John Wicker

"Yesterday afternoon I passed happily among the many varied exhibits at the National Trades Exhibition in Bingley Hall Quite suddenly I stopped before No 93 and was arrested by the sound of the voice of my dear old friend Mr John Wicker Ah thought I, this is the very man I have been waiting for Here goes to interview him.' 'Tis easy to speak, but harder to do, for Mr Wicker was up to his ears in work when I bashfully entered the domains of the National Cash Register Stand and tendered my card. It must have been the magic word 'Press' which within two minutes brought our friend to his senses (and to me) - -
Fifteen years ago Cash Registers were unknown. Tradesmen went on in the old slipshod unsystematic style -with no care or watch over their daily takings. All at once from the land of the Star Spangled Banner - there came an invention which has revolutionised the commercial world.. 

In 1885 what we now sneeringly call the old mahogany case detail adder came into use in the chief cities of the States, and found its way across 'the pond' to the American Bar, Lorne Street, Liverpool From here Mr John Wicker took up the sole Sales Agency in the Midlands and during the thirteen years he has been at his post he has sent up so many orders that he now proudly wears the badge as Banner Agent"

The National Trades Exhibition, Bingley Hall, Birmingham 1898.

Birmingham Mail - Friday 28 July 1905

Claim by Insurance Brokers

Messrs. Matthew Jones and Co., insurance brokers. Cherry Street, Birmingham, brought action against John Wicker, for the National Till Register Co and his wife Ellen Wicker, to recover various sums money alleged have been Vent promissory notes and paid in respect of premium* policies the defendants’ life. Mr. and Mr. Joy appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Stangcr, K.C. and Mr. Norris roster for the defendants. In their pleadings defendants denied that the money on the promissory notes was owing, and contended that the sums paid in premiums were not paid at their request. Mr. McCardao said that case was unusual, inasmuch as the defendants had set up a defence which, as far as he knew, had not been raised before. Up 1901 the defendant paid on the promissory notes, but he then got into low water, and. as he was being pressed by some of bis creditors, obtained several loans. Sums were also paid to keep up premiums on life policies at the request of defendants. The defendants now pleaded the Money Lenders Act. alleging that the terms were extortionate and unconscionable. Mr McCardio urged that plaintiffs were well-known insurance brokers, and could not be described as 'money lenders.—His Lordship was of opinion that a close investigation of accounts necessary to point, and referred the matter to the official referee. 

Biography

In 1901 John, who was born in London about 1852, and his family were living at 100 Pershore Road Birmingham.

His family was comprised of his wife Ellen, three children and they had two servants, a housemaid and a cook.

Birmingham Mail - Thursday 26 May 1904

 DISCHARGED. case which Arthur Bond was charged with embezzling four small sums of money from his employer, John Wicker, who is the local agent of  National Cash Register Company, having offices in Worcester Street, came before the Stipendiary at the Birmingham Police Court to-day.—Mr. Willison, for the defence, contended that the cash at  Mr. Wicker’s office was badly kept, while it was suggested that the cheques, the private property the prosecutor, alleged have been appropriated, were paid into bank the account the company.—Accused was discharged. 

Birmingham Mail - Tuesday 16 January 1906

INSURANCE BROKERS OR MONEYLENDERS?

BIRMINGHAM ACTION. Interesting action, referred from the Birmingham Assizes Mr. Justice Darling, was heard to-day before Mr. Official Referee Vesey, the Victoria Courts, in which Matthew Jones and Co., insurance brokers, of Cherry Street, sought to recover the sum of £1,065. 6s. 4d from John Wicker and wife, Ellen Wicker, of Chantry Road, Moseley, makers of a joint and several promissory notes for £1,069. 18s., dated 12th November, 1903, in favour of the plaintiffs, payable 152 consecutive weekly payments of £7. each, and one of £5. 18s. The first of such payments was to become due and payable on November 30, 1903, and in the event of default of the first any succeeding payment the whole the amount or tile balance unpaid should become due and payable. Default, according to the plaintiffs, had been made. Ellen Wicker was sued respect of the separate property possessed by her time she made the promissory note. The principal was £1,089. 18s.

£70. had been paid by weekly installments, leaving a balance of £999 18s., interest on this at £5 rate per cent, per annum making up the claim £1,063. 6s. 4d. An amendment had been made to the claim since the service of the writ by adding two premiums on a life policy, thus bringing the total up to £1,109. Mr. H. H. Joy (instructed by Philip Cohen and Slater) was for the plaintiffs. There was a counter claim against Jones and Co., and in support of this Mr. Norris Foster (instructed by East and Smith) stated that the plaintiffs were moneylenders, but were not registered as such. All the transactions that had taken place between the plaintiffs and the male defendant had been in their capacities as money-lender and borrower. Mr. Wicker admitted the making of the promissory note which was the subject of the action, and said it was given by him as the last of a number which had been renewed from time to time for loan incurred in 1901. On March 21st that year defendant gave a promissory note for £360., for which received a cheque for £217. only. The defendant repaid £182., and October 19, 1901, th© note was renewed for another note of £350., defendant receiving a cheque for £300. In December he repaid to the plaintiffs £200. and later borrowed two further sums £l00. each on the same conditions, and on May 8th, 1902, signed third note for £450. Of this amount £133. was repaid, and then a fresh note was signed for £415. It was stated by Mr. Joy that a new note being signed the old one was given up.

Proceeding. Mr. Foster the bill showed that £154. was repaid, but a sum of £29. was not credited. In March, 1903, another promissory note was given for £994., which the defendant's wife was a joined party, and on that the defendant was paid £206. That note was renewed on November 11 for one of £1,069. 18s. In 1901 the plaintiffs demanded further security, and there was deposited with them a life policy in the Rock Insurance Company on Mr. Wicker’s life £2,000.

In October, 1904, plaintiffs sold the policy for £315., after writing to defendants. Mr. Joy said his clients were willing to give credit for that £315. or, if the defendants preferred it. to treat the policy on the old footing of security, and charge premiums on that amount.

Mr. Wicker having given evidence, Mr. Joy submitted that Messrs, Jones did not carry on the business of money-lending at all. They effected insurance for the defendant, and the amounts advanced to him were for the payment of the premium.

Mr. Norris Foster: The notes show we have received £1,518. 10s. 5d, have repaid £1,252. 5s. 11d, and still owe £1,159. 5s 11d.  Mr. Joy said did not accept that, and it was not shown in evidence.

THE REFEREE’S VIEWS.

The Referee having listened to further legal arguments, said there was no evidence on which find as a fact that plaintiffs carried business as moneylenders. It was not suggested that they advertised or announced and held out in any way that they were carrying on such business. On the contrary, they were described at the office as insurance brokers and were proved in evidence to have insurance brokers. The defendant was clear that his first connection with the plaintiffs was as insurance agents, and that they effected an insurance on his life; that his premiums got behindhand, and they found him money to keep them going. Since October 1902, defendant had had detailed accounts as to how matters stood, it was clear that the defendant could not claim remedy under the Act, the plaintiffs were not money lenders. Eventually, Mr. Norris Foster agreed give the policy, and take credit for £315. for it. and also asked for credit for two premiums cf £31 19s. 7d. The Referee gave judgment tor the plaintiffs for £789 5s 11d, with costs, and tor the defendant in the counter-claim. 

Birmingham Mail - Wednesday 02 May 1906

MOSELEY AGENT’S FAILURE

ILLNESS AND BORROWED MONEY. A meeting of the creditors of John Wicker, 3, North Street, Brighton, a patent register till agent, who formerly resided in Chantry Road, Moseley, was held this morning at the Board of Trade Offices, Corporation Street. The statement of affairs showed liabilities amounting to £1,997., and assets £3. 13s. 9d., leaving a deficiency of £1,993. The debtor attributed his failure to heavy interest on money borrowed, illness during the past three years, and consequent loss of income. In his observations, the Official Receiver (Mr. Luke J. Sharp) stated that at a preliminary examination the debtor stated that for the past twenty years be bad been engaged a commission agent for a cash register company. He resided in this city until December last when removed to Brighton. In 1901 he began borrowing money from the petitioning creditor.the transactions continued, and action was recently commenced against the debtor and judgment obtained against him for £750. in January last. During the past three years the debtor’s earnings bad been small consequence of illness and owed his employers £838 in respect of commission overdrawn.

The furniture at Chantry Road was sold by auction on the 17th January 1906 and realised £156. 12s. 9d. After payment of the gas and expenses, the debtor received £131. 6s. 8d., which he stated he had expended in household and trade expenses. The unsecured liabilities include £858. commission overdrawn, £885. money borrowed, £lOO. law charges, and £153. 12s. domestic debts.—The case is a summary one. and the Official Receiver is the trustee. 

Birmingham Daily Gazette - Thursday 03 May 1906

DEFICIENCY NEARLY £2,000, "Heavy interest on money borrowed, illness during the past three years and consequent loss of income " were the causes of failure given by John Wicker, now of Brighton, late of Moseley. at the meeting of his creditors in..Birmingham yesterday. He was agent for the patent register till, and had conducted his business in Birmingham for twenty years. Some three years ago debtor had a complete breakdown in his. health. As he described it yorterday_" he went away to Brighton to die." But he has lived to face a deficiency is his accounts of £1,9113. The Official Receiver is trustee of the estate. Debtor came up for his public examination in the afternoon before Mr. Registrar Whitelock, who considered that the way in which he answered questions putt to him was most unsatisfactory. The Registrar adjourned the examination and ordered the debtor to furnish an account of receipts and payments since December 1. Should that account not be satisfactory, he should require the debtor to attend at the court again before the examination was closed.