Messrs. Cox & Co. - Army Agents

[Janey Fisher]

Hi, everyone! I came across this thread while doing some research connected with some original letters written from the Front by a young subaltern to his parents in 1915. He mentions a valise that had been sent home 'Cox & Co'. It is clearly the army agents, as he suggests his mother write to Cox at Charing Cross, which was their HQ at the time. But did they deal with officer's personal effects at this point, as they had in earlier times? Most references to Cox & Co seem to concern their banking activities (which were indeed taken over by Lloyds in 1923, by the way; their Indian branch took over Henry S. King, hence their postwar designation of Cox & King's, but I think the Indian part did not go to Lloyds but to another bank). 

[Andrew Upton]

3 hours ago, Janey Fisher said:

Hi, everyone! I came across this thread while doing some research connected with some original letters written from the Front by a young subaltern to his parents in 1915. He mentions a valise that had been sent home 'Cox & Co'. It is clearly the army agents, as he suggests his mother write to Cox at Charing Cross, which was their HQ at the time. But did they deal with officer's personal effects at this point, as they had in earlier times? Most references to Cox & Co seem to concern their banking activities (which were indeed taken over by Lloyds in 1923, by the way; their Indian branch took over Henry S. King, hence their postwar designation of Cox & King's, but I think the Indian part did not go to Lloyds but to another bank). 

 

Yes they did - from a WW1 Cox's account book:

 

 

[FROGSMILE]

I still have my account with Cox’s and King’s, although it’s no longer at Pall Mall, which premises they sold off not that long ago.  The branch remains a part of Lloyd’s but still has a great many Army officers on its books.  They used to be very understanding and even in the days before telephone banking was a normal process I was able to make transactions over the phone, on one occasion via a satellite connection at a jungle location.  In more recent times they had new staff who were more ‘jobsworth’ and with less knowledge of military life and its restrictions.  
There are historical details and links to records here: https://archiveshub.jisc.ac.uk/search/archives/438225a2-a132-3104-849a-7435035b0bd8

Edited 16 July , 2020 by FROGSMILE

[Guest]

2 hours ago, FROGSMILE said:

They used to be very understanding and even in the days before telephone banking was a normal process I was able to make transactions over the phone, on one occasion via a satellite connection at a jungle location.

 

     At this point, just to throw in a little nugget about how understanding they were (and, to be fair,other banks). -I had a local casualty who who killed trying to escape from a POW camp in Bulgaria in 1918-the Foreign Office files on POWs in Bulgaria showed that officer prisoners were allowed to pay by cheque which would be forwarded and honoured  from Bulgaria to London. (Moral of the story-Forget the revolver, the swagger stick and the whistle-an officer should always go into action with his chequebook about him)

[FROGSMILE]

 

     At this point, just to throw in a little nugget about how understanding they were (and, to be fair,other banks). -I had a local casualty who who killed trying to escape from a POW camp in Bulgaria in 1918-the Foreign Office files on POWs in Bulgaria showed that officer prisoners were allowed to pay by cheque which would be forwarded and honoured  from Bulgaria to London. (Moral of the story-Forget the revolver, the swagger stick and the whistle-an officer should always go into action with his chequebook about him)

That seems to be where the “officer and gentleman” dynamic seemed to come in, although of course there were always the ‘Flashman’ types as exceptions.

[Guest]

49 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

That seems to be where the “officer and gentleman” dynamic seemed to come in, although of course there were always the ‘Flashman’ types as exceptions.

 

 Very much so- Cox were often ahead of the War Offic in knowing what was going on-hence their hand-in-glove relationship. It would be interesting to speculate whether any officer was ever cashiered or reprimanded for bouncing a cheque while a POW.

[David_Underdown]

an officer should always go into action with his chequebook about him)

I've an idea that until crossing of cheques etc was required you could write a cheque on anything, cheque books were provided as a convenience, but were not necessary. See the (fictitious Board of Inland Revenue v Haddock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_Inland_Revenue_v_Haddock)

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, David_Underdown said:

I've an idea that until crossing of cheques etc was required you could write a cheque on anything, cheque books were provided as a convenience, but were not necessary. See the (fictitious Board of Inland Revenue v Haddock https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_Inland_Revenue_v_Haddock)

 

  Yes- very much so- Glad to see that someone else is aware of Roy Dotrice (Albert Haddock) and Alastair Sim (The Judge) in the old BBC version of A.P.Herbert's "Misleading Cases in the Common Law". Herbert did serious work on legal reforms (Rent Act 1937 for example) -he was a sort of Paul foot-cum-Michael Mansfield of his day- but all the absurdities of the law were highlighted as part of a movement for reform- much of which was achived by Greene,MR whose reforms have been overshadowed by WW2.

    The absurdity in question was whether a cheque had to be written as a cheque (Bills of Exchange Act 1882)- thus, A.P.Herbert tried to settle his tax bill with IRC by writing a cheque on the side of a cow. When I first started work in the City, then one had to learn that a cheque had to have a named bearer- a bank cheque made out for "Cash" was technically not valid. This could be got round by the use of a fictitious name-if that was a fiction then the cheque could subsequently be made over to bearer- ergo, "Pay Long John Silver's Parrot or Bearer" was a way round.

   All splendid stuff. Luckily, no British officer POW had to contend with snails thrown over the fence which could be classed as wild animals...... Happy days

[Guest]

Here’s a cox and co chest anyone no more about it?

[The Scorer]

On 08/10/2015 at 10:47, The Scorer said:

One of Cox & Company's branches in London was, of course, the place where a "dispatch box bearing the name of Dr John H Watson" containing the stories of Sherlock Holmes that "the country is not ready for" was said to be stored ... until it was (allegedly) destroyed in a bombing raid in the Second World War!

 

Have you checked whether this is the dispatch box that I referred to above ... ?

[FROGSMILE]

16 hours ago, Lewisc said:

Here’s a cox and co chest anyone no more about it?

 

It’s a typical commercially purchased shipping (aka ‘steamer’) trunk of the kind used when most travel still took place by sea.  During the days of Empire, colonial administrators, tea, coffee and rubber planters, as well as other, sundry employees, would move their prized possessions in such trunks that were transported in the holds of passenger ships.  I don’t think it’s military as there’s no rank or regiment to go with the name.  It’s more likely a civilian private gentleman.  As shipping agents, Cox’s arranged sea passage for all kinds of travellers, not just the Army.  The trunks were made in a variety of shapes, sizes, qualities and materials, some had brass, copper, or even iron bindings and to be robust many were made from dark, hardwoods, which although making them strong also made them quite heavy even before they had contents.  Since the 1960s the wooden types have often been sold for use as ad hoc furniture (coffee and lamp tables, etc) in trendy London apartments and houses furnished in shabby chic style.  Your trunk has merely had a Cox stamp painted on top to show it was the agent responsible for the safe transit at the time.

 

 

Edited 30 January , 2021 by FROGSMILE