DOVER KENT ARCHIVES

Sort file:- Folkestone, August, 2022.

Page Updated:- Monday, 15 August, 2022.

PUB LIST PUBLIC HOUSES Paul Skelton

Earliest 1872

(Name from)

Marquis of Lorne

Latest 1903

15 Radnor Street

Folkestone

 

Formerly referred to as the "Mariner's Home" and opened by retired seaman William Hall in 1851. However, he left in 1855 and by 1872 the premises was called the "Marquis of Lorne".

The census of 1881 indicates that living in the premises was also James Blogham, age 61 who was a baker by trade, and also a cricketer called Robert Frood age 35.

Any further information or indeed photographs would be appreciated. Please email me at the address below.

This page is still to be updated.

 

Folkestone Express 4 May 1872.

Saturday, April 27th: Before The Mayor, J. Gambrill and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

Emily Greenland, landlady of the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, was charged with assaulting Charlotte Whittaker, who described herself as an “unfortunate”.

From the statements of the parties concerned it appears that complainant had lodged at defendant's house two months, and left a short time since. On going for her clothes, a week's rent was demanded, which led to an altercation, and complainant alleged that defendant struck her three times without cause, which provoked her to use language more expressive than elegant. Defendant said complainant struck her first and that she took her in to lodge “out of charity”.

Mr. Boarer told defendant if she took such people as complainant into her house she must expect trouble with them. He did not believe she kept complainant two months “out of charity”.

Fined 1s. and 10s. costs.

Note: Greenland is listed as last licensee of Mariner's Home according to More Bastions, but this case suggests the house changed it's name whilst Greenland was there.

 

Folkestone Express 13 July 1872.

Wednesday, July 10th: Before The Mayor, T. Caister and J. Tolputt Esqs.

The license of the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, was transferred to Mr. Holloway.

 

Folkestone Express 27 July 1872.

Saturday, July 20th: Before The Mayor and R.W. Boarer Esq.

Nancy Golden was charged with using obscene language in Radnor Street on the 19th instant.

From the evidence of Alfred Pope, Star Inn, and his two daughters, Emily and Mary Ann, it seems that defendant lives with her sister, who keeps the Marquis Of Lorne public house in the same street, and that defendant was in the habit of addressing the two girls in anything but polite terms.

Defendant was fined 10s. and 12s. costs. Paid.

 

Folkestone Express 30 August 1873.

Annual Licensing Meeting.

Wednesday, August 27th: Before The Mayor, J. Gambrill, J. Tolputt, and J. Clarke Esq.

The licensing committee met at ten o'clock for the purpose of taking into consideration the question of making any alteration in the hours for opening and closing public houses. Shortly after eleven o'clock the licensed victuallers present were called into Court, where the Clerk said the Bench would hear anything with reference to the alteration of the hours for the opening and closing.

In the case of the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, Superintendent Wilshire said the house was the resort of prostitutes and there was a brothel kept by applicant's wife's sister next door.

Applicant said he could not help them coming to his bar.

The Mayor said applicant knew all about it, and the Bench would take time to consider whether the license should be renewed and would give their decision on the 30th September.

 

Southeastern Gazette 2 September 1873.

Local News.

The annual licensing meeting was held on Wednesday, when the magistrates present were J. Hoad, Esq. (Mayor), J. Gambrill, J. Tolputt, and J. Clark, Esqrs.

On the question of granting a licence to the Marquis of Lorne, the Supt. of Police complained of prostitutes being allowed to frequent the house. The applicant said he could not refuse them if they were orderly. The Bench reserved their decision.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 13 September 1873.

Wednesday, September 10th: Before The Mayor, J. Tolputt and J. Clarke Esqs.

George Holloway, a licensed victualler, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, was charged with allowing his house to be the habitual resort of prostitutes.

The Bench, after hearing the evidence, dismissed the case.

 

Folkestone Express 13 September 1873.

Wednesday, September 8th: Before The Mayor, J. Tolputt and J. Clark Esqs.

George Holloway was summoned on a charge of harbouring women of loose character in his house, the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street.

The case was adjourned from the previous Saturday to give defendant an opportunity of having a solicitor to defend him. Mr. Worsfold Mowll, of Dover, appeared for defendant today.

Supt. Wilshire said he visited the house in question about a quarter before eleven on the night of the 9th ult., when he saw two prostitutes in the tap room, one lying at full length on a form, and another sitting by the side of a fisherman. One of the girls ran out of the house into a cottage next door, which he believed was occupied by defendant's wife's sister.

By Mr. Mowll: Had seen the girls in the house before. The other girl had a black eye and went out in the same direction as the other one. Spoke to the landlady, and left a message that he should take proceedings against defendant. Had been eight months in Folkestone. Had been in the Wandsworth division of the London Police Force, but did not recollect any order with reference to such cases, but he would have to report cases on the second visit to the houses. It was not his duty to visit public houses when in London. Did not know how long the girls had been in the house.

Sergeant Reynolds corroborated the Superintendent's evidence, and said Mr. Wilshire cautioned the landlady.

Mr. Mowll said he had really no case to answer. It had not been shown in evidence how long the girls had been in the house. The Act said the woman must not be in the house a longer time than was necessary to obtain reasonable refreshments, and before defendant could be convicted that must be proved affirmatively. His client assured him that his house had only been visited once by the police. The rule observed in London, and also at Dover, was that the police should request publicans to clear their houses of such characters and then visit the house again to see if it had been done, and if not, then the landlord would be liable. He contended that on the evidence before the Bench the summons must fail.

The Mayor said the Bench were not satisfied that there was sufficient evidence before them to convict defendant. The case was therefore dismissed. Unfortunately the Superintendent did not pay a second visit, but defendant had been cautioned several times.

 

Southeastern Gazette 16 September 1873.

Local News.

At the Police Court on Wednesday, George Holloway appeared to answer an adjourned charge of harbouring prostitutes at the Marquis of Lorne public house, Radnor Street.

Supt. Wiltshire deposed to visiting the defendant’s house in company with Sergt. Reynolds, about a quarter to eleven on the night of the 29th ult., and seeing two prostitutes in the tap-room - one sitting down with a sailor and the other lying on a seat asleep. The one who was sitting down got up and ran into a cottage adjoining.

By Mr, W. Mowll (who appeared for defendant): He had not been in the house before on that evening, and he did not go in again. He did not know how long these girls had been there, but he had seen them there before.

Police Sergt. Reynolds corroborated.

By Mr. Mowll: He did not speak to the landlady, but the Superintendent cautioned her.

Mr. Mowll contended that there was no case against the defendant, as there was no proof that the parties stopped in the house longer than was requisite to obtain necessary refreshment. In Dover and other places it was the custom of the police, if they found persons of this kind assembled to warn the landlord, and return afterwards to see if they had dispersed. Such ought to have been done in this case.

The Bench agreed with this view, and accordingly dismissed the information.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 4 October 1873.

Adjourned Licensing Day.

Wednesday, October 1st: Before The Mayor, J. Clarke and J. Tolputt Esqs.

This was the day appointed to consider the postponed licenses, and Mr. Mowll, of Dover, appeared, and in a long address, pleaded the cause of the following house, the license of which the magistrates renewed, giving the landlord a severe caution, that if they were again complained of, they would not be granted: The Marquis Of Lorne, George Holloway, Radnor Street.

 

Folkestone Express 4 October 1873.

Adjourned Licensing Meeting.

Tuesday, September 30th: Before The Mayor, J. Tolputt and J. Clark Esqs.

The Star, The Marquis Of Lorne, and The Crown And Anchor.

The renewal of the above-named house was adjourned from the licensing meeting on the 27th August.

Mr. Worsfold Mowll, of Dover, appeared for Messrs. Holloway (Marquis Of Lorne), Pope (Star) and Smith (Crown And Anchor). He asked the Bench to take the three applications together, which was complied with.

Superintendent Wilshere said he had given notice that he should oppose the renewal of the license to the Marquis Of Lorne, the reason being that it was the habitual resort of prostitutes. He never visited the house, but found such characters there. He had seen prostitutes at the Star up to the 27th August. The Crown And Anchor was also a habitual resort of such characters, and the landlord was fined 10 on 7th May last for selling intoxicating liquors during prohibited hours. He had no complaint to make against the house since the annual licensing day. The cottage at the back of the house which was formerly occupied as a brothel was then untenanted.

By Mr. Mowll: Had visited the London music halls and although there was no doubt women of loose character habitually assembled there they did not conduct themselves as open prostitutes. Had cautioned Holloway. There was a brothel next door to the Marquis Of Lorne, and there was a communication between the two houses by means of a narrow passage into which a door opened from the tap room. On the 23rd May a prostitute named Fanny Boulton gave as her residence the Marquis Of Lorne.

Mr. Mowll objected to such statements being made unless supported by evidence.

Cross-examination continued: There were sure to be private brothels close to the public houses in a neighbourhood like Radnor Street.

Mr. Mowll apprehended that there would be no difficulty in the way of their Worships granting the licenses, because the evidence of the Superintendent merely went to show that he had visited the houses from time to time and he had found reputed prostitutes there, but it was acknowledged by the Legislature that such characters could claim to be served with refreshments, and if a landlord refused to serve them he would be liable to be indicted. But putting that aside for a moment, was it possible (he asked) that in a neighbourhood like that in which the houses were situated there would not be from time to time such characters taking refreshments at the public houses? Folkestone being a seaport and close to a military camp, where there were from 2,000 to 3,000 soldiers, it was impossible to keep houses where soldiers and sailors were in the habit of resorting entirely free from objectionable women. No doubt it was their Worships' duty to put down all kind of immorality as far as they possibly could, but the Legislature had to a certain extent legitimised it, and the women were entitled to go for refreshments to any public house. No doubt the Clerk would advise the Bench that not only was it necessary that notice of opposition should be given, but also that certain offences should be proved and recorded upon the licenses, but with the exception of Smith's case, there was not a single conviction recorded against his clients.

The Court was cleared for a time, and on the readmission of the public the Mayor said the Magistrates were glad to hear that there was an improvement in the conducting of the houses in question, and they had determined to renew the licenses, but they wished to say that in case of the law being broken in future the full penalties would be inflicted.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 29 August 1874.

Licensing Day.

The annual brewsters' licensing day was held on Wednesday last. The magistrates on the Bench were The Mayor, J. Tolputt, and W. Bateman Esqs. The license of the Marquis Of Lorne was adjourned for a month.

 

Folkestone Express 29 August 1874.

Annual Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, August 26th: Before The Mayor, W. Bateman and J. Tolputt Esqs.

The seventy four licensed victuallers, twelve beershop keepers and twenty three grocers and wine merchants had their licenses renewed, with the exception of those named.

The Marquis Of Lorne: In this case the license was opposed by Supt. Wilshere on the ground that George Holloway, applicant, had knowingly and habitually harboured prostitutes in his house.

Mr. Mowll, of Dover, appeared for applicant.

Supt. Wilshere said he had visited the house occasionally, and had found a prostitute always in the bar. He wished to have the application adjourned, as his witnesses were out of town.

Mr. Mowll said it would be a very extraordinary proceeding if the case were adjourned. The Superintendent had stated half a case, which might prejudice the minds of the Bench. Applicant was prepared to meet the case on it's merits. He contended that the application for an adjournment should have been made before, and not a statement from the Superintendent that he could prove something at a future time.

The Mayor said there had been good ground shown for an adjournment.

Supt. Wilshere, cross-examined by Mr. Mowll: I have visited the house twelve or fifteen times since last year, and have sometimes seen applicant, and at other times a woman who I believed was his wife. Do not remember going there at any time when applicant or his wife was not there. Have frequently cautioned him. I know the Licensing Act has a special provision for dealing with persons harbouring prostitutes, but I have not proceeded against him because I have not been in a position to prove the case.

Mr. Mowll said the Superintendent admitted that he had not laid an information against the house because he had not been in a position to prove the commission of the offence, and yet he asked the Bench to take away applicant's license on less grounds than on proof of commission of the offence, and now asked the Bench to adjourn the application, which was a most monstrous thing. If the evidence was not strong enough to convict, it would not b strong enough to take away his license. He would ask the Bench to look at the Act, when they would see that there must be two convictions before they could take the license away.

In answer to Mr. Mowll, the Superintendent said his witnesses were members of the Metropolitan Police, acting under the Contagious Diseases Act.

The application was adjourned to the 23rd September.

 

Southeastern Gazette 29 August 1874.

Annual Licensing Day.

At the annual licensing, on Wednesday, most of the licences were renewed.

That of the Marquis of Lorne was opposed by the Superintendent of Police, and adjourned.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 26 September 1874.

Brewster Session.

Wednesday, September 23rd: Before W. Wightwick Esq.

The license of the Marquis Of Lorne was renewed.

 

Folkestone Express 26 September 1874.

Wednesday, September 23rd: Before The Mayor, J. Tolputt and J. Clark Esqs.

This being the day for hearing the adjourned applications for licenses, the following was disposed of:

The Marquis Of Lorne: The application of George Holloway for the renewal of the license of the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, was adjourned on the previous occasion in consequence of it's being opposed by Supt. Wilshere on the ground that a woman of disreputable character was living in the house.

Supt Wilshere now said the woman had left the house, and the house having been well conducted since, he withdrew his opposition.

The license was renewed, The Mayor remarking that in the event of any future conviction the full penalty would be inflicted, but they hoped the house would be better conducted in future.

 

Southeastern Gazette 26 September 1874.

Adjourned Licensing Meeting.

At the adjourned brewster sessions, on Wednesday, the opposition to the renewal of the licences of the Marquis of Lome and the Crown and Anchor was withdrawn.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 13 January 1877.

Saturday, January 6th: Before The Mayor, General Armstrong, Captain Fletcher, J. Kelcey and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

Alice and Frances Minnte Longley, two little girls of very miserable appearance, aged thirteen and seven respectively, were charged with stealing three sheets, value 5s., the property of Charles Holloway.

Sarah Holloway, the wife of Charles Holloway, the landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne in Radnor Street: Prisoners came to her house on Thursday, and offered her 5s. for a fortnight's lodging. She gave them a bed, but in consequence of what she was told she sent them off next morning. After they had gone she missed three sheets. She sent after prisoners, and the youngest one was found in possession of them. After hearing further evidence the Bench sentenced them to one month's imprisonment with hard labour.

Note: Licensee is named as George Holloway in More Bastions.

 

Folkestone Express 13 January 1877.

Saturday, January 6th: Before The Mayor, General Armstrong, R.W. Boarer Esq., and Captain Fletcher.

Alice Longley, 13, and Frances Minnie Longley, 9, two raggedly attired little girls, were charged with stealing three sheets, valued at 5s., the property of Charles Holloway.

Sarah Holloway, the wife of the prosecutor, who is landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne beerhouse in Radnor Street, deposed that the prisoners came to her house on Thursday night and asked for a fortnight's lodging, for which they said they would pay five shillings. Witness accordingly let them have a room for the night, but on the following morning she was informed that they came from Hythe, and thereupon told the prisoners to leave her house. They went upstairs, got their things, and left. Shortly after she missed three sheets from the beds on which the prisoners had slept. She told a Mr. Chapman of her loss, and he went in search of the prisoners. When he returned he had the youngest prisoner with him and was carrying the sheets in his hand. When questioned she stated that her sister gave the sheets to her.

Edward Chapman stated that when he captured the youngest prisoner she had the sheets in her hand, and offered him a shilling to allow her to go.

P.C. Butcher said that when he took the older prisoner into custody she confessed to having committed the theft.

From the statements of Superintendent Wilshere and Raymond it appeared that the children were greatly neglected by their father, who allowed them to roam about the country and beg.

The Bench sentenced each of the prisoners to one month's imprisonment with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Express 24 May 1879.

Harry Cox, a private in the Grenadier Guards, was charged with stealing a guinea fowl, value 5s., the property of Mr. Albert Attwood, poulterer, High Street.

An assistant in the employ of the prosecutor having missed the fowl, gave information to the police. He identified that produced.

George Holloway, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, said on Thursday evening two soldiers came to his house, and after having some beer, one of them asked him to buy a guinea fowl, but he could not swear that prisoner was the man.

P.C. Butcher said from information he received he went to the Marquis Of Lorne. He saw the prisoner in the tap room with the fowl in his possession.

Prisoner pleaded Guilty, and was sentenced to a month's hard labour.

 

Southeastern Gazette 24 May 1879.

Local News.

On Wednesday Harry Cox, a private in the Grenadier Guards, stationed at Shorncliffe Camp, was charged with stealing a guinea fowl, the property of Albert Atwood. The fowl was found by P.C. Butcher in the possession of the prisoner at the Marquis of Lorne public-house.

The Bench sentenced the accused to one month’s hard labour.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 28 August 1880.

Wednesday last was the Annual Licensing Day for the Borough of Folkestone, the magistrates on the Bench being The Mayor, Ald. Hoad, Capt. Crowe, and Ald. Caister.

The landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne was cautioned respecting the manner in which he kept his house.

 

Folkestone Express 28 August 1880.

Annual Licensing Day.

Wednesday, August 25th: Before The Mayor, Captain Crowe, and Aldermen Caister and Hoad.

The existing licenses were all renewed, the only feature of note being that the licensee of the Marquis Of Lorne was cautioned.

 

Folkestone Express 6 May 1882.

Thursday, May 4th: Before The Mayor, Captain Carter, Dr. Bateman, Alderman Caister, W.J. Jeffreason and J. Clarke Esqs.

William Hart and John Newington, charged with being reputed thieves and frequenting Folkestone Harbour for the purpose of committing a felony, pleaded Not Guilty.

Henry Bailey, night watchman at the harbour, said he was on duty on Wednesday night, and saw the two prisoners, about half past ten, go over the bridge from the Harbour Station. He was standing behind a coal truck. Prisoners got into a boat and pulled out into the harbour, and were away about twenty minutes or half an hour. They were taken into custody by a policeman.

William Hall, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, said about ten o'clock on Wednesday night, in consequence of what Bailey told him, he went with others in a boat and rowed among the boats in the harbour. When they were near the East Pier he saw Newington get out of Starling's boat, The Bessie, No. 199. They rowed alongside and asked prisoners what they were doing. They replied “Nothing”. He said he had seen Newington get out of Starling's boat. He asked whose ferry boat they had got, and they replied “Mr. Sturgess's”. He advised them to run ashore, and as they declined, witness and Robert Fagg towed her ashore with the prisoners in her. Prisoners stood on the quay until P.C. Knowles and P.C. Swain arrived, when Mr. Starling gave them in charge.

Robert Starling, owner of the fishing boat Bessie, said the prisoners were not in his employ, nor did they have any business on board his boat. He had several times missed things from his boats during the past week. He knew one of the prisoners. The other was a “foreigner” to him.

The prisoners were remanded until Saturday.

 

Folkestone Express 13 May 1882.

Saturday, May 6th: Before The Mayor, Captain Carter, Alderman Caister and W. Bateman Esq.

The two young men, Newington and Hart, were brought up on remand, charged with wandering about at the harbour with intent to commit a felony. It will be remembered that they were apprehended on Wednesday night about 10.30, when Newington was seen to get out of the lugger Bessie.

Sergeant Ovenden said he knew both the prisoners. He had seen them about the town, and they appeared to do very little to obtain a livelihood. They had not been in regular employment. He was in court on the 3rd April, 1878, when Hewington was charged with vagrancy and sentenced to be imprisoned for one month. He was also present on the 3rd March, '81, when the same prisoner was charged with begging. He gave the name of James Smith on that occasion, and was sentenced to 14 days' hard labour. He had known prisoner to go to sea at times, and also to be engaged in chopping wood. The other prisoner was occasionally hawking fish, or sprat catching.

The witness Bailey, who was instrumental in causing the arrest of the prisoners, said he had known Hart from childhood. He had seen Newington before, but knew nothing of him. He had seen both of them about the harbour.

Newington said he went on board the boat to get a bit of fish for bait.

The Bench sentenced Newington to six weeks', and Hart to four weeks' imprisonment with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 27 January 1883.

Saturday, January 20th: Before The Mayor, Ald. Caister, J. Holden and W.J. Jeffreason Esqs.

William Hall, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, was summoned for having unlawfully and knowingly suffered William Knowles, a police constable of the borough, to remain on his premises whilst on duty, he not being there for the execution of his duty.

Mr. Minter appeared for defendant.

Supt. Taylor said on the previous Saturday morning he went to the house in question, when defendant's wife was in the bar, and Knowles was lounging in front, and in front of him a pint glass which had contained liquor. In answer to a question, “What are you doing here, Knowles” he replied “Nothing, Sir”, but afterwards said he had gone in to enquire about a little girl who had been assaulted, which he (witness) thought an afterthought.

In answer to Mr. Minter witness said Knowles was liable to be proceeded against, but he would be dealt with by the Watch Committee. With regard to the girl it was not his business to enquire about the matter, and it was for the purpose of making enquiries that led him (the Superintendent) to the house, when and where he met Knowles.

Mr. Minter said that the only distinction in the uniform of a policeman when on, and off duty, was that in the former case he wore an armlet, and how, he asked, was a publican to know that? He should call evidence to prove that Knowles did look in to enquire after the child, and that he had no liquor drawn for him.

Sarah Warman, servant at the Marquis Of Lorne, said she was in the house when the police constable came in and asked how the little girl was that was interfered with. He did not ask for any beer, nor was any drawn for him.

The Mayor said that the evidence was not sufficient to convict defendant and therefore dismissed the summons, but wished it to be known that any publican knowingly harbouring a policeman was liable to a penalty of 10.

 

Folkestone Express 27 January 1883.

Saturday, January 20th: Before The Mayor, Alderman Caister, J. Holden and W.J. Jeffreason Esqs.

William Hall, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, was summoned for having unlawfully and knowingly suffered William Knowles, a police constable of the borough, to remain on his premises during the time of his being on duty, he not being there for the purpose of keeping or restoring order, or in the execution of his duty.

Mr. Minter appeared on behalf of the defendant, who pleaded Not Guilty.

Supt. Taylor said: On Saturday morning about half past nine, I went to the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, kept by the defendant. Defendant's wife was behind the bar, and in fron of it P.C. Knowles was lounging. He had both arms on the counter, and was wearing his armlets, showing he was on duty. In front of him was a pint glass that had contained malt liquor. I said to him “What are you doing here, Knowles?” He replied “Nothing, sir”. I told him he had no business there, and I should report him for being out of his beat. He afterwards said he had gone in to enquire about the little girl that was assaulted. I told him that was evidently an afterthought, and that I should take proceedings against the house for having him there. I asked Mrs. Hall if she had supplied him with any drink, and she denied having done so.

In reply to Mr. Minter, the witness said Knowles was downstairs, but he did not propose to call him as a witness.

Mr. Minter: If he was, as you say, there whilst on duty, he is liable to be proceeded against? – Yes.

You have not proceeded against him? – He will be dealt with by the Watch Committee. It has nothing to do with this Court.

You say defendant was not in the house? – No, sir.

You don't suggest that one of the Folkestone policemen would go into the house to get some beer? – This particular one might. (Laughter)

But it is a fact, I believe, that defendant's little girl was knocked down the night before? – Yes. It was that which took me to the house.

Why then should you deny the notion that your man wanted to know as well as you? – He had no business to go near.

Not even to make enquiry about a little girl who had been injured? – No.

Mr. Minter addressed the Bench, submitting that it was not a serious case, and not one in which the Bench would be justified in inflicting a fine. They heard that defendant was not in the house, but he did not for a moment contend that he was not liable for the acts of his wife, who was conducting the business in his absence. He pointed out that the only distinction in the uniform of a policeman when on duty and when off was the wearing of an armlet, and how, he asked, was a publican to know that? He should call evidence to prove that Knowles did look in to ask after the child, and that he had no liquor drawn for him. And what was a landlord to do? He could not take hold of him and put him out. It was a dangerous thing to lay hands on a policeman, but surely, because a publican did not do so, he ought not to be charged with unlawfully suffering him to be there.

Sarah Warman, servant at the Marquis Of Lorne, said she was in the house when the police constable went in. She was standing in the passage. He asked her how the little girl was that was interfered with the previous night. She said that she did not know, for she was not in the house at the time. Her mistress came out of the bar parlour, and the constable enquired of her. He did not ask for any beer, and none was drawn for him.

The Mayor, at the conclusion of the case said the Bench had come to the conclusion that they would not be justified in convicting the defendant, and therefore dismissed the summons, but they wished it to be known that any publican who wilfully harboured a policeman was liable to a penalty of 10.

 

Folkestone News 23 May 1885.

Monday, May 18th: Before General Armstrong C.B., and F. Boykett Esq.

William Smith was charged with being drunk and disorderly on the 17th inst.; also with assaulting a police constable, and with breaking a square of glass.

P.S. Pay said: About a quarter to ten o'clock last evening I was on duty in Radnor Street. I saw the prisoner there, drunk, shouting and swearing, and using obscene language. I went towards him, and then saw him break a square of glass with his fist. He was charged by Edward Heritage, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, with breaking the glass, and given into custody. He then became very violent and struck P.C. Scott a violent blow with his fist on the right side of the face.

P.C. Scott corroborated.

Noble Heritage, sister of the landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, said the value of the glass was 2s. 6d.

Superintendent Taylor asked that the case should be severely dealt with, as prisoner was one of the flower sellers there had been so many complaints about.

The Mayor inflicted fines and damages amounting altogether to 1 4s. 6d. for the various offences, and prisoner was sent for 21 days' hard labour in default.

 

Folkestone Express 29 August 1885.

Wednesday August 26th:

The Annual Brewster Sessions were held on Wednesday. The Magistrates present were The Mayor, Dr. Bateman, Capt. Carter, Alderman Caister, F. Boykett and J. Clark Esqs.

The licence of the Marquis Of Lorne (James Heritage) was opposed by Supt. Taylor on the ground that the applicant was not the actual occupier of the premises and that they were conducted in a disorderly manner.

Sergt. Harman said the applicant lived at 85, Black Bull Road. On the 5th of July he visited the house. Mrs. Heritage was standing behind the bar.

Mr. Mowll, who appeard in support of the application, said James Heritage, out of charity, put his brother's wife into the house. His brother was now an inmate of Chartham Asylum. The woman was, he admitted, unable to control the class of people who frequented it, and he therefore asked that the application should be adjourned, and in the meantime he undertook to provide another tenant.

The Magistrates consented to this course.

 

Folkestone Express 24 July 1886.

Wednesday, July 21st: Before The Mayor, J. Clark, J. Fitness and J. Holden Esqs., and Alderman Caister.

John Murphy, a private in the Manchester Regiment, was charged with assaulting Helena Nicholls on the 20th July.

Complainant, a married woman, but not living with her husband, said she resided at No. 20, Radnor Street. On the 20th July she met defendant in the Marquis Of Lorne at 10.30. She had a glass of stout. He asked her to have another, and she accepted it. When they left the Marquis Of Lorne they went to her house, five soldiers and herself. They stayed till half past twelve, and then she wished them to go. Four of them went, but defendant insisted on staying. She told him she had someone to meet. Defendant threatened to “smash her two eyes into one” if she did not let him stay, and he then struck her in the face and tripped her up. One of the other soldiers, hearing the noise, returned and remonstrated with his companion. She reported the case to an officer of the regiment.

Samuel Crouch, a private in the Manchester Regiment, said six of them went to complainant's quarters after the public house closed. After they had drank the beer they left. Defendant stayed, and hearing a noise inside, he went back and saw the defendant knock complainant down and cut her head.

Sergt. Harman said the complainant showed him a cut on her head and bruises on her breast.

Private Banks said the whole five of them left the woman's house together. He did not see defendant go back again.

Private Jackson also swore that the whole of the men left the house together, and Private Crouch went back. He saw no quarrelling and no blows struck. He saw the woman fighting previously in the Marquis Of Lorne with a navvy's wife.

The Bench fined defendant 20s. and 16s. 6d. costs, or 14 days' hard labour.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 14 August 1886.

Wednesday, August 11th: Before The Mayor, Gen. Armstrong, F. Boykett and W.H. Poole Esqs.

William Paul was charged with permitting drunkenness on the premises of the Marquis of Lorne, Radnor Street, but as there was a doubt as to whether defendant supplied the liquor, the case was dismissed.

 

Folkestone Express 14 August 1886.

Wednesday, August 11th: Before The Mayor, General Armstrong, H.W. Poole and F. Boykett Esqs.

William Hadlow Paul was charged with permitting drunkenness in his house, the Marquis Of Lorne.

P.C. Lilley said on Sunday afternoon he was called to the defendant's house. In the back yard he saw three men with their clothes off fighting. He enquired for the landlord and was told he was out. A man named Spratling, living there, said he was in charge. He called his attention to what was going on and said he should report the landlord for allowing it. He took the names and addresses of the three men, who, Spratling said, were lodgers at the house. He got them into the house, and saw the house closed. In the kitchen there was another man, lying dead-drunk on the table. About ten minutes after he went to the house with Sergeant Pay, and saw the “deputy”, who wished to give a man in charge for striking him. That man was not drunk, and they recommended him to summon him.

Sergeant Pay said about twenty minutes past three, one of the lodgers asked him to go to the Marquis Of Lorne, saying they were fighting with knives. He went there and found great disorder inside. He saw three men sitting there drunk and one lying helplessly drunk on the table.

P.C. Swift gave similar evidence.

Defendant said he was away from home at the time. The men were lodging at his house, but they did not get drunk there. He called Spratling, who said he was appointed defendant's deputy on Saturday night. He was in the kitchen on Sunday morning. There were about fifteen lodgers. White and Murphy were annoying them. Murphy and Edwards went out and returned about two o'clock, drunk. White did not go out, and he was sober. He sent for the police because there was a disturbance. Murphy and Edwards were fighting in the yard. White tried to stop them, and the other two turned on him and beat him. A man they called “Bition” assaulted him for sending for the police. The man on the table was not asleep – only feigning. He had been out fighting in the morning. The men got their drink outside.

The Bench thought there was a doubt as to whether the men were supplied with drink in defendant's house, and dismissed the summons.

William White was summoned for being drunk on licensed premises. He was unable to appear owing to the injuries he had received, and the summons was adjourned.

Superintendent Taylor said Murphy had absconded, and the summons against another man had not been served.

 

Southeastern Gazette 16 August 1886.

Local News.

At the police court on Wednesday, William Paul, the landlord of the Marquis of Lorne, Radnor Street, was dismissed with a caution on a charge of permitting drunkenness.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 25 September 1886.

Monday, September 18th: Before The Mayor, Dr. Bateman, Ald. Caister, J. Holden and J. Fitness Esqs.

John Rust was charged with being drunk and doing wilful damage at the Marquis Of Lorne Inn amounting to 5s.

The Bench considered that the landlord was not wholly free from blame in the matter, having given the prisoner drink.

Prisoner was fined 5s. and costs.

 

Folkestone Express 25 September 1886.

Monday, September 20th: Before The Mayor, Dr. Bateman, Alderman Caister, J. Holden and J. Fitness Esqs.

John Rust, a labouring man, was charged with damaging a door in a public house in Radnor Street, and also with being drunk and disorderly. He pleaded Guilty.

Mr. Paul, the landlord, said the defendant went to his house on Saturday evening, and remained drinking with the lodgers. At closing time he asked to be allowed to stay, as he did not want to walk all the way to his lodgings at Etchinghill. After the house was closed, he made a disturbance and smashed the panel of a door.

The Bench dismissed the charge of wilful damage, as they believed the man got drunk in the house. For being drunk he was fined 5s. and costs.

 

Folkestone News 25 September 1886.

Monday, September 20th: Before The Mayor, Dr. Bateman, Alderman Caister, J. Holden and J. Fitness Esqs.

John Rust, dressed in the garb of the workhouse, was charged with wilful damage and with being drunk.

William Paul, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, said prisoner was in his house and created a disturbance, when he was put outside, and he then kicked in the panel of the door.

In answer to the Bench, witness said prisoner had been drinking before he came to his house, and he had been served with two pots of beer, besides drinking with other people in the kitchen. The damage to the door amounted to 5s.

The Bench considered the landlord had contributed towards the damage by giving the prisoner drink, and they dismissed that part of the charge, but fined him 5s., with 3s. 6d. costs, for being drunk, or seven days'.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 20 November 1886.

Saturday: Before The Mayor, J. Clarke and J. Holden Esqs.

Benjamin Freeman, a labourer, was charged with having stolen a bottle of cherry brandy, one of whisky, and one of cloves.

Henry Spillett, landlord of the Tramway Tavern Inn, Radnor Street, said that on the previous day prisoner entered his house several times and had drink. One one occasion he went in about 5-30 while witness was having tea in a room behind the bar, and remained about ten minutes. He was in the bar alone during that time. A few minutes after prisoner left he missed two bottles, the one containing about a pint of Scotch whisky, and the other about the same quantity of cloves. He had also missed a bottle of cherry brandy after one of prisoner's visits in the afternoon. Prisoner could reach the bottle from where he stood in the bar.

William Henry Forbes, landlord of the Marquis of Lorne, in Radnor Street, said that prisoner went into his house on the previous day, about two o'clock in the afternoon, and engaged lodgings. He then left, but came back in half an hour's time and, taking a bottle from his pockets, poured some of it's contents into a glass of beer which he had called for. Prisoner wanted him to taste it, which he did. It tasted like rum, and prisoner told him he had got it from a wreck at Romney. He then drew another bottle from his pocket, and offered it to him (Mr. Forbes) for 2s. He ultimately bought it. He thought it was home made cherry wine. Prisoner came back to his house again about six o'clock and offered him a bottle of whisky for 2s., which he declined to buy. Prisoner then called for a glass of beer and poured something into it from another bottle he had. He was asked by prisoner to smell it, and knew it to be cloves.

P.C. Lilley apprehended the prisoner, who, in answer to the charge, said “There is no charge. You can't find anything on me”. At the police station prisoner said nothing when the charge was read to him.

Prisoner, in defence, said he bought three bottles from a “chap” on the Leas, and three others he brought from a wreck at Romney. They might send him to gaol, but he should settle the matter with the “chap” who sold him the stuff when he got out.

He was sentenced to one month's hard labour, and the Mayor advised Mr. Spillett not to buy bottles of wine over his bar counter in this way.

Note: No mention of Forbes in More Bastions. Could this have been misheard in court instead of being Mr. Paul?

 

Folkestone Express 20 November 1886.

Saturday, November 13th: Before The Mayor, J. Fitness, J. Clark and J. Holden Esqs.

Benjamin Freeman, a labourer, who said he came from Bexhill, was charged with stealing a quantity of whisky, cherry brandy, and cloves, the property of Henry Spillett.

Henry Spillett, landlord of the Tramway Tavern, Radnor Street, said the prisoner was in his house several times during Friday, drinking. The last time was about half past five. He then remained about ten minutes. No-one else was in the bar whilst prisoner was there. Witness was in the bar parlour getting his tea when he heard the prisoner leave, and when he went back into the bar two or three minutes after prisoner had left, he missed two bottles from a shelf, one containing about a pint of Scotch whisky, and the other about a pint of cloves. Previous to that, about four o'clock in the afternoon, he missed two bottles – one of cherry brandy, and the other a show bottle.

William H. Paul, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, said the prisoner went to his house about two o'clock on Friday and took lodgings. He went away and returned about three. He had a pint of beer, and took a bottle from his pocket, and poured some of the contents into the beer. He asked witness to taste it. He did, and said “That is funny stuff. What do you call that?” He replied that he had a lot of it, brought from a shipwreck at Romney. Two other lodgers came in, and they tasted the liquor in the bottle, but none of them could say what it was. It tasted like a weak solution of rum, sugar, and water. After that prisoner pulled out a full bottle and offered to sell it for 2s. It had a capsule on it, but no label. He drew the cork from the bottle and tasted it, and gave the prisoner 2s. for it. He thought it was home made cherry wine. Prisoner went away, and returned a few minutes before six. He then pulled another bottle from his pocket, and witness found it was whisky. He told prisoner he did not want it. Prisoner had another half pint of beer, and poured something out of another bottle into it. He asked witness to taste that, but he declined. He smelt the glass afterwards, and it smelt strongly of cloves.

P.C. Lilley said he received information from the prosecutor that he had lost a quantity of spirits. In consequence of what was said he went with prosecutor to the Queen's Head, where they found the prisoner, and prosecutor gave him into custody. Prisoner, in answer to the charge, said “There is no charge. You can't find anything on me”. He at first refused to go to the police station, but another constable came up, and with some difficulty they conveyed him to the station. He had the appearance of a man who had been drinking, but was not drunk. He had 6s. and some bronze in his possession.

Prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, and said he bought three bottles of a man, to whom he gave 3s. 6d. for them, and the other bottles he brought from Romney. He was sentenced to one month's hard labour, and the Bench recommended Mr. Paul in future not to buy bottles of liquor in his bar.

 

Folkestone News 20 November 1886.

Saturday, November 13th: Before The Mayor, J. Fitness, J. Clark and J. Holden Esqs.

Benjamin Freeman, a labourer, was charged with stealing a quantity of whisky, cherry brandy, and cloves, the property of Henry Spillett.

Henry Spillett, landlord of the Tramway Tavern, Radnor Street, said the prisoner came to his house several times during Friday drinking. The last time was about half past five. He then remained about ten minutes. Witness was in the bar parlour getting his tea when he heard the prisoner leave, and when he went back into the bar two or three minutes after prisoner had left he missed two bottles from a shelf, one containing about a pint of Scotch whisky, and the other about a pint of cloves. Previous to that, about four o'clock in the afternoon, he missed two bottles – one of cherry brandy, and the other a show bottle.

William H. Paul, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, said the prisoner went to his house about two o'clock on Friday and took lodgings. He went away and returned about three. He had a pint of beer and took a bottle from his pocket and poured some of the contents into the beer. He asked witness to taste it. He did, and said “That is funny stuff. What do you call that?” He replied that he had a lot of it, brought from a shipwreck at Romney. Two other lodgers came in and they tasted the liquor in the bottle, but none of them could say what it was. It tasted like a weak solution of rum, sugar and water. After that, prisoner pulled out a full bottle and offered to sell it for 2s. It had a capsule on it, but no label. He drew the cork from the bottle and tasted it, and gave the prisoner 2s. for it. He thought it was home made cherry wine. Prisoner went away, and returned a few minutes before six. He then pulled another bottle from his pocket, and witness found that it was whisky. He told prisoner that he did not want it. Prisoner had another half pint of beer, and put something out of another bottle into it. He asked witness to taste that, but he declined. He smelt the glass afterwards, and it smelt strongly of cloves.

P.C. Lilley said he received information from the prosecutor that he had lost a quantity of spirits. In consequence of what he said he went with prosecutor to the Queen's Head, where they found the prisoner, and prosecutor gave him into custody. Prisoner, in answer to the charge, said “There is no charge. You can't find anything on me”. He at first refused to go to the police station, but another constable came up, and with some difficulty they conveyed him to the station. He had the appearance of a man who had been drinking, but was not drunk. He had 6s. and some bronze in his possession.

Prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, and said he bought three bottles off a man, to whom he gave 3s. 6d. for them, and the other bottles he brought from Romney.

The Bench sentenced him to one month's hard labour, and recommended Mr. Paul in future not to buy bottles of liquor in his bar.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 13 August 1887.

Saturday, August 6th: Before General Armstrong, Alderman Banks, and H.W. Poole Esq.

William Hadlow Paul was summoned for having kept open his licensed premises – the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street – during prohibited hours on the night of the 1st August.

Defendant pleaded Not Guilty, remarking that the persons found on his premises were only friends of his, and that they were there by invitation.

Police sergeant Pay said on Monday night he was on duty in Radnor Street near the Marquis Of Lorne about ten minutes to 12, when he heard some laughing and talking inside the house. He was in company with Police constables Smith and Stock. They went up the passage to the back of the house. They found the door standing wide open, and they all entered the house. On going into the bar parlour they saw a civilian and three sergeants belonging to the Oxfordshire Regiment, stationed at Shorncliffe. Their names were Buckingham, Williams and Stanmore, and the civilian's name was William Richey. The landlord's wife was sitting down in a chair, and the landlord was also present. Witness called defendant's attention to the time. He said “Those sergeants are friends of mine. Sergeant Harman won't say anything; have a drink”. Witness found a quart jug, nearly half full of malt liquor, standing on the table. Two half pint glasses were also on the table, containing malt liquor. Witness took the names and told the landlord he should report the case to the Superintendent. In defendant's presence one of the sergeants said “Don't do that. It won't hurt us, but it will do him a lot of injury”. They drank their beer and went. Saw the four men come out of Harbour Street and go into Radnor Street.

P.C. Smith deposed that he accompanied the last witness to the Marquis Of Lorne on Monday night. They went to the bar parlour where he saw three soldiers and a civilian. The landlord was standing against the door, which was wide open, and his wife was also there. On the table there were two glasses and a quart pot containing malt liquor. One of the sergeants said to Sergeant Pay “I am very sorry that this has occurred. Have something to drink, and I hope you will look over it”. Sergeant Pay ordered them out and they obeyed. When Sergeant Pay told the landlord he should report the circumstances, he replied “Those are my friends”.

P.C. Scott, who was with the other witnesses, gave corroborative evidence.

Defendant said the men found on his premises were friends of his. They came to his house early in the evening, and he asked them to come back again before they went to the Camp. They returned to the house some time after it was closed. They went to the back way and he asked them in. They did not pay for any drink.

General Armstrong said the defendant was found Guilty, and as he had committed a previous offence he would be fined 5. He was also in danger of losing his licence, but the Bench had decided not to go to the extent of endorsing it, but they hoped it would be warning to him for the future. In default of payment he would be committed to one month's imprisonment.

Defendant said he objected to the case being dealt with in that way. He had not made any defence.

The Magistrates' Clerk said the defendant had said that he had no witnesses to call.

After some consultation with the Bench the Magistrates' Clerk said the defendant could call who he liked as a witness.

Defendant, who said he was not aware that he could call a person who was on the premises, then proceeded to examine the persons who were found there.

Sergeant Buckingham, of the Oxfordshire Regiment, said he was at defendant's house between 8 and 9 o'clock on the evening in question. The landlord asked him and his comrades if they would look in again before they went home. He promised to do so. He went round to the back of the house after it was closed. Did not order any liquor. Defendant placed some on the table. Did not remember asking for any cigars, but he had some. They called there to have a drink. Had known defendant ever since he had been home from India. Had used the house two or three times a week. Could not say when he was invited into the landlord's private room last. Had been in the house several occasions before during prohibited hours, merely by invitation. They remained at the house on the first occasion about 20 minutes. The other sergeants were with witness then. Paul knew that they were on pass. Should think he had been in the house about half an hour when the police came. When he went to the house he went up the passage at the back. The door was closed, and it was opened by Mr. Paul. A civilian did not accompany him to the house. Noticed him some time after he got in there – just when the policeman came. It was the same one who was summoned that morning. Could not say whether he had anything to drink or not.

Sergeant Ernest Stanmore, also of the Oxfordshire Regiment, said on the night in question he went into defendant's house between 8 and 9, and defendant asked him to call at the house before he went home. He returned and went to the back door. Defendant did not speak to witness at the back door. He asked them if they would have a glass of beer. He did not give him any money for it. The last witness knew the way to the back of the house, and witness followed him. He had been there on previous occasions. Richey followed them in the house. First noticed him near the public house. One of the sergeants spoke to him. Thought it was Wilson, but was not sure. Richey went into the house. Could not say what Richey had to drink. Paul was in the room, but did not remember him speaking to Richey. Witness was quite sober. Did not know Sergeant Pay before he saw him in the house. Could not say whether Richey was talking to Sergeant Wilson or not. Witness understood that he was there by invitation.

Sergeant Thomas Wilson, of the Oxfordshire Regiment, said he went to the house with the other sergeants. Defendant said to them “Come in and have a glass together”. Did not ask for anything, and did not see anyone pay for what they did have. Did not see Richey have anything to drink. The civilian did not say anything. In the evening witness was in Mr. Paul's house, and he asked him if he would call in again before he went home. First saw Richey just before they got under the arches. Did not tell him where we were going. There was no objection made to Richey's admission. Mr. Paul drew the beer.

William Richey said he belonged to Ireland, and was employed on a coal collier lying in the harbour. Could not remember the name of the ship. He went to the public house with three sergeants. Wilson said he was going to see a friend. He asked witness to go with him to the house. Witness did not know where he was going. When he got into the house he sat down, but did not speak to them. He drank some beer from a glass which was given to him by a sergeant. Wilson came from Belfast. He knew that by his speech.

Sergeant Pay, re-called, said he saw all four of the men walking abreast in Radnor Street about 20 minutes to 12. They were going along singing and laughing. He stopped them and said “You sergeants ought to know better this time of the night”. They passed on towards Radnor Street.

General Armstrong said the Bench were convinced that the police had done right, and defendant would be fined 5 and 15s. costs.

Buckingham, Wilson and Stanmore were then brought before the magistrates, together with a civilian named William Richey, and summoned for being found on licensed premises during prohibited hours.

The defendants pleaded Guilty, but stated that they went there simply by invitation.

In addressing the prisoners, General Armstrong said the Bench had decided they were wrong in being at the house, but would be dealt with leniently. The fine would be 2s. 6d., with 8s. costs, to be levied by distress, or, in default, seven days' imprisonment with hard labour. Communication would be made to the Commanding Officer informing him of the affair, and ask him if he could not prevent sergeants setting such an example.

The money was paid.

 

Folkestone Express 13 August 1887.

Saturday, August 6th: Before General Armstrong C.B., H.W. Poole Esq., and Alderman Banks.

William Hadlow Paul, of the Marquis Of Lorne, was summoned for having his house open for the sale of liquor during prohibited hours.

Sergeant Pay said on Monday night at ten minutes to twelve he was on duty in Radnor Street, and heard laughing and talking inside the Marquis Of Lorne public house. He went up the passage to the back door, which was wide open. He went into the bar parlour and saw the landlord, three soldiers and a civilian. He called defendant's attention to the time, and he said one of the Sergeants was a friend of his, and asked him to have a drink. On the table there was a quart jug containing malt liquor, and two glasses. One of the Sergeants drank in witness's presence, and pressed him to have something.

After hearing the evidence the Bench imposed a penalty of 5 and costs.

The defendant complained that he had not stated what his defence was, and four other men having been summoned for being on the premises during prohibited hours, and having stated that they were there at the landlord's invitation and not as customers, the Bench decided to hear their evidence on behalf of the landlord.

Alfred Buckingham, John Wilson, and Ernest Stanmore, three Sergeants on the Oxfordshire Regiment, and William Ritchie, a sailor, were severally called by Paul, and the three sergeants stated that they went to the house after eleven o'clock at the invitation of the landlord, and that Ritchie followed them in. They entered and drank at the expense of the landlord. Neither of them paid for either beer or cigars.

Sergeant Pay stated that he saw the three sergeants and Ritchie together in Beach Street about twenty minutes to twelve. They were singing, and he told them they ought to know better than make a disturbance at that time of night.

The Bench told Paul that they had carefully reconsidered all the circumstances and they saw no reason to alter their decision. He would be fined 5 and 15s. costs.

The four men who were on the premises were each fined 2s. 6d. and 8s. costs.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 24 December 1887.

At the Police Court on Thursday, before Alderman Banks and H.W. Poole, Margaret Knott, a dilapidated looking woman, was placed in the dock, charged with being drunk and disorderly in Radnor Street that morning.

P.C. Wood deposed to finding prisoner at quarter past one on Thursday morning outside of the Marquis Of Lorne, drunk. Had to get assistance to take her into custody.

Prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, and stated that she was a lodger at the Marquis Of Lorne, and went to bed at ten o'clock, but that they pulled her out by the hair of her head, giving her a black eye. She belonged to Dover, was married, and living at 7, Queens Street.

Fined 5s, 4s. 6d. costs, or seven days'. Removed below.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 25 February 1888.

Wednesday, February 22nd: Before The Mayor, Surgeon General Gilbourne, Major Poole, Alderman Sherwood, S. Brooke, F. Boykett and W. Wightwick Esqs.

William Hadlow Paul, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, was summoned for keeping his house open for an unlawful purpose.

Sergeant Harman stated that he was on duty in Radnor Street on Sunday 15th inst. from seven till ten o'clock. At 7.45 he observed two women – Louisa Harris and Rose Flowers – whom he believed to be prostitutes, come from the Tramway Tavern and enter the Marquis Of Lorne. They went back to the Tramway, and subsequently at ten minutes to eight returned to the Marquis Of Lorne. They spoke to two other women outside of this place and afterwards went inside, remaining there about 20 minutes. They came out again at half past eight with four soldiers and went to No. 20, Radnor Street, the house of Mrs. Spearpoint. One soldier came out of here at ten past nine and another went in. Then another soldier came out with Rose Flowers and went across to the Marquis Of Lorne, and was followed shortly afterwards by another soldier. The girl Harris next came out and went into the same place. She came out again at 9.10 with another soldier in the Oxfordshire Regiment and went across to Mrs. Spearpoint's, and returned again in 20 minutes with the same man to the Marquis Of Lorne. At that time Rose Flowers came out with a soldier in the Hussars' uniform and went in the direction of Mrs. Spearpoint's house, and came back again at quarter to ten. At ten minutes to ten witness visited the Marquis Of Lorne and saw the two girls at the bar. There was a third woman, but witness did not know her name. She was a stranger to him. The bar was full of soldiers and some of them had their arms round the waists of the women. Defendant was behind the bar serving. Witness said to him “You see those women standing in front of the bar? They are prostitutes, and you know them to be such”. He answered “Yes, but I have never been spoken to about it”. Told him that he had had the house under his observation for two or three hours and should report the matter, and probably he would be summoned. When he had been in the house about five minutes he saw the woman Harris leave in company with a civilian, but could not say where she went to. Was on duty Friday and Saturday in Radnor Street, but did not see any of those women frequent the house then. Had frequently seen other women there. One's name he knew to be Lewis.

By Mr. Minter, who appeared for defendant: On this particular occasion there were a great number of soldiers at the house. Did not go into the Tramway Tavern and caution the landlord not to serve the soldiers.

P.C. Lilley said he was on duty in Radnor Street on the 6th of Jan. and on the 5th of Feb. He kept the Marquis Of Lorne under his observation. He had seen women there he had known to be prostitutes. Had seen them leave sometimes with soldiers, and sometimes alone. He had seen them go across to Mrs. Spearpoint's – 20, Radnor Street.

Mr. Minter said as far as the evidence went, it was clear that no offence for which they could convict the defendant had been committed on his premises. Defendant could not prevent prostitutes entering his house or soldiers bringing them there. The charge was that these women remained in the house longer than was necessary for the purpose of obtaining refreshments. He did not know what was the length of time, for he had never heard it mentioned. The defendant wished him to impress upon the Bench the difficulties which a publican of that class had to prevent that kind of people coming in and out. There was nothing against the defendant's character, and he tried to keep his house respectable.

Mr. Bradley said it was a question whether these women were not there for the purpose of prostitution.

Mr. Minter said there was no evidence to show it. It was all against Mrs. Spearpoint.

The Mayor said although it was a suspicious case the Bench had decided to dismiss it.

 

Folkestone Express 25 February 1888.

Wednesday, February 22nd: Before The Mayor, Surgeon General Gilbourne, F. Boykett, W. Wightwicj, and J. Brooke Esqs.

Wm. Hadlow Paul was charged with allowing his house, the Marquis Of Lorne, to be used by immoral women.

Sergeant Harman said on the 5th he was on duty in Radnor Street from seven till ten o'clock. At 7.45 he saw two women, Louisa Harris and Rose Flowers, whom he believed to be prostitutes, go from the Tramway Tavern to the Marquis Of Lorne. At eight o'clock they came out, and went to the Tramway Tavern. At ten minutes past eight they returned to the Marquis Of Lorne. Outside they spoke to two women, Mrs. Spearpoint and Mrs. Banks. They remained inside twenty minutes, and came out with four soldiers of the Oxford Regiment. Two of the soldiers remained on the pavement and the other two went into Mrs. Spearpoint's house with the two girls. At ten minutes past nine one soldier came out and another went in. At nine another soldier and Rose Flowers came out and went across to the Marquis Of Lorne. At five minutes past nine the other soldier came out of Mrs. Spearpoint's and went to the Marquis Of Lorne, and ten minutes after he was followed by the other girl. At twenty minutes past nine she came out and went with another soldier to Mrs. Spearpoint's. At half past nine she returned with the soldier to the Marquis Of Lorne. Rose Flowers came out with another soldier belonging to the Hussars and went across to Mrs. Spearpoint's. They returned to the Marquis Of Lorne at 9.46. Five minutes after, he visited the Marquis Of Lorne, and saw the two girls and a third woman there. The bar was full of soldiers. Paul was behind the bar serving. He said to him “You see those women there in front of the bar. They are prostitutes, and you know them to be such”. He said “Yes, but I have never been spoken to about it”. He told him he should report the matter, and probably he would be summoned. About five minutes after he saw Harris accompany a civilian in the direction of Mrs. Spearpoint's. Both Flowers and the other woman left at ten o'clock.

In reply to Mr. Minter, witness said there were a great many soldiers in Radnor Street that night. He had not been into the Tramway Tavern to caution the landlord.

P.C. Lilley said he was on duty in Radnor Street between the 5th and 6th of January. He saw prostitutes go in and out of defendant's house with soldiers, and go to Mrs. Spearpoint's, No. 20.

Mr. Minter contended that the evidence went to show that no offence was committed. The women had a right to go in and stay a reasonable time. He had never heard it defined what was a reasonable time. No complaints had been made against the defendant. He suggested that instead of the defendant, Mrs. Spearpoint, of No. 20, should have been prosecuted, because it was clear that it was her house that was the resort of prostitutes. The defendant had carefully prevented any girls from going beyond the passage of his house.

The Bench dismissed the summons against the defendant, but cautioned him as to his future conduct.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 26 May 1888.

Friday, May 18th: Before Major W.H. Poole, Surgeon General Gilbourne, and J. Brooks Esq.

James Manser, aged 60 years, deputy manager of the Marquis Of Lorne Inn, was charged with having indecently assaulted a little girl named Bertha Thomas, ten years of age.

The girl is the daughter of a travelling musician, who is staying at the Marquis Of Lorne, where the offence was alleged to have been committed.

As the child did not understand the nature of an oath, and there being no other evidence, Manser was discharged.

 

Folkestone Express 4 August 1888.

Wednesday, August 4th: Before Dr. Bateman, Captain Crowe, Alderman Banks, and H.W. Poole Esq.

Elizabeth Dawson was charged with stealing from the person of James Day, a tin box containing 9s.

Prosecutor, a labourer belonging to Hampshire, said he was at the Marquis Of Lorne between six and seven o'clock. Prisoner called him out into the street, and when he got out his box and money was all gone. The box was in his waistcoat pocket – his trousers pockets were worn out. (Laughter) He was quite certain he had the box in his pocket when he went out. He felt the prisoner put her hand into his pocket. He went with a constable, and found her in the Rodney lodging house and gave her into custody.

Mr. Bradley: Were you sober?

Prosecutor: Don't matter whether I was sober or not. She had no business to take my money. (Laughter)

Prisoner said the prosecutor followed her daughter into the street and put his arm round her waist.

William Hadlow Paul, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, said the parties were in his house on Tuesday evening. He saw the man go by the woman, and as he passed her she took hold of his arm and said “Come here, I want you” and took him out into the street. When he returned he said he had lost his box and his money. The woman and her daughter were then outside, but he said nothing to them.

P.C. Keeler said he found the prisoner at the Rodney with another woman. Prosecutor charged her with stealing his money. She replied that she knew nothing about the prisoner or his money. He brought prisoner to the station, where she was searched, but no money was found on her. He also searched the room where he found the prisoner.

Prisoner pleaded Guilty, and was sentenced to one month's hard labour.

 

Folkestone Express 18 May 1889.

Friday, May 10th: Before W. Bateman, J. Hoad, J. Sherwood and J. Pledge Esqs.

Harry White was charged with stealing a quantity of water cress, value 15s., the property of Mr. Pilcher, greengrocer.

Prosecutor said at the end of his garden there was a stream of water, in which he cultivated water cress. On the 22nd of April, between six and seven in the morning, he missed a large quantity of cress. It had been torn up with the roots – not cut. He was afterwards shown a quantity of water cress at the police station. He would not like to swear to them as his property, but believed them to be. They were pulled up, roots and all. There was more than a bushel, and he estimated the worth of them at 15s.

William Hadlow Paul, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne Inn, said on the 22nd of April prisoner was in his house in company with a man named Turner. They left a closing time, and returned next morning between eight and nine. Prisoner had a quantity of water cress, and they were bunching them up in the wash house.

Sergeant Butcher said he went to the Marquis Of Lorne on Tuesday, the 22nd of April, about eleven o'clock, and in an outhouse he found a quantity of water cress, some of them bunched. There was a basket full standing in the coal hole. They had not been properly cut, but pulled up with the roots. He took them to the police station, and afterwards showed them to Mr. Pilcher.

Sergeant Pay apprehended the prisoner at Swingfield Minnis. He told him the charge, and he replied “I meant to give you a run for it”. Prisoner had left the town. When charged at the police station, he said “I was hungry”.

Wm. Bowman, “deputy” at the Marquis Of Lorne, recognised the prisoner as having been at that house on the 22nd of April. He saw him next morning with a quantity of water cress.

Richard Cooper, a clerk in the office of the Clerk Of The Peace, produced a conviction against Henry White, of Folkestone, labourer, in May 1885, for stealing tulips and wallflowers from a garden, when he was sentenced to six weeks' imprisonment.

Supt. Taylor identified the prisoner as the same man.

Prisoner pleaded Guilty, and elected to be dealt with summarily.

The Magistrates' Clerk said it was a curious state of the law, but for the first offence the prisoner was liable to imprisonment for six months, but because he had been previously convicted, the Act provided that the second offence was simple larceny only, to be dealt with under the Summary Jurisdiction Act, and they could only order him to three months' imprisonment.

The Bench inflicted the full punishment of three months' hard labour.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 22 February 1890.

Thursday, February 20th: Before J. Clarke Esq., and Alderman Pledge.

Harry Austin and John Sullivan were charged with stealing one pair of stockings, one cotton shirt, and one sheet, valued at 5s., the property of Mrs. Kennard, on the 19th instant.

Mary Ann Kennard, living at 60, Dover Street, said she hung some clothes out to dry at the back of her house on the 19th instant. Amongst the articles there were a pair of stockings, a cotton shirt and a sheet. She last saw the articles safe at four o'clock and missed them about seven. She went to the police station about nine o'clock, and she was then shown the sheet. It was her property. She identified it by it's general appearance. The articles were worth 5s.

Harry Spillett, landlord of the Star Inn, said the prisoner went to his house at seven o'clock on Wednesday evening. Austin showed him a sheet and asked him to buy it, but he refused. Sullivan asked witness to buy a shirt and a pair of stockings, but he refused. He offered them to some people in the taproom, but no-one would buy them.

Ann Warwick, a servant employed at the Marquis Of Lorne, said the prisoner had lodged at the Marquis Of Lorne for a week. She met them at the Radnor Street arches on Wednesday night. Sullivan pulled out a shirt from his coat and asked her if she could sell it. She said she did not know where to sell such a thing.

P.C. Knowles said he saw Austin on Wednesday evening outside of the Marquis Of Lorne with a bundle. He followed him through the house and asked him his name. He said “Johnson”. Austin said “That's my parcel”. On the way to the station he said “It's no use; my name is not Johnson, it's Austin”.

P.S. Butcher said he saw the prisoner Sullivan outside of the Brewery Tap on Wednesday evening, and charged him with being concerned in the theft. He replied “All right, sergeant”

Sentenced to one month's hard labour.

 

Holbein's Visitors' List 18 March 1891.

Wednesday, March 11th: Before W. Wightwick Esq., Surgeon General Gilbourne, and W.G. Herbert Esq.

The license of the Marquis Of Lorne was transferred to Mr. Spillett, who holds the licence of the Star Inn, a house which Supt. Taylor said was conducted in a very proper manner.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 4 April 1891.

Monday, March 30th: Before Colonel De Crespigny, Surgeon General Gilbourne, Major Penfold, and W.G. Herbert Esq.

John Murray and Daniel Harford were charged with stealing two pairs of boots, valued at 15s. 6d., and the property of William Bull.

Charles Smitherman, a polisher, said he was in the Royal George Inn shortly before nine o'clock on Saturday evening, when the prisoner went into the bar and offered a pair of boots for sale. He asked witness if he knew where he could sell them, and he took them to Mr. Carter at the Oddfellows, but he would not buy them. He went back to the Royal George and found Murray waiting.

Joseph Whiting stated that Harford lodged at his house, the Bricklayer's Arms, and on Saturday evening both prisoners called at his bar for some beer, but he refused to serve them.

Winifred Whiting identified Murray as the man who called at her uncle's house on Saturday afternoon with a pair of elastic side boots. He waited until Harford came in and they both went out together.

P.C. Keeler deposed that he found Harford at 11, Fenchurch Street, a house hired by Mr. Whiting as a lodging house. Witness asked him if he had a pair of new boots, and he gave him the pair produced. He said he bought them at the Bricklayer's Arms for 3s. 6d. from a man whom he did not know. Witness took him to the police station, and later on he went to the Marquis Of Lorne, where he found Murray in the bar. He had been drinking.

Both prisoners denied the charge. Murray stated that he bought the boots from a strange man and sold them to Harford.

Each prisoner was sentenced to one month's hard labour.

 

Folkestone Express 4 April 1891.

Monday, March 30th: Before Colonel De Crespigny, Surgeon General Gilbourne, Major Penfold, and W.G. Herbert Esq.

John Murray and Daniel Harford were charged with stealing two pairs of boots, value 15s. 10d., the property of William Bull, of High Street.

Prosecutor said on Saturday night, about a quarter to nine, he missed a pair of boots from outside his shop. P.C. Swain called upon him and about five minutes after he was gone he missed a second pair.

Charles Smitherman, a polisher, said he was in the Royal George Inn about a quarter to nine on Saturday evening, when the prisoner Murray went in with a pair of boots and offered them for sale. Murray asked him if he knew where he could sell them. He took them to Mr. Carter at the Oddfellows, but he would not buy them. He returned to the George with the boots. Murray was still there. He thought one of the loops of the boots was broken.

Joseph A. Whiting, landlord of the Bricklayers Arms, said Harford lodged in his house. Both prisoners went to his bar between seven and half past seven on Saturday evening. They called for beer but he refused to serve them.

Winifred Whiting said she recognised Murray as having gone to her uncle's house about half past four on Saturday afternoon with a pair of new elastic side boots. He asked for Dan, meaning Harford, and she told him he was not at home. He waited until he came and they then went out into the back yard together.

P.C. Keeler said he went to No. 11, Fenchurch Street, a house hired by Whiting as a lodging house, and found Harford there. He asked i he had a pair of new boots, and he showed him those produced, saying he bought them from a man he did not know, whom he met at the Bricklayers Arms, and gave 3s. 6d. for them. Witness took him into custody, and when charged by Sergt. Ovenden he made no reply. About half past eleven he went to the Marquis Of Lorne, in Radnor Street, and found Murray in the taproom asleep. He had been drinking. When charged at the police station with stealing two pairs of boots he made no reply.

Prisoners elected to be tried by the Magistrates. Harford pleaded Not Guilty, and Murray Not Guilty. Murray said he bought the boots of a man and sold them to Harford.

The Bench convicted both prisoners and sentenced them to a month's hard labour.

 

Folkestone Express 25 April 1891.

Transfer.

Wednesday, April 22nd: Before J. Clark, J. Fitness, J. Pledge, J. Holden and E.T. Ward Esqs.

The licence of the Marquis Of Lorne was transferred to Mr. Spillett.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 26 November 1892.

Wednesday, November 23rd: Before The Mayor, Aldermen Sherwood and Pledge, Councillor Holden, and Messrs. H.W. Poole, J. Fitness and E.T. Ward.

Mr. Poole announced that owing to the absence of Mr. W.G. Herbert, the Bench would not give their decision in the case of Henry Spillett for a fortnight.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 10 December 1892.

Wednesday, December 7th: Before Major H.W. Poole, Mr. Wightwick and Mr. Herbert.

The adjourned summons against Mr. Spillett, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne Inn, in respect of an alleged unsanitary water closet again came on for hearing. It appeared that the house is the property of Messrs. Ash and Co.

The Bench decided to dismiss the case on the grounds that the Corporation should have proceeded against the owners instead of the occupier.

 

Folkestone Express 14 April 1894.

Saturday, April 7th: Before The Mayor, Alderman Pledge, and H.W. Poole, W. Wightwick, and W.G. Herbert Esqs.

Temporary authority was granted to H. Jasper to draw at the Marquis Of Lorne.

Mr. Wightwick asked if the applicant was 21 years of age.

Supt. Taylor said he was 35. He was a discharged soldier.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 2 June 1894.

Local News.

At the Police Court yesterday (Friday), John Gibbons, a private in the East Lancashire Regiment, who was charged with having been drunk and damaging the door of the Marquis Of Lorne public house, was sentenced to 21 days' in default of paying a fine of 30s.

 

Folkestone Express 9 June 1894.

Local News.

On Friday, John Gibbons, private in the East Lancashire Regiment, was charged with refusing to quit the Marquis Of Lorne, and fined 5s. and 2s. 6d. costs, and also with breaking two glass panels in a door, for which he was fined 12s., including costs. In default he went to prison for 21 days.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 27 July 1894.

Local News.

At the Police Court, Folkestone, on Saturday, before The Mayor, Alderman Banks, and Messrs. Herbert, Pursey, and Poole, James Hickey, hawker, of the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, pleaded Guilty to being drunk and disorderly in Harbour Street on the 7th of July, and in default of being able to pay a 5s. fine, with 9s. costs, was sent to prison for 14 days.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 26 October 1894.

Local News.

At the Town Hall on Friday a travelling general dealer named William Knell was brought up in custody charged with breaking a quantity of glassware, of the value of 12s., the property of Robert Jasper, of the Marquis Of Lorne Inn, on the previous evening.

Prisoner was ordered to pay the damage, and was fined 2, with 5s. 6d. costs, making 2 17s. 6d. in all, or in default to go to prison for one month with hard labour. He went to gaol.

A second charge of assault was withdrawn, prosecutrix stating that the glass which struck her might have been thrown by prisoner without intention of assaulting her thereby.

 

Folkestone Express 27 October 1894.

Friday, October 19th: Before The Mayor, Alderman Banks, and W. Wightwick Esq.

Walter Knell was charged with breaking three squares of glass and other articles, value 12s., the property of Robert Jasper, and assaulting Elizabeth Martin.

Prosecutor, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, said at 5.30 on Thursday prisoner was in the bar parlour. He went from there into the bar. Witness cautioned him not to enter his private room again. He was there trying to lure his wife's sister away from her home. Prisoner challenged him to fight, and said “If I can't do you any injury, I can do you some damage”. He took up three glasses and hurled them through a glass partition. He broke three squares of glass, three tumblers, a plate, and a basin, altogether of the value of 12s. One of the glasses bounced off the counter, struck Mrs. Martin in the mouth, and knocked a tooth down her throat. He followed prisoner out to Saffron's Place and the police took him into custody.

Elizabeth Martin said she could not say whether it was a glass or a piece of basin which struck her. It knocked her tooth out. She thought she was struck by accident.

Prisoner said “Before you send me to prison, will you telegraph to the Home Office or to Canterbury Prison? The doctor will tell you I am not fit to be sent to prison”.

Superintendent Taylor said the prisoner was drunk when taken to the station. He had a fit, from which he recovered. He feigned another and Dr. Bateman was sent for and applied a galvanic battery and he soon “found his feet”. Previously he had been cursing and swearing.

Prisoner had not been before the Court since 1889, when he was sent to prison for six weeks for assaulting a man named Tutt. He is an old offender.

Superintendent Taylor said his record dated to 1878.

The Bench fined defendant 2, damage 12s., and costs 5s. 6d., 2 17s. 6d. in all, and in default one month with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Visitors' List 24 April 1895.

Police Court Jottings.

Mary Ann Docharty was charged on Friday, before Mr. J. Fitness, with having broken a pane of glass in the Marquis of Lorne public house.

The evidence showed that Mary Ann was the worse for drink, and when she was ejected from the house she smashed the window with her fist, the value of the pane of glass having been put down at one shilling.

The Magistrate reminded the prisoner that she had a twenty years' record at the Court for bad character, but he would give he another chance and inflict a nominal penalty of half a crown, or seven days' imprisonment in default.

 

Folkestone Express 7 November 1896.

Friday, October 30th: Before The Mayor, Aldermen Salter and Pledge, and T.J. Vaughan, J. Fitness and J. Holden Esqs.

Two men, one named Driscoll, a discharged sailor, and the other named Trusler, a cook on board a collier, were charged with assisting a soldier to desert and with receiving and disposing of part of his kit. Driscoll appeared in the dock minus “breeks”, and bare footed, his lower limbs being enveloped in a police blanket. He wore a jacket and vest, but his shirt was missing. It appeared that he had divested himself of his own garments, and arrayed the deserter in them, donning the soldier's clothes himself. These the police removed.

The soldier, named Dungay, gave evidence to the effect that they went on board the ship, where he changed his clothing. The left the ship and went to a beershop just under the arch. Driscoll put up his small kit for sale, and sold one or two things to the people who were drinking there – a clothes brush for 1d., and a pair of laces. They then went to the Marquis Of Lorne, where they sold two pairs of boots, three pairs of socks, and a shaving brush. Driscoll sold them to different men lodging there. A new pair of boots he sold for half a crown, and another pair for 4d., and the razor case and brush for 6d. Driscoll received the money, and after paying for beer and for the lodging he handed over 5s. 4d. to the police sergeant at the station. He sold one pair of socks for 4d., another pair for 2d., and a shirt for 1s. and an old one. A set of boot brushes he sold for 2d., and a Guernsey for 6d.

Frederick Sendall, a sailor on board the Cumberland Lassie, said he was on board between seven and eight, and saw Dungay and Driscoll go on board with another man. Two were in uniform – Dungay and the man who was not in court. They asked him if he wanted to buy some clothes, and he said no. They then asked the cook, Trusler, and he said no. They also asked the boy. Driscoll asked if he had any plain clothes, and Trusler said he would have a look. He gave Driscoll a vest, jacket, and cap, and the cabin boy gave him a pair of canvas pants. The soldier, Dungay, gave Trusler 6d, and then put on the uniform, and they all went together to two public houses. At the first they sold a pair of braces and a clothes brush, and at the other house two pairs of shoes and some stockings and other articles.

Driscoll said the witness took them down into the cabin and supplied them with clothes to desert with. He also helped to drink the beer bought with the money.

P.C. Smoker said after he brought the prisoner to the station he went with the landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne to the Cumberland Lasise. They went below and saw Sendall and Trusler in bed together. He asked them what clothes they had got belonging to the soldier. Sendall got out of the bunk, and with the help of witness's lamp they searched the cabin, and found between two sails the articles produced – one glove marked 6103 H.L.I., a Glengarry cap, and a spoon marked 6063. Sendall said the soldiers had left them aboard. Driscoll had a pair of pants on, which Dungay identified.

Trusler was discharged as there was no evidence against him.

Driscoll said Dungay told him at Dover that he had 11 months bad service out of 13, and that he owed 9. He was in a draft going out to India, and had made up his mind to desert. He spoke with the purest Cockney accent and at a very rapid rate.

The Bench sentenced him to three months hard labour for assisting Dungay to desert, and fined him 3s. 9d., treble the value of the articles disposed of, 20s. fine, and 8s. 6d. costs, or a month. The sentences to run concurrently.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 27 November 1897.

Friday, November 19th: Before The Mayor, Messrs. Fitness, Vaughan, Wightwick, Salter, Pledge, Banks, Holden, and Stock.

Charles Lloyd was charged with stealing a half pint glass, value 3d.

George Henry Bishop said he was in the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, the previous night, and saw the prisoner go outside and put the glass in his pocket.

Robert Jasper, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, deposed to the prisoner taking the glass. He handed it back when spoken to and ran away. Prisoner was sober.

The Magistrates inflicted a fine of 2s. 6d. or seven days'.

 

Folkestone Express 4 December 1897.

Friday, November 26th: Before The Mayor, Aldermen Salter, Banks, and Pledge, J. Fitness, W. Wightwick, T.J. Vaughan, and H.D. Stock Esqs.

Charles Lloyd was charged with stealing a glass, value 3d., the property of Robert Jasper.

George Henry Bishop, a labourer, living at the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, said prisoner was in the bar on the previous night and called for a pot of beer. He went outside with a friend and drank the beer, and put the glass in his pocket.

Robert Jasper, the landlord, said he went after the prisoner and asked him for the glass. He took it out of his pocket, saying “Here it is”. Its value was 3d. Prisoner said he was sorry he did it. He found the glass in his pocket.

Prisoner said he expected he was guilty, but he did not remember doing it.

The Bench fined the prisoner 2s. 6d. or seven days'.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 20 August 1898.

Saturday, August 13th: Before Messrs. J. Holden, T.J. Vaughan, G. Spurgen and J. Pledge.

John Watson was charged with stealing a woollen shirt, value 2s. 6d., the property of Samuel Terry.

From the evidence of Mary Ann Mellish, landlady (sic) of the Marquis Of Lorne, a common lodging house, it appeared that she washed the shirt and hung it out to dry. She missed it soon afterwards. Prisoner and prosecutor both lodged in the house.

P.C. Nash arrested the prisoner, who pleaded Guilty.

He was sentenced to 14 days' hard labour.

 

Folkestone Herald 20 August 1898.

Police Court Report.

On Saturday, John Watson was charged with stealing a shirt.

Mary Ann Mellish, living at the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, deposed that she was the sister of the landlord. She hung out a shirt on the line, and afterwards missed it. She now identified it. The defendant had lodged in the house the previous two nights. She saw it in the kitchen before she missed it.

P.C. Nash deposed that he went to the Wellington beerhouse and found the defendant there. He had a paper parcel under his arm. Witness asked to see what he had. He gave witness the parcel. He undid it, and saw the shirt produced. Defendant said he bought it and gave a shilling and a pot of beer.

Defendant pleaded Guilty, and said he was drunk at the time.

The Bench sentenced him to 14 days' hard.

 

Folkestone Up To Date 20 August 1898.

Saturday, August 13th: Before J. Holden, J. Pledge, G. Spurgen, and T.J. Vaughan Esqs.

John Watson, a young man, was charged with stealing a coloured shirt, the property of Samuel Terry. The prisoner pleaded Guilty.

Mary Ann Mellish said: I am a single woman, living at the Marquis Of Lorne, a house kept by Mrs. Terry, who is my sister. Yesterday I washed a grey woollen shirt, hanging it on a line in front of the house. The shirt is produced. I saw the defendant in the kitchen a few minutes before the shirt was missing.

Samuel Terry said: I am a foreman in the employ of the Electric Lighting Company. On Friday night I gave the last witness a shirt to wash. I can identify the shirt by a stain, etc. Its value is 2s. 6d.

P.C. Nash (22) deposed to finding the prisoner with a paper parcel under his arm. The parcel was opened and the shirt produced was found in it. The prisoner said he did not steal the shirt, but gave a shilling and a pot of beer for it.

The prisoner now pleaded guilty, his defence being that he was drunk at the time he committed the theft.

He was sentenced to 14 days' hard labour.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 14 July 1900.

Saturday, July 7th: Before Alderman J. Banks.

George Humphreys, a rough looking customer, was charged with being drunk, disorderly, and breaking a pane of glass, value 10s., at the Marquis Of Lorne.

Fined 10s. and 4s. 6d. costs on the first count, and 10s. damage and 4s. 6d. costs on the second, or 14 days' hard labour on each charge.

 

Folkestone Express 15 March 1902.

Friday, March 7th: Before W. Wightwick and W.G. Herbert Esqs., and Colonel Hamilton.

Mr. Richard Heritage was granted a transfer of licence of the Marquis Of Lorne public house.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 7 March 1903.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

On Wednesday morning the large hall at the Folkestone Town hall was crowded to excess by temperance people, publicans, “trade” sympathisers, and some hundreds of the neutral public, to witness the anticipated legal combat over licensing matters in the borough. The Court presented a very animated appearance. On the Bench were Mr. W. Wightwick, Colonel Hamilton, Mr. W.G. Herbert, Mr. E.T. Ward, Mr. J. Pledge, Lieut. Col. Westropp, and Mr. C.J. Pursey. Facing the Bench were a noble array of legal luminaries, including Mr. Lewis Glyn K.C., and Mr. Percival Hughes, instructed respectively by Mr. Martin Mowll and Mr. G. Haines, to represent the applicants in the cases of opposed old licences; Mr. Thomas Matthew and Mr. Thorn Drury, instructed by Mr. Minter, representing new applicants; and Mr. Montague Bradley, solicitor, who held a watching brief for the Temperance Council. The Chief Constable, Mr. Harry Reeve, was present conducting the opposition. These gentlemen were flanked by the Press on one side, and on the other by either the principals or representatives of the various breweries having interests in the town, such as Messrs. Leney, Mackeson, Nalder and Colyer, Flint, G. Beer, etc.

The Chairman, in opening the Court, said that 23 full licences stood adjourned since the previous Court. Since the adjournment, enquiries had been made, and from those enquiries the Chief Constable was instructed to persevere in the objection against nine houses, viz.: The Providence, Mr. Arthur F. East; Marquis Of Lorne, Wm. R. Heritage; Granville, Charles Partridge; Victoria, Alfred Skinner; Tramway, Fredk. Skinner; Hope, Stephen J. Smith; Star, Ernest Tearall; Bricklayers Arms, Joseph A. Whiting; and Blue Anchor, Walter Whiting. From a recent inspection of those houses, however, the Bench had decided to withdraw the objections against the Victoria, the Hope, and the Blue Anchor, and proceed with the remainder. Regarding the 17 houses which would that day have their licences renewed without opposition, the Bench had decided to deal with them at the 1904 Sessions according to the then ruling circumstances. The Bench desired to warn Mrs. Brett, of the Swan Hotel, as to her husband's conduct of the business. In the cases of the London And Paris, the Imperial Hotel, the Mechanics Arms, and those houses against which convictions were recorded, it was the desire of the Bench to warn the various landlords that any further breach of the licensing laws would place their licences seriously in jeopardy. With respect to the Imperial Tap (sic), the Castle, and those houses which had been originally objected to for structural alterations to be made, the Bench now renewed the licences on the condition that the order made as to the various alterations should be carried out in 14 days. It was the wish of the Bench that the general warning should also apply to the beerhouses under the Act of 1869.

Coming to the licences in the old portion of the town, the Bench were of opinion that they were out of all proportion to the population, and it was the purpose of the Bench to obtain information before the 1904 Sessions which would lead to their reduction. In the meantime, the Bench invited the brewers and owners to co-operate with the Magistrates in arriving at the mode of the reduction. Failing that, the Justices would take the matter into their own hands, and, he hoped, arrive at conclusions on a fair and equitable basis. (Hear, hear)

Mr. Lewis Glyn K.C. at once asked the Bench to withdraw their opposition to all the opposed licences this year. With the whole of his learned friends, he thought he was right in saying that in view of legislation in the coming year it would be fairer to the Trade to wait until 1904 before taking any drastic action. He would submit that because a neighbourhood happened to be congested, it was hardly fair to take away one man's living and to hand it over to another, which such a proceeding practically meant.

The Chairman said the Bench would note Counsel's observations, but the applications must proceed in the usual way.

The Marquis Of Lorne.

The tenant of the Marquis Of Lorne, Mr. Wm. Heritage, was somewhat surprised when his application for a renewal was refused.

The evidence was very short. Under previous tenants, it was said, the house had not been everything that could be desired, although, in answer to Mr. Thorn Drury, the police admitted that there was no complaint against the present tenant, who had been in possession only twelve months. The chief grounds of opposition were in respect to certain structural alterations, which it was thought could not be carried out in a practical and satisfactory form.

Mr. Drury asked the Bench, if only for this year, to consider his tenant, whose living depended on his twelve months' investment. Although, no doubt, the brewers would meet Mr. Heritage, yet he would point out that if the licence were taken away, it would not be any adequate compensation to his client, who, he believed, had worked up a very good business by dint of hard work during the past twelve months. As a further inducement, the brewers would undertake to carry out any alterations suggested by the Bench.

The Bench retired, and, after three minutes, returned into Court with the announcement that they were unanimous in their decision to refuse the renewal of the licence. As the tenant had only been in the house twelve months, the Bench thought that in all probability the brewers would compensate him.

 

Folkestone Express 7 March 1903.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, March 4th: Before W. Wightwick, Col. Hamilton, Col. Westropp, E.T. Ward, J. Pledge, W.G. Herbert, and C.J. Pursey Esqs.

It will be remembered that at the last sessions the Justices ordered notices of opposition to be given to nine licence holders, namely:- the Providence, the Marquis Of Lorne, the Victoria, the Tramway, the Hope, the Star, the Bricklayers Arms, and the Blue Anchor.

Several other applications were adjourned, and in some cases plans were ordered to be submitted. The notices of opposition to the Victoria, the Hope, and the Blue Anchor were afterwards, by direction of the Bench, withdrawn.

The flowing counsel were engaged:- Mr. Lewis Glyn, K.C., instructed by Mr. Mowll, Mr. Percival Hughes, instructed by Mr. G.W. Haines, representing the Folkestone Licensed Victuallers' Association; Mr. G. Thorn Drury and Mr. Theodore Matthew, instructed by Mr. Minter; and Mr. Drake was briefed in the matter of the Blue Anchor, which was not in the end opposed. Mr. Bradley, of Dover, representing the Folkestone Temperance Party and Mr. W. Mowll opposed the applications for the two new licences.

The Chairman said before the commenced business, he would, by direction of the Magistrates, read to the gentlemen present what they proposed doing. At the General Annual Licensing Meeting they directed the Chief Constable to give notice to the owners of nine houses. Since then they had inspected those houses, with the result that they had directed the Chief Constable to withdraw the notices of objection served upon the owners of the Victoria, the Hope, and the Blue Anchor. The other objections would be proceeded with. As regarded the remaining houses, they decided to renew the licences, but the Chairman referred to those cases where there had been convictions, and warned the licence holders to be careful in future. Certain structural alterations were ordered to be made at the Packet Boat, the Brewery Tap, the Castle Inn, the Lifeboat, and the Prince Of Wales.

The Licensing Justices expressed the opinion that the number of houses licensed for the sale of intoxicating liquors now existing in the borough, especially in that part of the town near the harbour, is out of all proportion to the population, and the Justices proposed between now and the Licensing Sessions of 1904 to gain information and determine what reduction shall then be made. Meanwhile the owners of licensed houses were invited to agree amongst themselves to voluntarily surrender a substantial number of licences in the borough in 1904, and submit the result of their united action to the Licensing Justices. Failing a satisfactory voluntary reduction, the Justices would in the exercise of their discretion in a fair and equitable spirit decide what reduction should then be made.

Mr. Glyn, who said he was instructed on behalf of Messrs. Nalder and Colyer, thanked the Magistrates for the statement as to the course they intended to adopt, and said he was going to throw out a suggestion that it would be fairer under the circumstances if the renewals which still stood over for hearing should also stand adjourned until the Annual General Licensing Meeting of next year. The principal ground of complaint, so far as he gathered, was that the houses were not wanted. He contended that it would not be fair, for instance, to take away one of the six licences which were to be opposed.

The Chairman, however, said the Magistrates decided to hear all the evidence.

The Marquis Of Lorne.

This was the only case in which the licence was refused.

Mr. Drury said in that case the substantial objection was the same. There was no complaint as to the conduct.

The Superintendent said there was no spirit licence, although a certificate had been granted.

Mr. Henry Robert Walton, excise officer, was called to prove this.

Mr. Drury said they were prepared to give exactly the same undertaking with regard to the common lodging house business. By good management the tenant had increased the trade, and he was now prepared to take out the spirit licence. He would also undertake to close up a side entrance.

Plans were put in, showing that there was an entrance from a yard, to which another house had a right of access, and the Superintendent said he considered the opening of that other cottage into the yard highly objectionable.

Mr. Drury said he would be glad if the Bench would be good enough to give them an opportunity of seeing what they could do in the matter.

The Chairman said the house was structurally unfitted. It was dilapidated, and he did not see how it could be got over.

After retiring, the Bench decided not to renew the licence.

Mr. Drury said it would be a great hardship to the tenant, who paid a valuation, and had expended 52 on the house.

Mr. Ward: How long has he been in there?

The applicant, Mr. Heritage, said 12 months on the 6th March.

Mr. Wightwick said the Bench unanimously refused the licence. With regard to compensation, if he had only been in 12 months, probably the brewers would compensate him.

 

Folkestone Herald 7 March 1903.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

The Adjourned Licensing Sessions for the Borough of Folkestone were held in the Town hall on Wednesday. In view of the opposition by the police to a number of the existing licences extraordinary interest was evinced in the meeting, and when the proceedings commenced at eleven o'clock in the morning there was a very large attendance, the “trade” being numerously represented. Representatives of the Folkestone Temperance Council and religious bodies in the town were also present, prominent amongst them being Mr. J. Lynn, Mrs. Stuart, and the Rev. J.C. Carlile. Prior to the commencement of business the Licensing Justices held a private meeting amongst themselves. When the doors were thrown open to the public there was a tremendous rush for seats. The Justices present were the following:- Mr. W. Wightwick, Mr. E.T. Ward, Mr. W.G. Herbert, Lieut. Col. Hamilton, Mr. J. Pledge, Lieut. Col. Westropp, and Mr. C.J. Pursey.

Before proceeding with the business, the Chairman announced that at the Annual Licensing Meeting the Justices adjourned the renewal of 23 full licences and five on beer licences, and directed the Chief Constable to give notice of objection to the owners of the licences of the following nine houses:- Providence (Arthur F. East); Marquis Of Lorne (William R. Heritage); Granville (Charles Partridge); Victoria (Alfred Skinner); Tramway (Frederick Skinner); Hope (Stephen J. Smith); Star (Ernest Tearall); Bricklayers Arms (Joseph A. Whiting); and Blue Anchor (Walter Whiting). Since the former sessions the Justices had inspected all the houses objected to, and considered the course which they ought to pursue with respect to the same, with the result that they had directed the Chief Constable to withdraw the notices of objection served by him with respect of the Victoria, Hope, and Blue Anchor, and to persist in the opposition to the following:- Providence, Marquis Of Lorne, Granville, Tramway, Star, and Bricklayers Arms. As regarded the remaining 15 full licences and five beer licences they would renew the same this year, and deal with them next year according to the circumstances.

The five beerhouses on licences were granted before the 1st May, 1869, and had been continuously renewed since that date, therefore they could not refuse to renew the licences, except upon one of the four grounds set out in Section 8 of the Wine and Beerhouses Act, 1869.

The Licensing Justices were of opinion that the number of licences for the sale of intoxicating liquors now existing in the Borough of Folkestone, especially in that part of the old town near the immediate neighbourhood of the Harbour, was out of all proportion to the population, and they proposed, between now and the General Annual Licensing Meeting of 1904, to obtain information on various matters to enable them to determine what reduction should be made in the number of licences. Meanwhile they invited the owners of licensed premises to meet and agree among themselves for the voluntary surrender, at the General Licensing Meeting of 1904, of a substantial number of licences in the Borough, and submit their united action to the Licensing Justices. Failing satisfactory proposals for voluntary reduction by the owners, the Licensing Justices would, in the exercise of their discretionary powers decide, in a fair and reasonable spirit, what reduction should then be made.

At this stage Mr. Lewis Glyn K.C. (instructed by Mr. Mowll, solicitor, Dover), who represented the brewers, suggested that, under the circumstances, the opposition to all the licences in the borough should be postponed until the Annual Licensing Meeting next year.

The Chairman: We want to hear the cases first.

Mr. Glyn: i think it would be fairer to the “trade” to postpone the consideration of this also till next year. In the meantime any structural alterations which are required, the brewers, in conjunction with the tenants, will have an opportunity of doing what is required.

The Justices decided that the cases must proceed.

Consideration of the applications for the renewal of licences to which objection was taken by the police was then proceeded with.

The Marquis Of Lorne, landlord Wm. R. Heritage, to which objection had been made to the renewal of the licence, was next dealt with.

Mr. Thorn Drury said the objection to this house was substantially the same as in the other cases.

Evidence was given by Inspector Swift.

Mr. Thorn Drury intimated that, with regard to its being a common lodging house, they were prepared to give exactly the same undertaking. They would also be prepared to close up the side entrance. He asked the Justices to give them an opportunity of seeing if something could not be done in order to save the man. He had only been in the house twelve months.

The Justices consulted in private, and on returning in about five minutes, the Chairman said: The Bench unanimously refuse this licence. With regard to compensation, I believe the brewers will compensate you as you have only been there twelve months.

 

Southeastern Gazette 10 March 1903.

Local News.

At the Adjourned Licensing Sessions on Wednesday, the renewal of the licence of the Marquis Of Lorne was refused.

 

Folkestone Express 14 March 1903.

Local News.

We hear that the refusal of the Licensing Justices to renew the licence of the Marquis Of Lorne public house will be appealed against.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 11 April 1903.

East Kent Quarter Sessions.

Tuesday, April 7th: Before Sir W.L. Selfe.

The Marquis Of Lorne, Folkestone.

In this case Mr. G.T. Drury appeared for the appellant and Mr. Coward and Mr. Hohler for the respondents.

In opening the case, Mr. Hohler said the justices, after inspecting the premises, directed the Chief Constable to give notice of opposition. Their objections were (1) That the licensed premises were not required for public accommodation; (2) that the premises were unfit to be licensed; (3) that the premises were not suitable for night accommodation; (4) that no excise licence for the premises had been taken out. There was a public bar facing Radnor Street, a small store, a lumber room behind, and a small dark living room for the licensee adnd his family. The Marquis Of Lorne was not adapted for a night lodging house. It had only five bedrooms, and they were made to accommodate 16 persons, comprising out-porters and men employed in the fishing industry. There were in the neighbourhood 88 full, 11 beer on, 6 beer off, and other licensed premises to the number of 140. This number, he maintained, was out of all proportion to the needs of the place.

Harry Reeve, Chief Constable, and Alfred Wm. Burniston gave evidence.

Wm. Heritage, the tenant, said his father had occupied the premises before him. Since taking over the business (18 months ago), the trade had increased. No complaints had previously been made by the police with regard to the conduct or management of the premises.

Mr. Drury, for the appellant, asked what was the position of his client? He had gone into a house which his father had occupied for some years. He had invested all the money he had, and no-one had suggested how he was to recover the 90 which he had expended on the undertaking. If it could be said that the appellant had done something that he ought not to have done, then he would not have had so much to say. There were several similar houses in the vicinity, but this, it appeared, was the only one the police objected to. The police seized upon this unfortunate man's house purely and simply because in the existence of a certain right of way to cottages they saw a reason which would in their opinion justify their action.

Mr. Coward observed that so far as he knew the Justices were quite within their rights when they refused to grant the renewal of the appellant's licence. He ventured to think there was nothing more objectionable than the construction of the Marquis Of Lorne. There were two entrances to this house in Radnor Street, a passage communicating with some cottages, one of which was a lodging house. In this way people had easy access to the licensed premises in question, and the Justices in his opinion exercised very wise discretion.

The Bench retired, and after a short deliberation, the Chairman announced that the decision of the Justices would be upheld. The appeal was, therefore, dismissed with costs.

 

Southeastern Gazette 14 April 1903.

East Kent Quarter Sessions.

In the case of the Marquis Of Lorne, Folkestone, which was an appeal against the refusal by the Justices of Folkestone to renew the licence of the house, Mr. G.T. Drury appeared for the appellant (Heritage), and Mr. Coward K.C. and Mr. Hohler for the respondents.

The Chairman announced that the decision of the Justices would be upheld. Their appeal was, therefore, dismissed, with costs.

 

Folkestone Express 18 April 1903.

East Kent Quarter Sessions.

At the Kent Quarter Sessions, amongst the appeals was that against the refusal to renew the licence of the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, Folkestone, the property of Messrs. Ash and Co.

Mr. G.T. Drury appeared for the appellants, and Mr. Lewis Coward K.C., and Mr. Hohler for the Justices.

Mr. Lewis Coward said the licence was refused on four grounds, namely that the licence was not required, that the premises were structurally unfit, that the premises were used as a common lodging house, and also that no spirit licence had been taken out for four or five years. There were 63 houses in Radnor Street, and eight of them were fully licensed houses. In Folkestone there were 88 fully licensed houses, 11 beer on licences, six beer off licences, four wine off licences, three wine on licences, and 28 spirit off licences granted to grocers and others, making a total of 140 licences. Within 130 paces of the house there were 23 fully licensed houses.

Superintendent Reeve, Sergeant Swift, and Detective Sergeant Burniston gave evidence on behalf of the justices' decision, after which William Richard Heritage, the tenant, gave evidence, and said that he had been tenant for over twelve months. He was doing two and a half barrels a week. He paid 47 to go in; there was no furniture except a few bedsteads. He had spent 52 since on fittings. He was prepared to arrange that each lodger should have a separate room. He had a profit of 12s. to 13s. per barrel, and his rent 15 and rates, etc.

Mr. Bromley produced plans of the premises and the proposed alterations in the yard.

Mr. Drury, in speaking on behalf of the appellants, said the tenant had had no complaint made against him, and had invested his money in the house about twelve months ago, and could not recover any of it. Out of all the houses objected to only this one had its licence refused. The fact of a right of way across the back premises to two cottages was the chief ground of complaint. They ought to be allowed a year in which negotiations might be made with the owners of the cottages for alterations to be made. The spirit licence had not been taken out but the tenant was willing to take one out, and no case had been made that any other treatment should be meted out to this tenant than to the others.

Mr. Coward observed that so far as he knew the justices were quite within their rights when they refused to grant the renewal of the applicant's house. He ventured to think there was nothing more objectionable than the construction of the Marquis Of Lorne. There were two entrances to this house in Radnor Street, and a passage communicating with some cottages, one of which was a lodging house. In this way people had easy access to the licensed premises in question, and the Justices in his opinion exercised very wise discretion in refusing a renewal of the licence.

The Bench retired, and after a short deliberation the Chairman announced that the decision of the Justices would be upheld. The appeal was, therefore, dismissed, with costs.

 

Folkestone Herald 18 April 1903.

Local News.

At the East Kent Quarter Sessions, held recently, an appeal against the refusal of the Folkestone Licensing Bench to renew the licence of the Marquis Of Lorne, Radnor Street, Folkestone, the property of Messrs. Ash and Company, was dismissed with costs.

 

 

LICENSEE LIST

HOLLOWAY George 1872-80 Post Office Directory 1874Bastions

HERITAGE Edward 1880 Bastions

HALL William 1880-83 (also fish dealer age 20Census) Post Office Directory 1882Bastions

HERITAGE James 1883-85 Bastions

PAUL William Henry 1885-91 Post Office Directory 1891Bastions

PAUL Thomas 1891 Bastions

Last pub licensee had SPILLETT Henry 1891-94 Next pub licensee had (age 34 in 1891Census) Bastions

JASPER Robert 1894-1902 Kelly's 1899Bastions

Last pub licensee had HERITAGE William R 1902-03 Next pub licensee had Post Office Directory 1903Kelly's 1903Bastions

 

Post Office Directory 1874From the Post Office Directory 1874

Post Office Directory 1882From the Post Office Directory 1882

Post Office Directory 1891From the Post Office Directory 1891

Kelly's 1899From the Kelly's Directory 1899

Post Office Directory 1903From the Post Office Directory 1903

Kelly's 1903From the Kelly's Directory 1903

BastionsFrom More Bastions of the Bar by Easdown and Rooney

CensusCensus

 

If anyone should have any further information, or indeed any pictures or photographs of the above licensed premises, please email:-

TOP Valid CSS Valid XTHML

 

LINK to Even More Tales From The Tap Room