Lingering elements of the former regime remained evident following the reformation of the company through disposal of stock associated with the now defunct brewery. He sale of lab’ apparatus is recorded in January 1936 followed in May by the sale of the barley drying plant at a knockdown price of £100, while the following month the sale of the drying shed was concluded. (1) As late as January 1937 Sides reported the sale of elevators for £45 while the sale of various dozens of wines from January 1936 are reminders of the remnants of stock which was not finally cleared until April 1938.(2)

The decision to write off £1,725-19-3 of debt arising from the non-disposal of plant and machinery in October 1937 was an acknowledgement of the need to conclude the transitional phase of reorganization. The decision stands in sharp contrast to the statement of the previous October that

“…the Brewery Plant and Machinery is in the course of Realisation and it is considered that the Book value will be realized.”

a somewhat too optimistic view given the simultaneous acceptance of the processes sustained in the attempted sale of malt, spirits, bottle and casks. (3)

Despite such ‘echoes’ the transition was almost fully accomplished by the start of 1936. A major factor was the foresight of the new directorship in appointing T.J. Sides, as a temporary advisor in the first instance but shortly thereafter as managing director, for the directors despite being B.Y.B. board members with a wide knowledge and experience of that company and the brewing trade in general, could not match the intimate knowledge of Carters’ Knottingley Brewery Co which Sides had. In addition, the wide social and business contacts Sides possessed was a crucial element in ensuring the continued smooth functioning and rapid transition of the subsidiary company. The crucial role of Sides whilst a vital element of the process of reorganization was unfortunately severed by his death in September 1937, resulting in the temporary appointment of William Thompson, an employee of the parent company, as the secretary/manager of Carters’, a position which was confirmed as permanent the following year when he was given a seven year contract with an increase in salary from £400 to £600 per annum. (4)

The first change in the directorship after the demise of Sides occurred in 1938 when Benjamin Day resigned from both boards on account of old age. (5) At a meeting of Carters’ directors held on 29th September the company chairman proposed two new board members with effect from 1st November, Colonel William Grice Charlesworth and Captain Arthur Edwin Irvin, both having B.Y.B credentials, and restoring the number of directors to five, (6)

The chairman explained that it was not the intention of the newly elected directors to devote much time to the daily business of the company such as visitation of company properties or involvement with routine administration, therefore, while in common with fellow board members they would receive an annual tax free remuneration of £100, additional payments such as those paid to fellow directors for expenses incurred in the course of routine duties, were not applicable.(7) Indeed, in the case of Captain Irvin participation in daily routine business was impractical for at the time of his appointment to the board he was resident at the Junior Army & Navy Club, Whitehall, London, and shortly afterwards took up residence at Sidmouth, Devon. It is interesting to note, however, that despite the rigours and inconveniences of travelling, particularly during the ensuing war period, Irvin conscientiously attended the monthly board meetings over a 24 year period and was on one particular occasion the only person other than the company secretary) present for the conduct of business. (8) Travel and accommodation expenses incurred by such regular excursions clearly negated the statement of the chairman at the time of Irvin’s appointment, while

“out of pocket expenses regarding company business”

were paid to both new directors in October 1939 and for the year ending 31st September 1941Charlesworth received £96-17-9 and Irvin £94-16-3, sums only slightly less than those paid to their fellow directors. (9) In Charlesworth’s case the increase may well be ascribed to the exigencies of war which, whatever the original intention, had enforced a more ‘hands on’ role, easily undertaken from his Boston Spa residence. Such was not the case with Irvin, however, who continued to reside in south west England. (10)

The reorganisation of the company under a reformed and united directorate coincided with the recovery of trade from the effect of economic depression. The high profits which had characterised the years immediately following the end of the Great War gradually declined with the onset of trade recession from a high of £15,000 plus to £13,000 by 1926-27, although the well established annual dividend payment of 12% continued to be paid to shareholders. The financial year 1928-29 marked the beginning of a period of substantially reduced profit, however, culminating in no dividend being paid in the years 1931-35. Yet despite the exacerbation of the adverse economic situation by the boardroom conflict, the company made a profit of £3,205 in 1932-33 and £5,000 the following year. Following the B.Y.B. take over profits rose to £12,735 in1936-37 and by the following year to £13,223 which compared with the level of profit attained a decade earlier. Uncertainty consequent upon the political situation in Europe and the threat of war subsequently inhibited trade and this was mirrored in company profits for 1938-39 which fell from the high of 1937-38 to £11,000 the succeeding year and fell to a little over £8,000 in 1939-40.. A dividend of 10% was paid on ordinary shares between 1937-51 but a noticeable feature of such payments is the amount of tax deducted which rose from 4s 6d in the pound im 1935-36 when the company was reconstituted, to 10s in the pound following the outbreak of war in 1939 before reducing by 1s in 1946. (11)

A key element in the degree of profitability was the price control exercised by the parent company on the goods it supplied for sale in the inns and retail outlets of its subsidiary. The subject was a somewhat contentious one from the start. In January 1936 the secretary was instructed to inform B.Y.B. Ltd. that invoices sent in respect of wines, spirits and tobacco from September 1935 were inaccurate in terms of cost and percentage allowance and valid until due for review in March 1936, as previously agreed.(12) Carters’ board suggested that the respective company auditors examine jointly the price levels but the matter remained unresolved in April at which time Carters’ requested a list of the commodity prices agreed by both sets of auditors and a statement of any differences so that consideration could be given to the latter in an effort to obtain a settlement. (13)

At the ensuing board meeting 0n the 28th May, Sides raised an objection to the full range of prices suggested, being particularly dissatisfied with the 3% allowed on wines, spirits and tobacco and the all round price of 39s per barrel allowed to the company by B.Y.B.. In addition, Sides pointed out that no recognition had been given to delivery charges. The board, seem to have regarded the prices as non-negotiable and decided merely to refer the latter point to the joint auditors, their decision to be final. (14)

B.Y.B. price assessment for the half year ending September 1936 when submitted to Carters’ board were again challenged by Sides whose resentment was fuelled by the fact that the prices agreed by the joint auditors were based upon 1934 costs. In his former pomp Sides’ views would have doubtless prevailed but his role within the newly constituted company was less powerful and following discussion the board decided to accept the proposed charges with the proviso that any appreciable change in the price of raw materials would result in a review of the situation and retrospective adjustment as necessary. (15)

The effect of the delay in reaching a mutually acceptable settlement is seen in the necessity for the subsidiary company to make a series of staged payments to ensure

“…reduction of the amount for goods received.”

A cheque for £7,500 was paid to the parent company in April 1937 followed by one for £7,000 in June and a final payment of £5,000 in July. (16)

The somewhat arbitrary prices imposed by B.Y.B. Ltd. on supplementary goods and draught and bottled beers was reinforced by the conditions arising from the outbreak of war in September 1939. Material shortages and disruption of supplies inevitably increased the price of basic materials resulting in reduction by B.Y.B. on the price margin allowed to its subsidiary. A reduction of 2s per barrel on draught beer in September 1940 was predicted by William Cooper, a member of both company boards, as the harbinger of further reduction, (17) a prediction fulfilled the following March when the half yearly review of the price list resulted in the imposition of 2s per barrel reduction on grounds of the increase in the cost of raw materials, wages, transport and administration (18)

The inflationary effect of the war on raw materials, particularly the price of malt, necessitated further reductions in Carters’ rebate in October 1941 and the following spring when a reduction of 5s per barrel was made for the half year ending April 1943 at which time the company was assured an assessment would be undertaken in the light of prevailing prices and ongoing costs. (19) In February 1944 Carters’ board unanimously resolved to ask B.Y.B Ltd.,to consider the existing rebate, pointing out the recent reduction in barley prices and asserting that a reduction in the price of malt would doubtless follow. As a result, the parent company increased the rebate to 32s per barrel from April. (20)

Post war austerity characterised by material shortages and rising prices ensured the retention of the 1944 adjustment but in response to an application by Carters’ in June 1948 Bentleys revised their prices. A rebate of 3s per barrel on draught beers and 7s1d per gallon on bottled and draught ales was made retrospectively from October 1947. The concession yielded an estimated increase of £1,400 to the annual profit of the Knottingley company, lending perspective to the effect of the imposed wartime reductions. (21)

Something of the pace and scale of post war inflation is shown by the fact that within a year B.Y.B. felt compelled to increase the price of liquor supplied to its subsidiary. From April 1949 draught beer was charged at 6s 6d per gallon (inclusive of rebate) and the price of pale ales and stout was revised upwardly. In November that year Carters’ was informed that the charge for draught beer was to be 8s3d per gallon. (22)

Whilst the company absorbed the increases to some extent it was inevitable that an element was passed on to their tenants and customers; to the former in rent and the latter as price increases. The consequent effect was a reduction in custom which, combined with societal change from the mid 1950s resulted in the closure of a number of older, dilapidated properties in the following decade. The upheaval of the ‘Thirties gave rise to an anomalous decade in which government controls and the restrictions imposed by wartime conditions and the austere aftermath affected all aspects of life and presaged the increasingly bureaucratic and legislative society of today. In the context of company profit the principal anomaly was the introduction of the Excess Profit Tax which was introduced in 1940 to curb inflation arising from wartime disruption and the increasingly high prices consequent upon material shortages. Initially a tax of 60% was levied on excess profits but by May 1940 this was increased to 100%. The budget of 1942 introduced the concept of tax credits whereby provision was made for the repayment of 20% of company profits in the post war period. The budget of 1944 substantially modified EPT with the exemption of 10,000 smaller firms and the relaxation of constraints on a further 20,000.

As the result of the wartime restrictions the profits of the company dipped from £9,500 in 1940-41to £6,942 in 1943-44 before rising to £7,676 in 1945-46 and levelling out before reaching a peak at £12,494 in 1947-48 and then declining quite dramatically to £8,500 in the years between1949-51. (23) But while EPT circumscribed the financial gains of businessmen to some extent, like all forms of taxation it was open to methods of evasive manipulation. Rising staff salaries and day wage payments and the payment of wartime bonuses, justified on grounds of the extra time and labour imposed by wartime conditions allied with the expansion of basic costs and charges so that they impinged upon the parameters of EPT, together with the frequency of donations to local causes and organizations, were some of the measures applied to circumvent or modify the exigencies of war conditions on trade.

An increase of 5s per week in the wages of managers of the company’s licensed properties early in 1940 with a further increase in June 1942 is indicative of both the pace of inflation and the counter response of the company to EPT. (24) More significantly was the decision of the board in May 1940 to pay

“…a weekly ‘War Bonus’ to certain members of staff”

While simultaneously resolving that

“Any employee of the company serving in the forces be paid £1 per week if married and 10s per week if single, retrospective from 1st May 1940.”

The provision of an extra week’s wages to staff in addition to the customary Christmas gift of extra wages was also an ongoing feature of the period. (25) Prominent amongst the annual recipients was William Thompson the secretary/manager who in 1940 received £50

“in appreciation of his services.”

The token of appreciation rose to £100 the following year followed by four annual payments of £150, two of £175 and one of £200 making a total of £1,300 over an eight year period. (26)

In August 1941

“due to the unavoidability of long working hours”

an increased war bonus, made retrospective for twenty weeks, was paid to members of staff. Mr H. Grainger, the cashier, Mr E. Philpott, company traveller, and Mr W. Berry, senior invoice clerk, each received 10s per week, as did Mr Scholes, manufacturer/salesman at the company’s mineral water works, Burton Salmon. Miss Armstrong, invoice clerk and Miss Leeman, typist, received 7s6d each while Mr A. Murgatroyde, the company joiner, who was paid weekly, had his hourly rate increased to 1s9d. (27) From October 1942 separate additional bonuses were paid to staff. The cashier, traveller and Mineral Water Works supervisor, Mr J.A.Sefton, received £10 each, the invoice clerks and typist £5 with a similar sum being paid to the company’s joiner and painter. (28) The amounts paid as annual bonuses increased year on year thereafter. To what extent they were governed by inflationary trends, profitability, or conditions of work is conjectural. In 1943 the cashier and traveller received double the amount paid the previous year while Sefton received £25.

The invoice clerks received£10 each and the typist, togrther with the joiner and the painter each received £5. (29) In 1944 the same amounts were paid,plus £1 to Miss Pringle, an obviously new staff member, and £2 each to Heald and Mosby, employed as labourers at the Mineral Water Works. (30) By 1945 the head of the Mineral Water Works again topped the list with £35 and this was increased to £40 the following year which was the last one in which such payments were made. The cashier and traveller also received £35 each, rising to £40 in 1946, while the invoice clerks received £20 and £15 respectively in 1945 with an increase of £5 each the following year. The typist received £15 in 1945 and the two labourers at the Mineral Water Works received £2 each. None of these last three feature in the 1946 list. (31)

At the cession of the war bonus scheme in 1947 staff wages were reviewed. The secretary/manager was awarded an annual salary of £700 which meant that his salary had doubled in the decade since he was first appointed. (32)

The following table shows the staff salaries following the review of October 1947 and the increase which was implemented twelve months later.

The wages were subject to interim review. Upon her presumed appointment in spring 1943 Miss Leeman’s wage was set at £2-10- 0 with the proviso that if she proved satisfactory it be raised by 5s per week. The increase was awarded in October 1944 at which time Miss Armstrong’s salary was increased to £3-7-6. (33) In January 1946 the board resolved that the company’s joiner and painter should be

“paid the standard rate from the present time.”

but no detail of the existing day wage rate is given. The list of 1948 indicates that both were being paid official trade union rates whilst again being non- specific concerning the hourly rate. The resolution is significant, however, as it is the only known indication concerning trade union influence or representation in the affairs of the company. Presumably the hourly payments received by staff at the Mineral Water Works at that date reflect the official rate, R. Hope and Miss N.Sefton receiving 2s 3d and 1s 6d respectively. (34)

A further point of some significance concerns the salaries of the cashier and the traveller which until 1947 had followed a pattern of equality. Within a month of the annual increases of October that year, however, the salaries were reassessed at which time a differential of 10s per week was established, Grainger receiving £7 - 10 - 0 and Phillpott £8. The following year the gap widened to a difference of £1 per week. The reason for the change is unstated but the move marks the growing ascendancy of Phillpott who eventually succeeded William Thompson as secretary/manager although this was not a factor in the introduction of the salary differential. (35) As for Thompson, his salary rose from £650 p.a. early in 1945 to £700 in October 1947 and to £1,000 only one year later. (36) An additional gratuity of £100 was paid as a wartime bonus to the company auditors, Messrs Camm, Metcalf & Co., in the period 1940-48 in recognition of

“Special services re Excess Profits Tax and the company’s affairs in general.” (37)

Payment of E.P.T. and other forms of taxation was retrospective and careful provision was made in respect of projected payments with sums of money set aside for the purpose. A letter from the Inspector of Taxes dated January 1942 concerning the company finances during the preceding year and requesting a forecast of likely profit was referred to Mr Naylor, the company’s auditor, who was asked to use his own discretion in meeting the request (38) In anticipation of eventual demand for payment of E.P.T. the company in consultation with Naylor, periodically purchased Tax Reserve Certificates which had been introduced by the government to facilitate deferred payments.(39) Owing to inevitable delay in assessment and the high rate of wartime taxation, the sums demanded were considerable. In January 1944 a demand was received for Schedule D tax totalling £1,729-16-10 while the following month the board were informed that the sum of £9,229-16-10 had been paid by Tax Reserve Certificates in respect of Schedule A and D and land tax. (40) An auditor’s letter of April 1944 suggesting payments of £5,000 and £7,500 in respect of E.P.T. for 1941 and 1942 was followed in August by another advising that the Inspector of Taxes would shortly be sending a demand for £8,000 in respect of 1943 and suggesting an interim payment of £7,000 in anticipation of the same. (41)

Every aspect of company trading was closely monitored by the Inland Revenue with money spent on the repair and maintenance of property and payment of fees and expenses to the company directors requiring authorization by the tax inspectorate regardless of shareholder approval. In the middle of the war both aspects were queried by the inspectorate. Concerning expenditure on property in excess of the deferred repairs provision previously agreed, the auditor successfully managed to convince the Inspector of Taxes of its justification. A decision concerning remuneration paid to directors was withheld pending the production of further evidence. (42)

As early as 1936 T.J.Sides had proposed an extraordinary general meeting in order to pass a special resolution concerning Articles 83 and 88 of the company’s Articles of Association and on the 29th July 1937 the meeting held in the Queen’s Hotel, Leeds, deleted Article 88 and redefined the terms and conditions with regard to board membership. (43) A further such meeting was held in August 1941 when in anticipation of proposed government legislation in respect of tax free payments, the shareholders approved alteration to Article 85 which was reworded to state that the directors’ remuneration for 1941 and subsequent years

“…shall be at the rate of £400 per annum in respect of each director who has acted in that capacity during any part of the year, together with such further sums as the company in general meeting may in any year award.”

Acceptance of the resolution represented a four-fold increase in the annual fee previously paid to the directors. (44) The increase became a bone of contention in February 1944 when the Inspector of Taxes declined to allow the extra remuneration within the context of E.P.T liability.The company chairman justified the payments on the grounds that following the death of Sides in September 1937, his duties as managing director were shared by all the board members, resulting in extra work which the shareholders had unanimously agreed should merit extra remuneration. Furthermore, given the inherent difficulties of the war situation, the workload of the directors now demanded greater time than previously. In this respect the individual expertise of the board members was an invaluable adjunct. To reinforce the point the chairman cited the different qualifications each director brought to the administration of the company. (45)

The taxman subsequently allowed the fees paid to the chairman, Sir William Foster Todd, William Cooper and Walter Jackson but excluded Colonel Charlesworth and Captain Irvin of whom it was felt that the special qualifications cited were not essential for the execution of the additional work which it was felt could well be performed by the other three directors. In passing, the Inspector noted Irvin’s residence in Devon which it was considered would not mitigate the demands of the workload. The conclusions of the Inspector outraged the board which was informed (via the auditor) of its

“dissatisfaction…in view of all the directors equally giving additional services in a joint capacity.” (46)

In the face of this objection the Inspector relented and in May 1944 approved the payments to Charlesworth and Irvin for the years 1941 and 1942. The board expediently determined to retain the modus operandi at a subsequent meeting, pending the eventual appointment of a managing director. (47)

In its attempt to keep its finances in order the company was ever anxious to conclude negotiations regarding settlement of E.P.T. and deferred tax demands. Nevertheless, the inevitable delay proved irksome despite the attempt to make financial provision in anticipation of probable demand. In April 1944 at the suggestion of the auditor the company paid on account the sums of £5,000 and £7,500 for E.P.T. for the 12 months September 1941 and 1942 respectively. (48) However, it was not until September 1944 that the figures for the four years to the previous September were agreed. (49) Again, in mid 1945 the sum of £10,000 was paid in anticipation of E.P.T. for the year ending the previous September. Settlement of the demand required payment of an additional amount making the annual payment £12, 543. (50) In 1945 the liability was £8,543 and the extent of the delay may be judged the fact that as late as 1952 the company was still using Tax Reserve Certificates to settle a demand for E.P.T. liability of £7, 898-15-7. (51)

From the beginning of its public limited status the company had pursued a policy of making small donations on a casual basis to organizations and charities, usually associated with the districts in which the company had a presence. The size and the frequency of such donations were limited. In the 56 year period 1892 – 1950 some 56 donations were made, totalling £337-12- 6. Generally, donations were in the range of one or two guineas and seldom more than five guineas and in some years no donations were made at all. However, there were some exceptions to the limited size and an increase in the frequency over time with a few annual donations made to some local organizations eventually.

The outbreak of the Great War was a catalyst with the disbursement of £100 to local refugee funds in the early months. In other spheres the gift of £25 to the Knottingley National Schools in 1894 was a relatively large sum, masked by the fact that several prominent staff members led by the director, J.C. Harvey, were local members of the Anglican community and continuing the association observed by three generations of the Carter family. Other gifts of a religious nature included £50 towards a new vicarage for the parish of All Saints, Pontefract in 1925 and £25 towards the building of a new Roman Catholic Church at Featherstone in 1936. Direct interest motivated both these donations, the company seeking to obtain the old vicarage premises at Pontefract and sell the land for the new church at Featherstone. Two donations not included in the general list were the private gift of 300 guineas to the chairman of the directors, W.F.D. Fielding, in 1925 to subsidise his medical expenses and the payment of £1 per week to Alfred Crossland, the late company traveller who was also suffering a long-term illness to which he succumbed in 1902. A third payment of a private nature was made, ex gratia, to the outgoing tenant of the Ship Inn, Darrington, in 1938. (52)

During the decade 1940-50 some 36 donations, totalling £78-15-0 were made, the highest being 5 guineas, with several as little as 10 shillings. The latter were usually given as tokens of appreciation to help subsidise Police Force dances in the various districts in which the company had licensed houses. Of the regular annual donations were the 1 guinea to Featherstone Rovers Rugby League Club (increased to 2 guineas in 1947) and 1 guinea given to the Frickley Miners’ Welfare Bowling Club. Also 2 guineas donated annually to the Castleford & District Royal Naval Association Xmas Cheer Fund, the Association using the Queens Hotel, Castleford, as its headquarters. (53)

Regarded cynically the donations were a public relations exercise prompted by vested interest as illustrated in the two following instances. In 1943 a donation of 2 guineas in support for the Mayor of Pontefract’s Infirmary Fund was accompanied by a letter drawing attention that the appeal had been sent to the parent company instead of to Carters whose houses were directly relevant to the town. Although unstated, the implication was that the by-passing of the local company had denied it the publicity and goodwill attendant upon acknowledgement of direct sponsorship. Conversely, in December 1949, when the company was directly approached to make a donation towards a chain of office for the Mayor of the newly incorporated Borough of Castleford, the company, which by this time had little representation within the town, responded by stating that the parent company had made a donation, thereby obviating action by the subsidiary. (54) In the context of seeking some form of return on any donation it is interesting to note the negative response of the company to an appeal for aid by the West Riding Prisoners’ Aid Society in August 1942, citing its inability to support the appeal “due to area commitments”. One may, perhaps discern that in addition to the lack of return on its ‘investment’ the board was unsympathetic to the cause at a time when the outcome of a war involving the self sacrifice of the Nation’s citizenry still hung in the balance. (55)

A different form of public relations was seen in the response of the company to the government sponsored War Savings weeks. An annually held War Savings Week was observed by communities of cities, towns and villages throughout the land during the war years. The aim was to focus public attention on the war effort and encourage the direct participation of local inhabitants to attain a pre - set financial target based upon the presumed economic capability of each community. To this end ‘War Weapons Week, ‘Wings for Victory’, ‘’Warship Week’, Salute the Soldier Week’ and ‘Thanksgiving Week’ were the nationally themed campaigns adopted each spring throughout the duration of the conflict. (56)

The mainstay of the drive towards the set target was investment in government war bonds by local businesses and commercial organizations. In this respect Carters’ Knottingley Brewery Co., was at a distinct disadvantage for unlike single location companies its licensed houses were located in several towns and rural districts and therefore drew appeals for financial support from a number of local savings committees. Each appeal required a positive response as judged to be proportionate to the size of each community to ensure future goodwill.

The scene was set early in 1940 when in response to a government offer to convert or repay a 4 .5% holding in war bonds for newly issued stock at an enhanced rate of interest, the board sold £7,000 worth and advised the Debenture Holders’ Trustees to dispose of £4,000 at 3.5%, such a move regarded to be

“…in the government’s interest to see stock stand at an enhanced price with a view to issuing a new War Loan shortly.”

The sale of the Debenture stock was therefore approved at the discretion of the board and was sold for 99% of its face value by F.W. Bentley the Leeds based stockbrokers. (57)

Following the introduction of War Weeks the surplus funds of the company were rotated in an annual pattern with money invested in War Bonds during a particular War Week subsequently ‘cashed in’ for reinvestment in new stock the following year. Thus, in May 1941, for the ‘War Weapons Week’ activity of Doncaster Rural District Council, the company applied for £1,000 at 2.5% National War Bonds, scheduled for repayment in 1946-48, while the Debenture Holders’ Trustees invested the same amount in the effort of Hemsworth R.D.C. At Knottingley where the company was more prominently represented, £2,000 was invested. (58) The new investments were in turn liquidized in October 1941 to be utilized the following spring. (59) Somewhat puzzling is the company’s response to an appeal by Pontefract Borough Council seeking support for their planned ‘Warship Week’ the following February when it was pointed out that the company was allied to B.Y.B.Ltd which had already pledged support. The response is the more surprising given that the previous year the company had directly invested £1,000 in support of the Council’s ‘War Weapons Week’.(60) Reconsideration was evidently given concerning the subject for in January 1942 the board approved of the following investments for the forthcoming ‘Warship Weeks’



A later application by Osgoldcross R.D.C. drew £1,000 at which time the sums allocated to Castleford and Featherstone were also upgraded to £1,000 each. (61)

In September Bentley & Co., sold £2,000 of the company’s War Bonds 1949-51 issue, incurring a slight loss on the transaction and the following month £11,000 of the same stock was sold on behalf of the Debenture Holders’ Trustees

“…for reinvestment purposes in support of appeals re Government War Efforts.” (62)

It is of passing interest to note a degree of collusion involved in fixing realistically attainable targets for the War Weeks. A Letter from Pontefract Council in January 1943 sought information concerning the likely scale of investment by the company for the forthcoming ‘Wings for Victory’ Week. The company replied that while it was difficult to assess at that time it hoped to subscribe £5,000 as in the previous year, thus revealing that in addition to the £3,000 purchased on behalf of the Debenture Holders’ Trustees, a further £2,000 must have been invested in the name of the company. (63)

Of the bonds purchased for the ‘Wings for Victory’ campaign only £3,000 at Knottiingley and £1,000 each at Castleford and Featherstone are recorded although it seems safe to assume that the pattern of investment followed by resale was adhered to. (64) As the resale price was governed by market forces encashment carried the risk of a loss, albeit small, on the face value of the bonds sold. The question therefore arose as to whether any loss sustained on the sale of Debenture Holders’ investments should be borne by the company acting on the Trustees’ behalf or by the Debenture Holders’ themselves, a responsibility which the board arbitrarily assigned to the Trustees and which they apparently accepted without demur (65).

For ‘Salute the Soldier’ Week in 1944, heavier than usual investments were made, with £5,000 0f Debenture Holders’ money invested with Pontefract Council and an undisclosed sum on the company’s behalf. The sum of £2,000 was invested via Hemsworth and £1,000 each at Castleford, Doncaster R.D.C and Osgoldcross R.D.C. In addition, £2,000 was invested at York and £1,000 at Burley in Wharfdale. (66) As the company had no business interests in either of these locations it seem probable that the deciding factor was the residential proximity of two board members.

By late 1944 the end of the war was evident and it was doubtful whether any further War Week activity would be undertaken, the company’s bonds were, however, liquidated ready for reinvestment

“…if the Government starts an Appeals Week Campaign.” (67)

In the event a ‘Thanksgiving Week’ was held with some £8,000 worth of bonds being purchased by the company at various unlisted locations other than Knottingley and Pontefract which towns accounted for £5,000 between them. (68)

As in the case of Sides and his predecessor, Edwin Lawson, the demands of the work undertaken by members of the board and senior staff, particularly during the war, took its toll. In May 1946 the death occurred of Sir William Foster –Todd, who was succeeded as company chairman by William Cooper. In October, following several weeks of illness, Walter Jackson died. (69) Cooper’s tenure as chairman was brief and his death in April 1947 meant that three mainstays of the directorate had died within the space of a single year.

John Christopher Scott and Herbert Watkin, both nominees and associates of the parent company, were appointed to take the seats of Foster-Todd and Jackson and it was the recently appointed directors who nominated and seconded Colonel Charlesworth as joint chairman of company and directors. In accepting, Charlesworth, perhaps prompted by considerations of age, particularly an awareness of the fatal effect of age and overwork on his recently deceased colleagues, proposed that in future the chairman be appointed on an annual basis at the first board meeting following the Annual General Meeting of the company. (70)

The strain appears to have been well borne by Charlesworth for when, following the legal requirements of the Companies Act 1948, he gave the board formal written notification in September 1949 of his approaching 70th birthday, his reappointment was proposed by A.E. Irvin and he accepted the position which he held until his retirement in September 1960. (71)

The proposed review of the company’s Articles of Association by T.J. Sides in May 1936, had included the restructuring of the share issue formulated for the establishment of the company in 1892. Sides suggested that

“…ordinary and preference shares are sub-divided Into £1 shares.”Preference shares to bear interest At 6% and ordinary shares as the nett profits of the company warrant.” (72)

The company solicitors were instructed to deal with the matter and formulate any resolutions to allow the Articles of Association to be amended, particularly Article 88. (73) As shown above, the said Article, with its emphasis on the qualifications for membership of the board of directors, was altered and approved at a special A.G.M. the following month and registered with the Registrar of Companies in August 1937. However, the suggested change in the share structure was left in abeyance. (74)

The proposed alteration was made in anticipation of an intended public share issue designed to secure capital for the newly reconstituted company. In July 1937 William Cooper had suggested the further issue of the company’s debenture stock in order to clear the bank debt and subsidise the rebuilding of the Gardeners Arms Inn, Pontefract and the Darrington Hotel. (75) Following discreet enquiries by Cooper, the Leeds stockbrokers, F.W. Bentley, wrote to the company in September offering its services in placing £30,000 worth of debenture shares at 4.5% interest which it understood the company was about to float in order to raise the existing issue worth £46,500 to £80,000. However, as the existing issue was not quoted on the Stock Exchange and was therefore regarded as an “unmarketable security”, the company considered it expedient to obtain an official quotation and invited Bentleys to make an offer. The stockbrokers’ response was to offer 97.5% for £30,000 of the stock which terms the board, with the exception of William Cooper who had declared a personal interest as a shareholder of F.W. Bentley & Co., and was debarred from voting, approved with the proviso that acceptance by Bentleys be notified before 31st October 1937. (76)

The sale of the debenture stock was undertaken over a two month period in order to accommodate the company bankers who had previously held the stock as surety for the company’s overdraft, the share transaction being completed in late November, 1937. (77)

Cooper’s detachment from the decision was a consequence of the 1929 Companies Act which made necessary the declaration by the company directors of any additional interests. The measure also carried implications for Walter Jackson who had written in August 1937 to declare an interest in the firm of Samuel Jackson & Co., Ltd., which had long undertaken work on behalf of the brewery company. In Jackson’s case, however, the possible conflict of interest was resolved when only a few months later he announced that he had ceased to be active in the family firm and his financial connection would be severed at the end of the current financial year. (78)

Sale of additional debenture stock allied to favourable trading conditions enabled the newly re-organized company to turn a substantial profit in the financial year 1937-38. Following which

“ the company’s liquid position.”

prompted a decision by the board to purchase its own company debenture stock as and when it became available. The decision was taken to inform F.W. Bentley & Co., to buy until the receipt of written cancellation

“ any further stock which might reasonably be offered.”

Cooper was appointed as the arbiter of what constituted a reasonable price. (79) Thereafter several parcels of debentures were acquired over a three year period to May 1941, totalling in excess of £5,000. (80) The policy continued in the post war period with the purchase by the company of £10,000 of its own debenture stock commencing in October 1949. (81)

The low rate of interest payable on the company’s deposit account which had prompted the short-term investment in government bonds in 1938 was followed in 1940 by the transfer of £10,000 from the Debenture Holders’ Trustees account to the company’s credit account with B.Y.B. Ltd., which allowed interest of 3% compared with the bank’s 1%. (82)

It was not until July 1945, however, that the board met to give effect to the suggestion of Sides almost a decade before concerning the reorganization of the company’s shares. It was decided that the part-paid ordinary shares be fully paid up with shareholders being notified that £2 per share was to be paid at the company’s registered office before the 23rd September. A further resolution adopted Sides’ recommendation that ordinary and preference shares be sub-divided into £1 units. The reissue was placed in the hands of F.W. Bentley & Co., with provision for a Extraordinary General Meeting to be convened as appropriate to obtain approval by the shareholders. (83)

A rather sudden volte face occurred on the part of some board members in early September when a special meeting of the board was called to discuss the subject. Walter Jackson proposed that the previously agreed action be deferred to a later date and the prepared notices to shareholders be withheld. Jackson’s resolution was seconded by W.G. Charlesworth but an amendment by William Cooper, seconded by the chairman, Sir William Foster-Todd, was submitted. The amendment declared that it was

“…advisable [and] in the interests of the company, it being an opportune time to obtain money in view of immediate expenditure and future capital commitments.”

The amendment was rejected. All five directors being present it fell to A.E. Irvin to cast the deciding vote. The costs incurred by F.W. Bentley & Co., with regard to preparation of the shareholder notices were refunded by Carters. (84)

The company records provide no indication concerning the reason for the change in attitude of Jackson and Charlesworth but whatever prompted the resolution it would appear that their doubts were allayed for at a meeting of the board on the 25th October a resolution was passed to convene an E.G.M. at the Woodlesford offices on the 28th November in order to submit to the previously proposed resolution, the secretary to notify the shareholders and there the matter rested. (85)

Amidst the increasing complexity and hectic pace of commercial life during the war it is interesting to note the dependency on the telephone and postal system for the conduct of business and the efficiency of these services. Aside from the natural constraints imposed on civilian technology by the exigencies of war, the bulk of the period covered by this study shows a reluctance to embrace new technology. The tawdriness of the company in installing the telephone has been noted earlier and this was reflected at a later date when in August 1940, solely through the pressure of business it became convenient to have the telephone installed at the residence of the secretary. (86) Suspicion of commercial innovation was not exclusive to the company for eight years later when the company, again in response to the pressures of work, adopted a lithographed signature in connection with the issue of dividend warrents, the Midland Bank demanded the company provide a form to indemnify them in the event of any malfunction of the system. (87)

An aspect of company policy introduced during the war period was the redemption of tithe payments levied on company land. The genesis of such payments was the Commutation Acts of 1836 et seq, by which replaced payment of tithes in kind with annual rents. A variation was the fee farm rent by which tithe payment was usually incorporated by private arrangement within leasehold agreements. The acquisition by the company of properties with adjacent parcels of land or alternatively through leasehold agreements, often resulted in tithe liability. As company records provide no specific indication of the adoption of a tithe redemption policy it seems probable that the measure was a casual one arising from the desire to remove archaic encumbrances which might prove an eventual constraint to future plans for property development.

The earliest recorded commutation concerns the Sun Inn, Featherstone, where a record of 1890 refers to the tithe of £2 per year being paid by the tenant. The tithe was redeemed in 1940 at a cost of £5-9-0. (88) During the following year an approach was made to the Drapers’ Company, London, involving commutation of fee farm rents totalling £3-7-0 p.a. in respect of the White Swan Inn and allied properties at Knottingley. The redemption figure was based upon 20 years rental which the brewery company refused to entertain. The matter lay dormant until 1948 when in addition to the White Swan, consideration was given by the board to the redemption of fee farm rents in respect of the Anvil Inn, Aire Street Hotel, and the Wagon & Horses Inn, at Knottingley; Hope & Anchor Inn, Pontefract, and the Old Hall Inn, Great Houghton. (89) An attempt to commute a yearly corn rent of 2s 6d concerning the Wagon & Horses Inn had been made early in 1946 but negotiations had either stalled of being delayed. (90) Two other part owners of the White Swan site were involved with the Drapers’ Company fee farm rents. Of these one, was willing to seek commutation but the third party declined to do so. Carters therefore, in addition to their own redemption payment, commuted on behalf of the third party and claimed the fee farm rent from him thereafter. (91)

An indication of the anomalies and minor irritations arising from the levy of the tithe apportionment is seen in January 1948 when the company, following commutation of the £2 p.a. fee farm rent in respect of the Old Hall Inn, Great Houghton, received payment of £21-8-2 on behalf of other owners of land the tithes of which had been charged to the company in error for a number of years. (92)

Tithe of £9-7-2 on the Milnes Arms, Fryston, was redeemed late in 1941 in accordance with

“Company policy with regard to small tithes.”

and when planning commenced in connection with the proposed construction of the new Fryston Hotel late in 1947, a tithe of £4-13-1 was redeemed and the intention of the company to commute

“all other such which are possible.”

was stated. (93)

The possible replacement of the Fox & Hounds Inn, Thorpe Audlin, resulted in the purchase of two fields by the company as the potential site for the new inn. The fields were leased pro tem in 1946 to two tenant farmers who as part of their tenurial occupation agreed to pay the farm fee rents. The rents were presumably commuted although no record of the redemption has been found. (94)

The redemption fee of £61 in respect of the White Swan and associated lane at which the company had baulked in 1941 was the subject of review in October 1947 when hopes were entertained of transferring the inn licence to an alternative site. Simultaneously, the long established desire of the company to sell the Knottingley brewery site led to the decision to pay the sum of £121-12-1 to redeem the farm fee rents on both sites. (95)

Despite the attempt to remove the tithes from all company property a pause occurred in March 1949 when the Ministry of Health sought a redemption fee equivalent to 33.5 years’ rents on other company owned properties at Knottingley. The fact was merely noted at that time. Whether the price was ultimately paid is not known for there is no further reference in company papers. (96)

---

NOTES: Chapter 15
1. WYW 1415-2 p247, p261 & p264
2. ibid p247, p289, p343 & p359
3. ibid pp288-67
4. ibid pp294, p305, p315 & 1415-5 p95
5. WYW 1415-3 p5- Copy of letter of resignation dated 5-8-38.inserted between pp5-6
6. ibid p18
7. ibid p18. The resolution on the directors’ remuneration had been passed 9-8-35 made retrospective to July c.f. WYW 1415-2 p227
8. WYW 1415-3 p379. On that occasion the chairman was away and Jackson and Charlesworth were absent.
9. ibid p73 & p147
10. ibid p63
11. Minute Books passim.
12. WYW 1415-2 pp248-49
13. ibid p252 & p259
14. ibid p260
15. ibid p273. For comprehensive table of quantities and prices of bottled beers produced by B.Y.B. Ltd., and brands supplied by other companies c.f. ibid pp 277-78
16. WYW 1415-2 p301, p303 & p313
17. WYW 1415-3 p p110 & p145
18. ibid p148 & correspondence inserted between pp147-48
19. ibid p159 & p171 & related correspondence inserted between pp171-72
20. ibid p243 & p248
21. WYW 1415-4 pp109-110
22. ibid p146 & p176
23. Minute Books passim.
24. ibid p87. In the case of the manager of the Turk’s Head, Pontefract, the wage was increased to £4 per week c.f. ibid p182
25. ibid pp95-6, p114, p161 & passim.
26. ibid p114 and Minute Books passim.
27. ibid p144
28. ibid pp195-96
29. ibid p231
30. ibid p279
31. ibid p330 & WYW 1415-4 p3
32. WYW 1415-2 p228
33. WYW 1415-3 p209 & p275
34. ibid p346 & 1415-4 p129
35. ibid p77
36. WYW 1415-3 p301, p305 & WYW 1415 4 p121
37. WYW 1415-3 p153 & passim, also WYW 1415-4 p121
38. WYW 1415-3 p166, p291 & p345
39. ibid p291 & p305
40. ibid p238 & p240
41. ibid p265
42. ibid p243
43. WYW1415-2 pp262-63, pp308-09 & printed insert between pp307-08
44. WYW 1415-3 pp147-48
45. ibid pp243-44
46. ibid pp245-46
47. ibid p256
48. ibid p252
49. ibid pp269-70
50. ibid p309, p315 & p269
51. ibid p 361
52. WYW 1415-2 p33, WYW 1415-1 (n.p.) 31-5-1901 &27-11-1902, & WYW 1415-3 p15
53. Minute Books passim.
54. WYW 1415-4 p179, & p216
55. WYW 1415-3 p190
56. Spencer T. ‘Aspects of Local History, Knottingley Miscellanea’ (forthcoming)
57. WYW 1415-3 pp84-5 & p88
58. ibid p131, p133 & p122
59. ibid p153
60. ibid p118 & p158
61. ibid p167, p165 & p170
62. ibid p195 & p238
63. ibid p204
64. ibid p238 & p256
65. ibid p230
66. ibid p256, p259 & p261
67. ibid p283 & p286
68. ibid p331 & p335. ‘Thanksgiving Week’ was held in October 1945 at a time when the euphoria of victory had given way to war weariness and the burgeoning threat of further austerity c.f. Spencer. T. ‘Knottingley War Savings Weeks’ in ‘Aspects...’ (forthcoming)
69. WYW 1415-3 p357 & WYW 1415-4p7
70. ibid & p40
71. ibid p84, p167 & 1415-5 p30 & p237. Notification of age was stipulated in the Companies Act 1948 for all but directors of private companies. The Act also required directors to declare all shareholdings and directorships, hence the occasional declarations by members of Carters’ board e.g. 1415-4 p88, pp120-21, p 167 & passim. For details of the Companies Act 1948 c.f. Armstrong J. & Jones S. ‘Business Documents; their origins, sources and uses in historical research.’ (1987) p88
72. WYW 1415-2 p263
73. ibid p304
74. ibid p308 & p316
75. WYW 1415-2 pp314-15
76. ibid p314, pp317-18 & p330
77. ibid p330, p332, & p324
78. ibid p319 & p336
79. WYW 1415-3 pp4-5
80. WYW 1415-2 p356 & WYW 1415-3 p57, p73, p83 & p131
81. WYW 1415 -4 p 169, p186 & p191 for details of post war transactions.
82. WYW 1415-3 p93 & p95
83. ibid p315
84. ibid p321
85. ibid p322
86. ibid p103
87. WYW 1415-4 pp114-15
88. WYW 1415-3 p87. I am indebted to Mr J. Goodchild for information concerning tithes and farm fee rents and their application to several inns owned or leased by Carters’ Knottingley Brewery Co., Ltd.
89. WYW 1415-3 p122 & 1415-4 p88
90. ibid p379. Forrest C. ‘History of Knottingley’, (1871), states that the Wagon & Horses Inn and adjoining cottages was the only site in Knottingley which was not freehold, the copyhold believed to belong to the Manor of Barnby Dun. The site was reputed to have been in possession of a religions order based at Meaux prior to the suppression of the monasteries in 1539.
91. WYW 1415-4 p109
92. ibid p133
93. WYW 1415-3 p158 & 1415-4 p77
94. WYW 1415-3 p356 & p360
95. WYW 1415-4 p70
96. ibid p142.

---