Help identifying officers in group photo of 2/5th Lancs Fus in Bedford, 1/5/1915, "B" Coy, Hill, Abbotts, H. Waterhouse

[alantwo]

Crop of the 1911 Census cover sheet, image from Ancestry, for 8 Clapham Road; it is also identified as Orkney House on the actual Census sheet, see Peter’s post above.

Bedford Borough Council identifies 8 Clapham Road on their interactive planning map as shown in the second image below.

The property on the 1901 map provided and referenced by Peter I’ve highlighted in red.

The last image from Google Earth, current property is again highlighted in red.

Alan

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

20 hours ago, PRC said:

Sorry i can't resist, but I promise I'll make this the last one - the 1901 OS 25 inch to the mile map showing how much the area had developed.

Please don't feel obliged to make it the last one as far as I am concerned! I appreciate that the question of where the Officers' Mess was in Bedford is very much a minor footnote when there were so much more important things going on in the wider world, but trying to get to the bottom of it is, nonetheless, intriguing.

This 1901 map is very interesting, especially when compared with the further plans posted by Alantwo in the post immediately preceding this one, including, in particular, the up to date Bedford Borough Council Interactive Map, and the c.1884 map posted by him about 6 posts back.

In 1884 we can see that there was no development at all along Clapham Road or Waldeck Avenue, but by 1901 many, but by no means all, of the plots had been built on.

We now know for certain which is 8 Clapham Road on the modern map, and can identify that precise building on the 1901 map. Interestingly the plot, possibly a double plot, immediately next door to 8 Clapham Road, is an empty plot. 

This is quite interesting for two reasons; first, in PRC's post of 01.09 on 13/08/24 he has told us that on the 1911 census, the houses for which there are adjoining entries are 2-4 Clapham Road and 18 Clapham Road. Some missing numbers would be understandable in view of the unbuilt on plot or double plot, although, if, say it was a double plot, and the next highest number in the census was 18 Clapham Road, you would expect only 14 and 16 to be missing, whereas it seems that 10, 12, 14, and 16 are missing.

But, 10 and 12 were not missing in the 1901 census, as PRC said the following about that census:

On 13/08/2024 at 18:27, PRC said:

Just in case Arthur and his school were previously located elsewhere, I looked for him on the 1901 Census of England & Wales. Arthur H. Blake, a Schoolmaster, with his family are recorded living at 8 Clapham Road, Bedford, but there is then a rather convoluted entry covering 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 Clapham Road which shows them full of a mix of boarders who are pupils and domestic servants, with a nurse and a matron.

So it looks as though the school had completely taken over the whole of 2 to 12 at that point. It is perfectly possible that by 1911 there had been a reorganisation, possibly the sale off of 2 and 4 to a private individual, or possibly the census for those two was filled out by a separate member of staff (though it may be that the actual details of the entry would be against this), while 6, 10 and 12 had been subsumed within 8. But where had all the boarders gone, if not on Mr Blake's census form for 8 Clapham Road. The census date in 1911 was 16 April, a full 2 weeks after Easter Sunday on 2 April, so surely the boarders should have been at the school, unless the holidays did not necessarily take in Easter (actually I believe that pupils did used to spend Easter at their boarding schools if Easter fell early, and 2 April is quite early, so perhaps the pupils were at school for Easter and on holiday by 16 April?).

Interestingly, even on the modern Interactive Planning Map, two house numbers still appear to me to be missing, though these are 12 and 14, not 14 and 16; the number of the house which has been slotted into what was in 1901 an empty plot or double plot is number 10 Clapham Road.

The second reason why the empty plot or double plot is interesting is @FROGSMILE's comment to the effect that the school appeared to be in a rural location from the 1900s photographs of Sports Day. This might well be consistent with there being an empty plot or double plot beside the school, and empty plots behind the school on Walbeck Road as shown in the 1901 map. Can I see the outlines of houses in the distance on at least the second Sports photo, or is that my imagination?

Returning (belatedly!) to the question of the May 1915 photograph, as PRC says, on Google's Street View many of the houses between Nos 2 and 18 appear to be obscured by trees etc. But I took (Courtesy of Google) a screenshot through the gateway of what is certainly the building nearest to the corner of Union Street on the 1901 map, possibly numbers 2 to 4 on the 1911 census, plus a closer detail of that screenshot, and also another copy of the 1 May 1915 photograph.

The reason why I have uploaded the screenshot and closer detail is that in it you can see the wall of the next door property, which I think is the current no. 6. It is very possible that that wall is similar to the western external wall of the current number 8, the building that would have adjoined the empty plot or double plot in 1901, which would possibly still have been empty (or a sports field?) in 1915. Suppose the officers in the group photograph taken on 1 May 1915 had been arranged along a hedge in front of this wall. To me the two walls do look quite similar. While, it might be thought that "brickwork is brickwork", so of course they would look similar, it is worth noting the absence of windows in the wall, which is common where another building is to be built very close by, and it was presumably originally intended that another building would indeed be built in the empty plot or double plot. Also, on the closest building to be seen through the gateway there is a downpipe with a collection box half-way down the building, and there seems to be something slightly similar in the 1915 photograph; plus, is it possible to see a two-storey bay window jutting forward proud of the building in the 1915 photograph? There isn't much to go on, especially as it seems likely that the current building to be seen on the screenshot detail next to what would have been the empty plot or double plot is an entirely new construction, and must have replaced the original.

 

 

Edited 14 August by A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy

[PRC]

I'm going to be tentative about this but potentially I believe behind the left hand end of the officer group are the ground and the lower first floor part of the two-storey bay window, as you have commented..

If that is the bays at the front that that would put the officer group in front of the west wall facing what was on the 1901 OS map an empty plot - but bear in mind that is the date it was published, not necessarily the date of the survey, and thus may explain the numbering discrepancy versus the 1901 Census return.

However if number 10 was built by 1915 then there is no space, (or comparatively little space) for them to be in, let alone allow room for the photographer. Could possibly the Officers Mess have occupied 8 and 10 or indeed any other one of the houses utilised by the school ? - the statement of the other Lancashire Fusiliers Officer that he was was a student there may have been referring to the whole establishment rather than any one building.

Of course the bays could have been at the rear of the house, in which case they were standing in front of the east wall. Possible perhaps if the wall \ fence with 6 was down, the photographer was against the wall of 6 and the officer group was against the wall of 8 where there is a hedge. There is nothing on the satellite picture I posted to indicate bays on the rear - but if you check the building shape of the houses on Clapham Road that can be seen on the 1901 OS map and the 2024 satellite picture, only one building has really significantly changed it's shape - and to me that appears to be number 8. I don't think the building layout on the 1901 OS Map  is conducive to bay windows on the rear, but if the building shape has changed who's to say!

I also drew attention previously to the house numbering on Warwick \ Waldeck Avenue, which starts after a modern block of flats. I speculated that the flats might be on land that was attached to the houses on Clapham Road. But looking at the 1901 OS map there is a large building in that area - presumably knocked down and replaced with the flats. So perhaps the numbering as well as the street name changed at some future date.

Something perhaps to factor in is that Arthur Blake may have been renting rather than owning outright. If speculators are putting the buildings up with a view to selling them, and customers failed to turn up then they may have been keen to do a deal, moving the school between buildings when a house sale came alone.

2 hours ago, A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy said:

The census date in 1911 was 16 April, a full 2 weeks after Easter Sunday on 2 April,

The Census date was the 2nd April and yes many boarding school and university students turn up either at home, or for the latter on some kind of field trip. Can be a pain when you are trying to establish where a future officer went to in the hope that said institution has a online archive where a picture of them might be found!

Cheers,
Peter

 

[FROGSMILE]

4 hours ago, A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy said:

Can I see the outlines of houses in the distance on at least the second Sports photo, or is that my imagination?

 

I can see them too.

[alantwo]

The street images posted above of Clapham Road and the existent buildings show timber boarded soffits and fascias some with extended purlins and wallplates to the house eaves/verges, however the eaves to the building top left behind the officers appears to have a brick dentil course; I’ve cropped and highlighted the image previously referenced by @A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy to illustrate. It is difficult to tell from the shadowing but I would guess sawtoothed and by way of example The Foresters Arms just around the corner in Union Street/Tavistock Place has a sawtooth brick eaves, image from Google Maps. Creating a brick eaves was time consuming and more expensive than a timber eaves, and considering the growth in house building in Clapham Road evidenced on the Ordnance maps between 1884 and 1901, it’s understandable that short cuts to speed up the construction process needed to be found, thus more traditional detailing, the example The Foresters Arms building is pre-1884, whilst not lost was gradually being put to one side.

I agree, the second sports image has rooftops and chimneys in the background.

I also agree that this is an intriguing location problem, but I’ll try to refrain from further comment on tangential issues to what is an excellent thread about this group of officers.

Alan

 

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

 

 

On 15/08/2024 at 01:20, alantwo said:

The street images posted above of Clapham Road and the existent buildings show timber boarded soffits and fascias some with extended purlins and wallplates to the house eaves/verges, however the eaves to the building top left behind the officers appears to have a brick dentil course; I’ve cropped and highlighted the image previously referenced by @A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy to illustrate. It is difficult to tell from the shadowing but I would guess sawtoothed and by way of example The Foresters Arms just around the corner in Union Street/Tavistock Place has a sawtooth brick eaves, image from Google Maps.

That's interesting. I agree that the projecting building does look as though it has the sawtooth brick dentil course, so, if it belonged to the same house as the officers are standing in front of, that would be a rather grander house than the houses that you can see through the gateway in the google images that I posted. 

I wouldn't worry too much about the discussion being somewhat tangential to the main thread, as I think that if people come across the thread in future it will be because they have searched the names of one of the officers in the photograph, so the tangential discussion about the location of the photograph will not prevent them from finding what they are looking for.

On 14/08/2024 at 00:06, PRC said:

Do we know where the bulk of the Battalion were billeted - just wondering if the Bromham Road might feature in connection with that - leading to subsequent confusion.

I realise that I never answered this question. My GF and two other officers were billetted at Mrs Eaton's, 58 Adelaide Square, a house which is still in existence. The Turners appear to have been in residence in the house with them as they were "very kind" to them.My GFe goes on to say:

"Most of the officers were billeted away from the Mess – in pairs. The men were billeted in empty houses."

I don't know any more than that. I agree it is quite likely that my GF could have been confused between Clapham and Bromham Road as they were both off to the west of the city, and detailed maps would not have been so easy to come by as they are now.

[PRC]

On 15/08/2024 at 01:20, alantwo said:

I also agree that this is an intriguing location problem, but I’ll try to refrain from further comment on tangential issues to what is an excellent thread about this group of officers.

I admired the sentiment and I too was going to refrain from going down this grand designs rabbit hole any further, but @A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy has kind of twisted my arm!

For it to be the eaves then we'd proably be looking at a two storey extension rather than the side of the two storey bays than are known to be present on number 8 Clapham Road. Both would seem to be at odds with the angle of the picture, but the rear of either number 8 or the neighbouring house then seems a bit more probable, with the officers arranged along the side wall.

Something else did occur to me but just thought it would open up the rest of the warren or rabbit holes and was going to leave it

The 1884 map has just one dwelling on Clapham Road. The 1901 OS map does show the junction of Clapham Road, Union Road and Tavistock Street has been widened, but there still remains a slight bend as you enter Clapham Road. Even allowing for that I don't think the building present on the 1884 map can possibly be number 8. Indeed I don't think the building shape marries up to any of those present in 1901, but could be wrong. However if it was still there then possibly of a vintage to have had the sawtooth brickwork. We know Orkney School occupied several buildings along that stretch of the Clapham Road over time. So the Lancashire Fusiliers Officers wouldn't necessarily have to be at number 8 for the statement that the officers mess was once the old school to be factually correct.

Both 1884 and 1901 map crops are courtesy of the National Library of Scotland.

Of course the building present at the time the survey work was done for the 1884 map may have been demolished,t o allow the development of the houses present in 1901 to go ahead.

Cheers,
Peter

[brianmorris547]

On 14/08/2024 at 00:06, PRC said:

S

Image courtesy The National Library of Scotland. https://maps.nls.uk/view/114481872

Do we know where the bulk of the Battalion were billeted - just wondering if the Bromham Road might feature in connection with that - leading to subsequent confusion.

Cheers,
Peter

The only refererence to billets that I noticed in the Bedfordshire Times was this article in the edition 07/05/1915.  48, 50 and 52 Harpur St are mentioned along with a mention of the daughter of Warder Waller. I can not find any obvious matches for her on the 1911 Census, that might identify a hotel. 

EDIT It seems that 50 Harpur St was a large property. 

EDIT NLS Old Maps show Bedford Prison was adjacent to Harpur St. Could Warden Waller have been a Prison Warden. 

Image BNL via FMP

Brian 

 

Edited 16 August by brianmorris547
additional info

[FROGSMILE]

1 hour ago, brianmorris547 said:

Could Warden Waller have been a Prison Warden. 

Warder was certainly a common term for prison officers during that time, so I think so, yes.  

[brianmorris547]

16 hours ago, FROGSMILE said:

Warder was certainly a common term for prison officers during that time, so I think so, yes.  

I checked the 1911 Census. Alfred Waller, age 43, Warder Grade 1, Prison Service is shown at 6 Cross St with his wife and three daughters (Violet, Daisy and Rose). The streets around 48 and 52 Harpur St are shown as Dame Alice St then on to No 3 Quarters HM Prison, St Loyes St then the Governor's Residence, Bedford Prison. Then Harpur St, starting at 48, (9 rooms) No mention of No 50 although there are two for 48.

52 Harpur St is Mary Jane Crofts (8 rooms) and 54 Harpur St a possible related family of Crofts (11 rooms). Then the Census moves to Tavistock St.

This Town Plan shows the streets named above near Bedford Prison. I think 48, 50 and 52 Harpur St were in between Dame Alice St and Tavistock St. There is another map showing the bottom half of Harpur St down to the school and St Pauls Church which I will add as an edit

Image from NLS.    https://maps.nls.uk/view/228800954

Brian 

EDIT:  Map showing the rest of Harpur St.  Image from NLS     https://maps.nls.uk/view/228800963

Edited 17 August by brianmorris547