KNOTTLA FEAST
by TERRY SPENCER, B.A. (Hons), Ph D
FROM FAIRS, FESTIVALS and FROLICS,
KNOTTINGLEY, Circa 1840 - 2003
Volume One (2003)
<PAGE ONE | PAGE TWO
In both 1907 and 1908 the fair was held at the traditionally observed
date and although a variety of attractions featured on each occasion the
brouhaha of the former year engendered a degree of uncertainty. "Much
uncertainty is felt in Knottingley due to the Council action in
declining to let the Flatts at the usual time which has met with much
condemnation."
To drum up support in anticipation of the arrival of the fair "Mr
Tuby instructed the Town Crier to inform the inhabitants and another
proprietor, Mr T. Brannan, also intimated he would be there as usual."
(75)
Opinion concerning the practical effect of the uncertain situation
appears to be mixed, one source declaring that the attendance was
"not very great and interest less pronounced than in previous years"
while another refers to "an enormous crowd of visitors making passage
for ordinary business in Aire Street very difficult."
The uncertainty does, however, appear to have inhibited attendance by
some showmen for "It was expected in many quarters that other
amusements would be there but they did not turn up." (76)
Perhaps the reason for the reported congestion in Aire Street was due
to the fact that the Council having declined to let the Flatts at the
customary date had not closed Aire Street and its environs to vehicular
traffic as was usual at Feast time. (77) The situation was repeated in
1908 with the K.U.D.C recommending the closure of the Flatts between the
25th and 29th July when the Feast would normally take place and access
being provided by Thomas Worfolk at the due date. (78)
Having been presented with a fait accompli for the second year the
Council sought to assert its authority by demanding tolls from the
showmen but many refused to pay saying that they had made arrangements
with Mr. Worfolk, and although Mr. Tuby wrote to the council seeking
water for his machines and offering to pay whatever price was demanded,
the Council decided to seek a legal injunction against Worfolk. (79)
The longer term effect of the controversy was seen in 1909 when
despite settlement of the legal dispute it was stated that "nothing
near the usual number of shows and stalls [were] on the Flatts"
A factor influencing the decline, however, was that the Feast was held
for the first time on the occasion of the August Bank Holiday, a time it
was considered "when other places could be visited more profitably"
by the itinerant showmen. (80)
By 1911 it was claimed that "despite many and varied amusements
there was a decrease in interest, mainly due to the Feast falling so
long before Bank Holiday when the works break up."
Clearly, the fair was being held on the old established date but the
employers were holding to their decision not to close their factories to
enable the workforce to play. (81) There seems little doubt that the
decision of the manufacturers had dealt the Feast a hard blow for in
reporting that "the feastground was not so crowded as formerly,
perhaps on account of feast week falling the week before Bank Holiday
and the playing of the local works later." The local newspaper
stated that "the proceedings were practically closed on Tuesday
night." (82)
The situation stood in stark contrast to the optimism of 1910 when it
was stated that the Flatts were now "the property of the ratepayers
and should prove a profitable source of income."
It is interesting to note that despite this claim, one stallholder who
refused to pay a toll on the grounds that he was a ratepayer, was
ejected from the site, a situation reminiscent of an incident in July
1907, when owing to an administrative error, a Dewsbury based trader was
denied a pitch even though he had paid a deposit as early as the
previous January. (83)
Following several years of reputed decline in enthusiasm, in 1913 the
Feast made a remarkable recovery with throngs of people in attendance,
blocking Aire Street in their determination to enjoy the long
anticipated event. (84) Fluctuating attendance was nothing new, however,
such ‘decline’ had been reported in the 1890s and whatever the degree of
deterioration in attendance it was more imagined than real, it being
reported that some people had "returned to work no worse for their
temporary cessation; others with aching heads and empty pockets."
(85)
Returning to work in a ‘hungover’ state was almost bound to be bad for
production, a fact not lost on the employers and one which doubtless
underlined their determination to secure the transference of the Feast
to the August Bank Holiday. By 1914 it was reported that the town’s
works did not shut down for the Feast and there was "…a growing
feeling that the date ought to be changed to Bank Holiday." (86)
The outbreak of the Great War which occurred immediately after the
Knottingley Feast of 1914, created a hiatus in the matter of the Feast
date and although it is known that the Feast took place in 1915 there
are no further reports in the years 1916-1919, for fairs were prohibited
by order of the government and the showmens engines and horses were
utilised for active service. (87) In addition, fairs were generally felt
to be inappropriate given the condition of the war with its grim,
unprecedented slaughter.
A local example of implied disapproval is evident from a report of
1915 when a Knottingley woman broke her right leg while riding the
helter-skelter. The unfortunate victim was the wife of a soldier who was
at that time serving on the western front. The newspaper report, while
confining itself to the bare facts concerning the mishap, adopts a tone
of subtle disapproval of the action of a wife engaged in such a
frivolous pursuit at a time when her husband was in a state of mortal
peril. (88)
In 1920 however, the Feast had resumed and the fairground attractions
were retained during the week following the Feast. (89) Similarly, the
following year an element stayed behind for the Bank Holiday when it was
reported that there was "plenty of fun and frolic and a fair amount
of money in circulation despite the lean time experienced of late." (90)
The profusion of money, despite local unemployment, ensured a bumper
fair in 1922 and the development of public transport in the form of a
regular bus service was a major factor in bringing hundreds of
sightseers and friends of residents to the town. (91) The following year
all the local works closed on Feast Monday in addition to the following
Bank Holiday Monday and Tuesday, not through any benevolance on the part
of the employers but out of financial expediancy in the face of
diminishing trade conditions. The break enabled the fair to be well
patronised although it was stated that
"A long period of bad trade and unemployment has left the workers for
the most part with scanty means for feasting." (92)
As the recession deepened, its effect upon the Feast was increasingly
apparent. To add to the woe, in 1924 "much rain fell, creating great
discomfort. On Monday instead of opening about noon the fair was closed
until evening. Throughout the afternoon the attractions had a bedraggled
look and there were very, very few people about." (93)
The problem of broken time regarding the Feast continued until 1926
when on the 16th June the K.U.D.C. decided to ballot all ratepayers
concerning the Feast date. The matter was conducted with great
propriety, the four men appointed to deliver the ballot papers were
warned not to influence the voters on pain of an action for breach of
contract. (94)
The outcome of the ballot, declared on the evening of Monday 28th June
1926 showed 1,001 people in favour of changing the Feast date to
coincide with the August Bank Holiday and 967 in favour of retaining the
traditional date. A total of 84 spoilt ballot papers could have swung
the balance. The issue divided upon familiar lines with the shopkeepers,
anxious to capitalise from the extra trade visitors brought to the town,
holding their opposition to the views of the manufacturers. Others,
particularly the younger inhabitants, claimed that holding the Feast on
Bank Holiday week would be detrimental in that fairs held in larger
towns and cities would draw away the best attractions from Knottingley
Feast. (95) Nevertheless, despite the ambiguousness of the resultant
ballot, the decision was made to move the date of the fair and in 1926
Knottingley Feast was officially transferred to August Bank Holiday
week. The events was kept in traditional fashion and despite a reputed
scarcity of money due to the impact of the General Strike and the
continuation of the miners dispute on the local economy, the attractions
remained on the Flatts throughout the succeeding week. (96) However, the
continuing cycle of trade depression exerted a baleful long term effect
on the local community throughout the following decade. Nevertheless,
the Feast provided a focus for the inhabitants of the town and in 1928
it was stated that "considering the times the showmen have done well"
[drawing] "a large number of visitors with many old Knottlaites renewing
acquaintance with their former homes." (97)
However, the shortage of money detracted from the jollification
producing "an absence of the general abandon which was such a strong
feature of previous feasts." (98)
As in earlier days such a gloomy prognosis proved somewhat premature
for a few years later it was declared, "Feast time is still ‘an
event’ at Knottingley and many make a practice of visiting the town."
Despite the industrial situation with its corollary of heavy
unemployment "the most is made of the Feast..." the town being
"agog with excitement and merrymaking." (99) Yet in 1932 the Feast
was said to be "one of the poorest ever."
The meagreness of the attractions was held to be responsible for the
poor public response, engendering an enquiry by the Council, concerned
about the non-appearance of attractions and the economic consequences in
terms of lost revenue from tolls and also the effect on the townsfolk.
The clerk pointed out that the Feast was now in direct competition with
two others and Cr. G. Brown, Vice Chairman, K.U.D.C., revealed the
effect of such competition by pointing out that one showman had decamped
for other pastures despite having paid for his pitch on the Flatts. The
Council had become a laughing stock in consequence of the resultant
debacle, claimed Brown. (100) The situation seemed to justify the
earlier prophecy that rearrangement of the date contained the seeds of
the fairs destruction, but the following year the event was declared a
big success, as indeed was the subsequent year, 1934, when it was
reported; "King Feast held successful sway at Knottingley with a
bigger collection than ever on the Flatts of popular up to date
attractions which were well patronised." (101)
On several occasions following the debacle of 1932 the Feast reverted
to its traditional date. On such occasions the local works did not close
and in 1935 it was asserted that there were "signs that the
townspeople have not much room for feasting when it falls the week
before Bank Holiday." (102)
However, the variability concerning the staging of the event seems to
have depended less on the date of the Feast than on more generalised
social and economic factors. One may deduce that if anything the Feast
was marginally less successful in terms of size and spectacle when held
over Bank Holiday weekend. The reason was clearly seen in a report of
1938 which stated that
"other big holiday feasts had affected the scope a little."
The effect of the changed date was still evident more than a decade
later when overlapping engagements and the need to get the show on the
road led to some amusements at Knottingley being dismantled before the
last day of the Feast, to the disappointment of the townspeople. (104)
The pattern was repeated the following year when despite the Flatts
being full of entertainments the financial returns failed to impress the
attendant showmen, one of whom described trade as "wicked". While
admitting that trade was not good anywhere at that time many ceased
trading on the Monday evening instead of Tuesday night. (105)
A subtle yet increasingly perceptible change in public tastes was
taking place in the period following the Second World War, which
resulted in a decline in the popularity of the Feast in the post war
decades. Even at the height of its popularity the fair was not welcomed
by everybody. Quite apart from the objection of the local manufacturers
to the disruption of the work cycle and the inconvenience caused to some
traders by the prohibition of vehicular traffic in chapel street and
Aire Street at Feast-time, other objections were raised.
One source of complaint, mainly by those who adhered to strict
religious observance within the town, was the excessive amount of
alcohol consumed at such times and the frequent acts of anti-social
behaviour consumption produced. Prior to the introduction of more
restrictive licensing laws following the outbreak of the Great War in
1914, drunkenness was a common problem at Knottingley, as indeed was the
case generally, and the town was an active target for temperance
activity. (106)
Prior to the last decades of the nineteenth century fairs featured
numerous drinking booths which, supplementing the outflow from local
inns, promoted undesirable behaviour. The scale of the disorder at Hull
Fair in 1875 was such that the city authorities considered prohibition
of drinking booths but as late as 1890 magistrates granted a license for
the sale of intoxicants at Knottingley Feast. (107) As an inland port,
Knottingley had numerous inns and beer houses, many of which were
situated in Aire Street and its environs. The public houses were even
more well patronised than usual at Feast time and were often the undoing
of many a patron. Thus, in 1907, a labourer named Alfred Mosley appeared
before Pontefract Magistrates and was fined 6s 6d for being drunk on
Knottingley feast ground. As a result of this action Mosley was found to
be absent from the local militia and was duly remanded to await a
military escort. (108)
Whatever the objections and misfortunes of others, the Feast was
always welcomed by local victuallers. The extant accounts of the Buck
Inn, which was situated directly opposite the fairground, reveal that in
Feast weeks throughout the period 1875-87 takings at Feast weekend were
in excess of 40% more than those produced in the four days following the
departure of the fair. Viz:-
|
1874 |
1887 |
|
£ |
s |
d |
|
£ |
s |
d |
| Sat 26th July |
11 |
11 |
5 |
Sat 31st July |
8 |
10 |
5½ |
| Sun 27th July |
7 |
13 |
10 |
Sun 1st August |
4 |
17 |
11 |
| Mon 28th July |
22 |
13 |
7 |
Mon 2nd August |
15 |
0 |
8½ |
| Tues 29th July |
17 |
2 |
0 |
Tues 3rd August |
10 |
10 |
10 |
| Total |
59 |
0 |
10 |
Total |
38 |
19 |
11 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Wed 30th July |
11 |
16 |
9½ |
Wed 4th August |
5 |
11 |
10 |
| Thurs 31st July |
3 |
10 |
6½ |
Thurs 5th August |
2 |
8 |
5 |
| Fri 1st August |
2 |
11 |
6½ |
Fri 6th August |
1 |
14 |
9½ |
| Sat 2nd August |
7 |
9 |
2½ |
Sat 7th August |
6 |
8 |
8½ |
|
Total |
25 |
8 |
1 |
Total |
16 |
3 |
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRAND TOTAL |
84 |
8 |
10½ |
GRAND TOTAL |
55 |
3 |
8 |
It is interesting to note that whilst Feast takings for the two dates
continued to yield the same ratio of profit over normal takings a
considerable fall is evident in the overall amount of money taken at the
Buck Inn in the two years which form the comparative sample. It would be
interesting to know if this was due to circumstances unique to the
feast-time (eg. good/bad weather or cyclical trade depression) or if the
figures indicate a decline in the sale of alcohol and if the latter, was
this a general trend or due to circumstances solely affecting the Buck
Inn?
The more censorious citizens regarded fairs as vehicles for
criminality, providing opportunities for pickpockets, tricksters,
cheapjacks, lewd behaviour and gambling. While there is scant evidence
of such behaviour at Knottingley Feast there are occasional glimpses of
aberrant behaviour from time to time. A comment of 1888 that the
fairground contained "the usual gathering of itinerant time killers
collected in bold array."
Whilst, perhaps merely an aspersion cast by a jaundiced observer on
revellers in general, encapsulates the attitude of a section of local
society, doubtless shaped by an awareness of undesirable elements
commonly associated with fairground activity. (110) Similarly, a report
of 1892 refers to "plenty of rabble."
Although here again, the phrase may refer to the noise as much as
dubious characters amongst the general throng of merrymakers." (111)
Noise was a natural adjunct to fairground activity and was
supplemented by music from the adjacent inns. In July 1880 for instance,
a successful application was made to the West Riding Petty Sessions at
Pontefract by Robert Pickersgill, landlord of the Ship Inn, on behalf of
himself and other victuallers, to have music on their premises during
Knottingley Feast. (112)
From the 1890s, steam driven organs added to the noise of the
fairground, providing music for the roundabouts and some of the
accompanying booths. A further noisesome feature from this period was
the introduction of the bioscope or cinematograph shows. Although the
film stock had no soundtrack, loud extraneous sound effects were
produced to lend dramatic effect to the filmed image. (113)
Except for Saturday when the fair closed at midnight in respect of the
Sabbath, fairground entertainment continued unabated until the early
hours of the morning and one can only imagine the effect of the noise
upon the residents of Aire Street which was at that time the principal
residential area of the town.
A report of 1880 complained that "Hurdi-gurdies, mingled with
blatant rombone and ear-piercing gongs have presented the noisiest and
most discordant sounds" (114) while three years on it was stated
that there was "plenty of noise, some persons may think it was
music." (115)
In 1903 a letter from Mr W.E. Milburn, an Aire Street druggist, was
accompanied by a memorial signed by several fellow tradesmen with
premises near the Flatts, was presented to Knottingley Council
complaining of the continuous playing of organs and instruments on the
Flatts at Feast-time. As a result it was decided by the Council that
space for the forthcoming fair would only be let to tenants complying
with regulations to be drawn up. (116) Whatever steps were taken appear
to have been largely ineffectual for in 1912 an observer, reporting on
the motley throng crowding one end of the fairground from one end to the
other, making Aire Street practically impassable on Saturday night,
stated that it was not the noisy throng that drew comment but that
"certain shopkeepers will not deplore the passing of the music." (117)
As late as 1929 it was recorded that the town "resounded with the
blare of horns and organs playing the latest musical items."
Whether held to be popular or deplorable it is clear that Knottingley
Feast catered for the musical fashion of the period long before the
advent of the ‘Top Twenty’ hit parade. (118)
The fairground was ever the source of potential hazard although such
accidents as are recorded are of a minor nature. One of the most serious
occurred in 1866 when an inmate of Pontefract Workhouse, allowed to
attend the Feast along with others, died from the effect of a ruptured
blood vessel. A subsequent enquiry launched by the Poor Law Guardians
revealed that the group were drunk and that the Workhouse Master had no
authority to allow the inmates to attend the Feast. (119) Several
accidents occurred in the early decades of the twentieth century in
which cuts and broken bones occurred, mainly to young people and
involving fairground apparatus, most commonly featuring the swingboats.
(120) Several such accidents occurred in successive years, prompting the
local paper to remark in 1923, "fortunately there were no accidents
on the feast ground." (121)
One of the most bizarre accidents concerned Mrs Clewlow, Salvation
Army Captain, who was knocked down by a cyclist and sustained an injured
leg in the course of conducting a service in Aire Street on the evening
of Feast Saturday, the accident being the more ironic for the fact that
the road was closed to vehicular traffic for the duration of the Feast.
(122)
A serious consideration, particularly in the pre-electricity days was
the danger of fire. Naptha flares, fuelled by canisters of volatile
spirit which provided the means of lighting were an obvious hazard.
Lamps hoisted above the heads of an audience had to be lowered and
extinguished prior to the commencement of theatre shows. In the closing
decades of the nineteenth century cinematography became an increasingly
popular feature of the fairground, the highly flammable film stock
multiplying the risk of fire. The film show had first made an appearance
at the Feast in 1902 and by 1907 was reputed to be the most popular
attraction on the Flatts. (123) Taking advantage of the popularity of
the new medium the local Salvation Army used the platform of Farrers’
cinematographic show for their service on Feast Sunday that year. (124)
By 1907 naptha lights had been replaced by electric lighting, the
power being generated by portable steam engines specially designed for
the purpose. First introduced in 1891, the engines were not in common
use before the first decade of the new century. Harry Tuby used one such
engine in conjunction with his cinematograph show in the early 1900s.
The advent of safer electric lighting did not obviate the potential fire
hazard posed by the volatile film stock however, as shown by an accident
which occurred on Feast Tuesday 1909. A portion of the reel of film
caught against a live wire and resulted in an instant conflagration.
Fortunately a plentitude of help and an ample water supply enabled the
fire to be extinguished within minutes, the only casualty being the loss
of two rolls of film. (125)
Michael Farady’s discovery of magnetic electrical induction via dynamo
and generator during the 1830s provided a theoretical solution to the
problem of applying electric power to the fairground although it was
many decades before the apparatus was developed to enable its practical
application, initially for arc lighting. By 1912 however, mobile
generators were providing motive power for fairground rides. (126)
The introduction of steam powered and later petrol-fuelled vehicles
relieved the showmen of the more restrictive limitations of horse power.
The initial expense of auto locomotion and the problems of technical
adaptation however, meant that many of the more modest fairground
proprietors retained the use of horsepowered wagons and trailers until
after the Great War.
Initial constraints were the laws requiring auto-powered vehicles to
be driven at a maximum speed of four miles per hour and preceded by a
man waving a red flag. In built up areas the speed was further
restricted to two miles per hour with permits being required from local
authorities allowing the transit of heavy vehicles on local roads. (127)
Prior to the 1920s the fitting of rubber tyres to the huge fairground
vehicles was not compulsory and damage to local roads could be quite
extensive as shown by an incident in Aire Street in 1902. One of Tuby’s
wagons ladened with heavy components for a steam driven roundabout sank
into the surface of the road to the tops of its wheels. The wagon was
only slightly damaged and no one was injured but it was some
considerable time before the jacks were obtained to facilitate its
removal (128)
The replacement of horses by steam-driven vehicles and eventually
automobiles, was something of a mixed blessing to some local
inhabitants. While it seems probable that a number of the showmens
horses were tethered along the riverbank between the Island and Garner
Haven, there would presumably be far too many for the grazing afforded
by that area to suffice and alternative sources of grazing and stabling
were doubtless obtained from local farmers, smallholders and publicans.
In addition the procurement of corn and straw from local sources
provided supplementary income for local suppliers. With the advent of
auto locomotion such inputs to the local economy were lost.
Henceforth, the necessity was for water to enable the generation of
steam power. In earlier days the procurement of water had largely been
for domestic use by the showfolk and for watering the horses and show
animals and obtained from the numerous wells serving the inhabitants of
Aire Street and its environs. (129) From 1893 when the recently created
Local Board undertook arrangements with Pontefract Corporation for the
supply of water to Knottingley township, the emphasis changed. (130) and
by the close of the decade the fairground proprietors were paying the
K.U.D.C. for the supply of water to the fairground site. Something of
the quantity of water supplied to the showmen may be gained by reference
to a report presented to the K.U.D.C. by the Council’s Manager of Works
following the 1907 Feast. The report showed that Tuby had used about
1,000 gallons for washing his ‘motor cars’ [i.e roundabouts]. The
estimated daily use in a normal period was between 560-600 gallons per
day. It was therefore decided to make a minimum charge of 5d per gallon
for two days and two shillings for each additional day, with washing of
shows etc. being two shillings per day and one shilling per week for
each caravan. (131)
Access to the towns water supply was at the heart of a legal dispute
between some of the showmen and the Council in 1907. Tuby and others had
been admitted to the Flats by Thomas Worfolk in defiance of the Councils
order preventing access by the showmen. (132) Risking the threat to
public health and the possibility of litigation in the event of an
ensuing epidemic, the Council refused to supply water to anyone refusing
to pay tolls to them for the use of the Flatts, which the showmen,
having paid their dues to Worfolk, declined to do. However, a roundabout
proprietor, Thomas Brennan, ordered his employee James Brown, to take
water as required and was subsequently sued in the local Magistrates
Court for stealing water. (133) At the hearing, held on the 10th
August 1907, the Council, having asserted its authority, agreed to
withdraw the charge on payment of ten shillings, plus costs by the
defendant and the case was closed. (134)
The following year Tuby made enquiry in advance of the fair concerning
water charges for his machines and the Town Clerk advised him to present
himself before the assembled Council which Tuby declined to do. (135) At
a subsequent meeting of the Council, specially convened to consider
whether the resolution of the 6th August 1907, which had denied water to
the showmen at the previous Feast, should be rescinded, opinions were
divided with Crs. Drinkwater and Dey claiming that as the Feast was
being held at the traditional time that year it was a pointless act of
meanness to deny water to people who were not involved in the issue
concerning ownership of the Flatts. A proposition was made rescinding
the embargo of 1907 and was carried by four votes to two. (136)
Further resistance to the payment of tolls occurred in July 1924 when
following revision of the rental charges by the Council, Messrs Tuby
refused to pay the new levy. (137) The dispute was protracted by the
Councils renewed consideration of a change in the date of the Feast.
(138) Following a long drawn out correspondence between the parties the
matter came to a head when Tuby’s opened out their entertainments prior
to the newly designated Feast Week. The Councils Highways Committee
meeting on Tuesday 14th September 1926, decided in respect of its
outstanding claim "That the full charges for the first week be
charged for ground Messrs Tuby & Sons booked and that the usual charge
be made for Feast Week, and that the a/c (sic) be reduced to £30 instead
of £31, and £1-4-0 for water in addition, less the deposit of £1."
The matter of costs was left to the discretion of the Council Solicitor.
(139)
However, further resistance must have occurred for later in the month
it was resolved to deny use of the Flatts to Tuby & Sons until a
settlement was reached. (140) The dispute was eventually settled when
Tuby’s paid a cheque for the sum outstanding but the dispute had created
uncertainty on the part of the local authority and when application was
made by Tuby’s in February 1927 for use of the Flatts at the forthcoming
Feast it was referred by the Highways & Lighting Committee for direct
consideration by the Council. (141)
Amid the anxieties and uncertainties of the situation created by the
advent of war in 1939 it is unsurprising that in 1940 "the Feast went
almost unnoticed", a few attractions and their "attendant
paraphernalia" occupied the Flatts but workers neither sought or
took a beak from local works at such a vital time. (142)
For the duration of the war manpower shortage, fuel rationing and
‘Blackout’ regulations combined with the demands of war production to
restrict the Feast, echoing the situation during the Great War when it
was reported as being "less pretentious than previously." (143)
It is interesting to note however, that fairs did continue to operate
throughout the Second World War, albeit in a restricted way and under
strict government control, being regarded as an essential contribution
to public morale. While no visits to Knottingley are recorded, small
fairs were held at some larger neighbourhood towns with air raid
precautions being ingeniously devised from tarpaulin sheets. The present
writer recalls attending a fair located in the yard of the Windmill Inn,
Pontefract, about 1944, the whole of the rides and attendant attractions
being housed in a gigantic marquee. (144)
The immediate post-war years afforded a glimpse of the former glory of
the Feast as the principal proprietors, Tuby and Farrar, filled the
Flatts to overflowing in response to a public seeking pleasure as an
antidote to the war and continuing post war austerity. Again, drawing on
personal experience, the writer recalls the Flatts filled to overspill
about 1950 with attractions being so numerous that many trailers and
vehicles had to find parking space at the back of East Parade and Island
Court, a throwback to an earlier age which according to oral evidence
was a normal situation in bygone days. (145)
The flamboyance of the time provided something of a valedictory before
the gradual; decline and ultimate demise of Knottingley Feast. The seeds
of such decline were sown by the population shift of the 1930s as
Knottingley Council initiated housing schemes resulting in the
development of the Broomhill and Englands Lane estates at the south side
of the town.
Initially, the building programme had little impact upon the central
area of the town and for a decade following the end of the Second World
War Aire Street remained the commercial centre of the town and a densely
populated area. However, the rapid and extensive development of the two
Council estates in the immediate post-war period, followed by the
creation of the Simpsons Lane – Warwick estate in the 1960s removed the
bulk of the population of the town from earlier areas of settlement. The
developing trend exercised an adverse effect on the status of Aire
Street. It was now quicker and easier to catch a bus from one of the
outlying estates than to walk to Aire Street where shops afforded less
variety than that available elsewhere.
The demographic resettlement was accompanied by changes in public
attitudes towards leisure activities and by the early years of the 1950s
the deterioration in patronage of the Feast was sufficiently apparent
for fairground proprietors to advertise impending visits in the local
newspapers and on billboards in the area. An incidental indication of
the declining social status of the fair is the fact that for the first
time since 1880 the Feast ceased to be reported in the local press.
(146)
Widespread ownership of motor cars, television sets and the advent of
supermarkets and motorways revolutionised social behaviour and by the
mid 1960s Aire Street had become a commercial and residential backwater
with attendant consequences for the traditional Feast. The knock-out
blow was delivered late in the decade when as part of the proposed
redevelopment scheme Aire Street and the surrounding area was completely
demolished, the work preventing the use of the Flatts for Feast purposes
during the course of the demolition.
Increasingly alarmed at the declining attendances at the Feast the
fairground proprietors had begun to look for new venues closer to the
resettled areas of population from the mid 1950s. The desire was
reinforced when a fair was successfully located in Knottingley Playing
Fields adjacent to the England Lane estate, as part of the 1953
Coronation celebrations. Such was the success of the event that the
following November Mr Charles Doubtfire offered the K.U.D.C. the sum of
£40 to obtain permission to hold a fair in the Playing Fields from the
4th to the 12th June, 1954. To enhance the offer (and to attract the
public) Doubtfire also offered to stage two firework displays and a
children's fancy dress parade. The Council resolved to accept the offer
but a rival bid was made by Mr. J.W. Ling who sought the same dates and
offered £50 plus two firework displays and a benefit night with proceeds
donated to any charity designated by the Council. Ling’s offer was
therefore accepted. (147)
By the mid 1960s demolition had already begun in connection with the
Aire Street redevelopment scheme when one of the proposals being
considered was the building of flats on the Flatts, ruling out the
prospect of the site ever again being the venue of the Feast. (148)
Again, there were echoes of an earlier age for in 1926 preparatory steps
had been taken to establish an open market on the site, throwing into
jeopardy the future of the Feast. (149)
The demolition of property in and around Aire Street resulted in the
opening up of hitherto inaccessible areas of space. As a result, in
March 1964 R.L. Tucker applied to the Council for permission to site a
fair on land to the rear of Chapel Street for twelve days from the 21st
April 1965. In reply the Council recommended use of land at the junction
of Headlands Lane and Spawd Bone Lane as an alternative site. A rental
fee of £35 with the proprietor accepting responsibility for the repair
of any damage incurred was suggested, to which terms Tucker agreed.
(150) The site was strategically placed to attract attendance from the
England Lane and Warwick estates and must have met expectations for a
further application for the site, on the same terms, was made by Tucker
in 1968 and again the following year. (151)
The plan to build dwellings on the Flatts having been abandoned, the
Council approved the use of the site by Mr. C. Doubtfire for a fair on
the 20th-26th October 1968. Doubtfire had sought to obtain the Headlands
Lane site but ironically the land was now required for use in
conjunction with a road widening scheme and so the Flatts was offered at
a hire charge of £20. Despite the surrounding dereliction the Flatts
must have proved economically satisfactory for Doubtfire’s fair returned
to the Flatts in September 1970, which was the last occasion on which a
fair was held on the site. (152) It is of passing interest to note that
the Flatts also provided a venue for a two day visit by Joe Gandy’s
Circus during the last week in May 1967 and 1968. (153)
Doubtfire hired the Flatts in 1970 at a charge of £15 which was a
reduction of £5 on the previous rent, suggesting perhaps, that the site
was potentially less lucrative than previously. It is unsurprising
therefore, that having made provisional arrangements to use the Flatts
on four or possibly six weekends during 1971, Doubtfire should
reconsider and seek to obtain a site at Hazel Road on the by then,
hugely populated Warwick estate. The proposed relocation was rejected by
the K.U.D.C. however, on the grounds that the desired site was required
for building purposes. (154)
Meanwhile, Tucker had reapplied in 1969 for the Headlands Lane site
but was informed that the site was unavailable. (155) Undaunted, Tucker
again applied for the site in April 1971 and was informed that if no
suitable alternative site could be found approval would be given subject
to the satisfaction of the Council Surveyor regarding proposals for the
siting of vehicles and equipment of the showmen. (156) In the search for
suitable alternative sites unsuccessful attempts had been made to use
the Ferrybridge Playing Fields, Castleford Lane, for both the Spring and
August fairs of 1970. (157) The Spring fair was therefore located on the
Flatts for in March the Town Clerk reported that the showmens’ caravans
and accessories were still occupying the site beyond the expiration of
the lease date, leaving the Council to seek compensatory rent. (158)
By the following year when Tucker made application for land on which
to hold the Spring fair he was informed that no suitable site was
available anywhere in the town. (159) Knottingley Playing Fields had
been discounted as a suitable site for several years as a result of the
contentious leasehold agreement with the Coal Industry Social Welfare
Organisation, while in the meantime the Flatts had been landscaped to
provide a somewhat sepulchral adornment to yet another folie de grandeur
of the politicians forming the majority of the then Council who with
scant regard for tradition and even less regret, consigned to oblivion
another element of the town’s historical heritage.
Dr. Terry Spencer
Reproduced with the kind permission of Dr. Terry Spencer
Knottla' Feast is copyright ©Terry Spencer 2003
<KNOTTINGLEY FEAST
PAGE ONE
|