From the Kent and Sussex Courier, 28 October 1892.

MALLING PETTY SESSIONS.

Monday.— Before the Hon E. V. Bligh (in the chair), Colonel Luck, and Major Bailey.

LICENSING.

Mr F. R. Hewlett (Messrs. Hoar, Howlett, and Tatham) applied that the licence of the "King's Arms," West Malling, be temporarily transferred to George Usmar from Thomas Clifford, who Mr Howlett said, had suddenly left the house, and sent in the keys to the brewers, Messrs. Jude, Hanbury, and Co.

Having heard the evidence of Mr Hyatt, traveller in the employment of the owners of the house, and the ingoing tenant, Superintendent Lane said he should like to say that during the past five years there had been six tenants, and the last one had only been in the house about four months. The house was constantly changing hands, and in his opinion it was not required. He also opposed the application on the ground that Usmar, who now asked for the licence, had been before the Court for receiving stolen property and acquitted.

Mr Howlett:- Is this fair. I object to the Superintendent's statement. Usmar has been found innocent.

Mr Bligh said Superintendent Lane was on his oath, and he thought the Bench should have the whole of the circumstances before them. Besides he thought that Mr Usmar, who was in a good way of business in the town, could have no desire to exchange his business. Was he the only person Mr Howlett could put before them?

Mr Howlett said he did not know anything about the Superintendent's objection till just now.

Superintendent Lane said Usmar had been in the house two or three days, and he had had no notice of the proposed transfer.

Mr Bligh said he thought the Bench should know all thy circumstances of the case. If Superintendent Lane was prepared to say at the renewal day that the house was not wanted of course he could do to. But now as he understood a temporary authority was only asked for. Of course in a little town like Malling there were bound to be several little houses which did not pay, and perhaps it was not right to single out at the present time the house in question.

Some question arose as to whether the late tenant had given up possession of the house, and Mr Howlett contended that the fact of the late tenant sending in the keys was sufficient to prove that he had given up all interest.

The Bench decided that the brewers, who had the power, should put a man in the house as manager till the next renewal day.

Addressing Messrs. Jude, Hanbury and Co’s traveller, Mr Bligh said that both these houses (also "Nag's Head") were not required in Malling. He noticed that in the Tonbridge division that the same brewers had adopted a system, and given up two licenses for a new one. He only made these remarks for the consideration of Messrs. Jude. The last named house was most inconveniently situated, as he could himself testify, and if Messrs. Jude could see fit to do away with the house it might be of interest to them, as well as the public.