Maidstone Telegraph, Saturday 11 September 1869.

Applications for Spirit Licenses.

Mr. Barton of the "Queens Head Inn," Wateringbury applied for a spirit licence to his house.

The application was supported by Mr. T. Goodwin, and opposed by Mr. Hughes.

Mr. Goodwin opened the case by dwelling on the accommodation of the house for a licence, and putting in plans showing the rooms, coach-house, stabling, &c. He then read a very influential signed memorial praying for the licence. He contended that as there were only three licensed houses in the parish of Wateringbury there was plenty of room for another. The houses already licensed were the "King's Head," the "Duke's Head," and the "North Pole."

Mr. Hughes. Before Mr. Goodwin proceeds with his case I must ask him to prove the service of the notices.

Mr. Goodwin:- I will do so directly.

Mr. Bligh:- I believe the objections on the last occasion was that there was no room in front of applicants house for a wagon to pass if another was drawn up opposite his house.

Mr. Goodwin observed that there was plenty of room. When applicants applied last year there was a good Lodge of Odd Fellows which had now left defendants house because he had to close at 10 o'clock and there was not sufficient time for the transaction of the society's business.

Mr. Barton was called and opposed to the legibility of his house. He believed if the licence was granted him the Lodge of Odd Fellows would return again.

In cross-examination by Mr. Hughes applicants admitted that the road was only 22 feet wide from his house to Towner's wall opposite, out of which was one path of about 3 feet wide.

After few brief remarks from Mr. Hughes in opposition the chairman, after a short consultation, said that the bench would grant the licence.

One of the magistrate said that the chairman had made a mistake as there were a majority against the granting of the licence.

The chairman admitted, after counting the dissentients, that he was in error.

The magistrates then retired to consider their decision, and on their returning to court the chairman said that they had decided upon refusing the licence in consequence of the narrowness of the road where applicants house was situated.

Maidstone Telegraph, Saturday 10 September 1870.

Mr. W. W. Barton, of the "Queen's Head," Wateringbury, applied for a spirit licence for his house.

Mr. T. Goodwin appeared to support and Mr. Hughes, of the firm of King and Hughes, Maidstone opposed.

Mr. Goodwin in opening the case said that the bench last year had admitted that he had made out of very strong case, but the grounds upon which they withheld their consent, was the erroneous impression that the road was too narrow, that vehicle's stopping at applicants door would impede the traffic. Wateringbury consisted of something like 1,400 persons, and there were only three licensed houses in the village, distributed in various parts; there was only one on the main road. The three houses were the "North Pole," some distance; the "Duke's Head," and the "King's Head." The "King's Head" was the only one in the village on the main road, which house was more of the character of an hotel. There was another house imperatively requisite for a class of the lower degree than were in the habit of using hotels. In Aylesford, for the population of 1,500 they had seven licensed houses; in Burham last year four licensed houses for the population considerably below that of Wateringbury, Ightham had six licensed houses; West Malling with a population of 2,000 there were eight licensed houses; East Malling, five; East Peckham, eight; and Wrotham 14. Considering its population Wateringbury had less licensed houses than any he had named, and others that he could name. Mr. Barton had had an Odd Fellows' Society at his house, which was compelled to leave it, because his closing at 10 o'clock precluded their lodge business. After some further strong arguments in support of the application, Mr. Goodwin read three separate memorials in favour of the conceding of the licence; the first signed by Captain Bury and nearly all the influential inhabitants in the vicinity, a second memorial from the Odd Fellows, and a third from the carriers. Captain Bury who resides opposite to the "Queen's Head," also addressed a private letter, in support of the
claim of applicant.

Mr. Barton was then called and stated that he had kept the "Queen's Head" three or four years. He then enumerated the parlours, rooms, coach-houses and other appurtenances for a licence house. He had measured the road at his house to the opposite side and from path the path, exclusive of paths it was 22 feet, whereas the road opposite the "King's Head" was only 18½ feet.

Mr. Hughes then contended that in this case there was no new facts before the bench. If a licence was granted great inconvenience will rise from the narrowness of the road.

The bench then retired to consider their decision and on their return the chairman said that they had nothing to say against respectability of applicants character, that was admitted as was also the accommodation afforded by the house, but beyond that the question with them was really as to an additional licensed house being required, and they were of opinion that none other was wanted at present, and therefore they refuse the licences.

The refusal seemed to take the court by surprise after the influential memorials had been read and it was shown that the road was wider opposite the applicants house than at the "King's Head."

This concluded the licensing business, which was got through in a very expeditious and businesslike manner.