Quantcast
More Cockery from Prentice - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
AngryofTuebrook

More Cockery from Prentice

Recommended Posts

Not his worst crime ever, I suppose. It's just a bit irritating that the hack ruins a potentially interesting article by talking shite about "shedding new light" on the formation of LFC - despite failing to add any key facts to what was contained in the Official History of LFC 7 years ago.

Liverpool Echo.co.uk - Everton FC - News - Football historian Peter Lupson sheds light on 1892 Liverpool and Everton rent row

IT’S the most famous rent row in football history.

 

Except football historian Peter Lupson has now shed new light on the 1892 argument which saw Liverpool Football Club emerge from a split with Everton.

 

And living up to Liverpool stereotype, it was a row over a drink – or rather attitudes to the demon drink – which caused the seismic shift.

 

Even fans with barely a passing acquaintance of the history of this city’s two soccer giants know that Everton came first, until a row over rent at their Anfield home led to the formation of Liverpool.

 

Lupson, author of the best-selling Across The Park and Thank God For Football, has spent months researching, studying and meticulously chronicling the background and the history of the events of 1891 and 1892.

 

And he delivered his findings at a packed Hornby Room in Liverpool’s Central Library yesterday.

 

For 127 years it has been accepted that rent, pure and simple, was at the heart of the acrimonious row.

 

Everton were the tenants of Anfield, and John Houlding wanted to increase the rent on the stadium he owned.

 

Leading committee members, led by George Mahon, disagreed – and the situation escalated to the point of irretrievable breakdown.

 

The whole row, however, was infinitely more complex – and at the heart was alcohol and politics, always an explosive mix.

 

On one side was John Houlding, a Tory and a wealthy brewer – and his only ally on the board, Edwin Berry, a solicitor to the Licensed Victualler’s Association.

 

Ranged against him were a selection of some of the most zealous moral puritans of the day.

 

George Mahon was the organist of St Domingo’s Church and a member of the Liberal Party which, despite the name, was the party of moral purity in the austere Victorian age.

 

Rev Ben Chambers, loosely described as the founder of Everton, was a prominent member of the Temperance Movement and once took a pub to court in Stoke for breaking a licencing law.

 

Dr Clement Baxter was a committed and much loved city doctor who regularly witnessed first hand the appalling affects of drink on his patients – and a Liberal councillor to boot.

 

Will Cuff was a choirmaster at St Domingo’s, a strong and committed Christian who once declared that: “Football is the greatest teetotal agency in the world.”

 

There was William Whitford – an active temperance campaigner who went around talking about the “iniquitous influence of brewers” at a time when Houlding still owned his club!

 

And William Clayton, a committee member who used to give regular temperance talks to a Formby church.

 

Houlding never stood a chance.

 

“The Temperance Movement was at its height in the 1880s,” explained Lupson. “There is no doubt that had Houlding been a butcher or a baker, he would have had no problems.

 

“But he was a brewer.

 

“And at the time the association with drink was something that people of high moral standards were strongly opposed to.”

 

And the majority of the rapidly expanded Everton board were tee-total.

 

Indeed when Mahon led Everton to Goodison Park he ensured it was a club policy decision not to sell intoxicating liquor on the premises and that brewers would not finance the club.

 

That last statement was hugely ironic given the current reliance of both clubs on funds from brewing giants Chang and Carlsberg.

 

Lupson added: “The whole thing hinged on the Sandon Hotel,” (the official club headquarters and the pub used as a changing room by the players due to its proximity to Anfield).

 

“Drink had the same kind of image in the Victorian age as drugs does now,” he said “and while it is an exaggeration to say that Houlding was considered the pusher of the time, I don’t think we can quite go that far, but nevertheless the Temperance Movement was a powerful one trying to fight what it saw as the evils of drink.

 

“People would spend money on drink that should have gone on their children and on food and clothing. Children were left destitute.

 

“Liverpool had one fortieth of the country’s population, but a tenth of the arrests for alcohol related crime.

 

“It was a major problem. Beer was cheaper than tea or coffee and safer than water or milk.

 

“But members like William Clayton were horrified that the Sandon was seen to be causing bad behaviour amongst Everton players.

 

“One, Patrick Gordon, was brought before the committee for bad behaviour whilst drunk in the Sandon. Another committee member felt that one slump in results was due to players spending too much time there.”

 

While rising rents was undoubtedly the catalyst for the row, it seems that the attitudes and the personalities of the individuals concerned was equally to blame.

 

Houlding and Mahon had crossed swords politically before the split.

 

In 1887 Mahon was elected to the Walton local board, at the expense of Houlding’s protege John Utting.

 

And two years later Houlding was the agent for a Lancashire council hopeful called Ratcliffe. Mahon, who was the returning officer, disqualified Ratcliffe on a technicality.

 

But while Houlding has been dealt a bad press down the years, painted as the villain of the piece, Lupson considers that description as a myth.

 

“When Everton were forced to move from Priory Road to Anfield in 1884, the club’s very future was threatened because of the cost of building a new stadium,” he explained.

 

“Two members of the management committee, William Barclay and W Jackson went to Houlding and asked him to buy the club out.

 

“The cost of building a new stadium was £6,000 – in an age when £1,000 would have paid the wages of an entire football team for a whole year.

 

“He was offered no guarantees, with just a maximum of £100 a year rent in return, but Houlding agreed so that Everton could continue.”

 

“In 1889 when he opened his second pub, he introduced free Christmas dinners for the elderly and poor in West Derby with, eventually, 1,000 beneficiaries.

 

“He was involved in a workhouse and opened an orphanage in Fazakerley.

 

“Tom Evans, the vice-captain of Everton, even wrote a letter to The Sports Field at the height of the dispute describing Houlding as ‘the best friend the club ever had.’

 

Appropriately, Peter Lupson chose Armistice Day for his final revelation.

 

He explained: “I found an article where William Barclay declared ‘although we are the Liverpool club, all the old playing members of the old Everton, to whom Evertonians are much indebted for promoting the game in our midst, have been elected honorary life members of our club.’ ”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And he's still spinning this shite.Evidence suggests Everton FC's David Moyes' People's Club phrase existed in 1892

Nov 12 2009 Liverpool Echo

Add a commentRecommend (2) DAVID MOYES might have first coined the phrase “The People’s Club” but there is evidence that was the case a century ago.

 

George Mahon felt that when Everton re-opened at Goodison Park he wanted the members of the club to have control, the shares divided evenly across the club.

 

John Houlding, however, believed that the shares should be held by the people who invested the money in the club.

 

In 1892, after the split, 10 directors owned 6% of Everton’s total shares.

 

Liverpool’s eight directors owned 54%.

 

David Moyes might have coined the phrase, but it seems Everton has always been the People’s Club!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not his worst crime ever, I suppose. It's just a bit irritating that the hack ruins a potentially interesting article by talking shite about "shedding new light" on the formation of LFC - despite failing to add any key facts to what was contained in the Official History of LFC 7 years ago.

Liverpool Echo.co.uk - Everton FC - News - Football historian Peter Lupson sheds light on 1892 Liverpool and Everton rent row

IT’S the most famous rent row in football history.

 

Except football historian Peter Lupson has now shed new light on the 1892 argument which saw Liverpool Football Club emerge from a split with Everton.

 

And living up to Liverpool stereotype, it was a row over a drink – or rather attitudes to the demon drink – which caused the seismic shift.

 

Even fans with barely a passing acquaintance of the history of this city’s two soccer giants know that Everton came first, until a row over rent at their Anfield home led to the formation of Liverpool.

 

Lupson, author of the best-selling Across The Park and Thank God For Football, has spent months researching, studying and meticulously chronicling the background and the history of the events of 1891 and 1892.

 

And he delivered his findings at a packed Hornby Room in Liverpool’s Central Library yesterday.

 

For 127 years it has been accepted that rent, pure and simple, was at the heart of the acrimonious row.

 

Everton were the tenants of Anfield, and John Houlding wanted to increase the rent on the stadium he owned.

 

Leading committee members, led by George Mahon, disagreed – and the situation escalated to the point of irretrievable breakdown.

 

The whole row, however, was infinitely more complex – and at the heart was alcohol and politics, always an explosive mix.

 

On one side was John Houlding, a Tory and a wealthy brewer – and his only ally on the board, Edwin Berry, a solicitor to the Licensed Victualler’s Association.

 

Ranged against him were a selection of some of the most zealous moral puritans of the day.

 

George Mahon was the organist of St Domingo’s Church and a member of the Liberal Party which, despite the name, was the party of moral purity in the austere Victorian age.

 

Rev Ben Chambers, loosely described as the founder of Everton, was a prominent member of the Temperance Movement and once took a pub to court in Stoke for breaking a licencing law.

 

Dr Clement Baxter was a committed and much loved city doctor who regularly witnessed first hand the appalling affects of drink on his patients – and a Liberal councillor to boot.

 

Will Cuff was a choirmaster at St Domingo’s, a strong and committed Christian who once declared that: “Football is the greatest teetotal agency in the world.”

 

There was William Whitford – an active temperance campaigner who went around talking about the “iniquitous influence of brewers” at a time when Houlding still owned his club!

 

And William Clayton, a committee member who used to give regular temperance talks to a Formby church.

 

Houlding never stood a chance.

 

“The Temperance Movement was at its height in the 1880s,” explained Lupson. “There is no doubt that had Houlding been a butcher or a baker, he would have had no problems.

 

“But he was a brewer.

 

“And at the time the association with drink was something that people of high moral standards were strongly opposed to.”

 

And the majority of the rapidly expanded Everton board were tee-total.

 

Indeed when Mahon led Everton to Goodison Park he ensured it was a club policy decision not to sell intoxicating liquor on the premises and that brewers would not finance the club.

 

That last statement was hugely ironic given the current reliance of both clubs on funds from brewing giants Chang and Carlsberg.

 

Lupson added: “The whole thing hinged on the Sandon Hotel,” (the official club headquarters and the pub used as a changing room by the players due to its proximity to Anfield).

 

“Drink had the same kind of image in the Victorian age as drugs does now,” he said “and while it is an exaggeration to say that Houlding was considered the pusher of the time, I don’t think we can quite go that far, but nevertheless the Temperance Movement was a powerful one trying to fight what it saw as the evils of drink.

 

“People would spend money on drink that should have gone on their children and on food and clothing. Children were left destitute.

 

“Liverpool had one fortieth of the country’s population, but a tenth of the arrests for alcohol related crime.

 

“It was a major problem. Beer was cheaper than tea or coffee and safer than water or milk.

 

“But members like William Clayton were horrified that the Sandon was seen to be causing bad behaviour amongst Everton players.

 

“One, Patrick Gordon, was brought before the committee for bad behaviour whilst drunk in the Sandon. Another committee member felt that one slump in results was due to players spending too much time there.”

 

While rising rents was undoubtedly the catalyst for the row, it seems that the attitudes and the personalities of the individuals concerned was equally to blame.

 

Houlding and Mahon had crossed swords politically before the split.

 

In 1887 Mahon was elected to the Walton local board, at the expense of Houlding’s protege John Utting.

 

And two years later Houlding was the agent for a Lancashire council hopeful called Ratcliffe. Mahon, who was the returning officer, disqualified Ratcliffe on a technicality.

 

But while Houlding has been dealt a bad press down the years, painted as the villain of the piece, Lupson considers that description as a myth.

 

“When Everton were forced to move from Priory Road to Anfield in 1884, the club’s very future was threatened because of the cost of building a new stadium,” he explained.

 

“Two members of the management committee, William Barclay and W Jackson went to Houlding and asked him to buy the club out.

 

“The cost of building a new stadium was £6,000 – in an age when £1,000 would have paid the wages of an entire football team for a whole year.

 

“He was offered no guarantees, with just a maximum of £100 a year rent in return, but Houlding agreed so that Everton could continue.”

 

“In 1889 when he opened his second pub, he introduced free Christmas dinners for the elderly and poor in West Derby with, eventually, 1,000 beneficiaries.

 

“He was involved in a workhouse and opened an orphanage in Fazakerley.

 

“Tom Evans, the vice-captain of Everton, even wrote a letter to The Sports Field at the height of the dispute describing Houlding as ‘the best friend the club ever had.’

 

Appropriately, Peter Lupson chose Armistice Day for his final revelation.

 

He explained: “I found an article where William Barclay declared ‘although we are the Liverpool club, all the old playing members of the old Everton, to whom Evertonians are much indebted for promoting the game in our midst, have been elected honorary life members of our club.’ ”

 

Nothing new there then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an interesting fact about the split. We weren't formed in 1892 - we were the original company and just changed our name from Everton to Liverpool. They were the new entity - evicted and took the name (and stole the turnstiles).

 

So the title won before 1892 can't belong to them as they didn't exist at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's an interesting fact about the split. We weren't formed in 1892 - we were the original company and just changed our name from Everton to Liverpool. They were the new entity - evicted and took the name (and stole the turnstiles).

 

So the title won before 1892 can't belong to them as they didn't exist at the time.

 

Clutching at straws there, and not just any straws, century old straws

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't ring true really bearing in mind the so called Temperance FC (presumably with all these zealots at its head) decided to use Houldings pub and ground knowing his background.

 

So it was ok when they were in need but when the rent was going up they decided to bail and his brewing background is now being put up as part of the reason? Can't see it myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's an interesting fact about the split. We weren't formed in 1892 - we were the original company and just changed our name from Everton to Liverpool. They were the new entity - evicted and took the name (and stole the turnstiles).

 

So the title won before 1892 can't belong to them as they didn't exist at the time.

 

 

So we're really Everton?

 

Suddenly so many posts on this forum make sense...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clutching at straws there, and not just any straws, century old straws

 

I don't want to add it to our total -I just deduct it from theirs. If you know your history.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×