From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 11 September, 1868.

THE ANNUAL LICENSING DAY

THE GRAND SULTAN, SNARGATE STREET

William Henry Stiles applied for a license to this house, which, Mr. Coram said, had all the necessary requirements, whilst the good character of the applicant was beyond all question.

Mr. Fox, while stating that there could be no personal objection to the applicant, who was known to be a most respectable man, opposed on the ground of the number of licensed houses within sixty yards of the "Grand Sultan," but the license was granted.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 22 July, 1870.

DRUNK AND DISORDERLY

Emma Ransley, a dashingly-dressed young lady, was charged with having been drunk and disorderly and having caused an obstruction in Snargate Street on the previous afternoon.

Police-constable George Swaine said that on the previous (Sunday) afternoon a little before three o'clock, he saw the prisoner on the footway in Snargate Street, near the “Grand Sultan” public-house. She was drunk, and was stopping every person who passed. He went to her and cautioned her, and she then went into the “Warrior” public-house. She remained there a few minutes, when she returned to the street, and behaved in the same manner as before. He then took her into custody and conveyed her to the police-station.

The prisoner had nothing to say in her defence. She had come from Shorncliff, she said, on Saturday, she was drinking a great deal that day, and she had unfortunately not sufficiently recovered her sobriety to behave herself properly when she was found by the policeman. She prayed the clemency of the Bench, and assured the Magistrates that, if she were dismissed now, they should never see here again.

In reply to the Mayor, Superintendent Coram said that the prisoner had appeared before the Bench on two previous occasions charged with like offences.

The prisoner said the last time she was before the Magistrates was more than six months ago; and she hoped this would not be remembered against her.

The Mayor said that on the previous occasions when she had been charged with drunkenness, her conduct had been equally bad as it had been shown to have been on this. Such proceedings could not be permitted, especially on Sundays, when people were passing through the public thoroughfares on their way to the different places of worship. She would be fined 5s. and 6s. costs; or, in default, committed to prison for seven days.

The prisoner said she must go to gaol.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 19 August, 1870.

A STREET FIGHT INTERRUPTED

John Cullen, a stone mason, was brought up by Police-constable Bowles, charged with being drunk and disorderly, and fighting with another man in Northampton Street, at twelve o'clock the preceding night.

Bowles said he was on duty near the Post Office about twelve o'clock on the previous night, when he heard a disturbance in front of the “Grand Sultan” public-house, the back entrance to which is about he centre of Northampton Street, the front entrance being in Snargate Street. He went to the spot, and as he approached he saw two men stripped and fighting. The prisoner was one of them. The friends of the second man, as soon as they saw witness approaching, dragged him into the public-house; but the prisoner remained. A crowd was collected, and witness therefore ordered the prisoner away. Having put on his clothes under cover of some persons near, he still loitered upon the spot; bit witness, fearing that there might be another breach of the peace, insisted on his going away, and, as he declined, he ultimately took him into custody. The prisoner had been drinking; but knew perfectly well what he was about.

The prisoner said he was very sorry for having given the police trouble. He had been drinking with some other men in the “Grand Sultan,” and, a quarrel arising, that had adjourned to the street, “to fight it out.” All was over, however, before the policeman arrived; and had he been quite sober he should not have hesitated about complying with the policeman's orders to go away.

Mr. Smith said it was deplorable to fine hard-working intelligent men like the prisoner squandering their money and ruining their health at the public-house. A man who had to get up at five or six o'clock in the morning should have been in bed before midnight. He hoped this would be a caution to him. He would now be discharged on paying 2s. for the hearing.

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

WILFUL DAMAGE

William Stewart, a private in the 17th Brigade Royal Artillery, was charged with being drunk and disorderly, and wilfully breaking a pane of glass of value 30s., the property of Mr. Penn, in Northampton Street.

Police-constable Bowles deposed: About twenty minutes before twelve last night, I was on duty in Northampton Street, and saw the prisoner with two more soldiers come out of the “Grand Sultan” public-house, in that street. I stopped above Mr. Penn's widow. I do not know which of the three soldiers broke it. They then ran away. I went down the street and met them. I walked by their side talking to them as far as the bottom of Townwall Street, where I took the prisoner into custody, and the other two ran away. He went quietly to the station. On his way there he said to me, “I did not break the window, policeman; it was one of the others.” He was not drunk. I then took him to the station, where he said he did not break it, but that Gunner Jackson did.

The Magistrates considered the evidence insufficient to convict the man, and he was discharged; but the Bench, at the same time, granted an application for a summons against Jackson.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 25 November, 1870.

OBTAINING BY FALSE PRETENCES

Elen Hopper, a young woman who had recently been living as a servant at the “Grand Sultan” public house in Snargate Street, was charged with obtaining sundry articles of grocery, the property of Messrs. Bottle and Gandy, by false pretences.

Benjamin Merralls said he was an assistant in the employ of Messrs. Bottle and Gandy, grocers, carrying on business in Snargate Street. On Saturday afternoon the prisoner entered the shop, apparently in a great hurry, and asked him to make haste and serve her with a quarter of a pound of tea, as her mistress, Mrs. Styles, wanted to make tea for some gentlemen immediately and was waiting for it. In consequence of what she said she weighed her a quarter of a pound of tea, which he gave to her, and asked her if she wanted anything else. She then asked for a pound of sugar and half a pound of butter. When served with the butter she said she had forgotten to bring the plate across; so must put that in her pocket. (A laugh.) In consequence of what she said witness believed the whole of the things were for her mistress, Mrs. Styles. He knew she had been living at the “Grand Sultan” as servant.

Elizabeth, wife of William Henry Styles, landlord of the “Grand Sultan,” said her house was in Snargate Street, a little lower than Messrs. Bottle and Gandy's, on the opposite side of the way. The prisoner had been living at her house as servant; but she was not there on Saturday. Witness had discharges her on the previous Thursday. Witness did not authorise her to go to Messrs. Bottle and Gandy's on Saturday and get any grocery.

Police-sergeant Bailey said that, in consequence of information given at the station-house, he went in search of the prisoner, and found her at the “Prince Albert” public-house, Biggin Street, about six o'clock on Saturday evening. He told her what she was charged with, and she denied knowing anything about it, and said she had not been in Snargate Street that day. He took her to the station-house, where the charge was entered by the Superintendent and read over to her, when she said, “I had the things; you will find them at the “Prince Albert.” Witness went there and found the articles of grocery produced – a quarter of a pound of tea, a pound of sugar, and half a pound of butter.

The witness Merralls was called forward; but he was of course unable to identify the articles produced as those with which he had supplied the prisoner. He said, however, that they were all done up in the same description of paper, and that he believed them to be the same.

The prisoner having been cautioned in the usual manner, said she had nothing to offer in defence; and she was then committed for trial at the next Quarter Sessions.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 3 November, 1871. Price 1d.

IMPUDENT ROBBERY

Richard Jackson was charged with stealing from the person of George Terry, at the “Grand Sultan,” in Snargate Street, a silver watch, worth about £3, and 2s. in money, his property.

The prosecutor said he went into the “Grand Sultan” about half-past ten o'clock the previous evening, and feeling tired lay down and went to sleep on one of the seats. About an hour afterwards the landlord woke him up, and he was going to see what time it was, when he found his watch gone, the silver chain to which it was suspended being still hanging about his neck. Two or three shillings he had loose in his pocket, before he went to sleep, were also gone, and his purse was lying empty on the floor. Before he lay down to go to sleep, there was no one in the room; but when the landlord woke him up the prisoner was there. He asked the prisoner if he had taken his watch, and he replied, “No.” From something the landlord told him, he afterwards went for a policeman, and gave Jackson into custody.

William Henry Styles, the landlord of the “Grand Sultan,” said that shortly after ten o'clock on the previous night, he had the occasion to pass through the room, where he saw prosecutor asleep, on one of the seats, and the prisoner standing over him, overhauling him. When prisoner saw him, he walked away in the direction of the bar. About twenty minutes afterwards Jackson awoke, and came and told him that he had lost his watch, and on examining the chain, which was still around his neck, he saw that the swivel had been pulled completely open, as if by main force. From what he had seen, his suspicions were aroused against the prisoner, who had been the only person in the room, and he accused him of knowing something about he watch. Prisoner denied any knowledge of it. Witness asked him the reason he had pulled the man about, and the prisoner replied that it was because he believed he was a man from Kingsdown whom he knew. He afterwards said witness could search him, and emptied his pockets. There was no watch found upon him; but he had 2s. 6d. in silver and a few coppers. Witness knew prisoner had no money with him when he came in. After the time the witness saw prisoner overhauling prosecutor, he believed he left the house two or three times.

The case was remanded till Friday.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 24 May, 1872. Price 1d.

ONE PINT AND ITS EFFECTS

George Jackson, a labourer, was charged with being drunk and causing an obstruction of the footway in St, James's Street.

It appeared from the constable's statement that the defendant was drunk at the bottom of St. James's Street at half-past one the same morning .The defendant was so drunk that he had to get assistance to convey him to the police-station.

The defendant said he had only had one pint of beet at the "Grand Sultan."

Major Crookes, thought inclined to disbelieve the prisoner's statement, dismissed him on his payment of the costs of the hearing.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 8 November, 1872. Price 1d.

SERIOUS CHARGE

William Styles, the landlord of the “Grand Sultan” public-house, was summoned by the captain of a Norwegian ship lying in the harbour, for receiving a quantity of oats, his property, knowing them to have been stolen.

Mr. Minter prosecuted, and Mr. Fox defended.

The Bench adjourned the case, on the application of Mr. Fox.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 7 July, 1873.

ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OF THE LICENSING ACT

William Henry Styles, the landlord of the “Grand Sultan Inn,” Snargate Street, was charged with having sold intoxicating liquors after the hours prescribed under the new Licensing Act.

Police-sergeant Johnson deposed: On Saturday morning, the 5th of July, at about one o'clock, my attention was called by police-constable Bath to the defendant, who, with another man was carrying some cans of beer along the quay. I followed them, and I saw them serving out the beer to some men near the racquet court, and I saw one of the men pay Stiles some money. When asked, Stiles said the money was for some biscuits and cheese.

Stiles said the beer was ordered early in the evening and was taken out of the “Grand Sultan” before half-past eleven.

Mr. Thomas Sutton said he ordered the beer, for a gang of men who were working under his superintendence, early in the evening. The beer was brought out before half-past eleven.

The Bench dismissed the case.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 16 January, 1885.

ROOK v. FAGGETER – TEA VERSUS BEER

This is a judgement summons, the plaintiff a tea dealer, and the defendant the keeper of the “Grand Sultan,” public-house, Snargate Street.

In reply to the Judge, the defendant said: I keep the “Grand Sultan Inn,” Snargate Street, for Mr. Flint, brewer of Canterbury. I am put in there to make all I can. I do not pay rent for the place. I sell what I can at a certain price. I pay Mr. Flint 34s. per barrel for the beer. I make what I can upon that. I am put in to see if anything can be done with the house. The license is in my name, but Mr. Flint holds it. I have been in the house for a little over twelve months. This debt is for tea supplied to sell again. They pressed me to take the agency, but there was no trade for it. It is very hard for me to pay anything as I can hardly pay my expenses.

The Judge: How is it you do not have to pay rent?

Defendant: I pay it by paying a long price for the beer.

The Judge: Who is the freeholder of the house?

Defendant: Mr. Flint, and he supplies the beer.

The Judge: You pay for the beer of course. What else do you pay?

Defendant: I pay 8s. a week for the things in the house and furniture.

The Judge: What are your average takings?

Defendant: The most we take is from 10s. to 12s. per day.

The Judge: You take that, do you, even in this cheerful season. I think you must pay 10s. a month off this debt.

The plaintiff asked for expenses for coming from London, but they were not allowed.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, 5 February, 1915.

ANNUAL LICENSING METING

THE MAGISTRATES DECISION

The Magistrates then retired to consider their decision, and on returning the Chairman said that the Magistrates had decided to give a licence to the "Town Hall" for both music and singing on condition that free admission was given. The licence of the "Gothic" and "White Lion" would be renewed. The "Silver Lion," the "Black Horse," and the "Grand Sultan" would have to go to Canterbury.

Mr. Mowll said that he understood the Chairman to say he did not want to hear any more about the "Grand Sultan."

The Chairman: That is what the Bench told me to say.

Mr. Mowll: That surely cannot be right; it is an elementary point in all procedure that the evidence is never stopped.

Mr. Chitty: I thought that Mr. Mowll said it was not worth while for him to say anything more.

Mr. Mowll: I beg pardon. I should not say that I should not, for instance, expect to convince you that any licence is wanted. Naturally I should not attempt to do so.

The Chairman: Well, there it is.

Mr. Mowll said that he had some evidence to call and he thought it would be well that he should call it now.

The Chairman: You will have the opportunity at Canterbury.

Mr. Mowll after having enquired said that his witnesses had left. He then proceeded to  address the Bench and pointed out that the house was used by men employed in the coal trade. The house opened at 6.00 whilst the "Royal Hippodrome" did not open till 9 o'clock, and the men could get coffee and tea, and if they liked a little rum to put in it. He asked the Bench to recommend the matter. There had been some misunderstanding as he understood the Chairman to give a decision in his favour.

The Chairman said that he never intended to convey that.

Mr. Mowll said that he marked his papers "renewed."

The Chairman said that they did not want and more evidence as it was a question of trade. He pointed out that the licence would continue until the end of the year and Mr. Mowll could tender any evidence he wished when the case came up before the Justices at Canterbury.

Mr. Mowll asked if it was fair to his client to put him to this expense when the object was if the houses had a good trade Quarter Sessions should not be bothered with them.

The Chairman remarked that he thought he knew that would happen.

Mr. Mowll said that he did ask the Bench to renew the licence. he did not want to flog a dead horse. (At this point Mr. Chitty made some remark which was inaudible on the reporters' bench). He knew that it was no use addresses Mr. Chitty.

Mr. Chitty: Mr. Mowll you are not justified in making such remarks. I am here and give my opinion as a Justice and you are not justified in imputing to me improper motives.

Mr. Mowll: I did not do so, but I do say, with great difference you are not an unbiased person on the business.

Mr. Chitty: Is there any person unbiased.

The Chairman: I hope I am for one.

Mr. Mowll: You ask me-

Mr. Chitty: You are making very improper remarks.

Mr. Mowll: I have cross-examined you so often on the very point.

Mr. Chitty said that Mr. Mowll had asked a question of the Justices and he was entitled to give an answer. Mr. Mowll asked if these men were to be deprived of an opportunity of getting tea and coffee. He was aware that there were a number of places in the immediate vicinity where they could obtain it.

Mr. Mowll: With rum in it? (Laughter.) I say if they want some rum in it let them have it; that is where we differ.

The Chairman: I think this little question is closed. We can do nothing further for you until Canterbury.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 9 July, 1915. Price 1d.

THE GRAND SULTAN

On Wednesday the question of ordering the “Grand Sultan,” Snargate Street, to be closed and compensated in accordance with the Licensing Act, 1910, came before the East Kent Compensation Committee, sitting at the Session House, Canterbury, Mr. Plumptre presiding.

Prior to the Dover case being heard, Mr. Holler, K.C., appearing for the “Bell Inn,” Sittingbourne, urged that at the present time the Compensation Authorities should apply the money by investing it in the War Loan. He declared that by “carrying on business as usual” the Court were not realizing the very serious crisis through which the country was going. The Committee, however, disregarded this appeal and ordered the house to be closed and compensation determined.

In the two other cases remitted to the Authorities by the Dover Magistrates, the “Silver Lion,” Middle Row, owned by the Dover Town Council, and the “Black Horse,” Bridge Street, owned by Mrs. Sarah Dennis of Tower Hamlets, there was no opposition to the cases going to be compensated and the houses will accordingly be closed later in the year after compensation has been determined.

Mr. Travers Humphries, instructed by Messrs. Mowll and Mowll, of Dover, applied for the renewal of the licence of the “Grand Sultan,” Snargate Street, the licensee of which was Mr. T. H. Weeks, and the owners Messrs. Flint and Co., Canterbury.

Mr. Shewell Cooper appeared for the Dover Justices in opposition to the renewal of the licence. He said that the renewal was opposed on the grounds of redundancy. In Dover there was one licence to 242 persons, so that it was difficult to say how it could be said that by closing a public house anyone would be injured I regard to obtaining facilities for drink. The house had an entrance in Snargate Street and also another in Northampton Street. The house was practically in two parts, and the part in worst repair was that with the entrance in Northampton Street, which was disused, and served only as an entrance to Snargate Street part from Northampton Street. There were four fully licensed houses in the neighbourhood. The “Gothic,” next door, a similar house and doing a good deal larger trade; the “Invicta,” opposite, ten yards off; the “Avenue,” also opposite, and only twenty seven yards off; and the “Royal Hippodrome” bar, twenty five yards away. There had been four transfers since 1906, which was prima facie evidence that it was not extraordinarily successful.

Edward A. Jackson, clerk to Mr. Hayward, architect and surveyor, said that he had inspected the premises. The portion of the premises facing Northampton Street was disused and not in good repair. The sanitary arrangements for the public were poor.

Cross-examined. He supposed that by not using the Northampton Street part of the premises the landlord could give better supervision, as otherwise he would have to leave them without supervision or else employ two separate people. The Northampton Street premises required doing up.

Re-examined. The sanitary arrangements were poor from the point of view of requiring repairs and also from a sanitary point of view. Its present state was insanitary.

Chief Constable D. H. Fox said that the figures given as to the percentage of population per public house was on the 1911 census. There was at least 12,000 additional floating population in Dover. The licence was transferred to Mr. Weeks in August, 1913; and there were changes in 1911, 1907, and 1906 (twice). The nearest house was the “Gothic,” next door, which had an entrance both in Snargate Street and Northampton Street. As regards the trade of the two houses, since the War there had been a great number of troops in Dover, and this was a street frequented by them and also the Navy, and the licensed houses in the street were frequented very much all the evening by these men, and it was difficult for him to say which was doing the better trade. Before the War the “Gothic” was doing the better trade. In his opinion, there were sufficient facilities for the public if this licence were extinguished.

By Mr. Travers Humphries. A very brisk trade at times was done in connection with the coal boats at the back of these premises in Northampton Street.

Chief Inspector Lockwood gave evidence of visits to the house on January 22nd, at 10 a.m., there were no customers; on Saturday, January 23rd, at 3 p.m., there were seven customers; on January 25th, at twenty minutes to five p.m., there were three customers; and on Thursday, January 28th, at 7.45 p.m., there were 33 customers.

By Mr. Travers Humphries. Both the “Grand Sultan” and the “Gothic” were doing a very large trade, and if the licence of the “Grand Sultan” were taken away the trade might be thrown into the house next door. He did not think that the “Gothic” would be too full. There were other houses in the immediate vicinity.

Mr. Travers Humphries said that the house was considered, as the report of the Renewal Authorities stated, in conjunction with the “Gothic,” and it seemed to be assumed that either one of the licenses should be taken away. But he contended that there was no reason to take away either licence. It was a fallacy to say that where there were two houses next door one was redundant. It depended on the neighbourhood. It was a great fallacy, as was shown when there was a discussion as to restaurants in Piccadilly Circus, and it was then said by those who had most knowledge that a restaurateur always welcomed someone of the same sort coming close to him, because when the place became known as a centre people came there. In this case they had two houses close together who did the same class of trade, having always catered for the very large number of men employed in unloading coal, and the houses were open for them from 6 o'clock in the morning, and it was desirable that they should have a house that was convenient for them. The figures of the trade before the War showed that the “Grand Sultan” was doing a substantial trade that was not accounted for it merely by passing traffic of Snargate Street, and which came from the coal yards. At present the hours were limited. They would have crowded into one house a very large trade if this licence were taken away. At the present time Mr. Weeks was doing just seven barrels a week, and the “Gothic” according to the evidence before the Justices, was doing eight, so that if the enormous trade of fifteen barrels a week were crowded into the “Gothic” there would not be very much time for the sale to take place, and he questioned if it would be in the interests of anyone to take the licence away. As regard the name of the house, it was not connected with any Sultan with whom they were at war (laughter). It might possibly be in their minds of the Justices that the reason it was taken away was because of that (laughter), but it was named after the Sultan of Zanzibar (laughter). The trade before the year 1915 was an average of three and a quarter barrels a week, but it was most unfortunate to take this average, as for the week that Mr. Weekes went in the trade increased. For the year from November, 1913, to November, 1914, the barrels sold numbered 234, and the spirits 178 gallons. From November, 1914, to June, 1915, the number of barrels sold were 228, which worked out at 334 barrels per annum. No doubt some of that was due to the soldiers and sailors in Dover, but a great deal of it was due to the trade that Mr. Weekes was doing before the War. He said that he also wanted to deal with the little misunderstanding which might have been the cause that the “Grand Sultan” found its way to Canterbury. Mr. Mowll appeared for the licensee, and when he stated the trade the Chairman of the Licensing Magistrates said that they did not wish to hear anything more. Mt. Mowll interpreted that as meaning that the Bench had made up their minds to renew the licence and did not want to hear any evidence, and it was one of the things that Benches did and also Judges in the High Courts when they were satisfied and meant to decide in one's favour. The Magistrates then heard other cases, including the “Gothic,” and came back and gave their decision against this house without having heard any of the evidence to be called on the part of the owners. The Magistrates most fairly said that the evidence could be called when this was pointed out, but Mr. Mowll having marked his papers, “Renewed,” let his witnesses go, so that the facts of the case, through that misunderstanding, were never put before the Justices at all. He would call that evidence now.

T. H. Weekes, the landlord, produced his books containing the day's takings since he had gone into the house. In October, 1913, the week's takings amounted to £16 17s. 6d. last week the takings were £44 10s. 9d.; and the previous weeks' were £42, £38, £44, £48, £41, £50 and £48. He was doing a very big trade now, and a substantial portion of it was from the coal men, with whom a good trade was done from 6 a.m., all day long, till 5.30 p.m. he did this trade before the War broke out as soon as he begun to know the people. From that time the trade increased. It was not entirely due to the War. Last week he did close on eight barrels, and yesterday he did nine barrels, 40 dozen small bottle, and 20 crates. One of the barrels he had to buy in Dover not from his regular brewer.

Mr. Shewell Cooper said that from £16 in October, 1913, the weeks takings only appeared to have increased to £18 or £20 in April, 1914. Did he suggest there was any material increase before the War?

There was £5 a week; that is very nice.

Mr. Shewell Cooper; And now we have £49.

Re-examined: he was getting a very good living and was anxious to stay. He was making a good living from the trade he did before the War or else he should have asked the brewers to find him another house (laughter).

Mr. Kempton, a representative of Messrs. Flint and Co,. said that, including the bottled beer, the trade done was from November, 1911, to November, 1912, 101 barrels; 1912 to 1913, 155 barrels; 1913 to 1914, 234 barrels; and from November, 1914, to June, 1915, 228 barrels.

Mr. Barron, clerk to Messrs. Mowll and Mowll, said that the spirit book showed that the spirits sold in 1911 were 36 gallons; 1912, 20 gallons; 1913, 62 gallons; 1914, 178 gallons; and for the five months to May this year, 149¼ gallons.

Mr. J. Ingleton, secretary and manager to Messrs. Bussey and Co., coal merchants, Northampton Street, said that he had known the neighbourhood 43 years, and lived in Northampton Street, 29 years. The coal trade in Northampton Street employed 200 or more men, and the “Grand Sultan” and the “Gothic” were the two houses used by these men. He thought that the trade of these men would support two houses. They were also used for lavatory purposes. They were allowed a quarter of an hour off at 10 o'clock and at 3 o'clock to get refreshments. It was desirable that they should have these houses to go to close to their work, or otherwise they would have to go after them to find them (laughter).

Mr. Cooper: Do you seriously suggest that if this licence were extinguished there was not accommodation for these men in the “Gothic” and “Royal Hippodrome” bars?

The “Royal Hippodrome” bar does not open till 9 a.m., and if 100 men were to go into one house at one time there would not be much chance of them being served in a quarter of an hour.

Re-examined. It was very desirable to keep them men in Northampton Street.

Mr. Hatcher, hall porter at the “Burlington Hotel,” said that he resided at Folkestone, and used the house when he arrived in the early morning, and he found that the house was used almost entirely during the daytime by the coal men.

The Chairman, after consulting for a short time with the Committee, said the application for the renewal was refused. The house will be closed.