DOVER KENT ARCHIVES
PUB LIST PUBLIC HOUSES Barry Smith and Paul Skelton

Earliest 1826

Beehive

Latest 1870

166 Snargate Street

167 Snargate Street Pigot's Directory 1839Pigot's Directory 1840Bagshaw's Directory 1847

 

A licensed house prior to 1832 and Dover Harbour Board were the proprietors when it was auctioned in May 1859. The lease of 61 years had commenced in April 1834. The (unknown) buyer paid 550. George Eastman was still dispensing drinks there in 1870 but then the picture fades. My notes suggest the premises later becoming the "Lord Roberts" but I cannot reconcile any facts with the number.

 

From the Dover Telegraph 13 Feb 1836

Henry BREWER in his 20th year, (son of Mr Samuel BREWER, Bee Hive Tavern) died Sept 1835 on board the George IV, near Bengal.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 7 January, 1837.

ACCIDENTS FROM THE SNOW

On Monday evening Mrs. Brewer, of the "Bee Hive Tavern," Snargate Street, while in the act of crossing from a neighbour's to her own house, had the misfortune to slip down and break one of her legs. The requisite assistance was promptly given, and she is doing well.

 

From the Dover Telegraph 2 Sept 1837

Charlotte Maria BREWER (eldest daughter of Mr BREWER, of the Bee Hive, Dover) married 27 August at St Mary's Dover to Mr EWELL, draper, Deal.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 9 November, 1839.

CORONER'S INQUEST

An inquest was held on Wednesday last, at the "Bee Hive," before G. T. Thompson, Esq., Coroner for the borough of Dover, on the body of Mary Goodwin, aged 18, who had destroyed herself by taking poison.

Thomas Coleman, surgeon, deposed, that he had opened the body, and analyzed the contents of the stomach, which were highly impregnated with arsenic, and which had, no doubt, caused the death of the deceased.

Eliza Leigh, milliner, Snargate Street examined. "The deceased was servant in the house, and had lived with them about three weeks. On Sunday, the deceased had permission to dine with her sister, and returned home about nine o'clock in the evening. I saw her on Monday morning, when she came into the work-room to receive instructions for some errands, which she went out to execute, and returned home about noon. She then appeared pale, and I asked her if she was ill; but she said no. She then had a luncheon of bread, cheese, and beer, which she partook of at the table where the rest of us had been eating. At five o'clock we dined with the apprentices, and the deceased had some mutton broth; but refused to take any meat. About half an hour afterwards I heard someone cough as if they were sick, and I asked the deceased if she had been sick; and she replied, yes; but that she was better. She then went to Charlton on an errand, and returned  in about half an hour, and lit the fire which had gone out during her absence. I did not see her again till about half-past nine o'clock, when I again heard some one sick in the yard. I again asked her what was the matter, and she said she had a head-ache, and pains in her limbs, when I desired her to go to bed, and gave her some brandy which she drank. I did not see the deceased again until ten o'clock the next morning when I heard her calling; I went and asked what she required, and she said some gin and ginger, as she had a pain in her stomach. I did not see the deceased again alive. The deceased appeared to me obliging and cheerful; but I had heard there was something mysterious in her manner, and I intended to make some enquiry into it."

Deborah Hill examined. "I am apprentice to Miss Leigh. The deceased slept in the same room as myself, on Monday night. She did not make any noise to disturb me till about four o'clock, when she said she hoped it was not time to get up. I rose about seven, and left her in bed. I have never seen any powders or poison in her room. She never said anything to me about taking poison or dying, but had said she was very uncomfortable because her mother was so cross."

Sarah Leigh re-examined: "During the time deceased has been in our service I have observed nothing particular in her manner, except sometimes coming home crying, after she had been out, when she said her mother did not use her well. I have searched the boxed of the deceased and all places she usually had access to, but have discovered nothing that would bear on this enquiry. She appeared to me, on Monday night and Tuesday morning, composed, although distressed by sickness; and made no complaint except of pain in her stomach. I said to her on Tuesday morning, that if she did not bear up I must send for her mother, and she replied "No, do not; if you send for anyone, send for my sister."

Esther Prescott, wife of Richard Prescott, mariner, examined: "I saw the deceased, who is my sister, on Sunday last about noon. She remained about an hour and a half. When she left she said she should call in the evening if I would let her walk out with her sister, which I said I would do, but she never came. Her manner was then cheerful as usual. I had not seen her to speak to her till last Sunday for near two years, there having been a coldness between us. My husband told me on Sunday that she was coming. The deceased did not like her step-father; and in consequence seldom went to see her mother."

Sarah Baker examined: "I live with Mrs. Marsh, in Last Lane, and knew the deceased well, having been acquainted with her from childhood. On Monday she came to me about eleven o'clock, with a piece of paper, on which she wished me to write 'Two-pennyworth of Arsenic' in Mrs. Hiller's name, for her mistress did not like to have it in her own name. She further said her mistress had given her a note for the poison; but she had been up the shaft, and lost it. I would not write it, as I told her I believed she wanted it to poison a young Artilleryman. I said this in a laugh, when she went away, saying she could not stop long before she would serve him out. I saw her on Sunday between twelve and one o'clock, when she said she had been looking for an Artilleryman, named Peter Preel; and that she would try and find him before she went home. Deceased told me on Monday, she would get the poison where she used to get it when she lived with Mrs. Hillier.

Peter Preel, gunner, Royal Artillery, examined: "I have known the deceased about six weeks. I saw her on Monday evening in the street about seven o'clock, but we did not speak. I saw her also on Sunday morning while I was sentry on the bridge, at the Heights. She came up the steps; and then waiting a short time at the foot of the bridge, returned without speaking. She appeared as if she wished to speak to me. The last time I spoke to her, was Wednesday; when I told her I did not want to speak to her any more. She said 'If you won't speak to me, I'll haunt you always.' She used to follow me constantly, which I did not like. She never threatened before me, to destroy herself."

It now being near eleven o'clock, the Coroner observed that the evidence adduced did not appear sufficient for the Jury to come to any other than a general verdict; and the case being of some importance, under his direction the inquest was adjourned till Thursday; when the enquiry was again resumed, at eight o'clock.

John Thomas Harvey, Chemist, examined: "I recollect selling poison to a young woman on Monday, but do not know her name. She asked for twopenny-worth of arsenic for Mrs. Hiller. She had purchased arsenic of me about four months ago, which, she said was for Mrs. Hiller, whose son accompanied her. I served the poison in a white paper, with a printed label, "Arsenic - Poison." She has at other times bought salts of sorrel, which is a poison, and used in cleaning bonnets. There was nothing particular in her manner when she purchased the arsenic on Monday, which she said was to destroy rats."

The Coroner then summed up the evidence, and addressed the Jury, who retired to consider their verdict. After a short time the foreman, Mr. Hopley, returned, saying if it could be allowed, the Jury were anxious to have the evidence of Mr. T. Houghton's servant, as they had understood she could throw much light on this enquiry. The Coroner replied that if wished, the Jury had the power of calling further evidence, and issued a warrant for the attendance of-

Hannah Hoile, who being sworn said, "I knew the deceased, and saw her on Monday last between three and four o'clock, and she then told me she came to wish me good bye; on which I asked where she was going. She replied, not out of town; and I said, then why do you wish me good bye? She replied, you will soon find out, for news soon flies. I have found out the young man I walk with, nicely; and I don't like the news I hear about him. He walks with other young women; and I have never dreaded life as I have done for the last two or three days. I asked the deceased what she intended to do; and she replied, to poison myself. I thought nothing of this, as she had several times in the summer told me she should make off with herself. She appeared on Monday very low spirited, but was not wild or excited. The artilleryman's name is Preel; and deceased told me she was in the family way by him.

The Jury having again retired for a quarter of an hour, returned with a Verdict, "That deceased destroyed herself by taking poison during a temporary fit of insanity."

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 17 October, 1840. Price 5d.

DOVER POLICE COURT

Michael Moir, 34, a private in the 77th regiment of foot, was charged with stealing, on the 28th of August last, a basket, containing sundry articles of grocery, from Daniel Pound, a coast guardsman. From the evidence produced it appeared, that prosecutor, who is fond of "lifting his elbow very oft," came down to Dover on the evening in question, for some articles of grocery, and getting a leetle drop too much, in his ramblings up and down Snargate-street, encountered the prisoner, who being a brother lately from the Emerald Isle, shared in the bounty of the mountain dew. Having "stuffed both their skins," till Mr. Brewer, of the "Beehive" public house, perceived they were a little touched. They were reminded by the worthy host of the lateness of the hour, when they went away, and proceeded towards their destinations. They had not gone far, however, before the prisoner snatched the basket containing the grocery from Pound's hand, and made off with it. What became of Pound during the remainder of the night was not ascertained; certain it was he did not like the encounter the frowns of his amiable partner, and did not go home, but early in the morning found his way to the station-house, to give information of the robbery. On his way to the station-house, he met an artillery man, whom he recollected to have quarrelled with on the previous evening. The artillery-man, however, denied the charge, and assisted in finding the prisoner. The artillery-man said, that in the evening in question he believed that prosecutor and he had one blow between them; but he could not say who gave it. After committing the robbery, at appeared that the prisoner had amused himself with drinking potations, "pottle deep," at the "Rising Sun," public house, in company of a fair damsel of the name Dunn, to whom he communicated the intelligence of his late good fortune. She, however, gave information of the same to the police, and prisoner was taken into custody. Prisoner said the young woman he passed the night with gave him the articles that were found upon him, because she did not know what to do with them. She said she found them.

Sentenced to three months hard labour.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday, 18 October, 1845. Price 5d.

DEATH

October 22, at Dover, Mr. Samuel Brewer, plasterer, of the “Bee Hive Inn,” aged 54.

 

From the Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, Saturday 31 January, 1846.

NARROW ESCAPE OF LIFE FROM THE FALL OF A WALL AT DOVER

One of the most miraculous preservations from impending danger and death that it has ever fallen our lot to record occurred in Snargate Street during the present week. We have been favoured from an authentic source with the principal facts, and, without entering upon a lengthened detail of all the particulars, are enabled to furnish the following:-

About midnight on Monday Mr. E. Bottle, grocer, of Snargate-street was disturbed by a noise, apparently like he falling of bricks, in the rear of his premises. Supposing that depredators were endeavouring to effect an entrance, he aroused the male inmates of his establishment, with whom he searched the yard &c., and for a while watched the back of his premises; but observing no indications rendering further precaution necessary, the whole then returned to rest, totally unconscious of their critical and perilous position. About three o'clock (Tuesday morning) Mr. Bottle was awakened by a loud crash, and on proceeding towards the supposed spot a brick struck his hand, and knocked out the light which he held. The fearful truth no flashed upon his mind - that the wall at the back had fallen against the house - and alarming the inmates, whose exit by the staircase was stopped by bricks, &c., he then called the assistance of the police, who promptly repaired to the spot, and procured ladders, by which all in the house, viz., Mr. and Mrs. Bottle, two Miss Frys, (who were staying on a visit,) two young men, and a maid-servant effected an escape in their night clothes from the front window, and were received by Mr. Squire, whom the alarm had aroused, and who in the kindest manner instantly supplied what the exigences of the case rendered necessary. After some time had elapsed it was found, on an examination of the premises, that the wall erected against a bank at the base of the cliff, about 30 feet in height, and the same in length, as well as some of the bank, had fallen, and partially destroyed a range of storehouses, and the parlour, some of the furniture of which was driven into the cellar, while portions of the fallen mass had forced their way into the very apartment where the Miss Frys slept, and who, but for the fortunate position of their bed, must have been crushed to death. At the dawn of the day the removal of the rubbish was commenced, and upwards of 200 loads have been already removed. We hear that Mrs. Bottle, who has recently purchased the premises, is a sufferer to the extent of about 400, and that the re-building of the destroyed building &c., will require an expenditure of 3 or 400 more.

The premises adjoining Mr. Bottle's also experienced the destructive effects of the calamitous occurrence. At Mrs. Brewer's (the "Bee Hive") large masses fell on a workshop and the kitchen, driving the materials into the tap-room, over which Mrs. Brewer was sleeping; but the head of the bed being placed against the wall, the progress of the large stones was checked, and a most providential escape thus afforded was speedily effected by the front door. Some loose rubbish fell, however, on the head of Mr's Brewers bed, and slightly grazed her face, while two pigs were actually forced into her bed-room. Mrs. Brewer, it will be remembered, was left a widow a short time since; and as the workshop contained several new models, &c., belonging to her son, to enable whom to carry on business a as plasterer she has expended all her means, this loss will indeed be most severely felt.

At Mr. Elgar's, fruiterer, a quantity of rubbish also fell through the roof into an attic where two of his sons were sleeping. The whole family were immediately aroused, and in a state of alarm rished into the street with only their bed clothes on, and were taken in by Mr. Squire, from whom they received the same humane treatment as was experienced by Mr. and Mrs. Bottle &c.

 

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 19 July, 1867.

DESERTION

Charles Outley, a private of the 102nd Regiment was charged with desertion.

The prisoner had been apprehended by police sergeant Stevens at twenty minutes past six the same evening, in the Market Place. He had no pass, and in answer to the police officer he said he had none with him, but that he had been provided with one, and had left it with a girl named Jenny, ay the "Bee Hive" public-house. The sergeant went to the "Bee Hive," and found "Jenny," but she declared she had seen no pass. As the regiment was quartered at Shorncliffe the officer took prisoner into custody on a charge if desertion.

The prisoner denied that he was a deserter, but admitted that he was absent without leave. He said he had left his quarters on the previous evening.

The Magistrates ordered his conveyance back to Shorncliffe.

 

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 15 May, 1868.

AN IMPUDENT SWINDLER.

George Smith, who described himself as servant to the Colonel of the 33rd Regiment, quartered at Shorncliff, was charged with stealing two silk pocket-handkerchiefs, the property of Mr. George Bennett, general outfitter, of Snargate Street, and also with obtaining by false pretences from Mr. Bennett, two pounds' worth of silver and from Mr. George Ambrose Eastman, landlord of the "Beehive Inn," Snargate Street, one pound's worth.

The offences were taken in three separate charges, the first deposed of being the false pretence practised upon Mr. Eastman.

George Ambrose Eastman said the prisoner came into his house on Saturday afternoon. He had been there on the previous night, and remained some time. He was served with refreshments on Saturday and before leaving he asked witness if he could oblige him with change for a couple of sovereigns. Witness found he had only one pound's worth of silver in the till and he laid that on the top of the bar. The prisoner took it up, and on witness asking for the sovereign, he said, "All right, I have left a note with Mr. Bennett, who was unable to change it." Witness then allowed him to take the silver, and walked to the shop of Mr. Bennett with him. He remained in the shop some time, apparently selecting goods, and as witness had run to and fro to his own place, he ultimately lost sight of the prisoner and did not see him again till he was in custody.

By the prisoner: I did not on the Friday evening get on very friendly terms with you or offer to lend you any money you might require.

Mr. Bennett was then called to prove that the representation made by the prisoner to Mr. Eastman as to leaving a bank note with him was untrue.

On the charge of stealing a handkerchief being proceeded with, Mr. Bennett said the prisoner came to his shop on Saturday evening about the time he was said to have left Mr. Eastman, and selected a great quantity of goods, amounting altogether in value to about 6. He represented that he was captain of the ?????? a vessel lying in the harbour and that he was on a voyage to India. He did not take the goods away; but he (Mr. Bennett) was subsequently taken to the police-station, where he found the prisoner, who had in his possession the silk handkerchief produced, and one orange. They did not form part of the goods which the prisoner had selected.

Police-constable Baker said that on Saturday evening in consequence of information received, he went in search of the prisoner, and found him at the "Military Arms" public-house, Snargate Street. He told him that he wanted to see him on a charge of felony, and took him to the police-station. On searching him the purple handkerchief was found upon him, and the other was afterwards taken from him.

In reference to obtaining the two pounds' worth of silver from Mr. Bennett, it appeared that after he had selected the things above referred to, he requested Mr. Bennett to make out the bill, and have it ready by a certain time, when he would call and pay it and fetch the things away. He then asked Mr. Bennett if he could oblige him with a couple of pounds' worth of silver, as he was wanting some money to pay the boat's crew. In consequence of the prisoner's representations Mr. Bennett allowed him to have the money, and he then went away. Almost immediately he had quitted the shop, however, Mr. Bennett's suspicions were excited, and he made inquiries with the view of testing the accuracy of the statements made by the prisoner, the result inducing him to believe that they were fictitious.

Mrs. Caroline Foord, wife of John Foord, landlord of the "Gothic Inn," Snargate Street, said that on Saturday evening the prisoner entered the bar of the house and called for something to drink. While he was standing there she had occasion to send her niece for an article of grocery and laid down a sovereign, so that the niece might get change. The prisoner thereupon said he had plenty of silver change if she wanted any. She said that she would take what he had if he liked, and he then counted down 3 worth of silver, and she gave him three sovereigns.

Baker was again called to prove that on the prisoner being searched a purse was found upon him containing three sovereigns and some loose silver.

The prisoner, who had nothing to say in reply to any of the charges, was committed for trial at the next Quarter Sessions.

 

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 10 June, 1870.

ROBBERY FROM THE PERSON

Mary Ann Freeman, an unfortunate, was charged with stealing from the waistcoat pocket of Samuel Palmer, at the “Bee Hive,” public-house, Snargate Street, on Saturday afternoon, 16s. in silver and 4d. in coppers.

The prosecutor was not in attendance, and the police, therefore, asked for a remand, which was granted. From the statement of Police-sergeant Stevens, it appeared that the prosecutor and the prisoner were in a bedroom at the “Bee Hive” on Saturday, and the prosecutor leaving the room he found that his money was gone. At the station-house the landlady of the “Bee Hive,” who had followed the prosecutor and the prisoner, to hear the charge taken, endeavoured to thrust some money into prosecutor's hand. Some if it dropped, and witness picked up half-a-sovereign and a shilling form the mat.

A remand until to-day was granted.

 

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 16 September, 1870. Price 1d.

THE ANNUAL LICENSING DAY

The Borough Magistrates held their annual licensing meeting on Monday last at the Sessions House. The Magistrates on the bench were E. F. Astley (in the Chair), J. F. Crookes, T. E. Back, C. Stein, J. G. Churchward, J. G. Smith, and W. R. Mowll Esqs. Most of the licenses were renewed pro forma. The exceptional cases were the following.

THE BEE HIVE INN

In this case there were some question as to the renewal of the license in consequence of certain allegations made against the character of the house in the course of a charge which had been recently brought before the Bench in which a man named Samuel Palmer appeared as prosecutor.

Palmer, it appeared, had given a woman into custody on a charge of robbing him. According to his statement he fell in with her in the middle of the day in the Market Place, and took her to the “Bee Hive,” where he saw the landlord, who permitted him to retire to a bed room with the woman. They remained there some time, and Palmer ultimately fell asleep. When he awoke it was evening, and the woman had disappeared; and, according to his statement, a sum of 16s. had been taken from his pocket. He admitted, however, that he was very drunk when he went into the house; and as only fourteen pence was found in the woman's possession when she was arrested at her lodgings immediately afterwards, the Magistrates dismissed the case. It transpired, however, in the course of it, that Mrs. Eastman followed the prosecutor to the Station-house and endeavoured to force some money into his hand in order that he might not go on with the charge.

Mr. Fox, who appeared for the applicant, said he should be able to show that in all material respects the statement of Palmer was untrue. Mr. Eastman had had no opportunity of going into witness box when the case was heard before the Magistrates, or he would have shown them that there was not a particle of foundation for the allegations. As to the affair of money on the part of Mrs. Eastman though it was a matter calculated to excite some prejudice, it was easily susceptible of explanation, and, as he hoped he should show, amounted to nothing more than an act of indiscretion on her part. He should call Mr. and Mrs. Eastman, and examine them upon their oath, to show that, although Palmer did go into the house accompanied by a woman in the middle of the day, he was supplied with refreshment, as an ordinary customer, in a parlour, and that no facilities for any immoral purpose were afforded. The parties were not seen by the landlord at all; but Mrs. Eastman did supply them with some refreshment, and the woman shortly afterwards went away. As Palmer appeared the worse for liquor, Mrs. Eastman kindly gave him permission to lie down on a sofa; but he found his way into the servant's bedroom, where he was subsequently found by Mr. Eastman. He pointed out to the Magistrates that the defendant in the case, when it was brought before the Bench, was dismissed by the Magistrates, and this decision could have been brought about only by a want of reliance on the prosecutor's testimony. He asked the Magistrates, on the present occasion, then, to extend this doubt to that part of his statement which affected Mr. Eastman, and not allow the inaccuracies of a drunken man's statement to prejudice their decision. He pointed out that Mr. Eastman had held the licence of the “Bee Hive” for twelve years and that during the whole of that time he had never been summoned before the Magistrates for any offence whatever.

George Andrew Eastman, on being sworn said he had kept the “Bee Hive” twelve years, and had never given occasion for a single complaint. He denied entirely the truth of the statement made by Palmer as to his having permitted him to make use of a bedroom. He did not see either him or the woman. He did not know Palmer was in the house till someone told him there was a man lying asleep in a servant's bedroom. He then went up and endeavoured to rouse him; and shortly afterwards Palmer came down and said he had been robbed. The woman in whose company he had been was found, but she had no money; and as the man returned to the house and insisted on having the money he said he had lost restored to him, he (Mr. Eastman) told his wife to give him 12s., not because he believed he had lost any money in the house, but to avoid the disgrace which would be likely to be brought upon the house by the prisoner persisting in his declaration.

Mrs. Eastman was also called. She said she did not give Palmer permission to go into a bedroom. He went upstairs into a sitting room, and was supplied with a quartern of gin. She afterwards gave him permission to lie down in the sitting room, but not in a bedroom.
By the Bench: A woman accompanied him when he came in; but she went away again very shortly. The man was intoxicated. As he persisted in pressing the charge, I offered him 12s. not to go on with it, thinking that the allegation would injure the house, and that it was better to avoid it in this way.

Superintendent Coram said there had never been any complaint against the “Bee Hive.”

Sergeant Stevens also spoke as to the character of the house. He had seen prostitutes go in and out of it, and he had seen them go in and out of other houses; but the “Bee Hive” had always been very quietly conducted, and had never been the subject of a report.

By Mr. Fox: It is the duty of publicans to serve prostitutes, if they present themselves in an orderly way. I do not mean to insinuate that prostitutes have been harbouring at the “Bee Hive,” nor have I seen any disorderly conduct in the house.

The Magistrates then retired to consult; and upon their return into Court, they announced that their decision would be given at the adjourned meeting at Broadstairs.

 

 

LICENSEE LIST

BREWER Samuel 1826-22/Oct/45 Dec'd Pigot's Directory 1832-34Pigot's Directory 1839Pigot's Directory 1840 (also plasterer Dover Telegraph)

BREWER Ann 1846-47 Bagshaw's Directory 1847

TYLDEN John previous to 1852

ALLEN W T 1853 end

ALLEN Mrs Jane 1853-58 Melville's 1858

EASTMAN George Ambrose 1858-70 also wheelwright age 26 in 1861Census) Post Office Directory 1862

 

Pigot's Directory 1832-34From the Pigot's Directory 1832-33-34

Pigot's Directory 1839From the Pigot's Directory 1839

Pigot's Directory 1840From the Pigot's Directory 1840

Bagshaw's Directory 1847From Bagshaw Directory 1847

Melville's 1858From Melville's Directory 1858

Post Office Directory 1862From the Post Office Directory 1862

Dover TelegraphFrom the Dover Telegraph

CensusCensus

 

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

TOP Valid CSS Valid XTHML