From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 18 April, 1863.

A SINGLE YOUNG MAN LODGER

John Hannan, a wild young Irishman, whose eyes were bloodshot, his dress disordered, and his whole manner betokening recent excess, was placed at the bar handcuffed, by three constables, charged with creating a disturbance at the "Cherry Tree Inn," Buckland, and menacing the landlord, Mr. Taylor.

It appeared from the statement of Mr. Taylor, that the prisoner, who is a workman employed by the Submarine Electric Telegraph Company, had been lodging at his house for a short time past, having been at work in this neighbourhood erecting telegraph posts, and that up to the previous night he had conducted himself very well. On Friday night, however, he went out in company of two artillerymen who were billeted at the "Cherry Tree Inn," and none of them returned till one o'clock in the morning. It was evident they had all been drinking, and the prisoner was very much under the influence of liquor and inclined to be noisy. He had in his company a young woman whom, as it subsequently turned out, he had previously plied with drink; and he insisted that she should also enter the "Cherry Tree" and finish up the night in his company. To this arrangement, Mr. Taylor, the landlord, strenuously objected, and the prisoner then became very violent. He rushed upstairs to his room, and said he should take away his clothes, and as he passed the room occupied by the soldiers he ran into it and seized hold of the sword of one of them, which he flourished about in a very wild and threatening manner. Two or three constables, who had noticed the conduct of the parties in the street, had followed them up, and they were fortunate at hand, or there is no knowing what mischief the prisoner, in his wild and excited state, might have committed. Mr. Taylor called in the aid of the police, and though there were three of them on the spot it was some time before they could overpower the prisoner. This was at length done, and he was handcuffed and marched to the station-house, the female in his company. His wish was thus more nearly fulfilled than at one time seemed probable, for although she did not finish the night exactly in his company she was only in the adjoining cell. Her case was a hard one. It transpired that she was a respectable girl, with whom the prisoner had formed an acquaintance. She had fallen a victim to the blarney of Mr. Hannan (not a bad-looking fellow), under whose persuasion she had taken more refreshment than she could manage. The police, on going to her cell, found her almost broken hearted, and the Magistrates, on learning her circumstances of the case, at once discharged her.

The charge against Hannan, however, was fully entered into, the statement of Mr. Taylor, embraced in the above particulars, being corroborated by police-constable Williams, one of the policeman called into Mr. Taylor's assistance.

Williams said that at about a quarter to one o'clock he was on duty near the "Cherry Tree," when the daughter of Mr. Taylor rushed out of the house, screaming that a man was murdering her father. He and two other constables went into the house, and saw the defendant on the stairs with the landlord. He was flourishing a sword about, and threatened that he would do for any one who touched him. Defendant did not threaten Mr. Taylor in witness's presence; but he flourished the sword, and dared witness and the other constables to come near him.

Magistrate: With the sword in his hand?

Witness: Yes, sir.

Examination continued: As he saw us coming towards him he threw the sword away. On being taken into custody he became violent, and it was with great difficulty he was conveyed to the station-house. Prisoner was under the influence of drink, but he must have known what he was about.

On being asked what he had to say in defence, prisoner said nothing, except that he was drunk, and, if the Magistrates would believe him, did not know what he was about.

The Bench said that the conduct of the prisoner had been very bad. He had no right in the first place to take a woman to the house of Mr. Taylor, which had always been respectably conducted, and then his subsequent behaviour was unpardonable. He seemed to be a powerful fellow, and had there not been plenty of assistance close at hand it was likely he might have done mischief. He would be fined 20s. and costs.

The money was paid.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 5 March, 1869.

INFRINGEMENT OF LICENSE

Lewis Godden, landlord of the "Cherry Tree Inn," Buckland, summoned fro infringing his license, was ordered to pay the costs.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 18 June, 1869.

ASSAULT

Frederick Clark, a boy 14 years of age, was summoned for trespassing in a field in the parish of Buckland, and assaulting Lewis Godden, the occupier.

The prosecutor, who is landlord of the "Cherry Tree Inn," at Buckland, said that he was in occupation of a meadow situated at the back of his house. The meadow is fences round, and the gate is kept locked. On the previous night, while a game of cricket was being played in the meadow, the defendant with several other boys, obtained admission and commenced climbing up a booth, which was created in the field. the prosecutor ordered the boys out, and all of them left, with the exception of the defendant, who refused. he told the defendant that he should have to put him out, when the boy picked up a large stone and threw it at him, striking him at the back of his head. As the defendant continued to throw stones, the prosecutor called a policeman who took him into custody. the prosecutor said the boys were frequently annoying him by getting into the meadow, and that the defendant was the worst of them all.

By the defendant: I have seen you there within a fortnight. i did not strike you.

Police-constable Nixon said he was called by the prosecutor to take the boy who had assaulted him into custody. He saw some stones in the boy's hand and the boy was in the meadow. he also saw that the prosecutor was bleeding from the back of his head. He ran after the boy and caught him in a meadow adjoining the prosecutor's. He had cautioned the defendant for similar conduct on other occasions.

The defendant said that the prosecutor struck him first.

The father of the boy was present, and said he could bring several witnesses to prove that the prosecutor was the first to commit an assault, and desired that the case might be adjourned in order that they might be called.

The Magistrates thereupon adjourned the case till Friday (this day).

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 15 July, 1870. Price 1d.

STEALING A WHIP

William Godden, a lad belonging to Charlton, was charged with stealing from a cart in the London Road, a driving-whip, the property of William White, a carter, living in Bridge Street.

The prosecutor identified the whip produced by the police. He had last seen it at half-past eleven on the previous morning. He was then driving his cart along the London Road. He stopped beside the "Cherry Tree Inn," and stuck the whip in the whip-holder at the corner of the cart. He crossed over to the other side of the road, and remained talking to another man, with his back towards the cart, for about five minutes. When he returned the whip was gone; and he gave information to the police.

Police-constable Corrie said he took the prisoner into custody at the "Wheelwrights' Arms" public-house, in Bridge Street, Charlton. He found him standing at the bar, with the whip beside him. On charging him with stealing the whip, he said he was going to take it back. He had been drinking, but knew what he was about.

The prisoner said he had taken the whip, not with the intention of stealing it, but only for a lark.

The Magistrates remarked that larks of this kind were dangerous, and sent the prisoner to gaol for twenty-one days, with hard labour.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 4 November, 1870.

ASSAULT ON THE MASTER OF THE UNION

Richard Tenney, a middle-aged man, an inmate of the Dover Union, was charged with being drunk and assaulting the Master of the Union on the previous afternoon on the Buckland Road.

Mr. George Thurlow, having been sworn, said: I am Master of the Dover Union. The prisoner is an inmate. Yesterday afternoon about half-past four I was returning from the town and was passing the “Cherry Tree” public-house at Buckland, when I saw four of the inmates of the Dover Union in front of that house. I knew they ought to be at work and so I ordered them to go home. They had no business to be where I saw them. Two of the men went home in front of me. When I got to Mr. Bussey's farm I heard some men running behind me, and I was thrown down from behind, and one fell on me, and struck me. I found it to be a man named Henry Birch. I got up and then both Birch and Tenney came up to me and struck me several times. They continued striking me till Mr. Penn and another person came to my assistance. Birch is an inmate of the Union. Birch has not yet been apprehended.

The prisoners had no questions to ask this witness.

Mr. Charles Penn said: I am an upholsterer residing in Biggin Street. I was in Buckland Road yesterday afternoon, about half-past four o'clock, when I saw two men go up to the last witness, and assault him from behind. One man seized him by the collar of his coat and threw him down, and the other came up and struck him. Both men afterwards struck him. The prisoner is one of the men. They struck him several times. I assisted in detaining prisoner. The other man made his escape.

By the prisoner: You struck him several times.

Prisoner said he went to the assistance of the Master, and not to assault him. He was some distance from the man Birch when the prosecutor was knocked down.

Superintendent Coram, in reply to the Magistrates, said he did not know that the prisoner had been before the Bench before.

Mr. Thurlow said he was an idle man, and was frequently an inmate of the Union.

The prisoner was sent to gaol for a month with hard labour.

A warrant was ordered to be issued for the apprehension of the man Birch.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 25 October, 1871. Price 1d.

SHOCKING SUICIDE

The Borough Coroner, W. H. Payn, Esq., held an inquest on Saturday afternoon last, at the “Cherry Tree Inn,” Buckland, on the body of Thomas Greenland, for many years in the employ of Messrs. Court, wine merchant, Dover, who had committed suicide at his residence, London Road, early on the same evening. Mr. John Rowe Adams was chosen foreman of the Jury, and the Coroner and Jury then proceeded to deceased's residence to view the body and to take the evidence of Mrs. Greenland.

The body, which still remained in the kitchen where the suicide had taken place, having been viewed.

The deceased's wife, Sarah Vinall Greenland, gave the following evidence: The deceased, Thomas Greenland, was my husband. We had been married thirty-seven years. He was a cellar-man to Messrs. Court, wine merchant. He had been in their service thirty-five years. He had recently been pensioned off by the firm. The deceased would have been sixty on the 22nd of next month. He was always a very sober and temperate man, and he has been especially so during the last few months. The deceased left the services of Messrs. Court in July last, in consequence of illness. His legs and back have troubled him lately, and he has been very unwell. I told him last night that I should send for Dr. Duke; but he said he did not require him. The deceased has recently been very low-spirited. I last saw him alive last night, on retiring to bed, somewhere about ten. I awoke this morning just as the clock was striking six, and I directly missed deceased from the bed. I had not heard him move, so I went down stairs partly dressed to look for him. On reaching the kitchen I saw him lying there in a pool of blood. I immediately rushed to the front door, and alarmed the neighbourhood. I never heard deceased say that he would kill himself. He has recently been anxious about his children. I should not have been at all surprised to have found deceased in a fit, as I know he is subject to fits. Deceased was not at all in want; his pecuniary circumstances were very good.

The Coroner then returned to the “Cherry Tree,” where the two following depositions were taken:

John Reid, having been sworn, said: I am a bricklayer and builder, residing at 65, High Street. I was called to deceased's house this morning at about twenty minutes past six. I was engaged in a small job in the neighbourhood. Mrs. Greenland was standing at the gate, and she told me that her husband was in the kitchen, and that I had better go through. I went through into the kitchen and found the deceased lying on his face in a pool of blood. Mrs. Greenland asked me to lift him up and see if he was dead. I did so, and on turning him round I found that he had cut his throat. I saw the razor produced lying on the sink, and judging from the position of the deceased I should think he must have used it with his right hand. The deceased was quite dead, but I could b not tell how long he had been so. He was warm when I lifted him up. I advised Mrs. Greenland to send for a doctor immediately, and shortly afterwards Dr. Long came. He at once pronounced deceased to be dead.

Arthur Long, having been sworn, said: I am a surgeon, residing and practising in Dover. I was called at about half-past six this morning to deceased's house. I went through into the kitchen, where I found the deceased lying on his back, quite dead. I examined the body, and found his throat to have been severed completely through the windpipe. The cause of death I believe to have been suffocation from blood in the windpipe. I believe the deceased used his right hand, judging from the spot in which I saw the razor lying. It was lying in the sink as if it had been put down with the right hand. The deceased had been dead less than an hour.

The Coroner briefly summed up, and the Jury returned a verdict of “Suicide while in a state of temporary insanity.”

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 28 September, 1877. Price 1d.

CHARGE AGAINST THE LANDLORD OF THE CHERRY TREE

Percy Vyvyan kemp, landlord of the “Cherry Tree,” was summoned for selling intoxicating liquors to a drunken person, on the 16th inst.

Mr. Worsfold Mowll defended.

Mr. H. H. Jones said: I am one of the Magistrates of the borough. On Sunday, the 16th inst., about seven minutes past one, I was coming towards Dover, and when opposite the “Endeavour” public-house I saw three labouring men passing towards Dover, conducting themselves in a notorious manner, and shouting after a female who was ahead of them. I watched them five or six minutes. When I arrived in the vicinity of the Cherry Tree Lane I passed them. I then met Mr. Parker Ayres coming up the road towards me and he directed my attention ton the men. Mr. Ayres said it was a shame to see the men like them drunk and swearing as they were on a Sunday.

Mr. Mowll: Any observation which passed between Mr. Jones and Mr. Ayres, in the absence of the defendant, cannot be evidence.

Mr. Jones continued: We watched the three men who went into the “Fountain” public-house and were immediately ejected there-from. They were then very noisy, and made a remark to a man that was passing them that they could not get any beer there.

Mr. Mowll: That again is not evidence.

Mr. Jones: The men then passed towards Dover, and in a minute or two afterwards, as I was passing the “Cherry Tree” public-house, I heard loud talking and looking in at the bar, I saw the three men there with the defendant, who was on the other side of the counter. The man nearest to me had a glass of beer in his hand. I then remarked to Mr. Kemp that he was selling beer to drunken men. He replied that he was serving one of the men – the furthest man from him – whom he alleged was not drunk, and who had passed the beer on to the man who had the glass in his hand. Mr. Parker Ayres stepped inside the bar and saw the men standing there with the defendant as I have described. Mr. Ayres and I came towards Dover and I saw the three men afterwards going down the road noisy.

By the Bench: To the best of my belief the three men were drunk.

Mr. Mowll (in cross-examination): I believe I may take it that you are a total abstainer?

Mr. Jones: You may take it as such if you please.

Mr. Mowll: Exactly, and that you take a very warm interest in the total abstinence movement?

Mr. Jones: I take an interest in that and other matters for the prevention of crime, and as a Magistrate I feel it my duty to do so.

Mr. Mowll: now you were coming down the Buckland Road on Sunday morning?

Mr. Jones: Yes. I first saw the men by the “Old Endeavour” public-house, a little nearer Dover than the Buckland schools. They all reeled along the middle of the road. They all three reeled to some extent. They went into the “Fountain” public-house. I met Mr. Ayres before they went into the “Fountain.” He called my attention to the three men. I did not notice that one of them was very much intoxicated, I thought there was not very much difference between them all. They proceeded together in company to the “Cherry Tree.” I did not see them go in. I lost sight of them for about two minutes. Mr. Ayers turned back and walked down the road with me. We both lost sight of them for two minutes.

Mr. Mowll: Now when you got to the “Cherry Tree” I understand you looked through the glass window of the bar?

Mr. Jones: I went in. The door was open.

Mr. Mowll: Did you go in for the purpose of refreshment?

Mr. Jones: I did not; I looked in at the door in consequence of the noise I heard.

Mr. Mowll: I must ask you again if you went in there for the purpose of refreshment?

Mr. Jones: Certainly not.

Mr. Mowll: By what authority did you go there?

Mr. Jones: On my own authority.

Mr. Mowll: Did Mr. Ayres go in with you?

Mr. Jones; No, he stayed outside.

Mr. Mowll: He was wisest, I think. Who did you see inside?

Mr. Jones: I saw the three men that I had seen in the road. I saw Mr. Kemp there and he was behind the bar and the men in front of it.

Mr. Mowll; Did you say to him “Are you serving these men with beer, Kemp?”

Mr. Jones: I daresay I said something of the kind.

Mr. Mowll: Did you not say, “Are you serving these men with beer, Kemp?”

Mr. Jones: I would not swear to the particular words. I called his attention to it.

Mr. Mowll: I must ask you to answer me definitely; if you cannot answer, say so?”

Mr. Jones: Mr. Kemp said to me, “I am serving these two, but not this one who has the glass of beer in his hand.” He did not tell me that he had requested the man who had the beer to leave, but before he had time to do anything the other man gave him a glass of beer. Mr. Ayres was standing just outside the bar, and I asked him to step in. Mr. Ayres did not go in for the purpose of refreshment.

Mr. Mowll: I believe Mr. Ayres is not a total abstainer?

Mr. Jones; I cannot say.

Mr. Mowll: I must ask you to be particular to this. Did you not say to Mr. Ayres, pointing to the man who had the glass of beer in his hand, “Isn't this man drunk?”

Mr. Jones: Yes.

Mr. Stilwell: Was there much difference in the state of these three men?

Mr. Jones; I don't think so.

Mr. Stilwell: There was six of one and half a dozen of the other?

Mr. Jones: yes, I think so.

Mr. Parker Ayres said: I was in the London Road on the day in question and I met Mr. Jones there, just this side of the Cherry Tree Lane. I called his attention to three drunken men in the street, who were all reeling in the road. They were very noisy. While we were speaking I saw them enter or attempt to enter the “Fountain Inn,” but they were immediately bundled out altogether. We went down Cherry Tree Lane about a couple of minutes, and on passing the defendant's house I heard loud talking. Mr. Jones walked in and said something to the landlord. Mr. Jones asked me to step in. I did so, and saw the three whom I had seen previously. The one next to the door had a glass of beer in his hand. The further one of the three put himself in an extraordinary attitude and asked me if I called him drunk. I did not answer him. I did not speak to the landlord or the landlord to me. The men were fearfully drunk about three or four minutes before they entered the “Cherry Tree.”

Cross-examined by Mr. Mowll: I lost sight of the men after they had got out of the “Fountain.”

As I understand you, you went into the “Cherry Tree” at the invitation of Mr. Jones?

Mr. Jones asked me to step in.

I also understand you, the one nearest the door had the glass of beer in his hand?

Yes.

Could you tell, from his position, if he was the last man who entered the house?

No, I could not.

How long were you watching them?

Only a minute or two.

Mr. Mowll made an able speech for the defence, and concluded it by asking the Bench to dismiss the case on the grounds that Mr. kemp was suddenly called from the back part of his premises, where the family had just sat down to dinner, to serve two of these men, one of whom would swear that they were not drunk, having done so the third who was intoxicated came in, and when Mr. Kemp told him he did not want any noise in his house and to go out one of the others handed him the glass of beer Mr. Jones saw in his hand. The question for them to decide was whether Kemp had proper opportunities of seeing the state of the men.]

Percy Vyvyan Kemp, the defendant said: I am the landlord of the “Cherry Tree” which I have kept three years. I have never been summoned before the Bench, or cautioned by the Police. On the 16th of this month, between half-past one and two, as I was sitting down to dinner, I heard the front door of the house open. I cannot see from my living room into the bar. I went to the bar and saw a man named Ballard and another man. Ballard asked for as put of beer and porter. He paid for it with a sixpence and I gave him two-pence change. After them had drunk some of the beer another man came blundering in the door, and I immediately requested him to go out. He was very abusive. Mr. Ballard said to him “be quiet, old fellow,” and gave him a glass of beer, out of the pot he had ordered. Just at that moment Mr. Jones came in and said “Are you serving the men with beer, Kemp?” I said “I am serving these two men, but not the man that's drunk.” I told him the glass of beer had been given the man. Mr. Ayres then came in. I did not consider Ballard and the man who came in with him drunk. I should not think of serving them if I thought they were not sober.

William Ballard said: I am in the employ of the London, Chatham and Dover Railway, and have been eleven years. On Sunday morning, the 16th inst., I left work about nine o'clock. I had been clearing out the ashes from the Samphire. I went to work again about three in the afternoon. I fell in with the two men at the “Denmark Arms” and they asked me to have a stroll along with them out Buckland. We did not go into any house till half-past 12, and then we went into the “Cups” with three more. We had about a pint and a half or beer each. When we left the house we came down Buckland. One of the men's name was Ballard and the other Richards. Ballard, who was drunk, went to the “Fountain,” but I did not go. I should have gone if the landlord had let him in. Richards and I went to the “Cherry Tree” and Ballard followed us. We called for a pot of beer and porter and paid for it. After we had drank some beer, Ballard came in, and kemp tried to coax him out. I said “Here you are, Dick, be quiet, here's a drop of beer for you.”

By Mr. Stilwell: We are sitting on a bank while waiting for the public-house to open. We remained about 10 minutes in there “Three Cups.” We did not go into any house between the “Three Cups” and the “Cherry Tree.”

The Magistrates retired for a few minutes and on returning to the Bench Mr. back said: We have given this case our careful consideration. We have no doubt from the evidence before us that the men were intoxicated, or at least one of them very much so. At the same time we think, from the circumstances in which Kemp was, being suddenly called out to the bar he was not aware of the state of intoxication in which these men were. Therefore the summons will be dismissed.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 19 October, 1877.

CHARGED ON SUSPICION

James Edward Clark was charged on suspicion with stealing a piece of pork, value 3s., from the “Cherry Tree Inn,” the property of Percy Vyvyan Kemp.

The prosecutor did not appear.

Police-constable Bailey said: Last evening, about a quarter to ten, I was in the London Road, and was called by the landlord of the “Cherry Tree Inn.” I went to the house and saw the prisoner by the side of the bar, in the passage. Mr. Kemp said, in the prisoner's presence, that he had lost a piece of pork from the kitchen at the back of the house, and that there was no one in there about the time it was missing but the prisoner, and for that reason he gave the man into custody on suspicion of stealing it. The man admitted that he had been in the kitchen, but denied that he had touched the pork. He has had access to the place as he has been working for Mr. Kemp. There was nothing found upon him. I searched the premises and could not find anything. Mr. Kemp said the prisoner had not left the house.

By the Bench: The kitchen is open to others besides the prisoner. There is access from the stables to the kitchen.

The Bench said as they thought there was no other evidence against the prisoner in reference to the charge they must dismiss him.

Prisoner said he had not seen anything of the pork.

The Bench said as far as that went it had been stated that other persons seemed to have access to the kitchen. At the same time Mr. Kemp ought to have been present.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 5 July, 1878

DRUNKENNESS

John Ladd was charged with being drunk and incapable on the London Road on Saturday night.

Police-constable Blakely deposed to being on duty on Saturday evening about eight o'clock when he saw the prisoner drunk and disorderly on the London Road. He had been turned out of the “Cherry Tree Inn.” When the Constable went to the house Mr. Kemp told him to get the prisoner away, as he had been making a noise.

Dismissed with a caution, on paying for the hearing.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 28 November, 1884. 1d.

The Prussian Hermits had a convivial meeting at the “Cherry Tree Inn,” Buckland, last Thursday when about two dozen hermits joined them from Folkestone.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 2 April, 1886.

SUICIDE AT BUCKLAND

An inquest was held at the “Cherry Tree” public-house, London Road, on Thursday afternoon by the Borough Coroner (Sydenham Payn. Esq.), on the body of Stephen Read Elms, Jun., a young man 22 years of age, who met with his death early on Wednesday morning by taking poison. Mr. A. W. Adams was foreman of the Jury. After the Jury had viewed the body the following evidence was taken:-

Stephen Read Elms, landlord of the “Cherry Tree” public-house, London Road, said: The body the Jury have viewed is that of my son, Stephen Read Elms. He was 22 years of age next birthday. He had been a clerk, but was living at home. He had been suffering very acute of late from face-ache. Deceased has never been down to the bar at night for any spirits. The bar was locked. I have had a small quantity of essence of almonds for a number of years. The bottle of essence of almonds produced I have had for twelve years. It was kept in the bar parlour cupboard. There were three other bottles in the same cupboard, camphorated brandy, aniseed, and some other essence. The deceased has used the camphorated brandy. Deceased had never intimated taking his life. I last saw him alive on the Monday before I went to Canterbury. He was then all right.

By a Juror: Deceased had left the Prudential Assurance Company for some time.

Mary Elms said: I am the wife of the last witness. The deceased is my eldest son. I last saw him alive about half-past twelve o'clock on Tuesday evening. He was about the house all the evening. He was at the club meeting in his room of the Prussian Hermits. He was then quite well. I noticed nothing different with him during the evening. There seemed to be a little unpleasantness. I went to be at twenty minutes to one and deceased went to bed at the same time. I heard him shut the bedroom door. About a quarter of an hour after I had been in bed I heard a noise. It was very windy and I listened for the sound again. I then heard groaning proceeding from the deceased's room. I went upstairs and found the deceased undressed with his head lying over on the floor. I picked him up and placed him on the bed. There was a very strong smell of almonds. I asked him what he had been doing. He did not speak, he appeared too far gone. I then called my daughter. She came. Mr. Beechy, one of our lodgers, came to my assistance, I administered an emetic of mustard and water. I believe he had been sick before I went to him. Mr. Osborn was at once sent for. He came at once. On Monday night he said he had the toothache enough to make him mad. He was talking on Tuesday night, after the meeting with Mr. Clark, about the club matters. On Wednesday morning I went to the cupboard in the bar parlour after Mt. Osborn had said that the deceased must have taken something from a bottle or glass. I found the bottle (produced) there. I could not say if any has gone. My son had been bottling some port wine in the cellar that day. I have never heard him complain of anything. I found the tumbler produced on the bar parlour table, and a water bottle was also there. I smelt the glass, it smelt strong of the essence of almonds.

By a Juror: The deceased's brother slept in the same room.

By a Juror: The Prussian Hermits meeting broke up about 11 o'clock. I did not hear the deceased go downstairs.

By the Coroner: There was a light in the bar parlour when I went down for the mustard after I heard the deceased groan. I had put the light out before I went to bed.

Arthur James Elms, brother to the deceased, said: I went to bed about half-past ten on Tuesday night. I sleep in the same room a deceased, but not in the same bed. I did not hear him come to bed. I had just previously heard a groan as my mother came into the room. I took no notice at first, as I have sometimes heard the same noise when the deceased has been intoxicated. He generally makes the noise about once a week. I saw the deceased about a quarter to ten. He seemed a little excited. He was groaning louder this night than usual. I did not hear him get up. I know of no trouble to rest upon his mind.

John Hudson Clark, in the employ of the Dover brewery Co., said: I belong to the Company of Prussian Hermits. We had a meeting here on Tuesday night. There was a little unpleasantness. There was a discussion of the question of felony and misdemeanour. He used some high words. I was chairman, and called him to order. We do not allow swearing. He was fined 2d. he paid it and we were all right again. He looked rather different than usual. There was no bad feeling about the discussion. Something was said by the deceased, and he apologised for what he had said. I thought the deceased seemed rather excited. I left the house about twelve o'clock, the other members left at eleven o'clock. The deceased wanted me to stop. I went into the room at the back of the bar. We parted good friends. He did not complain of face-ache. He did not seem vexed at what had taken place upstairs. He was rather out of temper at first. The ill-feeling was because we thought one of the members ought to be expelled from the club for felony, but the deceased did not think so.

Harry Beechy, an ironmonger's assistant, said: I have been lodging at the “Cherry Tree” since Saturday. I knew the deceased well for the last twelve months. I went to bed about half-past eleven. He looked into the kitchen while we were having supper. He looked rather out of temper. I heard the deceased groaning about a quarter past one. He was groaning rather loudly when I jumped out of bed. I heard Mrs. Elms. I went into the deceased's bedroom. He was lying on the bed and was quite insensible. I could smell the essence of almonds just as I left my room. He remained insensible. I held the deceased up until the doctor came. I am quite sure he was alive when I went into the room. We poured down some mustard and water. He vomited slightly. I thought he was dead a few minutes before the doctor came.

By a Juror: I should think he lived about twenty minutes after I saw him.

Mr. Ashby Osborne, surgeon, residing and practising at Dover, said: I was sent for about five and twenty minutes past one on Wednesday morning. I attended the deceased immediately. I perceived a strong smell of bitter almonds on entering the house, and also in going into the deceased's bedroom. I found deceased lying upon his back on the bed supported by the last witness and one of deceased's sisters. Breathing and the heart's action had ceased. The body was quite warm. Death had recently taken place. I had the chest dashed with cold water and endeavoured to restore animation. I pumped some brandy and water into the stomach and pumped it out again. There was some effluvia of almonds then but not very strong. I found that life was quite extinct. I then commenced searching the room to see if I could find the vessel from which the deceased took the almonds. Mrs. Elms then brought up the tumbler produced. It smelt very strong of the almonds, and also the bottle about half full of essence of almonds. I should think the deceased had taken about a tablespoon of the liquid. A person might go down stairs, take a spoonful of the liquid, and get to his room again. From ten to thirty drops of the essence of almonds would be fatal. I noticed a small of the almonds in the bar parlour. If the deceased had taken essential oil of almonds it would have produced the symptoms as described by the previous witness. I am of opinion that death was due to poisoning by essential oil of bitter almonds.

After the Coroner had summed up, the Jury were left alone to consider the verdict, and after a lapse of about ten minutes they returned a verdict to the effect that “the deceased committed suicide by taking a dose of essential oil of almonds whilst in a state of temporary insanity.”

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 3 January, 1890. Price 5d.

SUDDEN DEATH AT BUCKLAND

A man named Spencer Dawes was taken suddenly ill yesterday morning at Buckland, and before a doctor was sent for, arrived, he died. An inquest will be held at the “Cherry Tree Inn” at three o'clock this afternoon.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 10 January, 1890. Price 5d.

REFUSED TO SEE A DOCTOR

An inquest was held at the “Cherry Tree Inn” last Friday afternoon, on the body of a man named Spencer Dawes, residing at 15, Union Road, who died on the previous day. The Coroner (Sydenham Payn, Esq.) was unable to be present through undisposition, and Mr. T. Lewis acted as Deputy Coroner.

Alfred Dawes, son of the deceased's said that his father had been unwell since the previous Sunday, but he refused to see a doctor. On Wednesday afternoon he grew gradually worse, and witness telegraphed for his mother who was away on a visit. When she arrived a doctor was sent for immediately, but before he came death occurred.

Mr. A. Long said he believed Dawes died from syncope brought on by general debility. If he had been attended to sooner his life might have been saved.

The Jury returned a verdict in accordance with the medical evidence.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 20 June, 1890.

A QUARREL

Alfred Kent was summoned by Mary Kent his wife for threatening to do her bodily harm. Complainant said she had been married to her husband 21 years; she had not been living with him for some time, he having left her and gone into the workhouse. Last Wednesday evening, at her lodgings in Victoria Street, he threatened to take her life, followed her down, and on the terrace on London Road, near the “Cherry Tree” he took a stone and said he would put it in her forehead and knock her over the wall. He did not carry out his threat. Her husband was a pensioner, and had £6 a quarter, he went to places where she works and annoys her. The defendant was also summoned by Caroline Mills for using threatening language to her on the same day, whereby she was afraid he would do her some bodily harm. The accused was bound over in the sum of £5 in each case, to keep the peace for 6 months the costs amounting to 18s.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 20 July, 1900.

OBSCENE LANGUAGE

Albert Gatehouse, Henry Gatehouse, and John Sharp were summoned for using obscene language on July 8th in London Road.

Mr. R. Knocker appeared to prosecute.

Police Constable Southey said he was on duty in London Road on July 8th. He was near the “Cherry Tree” public house and saw the three defendants. Sharp was on the opposite side of the road and the two gatehouse's on the other side. They were all intoxicated. A man who was with them used obscene language. Witness asked them to get away up the hill, the occupier opposite whose house they stood having complained of the use of bad language. The gatehouse's then made use of bad language, and Henry began to take off his coat. Witness advised them to go away, but they remained there for five or ten minutes, and witness told them if they did not go he should take them into custody. Shortly afterwards Sharp came over to witness and made use of bad language towards him, and tapped him on the nose. There was a great crowd, and witness did not take him into custody because he knew the crowd would set on to him. There had been a wedding at the “Cherry Tree.”
The men were each fined 5s.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 21 February, 1902. Price 1d.

THE SEALED BOTTLE

Martha Elizabeth George, landlady of the “Cherry Tree Inn,” was summoned for on February 9th, having supplied intoxicating liquor to James Sutton, under the age of 14, for consumption off the premises, such liquor not being in a corked and sealed vessel.

Mr. R. E. Knocker appeared on behalf of the Watch Committee to prosecute, and Mr. Rutley Mowll to defend.

Mr. R. Mowll pleaded, on behalf of his client, Guilty.

Rose Holmes, 65, Park Road, was summoned for having, on February 9th, unlawfully and knowingly sent a certain person under the age of 14 to a certain place where intoxicating liquors were sold, for the purpose of obtaining certain intoxicating liquors for consumption, without being corked and sealed.

The defendant pleased Not Guilty.

Police Sergeant Palmer said: On Sunday, 9th ist., my attention was called by Police Constable Fox to a boy named James Sutton. It was at 7.30 p.m., and I was in Cherry Tree Avenue. The boy's age, I ascertained, was 8 years and 11 months, and he lived at 67, Park Road. From what Police Constable Fox told me, I took the boy back to the “Cherry Tree” public house, kept by the defendant, Mrs. George. When I met the boy he had a bottle containing malt liquor. On getting to the house, I saw the defendant, and said, “This boy has been seen to leave here with this bottle not securely labelled.” The bottle is in the condition as it now appears. The paper label over the cork was gummed down, but only one end was attached to the bottle. That, however, could have been pulled off, as it was wet. Mrs. George said, “I have not served him.” The boy pointed to the landlady's daughter, Mrs. Lever, and said, “that is the lady that served me.” Mrs. George then looked to her daughter, and said, “You must be more careful in future.” I told her I should report the matter. I then went with the boy to No. 65 Park Road, where the other defendant lived. I saw her there, and pointed out the label to her. She said, “It is not as it should be. It is different to what it is when I sent him to the “Diamond Hotel.” After I took the bottle to the Police Station.

Police Constable Fox said: On the evening of the 9th inst., about 7.45 I saw the boy coming up Cherry Tree Avenue, with the bottle in his pocket, apparently empty. I was standing at the top of the Avenue, and I saw him go into the bottle and jug department of the “Cherry Tree” public house. I waited till he came out. He was then carrying the bottle. I stopped the boy, and took the bottle from him and examined the label. It was wet, and on putting my glove to it, one end came off the bottle. It would have come off the other side if I had not prevented it, as it was very wet. I was then joined by Police Sergeant Palmer, and corroborated the evidence he has given as to what occurred subsequently.

Mr. Knocker said this was, he believed, the first case to come under their notice, and the defendant appeared to be liable under Section 2 of the Intoxicating Liquors Sale to Children Act, 1901, for serving this boy under the age of 14 years with a bottle containing more than one reputed pint. With regard to the other defendant, she appeared to be liable for sending the boy to this public house for this amount of liquor, provided it was not served in the way it should be. He did not press for any heavy penalties, probably the payment of the costs if the Bench thought fit, as they desired this case to act as a warning to tenants of houses and other people in the town who were in the habit of sending children to public houses to obtain liquors.

The Magistrates' Clerk: Do you suggest that the person sending the child has to supply the child with something to seal the cork as well?

Mr. R. Knocker said he did not suggest that, but if a child were sent to a public house and it was under the age of 14, the chance had to be run of it being supplied with liquor in a bottle not properly sealed.

Mr. Mowll said a very few words would suffice from him. It was quite clear that there was an intention to comply with the Act. But, however good was that intention, acting for the landlady, he had to admit that in his opinion an offence had been committed, and therefore to save time, he thought it better in this case to plead Guilty. He need hardly remind them that the Act had only been in force since the 1st of January, and as Mr. Reginald Knocker had fairly remarked, this was the first case under the Act, and was, no doubt, brought forward with a view to showing that bottles must be more securely sealed than he could claim that the one in Court had been sealed. It was a fallacy amongst licensed victuallers that sticking a label over the top of a cork secured it within the meaning of the Act, but it did not do anything of the sort. If a little time had been allowed to elapse so that the gum had dried, then there might be perhaps a very nice question raised. Therefore, he admitted a technical offence had been committed, and pleaded Guilty. In doing so, he was fortified by the fact that Mrs. George had been at the house for 13 years, and, he believed, bore a most excellent character. He therefore hoped that the suggestion of the prosecution would be followed, and the case dismissed on the payment of the costs.

The Chairman said he should like to ask Mr. Knocker for a little more elucidation in the case where the defendant sent the child to the public house.

Mr. Knocker replied that if a woman sent a boy to a public house she could not know whether the liquor would be delivered in a vessel properly corked and sealed, and the Section making it an offence to send a child under the age of 14 years applied.

The Magistrates' Clerk: But on whom is the onus to see that the bottle is properly sealed? Is the onus on the person who sends, or on the seller?

Mr. Knocker said he took it that if anyone sent a child to a public house they should instruct it not to accept the bottle unless it was properly corked and sealed.

The Magistrates, after come consideration, said they had decided to convict Mrs. George. The penalty would be very light, 10/- including costs. In the case of Mrs. Rose Holness they had been at some little difficulty, but seemed that the Act intends that these children should not be sent to public-houses, and she would have to pay the costs, 6/-.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 17 February, 1922. Price 1½d.

LICENSING BUSINESS

Mr. Kenton, of the "Cherry Tree" applied for an extension for an hour on February 23rd for a smoking concert in connection with the R.A.O.B.

The Bench granted the extension for half an hour (until 11 p.m.)

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 26 November, 1937. Price 1½d.

GAS TRAGEDY AT BUCKLAND

The licensee of the "Cherry Tree Inn", London Road, Dover, Mr. Alfred Thomas Curd, aged 41 years was found dead on Wednesday morning with his head in the gas oven in the scullery at the rear of 61, London Road where he had a tobacconist shop. As he had not returned to the "Cherry Tree Inn" to sleep on Tuesday night, his wife became concerned, and on Wednesday morning mr. Hutchingson of 94, London Road, went to the premises at 61, London Road, and, getting by the back, made the discovery.

An inquest will be held this (Friday) morning by the Borough Coroner.

Mr. Curd leaves a wife and five children.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 3 December, 1937.

LICENSEE TRAGIC END

The Borough Coroner (Mr. E. T. Lambert) held an inquest at the Town Hall on Friday, on Alfred Thomas Curd (41), the licensee of the "Cherry Tree" Inn, London Road, who was found dead at 61, London Road, on November 24th.

Mrs. Beatrice Alice Curd, who was in great distress, said she was a widow of deceased, who was licensee of the "Cherry Tree" Inn, and carried on a confectionery business at 61, London Road. The last time she saw her husband alive was on November 23rd, at about 2.15 p.m., when he left the public house to go to the shop, as he often did. He seemed as usual, and asked her to send his tea, which she did, at about 4.45 p.m. when her children left school. They said, on returning, that he was in the shop. He generally closed the shop at 8 p.m., but he did not always return immediately. Hen he did not come home by 11 p.m. that night she went to Mrs. Hutchinson, at 94, London Road, because she was worried. She thought perhaps her husband was chatting with the licensee of the "Hand and Sceptre," or the "Red Lion" public houses, but he was not there, so they went to the shop. The key was not in the lock, and the door was locked, so they went home, and she sat up to 3 p.m. Next morning she told Mrs. Hutchinson that her husband had not returned, and they went to the shop at about 9.45 a.m. and Mr. Hutchinson forced a window and entered the premises. Her husband had no serious business troubles, but was anxious to sell the shop, and could not do so; she knew of nothing else to depress him. His health was good, and he was always cheerful and happy. She had no idea why he had acted as he did.

Alfred Hutchinson said he carried on a cooked meat business at 94, London Road. He had known the deceased for about two years and, he always struck him as a normal man. He did not appear to be worried. He last saw him on Sunday night in the bar of the "Cherry Tree" public house. On Tuesday, Mrs Curd came to his house at 11.20 p.m. and asked him if he had seen her husband. At her request he went with her to 61, London Road. They knocked, and rattled the door, and came to the conclusion that deceased was not there. It was a lock-up shop. Mrs. Curd then went home and the following morning he accompanied her to the shop. He entered the premises by the scullery window. Directly he got in he noticed a strong smell of gas, and went and turned it off. Mr. Curd was lying with his head in the gas oven and his legs curled up. He touched him, and found he was dead, so he told Mrs. Curd, and went to inform the Police.

Dr. J. R. W. Richardson, Police Surgeon said that at 10.15 a.m. on the previous Wednesday, as a result of a Police message, he went to 61, London Road, and in a scullery at the back of the premises he saw deceased lying near a gas oven. He had been dead about ten hours. Death was due to asphyxia, caused by coal gas poisoning. He had not previously known the deceased.

Margaret Ivy Kennet, 143, London Road, Dover, said that for some months until the previous Saturday she was in the employ of the deceased, and served in the shop at 61, London Road. She saw Mr. Curd every day, and he always appeared cheerful. He never mentioned any troubles, and she had no idea why he did what he had done.

Norah Goldfinch, Clerk to Messrs. Carder and Carder, solicitors, said her firm acted for a creditor of deceased to whom he owed a considerable sum, running into hundreds .She had reason to believe there were several other debts outstanding. She had seen deceased several times during the past year. He seemed anxious that the debt should be paid off, but not unduly worried. He appeared a cheerful man. Last January he signed an undertaking to pay off the money by instalments. He had kept up fairly well. He was pressed to pay at the beginning of the year, but not recently. His last payment was smaller than it should have been, and he explained that he could not pay more as he had several other things to pay. A letter was sent the deceased on 25th October in acknowledgement of £5 he had paid.

The Coroner said that was all the evidence available. There was nothing, so far as the deceased's state of mind was concerned, to show he was not perfectly normal and cheerful. He thought it very possible that deceased had worried considerably privately. He was indebted to one creditor for hundreds of pounds.

Mrs. Curd: Yes, but when he sold the shop we could have wiped out the debt.

The Coroner: Quite so, but he was anxious because he could not sell the shop, and that, no doubt, temporarily upset the balance of his mind and caused him to act as he did. I therefore find he died from asphyxia, caused by coal gas poisoning, which he administered himself, at a time when the balance of his mind was disturbed. I should like to express my sympathy with the relations.

Mrs. Curd said her husband had been worried about the takings of the shop.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 21 June, 1940.

Plans of proposed alterations to the "Cherry Tree" Inn, London Road, Dover, were approved.

Dover Express 24th August 1945.

Obituary Mrs. A. M. Lewis.

The funeral took place on Wednesday at Buckland Churchyard of Mrs. Annie May Lewis (late of the “Cherry Tree Inn”, London Road, Dover) who died at the residence of her son, Mr. C. Lewis, 17 London Road, Maidstone, at the age of 70 years. The Rev H. V. Green officiated and the mourners present were:- Mr. & Mrs. C. Lewis (son and daughter-in-law). There were many floral tributes. The funeral arrangements were by Mr. F. E. Ratcliff, 70 London Road, Dover.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 13 May, 1949.

DART WINNERS

Cups won by members  of the Dover Darts League were presented at the "Cherry Tree" on Monday evening. Holding cup is Jack Evans, captain of the "Grapes" team, which won the League. In the picture (left to right) are A. Clayson (Chairman), Mrs. Curd ("Cherry Tree," runner-up), V. Godden, ("Grapes" vice-captain), J. Howard (individual runner-up), J. Evans, A. Fernehough (captain, "Cherry Tree"), J. Wainwright (individual winner) and T. Hogg (The "Grapes").

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 27 May, 1949.

CHERRY TREE DARTS AND SOCIAL CLUB

Winners of the Royal Antediluvian Order of Buffaloes Cup, Deal; winners of Elvington Club Competition; runners-up of Dover and District Dart league; runners-up of Lesser Cup (St. Dunstan's); "A" Team, winners of Dover Working men's Club Cup; "B" Team, runners-up of Dover Working men's Club Cup.

Left to right - F. Austin, E. Rolfe, J Allmark, Mrs. Curd, A. Ferneyhough, J. Knott, F. Carter, R. Wicks, T. Edgar, M. Longley, P. Nox, S. Matcham, R. Doel, T. Allison, J. Abbott, J. Ricketts

From the Dover Express, 17 March, 1950.

DART RUNNER'S UP

The "Cherry Tree Inn" team, who were runners-up. (Standing): J. Godden, M. Langley, R. Wicks and T. Edgar. (Sitting): J. Knott, S. Matcham, (captain), Mrs. B A Curd (licensee), A. Clayton and J Allmark. The team lost to the "Cause is Altered."

From the Dover Express, Thursday, 14 February, 2013. 70p.

GAMBLING AT THE CHERRY TREE

RE: CLOSED pubs in Dover. The following was seen at 7pm on a Saturday night in the "Cherry Tree" pub which is now the William Hill shop. In 1960 five men, as normal, eat at a table playing a game of cards for money and naturally against the house. One of those men was this writer's eldest brother and when four men walked in smartly dressed with suits and ties, immediately the table was covered. All the four men had to drink was a half pint of beer each and, as the saying goes, “the usual patter” with the five men at the table. They did not stay long, about 20 minutes, and then as they left the last man laughed and said: “OK, you can continue now - we're off-duty policemen going to the other side of Folkestone for our yearly dinner and dance.” The following year I was invited to play the drums in the four-piece dance band for the event of policemen passing their examinations.

D J Gatehouse, Herbert Street, Dover.