Above photo, 1994.

Above photo, 2014.

Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser 25 January 1869.

ORPINGTON. ROBBERY AT THE MAXWELL ARMS.

At the Petty Sessions held at Farnborough, on Monday, the prisoner William Walton, of Orpington, was again brought up on a remanded charge of being in the unlawful possession of a mustard pot and salt cellars. The articles were identified by Mr. Parsons, of the "Maxwell Arms," Orpington, as his property, and were worth about 1s. each. The prisoner said he was going along the road and picked them up, and was innocent of any dishonesty in the matter; but the Bench were of a different opinion, and sentenced him to a month's hard labour.

Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser 13 January 1891.

THE MISSING ORPINGTON PUBLICAN.

At the Bromley Petty Sessions, on Monday, Mr. Gregory, solicitor, made an application, on behalf of Mrs. Francis, of the "Maxwell Arms," Orpington, for a protection order, under somewhat curious circumstances. Mr. Gregory said that applicant's husband left home on the 7th of September with the ostensible object of banking some money. He did not return, and although every effort had been made by the police, and by means of the press, his whereabouts had not been ascertained. Under these circumstances, Mr. Gregory asked for a protection order for Mrs. Francis. After consultation, the Bench said it was a very curious case, but they did not see how they could grant a protection order. However, under the circumstances, as long as the house was properly conducted, the Bench would deal very leniently with Mrs. Francis should she be summoned for selling without a license. The matter would be adjourned till the next transfer day, but he doubted whether the license would be renewed if the present holder did not turn up in the meantime.

From The Standard (London, England), Monday, January 16, 1893; pg. 6; Issue 21383.

FLEGG v. HIGGS.

This was an action to recover the value of a horse, which, it was said, met with its death by reason of the Defendant’s negligence in not keeping certain fences in proper repair.

Mr. Moyses appeared for the Plaintiff; Mr. Cluer for the Defendant.

The Plaintiff was the proprietor of the "Maxwell Arms," Orpington, Kent, and let out horses and traps for hire. He hired from the Defendant a field of about eight acres for grazing his horses, and the horse in question was found dead one morning, having apparently fallen to a depth of 13 or 20 feet through a hole close to the wire fence. The case for the Plaintiff was that it had broken its neck, but no evidence was given to show the actual cause of death.

For the defence, the alleged negligence as to the fence was denied, but the main question was the cause of the death of the horse.

The horse slaughterer who bought the carcase from the Plaintiff deposed that the neck was not broken, and that he found in the stomach a very large stone, which he produced, and which, he said, was of internal growth, and that such a stone not infrequently caused the death of horses.

The Jury seemed to take that view of the matter, for they found a verdict for the Defendant after deliberating for a short time in the box.

From The Morning Post (London, England), Wednesday, March 29, 1893; pg. 12; Issue 37689.

THE MAXWELL ARMS, ORPINGTON, KENT.

This Desirable Railway Tavern and Hotel to be Let; cash between £700 and £800.

Full particulars and cards to view of Messrs. Monk and Son, 111, Great Russell-street, Bloomsbury, and 132, Newington-causeway.