|
South Street/Bail Street
Folkestone
Not to be confused with the "Folkestone
Arms" as this had closed one year previous to this opening in 1847. The
house closed in 1857 just ten years later when Folkestone Town Council
acquired the building for demolition for the new Harbour Street.
|
Canterbury Journal 15 January 1848.
The much talked of new street from the High Street to the Mill
Lane has at last been commenced by pulling down the old "Folkestone
Tavern," and clearing the garden grounds adjacent. We regret to hear
that much opposition has been manifested, but the work will
nevertheless be proceeded with as fast as the weather will permit,
so that there will be no necessity for the ultimatum of our Boulogne
contemporary, viz., “a lighted torch and a south-wester”.
|
|
Folkestone Chronicle 28 February 1857.
Council Meeting Extract.
The Mayor then read a letter received from Mr. Hart, in which that
gentleman stated that it having been reported and named in the council
meeting, that he (Mr. Hart) had had a sinister motive in not scheduling
the Folkestone Arms Inn, South Street, it being his own property, he
therefore begged to offer the corporation the power to purchase such
property under the compulsory clauses of the Improvement Act.
Some little discussion took place upon the offer, and Capt. Kennicott
moved, seconded by Mr. Cobb, that the letter be accepted and entered on
the minutes.
To the Editor of The Folkestone Chronicle:-
Sir, - I avail myself of the medium of your valuable publication to ask
the following question: Why is it that the corporation have virtually
resolved to leave the Folkestone Arms standing, thus making it the
starting point of the continuation of Tontine Street to the Harbour? I
take it, Mr. Editor, that if this house is left standing, the
contemplated improvement will be interfered with to a very considerable
extent, seeing that the line of the new street will be of course
extended too far to the eastward, thus leaving the present narrow
entrance to the High Street, as well as the 'Box-iron' projection which
narrows Tontine Street ten feet at that point, it being understood that
all new streets shall be at least forty feet in width.
If this and the Folkestone Arms were removed, and the line of the new
street struck from the hairdresser's shop, we should get rid of the
narrow and inconvenient passage called South Street. I have heard that
the council at their last meeting decided to adopt a new line laid down
by the surveyor, without any deviation. If such be the case, a strong
remonstrance ought to be addressed by the inhabitants to the council,
calling upon them to re-consider their decision, and vary the plan so as
to meet the objection of South Street remaining a worse nuisance than
ever. This could be easily done by purchasing the property on the west
side of that thoroughfare, commencing with the fourth house, and
gradually bringing forward the frontage to the east side of the
pavement; this would give ample room for commodious houses and back
premises, as well as rendering the frontages much more valuable by
diverting the whole of the foot passenger traffic into the new street.
I am, Sirs, Yours Obediently,
A. RATEPAYER.
|
|
Southeastern Gazette 5 May 1857.
Local News.
The Improvement Committee, finding considerable difficulty in getting
the property required for the new street to the Harbour, have had
brought to their notice another plan. By the Folkestone Arms Tavern
being removed, with a slight curve, as good a thoroughfare may be had as
previously marked out. We believe Mr. Hart (the owner of the tavern) is
willing to take a reasonable sum for it. The council have as yet done
nothing in furthering the improvements, or carrying out the Act.
|
|
Folkestone Chronicle 11 July 1857.
Local News.
Purchase of the Folkestone Arms Inn by the Corporation: The Council met
in Committee yesterday evening, and decided on the purchase of this
property for the sum of £1,200, for the purposes of the Tontine Street
extension, having previously offered the owner (R. Hart Esq.) £1,000 for
the same. We have on a previous occasion advocated the purchase of these
premises, on account of the improvement the pulling down of them would
make to the lower part of High Street, but we should have preferred the
sum of £1,000 being paid for the property, instead of £1,200, especially
as it was sold by the executors of the late Mr. Jeffrey (as we are
informed) for the sum of £850, when Folkestone was in a much more
flourishing state than it is at present.
|
|
Kentish Gazette 14 July 1857.
Purchase of the "Folkestone Arms Inn" (sic) by the Corporation:
The council met in committee on Friday, and decided on the purchase
of this property for the sum of £1,200, of R. Hart, esq., for the
purposes of the Tontine Street extension.
Note: "Folkestone Arms Tavern."
|
|
Southeastern Gazette 14 July 1857.
Local News.
The corporation have agreed to purchase the Folkestone Arms Tavern of
Mr. Richard Hart, for the sum of £1,200.
|
|
From the Folkestone Chronicle 6 February 1858.
To the Editor of The Folkestone Chronicle
Sir, - I avail myself of the medium of your valuable publication to ask
the following question: Why is it that the corporation have virtually
resolved to leave the "Folkestone Arms" standing, thus making it the
starting point of the continuation of Tontine Street to the Harbour? I
take it, Mr. Editor, that if this house is left standing, the
contemplated improvement will be interfered with to a very considerable
extent, seeing that the line of the new street will be of course
extended too far to the eastward, thus leaving the present narrow
entrance to the High Street, as well as the 'Box-iron' projection which
narrows Tontine Street ten feet at that point, it being understood that
all new streets shall be at least forty feet in width.
If this and the "Folkestone Arms" were removed, and the line of the new
street struck from the hairdresser's shop, we should get rid of the
narrow and inconvenient passage called South Street. I have heard that
the council at their last meeting decided to adopt a new line laid down
by the surveyor, without any deviation. If such be the case, a strong
remonstrance ought to be addressed by the inhabitants to the council,
calling upon them to re-consider their decision, and vary the plan so as
to meet the objection of South Street remaining a worse nuisance than
ever. This could be easily done by purchasing the property on the west
side of that thoroughfare, commencing with the fourth house, and
gradually bringing forward the frontage to the east side of the
pavement; this would give ample room for commodious houses and back
premises, as well as rendering the frontages much more valuable by
diverting the whole of the foot passenger traffic into the new street.
I am, Sirs, Yours Obediently,
A. RATEPAYER
|
|
Southeastern Gazette 9 March 1858.
Local News.
The council met on Wednesday last. Present, the Mayor, Aldermen Tolputt,
Kennicott, and Gardner ; Councillors Tite, Tolputt, Jefferey (Walton,)
Jefferey (Coolinge,) Boorne, Gambrill, Baker, Fagg, Major, Pledge,
Meikle, Jinkings, Banks, Caister, and Cobb.
Taking down the Folkestone Arms Inn.
This ridiculous affair, after being fully discussed some time since and
a line drawn which included the building, which consequently must have
been pulled down, was the subject of two memorials to the council. One
commended the council for deciding that it should be pulled down, but
urged them to do it at once, and had 105 signatures of the most
respectable ratepayers from all parts of the town; the other by 64
names, 7 being members of the council and the remainder mostly old
ratepayers, and averse to any improvement.
The Mayor appeared to feel the matter to be very important, as it had
been the subject of a special notice on the paper, and he hoped the
subject would be fairly discussed by all.
Mr. Jinkings had an impression that it had been already disposed of, and
the seal of the corporation affixed to the minutes; but on its being
read it was found that a plan for the new street had been decided upon,
and a line drawn which included part of the Folkestone Arms.
Mr. Major moved, and Alderman Tolputt seconded, the motion that the
Folkestone Arms be pulled down and the materials sold.
Mr. Tite moved an amendment that it be not pulled down, and in an
excited strain said the signatures to the memorial were falsely
obtained, and he should be glad to see it thrown under the table; the
town would be ruined, and the poor suffer.
Mr. Gambrill seconded the amendment, which, after a lengthened and
uninteresting discussion, was put, when there appeared—for it, 8—Messrs.
Banks, Caister, Jefferey, Tite, Bovin, Jefferey, Gambrill, and Gardner;
against the amendment, 9.
The original motion was therefore carried amidst loud cheers, by a
number of the inhabitants who were present.
At the adjourned meeting held on Thursday evening, after some
discussion, it was agreed to put the Folkestone Arms up by public
tenders, to be delivered by the 6th April, with an intimation that land
adjoining might be had for rebuilding the same.
|
|
Folkestone Chronicle 27 March 1858.
Notice.
To be sold by tender: The materials of the Folkestone Arms, and the
house adjoining, situate at the bottom of High Street and South Street,
Folkestone, in one Lot. The two houses to be pulled down, and the
materials to be cleared away at the expense of the purchaser, in
accordance with certain conditions, to be obtained at the office of the
Town Clerk.
Tenders to be addressed to the “Corporation of Folkestone”, and be
delivered at the Guildhall, on Wednesday, the 7th April, at 6 o'clock.
The Corporation will not be bound to accept the highest or any tender.
By order of the Corporation,
R.T. Brockman,
Town Clerk.
N.B. The Corporation will at the same time be prepared to consider any
proposals for the purchase of a freehold site in the New Street, upon
which the Folkestone Arms may be re-erected.
Information to be obtained on application to the Town Clerk, or to Mr.
Bamford, surveyor.
|
|
Folkestone Chronicle 10 April 1858.
Monthly meeting of the Town Council.
Wednesday April 7th: - Among the business; To receive tenders for the
purchase of the materials of the Folkestone Arms and the house
adjoining, and make order thereon.
TENDERS FOR THE FOLKESTONE ARMS.
There were three tenders for the purchase of this and the adjoining
house.
Mr. Charles Stockwell, (of Dover) £61 5s.
Mr. John Dunk, Tontine Street £65 0s.
Messrs. Conway, Sherwood, Weld, Rose and Co. £60 0s.
Mr. Meikle moved and Mr. Jinkings seconded that Mr. Dunk's tender be
accepted.
Mr. Tite thought it a terrible thing that so much property should be
sacrificed for so little a money. They had much better wait a short
time, until a line of the new street could be got out, and the several
plots laid out, so that a plot might be offered with it – it would then
fetch a better price. With this view he should move as an amendment that
neither tender be accepted for the present.
Alderman Gardner concurred with Mr. Tite entirely, and seconded the
amendment.
Mr. Jinkings thought the line of the street could not be properly
defined until the property was removed.
Upon the amendment being put from the chair there were five votes, and
fro the original motion six.
The original motion was therefore declared to be carried.
|
|
Folkestone Chronicle 24 August 1861.
Annual Licensing Day & Petty Sessions.
Wednesday August 21st:- Before the Mayor, James Tolputt, W.F. Browell,
W. Major, W. Bateman, and A.M. Leith esqs.
New Licences.
Mr. Harrison said he appeared to support an application made by Mr.
Thomas Golder, for a licence to be granted him for a house he had lately
erected in Harbour Street. Mr Golder was no doubt well known to some of
the bench, having lived in Folkestone all his life. He of course was
determined to keep the house highly respectable; he might add that a
house stood a short time ago near the spot where his new house was
erected called the Pilot Cutter, but which was removed when the
improvements were carried out; and also another house called the
Folkestone Arms, which was in the vicinity, was removed. He trusted
therefore to have shown sufficient to induce the bench to grant the
application. Mr. Harrison also produced a petition numerously signed in
favour of the application.
Mr. Boult said he was a publican in the immediate neighbourhood, and if
this licence was granted there would be five licensed houses without a
single house between them, three adjoining at one side of the street,
and two at the other. There had been many houses pulled down in the
immediate neighbourhood and very few rebuilt; some that had been were
not let.
The Mayor in answer said that the bench had unanimously agreed to grant
the licence.
|
|
Folkestone Herald 16 March 1929.
Felix.
“I thank you very much for your last week's article, and particularly
that part referring to the Assembly (Corporation) meeting at the old
Kings Arms Hotel and the Marquis of Granby”. Thus Mr. F. Hedges, of the
Bouverie Arms, Cheriton Road, spoke to me on the bright and beautiful
morning of Monday last. It is nice to have a “Thank you” now and then,
because it is my main desire to please in these small weekly efforts of
mine. I do not soar towards the impossible, viz., to please everybody. I
remarked this much, many years ago, to a gentleman, who was then, as he
is now, associated with the Folkestone Herald. His reply was brief and
to the point. It was this “You will be a darned big fool if you try. Do
the right as far as you can and let the rest alone”. I have tried to
follow this advice. Now, to return to Mr. Hedges and his thanks. His
establishment is a place where men congregate largely, and naturally
many subjects crop up for discussion. There are arguments, friendly and
sometimes highly controversial. It is the latter that this particular
gentleman mostly dreads.
It appears one of the company at the Bouverie Arms on Saturday night,
after reading my paragraph, asked of another “Where was the Marquis of
Granby situate?” That was enough. The argument as to its whereabouts
went on fully for a couple of hours, and it was only when the Speaker
called “Time” that the controversy ceased. Now, to be fair, I must plead
guilty to providing, what after all was a friendly argument, for
discussion. In my last paragraph on this subject I declared the Marquis
of Granby was situate in Seagate Street. This was wrong. It should have
been High Street. I can't give the exact site, but there are those
living amongst us who can. It is probably difficult for the present
generation to realise that this present beautiful town of Folkestone was
confined to three, four, or five thoroughfares (not paved in some cases)
when the late Queen Victoria came to the throne in 1837. Such however
was the case.
Perhaps the Cheriton Road unofficial debating Society would like to
discuss the whereabouts of the Folkestone Arms. The site of it appears,
as far as I can make out, to have been where now stands the commanding
corner premises at the bottom of High Street at the junction formed by
Harbour and South Streets. The Folkestone Arms, it would seem, was an
important establishment in those days. I will prove it. Here is an
extract from an old Kentish newspaper and it will be read, I feel sure,
with interest by all true Folkestonians. “September 11th, 1812. Tuesday
last being the Mayor's choice for the town of Folkestone, Thomas Baker
Esq. was elected to the chair, who after taking the necessary oath
adjourned to the Folkestone Arms Inn, accompanied by the jurats and the
principal residents of the community, where a sumptuous and well-served
dinner was prepared for them. After the cloth was drawn (removed), the
following toasts, etc., were pronounced from the chair; “The King and
God Bless Him”; “The Prince Regent” (and under his benign auspices may
the Imperial Eagle be experimentally taught to fly the wing at the
roaring of the British Lion); “The Queen and Royal Family”; “Alexander
(and may the Gallic Cock (France) be finally brought to feel the
ascending influence of the Northern constellation)”. Thus passed the
fleeting hours, interspersed with convivial song and merry joke, until
“Nox” was contemplating to withdraw her sombre curtain from the dusky
landscape, which suggested to the company the idea of “iit domum”, and
on which they unanimously rose and congratulated the Mayor (Thomas
Baker) on his tenth election to the honour of the white wand”. The
foregoing, although an involved and rather complicated composition,
gives an insight into the life of Folkestone 117 years ago, and
incidentally reminds us that our forefathers well enjoyed themselves in
their own way, not only at the table, but with convivial song and merry
joke.
Note: Felix again gets it wrong. The Folkestone Arms referred to was
located at the top of High Street, and closed in 1846. The Folkestone
Arms Tavern, at the bottom of High Street, opened in 1847. |
LICENSEE LIST
KEMP John 1841+ (listed as labourer in 1841 )
FIELDS William 1847-53 (age 57 in 1851)
 
ADAMS Thomas 1853-54
WILSON Thomas 1854-57
From Bagshaw Directory 1847
From More Bastions of the Bar by Easdown and Rooney
Census
|
