These news items are not complete, and will be added to when more are found.

Contents

1910
1911
1913
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919

1910

Croydon Guardian and Surrey County Gazette, Saturday 26 March 1910, page 9

MITCHAM PARISH COUNCIL AND THE FAIR.
Showmen’s Guild Manifesto.

In view of the Parish Council Election we have been asked by the Rev. T. Horne, chaplain and lecturer to the Showmen’s Guild, to publish the following manifesto signed by himself on behalf of the Guild Executive Committee:—

“Certain efforts have been made during the past four years to abolish your ancient Charter Fair. Up to now these efforts have failed. Why they have failed is owing to the strong protest you, people of Mitcham, have made against the loss of your rights and liberties, that the abolition of the fair would inevitably bring. The enemies of the fair try to confuse the real issues by asserting that it is a showmen’s question, and that the showmen are merely interfering in your local affairs for selfish purposes.

BUT IS THAT THE TRUTH?

It is not. It is true that the showmen follow their lawful calling as entertainers for profit, and with the laudable ambition of earning an honest living thereby, like all other people who work. That is no argument against the reasonableness of their claim to be heard, and to have just treatment. Showmen are as much entitled to fair play and straight dealing as any other class in the community, and the Guild exists to vindicate and uphold that claim.

LET US CLEAR THE GROUND OF CANT.

The showman, like every other man, has his rights of citizenship. He does not seek preferential treatment. He demands justice, and justice means the right to pursue his lawful calling, with the liberty of all workers, and free from the malign and vituperative utterances of Christian faddists and reformers, who regard him as a material for their reforming zeal. When mistaken zealots attack the showman as a man, the showman shows fight.

THE SHOWMAN FIGHTS FAIR.

He does not attempt to overrule the Home Secretary’s decisions properly given. He does not seek by expensive processes of law (impossible save to the rich) to obtain his own way by other means where the statute of the land gives him no power. He refuses to enter into the debate of fine points of legal intricacy, or to waste his money on their solution. The showman is ever content with ‘tainted!’ in the dock.

THE TRIBUNAL OF THE PEOPLE.

Without the people he cannot live, and it is to the people that he goes for his verdict. Why complicate the issues by fine-spun arguments, as to when a charter is, or when it is not? The obvious truth is good enough for him. Here is a fair—the people want my show—when they do not want me it will then be time enough to close down my business.

WHAT MITCHAM MAY GAIN.

The ratepayers have already paid £400 towards the purchase of the Fair Franchise. Why should not the people of Mitcham get some return for their money? If the fair is removed, with consent of all parties interested, to a more convenient and salubrious site, the Council acting jointly with the Board of Conservators could relieve the rates by the tolls collected year by year from the shows, etc. Mitcham would thus get a sensible and adequate return for its invested money. You will at the same time retain control over the fair, and can co-operate with the showmen in the betterment of the site. The Guild has pledged itself to the reasonable scheme of removing the fair to a better site.

WHAT THE ELECTORS CAN DO AT THIS ELECTION.

They can take care to vote for men who are known to be the friends of the people’s fair. The electors have no direct vote for the Mitcham Conservators, but they have the power to vote for the councillors who do select and elect the Conservators. Here is the situation before the electors. Let it be well understood that no known enemy of the people’s fair shall have the people’s vote. Parish meetings, properly convened, expressing by unanimous vote the people’s will on the fair question, have been scorned and repudiated by the Mitcham Conservators. Public meetings equally enthusiastic have also been treated with contempt. Negotiations of the most persevering and moderate character have been fruitless of good result. The champions of the people’s rights at all crucial moments have been outvoted on the Parish Council.

IT IS FOR THE ELECTORS TO TAKE CARE THAT THEIR WILL SHALL PREVAIL.

Why should the people be despised, denied and flouted by the men who are sent to the Council as their representatives? Upon the question of the fair rights of the people the time has come for distinct pledges. Let the electors of Mitcham see that they are obtained. The Showmen’s Guild will take care that this clear issue is kept before the people. No clouding the issue—no intrusion of side issues to confuse the question—will be allowed to pass without exposure, and the Guild (in the exercise of its legitimate and constitutional rights) will support all the candidates pledged to the maintenance of the People’s right to have and to hold their ancient Charter Fair.”

Daily Mirror, Tuesday 9 August 1910, page 5

FIGHT FOR FAIR.
Mitcham Conservators Post Notices Forbidding Showmen to Take Up Pitches.

Mitcham Common is again to be the scene of a battle between the conservators and the showmen, who are already gathering for the fair. The conservators have opened hostilities by posting notices saying that no spaces will be let for show purposes on the fair green, and enumerating dread pains and penalties which will be incurred by erecting swings and roundabouts on the forbidden ground.

But the Showmen’s Guild is quite ready for war. Not only, they say, will Mitcham Fair open this week as usual, but it will be held on a larger scale than ever. They say that the fair is a legal fair, founded by royal charter, and that until the Home Secretary signs an order for its abolition all its rights and privileges remain. London showmen will meet to consider the situation to-morrow.

Daily Mirror, Wednesday 10 August 1910, page 5

BATTLE OF MITCHAM FAIR.
Showmen Excluded from Historic Green Say They Will “Pitch” There as Usual.

“Notice is hereby given that no sites for the creation of shows, roundabouts or other similar amusements on the fair green will be let for the present year, and proprietors of such shows, etc., are warned that they must not pitch on the land of the fair green.—By order of the Conservators of Mitcham Common.”

The above notice was exhibited yesterday in reference to Mitcham Fair, which begins on Friday, and which has been held on the fair green ever since the days of Queen Elizabeth. Of late, however, the site has been declared unsuitable. In spite of this prohibition, the showmen, several of whom have already arrived at Mitcham, declare that they will pitch on the fair green, as usual, and that they are quite prepared to incur any legal proceedings that may follow.

Daily Mirror, Thursday 11 August 1910, page 5

SITE OF MITCHAM FAIR.
Showmen to Co-operate with Authorities for Removal to Better Place.

The question as to where this year’s Mitcham Fair is to be held came before a meeting of the London committee of the Showmen’s Guild yesterday, held in the show tent of Mr. Alfred Balls on Mitcham Fair ground. Mitcham Common Conservators had forbidden the holding of the fair on the old Fair Green, declaring the site unsuitable. The committee yesterday, while resolving to safeguard the trading interests of the travelling showmen, reaffirmed their readiness to co-operate with the local movement for the removal of the fair to a better site.

Music Hall and Theatre Review, Thursday 1 September 1910, page 12

Guns at Mitcham.

At Croydon Police Court on Friday Henry Harris was committed for trial at the next Guildford Assizes, having been charged with the attempted murder of Frederick Gray, aged fifty, of Wandsworth-road, and Henry Gray, aged twenty-six, of Kensal-rise, by shooting them with a revolver at Mitcham-green on August 12. The injured men attended the court. Mr. A. A. Strong said it was customary for the showmen to take up their positions on the Thursday before the fair, and the members of the Showmen’s Guild had their places allotted by the Guild, so that everything should be done in order. This year, on reaching Mitcham the showmen found that, owing to the notoriety the fair had gained through the action of the local conservators, the ground was occupied by gipsies. On the Wednesday before the fair the Grays found the site they usually occupied was in Harris’s possession. The prisoner, said counsel, was not a showman. Showmen did not carry revolvers, and were a most orderly and law-abiding folk.

Harris carried on a small coal business at Battersea. Occasionally he had gone with shows, and the Grays had helped him. The elder Gray, knowing he had no legal claim to the site, offered Harris £5. On the first day of the fair they had not yet come to an agreement. Frederick Gray was under the impression on Thursday night that Harris had agreed to accept £6 and a use of a portion of the ground. Accordingly instructions were given for the roundabouts to be erected on Friday, but he found Harris was still in possession. About mid-day prisoner asked witness what he was going to do, and witness said, “I’ve finished,” and Harris then said, “I haven’t finished with you.” Between 1.30 and 2 o’clock as witness and his son were walking round the fair ground, Harris ran in front of them, and without a word pointed a revolver at them from a distance of eight or nine paces, and fired several shots.

After being treated by a local doctor witness and his son were taken to Guy’s Hospital, remaining until Wednesday last. A bullet was extracted from his chest, and a doctor told him that if it had been half an inch further to the left, the wound would have been fatal.

Harry Gray, the son, denied that he struck prisoner, or that his father threatened him.

1911

Daily Express, Thursday 13 April 1911, page 5

REMARKABLE QUESTIONS RAISED IN COURT.
“GRANT OF PITCHES.”

Questions of wide importance to the sporting public of London were raised before a Divisional Court, yesterday, when the Conservators of Mitcham Common appealed against a decision of the Croydon Bench in the case of Messrs. Walter Cox and John Cole, members of the Mitcham Village Golf Club. They were:—

Can the conservators of a common grant to a single club the sole right to play golf on the common on one day a week?

If not, can the London County Council assign to a cricket club the use of a pitch in a park for a whole season?

Mr. Justice Phillimore remarked that a golf course laid down on a common was laid down on public ground, but Mr. Justice Scrutton pointed out that if the exclusive use of public ground was illegal in the case of golf it was also illegal in the case of cricket. “And if pitches cannot be granted,” he added, “the clubs will be destroyed, for no one would join a club that could not guarantee a game.”

Mr. Cox played golf on Mitcham Common on a Saturday and Mr. Cole played on a Friday without a caddy, in defiance of rules made by the Conservators that only members of the Prince’s Golf Club shall play over the course on Saturday, and that no one shall play on any day unless accompanied by a caddy. They were summoned by the Conservators for breaking the by-laws, but the cases were dismissed by the Croydon magistrates on the ground that the by-laws were unreasonable and ultra vires.

WORKING MAN’S PLAY DAY.

In opening the appeal of the Conservators against this decision Mr. Danckwerts, K.C., mentioned that a women’s golf club had also been granted a licence to use the common.

Mr. MacMorran, K.C., for Mr. Cox and Mr. Cole, contended that the public should have free access to the common for recreation, and that Saturday was the only day the working man had for such recreation.

“I know,” stated Mr. Justice Scrutton, “that at Blackheath cricket clubs have the same pitch Saturday after Saturday, and spend a good deal of money in improving it. If it is ultra vires for the Conservators to grant permission to the Prince’s Club, all the cricket clubs in London will be affected. They are poor men’s clubs, and they will be deprived of this privilege.”

“Clubs are assigned pitches for the season in Battersea Park,” said Mr. Justice Phillimore. “I have helped some of these clubs, and I know.”

“Mr. Cox and Mr. Cole might as well have played in the Law Courts,” argued Mr. Danckwerts.

“That is not exactly the same,” replied Mr. Justice Phillimore. “If you lay down a nice pavement in front of your house for your children to roller-skate on, you cannot grumble if all the little urchins in your neighbourhood use it too.”

Judgment was reserved.

Daily Mirror, Wednesday 31 May 1911, page 4

GOLFERS ON MITCHAM COMMON.
Judges Refer Case of Players Without Caddies to Magistrates.

The Divisional Court gave its decision yesterday with regard to golf-playing on Mitcham Common. Two players, named Cox and Cole, had been summoned, the one for having played golf on Prince’s Golf Club course on a Saturday, when by regulation members only can play, and without a caddie, the other for playing without a permit or caddie.

The Croydon magistrates had refused to convict.

This decision Mr. Justice Phillimore and Mr. Justice Hamilton further upheld, regarding the regulations that it was sought to enforce as being too much in favour of one class of users of the common. Their Lordships, however, directed that the case should go back to the magistrates on the caddie point.

1913

The Advertiser, Friday 1 August 1913, page 8

MITCHAM COMMON CONSERVATORS.
SHALL THE FAIR BE ABOLISHED OR REMOVED?

A meeting of the Conservators of Mitcham Common was held at the Vestry Hall, Mitcham, on Wednesday evening. Mr. Mallaby presided, and there were also present Ald. G. J. Allen, Messrs. Roberts, Willcocks, A. Mizen, E. Mizen, and J. M. Leather, with the Clerk (Dr. Newnham).

BATHING POND.
With regard to the bathing pond at Marsh, it was said they wanted a keeper who could swim to look after the bathers.
Mr. A. Mizen—It wants someone with a considerable amount of pluck to swim in that lake now.
[Discussion of weeds; all weeds except in one deep place.]

ALLOTMENT OF FOOTBALL PITCHES.
The Clerk said football pitches had been allotted and they were practically the same as last year. Two new applications had been received since the list was made up, but he was afraid he had no room for them. The Chairman remarked that there were altogether nine new applications.
Mr. Willcocks suggested that the senior club, Mill Green Rovers, should have the choice of a pitch on the green opposite the Goat.
It was thought such a matter should be left to the Chairman and Clerk to arrange.

MITCHAM FAIR: A HARDY ANNUAL.
The Clerk reported that Mr. A. Mizen had written to the effect that he had met Mr. Chart and Mr. Cubison as to the transfer of the franchise. They were anxious for it to be completed on the terms previously agreed. They did not think they were safe without a clause stating that the Conservators would use their best endeavours to have the fair abolished. Mr. Harding told him he would be quite content if the fair was removed to Three Kings’ Green. According to a letter from Mr. Harding’s solicitors he did not mind so long as they moved it from Fair Green.
Mr. Willcocks—That simplifies the whole question. In that case Messrs. Chart and Cubison will give way.
The Clerk said the Home Office, they had been informed, were against abolishing the fair. If they had entered into the covenant prepared it would have precluded them from removing.
Mr. A. Mizen suggested that the words “abolition or removal” should be inserted in the covenant.
The Clerk—I would advise the Board to agree to that at once.
The Chairman said the Home Office would [not?] abolish the fair.
Mr. A. Mizen said Dr. Fegen told Mr. Samuels when the deputation waited upon him at the Home Office that it was a delicate matter. Mr. Samuels told them they had to be very careful how they interfered with the amusements of the people.
The Chairman—Suppose the words were inserted—“abolition or removal”—and the conveyance was made, what would be the next move on the part of the Conservators?
Mr. A. Mizen said if opportunity offered he thought they should try to get the fair abolished.
Mr. Leather thought it was a pity they could not put the fair on the Common.
The Chairman said two years ago Mitcham Parish Council would not support the proposal to remove the fair—they wanted it abolished. If they signed this deed to make them use their best endeavours to get the fair abolished or removed they were exactly in the same position as two years ago. The Showmen’s Guild agreed; it was Mitcham Parish Council that refused to consent.
Mr. Willcocks said at a parish meeting the matter was dealt with in a constitutional manner, and by an overwhelming majority the electors of Mitcham decided that they did not want the abolition of the fair. The meeting was called especially to consider this question.
Mr. Leather—I don’t attach much importance to such meetings.
Mr. Willcocks—It is the only constitutional way of getting the views of the electors of the parish.
Mr. E. Mizen—If a public meeting were called it would even move the Golf Club tomorrow. (Laughter.)
Ald. Allen—If Mitcham Parish Council would agree we could move it to Three Kings’ Green at once.
The Chairman—The Home Office do not recognise Mitcham Parish Council in this matter at all.
Mr. A. Mizen said as a trustee he was willing to have those words inserted in the deeds, but, personally, he should always fight for abolition.
Mr. Willcocks pointed out that the fair in its present position was a positive danger and a death trap.
The Chairman—This is a very hardy annual, and I have not the slightest doubt that this time next year it will come up again.
On the motion of Mr. Willcocks the Clerk was requested to write to Mr. Cubison to see if the trustees would agree to the insertion of words to the effect that the Conservators would use their best endeavours to [abolish the fair or procure its removal from] Fair Green to a more suitable site.

A DANGEROUS PRACTICE.
A letter from Mr. Chart on behalf of Mrs. Simpson, of The Birches, was read. It complained cricket was played on the Tower green close to her residence, and on one occasion four balls struck windows in her house within a few minutes.
The Common-keeper was instructed to pay attention to this matter.

1914

Daily Express, Thursday 22 January 1914, page 1

It was decided by the Croydon magistrates that golf on Mitcham Common cannot be restricted to the members of certain clubs.—(Page 5.)

Daily Mirror, Thursday 22 January 1914, page 4

EVERYBODY’S COURSE?

An important decision regarding the rights of the golfing public on Mitcham Common was given yesterday at Croydon, when Frederick Harris, the caddy master of the Prince’s Club, was fined 5s. for obstruction. He had refused to supply a caddy to a non-member.

The Conservators of the common have laid down that no person but a member of the Prince’s Club (of which Mr. Mallaby Deeley is chairman) or the Prince’s Ladies’ Club shall play on Wednesday or Saturday between certain hours. Counsel for the complainant, Mr. A. C. Harrison, of West Norwood, asserted, however, that Mr. Justice Phillimore had decided that whether a person lived at Mitcham or at Kensington, he had an inherent right to play golf upon the course.

The Bench were of the opinion that the regulation giving preferential treatment to a class, distinguishing between the members of the golf club and those who were not, was ultra vires. The Bench agreed to state a case.

Daily Mirror, Thursday 29 January 1914, page 14

GOLF ON COMMONS.
The Growth of the Public Course Movement and Its Sequel.

It is good to hear that no tinge of bitter feeling exists between the members of the Prince’s Club and the residents of Mitcham and district as a result of the recent test case, in which the Croydon Bench decided that the local people had the right to play over the Mitcham Common course at other than certain restricted hours.

The residents are playing in considerable numbers, but it is said that they are tacitly acknowledging the right of members to priority in the matter of starting. As the subscriptions to the club enable the course to be preserved in first-class order (an advantage for which the non-members pay nothing), a simple sense of justice suggests that, whatever the legal aspect of the situation may be, the members ought to enjoy some sort of privilege.

Whether the matter will be left where it now stands remains to be seen. Possibly it will be taken to a higher tribunal, and the question there decided as to whether the conservators of the common are justified in introducing a by-law allotting certain hours to persons who wish to use the course, but who are not members.

Perhaps the happiest solution to the bother might be obtained if the Prince’s Club were to confer with the residents, put before them a proposal to assist them in the raising of their own club to a position of prosperity. Experience shows that where a private organisation uses public land for the purpose of golf, the line of least resistance is obtained by making friends of the local population and offering it encouragement and facilities for the pursuit of the game.

Daily Mirror, Friday 24 April 1914, page 13

Fire In Smoke-room.

The smoking and billiard rooms in the Tooting Bec Golf Club House, Mitcham Common, have been burnt out by a fire as yet unexplained.

The Times, Monday 11 May 1914

GOLF ON MITCHAM COMMON.
RIGHTS OF PLAY OVER THE PRINCE’S COURSE.
DECISION OF THE HIGH COURT.

The Divisional Court, composed of Mr. Justice Ridley, Mr. Justice Darling, and Mr. Justice Rowlatt, heard on Saturday an appeal (Harris v. Harrison) of interest to golfers who are members of clubs on commons. The justices of Croydon convicted the appellant of obstructing the respondent when he was about to play on the Prince’s Golf Course, a part of Mitcham Common, under a permit from the Mitcham Common Conservators. The obstruction alleged was the refusal of the appellant, a caddie master of the club, to supply the respondent, who was not a member of the club, with a caddie during certain hours. It was contended that this was a breach of a regulation made by the Conservators in pursuance of a by-law under the Metropolitan Commons (Mitcham) Supplemental Act, 1891. No caddie master had been appointed by the Conservators, and play without a caddie was forbidden.

The justices were of opinion that the regulation made by the club restricting the rights of the public to play was ultra vires, but their Lordships now took a different view and allowed the appeal and quashed the conviction. Mr. Justice Rowlatt said that there was no duty imposed on the appellant to supply caddies to the public. Mr. Justice Darling held that the club should be allowed some privileges as consideration for spending money on the Common. If the regulation had amounted to total exclusion of the public or had left them without opportunity of play it would have been another matter.

On January 21, 1914, the appellant appeared before the justices to answer a complaint made by the respondent that in the parish of Mitcham on December 6, 1913, he did obstruct and interfere with the respondent, who had made preparations for playing golf on the Prince’s golf course—a part of Mitcham Common set apart for playing golf—and who had a permit from the Mitcham Common Conservators to play golf thereon, by refusing to supply him with a caddie though requested to supply one, contrary to regulation 2 made in pursuance of the by-law 14 by the said Conservators under the Metropolitan Commons (Mitcham) Supplemental Act, 1891. That the appellant was caddie master of the Prince’s Golf Club, and that no caddie master had been appointed and no caddie had been licensed by the Conservators of Mitcham Common.

1915

Mitcham local cutting (Urban District Council election candidates), 1915

EAST WARD.

LAING, W. F.—Unsuccessfully contested North Ward at the last election, and now goes in for the East unopposed.

CHART, J. R.—Undertaker and corn dealer. A member of an old Mitcham family, and at the first Parish Council election was returned at the head of the poll. A trustee of several of the local charities, and hard evangelistic worker.

DENDY, A.—Motor engineer, of London-road, and an old member of the Parish Council.

MIZEN, A., E. E., and E. J.—Members of the well-known firm of market gardeners who have long taken interest in the public affairs of Mitcham. Messrs. A. and E. J. are Common Conservators. The former is a member of the Surrey County Council. Mr. E. J. Mizen is the Chairman of the Croydon Rural District Council.

Mitcham local cutting (Urban District Council election candidates), 1915

WEST WARD.

PARSLOW, W. H.—Builder and house decorator. Has always been popular in the West Ward, where he has headed the poll once. On several occasions has organised a Christmas dinner for the aged poor of Mitcham. Mr. Parslow is also a Poor Law Guardian, and is again offering himself for re-election.

SNOWSILL, E. E.—A gardener by trade, who entered the Parish Council at the last election as a nominee of the Ratepayers’ Association. Has proved himself a most useful and businesslike man, and particularly was this so during his chairmanship of the No. 2 Fire Brigade Committee. More recently he was given a seat on the Board of Common Conservators.

BAKER, P.—A well-known florist of Merton terminus, who, after more than one unsuccessful attempt, returns to the local governing body.

POULSON, H.—A builder by trade, and enters the new Council under the auspices of the Ratepayers’ Association.

1916

Sutton Advertiser (local Advertiser), Friday 21 July 1916

MITCHAM FLOWER SHOW.

The annual summer show of the Tooting, Balham, Merton and Mitcham Horticultural Society was held in the Vestry Hall on Wednesday in glorious weather. There was a good attendance at the opening ceremony, which was performed by Mrs. G. J. Poston, Mr. Poston, as President of the society, occupying the chair, and amongst those present were Dr. T. Cato Worsfold, Ald. R. M. and Mrs. Chart, Mrs. Upton, Messrs. Edward Mizen, Cove, J. R. Chart, W. C. Webb, J. D. Drewett, J.P., C.C., C. Lack (hon. treasurer), W. C. Stratton (hon. secretary), etc.

Mrs. Poston having formally declared the show open, Mr. Lack said there was a membership of 89, and, in spite of many difficulties, the prize money was being paid in full. The Committee decided on the Vestry Hall this year in order to save from £15 to £20 on the tents, etc., but next year, if the war was over, they hoped, by the kindness of Mr. and Mrs. Poston, to again hold the show at Bishopsford.

Mr. Mizen, proposing a vote of thanks to Mrs. Poston, said he very much regretted that the Conservators refused to allow them to have the usual sports on the Common. The Mitcham members of the Board of Conservators did not know anything about the application. He would not then say anything more about the matter, which would be taken further.

The show was the most successful yet held, as not only was there a record number of entries, but the exhibits reached a degree of excellence not very frequently attained. The children’s classes brought some keen competition, though the youngsters were naturally disappointed that there were no sports. In refusing consent to hold the sports, the Clerk to the Conservators offered no reason but merely “regretted” in the usual formal manner. During the afternoon and evening the Misses Barnard, Callegan and Florence Howse played selections on the piano. The prizes were presented in the evening by Mrs. Poston.

Local cutting (Advertiser series), c. July 1916

BOY’S ADVENTUROUS CAREER.

Arrested on Mitcham Common on Wednesday by Det. McMullin, William Henry Harris (16), of 50, Marion-road, Lonesome, admitted rifling a gas meter of 2s. 6d. and a French penny. He was charged with stealing 2s. 3d., which the indicator had shown as missing, and with doing damage to the meter to the extent of 10s. Before the County Magistrates on Thursday he pleaded guilty. His mother said she left home on July 17th with her son for Streatham. He parted from her saying he was going to look for a job. When she returned she found the cupboard door open, and the gas meter in a battered condition on the floor, with the money missing. Mrs. Lewis, a next-door neighbour, spoke to hearing a noise like money being rattled in a tin. Looking up she saw the prisoner with the gas meter in his hands. William Jonas, a South Metropolitan Gas Company inspector, said the prisoner left the gas on. Det. McMullin said the boy was convicted last September of embezzling £1 2s. 1d., and was bound over on probation for 12 months. At 15, by giving his age as 19, he joined the Royal Marines. He was rejected after two months’ service and then joined the East Surrey Regiment, in which he served eight months. He left after 47 days’ punishment for a breach of discipline. Mrs. Harris said her husband had been eight months in the trenches. When her boy left the Royal Marines the chaplain gave him the highest character: his one desire was to go to sea. Prisoner was remanded for a week to see what could be done towards getting him to sea.

1917

Mitcham and Tooting Mercury, Friday 2 February 1917

MITCHAM COMMON FIRES.
Volunteers to the Rescue.

Apparently not content with the sport afforded by the frozen ponds on Mitcham Common some youngsters set fire to the gorse growing near Mitcham Junction Station. The flames spread and quickly reached serious proportions, the wind taking them in the direction of the station. Some attempts to beat them down failed. The Mitcham Company of Volunteers, just finishing their strenuous day’s work on the defences, was rushed back to the scene of the conflagration, and under Lieut. Chas. Poston, fell in to the task of extinguishing the fire, which was eventually accomplished. A word of praise is certainly due to the Volunteers for their timely assistance, rendered when all were thoroughly tired after labouring for many hours on the Defences of London.

At the same time another fire commenced some distance away and some difficulty was experienced in putting it out.

Mitcham and Tooting Mercury, Friday 20 April 1917, page 3

MITCHAM URBAN COUNCIL.
Counc. Hill the New Chairman — Prince’s Golf Club Rent.

NEW CONSERVATORS.

There was a contest for the four positions as representatives on the Board of Conservators. Counc. J. M. Leather declined to be nominated again. The Councillors nominated were A. Mizen, E. E. Mizen, and E. E. Snowsill (old members), and G. Farewell Jones, and W. F. Laing. On the first poll the brothers Mizen and Counc. Laing led, while Councillors Farewell Jones and Snowsill tied with 10 votes each. The result of the second ballot was Counc. Farewell Jones 15, Counc. Snowsill 6.

AN EXPLANATION.

At the end of the election Counc. Ernest Mizen said he wished to say a few words with regard to what took place after the ordinary meeting of the Conservators at the Vestry Hall last Wednesday. Owing to the action of the Chairman in taking the question of the Golf Club rent in private, the public did not know what was transacted there. But they ought to know, as it was of public importance.

The Chairman, who was also Chairman of Prince’s Golf Club, desired that the rent payable by the Club to the Conservators should remain in abeyance during the war. At the beginning of the war the rent was reduced from £250 a year to £150, and at the last meeting another proposal was made that the club should be excused from paying any rent while the war lasted. On the proposition of Mr. Hill-Locks, of the Wallington Council, it was decided that he and, he believed, Mr. Allen, of Croydon, should go through the books of the Club and report to the next meeting as to the state of affairs. Well, he could almost say what the result would be. (Laughter). He had been informed that it was not legitimate to call the heath “Mitcham Common.” It was no more Mitcham Common, declared the Chairman, than London or Croydon Common. Mr. Mizen concluded with the remark, “I know you are still interested in the Common though you must not call it the Mitcham Common, and that is why I have spoken.” (Hear, hear.)

Mitcham and Tooting Mercury (local cutting), c. Friday 5 October 1917

TAKEN TO COVER.—During the air raid on Saturday evening S.C. Sergt. Stanley Dale and S.C. William Holloway came across a man lying asleep on Mitcham Fair Green. Moreover, he was drunk and quite oblivious to danger. “We thought we had better take charge of him for his own sake,” explained the sergeant to the magistrates at Croydon on Monday. So they took him to Mitcham Police Station. He was Charles Halford, aged 52 years, a labourer, of Portland-road, Mitcham. At the station he denied being drunk, but the doctor came and confirmed the diagnosis of the “Specials.” Halford was fined 5s., doctor’s fee 7s. 6d., and 5s. each to the Specials (for their expenses), total 22s. 6d. “Yes,” soliloquised the Clerk (Mr Creak), “it’s a luxury to get drunk in war time.”

1918

1919

Mitcham and Tooting Mercury, Friday 21 February 1919, page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.
To the Editor of the Mercury.

THE OLD CROCK.

Sir,—There seems to be a strong undercurrent of opinion amongst the boys of the old brigade who would like a little help … that the brotherly feeling engendered by forming a friendly rambling community … [OCR fragmentary amid advertising columns] … learned to think of taking a ramble over to Mitcham Common, across the fields to the Wrythe, Carshalton, up the gallop to Banstead Downs and home via Belmont and Sutton, leaving, say, Crusoe-road, 9.15 a.m., bottom of Mitcham-lane, 9.25, Cricket Green, 9.30, returning to Mitcham Green, 1.15 p.m.

Yours faithfully,
THE OLD CROCK.