Tag Archives: Tamworth Lane

Victory Day Parties

Victory Day Street parties – from Mitcham News & Mercury, May and June 1945

Almond Way
Bordergate
Bramcote Avenue
Caithness Road
Biggin Avenue and Camomile Avenue
Carshalton Road
Dalton Avenue
Dearn Gardens
Deer Park Gardens
Fernlea Road
Lavender Avenue
Love Lane
Manship Road
New Barnes Road
Pear Tree Close
Raleigh Gardens
Rodney Road
Steers Mead
Tamworth Lane

Almond Way

Almond Way

Biggin Avenue and Camomile Avenue

Biggin Avenue and Camomile Avenue had a joint party. These photos were kindly provided by Alison via the Mitcham History Facebook Group.

Biggin Avenue and Camomile Avenue

Biggin Avenue and Camomile Avenue

Outside no. 19, Biggin Avenue

Bordergate

Bordergate

Bramcote Avenue

Bramcote Avenue

Caithness Road

Caithness Road

Carshalton Road

Carshalton Road

Dalton Avenue

Dalton Avenue – photo kindly provided by Debbie, via the Mitcham History Facebook group.

Dearn Gardens

Dearn Gardens

Deer Park Gardens

Deer Park Gardens

Fernlea Road

Fernlea Road

Lavender Avenue

Lavender Avenue

Love Lane

Love Lane

Manship Road

Manship Road

New Barnes Road

New Barnes Road

Pear Tree Close

Pear Tree Close

Raleigh Gardens

Raleigh Gardens

Rodney Road

Rodney Road

Steers Mead

Steers Mead

Tamworth Lane

Tamworth Lane

1889 : A New Cemetery

From the Croydon Advertiser and East Surrey Reporter – Saturday 18 May 1889 via the British Newspaper Archive.

A NEW CEMETERY AT
MITCHAM.
REMARKABLE UNANIMITY.

A special meeting of the Croydon Union Raral Sanitary Authority was held the Vestry Hall, Mitcham, Saturday last, for the purpose considering the report of the Clerk (Mr. Harry List) and the Surveyor (Mr. H. Chart), on the subject of inquiry recently held the Home Office to the proposed laying-out a cemetery in Tamworth-lane, Mitcham. Mr. W. J. Lamb presided, and the other members present were Messrs. O. W. Berry, Holloway, Keigwin, F. Tomlin, Webster, Brough Maltby, Rev. K, A. Boyle, and Mr. G. P. Bidder, Q.C. (ex-officio).

Messrs. List and Chart reported as follows: —In accordance with your instructions we attended on Saturday last the inquiry held here by Dr. Hoffman, the Medical Officer of the Burials Acts Department of the Home Office, with reference to the proposal establish a proprietary cemetery at Tamworth-iane, Mitcham Common, and we beg to report to you as follows :— ” That Mr. Ough, C.E., of Austin Friars, London, attended the inquiry and stated that he represented the promoters of a cemetery company, who proposed, if the consent of the Home Office were given, to establish at land now in the occupation of Mr. Bremerkamp, situate at Tamworth-lane, Mitcham, a proprietary cemetery in extent about 80 acres, with the view of meeting the burial requirements of South London and the districts around it. It was proposed to lay-out the grounds in an ornamental manner, with entrances from Greyhound-lane, near Streatham Common, and from Tamworth-lane, near Mitcham Common, the former being probably the principal or more used. The soil was described a loamy clay, and it is proposed drain the surface water into the watercourse passing through the property, and which, after traversing the East Fields and Figg’s Marsh, Mitcham, discharges into the River Graveney at Tooting Bridge, and from there to the Wandle; and it was promised to drain the graves into deep drains discharging into a tank to constructed for the purpose, from whence it would be pumped through a filter either into the sewers of the Sanitary Authority, with their permission, or, if such permission is withheld, on to an irrigation of about three acres prepared for the purpose, from whence it would gravitate into the watercourse before mentioned. Of these alternative proposals for dealing with the deeper drainage the former would be preferred, in which case the promoters would be prepared to compensate the Authority either the payment a lump sura or way of rental for the use of the sewers and fur dealing with the sewage. Mr. Ough laid before the Inspector a plan of the land and proposed works for dealing with the sewage, and at the same time produced and read a report made by M. Mausergh, the eminent sanitary engineer of Westminster, on a proposal to deal with the drainage of a cemetery in the manner now suggested. We then pressed upon the Inspector the fact that as no information with regard to the proposal was yet in possession of the Authority, they were unable to form an opinion as to whether or not it would be desirable in the interests of the district to oppose the proposal, and suggested that the inquiry should be adjourned to give you the opportunity of considering the proposal. Dr. Hoffman consented this suggestion, promising that if the Authority, or the parish of Mitcham, desired to oppose he would continue the inquiry on hearing to that effect, and if the Authority desired to propose any conditions with the view of ensuring the proper use of the works for purifying the subsoil water, such conditions should receive his mast careful consideration, and if reasonable, he would recommend—in the event of the site being sanctioned —that such stipulations should made should ensure the fulfilment of the requirements the Authority. We then asked that copies of the plans of M. Mausergh’s report, which had been produced, might be furnished us for the information of the Authority.”

A long discussion ensued on the consideration of the report, Mr. Bidder taking a prominent part.

It seemed to the general feeling that cemetery would an improvement to that particular part of Mitcham, and that it would open up the roads and stimulate building operations in the vicinity.

It was also mentioned that the objections which were urged against the site were not necessary in this cose, because the Morden site was below the flood level. In this site there would be no difficulty draining into the Authority’s sewers, as the promoters did not anticipate that the drainage would amount to more than 8,000 gallons a day, and the Authority’s sewers could take that additional amount without any difficulty. It was also stated that Messrs. Watney and all the adjoining owners were in favour of the scheme, or at any rate had no idea of opposing it, and there was not the slightest opposition at the inquiry.

After some further discussion, The Chairman moved that the Authority are not disposed to oppose the establishment of the proposed cemetery at Tamworth-lane, Mitcham, provided that in the event of the Home Office sanctioning the site for the purpose of a cemetery, the Home Office be requested to place all the sanitary arrangements of the proposed cemetery under the control of the Rural Sanitary Authority; and that failing an arrangement being come to to drain into the Authority’s sewers, it be required that a filtration area of not less than six acres provided.

Mr. Bidder seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously.

It was also decided that the Clerk should send a copy of the resolution to Dr. Hoffman, and that his attention should be called to the fact that in the Golden Green scheme, referred to by the promoters, a filtration area of three acres was considered necessary for cemetery of 30 acres in extent.