3.  Recruitment and Conscription

Recruitment

         The territorials were the earliest to be called up, apart, obviously, from the regular soldiers of the army and former regular soldiers who were on the reserve. But as soon as war was declared, many more men volunteered, and from then on there were successive recruitment campaigns. Some of the earliest recruits from Shelford – into Kitchener’s Army, as it was called - went into the Suffolk Regiment. Unlike the Cambridgeshire Regiment, it was a regiment of the regular army, and these men too served as a Shelford cohort with all the benefits of being with men you knew. But as time went on, men were distributed across the spectrum of regiments. The Roll of Service, which was published in July 1915, shows the astonishing number of regiments with Shelford men serving in them: from the Notts and Derby Regiment, to the Royal Scots, the London Regiment, the Leinster Regiment, and even the Nigerian Regiment. The army’s intention became simply to fill gaps left by casualties. Other men joined the Royal Army Medical Corps, particularly those with a moral objection to killing. Six men joined the navy. By July 1915, of the 224 men of military age in the parish, around 111 had joined up.

         The roll of service itself was an attempt to spur those who weren’t listed to a sense of shame, or of feeling left out, and so encourage further volunteers. In the introduction it states that it is: “To ascertain if a Parish has provided its fair share of men…”

Conscription

         In spite of all these efforts, by 1916 recruitment had stalled. Probably most of those still at home didn’t really want to go. The early days of enthusiasm, when young men had volunteered for an adventure, and what they believed would be a short sharp war, were gone. With great reluctance, the government introduced conscription, and people who were called up went to the war because they had no choice.

         Conscription was a big issue. For centuries, the notion of the Freeborn Englishman had been a powerful mantra: to conscript men was to take away that fundamental freedom. But the war was a mess. Both sides were stuck in their trenches, and every initiative failed to shift the stalemate. The army was out of its depth. Their only perceived option was to keep going, and throw more and more men at the enemy. What else could they do? In this context, right and wrong easily become meaningless. Everyone was caught up in an inescapable situation, including the military. So conscription was enforced with all its affronts to personal rights.

         If you were between 19 and 40 and single, then from March 1916 you were deemed to have joined up. This was extended to include 18-year-olds and married men in May 1916. At an appropriate point you would be called to present yourself for service.

         A number of grounds for exemption were specified: on grounds of ill-health, serious financial or business hardship, a conscientious objection to active service (ie killing people), or the fact that you carried out an essential occupation. To deal with applications for exemption, a series of local Tribunals were set up. If you lived in Shelford, your case would be heard by the Chesterton Tribunal. Above that, giving right of appeal, was an Appeal Tribunal. For the next three years a succession of men pleaded their case for exemption at the tribunals. Reports, often detailed, can be found in the local Cambridge newspapers. For the government, an important issue was at stake. If men were seen to be let off too easily, resentment would be stirred among others who had answered the call, or among the families whose loved ones were serving or had been killed. Public disapproval and sanction were important tools to be used in keeping the supply of men coming.

         The tribunal was made up of various local worthies of the upper middle class. Also present was a military representative who had the power to appeal against any exemption, and was usually vociferous in doing so. The military representative at the neighbouring Caxton Tribunal was Col. Tebbutt, who had been commanding officer of the peacetime Cambridgeshires, and he appealed against every man at the appeals tribunal. This thoroughly roused the hackles of the War Agricultural Committee, who, in turn, were trying to keep agriculture functioning in the face of a chronic shortage of workers (more about this later). The military rep. at Chesterton was Col. Hurrell (of Trinity House in Cambridge Road). It seems Shelford appellants were lucky. He was felt to be getting the balance right (CC Nov 22 1916). The aforementioned Col. Tebbutt had said that if he had his way, he would make everyone go, even in cases where he knew the man was absolutely indispensable – and some were. He was felt to be wrong. But let’s retain a little sympathy for this man. He had lost one son already to the war in 1915, and another died in August 1918.

         Reserved occupations were skilled jobs, essential to the war effort. If you were in one – a “starred occupation” - you went on the reserve. But if the military appealed against this, then your employer would be obliged to present your case at the local tribunal. You could also appeal on your own behalf against the local tribunal’s decision at the appeals tribunal.

         Some men appealed quoting need at home – sick wives, dependent mothers or siblings, or businesses which would be destroyed.

         Here is a selection of Shelford appeals.

         George Arnold, who was a carrier and smallholder, and later became publican of the Peacock, appealed successfully. He was 40, and had served nearly 3 years in the Boer War. As such, the military did not judge him to be a shirker, and his age was also in his favour – almost too old to serve. He was allowed to stay at home (CIP 17 Mar 1916). But military objections came thick and fast to other candidates.

         Cyril Marfleet, who was 24, was a harness-maker, employed by his mother, and supporting her and his five siblings, three at school, two (presumably daughters) supporting their mother who’d lately had a seizure. Theirs was the only harness business for five villages, and entirely agricultural. Their assistant had joined the Forces, and it had proved impossible to replace him. If he was called up, Marfleet claimed that the business must be shut down. A member of Tribunal said that “businesses of this kind were absolutely necessary to agriculture”. He was granted exemption. (CIP 25 Feb 1916 & 21 Apr). It is important to bear in mind that most agricultural work and local transport was done using horses.

         William Brown of High Street appealed on grounds of serious business hardship. He ran a grocer’s and draper’s business and his only assistant was a woman. Owing to a strained wrist he had been told he would be useless to the army. He was granted a certificate of unfitness while his wrist continued a problem. (CIP 26 May 1916 Appeal tribunal).

         Two village bakers launched appeals. There were no supermarkets then, and bread was a vital part of the daily diet, made in village bakeries, not factories. B. L. How, whose brother owned the Plough and the bakery nextdoor, appealed. He was 40, and worked in the bakery, which, he said, supplied the Shelfords, Trumpington, Stapleford, Hauxton and the outlying parts of Cherryhinton. His age was in his favour, and he received conditional exemption (on condition of him remaining in his current position) (CIP 28 Jul 1916). Bert Freestone, whom we’ve already met, had an elder brother Christopher. His father appealed to keep him, since he was in sole charge of the Shelford bakery, pleading his son’s recent ill health. The case was adjourning pending a medical (CIP 2 Mar 1917).

         William Gall, of the glue and size works at Granta Terrace, appealed on grounds of business hardship. He had already served in France, having gone with the Territorials on August 4th, and had gone to France as Company Quartermaster-Sergeant. He’d served a year and 50 days in France. The Chairman was at first reluctant, thinking that Gall would be of more use in the army, but Gall pleaded that the business had suffered badly, and he was now struggling to recover it. His appeal was granted (CIP 28 Jul 1916).

         Arthur Cock, who was employed at King’s Flour Mills was granted conditional exemption (CIP 16 Jun 1916).

         William Martin, aged 29, was a wholesale meat seller. He was currently in negotiation with the Home Office concerning a shipment of African beef which would alleviate the shortage of meat and supply the army. It would be necessary for him to go abroad. The Local Tribunal had not been satisfied that the arrangements were sufficiently far forward. The Board of Trade had written a letter saying that they thought it advisable that the man should have time to complete his business. The idea was to extend and develop it further. He only wanted time so that he could leave the business and join the Army when he came back. To go abroad and do his work he would require three or four months. He also read out a letter from the South African Trades Commissioner. He was granted 4 months exemption, granted subject to favourable confirmation by B of T (CIP May 26 1916). After that he would be called up.

         William Mirrlees applied for exemption for his gardener Harry Matlock. Matlock was a married man of 39, and was Mirrlees’ gardener. Not a very useful contribution to the war effort, you might think. But Mirrlees had given up his house (Mount Blow, now Middlefield) for use as a convalescent hospital, and Matlock was working the electric light for the hospital. Matlock was exempted as long as the hospital continued at the house (CIP Jul 14 1916).

         Alfred Robinson, who was 40, and a carpenter and joiner (an important trade), and had 4 children appealed. He was granted 6 month’s exemption. That no doubt saw him to the age of 41 and hence beyond the age for military service (CIP Jul 14 1916).

         Generally, men who gained exemption were only granted it for a period of three months or so. Mostly the idea was to allow them to get their affairs in order before they went. But others had to keep on applying every few months. The tribunal was not generous with its exemptions.

         Food production was vitally important to the nation, and farmworkers and smallholders appeared in droves before the tribunals. The Davey brothers were nurserymen in Great Shelford, occupying the site which is now Scotsdales. On their 5 acres of land, they grew a variety of foodstuffs. Both Bill and Percy appealed. The tribunal declared “one must go”. It was left to the brothers to decide which of them it should be. Bill took up the gauntlet. Percy was married with a young son and was initially exempted (CIP 31 Mar/14 April 1916) . By June 1918 Bill had been invalided out with trench fever, and Percy went out. “We were lucky to survive the war”, he later said (CEN, 1971). He served through the last few months of the war with the machine gun corps.

        Though it might seem evident that farmworkers were essential to the war effort, the military representatives on the tribunals were desperate to get as many men as possible into the army. Farmers appealing to keep their men were told to find themselves “a strong lady” (CIP 31 Mar 1916). As the conscription progressed, you can hear more and more desperation in the farmers’ voices, as they appeal for their men at the tribunals, and a constant war was waged between the military and the War Agricultural Committees, which had been set up to increase home food production.

Sources:

Newspapers, Cambridge Chronicle (CC), Cambridge Independent Press (CIP).

v1 © Helen Harwood, uploaded February 2025