ROYAL Pubs of Ramsgate

DOVER KENT ARCHIVES

Page Updated:- Sunday, 15 December, 2024.

PUB LIST

PUBLIC HOUSES

Paul Skelton

Earliest ????

Royal

Open 2019+

51 Harbour Parade

Ramsgate

01843 599599

https://www.theroyalramsgate.co.uk/

https://whatpub.com/royal

Above photos by Paul Skelton 21 July 2012.

Above photo 2016.

Above photo, 2019.

Above photo 2022.

Above matchbox, circa 1980s, kindly sent by Debi Birkin.

Also known as the "Royal Harbour Brewhouse and Bakers" around 2014-19, but I believe it has always been known locally and officially as simply the "Royal Hotel." I also believe that the number of the address has been changed at one time. At one time I have seen this as 98 but now (2021) it has the number 51.

From the Kentish Gazette, 20 October 1857.

QUARTER SESSIONS. Oct. 15, 1857. (Before John Deedes, Esq., Recorder.)

James Willis, late porter at the "Royal Hotel," Ramsgate, was charged with stealing a Mackintosh coat and pair of goloshes, the property of Mr. Snowden, solicitor, Ramsgate.

Mr. Scobell stated the case and called the following witnesses:—

George Reeve, waiter at the "Royal Hotel":— Prisoner was living at the hotel in Juno last. I remember Mr. Fowler coming to the hotel in June — two or three days before he was married to Miss Snowden, the daughter of the prosecutor. I particularly remember his coming the evening before his marriage, it was a wet night. He had on a water proof coat and goloshes. He wished them off; I rang the porter’s bell, prisoner came and I left him with Mr. Fowler. The day afterwards I saw the waterproof coat in the kitchen.

Cross examined by Mr. Towne:- I did not see prisoner bring them down.

Mr. Alfred Fowler:— I was staying at the "Royal Hotel" in June last; on the 20th June I borrowed the coat and goloshes of Mr. Snowden. I gave them in charge of one of the servants, I cannot say which.

Cross-examined:— My impression is that I told the person to take them to Mr. Snowden.

Elizabeth Stroud:— I am kitchen maid at the Hotel. I saw the coat hanging in the scullery for nearly three months after Miss Snowden’s marriage. The last time I saw it was about the end of August. I saw prisoner hang it up there, he said he had charge of it for a gentleman. On the 23rd August he took the coat and said "I am off," and I did not see him again.

Cross-examined:— I saw the prisoner take the clothes to a party who was leaving the hotel, and he brought them back and said they were not owned.

James Smith:— I am now head porter at the hotel. In July I heard prisoner say that the coat belonged to a gentleman who had left it behind.

Cross-examined:— I wore the coat whilst it was hanging in the scullery.

Mr. Hiscocks:— I am proprietor of the hotel. The prisoner was living with me as porter. He and all my servants had strict orders from me to bring all articles to me which were left at the hotel. I never saw anything of the coat. Prisoner absconded from my service on the 23rd August.

Cross-examined:— Prisoner was a weekly servant; he did not give me a week’s notice, and that is what I mean by absconding. He was in my employ in 1856, and I never missed anything whilst he was with me. He did not tell me before be went that he had hurt his back; but he might have said something about his being ill.

Mr. Snowden identified the coat and goloshes, and said that on the 12th September he accompanied the superintendent of police to Deal with a search warrant, and found the goloshes at prisoner's lodgings. He afterward met the prisoner at Ringwould. On being asked for the coat, he gave it up. The value of the articles is about £1 5s.

Cross-examined:— I never made any enquiries about the clothes till the 12th September. I had worn the coat and goloshes for several years. I am clerk to the magistrates and took the depositions in this case. I am now the prosecutor, and I am also the attorney, and instruct counsel in this prosecution, and expect to be paid my fees for preparing the brief, &c.

Henry Ridsull, inspector of police, at Deal, produced the coat and goloshes found in prisoner's possession.

Cross-examined:— I have known prisoner for 15 or 16 years — his family have all that time resided at Deal, and I never heard any complaint against any of them.

Mr. Towne, for the prisoner, made an eloquent appeal to the jury; doubtless, he said, it was highly proper that the masters and visitors of hotels should be peculiarly protected, for there was a large responsibility upon innkeepers, and they had to make good all the loss arising from the dishonesty of servants, and the delinquent when discovered should of course be brought to justice; but when an unfortunate man was upon such a trial as the present, the most ardent pursuer and lover of justice should be influenced by a more important attribute — the attribute of charity; and without which, justice, as it is said, is merely a sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. He (Mr. Towne) implored them now to exorcise that virtue, the brightest jewel which adorns the human mind; and he would undertake to shew them that, by taking a charitable view of the prisoner’s conduct, they would feel it incumbent to relieve him from the odious imputation of felony; by doing which he ventured to assure them he would satisfy the learned Recorder; extremely gratify themselves; but above all make the prosecutor rejoice that he had escaped the remorse of a conviction upon the present occasion. Mr. Towne then contended that the only question to be determined was what was the prisoner’s original intention when the coat was entrusted to him? Mr. Fowler had certainly stated that it was his impression that he gave the old clothes into prisoner’s care with directions to return them to Mr. Snowden; but that was merely his impression, for he admitted he had no distinct memory upon the subject, and as it was on the evening previous to his marriage of prosecutor’s daughter, they could clearly understand that his memory would more naturally be absorbed upon more attractive fancies than his intended father-in-law’s old garments. Mr. Towne submitted that it was evident that prisoner did not know the owner of the coat, that it was considered abandoned, that no enquiries had been made respecting it, and no concealment nor denial by the prisoner, that in fact it had been used indiscriminately by other servants like on old umbrella; and that if they were satisfied that the prisoner only thought it was abandoned, although he had no right so to think, and although he had acted most indiscreetly and imprudently he was entitled to an acquittal from the very hard and unfounded charge which was made against him, and to retain unsullied fifteen years unimpeachable character, hhich he was proved to possess.

The Recorder recapitulated the evidence to the jury, and observed that they had been rightly told, on behalf of the prisoner, that the true criterion to decide this charge was the prisoners intention; that if they were of opinion that he had not originally intended to steal the coat, but had taken it with him under an idea that it was abandoned and his perquisite, he was entitled to an acquittal.

The jury immediately returned a verdict of not guilty.

From the https://www.kentonline.co.uk By Jack Dyson, 5 September 2022.

Ramsgate residents' fears over ‘bulky and obtrusive’ bid for The Royal’s building.

A harbourside revamp will turn a “tired” building that houses a historic pub into a “bold landmark”, developers believe.

But critics fear housebuilder Jamie Copland’s plans for The Royal in Harbour Parade, Ramsgate, will transform it into a “bulky and obtrusive” structure.

A CGI showing how the development is expected to look.

Drawings show he wants to partially demolish the 1930s building and add a five-storey extension accommodating eight new flats and a reduced-sized commercial area on the ground floor.

In documents lodged with Thanet District Council, Mr Copland argues: “This will better secure the future of the commercial element and maintain the active street frontage.

“The site offers an opportunity for a bold landmark scheme that will create a statement.

“While the building has some historic relevance, it has been subject to minor changes over the years that have negatively impacted its character and appearance.

“It has also begun to appear tired due to a lack of investment and upkeep recently.

“A new lease of life would benefit the site, while also encouraging long-term occupation and upkeep, both of which are under threat.”

Mr Copland also believes his scheme “would act as a catalyst for future regeneration” in the area.

Despite this, the proposals – which were submitted to the local authority in June – have attracted opposition from residents.

A neighbour is vowing to “seek legal advice” over concerns the project would lead to a “loss of light”. Meanwhile, Ramsgate Town Council also believes the plans should be snubbed.

“The proposal is bulky and obtrusive,” a spokesman said.

“It is out of character with the conservation area, and not in keeping with the street scene.”

Thanet District Council conservation officer Josie Sinden also says she appreciates “a contemporary approach has been taken to develop this site”, but that she has “concerns” about the scheme, which she believes should be withdrawn and reconsidered.

The site currently has two flats above the tavern, with Mr Copland aiming to build eight more – including a three-bedroom penthouse.

The Royal has a first-floor function room, which would be lost should the project be given the green light.

Planning documents stress the commercial space will be “retained”.

But when asked if The Royal will remain at the site, Philip Thorley – whose firm Thorley Taverns runs the pub – said: “All planning is taking a month of Sundays at the moment because there’s a backlog from Covid.

“The Royal is there, it’s open seven days a week and there’s a planning application in.

“When and if that’s granted, then we’ll look at what happens.”

Records show a business has existed on the site since the 1600s.

In 1717 the premises became licensed as the King’s Head Tavern, before changing its name to The Royal Hotel following a visit from George IV in the 1800s.

The building was remodelled later that century and became one of the most dominant structures in the harbour, with parts of it being five storeys high.

It was demolished in 1938 and replaced with the current edifice, which opened the following year.

From the https://theisleofthanetnews.com By Kathy Bailes, 20 December 2022.

The Royal pub in Ramsgate ceases Saturday night trading ‘with immediate effect’

The Royal on Ramsgate’s Harbour Parade will not open on Saturday nights with immediate effect, it has been announced today.

It means events advertised for Christmas Eve and New Year’s Eve are cancelled.

A message posted on The Royal’s social media page says: “It is with great regret that we have made a tough decision to cease trading on Saturday nights with immediate effect.

“We will not be open on Christmas Eve and New Year’s Eve as previously advertised. We are still trading daily from 10am-7pm until further notice.”

The pub has been part of the Thorley Taverns stable for many years but has been going through the process of being sold.

Plans for the site were lodged with Thanet council back in June.

Applicant Jamie Copland wants to demolish part of the existing building and erect a five-storey side extension with recessed balconies, single storey roof extension and roof terrace. He also wants to add a new three-storey building to rear to provide 8 apartments and rearrange two existing apartments and reduce the scale of the current commercial unit housing The Royal pub.

A decision on the application has not yet been made.

In October Thorley Taverns director Phil Thorley told The Isle of Thanet News that the company is focusing on investment on its existing estate.

He added: “The late night (economy) in Ramsgate, and everywhere, has changed. We have been looking at that change and a change of direction and are investing in our existing estate, spending lots of money inside and outside on different venues.”

From the https://www.kentonline.co.uk By Daniel Esson, 17 August 2023.

Royal pub in Ramsgate to be redeveloped after plans approved by Thanet District Council.

The redevelopment of a seafront pub into a complex of flats and a commercial venue will “stick out like a sore thumb”, it is feared.

Plans to partially demolish and convert the Royal on Harbour Parade in Ramsgate have been given the green light by Thanet District Council (TDC).

Harbour Parade Ramsgate Ltd, which is behind the bid, says “the development seeks to act as a regenerative feature along the seafront promenade of Ramsgate”.

But opponents believe the modern design is out-of-keeping with the area surrounding the prominent site, which sits opposite Ramsgate Harbour.

Documents show the pub will be partially knocked down, with a five-storey extension - complete with roof terrace - built to the side.

Part of the ground floor and basement will be turned into commercial space, for which an operator has yet to be found.

At a meeting of TDC’s planning committee last night, councillors debated the development, which includes eight new apartments and the rearrangement of two existing ones in the building.

Street views show how the Royal pub in Ramsgate currently looks.

Developers will build a five-storey side extension to the Royal pub building, opposite Ramsgate Harbour.

The area’s representative, Cllr Tricia Austin (Green), told members she welcomes the development of a brownfield site, and does not bemoan the loss of the pub, but has serious concerns about the designs.

“I believe, many residents believe, and many Ramsgate town councillors believe, this proposal is still too large and obtrusive,” she said.

“It is not in keeping and we are very concerned that it will have a very damaging effect on the seafront of the only royal harbour in the country.”

Referring to the opinion of council officers that the proposal would cause “less than substantial harm” to the area, she added: “I am astonished that as the custodians of the only royal harbour in the country we are considering any form of harm.”

She said the designs should be sent back to the drawing board to be reduced in height by one floor.

Other councillors expressed similar concerns, with Steve Albon (Lab) adding “I’ve got no problem with having a development there and having that extension, I just believe that it’s just that bit too high.”

Cllr Rebecca Wing (Green) was more scathing in her comments.

“I agree that the royal building is not a particularly great-looking building presently,” she said.

“I just find that modern in-fill hideous, I have to say.

“It’s going to stick out like a sore thumb on that seafront.”

She suggested the plans be sent back to the developers for redesign.

Council officers, however, had recommended approval for the scheme.

“We do think that there is an appropriate balance struck here between the design, the conservation area and the listed building and the provision of eight units in a highly sustainable brownfield site,” the lead planning officer told councillors.

Other members thought the redevelopment would improve the seafront, with Cllr Pat Makinson (Lab) saying: “I find the Royal building very lumpish, not terribly attractive.

“I think it’s quite right that they use entirely different materials as they do in places like Italy where they’re building up against quite a lot of old classical buildings.”

The pub was opened by Thorley Taverns 28 years ago but has since been sold after being put on the market more than two years ago.

Philip Thorley, the director of the Thanet chain, says it will continue to run the venue until its new owners push forward with the development.

“We opened up the Royal in 1995 and we’ve had nearly 30 years of very successful trading there,” he said.

“We just decided it was time for us to look at ventures new, and we’ve been investing a lot of money within our existing estate.

“Now somebody else is going to breathe new life into it and I think it’s a great opportunity for Ramsgate seafront.

“The planning last night is just the next chapter in the book of the Royal going forward, and we wish the new owners the best of luck with it.”

TDC’s planning committee voted nine in favour, four against, and one abstention, to delegate the bid to officers for approval.

Before being officially set in motion a legal agreement will need to be on the level of developer contributions required to reduce the impact of the plans on the coastal environment.

LICENSEE LIST

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

Pub-info@Dover-Kent.Com.

TOP