Piece
See MH 82/12
Catalogue reference: MH 82/46
Date: 1950 Jan 19-1951 Jan 18
See MH 82/12
Item
Folios 96-98. Letter from W B Baring [MP Staffordshire] to George Nicholls, [Poor...
Catalogue reference: MH 12/11196/32
What’s it about?
This record is about the Folios 96-98. Letter from W B Baring [MP Staffordshire] to George Nicholls, [Poor... dating from 28 February 1838 in the series Local Government Board and predecessors: Correspondence with Poor Law Unions and.... It is held at The National Archives, Kew.
Is it available online?
Yes, this record is available online and can be downloaded. How to view it.
Can I see it in person?
No, this record is not available to see in person at The National Archives. Other ways to view it.
Full description and record details
-
Reference (The unique identifier to the record described, used to order and refer to it)
- MH 12/11196/32
-
Date (When the record was created)
- 28 February 1838
-
Description (What the record is about)
-
- Content
- Folios 96-98. Letter from W B Baring [MP Staffordshire] to George Nicholls, [Poor Law Commissioner], enclosing a letter from a gentleman of Wolstanton. Letter from Edward Wood, Porthill, Wolstanton, to [W B Baring MP Staffordshire] dated 26 February 1838, complaining that the Poor Law Commission has not yet answered the memorial Baring presented on behalf of Wolstanton parish authorities and asks Baring to act at the earliest opportunity to present in the strongest terms the opposition of the ratepayers to a union with Burslem on the grounds that the benefits of scale would not accrue to a union of that size and that unless other parishes were to be involved the jealousy between Wolstanton and Burslem would be prejudicial to achieving the advantages which could be obtained only from a union with a population of 40,000-50,000. Wolstanton contains 10,379 acres rated at 2s9d per acre; Burslem has 2,700 acres rated at 20s per acre, but the population of each is about 14,000. Tunstall is the only township in the parish of Wolstanton (an inconsiderable proportion of the whole) which has any manufactures, the rest is agricultural. It appears almost an act of injustice to form a union with Burslem alone thus depriving Wolstanton ratepayers of the benefits to which they are entitled under the new Poor Law. Unless, therefore, Burslem can show that this union will be of a greater benefit than the original proposal to unite Newcastle, Keele, Audley, Betley, Balterley with Wolstanton [and Burslem] the ratepayers of Wolstanton prefer the larger union as first suggested. Paper number: 2374/C/1838. Poor Law Union Number 415. Counties: Staffordshire.
-
Held by (Who holds the record)
- The National Archives, Kew
-
Legal status (A note as to whether the record being described is a Public Record or not)
- Public Record(s)
-
Language (The language of the record)
- English
-
Closure status (Whether the record is ‘open’ (available to the public) or ‘closed’ (not available due to a legal exemption))
- Open Document, Open Description
-
Record URL
- https://beta.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/id/C10384161/
How to order it
- View this record page in our current catalogue
- Check viewing and downloading options
- Select an option and follow instructions
Series information
MH 12
Local Government Board and predecessors: Correspondence with Poor Law Unions and...
See the series level description for more information about this record.
Catalogue hierarchy
Over 27 million records
379,937 records
90,136 records
347 records
You are currently looking at the item: MH 12/11196/32
Folios 96-98. Letter from W B Baring [MP Staffordshire] to George Nicholls, [Poor...
Related records
Records that share similar topics with this record.