Number 17 – Spring 2021 CHATHAM HISTORICAL SOCIETY Chronicle 'Keeping Medway's History Alive'

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ Medway's Jewish Community ● Walter Brisac Chatham Town FC ● A “Custer Avenger”

1 CHATHAM HISTORICAL SOCIETY meets at St Stephen's Church, Maidstone Road, Chatham, ME4 6JE on the second Wednesday of each month except January and August. Doors open at 7:15pm and the meeting starts at 7:30pm.

News and information about Chatham Historical Society is available on the website: http://chathamhistoricalsoc.chessck.co.uk

Officers of the committee President Vacancy Chairman Len Feist Hon Secretary Catharina Clement Hon Treasurer Barry Meade

MEDWAY CHRONICLE is published by Chatham Historical Society. Editor Christopher Dardry Contributors as credited throughout the magazine.

Views expressed by contributors do not necessarily represent the opinions of the Society. Copyright remains with the authors.

The Editor welcomes articles for inclusion in future issues of the Medway Chronicle. Please submit text and images in electronic form by email to [email protected] or on paper to the editor at any of the society's meetings. (The editor prefers email.)

The Medway Chronicle is produced with the financial support of MEDWAY COUNCIL.

Front cover: Chatham Town FC. Winners of the 1935­36 Amateur League.

2 Index Victor Chidgey...... 4 The beginnings of the Medway Jewish community...... 5 Walter Brisac: Exploding the myth...... 13 The Early Morning Rush...... 20 History of Chatham Town Football Club 1882 - 1940...... 21 A “Custer Avenger”: The Story of a Chatham Baker’s Son...... 30 High Halstow...... 38

3 Victor Chidgey by Len Feist

Members of the Chatham Historical Society and Lower Medway Archaeological Research Group attended the funeral of Victor Charles Chidgey, who had been Chairman of both, held at Medway Crematorium, Blue Bell Hill on Monday 1st March 2021.

Vic, as he was generally known, was born in Hackney and grew up to be a very independent man and worked as an electrician, which afforded him time to travel. He was very interested in history and archaeology, becoming a member of the above two societies, and would often give talks on his interests. His enthusiasm for his work will be missed.

Vic was born on 2nd March 1943 and died on 26th December 2020 aged 77.

4 The beginnings of the Medway Jewish community by Irina Fridman

Officially Jews did not reside in Rochester and had not visited it since their expulsion in 1290. However, it would be reasonable to presume that as Jews lived in London, some would have passed through the area or even lived in the city since the Reformation. Watling Street has been the main thoroughfare connecting London with the continent since Roman times. There are simply no records that could shed light on the matter. The only surviving information we have is about a Jewish musician from Italy, originally invited to court by Henry VIII. Thomas Lupo, a violinist and composer, seems to have lived in Gillingham after 1620 until his death at the end of 1627. His son, Theophilus, who replaced him as court violinist from 16 February 1628 probably also lived within the manor of Gillingham.

However, the inhabitants of Rochester and the surrounding area were probably familiar with the stories and plays by Chaucer, Marlowe and Shakespeare about the Jew as a bogeyman. As if to confirm their fears, the first official newspaper story, published shortly after the readmission, was about a murder.

‘On Tuesday, 15 October 1661, a prince of Transylvania, Cossuma Albertus, who had been on a visit to King Charles II, was approaching Rochester in his chariot. The vehicle got stuck fast in the mire near Gads Hill, within a mile from . The Prince resolved to sleep in his coach. According to the report of Mercurius Publicus newspaper for October, 1661, “while the Prince was fast asleep, his coachman, Isaac Jacob, a Jew, about midnight takes the Prince's hanger from under his head, and stabs him to the heart; and calling to his aid his companion—whose name was Casimirus Karsagi — they both completed the tragedy by dragging him out of the carriage, cutting off his head and throwing the mutilated remains into a ditch near at hand. The two men having possessed themselves of a large sum of money which the Prince had about his person, then took back the carriage and horses to Greenhithe, where they left them "to be called for." On the following Saturday, an arm of the murdered Prince was brought by a dog belonging to a Doctor of Physic of Rochester, who was riding by the spot, whereupon search being made, the other remains were discovered. Not long afterwards the Jew and the footboy were both taken in London, and being brought before the Lord Mayor, the footboy confessed the whole murder. They were tried at Maidstone Assizes before Sir Orlando Bridgman and were sentenced to be executed.’

5 The prince was buried with great solemnity in Rochester Cathedral. Rochesterians’ worst fears were confirmed. But if the city could not construct physical walls against the Jews, they could build political and corporate ones. On 6 September 1673, Rochester Corporation passed by­laws, forbidding he non­residents, or foreigners, to trade within the city; similarly, freemen of Rochester were not permitted to employ foreigners in any capacity.

Jews were permitted to settle in without any restrictions, but it would be an exaggeration to say that they were welcomed by many. Having fled from persecution in their countries, and hopeful for a peaceful life, Jews were nevertheless fearful of their new surroundings. Hostility of local populations only reminded them of the countries they left. Conversion was viewed by some as a pragmatic solution for survival.

The first reference to Jews in the area appears already on 19 February 1674. Rochester Cathedral’s officer records the alms given: [one shilling] ‘to a poor Jew lately made a Christian, by order of Dr Dixon’. It was further seven years before another reference to Jews, on 24 June 1681, stated: ‘To the relief of a Jew turned Christian.’ It seems the record­keeping was lax, as the names of the Jews are not known. The next year brings us the first names. On 17 January 1682 one shilling was ‘given to Thomas Abraham a Jew newly converted’ and a 4 April record states: ‘Paid 2s to John Alexander a converted Jew by the Dean’s order and the Vice Dean.’

Each record appears in the long list of people who received alms. Some of those people were passing through Rochester on route to somewhere else, as the description next to their names stated. Others lived in the vicinity. Nothing in the above records hints that those Jews were mere travellers, passing through the area. The absence of any description next to their names tells us that they were the first Jewish residents of Rochester, and their poverty suggests their Ashkenazi origin.

By the end of the 17th century, Rochester had acquired a commercial rival. The neighbouring small settlement of Chatham, which had only 200 people living within its boundaries in 1568, developed into an important governmental town with an estimated population of 2,100. Its own rapidly expanding royal dockyard offered numerous opportunities for making a living and, as a result, the poverty levels were much lower than in many other Kentish towns.

While the citizens of Rochester ‘basked in their winter sunshine of tradition, enjoying the advantages and suffering the ills pertaining to antiquity, Chatham possessed no traditions, and no local precedents impeded its development.’ Its

6 occupants spoke a different tongue alien to the Kentish natives. As the historian James Presnail writes: ‘Chatham was a colony of the New England set down in the midst of the Old, a pioneer township separated from the long­established by the forbidding barriers of change.’ It raised expectations for toleration, opportunities for work and a possibility to blend in with the environment.

Rochester 1720

No synagogue existed in the area, and there was no possibility of registering a birth of a child. However, a registration was necessary for legal purposes. The heirs of the property were required to prove their legitimate descent. To do so they needed to procure depositions from midwives who had attended their mother’s confinement, from other family members and from the neighbours and attested by a notary. So, it became quite a common practice for Jews to pay the local clergy for the entry of their births and marriages in the registers of the local parish church. Indeed, the registers of St Mary’s Church in Chatham record the baptisms of the children of a certain Moses in September 1677, April 1683 and June 1687, and the children of Moise in April 1678, May 1680, December 1684 and February 1688. We also find the marriages of William Levy in 1694 and Isaac Raphuen – probably a garbling of the Sephardi name Raphael ­ in 1695.

Those immigrants were mainly young men with no opportunity to learn a craft in their country of origin. And if the box of a Sephardi peddler included cuckoo clocks, sealing wax, spices, thimbles, pen knives and pencils, Ashkenazi peddlers, tended to specialise in inexpensive jewellery. The latter were a common sight at Strood Fair, as recorded in the poem written in 1756 by the Rev Thomas Austen, Vicar of Allhallows, and published the same year:

7 Here Jews, with pencils, seals, and gaudy rings, Convert your money into needless things.

It is not clear from the poem whether those were travelling Jews or those who had settled in the area. However, the parish records provide us with a glimpse into the numbers and geographical distribution of the Jewish population who did settle in the Medway Towns, and who resorted to the churches to register marriage or births of their children. From the beginning of the 18th century until 1780 there are 81 birth registrations, ie baptisms (the separation of birth registration and baptism would come only in 1836 with the introduction of the civil registration and the establishment of the General Records Office), seven marriages and eight burials recorded in St Mary’s Church in Chatham, while St Margaret’s parish registers record 19 baptisms and one marriage; St Nicholas of Rochester had merely two baptisms. Chatham, with its cosmopolitan population, proved to be at least on the surface a more hospitable and accepting place.

Chatham Dockyard 1738

The peak of the baptisms fell during the 1740s with a total of 27 baptisms recorded – 25 baptisms for St Mary’s, Chatham and two for St Nicholas, Rochester. The number of Jewish immigrants would have been very small in comparison with the overall population of both Rochester and Chatham. However, there is no doubt that their presence was noticeable, mainly by their appearance. This was especially true in regards to those who had recently arrived into the country – Jews wore beards, which were not fashionable in England until the 19th century; they wore a long garment and later some would also have sidelocks and a wide­brimmed hat.

In 1766, John Roberts, a house carpenter originally of Chatham, acquired a 40­year

8 lease for two tenements in St Margaret’s parish from St Bartholomew’s Hospital. One of the cottages was on the bank of Bull’s Head Alley, tucked away from the main thoroughfare of the High Street and nearly opposite the Bull’s Inn. By 1770 the property was adapted for Jewish worship. On 14 August 1780 Roberts renewed the lease and continued to sublet the cottage, now described as ‘lately rebuilt’, to the Jews ­ this time the document provides us with one name, though it is silent about the others: Levi Israel, who is not to be confused with Israel Levi. On 6 January 1787 the carpenter obtained a licence to alienate two adjacent premises and the alleyway to Levi Israel and others, making the arrangement legally more solid and more permanent for the Jewish community. As a result, the subsequent renewal in 1794 allowed the parties to deal with the trustees of St Bartholomew’s Hospital directly and rent the properties in their own right. Those responsible for the 40­year lease were:

 Levi Israel of Chatham, silversmith  Solomon Mordecai (Rochester), silversmith  Israel Levi (Rochester), chapman  Humphrey Solomon (Rochester) salesman  Isaac Abraham (St Margaret), tobacconist  Hart Cohen (Chatham), salesman  Michael Abraham (Chatham), salesman  Abraham Moses (Chatham), salesman

The above records allow us to deduce several facts about the Jewish community of the Medway Towns at the time.

Judaism puts especial importance on collective worship. The minimum quorum, 10 adult men (over the age of 13), does not require the worship to take place in a purpose­built structure: any can be adapted for the collective prayer and it can even be in open air. An enclosed place, such as a room adapted accordingly, is required only to house a Sefer Torah (Torah scroll), needed for public reading of the Jewish Law. This style of worship is compatible with the history of exile and wandering. It is also reminiscent of Mishkan, the biblical tent. The need for a dedicated building signifies the size and the permanency of the Jewish community in the Medway Towns. A room in a private house was not enough to accommodate all the members of the congregation. The increasing number of entries in the parish records, from five at the turn of the century to more than 20 in the 1740s, makes it obvious that the community expanded dramatically, and required a dedicated synagogue.

The place was situated a substantial distance from the city of Rochester and away from direct view from the High Street, chosen as if not to offend the hosts. The area

9 of extreme west end of Chatham High Street on the border with Rochester also had a notorious reputation; in the 1820s it was referred to as the Khyber Pass – narrow and dangerous, but essential for getting from Chatham to Rochester and vice­versa. The proximity to the river, the dockyard and the barracks ensured the existence of many drinking establishments, frequently troubled by bouts of violence, spilling over into the streets.

Eight people collaborated to establish a synagogue in the area to allow the community to practise their worship. Their financial position was rather precarious. Thefts and burglaries were a frequent occurrence; one unsuccessful investment would throw the family into destitution. This would have rendered the rent price prohibitive. It required eight people to chip­in in order to afford the rent and maintain the building. It also tells us that only eight people from the community, however big it was, were wealthy enough to contribute.

The Synagogue (centre of map)

10 The intense hostility towards Jews as a group was no doubt a strong contributing factor in the desire to escape the stigma. The Christian population dictated the customs and rejected anyone who did not fit the mould. Unless the Jewish minority was prepared to live on the margins of society and lead a precarious existence relying on the whims of the ruling majority, it had no choice but to adapt. Ultimately, Jewish integration was dependent not on Jewish achievements but on the attitudes of those with whom they wanted and needed to mix.

The beards, which were not fashionable till the 19th century, and the traditional dress code were the first to go. So when George Gordon converted to Judaism and started growing a beard, many of his contemporaries decided that he was insane. Wives in the better­off families abandoned the regulation of wearing wigs in public and were eager to follow fashion. Jews frequented coffee houses – Rochester had its first one by 1711 ­ and abandoned Yiddish as another distinctive feature setting them apart from the local population. In keeping with the national trend, by 1815 the language of the records of Rochester and Chatham Jewish community had switched from the combination of Hebrew and Yiddish to be exclusively English. The process of acculturation began, and it preceded social integration and political emancipation.

The above article is an extract from Irina Fridman's recently published book Foreigners, Aliens, Citizens: Medway and its Jewish community, 1066­1939. It is available from www.amazon.co.uk, and from Chatham Historical Society (www.chathamhistoricalsoc.btck.co.uk/Contact%20us) while stocks last.

11 As Irina Fridman says in the introduction to this book, “The Jewish presence in Rochester, Chatham and their environs goes back to the 1100s”. It is therefore surprising that an in­depth examination of this long­established community has never been attempted before. A project like this was long overdue. The significance of such a study goes beyond the subject matter itself, important though it is. In my view, it is impossible to have a full understanding of the history of the Medway Towns without examining the significant contribution made by incomers and their descendants.

However, better late than never, and Irina has risen to the challenge splendidly. This is an extremely comprehensive piece of work. The author has examined all the available sources, from medieval pipe rolls and chronicles to Victorian and Edwardian newspapers. She has interviewed members of the existing Jewish community and descendants of important families of the past such as the Barnards. She provides illustrations gathered from numerous sources. Many, if not most of these have never been published before.

She has assembled her research into an all­embracing study covering the period from the eleventh century to the eve of the Second World War. In a brief postscript, Irina takes the story to the present day.

She writes in a clear and accessible style which will appeal to both academic and general readers. Her footnotes are full and informative, and because they are included as a separate appendix, do not clutter the text.

The other appendices contain a mine of information. I was particularly impressed with lists of Jewish residents garnered from nineteenth century street directories as well of those who, either from conviction or expediency decided to be baptised in Anglican churches.

There has been a crying need for a book such as this for many years. Irina Fridman’s fascinating story of Medway’s Jewish presence will surely remain the definitive history of the community for many years to come.

Brian Joyce

12 Walter Brisac: Exploding the myth by Catharina Clement

This instalment follows on from the article in issue no. 14, which covered Walter Brisac’s early life and military career. Our current article focuses on Walter’s life after he left the army as well as his relationship with his family and his ancestral claims. He made certain claims that have since been proven to be untrue or at best tenuous.

During 1852 Walter Brisac was invalided out of the army at Dugshai in India due to ill health. He seems to have ended up at Fort Pitt Hospital in Chatham where a medical report was made on him on 29th June 1853:

‘Loss of health and weakness of intellect to be attributed to constitutional causes aggravated by climate; not the result of neglect, vice, or intemperance.’

‘After examination I am of opinion that Walter Brisac is in consequence of weakness and injuries unfit for further service.’

Fort Pitt Hospital, Chatham

Reproduced with permission of Medway Archives Centre

By Walter’s own account to friends he suffered from sunstroke, although this does not seem likely to have caused any impairment to his intellect. Possibly he may have contracted some disease or ailment such as malaria that impacted on his overall health. He was paid an army allowance of 7d per day till 1853 when this abruptly ended.

13 Correspondent and journalist, H.B. of Romford, interviewed Walter in the late 1870s and had access to a packet of papers he kept, which he copied into various note books. The only known image of Walter Brisac was taken at the behest of this journalist by a studio photographer and reproduced in the Chatham News of 16th December 1893 along with his account of Walter’s life. Walter was probably about 55 years old when this was taken.

Photograph of Walter Brisac c. 1878

Reproduced with permission of Medway Archives Centre

It is this journalist, who takes up the story of Walter’s efforts to gain financial redress from the records he had access to at the time. ‘Under date of August 28th 1856, is a portion of a letter from the Secretary and Registrar of the Royal Hospital, Chelsea, stating that the writer is “Directed to acquaint you that the Lords Commissioners have no authority under the regulations to grant any allowance from this establishment.”’ In 1867 Walter had tried them again for a pension and was again refused. On his father’s death in 1868 he tried the Admiralty to see if he could qualify for a payment from them. His last resort was a petition to the Secretary of War on 15th May 1873: ‘I have since my discharge done all I could to secure a living, but as age increases I begin to find it exceedingly hard to earn my daily bread, and more especially everything is now so dear…praying you if it be possible to grant me some small allowance so that I may not be utterly destitute.’

Walter Brisac made other attempts to mitigate his financial hardship. He applied to his father for assistance whilst he was still living in Peckham. Douglas Pettiward Brisac replied to his son in the early 1850s: ‘I regret I cannot avail myself of coming to see you, being low in pocket’. Although Douglas had come into an inheritance of £20 from his aunt Anne and was the sole beneficiary of his mother’s estate in 1838, he nevertheless often struggled financially. In the mid­1840s he sometimes had difficulty in feeding his family and by 1851 he was on half pay. A

14 correspondent (Old Dry­as­Dust) claimed in 1944 that Douglas died in poverty on a bed of straw and that Walter had refused his father’s pension, as that would have made him liable for his debts as well. This stands in stark contrast to the evidence of H.B., who indicates that Walter did pursue this angle and had made a fair copy of that letter.

In the end ‘Old’ Walter had to resort to obtaining a pedlar’s licence to maintain himself. Henry Smetham recollected in 1943 that Walter procured some of his wares from James Stevens; toilet soap, Dutch drops, pills etc. His main merchandise was haberdashery items. The only census that Walter can be traced on, that of 1881, described him as a haberdasher, aged 57. Apparently he was too much of a ‘gentleman’ to press his wares and so found it hard to earn his living that way.

Medway Union Workhouse, Magpie Hall Road, Chatham

Reproduced with permission of Medway Archives Centre

Walter was so poor that about seven years before his death he was admitted into the workhouse by Doctor Buchanan on the point of starvation. However he discharged himself from the workhouse a few months later, ‘considering himself superior to the other inmates’ and returned to his former way of life.

Despite allusions to the contrary Walter had a good relationship with his father. H.B. stated: ‘It has been said by those who claimed to speak with authority that the relations of the ragged recluse with his father had never been of an affectionate nature, that he was in fact an outcast from the parental home.’ The surviving correspondence for 1844­7 gives an account of a close family. Proof also comes from H.B., who had sight of Walter’s pathetic bundle of documents he kept tied up in string, which included letters from his father. A letter of 10th June 1853, just before Walter’s final discharge at Chatham, from his father read as follows:­

15 ‘Dear Walter, I have received your dutiful letter this afternoon, hoping you remain in good health. I shall be happy to see my Dear Boy if he can come to his Old Father’s address….Believe me my dear boy, Your affectionate father D.P.B P.S. Your sister sends her kind love to you.

A letter of a fortnight later was also concerned about ‘My Dear Son’s indisposition’ and thanked him for the present Walter had sent. This correspondence gives the impression of a family, who were on friendly terms with Walter in 1853.

The father and sister had moved to Morden Street in Rochester by the 1861 census. Douglas was by then retired from the Royal Marines, having suffered badly from rheumatism. From other local accounts it would seem that Walter was in contact with his father and Arabella Marshall in the early 1860s. His sister, a spinster, died aged 42 at Rochester and was buried in St Margaret’s Church on 18th December 1864. It seems probable that Walter would have attended his sister’s funeral. His father died four years later in October 1868. He wrote from his father’s address to the Admiralty on 23rd November 1868, just a month after his father’s demise, indicating that at this stage he was resident there. Walter also appears to have had detailed knowledge of his father’s financial affairs, suggesting a close connection at this point. There is little doubt from the facts uncovered that Douglas Pettiward Brisac was Walter’s father and Arabella the sister he often told people about.

Yet despite much truth about his parentage there were other tales Walter told local people about himself and his lineage that are not strictly true. He was not a lieutenant in the East India Company, never rising above the rank of private. His failure to advance in the ranks had nothing to do with his parentage or French descent. It can be ascertained from various records that the previous four generations had all been Captains or Lieutenants in the army or Royal Marines.

He was indeed descended from French Huguenots, but there is no trace of a landed Brisac Irish connection that can be found. His grandfather was Lieutenant Walter Henry Brisac and grandmother Elizabeth Marshall. A generation further back was his great grandfather Captain George Brisac, a director of the French Hospital in 1770, and his wife Mary Mortlock. It was Walter’s great great grandfather, Peter Brisac, who fled France as a Huguenot child refugee. He came over from the Netherlands at the turn of the eighteenth century. Peter Brisac was naturalised by an Act of Parliament in 1708 and served in the British army as a Captain. He married Susanna Regnault, of French descent, in 1702, who ran a young ladies

16 boarding­school in Enfield, Middlesex. This humble family of Huguenot extraction were always merely Brisac in England; perhaps Walter added the ‘De’ to his surname to give himself status when he was in straitened circumstances.

Further research has uncovered the original Huguenot refugee as Pastor Benjamin De Brissac (Peter’s father) of Châtellerault in France. It would appear he arrived in the Netherlands in 1686, where he ministered in Amsterdam till his death in 1722. As a pastor with Calvinist views, his position in France became untenable after the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685.

However a curiosity in the family is the name Pettiward accorded to Walter’s father. Some internet trawling came in useful here and it was discovered that a Reverend Roger Mortlock had changed his name by an Act of Parliament of 1749 to Pettiward on inheriting a substantial legacy from his uncle Roger Pettiward. From his will it can be ascertained that he was the brother of Mary Mortlock and so explains the names Walter’s father was given. This will of 1774 also left provision for a legacy of dividends and interest on £4,000 pounds worth of government securities to be paid to his brother­in­law George Brisac and his wife annually and upon their death the £4,000 to be divided equally among their surviving children. Whether this legacy found its way to George and Mary’s children is unclear. It certainly never made its way down Walter’s line of descendants, as both Walter and his father are testimony to.

Strangely a Roger Pettiward, son of the above testator and of Finborough Hall in Suffolk, left a bequest to a George Brisac of £100 in his will of 1833. Presumably this was referring to his cousin, George Brisac junior of Cheltenham. This will was still in the process of being executed in 1864 as the identity of Lieutenant George Brisac of the Marines was unknown and so a notice was placed in the London Gazette of 28th June 1864, requesting any male heir or issue of George Brisac to get in contact within a month with the solicitors handling the case. Although George, then of Honfleur in France, did not die till 1836 he obviously was not aware of this inheritance nor apparently were his two grandsons, Anthony and George. In 1865 a petition was made to the courts to settle this affair. The judge ruled that Roger Pettiward had actually meant Robert Pettiward Brisac, also a Lieutenant in the Marines and recent visitor to the deceased before he died, leaving him to inherit the legacy. A complete search and trawl through naval records and family history websites has found no trace of a Robert Pettiward Brisac or any other Brisac, who was a Lieutenant in the Marines in 1833, apart from Douglas Pettiward Brisac, suggesting they were one and the same person. Was this a misprint in the newspaper report or subterfuge on Walter’s father’s part? The legacy would probably have covered some of his debts, but was hardly life changing. He

17 certainly had sufficient knowledge of his uncle’s life to know that any heirs would be in France and unlikely to make a claim. It was not the first time he had pursued an inheritance when in debt, being quite proactive in chasing a legacy he felt was due to his wife in Ireland in the 1840s. Douglas made contact with distant relations when he was in dire straits at that time. Perhaps similar circumstances persuaded him to visit a dying relative, Roger Pettiward, in 1833 in the hope of being included in his will.

Finborough Hall, Suffolk, c. 1909

In later life Walter was aware of his family ties to Finborough Hall in Suffolk. H.B. notes there was correspondence between him and the manor house in 1869, following his father’s death. A letter from Finborough Hall stated: ‘I do not know of any money sent for your particular use,’ but advised he would contact his friend (a solicitor) in Chatham to delve into the subject of Walter’s father’s papers. According to ‘Old Dry­as­Dust’s’ father, Colonel Pettiward was in residence at Finborough Hall at the time and he tried to persuade Walter to go and visit this relative, who had three daughters, and form ‘a marriage alliance with one of the ladies’. However by that date the wife of Roger Pettiward had died and there were no surviving offspring to inherit Finborough Hall. So there were no female relations for Walter to marry and inherit it. Walter was indeed related to one of the wealthiest families in England, but gained nothing from this connection financially.

Another peculiarity was Walter’s alleged second middle name ‘Sargent’. There seems no ready explanation where this originated from. His sister, Arabella Marshall, was named after her paternal grandmother. This lead to much digging and beavering away at various sources to find that at one time the Brisac family had been tenants of a property owned by a Walter Largent in St Margaret’s, Rochester. In 1834 Susannah Largent, the widow of this Walter, left a bequest in her will to her sister Elizabeth (Marshall) Brisac. On checking back through the records completed by Douglas Pettiward Brisac for his son’s admission into Greenwich

18 School it was clear that the middle name was Largent, not Sargent. A simple comparison of his handwriting with his own title ‘Lieutenant’ made this obvious. This has been misinterpreted by even the keenest archivists at Kew and Shropshire. Some desire to carry on the Largent name inspired the Brisacs to continue this tradition as they had done with Pettiward.

The story will continue in the next issue, covering Walter Brisac’s alleged love life and relationship with women.

19 The Early Morning Rush by Len Feist

I worked as a young lad in a newsagent’s shop at the end of the large housing estate in Strood. Each morning the manager and I piled up boxes of packets of Players Weights, Wills Woodbine, Golden Virginia, Old Holbourn, Hearts of Oak­all in tens and half ounces­boxes of matches alongside newspapers such as the Mirror& Herald. Then about just after 6am it started­the ones who had a bus to catch and then the cycle workers came. All or a great many of them for the Dockyard at Chatham. Then as time went on those who worked nearer­such as those for the Esplanade, Airport and then of course those nearer home in Strood itself. In most cases the worker had the right money or a small amount of change was given for two shillings or half a crown tendered.

There were some who worked in London and had a train to catch. These were the ones who bought the Express, Telegraph or even the Times/ they smoked Players Senior Service or Capstan and Gold Leaf tobacco. Next we delivered the papers to the houses; Reynolds News and the Daily Mail. Comics such as Film Fun, Beano, the Hotspur, Wizard and the Eagle for the children. Women’s Own and Women’s Weekly for the housewives. The shop also sold sweets all in jars; Jameson’s chocolate eclairs, Bassett’s pear drops and acid drops, sherbet dabs, 4 for 1 shilling, fruit salads, wine gums­the list was never ending. I expect you’ll remember some I have not mentioned­­memories eh!

(2 shillings = 10p; half­crown or 2 shillings and 6 pence = 12½p in today’s money)

20 History of Chatham Town Football Club 1882 ­ 1940

by Pat Byrne (CTFC Historian)

1882­1900

The club was formed in 1882 as Chatham United, when Rochester Invicta merged with the football team of the Royal Engineers Band with the intention of creating a side that was capable of holding their own with the best in the country. The main person behind the merger was Harry Hobart whose plan was to bring together all the best players in the Medway Towns into one team. The main purpose was to create a team capable of challenging for the FA Cup a competition that started out in 1871­ 72 in which the local Chatham based side the Royals Engineers were to reach the final only to lose 1­0 to the Wanderers in the 1873­74 season. Prior to the formation of Chatham Football Club, the Royal Engineers were to appear in four Finals winning the trophy on one occasion in 1874­75 season after drawing 1­1 with Old Etonians and winning the replay 2­0, both games were played at Kennington Oval. They were to adopt the town’s coat of arms & motto as their club badge and were known as The Chats.

Chatham win first ever match Chatham played their first match on 7th October 1882, defeating Harley Street F.C. 4­0 at Mr Hartridge’s Meadow in Gillingham. The team that played for Chatham that day was 1. P.Y. Pettit, 2. Harold Vaughan, 3. EW Lush, 4. L. Conquer, 5. H. Blake, 6. R. Conquer (captain), 7.G.G. Verrall, 8. C.J. Collins, 9. H.K.P Ekins, 10. Hugh Jenner & 11. W.J Soppitt. The Chatham goals were scored by Hugh Jenner, C.J. Collins, R. Conquer & H.K.P Ekins.

The club were to have strong army connections which also allowed access to a strong pool of players as the Army were playing Association Football with keen interest and had several teams competing in the FA Cup and local leagues. Chatham

21 were to move onto the Great Lines where they were not allowed to charge an entrance fee and they collected funds via an honesty box which resulted in far less remittance than the attendances they were receiving and this was causing concern amongst the Chatham committee. The club entered the FA Cup shortly after forming and were given a bye in the preliminary first­round and were drawn away at Hendon FC in the preliminary second round and they were defeated by two goals to one. They were to be defeated the following season again in the preliminary first round by Old Westminsters by three­goals to nil. In their third season as a club they got a bye in the preliminary first­round then drew Hendon FC again in the preliminary second­round but this time at home and duly won by a solitary goal, the competition was seeing huge amount of entries and the FA Cup was gaining vast interest across the nation. The preliminary third­round saw Chatham defeat Hanover away by two­ goals to nil and in the following round they defeated Lower Darwen at home by a sound four­goals to nil thus reaching the preliminary fifth­round the final round of ties prior to the first round proper where Football League clubs were to enter the competition. Chatham drew Old Carthusians at home in a game that attracted a large crowd but alas Chatham were beaten by three goals to nil.

Chatham win their first­ever trophy In 1885­86 season Chatham were to lift their first major trophy in winning the Kent Badge and they retained this trophy for the following two seasons. The Kent Badge was replaced by the Kent Senior Cup in 1888­89 and Chatham became its first winners and the competition remains to this day with Chatham going on to lift this illustrious piece of silverware on five occasions to date though the last success was in 1918­19 after the First World War.

Chatham reach FA Cup Quarter­Finals The FA Cup remained the prize that Chatham aimed to prove themselves in and in 1888­89 it was one that was to prove pivotal to the club’s change of direction. Chatham played a total of eight games in the FA Cup to reach the quarter­finals, they defeated Old Wykehamists 2­1 away, London Caledonians 4­0 at home, Clapton 1­0 away, Crusaders away 3­2 to reach the first round proper and they were drawn against South Shore and again Chatham won 2­1 and were awarded an away tie at Football League side Nottingham Forest. Chatham earned an incredible 2­2 draw and a huge crowd gathered to see the replay, Chatham pulled off shock by winning 3­2 and qualified for the quarter­finals of the FA Cup, they were to be drawn against leading First Division side West Bromwich Albion and a record attendance at the Great Lines saw Chatham thrashed by ten goals to one. West Bromwich would go on to win the illustrious FA Cup beating Preston North end 3­0 in the Final.

22 With the club winning the Kent Senior Cup and reaching the FA Cup quarter­finals the club realised they needed an enclosure of their own in order to be able to charge entrance fees and set out a firm footing for turning professional going forward. The club were to purchase at the beginning of 1889­90 season the "Alderman Winch's Enclosed Ground", which was later to be known as Maidstone Road Ground.

The period leading up until the end of the century saw Chatham win the Rochester & District Charity Cup in 1891­92, completing the treble of winning the Kent League Championship, Kent Senior Cup & Chatham & District Charity Cup in 1894­95. This enabled Chatham to play in the top tier of football outside of the Football League in the Southern League, competing against teams such as Millwall Athletic, Southampton St Marys, Norwich City, Luton Town, Bristol City and Tottenham Hotspur. Chatham were actually one of the founding member clubs but they did not get elected into the league on its opening season. In their first season Chatham were to finish sixth in the table, fifth in their second season then in their third season they finished third behind champions Southampton St Mary’s, runner­ups Millwall Athletic but ahead of fourth place side Tottenham Hotspur and they won the newly formed Thames Combination Championship in 1896­97 a midweek league. Chatham resigned from the Southern League after finishing in fifteenth in the league in 1899­1900 due to severe financial problems and returned to the Kent League.

Chatham early team photo circa 1899

23 1900­1914

Chatham on the brink The club closed briefly following the death of their captain and leading player Howell Lewis and this had a profound effect on the club and in the close season they decided it must continue and rise again and despite missing out on completing in the 1900­1901 season as they were too late in sending in the entrance forms they decided to embark on a series of challenge matches against Kent League & Southern League sides throughout the season which some notable victories over Maidstone United home 3­2, Sheppey United home 3­1, Deal Town home 5­0 & Sittingbourne at home 3­1 in front of attendances in excess of 2,000 paying spectators and Chatham were truly back as a vibrant club.

Chatham win third Kent Senior Cup

On their return to Kent League football in 1901­02 Chatham finished eighth in a league comprising ten teams but the following season they challenged for the title finishing in runners­up position. They were to lift the Kent League title in the following two seasons in 1903­04 & 1904­05 respectively and were to win their third Kent Senior Cup also in 1904­05 completing a famous double after defeating Sittingbourne 3­1 in a thrilling Final. The club again failed to build on their success on the pitch caused by bad decisions off the field.

Chatham again left the Kent League following this success and joined the South Eastern League, they struggled to have any impact at the higher level and the travelling expenses, overnight stays in hotel accommodation and higher match fees to players drained the club’s finances and they even held Athletic & Sporting Carnivals to raise money and though these were very well attended over a three­year period, the finances were causing real concern and the club returned to the Kent League for the 1910­11 season where they were to finish in sixth place but were to lift the Kent Senior Cup for the fourth time.

The club continued to make an impact in the Kent League they finished fourth in 1911/12 but the hopes and aspirations were being curtailed by the financial problems that seemed to cause constant anxiety at the club, it was managed poorly with various boards being put in place and the club continued to lack direction as they finished sixth in 1912/13 season & fifth in 1913/14 as World War One broke out and all football in Great Britain was cancelled. All the Chatham Town players that were on the books at the time left to sign up or to serve their country in whatever capacity was deemed fit for purpose.

24 1914­1939

Chatham win Victory Cup & fourth Kent Senior Cup

Following the First World War, many clubs had lost a great deal of their former players and Chatham like their peers started again from scratch with a completely new squad of players and Chatham were to resume with great success in winning the specially created Victory Cup where they defeated Gravesend 2­1 in front of 8,000 at Maidstone’s ground, they also won the Kent Senior Cup for a fourth time which was to be the last time they would hold this famous trophy, they beat Maidstone 2­1 in the final on their own ground. Chatham also beat New Brompton 2­1 in the final of the Chatham Charity Cup as they returned to football winning a cup treble. They also entertained West Ham United in front of 4,000 spectators at the Maidstone Road Ground but the Hammers secured a 2­1 victory, the game raised much needed funds for both clubs as the gate money was shared.

The first full season of League football in 1919/20 season saw Chatham finish fifth in the Kent League but they were to win the newly formed midweek league Thames & Medway Combination which was designed to help create funds for all those clubs participating by creating a league of local ‘derbies’.

Chatham again decided to challenge themselves at a higher level by joining the South­East English Section League but they were to finish bottom and relegated back to the Kent League with attendances falling due to many heavy defeats. The league consisted of the reserve teams of Portsmouth, Southampton, Gillingham, Charlton, Luton town, Brighton & Hove Albion, Norwich City & Watford and proved too much for Chatham.

Chatham returned to the Kent League in 1921/22 and had a poor season finishing tenth in a league of twelve teams and they only won twice at home against Woolwich 4­0 and Rochester 2­0 and this form impacted on attendances and revenue. Local news reports indicated the games between Chatham and Gillingham were being played like a battle with both sides playing dirty and causing the FA to warn both clubs as a rivalry started to be established between the two clubs. The following season Chatham were to finish in tenth place again but this time in a league consisting of sixteen teams, the highlight of the season was seeing Chatham beat Maidstone United 2­0 in the FA Cup in front of 4,000 at the Maidstone Road Ground.

Chatham started to rise again in 1923/24 season where again they beat Maidstone United in the FA Cup but this time it was a resounding 5­0 victory in front of

25 another large crowd of over 4,000. Chats were to challenge Charlton Athletic reserves for the title and in late January Chatham were to play at the Valley the home of Charlton in what looked to be the title decider and the Chatham Observer reported the platform on Chatham station on the morning of the match was packed to the rafters as train after train transported Chatham fans to Charlton. The attendance for the game was to be 7,889 an amazing attendance for a game at this level in the Kent League, however Chatham were soundly beaten by five goals to one. Chatham were to win the Thames & Medway Combination finally bringing some silverware back to the club and the Chatham reserve side reached the Kent Junior Cup Final but were defeated 3­1 by Shorts Athletic.

Chatham beat Gillingham reserves 6­1 in front of 4,000

Hopes were high for the 1924/25 season and Chatham drew some large attendances including 4,000 for the 6­1 win over Gillingham reserves. 7­1 win over Sittingbourne and the 3­2 defeat to Northfleet bringing in much needed revenue as Chatham were to only lose twice in the Kent League all season and go on to lift the title. In 1925/26 they were to finish runners­up in the Kent League title, the highlight being the enthralling 0­0 draw with Northfleet in front of 3,500 spectators in which the North Kent Gazette described as the best goalless match seen with both sides hitting the woodwork on numerous occasions and both goalkeepers being outstanding during the match. Chatham notched up notable victories over Royal Marine 6­0, Catford 6­2, Grays 7­1, Ramsgate 5­0, RN Depot 5­0 as Chatham were to score 111 leagues goals in a season full of goals and entertaining football. An exceptional note of interest was that the newly formed Chatham supporters club raised over £200 throughout the season for the club and many fund raising events were held in the Rose & Crown Public House where it was said games of skittles, darts, shove­halfpenny, cribbage were played and thousands of pints of ale sunk!

Chatham win Kent League Titles

Chatham were to regain the Kent League title in 1926/27 and they again recorded some excellent victories including those against Tunbridge Wells 5­0, Rochester 4­ 0, Catford 7­2, Bexleyheath 5­1. The FA Cup saw Chatham defeat St Albans 3­1 in front of 2,500 at the Maidstone Road Ground before being drawn away at League side Norwich City. Chatham supporters hired special trains to transport them to the game and the attendance was registered at 12,082 and it was Chatham who took the lead through Burt to send the Chatham fans believing a shock could be on the cards, however, Norwich were to prove far to strong and they ran out 5­1 winners to end Chatham’s Cup dream.

26 Chatham continued to have ambitions to progress as a club but yet again the Southern League Eastern Section was proving to be a step too far as they had another disappointing season finishing second to bottom and just missing relegation. Despite this, it was the defence that was to be the major problem as the side averaged over a goal a game and lost many fixtures by the odd goal as their goal difference was only minus 21 a good record for a team in such a low position. The club had the option to remain in the Southern League Eastern Section or return to the Kent League and the end of season Board & Committee meetings were quite acrimonious as the costs for remaining in the Southern League Eastern Section was yet again causing severe financial strains on the club. The vote went in favour of remaining and to look to bring in new players who would make a difference, the club had two outstanding players in captain Len Ramsell & prolific goal scorer John Honeyman who scored thirty­two goals in the Kent League title winning season of 1925­26 and another twenty­three goals in the 1926­27 Kent League winning title season. Therefore, the club looked to sign new players to complement them, the club brought in several new additions to the squad but they did not live up to the standard required as Chatham finished third from bottom and suffered huge losses occurred in travelling overnight to play at Crewe Alexandra, Norwich City, Southampton to name a few and the Board conceded the time was now right to return to the Kent League where local opposition attracted good attendances.

Chatham hit by severe financial problems

For the 1929­30 season Chatham released practically all the previous squad including Len Ramsell & John Honeyman as the club introduced a lower match fee structure. The players including Hipkiss, Lester, Thompson, Rowden, Kilpatrick, Pollington, Fordham, Mitchell, T.J Jones, G. Jones, J. Taylor, P. Taylor, Williams & Heppler and the club were encouraged that many reserve players would step­up during the season for the first team. Hopes were high amongst the Chatham Board but supporters were more concerned as many new untried players had arrived at the club with many with vast experience leaving for pastures new. The first game saw 1,237 paying spectators arrive for the opening game of the season at Dartford and Chatham were soundly beaten 4­0, however they won their first home game in front of 654 against the RN Depot 3­2, a 1­1 draw followed away at Margate and their first away win 2­0 at Tibury, Chatham sat second in the table after six games played and the big games against Gills reserves saw Gills win at Priestfield 3­2 and Chatham’s biggest gate of the season saw 3,000 watch a thrilling 2­2 draw at the Maidstone Road Ground.

However, despite home victories against Folkestone 2­0, Bexleyheath 4­0, Royal Marines 3­1 & Grays Thurrock 3­1, Chats away form was dismal losing at Grays

27 Thurrock 7­4, Folkestone 4­3, Margate 3­0, Tunbridge Wells 3­0 alongside those at Gillingham reserves & Dartford and the club slid down the table to finish the season in a disappointing eighth position.

The 1930­31 season saw Chatham play the legendary Bedouins team in a pre­season Friendly at the Maidstone Road Ground and Chatham won by 10­3 with goals from Varrall (2), Goodwin (2), Meads (2), Rawdon, Kitto, Thomas & Grover. This looked to set the scene as 1,500 turned up for the opening game of the season as Chatham thrashed the RN Depot 9­0 and this was followed up by an 8­4 win at Dover United, and despite winning both return games by large margins the away form again hit the team hard, losing at Dartford 4­0, Margate 1­0, Tunbridge Wells 2­0 & Sittingbourne 2­0 to name a few. The team scored a record 134 goals which still stands as a club record but they could only finish fifth in the Kent League.

During the 1930’s Chatham were again having terrible financial problems and this in turn was resulting in a high turnover of players and their league form was poor finishing 5th in 1931­32, sixth in 1932­33 and in thirteenth in 1933­34 and were relegated to the Kent League Division Two for the 1934­35 season in which they lifted the title but yet again financial chaos consumed the club which resulted in an urgent AGM at the club as the club’s future was now seriously in doubt.

The AGM highlighted that the club could not compete in the Kent League anymore and that they had to revert to amateur status with no match fees or expenses being paid, the entire squad were allowed to leave on free transfers.

Chatham revert to amateur status

The 1935­36 season saw Chatham play in the Chatham & District League and after winning 16­1 & 14­0 against local sides they were expelled for being far too superior to play at that level and they were transferred into the Kent Amateur League.

The Chatham side containing all new faces, they set about claiming the title and bringing much needed silverware back to club as some of their results included wins over Aylesford Paper Mills 1­0, Margate ‘A’ 1­0, Sheppey Apprentices 9­0 & 5­0, SR Athletic 3­0 & 6­1 and the 10­0 hammering of RAF Eastchurch. The team were to win fourteen games out of sixteen and drawing once with only one defeat to amass a total of 29 points out of a possible 32.

The club were hoping the success would bring about a sounder financial footing but the entrance fees were vastly reduced at this level and despite having a winning team

28 with no player fees, the attendances were not that good. The club played a series of challenge matches against local district local sides to generate funds and split the proceeds with the opposition as Chatham had an enclosed stadium and again entrance fees were only 2d.

The club were not able to afford a return to the Kent League despite this success and they were to play the 1936­37 season in the Kent Amateur League where they were to finish as runners­up and enjoy another season where they scored sixty­nine goals in 16 league games averaging over 4 goals a game.

Chatham return to Kent League

The club’s board during this two­year period worked tirelessly behind the scenes in preparing the clubs return to the Kent League and their application to return for the 1937­38 season was accepted. This rejuvenated the club and they were placed into the Kent League Division Two and they came close to regaining their Kent League Division One status but missed out on the runners­up promotion place as they finished third but it was still progress as the players were only being paid small expenses during that season. The following season saw Chatham finish a disappointing eleventh place out of a league of twelve places but worse problems were on the horizon with the outbreak of the Second World War and again many players left to sign up.

1935-36 Kent Amateur League Winners

29 A “Custer Avenger”: The Story of a Chatham Baker’s Son by Peter Russell

THE EARLY YEARS

21 November 1848 ­ SAMUEL ROBERT STURLA, born Cross Street, Chatham, Kent (long since demolished), next door but one east of the Smith’s Arms public house, eldest child of Samuel Robert Sturla, a baker, and Sarah Jane (née) Blackman. His parents married the previous year.

St Mary’s Church, as it appeared when Samuel Sturla was baptised there.

17 January 1849 ­ Baptised in the parish church of St Mary’s where Charles Dickens worshipped and is reputed to have taken more than a dozen names for his novels from its gravestones. The building we see today was substantially extended in the late 1880s and closed in 1974.

30 March 1851 ­ Census, a public house (name not recorded) in Church Street, Gillingham, Kent. Samuel Sturla, age 2, staying with maternal grandparents, Thomas Blackman, 57, a licensed victualler, and Mary (née) Brown, 59.

30 The Smith’s Arms, 9­11 Cross Street, Chatham (c. 1980).

7 April 1861 – Census, Cross Street, Chatham. Age 12, living with his parents, six siblings and Elizabeth Rivett, 20, born Vandemon’s Land (sic) [Tasmania], Australia, a house servant.

2 April 1871 – Census, 13 Low Ousegate, York, next door to the Coach and Horses public house. Age 25 (sic), an assistant pawnbroker.

CROSSES THE ATLANTIC

S.S. Moravian, Allan Line, 2,481 gross tons.

31 27 March 1872 – Embarks as a steerage passenger, age given as 25, a labourer, on the SS Moravian, which sailed from Liverpool and arrived in Baltimore, Maryland, via Halifax, Nova Scotia, Portland, Maine, and Norfolk, Virginia, on 30 April 1872.

18 September 1873 ­ Marries Elizabeth Cozens (or Cosens), Cleveland, Ohio. 21 January 1874 ­ A son, Archibald, born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The fate of Archibald and his mother remains a mystery.

ENLISTS IN THE US ARMY

4 September 1876 ­ Enlisted as a private by Lt Gilbert E. Overton, 6th Cavalry, in the United States Army, Detroit, Michigan. Described as age 25 (sic), a salesman, not married, having brown eyes, brown hair, fair complexion, and being 5’ 61∕4” tall. Gave ‘London’ as place of birth. Became a “Custer Avenger,” the name given to men assigned to the 7th Cavalry following the defeat of Lt Col George Armstrong Custer by an overwhelming force of Sioux and Cheyenne Indians under the leadership of Sitting Bull at the Battle of the Little Bighorn, 25­26 June 1876. Did Sturla desert his wife and child?

28 September 1876 ­ Joins Company F, known as the “Band Box Company” (for its smart appearance) 7th US Calvary, at Fort Abraham Lincoln, Dakota, Territory, under command of the newly promoted Captain James Montgomery Bell. Sturla was Company F’s clerk from December 1876 until August 1881, clearly identified by his very distinctive handwriting.

7th U.S. Cavalry Private (left) and Corporal (right)

32 1876­1877 – At Fort Abercrombie, Dakota Territory during the infamous scandal of Major Marcus A. Reno’s behaviour towards Mrs Emily Hones Bell, wife of Captain James Bell. Emily Mary Hones was born 12 March 1851, in London’s fashionable King’s Road, Chelsea.

13 September 1877 – With Company F in Battle of Canyon Creek, Montana Territory, against Chief Joseph’s Nez Percé Indians. Survived unscathed. Sergeant Edward Davern, from County Limerick, Ireland, in the same company, Major Reno’s orderly at the Battle of the Little Bighorn, was unlucky to be hit by a conical ball which caused a slight flesh wound to his left arm.

19 June 1880 ­ Census, Billings County, Dakota Territory. With Company F in the field guarding the Northern Pacific Railroad extension. Appears as “Daniel R. Starla” in the records.

Chief Joseph Sitting Bull

19 July 1881 – Stationed at Fort Buford, at the confluence of the Missouri and Yellowstone rivers, when Sitting Bull surrendered. Company F was assigned to guard the Hunkpapa Lakota chief and his ragged band of around 190 followers until they were transported by the river steamer Sherman to the Standing Rock Agency, near Fort Yates, ten days or so later.

3 September 1881 ­ Discharged at Camp Biddle, Montana Territory, a private of excellent character. Camp Biddle, little more than a cluster of tents, was established by Company F to guard the Northern Pacific Railroad extension, on the north bank of the Yellowstone River opposite the mouth of Glendive Creek. Named after 2nd Lt Jonathan W. Biddle, Company K, 7th Cavalry, killed in action 30 August 1877 at Snake River, Montana Territory, against Nez Percé Indians.

33 A CANADIAN “MOUNTIE” 1

22 June 1883 – Swears an Oath of Allegiance to Queen as lawful Sovereign of the of Great Britain and Ireland, and an Oath of Office of the North­West Mounted Police Force of Canada (NWMP), in Winnipeg, Manitoba. The force had been established ten years earlier to maintain order in the Canadian West. It assisted in the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway, including relocating indigenous peoples living along the route and applying unpopular prohibition laws to the white community.

Samuel Sturla’s Oath of Office showing his distinctive handwriting referred to above.

5 October 1883 – Caught while intending to desert from NWMP, Calgary. Punishment: 9 months imprisonment with hard labour.

7 May 1884 ­ Using abusive and improper language to Con[stable] Ryan while undergoing imprisonment. 14 days added to last sentence.

20 September 1884 – Absent from cloak (?) inspection. Admonished.

34 North­West Mounted Police Constable

13 January 1885 ­ Assistant Surgeon Augustus Jakes, Regina, reported Sturla, though physically strong, is suffering from depression, which “May probably have been caused by some act of his work.” Likely to have participated in the suppression of Métis Louis Riel’s Northwest Rebellion later in the year.

3 October 1887 – Charged for driving his team at a rate faster than a walk contrary to orders. Fined $2.

Discharge Certificate issued by the North­West Mounted Police Force, Canada, 1888.

21 June 1888 ­ Discharged at Battleford. Described as age 36; blue eyes; brown hair, fair complexion, 5’10” [in boots]; smallpox scar on cheek. Conduct during service ­ “Indifferent.” Intended place of residence, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

21 October 1888 – Marries Agatha Love (a widow?), daughter of William Moran and Catharine (née) O’Conner, in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The fate of Agatha is not known.

1889 – Chicago Directory – Living in 4329 South Halstead Street, employed in a laundry.

RETURNS TO ENGLAND

1897 – His father, also Samuel Robert Sturla, dies age 76, Newington, near Sittingbourne, Kent, where he had set up in business as a baker and shopkeeper. Was

35 this the reason for Sturla to return home?

December 1900 – Samuel Robert Blackman Sturla, 39 (actual age 52!), widower, newsagent, 11 Upper Street, Islington, North London, marries Elizabeth “Eliza” Jane Bothamley, (née) Greenhill 36, widow (of James William Bothamley, died 1895), 7 Upper Street, Islington, daughter of Harry Greenhill (Dec’d), butcher.

31 March 1901 – Census, Mortimer Road, Canonbury, London N1. Listed as James (sic) R. B. Sturla., 39, omnibus conductor and his wife, Eliza, 37, mantle maker (cloth).

1908 – Electoral Register lists him in Clift Street, , renting a house which he shared with Frederick Gibbs.

1910 – Electoral Register lists him in 92 New North Road, Hoxton, renting an unfurnished back room on the first floor of a house which, again, he shared with Frederick Gibbs.

2 April 1911 ­ Census, 20 Aylesbury Street, Clerkenwell, London. Sharing a house with his wife, Eliza, 50, Robert Webb, 48, plumber, Webb’s wife and five children (one of whom, Robert, 20, was born in Detroit, USA). Sturla, 58, is described as a carter for a construction company, though currently “out of work.” Sturla’s clearly identifiable signature appears on this document.

1914 – Electoral Register lists him in 8 Camden Street, Islington, renting a room on the first floor from Mr Fraulo, the resident landlord.

THE FINAL CHAPTER

25 April 1916 ­ At a recorded age of 63 (actually 67), admitted to Highgate Hill Infirmary by a Dr Hutchings from 2 St Peter’s Street, Islington, suffering from an “unknown illness.”

15 August 1916 ­ Transferred from Highgate Hill Infirmary to Luke Ward, St John’s Road Workhouse, Islington.

36 St John’s Road Workhouse, Islington.

1917­ His mother, Sarah Jane Sturla, ((née) Blackman, died age 87, Newington, Kent, c. February.

23 March 1917 ­ Dies at a recorded age of 67 (actually 68) of Morbis Cordis Mitral (heart disease) in St John’s Road Workhouse and was “buried by friends.” Who could have guessed that this terminally­ ill patient, who died in poverty, had witnessed at first­hand the “taming of the Wild West” on both sides of the American border, the Nez Percé War, the surrender of the legendary Sitting Bull and the crushing of the Northwest Rebellion? A sad end to a truly incredible story.

Samuel Robert Sturla’s final resting place and the fate of his wife, Eliza, remain unknown to this writer.

Note 1. Strictly speaking the term “Mountie” applied a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which was not formed until 1 February 1920.

Peter Russell – Men With Custer UK© ­ 30 November 2020 http://www.menwithcuster.com/

37 High Halstow by Len Feist

High Halstow is another village on the that started life as a hamlet and has grown over the years to the size it is today. It still however only has one shop, a public house and a church; the reason for this is probably its closeness to Hoo and the Medway Towns. High Halstow is surrounded by farms, which played a major part in the village’s development and growth.

The village church is dedicated to St Margaret, alleged to be a member of the old Saxon Royals. She was a very benevolent lady and gave much of her time to relief the poor and was an abbess of the Priory. The land around the village at the time was poor because of ill drainage, but a Mr Pye who was a farmer came to view and purchased some of the land knowing he could improve it. This action led to better farming conditions and thus the land could sustain more people. Subsequently the village population increased and the church was extended. A school was also built, allowing the children of High Halstow to be educated. Many of the surnames have survived down the centuries in the village.

Nearby was a railway station called Sharnal Street; the rail line is still there and used to transport aggregate. However due to the building of roads and other public transport the passenger service was discontinued.

38