(Ealing’s
Conscientious Objectors: Case Study No. 6)
Bromberger, Frederick Cole 10, Sutherland Road West
Ealing
When Oscar Ricketts and Alfred Evans,
reprieved from their death sentences but landed with 10 years’ hard labour, had
been returned from France, they were sent with other Conscientious Objectors transferred
from prison to Dyce camp, near Aberdeen, set up in August 1916 as a first work
centre for COs. Among their companions in this phase of their ordeal was a
former fellow-resident of Ealing, Frederick Cole Bromberger, who was
later to proceed to Dartmoor work camp under the Home Office Scheme, as they
did.
Conditions at Dyce
were such as to make it appear like an alternative death sentence, and for one
unfortunate individual it was no less. In March 2014 the BBC, quoting an
Aberdeen University historian, Joyce Walker, gave an account of his story:
Extracts from:
World War
One: The labour camp for peace protesters -
Other conchies were sent
to the camp at Dyce, situated on a windswept hillside, which is now used as a
long-stay car park for Aberdeen airport. They lived in army surplus tents that
leaked in the rain and worked smashing granite in the nearby quarry. "The
men slept on straw paliases (mattresses) on the ground and they were not
permitted to build up with stones or wood to get off the bare ground. So it was
very cold and when it was wet, they were on a hill, so the water just ran
straight down through their tents."
One of the men in the
camp was 20-year-old Walter Roberts, from Bredbury near Stockport, who had
refused military service saying he was a Christian who had always renounced
violence. Roberts had already been weakened by months in prison when he was
sent to the camp. He died from pneumonia on 8 September, five days after his
arrival. A Home Office delegation, including some MPs, was rapidly dispatched
to Dyce and shown around the camp by the inmates."
"A month later, on
19 October, there was a big debate in parliament about it and at the end of the
debate the chairman of the Home Office committee that had come up, a chap
called William Brace MP, announced suddenly that the camp was closing. They had
decided it would cost too much to make the necessary adjustments, repairs, and
arrangements and it would close. The camp closed at the end of October."
Roberts had
written home: "All these fellows here are exceedingly kind and are looking
after me...”
Bromberger is second
from left at the back in the group photograph of 15 men in front of a pile of
stones at Dyce. The
name stands
out in the caption provided by David Boulton (Objection Overruled, 2014, opp.
frontispiece) among the British-looking
surnames of most of the others, and may have got him into bother even before he
became a ‘conchie’, given the wartime hostility to anything perceived as
German. According to the 1911 census, however, he and his immediate family –
parents and two older sisters – were all London born. All their given names were more or less English-sounding, except perhaps for "Rosa". His father was described
as a ‘Manufacturers Agent Dry Goods’; one sister at 21 was a Commercial
Traveller while the other, aged 17 was an Apprentice; Frederick at 15 was still
at school. In 1916 he was 21, single, and his occupation was as clerk to a firm
of chartered accountants in Victoria Street, London.
Notice
of Appeal. (2) Grounds on which appeal
made:
See letter attached hereto.
[letter] Dear Sirs,
The Local Tribunal of Ealing having
refused me exemption from the provisions
of the Military Service Act, I am now appealing against their decision, as I have
a very strong conscientious objection to the undertaking of military duties.
My firm belief is that warfare is
contrary both to the spirit & teaching of –Our Lord & Master Jesus
Christ for this dispensation of grace,
and therefore I cannot as a follower of the Lord participate in that which he
has condemned [..:]
The Christian must hold to the principles
of the blood-shed (that of Christ on
Calvary) and not to those of
blood-shedding, for true Christianity consists in the willingness to sacrifice
life as a martyr rather than saving it in killing others. Hence I feel bound in
loyalty to the King of Kings to have nothing to do with the war whatever.
My conversion was brought about some
seven or eight years ago, but not having any occasion to think seriously upon
this question of warfare, my convictions have been formed since the outbreak of
war. To the best of my knowledge, I became definitely settled upon this matter
in September 1914.
I am enclosing testimonials to the
sincerity of my views [...]
Yours respectfully,
Fredk . Bromberger
The mention of conversion,
together with the surname, may suggest that his background was Jewish, but this
is not otherwise indicated in the records. He was clearly no half-hearted or ‘convenience’ convert in any case; in
addition to being able to give chapter and verse (literally – multiple
scriptural references) for his beliefs, the testimonials he provided confirmed
his zeal in the Christian cause as he saw it.
One of these, handwritten,
is from “Arthur S. Booth-Clibborn, Minister of Religion, Late President of the
Continental Christian Mission, Son-in-law of the late General William Booth [founder of the Salvation Army]”
who stated that he had known Frederick Bromberger personally for more than three
years:
“I certify him to be absolutely sincere in the conscientious objection[s] he is making to taking
any part in warfare, and to their having been held by him as a true Christian
and a worker for Christ.”
A second, typed on headed
paper and dated 16th March 1916, is signed by solicitor J.H.
Mundell, who likewise certifies that he has known F B for a similar length of
time and been “associated with him in Christian work in London”. He explains
that the applicant’s failure to appear at the Local Tribunal hearing in Ealing
was due to a mistake – he was waiting in another room in the Town Hall where
different hearings (probably for exemption on other than conscientious grounds, or for "attested" men)
were being heard and did not hear his name called.
This had no doubt counted
against him:
Reasons
for the decision of the Local Tribunal
The appellant in this case was asked to attend before
the Tribunal on the 16th inst, and his name was called in the waiting
room three times, but no answer was forthcoming. The Tribunal rejected his
claim in his absence after having had the grounds read to them.
It transpired after that section of the Tribunal which had his
case before them had concluded its sitting, that the appellant had been
attending as a member of the public in another part of the building where the
other section of the Tribunal were sitting.
The Military Representative made no observation on this case.
{Signed 18-3-16]
The original application was dated 22nd February 1916,
when FCB gave his age as 20 years 10 months. It was made “on the ground of a
conscientious objection to the undertaking of military duties” and was
accompanied by a letter similar to, though longer than that sent to the Appeal Tribunal (above).
... I wish to make it quite plain that
I object on no other ground than that of what I believe to be the clear teaching of the Word of God.
... I am quite willing to serve my
country through God, while not able to do so apart from Him.
... I have come to the conclusion after much prayer, that I
cannot undertake any duties of a military character – that is work, which is
definitely military or which supplies military needs.
The Appeal Tribunal did not
endorse the local rejection of the claim, but as usual would only allow it up
to a point.
For
Appeal Tribunal:
Decision exemption
from Combatant Service.
Leave to appeal [To Central Tribunal] refused.
3 Apr 1916
For FCB this was of course
not good enough.
10 Sutherland Ave.
West Ealing
4.4.1916
To the
County of Middlesex Appeal Tribunal
Dear Sirs,
As
your decision on Monday the 3rd inst. to grant me non-combatant
service does not in any way meets my
convictions in the matter, I am applying to you for permission to appeal to the
Central Tribunal. I have no wish whatever to embarrass the authorities in any
way, but I must obey God rather than Man...
He followed this the next day with another completed appeal form,
with rewritten grounds:
(i) Non-combatancy
forms part of the system by which the Nation wages war against her enemies
& as such I feel bound in simple obedience to God to have nothing to do
with it.
(ii) It is unscriptural to put oneself under the absolute control
of another, for this would compel action, whether Christian or not. Daniel 316-18
& 7-10, and Acts 527-29.
The reply was brief and final, leaving no further conscientious
option, short of going on the run, but to await arrest:
7th April 1916
Dear Sir,
Referring to your application for leave
to appeal to the Central Tribunal, I beg to inform you that this application
was made at the hearing, and refused.
Yours
faithfully
for
Joint-Secretaries.
Furthermore, reference to another source, (John
W Graham, Conscription and Conscience, a History 1916-1919. London, 1922) published within a few years of the
war and based on meticulous record-keeping at the time of the events described,
reveals that he had already been involved in the even more notorious episode of
the “Frenchmen” – COs who were sent to France where, if they disobeyed an order
as such men routinely did, they could be court-martialled and sentenced to
death on the grounds that their refusal had occurred “in the face of the enemy”.
As is well known, 35 death sentences were passed and only commuted (to the usual
"prison with hard labour") after protests and delays. It is less well known that
a further seven COs, also sent to France, had “accidentally” escaped the same sentences
due to their courts martial having taken place elsewhere, not in Boulogne. One
of those was Fred Bromberger.
