In common with business rivals, the aftermath of the Great War posed problems for Knottingley brewery as alternative leisure activities such as spectator sports and a range of public entertainment's freed from wartime restrictions, were revived.

In addition to previously well-established forms of public entertainment was the development of cinema. Before 1914 the form had largely been a novelty with public showings in improvised settings. At Knottingley, for instance, regular performances of silent films were given at the Town Hall and the Congregational Chapel Rooms during the first decade of the twentieth century. The value of the medium as a draw to boost custom was not lost on James Holgate, licensee of Carters' Wagon & Horses Inn, Aire Street, where weekly performances featured during the years 1908-12. By the time the Inn was rebuilt in 1912 not only had concern for public safety in improvised settings resulted in the West Riding County Council refusing to licence public houses for performances but the development of cinema in general had promoted the construction of a myriad purpose-built cinemas, the Palace Cinema, Knottingley, also being built in 1912. (1)

During the four ensuing decades the increasingly sophisticated programme content and technical innovations and refinements reinforced the threat of the cinema to the licensed trade leaving publicans to attract cinemagoers as supplemental customers.

By the 1930s a proliferation of milk bars, ice-cream parlours and coffee bars, influenced by temperance propaganda and the almost subliminal psychological adoption of American lifestyle promoted by widespread exposure to imported films, had introduced additional rivalry to public house attendance.

Parallel to the development of cinema was experimentation with radio transmission, resulting in the establishment of the British Broadcasting Corporation in 1922. The introduction of home entertainment through the medium of the public broadcast further affected attendance at licensed premises. Here, however, a beneficial element was forthcoming as off licence premises and 'jug and bottle' outsales served domestic consumption, boosting the trend for bottled beer as home market consumption increased from 10% in 1920 to 20% by 1939. (2)

The growth in the number of off licence outlets was accompanied by the expansion of the club trade. While retail prices in general fell in the immediate post war period, the retention of high levels of excise duty and taxes on ales, wine and spirits placed public houses at a disadvantage in comparative pricing with workingmens' clubs. In addition, the later offered entertainment and social activities either denied to pubs or beyond their organisational scope, thus presenting them with further competition. The trend is evident at Knottingley where by the mid-1920s the number of workingmens' clubs increased from one to four. (3)

Underlining the adversity of the licensed trade was the estimated loss of 0.7 million potential customers as a result of the death toll during the late war while for the best part of a decade from the mid-1920s a deepening economic depression brought mass unemployment and poverty, particularly to the industrial area which was a feature of the customer base for the wares produced by Knottingley brewery. (4)

At a local level, although the development had general application in semi-urban areas, was the adoption of a public housing policy by Knottingley Urban District Council. Early day minor schemes at Forge Hill and Womersley Road led to the development of large estates at Broomhill and England Lane from 1928 and although a hiatus ensued in consequence renewal of warfare in 1939, the onset of the housing development carried adverse socio-economic implications for local licensees.

The developing centres of population were located on greenfield sites to the south of the town, situated well beyond the traditional centres of population such as Aire Street, Racca Green, Hill Top and their environs, well served by public houses. A physical gap arising from rehousing increasingly eroded the customer base of local licensed premises which was initially only modified to an extent by the absence of new inns to serve the inhabitants of the new estates.

The situation at Knottingley between the wars was a microcosm of that facing the licensed trade generally, presenting challenges, some aspects of which were unique, and demanding a response, the success of which was vital to the economic viability and therefore long-term survival of the brewery company.

To counter the prevailing situation the immediate post war priority adopted by the Company was the improvement of standards with particular attention to the design and location of public houses.

Late in 1921 a triangular plot of land some 2000 square yards in extent located at Holywell Lane at its junction with Redhill Road, was purchased from Mr D. Bland for £200. The site was chosen for the erection of a new inn to catch the passing trade and serve the council house development forming the new village of Airedale. (5) A successful licence application was made in February 1922, the monopoly value being fixed at £3,600, and the following January the Licensing Justices visited the site and although the premises, named as the Airedale Hotel, were not quite completed, allowed a portion of the inn to open to the public immediately. (6)

The Airedale development set the pattern for the purchase of other greenfield sites in areas earmarked for housing estates. In March 1922 a plot of land 2120 square yards in size at South Kirkby was purchased for £400 from Mr J.E. Thornley and a full licence was granted for a new hotel in February 1923, the monopoly value being fixed at £4,000. (7) The tender of William Horner, a Pontefract builder was accepted at an estimated cost of £6,276-12-6 but with the inclusion of a penalty clause in the contract of £15 per day if the hotel was not completed by the 11th July 1923, the Company having obtained the licence on the assurance that the premises would be open for trade at the end of a three month period of construction. (8)

In June 1922 land was also purchased at Baghill Lane, Pontefract, from the Trustees of the National Schools in anticipation of housing development in the surrounding area. (9) The extent of the Baghill purchase far exceeded the immediate requirement of the Company and may have been made to forestall an approach from a rival brewery chain for the following April 286 square yards of the land was sold to Mrs H.A. Taylor of Pontefract for £50 on condition that the site was used solely for the erection of a dwelling house and that no shop or outlet for the sale of intoxicating liquor should be erected on site. (10)

The construction of the proposed Willow Park Hotel at the top of Baghill Lane did not, however, take place immediately for a temporary expedient in the form of an off licence outlet to serve

"the new village of Baghill, Pontefract"

was granted by the Borough Magistrates on the 9th March 1923 (11) but long after the opening of the Willow Park Hotel in 1927 parcels of Company owned land adjoining the hotel were being sold. A further land purchase in July 1923 was at Westfield Lane, South Elmsall, where 2073 square yards of land was purchased from the representatives of Frickley Miners' Welfare as the site for the new Westfield Hotel. (12)

Speculative land purchases were often made to provide sites for new licensed houses which for reasons of cost, refusal to obtain licences or reconsideration of site potential never came to fruition. In 1925 two houses at Featherstone were bought with the intention to demolish them and utilise the land as the site of a new public house at a proposed cost of £850 but for unstated reasons the scheme was abandoned. (13) Simultaneously, in response to a suggestion by the Licensing Justices, a greenfield site was purchased at Womersley Road, Knottingley, for £400. A new inn was planned to serve the proposed council house estate at Broomhill, the licence from the old Greyhound Inn at Weeland Road, Knottingley, being transferred to the new premises. Again, the plan was abandoned, perhaps because of delay in the commencement of the housing development which only commenced in 1927, the licence of the Greyhound Inn being refused in March of that year followed by the closure of the premises. (14)

A further site purchased without immediate recourse to its utility was the six acres at Upton situated at the edge of the "new village" adjoining the colliery site. Acquired in February 1926 at a cost of £600, the land was purchased with the proviso that it

"be suitably fenced as the [adjoining] land is developed." (15)

Deferred development for whatever reason occasionally proved to be advantageous to the company. In 1927 the company decided not to proceed immediately with the erection of a new hotel on a site at Minsthorpe Lane, South Kirkby, on grounds of cost. However, in 1931, despite the deepening national economic crisis a decision was taken to implement the original plan. The board was motivated by the awareness that the depression had driven down prices. An estimated cost of £3,100 compared favourably with that of £8,750 in 1927, while monopoly value of £3,500 was reduced to £1,700 by 1931. (16) Given such favourable financial circumstances the risky decision was taken to commence building before the next licensing sessions and before a name had been formulated for the new hotel. Fortunately no hiccup occurred, (perhaps because the influential T.J. Sides had been given permission for the go ahead on the nod?) and the belatedly named Minsthorpe Hotel was opened on Saturday 11th February 1932. (17) Paradoxically, since the company was suffering the effects of the general depression of trade by this time, the board seem to have decided to take advantage of depressed conditions to spend their way out of adversity for simultaneously with the Minsthorpe Hotel development plans were submitted and approved for new hotels at Upton, Methley Bridge and Goole. (18)

The land at Upton was purchased in 1926 but it was not until six years later that the Greenfield Hotel was erected upon the site. The development was not without problems for in 1934 the proprietors of the Upton Colliery clamed ownership of Green Lane which provided access to the hotel. Locked in an internal legal dispute, the brewery company was reluctant to embark upon an additional and potentially expensive law suit and sought arbitration as a solution. The matter was settled by the Company paying an annual token sum of one shilling in acknowledgement of the right to use Green Lane solely for occupational access. (19)

Correspondence was opened in 1932 between the agent of Lord Mexborough concerning the sale of land at Three Lane Ends, Whitwood, close to Methley Bridge, comprising part of the estate of the Savilles of Methley Hall. A portion of land close to the road junction had recently been sold to Castleford Urban District Council and was earmarked for housing development. (20) The company was approached by the Pontefract architects, Pennington, Taylor & Hustler concerning the possibility of building a public house on the site but sought an assurance that no portion of the proposed development would be offered to a third party to enable the sale of intoxicating liquor. The assurance being given, the Company began initial preparation for the building of new premises.

The ambition of the board outran the financial resources of the company, however, and a proposal was made that the funding of the proposed new hotels should be financed by a loan of £55,000 from the Alliance Insurance Co., Leeds, the loan to be secured against the mortgaging of certain company properties. However, an element within the directorship was alarmed by the size of the Midland Bank overdraft and considered that any loan should be used to pay off the debt which was incurring large bank charges. The debate proved to be academic as the Alliance Insurance Co., rejected the company's application and a subsequent approach to the Midland Bank proved equally unsuccessful. (21) Further difficulties arose when it was subsequently found that the restrictive clause prohibiting the building of a rival sales outlet on the Three Lane Ends site had been omitted from the contract. As a temporary expedient it was agreed to sell the site to T.J. Sides at a profit of £200 on the original purchase price, the company bearing the cost of the transfer fees. The financial manoeuvre, undertaken in May 1932, was accompanied by the temporary sale to Sides of a consignment of Californian barley, both purchases designed to ease the growing financial plight of the company at the maximum period of the national trade depression. (22)

An approach from the legal representative of an estate owner at Eggborough offering land, including the Horse & Jockey public house, the following month had to be disregarded due to the financial straits of the company. A further consideration, however, may have been the acceptance by the company some six months earlier of a site costing £800 for the construction of a new inn at nearby Whitley Bridge. (23)

Early in 1925, the company, seeking to widen its retail base, particularly in areas of urban expansion, purchased a site at Goole known as the Victoria Pleasure Gardens. (24) The Company, aware of the potential customers frequenting the recreation grounds, which also housed the ground leased to Goole Town Football Club, planned to build an inn on the site. However, the plan was thwarted by the Licensing Justices at the Goole Sessions who rejected the application for a licence by five votes to four, leaving the Company with a potential white elephant. (25) In October 1932 the Football Club sought to purchase the football field. The company, wishing to off-load its responsibility, responded by stating that it was unwilling to sell any portion of the recreation grounds but would sell the entire site for £2,000. (26) The Football Club, already in debt to the company for ground rent, was unable to proceed and the Victoria Pleasure Grounds were therefore placed on the open market, Sides being authorised to obtain a minimum price of £2,000 or more if possible. (27) Several offers were made to the company. In April 1933 Sides reported to the board that a Mr Eastham of a firm of solicitors of Market Place, Goole, had made an offer of £1,750. A letter from Mr W. Coward, licensee of the company's Sydney Hotel, Goole, stated that he had overheard several discussions concerning the likely purchase of the recreation grounds. (28) As Eastham's offer was below the asking price it was decided to reject his bid. In this decision the Company was doubtless influenced by the awareness that the solicitor's approach had probably been made on behalf of a third party who would probably make an enhanced offer. If not, the Company optimistically assumed that an alternative purchaser would emerge. In this assumption the board was correct. A letter from a Mr Harlington, secretary of the Goole Athletic Festival Committee, in May 1933, representing a syndicate seeking to purchase the Pleasure Grounds, offered £1,900 for the site. The Company held out for the full price. In so doing they may have been influenced by alternative possibilities for the following month Sides reported that the land had been sold to R.W. & J.H. Barnett, a Hull building firm. (29)

The severity of the company's attitude towards the struggling Goole football club is hard to condone and can only be explained in the context of the company's own financial difficulties. When the tenancy expired on the 6th May 1933 the club sought a renewed option on the ground which was refused unless the club cleared its arrears of rent. (30) Unable to do so, a decision was made by the company to issue a writ to enable it to seize the club's assets. Protracted correspondence between legal parties and delay consequent on administrative upheaval within the company meant that action was postponed until April 1934 when the company resolved to issue a writ for the recovery of rent amounting to £70. (31) In June two committeemen representing the Goole F.C. attended the brewery and the board delegated Sides to meet them and accept £65 in settlement of the arrears. No agreement was reached, however, and it was not until November 1934 that a written offer of £40 was accepted by the company, conditional upon the football club paying the costs incurred by the company. On the 21st January 1935 Sides informed the board that the debt had been paid and the matter was concluded. (32)

Throughout the 1920s the expansion of retail outlets was not confined to the construction of new 'flagship' premises but included the acquisition of additional licensed houses, mainly freehold but in some cases leasehold, and the enlargement and refurbishment of a number of existing properties, to enhance the public image of the company. In January 1923 the leasehold was obtained on the Griffin Inn, Allerton Bywater, Castleford, (33) and in July 1925 the Crown Inn, Darrington and the Shoulder of Mutton Inn, Kirk Smeaton, were added to the company's property portfolio at a cost of £2,500 and £1,300 respectively. (34) Both the inns were situated in rural locations where the exclusively agricultural surroundings and sparse population presented little scope for urban development in sharp contrast to the villages to the south and west of Pontefract where industry, particularly coal mining was simulating demographic expansion and urban development. The purchase of properties such as those above and others to the rural area east and north of Knottingley was principally to provide retail outlets requiring little financial outlay beyond the purchase price and routine maintenance costs, or the acquisition of licences to be used as bargaining chips in negotiations for proposed new premises. In this respect it is interesting to note the effort of the company in April 1923 to obtain the renewal of the licences of the King's head, Beal, and the Junction Inn, Heck, both of which were scheduled by Goole Magistrates for referral to the Compensation Authority. The proposal of the company to spend £200 in making the Beal house safer ensured licence renewal but in the case of the other inn the Justices

"could not be persuaded"

a statement which at once indicates the reluctance of the company to lose the licence and the probable condition of the inn which in the opinion of the magistrates rendered its continuation unnecessary. (35)

In more populace areas money was more readily spent on 'modernisation' of company houses. In April 1924 alterations were undertaken at the Old Hall Inn, Great Houghton and an extra room was added to the Station Hotel, Askern. Plans were also presented and approved for alterations to the Red Lion Inn, Askern. The latter inn was further altered in August 1928. (36) While plans to rebuild the Turk's Head and Pine Apple Inns, Pontefract, were scheduled in January 1920 to "commence forthwith", it was not until July 1924 that the old Turk's Head was demolished and rebuilding commenced with provision for temporary sales in the interim. (37) Temporary service arrangements appear to have been a common feature during the process of construction or rebuilding licensed premises as shown in the case of the Hope & Anchor Inn, Pontefract, in 1892 and the Airedale Hotel and the Minsthorpe Hotel more recently. In December 1924 plans were implemented for the rebuilding of the Pine Apple Inn, Pontefract, while the Gardeners' Arms in the same town was upgraded to a full licence in March the previous year, a monopoly value of £700 confirming its enhanced status. (38)

Amidst the property transactions of the 1920s was one which was to have particular significance early in the following decade, namely the private acquisition and subsequent resale to the company by Sides of a small brewery and two licensed houses at Monk Fryston, a small village situated to the northeast of Knottingley.

The two public houses: the Chequers Inn and the Blue Bell Inn, were respectively located at each end of the picturesque village. Lying mid-way between Leeds and Selby on a main road along which a vast amount of traffic had already developed and was increasing in consequence of the introduction of motorised vehicles and accessibility to the manufactories of the West Riding, both houses offered excellent facilities and were well adapted to business expansion.

The stone built Chequers Inn, was a two storey property with a tiled roof and had a commanding frontage some 58 feet long. Numerous outbuildings were situated in and around a large open yard contiguous to a small brewery at the rear of the inn. The property had an annual rental value of £31-16-0.

The Blue Bell Inn was also stone built with a blue slate roof but was three storeys high and had a 60 foot frontage. A wide range of stone built buildings stood around an open yard which led to a kitchen garden and orchard covering an area some 5000 square yards in extent with an annual rental value of £34. The inns had previously provided a sales outlet for Messrs Berry, proprietors of the small brewery at the rear of the Chequers Inn.

A tiled roofed, brick built building, the brewery consisted of a brew house with bottle store and cellar, having an overhead chamber. An adjacent storage building and cart shed and stables had a hay loft above. The premises were 1500 square yards in extent with an annual rental value of £27-14-0. The combined sale valuation was £7,250. (39)

No reference exists concerning the reason for the sale but the period in general was one in which cash rich breweries absorbed smaller ones in order to expand their retail base. For their part small breweries with a productive capacity less than 1000 barrels annually, were becoming economically unviable and compelled to sell up or close. (40) A further consideration which may have caused difficulty for the original proprietor was the apparent lack of an independent water supply for having obtained the premises Sides negotiated a formal agreement with the trustees of the late Rev. Hemsworth to ensure the supply of water to the properties. (41)

That Sides always had his ear to the ground in order to procure a bargain is not only evident with reference to the Monk Fryston purchase but also with regard to the acquisition of the mineral water factory belonging to Davies & Co., Burton Salmon. The opportunistic and private nature of the purchase is suggested by the fact that the earliest formal reference is a report by Sides to the board in July 1925 in which he expressed his satisfaction with the new plant. (42) That Sides' initiative secured the bottling plant for the Company is seen in the grant of 5% of all profits accruing from the operation of the plant in December 1926 with payment made retrospective from the 1st October 1925, underlying the appreciation of the board. Given the rising demand for bottled beer the additional capacity produced by the bottling plant was a valuable asset to the Company.

From the period of George William Carter's ownership advertising had begun to play an increasingly significant part in fostering the public image of the Knottingley Brewery Co. and its products. Commencing with the formal registration of the company trade mark in 1877, by the following decade the firm had adopted a plethora of low key advertisements. Brightly painted inn signs and drayboards and sandblasted window panes were the most obvious manifestations of the drive for public recognition. Internal features included hand painted mirrors and signs, glass tablets and ash trays, beer mats and printed labels and embossed bottles with paper seals over their stoppers. Such were the features designed to reinforce brand image and public awareness.

Following the establishment of the public limited company in 1892 advertisements featured in the pages of the local press, particularly by the advent of the new century when advertising in general became more prominent. By the 1920s as trade competitiveness intensified advertising of products became essential. Coterminous with this development was the rise of trade exhibitions which featured the award of prestigious prizes, medallions and certificates. Under the aegis of Sides' management regular advertisements were placed in the local papers at this time. An example of Sides' ingenuity in combining the twin aspects of public advertising and trade exhibition is evident in December 1922:

On the referred page was an announcement that the company had been awarded third prize for beers in the Premier Awards Section at the Brewers' Exhibition held at the Town Hall, Islington, London, the previous week. The announcement was followed by a selection of congratulatory telegrams and letters received by the Brewery. The notice concluded by assuring the public that the company's beers were guaranteed free of chemicals and could be supplied wholesale or privately. (43)

A later example illustrates Sides' genius for presenting partial success in a glorified manner. The advertisement announced the participation of the company in the Brewers' Exhibition at London in November 1924 where, although not awarded a medal for their beer the company were one of the Very Highly Commended of the 643 entries for the Certificate & Diploma in the Class VI category. Only three prizes were allotted in that class

"but owing to our Beer being of such high quality we were given the above award."

The advertisement was repeated in subsequent issues of the newspaper. (44)

By the advent of the 1930s the downturn in trade witnessed the adoption of more aggressive marketing. In June 1933 Knottingley brewery, in common with all such businesses, was circularised by the Brewery Society which, based on the previous year's production figures, sought to levy 3d per barrel in order to raise £200,000 for a collective advertising campaign, to which the Company subscribed. (45) However, a similar appeal in October 1934 with the aim of repeating the campaign was discussed and rejected by the company which informed the Brewers' Society that it did not agree with the policy adopted. (46) Clearly, in common with other regional brewers the market pretensions of the company were less ambitious than those of the nationally known breweries. With a budget of at most a few thousand pounds, Knottingley Brewery Co., obviously preferred and was therefore principally geared to local forms of advertising. (47) Not that the company wasn't aware of the necessity to promote its products or flexible in its approach when an opportunity presented itself. Thus in spring 1931 a letter purportedly sent to the company by an off-licence proprietor was used verbatim as an advertisement in the Pontefract Adviser viz:-

“I have promised to supply beer for wedding on Easter Monday and the customer will only have your quarts. The biggest portion of this order is paid for [but] I am having to return the money as I cannot persuade them to take the others.”

The text continued

“Needless to say, the beer was sent [to Bradford]. The extract was received after delivering the goods there 3 days out of 4. Have you tried it? If not please do so.” (48)

When a case of drunkenness was presented at the Pontefract Borough police Court in July 1932, Sides, in his capacity as a local magistrate was on hand to seize the opportunity for publicity, ordering 10,000 copies of a handbill printed for distribution throughout the district stating:



Labels printed by Holmes for Carters' 'Branded' Sherry and a bill payment of twenty-five shillings for six months of regular weekly advertising in the Pontefract Advertiser, the latter running continuously since before 1922, are items recorded within account books which reveal the contribution of the company to the local economy through the medium of advertising. (50) In addition to general advertising material featured within the local press were numerous classified advertisements for job vacancies and sale items and these were frequently inserted within the columns of the Leeds based Yorkshire Post and Evening Post with their wider circulation. (51) Nevertheless, it was only with the advent of the commercial television service in the mid-1950s that saturation coverage was given to the sale of beer and spirits, making low budget, low key advertising of the Knottingley Brewery Co., appear quaint by comparison.

With the trend towards bottled beers and domestic consumption gaining popularity by the 1920s it is unsurprising that company activity concerning the off licence trade also increased at that time. Long before the Great War the company had begun to acquire leaseholds on properties with a view to the establishment of off licence outlets. Such premises were usually located alongside main roads such as the Wakefield - Goole road and in busy urban streets such as Station Lane, Featherstone and Smawthorne Lane, Castleford. (52) From 1920 such outlets were increased. An off licence property was obtained at Low Valley Wombwell in 1920 and in January 1923 one at the junction of Green Lane, Featherstone, was purchased from a Wakefield brewer, Mr Edwin Edey. In 1924 a shop was acquired at Vicar Street, Castleford and a second at Smawthorne Lane was purchased for £800. Ambler Street, Castleford, was a further location obtained in 1924 while the latter half of the decade saw off licence outlets opened at South Kirkby, Carleton, Pontefract, Love Lane, Pontefract, and, rather off beat, Baildon. (53).

An indication of the determination of the Company to promote new off licence outlets is seen in July 1925 when a cottage at Carleton Road, Pontefract, was purchased in order to provide alternative accommodation for the tenant of nearby 86, Carleton Road, to enable his premises to be converted to an off-licence shop. (54)

As late as 1929 the Company was promoting its off licence trade, obtaining a licence in respect of the premises at Love Lane, Pontefract. (55) Not all were commercially successful, however, for in January 1927 dwelling houses and an off licence lock up shop situated in Finkle Street, Pontefract, were sold by auction at the Turk's Head Inn for £635 plus £30 in respect of the valuation fee. (56)

Much effort was expended in opposing the establishment of rival off licences in order to safeguard market share. In April 1924 the Company successfully opposed the grant of a licence to a Mrs Burton of Airedale on behalf of John Smith & Co., Tadcaster Brewery, claiming that the establishment of an off licence would cause loss of trade at the recently opened Airedale Hotel. (57) Ten years later the company was successful in opposing an off licence application for premises at the Wrangbrook end of Upton on the same grounds in respect of the Greenfield Hotel (58) while mention has already been made of the restrictive clause inserted into the sale of land at Willow Park, Pontefract.

In addition to the actual off licence premises established or procured by the Company there is evidence of the acquisition of additional property for adaptation as sales outlets or merely to deny use to trade rivals. By 1927, however, the Company, partly to raise finance for its building policy and the modernisation of the best of its existing tied houses had begun to dispose of some premises in its property portfolio. In this decision the board may have been influenced by the awareness that many of its new and extended houses, particularly in or near developing urban areas, incorporated 'Jug & Bottle' outsales facilities, obviating the need for off licence premises.

A parallel source of competition to that posed by off licences, particularly in industrial and mining areas, was the proliferation of workingmens' clubs. Quite apart from cheaper beers and varied forms of entertainment on offer, any member without the price of a drink could nevertheless relax all day in the warmth, read the newspapers, converse with his friends or use the recreational facilities afforded by the clubhouse. Public houses were unable to match such benefits and many breweries adopted the policy of lending money for the establishment of clubs in the form of interest free loans, against exclusive right to supply their beer and accessories. Amongst smaller, less wealthy breweries an agreement was often concluded featuring financial sponsorship for commercial benefits.

Despite the developing trend, Knottingley Brewery Co. showed little interest in club activity. The earliest recorded reference is in April 1924 when, prompted by Sides, the board agreed to purchase All Saints Church Vicarage, Pontefract. The building, situated in Southgate, near the top of Slutwell Hill, had recently been replaced by a new Vicarage, also in Southgate, close to the junction with Walkergate. (59) Sides proposed the establishment of a social club at a cost of £1,200. The suggestion is difficult to understand given the recent decision by the board to demolish and rebuild the Turk's Head Inn at the bottom of Gillygate and almost facing the former vicarage at the opposite side of the Wakefield Road. (60) Quite apart from the mutual competition for trade is the fact that only a stone's throw away from both premises, standing in the middle of Gillygate was the Pine Apple Inn also recently rebuilt by the Company. Additionally, in a period which saw the increasing adoption of automobiles the former Vicarage afforded inadequate parking facilities standing as it did close to the main road. For whatever reason the club plan was abandoned and in 1926 Sides took over the ownership of the premises. (61)

During 1925 Sides received correspondence from a Mr Wrigglesworth of Featherstone proposing the Company establish a club utilising property at Purston. Sides viewed the site and in October 1925 it was agreed that the Company would purchase the property and that it would be altered at their expense. (62) Initially, the purchase appears to have been undertaken in a private capacity for on the 12th October it was agreed that the purchase

"land at Purston by Mr Sides"

[to the company] be £1,500. (63)

The indications are that a club had previously existed on the site but had failed and that this had prompted Wrigglesworth's approach to Sides, for in March 1926 Sides reported to the board that the club at Purston would reopen on Thursday 1st April. (64)

Apart from the auspicious opening the reopening of the club against the background of the industrial upheaval of the coal dispute and the General Strike of 1926, the club appears to have had a successful relaunch. In July 1931 Sides submitted complete accounts concerning the extension of the club which the board accepted and approved. (65) Early in 1934, however, adversity had struck and the company was considering the closure of the club. A letter from the club president requesting a stay of closure prompted a three month period of grace on the understanding that expenses be cut to an absolute minimum. (66)

In a situation with similarities to that involving the Purston Club, the Company was also associated with the [Eastoff?] Social Workingmens' Club. The club was indebted to the Company for a loan of undisclosed size. Whether the loan was made in connection with the establishment of the club or at a later juncture is unrecorded but examination by the directors of the club's balance by sheet in May 1933 revealed a parlous situation. Faced with the option of forcing the closure of the club, thereby losing both a retail outlet and loan repayment, the board hoped for a revival of trade and agreed to a further loan of £250 at 5% interest. (67)

The reason for the limited association of the company in the sphere of workingmens' clubs is not difficult to define. Involvement took place somewhat belatedly in terms of the general trend and at a time when adverse economic conditions affected the trade and finances of the institutions and the company. Beset by internal strife Sides' business instinct and managerial skill appears to have been lacking although the sparse documentation suggests that company involvement, which appears to have been prompted by Sides, was opportunistic and an incidental adjunct to company policy.

---

NOTES:Chapter 8
1. Spencer T. 'The Palace Cinema, Knottingley', (1999) , pp2-3. For reference to Holgate and the Wagon & Horses Inn c.f. Spencer T. 'Knottingley Public Houses .’ p57 & p122
2. Gourvish & Wilson, op cit, p340
3. Trade Directories passim
4. Gourvish & Wilson, op cit, p336
5. WYW 1415-1. 30-12-1921
6. WYW 1415-2 p3 & p8
7. WYW 1415-1. 6-11-1922 & 25-7-1922. 1415-2 pp3-5
8. ibid pp4-5
9. ibid p3 & 1415-1. 6-11-1922
10. WYW 1415-2 p11
11. ibid p3. For details re off-licence and Willow Park Hotel c.f. Pontefract Avertiser. 11-3-1922 p3; 18-3-1922 p4 & 12-3-1927 p7. Also Register of Alehouse licences 1095-38 W.Y.A. service, Wakefield, Ref p25/43. pp14-15
12. WYW 1415-2 ibid p6
13. ibid p25.Land was also purchased for, an unsuccessful application with regard to new premises at Love Lane in 1927 c.f. WYW 1415-2 p54 &Pontefract Advertiser 9-2-27 p4 & 12-3-27p7
14. Spencer T. 'Knottingley Public Houses & Breweries circa 1750 -1998', p92. The first inn to serve the Broomhill estate was the Winston Hotel built by the Tadcaster Tower Brewery Co., in1942 (provisional licence granted 4-3-1939) op cit p127 &pp58-59. The site acquired by Carters' Knottingley Brewery Co., was at the opposite side of Womersley Road, almost facing Long Racca, the site of the Winston Hotel.
15. WYW 1415-2 p35
16. ibid p92
17. ibid p97 & p124
18. ibid p109
19. ibid p162
20. The family name of Lord Mexborough was Saville and the family seat was the nearby Methley Hall.
21. WYW 1415-2 pp111-14
22. ibid p115
23. ibid p116 & p108
24. ibid p24 & Insert between pp29-30 re sealing of conveyance.
25. ibid p93
26. ibid p120
27. ibid p127
28. ibid p128
29. ibid p130 & p134
30. ibid p130
31. ibid p132 & pp161-62
32. ibid p164 & p170
33. WYW 1415-1 Insert listing miscellaneous tenancy details.
34. WYW 1415-2 p25 & pp28-29
35. ibid p3
36. ibid pp10-12 & p67
37. WYW 1415-1 23-1-1920 & 1415-2 p12
38. WYW 1415-2 p23, p9 & p3
39. ibid insert between pp35-36. Survey & Valuation for T.J. Sides by Messrs Thomas Barker & Co. (undated)
40. Gourvish & Wilson. op cit, p346
41. WYW 1415-2 p55
42. ibid p27
43. Pontefract & Castleford Express 3-12-1922 p4 & p6
44. Pontefract Advertiser 8-11-1924 p4
45. WYW 1415-2 p133
46. ibid p169
47. Gourvish & Wilson, op cit, pp350-53
48. Pontefract Advertiser 11-4-1931 p1. It was also stated that the original letter could be seen at the company offices
49. Pontefract Advertiser 16-7-1932
50. Pontefract Museum Miscellaneous Local History Collection. I am indebted to the Curator, Mr R. Van Riel, for making this material available to me.
51. WYW 1415-2 p117 & passim.
52. WYW 1415-1. Insert dated 12-8-1920 & 1415-2 p56
53. ibid pp 3, 10, 12, 21, 84, 88, 93. & 1415-1 7-5-1920
54. WYW 1415-2
55. ibid p93
56. ibid p52
57. ibid p10
58. ibid p159. The Greenfield Hotel was situated nearby.
59. The new vicarage was itself replaced by 'Grenton', a large detached house a few hundred yards to the east, also in Southgate, in the 1990s. Also c.f. Pontefract Advertiser 31-7-1926 p5
60. WYW 1415-2 p10 & p12
61. ibid p34. The house stood in the hospital grounds for many years before being demolished a decade or more ago. The company subscribed £50 towards the cost of the new vicarage built in Southgate in December 1925 c.f. ibid p33
62. ibid p32
63. ibid p33
64. ibid p40
65. ibid p99
66. ibid p156. Sides considered it unwise to close the club as it had paid £40 of its arrears and he arranged to keep it open providing that any goods supplied were paid upon receipt c.f. WYW 1415-2 p237
67. ibid p130, p132 7 p135.

---