Weird boundaries

[RichardA626]

I've heard that before 1974 speeding motorists on the A6 through Stockport would refuse to stop & speed up until they reached the boundary, where they would be in another jurisdiction. I'm not sure if this was Stockport Town Police to Cheshire, or Cheshire to Derbyshire heading south.

[Viator]

It was absolutely bonkers! I have a mental picture of early Victorian-era criminals desperately riding on horseback across a county exclave boundary to escape the clutches of the County Sheriffs - rather like a 19th century Dukes of Hazzard...

You can see exactly why the Detached Parts Act was needed; and then later than that why the 1888 Local Government Act set up these new-fangled Administrative Counties as being based upon, but different to, the historic counties.

Steven, I know I keep bringing this up, but -- only because I'm still unclear what the SABRE Wiki's "official line" is! -- may I ask again: does the term Traditional Counties as used in the Wiki in the context of England and Wales refer to the post 19 October 1844 boundaries (given that the Detached Parts Act failed to deal with a number of exclaves that continued in existence into the post 1922/3 road classification era)?

If that is the case, then among the consequences is the need to show the A3400 [ex A34, ex A42] and the A429 as running/having run (depending upon your degree of purism) in Worcestershire -- something we don't do at present.

[Vierwielen]

You can see exactly why the Detached Parts Act was needed; and then later than that why the 1888 Local Government Act set up these new-fangled Administrative Counties as being based upon, but different to, the historic counties.

I can't imagine criminals of that era being able to read maps or navigate that to that level accuracy.

Once the railway line to Farnborough was opened, a prize-fighting cult built up close to the Blackwater River (the Hampshire/Surrey border). If any officers of the law were seen approaching (prize-fighting was an illegal activity), everybody woull hot-foot it over the river.

[Vierwielen]

It was absolutely bonkers! I have a mental picture of early Victorian-era criminals desperately riding on horseback across a county exclave boundary to escape the clutches of the County Sheriffs - rather like a 19th century Dukes of Hazzard...

You can see exactly why the Detached Parts Act was needed; and then later than that why the 1888 Local Government Act set up these new-fangled Administrative Counties as being based upon, but different to, the historic counties.

Steven, I know I keep bringing this up, but -- only because I'm still unclear what the SABRE Wiki's "official line" is! -- may I ask again: does the term Traditional Counties as used in the Wiki in the context of England and Wales refer to the post 19 October 1844 boundaries (given that the Detached Parts Act failed to deal with a number of exclaves that continued in existence into the post 1922/3 road classification era)?

If that is the case, then among the consequences is the need to show the A3400 [ex A34, ex A42] and the A429 as running/having run (depending upon your degree of purism) in Worcestershire -- something we don't do at present.

IMHO, the term "traditional boundaries" should refer to the boundaries that existed as far back as any member can remember. There are a large number of Sabristi who can remember the 1975 reorganisation, so the 1975 boundaries are a clear candidate. Many can remember the creation of the GLC in 1965, so that is a better candidate. I don't think that we have any members who can remember the 1888 reorgansation, so we should not go that far back. I am not aware of any major reorganisations between 1888 and 1975 (apart from the 1923 railway reorganisation, but that doesn't count ). The only other alternative is to go back to the Domesday Book, but that would only show the English counties, not the Welsh, Scottish or Irish counties.

[Chris Bertram]

IMHO, the term "traditional boundaries" should refer to the boundaries that existed as far back as any member can remember. There are a large number of Sabristi who can remember the 1975 reorganisation, so the 1975 boundaries are a clear candidate. Many can remember the creation of the GLC in 1965, so that is a better candidate. I don't think that we have any members who can remember the 1888 reorgansation, so we should not go that far back. I am not aware of any major reorganisations between 1888 and 1975 (apart from the 1923 railway reorganisation, but that doesn't count ). The only other alternative is to go back to the Domesday Book, but that would only show the English counties, not the Welsh, Scottish or Irish counties.

The problem with trying to define the Traditional Counties is that you're trying to hit a moving target. Post-1844 sounds reasonable, but then you find that the 1888 act made further adjustments based on the urban and rural districts, which prior to then weren't aligned with county boundaries, but afterwards were absorbed into the county that contained a majority of the area. What happened between 1888 and 1974 in England and Wales were incremental changes, often associated with expansion of cities - such as the Greater Birmingham Act of 1913 that placed most of the (Worcestershire) Kings Norton and Northfield Urban District into the city, and nominally associated that part with Warwickshire. Something similar happened to Sheffield, with the southern suburbs transferred from Derbyshire nominally into the West Riding (in both these cases the cities were County Boroughs, so county governance didn't apply under the new structure). And then there was the creation of Greater London, which obliterated Middlesex and the County of London, and took chunks of Surrey, Kent, Essex and Hertfordshire into the Metropolis.

However, the 1974 reforms were much more radical (and could have been even more so, if Redcliffe-Maud had been implemented as proposed), with mergers of old counties and the creation of new ones, both metropolitan and shire. And of course the tinkering has continued, with unitary authorities being created, merged counties being split again (not always on the old boundaries), and small rationalisations of boundaries here and there all the time. The problem is that the act that implemented the 1974 reforms contained weasel words implying that the old counties still existed, even though they no longer had any purpose in governance. Which sends people like Steven scurrying away to find a "definitive" version of what the traditional county is. But whatever he decides, someone somewhere will dispute it on such-and-such a basis. And in the end they may both be right, or neither. Still, it keeps us busy.

[wrinkly]

IMHO, the term "traditional boundaries" should refer to the boundaries that existed as far back as any member can remember. There are a large number of Sabristi who can remember the 1975 reorganisation, so the 1975 boundaries are a clear candidate. Many can remember the creation of the GLC in 1965, so that is a better candidate. I don't think that we have any members who can remember the 1888 reorgansation, so we should not go that far back. I am not aware of any major reorganisations between 1888 and 1975 (apart from the 1923 railway reorganisation, but that doesn't count ). The only other alternative is to go back to the Domesday Book, but that would only show the English counties, not the Welsh, Scottish or Irish counties.

I can remember when there were administrative counties called the Soke of Peterborough, the Isle of Ely and the Ides of March.

[Ruperts Trooper]

IMHO, the term "traditional boundaries" should refer to the boundaries that existed as far back as any member can remember. There are a large number of Sabristi who can remember the 1975 reorganisation, so the 1975 boundaries are a clear candidate. Many can remember the creation of the GLC in 1965, so that is a better candidate. I don't think that we have any members who can remember the 1888 reorgansation, so we should not go that far back. I am not aware of any major reorganisations between 1888 and 1975 (apart from the 1923 railway reorganisation, but that doesn't count ). The only other alternative is to go back to the Domesday Book, but that would only show the English counties, not the Welsh, Scottish or Irish counties.

I can remember when there were administrative counties called the Soke of Peterborough, the Isle of Ely and the Ides of March.

Soke of Peterborough existed as an adminstrative county from 1888 to 1971 - before that it was part of Northamptonshire and after that merged with Huntingdonshire to become the County of Huntingdon and Peterborough which was absorbed in turn in 1974 by Cambridgeshire.

The southern suburbs of Peterborough weren't in the Soke but part of Huntindonshire - Orton Longueville Grammar School being part of the Huntindonshire LEA.

[wrinkly]

Soke of Peterborough existed as an adminstrative county from 1888 to 1971

These pages seems to suggest 1965:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Gov ... 80%931967)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soke_of_Peterborough

[Ruperts Trooper]

Soke of Peterborough existed as an adminstrative county from 1888 to 1971

These pages seems to suggest 1965:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Gov ... 80%931967)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soke_of_Peterborough

Correct! My bad

I lved in Huntingdonshire until 1966 but at that age had no interest in that sort of thing - but that changed when they proposed abolishing Huntingdonshire although I was an exile by then.

[Steven]

It was absolutely bonkers! I have a mental picture of early Victorian-era criminals desperately riding on horseback across a county exclave boundary to escape the clutches of the County Sheriffs - rather like a 19th century Dukes of Hazzard...

You can see exactly why the Detached Parts Act was needed; and then later than that why the 1888 Local Government Act set up these new-fangled Administrative Counties as being based upon, but different to, the historic counties.

Steven, I know I keep bringing this up, but -- only because I'm still unclear what the SABRE Wiki's "official line" is! -- may I ask again: does the term Traditional Counties as used in the Wiki in the context of England and Wales refer to the post 19 October 1844 boundaries (given that the Detached Parts Act failed to deal with a number of exclaves that continued in existence into the post 1922/3 road classification era)?

OK, this question proceeds from a bit of a false assumption, as do many of the succeeding posts; but I'll answer the question first!

To answer the question fully, yes, the Detached Parts Act was the last major legislation that changed the counties themselves, so yes, those boundaries are still extant. It's just a shame that most mapping doesn't show the remaining few exclaves properly for simplicity. So of course they continued into existence post 1922-23 as they're still with us today!

In 1888, Administrative Counties were created as new entities. The Historic Counties were not changed at that point one iota - but brand new administrative layers were created. Despite popular belief, County Boroughs were not part of the Administrative Counties; but were associated with one (or occasionally like Stockport CB, two) for various purposes.

All post-1888 changes were based on these County Council and County Borough Council areas, and not to the historic counties themselves. So when people talk about "changes to the counties" post-1888, they actually mean "administrative counties". So all of Chris B's and Vierwielen's "minor changes" and were to this layer. Again, in 1974, what happened was all those these County Council and County Borough council areas were abolished, and all new ones created - for example, the Administrative County of Cornwall (as created in 1888 and minor changes made since) was actually completely abolished on 31 March 1974, and a brand new Cornwall County Council was instituted on 1 April 1974. To take another example, Huntingdonshire was never abolished - what was abolished in 1965 was Huntingdonshire County Council, and a new entity called "Huntingdon and Peterborough County Council" created, which was in turn abolished in 1974 and its area became part of the brand new Cambridgeshire County Council area.

People like to think of these changes as being one continuous line of changes, but what you actually find is the opposite - there is an entirely new layer created in 1888, adjusted over time, then completely removed in 1974. These 1888 entities do not exist in any way today. Then post-1974 its horrible, with various parts being deleted (but not fully), deleted (completely) and replaced by multiple areas at the same level and all sorts of awful mess. In practice, we'd be so much better off binning the LGA 1972 and doing it again, deleting all the items on these administrative layers and starting again to get rid of the stupidity that is

Do the historic counties still exist? Of course they do! If the LGA 1888 destroyed them as claimed, then why do census reports well into the twentieth century give reports for the "ancient counties"? Why did the Goverment in 1972-3-4 consistently say that the historic counties still exist, and that all that was happening was the administrative layer was changing? Why does the Government still say that the historic counties exist? And remember, they can be signed correctly in a way a number of the post-1974 "counties" cannot...

[Viator]

It was absolutely bonkers! I have a mental picture of early Victorian-era criminals desperately riding on horseback across a county exclave boundary to escape the clutches of the County Sheriffs - rather like a 19th century Dukes of Hazzard...

You can see exactly why the Detached Parts Act was needed; and then later than that why the 1888 Local Government Act set up these new-fangled Administrative Counties as being based upon, but different to, the historic counties.

Steven, I know I keep bringing this up, but -- only because I'm still unclear what the SABRE Wiki's "official line" is! -- may I ask again: does the term Traditional Counties as used in the Wiki in the context of England and Wales refer to the post 19 October 1844 boundaries (given that the Detached Parts Act failed to deal with a number of exclaves that continued in existence into the post 1922/3 road classification era)?

OK, this question proceeds from a bit of a false assumption, as do many of the succeeding posts; but I'll answer the question first!

To answer the question fully, yes, the Detached Parts Act was the last major legislation that changed the counties themselves, so yes, those boundaries are still extant. It's just a shame that most mapping doesn't show the remaining few exclaves properly for simplicity. So of course they continued into existence post 1922-23 as they're still with us today!

In 1888, Administrative Counties were created as new entities. The Historic Counties were not changed at that point one iota - but brand new administrative layers were created. Despite popular belief, County Boroughs were not part of the Administrative Counties; but were associated with one (or occasionally like Stockport CB, two) for various purposes.

All post-1888 changes were based on these County Council and County Borough Council areas, and not to the historic counties themselves. So when people talk about "changes to the counties" post-1888, they actually mean "administrative counties". So all of Chris B's and Vierwielen's "minor changes" and were to this layer. Again, in 1974, what happened was all those these County Council and County Borough council areas were abolished, and all new ones created - for example, the Administrative County of Cornwall (as created in 1888 and minor changes made since) was actually completely abolished on 31 March 1974, and a brand new Cornwall County Council was instituted on 1 April 1974. To take another example, Huntingdonshire was never abolished - what was abolished in 1965 was Huntingdonshire County Council, and a new entity called "Huntingdon and Peterborough County Council" created, which was in turn abolished in 1974 and its area became part of the brand new Cambridgeshire County Council area.

People like to think of these changes as being one continuous line of changes, but what you actually find is the opposite - there is an entirely new layer created in 1888, adjusted over time, then completely removed in 1974. These 1888 entities do not exist in any way today. Then post-1974 its horrible, with various parts being deleted (but not fully), deleted (completely) and replaced by multiple areas at the same level and all sorts of awful mess. In practice, we'd be so much better off binning the LGA 1972 and doing it again, deleting all the items on these administrative layers and starting again to get rid of the stupidity that is

Do the historic counties still exist? Of course they do! If the LGA 1888 destroyed them as claimed, then why do census reports well into the twentieth century give reports for the "ancient counties"? Why did the Goverment in 1972-3-4 consistently say that the historic counties still exist, and that all that was happening was the administrative layer was changing? Why does the Government still say that the historic counties exist? And remember, they can be signed correctly in a way a number of the post-1974 "counties" cannot...

Right. First of all I can't see where my question -- which was, incidentally, not about "historic counties" as such but about the category "Traditional Counties" as used in the SABRE Wiki -- proceeds from any false assumption, Steven (perhaps you could let me know what you think it was ).

Secondly, however, I do recognize that my phrase "the post 19 October 1844 boundaries" was ambiguous: what I meant (and what I ought to have written!) was "the county boundaries as they stood on 19 October 1844" (which is to say, the boundaries of your "historic counties").

None of my question had anything to do with 1974 (or 1965). To restate it more succinctly, it is: are the "Traditional Counties" referred to in the Wiki the same thing, in your view, as the "historic counties" (with their 1844 boundaries), or are they not? If they are, then you would agree that Worcestershire needs adding to the routeboxes of the A42 (Reading - Birmingham) / A34 / A3400 and the A429.

[Viator]

P.S. I tried applying a version of the "Tebbit test" to Shipston-on-Stour (administratively transferred from Worcestershire to Warwickshire in 1931). However, I find that the town's cricket club is affiliated to something called the Cotswold Hills League, which straddles the borders, however defined, of Gloucestershire, Warwickshire, and Worcestershire -- extending from Solihull in the north to Adlestrop in the south -- so that wasn't a lot of help. Talk about weird boundaries!

[Chris Bertram]

P.S. I tried applying a version of the "Tebbit test" to Shipston-on-Stour (administratively transferred from Worcestershire to Warwickshire in 1931). However, I find that the town's cricket club is affiliated to something called the Cotswold Hills League, which straddles the borders, however defined, of Gloucestershire, Warwickshire, and Worcestershire -- extending from Solihull in the north to Adlestrop in the south -- so that wasn't a lot of help. Talk about weird boundaries!

Cricket leagues are much less help than you might think. The main league for Teesside, for example is the North Yorkshire South Durham Leage. The Birmingham League spreads its net way beyond the reach of B postcodes, and the Manchester League is also regional rather than local in its aim. And for heaven's sake don't try Rugby counties either - my club, Moseley, are affiliated to a mysterious county called "North Midlands", which essentially covers the SW Midlands. Go figure ...

[RichardA626]

Some of the merged Co-operative societies can cover odd areas.

[Steven]

Right. First of all I can't see where my question -- which was, incidentally, not about "historic counties" as such but about the category "Traditional Counties" as used in the SABRE Wiki -- proceeds from any false assumption, Steven (perhaps you could let me know what you think it was ).

That's what comes of me trying to answer fifteen posts in one instead of splitting them up!

Secondly, however, I do recognize that my phrase "the post 19 October 1844 boundaries" was ambiguous: what I meant (and what I ought to have written!) was "the county boundaries as they stood on 19 October 1844" (which is to say, the boundaries of your "historic counties").

More precisely, "have stood since the 1844 Detached Parts Act"!

None of my question had anything to do with 1974 (or 1965). To restate it more succinctly, it is: are the "Traditional Counties" referred to in the Wiki the same thing, in your view, as the "historic counties" (with their 1844 boundaries), or are they not? If they are, then you would agree that Worcestershire needs adding to the routeboxes of the A42 (Reading - Birmingham) / A34 / A3400 and the A429.

Traditional Counties is a synonym for "Historic Counties", hence they are the same thing - the former is mostly used in the SABRE Wiki, so perhaps we ought to consider changing the labels? Though that's really a discussion for elsewhere...

Fundamentally, exclaves that survived the Detached Parts Act are still part of the historic county - the most obvious in England and Wales being Dudley (Worcestershire), Maelor Saesneg (Flintshire) and the various Warwickshire and Worcestershire parishes you mention, and of course, Furness (Lancashire).

[Viator]

OK. That's finally answered my question; thanks, Steven. So now I'll make those routebox additions, the absence of which will have been causing the county traditionalists so much pain for so long Not too sure yet, though, how I'm going to break it to my Shipston-born brother that he is not a Warwickshire boy after all...

[Chris Bertram]

OK. That's finally answered my question; thanks, Steven. So now I'll make those routebox additions, the absence of which will have been causing the county traditionalists so much pain for so long Not too sure yet, though, how I'm going to break it to my Shipston-born brother that he is not a Warwickshire boy after all...

If you ask someone from Shipston what cricket county they support, my bet is that Warwickshire would be the almost universal answer - and that those who differ are incomers (just as I should support them, but favour Yorkshire due to birth). All the locals I know in Kings Heath, Kings Norton and Northfield, all once part of Worcs, would say Warwickshire too. And I'd expect anyone from Halesowen to say Worcestershire.

As a matter of fact I passed through Shipston this afternoon on a drive out with SWMBO. We'd been to the Fleece at Bretforton - in Worcestershire - for lunch. To get from there to Shipston, you have to climb over the Cotswold edge, and go via Chipping Campden - which is in Gloucestershire. So Shipston is now not one but two counties away from the county it historically belonged to in most directions. Which tells you just how odd the old situation was.

[vlad]

P.S. I tried applying a version of the "Tebbit test" to Shipston-on-Stour (administratively transferred from Worcestershire to Warwickshire in 1931).

Does that mean you're going to be classifying a large number of roads as being in the Minor Counties?

[Viator]

If you ask someone from Shipston what cricket county they support, my bet is that Warwickshire would be the almost universal answer - and that those who differ are incomers.

That would be my bet too. I lived near Shipston for 18 years from 1948 and never met anyone who ever mentioned that the town was "really" in Worcestershire, even though there must be have been plenty of older people around who would have remembered the administrative transfer to Warwickshire which had taken place just 17 years before that date. Unlike you, though, Chris, I doubt if even one in a thousand post-war incomers to the town know that it was ever in Worcestershire (or -- as Steven would say -- still is).

P.S. It's just occurred to me that in the course of my daily journey to school -- in a near straight line (with home and school both in Warwickshire) -- I crossed five "traditional county" boundaries in little more than five miles!

[Viator]

If you ask someone from Shipston what cricket county they support, my bet is that Warwickshire would be the almost universal answer - and that those who differ are incomers.

That would be my bet too. I lived near Shipston for 18 years from 1948 and never met anyone who ever mentioned that the town was "really" in Worcestershire, even though there must be have been plenty of older people around who would have remembered the administrative transfer to Warwickshire which had taken place just 17 years before that date. Unlike you, though, Chris, I doubt if even one in a thousand post-war incomers to the town know that it was ever in Worcestershire (or -- as Steven would say -- still is).

P.S.
It's just occurred to me that in the course of my daily journey to school -- in a near straight line (with home and school both in Warwickshire) -- I crossed five "traditional county" boundaries in little more than five miles!

My challenge to co-Sabristi is: I went to school in Stratford on Avon; where did I live?