When looking through the 1851 census books in George Street, Whitehaven I came across the following. No. 67. Edward France, Master Mariner, wife and two children No. 67 and a half. Aquilla Keene, Minister of Whitehaven Methodist Chapel and Lady of Fortune Chapel, wife, two children and servant No. 67 and three-quarters. John Kitchen, Corn Factor, wife, three children and servant Now if these three families were occupying separate floors in a Georgian town house, why not conventionally label them 67, 67a and 67b? What happened to 67 and a quarter? Did Edward France and family occupy two floors? These were obviously people of some substance and not poor families crammed into a hovel. Presumably they were leasehold or rented properties. In Scotch Street at No. 87 were separate families living in Nos. 87, 87a, 87b and two different households in 87 and a half. All around were other families living one to a house though two elderly ladies were occupying a cellar or part of one each. Presumably nowadays these would be more kindly termed basement flats. Since this area of Whitehaven was a planned town, presumably a set amount of frontage and land was allocated to each building plot. As one cannot see through to the rear from the street I wonder if extensions and annexes were allowed to be built on at the rear and if so in what era. This might account for some of the multiple occupancies as well as the division of the principal rooms. Jill

Jill, To quote from "A Study in Conservation" by Winston Barnett and Cyril Winskell" :- By 1799 the town, cramped by its physical limits, had become chronically overbuilt. Whitehaven was not a product of the industrial revolution. It did not become a Victorian slum; it was a Georgian slum. This was a great pity because Lowther had given his agents a brilliant brief or set of rules for developing the town. These were simply that each house should be not more and not less than 3 storeys in height, each 4-5 m (15 ft) wide, double-fronted if you had the money and with no side windows. It was a perfect formula for an urbane street architecture and the development of terraced housing. Behind these street façades - the houses enjoyed long and gracious gardens. Unfortunately Lowther gave up the freehold with the sale of house plots and it was the subsequent overbuilding which was put in hand after the initial occupants sold off their gardens that caused the environmental deterioration of the place for the next two centuries. Mel ----- Original Message ----- From: "John & Jill Coulthard" <jjcoulthard@btinternet.com> To: <ENG-CUL-COPELAND-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2003 12:12 PM Subject: [CUL-COP] Curious Street Numbers in Whitehaven > When looking through the 1851 census books in George Street, Whitehaven I came across the following. > > No. 67. Edward France, Master Mariner, wife and two children > > No. 67 and a half. Aquilla Keene, Minister of Whitehaven Methodist Chapel and Lady of Fortune Chapel, wife, two children and servant > > No. 67 and three-quarters. John Kitchen, Corn Factor, wife, three children and servant > > Now if these three families were occupying separate floors in a Georgian town house, why not conventionally label them 67, 67a and 67b? What happened to 67 and a quarter? Did Edward France and family occupy two floors? > > These were obviously people of some substance and not poor families crammed into a hovel. Presumably they were leasehold or rented properties. > > In Scotch Street at No. 87 were separate families living in Nos. 87, 87a, 87b and two different households in 87 and a half. All around were other families living one to a house though two elderly ladies were occupying a cellar or part of one each. Presumably nowadays these would be more kindly termed basement flats. > > Since this area of Whitehaven was a planned town, presumably a set amount of frontage and land was allocated to each building plot. As one cannot see through to the rear from the street I wonder if extensions and annexes were allowed to be built on at the rear and if so in what era. This might account for some of the multiple occupancies as well as the division of the principal rooms. > > Jill