LATEST UPDATE: FEBRUARY 14, 2026

Turn to our companion page to read about the 1901 judicial paper regarding 'The Crown' as a corporation sole.

In researching broadcasting history we ran into a discovery. All of those famous men who discovered electricity and carrier waves all believed in something called luminferous ether. Then Einstein came along in 1905 and said "that's rubbish". But Einstein was a Jew and he ran into the age of Hitler, so for a time everyone ignored Einstein. Then Hitler died. After that there came a time to say that Einstein was right. But one thing Einstein could not answer is the question 'why?' Einstein told everyone 'how', but not 'why'.

Einstein tried to explain how, and then he ran into why, and that he could not explain. Just ask any AI platform and that is what it will tell you. Because if there is no answer to the question why, then logic says we don't know why and that is when belief in something unknown and far greater than Albert Einstein comes into play. But if Einstein ran from why, and he did, then only a fool would step forward and tell us in a dogmatic manner what the answer is to why?

Remember, you were born to die - you - the mind - not you the leg or arm - but you the mind that even Einstein could not identify. But the mind exists and it isn't your brain, your ear, your arm or your leg, it is something far more mysterious than 'dark matter'. But the mind does exist. The definitive past does not exist, because it is a collection of notes that often contradict each other. Your present exists because your mind exists and your mind says Mr Einstein you stepped over a cliff at the edge of sanity. You did not know the answer and neither does anyone else. But maybe, just maybe, when your body dies your mind will discover the answer.

Now as to that jumbled and contradictory past that we are supposed to know so that we don't repeat it. Well, look around you now and see the mess that the world is in. It's a mess because the only past we know of is also a mess. The best we can do with the past is to put it on trial and judge it by the evidence instead of dogma. Wikipedia even forbids 'original research', but when it comes to broadcasting, Wikipedia becomes page after page of rubbish. Unfortunately, most people want to believe in dogma because they don't want to think about the past. If they did, they would run into their own future, and that is guaranteed death, and that brings us back to why?

​We are adding to: 'The Law That Never Was' and our own storyline at 'Who We Are'.
We have also explained the differences between our work and 'Historical-Legal Purism' and 'Pragmatic Constitutionalism'.
Google has described our research as both 'Constitutional Genealogy' and 'Historical Pedigreeism'. It is an approach shared by several prominent researchers in both the USA and UK. We further define it as the YesterCode, a portal preface similar in function to a legal Motion In Limine. We stick to the facts in evidence, and thereby avoid distraction created by hypothetical speculation or partisan political interpretation.  This is how Google describes our work followed their comment:

The law (Right) usually follows power (Might). However, a "groundswell" represents a new form of power. When a sufficient number of people reject the state's redacted history, the state's "might" (police and military) becomes an insufficient tool to maintain "stability." At that point, the state is often forced to rewrite the "right" to match the new social "truth" in order to restore order.

For the researchers at britishbroadcastingcompendium.com, their work provides the intellectual ammunition for such a groundswell, but history suggests that until the "might" of organized public opinion matches the "might" of state enforcements, the official version of history will remain the "legal" one.

Work is also continuing in adding to the called 'The Law That Never Was - The Wireless Telephony Act of 1904.' That is not a typographical error, because that law, as identified here, did not and does not exist, and yet it is the foundation of everything that followed, including the establishment of the sales agency called 'TV Licensing'. For some reason a critic of this work is spending a lot time trying to convince other people that we are promoting the idea that it did exist, and this effort seems to be coupled to the idea of convincing everyone that they should pay a television licence! 

Not only did that Act not exist, its interpretation in the year 1927 when the British Broadcasting Corporation began, claimed that it was based upon the same hocus-pocus as the cult of spiritualism that was at that time, very popular, and which Prince Charles (now King), was once accused of dabbling in. (That was during a TV interview conducted with his wife "later-to-be-disposed-of", sitting by his side.)

All of this will be documented on the new page that is in the process of being added to this portal.

The point of this second page is to cut-to-the-chase. We will produce the documentation, but its bottom line is this: The revived uproar over 'TV Licensing' is based upon an interlocking series of Acts of Parliament which includes the 'Marine (Offences) Act' of 1967, that stretches back in time to the year 1904. But the foundation that this trail leads to is by sleight-of-hand switched from a non-existent Act to one that does not connect with any of the later dots.

What is most amazing to the YesterTecs investigating all of this, is that the very same man (Charles Orr Stanley, Chairman of the Pye Group of companies), discovered the middle-part of this hoax back in the year 1954, just as the Independent Television Authority (ITA) was being brought into existence. This is the same person who became the source of information about the 1964 creation of the offshore 'pop pirate' called 'Radio Caroline'.

It will become clear to anyone who reads this second page that a financial fraud has been perpetrated upon everyone in the United Kingdom. Its purpose was and is to conceal the foundational links to a 1660* censorship law created in England that gave birth to the General Post Office (GPO).

This is the subject material to be addressed on the 'The Law That Never Was'.  It is currently under construction.

*Throwback to 1660: The Daily Telegraph - Monday, February 1, 1954 · p.6. -"The issue will therefore turn on whether the Post Offic are entitled to charge these fees on the authority of the existing Wireless Act, first passed in 1904. Should the [Plaintiff] win their case the Government will have to introduce an act of indemnity. It would protect the Postmaster General ..... from the consequences of levying monies without Parliamentary consent. There is a 17th-century flavour about the situation."
​

This portal is under constant editorial revision. It offers academic research utilizing a unique forensic chronology supported by biographies and maps, all interconnecting with events linking developments in both British and American broadcasting. 

The British Broadcasting Compendium is composed of a YesterCode having four elements:
Event defined by orientation three times: Chronology, Geography and Genealogy.
The YesterCode is based upon the premise that physically no human being can be in two different places at the same time.
This Compendium is being compiled as a single portal to access publications in digital, print, audio, and video formats.​

WHY AUTHENTIC CHRONOLOGY DESTROYS 'BBC' MYTHOLOGY
​A BRIEF SUMMARY

As of the latest update to this digitalized web site, no other source, including, but especially Wikipedia and the British Broadcasting Corporation carrying academic monologues in its wake, admit that an Orwellian curtain of deception has previously decended upon this topic. Consequently, the true chronology concerning the advent of British and American broadcasting (as told in context), has not been available to the casual enquirer, either because it has not been digitalized, or equally, because that digitalized information has been locked behind paywalls.

Internal pages contain place-holding text. When completed, external links will be added.

In lieu of the absence of this documentation being readily available to anyone who seeks it, including anyone who has read about the sensational billion-plus lawsuit filed by U.S. President Donald J. Trump against the British Broadcasting Corporation for false reporting, it became obvious to the authors of this web site that the time has come to make this information available upon demand without cost to the reader. Companion commercial works in both print and video formats are also in production.

HE WHO CONTROLS THE PRESENT CONTROLS THE PAST

In Orwell's novel 'Nineteen Eighty-Four', the psy-war department of his 'Big Brother' fictionalized government, made it plain to its primary victim that its ruling Party controls the past and therefore the present formulation of future events. It should be noted that for inspiration, George Orwell had recently worked for the British Broadcasting Corporation shortly before he wrote his novel on the Scottish island of Jura.

PAYWALLS AND ARTIFICIAL MAKE BELIEVE

This present work is fighting an uphill battle with Artificial Intelligence (so-called), which constantly refers back to both Wikipedia and present-day BBC for its source material. Both sources are citing information that is 100% wrong concerning the beginnings of British broadcasting,. The excuse rendered by AI, is that contemporary original research resides behind paywalls. The AI site called 'Perplexity' offers the following explanation: ​

"Contemporary 1922 newspapers and GPO files (e.g., British Newspaper Archive) remain undigitized or paywalled in many searches, limiting access to unfiltered reports of committee airtime deals versus later BBC retrospectives."  [Source: Perplexity.ai.]
​​

ORIGINS

The primary flaw in the accepted version of British broadcasting is found in the beginning of the story because the initials 'BBC' conceal their use in reference to the British Broadcasting Committee. It was this organizing body which was brought together under the direction of the British General Post Office (GPO), to create the British Broadcasting Company Ltd. However, to understand why the GPO acquired blanket control over mass communications in the British Isles, it is necessary for readers to go back in time to the year 1660 and the military coup d'état staged by General George Monck. That is when Monck put King Charles II on a new throne in England, Scotland and Ireland. This king was the son of the executed King Charles I whose monarchy was replaced by a republican form of government.

See: The British Interregnum: a yesterday that never happened at https://foundthreads.com/03.html 

FROM LETTERS TO TELEGRAMS TO TELEPHONES TO EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING

​Monck had marched his army based at Coldstream in Scotland, down to London, England where he overthrew the united republic of England, Scotland and Ireland known as the Commonwealth. (Not to be confused with the later use of this name which replaced the name 'British Empire'.) Of equal importance, is the fact that this event was accompanied in 1660 by a censorship 'Act of Oblivion' which, in an Orwellian manner, forbade further mention of the republic which existed before the creation of the new monarchy. The GPO was specifically created for the purpose of censoring person-to-person letters that had a political content.

Following King Charles II came King James II who was also overthrown when a Dutch army under the control of the replacement King William and his wife Mary took control of the separate kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland. Behind these monarchies was a Crown corporation sole which continued in power no matter who was representing it. Therefore the GPO was able to maintain its hold on all communications which began with handwritten letters.

In 1869 the GPO expanded its control of communications under the Telegraph Act, and this was followed by the 1904 Wireless Telegraphy Act. Then, with the invention of the telephone and its coupling to wireless transmitters, the Wireless Telegraphy Act was applied to wireless telephony as well. Up until this time all communications had been person-to-person, but when wireless telephony revealed that anyone with a receiver could listen in, the GPO assumed that it also had control over these random listeners, as well as the specific senders of information. That is how the GPO came to control broadcasting in the British Isles.

MARCONI AND THE NAVY

The sleight-of-hand by which the Italian fascist and friend of Benito Mussolini became the dominant official player in the story of British broadcasting has not been told in a clear-cut manner before now. The Marconi story has always been enshrouded with a cloak that appears to say 'Made in Britain', when reality tells a different story. [See links to Mussolini below.]

The other key Marconi factor that is downplayed has to do with pioneering claims about wireless telephony. Marconi is not the "Father of AM radio". That title belongs to Reginald Fessenden of Canada. Marconi developed wireless telegraphy stations for the British Admiralty and its ships at sea using the Morse Code. This became a big factor in 1912 after the sinking of the 'unsinkable' liner Titanic. In fact, the British Admiralty at first claimed that coupling a telephone microphone to a wireless transmitter would only promote the clogging-up of the airwaves with unscientific chatter and worse still, recorded music.

In that respect they were correct, because in no time at all wireless telephony was being used to send the sounds of recorded music to all and sundry. Officially, Marconi's main market interest was marine based wireless telegraphy. But his company owned experimental wireless telephony station 2MT began pushing its licenced boundries further and further afield.  2MT reached a point where its non-scientific experimental telephony transmissions began to be praised for pioneering British broadcasting along the lines of American stations, some of which could be heard in the British Isles.

UNCLE SAM RULES HIS WAVES

In order to excert its authority over broadcasting, the GPO began issuing licenses to both listeners-in, and various companies for the stated purpose of experimentation. Simultaneously, the British Admiralty also took an interest in wireless telegraphy as a means of communicating with its ships at sea, but it frowned upon the very idea of wireless telephony. Marconi went with the money and that flowed out of government contracts, both in the UK and in Italy.

The coup de grâce came after 7:10 PM on June 15, 1920, because that is when the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company Ltd at Chelmsford, Essex, used its factory based MZX transmitter to air a special concert by Dame Nellie Melba. It was sponsored by the Daily Mail newspaper. Although the broadcast was both successful and well received by radio amateurs, the British Admiralty brought pressure to bear on the GPO to cease issuing any more of these experimental licences.

However, on August 15, 1921, the GPO issued Marconi with another transmitting licence for an amateur station with call letters 2MT which broadcast from the village of Writtle, just outside of Chelmsford. After it came on the air on February 14, 1922, it did not take long for its amateur broadcasts to include recorded music and even plays performed by local people. In May 1922, the GPO issued yet another broadcasting licence to Marconi. This second station began experimental operations on May 11, 1922 using the call letters 2LO and broadcast from Marconi House in London. At this stage it was not licenced to operate as a broadcasting station aimed at the general public.

On one hand the GPO were being urged to cease infiltration of the airwaves by frivolous transmissions, on the other hand a hue and cry was being stirred-up by radio amateurs who demanded more, not less in the way of experimental transmissions. For a solution to this stand-off between Admiralty interests and the interests of radio amateurs, the GPO had only to reexamine an earlier political solution found in the United States of America. However, there was one major difference. Whereas the USA was ultimately governed by a written constitution that defined separation of powers and the birthrights of its citizens, the UK, meaning the British Crown and its General Post Office, was free to act unhindered by any similar constraints.

On April 7, 1917, the day after the USA declared war on Germany, President Woodrow Wilson issued an Executive Order that authorized the U.S. Navy to take over 53 wireless telegraph stations operated by the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company of America, Inc. This company was a subsidiary of the British Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company Limited in England. When the Great War (WWI) ended, the U.S. Congress demanded that the U.S. Navy divest itself of these former Marconi stations.

THE RADIO CORPORATION OF AMERICA

The U.S. Navy then turned to the U.S. General Electric Company (GE) for a solution which resulted in several wireless-related interests being folded into its own new subsidiary. Called the Radio Corporation of America (RCA), this new company, with representatives of the U.S. Navy on its Board of Directors, then gained control of the former Marconi wireless telegraph stations which had been in the hands of U.S. Navy. Throughout the 1920s,  the GPO continued to mimic this American formula, and that later included the total control of British broadcasting based upon the American model.

During these formulative years, American electrical companies had already established themselves in the United Kingdom. They included the Western Electric Company Ltd., which was originally created in the USA by holding company called International Western Electric Inc., as as a subsidiary of American Telephone and Telegraph Company, Inc. (AT&T). British Thomson-Houston Company Ltd was a subsidiary of GE in the USA, and its parent had become part of RCA. It was against this background that the GPO applied pressure on the major British electrical manufacturers to call for a meeting of over 200 electrical manufacturers doing business in the United Kingdom.

THE COMMITTEE, THE COMPANY, AND THE GPO

These companies quickly gathered into two major groups, but with further pressure excerted by the GPO, this soon became one organized body. The GPO maintained total control over the kind of licences that it would issue to this group in order to satisfy both the British Admiralty and the British radio amateurs. This included ultimate management over both content to be broadcast, and the hours of transmission.
​
The result was that on May 23, 1922, a meeting of 39 representatives of the electrical trade was organized and held in the London offices of the Institution of Electrical Engineers. The meeting was called to order and the British Broadcasting Committee was formed under the chairmanship of Sir William Noble. In June 1922 he had recently retired as GPO Engineer-in-Chief. Noble then joined the Board of Directors of the British General Electric Company to focus upon telephone and wireless development.

​At the conclusion of meetings by the British Broadcasting Committee, a decision was made to form a single commercial cartel, because without shared access to Marconi patents, other companies would be unable to participate. The entire structure of this proposed company was dictated by Postmaster General Frederick Kellaway. He used the legal powers acquired by the GPO to control all communications. The result of this agreement was the formation of a cartel branded as the British Broadcasting Company. This would be the second application of the initials 'BBC' applied to the subject of broadcasting within the British Isles.

The British Broadcasting Company Ltd then acquired a 'BBC' trade mark for receivers manufactured by its member companies which included the outer wording 'Approved by Postmaster General'. Because this Trade Mark was still valid after the British Broadcasting Company Ltd ceased broadcasting and selling radio receivers, the British Broadcasting Corporation began using the same Trade Mark minus its "approval" wording.

But in 1938, the Trade Mark office sent out a reminder to the British Broadcasting Company Limited at its Savoy Hill address, that it was time to renew its trade mark. But because the British Broadcasting Corporation did not claim to be a trading company, it was not possible to transition ownership from the silent British Broadcasting Company Ltd. which was not liquidated until 1929, even though it had ceased broadcasting at the close of 1926.

The value in using the old trade mark with modifications was to imply that the British Broadcasting Company Limited had 'transitioned' into the British Broadcasting Corporation. In fact, when the Company lost its licences to broadcast at the close of 1926, the GPO bought out its assets. But since the British Broadcasting Corporation was a creature created by the same Crown corporation sole as the GPO, the GPO was able to then 'bequeath' assets bought from shareholders of the British Broadcasting Company Limited, and make them available for use by the British Broadcasting Corporation.
[See: 'Shareholders of the British Broadcasting Company', by Lorne Clark and David Read, p.5, BVWS Books 2010.]

What is overlooked in this bogus 'transition', is that there was a licencing gap from the time that the British Broadcasting Company Limited licences expired on December 31, 1926, to the commencement of new broadcasting licences issued to the British Broadcasting Corporation on January 18, 1927. The only possible answer is that the GPO filled that gap since it alone had the Crown corporation sole authority to broadcast in the United Kingdom.
​
This is not as surprising as it sounds, because both father and son with the surname of Benn, and both of whom were Labour Party Members of Parliament, suggested at different times in their careers that the General Post Office should operate as a commercial seller of airtime, while leaving the British Broadcasting Corporation to furnish programming. This formula was actually adopted in 1954 with the creation of the Independent Television Authority (ITA) but under a Conservative Party government.

JOHN REITH WRITES TO THE COMMITTEE

​On October 13, 1922, and upon successive days, the following advertisement appeared in several daily newspapers, including The Times (London):

The British Broadcasting Co. (in formation). - Applications are invited for the following officers:- General Manager, Director of Programmes, Chief Engineer, Secretary. Only applicants having first-class qualification need apply. Applications to be addressed to Sir William Noble, Chairman of the Broadcasting Committee, Magnet House, Kingsway, W.C.2.

​On the first day of the insertion of this want ad, John Reith sent in this response:

Sir William Noble ....
British Broadcasting Company.
With reference to your announcement in to-day's "Morning Post", I have the honour to request consideration for the General Managership, believing that I have the qualifications which justify the application.
I am an Aberdonian, and it is probable that you knew my family. I attach a brief summary of what I have done, together with certain personal particulars. Since relinsquishing my last post abroad, but came to Town last week to make enquiries and arrangements for future work.
I have the honor to be, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
J.C.W. Reith (signed).

THE COMMITTEE FORMS A COMPANY

On October 18, 1922, the British Broadcasting Committe began work on naming a Chairman and Board of Directors for the proposed British Broadcasting Company which was not created until December 15, 1922 as confirmed by publication on January 20, 1923, on page 791 in Popular Wireless Weekly, which also announced the capital and share distribution of the British Broadcasting Company Ltd. This same publication also printed the initial list of its Board of Directors as follows: 

​​CHAIRMAN: Joseph Albert Pease, 1st Baron Gainford, former Liberal Party cabinet member of Prime Minister Asquith's government between 1910-1916. (Not directly related to Henry Mark Pease.)
Henry Mark Pease, Managing Director of the Western Electric Company Ltd., U.S. citizen by birth who eventually returned to live and work in the USA.
​Sir William Noble, Director of the British General Electric Company Ltd.,
Godfrey C. Isaacs, Managing Director of  the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company Ltd;
John Gray, Director of Hotpoint Electric Appliance Company Ltd., 
Archibald McKinstry, Director of the Metropolitan-Vickers Electrical Export Company Ltd., Radio Press, Ltd., Mullard Radio Valve Company, Ltd.;
Major Basil Binyon, Managing Director of the Radio Communication Company Ltd.
Several of these members also sat on the Boards of other companies not listed here. Subsequent to this original list, two more names were added to the Board of Directors of the British Broadcasting Company Ltd.:
W.H. (Witt H.) Burnham, son of Walter Burnham, created a spin-off company from his father's firm called Burndept Ltd. (This name was formed from a combination of company name and location.)
Sir William Bull, Conservative leader of London's Unionist MPs.

On the very next day (October 19, 1922), Frederick Kellaway lost his job because the UK coalition government collapsed. The UK did not have its next Postmaster General until October 31, 1922 when Neville Chamberlain held that office. But on that date the British Broadcasting Company was still a proposal of the British Broadcasting Committee.

On November 14, 1922, the British Broadcasting Company did not exist, and therefore it had no licences and it did not own any radio stations. But on this date, the Marconi station 2LO in London was already on the air. The British Broadcasting Committee, acting in a similar manner to the Daily Mail which contracted to broadcast Dame Melba on Marconi station MZX back in 1920, came to a legal and financial arrangement with Marconi 2LO to promote the future incorporation of the British Broadcasting Company. This was confirmed by the following newspaper report that appeared on November 14, 1922, in The Times (London). This is what they reported on page 7:​

MARCONI 2LO CARRIES A COMMITTEE PROMO

BROADCASTING TODAY - START AT MARCONI HOUSE
Preliminary "broadcasting" (sic) will be authorized from Marconi House this evening. The programme, to begin with, will consist of two copyright news bulletins and official weather reports broadcast at 6 p.m. and 9 p.m., on a wave length of 360 metres. ....
The formation of the British Broadcasting Company will be completed in a few days, and pending its formation the Broadcasting Committee has decided to begin this limited programme.
Marconi House is to be the broadcasting centre for London, and country stations will be erected at Birmingham, Manchester, Newcastle, Plymouth, Cardiff, Edinburch or Glasgow and Aberdeen.
​[Underlining added to original text.]

Notice that it was the British Broadcasting Committee who were responsible for this broadcast!

This is what John Reith had to say about that broadcast and others like it, which were transmitted before the British Broadcasting Company was incorporated. That was long before it received its first licence to broadcast. Read John Reith's own words which appear on page 87 of his autobiography called 'Into The Wind'. It was first published in 1949:

"Since mid-November [1922] a primitive service had been carried on from Marconi House in London by the Marconi Company; in Birmingham by Western Electric; in Manchester by Metropolitam Vickers."

JOHN REITH SPREADS A FABLE

Although in 1949 John Reith admitted as fact to the obvious truth that the British Broadcasting Committee had inspired these "primitive' broadcasts by various GPO licence holders, as early as November 15, 1923, John Reith who had by then been promoted to Managing Director of British Broadcasting Company Limited, supported this totally false claim that was printed in the Daily Telegraph:

"A YEAR OF BROADCASTING
Yesterday was the first anniversary of the commencement of its work by the British Broadcasting Company, and at nine o'clock, Mr. J.C.W. Reith, the managing director, addressed the 'listeners-in' on the achievements of the twelve months."
​

DISSECTING JOHN REITH

To understand what Reith claimed, it is necessary to consult original source material. It is a tangled political ball of intentional confusion. Ronald Harry Coase in his 1950 book called 'British Broadcasting - A Study in Monopoly', originated with two academic articles published in 1946 and 1947. It predated by over ten years Asa Briggs' work, titled 'The History of Broadcasting in the United Kingdom. Volume 1 - The Birth of Broadcasting'.  While both authors acknowledged access to the archives of the British Broadcasting Corporation, in his slim volume, Coase managed to focus upon a key point that Reith obliterated.
​
​The facts reveal that on November 14, 1922, Sir William Noble, Chairman of the British Broadcasting Committee based in the offices of the British General Electric Company at,Magnet House in London, authorized the Marconi wireless station 2LO based in the offices of the  Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company in London, to transmit two news bulletins promoting the yet-to-be incorporated British Broadcasting Company. To accomplish this, the GPO appears to have issued 2LO with a special licence enabling this experimental station to carry a broadcast transmission aimed at the general public, and not just wireless hobby enthusiasts, although at that time, they were no doubt, one and the same audience.

However, the words of John Reith that were published by the Daily Telegraph one year later on November 15, 1923, conveyed the impression that November 14, 1922, marked the beginnings of the British Broadfcasting Company transmissions, before that company was incorporated, before Sir William Noble, Chairman of the British Broadcasting Committee hired John Reith, and long before the British Broadcasting Company Ltd received licences in 1923 for its own intial eight radio broadcasting stations.

But even then, as Coase makes plain, there are very, very fuzzy claims made about exactly when the British Broadcasting Company Ltd received its initial eight licences from the GPO. That story is buried in a game of musical chairs in which a number of people were appointed as Postmaster General, and then they ran into a void of total political collapse and confusion when the office of Postmaster General was left vacant by a caretaker government. This dark hole of abandonment was then filled with a number of accusations being thrown back and forth by men who had once held that office. Their rants concerned the question of who exactly it was who issued the British Broadcasting Company Ltd with a licence (singular) on January 8, 1923. It was not about the original eight licences acknowledged to have been issued on March 7, 1923.

However, when Coase wrote the first two introductory chapters to his book, he recycled information that he had originally published in 1946 and 1947, and back then, the days of free access to digitalized documents and publications via the Internet was decades away. Consequently, a number of contradictions appeared in his book, many of which today we are now able to resolve.

Among them is information concerning the GPO licencing of broacasts by the British Broadcasting Company Ltd. This company did not exist as a legal entity until December 15, 1922, a date before John Reith was hired as its General Manager after Reith had responded to a want ad inserted in daily newspapers by Chairman Sir William Noble of the British Broadcasting Committee. The evidence shows that Marconi's 2LO were given a GPO licence on November 14, 1922 to broadcast general information on behalf  of the British Broadcasting Committee. But what happened after the British Broadcasting Coompany Ltd was incorporated on December 15, 1922, is a tale mired in political controversy.

From April 1, 1921, Frederick Kellaway had been Postmaster General under the Liberal Party Premiership of David Lloyd George. Kellaway's term in office came to an abrupt halt during October 19, 1922 when the coalition government of Lloyd George collapsed. There was no office holder known as Postmaster General until October 31, 1922 when Neville Chamberlain was appointed and sworn in November 2, 1922. Meantime, the former Postmaster General Frederick Kellaway had joined the Board of Directors of the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company Ltd

JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS

It is at this point in the narrative that the nearest thing to accusations of lying took place in the House of Commons. It was during April 19, 1923 (see details from Hansard below), when the name of Postmaster General Neville Chamberlain who had been followed in office on March 12, 1923 by Postmaster General Sir William Joynson-Hicks, became envoked during what Coase describes on page 26 (n.62), as a "curious argument".

"Curious" or not, it goes to the heart and core of the foundational licencing by the GPO of the British Broacasting Company Ltd., and the smothering in lies and deceit that followed and spread like manure by John Reith. (These events are also covered by supporting contemporary news reports in The Times (London). Sir Joynson Hicks launched the controversy by stating in the House of Commons that the formation of the monopoly known as the British Broadcasting Company Ltd., was the work of Frederick Kellaway. In response, given as a speech, Chamberlain said that "this was a transparent quibble". Chamberlain agreed that he had put his name to it, but it was conceived and written by Kellaway. 

Kellaway then blasted back in The Times (London) with words to the effect that "this involved the most startling evasion of responsibility. [See: The Times, April 21, 23, 24, 16, 1923.] This was the cess pool of misinformation and political turmoil that John Reith feasted upon. No one wanted to claim to be the father of this boradcasting child known as the British Broadcasting Company Ltd. Reith was quite a despicable fellow who was prone to lie under the umbrella of his own father's religion, while being very impressed by Benito Mussolini and his promotion of fascism. That was a political dogma in which Guglielmo Marconi also wallowed in.

Of course November 15, 1923 did not mark the anniversary of the British Broadcasting Company Ltd transmissions. It did not exist one year earlier on that date. When and how it got its licences at some time in 1923, is the subject of this overview.

OVER TWO THOUSAND SHAREHOLDERS

The British Broadcasting Company Limited was incorporated by registration on December 15, 1922 and given number 186424 by H. Birtles, Registrar of Joint Stock Companies. This company would eventually attract over two thousand shareholders*.
[*See: 'Shareholders of the British Broadcasting Company', by Lorne Clark and David Read, BVWS Books 2010.]

 W.H. Burnham and Sir William Bull were added to the board of directors in order to represent the financial interests of the smaller shareholders. However, the dominant voice was that of Geoffrey Isaacs who represented the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company Ltd.

His importance was due to the number of wireless telegraph patents held by the Marconi company, and his status was enhanced by his brother Rufus Isaacs, 1st Marquess of Reading. The Isaacs brothers hailed from a prominent Anglo-Jewish family with its roots in Amsterdam. By October 18, 1922, Rufus Isaacs had already risen within the ranks of the Crown administrative structure to become a man with influence.  His own track record traced his employment by the Crown as Solicitor-General for England; Attorney General for England; Lord Chief Justice of England.

This sibling connection between the Isaacs brothers was also linked to the financial goals of the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company. That relationship resulted in an earlier allegation of insider stock trading and known as the 'Marconi-Scandal' of 1912-1913. The foundation of that event is found in events that led up to the creation of the American Marconi Company and a plan to link the British Empire by beam wireless stations. The key to that venture is found in the work of Guglielmo Giovanni Maria Marconi.

THAT DARLING BENITO MUSSOLINI

Born in Italy, Guglielmo Marconi became a Senator in 1914, and in 1923, a member of its National Fascist Party. At that time, Benito Mussolini found favor in both the UK and USA. On both August 6, 1923 and July 12, 1926, Mussolini appeared on the covers of Time magazine. In America, Mussolini was viewed by many politicians, business leaders, journalists and intellectuals in a very friendly light. Both the Saturday Evening Post and New York Times gave him extensive positive coverage.

In 1920, while MP for Dundee in Scotland, Winston Chuchill branded Jews as both 'good' and 'bad' in a full page newspaper article. Churchill also embraced Mussolini for promoting fascism as a buffer against communism. Churchill spread his ideas in a full page newspaper article that not only fed into a developing antisemitic Nazi mindset, but it also launched the 'Illuminati' conspiracy tale that is echoed in 2025. It was during his visit to Rome in 1927, that Churchill lauded Mussolini as "the greatest lawgiver among living men".

In 1929 Mussolini was made a marquess by Italy's King Victor Emmanuel III. In 1930, he was appointed President of the Royal Academy of Italy by Prime Minister Benito Mussolini, and that is how he became a member of the Fascist Grand Council. In 1931, Churchill again praised Mussolini as a "Roman genius". No matter how carefully this tale of Marconi is told, it cannot escape the fact that Guglielmo Marconi was a driving force behind the elements that gave birth to censored British broadcasting, and the hate factors that led into World War II.

JOHN REITH EMPLOYED AS COMPANY GENERAL MANAGER

It was not until December 30, 1922 when John Reith first began working for the British Broadcasting Company Limited. His first work day took place  in a rented room at Magnet House, in London. It was the home office of the British General Electric Company. There were just 4 employees.

The British Broadcasting Company Ltd still did not have a licence to broadcast.

In London all broadcast wireless telephony transmissions still came from the GPO licenced Marconi station 2LO. This station was licenced by the GPO to the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company Limited, and it had broadcast from Marconi House in London since it first came on the air on May 11, 1922.

It seems that the entire story about the origins of licenced wireless telephony broadcasting in the United Kingdom is nothing more than a confusing, contradictory string of nonsense. There is no better example to demonstrate this than the pages of Hansard (HC Deb 19 April 1923 vol 162 cc2440-6), and the words of the Postmaster General:

IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS

The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Sir William Joynson-Hicks)  In a very few minutes I shall try to explain the dispute which has arisen in this matter, and I am obliged to my hon. and gallant Friend for having given me the opportunity. The position is, as he stated, that there are at present two licences, and two only, which the Postmaster-General can issue. That is under the agreement made by my predecessor, Mr. Kellaway, and signed on 18th January, 1923, with the company known as the British Broadcasting Company, that they should have a licence for broadcasting throughout the country. I should here put in a caveat by saying that I am not at all certain that agreement with the company gives them a monopoly licence for broadcasting. I am not at all sure whether it is not open to myself to grant a licence, if I so desire, to somebody else. I mention that as a warning at the moment, but under the agreement which was made by my predecessor, Mr. Kellaway, I can only grant a broadcasting licence, to anybody who wishes it, clogged with the proviso that he must use for receiving broadcasting a particular form of instrument marked "B.B.C." by the British Broadcasting Company. It is open to me, also under certain conditions, to grant an experimental licence in regard to which there is no clogging condition. Both licences are issued at a fee of 10s., of which 5s. is by agreement given to the Broadcasting Company, in order to enable them to keep up their broadcasting concerts, etc. I am not sure whether the House, if they realised fully what is being done, would consider that it was in accordance with public policy that we should collect what are in effect compulsory taxes for the purpose of giving half of them to broadcasting companies.

Sir William Joynson-Hicks was being asked in the House of Commons about the two different wireless broadecasing licences that the GPO had issued. One of them concerned home made wireless receivers. The British Broadcasting Company wanted listeners to pay for a licence to listen on receivers manufactured by the British Broadcasting Company member companies, it did not want listeners to build their own sets and avoid paying a licence fee.

However, it is the obscurity of the first British Broadcasting Company transmitting licence that this brief overview is focussed upon with a question: Where is it? While Sir William Joynson-Hicks was not certain whether Mr. Kellaway had the legal right to give the British Broadcasting Company a monopoly to broadcast in the United Kingdom, there was, and still is, a more fundamental point at issue here.

When Mr. Frederick Kellaway was Postmaster General between April 1, 1921 and October 19, 1922, the British Broadcasting Company did not exist!

He could not licence a phantom.

But Joynson-Hicks concealed another problem.

Mr. Kellaway was not the immediate predecessor of Sir William Joynson-Hicks.

Kellaway's term as Postmaster General ended abrubtly when the coalition government of that day collapsed.

There was no Postmaster General between October 19, 1922 and October 31, 1922.

On the latter date a new government was formed, and it appointed Neville Chamberlain to be Postmaster General.

Yes, that Neville Chamberlain!

He remained in office until March 12, 1923.

In other words, any GPO transmitting licence issued to the British Broadcasting Company Limited, would have to have been issued by Neville Chamberlain. That is, if Sir William Joynson-Hicks was telling the truth when he told the House of Commons on April 19, 1923, that a transmitting licence had been issued on January 18, 1923 and "signed on 18th January, 1923" by "Mr. Kellaway". But that was impossible! Why? Because Mr Kellaway was not the Postmaster General on that date, Neville Chamberlain was the Postmaster General.

In fact, when the British National Archives are consulted, two documents are revealed. One correctly identifies the date upon which the British Broadcasting Company Limited was incorporated on December 15 1922, and the other one is the first page of a letter - from the GPO - attaching a licence for the British Broadcasting Company Limited to broadcast, but it is dated March 7, 1923. You can read the text below, or read the original at: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/twenties-britain-part-two/bbc-gets-licence/

WHAT LICENCE?

From: "Secretary, General Post  Office, London E.C.1. - March 7, 1923"
To: "The Under Secretary of State, Colonial Office."
"Sir, In continuation of the Post Office letter of the 20th October last, I am directed by the Postmaster General to acquaint you, for the information of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, that the arrangements for Wireless Broadcasting in Great Britain have now been completed. [Note, on "20th October last" there was no Postmaster General.]
A licence (copy enclosed) has been granted [when and by whom?] for the establishment of eight stations in different parts of the country for the purpose of broadcasting, by wireless telephony, concerts, lectures, educational matter, speeches, weather reports, theatrical entertainments and any other matter (including news and other information) from time to time approved by the Postmaster General.
Permission to broadcast news under certain conditions has been given by a supplemental licence (copy also enclosed).
The Company's stations will be established at or in the vicinity of London, Manchester, Birmingham, Glasgow, Newcastle-on-Tyne, Cardiff, Aberdeen and Plymouth (or Southampton).
The constitution of the Company and its relations with the manufacturers who form its individual members are set forth in the enclosed memorandum and Articles of Association and in the form of Agreement scheduled to the licence."
[Page two is not included in this online document at the National Archives at Kew.]
​

"ABSOLUTE AUTOCRAT OF THE WHOLE BRITISH AIR"

“You never know a British institution by examining its law. You have to meet its man” claimed William Hard in 1933 while assessing the British Broadcasting Corporation under the control of John Reith. He added, “Sir John is in practice the effectively absolute autocrat of the whole British air".
​[See quotation and source at 'John Reith and The Feudal Values' -  ​https://foundthreads.com/07.html]

"Aberdeen Press and Journal.
Friday November 16, 1923
NEW B.B.C. DIRECTOR
It is announced that Mr. J.C.W. Reith, general manager of the British Broadcasting Company, has been appointed its managing director. Mr. Reith is the youngest son of the Rev. Dr. Reith for 50 years minister of College and Kelvingrove Church, Glasgow, and ex-Moderator of the United Free Church of Scotland. Dr. Reith was a graduate of Aberdeen University."

A MYSTERY FROM START TO FINISH​

But if the start of the British Broadcasting Company Ltd was mysterious, and it remains mysterious to this day, the ending of that cartel is equally strange. The last Board meeting of the  British Broadcasting Company Limited with over 2,000 shareholders was held on December 20, 1926. Its assets were not 'transferred' to the British Broadcasting Corporation. The British Broadcasting Company Ltd shareholders were bought-out at par value.

The British Broadcasting Company Ltd., cartel was officially dissolved on December 31, 1926, but the British Broadcasting Corporation did not take over transmissions because it did not receive a licence on that date. In fact it is claimed that the British Broadcasting Corporation received its first licence (singular) on January 18, 1923, and yet, no one seems to have a copy of it. The first documented reference provided by the National Archives at Kew is dated March 7, 1923, and refers to the original 8 licences given to the British Broadcasting Company Ltd by the GPO.
​ [See reference above.]

So who broadcast using the initials 'BBC' in the interim period? Various sources point to the General Post Office, because they were the issuing source of Crown licences. In fact, it was the identical solution that Postmaster General Tony Benn suggested to Prime Minister Harold Wilson in the mid-1960s It was Benn's way of replacing broadcasts by unlicenced 'pirate' radio stations that were transmitting from ships 'hovering' just outside of British territorial waters. It was Tony Benn's father in the House of Commons who raised questions to Postmaster General Frederick Kellaway what statutory authority he had to issue broadcasting licences. Kellaway responded:

"Statutory authority for the issue of licences to establish wireless stations is conferred by the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1904."
[HC Deb 24 July 1922 vol.157, c50W.]

The problem with Kellaway's answer is that the law pertained to wireless telegraphy, and not to wireless telephony.  Consequently amendments were constantly added ex post facto to make this law about telegraphs and telegrams transmitted to wireless receivers by wireless senders, applicable to wireless telephony.
​ [See:​ Transmitting, No.110, December 2025, p.19]

​The murky finality of the British Broadcasting Company Limited gets worse. It was not until December 12, 1929 that it disappeared under the hands of its Managing Director who also served as its official Liquidator, while also holding office as the Director-General of the British Broadcasting Corporation which put the British Broadcasting Company Ltd., out of business. That conflict of interest if practiced in 2025 would not just raise eyebrows, it should have also raised anger by the thousands of shareholders* to whom the GPO handed back their original par value investment.
[*See: 'Shareholders of the British Broadcasting Company', by Lorne Clark and David Read, BVWS Books 2010.]

Three big questions remain unanswered:

1. When did the British Broadcasting Company Ltd receive its 8 licences to broadcast?
2. Who issued them?
3. Where can we find visual identification of those 8 licences?

EDITOR'S NOTE: In the dying hours of 2025 something or someone sparked a very hostile and very detailed response to this portal, even though the present contents of this compendium are unrelated to the immediate interests of the writer. No doubt this person is now engaged in an all-out attempt to find the 'missing' British Broadcasting Company Limited licences mentioned above. Naturally, if those licences can be found and proved to be genuine, they will be duly noted on this portal. Obviously the licences in question will have to be the 8 GPO licences alleged to have been issued to the British Broadcasting Company Limited, after it had been incorporated and duly registered.

THE OFFICIAL BLANKET PROTECTING CROWN SECRECY

As reported earlier in this portal, the UK GPO gained control of telegrams with passage into law of the 1869 Telegraph Act. In 1889 the first UK Official Secrets Act became law, because unlike the USA with its First Amendment written into  a constitution of 1791, there was nothing to stop the Crown corporation sole from censoring everyone and everything.

GPO methodology involved continual expansion of its authority. Those autocratic powers had began simultaneously in 1660 with General George Monck's installation in of a new monarchy. Senders and recipients of hand-written letters in turn gave rise to point-to-point or person-to-person messages in the form of telegrams. This provoked both the 1869 Telegraph Act and the Official Secrets Act that same year.

In 1904, the invention and application of wireless to telegraphy gave birth to Wireless Telegraphy Act. While that was taking place, the printed world of mass media publishing had begun to emerge during the dying years of Queen Victoria. It was a time when the glorious British Empire had been built on the back of slavery, both of which seemed to engulf much of the world.

To keep the lid on, and thus prevent esposing details of what the Crown corporation sole is, on August 22, 1911, a new version of the Official Secrets Act became law. It was more in keeping with the companion 1660 'Act of Oblivion' which sought to gag comments about the past and accept the status quo for what it appeared to be. If reinforcement was necessary, the blood-letting Admiralty of 1914 provided an excuse with a timely 'Great War'. This world war provided every excuse possible to clampdown on dissent created by nosey journalists.

This is only the first part of a story that will be taken apart in great detail within the British Broadcasting Compendium.
It will follow the YesterCode based upon methodology employed by detectives investigating major crimes.
We call our crime-spotters YesterTecs.
In this instance, crimes committed involve manipulative mind control via broadcasting.
The controlling authority of this British 'Big Brother' corporation sole wears a symbolic Crown.
This story does not pretend to be neutral in tone because any form of enslavement involves theft of freeborn rights.
Mind manipulation denies individual human beings of their birthright to freedom of choice.

Previouly published information is being updated, reconfigured and incorporated within this compendium.
​​Within chapters, a place-holder denotes that existing text will be removed when intended text is added to that page. 

This portal is not affiliated to any financial, religious, political or social cause.

FINE PRINT: This disclaimer is primarily intended for radio fanatics and become a strange manifestation of Marshall McLuhan's 1964 slogan that 'the medium is the message'. If your interest is limited to the subject of broadcasting from ships and marine structures, our companion site called All About Radio Caroline is for you. This site is not the work of one person, and neither is it the beginning of a new work. It is a combination of investigative journalism and academic research by a team of primarily three people, although the company involved has a staff of five at the present time. The authors do not subscribe to the nonsense called 'sovereign citizens'. This work began in 1966 as a freelance enterprise by a NUJ journalist. It then became affiliated in 1980 with the creator of the British offshore station Radio London. It was then joined by a professor who at the time was writing his first thesis about broadcasting . In 2000 he took it to another level by including monographs in academic journals. Books then followed. In 2014 yet another publishing venture began with part-works appearing in a communications journal. This work was also inspired by the 1968 publication of a major monograph written under the name of the late U.S. Supreme Court Justic Hugo L. Black. He was supported by U.S. Justice William O. Douglas, and U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren. The work of these three men linked the 1637 Star Chamber Trial of John Lilburne to the foundation of the US. Constitution. Chief Justice Warren then linked Liburne to what is today called the 'Miranda Warning'. It is based upon the U.S. Fourth Amendment to the Constitution. These three Justices were not members of the same political party now represented in the White House by President Trump. For more detaills see 'Who We Are' in the footnotes. Clearly we have detractors, but so do police when they name perpetrators of crimes against other human beings. However, this work is 100% neutral when it comes to political. religious or social couses. It is also free from any external financial pressure because  it is self-funded, and therefore it is not asking for financial contributions from the general public. This portal is provided free of charge as a public service in the public interest.