|
|
We no longer use activation emails. Please allow 24h after sign up and your account should work |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Amble Water Supply 1873
A survey of the water supplies for the Alnwick district was undertaken in 1873 and reported in the Alnwick Mercury.
Amble had five sources of drinking water: 1. Springs issuing from the south side of Gloster Hill, supplying the gas works and residences of the Hendersons. They had also supplied Victoria Street and the western end of the village but because of "abuse" they were excluded from using it; 2 & 3. Two public wells, High and Low Bank Wells, in the centre of Amble. Access is down "declivitous muddy banks" and they are fouled by storm waters; 4. The "Douglas South Pump" which until recently supplied the tenants and owner of Marks Row. The privilege was "abused" and the tenants now had to go to the High or Low Bank Wells; 5. The "Douglas East Pump" in the "Sea Lane" (Church Street??) supplying the eastern and harbour portion of Amble. Users paid 1s a year for water from this source. It also supplied surrounding farms and places short of water, by barrel cart. There was also a minor source of water in a well near the quarry which would be used for 6 newly completed concrete houses built for Broomhill pitmen. I wonder what kind of "abuse" caused Victoria Street and the west and Marks Row to lose their privileges |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Very interesting, our shop cellar and others on Queen st have a constant wet trickle through them so it doesn't surprise me to hear of wells in the area.
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Here are 3 pumps on the east end. (1897)
Could the one at the bottom of Queen Street be the Low Bank one, and the Percy Street ones be the Douglas East Pump? |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Those Percy Street boreholes are probably under someone's living-room floor now.
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
I was googling about to find some info on pump boreholes - depths etc. Bit illusive, but this guy restored a pump and found the original borehole to stick it back on top of, which was 4 metres deep.
[actually 4 metres to the water... total depth?] edit.. 7.7m is maximum depth that can be lifted with the simple pump apparently... |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Directory of village pumps on that site as well.
http://www.villagepumps.org.uk/directory.htm Acklington makes it in. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
We've got a borehole and it is much deeper, at least 20 to 30 metres.
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
I think you're ok to go much deeper with modern electric borehole pumps but these hand pumps are limited by the opposing air pressure.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Is the motor for your pump down inside the borehole?
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Yes it is down the borehole. The old one was quite a long way down, the new one is higher up.
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Water supplies.
I remember an old Amble resident who,as a boy, lived in the Catholic Row in High Street, telling me that they had to use the Hallbank Well for their water.
One for you Coquet, what was the purpose of the cast iron upright in front of the High Street bus stop? When David Wilkinson was researching for his book on Amble he asked me if I knew anything about it, I didn't but pointed him in the direction of old Bob Close with whom I often had "crack" in the Bede Street club. As far as I know Bob couldn't help either. At first glance it looks as if it may have been a pump of some sort but I doubt if it would have been capable of lifting water from Hallbank. It has never been touched for some reason in all the improvements that have happened over the years, I wonder if there is a listing on it. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Douglas Pump
Now here's an interesting reference in 1876. The inspector has been having a look at the "Douglas Well" in Amble where a pumping station and a line of water main was proposed to provide water to Radcliffe. The well had been sunk by Mr Douglas 30 years previously and never run out of water.
However he had received a letter which described what the writer believed to be the Douglas Well....situated on the right hand side of the road leading to the shore, or nearly opposite the Coquet Leazes. If that was the case, the supply of water came from an accumulation of water in some old and abandoned pit workings. The letter writer claimed that the seam of coal worked had been very thin...20 to 30 ins. in thickness and worked for the use of the salt works on the links near the present works of Mr Henderson. He didn't think the supply would be reliable. The inspector confirmed that the supposition was correct in relation to old coal workings but that the supply of water had been good and continuous for over 30 years. Last edited by janwhin; 13-03-2014 at 12:18 PM. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
The Douglas Well and the Douglas East Pump are one and the same....in Sea Lane. Also the pit workings apparently ran south from the pit shaft and not north towards the well.
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.33...uw!2e0!6m1!1e1 |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
It is the bus stop opposite the Wellwood next to the Priests house.
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
Here is for the record the text from Janwhin's newspaper report regarding the pumps at the bottom end
Alnwick Mercury 21st October 1876 RADCLIFFE TERRACE. The INSPECTOR reported that he had had the covers removed from the Douglas Well in Amble, to acertain the depth of the well and the standage of water. The water level was eight feet six inches from the surface and the standage four feet nine inches down to the surface of the deposit at the bottom. This deposit might be two or more feet deep, as the well had not been cleaned out for thirty years, which would make the depth of the well from the surface to be about sixteen feet. He produced a plan showing the pumping station and line of water main to supply Radcliffe Terrace from this well. He had received the accompanying letter, which threw a doubt that had hitherto never been rained as to the quality of the water and continuity of the supply. He found that the information contained therein as to old coal workings in the locality of the well was correct. Nevertheless the theory was quite adverse to the considerable use that had been made of the well since it was sunk by Mr Douglas 30 years ago. He had ascertained, among other experiences of its large supply, that Mr Carse, builder, filled an adjacent gasometer 30 feet in diameter and 11 feet deep, by relentless pumping many hours without lowering the standage in the well. He required instructions for further procedure. The following is the letter in question :- "West Stanley Colliery, Chester-le-Street, October 3rd, 1876. Dear Sir,—I notice in the Alnwick Mercury for September 30th, that the Inspector recommends ‘Douglas's Well' as a source of water supply for the village of Amble. Am I right in supposing that Douglas's Well' is situated on the right hand side of the road leading to the shore, or nearly opposite the Coquet Leazes ? If my supposition is correct, are you aware that the source of this supply is from an accumulation of water in some old and abandoned pit workings ? I am afraid you will not find the quality of the water good for drinking purposes, or the supply adequate for Amble. You may find the quantity equal to your requirements for a time, but eventually you may pump the old workings dry, and then you will have to go elsewhere for supply. The accumulation of water cannot be very great, because the seam of coal worked was only thin, varying from 20in. to 30 in. in thickness, and only worked to a limited extent for the use of the Salt Works on the links near to the present works of Mr Henderson. If I am wrong respecting Douglas's Well, you will pardon me for troubling you with this letter; but if I am right respecting the site of the well referred to, as I am quite a stranger to you, Mr H. H. Blair can vouch for my knowledge of the village of Amble.” |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Looking at the 1860 map you can see where Coquet Leazes is relative to the railway lines so it does look like Percy Street to me.
|
|
|