North Queensferry School – pre WWII Air Raid Precautions
< Previous – North Queensferry School in World War I
Air Raid Precautions – gas masks, air-raid shelters, evacuation plans, and barrage balloons
By the late 1930’s the threat of war was creeping ever closer, and the advances in air-power meant that the coming war would affect civilians as much as the military.
This became harsh reality on April 26, 1937 when German bombers destroyed the sleepy Spanish market town of Guernica.
In 1938 the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain placed Sir John Anderson in charge of Air Raid Precautions (A.R.P.) – gas masks, air-raid shelters and evacuation plans.
On 29th September 1938, gas masks were distributed all of the children at North Queensferry School
There were 76 children on the roll at this time.
Anderson was also in charge of air-raid shelters. There were two schools of thought on this matter. Should the government build large centralized underground “bomb-proof” shelters or provide small distributed “blast-proof” shelters?
The problems with large shelters are the time taken to reach them and crowds to enter them, and the horrific consequences if a large shelter is breached by a direct hit.
The Anderson Shelter
Anderson’s solution was a small, inexpensive air raid shelter that people could build in their garden. The first Anderson shelter was built in a garden in Islington, London on February 25, 1939. They were supplied free of charge to those earning less than £250 a year, those with a higher income, paid £7.
Over 1.5 million Anderson shelters were given out before the start of WW2 to people in areas that were at risk of being bombed by the Germans, with a further 2.1 million built during the war.
Anderson shelters could hold up to six people and were very easy to build from six corrugated steel panels that were curved and bolted together at the top. They were buried up to a meter in the ground, with a thick layer of soil and turf on top to keep them secure. The corrugated sheets made them strong against compressive force providing protection from nearby bomb explosions. They were provided in kit form with full instructions.
An Anderson shelter
Anderson shelter instructions.
The shelter was assembled in a hole to be dug 7½ feet long, 6 feet wide by 3 to 4 feet deep
Problems with installing Anderson Shelters
However Anderson Shelters were not a universal solution. Not everyone had a garden. Building on a shared garden or common land required consent of all the land-owners, which could be a bureaucratic nightmare. And some areas did not have suitable geology – for instance North Queensferry.
The issue of the situation in North Queensferry was raised in May 1939
EDINBURGH EVENING NEWS, WEDNESDAY, MAY 3, 1939
NORTH QUEENSFERRY’S POSITION
AUTHORITIES URGED TO TAKE ACTION
In view of the fact that North Queensferry is situated almost under the Forth Bridge, and in close proximity to Rosyth Dockyard and other naval and military establishments which, in the event of war, are likely to become objects of special attack by high explosive bombs, and that a Fife A.R.P. official, after a brief examination, has advised that only splinter-proof shelters should provide protection to the villagers, who are urged not to use the deep and efficient mineral railway situated close to the village, a public meeting was held at which it was decided to urge that the Fife or other competent A.R.P. authority should have a more thorough investigation made on the spot, and that if the authorities are then satisfied that a special danger exists at North Queensferry, they should meet such danger either by (a) arranging immediately for the evacuation of the population in whole or part on the outbreak of hostilities or (b) in other ways ensuring adequate protection to the people of North Queensferry.
EDINBURGH EVENING NEWS, WEDNESDAY, MAY 24 1939
POLITICAL NOTES
A.R.P. DEFECTS IN NORTH QUEENSFERRY
MR GALLACHER AND A TUNNEL
(From our Lobby Correspondent)
Westminster, Wednesday Morning
Alleged “grave dissatisfaction” in North Queensferry at the refusal of the authorities to make adequate provision for air raid precautions is mentioned by Mr W, Gallacher, Communist MP,. in a protest he has made to Sir John Anderson, Lord Privy Seal/
Mr Gallacher points out that North Queensferry is likely to be a particularly vulnerable spot if time of war. He complains that an air raid precaution official has declared that only splinter-proof shelters are required in the village. Mr Gallacher suggests to the Lord Privy Seal that there is a deep and efficient mineral railway tunnel nearby which could be adapted to A.R.P. purposes. He also proposes that arrangements should be made for the evacuation of the whole or part of the population of North Queensferry on the outbreak of hostilities.
Sir John has ordered an investigation.
The Fife Free Press, Saturday May 27, 1939
NORTH QUEENSFERRY WANTS
MORE PROTECTION
QUESTIONS IN PARLIAMENT
Mr Gallacher (West Fife) asked the Lord Privy Seal, in the Commons on Thursday, whether he was aware of the grave dissatisfaction in North Queensferry, a particularly vulnerable spot in the event of air raids at the refusal of the authorities to make adequate provision for air raid precautions, that an air-raid precautions official had declared that only splinter-proof shelters are required in the village and that attempts had been made to dissuade from the use of a deep and efficient mineral tunnel situated nearby for air raid precaution purposes.
He also asked whether he would arrange a more thorough examination to be made on the spot with a view to arranging for the evacuation of North Queensferry in whole or part on the outbreak of hostilities and other means of ensuring protection to the people of North Queensferry.
Sir John Anderson – North Queensferry is included in the areas in which the Government’s shelter policy will be applied in full, but I have hot had referred to me any proposals for special arrangements for shelter in this area, nor any statement of the ground on which it might be urged that such special provision is required.
Mr Gallacher said that North Queensferry lay at the north end of the Forth Bridge and would be in a most serious danger in wartime. There was a very deep dissatisfaction at the lack of arrangements for deep shelters. He asked if the Minister would arrange for one of his officers to visit the area with him (Mr Gallacher) when he was there on Tuesday.
Sir John – I will see if that is practicable. I must look to the local authority in the first place to make representations on the subject.
EDINBURGH EVENING NEWS,
THURSDAY JUNE 8, 1939
A.R.P. AT NORTH QUEENSFERRY
Mr W Gallacher, the Communist Member for West Fife, has written Sir John Anderson regarding the A.R.P. arrangements being made for North Queensferry. In this letter Mr Gallacher points out that he visited North Queensferry for the purpose of discussing the measures necessary to provide protection for the inhabitants in the event of war and air raids. He explains that the only shelter provision available is the regulation steel shelter, but as North Queensferry is built on rock with only a thin surface of soil, it is impossible to sink these shelters. In many cases, he says, people are luck if they have three inches of soil.
Mr Gallacher has also protested to the Minister that North Queensferry is not being treated as part of an evacuation area. “I can scarcely believe this to be true,” he writes “but they assure me that there is to be no evacuation for the women and children of the village.”
ROCK TUNNELS
Mr Gallacher proceeds to argue that advantage ought to be taken of the quarry in the cleared space in the village which rises up to a height of 80 to 100 feet. A series of short tunnels cut in this rock face would, says Mr Gallacher, provide easily accessible and exceptionally safe shelters.
He adds that if this was carried out the danger to local inhabitants would be reduced to a minimum.
Discussions in Parliament
On 12th June 1939, the House of Commons held a six hour debate on “the Powers Of Local Authorities To Construct Underground Shelters And Other Premises Required For Civil Defence Purposes.”
Topics included:
The pros and cons of deep underground shelters v small Anderson shelters were discussed
How to balance the need to act quickly while avoiding legal issues over land ownership.
The proposed legislation only gave local authorities the power to construct a shelter, but not to maintain it. A landowner could remove the walls or roof.
Should vulnerable populations be evacuated?
Did Anderson shelters provide better protection than deep shelters in the event of a gas attack?
How should local conditions be taken into account in a national policy?
You can read the full text here: Parliament – Underground-shelters – 12th June 1939
The outcome of the deliberations was the Civil Defence Act 1939
Willie Gallacher, the Communist Party MP for West Fife raised the North Queensferry issue:
. . . I would direct the attention of the Minister to the position of North Queensferry, which, as I have mentioned very often, is built on rock at the base of the north end of the Forth Bridge. Two miles away there is Rosyth naval base, three miles on the other side is the new aerodrome factory at Donibristle, and there is a great munitions dump at Crombie near Dunfermline. In fact, all round the area there are great munitions dumps stretching to Grangemouth.
On the outskirts of the village there is a railway tunnel which runs through the rock. It could shelter 1,000 people, and, with the women and children evacuated, everyone who was left could be sheltered in that tunnel. If nothing is done and an air raid should take place, the people will naturally make for that tunnel. They will have to go down the railway embankment. Only about six trains a week pass through that tunnel, which is not really in much use. It is an old railway siding.
The leading people in the village are very concerned about the lack of preparation in connection with defence, and they consider and discuss the question of the tunnel. Colonel Wincole, who was taking the place of the lad who had gone on holiday to Canada, went to look over the situation. He was taken through the tunnel by Dr. Brock, of North Queensferry. He has prepared a report, a copy of which has been sent to the Minister.
What is the first thing he says? In order to carry out the desires of the Minister that there should be no discussion of bomb-proof shelters, the first thing he says is that North Queensferry is not a vulnerable area. Not a vulnerable area, with the Forth Bridge there, the Rosyth naval base, munition areas, munition dumps and aircraft centres!
The report says that in order to get to the tunnel it is necessary to go up a very high hill, that the crowd would rush up the hill and become completely exhausted, and then there would be a panic. Imagine an exhausted panic. What would it be like?
The significant thing about it is that this high hill has nothing whatever to do with the tunnel, because it is not on the road to the tunnel.
That report is from the military expert who went to have a look at the place. How are the people to get the question of deep bomb-proof shelters considered if the Department act on the process of digging military men out of the moth-eaten lumber room and putting them in charge of defence?
The report also says that if the people ran down the railway embankment they might sprain their ankles. Therefore, I suppose they had better stay on the top and have their heads blown off. Would it not be a simple matter to make a pathway along the railway embankment to the tunnel?
Everything has been done to throw cold water on the efforts of those concerned to get this question properly dealt with.
It is not only a question of the tunnel. In the vicinity of the village there is a great rock face 80 to 100 feet high, and there is an old quarry which is now covered with grass. Within a minute of almost any part of the village is this great rock face. Is it not possible at the base of that rock face to cut a series of short tunnels that would give adequate and effective bomb-proof shelters for the people?
According, however, to the Hailey Report if there is not a rock foundation of that sort in another area you cannot use it in North Queensferry. In other words, you must not give this protection in North Queensferry if you cannot give similar protection to people in another area.
That is why the military experts who have been to North Queensferry pooh-pooh the whole idea of bomb-proof shelters of this particular kind. They will not make use of the tunnel, nor will they consider the question of making use of new tunnels in the rock face there. As a consequence of this attitude there is the greatest feeling of disquiet among the people, not only in North Queensferry, but all over the area, because they are also affected by the situation in that area if a war should break out.
There are many men in this district who have taken positions of air-raid wardens and are giving up their time and spending money going here and there at their own expense, and they feel that the attitude of the Government is such that their time, energy and money are being wasted.
I have drawn attention to the fact that what they are faced with is the provision of blast-proof kennels that have to be sunk three feet. There is no soil in North Queensferry. There is the solid rock, with the thinnest surface of soil, not more than three inches deep, and in some places not an inch deep.
Therefore, these people feel that in view of the situation that may possibly develop with attacks on the Forth Bridge, on the aeroplane factory, on the Rosyth Naval base and on the munition dumps, with bombs dropping and guns blasting in reply, it would be a terrible situation; yet because of the policy of the Government every effort is made to minimise the danger to the extent that the women and children are not to be evacuated from North Queensferry, and no bomb-proof shelters are to be provided.
I wish the Minister would go up and have a look around the district and see the situation that confronts the people. I asked him to send someone while I was visiting there, but, unfortunately, it was not possible to do so. If a representative of the Minister’s Department went there the right hon. Gentleman would have a much better report than the report of Colonel Wincole, which has made a very bad impression upon the inhabitants of the area.
It is obvious that he did not pay any attention to the situation. He does not understand the modern conditions under which a war would take place. I cannot understand why it is that men who have had their military training long before the War are being used to deal with a situation where the whole technique of war has changed, and who cannot understand what Civil Defence means.
As one who has been interested in the protection of people from air attack right from the beginning, I make my appeal to the Minister. I think it will be found that every step taken towards an advance in the understanding of this problem on the part of the Minister has come originally from this side of the House, and it is so on this particular question.
While I am deeply interested in the protection of the people against air attack, I am not interested in National Service. As I said on another occasion, it is one thing to force a rotten Government to give service to the people, but it is an entirely different thing to try and force the people to give service to a rotten Government. Therefore, while I am not for National Service I am for air-raid protection to the fullest extent, and I demand of the Minister that he should give serious consideration to this question of bomb-proof shelters.
I appeal to him to make a practical test. Let him send a representative of his Department to North Queensferry to study the situation and the danger that will menace the people there, and to consider what nature has provided for the giving of adequate shelter to the people, and on the basis of that report I am certain that he would finish with the Hailey principle that if we cannot give adequate protection to all we will give adequate protection to none. While it is our duty to try to our utmost to give adequate protection to all who are subject to similar dangers, let us see to it that we give protection to the maximum number of people when and where it is possible for us to give that protection.
[The debate continued, with other MPs discussing potential local solutions.]
EDINBURGH EVENING NEWS, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 28 1939
POLITICAL NOTES
A.R.P. ARRANGEMENTS AT NORTH QUEENSFERRY
SEQUEL TO A COMPLAINT
(From Our Lobby Correspondent)
Westminster, Wednesday Morning
I understand that Sir John Anderson has instructed his chief Scottish A.R.P. representative, Mr D. Penman, Regional Technical Officer, Edinburgh, to have an interview with Mr W. Gallacher, M.P., and Mr Watson, M.P., regarding the situation at North Queensferry and Inverkeithing. The meeting will take place some time this week-end.
Recently Mr Gallacher wrote Sir John Anderson criticising the inadequate arrangements made for North Queensferry and drawing his attention to the protests made by the A.R.P. wardens of Inverkeithing. One of Mr Gallacher’s suggestions was that bomb-proof shelters should be created by tunnelling into the rock that arises from the old quarry site at North Queensferry.
Evacuation
Another Air Raid precautions was the Government Evacuation Scheme developed during the summer of 1938 by the Anderson Committee and implemented by the Ministry of Health.
The country was divided into zones, classified as either “evacuation”, “neutral”, or “reception”, with priority evacuees being moved from the major urban centres and billeted on the available private housing in more rural areas. Each zone covered roughly a third of the population, although several urban areas later bombed had not been classified for evacuation.
In early 1939, the reception areas compiled lists of available housing, and the government also constructed camps which provided a few thousand additional spaces.
The government began to publicise its plan through the local authorities in summer 1939; Operation Pied Piper began on 1 September 1939, before war was declared. Approximately 1.5 million people were relocated.
The Evacuated Children Of The Second World War | Imperial War Museums (iwm.org.uk)
Evacuations of civilians in Britain during World War II – Wikipedia
There were several debates in Parliament about the success and otherwise of the evacuation plans. They give interesting insights into life at that time.
Parliament – Evacuation – 24th October 1939
Parliament – Civil Defence And Evacuation – 2nd November 1939
Parliament – Scottish Education And Evacuation – 21st November 1939
North Queensferry was in a neutral zone. However, when the village school closed for the summer vacation on 7th July 1939, it remained closed for more than three years before opening again in November 1942, because it was occupied by the military.
< Previous – North Queensferry School in World War I
> Next – North Queensferry School, WWII Occupation and Evacuation
top of page