The Unofficial British Royal Family Pages

Monday 26 July 2004

Worthy of Our Custom

Her Majesty the Queen may not personally discuss her pest control needs with Rokill Limited, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother probably never smoked Havana cigars from James J. Fox, and it’s highly unlikely that Prince Charles, Prince of Wales picks-up his own dry cleaning from Jeeves of Belgravia, but each gave these particular businesses his or her stamp of approval by granting them a Royal Warrant.   

With roots dating back to the Middle Ages, Royal Warrants are essentially seals of approval bestowed by select members of the royal family to individuals or companies that have regularly supplied them with goods or services for at least five consecutive years. There are very few other official requirements to become a Royal Warrant holder, although there are restrictions. First, the warrants are issued only to businesses of trade and not to professions, government departments or “places of refreshment or entertainment,” among others. Second, holders of warrants are not permitted to disclose specific details about the goods or services they provide – only a general reference. Finally, if a person or business wants to gain a warrant from Prince Charles in particular, it must first prove that it has a “sustainable environmental policy and action plan.” 

At the moment, only the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and the Prince of Wales can grant Royal Warrants, although the Queen Mother also granted them during her lifetime and those companies are allowed to keep their warrants for five years after her death. Once granted a Royal Warrant, the individual or company can add the phrase, "By Appointment to [name and title of whoever made the appointment]," as well as the specified Arms or Badge of that particular royal, to its advertising, packaging, stationery, and even its building and vehicles. The warrant does not imply that the company is the only particular supplier of its kind to that royal, but rather recognition that it is the preferred supplier. 

Royal patronage has undoubtedly been important to tradespeople throughout history, but it wasn’t until Royal Charters were created that these suppliers were officially awarded with royal recognition. According to The Royal Warrant Holders Association, Henry II granted the earliest recorded Royal Charter in 1155 to the Weavers’ Company. In the 15^th century, the Royal Charter became the Royal Warrant of Appointment, which continues to this day. Like today, some very recognizable figures were given Royal Warrants, including William Caxton, the first English printer, in 1476. By the end of the 18^th century, warrant holders were permitted to display the Royal Arms to advertise their distinguished status. Among the more interesting suppliers to receive warrants throughout history were an “Operator for the Teeth,” a “Goffe-club Maker,” and a “Bug Taker.”  

Even now, some Royal Warrant holders perhaps seem a bit out of the ordinary to the rest of us. G.B. Kent and Sons, for instance, has been “brush maker” to the royal family since the reign of George III. The company even brags on its web site that it made William IV’s toothbrushes. Today, the company, which claims it is best known for its hand-made hairbrushes, holds the Queen’s Royal Warrant. Price’s Patent Candle may be a newer warrant holder than Kent, but its products have certainly been more high profile than hair and toothbrushes – even if most of us didn’t know it – as they have been supplying candles to the royal family since the 1850s. Most notably, Price’s has supplied the candles for all royal state occasions since the Duke of Wellington’s funeral in 1852. More recently, the company’s candles have melted elegantly at both the wedding of Prince Charles and Lady Diana in 1981 and the funeral of Diana in 1997. 

Like Kent and Price’s, a number of Royal Warrant holders have held the honor for between 100 and 200 years. Many of these owe their existence to Queen Victoria and her family, who were more enthusiastic Royal Warrant Grantors than any other royals before or since, granting more than 2000 during her 64-year reign.   Fortnum and Mason and Schweppes are just two companies that owe their original warrants to the Victorian royals.  

Today, there are around 800 Royal Warrant holders, although some of them have more than one Royal Warrant. Ainsworths Homeopathic Pharmacy, for instance, has warrants from the Queen and Prince Charles, as well as a remaining warrant from the Queen Mother. Only a handful of suppliers have a warrant from all four royals, one being Benney, a London gold and silversmith.  The number of Royal Warrants also changes frequently as new warrants are added and others expire. Of course, what is given can also be taken away. Although all Royal Warrants are granted for renewable five-year periods, they are reviewed regularly and can be cancelled at any time. Although truly at the Grantor’s pleasure, the official reasons for canceling a warrant include: a decline in quality or the discontinuation of the product or service; diminished need for a product or service; or the business goes out of business, changes ownership or is declared bankrupt. Whatever the case, the company is given 12 months to completely eradicate any indication of the warrant from its product and company. 

In early 1999, supposedly under pressure from Prince Charles, the Queen withdrew a 122-year-old Royal Warrant from Gallaher Limited, makers of Benson & Hedges cigarettes, which had originally been granted by another Prince of Wales, the future King Edward VII. The official reason for the withdrawal of the warrant, according to Buckingham Palace, was that smoking was no longer popular in the royal family, nor was there enough of a demand for tobacco products. Late in 1999, following Mohamed al-Fayed’s claim that Prince Philip masterminded Diana’s death, it was announced that Prince Philip was withdrawing his Royal Warrant of Harrods. Apparently unfazed, al-Fayed promptly proceeded to have not only Prince Philip’s name and Royal Seal removed from anything related to Harrods, he also removed everything related to the Royal Warrants of the Queen, the Queen Mother, and Prince Charles, despite the fact that those warrants had not yet expired or been withdrawn. 

Controversy has also been raised in regard to the benefits that may be received by the royals who grant the warrants. Although organizations like the Royal Warrant Holders Association insist that Royal Warrants neither cost the warrant holder anything nor provide the Grantor with any free products or services, the exact opposite was contended in late 2002 when Prince Charles’ “lavish” lifestyle received massive press coverage. The Prince was accused of bestowing Royal Warrants to obtain free and discounted products for himself, his family and certain members of his staff. The Observer even claimed that, among other things, the Prince received free toothpaste from GlaxoSmithKline in return for granting the company a Royal Warrant.  

But regardless of whether or not the royal family benefits from the Royal Warrant system, one thing is clear, it certainly couldn’t hurt an individual or business to have the royal seal of approval. Although, as honors go, Royal Warrants are certainly more symbolic than anything, it doesn’t take a whole lot of figuring to realize that most people will automatically assume that if it’s good enough for royalty, it must be the best. In the Queen’s speech to the Royal Warrant Holder’s Association in 2002, she stated that the “Royal Warrant of Appointment is an ancient and honourable institution” and warrant holders are “setting standards in terms of quality and performance which others are obliged to note if not to emulate.” Just the school of thought someone like Hyacinth Bucket of “Keeping up Appearances” would pursue with a comical vengeance.

Until next week, 

- Tori Van Orden Mart�nez