In article ,
(Aurora) wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 23:09:03 -0000, "NY" wrote:

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2014 22:16, Robert wrote:
Heathrow wasn't in London when first built! My father worked there in
the early 50s and we lived in Bedfont. Going to London was a major
expedition involving buses to either Feltham or Hounslow West stations
and then the train.

Where was the boundary between London and other places defined to be in
those days? Was it a 1974 change when the county of Greater London was
created? When the neighbouring counties had boundaries that met close to
central London, where was the boundary of "London" deemed to be, and did
it gradually change as greenfield sites got filled in?

Greater London was formed in 1965. Prior to that there was, the
almost sane, smaller, London County Council. Prior to 1889 Middlesex
was the county at the heart of England, although only its South
Eastern part was urbanized. IIRC until 1889 the City of London was
outwith any County.

The area of the County of London was defined long before 1889. The
Metropolitan Board of Works covered the same area and was formed in 1854
(IIRC).

The Metropolitan Police District (1829) and London Transport Area (1933)
were much earlier definitions of Greater London too. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropo...olice_District and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_...ransport_Board.

London's government has sadly been subject to endless meddling by central
government, partly because it is also located in London.

AFIK these 1889 and 1965 are the only times the County of London was
extended. Although Greater London disappeared for a while. It is now
back as a "region" with a peculiar governance structure.

It was never a county as such. London has never had the same local
government arrangements as the rest of England.

The borders of the Cities and boroughs within the County were also
consolidated into their present monstrous size in 1965. Prior to that
were the human scaled boroughs such as Paddington and St Marylebone.
In those days democracy was closer to the electorate.

Not everywhere. Wandsworth was divided, part going to Lambeth, with
Battersea added. the resulting entity was much the same size as the old
Metropolitan Borough.

The inner boroughs had lost a lot of population due to the war and post-war
reconstruction. In 1918 modern day Tower Hamlets had seven MPs. Now it has
one and a half.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:08:35 -0600,
wrote:

In article ,
(Aurora) wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 23:09:03 -0000, "NY" wrote:

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2014 22:16, Robert wrote:
Heathrow wasn't in London when first built! My father worked there in
the early 50s and we lived in Bedfont. Going to London was a major
expedition involving buses to either Feltham or Hounslow West stations
and then the train.

Where was the boundary between London and other places defined to be in
those days? Was it a 1974 change when the county of Greater London was
created? When the neighbouring counties had boundaries that met close to
central London, where was the boundary of "London" deemed to be, and did
it gradually change as greenfield sites got filled in?

Greater London was formed in 1965. Prior to that there was, the
almost sane, smaller, London County Council. Prior to 1889 Middlesex
was the county at the heart of England, although only its South
Eastern part was urbanized. IIRC until 1889 the City of London was
outwith any County.

The area of the County of London was defined long before 1889. The
Metropolitan Board of Works covered the same area and was formed in 1854
(IIRC).

The Metropolitan Police District (1829) and London Transport Area (1933)
were much earlier definitions of Greater London too. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropo...olice_District and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_...ransport_Board.

Understood, thank you for sharing.

London's government has sadly been subject to endless meddling by central
government, partly because it is also located in London.

Once again,e emphatically agree.

AFIK these 1889 and 1965 are the only times the County of London was
extended. Although Greater London disappeared for a while. It is now
back as a "region" with a peculiar governance structure.

It was never a county as such. London has never had the same local
government arrangements as the rest of England.

Middlesex was certainly a normal county. AIUI, it excluded the "City
of London". The LCC was certainly called a county, although I am
aware it was granted extra powers.

The borders of the Cities and boroughs within the County were also
consolidated into their present monstrous size in 1965. Prior to that
were the human scaled boroughs such as Paddington and St Marylebone.
In those days democracy was closer to the electorate.

Not everywhere. Wandsworth was divided, part going to Lambeth, with
Battersea added. the resulting entity was much the same size as the old
Metropolitan Borough.

Thank you, that was informative.

The inner boroughs had lost a lot of population due to the war and post-war
reconstruction. In 1918 modern day Tower Hamlets had seven MPs. Now it has
one and a half.

The old boroughs meant something. Perhaps as London's population
increases we will see a return to more localized boroughs.
--

http://www.991fmtalk.com/ The DMZ in Reno

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:46:19 -0800, Aurora wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:08:35 -0600,
wrote:

In article ,
(Aurora) wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 23:09:03 -0000, "NY" wrote:

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2014 22:16, Robert wrote:
Heathrow wasn't in London when first built! My father worked there in
the early 50s and we lived in Bedfont. Going to London was a major
expedition involving buses to either Feltham or Hounslow West stations
and then the train.

Where was the boundary between London and other places defined to be in
those days? Was it a 1974 change when the county of Greater London was
created? When the neighbouring counties had boundaries that met close to
central London, where was the boundary of "London" deemed to be, and did
it gradually change as greenfield sites got filled in?

Greater London was formed in 1965. Prior to that there was, the
almost sane, smaller, London County Council. Prior to 1889 Middlesex
was the county at the heart of England, although only its South
Eastern part was urbanized. IIRC until 1889 the City of London was
outwith any County.

The area of the County of London was defined long before 1889. The
Metropolitan Board of Works covered the same area and was formed in 1854
(IIRC).

It didn't form the same area. Like the Metropolitan Police, it
intruded into counties surrounding London but did not replace the
local governments in those areas but took over some of their
functions. The MBW area was greatly influenced by the course of an
assortment of rivers as it was responsible for stuff that doesn't run
uphill without help.

The Metropolitan Police District (1829) and London Transport Area (1933)
were much earlier definitions of Greater London too.

They (or rather the associated legislation) defined respectively the
"metropolitan police district" and the "London Passenger Transport
Area" neither of which ever matched any local authority boundaries
until the MPD was matched to Greater London in recent years.

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropo...olice_District and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_...ransport_Board.

Which effectively support what I've just said.

Understood, thank you for sharing.

London's government has sadly been subject to endless meddling by central
government, partly because it is also located in London.

Once again,e emphatically agree.

AFIK these 1889 and 1965 are the only times the County of London was
extended.

1965 wasn't an extension, it was the creation of a different set of
local government arrangements which wiped out two administrative
counties.

Although Greater London disappeared for a while. It is now
back as a "region" with a peculiar governance structure.

It was never a county as such. London has never had the same local
government arrangements as the rest of England.

It isn't and wasn't uniform in the rest of England.

Middlesex was certainly a normal county. AIUI, it excluded the "City
of London". The LCC was certainly called a county, although I am
aware it was granted extra powers.

Other counties weren't all equal as the result of various odd bits of
private legislation but possibly not as different as the County of
London.

The borders of the Cities and boroughs within the County were also
consolidated into their present monstrous size in 1965.

Maybe it would have been better to give back some land to surrounding
counties, decentralise into them and just have an overall authority to
deal with necessary common functions (e.g. transport) but prevent
detrimental centralisation either in the centre or in the surrounding
counties ?

Prior to that
were the human scaled boroughs such as Paddington and St Marylebone.
In those days democracy was closer to the electorate.

Not everywhere. Wandsworth was divided, part going to Lambeth, with
Battersea added. the resulting entity was much the same size as the old
Metropolitan Borough.

Thank you, that was informative.

The inner boroughs had lost a lot of population due to the war and post-war
reconstruction. In 1918 modern day Tower Hamlets had seven MPs. Now it has
one and a half.

The old boroughs meant something. Perhaps as London's population
increases we will see a return to more localized boroughs.

On 12/01/2014 07:27, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:46:19 -0800, Aurora wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:08:35 -0600,
wrote:

In article ,
(Aurora) wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 23:09:03 -0000, "NY" wrote:

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2014 22:16, Robert wrote:
Heathrow wasn't in London when first built! My father worked there in
the early 50s and we lived in Bedfont. Going to London was a major
expedition involving buses to either Feltham or Hounslow West stations
and then the train.

Where was the boundary between London and other places defined to be in
those days? Was it a 1974 change when the county of Greater London was
created? When the neighbouring counties had boundaries that met close to
central London, where was the boundary of "London" deemed to be, and did
it gradually change as greenfield sites got filled in?

Greater London was formed in 1965. Prior to that there was, the
almost sane, smaller, London County Council. Prior to 1889 Middlesex
was the county at the heart of England, although only its South
Eastern part was urbanized. IIRC until 1889 the City of London was
outwith any County.

The area of the County of London was defined long before 1889. The
Metropolitan Board of Works covered the same area and was formed in 1854
(IIRC).

It didn't form the same area. Like the Metropolitan Police, it
intruded into counties surrounding London but did not replace the
local governments in those areas but took over some of their
functions. The MBW area was greatly influenced by the course of an
assortment of rivers as it was responsible for stuff that doesn't run
uphill without help.

The Metropolitan Police District (1829) and London Transport Area (1933)
were much earlier definitions of Greater London too.

They (or rather the associated legislation) defined respectively the
"metropolitan police district" and the "London Passenger Transport
Area" neither of which ever matched any local authority boundaries
until the MPD was matched to Greater London in recent years.

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropo...olice_District and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_...ransport_Board.

Which effectively support what I've just said.

Understood, thank you for sharing.

London's government has sadly been subject to endless meddling by central
government, partly because it is also located in London.

Once again,e emphatically agree.

AFIK these 1889 and 1965 are the only times the County of London was
extended.

1965 wasn't an extension, it was the creation of a different set of
local government arrangements which wiped out two administrative
counties.

Although Greater London disappeared for a while. It is now
back as a "region" with a peculiar governance structure.

It was never a county as such. London has never had the same local
government arrangements as the rest of England.

It isn't and wasn't uniform in the rest of England.

Middlesex was certainly a normal county. AIUI, it excluded the "City
of London". The LCC was certainly called a county, although I am
aware it was granted extra powers.

Other counties weren't all equal as the result of various odd bits of
private legislation but possibly not as different as the County of
London.

The borders of the Cities and boroughs within the County were also
consolidated into their present monstrous size in 1965.

Maybe it would have been better to give back some land to surrounding
counties, decentralise into them and just have an overall authority to
deal with necessary common functions (e.g. transport) but prevent
detrimental centralisation either in the centre or in the surrounding
counties ?

Prior to that
were the human scaled boroughs such as Paddington and St Marylebone.
In those days democracy was closer to the electorate.

Not everywhere. Wandsworth was divided, part going to Lambeth, with
Battersea added. the resulting entity was much the same size as the old
Metropolitan Borough.

Thank you, that was informative.

The inner boroughs had lost a lot of population due to the war and post-war
reconstruction. In 1918 modern day Tower Hamlets had seven MPs. Now it has
one and a half.

The old boroughs meant something. Perhaps as London's population
increases we will see a return to more localized boroughs.

Bushey Station is not in Bushey, which is not in Watford, but Oxhey,
which is.

--
Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must
painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman

In article ,
(Charles Ellson) wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:46:19 -0800, Aurora wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:08:35 -0600,
wrote:

In article ,
(Aurora) wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 23:09:03 -0000, "NY" wrote:

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2014 22:16, Robert wrote:
Heathrow wasn't in London when first built! My father worked there
in the early 50s and we lived in Bedfont. Going to London was a
major expedition involving buses to either Feltham or Hounslow West
stations and then the train.

Where was the boundary between London and other places defined to be
in those days? Was it a 1974 change when the county of Greater London
was created? When the neighbouring counties had boundaries that met
close to central London, where was the boundary of "London" deemed to
be, and did it gradually change as greenfield sites got filled in?

Greater London was formed in 1965. Prior to that there was, the
almost sane, smaller, London County Council. Prior to 1889 Middlesex
was the county at the heart of England, although only its South
Eastern part was urbanized. IIRC until 1889 the City of London was
outwith any County.

The area of the County of London was defined long before 1889. The
Metropolitan Board of Works covered the same area and was formed in 1854
(IIRC).

It didn't form the same area. Like the Metropolitan Police, it
intruded into counties surrounding London but did not replace the
local governments in those areas but took over some of their
functions. The MBW area was greatly influenced by the course of an
assortment of rivers as it was responsible for stuff that doesn't run
uphill without help.

No. The County of London created in 1889 had the boundaries of the MBW at
the time of the change, despite london already being considerably larger by
then.

The Metropolitan Police District (1829) and London Transport Area (1933)
were much earlier definitions of Greater London too.

They (or rather the associated legislation) defined respectively the
"metropolitan police district" and the "London Passenger Transport
Area" neither of which ever matched any local authority boundaries
until the MPD was matched to Greater London in recent years.

Yes, but they recognised the reality that London had long spread beyond the
LCC/MBW area.

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropo...olice_District and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_...ransport_Board.

Which effectively support what I've just said.

Understood, thank you for sharing.

London's government has sadly been subject to endless meddling by
central government, partly because it is also located in London.

Once again,e emphatically agree.

AFIK these 1889 and 1965 are the only times the County of London was
extended.

1965 wasn't an extension, it was the creation of a different set of
local government arrangements which wiped out two administrative counties.

That's a terminological quibble only. The area of London government was
extended.

Although Greater London disappeared for a while. It is now
back as a "region" with a peculiar governance structure.

It was never a county as such. London has never had the same local
government arrangements as the rest of England.

It isn't and wasn't uniform in the rest of England.

As I said.

Middlesex was certainly a normal county.

Not exactly. It had no police force and its tramways were taken over by the
LPTB in 1933.

AIUI, it excluded the "City of London". The LCC was certainly called
a county, although I am aware it was granted extra powers.

Other counties weren't all equal as the result of various odd bits of
private legislation but possibly not as different as the County of
London.

It was the County of London and didn't include the City but its powers and
constitution were quite different from every other county in England. For
example, it had extensive housing powers; no other county had an. Every
other large urban area was one or more county boroughs anyway. London had
one alderman for every six councillors when the rest of England and Wales
had one for every three. The rules for Deputy Mayors are different.

The borders of the Cities and boroughs within the County were also
consolidated into their present monstrous size in 1965.

Maybe it would have been better to give back some land to surrounding
counties, decentralise into them and just have an overall authority to
deal with necessary common functions (e.g. transport) but prevent
detrimental centralisation either in the centre or in the surrounding
counties ?

Prior to that
were the human scaled boroughs such as Paddington and St Marylebone.
In those days democracy was closer to the electorate.

Not everywhere. Wandsworth was divided, part going to Lambeth, with
Battersea added. the resulting entity was much the same size as the old
Metropolitan Borough.

Thank you, that was informative.

The inner boroughs had lost a lot of population due to the war and
post-war reconstruction. In 1918 modern day Tower Hamlets had seven MPs.
Now it has one and a half.

The old boroughs meant something. Perhaps as London's population
increases we will see a return to more localized boroughs.

No they didn't. Their boundaries were as artificial as the present day ones.
They were based on the old vestries that had become irrelevant to modern
London by 1854. They have to be in a continuous urban area to a large extent
anyway. The County of London had been around for ten years before the
Metropolitan Boroughs were created in 1899. Obviously there are some strong
natural boundaries, especially the River Thames, but not many.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 2014\01\12 13:25, wrote:

No they didn't. Their boundaries were as artificial as the present day ones.
They were based on the old vestries that had become irrelevant to modern
London by 1854. They have to be in a continuous urban area to a large extent
anyway. The County of London had been around for ten years before the
Metropolitan Boroughs were created in 1899. Obviously there are some strong
natural boundaries, especially the River Thames, but not many.

But they didn't use the natural boundaries that existed, otherwise
Ruislip and Northwood would have been placed in Harrow (which kept its
boundaries unchanged), and Rush Green placed in Havering.

In article , (Martin
Edwards) wrote:

Bushey Station is not in Bushey, which is not in Watford, but Oxhey,
which is.

Didn't is used to be called Bushey and Oxhey?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Sun, 12 Jan 2014 07:25:03 -0600,
wrote:

In article ,
(Charles Ellson) wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 17:46:19 -0800, Aurora wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:08:35 -0600,
wrote:

In article ,
(Aurora) wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 23:09:03 -0000, "NY" wrote:

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2014 22:16, Robert wrote:
Heathrow wasn't in London when first built! My father worked there
in the early 50s and we lived in Bedfont. Going to London was a
major expedition involving buses to either Feltham or Hounslow West
stations and then the train.

Where was the boundary between London and other places defined to be
in those days? Was it a 1974 change when the county of Greater London
was created? When the neighbouring counties had boundaries that met
close to central London, where was the boundary of "London" deemed to
be, and did it gradually change as greenfield sites got filled in?

Greater London was formed in 1965. Prior to that there was, the
almost sane, smaller, London County Council. Prior to 1889 Middlesex
was the county at the heart of England, although only its South
Eastern part was urbanized. IIRC until 1889 the City of London was
outwith any County.

The area of the County of London was defined long before 1889. The
Metropolitan Board of Works covered the same area and was formed in 1854
(IIRC).

It didn't form the same area. Like the Metropolitan Police, it
intruded into counties surrounding London but did not replace the
local governments in those areas but took over some of their
functions. The MBW area was greatly influenced by the course of an
assortment of rivers as it was responsible for stuff that doesn't run
uphill without help.

No. The County of London created in 1889 had the boundaries of the MBW at
the time of the change, despite london already being considerably larger by
then.

The Metropolitan Police District (1829) and London Transport Area (1933)
were much earlier definitions of Greater London too.

They (or rather the associated legislation) defined respectively the
"metropolitan police district" and the "London Passenger Transport
Area" neither of which ever matched any local authority boundaries
until the MPD was matched to Greater London in recent years.

Yes, but they recognised the reality that London had long spread beyond the
LCC/MBW area.

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropo...olice_District and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_...ransport_Board.

Which effectively support what I've just said.

Understood, thank you for sharing.

London's government has sadly been subject to endless meddling by
central government, partly because it is also located in London.

Once again,e emphatically agree.

AFIK these 1889 and 1965 are the only times the County of London was
extended.

1965 wasn't an extension, it was the creation of a different set of
local government arrangements which wiped out two administrative counties.

That's a terminological quibble only. The area of London government was
extended.

Thank you.

Although Greater London disappeared for a while. It is now
back as a "region" with a peculiar governance structure.

It was never a county as such. London has never had the same local
government arrangements as the rest of England.

It isn't and wasn't uniform in the rest of England.

As I said.

Middlesex was certainly a normal county.

Not exactly. It had no police force and its tramways were taken over by the
LPTB in 1933.

Thank you for that. One assumes it was policed by the Met.

AIUI, it excluded the "City of London". The LCC was certainly called
a county, although I am aware it was granted extra powers.

Other counties weren't all equal as the result of various odd bits of
private legislation but possibly not as different as the County of
London.

It was the County of London and didn't include the City but its powers and
constitution were quite different from every other county in England. For
example, it had extensive housing powers; no other county had an. Every
other large urban area was one or more county boroughs anyway. London had
one alderman for every six councillors when the rest of England and Wales
had one for every three. The rules for Deputy Mayors are different.

Thank you. This is instructive.

The borders of the Cities and boroughs within the County were also
consolidated into their present monstrous size in 1965.

Maybe it would have been better to give back some land to surrounding
counties, decentralise into them and just have an overall authority to
deal with necessary common functions (e.g. transport) but prevent
detrimental centralisation either in the centre or in the surrounding
counties ?

Prior to that
were the human scaled boroughs such as Paddington and St Marylebone.
In those days democracy was closer to the electorate.

Not everywhere. Wandsworth was divided, part going to Lambeth, with
Battersea added. the resulting entity was much the same size as the old
Metropolitan Borough.

Thank you, that was informative.

The inner boroughs had lost a lot of population due to the war and
post-war reconstruction. In 1918 modern day Tower Hamlets had seven MPs.
Now it has one and a half.

The old boroughs meant something. Perhaps as London's population
increases we will see a return to more localized boroughs.

No they didn't. Their boundaries were as artificial as the present day ones.
They were based on the old vestries that had become irrelevant to modern
London by 1854. They have to be in a continuous urban area to a large extent
anyway. The County of London had been around for ten years before the
Metropolitan Boroughs were created in 1899. Obviously there are some strong
natural boundaries, especially the River Thames, but not many.

Granting the Metropolitan Borough of Westminster City status was long
overdue and sensible. The borough contained the palaces of Buckingham
and Westminster. It is the home to Whitehall. The issue is that it
also encompasses the old boroughs of Paddington and St Mary-le-Bone.
To the shopkeeper on Marylebone High St, or the Resident in Saint
Johns Wood, council offices in the old borough are much more
accessible. Government is closer.

However, the real issue here is that Westminster was thrust upon the
inhabitants of the neighboring boroughs. Had there been a ballot
option, offering the choice, there would be no problem here. The
residents would have decided to maintain their old local borough, or
join the nearby City. As it is we will never know.
--

http://www.991fmtalk.com/ The DMZ in Reno

"Aurora" wrote

However, the real issue here is that Westminster was thrust upon the
inhabitants of the neighboring boroughs. Had there been a ballot
option, offering the choice, there would be no problem here. The
residents would have decided to maintain their old local borough, or
join the nearby City. As it is we will never know.

The decision to reorganise London local government was taken at national
level, and it was true that there were no ballots as to which new London
Borough the old Metropolitan Boroughs would go into. Keeping the old
boroughs was not an option - they were too small, but local opinion was
taken into account. The original proposal was for Chislehurst & Sidcup UD to
go into Bexley Borough - sensible for Sidcup, but unwelcome in Chislehurst,
and after pressure it was agreed to split the UD along the A20 - Chislehurst
going into Bromley Borough.

Orpington UD also went into Bromley Borough. Knockholt didn't like this - it
wanted to stay in Kent, and following pressure, Knockkholt got out of
Greater London and Bromley Borough, and went into Sevenoaks District in Kent
in 1974 - and got its parish council back, which it lost when Orpington
became an Urban District.

Peter

In article ,
(Peter Masson) wrote:

"Aurora" wrote

However, the real issue here is that Westminster was thrust upon the
inhabitants of the neighboring boroughs. Had there been a ballot
option, offering the choice, there would be no problem here. The
residents would have decided to maintain their old local borough, or
join the nearby City. As it is we will never know.

The decision to reorganise London local government was taken at
national level, and it was true that there were no ballots as to
which new London Borough the old Metropolitan Boroughs would go into.
Keeping the old boroughs was not an option - they were too small, but
local opinion was taken into account. The original proposal was for
Chislehurst & Sidcup UD to go into Bexley Borough - sensible for
Sidcup, but unwelcome in Chislehurst, and after pressure it was
agreed to split the UD along the A20 - Chislehurst going into Bromley
Borough.

Orpington UD also went into Bromley Borough. Knockholt didn't like
this - it wanted to stay in Kent, and following pressure, Knockkholt
got out of Greater London and Bromley Borough, and went into
Sevenoaks District in Kent in 1974 - and got its parish council back,
which it lost when Orpington became an Urban District.

Knockholt was accompanied out of Greater London by a couple of other small
places, Farleigh and Hooley which went back into Surrey as a result of the
same Greater London, Kent and Surrey Order made in 1969. NALOPKT

--
Colin Rosenstiel