Canny lass

Such a pity that you don't recognise any names, Allan! However, this family information is from 1911, some 9 years before your father's birth, so they could well be relatives. The 1921 census should be released soon and we can get a better picture of where your father lived. However, there are other sources available for research and if you'd like to give me your father's full name and date of birth I'd be happy to have a look for you. Of course, you don't need to post that information publicly. you can send me a direct message if it feels better.

19 hours ago, Alan Edgar (Eggy1948) said:

This is the extract from the 1921 ordnance survey map showing the 4 rows of house, First, Second, Plessey & Third Street just above the name Netherton Colliery

A little correction needed there, Eggy. Plessey Street is not shown. The 1921 map only shows First-, Second- and Third street. Second Street being the two centre rows of the four with Third Street to the left and First Sreet to the right of them.

Allan, if you view the video above you will see Plessey Street, formerly called 2nd Second Street. It looks a bit the worse for wear in the video but in 1920, when your father was born there it would be almost "state of the art" as those rows were built between 1907 and 1915 and brought such "mod-cons" as outdoor, flushing toilets, electric lighting and a fresh water tap, in the street - one tap for every 8 houses! You'll find many more details on the photos in the gallery recommended above by Alan Edgar. If you've any questions feel free to ask.

22 hours ago, Canny lass said:

a couple of remnants of the place left. Howard House, the former pit manager's house, and the adjoining former Office Row, still exists

Correction! That should read: Howard House, the former pit manager's house, and the adjoining offices - not Office Row as i have mistakenly written. Sorry about that!

Hi Allan, welcome to the forum! You are  right in saying that the colliery houses are now gone but there are a couple of remnants of the place left. Howard House, the former pit manager's house, and the adjoining former Office Row, still exists but is now a school. Just a few hundred yards away is Blue House farm which was also there in the 1920s. Moving on towards Morpeth, you come to Nedderton Village where the old junior school exists, though no longer in use as such. However, I'm not sure if it was in use for the colliery children as early as the 1930s when your dad would be a 'junior'.

Second Street, Netherton Colliery consisted of 2 rows of houses: 1st Second Street and 2nd Second street, as far as 1911 at least. "nd Second street later became Plessey Street. I'd have to wade through my research for an exact date. Hower there was a Mills family living at number 13 2nd Second Street. Head of the household was Ralph Mills, born Sunderland then aged 29 and married to Rachel, also 29 . They had three children: maria, William and Thomas aged 2 months to 2 years. Only the baby was born in Netherton Colliery indicating that they recently moved to Netherton. Also living in the house was Ralph's brother William, aged 20, also born in Sunderland, Albert Gibbon, a lodger aged 21 and Barbara Scott, a 19 year old servant with roots in Netherton. Quite a crowd for 3 small rooms!

Do any of those names ring any bells?

Hope you enjoyed it, Vic! How was your trip to Blighty?

Very belated, I know, but hope you had a good day, Andy.

Hi Tony!

If you don't manage to find a magnet with Bedlington on it I can recommend these.

https://www.smartphoto.se/fotopresenter/kylskapsmagneter?pvc=MagnetSheetSquare&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIw4TTyY3q-gIVCdKyCh3A5g3AEAQYASABEgKN3vD_BwE

Take a few nice nice photos of your visit and make your own. I use them for the grandchildren's photos.

On 08/09/2022 at 12:33, Alan Edgar (Eggy1948) said:

Great minds think alike - and where not the same gender

No, but we're on the same page as far as colour and age are concerned. Two out of three's not bad!

How is it with equality  here on Bedders? ´Not many females about. It's a good job for you lot that i just think of myself as "one of the lads".

Thanks James! And, an extra thank you for the Crofton Mill Colliery photo! Many of my relatives lived in Cowpen Square and worked there and that's the first picture I've seen.

I have to admit my idea of a "tippler" was something quite unrelated to mining!

1 hour ago, Alan Edgar (Eggy1948) said:

Will we ever get the point where no matter what sex or colour, no matter what the balance is, everyone will treat everyone else as equal and just get on with it

Hopefully we wil - but I'm not holding my breath while waiting for it to happen.

The following is no reflection on the new cabinet, as of yet I haven't really looked at its composition, but sometimes i think equality of sexes and colours can go a bit too far. What do either of those matter if you are the right person for the job and work well in the team? I wouldn't like to be the employer who turns away a competent, prospective co-worker on my team just because they happened to have the wrong sex or colour needed to maintain the 'correct' balance in the workforce.

9 hours ago, HIGH PIT WILMA said:

Hi folks,aam still alive!

I'm very pleased to hear it!! You can further my mining education here by explaining what "tipplers" and creepers" are.

Have a lovely stroll down memory lane, Vic. Can't get away at the minute otherwise i would have loved to meet up with you. Maybe another time.

1 hour ago, Canny lass said:

Netherton Lane today. Nr 7 far right is The Louge (Hairdressers).

That should be far left. I edited it but it doesn't seem to have been amended.

Left to right: Nrs. 7, 6, 5 and 4 Netherton Lane today. Nr 7 far right is The Louge (Hairdressers). I had a look at the 1911 census and  two dwellings of the five on Netherton Lane were occupied by Douglas (possibly related). There were no numbers then but 5 must have been Douglas House with 4 rooms. Next door, at number 4 (at the far right of the picture) named "Netherton House", lived a 34 yo woman also named Douglas. She gives her civil status as married but is registered as head of the household. She has two children aged 4 and 1 yo. Strangely, she has the smallest family of all occupiers but has the largest house with 5 rooms. Could it be possible that Ann's GG grandfather was a boarder in that house? Boarders weren't unknown, even on Netherton Lane. next door was The Cottage, Netherton Lane also occupied by a female head with 2 teenage grandchildren and 2 boarders - a head teacher and a bank manager.

Ann, I've sent you a message.

Hi Ann, welcome to the forum. I vaguely recall it being part of the Red House Farm buildings but I'm not 100% sure. One way to locate unknown adresses is to follow the enumerator's route on his census rounds. If you let me have some details of your GG grandfather I'll see if I can help you (name, approx. year of birth and even occupation can be a good start). You can message me if you don't want to post details on site.

Hi Lynne, welcome to he forum!

Old Factory, sometimes called Old Factory Row, was, as the name implies, an old disused factory used as housing by the ever increasing mining population in the Bebside and Bedlington Area. I'm afraid i can't see as far as the 1920s but in 1911 the following family may be of interest to you. Living in "two large rooms" with address 27 Old Factory were the following 10 people:

John Forster, 53 yo, widower, Head of household, born Newfield, Durham

George Forster 17 yo son of the above, born Byker

Isabella Giles, 36 yo, widow, housekeeper to the above, born Burradon

Jane Isabella Giles, 16yo, boarder, born New Delaval

Mary Ann Giles, 14 yo, boarder, born Blyth

James Forster Giles, 12 yo, boarder, born Blyth

Robert Forster Giles, 6 yo, boarder, born Ashington

Lizabeth Forster Giles, 4 yo, boarder, born Bebside

Henry Forster Giles, 3 yo, boarder, born Blyth

Samuel Clark, 19 yo, boarder, born Mexborough, Yorkshire

All three adult males are mine workers.

If you would like a copy of the census form filled in by John Forster let me know.

Sorry, didn't see that. However, they can be contacted and they do reply. Perhaps if it's important you could try the contact us page. It works fine.

On 24/07/2022 at 13:06, _pauls said:

emailing the "contact us" address on Investing in Bedlington results in a bounce with a "No Such User Here" 

Worked fine just 5 minutes ago. I recieved a "Thank you for contacting us" reply immediately. Did you complete the  11+1, 22+5 correctly?

Petrol prices being what they are today this ought to be welcomed with open arms - if the ticket price is right.

It’s always interesting to see how the wheels of government grind. I’m all for transparency!

Thanks for the link to the Commons Library. I’ll be saving that for future perusal. Having read the document, am I right in understanding that central government has defined affordable as ”up to 80%” but ileaves it to local government to set the bar on a scale of 0-80% for their own area (30% in the case under discussion)?

1 hour ago, Malcolm Robinson said:

So depending on what we are talking about, renting, ownership, part ownership etc. this ambiguous term has a multiple of meanings.  Can that be right? 

It can indeed be right. Affordability means different things to different people because what’s affordable, cheap or expensive to one person is related to that individual’s perception – influenced, as I said previously, by that person’s tastes, feelings and opinions and even circumstances. So every person at that meeting could, and probably did, have their own idea of what was being discussed as ”affordable housing”. It’s a minefield for misunderstanding made all the more explosive if even the various planning instances involved are not working to the same definition.

Clearly, in the case of the report under discussion, some body of people somewhere, has defined the term ’affordable’ for the purpose of that project/report – otherwise, Cllr Hardcastle wouldn’t have been able to produce it. Myself, the least I’d expect is that such subjective terminology be defined at the outset of such a report. In that way, no one is left with any doubt as to what is being reported on or being discussed. In the absence of that then it’s good to know that there are people like yourself who are prepared to ask for a definition.

Naturally, everyone will not agree with it. As i said, it’s subjective terminology but it has to be called something and provided everyone knows what is meant by the term ’in just that report’ then there is no room for ambiguity – only for differing opinion.

Correct me if I’m wrong, Malcolm, but I understood from the government definition provided that the term affordable was specific to just one area - ”30% below the market rate for that area ”. Naturally, I’d expect that 30% to be based on, among other things, wage structure and not just the current market rate and hopefully that is the case. Perhaps market rates reflect the economic status of the area in question? I do, however, take your point about the outcome of basing anything on a super-heated market and, unfortunately, I have to agree.

Keep up the good work!

Symptoms, I see where you’re coming from when you mention misleading language. The question we should be asking is whether or not there is deliberate intention to mislead. The english language, or any other for that matter, doesn’t have too many ’absolute’ things – most are variable because they are subjective to the perceiver/user. We all have our own unique perspective on things which is influenced by our own personal tastes, feelings and opinions . These, in their turn, have been influenced by our uppbringing, culture and education. Let me clarify: a dog is a dog - that’s absolute. However, as soon as we get round to putting labels on the dog we are being subjective. A dog that jumps up and licks your face after licking its genitals may be labelled ’disgusting’ by you but labelled ’friendly’ by its owner. Two different ways of perceiving the same thing.

And so it is with labels on housing. as well They are also subjective. and have variable meaning according to our own perspective on what is: affordable, expensive, nasty, nice etc.etc. - one man’s meat is another man’s poison. Then, of course, English has a host of words that have both a positive AND a negative meaning. Cheap is a perfect example which in one context retains its original fourteenth century, positive meaning of ’a good bargain’ but in another context adopts the more modern, negative meaning ’of poor quality’.

I’m very much aware that this lexical ambiguity can, and is quite often, used deliberately by and to the advantage of politicians, not to mention the field day reporters have with it! Malcolm clearly understands this so I think he did right in asking for the term affordable to be defined. A clear answer, subjective though it may be, (subjectivity can’t, unfortunately, be siphoned off) allows everybody to understand just what is being discussed.

For that reason I thought Malcolm’s question was very relevant. He wanted to know the meaning of ’affordable’ according to the person using the term. Its interpretation was vital to everybody ’s understanding of just what was being discussed and, in my opinion, Clr, Hardcastle gave a clear reply in saying that it was a government definition set at 30% below the market rate for that area for rent and shared ownership. This left no one, regardless of their own definition of ’affordable’, in any doubt as to what was being discussed.