Well I never! I recently investigated the original owners of my property and discovered an interesting tale of the past 100 years and more.
In 1877 there was no Lawe road or properties going towards the riverside of the hill and the land was owned by the Church of England and appears to have been an open grassed space since the days when the Roman supply Fort Arbela dominated the hillside
It was then sold to two men with the same surnames with one living in York and the other in Sussex, although a subsequent document reveals that twenty years later they had employed a building firm headed by two men with the same surname of each other to build what I must assume was the terraces of similar dwellings which cover the hill. I also assume that some were subsequently converted into two flats, the famous Tyneside flat with separate front doors and each with rooms at different levels. It is also evident that the extension into the rear yard/ garden some with bedrooms above or bathroom toilets was added later and similar there are properties with three floor, with two levels of stairways and some with not. The first purchaser was already a widow and she held the property for ten years until 1903.
It was then bought by a pawnbroker and his family called Gompertz and they lived here until 1957. The interesting discovery is that there is a full size representation of the shop front in the South Shield’s Museum because it was mentioned by Dame Catherine Cookson in the book on her growing up experience. The evidence is that the family made their money from the very poor rather than the middle class falling on hard times.
It is therefore interesting that the son became a well known socialist and Labour Party Members in the town. He became secretary of the South Shield’s Party and a Councillor. It is recorded that when Eileen Wilkinson came to Jarrow to lead the famous March, she was supported by Councillor Gompertz at a time when the march did not have the support of the Trade Union and Labour Party Leadership.
I have considered myself a political socialist for close on fifty years and have voted for the Labour Party at General elections irrespective of the what previous Labour Governments have done or not done, whether I supported or opposed current policies or whether I liked, disliked or was indifferent to particular leaders. This is not because of ideology or tribal loyalty or because the sum total of what other Parties amounted to was always less and indeed there are aspects of the Social Liberal Democrats and the Greens which continue to appeal and my contact with many Conservatives including working for Conservative run councils is that policies, individual decisions and individuals can prove to be humanitarian, contributing to social justice and attacking injustice and so on as much and at times more so than Labour. My support for the party has therefore been tested on many occasions in the past but no more than at the present time. I fear that if the General Election is held at the same time as the Council elections given the size of the majority of the Labour Member of Parliament and current Foreign Secretary then the legion of the discontented will take it out on the local Labour Councillors.
The Labour Party was never an ideological communist or socialist party. It grew out of the Trade Union movement which in turn grew out of the industrial revolution when it became more possible to represent and organise the new industrial workers. Before then there were people who lived and worked in towns and cities selling goods and providing services who had degrees of independence but the majority worked for those who owned land or provided personal services for the land owners which included fighting and dying when required. There was often little difference between the position of the worker and the slave and the British became the slave owners par excellence, especially as they appreciated the great wealth which could be accumulated from trade and then by colonising the new territories and discovered new people. The Europeans, the Dutch, the Germans, The Spanish and Portuguese, the French and the Italians rushed to every part of the earth planet to take over and exploit the indigenous people and their resources with the British being better at it than the others because of the development of sea power.
One of the great myths within the broad Labour and socialist movement is that the condition of the working man deteriorated during the process in which the economy become industrial rather than agricultural. The available evidence is that wages and living conditions improved. I was forced to learn this lesson early on during my second term at Ruskin when I studied economic and social history. I had read and still have the Bibles of the Day The Common People 1746 to 1946 G D H Cole and Raymond Postgate, The University Press 12/6; The Town Labourer and the Village Labourer, each two small volumes at 1/6 published by guild books and written by J J and Barbara Hammond; and in hard back, A short history of the British Working Class Movement 1789 to 1947 by G D H Cole George Allen and Unwin amalgamated into one volume from the previous three in 1948 and where mine is the 1952 reprint, I have lost the dust cover so have no record of the price. These were read alongside W H B Court‘s A Concise Economic History of Britain from 1750, a 1958 edition of the first published 1954 work by Cambridge University Press together with the Woodward Age of Reform 1815 to 1870 and the Ensor England 1870 to 1914 in the Oxford History of England series at the Clarenden which was up the road from Ruskin College. In addition I have a constitutional history since the 15th century and an overview of the Monarchy which combined provided a broad brush understanding.
It became possible to organise the industrial worker to further their interests and those of their families because of the concentration of work forces and the separation between work life and the rest although there was not much rest! There was then inevitable realization in order to establish trade unions with permanent status they should have a more general political power and that then to become involved in general political power as a legitimate extension. There was limited progress until the end of the Second World War despite the horror of the First World War because the majority of men who would have wanted to change things were dead and this includes many young officers who found themselves with more in common with their men than the class in which they had been raised. The Trade Union and Labour Party was foremost a counterbalance to the power of the then ruling class of industrialists and the landed gentry who still controlled through the House of Lords and the Church of England. I continue to believe that the British, and largely English Civil War came too early and is the reason why the country was not caught up in the age of revolutions which swept through Europe in the Victorian era as well as having a female head of state who lived a long time. I also believe that general content with Queen Elizabeth prevented revolution recently when the future was mortgaged to the capitalist manipulators.
The power of individuals over others used to rest on being the head of state and having control of an army and navy. Keeping the power within the family is something which occurred from time to time but often members of families plotted and killed to remove a relative so they could have the power, wealth and life style that went with it. It really does not matter what the head of state called themselves.
It is only in recent times led especially in the United States and in France more than in the UK that the idea of representative government developed and only in the last 100 years that the choice has been between bringing about change and everyone being able to have their say and influence the outcome. Obviously it is not an either or but at times this appears to be the position. The Italians still praise Mussolini, and there are Russians who hanker for Stalin and Germans for Hitler and I suspect in fifty years there will be a similar clamour for the days of Chairman Mao. I am not referring to those who were part of the power dictatorship but to ordinary people who had homes, work, education and social welfare provided and who felt secure in their situation. It is the removal of that feeling of security and things can get better which damns ruling elites
The British form of democratic dictatorship which broadened the power and wealth structure has worked until this decade because all the traditional and new power structures felt able to maintain and further their positions. The landed gentry continued despite the attack on them through the recent ban on Fox Hunting, the Royal scandals and the untimely death of Princess Diana. Similarly the Church of England continued to exercise a power beyond the actual number of parishioners. Trading businesses flourished by becoming global and the justice system avoided cracking up by lawyers maintaining their hold on Parliament and building more prisons. The Armed services especially the army and the air force found a new role and international terrorism reinvigorated the security and spy services as relations between Russia and China changed and a solution to the Irish question developed. Domestically the underclass was kept within limits by the provision of a social welfare system which enabled them to live without open revolt through cheap drink and drugs and promiscuity. The jobs which require season work and mobility, in services, especially care and, food provision and accommodation, including cleaning, in building and repair work and agricultural harvesting, and which need to be as low paid within the framework of the minimum wage started to go to workers from throughout Europe and this has had greater impact than the arrival of the West Indians in the 1950‘s and Sixties and those from the Indian Sub continent. The extent of concentrations of the new Europeans is changing many towns and cities and I recently commented that on some buses in south London English speaking has become a minority language. Then there is has been the transformation in education, information provision and communication with the computer, the lap top, the Internet the mobile phone, the satellite and fibre optics. Just how many full paying students from other countries are there in the UK at the present time and how many then apply to work and settle here rather than return to their home countries.
This is context in which the next general Election in 2010 will be contested and where the two major political machine appear to have united in attempting to maintain the broad framework of British politics, despite the so called credit crunch and expenses scandal.
I have rambled on about all this because on Tuesday the Prime Minister addressed the annual conference of his party in order to rally support behind his continuing canditure as Prime Minister and his party continuing in government. I am yet to watch and listen to the speech which I will do on the i player later but I understand that he reminded of the achievements of the Labour Government from the past decade and indicated the approach ahead as well as trying to make the election a simple choice between the basic value of the Tory Party and those of Labour and the approach that will be taken to reducing the extent to which the nation has become mortgaged to prevent the worst aspects of the near collapse of capitalism. I cannot see the tide turning in favour of Labour, the Liberal Democrats or the Greens. It is the right and the far right who will benefit from the universal discontent.
It has been a difficult few days because of what appears to be a simple rash at the back of head within the hair line parallel to my ears. My hair had grown longer than usual and it has been a week or so before the last shampoo so when the itch started while watching cricket I scratched and out it down to the need to wash and have the hair cut. It was not something which caused concern or irritation.
On return home the itching became more constant to an extent I wondered if it was something more. It is difficult to see the back of the head even with two mirrors and the position is where there are bumps and folds in any event. I washed and had the hair cut and decided to ask at the chemist in Asda and he recommended a cream which is designed to soothe itchiness for a number of conditions. This had some good effect for a few hours and my sleep was not disrupted more than usual but the itchiness persist and I felt what I suspect was a rash. There was nothing for it but to consult my GP or a nurse at the practice and an appointment was arranged for this morning. It is a rash of undetermined cause and the stuff from the chemist was the right thing to be continued plus some one a day tablets, so I will have to grin and bear it and discipline myself against scratching.
In 1877 there was no Lawe road or properties going towards the riverside of the hill and the land was owned by the Church of England and appears to have been an open grassed space since the days when the Roman supply Fort Arbela dominated the hillside
It was then sold to two men with the same surnames with one living in York and the other in Sussex, although a subsequent document reveals that twenty years later they had employed a building firm headed by two men with the same surname of each other to build what I must assume was the terraces of similar dwellings which cover the hill. I also assume that some were subsequently converted into two flats, the famous Tyneside flat with separate front doors and each with rooms at different levels. It is also evident that the extension into the rear yard/ garden some with bedrooms above or bathroom toilets was added later and similar there are properties with three floor, with two levels of stairways and some with not. The first purchaser was already a widow and she held the property for ten years until 1903.
It was then bought by a pawnbroker and his family called Gompertz and they lived here until 1957. The interesting discovery is that there is a full size representation of the shop front in the South Shield’s Museum because it was mentioned by Dame Catherine Cookson in the book on her growing up experience. The evidence is that the family made their money from the very poor rather than the middle class falling on hard times.
It is therefore interesting that the son became a well known socialist and Labour Party Members in the town. He became secretary of the South Shield’s Party and a Councillor. It is recorded that when Eileen Wilkinson came to Jarrow to lead the famous March, she was supported by Councillor Gompertz at a time when the march did not have the support of the Trade Union and Labour Party Leadership.
I have considered myself a political socialist for close on fifty years and have voted for the Labour Party at General elections irrespective of the what previous Labour Governments have done or not done, whether I supported or opposed current policies or whether I liked, disliked or was indifferent to particular leaders. This is not because of ideology or tribal loyalty or because the sum total of what other Parties amounted to was always less and indeed there are aspects of the Social Liberal Democrats and the Greens which continue to appeal and my contact with many Conservatives including working for Conservative run councils is that policies, individual decisions and individuals can prove to be humanitarian, contributing to social justice and attacking injustice and so on as much and at times more so than Labour. My support for the party has therefore been tested on many occasions in the past but no more than at the present time. I fear that if the General Election is held at the same time as the Council elections given the size of the majority of the Labour Member of Parliament and current Foreign Secretary then the legion of the discontented will take it out on the local Labour Councillors.
The Labour Party was never an ideological communist or socialist party. It grew out of the Trade Union movement which in turn grew out of the industrial revolution when it became more possible to represent and organise the new industrial workers. Before then there were people who lived and worked in towns and cities selling goods and providing services who had degrees of independence but the majority worked for those who owned land or provided personal services for the land owners which included fighting and dying when required. There was often little difference between the position of the worker and the slave and the British became the slave owners par excellence, especially as they appreciated the great wealth which could be accumulated from trade and then by colonising the new territories and discovered new people. The Europeans, the Dutch, the Germans, The Spanish and Portuguese, the French and the Italians rushed to every part of the earth planet to take over and exploit the indigenous people and their resources with the British being better at it than the others because of the development of sea power.
One of the great myths within the broad Labour and socialist movement is that the condition of the working man deteriorated during the process in which the economy become industrial rather than agricultural. The available evidence is that wages and living conditions improved. I was forced to learn this lesson early on during my second term at Ruskin when I studied economic and social history. I had read and still have the Bibles of the Day The Common People 1746 to 1946 G D H Cole and Raymond Postgate, The University Press 12/6; The Town Labourer and the Village Labourer, each two small volumes at 1/6 published by guild books and written by J J and Barbara Hammond; and in hard back, A short history of the British Working Class Movement 1789 to 1947 by G D H Cole George Allen and Unwin amalgamated into one volume from the previous three in 1948 and where mine is the 1952 reprint, I have lost the dust cover so have no record of the price. These were read alongside W H B Court‘s A Concise Economic History of Britain from 1750, a 1958 edition of the first published 1954 work by Cambridge University Press together with the Woodward Age of Reform 1815 to 1870 and the Ensor England 1870 to 1914 in the Oxford History of England series at the Clarenden which was up the road from Ruskin College. In addition I have a constitutional history since the 15th century and an overview of the Monarchy which combined provided a broad brush understanding.
It became possible to organise the industrial worker to further their interests and those of their families because of the concentration of work forces and the separation between work life and the rest although there was not much rest! There was then inevitable realization in order to establish trade unions with permanent status they should have a more general political power and that then to become involved in general political power as a legitimate extension. There was limited progress until the end of the Second World War despite the horror of the First World War because the majority of men who would have wanted to change things were dead and this includes many young officers who found themselves with more in common with their men than the class in which they had been raised. The Trade Union and Labour Party was foremost a counterbalance to the power of the then ruling class of industrialists and the landed gentry who still controlled through the House of Lords and the Church of England. I continue to believe that the British, and largely English Civil War came too early and is the reason why the country was not caught up in the age of revolutions which swept through Europe in the Victorian era as well as having a female head of state who lived a long time. I also believe that general content with Queen Elizabeth prevented revolution recently when the future was mortgaged to the capitalist manipulators.
The power of individuals over others used to rest on being the head of state and having control of an army and navy. Keeping the power within the family is something which occurred from time to time but often members of families plotted and killed to remove a relative so they could have the power, wealth and life style that went with it. It really does not matter what the head of state called themselves.
It is only in recent times led especially in the United States and in France more than in the UK that the idea of representative government developed and only in the last 100 years that the choice has been between bringing about change and everyone being able to have their say and influence the outcome. Obviously it is not an either or but at times this appears to be the position. The Italians still praise Mussolini, and there are Russians who hanker for Stalin and Germans for Hitler and I suspect in fifty years there will be a similar clamour for the days of Chairman Mao. I am not referring to those who were part of the power dictatorship but to ordinary people who had homes, work, education and social welfare provided and who felt secure in their situation. It is the removal of that feeling of security and things can get better which damns ruling elites
The British form of democratic dictatorship which broadened the power and wealth structure has worked until this decade because all the traditional and new power structures felt able to maintain and further their positions. The landed gentry continued despite the attack on them through the recent ban on Fox Hunting, the Royal scandals and the untimely death of Princess Diana. Similarly the Church of England continued to exercise a power beyond the actual number of parishioners. Trading businesses flourished by becoming global and the justice system avoided cracking up by lawyers maintaining their hold on Parliament and building more prisons. The Armed services especially the army and the air force found a new role and international terrorism reinvigorated the security and spy services as relations between Russia and China changed and a solution to the Irish question developed. Domestically the underclass was kept within limits by the provision of a social welfare system which enabled them to live without open revolt through cheap drink and drugs and promiscuity. The jobs which require season work and mobility, in services, especially care and, food provision and accommodation, including cleaning, in building and repair work and agricultural harvesting, and which need to be as low paid within the framework of the minimum wage started to go to workers from throughout Europe and this has had greater impact than the arrival of the West Indians in the 1950‘s and Sixties and those from the Indian Sub continent. The extent of concentrations of the new Europeans is changing many towns and cities and I recently commented that on some buses in south London English speaking has become a minority language. Then there is has been the transformation in education, information provision and communication with the computer, the lap top, the Internet the mobile phone, the satellite and fibre optics. Just how many full paying students from other countries are there in the UK at the present time and how many then apply to work and settle here rather than return to their home countries.
This is context in which the next general Election in 2010 will be contested and where the two major political machine appear to have united in attempting to maintain the broad framework of British politics, despite the so called credit crunch and expenses scandal.
I have rambled on about all this because on Tuesday the Prime Minister addressed the annual conference of his party in order to rally support behind his continuing canditure as Prime Minister and his party continuing in government. I am yet to watch and listen to the speech which I will do on the i player later but I understand that he reminded of the achievements of the Labour Government from the past decade and indicated the approach ahead as well as trying to make the election a simple choice between the basic value of the Tory Party and those of Labour and the approach that will be taken to reducing the extent to which the nation has become mortgaged to prevent the worst aspects of the near collapse of capitalism. I cannot see the tide turning in favour of Labour, the Liberal Democrats or the Greens. It is the right and the far right who will benefit from the universal discontent.
It has been a difficult few days because of what appears to be a simple rash at the back of head within the hair line parallel to my ears. My hair had grown longer than usual and it has been a week or so before the last shampoo so when the itch started while watching cricket I scratched and out it down to the need to wash and have the hair cut. It was not something which caused concern or irritation.
On return home the itching became more constant to an extent I wondered if it was something more. It is difficult to see the back of the head even with two mirrors and the position is where there are bumps and folds in any event. I washed and had the hair cut and decided to ask at the chemist in Asda and he recommended a cream which is designed to soothe itchiness for a number of conditions. This had some good effect for a few hours and my sleep was not disrupted more than usual but the itchiness persist and I felt what I suspect was a rash. There was nothing for it but to consult my GP or a nurse at the practice and an appointment was arranged for this morning. It is a rash of undetermined cause and the stuff from the chemist was the right thing to be continued plus some one a day tablets, so I will have to grin and bear it and discipline myself against scratching.
No comments:
Post a Comment