RootsChat.Com
Ireland (Historical Counties) => Ireland => Dublin => Topic started by: dermo on Tuesday 02 June 15 16:33 BST (UK)
-
I have been looking through the electoral lists on the Dublin Heritage site. In those for the 1908-1915 period, the accommodation of householders in tenement buildings is described. Some of these descriptions are straightforward, e.g. "1st floor front and back room". In a number of cases, however, I found "two pair back room". I'm pretty sure this does not mean that the person in question occupied four rooms. I have a vague recollection of reading that the "two pair" part of the description might refer to the number of flights of stairs leading to the room. Can anyone shed light?
-
Problem solved. I did what I should have done earlier, i.e. I googled the phrase, and as I vaguely recollected "two pair" refers to flights of stairs. A "two pair back room" is, therefore, a second floor back room. Apparently the phrase occurs on a number of occasions in Dickens. You live and learn.
-
Can anyone explain what is the criteria for being on the electoral role in 1901 please. One grandfather is on the electoral role and one isn't. Both are Dublin born and bred and lived in the tenements doing labouring jobs. Any info would be appreciated.
-
Sorry. Meant 1908 electoral role!
-
I think its 21 yrs old for men.possibly 31 for women and anyone i suppose paying a rent to a landlord.
Have you tried searching by address only that he may have had on 1901 census in case of mispelling of his name or any wife or grown up children.
There is also the workhouse records,Tara a researcher on here found lots of people i had being researching who were in and out of the workhouse between 1901 and 1911, dont let the workhouse fool you into thinking its only for destitute people its also for sick people who would have had a proper address, some were only in for a few days or weeks with rheumatism or heart problems.
Oh and there is always the prison register.
-
Hi Turvey
Those early electoral rolls confuse me too and I meant to bring the subject up myself.
I know that's what they are called but I don't think that's what they are.
They strike me as more like a rental list or something similar, like a modern day Griffiths Valuation.
I've pretty much only ever found heads of household for families on my tree.
I'm interested if someone can throw light on this subject too.
Tara
-
http://databases.dublincity.ie/burgesses/about.php
-
If you look at the link that Hallmark kindly posted I think the issue is with ~
(Sorry I can't get the relevant bits that I am interested in to copy and paste)
'having to hold an additional qualification'
~ one of these was Inhabitant Householder
I am presuming this is where my 'head of household' theory comes into play.
I take it that once again, the head of household paying the rent means that in most cases it was only the man whom had the additional qualification and hence could vote.
Tara
-
....not if he/she had 2 households! He/she got 1 vote for where he/she was resident!
-
I'm confused again ~
It says that if you were a lodger you could vote once you'd met the age requirement.
But, that still rules out wives of those responsible for the rent ~
also sons and daughters whom had met the age requirements yet still lived with their parents.
Plus it excludes men and women whose yearly rent was less than £4.
UGH I must be reading this wrong.
Tara
-
if you were a lodger you could vote once you'd met the age requirement.... and didn't have a vote elsewhere, if one owned a house in Cavan, and didn't live there he couldn't get a vote there! non inhabitant!
-
Hallmark
My point is re the average man ~
For example I have a family member whom met the age requirement AND the inhabitant householder requirement ie paying £4 rent~
So he IS on the voter list !
His wife, whom met the age requirement is NOT on the list
His children, some of whom still lived with him and met the age requirement are NOT on the list.
It's just interesting to see the criteria to be able to vote or not, as the case may be !
Tara
-
...nothing about dependents of voting age!! grrrr...
-
I'm amazed at how many people then didn't qualify to vote based moreso on WHOM they were living with or on the amount of rent that they were paying.
It doesn't make sense to me that a lodger could vote but not someone whom was responsible for paying the rent themselves, no matter how little.
Oh Politics ::)
Tara
-
Looking forward to synopsis heheheee....
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1898/en/act/pub/0037/print.html
-
UGH
Scratch my example ~
My example was for an ancestor whom RENTED
BUT the 'inhabitant freeholder' had to OWN the property
SO WHY and or HOW did my ancestor fit the criteria ???
Back to square one ??? ??? ???
Tara
-
If you rented a couple of rooms in a house were you classed as a LEASEHOLDER ?
Tara
-
An inhabitant householder was a person who owned and lived in a residential house with a rateable valuation of £4 yearly.
Rateable valuation was a calculation of the amount of rental which could be obtained annually on any premises.
Rated Occupiers and Inhabitant Householders were entitled to vote in local elections and in parliamentary elections.
A person who had a separate business premises and a separate residential house in different electoral areas was entitled to two votes in local elections.
____________
So one of yours was Rated Occupier!! Lived in house with qualifying Rates!
Maybe the owner did too....
-
Rated Occupiers were entitled to vote in local elections and in parliamentary elections which would cover wife, children of votable ages.
-
Hi Hallmark
The first line says ~
'the rated occupier was the owner or occupier of a business property'
I don't read this as being a home / tenement type property but I could be wrong.
I suppose to the owners of tenements they WERE business'.
So, if you read this differently ie as in to cover tenement houses and the like then why do you think in the vast majority of my family tree only the 'head of household' is the only one listed ?
I can't see why all the others aren't listed !
Tara
-
Occupiers were entitled to vote in local elections and in parliamentary elections... of Rated properties of £4 rate value, they didn't have to own it.
-
an occupier is an occupier.. not necessarily the owner
-
Hi Turvey
I can only use my own tree to cross reference against the description given on the voter criteria link.
I'm typing this up how it makes sense to me but most likely won't read well or make sense to others but here goes :
Mine were mainly labourers in tenements too !
So, in my head, for it to make sense the rated occupier as Hallmark stated is what out folks would have fallen under as the extra criteria needed plus the obvious age one.
Then I feel that there was a rent book and it was the person named on the rent book only whom was the rated occupier and whom then could go on to vote.
So, this doesn't explain a lot of others (those I call head of households) from MY tree, whom are missing from the electoral roll.
So, I'm looking at the £4 criteria listed against the value of the rated occupier total house.
I am making a presumption here that like all things, that even amongst the poor folks, there was a hierarchy of tenement.
The lesser value tenements then didn't fall into this qualifying criteria.
Does that make sense ? ;D
Again, I could be wrong, but using this explains MY tree but maybe not other people's ancestors.
Tara
-
Hallmark
Here is an example for a street that my ancestors lived on ~ it's called Sitric Road.
http://databases.dublincity.ie/burgesses/viewdoc.php?burgessid=158137&djvupath=imagefiles&orderby=007633&imagefile=1911_0115.jpg
You can each house and / or portion of house only has ONE name listed against it !
Tara
-
Rateable valuation was a calculation of the amount of rental which could be obtained annually on any premises.
Rated OCCUPIERS were entitled to vote in local elections and in parliamentary elections.
i.e, OCCUPIERS who lived in a property where the amount of rental which could be obtained annually was £4!
-
If you look at my example of the electoral roll for Sitric Road and then cross reference it against the 1911 Census for Sitric Road ~ not one wife is on the electoral roll.
Some have children of the qualifying age and they aren't on the electoral roll either.
Tara
-
My point being ~
You may have OCCUPIED a RATED OCCUPIED HOUSE
BUT
That didn't make you the RATED occupier
The RATED occupier was the one responsible for paying the rates and hence the one that got the vote.
If you have any examples of your Dublin family whom they ALL appear on the electoral roll then I would love to see an example.
Tara
-
My point being ~
You may have OCCUPIED a RATED OCCUPIED HOUSE
BUT
That didn't make you the RATED occupier
The RATED occupier was the one responsible for paying the rates and hence the one that got the vote.
If you have any examples of your Dublin family whom they ALL appear on the electoral roll then I would love to see an example.
Tara
So if Landlord paid the rates, tenants didn't get votes? Landlord only got it for where he resided... I think it looks like!
-
Good Morning
. . . again if anyone can show me an example of a family living in a Dublin tenement in 1908, where all family members, whom met the age requirement, are all listed on that 'electoral list', then I'd love to see it.
Tara
-
http://dublincitypubliclibraries.com/story/dublin-city-electoral-lists-1908-10-available-online
I may contact them today to see can they explain it to me in layman's terms ;D
HEY Grizzly are you around ~ you are GREAT with this sort of thing !?
Tara
-
OK Am SO grumpy with myself for not copping on to this.
It was 1918 before women over 30 got the right to vote.
http://www.dublincity.ie/main-menu-services-recreation-culture-decade-commemorations/first-time-votes-women-elections-1918
After the Free State was founded this age was brought down to 21 for women.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage
So, that explains all the missing women !
So, re Turvey's question re missing men from the Electoral Rolls.
Take from the book 'Dublin a city in wartime'
. . . a required elector be a householder or tenant who paid more than 4 shillings a week
. . . also must be a year in tenancy in same premises
A large majority of slum tenants moved several times and the average rent was approx 2 / 3 shillings per week, so that alone would keep them off the register.
The fact that during those years circa 1900 -1920, that 38,000 people out of 299,000 were entitled to vote says a lot . . .
. . . most of the city were semi-skilled or non skilled and couldn't afford to meet the criteria . . .
Thank You so much to Grizzly for helping me with this.
Tara
-
Many thanks for replies. Very much appreciated. Link from Hallmark very useful. I do know their addresses, so this was very helpful. Many thanks.