From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 22 January, 1886. 1d.

On Tuesday evening, a supper was given at the “Marquis of Waterford Inn,” Union Row, by Mr. J. Collard, of Alkham to his Dover customers. The spread was an excellent one, the room prettily decorated, and the evening passed off very pleasantly.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 28 October, 1904. Price 1d.

PUBLIC HOUSE TRANSFERS

Mr. Mowll applied for the transfer of the licence of the "Marquis of Waterford" from Mr. Thompson to Mrs. Friend, late of the "Criterion." he said that Mr. Thompson went in three months ago, and an application would not have been made in the ordinary way within at least nine months. Mr. Thompson, who had the best of recommendations, had had some domestic trouble and the brewers thought that in order that the house might be conducted properly, the application for the transfer of the licence should be made.

The Magistrates said that under the circumstances it would be granted.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 2 February, 1912.

PUBLIC HOUSE SCENE

Sarah Ann Collins described as a flower seller, was charged with wilfully breaking a plate-glass panel in the door of the “Marquis of Waterford,” Union Row, doing damage to the amount of 16s. 8d.

Mrs. Christine D. Bourner, the licensee, stated that the defendant entered the bar of Saturday evening and called for a glass of ginger beer. She did not drink it but went out of the house. She returned in a few minutes and picked up a glass from the counter, she threw it at the door window and smashed it. Defendant was the worse for drink, but she left the house quietly, being subsequently arrested by the Police.

Defendant pleaded guilty and asked for leniency. She promised to sign the pledge.

It was stated the defendant was fined only in December last for common assault.

The Bench imposed a fine of 25s., this including the amount of the damage. A fortnight was allowed for payment, in default 14 days’ imprisonment.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 5 July, 1912.

MORE WINDOWS SMASHED

At the Dover Police Court on Saturday morning, before Messrs. P. W. J. Mackenzie (in the chair) G. C. Rubie and L. Bradley.

Henry Godden was charged with breaking a plate class window in the "Marquis of Waterford," Union Row, to the value of 16s. 8d., the property of Christina Bourner.

Christina Bourner said: Last Saturday, about 9 p.m. prisoner came into the bar under the influence of drink. I refused to serve him because I considered he had had enough. He then tried to make a disturbance, so I put him outside. The next thing I heard was a smash, and I went outside and saw the window broken and the prisoner going up the hill.

Ellen E. Lawrence said: I live at 9, Blucher Street. Last evening I was coming up the hill with two children. I saw the prisoner pick up  stone and throw it at the window, the stone rebounded. Prisoner then threw another, and this smashed the window.

The Chairman said in 1908, the prisoner was charged with breaking the same window, and he would be sent to Canterbury for one month's imprisonment, with hard labour.

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

SANITARY ACCOMMODATION

Mr. Mowll appeared in the case of the "Marquis of Waterford."

The Chief Constable said that that was a case which he was placing before the Court against his own opinion. In that case the urinal and W.C. accommodation was placed at the back and people wishing to use them would have to go through the  living room or sitting room of the occupier to use it. In his report to the justices he stated fully that all places of accommodation could be used on application to the tenant or attendants. He was of opinion that the accommodation there was quite sufficient for the public need. if the lavatory was placed at the disposal of the public in his opinion it would be grossly abused and would be likely to be damaged every day. The people using the house lived in the neighbourhood and there was amply accommodation at their own houses.

Mr. Mowll said that he was informed that the tenant had been there ten years and had only had five applications for the use of the closet during the whole of that time.

The Chairman said that with regard to the "Town Arms" they would adjourn that matter until the adjourned meeting. He did not think there would be very much difficulty about it, but the Magistrates took an interest in those matters and it was just as well that they should do so. With regard to the "Marquis of Waterford" and the "Marquis of Anglesey" they did not see how they could go behind the statement made by their officer and the licences would be renewed.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 18 June, 1915. Price 1d.

MARQUIS OF WATERFORD PROSECUTED

At the Dover Police Court this (Friday) morning, before Messrs. M. Pepper (in the chair), H. Hobday, A. Clark, and Dr. Wood.

Elizabeth Ratcliffe, an unfortunate, was charged with being drunk in the “Marquis of Waterford,” Union Row, on June, 9th.

Defendant pleaded guilty.

Mr. Vosper prosecuted.

P.C. Kingsmill said that on the 9th he was searching for defendant who was wanted on a warrant. He found her in the bar of the “Marquis of Waterford,” drunk and improperly dressed. She went to a house near by to put her clothes on before coming to the Police Station. She was in company with a woman named Collins, who was also drunk.

The defendant said she had been out all night and had a drink of brandy. She went into the house and got some ale. She kept going in and out of the house waiting for her brother, but she did not have any more drink.

It was stated that she was being arrested at the time to be taken to Canterbury. She had been convicted nineteen times.

Defendant was fined 5s.

Sarah Ann Collins, of Radnor Street, Folkestone was summoned for a similar offence.

Defendant pleaded not guilty.

Mr. Vosper prosecuted.

Police-sergeant Fox said that on the 9th he visited the “Marquis of Waterford,” at 7.40 p.m. the defendant was there drunk, leaning against the partition of the Public Bar. He called the attention of the licensee to the woman’s condition. The defendant was having an altercation with a man and another woman in the bar. The landlady at his suggestion asked her to leave. She said, Not until I have finished my beer which I have bought and paid for.” She held up a half pint glass filled with beer. She asked the landlady if she had served her with the beer. She replied, “No, my daughter-in-law, who was in charge of the bar when the defendant came in must have served her.” He told the landlady that she would be reported. The defendant left the premises at his request. She refused to give her name and address and he took her to the Police Station.

Defendant denied being drunk, saying she only went to four houses and four glasses would not make her drunk.

P.C. Kingsmill said that at 7 p.m. the same day he saw the defendant there when he went on the other case. She was drunk and came out with Ratcliffe, and would not go away till he cautioned her.

Defendant was fined 10s., or seven days in default.

Christina Dunn Bourner, who did not attend. “Mr. Rutley Mowll, who appeared for she stating that she was not well enough). Was summoned for permitting drunkenness at the “Marquis of Waterford,” of which she was the holder of the licence.

Mr. Vosper prosecuted.

P.C. Kingsmill repeated the evidence he had given in regard to Ratcliffe and Collins.

In reply to Mr. Mowll, witness said he went to the “Marquis of Waterford” in search of Ratcliffe. She recognised witness.

Chief Constable Fox said that on the 9th inst., he went to the Police Station and found the last witness there with Ratcliffe. She was too drunk to send to Canterbury that night.

Cross-examined. Mrs. Bourner and her husband before her had held licenses in Dover for twenty-five years without a conviction. When Mrs. Bourner went in, although the house was in a rough neighbourhood, no objection was made to her holding it owing to her character. She was now too old to manage it.

Mr. Mowll said that after a person had been in a house for so many years he was sure that the Magistrates would hesitate to record a conviction against her in the evening of her life. No doubt she was too old to manage the house now and that would be communicated to the brewers. He suggested that the case should be dismissed on the payment of the costs so as not to besmirch her record and on the understanding that she should leave the house.

The Magistrates fined the defendant £1 including costs.

Mr. Vosper withdrew a second summons for selling drink to a drunken person.