Friday, 24 November 2017

Jersey Our Island: The Years of Darkness – Part 2



















Published in 1950, this is an interesting snapshot of the Island and its customs as it was in the immediate post-war period, and not without humour. Most guide books of the time give the tourist information, or give the impressions of an outsider to the Island, but this is in "inside view", which is rarer.

Jersey Our Island: The Years of Darkness – Part 2
by Sidney Bisson


The two books about the occupation that have so far appeared (Ralph Mollet's Jersey under the Swastika and L. P. Sinel's German Occupation of Jersey) are tantalisingly impersonal.' They tell you what the official rations were, but nothing of the housewife who wept because she could only offer her family cold water and cold boiled potatoes for breakfast whilst their wealthy black-marketing neighbours indulged in tea at £20 a pound, butter at thirty shillings, pork at a guinea, eggs at three shillings each, and white bread made from locally ground flour that fetched £20 a hundredweight. Or of the indignation of the poorer classes that such a state of affairs was allowed to continue. For obviously in a small place like Jersey, where every- body knows his neighbour's business better than his own, the authorities could not be unaware of what was going on.

The commonest explanation offered is that the black market was really a patriotic institution. `If it hadn't been for the black market we'd have starved,' many a local resident has told me, forgetting that the poorest lived through the occupation without being able to patronise this luxurious institution. And when I ask if it wouldn't have been more patriotic for the authorities to exercise a stricter control over agricultural and dairy production and divert food from the black market to increase the general ration, the answer is that the Germans wouldn't have allowed it.

It is difficult for one who was not present during the occupation to decide whether this is a genuine reason or a mere rationalisation. I can only say that I should find the argument more convincing if some attempt had been made to requisition and re- distribute the vast quantities of food that were illegally sold at prices that only the rich could afford to pay. 

Not every farmer, of course, made a fortune out of the black market. Praise is due to those who resisted the temptation of turning the situation to their own advantage, and who sold food cheaply or gave it away to friends and neighbours whom they knew to be in need.

Another form of black marketing that I have also heard defended as an act of patriotism was the sale of food to German soldiers. The argument was that only soldiers with plenty of money could afford to buy food. It made the others discontented and lowered their morale ! One farmer told me more frankly : `If you refused to sell, they'd come back the next night and burgle. We'd have been fools not to take the money.' 

I chuckled to think that the Germans were foolish enough to offer to buy what they could so easily steal, but later learnt that there was some truth in his statement. German discipline was strict, and soldiers caught breaking out of camp or returning with stolen goods were severely dealt with. So it is quite likely that many took the risk of a nocturnal expedition only when their money had failed to get them what they wanted.

Side by side with the black market grew the more legitimate `barter market.' Until September, 1941, when the exchange, as well as the sale, of soap and foodstuffs was prohibited except under license, the `small ad' columns of the local evening paper were full of offers of this for that.

At one period eggs were most freely offered; at another, saccharine. Soap and sugar were most in demand. But the beauty of barter is its flexibility. Eggs might be converted into coke, bird seed into pepper, poultry food into soap. One reader offers a cycle tyre for cocoa; another, cockerels for salt. (One wonders how many for how much. Quantities are not always specified in this column.) 

There is something pathetic in the offer of a bottle of whisky for ajar of honey. And for what sinister purpose did someone offer `sugar for African Grey Parrot (stuffed) Perhaps the printer has got this one the wrong way round, and it's Aunt Agatha offering to part with her most treasured possession so that she can go on sweetening her ersatz (or black market?) tea. Was there ever such an optimist

I mis-spent one of this summer's many wet afternoons com- piling a table of barter values from these little ads. Here is the result.



















All the examples I have quoted are authentic. Don't blame me if you can prove from the table that 12 eggs = 36 eggs. (12 eggs equal 1 pair shoes, which equals 1 cycle tyre, which equals 800 saccharines, which equal 36 eggs.) There are eggs and eggs. Brown eggs and white eggs, small eggs and large eggs, new laid eggs and pickled eggs, good eggs and bad eggs, eggs taken and eggs offered . . . In fact every egg has its price. 

Some people who had not bothered to work out a little table like mine and were doubtful of the value of their egg got into the habit of advertising `1 egg. Will exchange for WHAT?' Regular readers of the Exchange and Mart column regarded this as cheating and wrote long letters to the editor pointing out the abuses to which it might lead. Hungry though he was, the Jerseyman had not lost his sense of humour.

In 1942, however, two blows fell which cast a gloom over the island. In June all wireless sets were confiscated. In September the English residents were deported.

Except for the first two weeks of the occupation, when listening to British stations was forbidden, there had been no restriction on the use of wireless receivers. With the German-controlled press publishing only enemy war commentaries and communiqués, the habit of tuning in to B.B.C. news broadcasts had become almost universal. The curfew, transport difficulties, and the limitation of public entertainments, had made recreational listening more popular than ever before. The depressing effect of the withdrawal of all sets from the civilian population can be imagined.

The fact that wireless sets are licensed made it difficult to evade the order. The Germans could easily make a check on license holders. Some of the more resourceful bought and handed in an old set, keeping their own for secret listening. The penalty for those who were found out was imprisonment or deportation. Some were taken to concentration camps from which they did not return.

The Deportation was effected with a dramatic suddenness that made it all the harder to bear. On September 15th a warning order appeared in the evening paper, stating that all persons whose permanent residence was not in the Channel Islands and all Englishmen between the ages of sixteen and seventy would be transferred to Germany, together with their families. 

No date was given for the evacuation, but the following morning German soldiers, working from lists compiled the previous year, started serving notices on some of the people concerned, ordering them to report for embarkation by four o'clock that afternoon. They were to take hand luggage only, and give the keys of their houses to the police. Failure to obey meant trial by court-martial.

The usually efficient German organisation seems for once to have broken down, and contradictory orders added to the confusion. Hundreds of people who were at work or who had gone out could not be traced at such short notice. A further sailing was arranged for the i8th, but about half of those who reported were turned away and told to return the following week. Many were in despair, having sold or given away all their food, linen, and fuel before leaving home.

Remembering how the Germans had requisitioned the contents of houses evacuated in 1940, some had, even in the short time available, stored their more easily movable furniture with friends. It was a time for testing friendships. Some were welcomed back by their neighbours with rejoicing. Others returned to find that `friends' had already broken into their houses and removed what they could lay their hands on. A musician caught his neighbours in the act of removing his grand piano. So much had two years of occupation done to the morals of the normally honest islanders.

There were similar scenes after the third and last deportation parade on September 29th. Two ships were filled, in no particular order of priority, and those who could not be accommodated (including some who had been turned away the first time) were sent back to their homes. Apart from a few who were deported the following year, they were not troubled again. It has been suggested that the remarkably haphazard organisation of the deportation was due to the German Commandant's disapproval of the order, which came from higher authority.
The depression caused by these two blows was lightened as winter advanced by the news of Montgomery's triumphant progress across North Africa. Even the German communiqués could not disguise Rommel's retreat, and news of each British success was passed round by the owners of hidden wireless sets.

Thursday, 23 November 2017

And so to bed

And so to bed... my regular selection of night time quotes.



And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Madeleine L'Engle:

Most of the time nowadays we human beings are referred to as consumers. What does the consumer think? What does the consumer want? How ugly. Forest fires consume. Cancer consumes. I want us to be nourishers. To be a librarian, particularly a librarian for young adults, is to be a nourisher, to share stories, offer books full of new ideas. We live in a world which has changed radically in the last half century, and story helps us to understand and live creatively with change.















And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Avi:

A sailor chooses the wind that takes the ship from a safe port. Ah, yes, but once you're abroad, as you have seen, winds have a mind of their own. Be careful, Charlotte, careful of the wind you choose.
















And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Lin Yutang:

I like spring, but it is too young. I like summer, but it is too proud. So I like best of all autumn, because its tone is mellower, its colours are richer, and it is tinged with a little sorrow. Its golden richness speaks not of the innocence of spring, nor the power of summer, but of the mellowness and kindly wisdom of approaching age. It knows the limitations of life and its content.












And so to bed.. quote for tonight comes from Simon Armitage:

It was the kind of music that God must hearing, no matter how busy or distracted, because it comes out of hundreds of square Miles of nothingness, out of the emptiness of the hills and the silence of the moors.
















And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Clifford D Simak:

He leaned back in his chair and let his eyes go shut and his mind drift back.

He was crouching in a corner of a garden and the leaves were drifting down from the walnut trees like a rain of saffron gold... When he held it so that the Sun struck it, he imagined that he could almost see through it, the gold was spun so fine.

He crouched with the leaf clutched tightly in his hand and for a moment there was a silence that held him motionless. Then he heard the frost-loosened leaves pattering all around him, pattering as they fell, talking in little whispers as they sailed down through the air and found themselves a bed with their golden fellows.

In that moment he knew that he was one with the leaves and the whispers that they made, one with the gold and the autumn sunshine and the far blue mist upon the hill above the apple orchard










And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Richard Rohr:

People who’ve had any genuine spiritual experience always know that they don’t know. They are utterly humbled before mystery. They are in awe before the abyss of it all, in wonder at eternity and depth, and a Love, which is incomprehensible to the mind.












And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Simon Armitage:

Of all the doorways in the world
to choose to sleep, I’ve chosen yours.
I’m on the street, under the stars.
For coppers I can dance or sing.
For silver-swallow swords, eat fire.
For gold-escape from locks and chains.
It’s not as if I’m holding out
for frankincense or myrrh, just change.
You give me tea. That’s big of you.


I’m on my knees. I beg of you.

Wednesday, 22 November 2017

A Century in Advertising - Part 10

A Century in Advertising - Part 10

My look at some of the advertisements and products of yesteryear. Some weird and whacky, some surprisingly still around today. Here are their stories.













1927 - Kodascope

Kodascope is a name created by Eastman Kodak Company for the projector it placed on the market in 1923 as part of the first 16mm motion picture equipment. The original Kodascope was part of an outfit that included the Cine-Kodak camera, tripod, Kodascope projector, projection screen, and film splicer, all of which sold together for $335

Kodascope Library, which operated from 1924 to 1939, and offered both educational and commercially released films on 16mm film and, from 1932, on 8mm film.

One of the great silent movies, “The Lost World” became a victim of its own popularity and the death of silent films. In the late 1920s when 16mm was introduced, 'Kodascope' digest versions were made of some popular silent films, for the home movie market. The Lost World was one of the first. The full version of Lost World was junked, and only recently pieced together from some Czech copies.




1928 - Aspironal

The website Nostrumopia comments:

Aspironal was a purported cold remedy manufactured by Aspironal Laboratories in Atlanta, Georgia, around the period of 1919 to 1921. The name obviously played on the name of Aspirin, as the medicine, which was a liquid solution, contained a solution of sodium salicylate and other ingredients. Salicylates are compounds from which aspirin is derived.

The advertisements for the medicine claimed it was "better than whiskey" for the treatment of colds or flu. Of course, although whiskey can provide some relief from the symptoms of a cold, it is not a cure, by any means. Neither are salicylates or any of the other ingredients in the Aspironal. Although the labels claimed that the solution contained 10% alcohol, it probably contained much more.

When federal prohibition tool place in 1920, some states had already enacted their own prohibition laws. Druggists and patent medicine makers took advantage of a loophole that allowed the sale of "medicinal Whiskey.”

You can imagine in what for this 'immediate relief' and 'quick warm-up' might come for a person in dire need of a drink! The dose instructions on the bottle were essentially to keep taking 1 teaspoonful until the desired effect. In other words, drink until you feel the desired buzz. Of course, they were careful to give the dose for children as drops.

For more information, see:
http://nostrumopia.blogspot.com/2014/11/aspironal-cold-remedy-better-than.html




1929 - Turtle Soup

Jack Hitt, on his blog, comments on this now rare delicacy:

I wanted to find out what had happened to turtle soup, which was among the most sought-after and popular dishes in all of American history. Accounts in the 18th and 19th centuries of massive parties known as “turtle frolics” suggest they were more popular than hog barbecues and oyster roasts, with descriptions of servants bearing three-foot-long upturned turtle shells filled with hot turtle stew for large crowds.

No early cookbook lacked a recipe for turtle, terrapin, or snapper stew—made from sea turtle, snapping turtle, box turtle, or diamondback terrapin, all of which, in Southern slang, became “cooter” in the pot. But some 50 years ago, turtle soup disappeared and, to most palates, now seems almost improbable verging on unacceptable. What happened?

For centuries, the flavor was legendary, and, really, nothing said American democracy like turtle. The poor man could often find a few slow-moving specimens hanging out at the backyard well, even as the privileged man sought out its refined flavor. Two days after voting for independence in Philadelphia, on July 4, 1776, John Adams celebrated with a bowl of turtle soup; when the war was over, George Washington met with his officers at Fraunces Tavern in lower Manhattan for a farewell frolic; and Lincoln celebrated his second inaugural with terrapin stew. Before Aaron Burr murdered Alexander Hamilton, both were members of the elite Hoboken Turtle Club.

The thing about an average turtle is that once cleaned, it will yield about three or four pounds of meat, so it's easy to see why it was once the workingman's meal. At any house with a well, there might be one or two turtles hanging out in the nearby puddles. I ran across accounts of people finding turtles here and there and tossing them into the water barrel at the well until there were enough to invite friends over for a frolic.

There was a big shift in tastes somewhere after World War I, Freedman told me. It's hard not to note the sheer variety of what was available before then, not just of turtle, but of all manner of meats.

Menus from that time routinely offered everything from roasted snipe and plover to rabbit hash, mutton cutlets, and oxtail. The decline of the family farm and the rise of mechanized factory farming, a process described as the “Eden Crash” in Christopher Leonard's Meat Racket, meant that by World War II, American taste for meat had bottlenecked into chicken, pork, and beef, all three of which could be grown, fed, quartered, and slaughtered according to the efficiency demands of Henry Ford's assembly-line theories. And I can testify that gutting and cleaning turtle is a big hassle and a poor candidate for any kind of industrial streamlining.

For more, see
https://www.saveur.com/history-of-turtle-soup-hunting

Tuesday, 21 November 2017

Breakwater Blues
















Breakwater Blues

In Guernsey news, BBC news reports that “The Alderney breakwater ‘remains vulnerable’ despite the £23m. Guernsey has spent maintaining it in the last thirty years, according to the president of Environment and Infrastructure.”

“Deputy Brehaut said the future of the breakwater had to be handled sensitively. However, a long-term strategy is needed that is more than just ongoing repairs. In many ways, he said the breakwater is a ‘metaphor for the protection that Guernsey provides Alderney’. ‘[The level of investment] does seem to be something of a folly, but to the people who live and work in the bay it provides them with protection.’ In powerful storms the breakwater is vulnerable to significant damage and in its current state it would be ‘difficult for someone to invest in’. “

‘The last time an option was put forward it cost £26m. to demolish part of the breakwater, shorten it and strengthen what was left,’ said Deputy Brehaut.

But in the Guernsey Press, Alderney representative Graham McKinley has accused Environment & Infrastructure of being less than supportive of the island’s most important assets.

One of the comments by Annette Curtan has some interesting historical background:

“Just for clarification .....When the French built a breakwater at Cherbourg in 1842, the British Government decided that a 'Harbour of Refuge' to protect the British fleet was needed. In 1847 work began on the Alderney breakwater and thousands of tons of granite had to be transported from the east of the island and from Portland. Irish workers escaping from poverty at home arrived in their hundreds to work on the project”.

”By 1864 at the western breakwater at 4,827 feet long was complete, but had cost an astonishing £1.5 million. However within a year, 1,780 feet was abandoned to the seas following heavy gales and as relations with the French had improved, the eastern arm was not continued with. “

“By 1871 all maintenance had ceased but as the old harbour was silting up, (allegedly because of the breakwater), Alderney appealed to the UK for financial assistance for its upkeep, this was granted in 1874.”

“This arrangement remained in place until the 1980s when Guernsey agreed to its upkeep in lieu of Defence payments. (Jersey pay approx £5 million per year to the UK for Defence.) Something of a folly eh Barry!”

In fact, a missing part of the history is that Guernsey’s troubles with the breakwater are Jersey’s fault.

After the Falklands War, mindful of the way the UK Government had helped with Jersey's post-war economy, and the help also provided by the Red Cross, the States decided (following a proposition by Senator Ralph Vibert )to make a one off payment to the Falkland Islands to help with their economy, island reaching out to island.

A gift of £5 million pounds was made "towards the expenses incurred in the recovery and rehabilitation of the Falkland Islands", of which £250,000 was made available straight away to the Falkland Islands Appeal, and the rest was originally going towards a jetty.

In fact, the balance was not used for that purpose. When Peter Crill, the new Bailiff, reported back to the States on 28th January, 1986, he noted that:

"I discussed the matter with Senator Vibert and we decided that the most appropriate items would be the provision of new housing and a renovated and expanded water treatment and supply plant. Accordingly, I informed the Home Office and the Executive Council of the Falklands now proposes to use the balance for these two projects. The housing development will be known as the Jersey Estate within which streets will be named after places in Jersey."

But the outcome of the donation had another effect. The Island's generosity had been seen by Whitehall, and the UK had noted that no defense contribution had been previously forthcoming since 1920, when after a protracted dispute, a single 'voluntary' payment of £300,000 was paid, on the grounds that Jersey had fiscal autonomy, and no representation in the UK Parliament.

Accordingly, both Jersey and Guernsey were now asked to pay their part in the defense of the realm. It was not hard to see why. If Jersey was capable of an act of generosity of £5 million pounds (the equivalent today of around £12,600,000) it clearly had money to burn.

The way in which the initial decision was made - like Ministerial decrees, this was decided without any discussion in the States - generated a lot of anger. The consensus was that the States, by acting precipitously, had woken up the UK Government to an extra source of revenue. Guernsey people, in particular, were even more annoyed by having to contribute as a result of Jersey's action.

There were several proposals on the table for defense, the most popular (especially with the Ministry of Defense in the UK) being a minesweeper, which would be supported in costs by Jersey, and which would hark back to the Island's maritime legacy.

The Special Committee consistently was recommending a Minesweeper as the contribution, although Deputy Rumboll favoured a contribution to search and rescue helicopter for the English Channel. In the end, Deputy Dereck Carter's proposition of a Territorial Army Unit, itself harking back to the Jersey Militia, managed to win the day, in the teeth of strong opposition.

Pierre Horsfall had won for the Special Committee the mandate (on 28th January, 1986) that "the Special Committee should enter into detailed discussions with the United Kingdom authorities regarding the feasibility of establishing in the Island a Royal Naval Reserve Unit, together with its attached minesweeper, the costs therefore being borne by the Island; and report back to the Assembly."

But the TA unit gained support, both with the public (who felt that if Jersey had to pay, at least this was not just writing a blank cheque) and the States. On 21st January, 1987 the States (including Pierre Horsfall) voted against the Minesweeper.

Looking back on the saga, Geoffrey Rowland, Bailiff of Guernsey, commented, that in 1984, when the Secretary of State in London raised with the Channel Islands the question of a financial contribution:

“It followed the Falkland Islands War and objective observers are of the opinion that the request was precipitated by Jersey making a voluntary contribution to Her Majesty’s Government. The outcome was that in 1987 a compromise was reached. Guernsey assumed, amongst other things, liability for the Alderney breakwater without giving an undertaking to Her Majesty’s Government that Guernsey would maintain it. Conspicuously Her Majesty’s Government had never over the years given any undertaking to Alderney that it would maintain the breakwater.”

So the cost of the Guernsey breakwater was part of a bargain struck which was precipitated by Jersey’s initial donation to the Falklands. Is it any wonder it is difficult for the politicians of both Islands to co-ordinate their affairs?

Recently, the matter of the Aircraft Registry, and now that of splitting the role of the Information Commissioner, show that a stance of short-sighted mutual belligerence is all too often the way ahead.

Monday, 20 November 2017

Nominee Directors: Still in the Frame















Nominee Directors: Still in the Frame

“A Latvian pensioner has emerged as one the World’s richest men – on paper. The 73 year old, appears to be a billionaire with an empire that has interests in hundreds of businesses including banks, investment funds, pharmaceuticals and shipping. But they are not his. He is revealed today as the stooge nominee director of “brass plate” companies from London to the Caribbean. He and others have also served on companies linked to a series of financial scandals. The stooge directors would have signed away rights to any powers and been unaware of any alleged fraud. “
--The Times, London 16 June 2013

The recent “Paradise Papers”, as reported in Radio 4’s “File on Four”, showed a web of companies from Nambia to Mauritius to Hong Kong. As the BBC reported:

“The fishing company in Nambia was Atlantic Pacific Fishing (APF), 51% Namibian owned. APF signed a deal with a company called Brandberg to manage their affairs, in return for 4% of the company's revenues. But despite being named after a Namibian mountain, Brandberg is based 4,000 miles away - in Mauritius. Why? Well, because of the island's double taxation treaties with Namibia, signed more than 20 years ago. In theory, this agreement means that companies operating in two countries can avoid being taxed in both by deciding which one would get the tax. In this case, it is Mauritius which gets the money.”

“The BBC went looking for Brandberg at its registered address in Port Louis, Mauritius. Only, it couldn't find the company. Where it should have been, we found instead an office for Appleby, one of the world's largest providers of offshore legal services. In fact, Brandberg the company that manages the Namibian fishing operation is actually based in Hong Kong. It was set up by Pacific Andes - one of the world's biggest fishing operations.””

“They show that Brandberg appears to have no economic activity in Mauritius. The only two directors of the company based in Mauritius both work for Appleby. And an email from a firm of auditors asking for the physical address of Brandberg is told in reply: Hong Kong.”

It appears these are nominee directors.

Another case in the Paradise Papers is equally instructive

Jean-Claude Bastos de Morais was trying to invest offshore but was having a hard time finding a place to put his money.

As ICIJ reports:

“First, Bastos tried Appleby’s office on the island of Jersey, a popular offshore financial centre in the English Channel. But Appleby employees there balked at his 2011 request to set up a shell company without being told why it was needed or what assets it would hold. One thing that concerned Appleby’s Jersey lawyers was the possibility that the shell company would own a shipping port in corruption-prone Angola.”

“Next Bastos, an amateur tennis player who runs an asset-management firm, Quantum Global Group, tried Appleby’s office on the Isle of Man, in the Irish Sea. Appleby’s management there decided that Appleby would require a seat on the offshore company’s board of directors to exercise some supervision over what they described as his high-risk business. The arrangement did not go ahead.”

“Finally, in 2013, after Angola’s sovereign wealth fund entrusted Bastos with $5 billion, he turned to another Appleby outpost: Mauritius, an island nation in the Indian Ocean, 1,200 miles off the east coast of southern Africa.”

“We are pleased to be able to act on your behalf,” Appleby’s top lawyer in Mauritius, Malcolm Moller, wrote to Bastos’ Quantum Global in October 2013.


The Affinex Group notes that:

“An offshore company registered in Mauritius must have at least one director. If you do not want to be the company director for any reason, you can use the services of a nominee director.”

“Nominee director - natural person EUR 400 a year (including one general Power of attorney verified by a Notary with Apostille and an undated resignation)”

The Guardian notes that “nominee directors” in some jurisdictions have no legal status but are “fettered” – it gives an example of a BVI company. The mechanisms used are:

·         A promise by a nominee director only to do what the real owner tells them – “I hereby declare that I shall only act upon instruction from the beneficial owners."
·         A "general power of attorney" – handing back power to the real owner. "To transact, manage and do all and every business matter … To open any bank account and to operate the same … To enter into all contracts … To collect debts, rents and other money due."
·         A signed, but undated, director's resignation letter – this can be used if the director acts in a way that the beneficial owners do not desire, but which may be part of his general fiduciary obligations as a director.

There used to be lots of nominee directors in Jersey, as noted in Mark Hampton’s 1996 book “The Offshore Interface”. But when the company law was changed in the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991 ("Companies Law"), it made directors far more responsible in law, and a lot of companies which had provided such services thought long and hard about it and ceased to do so.

Under the 1991 Law, as in the UK Company Law – there is no such legal entity as a “nominee director”. Indeed as Collas Crill point out, under the law:

“In general, a director may not fetter his discretion by contracting with other directors or with third parties to act in a certain way in the future. In other words, a directors obligation to act in accordance with his fiduciary duties would usually take precedence over any course of conduct he may have previously agreed with co directors or third parties.”

In Hawkes v Cuddy (2009) EWCA Civ 291 Stanley Burton LJ stated that:

"In my judgement, the fact that a director of a company has been nominated to that office by a shareholder does not, of itself, impose any duty on the director owed to his nominator. The director may owe duties to his nominator if he is an employee or officer of the nominator, or by reason of a formal or informal agreement with his nominator, but such duties do not arise out of his nomination, but out of a separate agreement or office. Such duties cannot however, detract from his duty to the company of which he is a director when he is acting as such.

That is not to say that nominee directors may not exist in Jersey or even in the UK. TCS Group UK says:

“We can provide UK or overseas nominee directors.”

Although it adds the caveat:

“A nominee director is not recognised by law and as such has the same legal obligations as a client providing their own directors. Where we are requested to provide nominees we will therefore require a full understanding of the nature of your business and also want to know who the beneficial owners of the company are, we will require certified copies of the passport and a recent utility bill or other proof of address for all beneficial owners of the company. This information is provided to us in the strictest confidence and we would only disclose it if required to do so by law.”

Comsure cite a case looking at “Duties of nominee directors faced with fraud” in the case of Central Bank of Ecuador and IAMF v Conticorp SA and others (2013). It notes that:

The Court “found the defendants guilty of dishonestly assisting and procuring the ‘nominee director’” to act in breach of his fiduciary duties, who acted at all times on the instructions of the other defendants.”

The Privy Council held: “Mr Taylor was in breach of fiduciary duty to IAMF because he failed to exercise any independent judgement.”

Comsure note that:

“The law relating to nominee directors’ duties is broadly speaking the same in the UK as it is in the Bahamas. As Lord Mance put it, “A nominee director is not entitled to forego, or surrender to another, any exercise of his discretion, however paltry the amount he may be paid.” In short, a nominee director is in no different a position to a normal director when it comes to the exercise of this duties.”

In the UK, in 2013, the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) noted that in the UK alone:

“Assuming that an individual acting as the director of over 50 companies is almost certainly acting as a nominee director, it estimates that 1,175 individuals are nominee directors and that 141,600 companies have nominee directors on their boards ‒ many of which are of course perfectly legitimate.”

Valetime Group notes that “nominee director” has no legal status, and yet can exist. However, they point out that: “Nominee directors share the same level of legal responsibilities as any other director. These responsibilities cannot be signed away to others or be treated as non-existent.”

And they state:

“We can provide directors and other nominee services, support to business processes & office services; and much else to present an UK face to a company’s image.”

And notes that:

“It must not be overlooked that nominee directors share the same level of responsibilities as do normal directors.  Their obligations cannot simply be signed away and directors cannot treat responsibilities as being non-existent (an accusation known in law as “abrogation”.)”

The OECD book “Behind the Corporate Veil: Using Corporate Entities for Illicit Purposes” comments that:

“Nominee directors and corporations sewing as directors [“corporate directors") can also be misused to conceal the identity of the beneficial owner and their use renders director information reported to the companies registry less useful. Nominee directors appear as a director on all company documents and in official registries (if any] but pass on all duties required to be performed by a director to the beneficial owner of the company. In many jurisdictions, the nominee or corporate director is not required to own shares in the company in which it serves as a director.”

“Certain jurisdictions, including most OECD Member countries and OFCs such as Cyprus. Isle of Man. Jersey. Malta. and the Netherlands Antilles, do not recognise nominee directors. Consequently a person who accepts a directorship is subject to all of the requirements and obligations of a director, including fiduciary obligations, notwithstanding the fact that he is acting as a nominee. “

“In certain jurisdictions, directors cannot be indemnified by the beneficial owner. Non-recognition of the concept of nominee director has one indirect benefit — those furnishing or acting as professional directors are likely to take greater precautions to ensure that their client - the beneficial owner - does not misuse the corporate vehicle for illicit purposes. “

And it gives an example:

“In the Netherlands Antilles, which does not recognise the concept of nominee directors, reputable trust companies that are asked to serve as directors will conduct a rigorous background check on their clients and. in the case of bearer share companies, will insist on the immobilisation of those shares as a condition to accepting a directorship. “

To curb the availability and use of nominee directorships certain jurisdictions, such as Ireland, impose a limit on the number of directorships a person may hold. In Ireland, a person may hold a maximum of 25 directorships. In the United Kingdom, the Companies Act requires disclosure of the identity of "shadow" directors, who are defined as persons on whose instructions the directors of a company are accustomed to act.

Even Mauritius does not recognise the concept of “nominee directors”, but it seems that some jurisdictions are better than others at ensuring directors face the full legal responsibility of their office. Jersey and the Isle of Man seem far better than Mauritius at ensuring that any directors acting as nominees do so as if they were not nominees, but properly appointed directors and not just stooges for the beneficial owners. 

But it would help to strengthen the case against nominee directors if the directors were made to declare by law, if they had any promissory notes, powers of attorney or unsigned resignation letters as outlined by the Guardian’s piece above so that their nominee status could be exposed in public.


References


Sunday, 19 November 2017

On Being a Christian















On Being a Christian

What is distinctive about being a Christian? A Christian is someone who is a “follow of Christ”, but if a non-religious person wanted to identify a Christian, how would they do so? I would like to explore this is greater depth.

One approach is to search the New Testament for various “proof texts” about Christians. Here we might look at the words of Jesus on his followers - “by their fruits you shall know them”, and also consider, for example, the “fruits of the spirit” mentioned in Paul, in Galatians 5:22: Love, Joy, Peace, Patience, Kindness, Goodness, Faithfulness, Gentleness and Self-Control.

The problem with this approach is that it is not showing what is distinctly Christian. A thought experiment may help here: you could have two people, one atheist, one Christian, both caring, compassionate, self-giving (like Mother Teresa). It would be impossible to tell from outward appearances who was a Christian and who was an atheist, unless there was some specifically Christian practice in which beliefs were also enunciated. Of course whether Christian or not, such actions should be commended.

If we look at the New Testament again, but not using proof texts, but simply marking out the broader picture which emerges, we can see that there are certain indicators, present in the early Church, which mark out Christians as different. There may be more, but I think one can safely single out at least five.

1.     What in modern terms we would call “lifestyle”, the way in which we live, and the values by which we live our lives, which are an ideal aspired to, even if we fall short of this. It is hear that we locate the “fruits of the Spirit” mention in Paul’s letters. The idea of “conforming to Christ” can also be located here.
2.     Coming together on "the Lord's day" and celebrating the "Lord's supper", which is again clearly denoted in Paul's letters as a tradition “handed down”, and is clearly very early. This may be termed “Mass”, “Eucharist”, “Holy Communion”, or even simply just “The Lord’s Supper”, but the core of the celebration remains the same. Again, this indicates that being a Christian is not, as a rule, a private matter, but a community matter, and also that it is not just about belief, but at its heart also involves the body in what might be understood as a form of “re-enactment”.
3.     Use of the "Lord's prayer" in liturgy and private prayer - this seems to have formed a part of early worship, and is also presented in the gospels as the prayer Jesus taught his disciples when asked how they should pray.
4.     Assenting to a an early credal statement like the Apostle's Creed, even if not explicitly spelt out in this form, as this is implicit in the New Testament writings, and places the elements of belief in proper harmony, not promoting one at the expense of others.
5.     Being baptised, as this forms part of the early tradition, and is a sign of joining and belonging to the Christian community. As with (2), this is a community practice, not a private social event.

I think if you just had (1), you would be possibly closer to Confucian or Socratic ethics than Christianity, in that it would not be distinctly Christian. The thought experiment of Mother Teresa shows that lifestyle, while necessarily a part of being a Christian, is not sufficient to mark out what is distinctly Christian. Equally, if you just had the ritualistic element of (2) to (5), this could all too easily become habit, losing sight of what Christianity is all about. Baptism (5) can degenerate into a social event, which is a ritual of a society with no beliefs but only  vestigial, pseudo-magical,  notions that certain rites must be followed. The Eucharist (2) can become just a community event, participation in which forms part of polite society and is expected.

While ritualistic element (2) and (5) can lend themselves to empty formalism, I don't think these can be remove them from the equation. The nearest to a Christian group without ritual would be the Quakers or Salvation Army, and even they meet together on Sundays, and conduct their own form of worship.

Historically, there is little evidence of Christianity from the earliest without these rituals, centred upon Jesus; Christianity is not purely ethical like the practices of the Stoics or Epicureans. Obviously there are exceptions, and there is a ascetic tradition of retreat, of being a hermit, as can be seen clearly with some of the desert fathers. But this is not taken as normative practice, although it is taken as permissible, of belonging within the boundaries of Christianity.

Of course, at the heart of Christianity, as at the heart of any faith tradition, is not just statements or practices, but an existential element. I remember a Druid friend of mine saying that rituals without engagement are just empty words and actions. At the heart of Christianity is God, and God is love in relationship:

If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.

For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me.

For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love. (1 Co 13:1-13)

Saturday, 18 November 2017

The Tide is High












Whatever the rights and wrongs of the local dispute with the RNLI, the singular action by the RNLI to lock their building and remove the lifeboat, rather than allowing an interim arrangement, is putting lives at risk. Will the RNLI take responsibility if lives are lost because of their precipitate action? This poem looks at what might happen. They need to put something else in place soon, either the existing crew or a new one.

The Tide is High

Waves crash on rocks, gulls cry
Dark storm clouds across the sky
The siren call, the song that calls
Poseidon’s deep, shipwreck falls
A call goes out, come aid me now
The waves crash thunder over bow
She dips and falls, then rises high
Swell so turbulent it meets the sky
But no one came, no listener heard
No listening radio, to hear a word
It is all locked up, and empty still
Heeds not despair, the cry so shrill
Up she goes, the boat once more
Down much deeper, ocean roar
The tide is high,still worse to come
The heavy rain pounds like a drum
Their faces white, and full of fear
And rocks grow every closer, near
No lifeboat now, was taken away
And how those sailors rue that day
Abandon ship, she’s sinking fast
And on the deck, a broken mast
The water is cold, freezing, ice
Bodies caught as within a vice
Another boat coming, with delay
Their distance just too far away
Find they bodies, floating, dead
Now words of comfort must be said
To relatives of those, they mourn
The passing to that final bourne
First duty: to save lives at sea
No one heard the dead men’s plea
Just too busy scoring points to care
Now commit to the deep, in prayer

Friday, 17 November 2017

Jersey Our Island: The Years of Darkness – Part 1

















Published in 1950, this is an interesting snapshot of the Island and its customs as it was in the immediate post-war period, and not without humour. Most guide books of the time give the tourist information, or give the impressions of an outsider to the Island, but this is in "inside view", which is rarer.

Jersey Our Island: The Years of Darkness – Part 1
by Sidney Bisson


A TABLET set in a circle of grass at one end of the North Marine Drive dedicates it `To the Men and Women of Jersey who suffered in the World War 1939-45.'

In Jersey the ultimate consequences of the evacuation from Dunkirk were overshadowed by its immediate results. The potato season was in full swing. The harbour should have been full of ships to take the precious crop to England. Where were they? Long strings of lorries waited on the quays for cargo steamers that did not arrive. Angry farmers demonstrated in the Royal Square against the incompetence of the authorities. They cursed at the waste of time and petrol as they drove their full loads back to their farms at night. The problem of the moment distracted their thoughts from the future.

Only with the fall of Paris came a general realisation that the island was in danger. Many English residents closed their homes and returned to England. The mail boats were crowded. Large numbers of British troops landed and began preparing defensive positions. The sound of gunfire was heard from the Continent.

On June 19th the comparative calm of the population was shattered by an announcement that the British Government had decided not to defend the Channel Islands. All troops would be withdrawn, and civilians who wished to leave the island would be evacuated the following day.

For two days panic reigned. Over 23,000 people decided to go, and joined a vast queue to hand in their names at the Town Hall. Shopkeepers closed their shops; farmers turned loose their cattle; hundreds drove to the harbour and abandoned their cars on the quay.

Thirty-one ships sailed with 8,500 passengers. A few more continued to leave on the following days, but well over half of those who had registered for evacuation changed their minds and stayed. Official announcements that the civil authorities were staying at their posts helped to restore calm. If they had been made earlier, the panic might have been avoided. Those who remained had a busy weekend looking after the effects of the evacuees. The police collected perishable food from evacuated houses. Relatives and friends removed or buried valuables, collected abandoned cars, cattle, poultry, and household pets, made arrangements to re-open businesses.

By Monday the 24th the island had returned to a semblance of normal life. But the Battle of France had ended, and the question that was upper- most in the people's minds was, `When will the Germans come?' During the next few days their planes flew high over the island. On the 28th they came low and dropped bombs near St. Helier's harbour. A few small boats caught fire, but most of the damage was to private houses and business premises in the vicinity. Six people were killed. La Rocque harbour was also bombed and various parts of the island were machine-gunned, causing further, but not heavy, casualties. After the raid the ships remaining in the harbour sailed for England and a B.B.C. broad- cast proclaimed the island an `open town.' There was no more bombing, but on July 1st messages dropped from the air called on the island to surrender.

There was no possible alternative. A silent crowd gathered to watch workmen painting a white cross on the Royal Square, where the last invader of Jersey was defeated in 1781. For the first time in her history the island surrendered without resistance.

Everyone I have spoken to agrees that the first thing that struck them about the German troops was their good behaviour. Those who expected an orgy of rape and atrocities were disappointed.

There was merely a spate of official proclamations. A curfew was imposed, weapons were confiscated, the use of private cars was prohibited, the sale of spirits was banned.

One of the most curious orders was that which permitted the continuation of Divine Worship in Churches and Chapels. One wonders if Hauptmann Gussek doubted the efficacy of prayer or just wanted to create a good impression when he decreed that `Prayers for the British Royal Family and for the welfare of the British Empire (my italics!) may be said.' At any rate he was having no proselytising. When the local Evening Post started an English-German vocabulary column for the benefit of readers who wanted to understand the invader, a correspondent suggested that a translation of the Lord's Prayer might be `a means of helpful contact and sympathy.' But the German Commandant forbade its publication.

My father and mother were amongst those who remained in the island. Like many other people with ties on the mainland as well as in Jersey, they found it difficult to make their decision. Relatives and friends in England proffered contradictory advice.

Those who visualised the enemy as a devastating arch-demon suggested immediate flight and offered accommodation. Others, like myself, who expected that the bombing of England would be intensified now that France had fallen, regarded even a German- occupied Jersey as a place of comparative safety. In fact, only a sense of duty prevented us from packing up and going to join my parents.

In the end Fate decided for them. The strain of that heart- swelling evacuation week proved too much for my mother's health, which broke down completely. They had to stay. For us, then, anxiety prevailed over duty. Or if you are a cynic, say that we were glad to have an excuse for going to what we thought was a better ‘ole! Anyway, we decided to go to Jersey. But we had left it too late. When I tried to get tickets, neither the steamship companies nor Jersey Airways would consider bookings to the Channel Islands. A last exchange of telegrams, then silence unbroken save by an occasional Red Cross message for five long years.

How we looked forward to those Red Cross messages. And how little real news their twenty-five words conveyed, much as we tried to read between the lines. For of course they had to be strictly confined to personal matters. Sometimes our anxiety made us read too much into them. When my sister-in-law wrote that she was very tired and needed a holiday we were almost convinced that the Germans had conscripted her for their Labour Corps. Only after the Liberation did we realise that every housewife was tired by the ceaseless search for food and the difficulty of cooking it when it had been procured.

At first the Red Cross messages were few and far between. Then we heard of a scheme devised by Thomas Cook's. For a small fee they provided you with an accommodation address in Portugal, posted your letters in that country, and re-directed the replies when they arrived there. At the risk of mystifying our relations in Jersey, who were bound to wonder what on earth we were doing in Portugal, we decided to try it. But no replies came, for the simple reason, as we discovered afterwards, that our own letters never got through. I only know of one other person who tried to get news this way, and one of his letters has just reached Jersey after over five years of travel. There is a chance that ours may get here yet!

Later, particularly in 1943 and the early part of 1944, messages were more frequent, and our scanty news was supplemented by the Channel Islands Monthly Review. This excellent little magazine, published by the Channel Islands Society at Stockport, printed not only any interesting Red Cross messages received by its readers, but also longer letters from internees in Germany full of Channel Islands news.

It is one of the minor mysteries of the censorship (or perhaps of the Rules of War) that although the islanders could only write twenty-five words for transmission to England, they could communicate freely with internees and prisoners of war in Germany, who in turn passed on the news to relatives and friends in England. Those in Germany could also send to the islands food and cigarettes which they received in parcels from England, yet nothing could be sent from England to Jersey.

It was mainly from this news traffic via Germany that we learnt to discount the more sensational newspaper reports of conditions in the Channel Islands. When the Daily Blank announced that the islanders were reduced to boiling cat skins for food, we took comfort in the reports of people who were `quite cheerful,' `all fit and well,' or `busy growing vegetables,' and who mentioned cycling, concerts, and amateur theatricals as the principal amusements.

If Mr. A missed his golf and Mrs. B complained of the cost of living, Mr. C said his children were healthy and Mrs. D spoke of a successful Harvest Festival. We smiled when the same newspaper reported that the latest fashion, born of necessity, was to go about dressed in an old sack. For did we not know from the Review that a well-known resident kept up his pre-war custom of wearing a carnation in his button-hole on his daily walk to business. And surely not even the most ardent dianthophile would insult the product of his horticultural art by displaying it on a background of sacking.

There were those, it is true, who contended that Red Cross messages and internees' letters alike were dictated by the enemy at the point of the bayonet for propaganda purposes only a position hard to maintain in view of the many scarcely veiled references to the enemy. The British censors must have been amused at the number of islanders who had an Uncle Jerry. According to Godfrey, one old lady who could not understand this addition to the family pedigree wrote back `Who is Uncle Jerry e' The reply 'Uncle Joe's new neighbour'- must have puzzled her still more...

The truth lay somewhere between the two pictures thus presented. Newspaper reports based on information smuggled out of the island were usually exaggerated; messages sent openly from the island were forcedly cheerful. No one who was not there or who has not talked freely to people who remained can imagine the conditions that prevailed during the occupation. I hope that someone will be tempted to write of his or her personal experiences.

Thursday, 16 November 2017

And so to bed...

And so to bed... my regular collection of inspiring quotes posted last thing at night, collected here.















And so to bed... quote for tonight is from James Hilton:

For London, Blampied claimed, was of all cities in the world the most autumnal —its mellow brickwork harmonizing with fallen leaves and October sunsets, just as the etched grays of November composed themselves with the light and shade of Portland stone. There was a charm, a deathless charm, about a city whose inhabitants went about muttering, "The nights are drawing in," as if it were a spell to invoke the vast, sprawling creature-comfort of winter.”












And so to bed... quote for tonight is from Philip Johnstone’s 1918 poem called ‘High Wood’:

In the fighting for this patch of wood
Were killed somewhere above eight thousand men,
Of whom the greater part were buried here,
This mound on which you stand being ...
Madame, please,
You are requested kindly not to touch
Or take away the Company’s property
As souvenirs; you’ll find we have on sale
A large variety, all guaranteed.
As I was saying, all is as it was,
This is an unknown British officer,
The tunic having lately rotted off.
Please follow me – this way ...
the path, sir, please.
The ground which was secured at great expense
The Company keeps absolutely untouched,
And in that dug-out (genuine) we provide
Refreshments at a reasonable rate.
You are requested not to leave about
Paper, or ginger-beer bottles, or orange-peel,
There are waste-paper-baskets at the gate.


British lieutenant John Stanley Purvis, who wrote under the pseudonym of Philip Johnson, was invalided out of the army after been wounded during the Battle of the Somme. Following the war he returned to Cranleigh School in Surrey where he had previously taught. He then took holy orders and at the age of 50 he settled in York













And so to bed... quote for tonight was written in 2009 by James Jeffrey, a thirty-two-year-old Captain serving with the Queen’s Royal Lancers, in Afghanistan

The Last Supper

A supper when we shared a table
Secure beside the bomb-blast walls
The ketchup bottle a reminder of home
Stands out from many others
I remember your humour, the polite bearing,
Explaining that insane job with zeal
Each day spending hours defusing bombs
Lying on dirt tracks, staring through sweat at wires
I sat wondering how it must feel
Almost asking the unquestionable
Might it be a matter of time with the numbers?
Perhaps you’d already thought this through.
Yet you never deterred in protecting others
All the way to where you could not turn back
From the blinding hot blast demanding sacrifice
Taking away the scruffy cheerful calm
Leaving another picture in a morose mosaic












And so to bed.. quote for tonight is from David Lloyd-George:

We cannot feed the hungry with statistics of national prosperity, or stop the pangs of famine by reciting to a man the prodigious number of cheques that pass through the clearing-house.












And so to bed... quote for tonight is from John F Kennedy:

Now the trumpet summons us again--not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need--not as a call to battle, though embattled we are-- but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, "rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation"--a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease and war itself.









G'Quon wrote, There is a greater darkness than the one we fight. It is the darkness of the soul that has lost its way.

The war we fight is not against powers and principalities – it is against chaos and despair. Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender.

The future is all around us, waiting in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation.

No one knows the shape of that future, or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.

Wednesday, 15 November 2017

A Century in Advertising - Part 9

A Century in Advertising - Part 9

My look at some of the advertisements and products of yesteryear. Some weird and whacky, some surprisingly still around today. Here are their stories.



















1925 - Hovis

Hovis Ltd is a British company that produces flour and bread. The brand originated in Macclesfield, Cheshire, in 1886, and became part of Rank Hovis McDougall (RHM) in 1962 after a succession of mergers. RHM, with its brands including Hovis and Mother's Pride, was acquired by Premier Foods in 2007.

The brand began in 1886; the Hovis process was patented on 6 October 1887[5] by Richard "Stoney" Smith (1836–1900), and S. Fitton & Sons Ltd developed the brand, milling the flour and selling it along with Hovis branded baking tins to other bakers.

The name was coined in 1890 by London student Herbert Grime in a national competition set by S. Fitton & Sons Ltd to find a trading name for their patent flour which was rich in wheat germ. Grime won £25 when he coined the word from the Latin phrase hominis vis – "the strength of man". The company became the Hovis Bread Flour Company Limited in 1898

When the abundance of certain B vitamins in wheatgerm was reported in 1924, Hovis increased in popularity!



















1926 - The Hoover

Hoover is an American vacuum cleaner company that started out as an American floor care manufacturer based in North Canton, Ohio.

The first upright vacuum cleaner was invented in June 1908 by Canton, Ohio department store janitor and occasional inventor James Murray Spangler (1848–1915). Spangler was an asthmatic, and suspecting the carpet sweeper he was using at work was the cause of his ailment, he created a basic suction-sweeper by mounting an electric fan motor on a Bissell brand carpet sweeper then adding a soap box and a broom handle. After refining the design and obtaining a patent for the Electric Suction Sweeper he set about producing it himself, assisted by his son, who helped him assemble the machines, and his daughter, who assembled the dust bags. Production was slow, just two to three machines completed a week.

Spangler then gave one of his Electric Suction Sweepers to his cousin Susan Troxel Hoover (1846–1925), who used it at home. Impressed with the machine, she told her husband and son about it. William Henry "Boss" Hoover (August 18, 1849 – February 25, 1932) and son Herbert William Hoover Sr. (October 30, 1877 – September 16, 1954) were leather goods manufacturers in North Canton, Ohio, which at the time was called New Berlin.

Seeing a marketing opportunity, Hoover bought the patent from Spangler in 1908, founding the Electric Suction Sweeper Company with $36,000 capital, retaining Spangler as production supervisor with pay based on royalties in the new business. Spangler continued to contribute to the company, patenting numerous further Suction Sweeper designs until his death in 1915, when the company name was changed to the Hoover Suction Sweeper Company

It also established a major base in the United Kingdom and for most of the early-and-mid-20th century it dominated the electric vacuum cleaner industry, to the point where the "Hoover" brand name became synonymous with vacuum cleaners and vacuuming in the United Kingdom and Ireland.



















1927 - Lucozade

"LUCOZADE-—Word mark. Wares: Non-alcoholic and carbonated beverages of all kinds and essences and syrups for making same. William Walker Hunter, trading as W. Owen & Son, 151, Barras Bridge, Newcastle-uponTyne, England. NS.

Lucozade is a soft drink manufactured by the Japanese company Suntory and marketed as a range of sports and energy drinks. Created as "Glucozade" in the UK in 1927 by a Newcastle pharmacist, William Walker Hunter (trading as W. Owen & Son),[a] it was acquired by the British pharmaceutical company Beecham's in 1938 and sold as an energy drink for the sick as Lucozade.

A glucose–water solution, the product was sold until 1983 as a carbonated, slightly orange-flavoured drink in a glass bottle wrapped in yellow cellophane. Pharmacists sold it, children were given it when ill, and hospital visitors would regularly arrive with a bottle.

"Dilly" (Poppadom Preach, 2011). "[Dr Johnson suspected that Egg had] picked up a bug of some sort. He said she needed plenty to drink, and suggested Lucozade. Suddenly I wished I was sick as well, because my friendship with Estie had given me a taste for Lucozade: the smell, the bright orange colour, the cellophane wrapping (which could later be used to make X-ray specs), the glugging as it left the bottle like a fizzy golden waterfall, the tiny bubbles jumping out of the glass and popping in the air."

"Adrian Mole" (The Lost Diaries of Adrian Mole, 1999–2001, 2009): "Personally I think it was a great mistake to provide hospital patients with bedside telephones. They give their long-suffering relations no peace with their incessant, peevish demands for Lucozade and boxes of tissues."

Tuesday, 14 November 2017

Behind the Headline: Christian groups to fight same-sex marriage

King Solomon and his wives
















Behind the Headline: Christian groups to fight same-sex marriage

https://www.bailiwickexpress.com/jsy/news/christians-fight-gay-marriage/

"A pro-Christian legal advice centre based in London is supporting Jersey Christian groups to fight proposals to introduce same-sex marriage in the island. In a memo seen by Express, The Christian Legal Centre provides advice on opposing same-sex marriage laws and suggests potential 'conscience clauses' that would allow Christians to opt out of the new legislation on religious grounds."

"It's believed the document is intended to support local efforts to get the new laws amended, delayed or scrapped altogether before they are agreed by the States."

The memo says: “Marriage has for time immemorial, brought a woman and man together in an exclusive relationship, which was meant to be permanent, and with the purpose of rearing children. Because of the family centred nature of marriage, government has a compelling interest to ensure a healthy marriage culture. By redefining marriage to be merely a contract based primarily on love, and divorcing it from its biological, social and anthropological purposes, the result is not only a breakdown of the marriage culture but numerous other serious threats to our freedoms.”

I do wish these people would stop making assertions which are quite frankly false.

As Rabbi Dr. Mark Goldfeder remarks:

“For Judaism and Jewish practice, everything eventually comes back to the Bible, and so there is no better place to begin. In both the narrative and genealogical sections of the Old Testament, there are numerous references to polygynous marriages, and there are quite a few Biblical laws and passages that presuppose the existence of polygamy.”

“While there are no biblical passages that seem to indicate an actual preference for polygamy, there are plenty of legal passages that acknowledge its existence and even approve of it. Aside from the many tales of multiple wives, the Bible assumes that female slaves will marry either their owner or his son, regardless of whether or not they are already married. Elsewhere, the text is explicit that ‘if a man (who is already married) marries another woman, he must not withhold (from his first wife) her food, her clothing, or her conjugal rights.’ The Torah also discusses what to do when bequeathing property to sons born from multiple wives in a situation where one wife is loved more than the other.”

“The rules of levirate marriage compel a man (in certain circumstances) to marry his childless brother's widow, regardless of whether or not the man is already married to his own wife. This is important because it is one of the only times (aside from the case of barrenness, above) that the taking of a second wife could be construed as actually fulfilling a commandment. The Children of Israel are warned that their king should not have too many wives, while Deuteronomy's discussion of the "beautiful captive" seems to be given in a polygamous context, as it too does not differentiate between married and unmarried soldiers.”(1)

The examples in the Biblical text are numerous:

“Throughout the Prophets and Writings we encounter Gideon (who had "many wives" ), King Saul (who had multiple wives, although no exact number is given , King David (who had seven wives before he reigned in Jerusalem, and then took additional wives and concubines when he left Hebron , King Solomon (seven hundred royal wives and three hundred concubines), King Mennasseh (at least one concubine), Shaharaim (three wives, unclear how many concurrent), King Rehoboam of Judah (eighteen wives and sixty concubines, and who sired twenty eight sons for whom he sought many wives ), Abia (fourteen wives and an unknown number of concubines), and King Jehoash (two wives)

To say therefore that “Marriage has for time immemorial, brought a woman and man together in an exclusive relationship” is to play fast and loose with history.

Time immemorial paints a very different picture, and it is really a much later development when monogamy becomes the rule for Jewish society.

“Overall, the materials available from the Second Temple period, both legal and homiletic, seem to reflect a growing attitude in favor of monogamy. Despite the fact that the majority of Jewish texts (with the exception of the Damascus Document had not outlawed the practice of polygamy at this time, it is likely that it was not common. This concept, of polygamy being legally valid but socially frowned upon, continued as a trend in the Jewish communities throughout the Talmudic period.”

So marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, while it existed in the ancient world, was not the only form of marriage.

None of this bears directly on same-sex marriage, which certainly did not exist in the ancient Jewish world, but it does show that what is deemed to constitute marriage is built on shaky foundations if it is attempted to built it on the Bible as fixed and immutable..

References:

The Story of Jewish Polygamy. Mark Goldfeder, Columbia Journal of Gender and Law.

Mark Goldfeder is senior lecturer at Emory University School of Law, Spruill Family Senior Fellow at the Center for the Study of Law and Religion, and director of the Restoring Religious Freedom Project. He is also editor of the Cambridge University Press Series on Law and Judaism, and has served as an adviser to the Permanent Mission of Israel to the United Nations.