Loading more
Page 4
Street Name | Houses in Street | Highest Occupancy | Average People per House | Cases of Scarletina | Cases of Typhus | % Houses Occupied by Irish |
Whalley Banks | 16 | 14 | 11 | 1 | 4 | 58 |
Bk Whalley Banks | 16 | 15 | 9 | 1 | 3 | 63 |
Livesey Front Street | 16 | 13 | 9 | 0 | 3* | 23 |
Livesey Back Street | 27 | 13 | 7 | 0 | * | 12 |
Livesey Little Street | 9 | 14 | 9 | 0 | * | 25 |
Back King Street | 22 | 17 | 7 | 0 | 2 | 18 |
Richard Street | 16 | 11 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Bk Richard Street | 26 | 12 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
*One figure provided for all Livesey Streets.
What is startlingly apparent from the above table is that where the incidences of Typhus and Scarletina are higher then there is a greater percentage of houses which are occupied by Irish immigrants. However over the two Richard Streets, there is only one house occupied by Irish immigrants. To take Whalley Banks in isolation, on average there are 12 people living in the same house in those houses occupied by the Irish giving rise to the notion that it was the Irish immigrants of the town who were exposed to the contagious diseases as a consequence of their poverty forcing many to have to live together under the same roof.
This would appear from the evidence obtained from the 60" to one mile map and the census returns that the Wrangling district displays those criteria which are evident in the classic slum since both of these sources show that there were in some cases many people crowded into many houses squeezed into a relatively small area of Blackburn together with evidence of cellar dwellings. The higher than average levels of disease, in particular typhus appears to be due to the proximity of the River Blakewater. The river flows directly through the middle of this area, which is shown on the above map between Whalley Bank's Mill and the Phoenix Foundry. Not only does the river weave its way through the Wrangling, but it is also downstream from the centre of town and so would by this stage would contain high levels of pollutants giving off high levels of undesirable exhalations the effects of which could quite possibly been experienced in this poor area of town. Also it is worth noting that the river in this area was prone to flooding as it was in the Salford area, therefore as the water level rose to overflow into the streets it would undoubtedly have inundated those cellars with the accumulation of impurities collected on its course through the Blackburn, a route taking in Brookhouse, touching on the Larkhill area, through Salford to the Wrangling and as such had a profound impact on those unfortunate folk living in those cellars at the time. Further, as can be seen on the map and by the census returns, that overcrowded houses were built cheek-by-jowl with the cotton factories also throwing impurities into what would also have been a very contaminated air.
Something which is apparent on the zoned map of the town above is the fact that within the area marked in grey, there is no record of either typhus or scarletina occuring. The area is made up of Montague Street and King Street and what is remarkable is the fact that this area of Blackburn is bounded by The Wrangling, Nova Scotia and Blakey Moor all areas where there are high incidences of these diseases. To take this point further, consideration is given to both the type of housing in these streets, together with other streets off these including, France Street, Heaton Street, Paradise Lane and Freckleton Street and the people that lived within. From the OS map, it would appear that the houses here were some of the largest in the town and 150 years after the collation of the census schedules where these building remain there still exists traces of these buildings' Georgian elegance that this area of Blackburn once possessed, also there is an area of parkland and a select school with a large playing area for the pupils. Another street where there is no incidence of either of the above two named diseases is Richmond Terrace a very airy open street who's property was a little more modern being constructed in the Regency Period and again has the ability to emanate the same elegance almost 200 years after the terraces here were built.
To digress a little here and look a little more closely at these houses, the maps show that not only where these houses larger than many few opened directly into the street, the map showing that the Georgian houses had steps leading from the street level to a grand single-front door whereas the Regency houses in Richmond Terrace had a small area in front and a path to their front doors. The census returns of 1851, gave a great deal of insight as to what type of people lived in these houses as it appears that they most definitely were homes to the town's gentry and merchants and the most wealthy folk in the town, being employed as Doctors, Accountants, Solicitors, Surgeons, Manager of a joint stock bank, a chemist an assistant in a Manchester warehouse, a leech bleeder, a pawn broker and a "gentleman", all who employed at least one servant further illustrating their higher social standing. In a house in Freckleton Street lived the vicar of Blackburn's Parish Church and around the corner in King Street was the town's "Royal Hotel" a very elegant hostelry dated from the times of stage coach travel, with its assembly room venue to those society functions attended by the town's gentry (6). What is of importance here is the fact that nowhere does this area feature in the Health Report illustrating that Withers apparently must have employed selectivity in his reporting of Blackburn which does raise the question of just how much those other claims made by him are as severe as he insists or as over-magnified as the examination of the overcrowding has revealed.
On another subject which features prominently in the Health Report is the condition of the town's streets and this also is an topic where Withers is at odds with other sources written at a similar time. It is categorically stated in the Health Report that two thirds of Blackburn's streets are at best poorly paved, but are mainly unpaved with no provision for surface drainage (7). However this statement totally contradicts that made both by Whittles' writings in 1852 and by Slater in the Trade Directory of 1848 who just as persuasively claim that there has been "considerable attention" (8) directed at the streets which includes the flagging of footpaths and repairing the highways. Whittle additionally states that all are in "good order". For further evidence, it is interesting to see what the local newspaper has to say about the conditions of Blackburn's streets. In 1841, the Blackburn Standard complained about the poor state of the sidewalks or footpaths, claiming that nowhere in England are they "so rugged, so uneven and so irregular" (9), yet a year later, the same newspaper was admitting that many new pavements had been laid down or had been flagged as a result of the interaction of the Improvement Commissioners (10), eleven years prior to the publication of Withers' Health Report. It can only be assumed here that the local newspaper is a more reliable source on this subject since it is writing at the time and such fundamental subject as the paving of the streets which would affect everyone would not in reality provide such an inaccurate account, especially as it would be so obvious that this fact was untrue. But what gives the newspaper added value is the fact that only a year before it had been commenting on the poor condition of Blackburn's streets.
Another ambiguity concerns the supply of water to households. On this point, Withers insists that more houses need to be supplied with water which implies that few are adequately supplied (11). Whittle on the other hand states that there are twenty three miles of water pipes in Blackburn - which is one mile more than there are streets (12). Furthermore Whittle states that there are 6332 houses in the town which are provided with a water supply, out of the total housing stock of 7925 (13). Therefore according to Whittle, 79.90% of houses in Blackburn in 1853 are supplied with piped water which is a considerably higher figure than would be expected from reading Withers' report. The Mannex trade directory published in 1854 puts this figure at an even higher level claiming that there are 7,000 houses provided with water (14) although it does not give accurate figures in regard to the town's population at that time. Slater's Directory of 1851 however states that there are only 15 miles of water pipes (15) reducing the figure presented by Whittle by a third, therefore there is a little discrepancy here as to just how many houses were actually supplied with water although non of their statistics appear as doom-laden as the Health Report.
Further evidence of Withers' over stating of the poor conditions in Blackburn is illustrated by his descriptions of the town's burial grounds. Throughout most of his report, Withers' cites names and localities, however on closer scrutiny of his report into Blackburn's burial grounds there appears to be no named localities indeed here there is no specific reference to Blackburn in Withers description of them. He say that "... [Burial Grounds] ought not to be permitted in large towns ...This system of having large pits for the promiscuous burial of the poor, kept constantly open and many other evils arising from the increased mortality of an increased population demands a remedy" (16). The conclusion from this is that the open graves that he mentions might not exist in Blackburn after all and the recommendation of the construction of a burial ground on an elevated situation on the outskirts of the town is in fact a precautionary measure based on observations and writings about those conditions that perhaps have been experienced in other towns and cities, but have not necessarily been experienced in Blackburn. His comment is that burial grounds should not be permitted in large towns where there are high densities of population. Evidence obtained from the OS maps indicate that in Blackburn as elsewhere in the country, burial grounds were mainly attached to churches which would be close to the centre of the town and yet Withers' makes no reference to St Mary's with its burial grounds at the very centre of Blackburn, St John's, St Peter's or St Paul's all of which having grave yards adjacent to those churches all in close proximity to the town's population. The notion of open-mass graves in his report therefore is a little misleading since it is assumed that they were existence in Blackburn, when in fact the report does not implicitly state that they were.
On examining other sources, a further statement of the Health Report which throws its true accuracy into question is the reference to the recommendation that there should be the provision of a public bath house to enable the populace to wash and bathe. On this matter Withers' clearly states that there is no such facility in Blackburn at the time claiming that "The establishment of a public bath house would be a great boon to the inhabitants and be conductive to their health and yet while the necessity of frequent ablutions is so generally recommended-there is no facility for the performance of them in Blackburn" (17). However, Rogerson in 1818 says different. In his Directory, one of the favourable aspects of Blackburn was that there was "several springs of most excellent water and there is a cold bath" (18) however there is no mention of this facility in the directories which followed which might have been dropped from subsequent directories since this detail may not have been of any relevance to the potential entrepreneur interested in setting up business in the town. Here again it could have been that Withers selectivity comes to the fore and claiming that they did not exist could have had a greater impact than by otherwise acknowledging their presence or it may have been that the facilities which did exist were totally inadequate to provide for the population which had increased greatly by 1853. Nevertheless, it is matters such as these and the burial grounds issue which are themselves questionable and in turn start the process of questioning the accuracy of Withers all the issues detailed in the report which stimulate the doubt that if these are inaccurate then what else is?
It is not only the fact that some of the findings of the Health Report are over exaggerated but what also begins to emerge is the possible notion that perhaps some of the conditions that Withers claim to be apparent have been dealt with and as such his claims are well out of date. The aforementioned conditions of the town's pavements is one such area another and another is the recommendation made by Withers that there should be more space between buildings in order to enable a greater flow of air. Withers' writes: "Cleanliness and purity of air and space combined with ventilation, has a tendency to prevent disease in families" and that what he terms the `dreaded scourge', Cholera bow to these effects, whereas crowded, filthy, ill ventilated habitations, ..."court disease and are the handmaids to Cholera and Typhus" (19). However there is evidence showing that that there was indeed better planning in the town from the late 1840s onwards as discussed in the previous chapter (20) which is indicative that Withers is skipping over this favourable element in order to emphasise the poor conditions of Blackburn, just as the Trade directories neatly skip over the undesirable elements. Having considered both the Health Report and the trade directories, it appears that there were few buildings of architectural note in Blackburn in the early 1850s, prior to the Charter of Incorporation. Picking up the fact that the Trade Directories mention that streets were irregular in Blackburn is indicative that they were constructed at a time when there was little constraint by way of planning (21). However one feature that is in existence then not only is the Market Hall which all mention, but also some of the buildings in the adjacent area, namely the Victoria, the New Market, the Albert Buildings (22), giving the area a very clean and airy feel and evidence that some thought did go towards town planning since the latter buildings are still standing and still eye-catching 150 years later and were worthy of the most prosperous city, albeit on a smaller scale. Perhaps these buildings were not flamboyant enough to suit the tastes of that earlier age. Photographic evidence here shows that in this area at least there was the provision of a greater amount of space and again on this subject that it was not a universal factor that all the streets in the town were irregular and yet this is the impression that the Health Report provides. However by admitting that these did exist in the Health Report might have had the effect of lessening its impact although 150 years after the publication of the Health Report some of the more favourable structures are still standing whereas the more unfavourable ones are long-gone and as such the contemporary historian is unable to actually see what the worst dwellings actually were like.
Inconsistencies generate doubt and if there is discrepancy on this one element then there could be other areas in the Health Report which are either not as accurate as they should be or distorted to give a poor overall impression of Blackburn. That having been said, it would be a very foolish individual to firstly dismiss the Health Report as a complete work of fiction and secondly be so naive as to believe without question those claims made by the Trade Directories. If therefore there exist flaws in the Health Report then the doubt which has been generated as a result does not end there as there is a strong possibility that the Trade Directories are also flawed in the way that they depict Blackburn. A criticism which can be levelled at the trade directories is the fact that their view is probably a very selective one which as discussed earlier, which dismisses all the undesirable elements of the town in much the same way as Withers apparently ignores all the more favourable aspects. However, there is no need to look any further back than Blackburn in the 1950s, to realise that the Trade Directories accounts were overlooking a fundamental element that must have been apparent a hundred years before, that being the smoke. It is well within the memories of many folk living today to remember the fact that there was constantly a blanket of smoke hovering over Blackburn at all times apart from the annual holidays when the mills closed and as the mills closed down then this blanket of smoke disappeared. This same phenomenon must have been there a hundred years before, blackening everything, however by reading the Trade Directories, the reader would not have that impression. Those descriptions of the town's buildings are missing one adjectives, the fact that they must have been filthy blackened by the smoke of the chimneys of the town's industries. Peter Whittle on the other hand appears to be attempting to be more objective in his observations which makes his work all the more valuable for there cannot be a more objective commentary about Blackburn in the early 1850s as this. It is after all an out of town person writing about Blackburn as the title suggest, as it was in 1853.
The most negative feature of the town according to all of the Trade Directories and something they all comment upon is the "little regularity in the form of streets". Is this in fact some hidden element and a reference to the blind alleys and courts overflowing with filth which Withers describes? (23) True, Whittle uses plenty of flowery expression to extol the virtues of 1850s Blackburn although he is also very explicit in his descriptions of some of the more unfavourable aspects. He states that "Blackburn might be made one of the cleanest and neatest towns in England. There are lanes, alleys and courts and whole streets of low houses, very irregularly built and the back yards are closing together, presenting filth and slime and impure wash water in great abundance. Sickness such as scrofula, smallpox, measles and typhus fever have and do leave their ravages to an enormous extent: asthma and shortness of breath and debility are often generated from these cess pools and dirty purlieus. With proper care and cleanliness all this might be avoided and thousands might escape from a premature death" (24). Further he states that "We must oblige the owners of property haunted by death and contagion to yield to the demands of society to forbid these open sewers and other dirty nuisances to remain any longer in the neighbourhood" (25). The most important thing about these statements are that they start to give weight to some of the claims made in the Health Report since Whittle does remark upon such components as the condition of the River Blakewater. He states that "If the old mill dam, below Darwen Street bridge was removed so as to give a free course to the River Blakewater, the stagnant water would become more pure and the nuisance in a great degree would be removed, thereby rendering the vicinity of Water Street more healthy: the stench and the effluvia sometimes in that part being intolerable" (26). Suddenly as a result of these two statements by Whittle, the Health Report appears to become more accurate.
That having being said however the Health Report must still be read with caution since it would appear that even in the light of Whittles negativity over some aspects of the town, those appalling conditions of the Health Report are not as widespread as Withers' would imply since in in closing statement. Whittle says that "The entire district of Blackburn is regarded as particularly favourable to longevity and the enjoyment of health" (27) - a conclusion which the Withers' Health Report does not come to and would surely puzzle any reader of the Health Report as a consequence of the findings and conditions which Withers encountered in Blackburn at that same time.
References
Chapter 4
(1) Withers p7
(2) Withers pp5-8
(3) Encyclopaedia
(4) Encyclopaedia
(5) Whittle p289
(6) Miller p282
(7) Withers pp8; p l3
(8) Whittle p35; Slater (1848) p 287; Slater (1851) p28; Baines p504
(9) Blackburn Standard 12.5.1841
(10) Blackburn Standard 10.5.1842
(11) Withers p 18
(12) Whittle p105
(13) Whittle p105
(14) Mannex p267
(15) Slaters (1851) p28
(16) Withers pp26-27
(17) Withers p35
(18) Rogerson p4
(19) Withers p10
(20) See p
(21) Rogerson p4
(22) Whittle p115
(23) Whittle pp148-149
(24) Whittle p149
(25) Whittle p149
(26) Whittle p 149
(27) Whittle p274
Bibliography
1. Primary Sources:
Published Sources.
Baines, E - History, Directory and Gazetteer of Lancashire Vol I (1824)
Mannex -Directory of Mid Lancashire (1854)
Rogerson, T - Lancashire General Directory (1818)
Slater - Lancashire Directory (1851)
Slater -Lancashire Directory (1848)
Withers, J - Report on the Sanitary Condition of the Borough of Blackburn, with observations on the Drainage and other subjects, calculated to improve the health of the inhabitants (1853).
Newspapers.
Blackburn Standard 12 May 1841
Blackburn Standard 10 August 1842
Maps and Plans
Yates's Map of Lancashire (1780)
Untitled Map of Blackburn (c1795)
1824 Map of Blackburn
1795 Map of Blackburn
Ordnance Survey 6" to 1 mile map of Blackburn (1848)
Ordnance Survey 5' to 1 mile map of Blackburn (1848)
Other Primary Sources
Census Return, 1851
Secondary Sources:
Books.
Aspin, C - The First Industrial Society - Lancashire 1750-1850 (1995 - revised edition) Bagley, JJ - A History of Lancashire (1982)
Beattie, D - Blackburn - The Development of a Lancashire Cotton Town (1982).
Chapman, SD -The History of Working Class Housing, Chapter 5 - Liverpool
Working Class Housing 1805-51 - James H Treble (1971)
Dickens, C - Hard Times (1969 re-print of the 1854 edition)
Langton, J and Morris RJ - Atlas of industrialising Britain 1780-1914, Chapter 2 Population - Richard Lawton. Chapter 22, Urbanisation, RJ Morris.
Miller, G - Blackburn - The Evolution of a Cotton Town (1951)
Morgan, N - Vanished Dwellings, (1990)
Roberts, Dr J - Working class houses in Nineteenth Century Manchester - The Example of John Street, Irk Town, 1826-1936 (1983)
Whittle, P - Blackburn As It is (1852)
Victoria History of the Counties of England - Lancashire Vol 2 (1966 re-print of the 1908 edition)
By Andrew Taylor
Conclusion
In conclusion what is beginning to emerge from this investigation of the written sources relating to Blackburn in the mid nineteenth century is the fact that in many ways it was very much like the modern day town of 2001 - that is there were good parts and poor districts in Blackburn. Obviously those poorer areas of 2001 bear no resemblance to the terrible conditions that some people had to endure in the 1850s, namely the severe overcrowding and the consequences of the diseases that occurred as a result but yet the theory remains that if someone was to pick up solely on the poorer parts of town and write a report on these places then this would be there impression of twenty-first century Blackburn that the people who read the report would get. Although the facts are not untrue, the selectivity has the ability to distort the overall picture somewhat resulting in an overall impression which is not necessarily a true account. Not only that but also in spite of the innovations, improvements and developments that have taken place in relation to social conditions in the last 150 years, there is still in some areas, room for improvement as in some districts still are behind awaiting their turns for renovations and improvements to take place.
Likewise, it is not the fact that those sources which have been observed from the 1850s are each only presenting one point of view but it is the fact that both opinions have the ability to produce a very powerful and somewhat influential opinion. Closer examination however indicates that both of the sources of detail have damaged their reliability somewhat as a consequence of their selectivity caused by their individual biases. Both the Trade Directories and the Health Report are guilty without doubt of this. Considering further these biases of both the health report and trade directories and questioning their validity in the light of selective reporting, then perhaps the most reliable source is Peter Whittles' book due to the fact that it is based solely upon his observation of the town, Whittle gaining little either by presenting biases towards either side of the argument and so it is assumed that his view is nearer to the ultimate aim of providing a true image of the town than the others are. Whittles' writings appear to be as close to an objective picture of the town as there can be and this source is very useful since it was written at the same time as the Health Report. Additionally the fact that Whittle is from Preston is also a significant factor since there might have been a little civic rivalry and a negative image of Blackburn might have led observers to think that any unfavourable conditions there were not as bad as they were in Blackburn. What is however interesting about Whittle's view is that his opinions match the other two sources, very closely in places and as such gives weight to both sides of the good and bad argument. Further, it is interesting to note that although in parts his opinions differ from those stated in the Health Report in other places he agrees wholeheartedly with some of the accusations that Withers' makes. The important feature however it that not only does Whittle provide an objective picture, but by doing so also adds validity not only to some of the claims made by the Health Report, but also to those made in the Trade Directories showing that they both have their uses for providing an accurate image of what Blackburn was actually like each in their own specific areas and by combining all three it should be possible to present an accurate picture of what Blackburn was like.
What is interesting is the conclusion which is reached on examining the motives of the sources. On inspection, both of these sources are very different in their approach to the town and yet, despite their differences it would appear from them, that ironically both were striving to achieve the same aims by utilising the same tactics, namely exaggeration. It appears that both Withers' Health Report and the Trade Directories were attempting in their own ways to improve the town. The trade directories were attempting to entice new trades and industry into Blackburn, which would increase the overall prosperity of the town; the Health Report was highlighting those areas where there were appalling living conditions and by doing so might provoke the authorities to do something to overcome them and improve the living conditions for these unfortunate folk whether or not these conditions only affected a small minority of people living in Blackburn in the 1850s. Taking the Health report, the fact that Withers was quite capable of over-exaggerating the poor conditions was it appears to have been done in order to get action to combat the poor situation in those places which for example were without an adequate supply of water. Surely the ideal and not so difficult situation was to ensure that all dwellings in the Borough were supplied with running water which could be a feather in the cap for the infant Borough of Blackburn in relation to some of the town's neighbours where possibly these levels were far lower. However here again such a shocking account as Withers' gives provided those in authority to react to such allegations. This subject as in others detailed by Withers in such an eminent source as a Health Report may have had the necessary influence to have brought about a reactionary 'knee jerk' action to tackle those unacceptable conditions whether they be widespread throughout 1850s Blackburn or not in order to banish the tail end of these shocking conditions out of the town for good. Continuing with the subject of water provision, if only 10% of houses in Blackburn in 1852 were without water, Withers' was ensuring that those 10% were not being overlooked by utilising such shock tactics as the ones he uses. It could also be levelled that Withers produced such shocking account of conditions so as to justify his investigations. That his investigations were necessary maybe in the light of those higher echelons of society who may have criticised his investigation since it did not affect them. Surely an inspector who finds little wrong could be challenged for not having undertaken their investigation thoroughly and was wasting money and it was not his objectives to present a report highlighting all the favourable aspects of the town and it is only reasonable to expect his accounts to emphasise only the worst aspects.
It is not only the Health Report that may have over exaggerate conditions. Caution must also be exercised when looking at the Trade Directories. The purpose of these were to promote the town in order to bring new trades into Blackburn. Obviously they were not going to present a negative picture and nowhere do they mention housing or social conditions but in truth that was not their purpose since these features were of no real interest to the potential businesses interested only in the more prestigious elements of the town. However, a negative view would undoubtedly have put the potential trader off and so by enticing new trade into Blackburn this would undoubtedly benefit the town and improve the fortunes of the inhabitants.
Therefore, suddenly both of these two different sources with their contrasting points of view are on the same side of the argument despite their different approaches. This is true also of some of the information that they provide. On closer scrutiny of both, it is apparent that the conditions that are being described are over exaggerated that they are being selective in what they are including, and to some extent even fabricating their opinions in some places in order to instil their points of view on the reader. Some might even say that they are tending to sway towards dishonesty both in what they are describing and also in what they are not writing about in order to present a misleading opinion. However though this might be the case, in both Health Report and trade directories their motives were honourable; each in their own way improve the town and its population by presenting their opposing views of Blackburn in the 1850s.
In fairness to Withers' Health Report it does appear to be an original piece of investigative work which cannot be levelled at either the Trade Directories and even Whittles' book on closer scrutiny. The alarming feature of these sources is the similarity that they all appear to describe Blackburn. From the Rogerson Dirctory of 1818, through to the Mannex version in 1854, including Baines's of 1824 and Slater's of 1851, the commentaries on Blackburn could well have been written by the same person. The danger is that the writers might have based their synopsis of Blackburn on earlier Trade Directories without actually visiting Blackburn themselves to observe what the town was actually like. However a little solace can be found with Whittles' book since it details other elements beyond the boundaries of the Trade Directories.