The areas involved had already been reorganised for some purposes.
This was a process which began with theinclosure acts of the later 18th century. A parish on a county boundary which used theopen-field system could have its field strips distributed among the two counties in a very complicated way.Enclosure could rationalise the boundary in the process of re-distributing land to the various landowners. Two parishes mentioned in the Counties (Detached Parts) Act 1844 had been subject to this procedure:Stratton Audley inBuckinghamshire andOxfordshire (1770),[3] andFarndish inNorthamptonshire andBedfordshire (1800).[4]
On the other hand, an inclosure act could leave such county boundary anomalies alone – and so they would appear as ghost field strips on the map, overlaying the hedged fields of the parliamentary enclosure.Pirton inBedfordshire was enclosed in 1818,[5] but the field-stripBedfordshire exclaves ofShillington survived in this way to be dealt with by the Counties (Detached Parts) Act 1844.[6][7]
A special case occupied Parliament's attention in 1815. The Liberty ofSt Martin's Le Grand was situated in theCity of London,[8] but was part of the parish of Martin's Westminster[9] and therefore an exclave ofMiddlesex.[10] TheCity of London and Westminster Streets and Post Office Act 1815 (55 Geo. 3. c. xci) annexed theLiberty to theAldersgate Ward of the City of London at the behest of the City authorities, who had complained for centuries about the alleged criminality and actual commercial freedom of the inhabitants. The act was for the building of a newGeneral Post Office in the Liberty. However, the few electors left in residence were still under Westminster and this illustrated the need for multiple parliamentary interventions to deal with the issues thrown up by exclaves.[11]
The systematic involvement of theHouse of Commons began in February 1825, when Charles Fyshe Palmer, Member of Parliament forReading, moved aprivate member's bill entitled "County Transfer of Land Bill":
To empowermagistrates atquarter sessions to effect Exchanges between counties of insulated parcels of Land, for the more convenient administration of justice. To provide a remedy for the inconvenience and perplexity which resulted from having certain parcels of land belonging to particular counties situated at a considerable distance from these counties".[12]
The bill was allowed to be read, but did not pass. However, the process resulted in the publication in May 1825 of the "County Boundary: Returns from Clerks of the Peace of Insulated Parcels of Land". Each county'sclerk of the peace had been asked to report on their county'sexclaves ("insulated parcels"), together with their valuations forland tax andcounty rate purposes. Their replies were collected and printed.[13] The process was not altogether satisfactory, witness the return of theHertfordshire clerk:
There is much difficulty in answering the inquiries with any certainty. I do not know of any person having sufficient local knowledge of the County to give the information with accuracy.[14]
TheOrdnance Survey First Series maps were a "work in progress", and his colleague inBedfordshire was frank in admitting his reliance on a commercial map of no legal standing and of questionable accuracy:
I have no official knowledge of the boundaries of the county. But it appears, on reference to the large engraved map of the County upon a survey in the year 1765...that a small part of the parish ofStudham...is locally situate in the county of Hertford.[15]
Actually, Studham was equally divided between the two counties and the exclave that the clerk was referring to belonged toWhipsnade.[16] This sort of mistake illustrates the difficulties in drafting the specific changes to be dealt with by the 1844 act.
This act included a schedule ("Schedule M") of county boundary anomalies to be acted upon, drawn up by aboundary commission headed by the surveyorThomas Drummond.[17] This schedule included a few examples of salients and divided parishes, as well as true exclaves, and was to be used in the 1844 act.[18]
TheCensus (Great Britain) Act 1830 (11 Geo. 4. c. 30) was prescribed the 1831Census, and also known as the "Population Act". It requested a schedule to be prepared by the Census Office as regards county boundary anomalies, which was published in 1833 under the title "Irregularities of Boundary of the Several Counties in England and Wales". This detailed all known examples of county boundaries dividing parishes as well as of exclaves.[19]
Two acts of Parliament of 1839 addressed the problems associated with law enforcement in county exclaves:
TheCounties (Detached Parts) Act 1839 allowedjustices of the peace to act for enclaves surrounded by their county, although this left the question of jurisdiction open as regards exclaves surrounded by more than one county.
Police constabularies established under theCounty Police Act 1839 were given jurisdiction over detached parts of other counties within their county territory in the same manner.
Section 1 of the Counties (Detached Parts) Act 1844 read in part as follows:
[F]rom and after the Twentieth Day ofOctober next every Part of any County inEngland orWales which is detached from the main Body of such County shall be considered for all Purposes as forming Part of that County of which it is considered a Part for the Purposes of the Election of Members to serve in Parliament asKnights of the Shire [...]
Section 2 of the act went on to state that the parts transferred would be incorporated in an existing:
Hundred,Wapentake,Ward,Rape,Lathe, or other like Division by which it is wholly or for the most Part surrounded, or to which it is next adjoining, in the County to which it will thenceforth belong, unless the Justices of the County, [...] shall declare it to be a new or separate Hundred or other like Division [...].
Despite the prescriptive nature of Section 1 of the Act, its powers were applied in a discretionary manner and following the provisions of "Schedule M" of the 1832 Act – which was not a comprehensive list of extant exclaves.
Exclaves abolished by Act, l. to r: Minety Gloucs (with counter-exclave around church), Poulton Wilts, Broughton Poggs Oxon, Inglesham Wilts (small, s. of Lechlade), Little Faringdon and Langford Berks, Shilton Berks, Widford Gloucs. (Historic County Borders Project)
The Act affected twenty-seven counties. The largest changes were toCounty Durham, which lost substantial territory toNorthumberland, as well as a single parish toYorkshire.
However, by no means all detached areas were changed:fifteen counties still had exclaves. As with the 1832 Act, apart from County Durham those counties with large multi-parish exclaves, such asDerbyshire,Flintshire,Worcestershire andWarwickshire, had them left alone. The Act made no provision to exchange territory in compensation for lost exclaves, and those counties which would have lost a substantial proportion of territory were either completely left alone (Flintshire) or mostly so (Worcestershire).
Many smaller exclaves were overlooked in the drawing up of the 1832 schedule and so were ignored in the 1844 Act, for example the small exclaves of theBuckinghamshire parishes ofDrayton Beauchamp andMarsworth inHertfordshire.[21][22] Similarly, the chaotic meeting ofNottinghamshire,Lincolnshire andYorkshire atAuckley andMisson was ignored despite the Ordnance Survey First Series 1841 not attempting to show boundaries (and giving despairing notes instead, e.g.: "Township of Auckley in the Counties of York and Nottingham").[23]
Muddle could be a factor in exclaves being left alone.Northamptonshire had eight small exclaves in theHuntingdonshire parish ofGreat Catworth, which were reported by the confusedclerk of the peace of the latter county in 1825 as the county's enclaves when he had been asked to report on exclaves.[14] The 1832 schedule listed them as exclaves of Huntingdonshire in Northamptonshire (back to front),[24] and the 1844 Act ignored them.
Exclaves of Northamptonshire missed by the Act, also shows Swineshead exclave of Huntingdonshire. (Historic County Borders Project)
The wording of the Act was effective in dealing with exclaves wholly or mostly surrounded by a single other county, but not for examples with approximately equal borders of two other counties. For example, theHerefordshire exclave of Ffwddog borderedMonmouthshire andBrecknockshire, and was left alone.
An exclave containing territories belonging to more than one parish was listed by the Act as separate legal cases under the parish names concerned, such as theThorncombe exclave ofDevon containing territory belonging toAxminster – this was one exclave, not two.
Several border anomalies were addressed which were outside the Act's strict remit because they were not exclaves. Somesalients were abolished, and one example of such a transfer (Oxenwood inBerkshire, surrounded mostly byWiltshire) was challenged as erroneous and cancelled.[25] Two boundary disputes, betweenCornwall andDevon andDerbyshire andCheshire, were resolved using the Act although no exclaves or salients were involved. Finally, there were a few strange cases involving divided parishes which were either errors or had ulterior motives, such as Studley inBuckinghamshire transferred toOxfordshire.
Many of the surviving outlying parts changed their administration in the 1890s following the passing of theLocal Government Act 1894, which made the legal process easier.
The 1844 Act had transferred the detached parts to different counties, but not to different parishes. Unless the detached part was an entire parish, this resulted in many cases of a detached part in one county belonging to a parish having its main territory in a different county. Later legislation, including theDivided Parishes and Poor Law Amendment Act 1882, eliminated most instances ofcivil parishes belonging to two (or more) counties, and by 1901Stanground inHuntingdonshire and theIsle of Ely was the sole remaining example.[26]
The parts of the parish ofShillington ofBedfordshire isolated inHertfordshire, transferred to the latter. There were five small exclaves in fields ofPirton next toOughtonhead Common, the largest being of very irregular shape and another containing a counter-exclave of Hertfordshire. A sixth contained Shillington Mill atIckleford.[6][7] The 1832 schedule listed the parish asIckleford in error.[28]Exclaves of Shillington, Bedfordshire, in Hertfordshire. (Historic County Borders Project)
The part of the township ofTetworth (in the ancient parish ofEverton) inBedfordshire,[29] This entry is not in the 1832 schedule. A single irregularly-shaped field by the north-west corner of the southern exclave of the township inHuntingdonshire, north of Biggin Wood moated site, was transferred toHuntingdonshire.[30][31]
The part of the parish ofFarndish in Northamptonshire.[35] This entry is not in the 1832 schedule. Divided parish, not an exclave or salient. However, before the parish wasenclosed in 1800, itsopen field system had its field strips shared out among the two counties in an extremely complicated manner. The Enclosure Act rationalised the boundary and left no exclaves.[4]
The parts of the parish ofMeppershall inHertfordshire. Three enclaves, the largest containing a small counter-exclave of Bedfordshire. The village was divided between the two counties.[36]
The part of the divided parish ofInglesham in Berkshire, transferred toWiltshire. This included a salient which was inaccessible from the rest of the county. The action also abolished a small exclave ofWiltshire, including the parish church.[37] The 1832 schedule had swapped the county names by mistake,[38] and so the 1832 Act left the parliamentary boundary alone -including the exclave.[39]
Thetownship ofLittle Faringdon and part of that of Langford proper (both in the ancient parish ofLangford), exclave transferred toOxfordshire. The 1832 schedule listed these separately, the former as atithing.Shalbourne salient of Berkshire, briefly in Wiltshire 1844 (Historic County Borders Project)
The part of the parish ofShalbourne including the tithing ofOxenwood in Berkshire, transferred toWiltshire. This entry is not in the 1832 schedule. It referred to a salient, not an exclave.[40] Oxenwood was included in the 1844 Act by mistake, as it was erroneously reported as an exclave. The relevant Order was cancelled after the error was pointed out. The salient was only annexed byWiltshire in 1895.[40][25]
The greater part of the parish ofShilton in Berkshire, transferred toOxfordshire. The parish had an exclave comprising a 7-acre (2.8 ha) meadow next to theRiver Windrush south-east ofWitney, which was already in Oxfordshire.[41]
Transferred from other counties:
The parts of the parochial chapelry ofHurst (in the ancient parish of Sonning) inWiltshire. Four exclaves, one large and three atTwyford two of the latter being tiny.[citation needed]
The part of the parish ofWokingham inWiltshire, including the east end of the town with its parish church. This exclave joined to the large Hurst exclave via an isthmus the width of a road.[citation needed]
The parish ofCaversfield, transferred toOxfordshire. Had two satellite exclaves, including half of the village ofStratton Audley (see below). These were transferred to the parish of Stratton Audley in 1888.[43]
The parts of the so-called chapelry ofStratton Audley in Buckinghamshire transferred toOxfordshire.[44] Beforeenclosure, in 1770 the parish of Stratton Audley had anopen-field system the strips of which were divided between itself andCaversfield in a complicated manner, and the county boundary followed this. Enclosure consolidated the latter's share as two exclaves.[3] The 1832 schedule listed these as the "Chapelry of Stratton Audley", although there was never a chapel separate from the parish church.[17]
The township ofStudley (in the ancient parish ofBeckley) in Buckinghamshire, transferred toOxfordshire. Divided parish, not an exclave or a salient, and this township did not include the village of the same name which was in the adjacentOxfordshire township of Horton-cum-Studley.[45] The township used to havecommoners' rights onOtmoor in Oxfordshire, which had beenenclosed in 1815. The commoners disputed this, hence the so-called "Otmoor Riots" 1829–30. The transfer of Studley put the inhabitants under the authority of the Oxfordshire magistrates who were in charge of suppressing these.[46]
The part of the parish ofBridgerule in Cornwall, transferred toDevon. This entry is not in the 1832 schedule. Divided parish, neither an exclave nor a salient. Approximately equal in size to the disputed territory ofNorth Tamerton listed below.[47]
The part of the parish ofMaker inDevon. Two enclaves, one of which was disputed with the adjacent parish ofSt John which the 1832 schedule hence listed separately[48]
The part of the parish ofNorth Tamerton inDevon, allegedly. Neither an exclave nor a salient. The Ordnance Survey First Series in 1809[49] showed the county boundary here as it is now, but "Returns from Clerks of the Peace of Insulated Parcels of Land" to the House of Commons in 1825 had the Clerk for Devon report that the portion of the parish east of the Tamar was in theBlack Torrington Hundred of Devon. His counterpart in Cornwall did not concur. The 1844 Act was used to settle a boundary dispute.[50]
The part of the township ofBeard in the parish ofGlossop on theCheshire side of theRiver Goyt was declared to be inDerbyshire – its previous status was uncertain. Divided township, not an exclave. The Act was used to settle a boundary dispute involving a set of fields just south of what is nowNew Mills.[51]
The part of the parish ofMaker inDevon, transferred toCornwall. Two enclaves, one of which was disputed with the adjacent parish ofSt John which the 1832 schedule hence listed separately[48]
The part of the parish ofNorth Tamerton inDevon, allegedly. Neither an exclave nor a salient. The Ordnance Survey First Series in 1809[49] showed the county boundary here as it is now, but "Returns from Clerks of the Peace of Insulated Parcels of Land" to the House of Commons in 1825 had the Clerk for Devon report that the portion of the parish east of the Tamar was in theBlack Torrington Hundred of Devon. His counterpart in Cornwall did not concur. The 1844 Act was used to settle a boundary dispute.[50]Pair of Devon and Dorset exclaves, exchanged in the Act. (Historic County Borders Project
The parish ofThorncombe transferred toDorset, exclave also including the tithing of Beerhall and Easthay, a parish exclave belonging toAxminster.[52] The 1832 schedule listed Thorncombe and Axminster (detached) separately.
Transferred from other counties:
The part of the parish ofBridgerule in Cornwall, transferred toDevon. This entry is not in the 1832 schedule. Divided parish, neither an exclave nor a salient. Approximately equal in size to the disputed territory ofNorth Tamerton listed above.[47]
The parish ofThorncombe transferred toDorset, exclave also including the tithing of Beerhall and Easthay, a parish exclave belonging toAxminster.[52] The 1832 schedule listed Thorncombe and Axminster (detached) separately.
Monks' House, an extra-parochial territory of 0.6 acres (0.24 ha) atBamburgh and an exclave of Islandshire hence treated with it as a single legal issue. It had functioned as a mainland port for the monks living on Inner Farne, being donated for this purpose in 1257 byKing Henry III.[53] Transferred to Northumberland.[54]
Norhamshire (the ancient parish ofNorham) transferred toNorthumberland. Made one exclave with Islandshire, above, but treated by the Act as a separate legal issue.
The township of Lea Lower (in the parish ofLea) in Gloucestershire, transferred toHerefordshire. The parish had three townships, the others being Lea Upper and Lea Bailey.[55]
The township of Church Icomb in the parish ofIcomb (older spelling Iccomb) inWorcestershire, transferred toGloucestershire to join the township already in the latter county called Westward Icomb. The village had been divided between the two.[57]
The hamlet of Bwlch Trewyn (in the parish ofCwmyoy), transferred toMonmouthshire. A salient, not an exclave. The actual exclave in this parish was called Fwddog, and was only transferred in 1891.[58]
The township of Lea Lower (in the parish ofLea) in Gloucestershire, transferred toHerefordshire. The parish had three townships, the others being Lea Upper and Lea Bailey.[55]
The parts of the parish ofMeppershall in Hertfordshire, transferred toBedfordshire. Three exclaves, the largest containing a small counter-exclave of Bedfordshire. The village was divided between the two counties.[36]
Transferred from other counties:
The parts of the parish ofShillington ofBedfordshire isolated inHertfordshire, transferred to the latter. There were five small exclaves in fields ofPirton next toOughtonhead Common, the largest being of very irregular shape and another containing a counter-exclave of Hertfordshire. A sixth contained Shillington Mill atIckleford.[6][7] The 1832 schedule listed the parish asIckleford in error.[28]
The part of the township ofTetworth (in the parish ofEverton) inBedfordshire,[29] comprising a single irregularly-shaped field in the north-west corner of the southern exclave of the township inHuntingdonshire, north of Biggin Wood. Transferred toHuntingdonshire. This entry is not in the 1832 schedule.[30][31] (Tetworth, which became a separatecivil parish, remained in two distinct parts, one of which was an exclave ofHuntingdonshire until 1965.)
The hamlet of Bwlch Trewyn (in the parish ofCwmyoy), transferred fromHerefordshire. (A salient, not an exclave. The actual exclave in the parish was called Fwddog, and the mistake was only rectified with its transfer in 1891.)[62]
The part of the parish ofFarndish in Northamptonshire, transferred toBedfordshire.[35] This entry is not in the 1832 schedule. Divided parish, not an exclave or salient. However, before the parish wasenclosed in 1800, itsopen field system had its field strips shared out among the two counties in an extremely complicated manner. The Enclosure Act rationalised the boundary and left no exclaves.[4]
Monks' House, an extra-parochial territory of 0.6 acres (0.24 ha) atBamburgh and an exclave of Islandshire. It had functioned as a mainland port for the monks living on Inner Farne, being donated for this purpose in 1257 byKing Henry III.[53] Transferred fromCounty Durham.[54]
The parish ofCaversfield inBuckinghamshire. Had two satellite exclaves, including half of the village ofStratton Audley (see below). These were transferred to the parish of Stratton Audley in 1888.[43]
The greater part of the parish ofShilton in Berkshire. The parish had an exclave comprising a 7-acre (2.8 ha) meadow next to theRiver Windrush south-east ofWitney, which was already in Oxfordshire.[41]
The part of the so-called chapelry ofStratton Audley in Buckinghamshire transferred toOxfordshire.[44] Beforeenclosure, in 1770 the parish of Stratton Audley had anopen-field system the strips of which were divided between itself andCaversfield in a complicated manner, and the county boundary followed this. Enclosure consolidated the latter's share as two exclaves.[3] The 1832 schedule listed these as the "Chapelry of Stratton Audley", although there was never a chapel separate from the parish church.[17]
The township ofStudley (in the ancient parish ofBeckley) in Buckinghamshire, transferred toOxfordshire. Divided parish, not an exclave or a salient, and this township did not include the village of the same name which was in the adjacentOxfordshire township of Horton-cum-Studley.[45] The township used to havecommoners' rights onOtmoor in Oxfordshire, which had beenenclosed in 1815. The commoners disputed this, hence the so-called "Otmoor Riots" 1829–30. The transfer of Studley put the inhabitants under the authority of the Oxfordshire magistrates who were in charge of suppressing these.[46]
Dudley, shown on an 1814 map as being an exclave ofWorcestershire locally situated inStaffordshire. Note also the exclave ofShropshire atHalesowen, abolished by this Act.The ancient parish of Halesowen was an exclave of Shropshire. (Historic County Borders Project)
The part of the parish ofShinfield inWiltshire. Twoexclaves. The larger contained the hamlets ofSwallowfield andRiseley, the smaller that ofFarley Hill.[42]Exclaves of Wiltshire (lilac) near Reading, Berkshire. (Historic County Borders Project)
The part of the parish ofWokingham inWiltshire, including the east end of the town with its parish church. Thisexclaves joined to the large Hurstexclaves via an isthmus the width of a road.[citation needed]
Transferred from other counties:
The part of the divided parish ofInglesham in Berkshire. This included a salient which was inaccessible from the rest of that county. The action also abolished a small exclave ofWiltshire, including the parish church.[37] The 1832 schedule had swapped the county names by mistake,[38] and so the 1832 Act left the parliamentary boundary alone -including the exclave.[39]
Part of the parish ofShalbourne including the tithing ofOxenwood in Berkshire, transferred toWiltshire only in 1895 -this was a salient, not anexclave.[40] Oxenwood was included in the 1844 Act by mistake, as it was erroneously listed as an exclave. The relevant Order was cancelled after the error was pointed out.[40][25]
The township of Church Icomb in the parish ofIcomb (older spelling Iccomb) inWorcestershire, transferred toGloucestershire to join the township already in the latter county called Westward Icomb. The village had been divided between the two.[57]
^abThe citation of this Act by this short title was authorised by theShort Titles Act 1896, section 1 and the first schedule. Due to the repeal of those provisions it is now authorised by section 19(2) of theInterpretation Act 1978.
^The Statutes of the United Kingdom Vols 30, 34 1832 p. 816ff.
^Census Office (2 April 1833)."Irregularities of Boundary of the Several Counties in England and Wales".Abstract of the Answers and Returns Made Pursuant to an Act Passed in the Eleventh Year of the Reign of His Majesty King George IV, Intituled, "An Act for Taking an Account of the Population of Great Britain, and of the Increase Or Diminution Thereof" 1831; Volume 2. Sessional papers. Vol. HC 1833 XXXVI (149). pp. 1064–1067.
^Parliamentary Boundaries Act 1832, 2 & 3 Will. 4 c. 64;Section XXVI for general rule andSchedule M for list of the parts affected.
^abOrdnance Survey 6 inch sheet Cambridgeshire XLIV SE 1883
^The Counties of Bedford and Hertford (Caddington, &c.) Order 1897. This order also created the parish ofMarkyate, which is presumably why some sources incorrectly say that the detached part of Whipsnade became part of Markyate. However, the 1897 order itself says that the "...isolated and detached part of the Parish of Whipsnade shall cease to form part of that Parish and shall be amalgamated with the Parish of Flamstead...", with subsequent Ordnance Survey maps showing that the detached part of Whipsnade did thereafter become part of Flamstead.
^The Statutes of the United Kingdom Vols 30, 34 1832 p. 816,
^ab"GIS boundary datasets created by the project".Cambridge Group for the History of Population and Social Structure.University of Cambridge. Retrieved25 April 2017.boundary and attribute data for the counties of Scotland as given in the 1851 census ... represents the counties of Scotland as they were before the boundary changes caused by Inverness and Elgin County Boundaries Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 16) and the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 50) which eliminated the detached portions of counties.
Moule, Thomas (1836)Moule's English Counties in the 19th century, London: Simpkin & Marshall, republished (1990) asThe County Maps of Old England by Thomas Moule, London: Studio Editions Ltd,ISBN1-85170-403-5
Youngs, Frederic A. (1979)Guide to the local administrative units of England, Vol. 1: Southern England, Royal Historical Society, Guides and handbooks no. 10., London : University College,ISBN0-901050-67-9
Youngs, Frederic A. (1991)Guide to the local administrative units of England, Vol. 2: Northern England, Royal Historical Society, Guides and handbooks no. 17., London : University College,ISBN0-86193-127-0
.svg)
