The firm was summoned for, in the course of manufacturing footwear, consuming 4,737 square feet of upper leather, otherwise than under the authority of or in accordance with a licence granted or a special or general direction issued by the Ministry of Supply, at Rushden, between April 1st and June 30th, 1942.

They were also summoned for acquiring 20,398½ square feet of upper leather otherwise than under the authority of the Minister of Supply at Rushden, between July 1st and September 30th, 1942.

A third summons was that of producing footwear consuming 7,479½ square feet of upper leather otherwise than under the authority of the Minister of Supply, at Rushden between July 1st and September 30th, 1942.

They were also summoned for acquiring 17,346 lbs. of bottom leather otherwise than in accordance with the Control of Leather Order, 1941, at Rushden between July 1st and September, 30th, 1942.

Announcing the Bench’s decision to fine defendant company £50 on each of the four summonses, the chairman (Col. H. G. Sotheby) said that the Bench was not satisfied with the fact that Inspectors constantly visited the firm’s premises, but had apparently been ignored up to the visit of the Director of Civilian Leather Supplies.

The law had been contravened and the Bench was not satisfied that defendants had bought leather without knowing the amount they were buying.

“It does not seem a very good way of running a business,” commented the chairman, who pointed out that the firm had not been engaged on Government work.

In addition to the total fine of £200, the firm was ordered to pay 10 guineas costs.

Large Profits Made

Mr. B. M. Stephenson prosecuted for the Ministry of Supply, and Mr. J. Cairns Parker, for defendants, entered a plea of not guilty.

In his opening statement Mr. Stephenson said that the firm had not endeavoured to hide the quantity of leather they had used, and seemed to have the idea that they could do what they liked, irrespective of the requirements of the Ministry.

Mr. Stephenson emphasised the large quantity of leather that had been over used, the unfair competition to other traders, and the large profits that must have been made.

Mr. Stephenson explained that during the period mentioned in the first summons, the firm was allowed to use 35,817 square feet, but had used 40,554. In the period covered by the second summons, they were allowed to purchase 24,723, but had purchased 45,121. In the third case they were allowed to use 28,654, but had used 36,133.

In connection with the bottom leather, 20,464 lbs were bought, as against an allowance of 3,118.

All Above Board

Mr. Harold Salt, director of Civilian Leather Supplies, Bedford, gave details of the licences which entitled the firm to acquire leather.

Answering Mr. Parker, witness said that the firm had made no effort to conceal anything, and everything had been above board. He was not previously aware that it was possible for a firm to exceed its allowance unless a careful check was made.

Mr. L. L. N. Copperdale, Investigating Officer for the Ministry of Supply, said that the books of the company were freely produced for his inspection. The firm’s sale of footwear averaged out at between £2,000 and £3,000 a month. This witness gave details of the acquisition of leather over and above the quantity granted by the licence.

Offered The Leather

In a statement the managing director, Mr. Bernard George Coe, said that from time to time he had been offered a parcel of leather, which he had bought without realising that he was over-acquiring on his official allowance.

Mr. Coe, on oath, said that he had been connected with the company since 1910. When he was offered the parcels of leather, it was very difficult to judge the feetage. Sometimes, leather sent in exceeded the amount, sometimes it was less. The errors had occurred because he did not check up with his stock book, and he took full responsibility. Their books were in proper order.

Mr. Stephenson asked Mr. Coe if it was possible for him to have bought double the quantity he was allowed in one quarter. Mr. Coe replied “If I did not check it, I should not know.”

Mr. Stephenson further asked if it was not a fact that his allocation precluded him from doing his pre-war trade, so he bought more – Mr. Coe: I have not done that.

Mr. Parker submitted that the case arose out of foolishness and negligence rather than any deliberate intent to infringe the regulations.

In reply to a question put by a magistrate Mr. Stephenson said that the firm could buy its leather from any source as long as the regulations of the licence were observed.

Coun. F. Green (Wollaston) did not adjudicate in this case as he was connected with another firm of boot manufacturers.