From the Kentish Gazette or Canterbury Chronicle, Wednesday, 7 September to Saturday, 10 September, 1768. Price 2d.

TO BE SOLD BY AUCTION

On Thursday the 22nd of September, Instant. At the “Sign of the Hop Poles,” in the Parish of Thanington (near the City of Canterbury) in the County of Kent, between the Hours of 3 and 5 in the Afternoon.

One full equal undivided Moiety, or Half-Part of all in that Freehold Messuage or Tenement, with Two substantial Oasts, Garden, and other Premises, thereunto belonging, situate in the Parish of Thanington, in a certain street called Wincheap, and now in the Occupation of John Blaxland or his assigns.

Also, One full equal undivided Moiety of Half Part of and in all those Two Freehold Messuages or Tenements, with the Gardens, Oasthouses, and Buildings there unto belonging, situate in the Parish of Chilham, in the said County of Kent, and now in the several Occupations of William Wills and ------- Wills, or their assigns. Which said Premises are chargeable with an Annuity of four Pounds during the Life of a Person who is upward of Forty Years of age.

For further Particulars enquire of Mr. Slodden, Attorney at Law at Canterbury.

Kentish Gazette, 29 June, 1821.

FREEHOLD PUBLIC HOUSE,

NEAR WINCHEAP, in THANINGTON.

TO BE SOLD BY AUCTION, By Mr. THOMAS MINTER,

AT the "Hop-Poles," near Wincheap, in Thanington. in the County of Kent, on MONDAY, the-16th day of July, 1821, at 12 o'clock at noon, (subject to such conditions of Sale as shall be then and there produced).

All that MESSUAGE, called the "Hop-Poles," with the new-built Stable, Yard, Garden, and Appurtenances, situate in or near Wincheap aforesaid, and now in the occupation of George Stubberfield.

The Land Tax is Redeemed.

The Tenant trill shew the Premises; and for further particulars apply (if by letter post-paid) to Mr. Shepherd, Solicitor, Faversham.

From the Kentish Gazette, 19 April 1842.

ASHFORD, CANTERBURY, and FOLKESTONE, in KENT To brewers, Innkeepers, and Capitalists.

TO BE SOLD BY AUCTION, By Messrs. BAYLEY and REEVE, ON WEDNESDAY, the 4th of May, 1842, at Two o’clock, at the "Royal Oak Inn," Ashford (by the direction of the Proprietor, who is leaving the county).

Lot 2:— All that FREEHOLD PUBLIC HOUSE, called the "Hop Poles," with the stabling, yard, and garden, situate in Wincheap-street, in the Parish of Thannigton, in the City of CANTERBURY, in the occupation of Mr. James Hodges.

The Purchaser of this Lot may have immediate possession.

Printed Particulars and Conditions may be had ten days preceding the sale, of Messrs. Robert and George Furley, Solicitors, and of the Auctioneers, Ashford.

Kentish Gazette, 8 June 1852.

Accident.

A man, named John Belsey, met with an accident on Tuesday evening, at Wincheap fair. He had been drinking at the "Hop Poles" public house, when, coming down the fair, he went into the "King's Head," and in trying to force his way into a room where dancing was, got pushed down, by which one of his legs were fractured. He was at once taken to the hospital.

Kentish Gazette, 17 January 1854.

Running Down case. Rose v. Clark. Jury case.

This was an action to recover the sum of £18 for injury done to the horse and cart belonging to the plaintiff through the furious driving of the defendant. Mr. Mercer for the plaintiff and Mr. Ribton (council) for the defendant.

Our readers will remember that at the previous Court an action was brought by George Newton against the same defendant for injuries received by him at the time of this accident, when a verdict was given for the plaintiff with £50 damages. A great number of witnesses were then called, and to-day they repeated the evidence then given, with very little variation, one or two additional witnesses being produced, who identified the defendant (Clark) as the man who drove the cert on the night of the accident.

Mr. Mercer having opened the case and detailed the particulars, as they would be proved in evidence, then proceeded to call the fallowing witnesses:—

The plaintiff deposed that be heard on the Saturday of the accident having taken place, and he went and looked at the mare; he found her in a very bad state, and she was in consequence laid up for four or five weeks.

On Sunday he went to the defendants, and told him he had heard, that he had run against his mare.

The defendant replied:— What time did the accident take piece?

Plaintiff said he knew best.

Defendant answered — you be ------.

Chas. Valence was going to Canterbury, on the 3rd of September, in a light cart, and when he had reached White-hill, he heard a cart coming along at a fast rate; it ran against the cart he was in, and threw George Newton, and himself out—the horse ran away.

He hollowed out "What are you after?"

There was no answer; and the parties drove off.

George Newton deposed that he was a painter. On the 3rd Sept. last, he was requested by Mr. Valence to accompany him to Canterbury. They left Mr. Rose's yard just about eight o'clock in the evening. Just beyond Chilham station, at Whitehill, they heard a horse and cart coming along very fast. He said to Valence, "pull up as close as you can." Valence pulled up to a Stand still as close to the hedge as he could get, and they both halloed as loud as they could. They saw a horse coming along at a rate of about 12 miles an hour. The cart ran against the nave of their wheel, and turned the cart completely round. The driver (Valence) was thrown out, and he (witness) was thrown between the cart and the horse. The shafts were both broken, and the cart overturned on to his leg, which it broke, also fracturing his ankle. He had been a cripple ever since, and under medical treatment.

James Buss proved the time the accident took place; it I was about a quarter or 20 minutes past 9 o'clock on the night of the 3rd of September.

Stephen Butcher, (keeper of the Wincheap turnpike gate) stated that the defendant, with Mr. Horton, passed through his gate at three minutes before 9 on the night of the accident, in his horse and cart: he had not then put up his light, as it was not dark enough. Was driving at the rate of 12 miles an hour.

George Loram deposed that he remembered the 3rd of September last. On that day he went with others, from Chartham to Canterbury; he left the former place for that purpose about half-past eight in the evening and met a horse and cart about a mile this side of the toll-gate. He believed Mr. Clark was driving.

Croat-examined by Mr. Ribton:— It was about four miles from where we saw Clark to where the accident took place; saw Clark about ten minutes past 9.— Went into the "Hop Poles" with Link; did not see him take out his watch; did not sit nor stand near the window.— Would not swear, Clark was in the cart, but believed he was. Mr. Pain did not tell me what I was to say to day, nor have I received any money from him.

A labourer of the name of Link gave similar testimony.

Henry Cook, an engineer at Mr. Wetherley's Mills at Chartham, remembered the 3rrd of September last, on which occasion he went lo the Chilham station, to meet a friend coming from Maidstone; the train was due then at 18 minutes past 9. His friend did not come, and he returned home; as he was going along he saw Nutting. When near Whitehall, a quarter of a mile from the station, he met two men in a horse and cart; they were driving very fast when they passed him. Mr. Clark was driving; he had known Mr. Clark some time. He looked at him for a minute or to, as he thought he was driving very fast. He then went homewards, and found a young man lying in the hedge with his leg broken; the cart was by his side. He should say it was 80 or 90 yards from the spot where the cart passed him.

J Hopkins Payne deposed that he lived at Canterbury. On the 3rd Sept., he had been to Shottingden, which place he left (for Chilham) about a quarter to nine. Before he got to the station the train passed, and he proceeded on the road to walk to Canterbury. Just before he got to Chilham, he met a small pony and cart; the pony was driven very slowly by a young man.

There were two young women in the cart. He afterwards saw a horse and cart, which was a being driven at a very fast pace.

The driver was Mr. Clark, of Shottingden, Chilham. He was beating the horse. Directly after Clark had passed him, he saw a confusion in the road, and several persons running. He consequently ran to the spot, and he saw Newton lying in the road.

Cook and Nutting were with him. He was confident that no other vehicle had passed after Clarke passed, until he got up to the place where the plaintiff was lying. He reached that spot about three minutes after Clark passed.

[This witness was subject to a severe cross-examination as to his previous conduct and dealings, but he distinctly negatived the insinuations of the learned counsel, whose questions did not appear to have the remotest bearing on the case at issue, although they might possibly have been of some importance, had Payne been the plaintiff instead of a witness.]

John Nutting, a waggoner, went to Canterbury on the night in question—and returned at a little before four o'clock, when he passed Mr. Clark in his cart in Wincheap, driving fast. Afterwards, he went to the Chilham Railway Station, and on returning passed a horse and cart, which he took to be the same he had seen previously, in Wincheap. There ware two persons in the cart; would not swear who drove. About 100 rods further on, he saw a man lying on the ground with his leg broken, and the cart in the road.

Edgar Manser stated that the plaintiff's cart was brought to him to be repaired, but it was too much damaged to allow of its being repaired; it would have cost £5 to have placed it in a proper condition; the cart might have been worth £10 before the accident.

— Pope, a veterinary surgeon, of Ashford, stated the injuries received by the plaintiff's mare: it was very much hurt; his bill for attendance was £3.

Mr. Ribton then addressed the jury for the defendant:— If they were satisfied that the defendant was the man who drove the cart causing the accident, it would not only prove him to have perjured himself both on the past and present occasion, but that he had shown himself to be a very inhuman and unfeeling person. But the answer he would give to the case that had been made out for the plaintiff, would put a very different complexion upon the whole affair,— and upon the evidence he was about to call, he had no hesitation in expecting a verdict at their hands. He then reviewed the evidence for the plaintiff, remarking upon its bearing upon the case, and commented with some severity upon the character of the witnesses adduced. He did not impute perjury against the persons who had given evidence,— but what he urged was, that they were mistaken in fixing upon the defendant as the party who drove the cart occasioning the accident.

He then called the defendant, who deposed, that he resided at Shottingden, in the parish of Chilham. On the 3rd of September last he went with Mr. Horton, to Canterbury, and put up at the "Queen's Head;" he left at half-past seven at night, having gone from the smoking room to the yard at 20 minutes past seven. It took about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour to get to the Wincheap-turnpike-gate; he passed Mr. Videon about a quarter of a mile from the scene of the alleged accident; it would have taken him about three-quarters of an hour after leaving Canterbury before he could have reached the spot where he passed Mr. Videon. In Stone Stile Lane, he met Amy Knowles and Benstead. When he reached home it was half-past eight, having left Mr. Horton at his own house, a short distance from witness’s. After having partaken of supper, he went to the "Woodman’s Arms," and met Mr. Horton there, according to appointment; it was then a quarter or 20 minutes after nine o'clock. From the time he left Canterbury till he reached his home he did not come in contact with any cart, nor had his own cart been damaged; it was impossible that he could have caused such an accident without knowing it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Mercer:- He had but one light cart that he generally drove; this is the first accident he had been charged with. He had been to America, but had returned upwards of 20 years.

By His Honour:- From the Chilham Station it would take him 20 minutes to drive to his own house; it was a distance of 2 miles.

Re-examined:- The cart he had with him to-day was the same he used on the night the accident occurred. It took him an hour to drive home from Canterbury.

Thomas Horton, accompanied the defendant to Canterbury on the day in question; he confirmed his evidence. It was about half-past seven when they left at night to return home. Mr. Videon left the "Queen's Head" just before witness and the defendant. It look about 5 minutes to reach the Wincheap-gate. Met Benstead and a young woman in Stone Stile Lane, and spoke to the former. The cart in which he was riding did not come in contact with any other during the journey.

Geo. Bond, hostler at the "Queen's Head," Canterbury, stated that the defendant and Mr. Horton left about half-past 7 o'clock in the evening.

Cross-examined:- The cart was not ordered any time at all. Mr. Videon left about a quarter or twenty minutes before the defendant. Did not start the defendant but saw him go. Did not swear on the last occasion that there were more than 40 horses in the yard on the 3rd of Sept.; there were more than 4, but not to many as 40: could not say how much money he took then, he did not keep any account.

James Kennett, hostler, put Mr. Clark's horse to on the night in question; he drove off about half-past 7. Knew it was that time, because he had heard the clock strike 7.

Crova-examined:- Knew the clock struck 7 because he counted the strikes; could not always count them because he was sometimes asleep.

[Mr. Mercer:- Are you wide awake now then? (Laughter.) Witness smiled assent.]

Could not say who left the yard at either 8, 9, or 10 o'clock the same night.— Did not know how many horses there were in the yard that day—it was not his business.

James Videon, a farmer, living at Moldash, was at the "Queen’s Head," Canterbury, on the 3rd Sept.—Saw Mr. Clark there; he left about a quarter past seven. Was no relation to the defendant, and had no interest in the result of this action. Mr. Clark overtook him about four miles from the Wincheap gate, and 60 or 70 rods from where it was represented the accident took place. He reached home about half past eight; knew that was the time because he asked his servant what time it was, and she said just half-past eight.

Cross-examined:- The cart that passed him was trotting; he was going at a good pace.

Charles Videon, jun., gave similar testimony.

Cross examined:- It was 10 minutes or a quarter past 9 when they left Canterbury—but was not sure which.

John Benstead, a blacksmith, of Shottingden, took up Amy Knowles at her own house, on the 3rd Sept., and drove down
Stone Stile Lane; he there passed Mr. Clark with Mr. Horton t it was about a quarter past eight, he reached Chilham station before the train arrived.

Cross-examined.— Both going and returning he went along Stone Stile Lane; did not meet any one on foot as he returned.
Amy Knowles, of Chilham, confirmed the last witness's statement— Just before the last trial, Pain came to her house, and said to witness— "You told me before that Clark passed you as you were coming from the station." Witness replied that she did not; what she said was, that Mr. Clark passed them as they were going to the station."

Cross-examined.— Witness had wrongfully stated on the previous trial that she was in the employ of Mr. Clark.

Wm. Jull, servant to the defendant spoke to his master coming home on the night of the accident at half past eight o'clock.

Frederick Jenkins, a farmer, of Baldesmere, saw Mr. Hortan at the "Woodman's Arms" on the evening of the 3rd of Sept. Witness asked him what o'clock it was by Canterbury time; he replied, a quarter to nine. Mr. Clark came in about 10 minutes after that.

Sophia Finn, mother of the landlord of the "Woodman's Arms"; saw Mr. Horton there about a quarter to nine, on the 3rd of September last.

Elisabeth Finn, landlady of the "Woodman's Arms," heard Mr. Horton say it was 10 minutes to nine, when he was at their house on the 3rd of September.

Elijah Bartlett, carpenter:- On the 3rd of September he went to Chilham Lees, with the witness Pain; did not return at night by Stone Stile Lane, although they went that way. Did not know what road they returned by—but they passed through Chilham Square. Did not pass any cart. When they got to the place where the accident took place, Pain asked witness if he remembered seeing a cart pass them; he said no. Did not hear any one mention Clark's name that night. People in the crowd asked who could have done it; Pain must have heard them, but did not say anything. When near Canterbury witness met his brother, and told him of the accident; he asked who had done it; Pain said they did not know, but hoped to find out before long.

Cross-examined.— Had never been to Chilham before that day; it was a very dark night, and inclined to rain. Did not notice Chilham Castle; could not say that he passed through the turnpike gate. Before reaching the place where the accident occurred, did not see a horse and cart driving furiously. Could not say for certain that he ran before reaching that spot. Between the "Woodman’s Arms" and the accident he did not meet a carriage or any other vehicle.

Enoch Bartlett, met his brother and Pain on the night of the accident. The latter said he did not know who had caused the accident.

Wm. Warman, Wm. Skinner, and George Curtis, of Canterbury, and J. Dunn, of Faversham, were then examined, with the view of throwing discredit upon the evidence of John Hopkins Pain, who was produced on the other side; they would not believe him on his oath, they severally stated; but their reason for so doing was based, as Skinner admitted, on the fact that the witness had made promises to pay money, verbally and by letter, and had failed to fulfil them—which drew forth strong dissentient expressions from the persons assembled in the court-room.

Mr. Mercer then replied at some length, and with considerable power, going carefully through the whole evidence on both sides, and pointing out that the statements made by the plaintiff's witnesses had not been impugned in one material particular.

His Honour summed up, and the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff.