From the Kent and Sussex Courier. 3 October, 1873. Price 1d.

AN EXTRAORDINARY PUBLIC HOUSE CASE.

James Warnett, landlord of the "King's Head Inn," Capel, was summoned for having his house open for the sale of beer during prohibited hours on the 14th ult., Capel.

Mr. W. Gorham defended.

P.C. Whibly said that at about ten minutes to 3 o'clock on Sunday afternoon, Sept. 14th, he visited the "King's Head Inn," Capel, kept by the defendant, and in the bar he saw William Crayford standing up with a quart pot containing beer. The defendant was present at the time, and his wife was at the same time selling beer to the hoppers in bottles. There were about sixty or seventy hoppers there singing, and making a great noise, and when he called the defendant's attention to the affair he said his time was correct—his clock was at five and twenty minutes to three o'clock. Defendant followed witness out into the street and told him he had better look after the beer-houses, and if witness reported him he should report him to Supt. Dance for drinking and smoking in beer-houses. He added he could look after his house himself, and witness had letter look after his 'back numbers.' Upon that the hop pickers commenced shooting at him.

By Supt. Dance: Knew his watch was correct and it was ten minutes to three o'clock.

By Mr. Gorham: Never knew a policeman's watch or clock turn out to be wrong. Policeman's watches are generally infallible. It was ten minutes to three o'clock when I went in. That was by my time and railway time. I never said that the hoppers were turned out right by the defendant's time but wrong by mine. I did not say to anyone it was nearly half-past two o'clock, and I must turn the hop pickers out.

Mr. Gorham: Have you got your watch?

Witness: Yes.

Mr. Gorham: What is the time by it.

Witness: (looking at the clock in the Court which was twenty minutes past twelve o'clock, the real time being fifteen minutes past)

Twenty minutes past twelve o'clock.

Mr. Gorham: Let me look at it.

Witness: Oh no, I have made a mistake, it is ten minutes past.

Mr. Gorham looked at the watch and then handed it to the Bench, remarking upon the statement of the police, which was contrary to the time indicated by the watch.

John Martin, labourer, said he lived near the "King's Head," and was standing by the side of the fence on the Sunday in question, being about going to Church. At about ten minutes to three o'clock, he saw a number of hoppers go out of the house.

Whibley, the policeman, was followed by the landlord, who told him he could conduct his house himself and the policeman had better look after the beer-houses.

By Supt. Dance: He could not see the door of the house, because of a projecting wall. He could only see them come off the pavement.
By Mr. Gorham: He knew the time by his watch which he did not set according to Whibley's.

Mrs. Mercer said she lived opposite "King's Head," and on Sunday afternoon, at about 10 minutes to three, she saw a number of hop-pickers apparently attempting to get into the house. She saw Whibley come out of the house exactly at eight minutes to three o'clock, and he was followed by a number of hop-pickers, who, she imagined by their manner, were far from being sober.

By Mr Gorham: Looked at the clock and said that as it was eight minutes to three o'clock Warnett was all right, but Mr. Mercer said he was wrong, because he should close at half-past two o'clock. Mr. Gorham said this being the whole of the evidence offered on the part of the police, he asked whether he need address their worships on the case which almost entirely rated upon the testimony of the policeman, who had said that a policeman's watch was infallible, and had endeavoured to support that argument by shewing the infallibility of his own watch. The policeman had been in this case a little too premature.

Defendant was then called, and said: On the afternoon of Sunday, the 14th, there were several persons in my house at about two o'clock. I was aware what were the proper hours for closing. At five-and-twenty minutes past two o'clock I ordered the men to leave, and I drew no more beer. Exactly at the half-hour my wife drew a pint of beer in a bottle, which was taken away. Not one drop was afterwards drawn. It was exactly at half-past two o'clock when Whibley came in. He made a sort of a rush, and mine being a narrow passage, he sent the people back. He said, "Now, Mrs. Wamett, do you know what you are doing?" She said, "All right; look at the time." I did not see the policeman's watch, nor did he pull it out in my presence. I told him he had better go and look after the beer-houses, and not let the people come up and annoy me as they had done all the morning. I told him I should report him to Supt. Dance, but he said I had been there so often that they would not take any notice of me. I sent out my man to see if other places were closed. After I cleared all out I looked at my watch and it was twenty five minutes to three o'clock. I know my watch was correct time, and on comparing my time with two other gentlemen's watches, I found we all agreed. I came to Tonbridge and ascertained my time was right by the railway clock. Some time afterwards, Supt. Dance and Whibley called upon me, and I told them my time was right. Whibley said I turned out right by my time but not according to his. I told Mr. Dance I had seven watches to one against him.

By Supt. Dance: After the house was cleared I looked at my watch and it was then 25 minutes to three o'clock. I am sure Whibley said I turned out right by my time. If the constable had waited half a minute the hoppers would all have been out. I did not set my watch on the Sunday by the railway time because it was correct. I am not in the habit of following the police round the beer-houses, watching them, and telling them to look after the beer-houses. I did not invite the mob to call out at the policeman.

William Tubbs, blacksmith, in the employ of the defendant, said that on the day in question at about twenty seven minutes past two o'clock, he heard the defendant tell the people to clear out. After the policeman had called, and the people had been turned out, he went to the two beer-houses, and found that both of them were open. It took him five minutes to go to the beer-houses.

By Supt. Dance: I knew it was twenty minutes past two o'clock because I looked at the clock and my watch. I have been sent, to watch the beer-houses to see what time they closed.

Alexander Terry, blacksmith, in the employ of Mr. Mercer, of Capel, said he lived near the "King's Head," and on the afternoon of the Sunday in question, he saw the people turn out of the house at half past two o'clock, and the door closed exactly at twenty five minutes to three o'clock. He made a remark at the time that the people had turned out very quietly. He compared his watch with the railway time at Paddock Wood and found that Mr. Warnett's time was perfectly correct.

By Supt. Dance: I did not go to the Mote Farm, to say it was the Sunday before, I did not go that afternoon I mean. The people were pretty quiet, hot of course you cannot expect a lot of hop-pickers to be very quiet. I did not see the men mob the police. In the evening I compared my watch with Whibley's. My watch was ten minutes to six o'clock, and Whibley's ten minutes past. My watch was one minute last by railway time.

George Martin, labourer, of Capel, said he lived close to the "King's Head." On the Sunday afternoon in question he saw Whibley pass by, and heard him say, "Surely it must be pretty nearly half-past two o'clock." He said to his wife they were pretty sharp on Mr. Warnett. The policeman went round to the public-house. When the policeman went by he looked at his watch, and saw it was 27 minutes past two o'clock.

By Superintendent Dance: My son is a witness here to-day, but he was not in my house when the police-man passed.

Mr Gorham drew the attention of the Bench to the case of Kates v. South, in which Mr. Justice Cockburn said 'the landlord was not bound to turn out customers when the clock struck twelve' and that there must be direct evidence of sale, and to show that House was wilfully kept open after hours for the purpose of inviting persons in. He thought after that case the Bench would find it utterly impossible to convict the defendant on the evidence adduced.

The Chairman said they had given the case a great deal of attention. There was a great deal of discrepancy as to time, and they were therefore disposed to give the defendant the benefit of the doubt and dismiss the case.

From the Kent and Sussex Courier, 8 May 1874.

Five Oak Green. Extraordinary Death of an Old Man.

On Tuesday, J. N. Dudlow, Esq., one of the coroner's for Kent, held an inquest at the "Kings Head Inn," relative to the death of John Easterfield, 85 years of age, a gardener, living in a cottage by himself.

The following were the jury:- W. Barnett (forman), C. Brotherwood, J. Collins, E. Fever, R. Fever, W. Fever, A. Fry, J. Knell, S. Larkin, J. Lawrence, J. Pearson, and H. Sole.

William Tubbs deposed that he was in the employ of Mr. Warnett, blacksmith, of Five Oak Green, and on Friday he went to the deceased's cottage, shortly before noon, for some greens for his master. He could not make anyone here at the front door, and, thinking he could see the old man on the floor through the window, he went to the back door, which was open. He went through the scullery into the kitchen, and there found the deceased lying in the corner of the fireplace, with his left arm on the fender. He was quite dead, and he could see that his clothes were a good deal burnt. His hat was slouched on the back of his head. A kettle was in the fireplace, but he could not say whether there was any water in it. There was a cup and saucer on the table, and a short distance from the door he saw a teapot containing a little tea, with a handle towards the door. The front door was fastened at the bottom, but both the back doors were open. Deceased used to go through the back door to fetch his water. There was no food on the table, but plenty in the cupboard, and near the window was a bottle containing rum. He saw a penny-piece lying on the corner of the table. Could not say whether the deceased had been touched after death, but should say if he fell down his hat would have tumbled off. There was mud and cobwebs on the hat, but there was none in the corner where he found him. The deceased and complained to him of giddiness.

James Warnett, landlord of the "Kings Head," and a master blacksmith, spoke to the position and appearance of the body after it was found by the last witness, and said it looked to him as if it had been pushed into the corner. The witness also said that a man named Langridge, living next door to the deceased, was accused of stealing some of his broccoli, and the leaves were found close to his back door and the ends in his pig-tub; and in consequence his (Warnett's) wife gave Langridge notice to leave, which greatly displeased him, and as the broccoli was referred to, he said, "I'll broccoli that old _____." That was on the Monday, as deceased was found dead on the following Friday. He lasts saw the deceased alive about 2 o'clock on Wednesday afternoon, when he appeared in very good health.

The wife of the last witness deposed that deceased had complain to her of weakness, and she had told him to be very particular and not get near the fire. She also deposed to giving Langridge notice, when he use the threat stated by the last witness.
Jane Ann Wheeler, a widow, deposed that on a Monday night, when she last saw defendant alive, he complained to her of a "swimmy" sensation in his head. She helped to lay the deceased out, and he was very much burnt about the back and left arm, and on his left side was a bruise as big as a man's fist. In his pockets she found an empty purse, and in a table drawer 4s. in silver.

Mr. Caleb Gargory, surgeon, of Pembury, was examined, and his evidence appeared to favour the idea of the death had taken place while deceased was in a state of syncope, but he concluded by stating that he could not say what was the cause of death unless he made a post-mortem examination.

The Coroner summed up, and said that no doubt the threats used by Langridge were mere idle threats, which were never carried into execution. Nothing had been touched in the house to warrant the supposition that robbery had been committed. It was unfortunate that Langridge had made use of such threats. The case was reported to him, and he thought death the result of an accident, and therefore deemed it unnecessary to hold an inquest; but on the fact of Langridge having used threats being reported to him, he rescinded his former order, and hence the present inquiry.

After a good deal of conversation, the jury returned a verdict that deceased died in a fit.

Some of the neighbours and friends of the deceased seemed greatly dissatisfied with the result of the inquiry.

From the Kent and Sussex Courier, 25 August, 1876.

ALLEGED LICENSING OFFENCES.

Sarah Scoones was summoned for unlawfully selling beer, to be consumed on her premises, at Capel, on the 14th inst., without a license.

Mr Rogers, solicitor, applied for a remand, in order that witnesses might be summoned to give evidence on behalf of the defendant, and the application was granted.

From the Kent and Sussex Courier, 30 August 1876.

CAPEL ALLEGED SELLING BEER WITHOUT A LICENSE.

Sarah Scoones, grocer, of Capel, was summonsed for selling liquor to be consumed on unlicensed premises on the 14th August.

Mr Rogers defended.

P.C. Whibley said that on Monday, August 14th, at about half-past five o'clock in the afternoon, he was on duty at Five Oak Green, and saw Dennis Burr go from the defendant’s shop with a pot of beer, and as soon as he got out of the door he drunk out of the pot while standing on a patch close to the door. He then put the pot down within a few feet of the path, and walked past the old lock-up. He then sat down on a post, and afterwards he took the pot into the defendant’s shop. The defendant was not there, and he called her. She came, and he told her that he had seen Burr drinking against her door, and in reply to a question, she said that Burr bought the beer, and that the pot it was in belonged to her. Witness then reminded her that she had only an outdoor license, and she replied that the Excise Authorities had told her that persons could drink just outside the door.

By Mr Rogers:- He only saw Burr present, and did not see Mrs Springate. Burr drunk the beer just outside the house, and she had no control over him when he got outside the shop. Considered that the brick pavement was part of Mrs Scoones premises. James Warnett, landlord of the "King's Head," Capel, Five Oak Green, said he saw Burr and the and the policeman together, and heard Mrs Scoones call the policeman a "bullying man."

Mr Rogers submitted that the defendant had committed no offence, and he called the defendant, who said that about half an hour before the policeman called Burr had a pint of beer, which she told him to drink outside her house. He went outside, and afterwards a Mrs Springate called and took a pot of beer to Burr, who had carried some things home for her. Burr stood on land over which she had no control.

Dennis Burr, who said he was 18 years of age, said be stood on Mr Larkin's premises when Mrs Springate brought him out a pint of beer. He denied that he drunk the first pint of beer until he got to the post, and the second pint of beer Mrs Springate brought to him.
Mrs Springate said she bought a pint of beer for Burr, and took it out to him. Defendant told her the beer must not be drunk on her premises.

Mary Taylor said she saw Burr drink the beer on the post, and also saw Whibley take the pot from Burr. The landlord of the "King’s Head" came out some time afterwards.

Emily Mercer corroborated the statement of her.

The Bench said it was a very suspicious case, but giving her the benefit of the doubt, they dismissed the case with a caution as to her future conduct.