Page Updated:- Thursday, 27 December, 2018.


Earliest 1816-


Latest ????

Ospringe Street


Lion Inn 1895

Above photo circa 1895.

Lion 1910

Above photo 1910, kindly sent by Rory Kehoe.

Lion Inn 1915

Above postcard 1915. Kindly sent by Rory Kehoe.

Former Lion Inn 2014

Above photo 2014.


Kentish Weekly Post or Canterbury Journal 24 December 1816.


John Jennings, "Lion Inn," Ospringe, returns his sincere thanks to his friends, the Nobility, Gentry, and the public, for the support he has experienced during his residence at Ospringe, and begs leave most respectfully to inform them that he has taken.

The "Rose Inn," Sittingbourne, and will enter upon it at Christmas, which he intends fitting up in the most comfortable manner, and hopes by moderate charges and a strict attention to the comforts of his friends that may honour him with their commands, to merit a continuance of their favours.

Ospringe, Dec. 18, 1816.


Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser 07 October 1862.

Mr. Packer, "Lion Inn," Ospringe, was summoned for having his house open at an unlawful hour on a Sunday. Mr. Johnson. who appeared for the defendant, asked for a remand until next Petty Sessions, which was granted.


Whitstable Times and Herne Bay Herald, 11 September 1897.


Four youths named Robert Hodges, Albert Chapman, Frederick Sheppard, and Georgt Hayes, horse boys, in the employ of Mr. W. Clark, were summoned at the instance of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for cruelty to a game cock, at Faversham, on Sunday, August 8th. Chapman pleaded guilty, but the others denied the offence. Mr. Colam, barrister, secretary of the Society, appeared to prosecute. In stating the facts of the case Mr. Colam said that the employer of the defendants kept his carts and stabled his horses at the "Lion Inn," Ospring Street. There was a game cock which belonged to the occupant of "Lion Inn., and at 6.30 on the morning in question the defendants came to feed their horses. Sarah Goldfinch, a domestic servant, heard a screeching noise and on looking out of her bedroom window she saw the defendants take the fowl, dip it into a tank of water, and then pelt it with stones. She called out and told the defendants to desist, but they replied with a coarse expression. She then went back to bed. Twenty minutes later the screeching was again heard and the servant again told them to desist. Later in the morning the bird was found in the yard, bereft of its feathers on the breast, whilst the tail feathers had also been pulled out. The only excuse that the defendants could give for their conduct was that the fowl had been "nicking" the corn of the horses. Mr. Colam added that, by two decisions of the High Court a fowl was designated a "domestic animal," and he suggested that that was a case which ought to deserve severe punishment. Evidence in support of the prosecution was given by Sarah Goldfinch, the young woman who witnessed the cruelty; Thomas Spencer, the landlord of the "Lion Inn," the owner of the fowl, who said there were raw places on the breast and legs where the feathers were missing; Police-constable Lambkin, and Inspector Fair, R.S.P.C.A., who each testified to the condition of the bird. The Chairman observed that it was the owner’s duty to see that the bird was kept under proper control. Mr. Spencer said that he had had fowls running about there ever since he had the house—fourteen years. Hodges said he was cleaning his horse and did not see the cruelty, and Sheppard and Hayes said they were not there. There was a previous conviction for driving a horse whilst in an unfit state against Hayes. The Chairman said the Bench considered that Chapman had ill-treated the bird, and they thought that all the defendants were equally guilty. It was a cowardly thing to do. It was something more than committing an offence against the law. The bird was one of God's creatures as much as they were, therefore it was an offence against God. It was an act of horrid brutally, and their friends and neighbours - if they had a spay of feeling amongst them - would think all the worse of them for having treated a poor dumb animal in the way they had. It meant a want of civilisation; it meant brutality. He hoped it would be a serious warning to then to keep their tempers, and to treat poor beasts kindly. If the magistrates could have flogged them they would have done so. The Bench, however, would treat them leniently as far as imprisonment was concerned. The Chairman then informed the defendants that they would be imprisoned for one day. The costs in the case were remitted.



JENNINGS John to Dec/1816 Next pub licensee had

GREEN Isaac to Oct/1820 Next pub licensee had

STARR George to 1828-Apr/29 Pigot's Directory 1828-29 (Moved to "Cross Keys Tavern," Cheapside, London)

PACKER Edward 1858-62+ (licensed to let post horses & baker)

CLARK William 1871 (also farmer & carrier age 36 in 1871Census)

FINCH John & Mary 1881+ (age 44 & 48 in 1881Census)

COAST Walter 1882+

SPENCER Edward Arthur 1901+ (age 39 in 1901Census)

MACEY Henry Frank 1913-Aug/1928 (age 35 in 1911Census) Whitstable Times

GROOMBRIDGE Albert Zebulon Aug/1928-30+ Whitstable Times

BULTON Alfred E 1938+


Pigot's Directory 1828-29From the Pigot's Directory 1828-29

Whitstable TimesWhitstable Times and Herne Bay Herald



If anyone should have any further information, or indeed any pictures or photographs of the above licensed premises, please email:-