Sunday School outing. Back in the early 1960s most people still didn’t have cars so, annual holiday apart, rarely went far, making the outing a great event. Our outing destinations were Oxshott Heath with its enormous sandpit, Frensham Ponds, Box Hill, and for seaside trips, Lancing or Wittering. An elderly near-blind member of the congregation, James Rennie, would give Maurice some money to be shared out towards the end of the outing so that each child could buy some seaside rock or sweets. He would be amazed to know that his simple kindness towards children he didn’t know is still remembered fifty years after his death.
Holidays over, September saw promotion Sunday. Everyone who was eligible moved up on the same date, and getting a new teacher was an exciting thing. Even more so, joining the mixed young people’s group!
This one I can’t date, but like many children across the world in linked churches we were given collecting boxes to collect donations in support of the London Missionary Society’s John Williams missionary ship which served scattered communities in the southern Pacific. When the John Williams VII ship was commissioned at Tower Pier in 1962 our Sunday School ran an outing to visit her but my parents wouldn’t let me go, scared that I might fall in the Thames!
And so to year end. The Christmas family service would invariably include a short nativity play of some sort. Then we’d have a Sunday afternoon Christmas party with games and tea. Aged about nine I can remember my teacher telling me “as it’s the party you can call me Christine instead of Miss Kerslake”! How things have changed!

Within five or so years the practice of non-church parents sending children to Sunday School was no more and numbers sadly collapsed. I’m so grateful to have been part of the preceding generation. So many happy memories of my teachers – Margaret Day, Christine Kerslake, Pat Sparks, John Cragg and Maurice Stockdale. Thanks for all you gave me as a small child.

Tony Bryer

Bits and pieces from my life

Category Archives: UK local history

Trial by Jury

Mills v. Paine, 1906 – Surrey Comet report

Who was Mr Bridges?

The road that never was

Wates chalet spotting

Wates: The brothers who changed New Malden

The Book(let) I wish I’d written

Chapel Next The Green – Into Print

Chapel Next The Green – Research

1960s Sunday School memories