player – Tennisarchives.com

General First nameWilfred
LastnameBaddeley
GenderMale
CountryEngland
Date of birth1872-01-11
Place of birthBromley, England
Date of death1929-01-24
Place of deathMenton, France

About

A Biographical Sketch of Wilfred Baddeley

By Mark Ryan

Wilfred Baddeley and his twin brother Herbert were born on 11 January 1872 in the town of Bromley, which at that time was located in Kent. They were two of the seven children – three sons and four daughters – of Frederick Piper Baddeley (1841-1916), who was from Stepney in the East End of London, and Catherine Eliza Baddeley (née Vine), a native of Hadlow in Kent; she was the daughter of Dr George John Vine, a physician, and Eliza Harriet Vine (née Atkins).1

Frederick P. Baddeley and Catherine Vine were married on 23 January 1867 in Saint-Martin-in-the-Fields Church, by Trafalgar Square. Their other children were Hilda Catherine (b. 1869), Ida Lilian (b. 1873), Evelyn Mary (b. 1874), Frederick Clifford (b. 1876) and Muriel Violet (b. 1879).

Frederick P. Baddeley was a solicitor by profession and by 1872, the year of the twins’ birth, a partner in the well-established firm of Thomas Baddeley & Sons whose offices were at that time located in Leman Street in the City of London. The Post Office London Directory for 1820 includes the details of an E. Baddeley, who at that time was practising as an attorney, with offices in 61 Leman Street.2 The E. Baddeley in question was Edward Baddeley (b. 1766), paternal great-grandfather of Wilfred Baddeley, and founder of the family law firm which Wilfred and his twin brother would also later join.

When the decennial Census of England and Wales was taken on 3 April 1881, the Baddeley family – Wilfred, his parents and his six siblings – were still living in Bromley in Kent, in a house at 6 Hope Park. The same census also lists three servants. All seven of the children, including the youngest, two-year-old Muriel, are listed as scholars.

The next Census of England and Wales was taken on 5 April 1891. Between this census and the previous one, the Baddeley family had moved and were now living in a house at 214 Oakdale Road in the civil parish of Streatham in south London. By this time Wilfred Baddeley was 19 and, under the heading “Profession or Occupation”, the 1891 census includes the word “Law” and what looks like the word “articled” for both Wilfred and his twin brother.

Both twins had, in fact, begun what used to be called an articled clerkship, which involved prospective solicitors signing a contract with a solicitor who agreed to train the clerk for the law profession. According to The Times newspaper of 10 November 1888, Wilfred and Herbert Baddeley were among the candidates who had passed the preliminary examinations of the Incorporated Law Society, which had been held a few weeks earlier, on 21 and 23 October 1888.3

By 1891, the Baddeley twins had also begun to take part in lawn tennis tournaments, initially mostly at small meetings. Wilfred and Herbert Baddeley first took part in the Wimbledon tournament in July 1889, when they were 17 years old. They entered the men’s doubles event together, winning one match before losing a five-set semi-final encounter to their compatriots George Hillyard and Ernest Lewis.

Wilfred, who was the better singles player of the twins, first entered the men’s singles event at Wimbledon one year later, in 1890. He reached the quarter-finals of the men’s singles event before losing to the eventual champion, the Irishman Willoughby Hamilton. The score was 6-3, 6-0, 6-1.

One year later, in July 1891, Wilfred Baddeley won the men’s singles title at Wimbledon at only his second attempt, from a high-class field which included the two favourites, the Englishman Ernest Renshaw and the Irish player Joshua Pim. Baddeley won two matches for the loss of only one set to reach the semi-finals, where he thrashed Ernest Renshaw, men’s singles champion in 1888, 6-0, 6-1, 6-1. Ernest Renshaw was himself the elder of lawn tennis-playing twin brothers, the younger brother being William, the better player, and men’s singles champion at Wimbledon in the years 1881-86 and again in 1889.

In the all-comers’ final at Wimbledon in 1891, Wilfred Baddeley faced Joshua Pim, and beat him 6-4, 1-6, 7-5, 6-0. Willoughby Hamilton, holder of the men’s singles title, was not defending, so there was no challenge round that year. This meant that, at just 19 years and 5 months of age, Wilfred Baddeley became the youngest player to hold the men’s singles title. This record stood for 94 years, until the West German Boris Becker won the same title in 1985 at the age of 17 years and 7 months.

In the edition of 8 July 1891, a report on the Wimbledon tournament included in the sports magazine Pastime noted the following about Wilfred Baddeley’s victory over Joshua Pim at Wimbledon: “The winner may be compared to a cricketer who has played a faultless innings. It is not too much to say that he always did the right thing. Besides playing with wonderful accuracy, he kept his head well at the most critical times, and showed, in particular, the most unerring judgment in choosing the right side for passing his man. In activity he is second to none, and the manner in which he places the ball when running at full speed recalls the famous strokes of the champion whom he has succeeded [Willoughby Hamilton].”4

In 1891, Wilfred and Herbert Baddeley also won the men’s doubles title at Wimbledon, defeating the holders, Joshua Pim and his fellow Irishman Frank Stoker, in the challenge round, 6-1, 6-3, 1-6, 6-2. The Baddeleys were not the first twins to win the men’s doubles title at Wimbledon, the Renshaws having won the same title in the years 1884-86 and 1888-89. More recently, in 2006, 2011 and 2013, a third pair of twins, the Americans Bob and Mike Bryan, have together also won the men’s double title at Wimbledon.

One year later, in July 1892, Wilfred Baddeley retained the men’s singles title at Wimbledon, again beating Joshua Pim, the challenger, this time by the score of 4-6, 6-3, 6-3, 6-2. At that time the Wilfred Baddeley-Joshua Pim rivalry was one of the leitmotifs in lawn tennis in the British Isles. One of their first meetings in singles had occurred in 1891 at the prestigious Northern Tournament, held in late June, alternately in Liverpool and Manchester. In 1891, the tournament had been held in the latter city and Pim, the holder, had beaten Wilfred Baddeley in the challenge round, 4-6, 8-6, 6-4, 7-5.

At Wimbledon in 1892, Wilfred Baddeley was less successful in the men’s doubles event, he and his twin brother losing the challenge round match to their countrymen Harry Barlow and Ernest Lewis, 4-6, 6-2, 8-6, 6-4.

Because of his legal commitments, Wilfred Baddeley restricted himself to taking part in only a few tournaments each year during his lawn tennis career. In addition to Wimbledon and the Northern Tournament, these tournaments included the Sussex Championships, held in Brighton, and the tournament that immediately followed it, the season-ending South of England Championships, which was held in Eastbourne in mid-September.

One year later, in July 1893, Joshua Pim turned the tables on Wilfred Baddeley at Wimbledon. The Irishman once again reached the challenge round of the men’s singles event and this time emerged the victor after a four-set match, the final score being 3-6, 6-1, 6-3, 6-2. (At this point Pim began to get the upper hand in most of his matches against Wilfred Baddeley.) In the men’s doubles event at Wimbledon in 1893, Wilfred and Herbert Baddeley were beaten in five sets in the all-comers’ final by Pim and Frank Stoker.

Soon after the end of the Wimbledon tournament, in late July 1893, Wilfred Baddeley and Joshua Pim faced each other again in a singles match, played during the annual England versus Ireland series of matches, which that year were also held at the All England Club in Wimbledon. This time Pim beat Wilfred Baddeley 6-3, 6-4, 5-7, 6-4.

At the end of the lawn tennis season, in early September 1893, Wilfred Baddeley won the men’s singles title at the Sussex Championships in Brighton. In the all-comers’ final he was given a walkover by his twin brother, Herbert (this was the usual arrangement when the twins were due to meet each other in a singles match). In the challenge round Wilfred defeated the holder, the Australian-born player Wilberforce V. Eaves, 6-1, 1-6, 8-6, 6-2. The following week, Wilfred Baddeley also won the men’s singles title at the South of England Championships in Eastbourne, where he defeated the holder, Harry Barlow, in the challenge round, 7-5, 6-0, 6-1.

In 1894, the England versus Ireland series of matches was held in Dublin, in early June, soon after the Irish Championships tournament. Here Wilfred Baddeley and Joshua Pim met again, with Baddeley this time emerging victorious after a long five-set encounter. The final score was 6-1, 6-1, 2-6, 2-6, 8-6. Two weeks later, in the challenge round of the men’s singles event at the Northern Tournament in Liverpool, Wilfred Baddeley again beat Pim, the holder, 4-6, 11-9, 4-6, 6-3, 6-4.

However, at Wimbledon in mid-July 1894, Joshua Pim reversed the recent trend by beating Wilfred Baddeley in the challenge round, 10-8, 6-2, 8-6. This was the fourth consecutive year in which the same two players had met in the last match in the men’s singles event at Wimbledon, a record which still stands today. In 1894, the Baddeley twins regained the Wimbledon doubles title they had first won in 1891. In the all-comers’ final they beat Harry Barlow and the Irishman Charles Martin, 5-7, 7-5, 4-6, 6-3, 8-6. (Pim and Frank Stoker, the holders, were not defending).

In 1894, Wilfred Baddeley ended the lawn tennis season as he had done in 1893, by winning the men’s singles title at both the Sussex Championships and the South of England Championships in September. In Brighton, he defeated Harry Barlow in the challenge round, 6-1, 6-0, 2-6, 7-5, while in Eastbourne Baddeley beat the same player at the same stage, 6-3, 3-6, 6-3, 6-1.

In mid-June of 1895, Wilfred Baddeley retained the men’s singles title at the Northern Tournament, which that year was held in Manchester. In the challenge round he faced his twin brother, Herbert, who retired with the score 6-8, 6-2, 6-4, 1-0 in Wilfred’s favour.

In 1895, Joshua Pim did not defend his Wimbledon singles title. He was in the process of qualifying as a medical doctor and did not play much competitive lawn tennis after 1894. Wilfred Baddeley played through and again reached the all-comers’ final, which that year was the real final because of Pim’s absence.

Wilfred Baddeley’s opponent in the all-comers’ final at Wimbledon in 1895 was Wilberforce V. Eaves, whom Baddeley defeated in a five-set encounter, 4-6, 2-6, 8-6, 6-2, 6-3. In the third set, with a two-sets-to-love lead, Eaves had one match point, at 6-5, but hit a lob inches out and never quite recovered. This was to be Wilfred Baddeley’s third and last Wimbledon singles title. The following report on this match is taken from the edition of Pastime published on 17 July 1895:

“The weather on Saturday was not all that could be desired, for although the day was bright enough, there was more wind than on any previous day. A goodly number of spectators had gathered round the centre court to witness the all-comers’ final between Wilfred Baddeley and Wilberforce V. Eaves; but the number never attained the proportions of some years back. Of the two players the ex-champion was the more fancied, but there were not wanting a few good judges who anticipated a very close match.

“Eaves started the service, and won the game to 15. Then Baddeley secured two love games, his opponent falling heavily in the third game. Presently 3-all was called, then 4-all. Eaves, by means of some brilliant passing strokes and aided by unwonted inaccuracy on Baddeley’s part, placed the next two games to his credit, and with them the first set by six games to 4. Three games [were] at deuce.

“The second set showed Eaves at his best. Indeed, hard as Baddeley worked he was quite unable to cope with his opponent’s strokes in this set, and was ‘run about’ unmercifully. The consequence was that the inaccuracy of which he gave evidence in the first set increased, and he found the net – especially with his backhand returns – on many occasions. He could win but two games in this set – the third and seventh. He played chiefly from the back of the court, and Eaves’s volleying told its tale. Two sets to love in Eaves’s favour.

“The first game of the third set went to the same player, whereupon Baddeley added three games. Eaves followed suit, making the score 4-3. His opponent carried off the eighth and ninth games, but Eaves drew level and then went ahead at 6-5, Baddeley being all to pieces in this game. In fact, the match appeared to be over when, in the following game, Eaves won the first and second strokes. He afterwards stood at 40-30, or within a stroke of the match by three sets to love.

“The issue of the next rest [rally] was watched in breathless silence. Eaves tossed [lobbed] – in all probability a winning stroke had he made it – but the ball fell some six inches outside the baseline, and Baddeley must have felt as one delivered from imminent death. He won the game, and followed up his success by adding the next two to his score. Thus the set, which had appeared to be at Eaves’s mercy, was carried off by Baddeley by 8 games to 6.

“The opening game of the fourth set fell to Eaves. With the score at 30-all he fell, recovered himself sufficiently to volley – backhanded – while in a kneeling posture, and eventually, amid great cheering, won the ace [point]. From that point, however, Baddeley’s star was constantly in the ascendant, and he gained the next five games. He was becoming more accurate, while Eaves’s exertions appeared to be telling upon him. The latter player added one more game to his account, but Baddeley ran out the winner of the set by 6 games to 2, each player having now won two sets.

“Hope told a flattering tale to Eaves in the beginning of the fifth set, for he won two of the first three games, the play hereabouts being quieter and more cautious than previously. Baddeley now came with a wet sail, and 5 games to 2 was called in his favour. Eaves’s judgment had been more than once at fault during these last four games. He made one more effort, and succeeded in gaining the eighth game, but it was his last, and Baddeley was hailed the winner of the set by 6 games to 3, and of the match by 3 sets to 2, 26 games to 23, 169 strokes to 147, in one hour and thirty-five minutes.

“The winner may be counted lucky to have won this match, for he was clearly outplayed until quite the end of the third set, which Eaves ought to have won. In fact, Eaves may be said to have lost the match by six inches. Baddeley was sadly inaccurate in the opening sets, placing easy returns one after the other in the net – a most unusual thing for him.

“Baddeley improved towards the very end of the third set, and this improvement continued to the close, he then showing his accustomed mastery. He played chiefly from the back of the court, but when he came up to volley Eaves generally scored the ace. Baddeley lasted better than his opponent, and to this fact alone is to be attributed his victory, for on Saturday he was certainly otherwise at a disadvantage.

“Whether from the back of the court or from the service line Eaves showed the better tennis. Indeed, the display of the loser in the first two sets would be very hard to beat. His volleying especially was brilliant in the extreme, particularly on the backhand, while his ground strokes were severe and well placed.”5

At Wimbledon in 1895, Wilfred and Herbert Baddeley retained the men’s doubles title by beating Eaves and Ernest Lewis in the challenge round, 8-6, 5-7, 6-4, 6-3. Wilfred Baddeley finished the lawn tennis season of 1895 by winning the men’s singles title at the South of England Championships in Eastbourne in September for the third year in a row. In the challenge round he beat George Hillyard, who retired with the score 6-3, 7-9, 7-5 in Baddeley’s favour.

The following year, 1896, Wilfred Baddeley began the lawn tennis season by taking part in the Irish Championships in Dublin. At that time this tournament was considered to be almost on a par with the Wimbledon tournament due to the quality of the entries it received each year. It was held in late May in Fitzwilliam Square, a small Georgian square located close to the city centre. Before 1896, Wilfred Baddeley had only taken part in the Irish Championships once before, in 1892, when he reached the semi-finals of the men’s singles event where Frank Stoker beat him in four sets.

In 1896, Wilfred Baddeley won three matches to reach the all-comers’ final of the men’s singles event in Dublin. His opponent in that match was Harold Mahony, one of the top Irish players of the time. After a four-set match Baddeley emerged the winner by the score of 6-1, 6-2, 3-6, 6-3. This victory made him Champion of Ireland as Joshua Pim, the holder of the men’s single title, had virtually retired from the game after 1895.

Two weeks later, in mid-June, Wilfred Baddeley successfully defended the men’s singles title at the Northern Tournament, which in 1896 was held in Liverpool. In the challenge round he defeated Harold Mahony for the second time in two tournaments. The score was 6-1, 10-12, 7-5, 6-4.

Wilfred Baddeley and Harold Mahony seemed fated to meet several times in 1896. One month after the Northern Tournament, in mid-July, the same two players met again in the challenge round of the men’s singles event at Wimbledon. Although he was the defending champion, this was Baddeley’s sixth consecutive appearance in the final match in the men’s singles event at Wimbledon – an impressive record. On a muggy, close day neither player could quite find his best form and Harold Mahony won the match after a dour struggle. The final score was 6-2, 6-8, 5-7, 8-6, 6-3.

At Wimbledon in 1896, Wilfred and Herbert Baddeley, the holders, won the men’s doubles title for the fourth and last time when they beat Reggie Doherty and another English player, Harold Nisbet, in the challenge round. The final score was 1-6, 3-6, 6-4, 6-2, 6-1.

As he had done in previous years, Wilfred Baddeley ended the lawn tennis season in 1896 by taking part in the Sussex Championships and South of England Championships tournaments in September. At the former tournament, in Brighton, he defeated Reggie Doherty in the all-comers’ final, 6-1, 6-2, 6-3, to regain the title he had last held in 1895. (The holder of the men’s singles title at the Sussex Championships, the Irishman Grainger Chaytor, was not defending.)

One week later, at the South of England Championships in Eastbourne, Baddeley was a given a walkover in the challenge round by his brother Herbert. This gave Wilfred the men’s singles title at the South of England Championships for the fourth consecutive and last time.

By 1897, Wilfred Baddeley’s professional commitments had begun to grow. In 1892, he and his twin brother had passed the Intermediate examinations of the Incorporated Law Society6, while in 1894 they had passed the Final Examinations, held on 9 and 10 January of that year7. They were admitted solicitors in 1895, the year in which they joined the family firm, which at that time was headed by their father Frederick and his brother Thomas. According to The Post Office London Directory of 1895, Frederick and Thomas Baddeley had moved offices from Leman Street to a building at 60 Leadenhall Street, which is located a short distance from Leman Street in the City of London.8

His increasing professional commitments meant that 1897 was the last year in which Wilfred Baddeley played anything like a (for him) normal schedule of lawn tennis tournaments. Indeed, there is evidence that he only took part in three tournaments in that particular year. In late May, at the Irish Championships in Dublin, he lost the men’s singles title when Wilberforce V. Eaves defeated him in the challenge round, 1-6, 2-6, 8-6, 6-2, 6-3. This encounter was reminiscent of the all-comers’ final of the men’s singles event at Wimbledon in 1895, when Eaves had held a two-set lead before Baddeley recovered to win the next three sets and the match.

In mid-May, in Manchester, Wilfred Baddeley successfully defended the men’s singles title at the Northern Tournament by beating Reggie Doherty in the challenge round, 6-2 7-5, 2-6, 6-0. This was the fourth consecutive and last time that Baddeley won the men’s singles title at the Northern Tournament.

At Wimbledon in late June 1897, Wilfred Baddeley had one walkover and won two matches to reach the semi-finals of the men’s singles event. In the quarter-finals he notably beat Lawrence (‘Laurie’) Doherty, younger brother of Reggie, in straight sets. However, in the semi-finals Reggie Doherty gained revenge for his brother’s defeat by easily beating Baddeley, 6-3, 6-0, 6-3. Reggie Doherty would go on to win the men’s singles title at Wimbledon for the first of four consecutive years.

In the men’s doubles event at Wimbledon in 1897, Laurie and Reggie Doherty – brothers but not twins – defeated Wilfred and Herbert Baddeley, the holders, in the challenge round, 6-4, 4-6, 8-6, 6-4. Just as the Baddeley twins and Joshua Pim had been the successors to the Renshaw twins, William and Ernest, as Wimbledon champions in the early 1890s, so the Doherty brothers would succeed the Baddeleys and Pim as champions at the same tournament in the late 1890s.

After the Wimbledon tournament of 1897, Wilfred Baddeley would never again take part in the singles event at a lawn tennis tournament. The only exception to this was the clay court tournament held in the summer in the French resort of Dinard in Brittany, which he entered in 1903. He reached the semi-finals of the men’s singles event there before losing in four sets to an old rival, Wilberforce V. Eaves.

Herbert Baddeley also effectively retired from lawn tennis competition after the Wimbledon tournament of 1897. (The twins returned to Wimbledon in 1904 and 1905, when they took part in the men’s doubles event. They lost in the second round in 1904 and the quarter-finals in 1905.)

In 1898, one year after the effective retirement of Wilfred Baddeley and his twin brother from the sport, the book Lawn Tennis Recollections was published. It was written by Herbert Chipp who, in addition to being a lawn tennis player and official, also wrote widely on the sport. In Lawn Tennis Recollections Chipp had the following to say about Wilfred Baddeley:

“[…] it may be said of Wilfred Baddeley that he is probably the most consistent player the game has yet known. At his highest and best Joshua Pim was undoubtedly his master – probably, indeed, the master of anyone – but of no other player of Baddeley’s day can this be said. And possibly in a long series of matches even Pim might have come off second best, so marked was and still is Baddeley’s consistency.

“Beaten on his merits by Pim in 1893 and the following year, Baddeley again became Wimbledon champion in 1895 by reason of Pim’s retirement. His loss of the title to Harold S. Mahony in 1896 was due, I shall always think, to ill health on the critical day. Last year Baddeley met with a reverse at the hands of Reginald Doherty, this player, who was in marvellously fine form, administering to Baddeley the severest beating he has received since he became famous. But it would surprise nobody were the ex-champion to come forth again with renewed vigour and resume his old position at the head of the lawn tennis world during the coming season.

“His style is a perfectly sound and neat one, although he may not possess quite the life and dash of William Renshaw and Ernest Lewis, the perfect ease and elegance of Ernest Renshaw and Reginald Doherty or the attractive power of Joshua Pim. But in point of effectiveness one is at a loss to pick a hole in Baddeley’s game. Like nearly all the great players he is a past master in the back of the court, from which position most of his game is played. But he well knows when ‘To take occasion by the hand’, and by a well-timed volley give a finishing touch to the rest [rally].

“In driving Baddeley takes the ball at the top of the bound, and is equally strong on forehand or backhand. His activity is boundless, and his powers of endurance are well proved. Perhaps a lob – provided it be of good length – is as effective a weapon as any to employ against him. But it must be used very judiciously.”9

The Commercial Directory section of The Post Office London Directory for 1900 contains an entry for the firm Baddeleys & Co., solicitors, whose offices were located at 60 Leadenhall Street, the same address given for Frederick and Thomas Baddeley in the edition of the directory published in 1895.10 The newly-named firm now also included Wilfred and Herbert Baddeley, who would continue to work there until just after the end of World War One.

By 1900, Wilfred Baddeley was also a married man. He had married Florence Burn (1874-1949), a Londoner, in 1898 in Dover, Kent. She was the daughter of John Henry Burn and Catherine Mary Burn (née Purcell), Irish immigrants to England. The marriage between Wilfred and Florence Baddeley would remain childless.

One year later, on 16 August 1900, Wilfred Baddeley’s twin brother Herbert married Maude Philpott Soper in Saint John the Baptist Church in the town of Epping in Essex. She was the daughter of Henry Lewis Soper, a wholesale dealer from Hadlow in Kent, and Hannah Soper (née Dandridge), who was from Blackheath, also in Kent. Herbert and Maude Baddeley would have one child together, a daughter called Violet Maude (b. 1902). Violet Baddeley later became a renowned badminton player.

By 1901, Wilfred Baddeley was living at 144 Cromwell Road, Kensington. In the Census of England and Wales taken on 31 March 1901, he was listed as both a solicitor and employer. Ten years later, when the next Census of England and Wales was taken, on 2 April 1911, Wilfred Baddeley and his wife Florence were still living at 144 Cromwell Road in Kensington. The same census once again listed Wilfred Baddeley as a solicitor and employer.

By 1919, when Wilfred and Herbert Baddeley retired from the family firm, Baddeleys & Co., its offices had been moved from No. 60 Leadenhall Street to a building at No. 77 in the same street in the City of London.11 After their retirement, their first cousin, Cyril Laud Baddeley, carried on the firm in the family name.12 In later years it would be known as Baddeley, Wardlaw & Co. and continue to operate from 77 Leadenhall Street.

Wilfred Baddeley spent much of his retirement living in Dinard and in the town of Menton on the French Riviera, whose proximity to England and favourable climate made it popular with the wealthy and the retired, especially in winter. In later life Wilfred Baddeley and his wife Florence lived in an apartment in a building in the Careï Valley in Menton.

A local newspaper, The Menton and Monte Carlo News, regularly reported on the doings of many of the expatriates holidaying and living on the French Riviera. In its edition of 17 November 1928, it noted the following: “A great many visitors have spent the summer months at Le Zoute in Belgium. Among those were Mr and Mrs Wilfred Baddeley, who are now back in their apartment in Las Loggias. In the same block Mr and Mrs Herbert Baddeley have also rented a flat […]”13

Just as they had lived together during their childhood, played together in the same lawn tennis tournaments, learned the rudiments of law together and subsequently worked in the family law firm together, the twins Wilfred and Herbert Baddeley spent their later lives living in the same building and socializing together with their wives.

Towards the end of the 1920s, Wilfred Baddeley began to suffer from ill health. In its edition of 5 January 1929, The Menton and Monte Carlo News reported the following: “Mr Walter [Wilfred] Baddelely is making slow progress after his operation and hopes to leave the home for his apartment next week.”14 Two weeks later, on 19 January 1929, the same newspaper stated the following: “We are glad to hear that Mr Wilfred Baddeley, who is back at his own flat, is progressing very well indeed after his operation.”15

However, Wilfred Baddeley subsequently suffered a relapse and died in his apartment in Menton on 24 January 1929. He was 57. The Menton and Monte Carlo News carried the following report in its edition of 26 January 1929: “We regret to record the death of Mr Wilfred Baddeley, aged 57, which took place at his residence in the Careï Valley on Thursday morning after a serious illness and two very severe operations. He passed away in the presence of his twin brother, Herbert, and his sister-in-law. […] The funeral service will be held in the cemetery chapel on Monday, 28 January, at eleven o’clock.”16

Herbert Baddeley outlived his twin brother by less than two years. He died in Dinard on 20 July 1931 at the age of 59.
------

Notes

1. For more information on Wilfred Baddeley’s immediate family and ancestors, see genealogical websites such as Ancestry, accessible via www.ancestry.com.

2. The Post Office London Directory, London, Kelly & Co., 1820, p. 15.

3. The Times, Saturday, 10 November 1888, p. 16.

4. Pastime, Wednesday, 8 July 1891, p. 25.

5. Pastime, Wednesday, 17 July 1895, p. 248.

6. The Times, Saturday, 30 April 1892, p. 15.

7. The Times, Saturday, 27 April 1894, p. 7.

8. The Post Office London Directory, London, Kelly & Co., 1895, p. 794.

9. Chipp, Herbert, Lawn Tennis Recollections, London, Merritt & Hatcher, 1898, pp. 91-2.

10. The Post Office London Directory, London, Kelly & Co., 1900, p. 881.

11. The Post Office London Directory, London, Kelly & Co., 1920, p. 1,260.

12. The Times, Friday, 25 January 1929, p. 21.

13. The Menton and Monte Carlo News, Saturday, 17 November 1928, p. 9.

14. The Menton and Monte Carlo News, Saturday, 5 January 1929, p. 10.

15. The Menton and Monte Carlo News, Saturday, 19 January 1929, p. 10.

16. The Menton and Monte Carlo News, Saturday, 26 January 1929, p. 12.
-----

Media

Leave a Reply Cancel reply