Coquet and Coast Forum
Don't forget to check out our sister site: Amble and District

Go Back   Coquet and Coast Forum > Local History, Genealogy, People and Places > Amble and Hauxley

 We no longer use activation emails. Please allow 24h after sign up and your account should work
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 18-06-2013, 10:17 AM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default 1926 Electoral Register

I've made a start on this document from forum member 'Leslie'.
Slow going as ever, here's the start, just about 2,000 more names to add.

[might be enough here to answer your query Janwhin?]


http://www.fusilier.co.uk/amble_nort...oral_roll.html
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 18-06-2013, 10:36 AM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

I should add it will take weeks rather than days to finish it. I'm fed up with real life getting in the way of my local history.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 19-06-2013, 04:32 PM
janwhin janwhin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Nr Eglingham
Posts: 1,377
Default

You're a star, Coquet, it has answered my query.Grandparents and uncle esconced in Amble.....opposite Bob Aicheson
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 19-06-2013, 08:34 PM
janwhin janwhin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Nr Eglingham
Posts: 1,377
Default

The 1926 Register is interesting as it shows women being eligible to vote. From what I can gather, in 1918 women aged over 30 and property owners were entitled to vote for the first time, but it was not until 1928 that all women were eligible to vote on the same footing as men.
From looking at the Amble register, it seems that married women were eligible because their husbands were occupiers of property but there also seems to be some single women eligible too......property owners in their own right?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 22-06-2013, 05:36 PM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

Yes I think property owners

bottom right hand column here, and on to the next page. Still aged 30 though.

http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/30579/pages/3312


I noticed this too: question asking if women are over 21 or 30 (Question 7):

http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/31352/pages/6358


What was the point? Did women property owners become eligible to vote at 21 in 1919? (of course they would be few and far between anyway I imagine)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 22-06-2013, 05:39 PM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

Actually not sure about that now, it's referring just to 'Own Occupation' and not 'Property Owning'
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 22-06-2013, 05:44 PM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

"(3) that the annual value of the qualifying
premises is not less than five pounds ;"

wonder what that is about? Is that Rateable Value?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 22-06-2013, 05:52 PM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

phew. that is a bit mind numbing.

it starts here:

http://www.london-gazette.co.uk/issues/30579/pages/3307

Our absent voter military males are definitely voting at 19. I think the point was raised before the act that they were old enough to die for their country at 19, but not old enough to vote - so it was reduce from 21 to 19.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 22-06-2013, 05:58 PM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

Janwhin; your mission is a 6000 word essay on the Representation of the People Act 1918, and subsequent amendments up to 1928.


ok I'll let you off on this occasion.


1926 was the year of the General Strike. Probably hard times immediately ahead for many in our list of Amblers.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 22-06-2013, 06:54 PM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

Done a bit more on the 'register', now up to 679. Just 1,649 more to go!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 23-06-2013, 12:06 PM
janwhin janwhin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Nr Eglingham
Posts: 1,377
Default

Nice of you to share your thought processes, Coquet And even better that you've let me off the mission, should I have chosen to accept it

I'll throw away the 3000 words I've already done then?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 23-06-2013, 12:36 PM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

Quote:
I'll throw away the 3000 words I've already done then?
yeah just bin that. Here's another quandary. We've come across this before in some other document, "Nyberg's Shop" at Radcliffe being recorded as in Amble Parish.

In this Register it's recorded as Derwent House.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg derwent_house_radcliffe.jpg (87.5 KB, 23 views)
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 23-06-2013, 12:45 PM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

I think I found the explanation. The Amble Parish/Township boundary heads south in the fields west of Radcliffe, but it then dog-legs east to just clip the south west corner of Radcliffe village, probably taking in a building - that building is possibly the post office on the Radcliffe map?

Never knew that. Radcliffe was in both townships, Hauxley and Amble.



Last edited by Coquet; 23-06-2013 at 12:52 PM. Reason: spellings and add map
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 23-06-2013, 12:54 PM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

I wonder why it's not shown as a shop on the 1926 register?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 23-06-2013, 01:11 PM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

Blue = Amble Township
White and yellow = Hauxley
Green = Togston

the boundaries were marked on this map - I just noticed them!


Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 23-06-2013, 03:59 PM
Alan J. Alan J. is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Amble
Posts: 344
Default Boundaries.

It looks like the area that was Radcliffe welfare was in fact actually in Amble, as was that bit of the road from Craiggs garage to the end of Leslie Row.
In the days of Amble Urban District Council, Radcliffe actually came under Alnwick Rural District Council , strange isn't it. I wonder who drew up the boundary lines and why some of these decisions were made.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 24-06-2013, 08:48 AM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

I've often wondered about the boundaries. I wouldn't be surprised if some are medieval in origin. There's sure to be some interesting stories in antiquity as to why they are like they are.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 27-06-2013, 11:31 AM
janwhin janwhin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Nr Eglingham
Posts: 1,377
Default

Nice progress on the register, Coquet. It's a valuable supplement to the 1911 census. I see that Central Avenue is up and running, do we know when that was built?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 28-06-2013, 10:48 AM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by janwhin View Post
I see that Central Avenue is up and running, do we know when that was built?
It's much earlier than you might expect isn't it?

We had a photo dated 1932 here, and I'm sure Alan_J had some dates but they must be in another thread. I cannot see them pre-dating 1926 by very much.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 28-06-2013, 01:26 PM
Coquet's Avatar
Coquet Coquet is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Amble
Posts: 3,253
Default

I wonder why there are a few blocks of house numbers missing? (or apparently missing) Coquet Street for example.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:21 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.