Following the Great Plague and the Fire of London in 1666 aristocratic families started to move westwards and the development of the West End had begun. City tradesmen also started to move west to escape the effects of the Plague and Fire encouraged by landowners who had lost heavily during the English Civil War and now needed to raise money from their estates and the movement of their client base.
George James Lock was one of these City tradesmen whose family had interests in importing coffee, chocolate and tobacco from Turkey. The patriarch of the family was Sir John Lock who lived in Goodman’s Fields while his sons lived among their merchandise in Tower Street and Rood Lane in the city. Their business was disrupted by the Fire of London and although they were back in business by the next year the lure of the new developments in the west was calling them.
In 1686, funded from his successful trading concerns with Turkey, George James Lock became the leaseholder of seven houses in St. James’s Street that had been built by Baron Dover, a nephew of Henry Jermyn. On the site there had once stood a ‘real’ tennis court built in 1617 for the then Prince of Wales, later Charles 1. George lived in one of the houses and rented the others out to either merchants or private individuals.
1n 1676, ten years prior to George James Lock’s arrival, Robert Davis, a Hatter from Bishopsgate, had become a leaseholder from the Crown of five houses and had set up his shop in one of these.
He had picked a good spot for his enterprise as it was a few doors up from The St. James’s Coffee House which was a popular haunt of the Whig political class. Looking through the earliest surviving order books from Robert Davis’s business you will see the names of great Whig families such as Marlborough, Bedford, Devonshire and Walpole.
Coffee Houses had become very popular and there were a number in St. James’s Street and records show that one of George James Locks’ tenants was a Coffee House.
At all except a few of the more aristocratic chocolate houses (explains an article in The National Review) smoking was allowed. A penny was laid down on the bar on entering, and the price of a dish of tea or coffee seems to have been two-pence; this charge covered newspapers and lights. The established frequenters of the house had their regular seats, and special attention from the fair lady at the bar, and the tea or coffee boys………To these coffee houses men of all classes who had both leisure and money resorted to spend both; and in them politics, play, scandal, criticism and business went hand in hand.
The house of which Robert Davis took possession of in 1676 was described by the Bailiff of St. James’s as:-
It was commodious. It possessed a glazed shop-front with shutters, a sash door with a fanlight above. It was strongly built and held two chimneys and two hearths, with the floor of the passage leading to the shop of good English timber; the flight of stairs up to the bedrooms of the same material. A Basement and ’necessary’ were of stone paving. Entry north of Middle Row that gave access to the Tavern Court.
Robert Davis plied his trade as a Hatter in St. James’s and had a son named Charles who succeeded in the business sometime before 1719. In 1732 he married a Mary Hall and in 1735 their only child Mary was born.
Meanwhile James Lock, the son of George James Lock, who had been born in St James’s Street in 1700, had married one year earlier. In the same year his wife Elizabeth gave birth to a son who was also named James.
In 1747 the seven houses under lease to the Lock family were under threat of demolition to make way for a new development. In that year James Lock, the grandson of George James Lock, became apprenticed to Charles Davis at the age of 16 for seven years.
As Charles Davis had no male heir he needed to find a suitable young man for his daughter to marry and to learn his trade. Obviously James Lock, although he appeared to have been a second choice as there had been a previous apprentice, must have fitted the bill and less than three years after he was out of his indentures he married Mary Davis.
When Charles Davis died in 1759 James Lock II inherited his former masters business.
At this time the west side of St. James’s Street, where the hatters was situated, was becoming more residential with the benefits of backing on to Green Park. Most of the trading was being conducted on the east side of the street and James Lock was keen to move so that he could benefit from this trade and also he needed more space as he now had four children.
No 6. St. James’s Street had been used for some time as an Alehouse known as The Feathers. From 1747 it had been occupied by a watchmaker called John Sneddon, who was the son of George Sneddon – one of George James Locks’ original tenants.
When John Sneddon died in 1752 Peter Vanina, a celebrated maker of figurines, took over the lease and was allowed to install a kiln to carry out his trade. To this day part of the premises at No. 6 is known as ‘The Kiln’.
James Lock had his eye on No. 6 and in 1764 he made Peter Vanina an offer for the lease which was accepted with the proviso that he could stay on until the summer of 1765 while he searched for new premises. On the 24th June 1765 James Lock, his wife Mary, their four children and his trimmers, journeymen and counter-assistants, laden with boxes of fine beaver hats, cockades and various trims, crossed the street to No. 6.
Business had been good for James Lock prior to his move to No. 6. In 1756 The Seven Years War had begun and he became known as a military ‘hatter and cap-maker’. Many of his customers were colonels in regiments for whose equipment they were personally responsible for out of their own pocket.
An extract from the order book of the Coldstream Guards, dated 1st June 1771, testified to the success with which he pursued his new line.
Regimental Order
Field Marshall Lord Tyrawley Desires that such officers of the Coldstream Regt. Whose full Regiments are not Good a nough to appear before his Majesty at the Review Do Immedeadley make up new, and also that the officers be very exact in having Laced Regtl Hatts in every Prectilor uneyform with the Pattern Hatt wich is to be Seen at Mr Lock’s Hatter in St. James’s Street.
After the end of The Seven Years War in 1763 imperial and industrial expansion together, with improved communications, reflected in the wealth of James Lock and his turnover peaked in 1782 during the time of The War of American Independence.
While his business life had proved to be very successful tragedy stalked his family life. His three sons Charles, Thomas and James all died before they had reached their teens and his wife Mary passed away not long afterwards. Only his daughter Mary remained and James Lock was concerned for her future and the succession of his business.
James Lock deposited his money with Coutts and drew on it for his ordinary business expenses. He also bought and sold bills or simply provided loans, at greater profit but higher risk. One of his debtors was Thomas Panton, the younger, who was a customer at No. 6 and a popular sportsman, gambler and racehorse owner who won the Derby in 1786 with his horse Noble. James Lock lent him £1,000 to pay off his gambling debts and when Thomas Panton could not settle the debt he signed over to James Lock the tenancy of a manor in Shenleybury, near Radlett in Hertfordshire, which had a peppercorn rent.
It was here that James Lock took his nine year old daughter to escape the unhygienic conditions of London and where he employed a housekeeper to look after the child and the manor.
In 1773, the year of the Boston Tea Party, James Lock became, at the age of 43, the father of what was called in the language of the day ‘a natural child.’ Although James Lock did not acknowledge publicly his paternity of the child the boy was named George James. The mother of George James remained at the manor in Shenleybury and continued to look after the manor and both children.
In 1776 Samuel Yew Griffith became an apprentice to James Lock and he felt that this was the right man to wed Mary and become the heir to the business. Samuel prepared a home for them in Brompton Road in the village off Kensington as James Lock was still living at No. 6.
Unfortunately Samuel became unwell and at the advice of his apothecary he made his will. On his death in 1785 he bequeathed all his personal wealth to Mary. Mary was now nearly £1,000 wealthier but she had no husband and James Lock had no successor for the business.
James Lock had invested some of his money in clothing manufacturers in Nottingham which was run by a family called Nixon. In 1793 Mary Lock married Thomas Nixon, who was the second son of Thomas and Peggy Nixon, and was a surgeon in the 1st Regiment of Foot Guards. In the same year she bore him a son, James Lock Nixon, and died.
James Lock Nixon was the apple of his grandfather’s eye but James Lock realised that he was too young to succeed him in the business and there was a strong chance that he would follow his father and have a career in the army. James Lock Nixon was left in Nottingham, to be brought up by his grandmother Peggy, while James Lock turned his attention to his illegitimate heir in Shenleybury.
Young George James was introduced to No. 6 and there were some raised eyebrows. However in 1794 James Lock went into co-partnership with his son and the sign above the shop door was changed to ‘Lock & James’. Eventually James Lock moved out of No. 6 and went to live in Oxford Street.
The sign above the shop was changed back to James Lock as George James moved in and assumed his fathers persona and for convenience will be referred to as James Lock II. In 1799 he was married to Caroline Hall and in 1800 their first child, James Lock III was born. There followed a daughter in 1801 called Caroline; in 1803 a second boy, George; and in 1806 a third boy called Henry.
In 1806 the ‘old Mr. Lock’ passed away and in his will he left the residue of his estate to George James Lock ‘who succeeded me in the business’. He left money in trust for a Charlotte Vanderpant and her sons and for Peggy Nixon. The will was devised so that if any of the beneficiaries predeceased his grandson James Lock Nixon their shares would revert to the boy and if the boy died before his father then the bulk of the fortune would revert to Captain Thomas Nixon, Surgeon in the First Regiment of Foot.
As James Lock had predicted James Lock Nixon joined his father’s regiment in 1812 and three years later died on the battlefield of Waterloo.
Pollution had become an increasing problem and with an enlarging family, and a wife who had been used to living in a certain style in Mayfair, James Lock moved his family out of the living accommodation above the shop and to a large property in East Sheen. He soon disposed of the lease for this property and moved to Richmond where he commuted to work in a carriage with an armorial bearing. Unfortunately he was unable to tether the carriage in Crown Passage behind the shop and so had to lease a coach house and stables in Ormond Yard that was near Jermyn Street. His outgoings on this and his house in Richmond amounted to several times the rent payable for No. 6 for which the lease had only eight years left to run. It was highly unlikely that it would be renewed at the current figure of £52 10s 0d.
At this time turnover was in steady decline with competition increasing. A Mr. Dolman set up his business of Hatter and Hosier at No. 8 and there were hatters at No. 2 and No. 79 St. James’s Street. There was also competition from Piccadilly and Bond Street where the fashionable ‘loungers’ such as Beau Brummel flocked. With the country under war footing from the threat of Napoleon business costs were on the increase.
James Lock II, perhaps because of his background, appeared more interested in playing the gentleman than getting a grip on the challenges the business faced. He started to spend less time at No. 6 and left the running of the business to Robert Lincoln who had become his business partner. Robert Lincoln had been a friend of James Lock I and in 1798 he had been apprenticed to James Lock II for a period of 5 years. In 1801 he was promoted from the counter to the counting house where James Lock II was always having trouble balancing the figures. In 1803 it was proposed that he should have a contract of employment for a further six years with the prospect of an eventual partnership. In 1810 both gentlemen entered into a partnership and Robert Lincoln moved into No. 6 with his family.
Unfortunately James Lock II continued to live above his means and the expenses of Robert Lincoln started to grow as well. Robert Lincoln was also starting to get involved in other business ventures that were not always successful. By the end of 1814 James Lock II owed the company £1,400 and when Lincoln remonstrated with him he replied ‘I can do nothing. I am in so much distress for my private debts that I do not know which way to turn’. To escape their creditors they borrowed £3,000 from a Mr. Nathanial Darwin on payment of an annuity of £300 per annum and James Lock persuaded Robert Lincoln to approach Captain Nixon for a loan of £3,000 from the estate of his dead son.
Robert Lincoln tried to persuade James Lock to cut back on his spending but without any great effect and soon the creditors were knocking on the door. The partners quarrelled bitterly.
In 1819 a meeting took place at No. 6 between Robert Lincoln and James Lock II with Robert Lincoln’s Lawyer, Mr Wilson, present and his articled clerk; who happened to be James Lock III.
It was agreed that the partnership of 1809 was rescinded and Robert Lincoln was given a larger share of the business. It was also agreed that George Lock, James Lock II’s second son should be an apprentice to Robert Lincoln. James Lock II agreed to retire to the country, at Lyndhurst in Hampshire, in order to be as small a burden on the business as possible. Robert Lincoln agreed to rent the property at East Sheen for £70 per annum and George Lock and James Lock III would move into No. 6 with Mr. Moss, the clerk, and Mrs Moss to look after them. Mr Wilson also got James Lock II to agree reluctantly that the £3,000 loan from Nathanial Darwin was his personal responsibility.
James Lock III realised that the future success of the business and the prospects of his younger brother George depended on Robert Lincoln. He tried to help the ailing business by borrowing some capital for the business but by then it was too late.
Robert Lincoln’s other business activities had continued to prove costly and James Lock found that he could not live on his annuity in the country. Any trust between the two men had disappeared and James Lock stormed back to No. 6 to demand payment of £6,000.
The dispute went to arbitration, at more cost to both parties, and James Lock took over the company and its debts. However, business continued to be poor and bankruptcy loomed.
James Lock III got the creditors to accept payment of fourteen shillings in the pound over the next two years for his fathers’ personal debts. In return for the goodwill of the business and for stock and furniture at No. 6 James Lock III would pay his father an annuity of £250 per annum. James Lock agreed to this and left these shores for Calais where a gentleman could still live cheaply. At the age of 51 he married a young lady called Elizabeth Vale and fathered four children. He lived on to the ripe old age of 90 on £250 a year.
With James Lock III at the helm confidence in the business at No. 6 grew and in 1826 young George was out of his indentures and the brothers drew up a formal partnership. The business was to be known as ‘James and George Lock’ and after 21 years would revert wholly to James. The annuity to their father was to be paid out of the business.
The sign over the shop remained James Lock and the two brothers together took on the persona of James Lock. James was the administrator and bookkeeper while George was a practised craftsman who was well versed in every part of the process of hat making.
In 1833 when George married Louisa Prater, daughter of prosperous silk mercer in the City, she moved in above the shop and James moved into bachelor chambers at 19 Buckingham Street. James Lock put all his efforts into the family business and making sure that his siblings were happy. He felt a special care to Ann Lock and was determined that she should marry for love and not economic necessity. She became a student at Miss Prowting’s Academy at Guildford and when her education was considered complete she graduated to the staff at the Academy. While working in Guildford Ann met a Charles Whitbourn whose father held the title Warden of the Corporation of Godalming. Charles came from a wealthy family of farmers, millers and tanners although he was a country man of leisure. Ann was determined that she should wed Charles although she faced opposition from his uncles Thomas and Richard. They felt that there was nothing to be gained from the marriage as Ann Lock was without land of her own. James Lock was also concerned about the match because he did not see the work ethic in the young Charles and he had already experienced the effects that this could bring.
Ann, however had her way and she married Charles Whitbourn in Godalming Church in 1836. The following year she gave birth to a boy who sadly lived only a few days. In 1838 a second boy, Christopher, was born and in 1840 a third son, Charles Richard, was born. Unfortunately Christopher died in 1844 and Ann’s health had never been good after the birth of her first child. With the help of James Lock she moved to the seaside at Littlehampton with her husband and surviving child.
The business at No. 6 continued to flourish and took in the development of the Coke (Bowler Hat) and the grey topper known as the Ascot and to be only worn at that particular race meet.
In 1865 George Lock died and his foreman, James Benning, was a legatee of his will. James Lock recognised that Mr Benning was a competent successor to his brother and he soon took over all his dead masters’ responsibilities. James Lock realised that he needed to find a successor for himself and he looked no further than his nephew Charles Richard Whitbourn who was known as Charley to distinguish him from his father. However, there was much opposition to this offer of a partnership in the business. Charley’s paternal grandmother wanted him to join the Church whereas his father felt that the role of a ‘shopkeeper’ was beneath him and the family.
James Lock managed to persuade Charley that if he took up the position he would be able to provide for himself and look after his mother in the event of his father’s death. His father had not been prudent with his income and was having to dip into his savings. James also told Charley that he would not have to actually serve in the shop but that he would have his own office like his uncle Richard who was a banker.
Charley decided that he would accept the partnership despite the outrage of his family and James arranged for him to gain work experience with cotton and clothing merchants in the City.
On 31st December 1871 the interim tripartite association which James Lock had arranged with his two protégés was dissolved and the business at No. 6 was handed over to James Benning and C.R. Whitbourn as equal partners. James Lock assigned all his interest in the company for an annuity of £400 which would help him in his retirement as he was now 70 years old.
Having sorted out the inheritance issue at No 6 James Lock surprised everyone by taking a wife. Her name was Miss Mariane Selot, whose father was a partner at Fortnum and Mason’s. They married in 1872 and in 1874 they had a daughter called Amy who eventually married a George Scorer and lived until 1962.
The persona of James Lock lived on in the form of James Benning who would sit at his desk by the window observing the passage of customers alighting outside the shop. He was described as having the manners of a very grand and distinguished butler.
His partner, Charles Whitbourn, remained in the counting house from where he seldom appeared. He controlled income and expenditure and recorded every transaction in great detail.
The relationship of the two partners was very formal but they each respected what the other brought to the business. They did not mix socially as Charles Whitbourn thought Benning was a bit of a rough diamond in spite of his ingratiating manners while Benning thought Whitbourn to be something of a snob.
Charles Whitbourn’s attitude to the shop was ambivalent as he both loved and hated it. He loved it for the sake of his mother and uncle but hated it for the aspect of servitude it brought. Unfortunately this came out in a terrible temper and he was known to bully the staff and was much feared because of it.
His eldest son, Charles Herbert Lock Whitbourn who had been born in 1876, joined the company in 1900 and took his share of the bullying. Perhaps he suffered more than his share as he was also bullied at home.
James Benning died in 1899 and his place at the window and in the partnership was taken by his grandson, George James Stephenson, who had joined the firm in 1894. G.J. Stephenson got to grips with the extended credit that had been offered to customers despite the angry protestations from Charles Whitbourn that it was not gentlemanly. Gradually he was able to reduce the list of outstanding debtors, keeping a black book of defaulters, and contributed in keeping prices stable.
Suppliers also found that if there goods were not up to standard they were returned and if they repeated the error they were replaced.
For the Coronation Procession of King George V and Queen Mary in 1911 the Whitbourn family occupied the first floor windows at No. 6 while the Stephenson’s the second floor as the partners continued to inhabit separate worlds.
In 1913 George James Stephenson heard on the grapevine that the freehold for No. 6 was up for auction and after conferring with Charles Whitbourn they sent an agent to bid on their behalf. A bidding war broke out between their agent and a Mr. Solomons, who wanted to open a fruit shop at No. 6. However, when the bidding reached £12,000 Mr. Solomons was unable or unwilling to go on and the partners now owned No. 6.
At the outbreak of the First World War George Whitbourn, the cousin of Charles Whitbourn died, and so he inherited the family fortune which was more than a £100,000 in Gilt Edged and ironmongery. He was now a man of leisure at 75 years of age who no longer needed to get his hands dirty in Trade. However, he found that he did not want to go and with the excuse of the war effort he continued to commute to the counting house at No. 6 until 1918 when Peace was assured and he was nearly 80.
One evening he put the counting house in order and walked through the shop nodding good night to his partner who did not realise that Charles Whitbourn was leaving for good.
Charles Herbert Lock Whitbourn, known as Bertie, was to become the new partner of George James Stephenson and a shock to his system it was too. Bertie had been deeply scarred by his father’s attitude to him and one day he confessed to Harry Marsh, an accounts clerk,. “You know, Marsh,” he said, “when I first came to this place my father gave me such a hell of a time that I swore when he went I wouldn’t do a hand’s turn more than I had to.”
A visitor to the counting house would now more likely find Bertie practising with a catapult or air pistol shooting at birds or furniture within the office than balancing the partnerships books. He was however a very charming man and was used to deal with difficult customers or visits from officialdom of whom he had not replied to their correspondence. His lunch times seemed to extend into the afternoon where he could be found playing billiards at the Junior Carlton Club with Joe Davis, a famous master of the game.
George James Stephenson bore all of this with patience and honour but he was no longer a young man and he knew that the matter of succession would soon have to be considered. Bertie had two daughters but no son while G.J.S had two sons called Gordon and Cyril. The boys had been introduced into the business where Gordon assisted in the shop while Cyril worked under Bertie in the office. In the business there were now three Stephenson’s, descendants of James Benning, and a single Whitbourn who was a descendant of James Lock I.
There were only two partners in the business and if one should die the other would be obliged to buy the others share and would have to find a formidable sum. An accountant was consulted and he advised that they should form a private limited company. His advice was acted upon and in 1928 James Lock & Co. was formed with G.J. Stephenson, C.H.L. Whitbourn, C.H. Stephenson, G.J.G. Stephenson and Mrs. C.H.L. Whitbourn as directors.
Bertie realised that there was an imbalance on the board as his wife was not actively involved in the business and so he sought to increase the Whitbourn representation. He had no son but he had a nephew Charles Richard Wray Whitbourn who was the great-great-grandson of James Lock II. Bertie drove to Hurstpierpoint where young “Mr Wray” was being educated and within 48 hours he found himself amongst the boxes and hats at No. 6.
The outbreak of the Second World War in 1939 confronted Mr. Lock with problems of supply, the substitution of civilian with military attire and the difficulties of the black out.
Charles ‘Bertie’ Whitbourn died in 1943 and G.J. Stephenson soldiered on despite developing glaucoma with Gordon and Cyril taking turns to escort him to work. He died in 1950.
The next generation to join the firm was Richard Bruce Geden Stephenson in 1957 and Andrew James Whitbourn Macdonald, grandson of Bertie, in 1963. When Gordon Stephenson retired in 1966 Richard Stephenson became a director of the company and when Cyril Stephenson retired in 1969 Andrew Macdonald took over his responsibilities.
Today the two families are still very much involved with the running of the business and there are seven members and two generations sitting on the present board. ‘Mr. Lock’ is still very much alive in St. James’s Street as it was when Mr Wray was asked by a City of Westminster official if there was any plans in the future for the premises to be put to other uses – “Pack the place in, d’you mean?” exclaimed Mr Wray. “After three hundred years? Not bloody likely! If the Duke of Bedford can keep his family chateau in business we can do the same for ours!”