DOVER KENT ARCHIVES

Sort file:- Folkestone, September, 2021.

Page Updated Folkestone:- Wednesday, 29 September, 2021.

PUB LIST PUBLIC HOUSES Paul Skelton & Jan Pedersen

Earliest 1867

Albion Hotel

Latest 1880

(Name to)

 25 Bouverie Road

Folkestone

 

The Earl of Radnor granted a lease for 86 years for 14 per annum on 4th October 1866 for builder John Bennett Tolputt, the building was completed and opened on the 9th February 1867 and titled the "Albion Tavern" as a beer house. A spirit license was obtained in 1869. The licensee, William Henry Jacobs was an eccentric who was often seen in court, being charged for selling intoxicating liquors out of hours, and also had a reputation for upsetting the guests.

In November 1877 he was charged with receiving stolen goods, obviously to gain some extra cash to help pay for his second mortgage from banker Richard Hammond who had been after payment since taking it out in 1874. Eventually things got too much for Jacobs and the hotel was relinquished to auctioneer John Banks who auctioned it on Friday 27th September, 1878.

At the time the building was described as follows:- Containing a basement with five large cellars, a coal cellar and larder and a ground floor containing  a hall, bagatelle room, coffee room, bar parlour, kitchen, scullery, urinal and lavatory. The first floor contained a billiard room, three sitting rooms, two bedrooms, landing and lavatory. The second floor had nine bedrooms, housemaids closet and lavatory, and at the very top of the building were two attics. The hotel was eventually secured by Croyden Brewers, Nalder and Collyer for 4,250.

Things must have been difficult to start of the business again, as from 1878 to 1881 the premises saw no less than five managers installed to run the hotel, one called William Allen from December 1879 to July 1880, but during this time the name changed from the "Albion Tavern" to the "Bouverie Hotel" either because it adjoined Bouverie Square or to honour the family name of the earl of Radnor who originally granted the lease.

 

LICENSEE LIST

TOLPUTT J B 1866-67

JACOBS William Henry 1867-78 Post Office Directory 1874Bastions

CRUX John 1878 Bastions

BANKS John 1878 Bastions

BRYAN Thomas 1878-79 Bastions

Last pub licensee had

WRIGHT George 1879 Bastions

ALLEN William 1879-80 Next pub licensee had

Bastions

http://evenmoretales.blogspot.co.uk/Albion-Hotel

 

Post Office Directory 1874From the Post Office Directory 1874

BastionsFrom More Bastions of the Bar by Easdown and Rooney

 

Folkestone Observer 24 August 1866.

Licensing Day.

The magistrates issued their licensing certificates on Wednesday to all established publicans who applied for them, Mr. Morford, of the Fountain, being the only pub who got a lecture, and that a not very severe one. There were seven applications for new houses, and certificates were granted for four, namely: The Rendezvous, Mr. S. Hogben (another publican lost a 10 bet over this, we hear); Alexandra, Mr. Spurrier: Raglan, Mr. Lepper; and a house in Bouverie Mews, Mr. J. B. Tolputt.

Notes: If this is the first license for the Raglan it puts the accepted date of 1864 into doubt. Also, no record of Tolputt having a license anywhere. Could this, however, be the first license for the Albion Hotel?

 

Folkestone Chronicle 25 August 1866.

Licensing Day.

A Special Sessions was held at the Town Hall on Wednesday, for the purpose of renewing old and granting new spirit licenses &c. The magistrates present were Captain Kennicott R.N., James Tolputt and A.M. Leith Esqs. There was a large attendance of publicans, some interest being excited in consequence of strong opposition being raised against the granting of several new licenses. The first business was to renew old licenses, and about 70 names were called over alphabetically.

The seventh and last applicant was Mr. J. B. Tolputt, for a license to a house called the Albion recently erected by him in Bouverie Square for the accommodation of coachmen and others at the Mews.

The court was then cleared for a short time, and on the re-admission of the public Captain Kennicott said the magistrates had decided on granting a license to Mr. Tolputt.

Notes: Tolputt does not appear in the list of licensees for the Albion (later Bouverie Hotel) in More Bastions.

 

Southeastern Gazette 28 August 1866.

Local News.

Wednesday last was the annual licensing day, when the magistrates on the bench were Capt. Kennicott, R.N., J. Tolputt and A. M. Leith Esqrs.

All the old licenses were renewed. There were seven applications for new licences namely, Mr. Hogben for the Rendezvous, in Broad Street, (lately opened as a luncheon bar); Mr. Spurrier, for the Alexandra, in Harbour Street; Mr. Lepper, for a new house, the Raglan Tavern, in Dover Road; Mr. J. B. Tolputt, for a house in Bouverie Square; Mr. Elliott for the Gun, Cheriton- Road; Mr. Tite, for the Shakespeare, Cheriton Row; and Mr. Mullett, for the Star, in Seagate Street. The Bench granted licences to the four first-named, and refused the other applications. Mr. J. Minter presented a petition signed by all the publicans in the town against new licences, and appeared specially to oppose the granting of licences to the Rendezvous and Star.

 

Folkestone Observer 9 February 1867.

Wednesday, February 6th: Before James Kelcey and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

William Henry Jacobs applied for a temporary license to sell excisable liquors under the license granted to John Bennett Tolputt at the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Square. Application granted.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 2 March 1867.

Advertisement:

ALBION HOTEL.

Bouverie Square, Folkestone.

W.H. Jacob, Proprietor, begs to inform the visitors and inhabitants that he has opened the above hotel, and trusts by earnest attention to the comfort of visitors, and the lowest possible charges, to merit their support. ...................

 

Folkestone Chronicle 13 April 1867.

Saturday April 6th: Before R.W. Boarer and J. Kelcey Esqs.

W.H. Jacob, of the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Square, was charged with having opend his house for the sale of intoxicating liquors at one o'clock on the morning of the 1st April. There were four men in the tap room. Fined 25s. and costs, or one month. The money was paid.

 

Folkestone Observer 13 April 1867.

Saturday, 6th April: Before R.W. Boarer and J. Kelcey Esqs.

W.H. Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Square, pleaded guilty to having his house open for the sale of liquors at one o'clock on Monday morning, the 1st instant. Supt. Martin stated that on the night before the house was open at unlawful hours. Fined 20s. and costs, in default one month's imprisonment.

 

Southeastern Gazette 8 October 1867.

Local News.

At the Petty Sessions, on Saturday, before Capt. Kennicott, R.N., A. M. Leith, and J. Tolputt, Esq., Alfred Fedarb, potboy at the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Square, was charged with embezzling 1 12s. 4d., the property of his master, William Henry Jacobs.

Prosecutor deposed that the prisoner entered his service on the 2nd August last, and that from the 24th August to the 29th Sept., he supplied to No. 43, Bouverie Square, ale and porter to the above amount, which money he had taken and kept. It was prisoner's duty to account daily for all beer taken out, and for all money received. On Sunday evening Mrs. Wright, the house-keeper at No. 43, came into the house, and from what she said he asked prisoner if he had been paid the amount, and he said “No.” Afterwards he said he had received a part; that he had lost half-a-sovereign and spent some. Witness told prisoner that if he could refund the money he would not prosecute him, and detained him in his bedroom till the Friday, when he got out a warrant and had him apprehended.

Eliza Wright, housekeeper to Miss Sankey, at 43, Bouverie Square, deposed to the payment of money to the prisoner, who was committed for trial at the Quarter Sessions on Wednesday (to-morrow).

 

Folkestone Chronicle 12 October 1867.

Quarter Sessions.

Wednesday October 9th: Before J.J. Lonsdale.

Embezzlement: The Grand Jury retired, and shortly afterwards brought in a true bill against Alfred Fedarb, for embezzling 1 12s 4d, the money of his master, Mr. Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel. He pleaded “guilty of having had some of it”, which was taken as a plea of guilty.

In reply to the learned Recorder the prisoner said he came from Canterbury, where he worked as a plumber, painter, and gas-fitter, that he had worked here for Mr. Ramell, and gave up the trade because of his ill health.

Mr. Minter, who appeared to prosecute, said he believed the prisoner had no father or mother, but his grandmother was in a respectable position. The prosecutor, in reply to His Honour, said he could not speak favourably of the prisoner's conduct, and Mr. Ramell, who was in court, said his opinion, if he gave it, would be very unfavourable to the prisoner, and the Recorder said he had no wish to hear it.

Addressing the prisoner, he said that he had pleaded guilty to a serious crime, for which he might have been sentenced to fourteen years' penal servitude. When a lad left a trade in his native town for the post of pot boy in a strange place, there must be something wrong, for the one was a respectable situation, the other was a disreputable one, and he was afraid the prisoner was a very bad young man, who was likely to become worse, and he was satisfied that a short term of imprisonment would do him good. He was sentenced to nine months' imprisonment with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Observer 12 October 1867.

Saturday, October 5th: Before Captain Kennicott R.N., A.M. Leith and J. Tolputt Esqs.

Alfred Fadarb was charged with embezzlement.

William Henry Jacobs, landlord of the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Square, said: Prisoner has been in my employ as a pot-boy since the 2nd of August, and it was his duty to take out all the beer ordered. From the 29th of August to 24th September I have supplied beer to Miss Sankey, in Bouverie Square, to the amount of 1 12s. 4d. I sent daily to the house. I have not received any part of that sum from the prisoner. I asked him several times whether the account had been asked for and he said “No”. I did not ask him if he had received the money. It was his duty to account to me nightly for all money received and beer taken out. Miss Sankey's housekeeper, Mrs. Wright, told me on Sunday evening that it had been paid. When he came in afterwards, I asked him if he had taken the money for Miss Sankey's beer and he said “No”, but when Mrs. Wright asked him he said he had. He told me then that he had lost half a sovereign the week before, and was afraid to mention it till he could make it up. For the first eight days Mrs. Wright said he was paid daily. I asked him what he did with that money, and he said he had spent it, and the last week's money as well. I told him if he could make up the amounts he was deficient I would forego the prosecution. I have not received any money from him. Since Sunday I have kept him in his bedroom. Yesterday I got a warrant against him, and he was locked up by the police.

Liiza, wife of Wm. Henry Wright, said: I am cook and housemaid to Miss Sankey, 43, Bouverie Square. I order goods and pay for them. I had ale and beer twice a day for the house from the prisoner (Mr. Jacobs' servant) from the 26th August. For the first eight days I paid him daily, sometimes 10d, and some perhaps 1s. I don't know how much. Afterwards I paid him once a week. I don't know which day – one day one week, another the next, perhaps. It was not regularly. I can't say how much – once I paid him 13s. 6d. I did not pay him a half sovereign at any time. I cannot say how much I have paid him altogether, because I never kept any account. Last Monday week I had the last beer, and on Tuesday I paid him, by 4s. and some half pence. On Sunday I went in to pay 1s. I owed the prisoner for beer. While I was in the bar parlour the prisoner came in. Prosecutor asked him if he was paid at 43, Bouverie Square, and he said “No”. I asked him whether I had not paid all up and he said I had. I did not say that I had paid the first eight days, or weekly, before Mr. Jacobs went for the police.

Police constable Reynolds deposed: I apprehended the prisoner on a warrant yesterday afternoon at the Albion Hotel. I charged him with embezzling money of Mr. Jacobs, and he said “It is true”.

Prosecutor, re-examined, said he had no recommendation with the prisoner.

A magistrate said it was rather imprudent to employ any person in a position of trust without any character.

The prisoner reserved his defence, and was committed for trial at the Quarter Sessions.

 

Quarter Sessions.

Wednesday, October 9th: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

The Grand Jury were but a short time absent from Court, and returned a true bill against Alfred Fadarb, who was then arraigned for that he, being the servant of William Henry Jacobs, on the 30th of August last, received and took into his possession, for, and on account of his master, 8s. and did not pay the same over to his master, and on two subsequent occasions, on dates named, appropriated 13s. 6d., and 4s.

Mr. Minter appeared for the prosecution.

The prisoner pleaded “Guilty for taking some of it, but not all”.

The Recorder: Are you aware of the consequences of pleading Guilty?

Prisoner: Yes, Sir.

The Recorder: It only remains for me now to sentence you.

Prisoner: I should like to ask Mr. Jacobs two or three questions. He locked me up in a room from Sunday night to Tuesday morning.

The Recorder: I have nothing to do with that today.

Prisoner: He took my clothes away also.

Mr. Minter said the clothes were provided by his master.

Prisoner said farther, in reply to the Recorder, that he was not a Folkestone boy. He had worked at Canterbury. He was not a waiter there. He was a painter, plumber, and gas fitter. He had worked in Folkestone for Mr. Rammell.

Mr. Minter said he understood prisoner's grandmother was very respectable in Canterbury. She kept an inn there.

The Recorder to Mr. Jacobs: How has he conducted himself in other respects while with you?

Mr. Jacobs: I would rather not say, sir, for I cannot speak favourably of him.

The Recorder: How long has he been with you?

Mr. Jacobs: He came on the 2nd of August.

The Recorder to Prisoner: How old are you?

Prisoner: Twenty, Sir.

The Recorder to Mr. Rammell: Can you say anything in his favour?

Mr. Rammell: What I should say would be very unfavourable, Sir.

The Recorder: Then I don't want to hear anything of it.

The Recorder to Prisoner: You are aware that the offence to which you have pleaded guilty is of a very unfavourable kind, and one which might subject you to penal servitude for fourteen years. I am afraid that when a young man leaves the trade to which he has been brought up, and leaves his town and his relations, and takes a situation as potboy, he must be a very bad man. I am quite satisfied that any short term of imprisonment will do you no good. From all I have heard it is quite clear that you are a very bad man. The sentence that I pass upon you is that you be imprisoned for nine calendar months with hard labour.

This closed the proceedings.

 

Southeastern Gazette 15 October 1867.

Quarter Sessions.

On Wednesday, the Michaelmas Quarter Session was held in the Town-hall, before J. J. Lonsdale, Esq., recorder.

Alfred Fedarb, aged 20, described in the calendar as a gas fitter, of superior education, was charged with embezzling money from William Henry Jacobs, landlord of the Albion Hotel, his master. The facts of the case have already appeared in our columns. The prisoner pleaded guilty, and the Recorder sentenced him to nine months’ hard labour.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 23 November 1867.

County Court.

Monday November 18th: Before W.C. Scott.

Jacobs v Jno Davis: This was a claim for 4 16s., for money lent, and for wine and spirits supplied. Mr. Minter appeared for the plaintiff. Defendant made a counter-claim for lodgings, and pleaded that at the time he had the spirits from Jacobs, who is proprietor of the Albion Hotel, he (plaintiff) had no license to sell spirits, and that they were presents made to him and never intended to be charged for. After going into the amounts, His Honour gave judgement for 3 12s. 7d., to be paid in three monthly instalments, and characterised the defence of the spirits being presents as being frivolous in the extreme.

Jacobs v Frederick Graves: Claim for 8s. 6d. Defendant did not appear, and an order made for payment forthwith.

Note: Graves had previously been licensee of the Princess Royal.

English v Jacobs: Claim 25s. for an advertisement inserted in English's Guide, which defendant denied having ordered. Judgement was given for the plaintiff.

 

Folkestone Observer 23 November 1867.

County Court:

Monday, November 18th: Before J.C. Scott Esq.

John English v W.H. Jacob: Mr. Minter, for plaintiff, said the action was brought to recover 1 5s. for an advertisement published by plaintiff on behalf of defendant in the Guide to Folkestone.

John English said that previous to publication of the Guide he called upon defendant and asked him if he would have an advertisement inserted. Defendant asked him to call again in a few days, when he would give him an answer. He called again on the day he was going to press and told him he must decide at once whether he would have the advertisement in or not, and defendant said he would have it. It was consequently inserted a a whole page advertisement, and the price charged was the regular price. After publication he saw Mr. Jacobs for the money, and he said he had not given the order. The price was mentioned at the time.

Defendant said that when Mr. English called upon him about the advertisement, he replied that he would think of the matter and let him know in a few days. Mr. English showed him his monthly book, and he (defendant) said he did not know that he could improve upon the advertisement there. He heard no more of it until plaintiff came to claim the twelve months money, when he said there must be some mistake; he knew nothing of it. In a few days Mr. English called him in and told him that he gave the order, which he repudiated. He had no recollection of Mr. English saying anything about the book going to press. It was during the summer season that Mr. English called for the advertisement, and he was very busy and had no time to think about the matter. Mr. English made no further application to him, nor did he know anything about the price. At the time that Mr. English applied to him for the advertisement there were a number of persons there, before the public bar, but he did not notice who the persons were. When Mr. English called upon him the second time about the advertisement, he (defendant) said that if the advertisement were put in he should wish it to be stated that he was agent for the Litre Bottle Wine Company.

The Judge said it was quite clear there was a conversation, but whether defendant apprehended what was said or not he did not know, but he considered that there was quite enough said to warrant plaintiff putting in the advertisement.

Verdict for plaintiff.

W.H. Jacob v John Davis: Mr. Minter, far plaintiff, said plaintiff formerly lodged with defendant, and during the time he so lodged with him he lent defendant some 9 or 10. Upon his leaving, the accounts were balanced up, and there was found to be 3 some odd due to Jacobs. Afterwards he sold defendant several articles, and had from defendant some meat &c., leaving a balance of 4 due.

Plaintiff said he formerly lodged with defendant and during that time he lent him money. He had an IOU (produced). On the date of the IOU he lent defendant 9. At the time that he left the money owed to him had been reduced, by lodging and meat, to 3 14s. 6d., though in his bill of particulars he had made a mistake and charged only 3. He afterwards served him with a gallon of brandy, 14s. 6d; on February 9th, two bottles of rum 4s. 4d.; February 12th a gallon of rum, 13s. 6d.; a gallon of gin, 12s.; February 23rd, a quart of brandy, 3s. 7 d.; March 18th, a gallon of gin, 12s; the total being 5 19s. 11d. The goods were delivered by him to defendant. He had given defendant for the 1 5s. 3 d. for meat supplied to him, and defendant had the whole account entered in a book that was in his possession. Defendant had frequently promised to pay if time were given, and plaintiff had told him he had had plenty of time, but if he would pay him off at 4s. a week he would take it. He was in full work. Had never heard of the action until he commenced the action. All his lodging account, and everything else, were included when they balanced up on his leaving defendant's house, and defendant was due to plaintiff 3 14s. 6d. There was a picture in the set-off, two guineas; that was a picture given to him by defendant's wife. Two pictures came to him at the house, and he told defendant's wife that since she had given him a picture, he would give her two others. Had never had the riding whip demanded of him, and he was willing to give it up. No demand was ever made of him of 2 for rent of room as store room. Mrs. Avis frequently said that if he liked to bring anything there he was quite welcome, and he took some things while he was lodging there, and no rent was ever demanded of him.

Defendant produced a book with entries in plaintiff's handwriting, from which His Honour drew the conclusion that there was due to plaintiff 4 4s. 11d., from which 1 3s. 11d. must be deducted.

Plaintiff said that in another book which defendant had there was an account made up in his handwriting, showing a sum of 4 14s. 6d. due on March 18th.

Defendant asserted that when he had the spirits, plaintiff had no wholesale license at the time, so defendant gave him the spirits.

Plaintiff said he had the magistrates' permission to sell until licensing day.

Defendant said that when he used to go there to work, plaintiff gave him two or three bottles of rum to carry home, and plaintiff had had spirits in return.

Plaintiff said the spirits were not supplied as presents. The amount charged was the amount agreed upon to be charged. Plaintiff then proceeded to mention instances in which, since he had left defendant's house, defendant had taken up goods in his name, including a sheep from a butcher, without plaintiff's sanction.

His Honour gave a verdict for 3 12s. 7d.

Defendant asked for time.

Plaintiff said that defendant had threatened to run away if this claim, and another by a brewer for 23, were given against him.

His Honour: I know nothing about what he owes the brewer.

Plaintiff: His wife has a farm, said to be worth 7,000.

Order - 3 12s. 7d. in three monthly payments.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 25 January 1868.

County Court.

Monday January 20th: Before W.C. Scott.

W.H. Jacobs v Ernest Farnworth: Claim for 3 9s. 10d. for spirits &c. Order for immediate payment as defendant did not appear.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 29 February 1868.

County Court.

Monday February 24th: Before W.C. Scott.

W.H. Jacobs v Ernest Farnworth: 4 4s. 10d. An order was made on defendant last court, and as he was going to Scotland immediately, execution was prayed. Defendant attended and said he was out of a situation, and had no means of payment. He was under age when the debt was contracted, and his father refused to pay it because it was incurred for billiards. Plaintiff produced his book to disprove that, and Hih Honour remarked that defendant seemed to have enjoyed himself at plaintiff's expense. Plaintiff was bound to show that defendant had been in a position to pay before he could ask for a committal. All that he (His Honour) could do was to hope that defendant would be honourable and pay the debt as soon as possible.

 

Folkestone Observer 29 February 1868.

County Court.

Monday, February 24th: Before W.C. Scott Esq.

Judgement Summons.

W.H. Jacob v Ernest Farnworth: An order was made at the last court for payment of 4 4s. 10d., and payment not having been made, defendant now came up on a judgement summons.

Defendant, in reply to the Judge, said he had no means of paying the debt. He was of no profession whatever, and was out of a situation at present. He had been a clerk, and was not likely to have any situation at present.

Plaintiff: His father was Surveyor Of Customs of the port, and is now in Glasgow.

Defendant: I was not of age at the time the debt was contracted.

The Judge: I cannot listen to that now. That should have been named when the order was made. Have you no means of payment?

Defendant: No, nothing.

The Judge: I must hold the order over for two months.

Plaintiff: Mr. Farnworth is going to Glasgow.

The Judge: Where is your father? Is he at home?

Defendant: Yes.

The Judge: Will he not pay the amount for you?

Defendant: No, he refuses to pay.

The Judge: When are you going to Scotland?

Defendant: In another fortnight. It was taken on credit at billiards, and my father refuses to pay for it.

Plaintiff: It was only partly billiards, Sir.

The Judge: Aye. I see that some of the charges are for refreshments, tea, &c. I really don't think I am justified in making the order. You swear, as you have sworn today, that you have no means of paying it. Your father positively refuses to pay it, and has written to the Registrar to say he will not.

Plaintiff: Can you advise how I can proceed to get the debt?

The Judge: I don't know that I can. I am afraid you will lose the debt, unless the young man is honourable and pays you when he can.

 

Southeastern Gazette 2 March 1868.

County Court.

At the usual sitting of this court, on Friday week, the following case was heard:—W. H. Jacobs v. Ernest Farnworth. A claim for 4 4s. 10d.

Defendant had an immediate order against him, made by default at the last court, and now appeared to say that he was out of employ, and without any means of meeting the demand. His father was Surveyor of Customs, and would proceed to Glasgow in a fortnight. He objected and refused to pay the claim, as it was incurred at billiards. This was disproved by plaintiff’s books, his Honour remarking to defendant, “Well, you seem to have enjoyed yourself at his expense.”

Plaintiff pressed for immediate committal, but this was refused by his Honour, who said that plaintiff was bound first to prove that defendant had the means of paying, and that all he could do was to hope that defendant would be honourable and pay the debt as he had promised, with the first money he had. The plea of minority defendant set up now was too late; it should have been urged at the hearing of the case.

 

Southeastern Gazette 9 November 1868.

Local News.

At the Borough Police Court, on Saturday, before Capt. Vennicott, R.N., and Mr. Tolputt, Mr. Jacobs, of the Albion, Bouverie Square, was fined 4 and costs for having his house open on Sunday afternoon last.

 

Folkestone Observer 14 November 1868.

Saturday, November 7th: Before Capt. Kennicott R.N., and Alderman Tolputt.

William Henry Jacobs was charged with having his house, the Albion Hotel, open between the hours of three and five in the afternoon of Sunday, the 1st instant.

P.C. Hills said: On Sunday afternoon about half past four I visited the Albion Hotel. I opened the door and went into the bar. Defendant was there; there were also in front of the bar three civilians. They were not drinking. I then went into the parlour and saw three soldiers sitting round the fire with their hats and belts off. They had a quart pot on the table, about half or three parts full of beer. I then told defendant he had no business to have the soldiers there. He said they came in at one, and he had forgotten they were there. He wanted me not to report him. I told him I must.

Cross-examined by Mr. Minter: Mr. Jacobs was not looking at a timetable. He said nothing about a train.

The Bench fined 4 and 10s. costs, in default one month's imprisonment.

 

Folkestone Express 14 November 1868.

Saturday, November 7th: Before Captain Kennicott R.N. and Alderman Tolputt.

W.H. Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel, was charged with keeping his house open on Sunday, the 1st. instant, between the hours of three and five in the afternoon. Mr. Minter appeared for the defendant.

P.C. Hills deposed that he went to the house on that day at about quarter to four. He found three civilians in front of the bar, whom he did not know. They were not drinking. He asked the defendant if there was anyone else in the house. He made no answer that he could understand, so witness went into the parlour and found three soldiers sitting round the fire with their belts and caps off, with a pot of beer partly drunk on the table, and two glasses. One of the soldiers asked him to have some; he just tasted it to be certain it was beer. The defendant said he had quite forgotten they were there, as he had been asleep for two hours, and he drew them the pot of beer just after they came in at one o'clock. He asked him not to report it.

By Mr. Minter: Mr. Jacobs was talking to the men in front of the bar. He was not looking at a timetable.

Mr. Minter said that he did not find any fault in the evidence, but it was no offence to have people in their house between three and five. The offence was selling beer, and then the prosecution must prove that the people are not travellers. The police did not know these persons, and that was hardly a possible thing to exist if they had belonged to this town. They were travellers who had called in to ask Mr. Jacobs the time the train started, and he was looking at a timetable for them. As to the three soldiers, it was no offence. The fact of their having their belts and caps off showed that they had been there for some time.

The Bench were satisfied that the offence had been committed, and this was not the first, but the third time. They therefore fined him 4 and 10s. costs.

 

Folkestone Express 21 August 1869.

Wednesday, August 18th: Before Captain Kennicott R.N., and J. Clark Esq.

William H. Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel, was summoned for having his house open before half past twelve on Sunday last.

P.C. Hills said: Last Sunday morning I was on duty, and I visited the defendant's house at ten minutes to twelve o'clock. I went to the front door, half of which was standing wide open; this door leads into the passage. I turned into the bar. Three men were there whom I know; a man named Hoad, plasterer, Stevens, shoemaker, and Tribe, a labourer. On the counter was a glass and tumbler half full of beer. I saw the defendant in the little bar parlour when I went in, and I said to him “Do you know what time 'tis? I should have thought you had caution enough”. He replied “I am sorry, and I hope you will not report me, for I did not know these people were in the house”. There is nothing but glass between the parlour and bar.

The defendant said: I had just come downstairs, and went into the parlour reading an income tax paper. I did not notice anyone in the bar till the policeman came in, as they made no noise, and a curtain hangs in front of the glass preventing anyone from looking out or into the parlour. My sister let the people in; she was unacquainted with the rules, not having been in my place very long. The front door was left open for my brother who was expected down from London, and he came in just as the policeman was leaving.

The Magistrates were sorry to see the defendant brought before them the third time for this offence. He had already been fined 2 and costs, and 4 and costs, and now they must inflict a penalty of 5 and 10s. costs, and caution him not to keep his door open in future.

 

Southeastern Gazette 23 August 1869.

Local News.

W.H. Jacobs, the proprietor of the Albion Hotel, was summoned on Wednesday for opening his house on Sunday morning last for the sale of beer.

P.C. Hills proved the case.

The Bench said this was the third offence, and the least they could do would be to fine the defendant 5 and 10s. costs.

 

Folkestone Express 28 August 1869.

Wednesday, August 25th: Before Captain Kennicott R.N., W. Bateman. J. Tolputt, A.M. Leith, and J. Gambrill Esqs.

Spirit License (Renewal).

William Henry Jacobs applied for a continuation of the license of the Albion Hotel. Mr. Martin alluded to the fining of the applicant for having his house open on Sunday morning. The Magistrates suspended their decision until the adjourned meeting, when they would make further enquiries into the circumstances.

 

Folkestone Observer 11 September 1869.

Wednesday, September 8th: Before Capt. Kennicott R.N., James Tolputt, A.M. Leith and W. Bateman Esqs.

The following public houses was granted a spirit license: Albion Hotel, W.H. Jacobs.

 

Folkestone Express 11 September 1869.

Wednesday, September 8th: Before Captain Kennicott R.N., A.M. Leith and J. Tolputt Esqs.

Adjourned Licensing Day.

Spirit license was granted to W.H. Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel.

 

Southeastern Gazette 13 September 1869.

Local News.

On Wednesday last, the adjourned licensing meeting was held at the Town Hall, before W. Bateman, Esq., Captain Kennicott, R.N., J. Tolputt, Esq., and A.M. Leith, Esq.

A spirit licence was granted in the case of the Albion Hotel.

 

Folkestone Observer 24 March 1870.

Monday, March 21st: Before The Mayor and J, Tolputt Esq.

Alfred Huntley, of Folkestone, was charged “that he, being a servant of Mr. Henry Jacobs, proprietor of the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Square, did feloniously steal two keys, the property of his master.”

Before giving evidence Mr. Jacobs asked permission of the Bench to withdraw from the prosecution.

The Magistrates' Clerk said that if he had not wished to press the charge he should not have given the prisoner into custody. Were the magistrates to allow him to withdraw they would be compromising a felony.

The Bench decided that the case must be proceeded with.

Mr. Jacobs was then sworn, and said: The prisoner has been in my employ as waiter and general servant for about three months. On Saturday evening last I missed the key of the till. I had previously missed the key of the private bar, which was usually kept in the door, but as I thought it might have fallen out I didn't trouble much about it, as I have another key to fit the same door. They key of the till was usually kept in the till, but sometimes it was placed on a shelf opposite. About midnight on Saturday I missed the key of the till, and as I had previously missed the other key I suspected that something was wrong, and I stopped up in the bar parlour, which is behind the bar. About half past eight on Sunday morning the door was unlocked from outside and opened. The prisoner came in and peeped into the room where I was sitting. When he saw me he drew back, and I jumped up to run after him. He ran out through the kitchen and scullery into the yard, where he threw from him something which appeared to me to be a key, and it afterwards proved to be the key of the till. I searched for the key for some time, the prisoner helping me, but we could not find it. I asked him afterwards why he took the keys. He replied that he went out the previous evening and he was afraid he must have had too much to drink, for in bringing some glasses from the coffee room to the bar (as was the custom) he saw the key of the till lying on the shelf, and was tempted to take it, but during the night he was sorry for it, and having found the key of the outer door, which was missing, he thought he would return the key of the till without my knowledge. Having searched for the key some time, and the search being unsuccessful, I sent for a policeman, and P.C. Richard Sharpe came and I gave the prisoner into custody. Afterwards we searched the yard again and found the key of the till. The key of the outer door was left in the door by the prisoner when he unlocked it. The keys are worth about 2s. to me.

P.C. Richard Sharpe proved taking the prisoner into custody.

Mr. Jacobs asked the Bench to be merciful to the prisoner as it was his first offence, and if they would discharge him he would take him back to his service again.

The magistrates, after deliberating on the case, told the prisoner he had had a narrow escape of being sent to prison, and thanks to Mr. Jacobs' intercession they would discharge him this time, but a second appearance before them would probably lead to two or three months' imprisonment.

The prisoner was then discharged.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 26 March 1870.

Monday, March 21st: Before the Mayor and J. Tolputt Esq.

Alfred Huntley was charged with stealing two keys, value 2s., the property of Mr. Henry Jacob, his master.

Mr. Jacob, of the Albion Hotel, deposed that on Friday he missed the key of the private bar, and on Saturday night, finding the key of the till which was inside missing, he determined to sit up and watch. About eight o'clock on Sunday morning he heard the door unlocked from the outside, and prisoner came in, but started back on seeing him and ran away. Witness followed him through the kitchen and scullery into the yard, where prisoner threw something (which, after a long search, proved to be the key of the till) into a heap of faggots. Prisoner told him that he was drunk the night before and took the key of the till, and that having found the key of the bar he was going to replace the key of the till without his master knowing it. He gave prisoner into custody.

P.C. Sharpe deposed to apprehending the prisoner on the charge of stealing two keys. Prisoner made the same statement as he did to the prosecutor, and in reply to witness said he threw the key into the faggot heap because he did not wish prosecutor to find it on him.

Prisoner pleaded Guilty, and elected to be tried under the Criminal Justice Act. Prosecutor recommended him to mercy, and said that he would take him back into his employment, and under the circumstances the Bench discharged prisoner with a caution.

 

Folkestone Express 26 March 1870.

Monday, March 21st: Before The Mayor and J. Tolputt Esq.

Alfred Huntley, 19, employed at the Albion Hotel, was charged with stealing two keys, the property of his master.

Mr. W.H. Jacobs said: I am proprietor of the Albion Hotel. (Witness here asked permission to withdraw the charge, but this was not granted.) The prisoner was in my employ as a general servant and waiter, and has been with me three months. On Friday last I missed the key of the private bar. It was generally kept in the door, and I did not trouble about it as I thought it might have fallen out. On Saturday night I missed the key of the till when I went to take the money out. The key was usually kept on a shelf behind the bar. I waited up the whole night in the bar parlour, as I suspected there must be something wrong. About half past eight o'clock on Sunday morning the door was opened by the prisoner, and he came through and looked over the top of the top of the door leading from the bar to the parlour. Directly he saw me he turned and ran away through the kitchen. I followed him; he ran into the yard and threw what appeared to me to be a key from him. I caught him and asked him why he did it. He replied that he went out the previous evening and had too much to drink. In bringing out some glasses from the coffee room to the bar he saw the key of the till lying on the side and was tempted to take it. In the morning he was sorry for what he had done, and finding the key of the outer bar he thought he would return the till key without my knowledge. I gave the prisoner into custody. I found the key afterwards in the yard. The keys are worth about 2s.

P.C. Sharpe deposed to taking the prisoner into custody. He charged him, when he said he was sorry for what he had done, and he meant to put the key back again.

The prisoner pleaded Guilty to the charge.

Mr. Jacobs said he believed the prisoner was really sorry for what he had done, and if the Magistrates would dismiss this charge he would willingly take the prisoner into his employ again and give him another chance.

The Mayor said they had come to the conclusion to accede to Mr. Jacobs' request and dismiss the charge. The prisoner had had a very narrow escape and he hoped it would act as a warning to him in future.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 23 April 1870.

Friday April 22nd: Before W. Bateman and J. Tolputt Esqs. His Worship the Mayor was also present during part of the proceedings.

John Johnson and John Smith, two tramps, were charged with wilful and malicious damage.

William Henry Jacobs, proprietor of the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Square, said: Yesterday the prisoners came to my house in the morning, and again between three and four o'clock. They had some refreshments which the paid for quietly and civilly. A man named Foster came in, and after a while I heard some quarrelling, and going into the tap room found them quarrelling together. Smith struck Foster, who is afflicted, and I called him a cowardly rascal, threatening to put him out. He again struck Foster, and I went round the bar to protect Foster. Smith then took up a pewter measure, which he held up in a threatening manner. I took the measure from him, and went behind the bar. As I was going I felt a blow on the back of my head. I came back, threw him on the ground, and held him for a moment. When I let him get up he aimed a blow at me again, but I avoided it and threw him down again, intending to hold him until a policeman should come. In a moment or two he made an attempt either to take or break my watch chain, and I struck him in the face. I lifted him by his waisbelt, put him out of my back door, and fastened it. I went out of the front door and saw him pick up some large stones and run round from the back to the front of the house. I knocked him down with the stones in his hand, his arm being raised as if to throw a stone through one of my windows. Jackson then came up and tried to kick me on the head while I was holding Smith down. I kept off the kicks with my arms. I called to Mr. Wightwick, who was standing by, to keep the rascal off, but he took no notice, and I went towards my front door, but Johnson, with a screwdriver or some other instrument, threatened me if I came towards him, and I went into the house by the back way, and got to the front just in time to see both prisoners throw stones through the windows of my front bar. The three stones produced are some of the stones thrown by the prisoners, which were picked up inside the house. Three of the glass panes were broken in the bar front window, the passage front door window, and one square of the inner bar window. The value of the damage done is 5 15s.

Johnson said “It was me, gentlemen, as broke his windows”.

Alfred Huntly, waiter at the Albion, said about five o'clock prisoners were in the house drinking, and there being a row he was sent for a policeman, and on coming back with P.C. Ovenden he saw prisoners throw three or four stones each at his master's window. He afterwards picked up two stones inside the bar.

P.C. Ovenden deposed that he was sent for on Thursday afternoon, and that as he was coming up by Christ Church Schools with last witness he saw prisoners pick up stones and throw at the windows of the Albion. He heard the glass smash. Smith saw witness coming, and dropped a stone from his hand, and went across the wall of Col. Hewett's house, where he picked up a child, and Johnson lay down by him. He took both prisoners into custody, and brought them to the station. Prisoners have been in custody here before, and on several occasions have had to be turned out of different houses.

Mr. Page, plumber and glazier, was called and estimated the damage at 5 15s.

Prisoners were ultimately committed for trial at the next ensuing Quarter Sessions, which will be held on Tuesday next, at the Town Hall.

 

Folkestone Express 23 April 1870.

Friday, April 22nd: Before The Mayor, W. Bateman, and J. Tolputt Esqs.

John Johnson and John Smith, two young men, were charged with breaking windows at the Albion Hotel.

Mr. W.H. Jacobs deposed as follows: The prisoners came to my house yesterday about three or four o'clock in the afternoon and called for some beer in the usual way; they paid for it; they appeared quite quiet and civil. A short time after that a man named Foster came in for some beer. He had not been there five minutes before I heard them quarrelling, and I came out in front of the bar and asked the prisoner Smith to be quiet or go into the tap room. The next thing I saw was that he struck Foster in the face. I then said “Do not strike him. The man's afflicted and cannot help himself”. He then struck him twice in succession on the face. I called him a cowardly rascal and threatened to put him out, and went round the bar to prevent Foster being struck by him. He then caught hold of a pewter measure and held it in a threatening manner. I caught hold of him and pulled it out of his hand. I went behind the bar and turned to go in the room, when I received a blow at the back of my head from his fist. I lifted the flap up, came out again, and threw him to the ground, and kept him down for a moment and thought he would be quiet. He no sooner got up than he made a blow at me again. I avoided the blow and knocked him to the ground. After holding him down he attempted to break my watch and chain. I then struck him in the face and took my watch and chain off and gave it to my wife. She advised me to put him outside the back door. This I did, imagining he would be quiet. I then walked to the front and saw him picking up some large stones. I ran out as fast as I could and knocked him down to prevent him breaking the windows and intended holding him there till the police came. Nothing was said about breaking the window, but he had his arm raised in the position of throwing. The other prisoner then came up and tried to kick me on the head; he did not succeed because I prevented him with my arm. I called to Mr. Wightwick to keep the rascal off, but not hearing me he did not. A scuffle ensued and one of the bystanders (I rather think it was Mr. Wightwick) advised me to go into the house. I went, but on attempting to enter the front door the prisoner (Smith) prevented me from going that way as he threatened me with a chisel or screwdriver. I then went round the back way, and was going towards the front when I saw the prisoners throwing stones through the glass windows in the front bar. The prisoners were standing in the road. The three stones produced are those that came through the window. All the glass broken is plate glass. They broke three front bar windows, front door window, the passage window, and the window of the small bar parlour, four of them plate glass. He damage amounted to 5 15s. P.C. Ovenden took them into custody.

Alfred Huntley, porter and waiter at the Albion Hotel, said he fetched a policeman, and he saw the prisoners throw the stones.

P.C. Ovenden deposed to taking the prisoners into custody in the Bouverie Road, opposite Col. Hewitt's. The prisoner Smith had a child, which he believed was his own. Witness had known the prisoners for a long time; they had been in custody before on other charges.

Mr. Joseph Page, plumber and painter, said the damage done amounted to 5 15s.

The prisoners made a rambling defence, and were committed for trial at the Quarter Sessions.

 

Folkestone Observer 28 April 1870.

Friday, April 22nd: Before The Mayor, W. Bateman and J. Tolputt Esqs.

John Johnson and John Smith, two ruffianly looking fellows, were charged with malicious damage to the property of Mr. W.H. Jacobs.

Mr. Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Square, deposed: On Thursday last the prisoners came to my house in the morning and went away, returning between three and four o'clock in the afternoon. They called for some refreshments in the usual way, and paid for them quietly and civilly. Some time after a man named Foster came and called for some beer and I went out and sat in the bar parlour. After a little while I heard a quarrel, and when I went in and desired them to be quiet, and asked Smith to be quiet and go into the tap room, he immediately struck Foster in the face. I told him not to strike him as the man was afflicted and couldn't help himself. He then struck him on the face two blows in succession. I called him a cowardly rascal, and threatened to put him out. I went round the bar to protect Foster, and Smith caught hold of a pewter measure and held it up in a threatening manner. I seized it and pulled it out of his hand. I then went back to the bar side of the counter, thinking that they might be quiet, and as I was going I received a blow on the back of the head, which I believe was given by Smith's fist. I lifted the flap again, came out into the outer bar, and threw him on the ground, but I am not sure whether I struck him. I kept him down for a little while, and thinking he might be quiet I let him get up. He had no sooner done so when he aimed another blow at me. I warded the blow and threw him down, intending to keep him there till the police, whom I sent for, arrived. After holding him down a few minutes he made an attempt to take or break my watch chain, and I struck him in the face to make him loose his hold. I then took my watch and chain off and handed them to my wife, who advised me to put him out of the back door and fasten the door. I put him out and fastened the door. I then walked round to the front bar and saw him look up to the window and pick up some large stones from the road. I ran out as fast as I could and knocked him down with the stones in his hand, and intended holding him there till the police came. Presently the other one, whom I had missed for a little time, came up and tried to kick me on the head. I put my arm up and partially prevented him. I called out to Mr. Wightwick, who was standing by, to come and take the rascal off. He did not do so, and as it was becoming dangerous, I jumped up to knock Johnson down, but Smith was up almost as soon, and I followed him. Someone said “You had better go in, and they will be quiet”. I thought it was good advice, and was about to go in, when I saw one of them holding up a chisel or something in a threatening manner, and I therefore went into the back door, the prisoner following me with this instrument as far as the arch. I went to the front of the house, and was in the bar in time to see them throwing stones from the road through the bar windows. The three stones produced were picked up inside the house. One of them went through two glass doors – one at the front and the other going into the passage. Altogether six windows were broken – three in the front bar, a passage window, the window of the small parlour, and the front door. Four of the windows were plate glass. The damage amounts to 5 15s. I ran out when I saw the prisoners throw, and I saw the policeman take them into custody.

Johnson: It was me that throwed the stones when he caught hold of me.

Alfred Huntley, porter and waiter at the Albion Hotel, saw the prisoners about five o'clock, when they came to the house, and hearing a little noise went and saw his master under another man. He was sent for the police, and on his return with P.C. Ovenden, when opposite Christ Church Schools, saw the prisoners in the middle of the road throwing stones at the windows of the Albion. When they saw the policeman they went back to the wall beside Colonel Hewitt's and stood there till the policeman came to them. He afterwards picked up a stone between the blind and the window in the bar.

P.C. Ovenden stated that he went to Bouverie Square, and was proceeding up the road, opposite the Christ Church Scools, when he saw the two prisoners in a stooping position, apparently picking up stones. He saw them rise and throw something, which was followed by a smashing of glass. They threw towards the Albion two or three times. The prisoner Smith, when rising the last time, noticed witness, and he then walked towards the wall of Colonel Hewitt's garden, and picked up a child which was standing by the wall. Johnson, when he saw witness, went and laid down on the pavement near to the other prisoner. Witness had known the prisoners before; they had been in custody several times.

Mr. James Pledge, plumber and glazier, Sandgate Road, deposed that the damage done would amount to 5 15s.

Smith said they were in the public house all day; hardly out of it ten minutes. His little boy began crying, and the master said he could not stand such a noise as that. He told the master that he could not stop the child, and he came round and commenced pushing him about, dragged him out into the road, knelt upon him, and punched him in the face. Two gentlemen cried “Shame” on him for doing it, and but for Johnson he would have been strangled.

Johnson stated that during the time the others were out he was sitting in the bar and did not interfere. The prosecutor afterwards had the other prisoner on the floor punching him. He interfered with him and told him not to do it and he then held him and tore his clothes. Afterwards Mr. Jacobs took Smith out of the door and another man had hold of his clothes during this time and used him fearfully, and when he came out he saw Mr. Jacobs on Smith, and Mr. Jacobs threatened him if he would insist on trying to get him off. Mr. Jacobs afterwards got up after him, and before Smith could get on his feet he ran in the front door, at which he picked up a stone and threw at the door. Two gentlemen opposite told him not to be so foolish and they would summons Mr. Jacobs for ill-using him. He never saw Mr. Jacobs again till the morning.

The prisoners were committed for trial.

 

Quarter Sessions Extract.

Tuesday, April 26th: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

The Grand Jury retired for a few minutes, and on their return announced that they had found a true bill against John Smith and John Johnson for wilful damage to the property of Mr.Jacobs. As the prisoners pleaded guilty, the only evidence given was that of Mr. Page, who deposed that the amount of damage done was 5 15s. After some questions to the prisoners, and to the police as to their character, the prisoners were sentenced to a calendar month's imprisonment with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 30 April 1870.

Quarter Sessions.

Tuesday 26th April: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

John Smith and John Johnson pleaded guilty to a charge of smashing the windows of the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Square, causing damage to the amount of 5 15s. Prisoners were committed to one month's hard labour each.

 

Folkestone Express 30 April 1870.

Quarter Sessions.

Tuesday, April 26th: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

William Johnson and John Smith were placed in the dock and charged with a misdemeanour, viz., breaking six panes of glass at the Albion Tavern, Bouverie Road, on the 21st of April, 1870, the damage done amounting to 5 15s.

Mr. F.J. Till appeared for the prosecutor, Mr. W.H. Jacobs.

The prisoner Johnson pleaded Guilty.

Smith said: I am guilty of throwing one stone, but I don't know if it hit the window or not, but the landlord struck me on the back, face, and arm. (The prisoner here bared his arm to show the bruise.) In answer to the Recorder he said – For the last five or six years I have lived at Dover. I do any kind of work, and every two or three months I come to Folkestone for a job. We came to Folkestone together.

Mr. Joseph Page was called, and deposed to the damage done amounting to 5 15s.

The Recorder (to the prisoners): Have you anyone to speak to your character?

Smith: I have no-one that will say anything against my character.

Superintendent Martin said he had them both in custody on the 7th of October, 1868, for being drunk and riotous, and they were fined.

Smith: Well, I paid the 8s. 6d.

The Recorder: I suppose when you had done that you thought you had a perfect right to commit another offence?

Smith: No, Sir. If I am punished, you only punish my wife and child. I never did a “ha'poth” to the prosecutor, and he beat me. I only threw one stone; if it hit the window, I don't know.

The Recorder: You have rendered yourselves liable to two years' imprisonment, and although I shall not send you for the full term, I hope the punishment will be a caution to you. I sentence you to one month's imprisonment with hard labour.

This finished the business and the Court rose.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 5 October 1872.

Wednesday, October 2nd: Before J. Tolputt, J. Clark, and T. Caister Esqs.

William Henry Jacobs was charged with keeping his house (the Albion Hotel) open during prohibited hours on Wednesday the 25th instant.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the charge, and said he offended quite in ignorance. He heard, on what he believed was good authority, that the magistrates had, on the day he was charged with breaking the law, extended the hours until 12 o'clock, and accordingly he kept his house open, being unaware that any special time should elapse before the Act should come into operation.

P.C. Swain said that on the night in question he went to defendant's house. He went in and saw light in the bar. There were six leaving, some coming out the back way, and some out of the front. The landlord said he was unaware that he was offending the law, as he did not know that any particular time should elapse before the extension of hours granted that day should come into operation.

Defendant: How was I to know when the change was to commence? I had no official intimation.

Mr. Tolputt: You ought to have ascertained.

The Magistrates' Clerk: The reason you give is no excuse. You are liable to a fine of 10 for the first, and of 20 for the second offence, and your license can be endorsed.

Mr. Caister: Mr. Martin told you that the regulations were to remain in force until further notice.

Defendant: I understood that the notice was done away with by the decision of the magistrates on that day to extend the hours. Was it likely that I should run the risk, gentlemen, otherwise, considering the heavy penalties attached to disobedience of the law?

The Bench, after a consultation, decided upon inflicting a fine of 20s. and costs, but the license not to be endorsed.

George Parker, William Tyas and Henry Daniels were charged with being in the Albion Hotel tap room during prohibited hours. The defendants pleaded guilty, and said that they had no idea but that they were doing right in being there, as Mr. Jacobs had told them the hours were on that day extended. P.C. Swain stated that all defendants were sober, and told him they were labouring under a misapprehension, and had no idea of breaking the law. The Bench fined each – in consideration of the circumstances – 1s. and 9s. costs.

 

Folkestone Express 5 October 1872.

Wednesday, October 2nd: Before J. Tolputt, T. Caister and J. Clarke Esqs.

William Henry Jacob, Albion Hotel, Bouverie Road, was charged with having his house open during the hours prohibited by the Licensing Act on the 25th September.

Defendant said: Of course I am Guilty, but it was done in ignorance. I had heard that the house might be kept open until 12 o'clock. The doors and shutters were open, and there was no attempt at concealment. I am very sorry I have done so.

P.C. Swaine, without being sworn, said he saw lights in defendant's house on Wednesday night between 11 and 12 o'clock. He went into the house and saw five men in front of the bar, two of whom were about to go out. Defendant said two of the number were lodgers, and he was not aware but that an extra hour had been granted.

Defendant: I knew nothing about the month's notice, not that notice would be given. I had it on respectable authority that the time had been extended to 12 o'clock.

The Clerk: You ought to have been more particular in ascertaining the facts.

Supt. Martin: Everyone had notice of the hours fixed on the licensing day, and was told that the order would be in force until further notice.

Defendant: The only notice I had was that the hours were 11 on week days and 10 on Sundays.

The Clerk: You are an old offender. Your ignorance of the month's notice does not excuse you, but it may go towards a mitigation of the penalty.

Defendant: I believe I conduct my house as well as anyone, and I am not aware that there are any complaints against me.

The Clerk: The penalty is 10 for the first offence, and 20 for the second, and the conviction must be recorded on the license, and you would be disqualified for five years and your house for two years.

Defendant: I knew an order had been made that day for an extension of time, and it is unreasonable to suppose that I would willingly and knowingly run the risk of being fined.

Supt. Martin: It is not the duty of the police to give publicans notice of alterations.

Mr. Tolputt: The magistrates do not wish to strain the law. We shall impose the lowest penalty in our power, viz. 1 and 9s. costs.

Defendant: I hope my license will not be endorsed.

The Clerk: It will not this time.

George Parker, ---- Tyas, and Henry Daniel, fly drivers, were summoned for being in the Albion Hotel during prohibited hours on the 25th September.

All three pleaded Guilty, and said they were under the impression that the hour had been extended to 12 o'clock, and were told so by Mr. Jacob.

In answer to the Bench, P.C. Swaine said the defendants were all sober, and there was no noise in the house.

Mr. Tolputt: If the house had not been open defendants would not have been there. They must pay a fine of 1s. and 9s. costs.

 

Folkestone Express 30 August 1873.

Wednesday, August 27th: Before The Mayor, J. Gambrill, J. Tolputt, and J. Clarke Esq.

Annual Licensing Meeting.

The licensing committee met at ten o'clock for the purpose of taking into consideration the question of making any alteration in the hours for opening and closing public houses. Shortly after eleven o'clock the licensed victuallers present were called into Court, where the Clerk said the Bench would hear anything with reference to the alteration of the hours for the opening and closing.

Mr. Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Road, said it would be a convenience if the public houses were allowed to keep open until eleven on Sunday nights during the summer season, remarking that many strangers who were under the impression that the houses were open until that hour came after ten o'clock, and were subsequently unable to obtain refreshments.

The Mayor said the Magistrates had considered the matter and had determined to adhere to last year's arrangement, namely, to close at twelve o'clock on week nights and ten o'clock on Sunday nights.

 

Southeastern Gazette 2 September 1873.

Local News.

The annual licensing meeting was held on Wednesday, when the magistrates present were J. Hoad, Esq. (Mayor), J. Gambrill, J. Tolputt, and J. Clark, Esqrs.

Mr. Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Road, suggested an extension of hours on Sunday evenings to eleven o’clock, for three months in the year. After consideration the Mayor stated that the magistrates could not accede to the application; the time would remain unaltered, viz., from 5 a.m. to 12 p.m. on week days, and according to the Act on Sunday, viz., until 10 p.m.

 

Folkestone Express 8 November 1873.

Monday, November 3rd: Before The Mayor, J. Tolputt, W. Bateman, J. Clark, J. Kelcey and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

William Henry Jacobs, Albion Hotel, was summoned on a charge of not attending to be sworn in as a Special Constable of the Borough on the 31st October.

Police sergeant Reynolds said he served the summons on defendant's wife, who told him defendant was in London. The summons stated the hour at which defendant was to attend the Court, namely Friday morning at ten.

Defendant said his wife was unwell, and was, in consequence, late before she came downstairs on Friday morning, and he came to Court as soon as she came down. Having no-one to attend the bar, he could not leave his business until a little before 11 o'clock.

The Mayor said defendant had rendered himself liable to a penalty of 5, but under the circumstances he would only be fined 5s. and 9s. costs.

Defendant paid the money, and was sworn in a Special Constable.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 23 May 1874.

Wednesday, May 20th: Before The Mayor, J. Tolputt, R.W. Boarer and J. Hoad Esqs.

Henry Jacobs, landlord of the Albion Hotel, was charged with keeping his house open during prohibited hours.

P.C. Bourne said that between twelve and one o'clock he saw some men enter the Albion. He passed the house at a quarter past twelve, when he saw men in the bar, with liquor before them. They said they were travellers.

Defendant said the men told him they were travellers.

The Bench determined to reserve their decision until the next case arising out of this was heard.

Richard Cooper and Charles Smith pleaded guilty to being in the Albion during prohibited hours on Sunday last.

The Bench retired for consultation, and on their return the Mayor said he was sorry that this was the fifth offence on the part of the defendant, and the Bench were doubtful whether they ought to inflict the full penalty of 20. They would inflict a penalty of 10 and 10s. 6d. costs, as it was not in their power to impose a less fine. The license would be endorsed, and if brought before them again the full penalty would be inflicted, and probably the license forfeited. He must have been aware the men were not travellers.

Cooper and Smith were fined 5s. and 8s. costs.

 

Folkestone Express 23 May 1874.

Wednesday, May 20th: Before The Mayor, J. Tolputt, J. Hoad, and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

Henry Jacobs, Albion Hotel, Bouverie Road, was charged with opening his house during prohibited hours on Sunday, the 17th instant.

Defendant, upon being called to plead, said he admitted men being in his house at twenty minutes past one.

P.C. Bourne, without being sworn, said: I was on duty in Bouverie Road between eleven and twelve o'clock on Sunday morning, when I saw several men go in and out of the Albion Hotel, about a quarter before twelve. I passed the house again at a quarter past twelve, when I saw the door under the archway open, and two men standing in front of the bar with a glass of malt liquor before them. I asked the defendant how he came to have his house open during prohibited hours, and he said the men were travellers. Not being satisfied with his answer I told him I must report the house, and I then got the names of the men.

Defendant: The men told me they were travellers, and it being twenty minutes past one o'clock, I thought that as it was so near opening time there would be not much harm done by letting them have a pint of beer. I had seen them in the house before.

Witness: I looked at the time on my watch, and compared it with the Town Hall clock.

Defendant: I got up about half past eleven or twelve that morning, and I thought the men were sweeping the rooms. I only deny the time; I do not deny the fact. I am guilty of having the men there at twenty minutes past twelve. I plead Guilty, but with that explanation.

The Clerk: You can withdraw your plea of Guilty if you like.

Defendant: I have nothing more to say; only that they were travellers.

The Clerk: Do you wish to call them as witnesses?

Defendant: No.

The Bench decided to hear the next cases before giving their decision.

Richard Cooper and George Smith were charged with being in the Albion Hotel on Sunday last during prohibited hours.

Smith pleaded Guilty, as also did Cooper, who said he went in because he saw the door was open.

In answer to His Worship, Cooper said he had often been in the Albion, and he had walked from Sandgate on Sunday morning.

The Clerk to Cooper: Did you tell Jacobs that you were a traveller?

Cooper declined to answer.

Smith said he thought Jacobs knew him, and he thought the time was up to himself.

The Magistrates retired for consultation, and on their return into Court The Mayor said to Jacobs: You have been brought before us, I am sorry to say, for the fifth time. The Magistrates have not been considering whether you are Guilty or not, because of that they are well satisfied, but whether they should inflict the full penalty of 20. This is a very serious offence, and we have no power to inflict a less penalty than 10 with 10s. 6d. costs, or in default of payment three months' hard labour. Your license will be endorsed, and you know that means if you are again convicted you may lose it altogether. It is quite clear you knew the men were not travellers.

Addressing Cooper and Smith, His Worship said they were not so much to blame, as they found the door open. They were fined 5s. and 8s. costs each, or seven days' hard labour.

 

Southeastern Gazette 23 May 1874.

Local news.

On Wednesday the borough Magistrates fined Mr. Henry Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel, 10, and 10s. 6d. costs, for haying his house open quarter-past one on Sunday, being a quarter of an hour before the time of opening.

This was the fifth conviction, and the licence was endorsed, with the intimation that in case of another conviction defendant would be fined 20, and his licence would be forfeited. Two men who were in the house were fined 5s. and 8s. costs each.

 

Folkestone Express 29 August 1874.

Wednesday, August 26th: Before The Mayor, W. Bateman and J. Tolputt Esqs.

Annual Licensing Sessions.

The seventy four licensed victuallers, twelve beershop keepers and twenty three grocers and wine merchants had their licenses renewed, with the exception of those named.

The Albion Hotel: The renewal of the license to William Henry Jacobs was opposed by the Superintendent on the ground of his having been convicted of having his house open during prohibited hours, viz.: October 22nd, 1872, when he was fined 1 and 9s. costs, and May 20th, 1874, when he was fined 10 and 10s. 6d. costs.

Mr. Jacobs said he was very sorry, and did not know what he could say.

The Mayor said the Bench felt disposed to renew the license on this occasion. They had received an intimation that the house was not what it should be, and if he were convicted again they would have no alternative as the license would be forfeited.

 

Folkestone Express 19 September 1874.

Saturday, September 12th: Before The Mayor and J. Tolputt Esq.

John Wood was charged with begging.

P.C. Keeler said: From instructions received from the Superintendent, I watched prisoner along the north side of Bouverie Square and saw him put his hand to his hat at every window. He went into the Albion Hotel where I heard him ask a man to give him the price of a pint of beer and I took him into custody.

Supt. Wishere said he saw prisoner in Shellons Street stop at seven or eight houses and hold his hat up to the windows. Witness went in advance of him to his own residence, Brookvale Villa, where prisoner came and held up his hat. Witness went to the window and asked him what he wanted, and he said “A copper to help a poor fellow on the road”. Prisoner had a bundle containing about two gallons of broken victuals.

Prisoner, who pretended to be deaf, made a stormy declamation against the police, and after he was sentenced to one month's hard labour he left the court using words not fit for ears polite, and when he was introduced to the Governor of Dover Gaol it was found he was an “auld acquaintance”.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 10 November 1877.

Saturday, November 3rd: Before R.W. Boarer, J. Clark, and W.J. Jeffreason Esqs., Ald. Caister, and General Armstrong C.B.

Alfred Marks was charged with stealing three hams, the property of Mr. John Sherwood, provision merchant.

Mr. Newport deposed: I am clerk to the prosecutor, who carries on business at No. 3, Sandgate Road. Prisoner was in his employ as porter. I saw him in custody last evening in the Superintendent's office. He said he knew of what he was accused, and knew that he had done wrong. He said he had sold three hams to Mr. Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel for 6s. each. Their proper value is 12s.

Supt. Wilshere deposed: Last night I exercised a search warrant at the Albion Hotel. I found there in the kitchen the three hams produced. I sent for Mr. Jacobs and said to him they were something similar to those which were missing, and asked him if he wished to say where he bought them. He said he bought them at many places, and always paid ready money for them. I took the hams to the station.

Mr. John Sherwood deposed: I am a grocer residing at No. 3, Sandgate Road. Prisoner was in my employ as a porter. He had been with me eight or nine years. It was not his duties to sell goods at all, either in or out of the shop. I identify the hams produced by the initials J.S., F., the marked weight, and the name Denny and Sons. I did not authorise prisoner to sell these hams to Mr. Jacobs.

John Goodspeed, a porter in the employ of the prosecutor, also identified the hams.

Mr. Sherwood applied for an adjournment until Thursday, which was granted.

Thursday, November 8th: Before W. Bateman, W.J. Jeffreason, R. W. Boarer and J. Clark Esqs., Ald Caister, and Gen. Armstrong C.B.

Albert Marks was brought up on remand, charged with stealing three hams, the property of Mr. Sherwood.

William Henry Jacobs, landlord of the Albion Hotel, surrendered to a summons charging him with receiving three hams, the property of Mr. Sherwood, well knowing them to have been stolen.

Mr. Minter appeared to prosecute, and Mr. Mowle to defend Jacobs.

Mr. Mowle asked for a remand, as he had only received his instructions at seven o'clock the previous evening. The defendant was, they must remember, placed in a very serious position, and he was totally unprepared to go into the case then. He would accept any day the Magistrates might select.

Mr. Minter said he would ask the Bench to remember that Jacobs would be charged with jointly stealing with Marks, as well as receiving. A warrant might have been issued for his apprehension. He did not oppose, considering the serious nature of the charge, any reasonable application for an adjournment, and therefore would leave the matter entirely to the discretion of the Bench.

(After a consultation with Mr. Sherwood).

Mr. Minter said that after the evidence already adduced the Bench would see it was a most serious case, and naturally his client thought that there should be a certain security for defendant's attendance.

Mr. Mowle said that Jacobs was quite prepared to be there when called upon.

The Chairman: The suggestion is, I suppose, that he should be bailed?

Mr. Mowle said that Jacobs was quite prepared to give his own recognizances. He was a man of means, being absolute owner of the Albion Hotel.

Mr. Minter: I am quite satisfied to leave it with the Bench.

Defendant was then bound over in his own recognisances of 100 to appear on Saturday next.

Mr. Mowle said that there was some evidence taken on Saturday, and he should like to be supplied with a copy of it.

Mr. Minter: I never heard of such application. On my part I can say the case will be commenced de novo.

Gen. Armstrong: The enquiry held was only plenary.

Marks was then removed to his cell, and Jacobs left the Court.

 

Folkestone Express 10 November 1877.

Saturday, November 3rd: Before R.W. Boarer Esq., General Armstrong, Alderman Caister, and W.J. Jeffreason Esq.

Alfred Marks, a porter, was charged with stealing three hams, the goods and chattels of his master, Mr. John Sherwood, The Mayor.

Mr. Newport, clerk in the employ of Mr. Sherwood, grocer, of Sandgate Road, said: Prisoner was in Mr. Sherwood's employ as porter. I saw him after he was in custody last night, in the Superintendent's office. He knew on what charge he was in custody, and said in the presence of Mr. Sherwood that he had done wrong. He said he had taken the goods to Mr. Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel. He told me so in the presence of Mr. Sherwood and his son. He did not mention the date or time, but said he had taken them there to sell. He said he had sold them, and that Mr. Jacobs had given 6s. each for the hams. That would not be the selling price, as they would be worth about 12s. each. He added that he had taken the hams during the past month.

Superintendent Wilshere said: I executed a search warrant at the Albion Hotel this morning. I found three hams hanging in the kitchen. Mr. Jacobs was present, as I had sent for him, and he came down in his dressing gown. I read the warrant to him, and pointing to the hams I said “Something similar to that is missing. Do you wish to tell me where you bought them?” His reply was “I have bought things at many different places, and I always pay ready money for what I do buy”. I put a mark on the hams, and the last witness put another, and I then took possession of them.

Mr. John Sherwood said: I am a grocer, residing at 3, Sandgate Road. Prisoner was in my employ as a porter. He has been with me several years – eight or nine propably. It was no part of his duty to sell things either in or out of the shop. He was only a porter. That (a ham produced in a canvas cover) is one of my hams. There are my initials “J.S.F.” on the canvas cover. The marked weight upon it was put upon it by another porterin my employ. That (another ham) is similar to others in my warehouse, and has the same brand upon it, and there is the marked weight upon it by the same man. The third ham is similar to the last. The man who marked them will be able to further identify them. They are branded “Denny and Son”.

The Clerk: Did you give the prisoner permission to sell these hams to Mr. Jacobs? – Oh, no.

Is Mr. Jacobs a customer of yours? – I don't know that he has been for a very long while.

Where were these hams kept? – Hanging in the warehouse on pegs and nails driven into the ceiling. The selling price would be about 12s. each ham.

Mr. Jeffreason: Have you any idea when these hams passed out of your possession? – Oh, no. We have so many.

John Godspeed, a porter in the employ of Mr. Sherwood, identified the hams by the marks he had put upon them.

This was the whole of the evidence, and Mr. Sherwood then said he would ask the Bench to remand the case till Monday or Tuesday for further evidence. Mr. Minter, the solicitor whom he had employed to prosecute, was unavoidably away from home, and therefore he should wish the charge remanded.

The prisoner was then formally remanded until Thursday.Thursday, November 8th: Before W, Bateman Esq., Alderman Caister, General Armstrong, R.W. Boarer, W.J. Jeffreason, and J. Clark Esqs.

Alfred Marks was charged on remand with stealing three hams, the property of his employer, Mr. John Sherwood, grocer, of 3, Sandgate Road.

William Henry Jacobs, hotel keeper, proprietor of the Albion Hotel, appeared to a summons charging him with receiving the hams, knowing them to have been stolen.

Mr. Minter prosecuted, and Mr. Mowll appeared for the defence of Jacobs.

After the charge had been read by the Clerk, Mr. Mowll said his client only received the summons at seven o'clock on the previous evening. It was a case involving a very serious charge against the defendant – one of the most serious that could be brought against a respectable man, or one holding the position of the defendant, and he was utterly unprepared to go into the charge that day. He had, therefore, to ask their Worships, before Mr. Minter opened his case, to ask for an adjournment. He did not mind how early a day was fixed – next Saturday would, as far as he was concerned, suit for the investigation, but today he was utterly unprepared to go on with the defence.

Mr. Minter said the case was one against Marks and Jacobs jointly. Marks was charged with stealing, and he proposed to charge Jacobs with stealing as well as receiving and was prepared to go on with the case. It might have been that a warrant had been issued, and Jacobs taken into custody. He, however, did not like to oppose an adjournment when asked for for the purpose of the defence, but he must leave the matter in the hands of the Bench.

The Chairman said under the circumstances the application was a very reasonable one, and the case would be adjourned.

Mr. Minter said there was one thing about the adjournment. He did not want to make any charge against defendant except what would be brought out in evidence, but it was a case of a very serious nature, and his client thought there should be some security against defendant's appearance.

The Chairman: Oh, certainly; he will be bound over.

Mr. Mowll said they were there in answer to the summons, and his client was prepared to give his own recognisances to attend and answer the charge. He was the owner of the house he occupied, and it was not likely but that what he would attend.

Mr. Minter repeated that he put himself entirely in the hands of the Bench.

Jacobs was then bound over to appear and answer the charges on Saturday at eleven o'clock.

Mr. Mowll asked for a copy of the depositions given in the charge against Marks on Saturday because, as they were charged jointly, that evidence would affect his client.

The Bench thought the granting of the application would be irregular.

The man Marks was then further remanded till Saturday.

 

Southeastern Gazette 12 November 1877.

Local News.

At the Borough Police Court, on Saturday, before the Mayor and a full bench, Albert Marks was charged on remand with stealing three hams, the property of Mr. John Sherwood, grocer, and William Henry Jacobs, proprietor of the Albion Hotel, was also charged on summons with the theft.

As Marks was to be called as a witness, at the request of Mr. Montague Williams, who defended Jacobs, he was removed from Court.

Mr. Minter opened the case for the prosecution. Marks, he said, had made a clean breast of it, and it would appear that Jacobs suggested to him that he might obtain goods from his master’s shop and let him have them at half price. He would tell them that he had stolen from his master’s house a quantity of eggs and other articles, including three or four Dutch cheeses, and the greater part of a side of bacon, all of which he sold at half-price. If they were satisfied with his evidence Jacobs would be an accessory before the fact, and as much guilty as Marks himself.

He called Albert Marks, who said: I was a porter in the employ of Mr. Sherwood, grocer, of Folkestone, for between eight and nine years. I have known the defendant Jacobs for five or six years. About two or three months ago he asked me to get him a ham. I told him I would see if I could. I did get him one some considerable time after that. I got it from Mr. Sherwood’s store. I can’t give the exact date, but it was five or six weeks ago. He gave me 6s. for it. Some little time after I got him another, which I stole from my master’s store. I identify the hams produced by the marks on them. I delivered them to him in the bar of his hotel. I took him the third ham, which is wrapped in canvas, and has the initials “J. S. F,” and the weight (10 lbs.), which I also stole, I took about 14 lbs. of bacon to him. It was the thick end of the back. He paid me altogether for that 16s. This was very nearly a month ago. I did not tell him under what circumstances I got them, because he was perfectly well aware of that. He asked me to get him other things as well. He used to place them in a little trap door behind the counter.

I have stolen Dutch cheeses from my master. Jacobs has frequently asked me for some. I have taken him four. He has paid me 1s. 6d. each for them.

Cross-examined: I was a perfectly honest man before he asked me to steal. He said to me one day, “Can you get me any hams?” I got the hams upon that. I understood him to mean, “Can you rob your master of hams?” I took them not long after, but I can’t say how long it was after. Between the times of taking the two hams I had no further conversation with him. He did keep asking me if I had got the ham.

I told him that I could not get hold of it properly [laughter]. There was no further conversation. I began to try immediately he asked me.

John Connor said he was formerly in the service of Mr. Jacobs, and left a fortnight ago on the previous Thursday. He had seen Marks at the house. He generally went into the private bar. Sometimes he (witness) was sent out for something if he was doing anything in the bar. After Marks had left he had seen Jacobs take things into the kitchen. He went and made a communication to Mr. Sherwood.

At the conclusion of the evidence the magistrates retired, and on their return the Mayor said they had unanimously decided to send the case for trial by a jury. They consented to take bail, the prisoner himself in 200, and two sureties i 100 each.

Bail was not forthcoming, and prisoner was therefore taken to the cells. An application was made for committal to the Assizes instead of the Quarter Sessions, on account of the prejudice existing against him, but refused.

Mr. Minter said he did not propose to offer any evidence against Marks, whom he asked to be bound over to appear as a witness.

The affair has caused great excitement in the town.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 17 November 1877.

Saturday, November 10th: Before The Mayor, General Armstrong C.B., Ald. Caister, R.W. Boarer, J. Clark and W.J. Jeffreason Esqs.

Long before the opening of the Court, the approaches to the Town Hall were crowded by those anxious to hear the case to be tried before the Bench, and only a few could gain admission to the Court.

Albert Marks was charged on remand with stealing three hams, the property of Mr. Sherwood, grocer, and William Jacobs, landlord of the Albion Hotel was charged with receiving the same, knowing them to have been stolen.

Mr. Minter appeared to prosecute, and Mr. Montagu Williams to defend.

Mr. Minter briefly opened the case by detailing the facts.

Albert Marks, sworn, said: I was a porter in the employ of Mr. Sherwood for between eight and nine years. I have known defendant for five or six years. About two or three months ago he asked me to get him a ham. I told him I would see if I could. I did get him one some considerable time after that from Mr. Sherwood's store. It was a Denny's ham, which I stole from my master's store. It was five or six months ago. He gave me 6s. for it. Some little time after, I got him another, which I stole. I identify the hams produced by the marks on them. He gave me 6s. for the second ham. I delivered them to him in the bar of his hotel. I took him the third ham, which is wrapped in canvas, and has the initials J.S.F, and the weight 10 lbs., which I also stole. I took 14 lbs. of bacon to him. He paid me altogether for that 15s. This was very nearly a month ago. I did not tell him under what circumstances I got them, because he was perfectly well aware of that. He asked me to get him other things as well. He used to place them in a little trap door behind the counter. I have stolen Dutch cheeses from my master. Jacobs has frequently asked me for some. I have taken him four. He has paid me 1s. 6d. each for them. I have taken a great number of eggs to him. The last time I took any was about eight or nine days ago. I saw a police constable one day outside the house when I had taken in half a dozen. I stole them from Mr. Sherwood's store. Jacobs gave me a pint of beer for about half a dozen.

In cross-examination witness said that he was a perfectly honest man before defendant asked him to steal. When he asked him “Can you get me some hams?”, he understood defendant to mean “Can you rob your master of some hams?”. He took them not long after. He kept asking if he had got the hams. He could not give any date, or any day of the week, either with regard to the hams, the eggs, or the bacon. It was in the daytime. He was taken into custody yesterday week. He had seen no-one but the policemen since. The Superintendent asked him why he had sent for Mr. Minter. He told him he wanted to broach the whole subject. He thought he should be called as a witness. He thought it would be much better because he would get more leniency. Conner, defendant's porter, who was in the bar when he took the first ham, was sent out. On the other occasion signs were made to him to keep quiet. He left the ham without saying anything in the doorway. He never said to Mr. Jacobs “I wonder you don't deal with our firm more than you do. We could often send you business in the summer”. Jacobs did not answer “Your firm is too expensive. I get my goods cheaper elsewhere”. He never said to him “We have a splendid lot of hams we can sell at a shilling a pound”. He was not always paid at the time, but called when he liked for the money. They are worth about 12s. each. These were the only articles that he stole. His house was searched, but no stolen property was found there. There were only some tins found belonging to his master. They were biscuit tins, and quite empty when they left his master's premises. His wages were 24s. per week. He was a married man with a family. There were eight tins of Swiss milk found there. Their cost is 7d. per tin. None of them came from his master's.

John Goodspeed, porter to Mr. Sherwood, identified the hams as the property of his master. They were worth about 1s. 3d. per pound.

Supt. Wilshere repeated his former evidence, and in cross-examination said: Jacobs said he should have no objection to his taking the hams away. He found in Marks's house a few cloves and five rough pieces of bacon, a biscuit tin containing 39 eggs, another containing 17 eggs, two large biscuit tins; in the scullery there was a tin containing 1 egg, and 12 empty biscuit tins, and in the parlour cupboard four eggs and eight tins of condensed milk wrapped in paper, and some sultana raisins.

John Conner said he was formerly in the service of Mr. Jacobs. He had seen Marks at the house. He generally went into the private bar. Sometimes he was sent out for something, if he was doing anything in the bar. After Marks had left he had seen Jacobs take things into the kitchen. He went out and made a communication to Mr. Sherwood.

Mr. Williams said he should not deny receiving the hams from Marks, or that they were Mr. Sherwood's.

P.C. Butcher and P.C. Hogben deposed to seeing defendant come up with the cart and leave a parcel at defendant's place.

Mr. John Sherwood said: The witness Conner made a communication with him on Monday, the 29th, and in consequence he went to Bouverie Square on the following Friday between six and seven. He saw Marks pass in the cart, and he drove under the archway leading into the mews. The hams were his property and are worth 12s. each. The cheeses would be worth 3s. each, and the bacon from 11d. to 13d. or 14d. a pound. He had made enquiry and found some months back Jacobs gave an order for some sugar. He knew of nothing else. The sugar was not all supplied at the time, and he had some tins of soup instead.

Mr. Montagu Williams, in the course of an elaborate defence, pointed out that Marks was the only witness against Jacobs, who, on his own showing, had perjured himself. He trusted the Magistrates would not send Jacobs for trial on the evidence of a thief and a perjurer. The defence was that Jacobs had honestly bought these things, and he would bring witnesses to prove this.

George Trice, carrier, called, said that he frequently went to Mr. Jacobs' house. He went once when Marks was there. He heard Marks say “It is a wonder you don't deal with my governor more than you do”, and Jacobs replied “Your firm is too dear for me. I can buy my goods cheaper”. Marks said he had got some nice hams in stock, and Jacobs had better let him send him one. The price was 1s. a pound, and Jacobs said he might bring him one.

In cross-examination witness said he had borrowed money of Jacobs, and being re-examined said he had paid the money back.

Abraham Huntley deposed to seeing Jacobs pay Marks 11s. 3d. for a ham, and his buying 1s. worth of eggs.

The Magistrates retired, and on their return intimated their intention to send the case against Jacobs for trial at the Quarter Sessions, consenting to take bail, for himself in 200, and two sureties of 100. Bail for Marks was accepted in two sureties of 10 each.

Satisfactory bail was not forthcoming, and Marks and Jacobs were taken to Dover gaol. On Wednesday, however, Marks was bailed out, but Jacobs still remains in prison.

 

Folkestone Express 17 November 1877.

Saturday, November 10th: Before The Mayor, R.W. Boarer, J. Clark, and W.J. Jeffreason Esq., Alderman Causter, and General Armstrong.

Albert Marks was charged on remand with stealing three hams, the property of Mr. John Sherwood, grocer, and William Henry Jacobs, of the Albion Hotel, was also charged on summons with the theft.

As Marks was to be called as a witness, at the request of Mr. Montague Williams, who defended Jacobs, he was removed from Court.

Mr. Minter opened the case for the prosecution. Marks, he said, had made a clean breast of it, and it would appear that Jacobs suggested to him that he might obtain goods from his master's shop and let him have them at half price. He would tell them that he had stolen from his master's house a quantity of eggs and other articles, including three or four Dutch cheeses and the greater part of a side of bacon, all of which he sold at half price. If they were satisfied with his evidence he would be an accessory before the fact, and as much guilty as Marks himself. If they thought that Marks was telling the truth, it would be competent for them to commit the defendant for trial before another tribunal. As to the eggs, though they were gone, it would not prevent them from bringing the charge. There would be the approver's evidence, and a police constable would swear that he saw Marks go into the house of Jacobs with the eggs. He should also call Marks' wife, who would tell them after her husband was in custody she went to Jacobs and asked him how it was her husband was in custody.

He then called Albert Marks, who said: I was a porter in the employ of Mr. Sherwood, grocer, Folkestone, for eight or nine years. I have known defendant Jacobs for five or six years. About two or three months ago he asked me to get him a ham. I told him I would see if I could. I did get him one some considerable time after that. I got it from Mr. Sherwood's store. It was a Denny's ham, which I stole from my master's store. I can't give the exact date, but it was five or six weeks ago. He gave me 6s. for it. Some little time after I got him another, which I stole from my master's store. I identify the hams produced by the marks on them. I cannot say which was the first one I took. He gave me 6s. for the second ham. I delivered them to him in the bar of his hotel. I took the third ham, which is wrapped in canvas, and has the initials “J.S.F” and the weight 10 lbs., which I also stole. I took about 14 lbs. of bacon to him. It was the thick end of the back. He paid me altogether for that 15s. This was very nearly a month ago. I did not tell him under what circumstances I got them, because he was perfectly well aware of that. He asked me to get him other things as well. He used to place them in a little trap door behind the counter. I have stolen Dutch cheeses from my master. Jacobs has frequently asked me for some. I have taken him four. He has paid me 1s. 6d. each for them. They were taken at different times. The last time was a fortnight ago. I stole them from Mr. Sherwood. I have taken a great number of eggs to him. The last time I took him any was about eight or nine days ago. I saw a police constable one day outside the house when I had taken in half a dozen. I stole them from Mr. Sherwood's store. Jacobs gave me a pint of beer for about half a dozen, or seven or eight.

Cross-examined: I was a perfectly honest man before he asked me to steal. He said to me one day “Can you get me any hams?” I got the hams upon that. I understood him to mean “Can you rob your master of any hams?” I took them not long after, but I can't say how long it was after. Between the times of taking the two hams I had no further conversation with him. He kept asking me if I had got the ham. I told him I could not get hold of it properly. (Laughter) There was no further conversation. I began to try immediately he asked me.

Did you on that suggestion at once try to rob your master? – I did not.

Then when did you try? – A few days after – as soon as I could. I can't give any date or any day of the week, either with regard to the hams, the bacon, or the eggs. I can't say the time it was when I took them, but it was in the daytime. I was taken into custody yesterday week. I have seen no-one but the policemen since. I will not swear that I have not had conversation with a police officer. I have spoken to Keeler and Smith, and the Superintendent. The Superintendent asked why I sent for Mr. Minter. I told him I wanted to broach the whole subject. I thought I should be called as a witness. Mr. Minter told me not to expect anything. He did not tell me I was going to be called as a witness. I cannot say why I thought so. I gave a statement in writing of what I could prove. I thought it would be much better because I should get more leniency.

Thought you would get off altogether, perhaps? – No. I did not think that. Connor, defendant's porter, who was in the bar when I took the first ham, was sent out. On the other occasions signs were made to me to keep quiet. I left the ham without saying anything in the doorway. I had a glass of beer after I left the ham. I never said to Mr. Jacobs “I wonder why you don't deal with our firm more than you do. We could often send you business in the summer”. He did not answer “Your firm is too expensive. I can get my goods cheapest elsewhere”. I never said to him “We have a splendid lot of hams we can sell at a shilling a pound”. I was not always paid at the time, but called when I liked for the money. They are worth about 12s. each. These are the only things that I stole. My house was searched, but no stolen property was found there. There were only some tins found belonging to my master. I had taken them home with broken victuals in. I had no use for them. They were biscuit tins. They were quite empty when they left my master's premises. My wages were 24s. per week. I am a married man with a family. There were eight tins of Swiss milk found there. Mr. Sherwood sells milk. I used to buy many of my things of Mr. Gosling. The cost is 7d. per tin. None of them came from my master's. Nothing else besides the Swiss milk was there. There was no amount of grocery inconsistent with my position.

Re-examined: Connor was a servant of Jacobs's, and whenever I went in he was sent out. On the occasion when there were some people there he made a sign to me.

John Godspeed, porter in the employ of Mr. Sherwood, identified the hams as his master's property. The hams were worth 1s. 3d. per pound.

Superintendent Wilshere repeated the evidence given last Saturday. His search warrant was for a Dutch cheese and a quantity of eggs.

Cross-examined: Defendant said he should have no objection to my taking the hams away, and he supposed if it was found they were honestly come by they would be returned. He found in Marks's house a few cloves and five rough pieces of bacon, a biscuit tin containing 39 eggs, another containing 17 eggs, two large biscuit tins; in the scullery there was a tin containing 1 egg, and 12 empty biscuit tins, and in the parlour cupboard four eggs and eight tins of condensed milk wrapped in paper, and some raisins.

John Connor said he was formerly in the service of Mr. Jacobs, and left a fortnight ago last Thursday. He had seen Marks at the house. He generally went into the private bar. Sometimes he was sent out for something if he was doing anything in the bar. After Marks had left he had seen Jacobs take things into the kitchen. He went and made a communication to Mr. Sherwood.

Cross-examined: I was in Jacobs' employ nine weeks and was glad to get away. I was noy afraid of having my morals corrupted. We had a few words, he paid me, and I left. After that I went to Mr. Sherwood. I could not swear I was ever sent out when Marks was not there. I saw the hams hanging in the kitchen. The scullery opened into the kitchen and also into the mews. I know nothing about the unlawful possession of a watch. I was never charged with the offence.

Mr. Williams said he should not deny receiving the hams, and that he received them from Marks.

P.C. William Butcher said: I watched Mr. Jacobs' house on the 3rd of October. About four o'clock in the afternoon I saw Marks drive up and take something from the cart. He stopped some short distance above the Albion. I saw him take something about the size of a pound of tea and go into the Mews, and come out of the jug department.

Detective Hogben said: I watched Jacobs' house on Thursday, the 1st November at half past three in the afternoon. Marks came up in Mr. Sherwood's cart, which he left on the opposite side to the Albion. He went into the kitchen at the Albion.

Mr. John Sherwood said: The witness Connor made a communication to me on Monday, the 29th, and in consequence I went to Bouverie Square on the following Friday between six and seven. I saw Marks pass in the cart, and he drove under the archway leading into the mews. I saw the reflection of a light from a door being opened and shut. The hams are my property and are worth 12s. each. The cheeses would be worth about 3s. each, and the bacon from 11d. to 13. or 14d. a pound. I have made enquiry and I find some months back Jacobs gave an order for some sugar. I know of nothing else, only the sugar was not all supplied at the time, and he had some tins of soup instead.

Cross-examined: The men are sent out to solicit orders.

In reply to Mr. Minter, he said the men were not allowed to take orders individually. If they got any casual orders, they should be given to the counterman.

This was the case for the prosecution, and Mr. Williams said the question for the Bench to consider was whether there was a prima facie case upon which a jury would convict. He would call their attention at once to the fact that there was no real corroboration. The corroboration must be in some material particular. The mere fact of an approver and thief saying “I stole certain property from my master” and their being found at the place at which the prisoner said he disposed of it was not corroboration as against the person on whose premises it was found. There was no corroboration as to the prisoner's statement. He said he sold the things for half their value. Mr. Sherwood had admitted that his servants were permitted to seek custom and customers, and that was a common sense view of the thing. It was true Marks said he stole them, but his client was not to know that. He asked if any reasonable man could believe that Marks was speaking the truth when he told them about the property found in the house. He contended that he was committing wilful and impudent perjury when he swore it, and he asked them to dismiss the case. His defence was that Jacobs bought the goods honestly and fairly.

He then called George Trice, a carrier, who said he frequently went to Jacobs' house. He recollected going in once when Marks was in there. He was drinking, and Marks said “It is a wonder you don't deal with my governor more than you do”. Mr. Jacobs said “Your firm is too dear for me. I can buy my goods cheaper”. Then he said he had some very nice hams in stock, and he had better let him send him one. He said the price was 1s. a pound, and Mr Jacobs said he might bring him one.

Cross-examined: There is not room in the bar for several. I have had business transactions with Jacobs. I have borrowed money on Saturday evenings. It aws a month or five weeks ago I saw Marks. I had seen him there scores of times before. I had heard him say he could sell biscuits 2d. a pound cheaper than anyone else. No=one has spoken to me about this case. I heard about it and read it in the paper.

Re-examined: I have paid back the money I have borrowed from Mr. Jacobs.

Abraham Huntley, fly proprietor, of Folkestone, deposed to being in Jacobs' bar when a ham and some eggs were sold. He saw 11s 3d. paid for them. The ham weighed 10 lbs., and 1s. worth of eggs.

Cross-examined: I never borrowed any money from Jacobs, and I don't owe him any. There were other persons in the bar. My wife read the case in the paper. No-one asked me to come here to give evidence.

The Magistrates retired, and on their return the Mayor said they had unanimously decided to send the case for trial by a jury.

They consented to take bail, prisoner himself in 200, and two sureties of 100 each.

Bail was not forthcoming, and prisoner was therefore taken to the cells. An application was made for committal to the Assizes instead of the Quarter Sessions, on account of the prejudice existing against him, but refused.

The Bench, after consideration, decided to commit Marks for trial also, and the evidence against him was read over.

Mr. Minter intimated that he should make an application to the Recorder to discharge Marks in order that he might give evidence against Jacobs.

Marks has since been liberated on bail, but up to last night (Thursday) Jacobs was still unable to obtain sureties.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 24 November 1877.

Wednesday, November 21st: Before The Mayor, Col. De Crespigny, J. Clark and T. Caister Esqs.

Charles Wilson and William Herring were summoned for being found on the licensed premises of the Albion Hotel during prohibited hours.

Both pleaded guilty, and were fined 10s. and 8s. costs.

REGINA V JACOBS.

Mr. Henry Spurrier, of Victoria Road and Dane Road, Margate, slate merchant, and William Satchell, of No. 2, Parade, Margate, tobacconist, were tendered as bail for the prisoner Jacobs, and the prosecutor consenting, they entered into the usual recognisance of 100 each.

 

Folkestone Express 24 November 1877.

Local News.

On Wednesday Mr. Jacobs, who stands charged with receiving stolen property, was released on bail, the sureties being Mr. Satchell, tobacconist, of Margate, and Mr. Spurrier, slate merchant, of Margate.

Wednesday, November 21st: Before The Mayor, Alderman Caister, Colonel De Crespigny, and J. Clark Esq.

Charles Wilson, a young man, pleaded Guilty to a charge of being on the premises of the Albion Hotel, Bouverie Road, on the night of the 2nd inst.

P.C. Hogben said he was outside the house about a quarter to twelve, and saw Wilson come out of the bar in company with a young man named Herring. The Superintendent and P.C. Ovenden were then inside the house. He heard Mrs. Jacobs say “Make haste and go out”, and the door was then opened.

This was a first offence, and the Bench inflicted the mitigated penalty of 10s. and 8s. costs, which was paid.

William Herring, who was with the last defendant was also fined the same amount and costs. Paid.

 

Southeastern Gazette 24 November 1877.

Local News.

Mr. Henry Spurrier, slate merchant, and Mr. William Satchell, tobacconist, both of Margate, were accepted, each in 100, as bail for William Jacobs, landlord of the Albion Hotel, recently committed for trial at the Quarter Sessions for feloniously receiving stolen goods.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 8 December 1877.

Mr. Glyn appeared in the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice, before the Lord Chief Justice and Justices Mellor and Field on Monday, on behalf of W.H. Jacobs, for a certiorari calling on the Justices of the Borough of Folkestone, and one J. Sherwood, the prosecutor, to show cause why an order should not be made removing the trial of W.H. Jacobs from Folkestone to the Central Criminal Court, on the ground that he could not have a fair trial at Folkestone. The defendant, who was the proprietor of the Albion Hotel, Folkestone, had been committed for stealing two hams, two Dutch cheeses, some bacon and eggs, the property of Mr. Sherwood, ex-mayor of Folkestone. The prosecutor would preside on the trial at the Quarter Sessions, and a strong feeling existed in the borough with regard to the case, and to such an extent that it was impossible for the defendant to have a fair trial. The defendant had been admitted to bail. The Lord Chief Justice said that there would be a rule, but not on the ground that the prosecutor, as a justice of the peace, might preside at the trial. Mr. Lonsdale, the Recorder, was not a person likely to be influenced in the conduct of the trial by the prosecutor. The rule was granted on the strong feeling that appeared to prevail in Folkestone, and the probability that the defendant might be prejudiced in the trial taking place there. The defendant would have to enter into fresh bail and recognisances, and pay the extra expenses of the trial. Rule granted accordingly.

 

Folkestone Express 8 December 1877.

Local News.

On Monday, in the Queen's Bench Division, before the Lord Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Mellor, and Mr. Justice Field, sitting in banco, an application was made on behalf of William Henry Jacobs, proprietor of the Albion Hotel, Folkestone, for a certiorari to bring the case for trial at the Central Criminal Court. Mr. Glyn said the applicant was indicted for receiving a ham and some Dutch cheeses, the property of a tradesman in the town, who had filled the office of Mayor, and was at the present time a Justice of the Peace. The accused would be triable at the Sessions before the Recorder of the town; and on an affidavit that the Magistrates sat on the Bench during trials, that from the position of the parties the case had excited a great deal of local interest, that the prosecutor had been talking of the case, and that a prejudice had been excited against the accused, and that therefore he could not have a fair trial at Folkestone, he moved to bring the case before the Central Criminal Court, pointing out that it would cause no delay and would be more satisfactory for the purposes of justice.

The Lord Chief Justice said it was not at all likely that the Recorder would allow himself to be prejudiced by the mere presence of the prosecutor on the Bench, even if he should sit there, which was only suggested, but on the whole, as there would be no delay of the trial, the Court would accede to the application.

A nile nisi was granted accordingly.

 

Southeastern Gazette 8 December 1877.

Local News.

In the Queen’s Bench Division, on Monday, Mr. Glyn applied on behalf of Mr. W. H. Jacobs, for a certiorari to remove his trial from Folkestone to the Central Criminal Court, on the ground that he could not obtain a fair trial at Folkestone. The defendant was proprietor of the Queen’s Hotel (sic) in that town, and was committed on a charge of stealing two hams, two Dutch cheeses and some bacon and eggs, the property of Mr. Sherwood, grocer, ex-Mayor of Folkestone, and a justice of the peace for the borough. The prosecutor would preside at the quarter sessions, and a great deal of feeling existed in reference to the case. The defendant had been admitted to bail. The Lord Chief Justice said a rule would be granted on the ground of the strong feeling that existed, by which the defendant might be prejudiced, but not for any apprehension that the prosecutor would preside at the trial.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 29 December 1877.

The Queen v Jacobs.

On Friday last in the Queen's Bench Division, before the Lord Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Lush, Mr. Montague Williams, with Mr. Glyn moved to make absolute the rule for removal of the trial of this cause to the Central Criminal Court. Mr. Biron, with Mr. Denman, in opposing the rule, said that the prosecutor could have only one desire, viz., that the accused should have a fair trial, and felt bound to say that he was of opinion that he would have a fair and impartial trial at the Folkestone Quarter Sessions. The Lord Chief Justice thought there could be no objection to the removal of the trial, upon condition that the accused paid the expenses of the prosecution appearing upon the rule, and all extra costs occasioned by the removal. Rule absolute.

 

Folkestone Express 29 December 1877.

Local News.

The Queen v Jacobs.

On Friday last, in the Queen's Bench Division, before the Lord Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Lush, Mr. Montagu Williams, with Mr. Glyn, moved to make absolute the rule for removal of the trial of this case to the Central Criminal Court. Mr. Biron, with Mr. Denman, in opposing the rule, said that the prosecutor could have only one desire, viz., that the accused should have a fair trial, and felt bound to say that he was of opinion that he would have a fair and impartial trial at the Folkestone Quarter Sessions.

The Lord Chief Justice thought there could be no objection to the removal of the trial, upon condition that the accused paid the expenses of the prosecution appearing on the rule, and all extra costs occasioned by the removal. Rule absolute.

 

Folkestone Express 19 January 1878.

Local News.

The Queen v Jacobs.

The following is a copy of the writ of certiorari ordering the removal of this trial to the Central Criminal Court:

Victoria, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, to the Recorder of our Borough of Folkestone, in the County of Kent.

We being willing for certain reasons that all and singular indictments which may be found against William Henry Jacobs, for any of the offences of which he has been committed to take his trial at the next General Quarter Sessions, in and for the Borough of Folkestone, be determined before our Justices at the Central Criminal Court and not elsewhere, DO COMMAND you that you send under your seal, before our said Justices of the Central Criminal Court at the Sessions to be holden for the Jurisdiction in the said Central Criminal Court at Justice Hall in the Old Bailey, in the suburbs of our City of London to be done thereon what of right and according to the law and custom of England we shall think fit to be done.

Witness Sir Alexander Jas. Edmund Cockburn, Baronet, at Westminster, the twenty second day of December, in the forty-first year of our reign.

By the Court.

COCKBURN.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 2 February 1878.

Quarter Sessions.

Monday, January 28th: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

Albert Marks, 42, a grocer's porter, surrendered to his bail, charged with stealing three hams, value 1 16s., 14 lbs. of bacon, value 14s., four Dutch cheeses, value 12s., and six eggs, value 6d., the property of John Sherwood, at Folkestone, on the 1st of October, 1877, and William Henry Jacobs, proprietor and owner of the Albion Hotel, Folkestone, also surrendered charged with “aiding, abetting and procuring Albert Marks to steal the above mentioned goods. Also receiving the same, well knowing them to have been stolen”.

Before, however, the case was called on, Mr. Denman, the counsel for the prosecution, said His Honour was aware that a writ of certiorari had been obtained, moving the trial of Jacobs to the Central Criminal Court, and he would therefore ask that the trial of Marks (who had turned Queen's Evidence) might be postponed until the next Sessions.

No objection being raised, the Recorder directed the trial to stand over. The charge against Jacobs will be heard at the next sitting of the Central Criminal Court, at the Old Bailey.

 

Folkestone Express 2 February 1878.

Quarter Sessions.

Monday, January 28th: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

The Grand Jury having returned true bills of indictment against William Henry Jacobs and Albert Marks, Mr. Denman, the prosecuting counsel, said with regard to the prisoner Marks, he was instructed to ask that the trial should be postponed until next session. No doubt His Honour had read the depositions and would understand the reason.

There was no objection offered, and the adjournment was consented to.

Mr. Deane said he appeared for the prisoner Jacobs, in whose case His Honour was aware that there was a writ of certiorari ordering the removal of the trial in the event of a true bill being found. He supposed that would be the time for him to ask that the case should go at once to the Central Criminal Court.

The Recorder: Certainly. I have no discretion.

Mr. Denman remarked that there would be further recognisances required to be entered into to meet the cost of the removal of the trial.

The usual formalities of binding over the witnesses in the cases of Marks and Jacobs followed.

We believe the trial of Jacobs will take place at the Central Criminal Court on the 11th February.

 

Folkestone Express 16 February 1878.

The hearing of the charge against William Henry Jacob of the Albion Hotel was set down for hearing at the Central Criminal Court on Wednesday. The cause was first on the list in the third Court, where Sir Thomas Chambers presided. The Court opened at ten o'clock and the case was called, but as the witnesses and the defendant had not arrived, a charge against four persons for conspiracy and false pretences in connection with the Bazaar newspaper and Exchange And Mart was taken. This lasted until nearly three o'clock, when Sir Henry James, who was specially retained for the defence, asked His Lordship what would be the most convenient course to adopt.

Sir Thomas Chambers said it would be impossible to get through the mass of evidence which would be tendered before the usual time of the rising of the Court (probably not till ten or eleven o'clock), and left it to the counsel engaged to make some suggestion.

Before the adjournment for luncheon application had been made and granted for another case to be taken first on Thursday morning, and this precluded the Folkestone case from being heard on that day.

Sir Henry James suggested Saturday, but it was understood that the prosecution could not conveniently attend on that day. Sir Henry then said if it was convenient to the Court to give the case precedence on Friday morning he would endeavour to be present, although he had an appointment.

Sir Thomas Chambers said he was willing to consent to this arrangement, and ultimately it was decided if nothing transpired in the interval to render it necessary to further adjourn the trial, that it should be taken at ten o'clock on Friday.

It will be seen that had the witnesses left Folkestone by the first train, instead of delaying their departure until eight o'clock, the whole of the inconvenience would have been avoided.

The preparations for the defence are of the most elaborate description. Photographs of the Albion Hotel showing the various entrances to the bars &c. have been executed, and a wooden model of the interior of the bar, perfect in every detail has been made, and a whole host of witnesses has been summoned.

The trial is now fixed to take place this (Saturday) morning at ten o'clock.

 

Southeastern Gazette 18 February 1878.

Local News.

At the Central Criminal Court on Friday, Mr. William Henry Jacobs, an hotel proprietor at Folkestone, surrendered to his recognisances, and was indicted for procuring a man named Marks to rob his employer, Mr. Sherwood, of three hams and 14lb. of bacon, and then feloniously receiving the game articles, well knowing them to have bean stolen. The case had been removed for trial to this court under Palmer’s Act from the Quarter Sessions at Folkestone at the instance of the defendant. The complainant, Mr. Sherwood, was an Alderman and ex-Mayor of Folkestone, and a great deal of local feeling had been excited on both sides. Mr. Green and Mr. W. Denman conducted the prosecution; Sir H. James, Q.C., Mr. Montagu Williams, and Mr. Lewis Glyn were for the defence.

A witness deposed that one evening he was watching the prisoner’s establishment at Folkestone, when the man Marks drove into an archway. Witness then walked down to the archway. By that time Marks had gone into the bar, where he remained about five minutes. He then drove his horse and cart into the stable yard. The odds and ends of bacon were sent into the town to be sold to a different class of customers than ordinarily. The prosecutor, Mr. Sherwood, had told witness to look over books, but he had not since had time to do that. He put down the weight of what he sold to Marks in scribbling books. He had never destroyed any of the books, nor had he any reason to suppose that the books had been destroyed. It would be nobody’s business to make away with them. The books would not have shown the character of the goods. Fifty pounds was the largest weight he had ever sold him at one time.

Frederick Cobb, foreman to the prosecutor, said there was a custom to sell rough pieces of bacon whenever he got leave to dispose of them. That never included hams. Marks was in the habit of purchasing odds and ends.

William Butcher, a constable at Folkestone, spoke to having searched the prisoner’s house, and afterwards to having seen Marks drive a horse and cart to an archway and then leave them. On coming out of the house he returned to the cart again and then drove away. It was then quite light.

Robert Hogben, a constable, said he received instructions to watch the prisoner, and saw Marks drive up in a trap and stop about 40 yards from Mr. Jacob’s house, and take a basket from behind a cart and set it on the seat of the cart. He then took a parcel from behind the cart, and took two smaller ones out of the cart and put one in each pocket of his coat. He remained there two or three minutes, and then came out and drove away. It was then quite light, and witness could see him very plainly.

Albert Marks deposed that he had been in the employment of the prosecutor eight or nine years and had known the prisoner Jacobs five or six years. Before last November witness had some conversation with Jacobs, and sold him some pieces of bacon which he had bought of Mr. Sherwood. He asked witness if he could get him a ham, some tapioca, coffee, and other things. He replied that he would see. About a fortnight or three weeks afterwards witness got him a ham from his master’s stores, and took it to Mr. Jacobs in the bar of the Albion, and put it below the counter, telling him to keep quiet. No money passed on that day, but some days afterwards witness asked him what he was going to give him for the ham. The reply was, 6s,, and he gave it him. After that witness took other things from his master’s premises. Jacobs had asked him to get some eggs and other articles. He said he would try. About a week afterwards he took him another ham and put it below a door, Jacobs giving him 6s. for it. All those things, said the witness, were taken from Mr. Sherwood’s stores. Witness went there often, but did not take things every time. Witness had a round of customers. He was now out on bail and could not take his trial yet. A true bill had been found against him at the Quarter Sessions. He had been working as a “navvy” at Folkestone. On being committed for trial he was admitted to bail. It was known at Mr. Sherwood’s that he was buying eggs and selling them again at a profit.

In cross-examination, the witness admitted that he had sold bacon, hams, eggs, and candles to a great number of persons in Folkestone, and that he had purchased these articles at his master’s shops, and all these transactions were perfectly honest. He said nothing of the affair until after he was himself taken into custody, and then, he said, he “broached the subject,” in the hope that he should be dealt with more leniently, and told what had taken place between him and the prisoner.

That was the case for the prosecution, and the jury immediately, without calling upon Sir Henry James to address them, or leaving their box, returned a verdict of Not Guilty, upon which the prisoner was at once discharged.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 23 February 1878.

At the Central Criminal Court on Saturday before Sir Thomas Chambers Q.C., the Common Sergeant, Mr. William Henry Jacobs, an hotel proprietor at Folkestone, surrendered to take his trial for having feloniously counselled and procured one Albert Marks to rob John Sherwood, his master, and also on a second charge of having feloniously received 14 lbs. of bacon, six eggs, four Dutch cheeses, and three hams, the property of Mr. John Sherwood, knowing them to have been stolen.

Mr. Grain and Mr. Denman conducted the prosecution; Sir Henry James Q.C. was specially retained with Mr. Montagu Williams and Mr. Lewis Glyn for the defence.

This case was remitted to the Central Criminal Court for trial under the provisions of the statute known as Palmer's Act, the alleged offence having been committed at Folkestone, and the indictment, in the ordinary course, would have been disposed of at the Folkestone Quarter Sessions. In consequence, however, of the position of the defendant, and other circumstances, the charge appeared to have created so much local excitement that it was removed to an entirely indifferent tribunal.

In opening the case, Mr. Grain said the prisoner was the proprietor of an hotel at Folkestone, and the prosecutor (Mr. J. Sherwood) was a large provision merchant in the town. The prosecutor missed some property, which was afterwards found to have been stolen by Marks, who had been in his employ seven or eight years. Some of this property was subsequently found in the house of the prisoner. On the 25th Oct. a man named Conner made a communication to Mr. Sherwood, and the police in consequence were instructed to watch the house of the prisoner. Marks was seen to go there on various occasions, and a search warrant was subsequently issued, and the hams which would be produced were found, although the search warrant was not for hams, but for eggs or something of that kind. It was clear from the marks on the hams that they once belonged to Mr. Sherwood. Marks would tell them that some time in August, Jacobs asked him if he could get some hams, that he did so, and various other goods, for which he received sums very much below their value. He would show that Marks was seen going to the house at unusual hours of the day. It was true that Marks, who would be the principal witness, was an accomplice – that was if the prisoner were found guilty – and no doubt his learned friend and His Lordship would tell them that they must not rely on the evidence of an accomplice, unless it was corroborated on some material point. He apprehended, however, that he should be able to put before them, quite apart from the evidence of Marks altogether, a case which would call for the careful consideration of the jury. Jacobs was not a customer of Mr. Sherwood's, and he must have known that Marks was a servant to Mr. Sherwood, and that he was not dealing with him. He should also call before them the wife of a bandmaster of the 61st Regiment, and the wife of Marks, who would speak to a conversation and a practical admission by Jacobs that he was a party to the robbery. Mr. Grain also commented on the fact that when the police searched his house the prisoner made no allusion whatever to Marks or to any dealings with the prosecutor.

John Goodspeed, examined by Mr. Denman, said he was a porter in the employ of the prosecutor, and it was part of his duty to weigh and store the hams. The hams produced he identified as his master's property.

Cross-examined by Sir Henry James: The 10 is the weight of the ham, and was put on by me. The 10 is very plain. Nothing has been done to alter the mark or take it off. I recognise the marks as mine. I have been twelve or thirteen years porter and warehouseman to Mr. Sherwood. Mr. Sherwood was not in the habit of allowing Marks to purchase goods to sell again. I don't remember Marks buying large quantities of bacon on Saturday evenings. I have heard that he did from the foreman, Mr. Cobb.

“Was the bacon for himself?” For all I know.

“He had a large family, which you thought he brought up on bacon?” Very likely.

“What was about the quantity, 56 lbs.? It might be more?” Perhaps so.

“Do you mean to tell the jury you believe he bought this large quantity of bacon to feed his young family upon?” I don't know, I'm sure.

Mr. John Sherwood, the prosecutor, said: On the 29th October a man named Conner made a communication to me, in consequence of which I communicated with the police on Friday, November 2nd. I went between six and seven o'clock, and kept a watch on the prisoner's house. Marks was second porter in my employ. He would have to go a certain round of houses. Jacobs was very rarely a customer of mine. I had one transaction with him in June. I saw Marks, as I was watching, drive up in the cart into an archway into which a door leads to a bar of the Albion Hotel. I walked down to the archway, and I was just in time to see the flash of light from the opening of the door as he went in. Marks was there about five minutes. In my business it is the custom to sell odds and ends of bacon to smaller shops. This would not apply to hams or eggs at all. I did not know that Marks was in the habit of buying bacon. I have learned so since.

“Did you know whether any of those odds and ends of bacon went to Jacobs' establishment?” Not to my knowledge.

Cross-examined by Sir Henry James: Marks had been seven or eight years in my employ. After he was arrested I saw the articles brought from his house. I should say the tins were mine – in fact I have no doubt. The police found fifty or sixty eggs and part of a box of sultana raisins. I have no doubt they were mine. I am an alderman and ex-Mayor of the Corporation. I believe the town surveyor has employed Marks since he has been on bail. He has not been tried yet. I was not aware of it when Marks was before the magistrates. The foreman of the shop had a book in which he would put down items bought by Marks. Personally I know nothing about this book, nor did I know till some time after that Marks was in the employ of the Corporation. I have never seen the entries in the book, but Cobb, my foreman, used it for his own reference. My workmen deal with me if they please, but I do not make it a condition. The bacon was sold to other shopkeepers who could find sale for it.

Re-examined: These hams are perfectly good. I know nothing about the book. Marks is employed as a navvy on the drainage works.

By Sir Henry James: I was told that the defence wanted the rough book, and I promised to do what I could to find it.

By Mr. Grain: I have searched among my books, but can find no reference to Marks.

By Sir Henry James: I mean that I see no ready money dealings with Marks' name. I presume Cobb had the rough book with him today. I do not recollect telling Mr. Mowll that the foreman had the book and it should be produced.

Frederick Cobb, foreman to prosecutor, said: It was the custom in our establishment to sell the odd pieces of bacon whenever we had a lot. They did not include hams. Marks was in the habit of purchasing. I sold to him, charging him so much per pound. He often paid ready money. I kept no regular record, but sometimes put a memorandum on a piece of paper or scribbling. I had no books that anyone would understand.

By Sir Henry James: I may have some books, but I cannot find them. I was subpoenaed to produce the books by the defence. I have looked for them, but only for half an hour on Thursday. I knew the man was on his trial, and it was to show whether any goods had been sold to Marks or not. I put down in the book the amount I sold to Marks. It was a memorandum book. I never destroyed any of them. They were left in the clerk's office. I have no reason to suppose they were destroyed. They were on a shelf. I may only have put Marks' initials in the books. I should hardly think the bacon was for Marks to bring up his young children upon. I do not know his wages. When the amount was paid it would be entered in the cash book, but it would not show the character of the goods sold. I have sold him more than 28 lbs. at a time. I should say the largest was 50 lbs. He may have sold it again. It was his business what he was going to do with it.

Police constable Butcher proved watching the house of the prisoner, and seeing Marks drive up and take a parcel in.

Police constable Robert Hogben also gave similar evidence.

John Conner, late a potman in the employ of the prisoner, gave evidence to the effect that he saw Marks come into the bar on several occasions, and that he (witness) was immediately sent out on some pretence. On his return he had seen Mrs. Jacobs removing a ham or some bacon from the bar to the kitchen. In cross-examination witness admitted that he had left in consequence of a “few words” with the prisoner.

Albert Marks said he was until lately in the employ of the prosecutor. In November last he had a conversation with the prisoner. Prisoner said “Can you get me a ham?”. He asked him for several other things also. Witness got him a ham on one or two occasions. He also got him the Dutch cheeses and the eggs mentioned in the indictment. He got the things from his master's stores. Jacobs paid him 6s. each for the hams – about half their value – and 1s. 6d. for the cheeses.

Cross-examined by Sir H. James: Was committed for trial on a charge of robbing his master, and was admitted to bail three days after. The prosecutor was a magistrate. Was now employed by the Borough Surveyor, and earned 3s. 4d. per day. Made a statement to Mr. Minter, the solicitor for the prosecution, in order that he might get more leniency. Had dealt very largely in eggs, which he bought from country persons. Had sold some to the prosecutor. This was a perfectly honest transaction. Had bought large quantities of bacon from Sherwood, and had sold it at a profit. Had solicited people to buy it. Persons had come to his house for it. Certainly did not buy it to bring up his children upon. Had got 10d. per pound for it. Might have got more. Had never offered to supply Mr. Trice with a cask of soda for 5s. Had sold some gammon of bacon to a man named Sharpe; had sold W. Aird, a milkman, bacon. Knew a man named Henry Pain, a master builder. He never sold him a ham. He sold a man named Andrews pieces of bacon. Knew Mr. Matthews, a hairdresser, and had sold him bacon. Had never offered to sell Lord Radnor's gardener a ham. He offered a tongue to a man named Manly for sale.

Witness further admitted several transactions with people, which he said were all perfectly honest. He was also subjected to a most searching cross-examination as to his transaction with Jacobs.

The Court then adjourned for luncheon.

On it's re-assembling Jane Snell deposed going with Mrs. Marks to Jacobs' hotel after Marks had been arrested, and having a conversation with Jacobs on the matter, in which he admitted he had bought the hams of Marks, and gave him 6s. each for them.

Mrs. Marks gave corroborative evidence.

Superintendent Wilshere proved searching the prisoner's house.

Without waiting for the speech for the defence, or the witnesses to be called, the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

 

Folkestone Express 23 February 1878.

Not for a very long time has so much excitement been caused in Folkestone by a criminal prosecution as was manifested in the proceedings which have just resulted in the acquittal of Mr. William Henry Jacobs at the Central Criminal Court, to which tribunal the trial was moved by writ of certiorari granted on the representation of the accused's counsel that owing to the prevalent ill-feeling against him it would be impossible for him to have an impartial trial at the borough Quarter Sessions. Briefly the charge against him was as follows: - It was ascertained that one Albert Marks, late a porter in the employ of Mr. John Sherwood, an Alderman and ex-Mayor of the borough, and a grocer, was in the habit of frequently visiting the Albion Hotel, of which the prisoner is the proprietor. It was suspected that he was in the habit of disposing of goods which he had stolen, and after he had been watched by the police he was given into custody. No sooner was he arrested than he made a communication to the police and afterwards to the prosecutor's solicitor, which led to the summoning of Jacobs and his ultimate committal for trial on the charge if inciting Marks to commit thefts, and with receiving goods knowing them to have been stolen. The prisoner Marks stated that he sold Jacobs eggs, Dutch cheeses, and such things, and a search warrant was executed at his premises. No articles such as those named in the warrant were found, but three hams, one of them in a canvas bag marked with the prosecutor's initials, were hanging in the kitchen, and of these the Superintendent of Police took possession. These Marks said he sold to Jacobs for less than half their value, and that he had been induced to steal them by Jacobs. It was a most serious accusation under which to labour, and Mr. Jacobs sought the highest legal ability to defend him in the emergency. Mr. Montague Williams opposed his committal for trial, and on Saturday Sir Henry James and Mr. Glyn were engaged also in his defence. Mr. Mowll, of Dover, Jacobs' solicitor, had laboured incessantly during the three months which have elapsed since the committal to get together an immense mass of evidence by which to refute the testimony of the man Marks, on whose statements the charge mainly rested. Some thirty witnesses, many of them respectable tradesmen in the town, were subpoenaed, and were present at the Old Bailey.

The hearing of the case was postponed day after day, until from having been the first on the list for trial it became the last, and the Common Sergeant (Sir Thomas Chambers) sat specially on Saturday to hear it. Alderman Figgins occupied a seat on the bench during the trial. It was expected that the fact of Sir Henry James being “up” would have caused a considerable number of barristers to put in an appearance, but there were only three or four present at any time besides those engaged in the case. A few minutes after ten Jacobs was called on to surrender, which he did, and on being called on to plead to the indictment read over to him by the Clerk to the Arraigns, he pleaded Not Guilty.

Mr. Grain, the leading counsel for the prosecution, and a barrister of considerable experience, laid before the jury the facts of the case, and the nature of the evidence he proposed to call to substantiate the charges in the indictment. The first witness called was a fellow porter of Marks', who merely gave evidence identifying the hams as having been marked and weighed by him. Following him came Mr. Sherwood, who deposed to receiving information that Marks was carrying on an illicit trade with Jacobs, that he himself watched the house and saw Marks go there with his horse and cart. He disclaimed all knowledge of Marks having been allowed to buy large quantities of bacon, and that he was not aware for some time that the Surveyor of the Corporation had employed Marks after he was admitted to bail. Frederick Cobb, it seems, it was not originally intended to call for the prosecution, but the defence had found out that he had been in the habit of selling Marks odd pieces of bacon in quantities of from five to twenty five pounds weight, and wisely concluded that his evidence would be favourable to their client. His cross-examination by Sir Henry James occupied a considerable time, inasmuch as he seemed very strongly disposed to fence with the learned counsel, especially on the point as to whether he was or not fully aware that Marks re-sold this bacon at a profit. His answers gave an impression that he was not going to say too much, and his failure to produce any one of the books in which he had from time to time made entries of sales to Marks, although he had been summoned to do so, was specially noted by the learned counsel. Next came John Connor, a witness who could scarcely be called an unprejudiced one. For some time he was in the employ of the accused. He left after a quarrel, and forthwith proceeded to use against his late master some information which he had obtained of what he believed were dishonest dealings. In reply to Sir Henry James as to whether the Albion was an hotel, he, with a shrug of his shoulders, admitted that “they called it an hotel”. He spoke disparagingly of the cook, and comported himself altogether in a manner which plainly indicated that it was with no feeling of compunction that he was “paying off an old score”. Next came the approver, Marks, who repeated his admission that he accused Jacobs in order that he might get “more leniency” himself. Cross-examined as to how he became possessed of the articles which the police found on searching his house he gave the most improbable accounts. Sultana raisins, which Superintendent Wilshere afterwards said “looked very nice”, he swore he dad taken from the dusthole of a house which had been occupied by a colonel. He did not seem to see how the question how many children he had was connected with his statement that this “nice looking” fruit had been unconsumed for two years. According to his own statements he had sold different articles to several persons, but singularly enough not one of these transactions was dishonest, saving only his dealings with Jacobs. His wife and a woman named Snell swore to a conversation with Jacobs in his bar, in the course of which he had admitted to them that he had paid Marks sixpence a pound for the hams – a statement so inconsistent with probability that no jury could give credence to it. The evidence of the police proved incontestably that Marks was a constant visitor at the Albion, and that he took parcels from the cart left outside, and returned minus of them. The cross-examination by Sir Henry James was conducted in a manner which from the very outset showed that he was confident of securing an acquittal for his client, and it could not have been a surprise to the parties concerned when the foreman of the just intimated to the Common Sergeant that they had no wish to hear the case for the defence as the prisoner's guilt was not established.

A portion of the following evidence appeared in our second edition of last week.

The prosecuting counsel were Mr. Grain and Mr. Denman, instructed by Mr. J. Minter.

The accused was defended by Sir Henry James, Mr. Montague Williams and Mr. Lewis Glyn, instructed by Mr. Mowll, of Dover.

The charge, it will be remembered, was for feloniously receiving 3 hams, 14 lbs. bacon, 3 dozen eggs, and 3 Dutch cheeses, the property of Mr. John Sherwood, grocer, &c., which were stolen from the warehouse by Albert Marks, a porter late in the employ of the prosecutor. Another indictment charged him with counselling and procuring Marks to steal the said goods.

The case commenced precisely at ten minutes past ten.

The jury having been sworn, Mr. Grain proceeded to open the case for the prosecution. He stated that a man named Connor made a communication to Mr. Sherwood, and the police in consequence were instructed to watch the house of the prisoner. Marks was seen on various occasions, and a search warrant was subsequently issued, and the hams which would be produced were found, although the search warrant was not for hams, but for eggs, or something of that kind. It was quite clear from the marks on the hams that they once belonged to Mr. Sherwood. Marks would tell them that some time in August Jacobs had asked him if he could get some hams, that he did so, and various other goods, for which he received sums very much below their value. He would show by witnesses that Marks was seen going to the house at unusual hours of the day, and without the evidence of Marks himself, whose evidence would be that of an accomplice, he should put before them a case which would call for the serious consideration of the jury. Jacobs was not a customer of Mr. Sherwood's, and he must have know that Marks was a servant to Mr. Sherwood, and that he was not dealing with him. He should also call before them the wife of a bandmaster in the 60th Regiment, and another witness would be the wife of Marks, who would both speak to a conversation and a practical admission by Jacobs that he was a party to the robbery. He also called attention to the fact that Jacobs had not mentioned the name of Marks in the statements he made.

The first witness was John Goodspeed, who was examined by Mr. Denman. He said: I am a porter in the employ of Mr. Sherwood, and it was my duty to weigh hams. The ham produced I put the weight upon. It has the initials “J.S.F.” on it. That ham (the second) I also marked, and the third. The price at this time of year is 15d. and 14d. per pound.

Cross-examined by Sir Henry James: The 10 is the weight of the ham, and was put on by me. The 10 is very plain. Nothing has been done to alter the mark or take it off. The marks are all left as I marked them. I recognise the marks as mine. I have been twelve or thirteen years porter and warehouseman to Mr. Sherwood. I am the foreman. There was a foreman of the shop, named Ashdown. Mr. Sherwood was not in the habit of allowing Marks to purchase goods.

Do you not know that Marks bought large quantities of bacon of the foreman? – I do not know.

What quantity did he buy? – He had a large family (Laughter).

About how much did he buy at the time to feed this young family, 56 lb. Weight? – He may have done so.

More? – He may have done so.

Do you mean to tell the jury you believe he bought this large quantity of bacon to feed his young family upon? – I should think not.

Were they ready money transactions? – I believe they were.

Did you not know he was buying goods to sell again? – I do not.

Who would know? – Mr. Cobb.

Where is he? – He is here, and he is still in the employ of Mr. Sherwood.

Re-examined: I mean that an employee of Mr. Sherwood's would have the privilege of buying goods for his own family. I never knew particularly that he was in the habit of buying bacon.

Mr. John Sherwood said: On the 29th October a man named Connor made a communication to me, and in consequence I communicated with the police. I went between six and seven o'clock and kept a watch on the prisoner's house. Marks was second porter in my employ. He would have to go a certain round of houses. Jacobs was very rarely a customer of mine. I had one transaction with him in June. (Witness was asked what character Marks bore, but the defence objected). I saw Marks, as I was watching, drive up in the cart, into an archway into which a door leads to the bar of the Albion Hotel. I walked down to the archway, and I was just in time to see the flash of light from the opening of the door as he went in. Marks was there about five minutes. In our class of business it is the custom to sell odds and ends on Saturday nights cheaply. I supplied several smaller shops. This would not apply to hams unless they were bad, or to eggs at all. The hams are Shaw's Castle brand, and are worth 14d. or 15d. a pound.

By Sir Henry James: The photo produced shows the archway at the Albion Hotel. I saw Marks drive into the archway. There are two rows of mews there, but my horse and cart is not kept there, but very near. It would be possible to get to my stable that way. Marks had been 7 or 8 years in my employ. After he was arrested I saw the articles brought from his house. I should say the tins were mine – in fact I have no doubt. The police found 50 or 60 eggs and part of a box of sultana raisins in Marks' house. I have no doubt they were mine. I am an Alderman and ex-Mayor of the Corporation. I believe the town surveyor has employed Marks since he has been on bail. He has not been tried yet. I was not aware Marks had been purchasing bacon. I was not aware of it when Marks was before the Magistrates. The foreman of the shop had a book in which he would put down items bought by Marks. Personally I know nothing about the book, nor did I know till some time after that Marks was in the employ of the Corporation.

Sir Henry asked for the book, but it was not produced.

Cross-examination continued: I have not seen the entries in the book, but Cobb, my foreman, used it for his own reference. I never knew Marks had bought hams or bacon. My workmen deal with me if they please. I did not know that Marks bought large quantities of bacon. The bacon was sold to other shopkeepers who could find sale for it.

Re-examined: The hams are perfectly good. I know nothing about the book. Marks is employed as a navvy on the drainage works.

By Sir Henry James: I was told by Mr. Mowll that the defence wanted the rough book, and I promised to do what I could to find it.

By Mr. Grain: I have searched among my books, but can find no reference to Marks.

By Sir Henry James: I mean that I see no ready money dealings with Marks' name. I presumed Cobb had the rough book with him today. I do not recollect telling Mr. Mowll that the foreman had the book and it should be produced.

Frederick Cobb, foreman to prosecutor, said: It was the custom in our establishment to sell the odd pieces of bacon whenever we had a lot. That did not include hams. Marks was in the habit of purchasing. I sold to him, charging him so much per pound. He often paid ready money. I kept no regular record, but sometimes put a memorandum on a piece of paper, or in a scribbling book. I have no books that anyone would understand.

By Sir Henry James: I may have some books, but I cannot find them. I was subpoenaed to produce the books by the defence. I have looked for them, but only for half an hour on Thursday. Mr. Sherwood told me to look for them, but I did not do so. Mr. Sherwood did not say it was an important thing to find them. I knew the man was on his trial, and that it was to show whether any goods had been sold to Marks or not. I put down in the book the amount I sold to Marks. It was a memorandum book. I never destroyed any of them. They were left in the clerk's office. I have no reason to suppose they were destroyed. They were on a shelf. I may only have put Marks' initials in the book. I should hardly think the bacon was to bring up his young children upon. (Laughter) I do not know his wages. (Mr. Sherwood: I can tell you – 24s. a week) When the amount was paid it would be entered in the cash book, but it would not show the character of the goods sold. I have sold him more than 28 lbs. at a time. I should say the largest amount was 50 lbs. He may have sold it again. It was his business what he was going to do with it. It may have passed through my mind that he was going to dispose of it among his friends. I never knew that he hawked bacon about the town. It would be wrong in my idea for him to do so. (Witness was closely questioned as to whether he did not know positively that Marks sold the bacon at a profit, but he persisted that he did not).

In a continuation of the cross-examination he said: Mr. Sherwood knew nothing about these transactions with Marks. I do not think he would object to it if he had known it. Other things besides bacon were sold to shopkeepers who had a sale for them. Refuse sugar, and such things were sold by us to small shopkeepers. Mr. Sherwood was aware of that, but not that they were sold to Marks. I do not know why he was not informed of it.

Re-examined by Mr. Grain: The memorandums of the things I sold to Marks were often on rough pieces of paper, which I afterwards threw away or destroyed.

William Butcher, a police constable of the borough of Folkestone, examined by Mr. Denman, said: On the 30th October, about four o'clock, I was watching outside the Albion Hotel. I saw Marks drive up, get out of the cart near Mr. Wightwick's, take something from his cart, which by the size looked like a pound of tea, put it in his pocket, and go into the door of the jug department. He left the cart some distance from the Albion Hotel.

By Sir Henry James: It was quite light. Anyone in the street could see the transaction. I do not know if there is a place for accommodation up the archway. The bottle and jug department opens into the archway. There is a small compartment there which is called a “snuggery”, where anyone can go in and get a glass without being seen.

Sir Henry James: I suppose you often had a glass in that “snuggery”? (Laughter) – I don't know that I have.

P.C. Robert Hogben, examined by Mr. Denman, also gave evidence that he watched the Albion Hotel, in accordance with the Superintendent's orders, on the 1st November. He saw Marks take a basket from the hind part of the cart and put it on the seat. He put two parcels in his pocket, and then went into the kitchen. He remained there about ten minutes, came out, and drove away.

By Sir Henry James: I believe I said before the Magistrates that I saw Marks take the parcels out of his pockets.

The witness's depositions were read, and the words were not there.

Sir Henry James: Will you swear you said more than I have read to you? – I might not have done.

Cross-examination continued: The whole transaction was quite open.

John Connor, examined by Mr. Grain, said: I was a porter and potman at the Albion. I believe they call it an hotel. Whilst I was there I knew Marks. I have seen him twice and three times a day at the Albion. He came generally in the morning, and perhaps once or twice in the afternoon. He used to go into the private bar. When he came and I was present, I was generally sent out of the way by Mr. Jacobs. After I had been sent away and returned, I sometimes saw a ham, or a Dutch cheese, or a box of eggs had been left. They were generally placed underneath the counter by a door which lifted up in the bar counter. I used to hang the hams up afterwards in the kitchen. The last time I saw anything of the kind was about the end of October. I remember the ham coming in sacking with the initials “J.S.F.”. I afterwards made a communication to Mr. Sherwood. I was with Jacobs about nine weeks and four days. I found the last ham inside the door.

By Sir Henry James: I left the first week in September. (Witness afterwards corrected himself and said he meant November). I left Mr. Jacobs' employment without any notice. I did not have a quarrel with Jacobs. We had a few words, and I'll tell you how it was. I was up in the billiard room, when Mr. Jacobs came up and began to swear, and said the room was like an Irish mud cabin. I replied “Well, what about that. It is as good as a petticoat lane one”. (Laughter) After that I went and asked for my money, and left the house. I afterwards went to Mr. Sherwood's and told him what was going on.

The model of the bar was produced, and witness was asked whether it was correct. Pointing to one of the doors, he said it should have been made to open inwards.

Cross-examination continued: When the hams were brought they were put into the place beneath the flap, laid upon the floor. I hung the ham in the bag marked “J.S.F.” up in the kitchen. Many people had access to the kitchen besides the cook and the servants. The men from the stables came in for hot water to make mashes. All of them could see the hams, and anything else that was there.

The next witness was Albert Marks. In reply to Mr. Grain he said: I was a grocer's porter and was in the employ of Mr. Sherwood up to the 1st or 2nd of November. I have worked for him seven or eight years. I have known Jacobs, I should think, five or six years. Before November I had some conversation with Jacobs. I sold him some odd pieces of bacon first that I had bought. He then asked me if I could get him a ham. He said “Can you get me a ham?” He also asked me for sago, coffee, and different things. I said I would see if I could. I did after about a fortnight or three weeks get a ham from my master's stores. I can't say what time I got it. I took it to Mr. Jacobs. I went into a small side place, in the bar. I put it under the little door that holds the counter up. I told him I had got the ham. He told me to be quiet, there was someone in the bar. He said “Mr. Paine is in the bar, and I would not have him know anything about it for the world”. I think that was all he said. No money passed then. I went in some days afterwards and said “What are you going to give me for the ham?” He said “Well, you know what it is worth. Will 6s. do?” I said “That is a very small price for it. It is worth 15d. a pound”. He said he would not give me any more, and he then gave me 6s. After that he was continually asking me for goods. When I took him the ham he asked me for other things. I told him I would try to get them. About a week after I took him another ham. I saw him, and put the ham under the same door. He told me then to keep quiet. There was a bar full of people and he pointed his finger at me to tell me to keep quiet. I saw him a few days after, and he gave me the same money as for the other, 6s. He asked me for cocoa nibs, coffee, and fresh butter. I told him I could not possibly get at them. They were kept in the shop, out of my way. He asked me for a piece of bacon as well, and I took him a piece about 15 lbs. I took it into the kitchen, after taking it into the bar first. I also took him some eggs and Dutch cheese. For the cheese I got 18d. each. I was given into custody on the 2nd of November. I think I had been to the Albion on the same evening. I took Mr. Jacobs in some eggs. They came from Mr. Sherwood's shop, and the bacon and other things came from Mr. Sherwood's stores. I used to go to the Albion very nearly every day. Sometimes I went just to get a glass of beer. I stole all the things, and Jacobs knew it. It was well known to me that he knew it. After I was taken into custody I gave a written communication to Mr. Minter. I knew Connor. I have seen him in Jacobs' bar. When I have taken anything in there, Jacobs ordered him out. I had a round for orders, and a book. I went every morning and made entries into the book, and everything was entered from that book into the day book. That produced is the book. I am out on bail, I have not taken my trial yet. I surrendered at Folkestone Quarter Sessions, and a true bill was found against me. An application was made that the trial should be postponed. I have been working for the surveyor to the Corporation since.

Cross-examined by Sir Henry James: When I was examined before the Magistrates I told them I had stolen things from Mr. Sherwood. I was admitted to bail at the same time. I was employed about a week after by the borough surveyor. I get 3s. 4d. a day. He asked for no character. They do not ask anyone for a character. I did not tell him I was committed for trial – no fear. I am working for him now. I made the communication of what I had done to Mr. Minter. I said “I thought I would broach the whole subject, in order to get more leniency”. That was what I thought. I have never taken any tins of condensed milk from Mr. Sherwood. My wife sent out and bought them. We always kept about half a dozen in the house for a sick child. I take my oath they did not come from Mr. Sherwood's. When the police searched my house they found some sultana raisins in a box. They never belonged to Mr. Sherwood. There was no lid to the box. I have had them in my house, I should think, two years. I got them from an empty house which had been occupied by a Colonel. They were left out on the dusthole. (This statement caused signs of disbelief to be uttered by several in Court). I was in the habit of buying large quantities of eggs from the country. I have had 200 or 300 eggs at a time from different persons. They are not present, but I could bring them. A woman used to leave some of them at the George Inn for me. I used to buy them for the lodgers in my house, and I let Mr. Sherwood have some on one occasion, I think. I am not quite certain. I knew they were in want of country eggs and I offered them some. I believe they said they had enough. I sold some to Goodspeed, and have offered some to Mr. Cobb. I told them I got them from a country person. Both Goodspeed and Cobb knew I was buying and selling eggs. I have bought hundreds of eggs in Folkestone, but have not sold them openly. I sold some to my lodgers. I think I have let other people have some. I sold them for a small profit. It was such a few that the profit was not much. I never concealed the fact from any person in Mr. Sherwood's employ. There were some empty tins of my master's found in my house. I had not taken them with my master's leave. I had taken some of them from empty houses. I used to take them home with broken food from gentlemen's houses. They had contained biscuits. I was not in Court when Cobb was examined. Three foremen were employed while I was with Mr. Sherwood, Mr. Martin, Mr. Ashdown, and Mr. Cobb. I have bought bacon of all of them to sell again, and I have asked persons to buy it. The highest price I ever got was 10d. a pound for bacon. I always paid ready money for it. If I did not pay for it the same evening, I did next morning. I can't say if it was put down in a rough book. I have seen Cobb write in a book directly after he sold me the bacon. I was buying bacon every week. I used to buy half a hundredweight sometimes, and sometimes more. It was not all for my family or my relations. I have no relations in Folkestone. I used to ask people to buy bacon. I told them I had some nice bacon. That was a perfectly honest transaction. I know George Trice, a carrier. I never asked Trice to let me bring him a cask of soda at 5s. per cwt. I never knew the price of soda. I never said to him “Why don't you deal with my governor, and he would send you a lot of things like he does Mr. Salter, at the Bouverie Laundry”. I know James Sharp. Some five years ago I may have offered bacon to him, and also to Mr. Upton. That came from Mr. Sherwood's. Sharp bought bacon from me several times. He came to my house to see it. Some of it was gammon. I know William Aird. I have sold him bacon, and my wife has sold him some. Very likely I told him I had the privilege of selling bacon. He has had some several times. I know Henry Payne, a builder. He is a tenant of Mr. Sherwood's. I did not sell him a ham about four years ago. I did not meet him in the street and ask him if he would like another ham. I should not think of such a thing. He did not reply “Marks, I am keeping pigs, but I will have one”. He did not say he would pay 1s. a pound for it – nothing of the sort. I know Arthur Andrews, who once kept the Guildhall Tavern. I have sold him some cushions of bacon I think, which I bought from Sherwood's shop. I know a man named Matthews. I don't know if I ever asked him to buy bacon in the George Inn, but I never thought there was any objection to it. I have sold bacon to a man named Jones, a fly proprietor. I know a man named Rumbold, head gardener to Lord Radnor. I never told him I had sold Mr. Jacobs a nice ham. Never should have thought of such a thing. I never told him so in the British Lion Inn. I know Joseph Manley, who lodged there. I remember showing him part of a cooked tongue which I got from Mr. Sherwood's shop. There was something the matter with it, I forget what. It was nothing very bad. I ate it myself afterwards. I do not know what I asked him for it. I know he says I asked him five shillings for it, but I don't think I could have done. I was known to him as a porter in Mr. Sherwood's employ. I may have told him the tongue was worth 5s. Mr. Cobb sold it to me. I know a Mrs. Waldron. I never told her I purchased this bacon a hundredweight at a time or that I sold Slater, the grocer, as much as 30 or 40 lbs, weight at a time. I have sold him some quite openly. He has paid me ready money for it. I don't know Joseph Page, a plumber. Mr. Cobb knew of my taking bacon out to sell. Jacobs asked me first if I could get him some hams. When he said that I came to the conclusion he wanted me to rob my master. He asked me several times in writing, handed over the counter, if I could get him some. I said nothing about that to the Magistrates. I told the Magistrates he made signs to me to keep quiet. These transactions never took place before other people. I was present with Mr. Trice in Mr. Jacobs' house, and I may have asked him why he did not deal with Mr. Sherwood more than he did. I never said to him “Let me bring you a ham. I can bring you one for 1s. a pound”. I never said I would bring him a ham and a shilling's worth of eggs. I never told Jacobs Mr. Sherwood could sell him biscuits 2d. a pound cheaper than anyone else – not likely. I know Abraham Huntley. I never in his presence brought in a ham or any single article. I never said in his presence “I have brought you a ham, Mr. Jacobs. It is a little beauty”. I never said the weight was 10 lbs.I had no eggs with me then. There were none taken with the ham. I know Charles Austin by sight. I think he has been in the house at the same time with me. If anyone was in the bar I kept the things in the basket till they were gone. I did not take a ham at all without a basket; at least I think not. I have never delivered goods and received money over the counter in the presence of these witnesses. He did not give me 10s. 3d. for the ham which weighed 10 lbs., and 1s. for the eggs. Six shillings was the price paid for the ham. No-one was present to see it. I called him on one side and asked him for the money. On every occasion I was alone in the side bar. I swear I was always alone. I can't say what occasion there was to pass the money quietly if there was no-one there.

This concluded the cross-examination of Marks, and the Court then adjourned for luncheon.

When the Court reassembled Mr. Grain called Jane Snell, the wife of Edward Snell, a bandsman in the 60th Rifles, who said: In November last I was at Folkestone. I knew Marks and his wife, and heard of Marks being locked up. I met Mrs. Marks on the Sunday after. I accompanied Mrs. Marks to the house of the prisoner. I heard Mrs. Marks say to him “What is Marks locked up for?” He said “Don't you know?” She said “No”. He said “Haven't they searched your house?” She said “Yes”. He said “So they have mine, and found some hams”. He added “I know who split, but I shan't say”. She said “Did Marks bring those hams?” He said “Yes. I gave him 6d. a pound for them”. Mrs. Marks said “It is a bad job for me”. He said “It is a d---- sight worse for me”.

Cross-examined by Sir Henry James: I knew Mr. Marks four or five years before. She did not ask me to go to the house with her, but when I got to the door she asked me to go in. I still live at Folkestone. I have seen Mrs. Marks since her husband was committed, but not to speak to her. I have seen her in her house. I knew Mrs. Marks had been to the police court. I know now Marks is out, but have not seen him since he has been on bail. She never told me her husband accused Mr. Jacobs in order to get leniency himself. We saw Jacobs in the bottle and jug department, but I cannot say if there was anyone on the other side of the partition. Jacobs spoke loud enough for anyone in the next compartment to hear.

Mrs. Marks was next called, and said: I went with Mrs. Snell to the Albion Hotel, and into the private bar and saw Jacobs. I said to him “What is Marks locked up for?” He said “Don't you know?” I said “No”. He said “Haven't they been to search your house?” I said “Yes”. He said “So they have mine, and found some hams and took them away. I know who split, but I'm not going to say”. I said “Did Marks bring you those hams?” He said “Yes. I gave him 6d. a pound for them”. I said “It's a bad job for me”, and he said “It's a d--- sight worse for me”.

By Sir Henry James: I had not seen my husband since he was taken into custody. I and Mrs. Snell have talked about the matter some time. My husband never told me he had made a statement to Mr. Minter in order that leniency should be shown him. I was not examined before the Magistrates. I looked round when we were in the jug department at the hotel, but cannot say whether there was anyone there. Jacobs spoke loudly to me so that anyone in the other bar could have heard. Jacobs knew me, but not Mrs. Snell.

Re-examined: My house was searched on Friday for goods stolen from Mr. Sherwood's.

By His Lordship: The empty tins were taken away from my house.

Superintendent Wilshere, examined by Mr. Denman, said: I went at a quarter to twelve on the 2nd of November to search the house with a warrant. Jacobs came down, and I read the warrant to him. It was for Dutch cheeses and eggs. I made a search and found nothing of that kind. I pointed to some hams which were hanging there and said “Some things like these are missing. Do you wish to tell me where you got them?” He replied “I buy things at many different places, and always pay ready money for them”.

Cross-examined by Sir Henry James: The hams did not appear to have been rubbed in any way to erase the marks. They are nearly in the same state now as they were when I took them, but a mouse has been nibbling one. (Laughter) I do not know who mentioned Mr. Sherwood's name first, Jacobs or myself. I believe I did in reading the warrant to him. I asked Jacobs if he had any objection to my taking the hams away, and he said “No. I suppose I can have them again if I show I came by them honestly”. I searched Marks' house. (Witness here enumerated the different articles found there, and said Mr. Sherwood identified them as similar to those in his shop).

Sir Henry James: You saw those raisins? – I did.

Did they look as if they had been taken from a dusthole? – They looked very nice raisins (Laughter).

Mr. Grain said that was the whole of the case for the prosecution.

Sir Henry James rose to address the jury for the defence, when the Foreman asked the learned Sergeant if it was necessary for them to hear the address. There seemed to be an impression on the minds of the jury that the prisoner was Not Guilty.

The Common Sergeant said that if the jury had made up their minds it would be useless to go on with the defence.

After a brief consultation with his brother jurymen, the foreman again rose, and in reply to the Clerk of the Arraigns, whether they found the prisoner Guilty or Not Guilty, he said “Not Guilty”.

There was a slight amount of applause on the verdict being given, which was immediately suppressed, and the prisoner left the dock.

This case terminated the business of the sessions, and the jury were discharged.

The case concluded shortly after two o'clock.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 4 May 1878.

Quarter Sessions.

Monday, April 29th: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

Albert Marks surrendered to his bail on a charge of stealing three hams, value 1 16s., 14 lbs. of bacon, value 14s., six eggs, value 6d., and four Dutch cheeses, value 12s., the property of John Sherwood, at Folkestone, on the 1st October, 1877.

The prisoner pleaded Guilty.

Mr. Deane prosecuted, but asked for a light sentence, which was supported by Mr. Sherwood.

The Recorder sentenced the prisoner to three months' imprisonment with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Express 4 May 1878.

Quarter Sessions.

Monday, April 29th: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

Albert Marks surrendered to his bail on a charge of stealing three hams, value 1 16s., 14 lbs. of bacon, value 14s., six eggs, value 6d., four Dutch cheeses, value 12s., the property of John Sherwood, at Folkestone, on the 1st October, 1877.

It will be remembered that in this case the grand jury at the last Quarter Sessions returned a true bill against the prisoner, who now pleaded Guilty.

Mr. Denman, who appeared for the prosecution, reminded the learned Recorder that the case was adjourned pending the trial of another person, whom the prisoner made certain allegations against, and who was acquitted. He (Mr. Denman) was instructed by the prosecution to ask His Honour to pass as lenient a sentence as in his discretion was compatible with justice, and to state that they had no reason to be dissatisfied with the way in which the prisoner had acted in the case referred to.

The Recorder thought that in this case it was a voluntary confession. No inducement was held out to him to confess, and it was not a case of the prisoner turning Queen's evidence. He thought the prisoner stood quite as an ordinary prisoner.

Mr. Deane said permission was asked from the Bench previous to Marks being asked to give evidence, and it met with the concurrence of the Magistrates.

The Recorder repeated that his confession was voluntary.

Mr. Dean said quite so.

The Recorder (to the prisoner): Have you anyone to speak as to your character?

Prisoner handed in some testimonials, which the Recorder said were of an old date, and the prisoner replied that he was nine years in one situation. He was with Mr. Sherwood between eight and nine years.

Mr. Denman said the prosecutor was in Court if the Recorder wished to ask him any questions.

In reply to the Recorder, Mr. Sherwood said he had always found the prisoner a very good servant. He did his duties exceedingly well. He was very attentive, very obliging, and very civil, not only to himself and those in the shop, but also to the customers.

The Recorder: Had you any suspicion that he was dishonest?

Mr. Sherwood: Not at all. It was a matter of very great surprise to me when these disclosures were made. I have no wish to press vindictively against him.

The Recorder, in passing sentence, said he should listen to what had been said, though he confessed, as far as his own inclination was concerned, he perhaps should not do. He had very little doubt that when the prisoner confessed it was with a view to getting his own punishment lightened. He was found out –

Prisoner (interrupting): I thought it was nothing but right that the other man's share in it was known too.

The Recorder: How can you suppose that would excuse you? A man at your time of life ought to have known better than that. The sentence I have to pass is that you be imprisoned for three calendar months with hard labour.

Later on Mr, Denman asked that the hams, which were then in the possession of Superintendent Wilshere, should be given up to the prosecutor, and the Recorder ordered this to be done.

 

Southeastern Gazette 4 May 1878.

Quarter Sessions.

These sessions were held at the Town Hall on Monday, before J.J. Lonsdale, Esq., Recorder.

Albert Marks was charged with stealing three hams, value 1 16s., 141bs. of bacon, value 14s,, six eggs, value 6d., four Dutch cheese, value 12s., the property of John Sherwood, at Folkestone, on the 1st October, 1877. He pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to three months’ hard labour. Mr. Denman prosecuted.

 

Folkestone Express 3 August 1878.

Local News.

At the Dover Police Court on Friday, Richard Morley Mosaise, who said he was living at the Albion Hotel, Folkestone, was charged with stealing one gold ring, value 9s. 6d., and 16s. from a drawer at 15, Beach Street, the property of Henry Joseph Marquis, hairdresser, who deposed: Three weeks ago prisoner came into my shop and wanted a shave, and I shaved him and cut his hair. He asked me to go out and get him some rum and milk. I went out and left him in the shop alone. When I got back he drank the rum and milk, and then a friend of his came in. They stayed about five minutes, and then they went away. I went into the kitchen to get my breakfast, and then I thought of my drawer, and went and missed 16s. in silver and a gold ring. I did not see him again until yesterday, in Snargate Street, when I followed him, and he ran away, and a soldier helped me to stop him. We then took him into Mr. Parton's shop, and he said he had put the ring somewhere, and Mr. Parton went and found it.

John Parton gave corroborative evidence, and prisoner, who pleaded Guilty, was sentenced to three months' imprisonment with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 31 August 1878.

Notice.

To THOMAS PREBBLE, one of the Overseers of the Poor of the Borough of Folkestone, in the County of Kent, and to the Superintendent of Police for the same Borough.

I, JOHN BANKS, Auctioneer, now residing at No. 16, Tontine Street, in the Parish of Folkestone, in the Borough of Folkestone, do hereby give you notice that it is my intention to apply at an adjournment of the General Annual Licensing Meeting for the Borough of Folkestone, to be holden at the Town Hall, in the said Borough, on the 25th day of September next ensuing, for a license for the sale of spirits, wine, beer, porter, cider, perry, and other intoxicating liquors, to be consumed in a certain house, and in the premises thereunto belonging, about to be constructed for the purpose of being used as a house for the sale of intoxicating liquors, to be consumed on such premises, situate at Bouverie Road, in the Borough aforesaid, and known by the sign of the Albion Hotel, which I intend to keep as an Inn, Alehouse, or Victualling house.

Given under my hand this 28th day of August, 1878.

John Banks.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 14 September 1878.

Advertisement.

Auction Sale of a First Class Family Hotel, known as the “Albion”, and a Private Residence adjoining, situate in Bouverie Square, West Cliff, Folkestone.

Mr. John Banks is instructed to sell by auction at the Albion Hotel, Folkestone, on Friday September 27th, 1878, at three of the clock in the afternoon, in one lot, all that modern and substantially built (Fully Licensed) leasehold family hotel, known as the Albion, Bouverie Square, Folkestone, together with the leasehold family residence adjoining, the whole having a frontage to the Bouverie Road of seventy feet.

The hotel contains in the basement five large and well arranged beer, wine, and spirit cellars, coal cellar and larder. Ground Floor: Spacious entrance hall, bagatelle room, coffee room, bar, bar parlour, kitchen, scullery, urinal, and W.C., with separate entrances to the bar and kitchen. First Floor: Billiard room, lavatory, 3 sitting rooms, 2 bedrooms, landing and W.C. Second Floor: Nine well arranged bedrooms, housemaid's closet, fitted with water supply and W.C. Third Floor: Two attics.

The Residence contains on the Ground Floor: Parlour, kitchen, scullery, store and W.C. First, Second and Third Floors: Drawing Room, five bedrooms, landings and W.C.

In the occupation of the Rev. A.L. Hussey, at the low and inadequate rent of 35.

Held under a lease for a term of 83 years, from the 26th day of March, 1866, at the very low annual ground rent of 14.

The landlord's fixtures will be included in the sale.

The household furniture, linen, plated goods, fixtures and other effects in the hotel to be taken by the purchaser at a valuation to be made in the usual way.

Four-fifths of the purchase money of the lease may remain on mortgage at 4 percent per annum, and two-thirds of the valuation of the furniture and effects may remain on good security at 5 percent per annum, and the stock-in-trade to be paid for on completion of the valuation, and not to exceed the sum of 300.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 28 September 1878.

Auction Sale.

Yesterday afternoon, in the presence of a large company, Mr. John Banks, auctioneer, sold the valuable leasehold premises known at “The Albion Hotel”, Bouverie Road. In a few practical remarks the auctioneer pointed out the value of a property like this in such a neighbourhood, showed the advantages the late proprietor gained from it, and the still further advantages whoever took the house would acquire. The first bid offered was 2,500; from that the bidding was quickly increased to 4,200, at which sum it paused a little, but afterwards reached in bids of 10 to 4,240, at which large sum it was knocked down.

 

Folkestone Express 28 September 1878.

Wednesday, September 25th: Before J. Clark and W.J. Jeffreason Esqs., Alderman Caister and Captain Crowe.

Adjourned Licensing Meeting.

The Albion Hotel.

Mr. Mowll applied on behalf of Mr. John Banks for a license for the Albion Hotel. Mr. A.H. Gardner opposed the granting of the license on behalf of owners of and residents in adjoining houses.

Mr. Mowll said it would be ungenerous on the part of Mr. Gardner if he forced him into a disclosure of the whole facts of the case.

Mr. Banks was called by Mr. Mowll, and having given his evidence, was cross-examined by Mr. Gardner as follows:

Are you the occupier; are you actually in possession of the premises? – Not now, but I shall be.

Do you ask for the license for your own occupation, or as tenant for the purpose of selling the property? – I intend to sell the property.

In other words, you mean to transfer the license? – Quite so.

Mr. Gardner said he appeared on behalf of several owners of property close to the Albion Hotel, and he was instructed to present a petition against the granting of the license. It was admitted by Mr. Banks that he was going to transfer the license. He could prove that several convictions had been recorded against the house, it had been badly conducted, and it was the feeling of the neighbours that the license ought not to be renewed. It was felt that if it was passed over the Bench might think there was nothing against the house. The petition was signed by Mr. Clark, and several trustees of the National Schools. There were already within a short distance the Gun Tavern, the Bouverie Arms, the Foresters Arms, and the Shakespeare Tavern, and there was ample accommodation for the wants of the neighbourhood. The position and construction of the house, too, were bad. He also contended that Mr. Banks was not the occupier of the premises.

Mr. Mowll: Have you got any evidence?

Mr. Gardner: I simply put in that memorial.

Mr. Mowll: And no evidence on oath at all. I don't know whether your worships will take any notice of that memorial at all.

The Magistrates' Clerk said the convictions were in 1872 and 1874.

The Bench decided to grant Mr. Banks a license.

 

Southeastern Gazette 28 September 1878.

Local News.

The Albion Hotel.

Alderman Banks has obtained a licence for this hotel, the old one having been allowed to lapse. The application before the magistrates on Wednesday was opposed.

 

Folkestone Express 5 October 1878.

Local News.

Sale of the Albion Hotel.

Last Friday Mr. John Banks sold the lease of this hotel by auction. It was purchased for Messrs. Nalder and Coyer, brewers, of Croydon, for the sum of 4,240.

 

Southeastern Gazette 7 October 1878.

Local News.

The Albion Hotel.

On Friday Mr. John Banks sold the lease of this hotel by auction. It was purchased for Messrs. Nalder and Colyer, brewers, of Croydon, for the sum of 4,240.

 

Folkestone Express 26 October 1878.

Wednesday, October 23rd: Before Aldermen Caister and Sherwood, and Captain Carter.

The Albion Hotel.

The license of this hotel was provisionally transferred to Thomas Benjamin Brian.

 

Southeastern Gazette 20 January 1879.

County Court.

Saturday, before George Russell Esq., Judge.

Daniel Matthews v. W. B. Jacob: Claim for 4 for expenses incurred in attending defendant’s trial at the Central Criminal Court. John Slater and Arthur Andrews also summoned the defendant for their expenses in the same case, amounting to 6 and 4 respectively.

His Honour, having heard the evidence, gave judgment for the plaintiffs for the full amount claimed.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 25 January 1879.

County Court.

Before G. Russell Esq.

Daniel Matthews v W.H. Jacobs: Claim 4 for the expenses incurred in attending the defendant's trial at the Central Criminal Court. John Slater and Arthur Andrews also summoned the defendant for their expenses in the same case, amounting to 6 and 4 respectively.

His Honour, having heard the evidence, gave judgement for the plaintiffs for the full amount claimed.

 

Folkestone Express 25 January 1879.

County Court.

Saturday, January 18th: Before G. Russell Esq.

Daniel Matthews v W.H. Jacob:Mr. Minter appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Mowll for the defendant.

This was a claim for 4 10s. for plaintiff's expenses and loss of time in attending on a subpoena at the recent trial of the defendant in the Central Criminal Court.

There were two other plaints in which the questions involved were the same.

The plaintiffs are all tradesmen, and they claimed at the rate of 1 per day for their expenses, the defence being that they were only entitled, according to the scale adopted by Mr. Avery, the Clerk of Arraigns, to 2s. per day. They were not skilled evidence, but witnesses to matter of fact. There were about 30 witnesses taken to London, and they had all been settled with but these three.

Mr. Minter remarked that Mr. Avery's scale was only applied to witnesses who were bound over to attend at prosecutions.

His Honour said the only question was whether, having regard to the position of the plaintiffs, and the time they were withdrawn from their businesses, the claims were reasonable. He was bound to say they were, and he accordingly gave a verdict for the plaintiffs.

 

Folkestone Express 17 May 1879.

Wednesday, May 14th: Before W.J. Jeffreason Esq., and Aldermen Caister and Sherwood.

The Albion.

Temporary authority was granted to George Wright to carry on this hotel until next licensing day.

 

 

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

TOP Valid CSS Valid XTHML

 

LINK to Even More Tales From The Tap Room