CATHERINE WHEEL Pub of Canterbury

DOVER KENT ARCHIVES

Sort file:- Canterbury, November, 2025.

Page Updated:- Friday, 14 November, 2025.

PUB LIST

PUBLIC HOUSES

Paul Skelton & Rory Kehoe

Earliest 1692-

Catherine Wheel

Closed 1920

25 St. Dunstan's Street

Canterbury

Above photo, circa 1904, kindly sent by Rory Kehoe. The building is the third building on the left, opposite the House of Agnes. Prior to its closure in 1920, the pub used to have a public right of way running through it. Apparently, it was not uncommon for customers, as they were enjoying a quiet pint, to have to make way for a horse being led from the rear of the pub onto the street. Pubs with the name "Catherine Wheel" derive their name from the badge of the Knights of St. Catherine, who used to protect pilgrims on their way to/from the Holy Sepulchre at Sinai. Inns along the route would offer pilgrims hospitality and accommodation, indicating this by means of displaying a Catherine Wheel sign.

Above photo 1909. Kindly sent by Rory Kehoe. The pub is just seen on the extreme left of the photo.

Above photo, circa 1909.

Above photo, pre 1914.

Above photo, circa 1954, kindly sent by Rory Kehoe. Showing the former pub on the right (with the awning) trading, then as now, as Hedger's butchers.

Above photo, circa 1992.

Above photo, August 2017, kindly sent by Rory Kehoe.

This inn was included in the 1692 List of licensed inns in Canterbury (Westgate Without). It accepted 6 soldiers from the Billeting Officer.

This has also been spelt "Katherine Wheel." I am told this was situated three doors from the railway crossing.

I believe the premises closed as a public house in 1920, and in 1925 the directory names the occupant of the premises as Edwin B Hedger. The building from 1992 is, of course, Mr Hedger's popular butcher's shop.

At one time there used to be a right of way that passed through the house, and it was not uncommon to see horses being led past the customers.

Kentish Gazette, Tuesday 9 June 1772.

CHARITY ESTATES.

In St. Dunstan's, near and without the Walls of the City of Canterbury.

Whereas a Part of the House, Land, and Premises, known by the Name of the "Katherine Wheel," also several Messuages, Lands and Tenements, in the Occupation of Mr. Thomas Luckett, or his Under Tennants, in St. Dunstan's aforesaid.

Also a Messuage or Tenament, Oast, and Premises, at Harbledown, which said premises were formerly the property of Thomas Trensham, Gent. of the Parish of St. Dunstan's aforesaid, and given by him at his Decease, for the Benefit of the Poor of the said Parish, and of late years are mixed and blended with other Estates, by having Buildings erected partly thereon, and partly on other adjoining Estates; by which Means the said Charity is liable to Encroachments, and in Danger of being lost.

THIS IS THEREFORE TO GIVE NOTICE,

That the said estates are ordered, by the Trustees, to be surveyed, marked out, and planned, to prevent future disputes, and that the same will be done on Monday next, the 15th instant; and all persons who have land or premises adjoining, are desired to attend, to see they are not encroached on by placing the said Marks.

John Hart,

Land, Timber, and Building Surveyors.

From the Kentish Gazette, 17 April 1810.

DEATHS.

April 16, Mrs. Holness, wife of Mr. Holness, landlord of the "Catherine Wheel" public-house, St. Dunstan's, Canterbury.

From the Kentish Gazette, 20 April 1810.

DEATH.

April 16. Mrs. Hulness, wife of Mr. Edward Holness, landlord of the "Catherine Wheel" public-house, St. Dunstan's, Canterbury.

From the Kentish Gazette, 16 July 1844.

PROVINCIAL INTELLIGENCE.

VICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT—Monday, July 8. Before Sir J. Wigram.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL v. FLINT

This was a bill filed by the Feoffees of the Poor of St. Dunstan, Canterbury, in the name of the Attorney General against Messrs. Flint and Kingsford, to recover possession of part of a public house called the “Catherine Wheel,” in St. Dunstan’s street, which the defendants claimed (except a part of a room) as bona fide purchasers of the late Mr. Abbott, and which they had held for upwards of 20 years.

Mr. Cooper and Mr. Crofton appeared for the feoffees, and Mr. Romilly and Sir W. Riddell for the defendants.

Mr. Cooper had commenced the case, when he was stopped by Mr. Romilly, who took an objection to the bill in its present shape, and contended it was defective, as the feoffees ought to have been made either plaintiffs or defendants, which had not been done. The case was, therefore, withdrawn, for the proceedings to be amended.

(Feoffees:- a trustee invested with a freehold estate to hold in possession for a purpose, typically a charitable one. Paul Skelton.)

From the Kentish Gazette, 19 November 1844.

VICE CHANCELLOR’S COURT. Wednesday.

(Before Sir J. Wigram.) ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. FLINT.

By indenture of feoffment, dated in 1584, Thomas Streiusham assured his five houses and gardens, four of which were situate in the parish of St. Dunstan’s, Canterbury, to trustees upon trust, to bestow the issues and profits unto the poor householders and their natural children inhabiting or abiding in, or that should inhabit and abide within, the said parish of St. Dunstan’s, as to help and comfort the parents, clothe their children, or set them forth to service. The charity property in St. Dunstan’s had in the course of years been in the occupation of various lessees and tenants, many of whom had taken under express agreements by which they were allowed to erect buildings or make improvements on the premises, and remove such erections again at the end of their terms. Under these agreements, and from the necessity of rebuilding or repairing the tenements in consequence of their decay, or of the application of the premises to new purposes, the property had become much altered. About 30 years ago the lessee of a part of the property, who was also the lessee of adjoining premises, rebuilt the house called the “Catherine-wheel Inn,” and, according to the allegations of the information, so constructed the new promises that the parlour of the inn, and a passage leading to the stables, over which some of the upper rooms were placed, covered a part of the land belonging to the charity. Various deeds and other documents were produced for the purpose of proving the alleged conversion of the site, but in consequence of the premises not being described in any of the instruments by metes and bounds, the facts with reference to the ancient situation of the property were very obscure. The defendants were the owners in fee simple of the “Catherine-wheel Inn,” and they insisted — first, that the piece of ground claimed by the information never formed any part of the charity estate; secondly, even supposing that any part of the site of the public-house formerly belonged to the charity, that the defendants were purchasers of the premises for a valuable consideration without notice of the title now alleged by the relators; and, lastly, that any right which the charily trustees might have formerly had was barred by the Statute of Limitations, 3 and 4 William IV, c. 27. The defendants also, by the arguments of their counsel at the bar, contended, that the case was not one for the interposition of a court of equity, but that the right of the charity, if any, might have been shortly, and with comparatively little expense, tried at law by ejectment.

Mr. Romilly and Sir Walter Riddell were heard for the defendants; and Mr. Cooper replied.

Judgment reserved.

From the Kentish Gazette, 19 November 1844.

VICE-CHANCELLOR’S COURT, Nov. 16.

(Before Sir J. Wigram). ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. FLINT.

His Honour delivered judgment in this case, with respect to the claim of Streinshaw’s charity to a part of the site of the premises culled the “Catherine Wheel,” St. Dunstan’s, Canterbury, and held that under the circumstances, neither the Statute of Limitations nor the purchase by the defendants of the premises without actual notice of the title of the charity (if any) was a defence to the information; and he directed an issue to try whether the land lying on the north-west side of certain walls, referred to in the evidence, belonged to the charity.

Kent Herald, 24 July 1845.

Nissi Prius Court.

Castleton and another v. Flint and another.

Mr. Sergeant Channell (with whom were Mr. Peacock and Mr. Addison,) stated to the jury that this was an issue, directed by the Vice-Chancellor, to try the right of the present defendant to a portion of the "Catherine Wheel" public house, in Canterbury, which was now claimed by the plaintiffs as trustees of the Strensham's charity.

The plaintiff's case was supported by various documents relating to the different holdings of the property, and many witnesses were called to give their recollections of various alterations, which had been made at different times during the last 50 years. These alterations were explained by a very neatly executed model of the premises, without witch the evidence would have been altogether unintelligible. The plaintiffs' case occupied six hours.

Mr. Sergeant Shee (with whom was Sir W. Riddle,) contended that, by the deeds and the witnesses adduced by the plaintiffs, all they could claim of the "Catherine Wheel" was a portion of the parlour, which had been taken into it from the passage, which led to an oast at the back of the house. He concluded a very able address by calling on the jury to give a verdict for the defendants.

Verdict for the plaintiff.

Kent Herald, 11 December 1845.

Before Sr J. Wigram.

The Attorney-General. Flint.

This case was heard in November, 1844 when the Court directed an issue to try whether the certain premises, forming part of the "Katherine Wheel Inn" in the City of Canterbury, belonged to a charity named Streinham's Charity, or to the defendants, who were admitted to be the owners of all those parts of the "Katherine Wheel" which did not belong to the charity. The site of the property in question was first conveyed upon charitable trusts by indenture of feoffment in ale in 1584. In the course of time the premises had undergone various alterations from the decay and removal of old buildings and the erection of others in their stead. A Mr. Abbott was the owner of the "Katherine Wheel" in 1820, and was also a trustee of the charity. Abbot sold his business of a brewer and his brewhouses and public houses to the defendants, who took a conveyance of them in July, 1823. The information was filed in May, 1843, claiming part of the inn as having been built upon the site of the charity property. The jury before whom the issue was tried that the site of the rooms in questioned belonged to the charity.

Mr. Cooper (with whom was Mr. Crofton) now asked for a reference to the Master to fix an occupation rent on the premises, and insisted that the defendants ought to be charged with such rent for so many years as they had been in the occupation of the property.

Mr. Romilly and Sir Walter Riddell, for the defendants, contended that the claim for more than six years' arrears of rent was barred by the Statute of Limitations. One of the defendants, however, was still a trustee of the charity, and if the claim to the back rent was not barred as against him, it was so at least against the other defendant.

Mr. Cooper, in reply, argued that in favor of a charity, the courts both of law and equity excluded the plea of Statute of Limitations.

His Honour inquired how the question could arise at law? If the trustee of the charity bought an action for insane profits, and the defendant pleaded the statute, could the plaintiff reply that he was trusty for a charity, and so removed the objection?

Mr. Cooper said that the Statute of Limitations, which must be pleaded especially, excepted in cases of express trusts, which charity cases were; and before the statutes there was nothing to limit the demand backwards to the commencement of the time of legal memory, namely, the return of Richard I. This Court had carried back the account in some cases to a very remote period, for more than 100 years before the filing of the information.

His Honour reserved his judgment, requesting to be furnished with some legal authority for the proposition that the trustee of a charity in an action of law was not liable, like any other party, to be met by the Statute of Limitations.

Kent Herald, 25 December 1845.

Death.

Dec.19, at St. Peter's, Thanet, Mr. James Back, baker, aged 59 years, formerly for many years landlord of the "Catherine Wheel," St. Dunstan's, Canterbury.

From the Kentish Gazette, 30 December 1845.

DEATH.

Back:— Dec. 19, at St. Peter's Thanet, Mr. James Back, baker, aged 59, formerly for many years landlord of the "Catherine Wheel," St. Dunstan's, Canterbury.

From the Kentish Gazette, 8 February 1848.

MARRIAGES.

Groombridge - Morgan, Jan 30 at St. Peter's Street chapel, Canterbury, Mr. Thomas Groombridge, to Mrs. Mary Ann Morgan, landlady of the "Catherine Wheel," St. Dunstan’s.

Kentish Gazette, 18 March 1851.

Subscriptions for the Broadstairs Boatman.

A penny subscription has been opened at the "Catherine Wheel," Saint Dunstan's Street, Canterbury by the Thursday night's reading club, in aid of the fund for rewarding those meritorious and hardy men. It will be open for three consecutive Thursdays, and we have no doubt a liberal sum will be raised.

Kentish Gazette, 20 June 1854.

Wednesday.

Robert Wright was charged with having stolen a pint pewter pot from the "Catherine Wheel."

Committed for trial.

From the Kentish Chronicle, 30 May, 1863.

STEALING A RABBIT.

Jeremiah Edwards was brought up on a warrant, charged with having, on the 14th February last, stolen a live tame rabbit, the property of Isaac Bedwell.

Prosecutor stated that on the 14th February he went into the “Catherine Wheel” for the purpose of raffling a rabbit, and he there met the prisoner, who agreed to take two chances. As they could not get enough members there, the prisoner proposed that they should go to the “Eight Bells,” kept by a man named James; but instead of doing so, they went into the “Unicorn,” where the prosecutor called for a pint of beer. He and the prisoner drank together, and the latter then suggested that he should take the basket containing the rabbit into the parlour, and see if he could find a sufficient number of members there. To this the prosecutor consented; but on his going into the room about ten minutes after, he discovered that the prisoner had left the house, taking with him the basket and rabbit.

George Ancle deposed that on the 15th February he bought a rabbit of a man at his door for 2s. The prosecutor had identified that rabbit as the one the prisoner took away from him at the “Unicorn,” and it had been returned to him on his paying witness 1s. Witness was unable to identify the prisoner as the man who sold the rabbit to him.

Superintendent Davies said he apprehended the prisoner at the Faversham lock-up on the previous afternoon, and asked him whether his name was “Jerry” Edwards. He said it was; and witness then asked him what he had done with the rabbit he stole. Prisoner stated that he knew nothing about any rabbit. Witness then asked whether he did not take a rabbit from the “Unicorn” public-house, and he said, “Yes; but that was given me.” He (the Superintendent) said, “Yes, and you sold it to a man named Ancle, in St. Mildred’s,” to which he replied, “I sold it to a man in St- Mildred’s; but I don’t know his name.” Witness then took him into custody on a charge of stealing the rabbit.

The prisoner, on being asked whether he would be tried by the Bench or sent to the sessions, replied, “Tried by you. Now you are at it you may as well finish it.”

The Mayor, in delivering the decision of the Bench, told the prisoner that the crime he was charged with committing was rather a serious one; for he had been drinking with the prosecutor, and, taking advantage of his friendship, walked off with his rabbit. To make the case worse, he appeared to treat the matter as a joke. The Bench committed him for three weeks’ hard labour.

From the Whitstable Times and Herne Bay Herald. 27 July 1867. Price 1d.

(Before W. Plummer, Esq., in the chair; Alderman Aris and J. Hemery, Esq.)

BREAKING WINDOWS.

Eliza McGuire was charged with breaking two panes of glass, value 2a. 6d., in the “Catherine Wheel ” public house, on Saturday evening, the 20th inst.

Eliza Whiddett, landlady of the "Catherine Wheel,” St. Dunstan's, stated that defendant came to her house on Saturday evening, and purchased a pint of beer. When witness supplied her with the beer, defendant, who was drunk at the time, took up a pint pot, and threw it through the bar window, breaking two panes of glass.

The magistrates ordered defendant to pay 5s. costs, 2s. 6d. expenses, and 3s. 6d. fine; or, in default, to be imprisoned for fourteen days' hard labour in Maidstone gaol.

From the Kentish Chronicle, 30 April, 1864.

MONDAY. STEALING A MILITIAMAN’S KIT.

John Wright, pensioner, was sentenced to six weeks imprisonment with hard labour, for stealing a kit and a quantity of regimental necessaries, the property of Michael Ryan, a private in the East Kent Militia. The prosecutor and the prisoner were drinking together at the “Catherine Wheel” on Friday, and Ryan left his kit at that house till he went to the barracks. On returning he found that his kit had been taken away by the prisoner, who was traced to the “Roebuck” public house, and it was discovered that he had been dealing with the property.

LICENSEE LIST

LUCKETT Thomas to June/1772

HOLNESS Edward 1803-10+

BIGGLESON John D pre 1828 (also butcher)

BAX/BACK James 1824-28+