[The Times: Search: "Wandsworth Common"].
[BNA: Buckmaster Battersea 1883]
[BNA: Buckmaster Wandsworth 1883]
[London Evening Standard: Buckmaster Wandsworth 1883]
[John Conder takes pupils - repeat adverts in Morning Post january onwards]
Education near Cambridge. - The Rector of a very small parish (late a headmaster) RECEIVES a few Boys as PIPILS. Special advantages for back-ward boys. Resident foreign tutor. Extensive grounds. Ponies kept. Terms from 60 guineas. - Rev. J. Conder, LLD., Wendy, Royston.
[BNA: Link]
South London Press - Saturday 17 March 1883
Open Spaces in South London. - The twelfth annual meeting of the Conservators of Wandsworth Common was held on Monday night at the Town Hall, under the presidency of Mr. E. K. Ransome. The clerk (Mr. N. Walsh) having presented the annual report, which referred to certain improvements which had been carried out during the year, including the recovery of piece of the Common from the authorities of Magdalen College,
Mr. S. Bowker objected to the manner in which the Common had been managed. He pointed out that Clapham and Tooting Commons, with 427 acres, cost only £1,309 yearly, ns against £1,320 for the acres of Wandsworth Common; and suggested that the Conservators should take the necessary steps towards handing the Common over to the Metropolitan Board of Works. objected to the religious meetings which were held near the railway station on Sunday evenings.
Mr. James Anderson Rose, for 32 years a resident on the Common, repudiated the idea that there was anything to complain about in its management, and objected most strongly to the idea of handing it over to the Metropolitan Board. As to the religious services, he had often attended them himself, and thought the more open Uie place was, and the more they trusted the people, the better. A vote of thanks to, and confidence in, the Conservators was unanimously accorded.
[BNA: Link.]
THE NEW WORKHOUSE. There was the largest attendance of guardians that has been known for a very long period in view of the adjourned discussion on this subject, only Mr. Caine, M.P., the Rev. W. H. Barlow, Mr. Purdy, and Mr. Cameron being absent out of the 26 guardians who form the board. Mr. Lambert moved the adoption of the report of the Building Committee, which had been adjourned, and which recommended that the plans of Mr. Aldwincklc for the erection of new workhouse adopted, and that the work be taken in hand with the least possible delay. Mr. Lambert said he was sorry that Dr. Longstaff, the able chairman of the committee, had not been re-elected, so as to present the report. As to the necessity for new workhouse no one could glance the figures and deny it. Twenty years ago the population of the Union was 70,000; now it was over 210,000, and still increasing. Nothing could done the present site, the Local Government Board had positively refused sanction any of the plans submitted to them for that purpose. The board had consequently purchased acres of land near Allfarthing-lane, Wandsworth, at a cost of <£lo,ooo, and Mr. Aldwincklc had prepared plans for the erection of workhouse on 5:, acres of the site, to accommodate 021 inmates, with a possibility of enlargement to accommodate 1,200, should it be required. The estimated cost of the building was .£43,000. Mr. Rixon seconded the motion, and observed that in 1881 the infirmary was full for 10 w’ceks—equal to one-fifth of the year ; 1882 for 16 weeks—or onethird of the year; and in 1883 anticipated it would full for half the year. The present workhouse was out of date, ar.d had none of the modern improvements. It was impossible to classify the inmates. The labour could not be properly carried out, for the room in which the men had to work was so close and stuffy it was almost impossible to work in it. It was not the guardians, but the Local Government Board who had decided that new workhouse must be built. The guardians could not help themselves, but there was no reason alarmed. every hand new’ houses were being built, of high rateable value, which would bear their share of the cost of the new workhouse. If the guardians did not cheerfully and willingly build it, they would be compelled to. Mr. Smith asked why the present piece of ground had been chosen for the site of the workhouse, and not a piece nearer the road. The chairman said that subject was not under discussion. , , . Mr. Pluraridge said he knew the reason, but they had not got road to it. The chairman had told him distinctly that the guardians who bought the land knew what they were about, but it was now evident they did not know what they were doing. After a long and somewhat warm speech, he was followed by Mr. Evershed and Mr. Phillips, who also opposed the motion, and the last-named moved that the matter adjourned for six months. This was seconded Mr. Barringer, but in the end the report was adopted on division by vote of 13 against 9, and the committee were re-appointed to carry out the work. . . . For the adjournment of the question for six months there voted —Messrs. Bugler, Barringer, Phillips, Hancock, Evershed, Smith, Josephs, and Field. For proceeding forthwith there voted Canon Clarke, Colonel Hardy, Rev. Mr. Holmes, Rev. Mr. Lander, Miss Synnot, Mrs. Poulden, Lady Pollock, Mr. Rixon, Rev. Mr. Scott, and Messrs. Lambert, Pennington, Heale, and Stanley. The board then adiourned
>>https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0000213/18830519/081/0006Wandsworth Common - Henry Peek, M.P., presided on Wednesday night over meeting of the inhabitants of Wandsworth, Battersea, and Streatham to protest against the proposal to erect a Board School on a field which was originally a part of the common, and was enclosed upon condition that it should never bo built upon. letter was read from Sir Trevor Lawrence, M.P., in which said : "It seems to me imperative duty to resist all attempts to encroach upon open spaces in and around Loudon to which the public have claims, or to which they have rights. In my judgment it is especially incumbent upon public bodies like the Loudon School Board to avoid doing anything which may infringe upon those public claims and rights."
[BNA: Link. NB make connection with Fithian, who lived on Brodrick Rd, also opposed the loss of the field, but was criticised for looking after his own interests - which he denied.]
TEXT