a ‘number of shops previously classed as dairies were transferred to the class grocers shops’ as a result of those shopkeepers beginning to sell groceries as well as dairy products.1 It is an interesting coincidence and no conclusions can be drawn without further evidence which is not available. However, there is no escaping the fact that Arthur enlisted on 28 April 1915 which was just over two weeks before Letitia Elsie died. It is very likely she was infected prior to his departure as measles has an incubation period of 7-21 days in which the child is apparently well. Pneumonia is a common complication and Leitita Elsie’s death certificate stated the cause of death to be bronchopmneumonia as well as measles.2 Arthur and Jane would never have realised about the infection or its possible source and it must be remembered that the infection could equally have come from elsewhere. It must have been awful for Jane to have to cope with her husband going to war, wondering if she would ever see him again, followed rapidly by the death of their child.

As mentioned previously, Arthur was honourably discharged from the Army in April 1917 and seems to have returned to his previous occupation of greengrocer. Unfortunately, 1917 seems to have been another difficult year for this part of Paddington. The Public Health Report states that there were two exceptional storms on the 16 and 28 June. The writer comments that the ‘hourly falls were 52 and 37 times the hourly capacity of the sewers’. The result was overflowing sewers and flooding on a large scale. Interestingly, the writer also comments that with the ‘covering of the roads with impervious materials and of the adjacent grounds with houses’ the rain, which would previously be absorbed by the ground, was flowing into the sewers. This is a problem not unheard of today as more gardens are paved over to create parking spaces. The author of the Public Health Report continues to describe the areas affected by the flooding and, although he did not mention Brindley Street by name, the various streets he mentioned were very nearby. Brindley Street’s proximity to the canal also needs to be borne in mind. There were complaints from many households 96 of which had basement rooms in which the bedding was ‘found to be saturated with sewage’. The bedding was removed by the Council and replaced with new. It seems that by 18 July the Acting Medical Officer of Health reported that: All the flooded houses have now been cleansed…and the rooms are now in a fairly habitable condition. This author wonders what the definition of ‘fairly habitable condition’ was. It seems a collection was organised and a sum of £406 (approximately £25,000 today) was raised as a relief fund.3

Table 1 on Pages 43 – 47 is a chronology of the family’s residences, Arthur’s occupation, others resident at the same address, deaths and children taken into care. It can easily be seen that others were

1 Reginald Dudfield, Medical Officer of Health, Report on the Vital Statistics and the Work of the Public Health Department for the year 1914-18 Metropolitan Borough of Paddington. 2 Letitia Elsie Grange death: GRO Reference: District: Paddington; Year 1915; Quarter: 2, Vol.1a; Page 74. 3http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/education/Pages/resources/inflationtools/calculator/default.aspx; Reginald Dudfield, Medical Officer of Health, Report on the Vital Statistics and the Work of the Public Health Department for the year 1914-18Metropolitan Borough of Paddington. resident with Arthur, Jane and their family throughout their lives. Arthur commenced employment as a porter with the National Health Insurance Office and subsequently a messenger with the Ministry of Health. The job description seems to vary but Arthur seems to have stayed with the same employer. The work of the National Health Insurance Commissions of England and Wales was taken over by the Ministry of Health when it was established in 1919. Arthur’s war service would probably have played a role in him gaining these positions. It is not known why he did not continue as a greengrocer. Perhaps the government employment provided better remuneration and was less demanding physically. Arthur’s physical condition is not known apart from the knowledge he was no longer fit for war service as a result of the wounds he sustained.

Whatever the situation, Arthur and Jane were by no means well off financially and the strain of a growing family must have taken its toll. Jane’s aunt, Letitia Morgan, was also living with the family. Letitia appears to have cared for Jane when she was younger and it would appear the relationship was a close one. It does seem likely that Arthur and Jane’s eldest child was named Letitia in honour of Jane’s aunt. Please see Chapters 4 and 5 for more details Letitia Morgan and Jane Grange’s (née Handley) family. Letitia Morgan died on 13 August 1921 at 50 Brindley Street.

Letitia’s death certificate states Jane was present at the death – perhaps she had nursed Letitia. According to the death certificate Letitia Morgan had suffered from enteritis and vomiting for five days – it must have been very grim indeed. The lack of health care provision, lack of fluids, lack of hospital care, no intravenous infusion and probable poor sanitation make for a dismal picture. Whether or not Arthur and Jane had any form of health insurance is not known. The health insurance scheme, as it was, applied only to wage earners whose families had to rely on the outpatient clinics of voluntary hospitals. Many people were not insured at all – Letitia Morgan was quite probably one of those. Interestingly, 1921 experienced a particularly hot July and it was the driest year of the twentieth century.4 Letitia Morgan was one of only three adults to die of diarrhoea and enteritis in 1921 but there were 90 deaths in Paddington overall - 75 in babies less than a year old.5

The Public Health Report for 1921 makes some interesting and illuminating remarks regarding the conditions experienced by those living in Paddington. The author mentions the lack of up to date population data even though the 1921 Census had been conducted but the results had not been made available a year later. He comments therefore that there was no sure way of estimating morbidity rates which the author said: ‘are sure tests of the sanitary state of the community’. He remarked that the Public Health Department needed to do more but it could not due to a lack of staff. There were

4 Weather Booty, Historical Weather Events,.http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/1850_1899.htm; Central England Temperature Series, Met Office, http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet. Consulted November 2017 5 Reginald Dudfield, Medical Officer of Health, Report on the Vital Statistics and the Work of the Public Health Department for the year 1921 Metropolitan Borough of Paddington. arrears in improvements and ‘in the work of the sanitary repairs’ from the war which were far from being completed. The borough was responsible for the employment of sanitary inspectors. According to the writer the state of the housing demonstrated the lack of staff to meet the needs of the borough.6

Dr Dudfield, author of the Public Health Report, commented that Westbourne was one of the wards where the death rate was ‘consistently in excess of the standard’. There were ongoing drainage and sewer problems since the war and work desperately needed to be done to remedy those problems. Dr Dudfield was also of the opinion that the increase in traffic weight and speed contributed to these problems. The roads at that time were not sufficiently strong to cope with the pressure applied to them thus causing damage to any underlying structures.

Unfortunately, for Arthur and Jane, Brindley Street was one of several streets given ‘special area’ status, by the Borough of Paddington, which meant, amongst other things, it was designated as an area that required annual cleansing.7 This does not present a good picture at all. It seems that the standard of housing in the area was a significant problem and efforts were being made to ensure adequate levels of sanitation. Dr Dudfield, remarked that the level of overcrowding had decreased but many houses were in need of repair and upgrading. There was also the problem of unscrupulous landlords. The author commented that: …the deficiency in housing accommodation makes the necessity of putting existing premises in decent repair all the greater.

There was a shortage of staff in 1921 and only 55 notices for compulsory repairs had been issued compared with 141 in 1920. Tenement houses were still below pre-war standard and Dr Dudfield commented that tenements would take longer to inspect, they had more defects and closer supervision of them was required. He mentioned that 1404 houses were on the register to be inspected but that this number reflected just a part of the real state of affairs. It is not known if Arthur and Jane lived in a house that had been converted to tenements but, given the other occupants listed in the electoral registers (the electoral register did not include those not eligible to vote but would still have been resident), it would be reasonable to believe this was the case.

The Public Health Report of 1921 is depressing without the problems brought about by the weather of the same year. Dr Dudfield commented on the weather of 1921 and the detailed temperatures that were recorded in the Royal Botanical Gardens, Regent’s Park. The highest temperature was recorded, on 11 July, as 93 degrees Fahrenheit (34 degrees Celsius) in the shade whilst in direct sunlight a temperature of 138 degrees Fahrenheit was recorded which equates to a staggering 59 degrees Celsius. Dr Dudfield mentioned that rainfall for 1921 was just 14.55 inches ‘measurable quantities

6 Reginald Dudfield, Medical Officer of Health, Report on the Vital Statistics and the Work of the Public Health Department for the year 1921 Metropolitan Borough of Paddington. 7Ibid. being recorded on 116 days’. These observations are borne out by a series of readings available from the Met Office known as the Central England Temperature (CET) Series.8 The monthly series of temperature recordings began in 1659 and the daily series of recordings began in 1772 - they continue to date. The average temperatures recorded represent a triangular central area of the United Kingdom enclosed by Bristol, Manchester and . The CET is the longest available instrumental record of temperature in the world and, therefore, a very useful and valuable source of information.

There is no doubt that July 1921 was very warm. It was also remarkably dry having received about 50% of the long term mean rainfall. The temperatures in July 1921 were on average 2.5 degrees Celsius warmer than average and into the top ten of warmest Julys in the CET series of recordings from 1659.9 Annually 1921 was the driest year in the twentieth century and second driest in the entire series.10

The author of the Public Health Report expresses concern about the effects on public health of such a hot and dry summer particularly in relation to the risk of diarrhoea. His concerns state that insufficient rainfall results in: … insufficiency of supply of water for and domestic and municipal cleansing… … loss of cooling of the soil… …promotion of decomposition in accumulation of refuse of all descriptions thereby favouring the breeding of flies and increased danger of spread of infective material by those insects… … high temperatures in the upper layers of the soil.

It is a worrying and depressing picture. Please see the graphs on Page 36 which depict rainfall for the years 1906 – 1936 and July temperature for the same years.

8Central England Temperature Series, Met Office, http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet. Consulted November 2017 9 Weather Booty, Historical Weather Events. http://booty.org.uk/booty.weather/climate/1850_1899.htm. 10 Met Office Hadley Centre Observation Data, Monthly England & Wales precipitation (mm). https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadukp/data/download.html

Yearly Rainfall 1906 -1936 1200

1000

800

600

400 Rainfallmillimeters in 200

0

1911 1913 1915 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1912 1914 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 Year

July Temperature 1906 - 1936 20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4 Temperature Temperature degrees in Celsius 2

0

1916 1924 1932 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1933 1934 1935 1936 Year

Less than three years after Letitia Morgan’s death Leonard Henry (it would seem very likely he was named after Arthur’s younger brother of the same name mentioned on Page 20) died on 29 April 1924 at the age of 22 months.11 According to the death certificate he died from shock as a result of accidental burns. This must have been a traumatic and terrible accident the circumstances of which are not known. Leonard Henry died at 285 Harrow Road which had been Paddington Workhouse. It was now Paddington Infirmary but a sense of stigma was still attached to the building. The Public Health Report for 1924 and 1925 provides few clues as to Leonard Henry’s accident.12 The report mentions that in 1924 there were 55 deaths in the borough from ‘other accidents and violence’ and one of those deaths was of a male child between 1 and 2 years of age. It would seem likely this was Leonard Henry. The graph on Page 42demonstrates deaths in the different wards, in the years 1921 – 1928, and it is easy to see which wards were most affected. Westbourne is second only to Church Ward which contained the notorious Clarendon Street. Westbourne and Church Wards are described as special areas. There were 33 deaths from diarrhoea - all in babies under a year old. Nine of the deaths were in Westbourne, twelve in Church and seven in Harrow Road, therefore 28 of the 33 deaths occurred in these three wards. Dr Dudfield listed the precautions to be taken against summer diarrhoea, which had become a notifiable disease for Paddington, and stressed the infectious nature of the condition. He made a point of saying it is often fatal to babies and can leave harmful side effects for those who recover.

The Public Health Reports for 1924 and 1925 devote much detail to the various notifiable diseases such as - tuberculosis, measles, polio, whooping cough, malaria , dysentery, pneumonia, diphtheria, typhoid, erysipelas, ophthalmia neonatorum, puerperal fever and scarlet fever. Examination of these different diseases and their significance in Paddington would be most interesting but outside the scope of this document. The various Public Health Reports make it clear there was concern for the welfare of mothers and children and the report addressed such concerns. Provision was made for mothers and children who needed support and came under the heading of ‘necessitous’. Maternity and child welfare services could be accessed and arrangements made for the provision of milk for such needy cases. Health visitors made many visits and perhaps visited Jane in Brindley Street. It is evident there were health centres for the mothers to visit and gain medical and practical advice. One such place was situated at 232 Harrow Road and was described as having ‘nine good rooms warmed by gas fires, bathroom and basement’. This particular centre served Westbourne.

11 Leonard Grange, death, GRO Reference: District: Paddington; Year: 1924; Quarter: 2; Volume; 1a; Page: 45 12 Oates, Geoffrey Eugene, M.D., B.S. (London), M.R.C.P. (London); D.P.H. (Cambridge); Barrister - at- Law. Medical Officer of Health, Medical Officer of Health, Report on the Vital Statistics and the Work of the Public Health Department for the years 1924 and 1925. Metropolitan Borough of Paddington. Wellcomelibrary.org

The Public Health Report for 1924 details the remedies the Sanitary Department carried out to housing.13 These repairs related to:

1. defective, choked or improperly ventilated drains 2. defective soil pipes 3. water closet choked, defective, insufficiently flushed, ‘flushing apparatus defective’, absence of water supply, foul, insufficient accommodation of water closet, no door to closet, no external light or ventilation to the water closet 4. problems with rain water pipes being defective, choked and not disconnected from drain or soil pipe 5. defective wastepipes 6. defective cistern, dirty, without proper cover or a defective cover 7. problems with dustbins 8. problems with defective paving in area, yard or washhouse 9. defective guttering 10. damp premises 11. dirty or verminous rooms 12. defective roof 13. accumulation of refuse 14. animals 15. water supply to premises insufficient; 16. ‘other defects or nuisances’.

The report makes it clear that the owner of 22 Brindley Street was obviously very reluctant to rectify problems with the property. This author does not know who owned the house but the electoral register certainly suggests at least three families were resident in the building.14 It would seem their living conditions were poor to say the least. There was insufficient water supply which the owner was ordered to correct. Subsequently the owner was fined for failing to rectify the Magistrate’s Order to provide the extra water supply. The owner then failed to carry out annual cleansing and finally in 1924 he was ordered to clean a ‘verminous room’.15 It is a dismal picture of this part of Paddington.

13 Oates, Geoffrey Eugene, M.D., B.S. (London), M.R.C.P. (London); D.P.H. (Cambridge); Barrister - at- Law. Medical Officer of Health, Medical Officer of Health, Report on the Vital Statistics and the Work of the Public Health Department for the years 1924 and 1925. Metropolitan Borough of Paddington. 14 London Metropolitan Archives: London Electoral Registers 1847-1965 15 Oates, Geoffrey Eugene, M.D., B.S. (London), M.R.C.P. (London); D.P.H. (Cambridge); Barrister - at- Law. Medical Officer of Health, Medical Officer of Health, Report on the Vital Statistics and the Work of the Public Health Department for the years 1924 and 1925. Metropolitan Borough of Paddington.

Life would appear to have been a struggle for Arthur and Jane who were then to experience another death in the family. Their daughter, Mary, aged just eleven months, died 6 April 1926 from ‘acute intestinal obstruction from peritoneal adhesions’. Mary died at 285 Harrow Road, the old Paddington Workhouse, which had become the Paddington Infirmary. It seems from the death certificate a post mortem examination was conducted.16

The Public Health Report for 1926 demonstrates that two children, one of each sex, under the age of one year died of ‘obstructions of the intestines’. It is interesting to note that the main causes of death in this age bracket were as a result of premature birth – 46 cases, diarrhoea and enteritis – 44 cases, developmental diseases – 15 cases and bronchopneumonia - 22 cases.17 In total there were 16 cases of obstruction of the intestines (across all age groups) eight of which occurred in Westbourne. As with all the reports much space is devoted to describing the care available to poor families and the efforts being made with regard to housing. Although Arthur and Jane were far from in a good position it is evident they were not as badly situated as many others. Overcrowding continued to be a problem in 1926 with fifteen tenements in registered houses reported as overcrowded. In total 1,406 houses in Paddington were registered as tenements. These had been inspected and an array of defects found much as described above on Page 38. There were attempts to correct the overcrowding issue that was present in the borough but only three instances were remedied before the end of 1926. The others had been unable to find better accommodation. Dr Oates, author of this report, made the comment: Owing to existing social conditions only bad cases of overcrowding are dealt with by official action.18

As mentioned above Brindley Street was situated in the deprived ward of Westbourne and given the status of a ‘special area’ because of its various social problems. Brindley was far from the only street to have such difficulties with Church Ward, containing Clarendon Street, featuring even more prominently than Westbourne. Arthur, Jane and family lived in three different houses in Brindley Street – numbers 15, 13 and 50. It is evident that any disease would spread very easily in an area where there was crowding and the sanitation levels were far from satisfactory – certainly by today’s standards.

Measles had been a notifiable disease in Paddington since 1914 (Letitia Elsie died of it in May 1915) with the relevant regulations being The Metropolitan Borough of Paddington (Measles and German Measles) Regulations 1920. Measles was a dangerous infectious disease and would be today were it not for vaccination. Unfortunately, this was proved in recent years when some parents were frightened

16 Mary Grange, death: GRO Reference: District: Paddington; Year: 1926; Quarter: 2; Volume; 1a; Page: 33. 17Oates, Geoffrey Eugene, M.D., B.S. (London), M.R.C.P. (London); D.P.H. (Cambridge); Barrister - at- Law. Medical Officer of Health, Medical Officer of Health,, Medical Officer of Health, Report on the Vital Statistics and the Work of the Public Health Department for the years 1926. Metropolitan Borough of Paddington. 18 Ibid by a completely unfounded report which cast doubt on the safety of the Measles, Mumps and Rubella vaccine. This resulted in some children being unvaccinated with the result some children died and some sustained permanent damage to their health. The author of the report was struck off the medical register by the General Medical Council but the damage was done.

Local authorities were obliged to disinfect after a measles outbreak and to take measures to protect the public after infection. This is an interesting point as, at the time of Annie Catherine’s death, the family was living at 50 Brindley Street and Jane was pregnant with Peter and Paul, who were born 9 October 1928, when the family was living at 42 Bosworth Road, Kensington. Did the family actually move then because of the measles outbreak? It seems possible. It is noteworthy that the family had lived at three different houses in Brindley Street the conditions of which can only be imagined. The relevant electoral registers reveal a variety of other people resident at those addresses but it is not known if those particular houses had been divided into tenements and the standard of such conversions. However, it seems likely. It is possible that the family found alternative accommodation which was perhaps less crowded. It is also possible that they were forced to move – the answer will never be known. See Table 1 for the chronology and addresses of Arthur and Jane’s homes. Paddington as a whole experienced 2,862 cases of measles during 1928. Westbourne ward experienced 561 of these, that is, 19.6% of the total cases.19 Harrow Road was also badly hit by the epidemic and experienced 584 cases which equates to 20.4%, therefore these two wards accounted for 40% of the total measles cases. Remarkably, Church, the most problematic of the wards, experienced only 65 cases. This situation is deserving of further analysis but is outside the scope of this document. Please see graph below.

19 Oates, Geoffrey Eugene, M.D., B.S. (London), M.R.C.P. (London); D.P.H. (Cambridge); Barrister - at- Law. Medical Officer of Health Report on the Public Health and Vital Statistics of the Borough of Paddington for the year 1928. Borough of Paddington Measles Cases in 1928 700 600 500 400 300 200 100

0 Number Number Cases of

Ward

Dr Oates, author of the 1926 Public Health Report goes on to say that the epidemic was at its zenith during the fourth month of the year – by month Dr Oates actually means the fourth set of four weeks not the month of April. He goes on to mention that the last epidemic had occurred in 1926 and that an epidemic of measles can occur approximately at two year intervals. Dr Oates states that no less than 71 deaths were directly as a result of measles or its complications with 14 deaths being in children under one year of age. There were 28 deaths in children between the ages of one and two years – Annie Catherine was 19 months. Between the ages of two and five years there were 24 deaths and five deaths in those aged five to fifteen years. Dr Oates also suggested that it was likely other deaths occurred that were indirectly attributable to ‘debilitated conditions arising after measles’. Dr Oates then stated that more research was necessary as to the cause of the disease but that the Borough of Paddington was doing all it could to combat the disease. A large number of cases needed nursing assistance including 198 under the age of five years. The nurses made 1,813 visits to this age group which perhaps included visiting Annie Catherine although she died in 285 Harrow Road - Paddington Infirmary.

The graph below demonstrates deaths in Paddington, 1921-1928, by age and sex. It is evident that infancy was a hazardous time with it being worse for boys than girls. Once past infancy the chances of surviving to adulthood were much better but people started to die in the 25 plus age group and the 45 plus age group in which men fared badly. Without further in depth analysis, no firm conclusions can be drawn from the graph but some obvious issues would be reproductive problems and infectious disease for females and occupational injuries in association with disease for men. Number of Paddington Deaths by Age and Sex 1921 -1928 600

500 1921 400 1922 300 1923 200 1924 NumberofDeaths 1925 100 1926 0 1927 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1928 0 1 2 5 15 25 45 65 1 = Male, 2= Female Age Group

The following two graphs illustrate death rates by ward and year. There are no surprises with regard to which wards were most affected

Paddington Death Rates by Ward 1921 - 1928 18 16 14 12 1921 10 1922 8 1923 DeathRate 6 4 1924 2 1925 0 1926 1927 1928

Ward

Paddington Death Rates by Year and Ward 18

16

14 Church 12 Harrow Road Hyde Park 10 Lancaster Gate East

8 Lancaster Gate West DeathRate 6 Maida Vale Queen's Park 4 Town 2 Westbourne

0 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 Year

Chapter 5: Generations 2 and 3 – Peter’s Probable Maternal Grandfather and Great Grandparents.

The previous chapter described Jane’s relationship and connection with Letitia Morgan who appears to have been her aunt. This chapter will now look at Letitia’s background and family. Please see Handley and Shine Family Tree on Page 6.

As mentioned previously Letitia was born 9 August 1855 which has been confirmed by a birth certificate and record of baptism which in itself is interesting. The record states that Letitia’s baptism was ‘sub conditione’ which would appear to mean that she may have been baptised previously but not in the Catholic faith. Indeed records do suggest that Letitia Shine (Handley, Manning, Morgan) was baptised at the Church of St John the Evangelist on 27 January 1856 which is where Jane Shine married Thomas Handley in 1857. 20 This would seem to fit with the fact that Letitia was born out of wedlock whilst her mother was employed as a servant.21 Letitia was subsequently baptised, for the second time, on the same day as her sister Mary – 12 February 1861 at the Roman Catholic Church of the Holy Family, Saffron Hill, Holborn.22

The last chapter mentioned that Letitia’s mother, Jane Shine, married Thomas Handley, a painter, on 7 September 1857. John Shine, Jane Shine’s father, was a compositor and Daniel Handley, Thomas Handley’s father, was also a painter. Jane Shine and Thomas Handley were living in Waterloo Road, Lambeth at this time.23 Prior to this Jane Shine was resident at 4 Birches Place, Liberty of the Rolls, St Clement Danes, Strand. Ellen Mears was a witness at the wedding and had been living at 1 Thavie Inn in 1851 whilst Jane Shine was living at 3 Thavie Inn in 1851 part of the parish of Saint Andrew, Holborn.24 It would seem they were neighbours and friends.

Evidence from baptismal records demonstrates Jane Shine was born on 16 December 1833 and baptised on 22 December 1833 in a Roman Catholic Church in Sheffield - this also agrees with evidence in the 1851 and 1861 England Censuses. Jane’s father was a compositor and her mother was either Emma or Letitia Boyde - the name Letitia occurs throughout this research and once again this could be an example of someone choosing to use their second name as opposed to their given

20 Church of England Parish Registers 1754-1906 Reference Number: p85/jna3/014 Name: Letitia Shine; Record Type: Baptism; Baptism Date: 27 January 1856; Baptism Place: St John the Evangelist, Lambeth; Father: Thomas Shine; Mother: Jane Shine 21 1851 England Census: Class: HO107; Piece: 1527; Folio: 151; Page: 31; GSU roll: 174757 22 England Roman Catholic Parish Baptisms Letitia Handley; Mother: Joanna Handley olim Shine; Father: Thomas Handley; Baptism Date: 12 Feb 1861; Birth Date: 09 Aug 1855; Church: Holy Family; Parish: Saffron Hill; Diocese: Westminster. 23 London Church of England Marriages and Banns 1754-1921: Name: Thomas Handley; Spouse: Jane Shine; Date: 7 September 1857; Parish: St John the Evangelist, Lambeth; Borough: Lambeth; Father Name: Daniel Handley; Spouse Father: John Shine; Register Type: Parish Register 24 Ibid. Christian name.25 The 1851 England Census suggests both John and Letitia Shine were born in Ireland – there are no further details.26 By 1861 Letitia Shine was a widow and living at 1 Bowling Pin Green, Liberty of the Rolls and working as a needlewoman.27John Shine appears to have died on 24 July 1860 of ‘chronic bronchitis and disease of the bladder’. He was 62 years of age and his wife, Letitia, was present at his death. They were living at 4 Birches Place, , St Clement Danes. This is the address given on the birth certificate of Letitia Shine (Handley, Manning, Morgan).28 This does seem to confirm the research conducted and the connections between these different people. It has not been possible to discover much more about Letitia Shine (widow of John Shine) except for the fact she was possibly in the Cleveland Street Workhouse between 28 July 1863 and the 11 September 1866 when she was discharged. She was 67. It is likely this is the correct Letitia Shine but there is no other evidence to confirm it. No date of death has been found for her. The information given above provides some background, albeit limited, to Jane Shine and Thomas Handley and appears to confirm that there is an Irish connection in the family.

The Handleys appear to have remained in the Liberty of the Rolls, St Bride’s and St Clement Danes area of London which were all within close proximity – these streets were very close to Fetter Lane and Fleet Street and the associated printing works. Given that John Shine was a compositor it was, perhaps, a natural place to settle and work. It is not known what occurred next but can only be concluded that Thomas, Jane and family were unable to pay their rent as, in approximately 1865 (but could be earlier), they seem to have been admitted to the workhouse. This occurred again in 1868 where Jane Handley née Shine gave birth to a son Thomas - Peter’s probable grandfather and the father of Peter’s mother Jane Grange née Handley. The family entered the workhouse twice in 1871 and on the second occasion Jane Handley née Shine gave birth to another son who was named John.29 The family was admitted to the Union Workhouse on 19 January 1871 and discharged at their request on 23 Jan 1871. They were admitted from 9 Holborn Buildings and described as paupers. Thomas Handley was aged 48, and Jane was 38 years old. Letitia was 15, Mary 10 and

25 England and Wales, Non-Conformist and Non- Parochial Registers 1567 - 1970. Jane Shine; Birth Date: 16 December 1833; Baptism Date: 22 December 1933; Father: John Shine; Mother: Emma (or Letitia) Boyde; Place: Sheffield; Denomination Roman Catholic; Piece Title: 3754, Sheffield, Norfolk Row Chapel (Roman Catholic) 1827 - 1840 26 1851 England Census. Class: HO107; Piece: 1512; Folio: 470; Page: 15; GSU roll: 87841 John and Letitia Shine. 27 1861 England Census; Class: RG9; Piece: 181; Folio: 117; Page: 28; GSU roll: 542587. Letitia Shine. 28 GRO Reference District: Strand; Year: 1860; Quarter: 3; Volume: 1b; Page: 246. John Shine death. 29 London Workhouse Admission and Discharge Records 1659-1930; Name: Thomas Handley, Jane Handley, Latitia (Letitia) Handley, Mary Handley aged and Thomas Handley; Admission Date: 19 January 1871; Discharge Date: 23 January 1871; Parish or Poor Law Union: City of London; Title: Homerton Workhouse Thomas was 2.30 The workhouse record also indicates probable birth years for each person. It is another piece of evidence in this intriguing puzzle.

Please see Table 3, on Pages 65 – 66, which details the children of Jane Handley née Shine and her husband Thomas Handley. It is not difficult to see the problems. It is apparent from Table 3 that Jane had at least eight children four of whom died. Jane was present at three of these deaths. Given the gaps between the birth dates it is reasonable to suggest Jane had further pregnancies in which the babies were either stillborn or had been miscarried. It is such a dire picture of the state of people’s lives in middle to late nineteenth century.

One particular address, in Table 3, stands out for its notoriety and that is Dawes Court, Shoe Lane, Fleet Street. This is where one of Jack the Ripper’s victims, Mary Ann Nicholls, was born in 1845. Mary Ann Nichols would have been about 16 years old in 1861, when Jane and Thomas Handley were living there, and it is vaguely possible they knew her. However, this piece of evidence serves again to illustrate that life at this time for many people was really quite desperate and to put this research into historical context.

30 London Workhouse Admission and Discharge Records 1659-1930: Name: Thomas Handley, Jane Handley, Latitia (Letitia) Handley, Mary Handley aged and Thomas Handley; Admission Date: 19 January 1871; Discharge Date: 23 January 1871; Parish or Poor Law Union: City of London; Title: Homerton Workhouse 1868-1871

Table 3 Chronology of Handley Family Residences, Deaths, Causes of Death and Place of Death.

Date Birth of Residence Death Death of Cause of Place of Child of Child Other Death Death 1855 Letitia 4 Birches Place 1857 Waterloo 31Road 17 July 1858 Thomas32 2 Dawes Thomas Hydrocephalus 2 Dawes Court, Shoe 1 Sept Court, Lane St 1858 mother Bride’s Aged 7 present at weeks33 the death 30 Mary34 October1860 1861 1 Dawes Court35 6 December Jane36 16 Plough 1863 Court Lane

29 July 1864 16 Plough Jane37 Pertussis, At home, Court Lane, Aged 7 convulsions mother months present at the death 29 July 1868 Thomas West London Union38 19 – 23 Jan Homerton 1871 Workhouse39

31 England and Wales, Non-Conformist and Non- Parochial Registers 1567 - 1970. Jane Shine; Birth Date: 16 December 1833; Baptism Date: 22 December 1933; Father: John Shine; Mother: Emma or Leitita Boyde; Place: Sheffield; Denomination Roman Catholic; Piece Title: 3754, Sheffield, Norfolk Row Chapel (Roman Catholic) 1827 - 1840 32 Thomas Handley birth: GRO Reference District: West London; Year: 1858; Quarter: 3; Volume: 1c; Page: 48. 33 Thomas Handley death: GRO Reference District: West London; Year: 1858; Quarter: 3; Volume: 1c; Page: 48. 34 Mary Handley; Mother: Joanna Handley olim Shine; Father: Thomas Handley; Baptism Date: 12 Feb 1861; Birth Date: 30 Oct 1860; Church: Holy Family; Parish: Saffron Hill: Diocese: Westminster. 35 1861 England Census, Class: RG9; Piece: 221; Folio: 15; Page: 35; GSU roll: 542594 36 Jane Handley birth: GRO Reference District: West London; Year: 1863; Quarter:1; Volume: 1c; Page: 46 37 Jane Handley death: GRO Reference District: West London; Year: 1864; Quarter: 3; Volume: 1c; Page: 51 38 Thomas Handley birth: GRO Reference District: Islington; Year: 1868; Quarter: 3; Volume: 1b; Page: 316 39 London Workhouse Admission and Discharge Records 1659-1930; Name: Thomas Handley, Jane Handley, Latitia (Letitia) Handley, Mary Handley aged and Thomas Handley; Admission Date: 19 January 1871; Discharge Date: 23 January 1871; Parish or Poor Law Union: City of London; Title: Homerton Workhouse 1868-1871 Table 3 continued.

17 Nov 2 Bangor William40 Scarlatina 2 Bangor 1874 Street Aged 14 Street, months/ mother present at the death. 23 Jan Jesse41 2 Bangor 1877 Street 21 May 2 Bangor Thomas Disease of the Found dead 1878 Street Handley42 brain at home Aged 55 19 Sep 2 Bangor Jane Phthsis John 1878 Street Handley43 Manning Aged 44 son-in-law present at the death 1881 2 Bangor Street44 1881 14 Bangor Street45 12 Jul 9 Bangor Jesse Pulmonary 9 Bangor 1886 Street Handley46 phthsis, Street. John Aged 9 dropsy, Manning asthenia present at the death. 7 Jun John Sudden Brompton 1893 Manning asphyxia due Consumption Aged 35 administration Hospital of chloroform. Emphysema. 14 Oct Thomas Syncope, 7 Bangor 1915 Handley haemorrhage Street Aged 46 from the lungs, phthsis 1921 Letitia Diarrhoea and 50 Brindley Morgan enteritis. Street. Jane (Shine, Grange née Handley, Handley Manning) present at the Aged 66 death.

40 William Handley death: GRO Reference: District: Kensington; Year: 1874, Quarter: 4; Volume: 1a, Page 80 41 Jesse Handley birth: GRO Reference: District: Kensington; Year: 1877, Quarter: 1; Volume: 1a, Page 152 42 Thomas Handley death: GRO Reference District: Kensington; Year: 1878; Quarter: 2; Volume: 1a; Page: 89. 43 Jane Handley death: GRO Reference: District: Kensington; Year: 1878; Quarter: 3; Volume: 1a; Page: 98 44 1881 England Census ,Class RG11; Piece: 32; Folio 71; Page 7; GSU Roll 1341007 Thomas and John Handley 45 1881 England Census ,Class RG11; Piece: 32; Folio 71; Page 7; GSU Roll 1341007 John and Letitia Manning, Jesse Handley 46 Jesse Handley death: GRO Reference: District: Kensington; Year: 1886; Quarter: 3; Volume; 1a; Page: 59 Jane Handley née Shine gave birth to another son, William, on 13 August 1873.According to the birth certificate the family address was 2 Bangor Street.47 Unfortunately Bangor Street was another notorious street and one of the worst in the Norland Ward of Kensington. Please see Appendix 1.

Bangor Street had many social problems, much of it was extremely filthy and it had a bad reputation. It had been built in an area called the ‘Avernus’ or Notting Dale Special Area. The problems had begun years earlier, in the 1830s, when the area became populated by pig breeders and brickmakers. The area was referred to as the Potteries as there was also production of drain pipes, tiles and flower pots. Filth, disease and lack of sanitation made this area an abominable place. In 1838 the Poor Law Commissioners were aware that some cottages had been built over stagnant pools of water, floors had given way with one end of a room being in the water whilst the other dry end would contain a bed or straw mattress on which a family would sleep. The combination of pig manure, other organic matter, dug up by the potters and brickmakers, all in an area difficult to drain, provided a perfect breeding ground for all that is unhealthy and liable to produce disease. During the years 1846 - 48 living conditions had become so appalling that the average age of death was 11 years and 7 months compared with 37 years throughout the rest of London which was still horribly low. The number of pigs in the Potteries was over 3000! The houses were ruinous, wretched and surrounded by ditches containg the most foul and offensive material. There was accumulation of rubbish of all sorts which included offal. Needless to say, cholera broke out as well as many other diseases such as typhus and typhoid. There were some improvements in the 1860s, although the situation was still dreadful and, to make matters worse, the population was rising as a result of the railway development works which displaced more people from the central parts of London. Death rates were very high and many children died before reaching five years of age.

47 William Handley birth: GRO Reference: District: Kensington; Year: 1873, Quarter: 3; Volume: 1a, Page 147 In 1873, the year the Handleys seem to have moved to Bangor Street (it could have been anytime from 1871), a medical officer, by the name of Dr Thomas Orme Dudfield, had been appointed and was horrified at the state of the Potteries. Dr Dudfield condemned a number of houses as unfit for habitation but little improvement took place for many years. Meanwhile the pigs did start to decrease in number but it was 1878, the year both Thomas and Jane Handley died, before the pigs were finally stopped. However the death rate was still high and by 1895 it had not changed despite Dr Dudfield’s best efforts. The death rate was 33.3 per 1000 living more than double that for the whole parish. It was still comparable to the death rates of the 1850s. A staggering 432 out of 1000 children born died before reaching a year old. Overcrowding would appear to be the culprit. There were situations where houses that had been built for occupation by a single family were now being occupied by up to seven families. These houses seem to have contained eight or nine large rooms, over 3 floors, but had only one water closet and one water tap both of which were in the basement. There were no sinks upstairs and clean water had to be carried up and dirty water down. Very gradually improvements did take place but things were still bad following World War I. In 1923 the council decided landlords should be required to provide one water closet for every 12 people (!) and a proper water supply. New bye laws for the control of houses let as lodgings were also introduced in 1926. The situation cannot be comprehended and it is incredible to believe that only 100 years or so ago such a situation existed.

In 1938 the Council decided to redevelop the area but World War II intervened thus delaying the matter. However, the area was eventually redeveloped, Bangor Street was demolished, and a building known as Henry Dickens Court sits on the old site. The Roman Catholic Church of St Francis of Assisi, where Letitia Handley (Shine) married her first husband John Manning in 1877, remains in Pottery Lane. It had been built in 1859-60 and was there for the Catholic community, many of whom were Irish immigrants or those of Irish extraction, who had been moved and displaced because of the railway expansion that was occurring. The Church of St Francis of Assisi opened on 2 February 1860 and was built at Father Rawes’ own expense. Father Rawes chose the site of Pottery Lane ‘for the poor and populous of Notting Dale’ as he thought the rich would always go down the hill to church but the poor would not go up a hill. There were also other good charitable and philanthropic people in Notting Dale trying to help alleviate the problems of the area.48

48 British History Online. F H W Sheppard (Ed) 'The Potteries and the Bramley Road area and the Rise of the Housing Problem in North Kensington', in Survey of London: Volume 37, Northern Kensington, ed. (London, 1973), pp. 340-355. http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-london/vol37/pp340-355 [accessed 1 December 2017]

The Handley family continued to live in Bangor Street but one death seemed to follow after another. Thomas Handley succumbed to ‘disease of the brain’ and was found dead on 21 May 1878. Jane died just a few months later of phthsis (tuberculosis) and just over a year from the birth of her last child Jesse. Letitia Manning (Shine, Handley, Morgan) and her husband then took over the care of Jesse who lived with them.49 It is very noticeable that John Manning was present at the death of his mother- in-law and at the death of Jesse Handley. Both death certificates state John Manning (Letitia Handley’s first husband) was present when Jane and Jesse died. This provides more evidence linking Letitia and the Handleys of Bangor Street.50 It is also to be noted that both Jane Handley and her child Jesse died of phthsis – tuberculosis. John Manning would later die of pulmonary disease.

This research has illustrated how much more needs to be done to fully understand the conditions prevalent at the time. Much has been written about Victorian slums and the slums in London generally but there is a definite need for more work in this area. It is also clear from the 1881 Census that 10 Bangor Street was a lodging house and housing 27 people two of whom were female - a 42 year lady described as a hawker and her 13 year old daughter also described as a hawker. Number 18 was also a lodging house with 27 people and number 20 contained 40 people including one woman.

This researcher was surprised to discover Jane Handley née Shine had made a will in which she was very concerned about the future of her ‘dear children’. It seems that although Jane appears to have been unable to write, the will is signed with her mark, she had received some good advice and she appears to have been an intelligent lady of forethought. Jane’s first executor, Jesse Couchman, (perhaps Thomas and Jane’s son, Jesse, was named after Jesse Couchman) died before he could carry out his duties under the will. He died 4 November 1878 aged just 33 years of ‘fit 2 days, cardiac embolism’.51 He was a police constable and it would seem he was a good friend to Jane at least. Jane’s daughters, Letitia Manning (wife of John Manning) and Mary Woodward (wife of Alfred Woodward) both of number 2 Bangor Street became executors. Jane Handley’s effects were valued at under £300, which according to the Bank of England online calculator, is equivalent to approximately £34,209 now.52 This does seem more than would be expected from living in Bangor Street. Jane was residing at number 2 Bangor Street and part of her will is reproduced below - there was no punctuation in the document.

I give devise and bequeath to my daughter Mary all the goods chattels effects and furniture that may be at the time of my decease on the premises tenanted by me and

49 England Census 1881: Class RG11; Piece: 32; Folio 71; Page 7; GSU Roll 1341007 John and Letitia Manning, Jesse Handley 50Jesse Handley birth: GRO Reference: District: Kensington; Year: 1877, Quarter: 1; Volume: 1a, Page 152; Jesse Handley death: GRO Reference: District: Kensington; Year: 1886; Quarter: 3; Volume; 1a; Page: 59; Jane Handley death: GRO Reference: District: Kensington; Year: 1878; Quarter: 3; Volume: 1a; Page: 98. 51Jesse Couchman death: GRO Reference: District: Kensington; Year: 1878; Quarter: 4; Volume: 1a; Page: 72. 52 http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/education/Pages/resources/inflationtools/calculator/default.aspx known as No. two thirteen and fifteen Bangor Street…and to my daughter Letitia I give a similar devise of 3 houses of furniture known as five fourteen and sixteen Bangor Street aforesaid upon trust that the said Mary and Letitia receiving the benefits from such houses now let out they or either of them will maintain and educate their three brothers Thomas John and Jesse until they or either of them attain the age of twenty one years and will apprentice them on their own desire to any trade they wish…

This seems to suggest that Jane and, possibly her husband, had actually been letting several houses in Bangor Street but the circumstances of the lettings and the state of the properties is not known. However, they would have been far from good. Jane’s will continued to say:

… all the goods chattels property and effects shall become absolutely the property of my said two daughters…I also give devise and bequeath to my said three younger children Thomas John and Jesse Handley the sum of two hundred pounds to be equally divided between on their attaining the age of twenty one years… 53

One of the witnesses to Jane’s will was Arthur Horatio Varnham who also died very prematurely. He died 22 November 1881 aged 34 of ‘phthsis pulmonalis’ – tuberculosis again!54 By this time Mary Woodward née Handley had also died and Arthur Varnham’s widow then married Alfred Woodward – Mary’s husband. They would all have known each other well. It is not surprising widows married widowers – they had children to be cared for, they needed some security, human companionship and love.

It does seem that Jane had made some money. The Handleys were poor but perhaps not as destitute as might be imagined. Letitia moved to Brindley Street which, whilst in a very poor part of Paddington, was definitely an improvement on Bangor Street.

This research has concentrated on the Handleys of Bangor Street. Very little has been discovered about Thomas Handley’s parents. His father, Daniel, appears to have been born in Ireland around 1791 and Thomas’ mother, Ann, is a mystery but also would appear to have been Irish. They lived in Dawson’s Place, Lambeth near to Jane Handley née Shine and her parents John and Letitia Shine.55

53 England & Wales, National Probate Calendar (Index of Wills and Administrations), 1861-1941 https://probatesearch.service.gov.uk/#wills Jane Handley; Death Date: 19 September 1878; Death Place: ; Probate: 5 February 1879: Registry: Prinicpal Registry. 54 Arthur Horatio Varnham death: GRO Reference: District: Kensington; Year: 1881; Quarter: 4; Volume: 1a; Page: 82. 55 1841 England Census: Class: HO 107; Piece: 1057; Book 8; Civil Parish: Lambeth, County: Surrey; Enumeration District: 14; Folio: 44; Page: 16; Line: 15; GSU roll: 474653. Daniel and Ann Handley.

They are likely to have been neighbours. Very little is known about the Shines apart from what has been mentioned above and the fact they also came from Ireland. There is very little doubt in this researcher’s mind that there is an Irish connection in the family. The research also suggests that Peter’s (probable) grandfather, Thomas Handley (1868 – 1915) never actually moved out of Bangor Street as according to his death certificate he was residing at 7 Bangor Street at the time of his death. He was just 46 years old and, yet again, tuberculosis was a cause of death. 56

56 Thomas Handley death: GRO Reference: District: Kensington; Year: 1915; Quarter: 4; Volume; 1a; Page: 203