CCL6
WILDERNESS CONTACTS CONTINUE
Thursday 8th February 1968
1500 Electronics Design Conference Organising Committee.
CCL had submitted a paper by Gordon Edge for the Conference on Electronics Design. which in the view of some members of the Committee, including myself, was not of an appropriate standard. J.D. Tucker referred to Maxwell and also said CCL had the backing of large group. I said I was not happy with them. Rolfe said it was more or less our duty to include CCL in programme - but he knew nothing about them.
Monday 11th March 1968
I went to the Physics Exhibition (at Alexandra Palace?). AIM Electronics had a Stand and I went and talked to a junior engineer. Later I passed the Stand when Tim Eiloart and Jeremy Prosser were there - I waved and walked on.
Friday 12th April 1968
IEE send me Electronics Design Conference Paper 20 from CCL "For comments if you wish". IEE also ask me to get in touch with John Coales on an 'old pals' basis
Friday 19th April 1968
An item about CCL's search for top tycoons appeared in The Daily Telegraph.
Friday 3rd May 1968
I received from Arthur D. Little a letter postmarked Musselburgh, Midlothian, 1st May 1968, re-addressed from M.I. It contained a With Compliments slip signed by W.A.P. Black, who was Deputy Director of Research. Arthur D. Little's fields were stated as Research, Management Consulting and Engineering.
CCL was later taken over by Arthur D. Little.
A few years later I named my fictitious learning company, Alpha Displays Limited, to refer obliquely to the CCL phase of my bizarre experiences. Likewise I chose the title A Disrupted Life for a document describing some of my experiences.
June 1968
AIM Associates Cambridge founded - it took its name from AIM Electronics. CCL and AIM Electronics were its subsidiaries.
Friday 14th June 1968
Royal Society talk, keeping Harold Wilson at bay and Cabinet Office presence at IoP
Tuesday 18th June 1968
I received a letter from Tim Eiloart (dated 13th, posted 17th) inviting me to the Opening of CCL's Development Laboratories by Rt Hon George Brown on 28th June.
13th June, 1968
Dear Harold,
We will be holding open house here from Friday 28th June
to Tuesday 2nd July, 1968.
The Rt. Hon. George Brown will open our new development
laboratories on 28th. I do
hope you may be able to be with us and join us for lunch afterwards.
Otherwise you are welcome, of course, during the open days that follow.
I do hope we may look forward to seeing you, and will
send further details as soon as we hear from you.
Yours sincerely,
Tim
T.M.B. Eiloart
I have no doubt the events at the Publications Committee meeting on the 14th were linked to the warm invitation from CCL to attend the opening of their new laboratory. Rt. Hon George Brown was then Deputy Leader of the Labour Party. I think he had resigned as Deputy Prime Minister but nevertheless this was going up the scale politically. I guessed (correctly) that I would also be lunching with Robert Maxwell.
I wrote to Tim Eiloart declining the invitation, adding "my best wishes in spite of our unfortunate association".
Monday 24th June 1968
Electronics Design Conference - The IEE Officer concerned with the Electronics Design Conference said CCL was inefficient.
Thursday 4th July 1968
I received from the IEE a synopsis of Gordon Edge's paper - full paper promised for by 14th July (a Sunday).
Wednesday 10th July 1968
Electronics Weekly had an article by Kevin Smith about CCL's Open Day. D. Southward named as Joint MD.
Tuesday 16th July 1968
I received from the IEE a number of Conference papers, with Gordon Edge's paper on top. He was now MD of CCL!
Tuesday 23rd July 1968
Tim Eiloart was interviewed on radio about tycoons - they don't use their time travelling well enough, are very hard working and surprisingly do not gamble.
Monday 25th August 1968
A storm breaks around Robert Maxwell.
23rd to 27th September 1968
The Conference on Electronics Design took place in Cambridge.
As I had surmised there was a problem with the CCL contribution - Gordon Edge did not attend to present his paper, which was given instead by Tim Eiloart. By this time they were Managing Director and Chairman of CCL respectively. Under all the circumstances I felt I could not respond to an invitation for participants in the Conference to visit CCL.
Just before the Conference, Computer Technology approached me personally through a Public Relations agency with an offer of a paper but it was too late to include it. It is interesting to note that the IEE Press Officer, who handled the Conference Press arrangements, joined Computer Technology shortly afterwards.
Electronics Weekly had an item on CCL headed "No Comment" Among the points made were that life in CCL was Monastic - it had soundproof cells rather than open plan. The Bible was also mentioned.
Thursday 25th September 1968
Maxwell controversy in full swing.
Friday 11th October 1968
Design Electronics carried an article by Ed Patterson on AIM and CCL. Eric Fearon had put Ed in touch with CCL. Eric Fearon was then at English Electric (Technical Writing) and later joined Business Publications.
Friday 1st November 1968
It was announced in The Daily Telegraph that Robert Maxwell had joined AIM Associates, the holding company for CCL.
Sunday 15th December 1968
John Hammond referred to "your friends" CCL at Bar Hill.
Friday 1st November 1968
It was announced in The Daily Telegraph that Robert Maxwell had joined AIM Associates, the holding company for CCL.
Sunday 15th December 1968
John Hammond referred to "your friends" CCL at Bar Hill.
Wednesday 1st January 1969
Dunworth made a C.B. I was writing Section 5 (about CCL), with Sheila typing.
Thursday 2nd January 1969
Maxwell looks like losing News Of World fight.
Friday 3rd January 1969
I had a meeting with Robert Clayton, Chairman of the IEE Electronics Division, in his office at the Hirst Research Laboratories, Wembley. The meeting, which took a long time to arrange, has been fully reported elsewhere.
It is possible that a left-wing political encounter which occurred shortly before I was shown into Clayton's office was related to CCL.
During our meeting Robert Clayton acted as a Company rather than an IEE man. He was extremely offensive and belligerent in his manner and poured scorn on my Electronics Design activities, attacking every aspect of a memorandum I had sent in advance. I gave as good as I got.
There was no doubt whatsoever that the offensive stance taken by Clayton was deliberate and had some purpose other than serving the interests of the IEE. I suspected that he had been given the specific company objective, in attacking my IEE proposals, of creating conditions in which I would be amenable to something or other yet to be revealed.
Then at one point he introduced and laboured a point about Discounted Cash Flow techniques and then went on to say that he was Technical Director of the merged companies (i.e. GEC & AEI with E.E. & Marconi) and that he and the Research Director (Eric Eastwood) needed the help of a consultant with the Research and Development phases.
His stressing of Discounted Cash Flow was a clear reference to CCL - it had been my last assignment at that company before I severed all connection. His point about GEC needing help at the research and development phases referred to the consultancy services provided by CCL.
Saturday 4th January 1969
I received a letter from Tim Eiloart inviting me to visit the CCL Stand at the 1st London International Inventions and New Products Exhibition at any time except Thursday afternoon. An overseas ticket was enclosed.
Any residual doubts I had about interpreting the behaviour of Robert Clayton the previous day vanished with the receipt of this letter, which was dated and posted on 3rd January 1969. It was the first communication from or on behalf of CCL for many months and I cannot think the timing of its arrival was coincidental. This was the PEP indicating the desired behaviour after the softening up by the sequential series of NIPS.
I did not respond - but this did not stop further CCL-directed attempts.
Tuesday 7th January 1969
I held a meeting of the Safeguard Group in my home. A full description of the meeting has been given elsewhere but in the context of CCL it was the contribution to discussion of Rev George Austin (who became Archdeacon of York) that was particularly thought-provoking.
Rev George Austin said he had recently been invited to dinner with a salesman who travelled the world on behalf of George Kent (a Luton instrument company), another person with a small company in Dunstable and yet another wondering whether to move from a large to a small company. George Austin said they felt under stress from their jobs whereas he did not. LIFT! - he will not have known it but I am reasonably sure that the invitation and the conversations at dinner were set up to provide an 'in-off' communication (to use a billiards analogy) favourable to small instrument companies.
Saturday 11th January 1969
Ian D. Morton, who had been at the Safeguard Group meeting earlier in the week, called in with some photocopies needed by the Group - he brought them in a Pergamon envelope which had originally contained a Training journal.
Pergamon and Training!!! The use of that envelope must be sheer coincidence - I concluded that the chances that it was chosen to convey a message must be extremely small for I could not see what possible connection IDM could have with CCL/Maxwell/Pergamon on the one hand and E.E./Marconi on the other. Much later I learned that one of Ian Morton's children had been sponsored on an engineering degree course by M.I. This would have given that company an entree so the balance on the coincidental/contrived scale has to be shifted towards the latter.
Wednesday 12th February 1969
I attended an IEE meeting on Electronics Research and the Ministry of Technology. Next to me at Dinner afterwards was Dr.R.B.D. Knight, who referred to my friends at CCL. Also present was Prof J.F. Coales, who had booked a place at short notice and had brought along a Miss Bowell of the Science Research Council. At the end of the dinner, Prof. Coales came over to my place with Miss Bowell, introduced me to her. Prof. Coales then wandered off. Miss Bowell, asked me what my label was. I said I was a consultant. She said that wasn't much of a label. She said some labels were a bit of a mouthful - such as the name General Electric - English Electric. She said it was all very well running large companies but we needed small ones as well. I said pointedly to Miss Bowell that I had become interested in group processes and would send her a copy of a letter I had published on the subject. There is little doubt that Miss Bowell had been brought along for a purpose connected with CCL.
Friday 21st February 1969
I had heard that CCL, including AIM, had become a member of SIMA (Scientific Instrument Manufacturers' Association). I wanted to find out who had put them up for membership so I went to the SIMA offices and saw Outridge, the General Secretary. He said CCL was the only firm he knows on Group basis, as distinct from individual companies. I asked him who had proposed CCL/AIM for membership of SIMA. He looked it up and found that the Proposer had been Ray Burnett of M.I., and the Seconder was Jennings of Dynamco.
COLLEGE HEAD or METHS DRINKER?
Friday 14th March 1969
A barrister says "someone is trying to destroy you" and names a tough solicitor
I called by appointment on Professor John Coales in the Engineering Laboratory, Cambridge, and was most warmly received. He took me to lunch in Clare Hall. He spoke about the foundation of the Hall, its purpose, the female company, the need for money and the Russian visitors. He said that the President was Brian Pippard, who would be in that Office for 7 years, then they would be-looking around for another . . . .
Going out of the dining hall, we passed a portrait which included Sir Henry Thirkill, Master of Clare College, who I knew as Provincial Grand Master of Cambridgeshire and who had been Secretary of the Cavendish Laboratory. John Coales pointedly asked if I knew Sir Henry had run the Part II practical class at the Cavendish Laboratory. When I said I didn't, he went on to say that Lord Blackett used to assist Sir Henry in the practical class. I asked John Coales whether he knew I had run the 2nd year practical class. He said "yes, of course" - very euphoric.
Someone had been doing his homework - I hadn't known that Sir Henry and Lord Blackett had been my practical class predecessors. Back in Professor John Coales's office I described something of the circumstances of my leaving M.I., including the psychological pressures and the resignation agreement. I then outlined the pressures applied to get me to join CCL and how I had decided the cut loose from them altogether. Prof. Coales then revealed that he had become involved with Computer Technology - he said Tim Eiloart had got him interested.
There is little doubt that John Coales had delivered the massive PEP to make me more amenable to CCL. I had got in first with my views on CCL and had made it clear that I was not interested in the company. On whose behalf was John Coales acting?
Tuesday 29th April 1969
I received a journal, New Electronics, readdressed from M.I. It contained an article on CCL, electronics was denigrated and University/Industry links were stressed.
May 1969
The IEE News of May 1969 featured on the front page an AIM/CCL advertisement about a product I had strongly advocated at M.I. adjacent to a picture of Trafalgar Square which didn't include Nelson's column!
Friday 9th May 1969
I paid a follow-up visit to John Coales. When I arrived I found the atmosphere had completely changed. In the course of discussion John Coales said Lord Nelson was allright - he could look after himself. I must on no account approach him and I must not persist in my enquiries - if I did I would probably end up a meths drinker! He said there were no openings in the University.
Tim Eiloart was waiting in Prof. Coales's outer office as I came out! This time John Coales had delivered a massive NIP ahead of a CCL hint - he was learning the technique fast. I simply nodded to Tim Eiloart and departed. John Coales was clearly part of the network trying to get me to join CCL - again, the vexed question was "On whose behalf was he acting?".
I went on to see Nat Hiller. He told me he edits for Maxwell. I told him I had earned only £53 in a year. Apparently he had heard of Assistant Secretaries dropping hints and leaving you to work things out.
Friday 16th May 1969
I saw FE Mostyn. I explained the T-Group background and left various papers. He knows Maxwell. He was against Freemasonry. He said there was no such thing as honesty - he had just been asked to talk about "lies". He will call me or write.
Tuesday 20th May 1969
I had lunch with Gabriel Horn in King's College. He told me he was a Director (as was Tim Eiloart) of one of CCL's subsidiaries, AIM Biosciences. Gabriel Horn asked me what I had said to Prof. Coales when I had seen him on the 9th. I was tight-lipped in response to his question even though he was a great friend. Indeed, one of the main reasons why I avoided CCL was the high probability that it was because he was a friend of mine that he was approached and became involved with the CCL/AIM set-up.
While we were living in Cambridge, Gabriel Horn and his charming wife Ann (daughter of Lord Soper) and my wife and I spent many delightful evenings together and on day trips with our respective children. It was galling to realise that during that lunch at Kings' College he may have been acting as an intermediary. That was the last time I met him, long before he moved to Bristol to take up the Chair of Anatomy and his return to Cambridge to become Master of Sydney Sussex College.
Wednesday 28th May 1969
I saw F.E. Mostyn again. He said Maxwell doesn't know Lord Nelson - I should have realised that. He said wait, lie low. You could walk back - why not, you can handle him.
Sunday 8th June 1969
I visited John & Joan Hammond. During our visit I asked John how he had come to get in touch with CCL/AIM. He said someone had asked him to enquire about investing in AIM. He said the person's name may have been in the documents I had shown him. When I asked "Why not tell me?" - he declined saying he had been asked in strictest confidence. He did not even offer to approach the person concerned to see if he minded disclosure to me. Besides, he said, it is not connected to my situation because he had been asked to look into two other firms at same time. It wasn't so long ago that I was as innocent as he was! LIFT!
It emerged that John Davis had been upset because I wouldn't take the E.E. consultancy. LIFT!
7a