Folkestone Herald 19 March 1892.

Bankruptcy.

Re. James Fisher, Carpenter and Licensed Victualler: Under the failure of James Fisher, of 104, Black Bull Road, Folkestone, formerly of the Mechanics Arms, St. John's Street, Folkestone, carpenter and licensed victualler, lately residing at 60, Walton Road, Folkestone, the statement of affairs shows gross liabilities of £288 12s. 9d., and the only asset returned is £72 10s. surplus from securities in the hands of creditors. The causes of failure are set down as follows: The cost of the building of the two cottages in Black Bull Road is estimated to have exceeded the bankrupt's calculations by £150. Want of employment for four months during present winter.

The Official Receiver's observations are as follows: The receiving order was made on the debtor's petition, and he has been adjudicated bankrupt upon his own application. The bankrupt commenced business at the Mechanics Arms, St. John's Street, Folkestone in May, 1883; he had previously been a journeyman carpenter, and followed that occupation during the time he carried on the public house. He gave up the public house at Christmas, 1890, and for about nine months resided in lodgings at 60, Manor Road, Folkestone. In June last he purchased two plots of land in Black Bull Road, Folkestone, from the Kent and Sussex Land Society for £178, and upon these plots he has erected two cottages, which he estimates to be of the value of £600. They are mortgaged at £300, £120, and £100 respectively. The furniture upon the bankrupt's premises is claimed by his wife as having been given to her on her marriage or purchased subsequently out of her own earnings. I have been unable to admit this claim. The bankrupt's life is insured in the “Pearl” for £30 under a policy effected about seven years ago at a premium of 2s. 4d. a month.

Folkestone Herald 5 August 1899.

Wednesday, August 2nd:

The following transfer of licence was allowed: Mr. Ribband, Mechanics Arms.

Folkestone Herald 15 September 1900.

Folkestone Police Court.

On Monday, transfer was granted to the following: Mr. George John Lawrence for the Mechanics Arms.

Folkestone Herald 22 February 1902.

Wednesday, February 19th: Before J. Stainer and G. Peden Esqs., Alderman Vaughan, and Col. W.K. Westropp.

George John Lawrence, landlord of the Mechanics Arms, was summoned for keeping his house open during prohibited hours on the 13th inst. Mr. G.W. Haines appeared for the defendant. Defendant pleaded Not Guilty.

Inspector Swift stated that about 11.12 p.m. on the date in question he was in St. John's Street when he saw four men leaving the public bar of the house. On entering the bar he saw Mrs. Lawrence filling a pewter measure from the engine, and someone in the adjoining compartment handed her a jug, into which she put the contents. At the same time twopence was pushed on to the counter. Witness went out of the door and saw Mr. Thos. Greengrass and his wife leaving the house. They had a jug containing beer, with a thick froth upon it. Mrs. Lawrence, the landlady, came to the door, and witness said to her “You have just served this man with a pint of beer; it is considerably past 11 o'clock”. Witness pointed to the twopence, which was still on the counter. She said “Yes, that's right; I did not think it was quite as late. I had just called time”. She then said she was in charge of the house, her husband being out singing at concerts. Witness told her that he should report the case, and she did not reply.

By Mr. Haines: It was 12 past 11 when he spoke to Mrs. Lawrence. His watch was timed by the Town Hall clock. He did not know where Greenwich time could be obtained at Folkestone.

Thos. Greengrass, of 33, St. John's Street, said he was a friend of the defendant, and he often went to the house to see there was no disturbance when defendant's wife was out, as the latter's wife was indisposed. At 11 o'clock on the night in question there was only one customer in the bar, and he went out. Witness said there was a difference between the Congregational Church and St, Michael's Church clocks. He got his beer as usual, and was on the way home as the Inspector stopped him. The beer was drawn after 11 o'clock by Mrs. Lawrence's clock, which was always kept 5 or 6 minutes fast.

Ellen Lawrence, defendant's wife, said Mr. Greengrass often came in to assist her when her husband was not there. Their clock was always kept about 6 minutes fast so that they could clear the house quickly. She did not hear any clock strike, and thought it was 11 o'clock when she drew the pint for Mr. Greengrass.

Supt. Reeve: Do you admit drawing the beer after 11 o'clock?

Witness: Yes, sir.

Mr. Haines: That is after 11 o'clock by your clock?

Witness: Yes, sir.

Eliza Greengrass also gave evidence.

The Chairman said it had been admitted all round that the house was open after 11 o'clock. The Town hall clock was rarely wrong. As it appeared to be but a small matter, the Bench would deal leniently with it, and inflict a fine of £1 and 12. costs, or 14 days' in default.

Folkestone Herald 28 June 1902.

Saturday, June 21st: Before Alderman Lieut. Colonel Penfold, Liuet. Colonel Westropp, Aldermen Herbert and Vaughan, Mr. J. Stainer, and Mr. W.C. Carpenter.

Folkestone Herald 2 August 1902.

Wednesday, July 30th: Before Aldermen Banks and Herbert, and Mr. Swoffer.

Mr. J. Lawrence applied for an occasional licence in Ashley Park on Bank Holiday. Granted.

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.

They warned the holder of the licence of the Mechanics Arms, who was convicted on the 19th of February, 1902, for selling intoxicating liquors during prohibited hours, that any future breach of the licensing laws would jeopardise his licence.

When Mr. Lawrence, landlord of the Mechanics Arms, stepped forward, the Chairman informed him that that morning before breakfast, the members of the Licensing Committee received a letter purporting to have been signed by him (Mr. Lawrence), threatening the lives of the Justices. They did not know whether Mr. Lawrence wrote it or not, but if he did they hoped he would not carry out his threat just at present. (Laughter)

Mr. Lawrence: I know nothing whatever about that letter, sir.

The Chairman: It is threatening two of us.

Mr. Herbert: I don't think for a moment Mr. Lawrence wrote that letter.

Folkestone Herald 30 May 1903.

Wednesday, May 27th: Before Mr. W. Wightwick, Alderman T.J. Vaughan, Lieut. Colonels Westropp, Hamilton, and Fynmore, Messrs. W.G. Herbert, J. Pledge, and G.I. Swoffer.

Mr. J. Lawrence, of the Mechanics Arms, was granted an occasional licence to sell at Ashley Park on Whit Monday.

Folkestone Herald 4 July 1903.

Wednesday, July 1st: Before Mr. W. Wightwick, and Alderman G. Spurgen.

Mr. Johnny Lawrence, of the Mechanics Arms, applied for a licence to sell on the show ground for three days. It was explained that although the show only lasted two days a number of men would arrive on the previous day. The application was granted.

Folkestone Herald 1 August 1903.

Wednesday, July 29yh: Before Messrs. W. Wightwick, W.G. Herbert, C.J. Pursey, and G.I. Swoffer, and Lieut. Colonel Hamilton.

Mr. J. Lawrence was granted an occasional licence to sell intoxicants at the Ashley Park Fete on Monday next.

Folkestone Herald 2 April 1904.

Wednesday, March 30th: Before Alderman J. Banks, W.G. Herbert and G.I. Swoffer.

Mr. J. Lawrence, of the Mechanics Arms, was granted an occasional licence to sell at the Ashley Park Sports on Monday.

Folkestone Herald 21 May 1904.

Wednesday, May 18th: Before Alderman G. Spurgen, Alderman T.J. Vaughan, Lieut. Colonels Fynmore and Westropp, Mr. W.C. Carpenter, and Mr. J. Stainer.

Mr. J. Lawrence, of the Mechanics Arms, was granted an occasional licence to sell at the Fire Brigade Tournament on Monday.

Folkestone Herald 10 June 1905.

Wednesday, June 3td: Before Alderman T.J. Vaughan, Lieut. Colonel Hamilton, Councillor R.J. Fynmore, and Mr. J. Stainer.

Mr. Johnny Lawrence was granted occasional licences for the new Cricket Ground from 11 to 7 on Friday (yesterday) and Saturday (today), and also for the Fete at Ashley Park on Whit Monday from 12 to 8.

Folkestone Herald 29 July 1905.

Wednesday, July 26th: Before Alderman W.G. Herbert, Lieut. Colonel Hamilton, Mr. G.I. Swoffer, and Mr. J. Stainer.

Mr. Johnny Lawrence was granted an occasional licence to sell on the Cricket Field during the Festival.

Folkestone Herald 5 August 1905.

Wednesday, August 2nd: Before Alderman T.J. Vaughan, Councillor R.J. Fynmore, and Colonel Westropp.

Mr. J. Lawrence, of the Mechanics Arms, was granted an occasional licence for the Ashley Park Fete on Monday.

Folkestone Herald 2 June 1906.

Wednesday, May 30th: Before Alderman W.G. Herbert, Lieut. Colonel Hamilton, Major Leggett, Messrs. J. Stainer, R.J. Linton, G.I. Swoffer, and C.J. Pursey.

Mr. J. Lawrence, of the Mechanics Arms, was granted an occasional licence to sell at Ashley Park Fete on Whit Monday.

Folkestone Herald 4 August 1906.

Wednesday, August 1st: Before Councillor R.J. Fynmore, and Mr. W.C. Carpenter.

An application by Mr. J. Lawrence to sell intoxicating liquors at Ashley Park on Monday, August 6th, between the hours of 12 and 8, was granted.

Folkestone Herald 23 February 1907.

Saturday, February 16th: Before Mr. E.T. Ward, Colonel R.J. Fynmore, Alderman T.J. Vaughan, and Councillor G. Boyd.

Mr. Johnnie Lawrence applied for an occasional licence at the Town Hall, from 7 till 10 o'clock on February 27th on the occasion of the installation of Sir Edward Sassoon and others as Oddfellows. Granted.

Folkestone Herald 11 May 1907.

Wednesday, May 8th: Before The Mayor, Alderman T.J. Vaughan, Messrs. E.T. Ward and R.J. Fynmore.

Mr. J. Lawrence, of the Mechanics Arms, applied for an occasional licence to sell at the Volunteer Drill ground on the occasion fo the visit of the Oddfellows. He wanted the licence granted from 9 a.m. till 6 p.m. in the evening during the week, from Monday till Saturday. He proposed to erect a tent in the ground.

The Chief Constable said it was quite in accordance with the custom at the Conference to have a licence granted, and he had no objection.

The licence was granted.

Folkestone Herald 25 May 1907.

Wednesday, May 22nd: Before The Mayor, Messrs. W.G. Herbert, C.J. Pursey, J. Stainer, R.J. Linton, G.I. Swoffer, and Councillor G. Boyd.

Mr. J. Lawrence was granted an occasional licence to sell liquor at the Woodward Hall on Thursday evening from 7 till 10 on the occasion of the Grand Master's levee (in connection with the Oddfellows' visit).

Folkestone Herald 28 January 1911.

Wednesday, January 25th: Before Messrs. W.G. Herbert and R.J. Linton.

An hour's extension was granted to the Mechanics Arms for that evening for the motor drivers' annual dinner, but the applicant was told that in future a proper written application must be sent to the Clerk beforehand. The Chairman said it was most unfair to the police having having to be sent round at a moment's notice to find Magistrates. It was also very unfair to the Justices.

Folkestone Herald 3 February 1912.

Wednesday, January 31st: Before Mr. E.T. Ward, Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Major Leggett, and Mr. W.G. Herbert.

Mr. J. Lawrence was granted extensions for the licence of the Mechanics Arms for one hour on February 3rd and February 6th, the first for a club dinner, and the second for the Provincial Motor Cab Company's drivers' dinner.

Folkestone Herald 22 January 1916.

Friday, January 21st: Before Mr. G.I. Swoffer, Councillor G. Boyd, Mr. R.J. Linton and the Rev. Epworth Thompson.

George John Lawrence, the licensee of the Mechanics Arms, St. John's Street, was summoned for keeping his house open for the sale of drink for consumption by a soldier, contrary to the Regulations. Defendant, who pleaded Not Guilty, was represented by Mr. G.W. Haines.

Corporal McDonald, of the C.E.F., deposed that on January 6th, about 4.30, he was in company with Corporal Price, of the C.E.F., in St. John's Street. He there saw a man named MaCartney, and after a conversation with him handed him some money, and gave him certain instructions. MaCartney then went into the Mechanics Arms, leaving the door open about a foot, and witness saw a bottle of whisky handed over to him (MaCartney). The server of the whisky was behind the counter. When MaCartney came out of the house he was carrying the whisky under his coat. He put it under his coat just as he was coming out of the door. About ten yards further down the street MaCartney gave him the whisky. He and Price then took MaCartney to the guard room, and later he was brought to the police station. MaCartney was in the public house about ten minutes. Witness could not say whether he was supplied with any drink himself. The whisky was wrapped up in white paper. Witness had given MaCartney 4s. 6d. for it. He did not bring any change.

Cross-examined, witness said he knew it was whisky in the bottle. He smelt it. He was not on military police duty at the time. The instructions he gave MaCartney were carried out. The object of getting MaCartney to get the whisky was to have him charged.

Mr. Haines: You incited this man to do what is wrong? – No; he offered to get the whisky.

I put it to you that you went up and asked him to get it? – No.

In further reply to Mr. Haines, witness said he did not know if MaCartney paid for the whisky. He swore that he was not on military police duty that day.

By the Magistrates' Clerk (Mr. J. Andrew): MaCartney went right up to the counter. He could only see a portion of the bar. He only saw one other person in the bar. It was the public bar and MaCartney went in by the main door. Both Price and himself were military policemen, but they were not on duty on the afternoon in question.

In reply to the Chief Constable (Mr. H. Reeve), witness said he had seen MaCartney before. MaCartney then offered to get some whisky, whereupon witness gave him some money, which he bolted with.

The Magistrates' Clerk: When did MaCartney bolt with the money? - About a month previous to the last meeting. I had known MaCartney for about a month. Witness added that he would not say MaCartney was well dressed. He could not say what age he was either.

Corporal C.F. Price gave corroborative evidence. He said he saw MaCartney put the bottle of whisky under his coat. There was only one person behind the bar at the time. He had known MaCartney about a month altogether. He saw him nearly every day. He had seen previous transactions between him and soldiers. MaCartney on this afternoon came up to them and made a suggestion. It was in consequence of that suggestion that the last witness gave him 4s. 6d.

By the Magistrates' Clerk: They were not waiting for him on this day particularly. They were glad, however to see him. MaCartney entered the bottle and jug department.

P.C. Arnold said he was on duty on the 6th January at the police station when MaCartney was brought in. At the same time he received a bottle of whisky. He went to the Mechanics Arms, St. John's Street. He saw Mr. Lawrence, and told him of the complaint which had been made by the military. Mr. Lawrence said he had not sold a bottle of whisky that afternoon, as he had not been in the bar. He then went and saw Mr. Harrington, the barman, with Mr. Lawrence, and asked if he had sold a bottle of whisky. He replied “No, I have not”.

Inspector Lawrence said he accompanied Corporal Price to the Mechanics Arms on Tuesday, the 11th inst. The corporal pointed out the door of the Mechanics Arms through which MaCartney entered. It was the door of the bottle and jug department. It was a narrow bar, not much wider than the bar itself. The counter faced the bar. He would not think the bar was more than five feet across. Before then he had seen the defendant, and told him he had called respecting a bottle of whisky which was said to have been purchased there for a soldier on a previous occasion, and in regard to which P.C. Arnold had been to see him. Defendant replied “I remember, and I can assure you it did not come from here, as we never see a bottle of whisky”. Witness then told him that from what had since been ascertained he would report him (defendant) for selling a bottle of whisky to a man named MaCartney, who was acting as agent for a soldier named McDonald, contrary to the Defence of the Realm Act. Defendant replied “It is up to my man Harrington. He was in charge of the bar. There were only five bottles of whisky in the bar when he went on duty, and none of them has been sold”.

Corporal McDonald, re-called, said in reply to the Magistrates' Clerk that previously to meeting MaCartney he had no bottle of whisky in his possession, nor had Price one to his knowledge.

Corporal Price, re-called, made the same answer to a similar question.

Mr. Haines, addressing the Bench, said the charge was not of selling whisky, but of keeping open the premises for the sale of for the consumption of liquor for a soldier. The Order said “The premises shall be closed as respecting soldiers”. Of course, since the 10th inst. another Order had come into force. They had to be satisfied that Harrington knew the whisky was for a soldier. He put it that in this case the man MaCartney was incited to commit a crime. If they wanted an informer they should have treated him properly, and not go and run him in directly afterwards. He ventured to say that the case had not been satisfactorily proved.

Mr. Lawrence, on oath, said on the day in question he was out. He knew of the Order, and he had told the barman not to sell any whisky whatever to a soldier. Also, if a man who looked a bit dubious came in and asked for a bottle of whisky, Harrington was to use his own discretion. He would not allow a bottle of whisky to be sold to a man who was acting for a soldier. After Inspector Lawrence had called, Harrington said he had sold a bottle of whisky to a civilian, but not to a Canadian soldier.

In reply to the Chief Constable, witness said when he went out he left the bar in charge of Harrington. When Harrington replied to P.C. Arnold, witness did not hear him (Harrington) say he had not sold any whisky to anyone.

William John Harrington, the barman, said he was in charge of the day on the day in question. Defendant had given him instructions about serving soldiers and civilians. MaCartney had been a very good customer at the Mechanics Arms. He knew him just a week before Christmas. One day MaCartney came in with a pocket full of money, and he treated everyone in the bar twice. He told witness he was a miner from Tilmanstone, and was on his holiday. Witness remembered him coming in on the day in question. He had a bitter and a pork pie, which he paid for. When he had finished that he came back into the private bar and said “I can't get to Dover by train tonight, so I am going to walk”. He asked for a quarter of whisky, but he then altered his mind and said “I will take a bottle of “Johnny””. He put the money down on the counter. Witness said to him “Now, is this for yourself or for a soldier?” He thought it was safest to ask. MaCartney said he would take an oath it was for himself. He then gave the man the whisky and took the money. He admitted when the police first came he said he did not sell any whisky. He was so taken aback that he did not know what he was saying, so he made a mistake. MaCartney had never bought a bottle of whisky from him before. He believed MaCartney's statement.

Cross-examined by the Chief Constable, witness said he did not know where MaCartney lived. He was quite clear he asked him if he wanted the whisky for himself or for a soldier. He paid 4s. 6d. for it. That was the first time this man had visited the house that day. MaCartney was not badly dressed. On the day in question he was wearing a muffler. There was no-one in the bar when the transaction took place. MaCartney paid for the whisky in silver. He was quite sober. Witness did not look outside to see if there were any soldiers outside.

In reply to the Magistrates' Clerk, witness said when he told P.C. Arnold he had not sold any whisky that afternoon he did not realise he was telling a lie. They often sold bottles of “Johnny”.

The Magistrates' Clerk: Did you hear the defendant tell Inspector Lawrence that they never sold a bottle of whisky?

Witness said he heard what Inspector Lawrence said, but Mr. Lawrence (the defendant) did not know what whisky he sold, as he was never in the bars.

The Magistrates having deliberated in private, the Chairman said the Bench had decided to convict. This being the first case of the kind, defendant would be fined £5.

Folkestone Herald 12 February 1916.

Annual Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, February 9th: Before Mr. E.T. Ward, Lieut. Colonel R.J. Fynmore, Mr. G.I. Swoffer, Mr. R.J. Linton, Councillor G. Boyd, and Colonel G.P. Owen.

The Chief Constable (Mr. H. Reeve) submitted his report (for details see Folkestone Express).

The Chairman said they were sorry that the report was not so satisfactory as it generally was. The drunkenness had increased, as they saw. There had been 129 convictions last year, as against 65 in 1914. There had been four convictions against licensees. They were glad to see, however, that, with a few exceptions, the houses had been well-conducted. The Bench looked to the licensees to continue this, and so prevent drunkenness. With regard to the four houses which had convictions against them, the renewal of the licences would be deferred to the adjourned licensing sessions. With reference to the licence of the Clarence Hotel,, as the Chief Constable had mentioned. He would oppose the renewal of the licence on the grounds of misconduct, and they would instruct him also to oppose it on the grounds of redundancy.

The Magistrates fixed the adjourned licensing meeting for Monday, March 6th.

Folkestone Herald 11 March 1916.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

Monday, March 6th: Before Mr. E.T. Ward, Lieut. Col. R.J. Fynmore, Mr. J. Stainer, Mr. G.I. Swoffer, Mr. R.J. Linton, Councillor G. Boyd, Alderman C. Jenner, Col. G.P. Owen, and Mr. H. Kirke.

The Chief Constable (Mr. H. Reeve) said with regard to the licences of the Mechanics Arms (held by Mr. J. Lawrence) and the Railway Hotel, Coolinge Lane (held by Mr. J. Kent), he had gone into the matter very closely, and after careful consideration he had not served notices on either of the licensees, who had been convicted during the past year. He therefore proposed that those licences should be renewed.

The Chairman, addressing Mr. Lawrence, said they were very sad to see these convictions, but they had to be very stringent at the present time. From what he could remember of his case, he was not present at the time, and had nothing to do with it. As they were open such a short time nowadays he thought the licensee should put in all his time at the house. Addressing Mr. Kent, the Chairman said the same remarks applied to him. He should be very careful in the future. The licences would be renewed.

Folkestone Herald 25 March 1916.

Friday, March 24th: Before Mr. J. Stainer, Mr. G.I. Swoffer, Mr. R.J. Linton, Councillor G. Boyd, Councillor C. Edward Mumford, and the Rev. H. Epworth Thompson.

George John Lawrence, landlord of the Mechanics Arms, was summoned for allowing a child under fourteen years to be on his premises on March 16th. He pleaded Not Guilty.

Inspector Swift deposed that at about 7.30 on the 16th inst, accompanied by P.C. Butler, he visited the Mechanics Arms, St. John's Street. In the bar he found three woman and a child. One of the women was the mother of the child, whose age was eight and five months. He called the attention of the barman to the fact that the child was there, and he said “I told him to go out just now”. Witness said he should have seen that he did go, and the barman replied “I was busy at the time”. The mother had a glass containing liquor. Later witness saw the defendant, and told him what had happened, and Mr. Lawrence said “I am very sorry. I was away from home at the time, and up at the Camp till eight”. The barman (Tailor) said he was in charge of the premises. The child was in the bottle and jug department.

Cross-examined, witness said the barman said “I told them to take the child out just now”. The mother said she had told the boy to go out several times, but he would not go.

P.C. Butler corroborated.

William Edward Tailor, the barman, said on the night in question he was in charge. Mrs. Jones, the mother of the child, came in and asked for refreshments. The boy then came in, and witness told the child he must go out. He was serving other customers at the time. Inspector Swift came in. He saw the mother come in at the door. The women were alone there at first, and about five minutes afterwards the boy came in. He told the mother the child must go out, and she replied that she was drinking up and was going out at once. He then went into the other bar to serve some other customers. When he returned a few minutes later the women had drunk up their liquor. The Inspector was in the place then.

Cross-examined, witness said Mrs. Jones came in first. The boy could not have been in then without him seeing him. Three or four minutes afterwards the other two women came in. The boy was not there then. He did not wait to see the mother take the boy out. He went into the other bar.

Mrs. C. Jones, of 5, Mount Pleasant, said she went into the bar alone. A woman came in, and witness's little boy followed her in. She told the boy to go out, as also did the last witness. Her boy said “I am waiting for you”. Just after that Inspector Swift came in. She asked her boy to go out three times.

Defendant said the barman told the boy to go outside. He served the mother when she was alone, but not when she was with the child.

The Chairman said they agreed there must be a conviction. It was the duty of the barman to turn the boy out. They fined defendant £1.

Mrs. Jones, summoned for causing the boy to be on the premises, was dismissed with a caution.

Folkestone Herald 10 February 1917.

Folkestone Herald 10 March 1917.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, March 6th: Before Mr. E.T. Ward, Lieut. Col. R.J. Fynmore, Mr. G.I. Swoffer, and Mr. H. Kirke.

The licences of the Pavilion Shades (Mr. E. Bishopp), the Mechanics Arms (Mr. J. Lawrence), Paris Hotel (Mr. G. Gray), Guildhall Vaults (Mr. Cousins), and those of Mr. J. Kent (Morehall), and Messrs. Finn and Co. Ltd. (Rendezvous Street) were renewed.

The Chairman, addressing the licensees, impressed upon them the great necessity of taking the greatest care in the conduct of their businesses, whilst at the same time acknowledging their difficulties.

Folkestone Herald 17 January 1920.

Local News.

At the Folkestone Police Court on Tuesday the licence of the Mechanics Arms was temporarily transferred from Mr. Johnny Lawrence to Mr. George Vickery Drysdale.

Folkestone Herald 21 February 1920.

Annual Licensing Sessions.

The annual licensing sessions for Folkestone were held at the Police Court, the Mayor presiding.

The licence of the Mechanics Arms was transferred from Mr. J. Lawrence to Mr. Drysdale.

Folkestone Herald 16 April 1921.

Local News.

At the Folkestone Police Court on Wednesday, the Justices granted Mr. Drummond (sic) of the Mechanics Arms, St. John's Street, an extension of one hour on Wednesday next on the occasion of the annual dinner of the Folkestone Lodge of the Royal Antediluvian Order of Buffaloes.

Folkestone Herald 25 March 1922.

Folkestone Herald 10 February 1923.

Local News.

At the Folkestone Police Court on Tuesday (Mr. G.I. Swoffer in the chair), the Bench granted an application by Mr. Drysdale, of the Mechanics Arms, till 11 o'clock on the 12th instant for a smoking concert in connection with the local journeymen butchers.

The Magistrates' Clerk (Mr. J. Andrew) said the Justices wished him to explain a matter arising out of these recent applications for extensions of hours for balls. It had been brought to the knowledge of the Licensing Justices that the letter and spirit of the Act of Parliament which enabled them to grant these orders of exemption from the ordinary closing hours had been transgressed. Precise information had been brought to the notice of the Justices that in one or two recent instances gentlemen who were not patrons of the ball, and who had not ball tickets, had driven up to a certain hotel in the town, gone in, and had been supplied with refreshments for a considerable time. The Bench desired him to point out to licence holders that the Magistrates granted these extensions solely that those taking part in the ball could obtain drinks, and outsiders should not be supplied with drinks after hours.

Folkestone Herald 9 May 1925.

Obituary.

We regret to announce the death on Sunday, at Farnborough, of Mr. George John (Johnnie) Lawrence, of 37, Canterbury Road. He was fifty six years of age. At the time of his death he was employed as chef in the officers' mess of the 1st Batt. Northamptonshire Regiment at Dettengen Barracks, Blackdown, near Aldershot.

The late Mr. Lawrence had had a varied career. Coming to Folkestone many years ago with a travelling minstrel troupe, “busking” on the beach and in different parts of the town, he settled down in the town. He tried his hand at many things. If one venture failed, he would tackle another. He appeared on many a concert platform as a comic singer, and his efforts were generally well received. He often appeared with his old friend, Tom Taylor. There was a time, too, when deceased was engaged with others in painting the barracks at Shorncliffe. Subsequently he became proprietor of the Mechanics Arms, St. John's Street. Here he turned his attention to catering, installing special ovens for the cooking of steak and kidney pies. During the war these had a great vogue, and he supplied hundreds of thousands to the steamers that conveyed the troops across the other side. Deceased subsequently established a food factory in Ash Tree Avenue, off the Canterbury Road. At one period he was a mineral water manufacturer. Mr. Lawrence often catered for great parties, notably at the Drill Halls. He was responsible on various occasions for the dinners provided for the men of the Navy when sections of the Fleet were anchored off these shores. On one occasion, so pleased were the jolly tars, that they, as with one voice, called for the chef, and “Johnnie”, attired in the usual chef's garb, made a speech which was cheered to the echo. Deceased had lately acted as chef in various officers' messes at Shorncliffe and elsewhere. The marvel of it was how, without any training, he adapted himself to the chef's calling, but he did so with some success, as his many testimonials proved. He made a great hit on one occasion when he took a leading character in a local pantomime written by the late Mr. Austin Wilshire, and produced in the Drill Hall. “Johnnie” was regarded in the light of a “character” and though ill-health affected him of late, he still had the will to work, which he did also up to the last.

To his widow and family sympathy is extended.

The funeral took place quietly at Frimley Churchyard (Hants) on Thursday, the mourners being confined to the widow and members of the family.

Folkestone Herald 9 October 1926.

Tuesday, October 5th: Before Alderman G. Spurgen and other Magistrates.

George Vickery Drysdale, licensee of the Mechanics Arms, was charged with stealing, on October 4th, from outside 2, Dover Road, a printed book, valued at 7d., the property of Mrs. Grinstead. Mr. G.W. Haines defended.

P.C. Whyman said that at about 6.30 p.m. the previous day he was in Dover Road, where he saw defendant take a magazine (produced) from the shelf outside 2, Dover Road, a small shop which sold newspapers and periodicals. He saw defendant fold the magazine up, put it in his inside left breast pocket, and walk away. Witness went into the shop and saw Mrs. Grinstead, the proprietress. From what she said he went in search of defendant, and saw him in Rendezvous Street, close to the shop. He stopped him and told him he was a police officer. The book was protruding from the top of his pocket. Witness pointed to the book and said to him “Where did you get that book?” He said “Down the roadway. I know the lady there”. Witness took him back to the shop, and in his presence asked Mrs. Grinstead if she had sold him a book. She said “No”. Witness brought him to the police station, where he was charged with stealing the book. He said “I had no intention of stealing it”. He was quite sober, but seemed rather dazed.

In reply to Mr. Haines, witness said he was in plain clothes.

Mrs. Emma Jane Grinstead, proprietress of the shop, said the shelf of books was put outside the shop at 9.30 a.m. The shelf was in front of the shop, but in view of the door. Among the books was the magazine produced, which was valued at 7d. At about six o'clock in the evening prisoner came into the shop and purchased a packet of Woodbines. He turned to leave the shop after he had the cigarettes, and as the baby was screaming with toothache she turned and left the shop. A little later the last witness came and from what she told him he left the shop and returned in a few seconds with prisoner. The constable handed her the book, and she left the matter in his hands.

Replying to Mr. Haines, witness said prisoner had on rare occasions over a long period of time come to the shop. He did not ask for a book when he came for the Woodbines. She agreed that he might have thought she was coming back into the shop after she had seen to the baby and he had selected a magazine.

Mr. Haines entered a plea of Not Guilty, and read a section of an Act which stated that in a Court of summary jurisdiction, if the Magistrates considered it proved that a defendant was not normal, and the value of the article stolen (if the case was one of larceny) was negligible, they could dismiss the case. In this particular instance, he added, strange to say, the defendant was a licence holder and had been in the town for some years, but had not taken an active part in the business, which was being managed by some person, who was being paid for it, and would ultimately possess the business. The reason that he had a manager was that his condition was not altogether a normal one. He did not know whether it was through drink or what it was. Defendant was at one time on the Stock Exchange. He was often visiting the shop and purchasing books, and he might have taken the book up intending to go in and pay for it. He submitted that there was no malicious intent to steal the book.

The Chairman said the Magistrates had carefully considered the case and were not satisfied defendant did steal within the meaning of the law. Unfortunate circumstances might have put him in a position in which he did not exactly know what he was doing. The case would be dismissed.

Folkestone Herald 3 January 1931.

Thursday, January 1st: Before Alderman C.E. Mumford, Alderman T.S. Franks, Mr. W. Smith and Dr. W.W. Nuttall.

Marcus Barthropp was charged with having on August 2nd obtained £3 10s. by false pretences from Walter Grant, and on the same date with having obtained £17 10s. from Walter Harbord with intent to defraud.

Walter Grant, licensee of the Mechanics Arms, 37, St. John's Street, said that Barthropp came into his bar on August 1st last. He was with a friend and also a chauffeur. They had drinks and Barthropp asked him if he could put his friends and the chauffeur up for the night, and added that he was staying with his sister-in-law, Mrs. Chadwick, in St. John's Street. Witness asked him what his business was, and he said “Don't you know me? I am Mr. Barthropp, the racehorse owner and trainer”. He made arrangements to put the men up and Barthropp then left the bar. On the following day the others had their breakfast and lunch, and Barthropp then came in and settled up in cash. The three men went out together and later on Barthropp returned with his friend. He asked witness for the loan of a pen and ink, which witness provided. He saw Barthropp take a cheque (produced) from his inside coat pocket. He wrote upon it, but witness could not see what he wrote. Barthropp then asked him if he would oblige him by changing the cheque. Witness asked if it was a genuine cheque, and also asked him twice after that if it was quite in order. Barthropp replied “Yes, it is quite in order and will be met”. Witness then handed Barthropp £3 10s. in cash and took the cheque. He could not say whether Barthropp wrote on the back of the cheque but he saw him writing on the face of it.

The Clerk (Mr. C. Rootes) said that the cheque was on the London and Joint Midland Bank Ltd., Kensington, and dated July 31st. The name A.M. Barthropp was on it, and £3 10s. in figures, with the signature F.W. Morton.

Continuing, witness said that he did not see the signature F.W. Morton on the front of the cheque as they were busy at the time. He presented it at Lloyd's Bank, Tontine Street, a day or two later, but it was subsequently returned marked “No Account”.

Cross-examined by Barthropp, witness said that he was positive Barthropp had spoken about his business as a racehorse owner and trainer, and gave his name as Barthropp. Barthropp had not referred in his presence at any time to his brother, but Barthropp's brother's name arose in conversation with Mrs. Chadwick. When he discovered from Mrs. Chadwick that the prisoner was not the trainer he said nothing about it, but simply spoke about the cheque.

Barthropp: You told the Bench that you saw me writing on the face of the cheque? – I distinctly saw you writing on the face of the cheque.

Patricia Mary Stephens (11), living at 15, St. John's Street with her mother, Mrs. Chadwick, said that in August last, Mr. Barthropp, who was her uncle, was staying with them. One day he gave her a piece of paper but she did not know what it was. He asked the name of the place where her brother worked; her mother was there at the time and she told him. He put the piece of paper in an envelope, and then gave it to her and said “Take this up to Mr. Harbord, and ask him if he will change it. Take care of it, duckie, because it's a cheque”. She took the envelope with the paper in it up to her brother, Percy Stephens, at the Rego shop, in Church Street.

Samuel Percy Stephens, 15, St. John's Street, said he was formerly employed at the Rego shop in Church Street. He was there in August last, and on August 2nd his sister, the last witness, came to him with an envelope which he saw contained a cheque. He took it to the office dest and the manager, Mr. Harbord, was there. He did not see the cheque then. Later Mr. Harbord handed to him £17 10s., and he took it home to 15, St. John's Street and gave it to Mr. Barthropp. Witness asked him if the cheque was good and he replied that it was quite all right.

The Clerk said that the cheque was headed “Barclay's Bank”, the name A.M. Barthropp was on it, £17 10s. in figures, and also the signature W.H. Harrison.

Walter Harbord, manager of the Rego Ltd., 2, Church Street, said that on August 2nd the last witness came to him and handed him an envelope containing a cheque. He looked at the cheque, which was filled up and endorsed, so he paid him £17 10s. The cheque was returned marked “No Account”.

Prisoner: When the cheque came back dishonoured, did you take any action? – I wrote to you telling you that the cheque had been returned from the bank, and it was a serious matter to me, and would you make it good so that I could put my banking account right.

Did you communicate with anybody else? – I also approached Mrs. Chadwick and paid for a wire to be sent to your address.

Did you write to anybody else? – I heard from your brother, who asked what the trouble was about a cheque. I wrote to him and explained the trouble but I have not received any reply. Had I received the money from you or your brother that would have been the end of the matter so far as my company was concerned.

Did you recognise my handwriting? - I have never met you before and I have never seen your handwriting.

In reply to the Clerk, witness said that when he wrote to the prisoner's brother he had already put the matter in the hands of the police.

Prisoner: Had you communicated with them when you sent the registered letter? – I sent the registered letter after I had been in communication with the police.

Detective Constable Southey stated that at 2 p.m. on Wednesday he attended the Brixton Police Station, where he saw the prisoner detained. Prisoner did not reply when formally charged.

An application for a remand until January 9th was made by the Chief Constable for purposes of calling additional evidence, and this was granted by the Magistrates.

Barthropp asked for bail, but the Chief Constable said that he did not think it should be allowed as they had considerable difficulty in finding the man.

Barthropp: I think that was most uncalled for on the part of the Chief Constable. I have a wife and three children and I have been unable to get out of the house.

The Chairman: Bail is refused.

Barthropp said that he would like to have the last word. He had been attending hospital for a very serious illness. He could hardly walk and was taking electrical treatment.

The Clerk: That is so. Could you put forward substantial bail?

Barthropp: What do you mean by substantial bail?

After reconsideration the Bench decided to grant bail in one surety of a £100 and prisoner himself in a similar sum.

Folkestone Herald 17 January 1931.

Local News.

The Folkestone Magistrates on Friday of last week committed for trial at the Quarter Sessions, to be held on January 17th, Marcus barthropp, stated to be the brother of a racehorse owner and trainer, who was charged on remand with obtaining by false pretences £17 10s. and £3 10s. During evidence given at the previous hearing, Barthropp, it was alleged, represented himself to be the racehorse owner.

Mary Chadwick, 15, St. John's Street, the wife of George Thomas Chadwick, said defendant was her brother-in-law. He came to her house on August 1st last and asked to be put up for the night. Defendant came down for breakfast the next morning about 9 o'clock. After going for a walk he came back and asked her if she could change a cheque. She said she could not, and then he asked her if she dealt with the Co-Operative Stores. She said she didn't. He asked where her two sons worked, and she said “At The Rego”. He said a big firm like that would be run by a manager, and she gave defendant Mr. Harbord's name as the manager. Barthropp then took from his pocket a cheque. He wrote something on the back of the cheque. He then asked witness's daughter to take it to Mr. Harbord, and she did so. When she returned she said Mr. Harbord would send the money (£17 10s.) by one of witness's sons. She said to defendant “How much did you send her up for?” He replied “Just a matter of £17 10s.”. Some days later she communicated with defendant by telegram and received a letter in which he said he accepted full responsibility. “It is more than unfortunate that such a thing should have happened”, the letter went on, “and I am more than sorry”. Defendant added that he got several cheques for racing transactions, and one was expected to take risks as one could not afford to refuse them as times were bad on the Turf. He said that he would see what he could do about the reimbursement of the amount, adding that she could rest assured that the matter would be put right in due course.

Sydney Lewis Stoicvis, first cashier at the Midland Bank Ltd., Leonard Place, Kensington, said the cheque produced for £3 10s. was purported to be drawn by F.W. Morton, and dated July 31st, 1930. The cheque was one of a book issued to Mr. Grosvenor Thomas, a customer of the bank, on January 8th, 1923. Mr. Thomas died about six years ago. On July 31st they had no customer of the name of F.W. Morton. The cheque was received at the bank on August 6th, and returned, as marked, “No Account”.

By defendant: The endorsement of the cheque was quite different to that in the front of the cheque.

Frank Shipway Lawrence, manager of Barclay's Bank, 208, Regent Street, W., said the cheque produced for £17 10s. purported to be drawn by W.H. Harrison, and was dated August 1st, 1930. The cheque was issued to Mr. B. Elen,, who had been a customer of the bank some years ago. They had no account in the name of W.H. Harrison at the bank in August last. The cheque was received at the bank on August 6th and returned marked “No Account”.

By defendant: He could not say whether the handwriting on the front of the cheque was the same as the endorsement.

Mr. Grant, the landlord of the Mechanics Arms, re-called by the defendant for the purpose of cross-examination, said he had received by post the sum of £3 10s. by money order, sent on behalf of the accused.

Mr. Harbord, manager of Rego Ltd., (Folkestone Branch), also re-called by accused, said he had received the sum of £17 10s. by money order that morning.

Barthropp made the following statement to the Bench: There is no evidence, so far as I can see, produced by the prosecution, that I have any knowledge that the cheques in question were not genuine. The evidence shows that full compensation has been made by me, and I submit that there is no evidence whatever on which I can be either justly sentenced or sent for trial. I am a married man with three children and have lived at the same address for the last six years. I have made no effort to hide or conceal my whereabouts since the transaction”.

As stated, Barthropp was committed for trial, bail being allowed in two sums of £100 each.

Folkestone Herald 24 January 1931.

Local News.

The decision of the Folkestone Recorder (Mr. Roland Oliver, K.C.) to give another chance to a man with 13 convictions was a feature of the trial, at Folkestone Quarter Sessions on Saturday, of Marcus Philip Prescott Barthropp, 53, described as a journalist, who was charged with obtaining from Walter Grant £3 10s. by false pretences, with intent to defraud. He was further indicted with obtaining from Walter Harbord £17 10s. by false pretences, with intent to defraud. Prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, and asked for a dock brief, selecting Mr. Baxter to defend him. Mr. L.S. Fletcher prosecuted.

Walter Grant, the licensee of the Mechanics Arms, said on August 1st, in the evening, prisoner came into his bar in the company of two other men. They had some drinks and prisoner asked him to put his friends up for the night. He asked accused what he was and he said he was “Mr. Barthropp, the owner and trainer of racehorses”. He added that he was staying at St. John's Street with his sister-in-law, whom witness knew. On the following day prisoner came in and he paid an account (18s.) for his two friends who had stayed with him for the night. Later prisoner came to the house again. He remarked that one day he had £100 in his pocket and another day very little. He then took out of his pocket the cheque for £3 10s. produced. Barthropp wrote on the cheque and asked witness to cash it. Witness asked if it was genuine and he replied that it was quite in order. He gave accused the money, but when he paid the cheque in it was returned “No Account Leonard Place”. He did not see prisoner again until January 1st, when he was before the Court. On January 9th re received £3 10s. on prisoner's behalf.

Cross-examined, witness said he knew Mrs. Chadwick (prisoner's sister-in-law). Between 9 and 9.30 in the evening he was pretty busy, but he was sure accused said “Don't you know me? I am Mr. Barthropp, the racehorse owner and trainer”. He did not say “Don't you know Barthropp, the trainer?”

Mrs. Mary Chadwick, of 15, St. John's Street, Folkestone, said Barthropp was her brother-in-law. On August 1st he asked her to put him up, and she said she would. On the following morning, before going for a walk, he borrowed 15s. from her. When he returned from his walk he asked her if she could change a cheque. She told him she could not. He then asked her if she dealt with the Co-Operative Stores, and when she replied that she did not, asked where her boys worked. She told him they worked at the Rego Company in Church Street. Later Barthropp sent up witness's little girl with an envelope to the Rego shop. Witness later wired to Barthropp after he had returned to London, and received a letter from him, dated August 11th, which contained the following; “Only just back here, or you would have heard from me about the cheques. I should like you to tell the firm which cashed it that I accept full responsibility, and your boys have nothing to do with the matter. Your boys were quite innocent parties. It is worse than unfortunate that such a thing should have happened, and I am more than sorry. I get several cheques from time to time for racing transactions, and one has to accept them or risk getting nothing, as in many cases cash is scarce, owing to the bad time prevailing on the Turf. I will see what I can do as regards reimbursing the amount, and I will wire or write you. One thing you may rest assured about. The matter will be put right in due course, and if you will let me know the name of the firm concerned, I will either communicate with them direct at Folkestone, or, if possible, at their London headquarters. I feel very seriously that your boys must be exonerated from any blame in the transaction. I am so sorry it happened”. It was signed Marcus, and was addressed from 81, Clapham Road, London, S.W.

Cross-examined, witness said she did not know Mr. E.P. Barthropp, the trainer. She knew nothing about the family. She saw Barthropp write on the back of the cheque.

In reply to the Recorder, witness said she had met Barthropp altogether about six times. She first knew him about two months before August.

Natalie Stephens, daughter of the last witness, said that on August 2nd the accused gave her a piece of paper enclosed in an envelope, and asked her to take it up to her brother at the Rego shop. She took the envelope, and gave it to her brother, Percy.

Samuel Percy Stephens said that on August 2nd his sister brought an envelope with a cheque inside to him. This he gave to Mr. Harbord, the manager, who later handed witness the sum of £17 10s. Witness went home and gave the money to the accused, and said to him “I hope the cheque is all right”. Barthropp replied “It is quite all right”.

Walter Harbord, manager of Rego Ltd., (Folkestone Branch), said that on August 2nd Stephens, who was employed in the shop, brought him a cheque, and witness later gave him £17 10s., which was the amount the cheque was made out for. It was drawn by W.H. Harrison, and made payable to Marcus Barthropp. He paid the cheque into Lloyd's Bank on the following Tuesday, and it was subsequently returned to him marked “No Account”. On January 9th of this year the amount was returned to him.

Sidney Louis Stoicvis, first cashier at the Midland Bank, Leonard Place, Kensington, was shown the cheque dated July 31st, which the accused gave to Grant. The cheque book from which that cheque was taken, he said, was issued to Mr. Grosvenor Thomas, a customer of the bank, some six or seven years ago. Mr. Thomas died about six years ago. On July 31st last there was no customer at the bank in the name of F.W. Morton, nor any account in that name. The bank returned the cheque marked “No Account”.

Mr. Baxter: Is there any procedure by which a bank can recall a cheque book when a customer dies? – A cheque book is usually handed in by the next of kin, but as far as we can, we try to recover cheques.

He agreed that if the cheque books were still out after the death of a customer, they would be a great danger to everybody in the community.

Frank Shipway Lawrence, teh manager of Barclay's Bank Ltd., 208, Regent Street, W., said there was no customer of the name of W.H. Harrison at that bank on August 1st, nor any account in that name. The cheque book from which the cheque was taken was issued to Mr. B. Ellen on August 25th, 1927.

Detective Constable Southey said that on December 30th last he brought the accused from Brixton Prison to Folkestone. When cautioned and charged he made no reply, either at Brixton or at Folkestone.

Mr. Fletcher said Barthropp made the following statement at the Folkestone Police Court before he was committed for trial; There is no evidence, so far as I can see, produced by the prosecution, that I have any knowledge that the cheques in question were not genuine. The evidence shows that full compensation has been made by me, and I submit that there is no evidence whatever on which I can be either justly sentenced or sent for trial. I am a married man with three children and have lived at the same address for the last six years. I have made no effort to hide or conceal my whereabouts since the transaction.

Barthropp did not wish to go into the witness box, and Mr. Baxter then addressed the jury.

Summing up, the Recorder said that any innocent person might come into possession of a cheque that would not be negotiable, although the person who had it thought it would be. But it was unlikely, Mr. Fletcher had said, that one person should get two from two different people on the same day, one out of a cheque book which appeared to have belonged to a person who had been dead for six years. Although those people had not lost any money, and had been paid back, it was no defence for a crime which had been committed. Who Barthropp was, of course, they did not know, because he had not told them; but he did not seem to be such a person as Barthropp, the racehorse owner and trainer.

After retiring, the jury returned a verdict of Guilty.

The Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) said Barthropp commenced his career in 1903, when he was sentenced to one month for larceny. He had had 13 convictions, mainly for false pretences and fraud. From 1916 to 1927, however, he had no convictions against him. He came from very good old Suffolk stock, and was born on August 22nd, 1877. He was educated at Bradfield College, and was employed by his father on the London Stock Exchange for two years. He served through the Boer War, and was taken by the Boers. He returned to England in 1901, and resided with his parents at Windsor. He served in the last War until 1919. He stated that he was wounded, and was the holder of the Military Medal and bar. Since the late War, he had been engaged on journalistic work, and was at present undergoing treatment at the Charing Cross Hospital for peripheral neuritis. In spite of what Barthropp had said about always being at his residence, the London police had attempted over and over again to effect his arrest, but had not succeeded. He was never in. It appeared that he went out very early in the morning, and returned late at night.

Mr. Baxter said Barthropp had received the Military Medal for gallantry in the field. He had a number of letters from officers under whom he served, who stated that they would be pleased to recommend him for a commission. He asked if the Recorder could use the greatest possible leniency in dealing with Barthropp.

The Recorder said he was going to do something which he thought was probably wrong, but he was so much impressed by Barthropp's record that he would take a chance with him.

Barthropp: You will find I shall not abuse it.

The Recorder said Barthropp had behind him a career of frauds. But there were two things about him which struck him. Barthropp was continuously in and out of prison for 13 years up to 1916, and then he kept out of trouble for 11 whole years, during which time he served with honour in the War and was twice decorated for bravery. That was a thing which impressed him very much, for it convinced him, in spite of Barthropp's career, that he had good in him. He was probably quite wrong in doing what he was going to do. He had in front of him a letter from Barthropp's wife, which impressed him, and he was going to give him another chance. That was going to be his last chance. He did not say Barthropp had had any chances given him, but he was going to have one then. He would be bound over for two years.

Asked if he would do as the Recorder asked, Barthropp said “I am very, very grateful to you. It is the first chance I have had”.

The Recorder: If you disappoint me, you will disappoint me in a great measure.

Folkestone Herald 18 August 1934.

Local News.

The Folkestone Magistrates yesterday (Friday) granted the application of Mr. W.H. Steward, of the Wolf Pack Inn, Goudhurst, for a protection order for the transfer of the licence of the Mechanics Arms, Folkestone.

Folkestone Herald 26 January 1935.

Local News.

The Folkestone Magistrates have granted a protection order this week in respect of licensed premises in the town.

On Tuesday a protection order was granted to Mr. J.W.G. Moxom in respect of the Mechanics Arms, St. John's Street, the outgoing tenant being Mr. Steward.

Folkestone Herald 16 February 1935.

Folkestone Herald 16 March 1935.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

The Folkestone Licensing Magistrates on Wednesday, at the adjourned annual Licensing Sessions, renewed the licence of the Mechanics’ Arms, St. John’s Street, which had been referred by the Justices at the annual sessions with a view to considering whether it was redundant. Mr. B. H. Bonniface, of Messrs. G. W. Haines, Folkestone, appeared for the licensee and brewers.

The application was heard by Mr. R.G. Wood, Mr. J.H. Blarney, Dr. W. Nuttall, Alderman T.S. Franks, Engineer Rear-Admiral L.J. Stephens, Alderman Mrs. E. Gore, Alderman J.W. Stainer and Alderman W. Hollands.

Chief Inspector H.G. Pittock said the Mechanics’ Arms was situated in St. John’s Street. It was a fully licensed house. The frontage in St. John’s Street was 19ft. 6ins. with a side frontage of 68ft. Witness gave evidence of the accommodation of the house. He stated that downstairs was a club-room, which was at the rear of the building. It was almost an annexe. The rent of the premises was £30 a year and the rateable value £32. He had known the house during 26 years, and during the past 10 or 12 years the trade had decreased enormously. During the past year the trade had dropped down very much indeed. The licence had been transferred in 1900, 1920, 1926, 1934, and 1935 (at the last annual Licensing Sessions). He put in a copy of visits made to the Mechanics’ Arms, the Honest Lawyer, and the Harvey Hotel, from April to December last. Eighteen visits were made to each house and the average number of customers found in each house was: Mechanics’ Arms six, Honest Lawyer 19, and the Harvey Hotel 16. From January 17th to February 12th 12 visits were made and the average number of customers on those occasions was: Honest Lawyer 17, Mechanics’ Arms 5, Harvey Hotel 10. The Honest Lawyer was a beer house, on and off.
From February 14th to March 15th he made 14 visits to the Mechanics’ Arms, the Honest Lawyer, the Harvey Hotel, the Star and Garter and the Richmond Tavern. The average number of customers was: Honest Lawyer 16, Mechanics’ Arms 7, Harvev Hotel 9, Star and Garter 10, and the Richmond Tavern 12. The Honest Lawyer was within 100 yards of the Mechanics’ Arms; the Harvey Hotel, the Bradstone Tavern, and the Mitre, beer houses, were within 200 yards: and the Star and Garter and the Richmond Tavern within 300 yards.In his opinion there were sufficient houses to supply that particular neighbourhood if the Mechanics’ Arms was redundant.

The Clerk (Mr. C. Rootes): What is J {be reason for suggesting the Mechanics’ Arms is redundant? - Because so little trade is done there.

Mr. Bonniface: This house is really put up as redundant at the suggestion of the Licensing Bench, isn’t it? - Yes.

You were present at the annual Licensing Sessions when the Chief Constable staged that there were not too many facilities for drinking in the summer months?

Inspector Pittock said he was, but he understood that the Chief Constable was referring more particularly to the the number of houses at the lower end of the town.

Mr. Bonniface: Between the railway line and Dover Road there are only two licensed premises? - Yes.

And one is a beer house and the other (the Mechanics’ Arms) a fully licensed house? - Yes.

In order to get to other premises one has to cross Dover Road? - Yes.

Mr. Bonniface: Do you agree that since the new tenant took over six weeks ago the trade of the house has increased? - Yes. I found more customers there and the tenant showed me figures.

Will you agree the trade has doubled? - I cannot say that.

The Clerk: Since the new tenant has come in the trade has increased? - Yes, definitely.

Mr. Bonniface: Do you know that since December the British Legion has made this house their headquarters? - Yes.

The Premises were very convenient Premises? - Yes, except for some difficulty in getting about downstairs.

And the premises have recently been done up from top to bottom and are in excellent condition? - Yes.

Would vou agree with me that from 1900 to 1920 there was only one tenant, Mr. Jobn Lawrence? - Yes.

Do you know that the present tenant has put the whole of his capital into the business? - I don’t know that.

The Chairman: Is the new tenant a local man? - No. but he has been living here some time.

The Chief Constable (to Inspector Pittock): What does one find usually when a new tenant comes in? – Trade generally picks up for a while.

Mr. Bonniface then called witnesses to support the renewal of the licence.

Walter Lester, managing director of Gardeners’ Brewery, Ash, the owners of the premises since 1913, said trade went down from 1926 until Mr. Grant (a former licensee) left in 1934. Mr. Stewart then took over, but he had to leave because of his son’s health.
Since the present tenant had taken Possession trade had gone up very considerably; it had been nearly doubled. He was speaking of the beer trade; they did not supply the spirits. A considerable amount of money was spent on doing up the premises before the licensing sessions. The present tenant was a very satisfactory man and all his savings were in the business.

Cross-examined, witness said in 1925 the house did 280 barrels of beer; 1926, 259; 1927, 260; 1928, 235; 1929, 234; 1930, 214; 1931, 183; 1932, 100; 1933, 96; and 1934, 85. During the last six weeks 11½ barrels had been delivered as compared with 6½ for the corresponding period of last year.

Joseoh William G. Moxon, the licensee, said he took over the premises on January 22nd, when be was granted a Protection Order. He had taken delivery of 13½ barrels in six weeks, excluding bottled beers. In addition he had sold spirits and wines. The British Legion used the clubroom all the week. He had all his capital in the business, and he was positive the trade of the house was improving. He had nothing to do with a petition which had been prepared.

Albert Edward Palmer, of 25, Mount Pleasant Road, handed in a petition signed by 89 persons.

The petitioners, describing themselves as residents of St. John’s Street, protested against the proposed withdrawal of the licence. They added that the house was quietly and well conducted.

Mr. Palmei said the licensee had nothing to do with the petition. There was a lot of letting done in the neighbourhood of St. John’s Street. He had used the house for over 20 years and he had never found a better licensee than Mr. Moxon. Customers got better attention, and trade had improved enormously.

Mr. Palmer caused some laughter when he said he would like to ask Inspector Pittock a question. He (Inspector Pittock) had given evidence of visits he had made and the number of customers. On a recent Saturday evening the house was so full that everybodv could not get in.

The Clerk referred to a statement of visits prepared by Inspector Pittock showing that on a recent Saturday night, the number of customers was 21.

Mr. Bonniface, addressing the Magistrates, said in previous years they had taken away two of the four licensed houses in that district and there were only two left. When they had some 78 of the inhabitants saying that they required the house he suggested they should not refer the house, when their nearest supply would be the Harvey Hotel, on the other side of Dover Road. It was not suggested that there they had a congested area.

The Magistrates retired. On their return the Chairman said: After hearing the evidence with reference to the new tenant and so forth the Licensing Justices have decided to renew the licence.

Folkestone Herald 6 July 1940.

Local News.

A considerable amount of licensing business was transacted at the Folkestone Police Court on Wednesday.

The licence of the Mechanics Arms, St. John’s Street, was transferred to Mr. Ernest W. Clinch, secretary of Messrs. Gardiner and Coy., brewers, from Mr. James Roberts.

Folkestone Herald 14 March 1942.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

Mr. Bonniface made an application for a music licence in respect of the Mechanics Arms. On the premises, stated Mr. Bonniface, there was a large club room. The wife of the licensee was an able pianist and he wanted to be able to allow her to play the piano and make use of the room which at the moment was little used. It was a precautionary application so that there should be no risk of the licensee breaking the law by allowing his wife to play the piano for the benefit of the customers.

Chief Inspector W. Hollands said the police had no objection but it opened up something new. The only objection he could foresee were possible complaints by residents in the district. He suggested the licence should be restricted to 10 p.m., the closing hour.

Mr. Bonniface said they wanted the licence confined to licensing hours.

The Magistrates granted the application, the licence to be for the ordinary licensed hours only.

Alderman W. Hollands presided with Mr. S.B. Corser and Alderman J.W. Stainer.

Folkestone Herald 6 March 1943.

Local News.

Two soldiers found guilty of assaulting the police, after committing damage at a licensed house, were sent to prison by the Folkestone Magistrates on Tuesday.

Spr. Jack A. Hinton, who was charged with assaulting P. Sgt. Dickinson while in the execution of his duty, pleaded Not Guilty. Spr. Harry Brown and Spr. Hinton were charged with assaulting P.C. McNaughton, to which they pleaded Not Guilty. There was a third charge alleging that defendants had been concerned together in committing wilful damage by breaking 11 glasses, a door, a table and a black-out curtain, the property of H. Goldsworthy, licensee of the Mechanics’ Arms. Defendants denied the allegation.

P.C. McNaughton said at 11.50 the previous evening he was on patrol in Cheriton Road, near Beachborough Villas, when he saw Hinton hanging on to a car which was travelling slowly from Beachborough Villas into Cheriton Road. Upon witness's approach he heard the driver of the car say “Will you please stand clear”. Hinton said “It’s only a ---- policeman”. Witness then pulled Hinton away from the car and asked to see his A.B.64 (Army book similar to the civilians National Registration card). Defendant was most abusive and used offensive language all the time. Brown, who was standing on the pavement, came over. He asked Brown for his A.B.64., but both refused to produce them. P. Sgt. Dickinson then arrived and witness again asked to see their A.B.64’s. Sgt. Dickinson made a similar request. Hinton then struck Sgt. Dickinson, and witness seized Brown and went to the assistance of the sergeant. Hinton broke away and at the same time Brown got away from witness. Defendants struck witness on the head, knocking off his helmet. They then ran away together with witness following. They came up with defendants in Risborough Lane, where they were being interrogated by Sgt. Bowley. He later brought defendants to the police station where on being charged with the assault they replied “We know nothing about it”. Defendants had been drinking but were not drunk.

P. Sgt. Dickinson said he saw the last witness speaking to defendants, who were using foul and abusive language. Both declined to produce their A.B.64’s. although he tried to persuade them to do so. He intended to arrest defendants but before he was able to do so Hinton tore off one of the stripes on his coat and struck him in the mouth. Hinton then called to Brown to run away and thèy did so. On the pavement were found two £1 notes and a pass made out in the name of Spr. Brown.

Robert H. Goldsworthy, licensee of the Mechanics' Arms, St. John’s Street, said defendants were in the public bar the previous night. About 10 o’clock Hinton approached a woman in the bar and when a young man intervened, Hinton hit him. That started a free light in the bar. Eleven glasses on the counter and tables were broken, and damage was also done to a door which was broken off its hinge, and a black-out curtain. With assistance the two men were ejected from the house. He estimated the damage at 35s. Defendants started the fight. Replying to Hinton, witness said he did not see someone strike him first.

Sergeant-Major William E. Oliver said after leaving the Mechanics’ Aims he heard a cry for help. He went back to the premises and saw Hinton struggling with Goldsworthy. He threw Hinton out. There was a lot of glass on the floor. The black-out curtains were damaged while witness was struggling to put Hinton out. Defendants kicked the door when being put out.

P. Sgt. Bowley said while making enquiries he saw defendants and he interrogated them both with regard to the damage. Hinton said “I don’t know anything about it. I know the Mechanics’ Arms. I left there about 9.30”. Brown said “I know the Mechanics’ Arms, but I can’t remember being there this evening”.

Hinton said he was first struck by a man in the public house. On the way back to his billet he asked the driver of a car for a lift. The police officer said he would take them to the police station and there was “a bit of a scrimmage”.

Brown said they had had a lot of drink.

An officer said Hinton’s Army character was bad. He joined the Army in August, 1940. Brown s character was not so bad but not good. He joined the Army in December, 1940.

After retiring, the Chairman (Alderman W. Hollands), said the Magistrates considered they were two very bad characters and the Bench did not intend to tolerate such conduct. Not only did they create a disturbance in the licensed house but on account of their conduct they caused damage and afterwards they were violent. They regarded Hinton as the ringleader and he would go to prison for three months with hard labour. Brown would be sentenced to one month with hard labour. They hoped it would be a warning to them and others.

Sitting with Alderman Hollands were Mr. P. Fuller, Alderman N.O. Baker, Capt, H.P. Keary and Dr. Esme Stuart.

Folkestone Herald 19 June 1943.

Local News.

Mrs. Caroline Ellen Trayler, aged 18, a cinema usherette, was found dead in a room at the rear of an empty Folkestone shop on Thursday. She had been missing since Whit-Sunday evening.

The circumstances surrounding the girl’s death were very suspicious and Det. Inspector Smee, of Kent County Police HQ., Maidstone, took charge of investigations with the C.I.D. of the County Constabulary.

It is understood that death was caused by strangulation. Dr. Simpson, Home Office pathologist, came to Folkestone on Thursday and made a post mortem examination. He returned to London later.

Mrs. Trayler was a daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Stapleton, of Sussex Road, Folkestone, and it was when she failed to return home on Sunday night that her parents, becoming anxious, informed the police. After a number of enquiries had failed to locate the missing girl the police commenced a search of empty shops and houses in the town. It was while they were searching an unoccupied shop in Foord Road that they made their discovery. They found Mrs. Trayler dead in a rear room almost fully clothed. The shop has been empty for well over two years. At one time it was a greengrocer's shop. A police cordon was thrown round the premises and during the remainder of the day police cars were arriving and leaving the shop during the course of investigations. Mrs. Trayler was the wife of a soldier who recently proceeded to the Middle East. He was home on leave less than two months ago. The dead woman had been living with her parents, whose home is only a short distance from the shop where the discovery was made. For the past two months Mrs. Trayler had been working at a local cinema, where she was described as “a bright and jolly girl, good at her work and popular with her colleagues”. An attractive girl, she had auburn hair and a vivacious manner. She left the cinema just before 9 o'clock on Whit-Sunday evening after finishing her duties. But she did not return home, although it is believed she was seen going in that direction an hour later. At that time she was alone.

Inquest.

An inquest on Mrs. Trayler was opened by the Borough Coroner (Mr. B.H. Bonniface) at the Town Hall yesterday.

Det. Inspector Smee and Det. Inspector E. Pierce, Folkestone C.I.D., were among those present.

The Coroner told the jury that they had been called together that afternoon to take the first step in enquiries as to when, how and by what means Caroline Ellen Trayler met her death. They would not be sitting very long that afternoon. He proposed to call two witnesses and then adjourn the enquiry.

Frederick Stapleton, 3, Sussex Road, a night spotter, the father, said his daughter was born on February 1st, 1925. She was married, her husband being Sgt. Edgar Trayler, of the Durham Light Infantry, who was serving in the Middle East.

The Coroner: What was her general state of health?

Witness: Good, sir.

The Coroner: Was she employed anywhere? – At the Central Picture Theatre as an usherette.

When did you last see her alive? – Sunday lunchtime. She had to be on duty at 1 o'clock.

Witness, continuing, said his daughter came home for tea at 4.30, but he did not see her then.

The Coroner: Did you see her dead body yesterday? – I did, sir, and identified her last evening.

Where did you see the body, at the premises where it was found? – Yes, 94, Foord Road.

P.C. Lewis, Folkestone Div., K.C.C., said in consequence of instructions received he examined unoccupied and empty premises in the Foord Road area the previous day. “About 11.30 a.m. I entered the empty shop premises of 94, Foord Road”, continued witness, “by the rear entrance, which was in Devon Road. The door was ajar and I was able to push it only nine inches because of disuse. Immediately in front of me was another door which leads to the shop and living quarters. I found this door shut but not locked. Upon opening the door I found a woman's blue suede shoe and a woman's brown leather handbag. They were on the floor at the entrance. On looking further down the passageway which leads to the shop and living premises I saw the body of a woman, which answered the description of Caroline Ellen Traylor. She was lying face downwards with her face resting on her left arm, with her head facing the front of the premises. Having satisfied myself that she was dead I left the premises and saw Inspector Grey travelling in a police car. I informed him and he telephoned headquarters. I then returned to the premises and stood by the body.

The Coroner said that was as far as he proposed to take the matter that afternoon. A post mortem examination was made last night, but the result has riot been officially notified to him yet.

The inquest was then adjourned until Wednesday, June 30th, at 2.30.

Folkestone Herald 26 June 1943.

Local News.

Detectives investigating the death of Mrs. Caroline Ellen Trayler, 18 years’ old Folkestone cinema usherette, who was found strangled in an empty shop in Foord Road last week, after being missing since the preceding Whit-Sunday night, have made many enquiries in and out of Folkestone, interviewed large numbers of people, and narrowed down their line of enquiry during the past week.

Mrs. Trayler, a daughter of Mr. And Mrs. F. Stapleton, of 3, Sussex Road, Folkestone, lived with her parents; her husband, Sgt. Edgar Trayler, is serving in the Middle East. She was found dead in the rear room of an empty shop on Thursday last week.

Dr. Keith Simpson, Home Office Pathologist, who carried out a post mortem examination, has submitted his report to the Borough Coroner (Mr. B.H. Bonniface) who, after opening an inquest last Friday, adjourned it until next Wednesday afternoon at the Town Hall. The cause of death is understood to have been strangulation.

During the past week Det. Supt. F.H. Smeed, Kent County Constabulary C.I.D. Chief, assisted by Det. Insp. E. Pierce, in charge of Folkestone C.I.D., and other Folkestone and County officers, has followed up a line of enquiry, the results of which narrowed down the police investigations. During the weekend investigations extended outside the town and police officers motored to villages not far from Folkestone to continue their enquiries. Investigations have also been made at places more distant from the town. Mrs. Trayler left the cinema shortly before 9 o'clock on Whit-Sunday night and a check of her movements after that time was of vital importance to the police investigation. A little later she was seen in the Mechanics’ Arms, where she had expected to meet mother, but Mrs. Stapleton not arrive. In the public house she was seen in conversation with a soldier and at closing time she is stated to have been still in the soldier's company.

Mr. Stapleton, her father, is a fire watcher, and on Whit-Sunday night he was on duty at his post less than 100 yards from the shop where his daughter's body was later found.

Among those interviewed have been numbers of soldiers as well as civilians.

Reports appeared during the week that screams were heard in the Linden Crescent district late on Whit-Sunday night and there was a suggestion that the dead woman might have been attacked in the Street. It is believed, however, that Mrs. Trayler met her death between 11 p.m. and midnight on Sunday, probably before the screams were heard.

Det.-Supt. Smeed Issued the following statement on Monday night: “A witness whom the police wish to interview is Gunner Dennis Edmond Leckey, of the Royal Artillery, who has teen absent from his unit since June 18th. On the following day he was seen in Manchester wearing a single-breasted brown suit with link buttons, a fawn belted overcoat and brown shoes. Gunner Leckey's description is: Aged 24 years; height 5ft. 10 ins., hazel eyes, dark hair; fresh tanned complexion, round face; medium build and of good appearance”.

Gnr. Leckey's home is understood to be in Manchester.

The funeral of Mrs. Trayler took place at Smeeth church on Tuesday.

Folkestone Herald 3 July 1943.

Local News.

A soldier detained in London on Tuesday by officers of the U.S. Military Police was handed over on the following day to detectives investigating the death of Mrs. Caroline Ellen Trayler, 18 years’ old Folkestone cinema usherette, and later charged with the murder of Mrs. Trayler.

The dead girl, whose home was in Sussex Road, Folkestone, where she was living with her parents while her husband, a sergeant in the Durham Light Infantry was serving in the Middle East, was found in the back room of an unoccupied shop, 94, Foord Road, on Thursday, June 17th, during a police search.

Following the report that a man had been detained in London, Det. Supr. F.H. Smeed, Kent County Constabulary C.I.D. Chief, who has been in charge of the enquiries concerning Mrs. Trayler's death, and Det. Insp. E. Pierce, Kent County Constabulary, Folkestone Division, travelled to London on Wednesday and took Gnr. Dennis Edmund Leckey, 25, of the Royal Artillery, into custody. Later on Wednesday Leckey was charged with murdering Mrs. Trayler, and he appeared at Folkestone Police Court on Thursday morning.

The proceedings before Alderman R.G. Wood (in the chair), Mr. S.B. Corser, Alderman J.W. Stainer, Mr. P.V. Gurr, and Mr. C.A. Wilde, were brief, lasting not more than five minutes.

The accused, a good-looking young man, appeared in Court wearing a brown suit with shoes to match. He stood close to a table where the Clerk of the Court (Mr. C. Rootes) and Det. Supt. Smeed were seated.

The Clerk read the charge, which alleged that “on a date between 13th June and 17th June, both dates inclusive, he feloniously, wilfully and with malice aforethought killed and murdered Caroline Ellen Trayler”.

Det. Supt. Smeed said in that case defendant was detained in London on Tuesday evening, brought to Folkestone the previous day, and charged by Det. Insp. Pierce. “It is perfectly obvious that the case cannot be gone on with for some little time”, Supt. Smeed added, “and today I propose calling evidence of charging Leckey and then asking for a remand of three weeks to enable the necessary evidence to be got together and submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions”.

The Clerk (Mr. C. Rootes), to defendant: It is not necessary for you to say anything at present. I understand you are going to apply for a legal aid certificate. That will be dealt with at the end of the taking of the evidence.

Det. Insp. E. Pierce said at 6.50 p.m. the previous day he saw Leckey at Folkestone police headquarters. He charged and cautioned him.

After about 30 minutes' hesitation defendant replied “Well, I've nothing to say until I've seen someone”. “A solicitor” he added afterwards.

The Clerk to Supt. Smeed: You have made a number of enquiries in this case, I understand, and you have a number of witnesses whom you will be calling later.

Supt. Smeed: Yes.

The Chairman said defendant's application for legal aid would be granted. “We are not proceeding any further with the charge this morning, and you will be remanded until July 22nd, when the case will be proceeded with”, added the Chairman.

Leckey was then escorted out of the Court to the cells below.

Folkestone Herald 17 July 1943.

Local News.

The adjourned inquest on Mrs. Caroline Ellen Trayler, 18 year old cinema usherette, of 3, Sussex Road, Folkestone, will be resumed at the Town Hall, Folkestone, on Thursday, by the Borough Coroner (Mr. B.H. Bonniface), who will sit with a jury. On the same day Gnr. Dennis Edmund Leckey (25), Royal Artillery, will again appear before the Magistrates, charged with the murder of Mrs. Trayler.

Folkestone Herald 24 July 1943.

Local News.

Gunner Dennis Edmund Leckey, 25 years' old Royal Artilleryman, was committed for trial at the Old Bailey in September by the Folkestone Magistrates on Thursday, on a charge of murdering Mrs. Caroline Ellen Trayler, a Folkestone Cinema usherette. The hearing lasted all day.

Mrs Trayler, 18 years' old wife of a sergeant in the Army serving in the Middle East, was found dead in an empty shop in Foord Road, Folkestone, on June 17th after she had been missing since the preceding Sunday night.

Leckey, who pleaded Not Guilty and reserved his defence, was arrested in London on June 30th and when charged at Folkestone on the following day was remanded for three weeks.

The Police Court was crowded on Thursday when Leckey appeared before Alderman R.G. Wood (presiding), Alderman J.W. Stainer, Mr. P.V. Gurr and Mr. C.A. Wilde. Mr. E.G. Robey appeared for the Director of Public Prosecutions, and defendant was represented by Mr. Francis J.R. Mountain, of Rainham, Kent.

Opening the case for the prosecution, Mr. Roby said Leckey was charged with murdering Mrs. Trayler on the night of June 13th – June 14th at Folkestone. At about 11.30 on the morning of June 17th the dead body of this girl was found in a passageway at the rear of an empty shop, 94, Foord Road. Dr. Keith Simpson made a post mortem and he would tell them that Mrs. Trayler had been strangled by a grip of some considerable force. On the dead woman's body were found six dark hairs. The girl herself had auburn, sandy coloured hair. Mr. Robey, continuing, said Mrs. Trayler lived at 3, Sussex Road, near to the shop where her body was found, and she was employed as an usherette at a cinema in the town. She was on duty until about 9 o’clock on the evening of June 13th. She must have gone straight from there to the Mechanics’ Aims public house. At the time accused was also there with a friend, Bombardier Knight. They had come from a camp some five miles from Folkestone. It was evident that accused was struck by the appearance of this girl and he got into conversation with her. He continued talking to her, so much so that Knight felt himself to be in the way and left them. At closing time at 10 o'clock accused and deceased left the public house together. There was no-one whom the prosecution could put before them to say that after they had left Mrs. Trayler was seen actually with accused, but there were witnesses who knew the girl and they would say that they saw her walking with a soldier in various streets not far from the public house. At 10.15 she was seen walking along Bradstone Avenue towards Black Bull Road with a soldier. About that time, Bdr. Knight, who had left the public house, got into the truck which had brought him to Folkestone and went back to camp. Mr. Robey said two trucks had brought accused and other men into Folkestone on this evening, and when the second truck left for camp at 11.10 all of the men had returned except Leckey. At about 10.30 deceased was seen again, with a soldier, in St. John’s Church Road, and about 10.40 deceased was seen talking to a soldier outside the shop the prosecution suggested, later that night she was murdered. At about 1.30 a.m. on June 14th accused arrived back in camp. He told soldiers there that he had walked home and that on the way he had met an officer in the W.A.A.F.‘s and had walked with her as far as her station. The officer would tell them that after she had arrived at Folkestone Junction station at 12.15 a.m. a soldier had followed behind her and caught up with her. They might ask themselves: What was Leckey doing in Folkestone at that time? Leckey had also made various inconsistent statements as to what he had been doing with reference to the woman with whom he had been seen at the Mechanics' Arms. Mr. Robey said the body was found on the morning of June 17th and evidence would be called as to the conduct of accused from about that time, probably just before, until his arrest, and it was suggested by the prosecution that his conduct was that of a man with a guilty conscience and that of a man endeavouring to hide his identity as much as possible, because he must have known, presumably, that he was wanted for interview. A book of leave forms was taken from the accused's troop office and was subsequently found in his possession. Two of the documents were filled up and bore the signature of an officer, not the officer’s signature. Other articles, including soldiers’ pay books, were also missing. He understood four pay books were found on Leckey, one belonging to a room mate, and accused had even gone so far as to extract his photograph and put it in the other man’s pay book. On June 18th Leckey told another soldier that he was going home for the week-end because he suspected his wife's conduct, although he (Mr. Robey) should say in the wife's interests that there would seem to be no foundation for that suggestion, which probably Leckey did not mean either. That day accused’s sergeant- major had to check Leckey for being away from his vehicle. After being paid that day Leckey should have attended for guard duty at 7 o’clock, but he was nowhere to be found, and the reason was that he was on the 8.40 p.m. train from Euston to Manchester. On the following day (June 19th) Leckey was in Manchester with his wife. He had then changed into civilian clothing. He also called on his mother-in-law, and both accused and his wife appeared to be somewhat worried. Leckey said that he was on embarkation leave, and there was no suggestion of any trouble between him and his wife. He left his uniform at home and on June 20th accused was in Stockport. He saw a friend there and said he was due back at Folkestone at midnight, but he spent the night of June 20th – 21st at a drill hall in Mere. On June 22nd Leckey was at Stafford railway station and he told a woman he met there that he was a fighter pilot in the R.A.F. They went to Birmingham where they spent the evening together at a cinema. On June 23rd they travelled on the same train to London. The woman lent Leckey an attaché case because accused said his luggage was supposed to be at the station and had not arrived. He telephoned the woman on the following day (June 24th) making an appointment to return these articles but he did not keep the appointment. They next heard of accused in the Queen’s Hotel, Leicester Square, London, on June 28th in the company of a Canadian soldier. He there got into conversation with two N.C.O.’s of the U.S. Army, and he spent the night with them at the Green Park Hotel. On June 29th Leckey was arrested at the City of Quebec public house and taken to Marylebone police station where he awaited the arrival of police officers from Folkestone. He was told that the officers were making enquiries about a Mrs. Trayler who had been murdered and he was tasked if he would care to give an account of his movements. He said “I was with the girl. I want to be fair with you and to myself but before I make a statement I should like to get advice”. Mr. Robey said the police took possession of Leckey’s uniform at Manchester. On the dead woman’s body were a number of dark hairs, and scientific evidence would be called to show that those hairs were identical in every respect with the hairs of accused. One of the dead woman’s finger nails was slightly broken and in it were some debris and fibres. Amongst the debris and fibres was one woollen rust coloured fibre which was identical with a rust coloured fibre taken from the khaki shirt which Leckey admitted he was wearing on the night of murder. There was also found on Leckey's trousers one sandy coloured hair which was identical in every respect with the hairs taken from the body of the deceased girl. Mr. Robey, in his submission, said after hearing the evidence, he thought the Magistrates would come to the conclusion there was enough evidence to justify them sending accused for trial.

Det. Sergt. H.J. Mott, K.C.C., said on June 17th and 28th he visited Folkestone and on those dates he took five photographs. He produced a book containing prints of the photographs which included pictures of premises in which the woman was found and several of the body of the deceased. Witness said on June 19th he visited Folkestone Hospital mortuary and saw there body of the woman shown on the photographs. He took a sample of deceased's hair and handed it later to Det. Insp. Pierce.

P.C. Lewis, Folkestone K.C.C., said on June 17th 11.31 a.m. he went to 94, Foord Road, which was completely empty. At the time he was searching unoccupied properties. He entered by the entrance in Devon Road. The back door was closed but unlocked. Inside he saw a blue suede shoe lying on the floor, and to the left of the entrance a large brown leather handbag. In a passage leading from this doorway to the shop he saw the body of a woman, as shown in three photographs produced. He reported the matter immediately and waited until Det. Insp. Pierce arrived.

Dr. James Davidson, Director of the Metropolitan Police Laboratory, Hendon, said on July 5th he saw Det. Insp. Pierce, who handed him a number of articles, including a sample of hair and a pair of battle dress trousers. On the trousers he found a hair adhering to the surface on the front of the right leg. The hair was similar in all respects to a hair examined and taken from the dead woman's body.

Mrs. Beatrice Shaw, of Daisybank Road, Longsight, Manchester, said her daughter was the wife of the accused. They lived in Santley Street, Longsight, and would have been married four years next September. There were two children by the marriage and her daughter and her husband appeared to be very happy. On June 19th defendant and his wife came to her house. Leckey said he was on 48 hours embarkation leave. Witness noticed that her daughter looked poorly and remarked that perhaps she was worried about her husband going abroad. Leckey said “Not so worried as me”. They went out and drink and Leckey said “I have had a bit of bad luck the last three weeks”, but he did not say in what way. Leckey spoke of one of his friends' birthday. He said he had had an extra drink and seemed to lose his head a little and that “Ken” then went out and left him. Before leaving, Leckey asked witness to help look after the children when he went abroad.

Mr. Robey: Did you ¡notice any difference in his general manner that evening?

Witness: I thought he was rather quiet.

L. Bdr. John Austin Kearney, R.A., said he had known Leckey for about four years. He saw him at Mere on June 20th, when Leckey was wearing civilian clothes. Leckey said he had been away from his unit, and had come from Manchester, but did not say why. Leckey told witness he left Manchester on the Saturday, and had been to Stoke, and was returning from his leave to Folkestone, where he had to be in by 11.59 p.m. on June 21st. Witness continued that Leckey spent June 20th in his company, and slept that night in barracks with witness. On June 21st Leckey left the barracks at 9 a.m., and they arranged to meet af 1 p.m. They went to the Waggon and Horses public house, and had a drink. Leckey said he had an engagement ring in his pocket, which he said he got from some person in Ireland, but witness did not see the ring. Witness last saw Leckey at 1.45 p.m. that day.

Mrs. Winifred Woolley, of West Twyford, London, said she was at Stafford Railway Station on June 22nd, when Leckey got into conversation with her. She told him where she wanted to go, and he suggested that they should go to Birmingham, so that they could visit a cinema together. She was going to visit a relation at Wolverhampton. Leckey told her that he was a pilot-officer in the R.A.F., and when she mentioned thaf he was in civilian clothes remarked that “one liked to get out of uniform”. He also said he had lost his luggage and case, and that was why he wanted to go to Birmingham. Witness said Leckey told her his name was Alan Leckey. They went to a cinema at Birmingham together.

Mr. Robey: Did he make any enquiries about his luggage?

Witness: He went to the enquiry office at Birmingham Station.

Witness continued that on June 23rd Leckey travelled with her to London. She lent him a shaving kit and a small case. On June 24th Leckey rang her up, asking if they could go to a dance together. She said she was rather tired, but arranged to meet him, because he said he would return the case and contents. He did not keep the appointment.

Witness was handed a book of Savings Certificates, and said it was hers. She could not remember when she last saw it; she always carried it in her bag. Witness also identified a clothing coupons book, which she said belonged to her landlady. She (witness) last used it on June 21st, when she bought some stockings. Leckey told her he bought a shirt in Birmingham.

Det. Insp. Robert Lennox, Manchester City Police, said he visited 34, Santley Street, Long-side, Manchester, on June 21st, and took possession of a soldier’s battle-dress, trousers and shirt. On June 22nd he handed the uniform to Det. Insp. Pierce.

Det . Insp. Edward Joseph Pierce, K.C.C. (Folkestone), said on July 17th he received a message from the witness Lewis, and went to 94, Foord Road, Folkestone, where he saw the body of a woman. A handbag was lying on the floor of the passage, just inside the door. It contained 4s. 5d. in money. A loose shoe lying six or eight feet from the body was one of a pair, the other being on deceased's foot. Deceased was wearing no rings. That evening the body was identified by Frederick Stapleton, and a doctor saw the body and made a post mortem examination. Witness continued that he saw Leckey at Marylebone Police Station on June 30th, and took possession of an A.B. 64 (parts one and two) in the name of Gunner Frederick Latham. On examining part one of the book, witness noticed that a sheet containing pages 3, 4, 17 and 18 had been neatly extracted by unpinning the book, and a similar sheet from another book had been inserted. Page 3 bore a photograph of Leckey.

Witness took possession of a National Savings Certificates book, a book of clothing coupons, a National Identity Registration card in the name of Renee Bowden, a wallet containing £5 10/- in notes, papers in the names of Cpl. Bear and Sgt. Rackley, and a white metal watch. The same evening witness went with Leckey to the Imperial Hotel, Russell Square, London, to a room Leckey had booked, and took possession of an attache case containing an A.B. 64 part two, in the name of George Melia; an A.B. 64, parts one and two, in the name of Alan Hadley; an AJB. 64, part one in the name of Ronnie Fletcher; and a pad of blank Army forms B.295 (leave forms). In the case were two loose forms, one made out to D. Leckey, and the other to F. Latham. An A.B. 64 in the name of D. Leckey was aJso found. Part of it was unpinned and loose, and the sheet comprising pages 3, 4, 17 and 18 was missing. Witness also found four hotel bills made out in the Hadley, and two room reservation cards. Witness continued that he escorted Leckey to Folkestone and produced a uniform. He asked Leckey if it was the uniform he was wearing on June 13th and 18th, and Leckey examined it and replied “Yes”. At 7 o’clock that evening after Leckey had been charged with the murder of Mrs. Trayler, Leckey was asked if he had any objection to being examined by the police surgeon. He said he had no objection, and was examined and samples of hair were taken. On July 5th witness handed samples of the girl's hair to a doctor, and a sample of Leckey’s hair and a sample of his shirt to another doctor.

P.C. Oliver Riggs, D. Division, Metropolitan Police, said at 8.05 p.m. on June 29th he was on duty at the Marble Arch when Mr. Slevin, attached to the C.I.D., U.S. Army, made a communication to him. Witness went with him and P.C. Field to the City of Quebec public house, where Leckey was in the saloon bar, with a group of other men. “I said “What is your name?””, witness continued, “and Leckey replied “Latham”. I grabbed his left arm and told him that he answered the description of Dennis Edmund Leckey, R.A., who was wanted for the larceny of a wallet and contents, and also for questioning by the Folkestone Police. He said “You have got nothing on me””. Leckey was taken to Marylebone Lane police station, where toe was detained.

Det. Supt. Francis H. Smeed, Kent County Police, said with Det. Inspector Pierce, he saw Leckey at Marylebone Lane police station on June 30th about 11 a.m. He said to accused “We are making enquiries about the death of a young woman named Mrs. Trayler, whose body was found in an empty shop at Folkestone on Thursday, June 17th, 1943”. He said “I know about it”. Witness said “She was last seen in company with a soldier and enquiries show that she was murdered on Whit-Sunday night, the 13th June, 1943”. He cautioned Leckey and said “Do you care to give me an account of your movements late that day?” He replied “I was with the girl. I want to be fair with you and to myself, and before I make a statement I should like to get advice”. He told Leckey that he would be taken to Folkestone on suspicion of murdering Mrs. Trayler. Leckey made no comment.

Frederick Stapleton, 3, Sussex Road. Folkestone, the father of the dead woman, said at the time of her death his daughter was living with him. He identified the photo produced as that of his daughter. On June 17th he identified his daughter's dead body at 94, Foord Road.

Mrs Nellie May Bonzitt, 32, Foord Road, secretary and cashier at the Central Cinema, said the dead woman was employed there as usherette. On Sunday, June 13th, Mrs. Trayler left the cinema at 8.55 p.m. Witness noticed that before she left deceased was wearing a wedding ring and an engagement ring.

Dorothy Helen Goldoworthy, wife of the licensee of the Mechanics Arms public house, St. John’s Street, said she was in the hotel on the evening of June 13th. She saw deceased, who came in about 9 o'clock. Later that evening she saw Mrs. Trayler in conversation with Leckey, who said to witness when she went to speak to Mrs. Trayler, “She says she’s going, she’s got a date”. Witness said to Mrs. Trayler “Oh never mind your date, stay at the ‘Old Mechanics’”. Mrs. Trayler remained, and Leckey asked witness once if there was “any chance of a little party after the pub had closed”. She told him that it was impossible. Leckey and Mrs. Trayler remained together until closing time and when they left witness shook hands with both of them.

Bombardier Kenneth Knight, Royal Artillery, said he had known Leckey on and off since 1939. On June 13th accused and witness left the camp at 5.15 p.m. to come to Folkestone. They visited a cinema, leaving there at 7.20, and then went to an amusement arcade. From there they went to the .Queen’s Hotel, to the Oddfellows Inn, and then to the Mechanics Arms where they arrived about 9 o’clock. Up to that time defendant had had about five pints. Witness saw Mrs. Trayler come in and Leckey said “She’s nice”. The girl walked up to the landlady. Mrs. Trayler ordered a drink and Leckey got into conversation with her and bought her a drink. This continued until about 9.30 and as he (witness) was getting a little fed up he told Leckey that he was going. Defendant said “Don’t, there are other girls here”. Witness left and told Leckey that he would see him on the truck taking them back to camp Witness spoke to Gnr. Melia, the driver of the second truck. Witness’s truck left about 10.20 that night. He next saw Leckey at breakfast time the next day. He asked Leckey how he had on. Accused said that he and Mrs. Trayler had come out of the pub. He had kissed the girl, but she had “a date” to keep. He then said he left her. Leckey told him that he had walked home and that on the way he met a W.A.A.F. officer who was carrying a bag, which he offered to carry. On that morning Leckey seemed a bit downcast and witness put it down to the fact that he had had too much beer. On the other mornings he was “just ordinary”. On the following Friday Leckey borrowed 6/- from him, to pay back Melia, he said.

Gunner George Allison. R.A., said on Sunday, June 13th, he was in the Mechanics Arms public house until closing time. Leckey was there with a girl. Examining a photograph witness said it was that of Mrs. Trayler, whom he saw with Leckey.

Mrs. Ida Clara May Belsey, 48, Bradstone Avenue, Folkestone, said at 10.15 p.m. on June 13th she was looking from a window of her house when she saw Mrs. Trayler walking with a soldier towards Black Bull Road. The soldier was wearing battle-dress and side-cap, with a white lanyard.

Benjamin Joseph Burbridge, 8, Downs Road, Folkestone, a ticket collector employed by the Southern Railway, said he left the Central Station at 10.30 p.m. on June 13th, and walked down Radnor Park Road. Mrs. Trayler was going from St. John’s Church Road to Radnor Park Road with a soldier.

John Strickland, 43, Cheriton Road, Folkestone, a barman, employed at the Red Cow public house, Foord Road, said he knew Mrs. Trayler by sight. On the night of June 13th, at 10.40, he saw her in Devon Road with a soldier.

Mr. Robey: In fairness to the accused, I think you failed to pick out the accused at an identification parade, although the accused was in the parade?

Witness agreed.

Gunner Fred Latham, RA., said Leckey slept in the next bed to him in camp. After Whit-Sunday Leckey seemed rather moody. On the night of Thursday, June 17th, Leckey said “Have you heard about the girl being done in in Folkestone?” Witness asked him where he had seen it, and Leckey replied that he had seen it in the paper. Next day, witness continued, he received his pay at about 4.10 p.m., and gave Gunner Bagnall silver in exchange for a pound note. Witness put the note in the back of his pay book, and left it in the left-hand pocket of his denim jacket. Witness left his jacket on the bed, and went down to see the sergeant-major, who shouted for him. No one was in the room at the time. Witness continued that when he was ready for going out that evening the pay-book was not in his pocket. Examining a pay-book, witness said there was an entry showing an advance of pav of 85/- on June 25th, but the money was not advanced to him. Witness also examined a leave pass made out in his name, and said it was not issued to him.

Gunner George Melia said on June 17th he drove a recreation truck into Folkestone. Leckey was among the passengers. Witness saw the other truck go back to camp later that night and when he left everybody except Leckey had left Folkestone to return to camp. When he saw Leckey the next day he said to him “How did you miss the truck?” He replied that when he got there it had gone. Towards the middle of the week Leckey became rather quiet. Either on the Wednesday or Thursday night Leckey said "Have you heard about the girl ‘done in’ in Folkestone?” Witness said casually “Whoever done it will get it”. On Thursday evening while witness was in the Queen’s Hotel with Leckey and others, the barmaid mentioned the murder. On the following day Leckey said he was going home for the weekend. He told accused that he would be a fool if he went, his leave being so near. Leckey replied “I’m going Just the same”.

Mr. Robey: Did he give any reason for going home?

Witness: He said that he had reason to suspect his wife’s faithfulness.

Continuing, witness said he was on leave that weekend and on June 18th he caught the 8.40 p.m. train from Euston to Manchester. He saw Leckey on the same train. He left Leckey at the Y.M.C.A. at Manchester Station. Witness said be missed his pay-book on Friday, June 18th, when he went to get paid. Leckey did not owe him 3/-.

Mr. Mountain: Where did you first hear that a girl had been murdered?

Witness: In the billet.

Is that when you say Leckey mentioned it? – Yes.

When did you next hear it? – In the Queen's Hotel on Thursday night.

Dr. Keith Simpson pathologist at Guy's Hospital, said on June 17th he went to 94, Foord Road, where he saw the body of a woman. On the body he found six dark hairs, entirely different to deceased's hair which was auburn. Microscopical reproductions of the hairs had been photographed. He found a fresh tear in the left third finger nail of the dead woman. Scrapings from underneath this contained a wool fibre torn away, which microscopically was identical in colour, size and general character with a fibre teased from a shirt shown to him on July 5th. At the mortuary he made an autopsy. He found two groups of injuries in keeping with deceased being gripped with very considerable force by the throat, both from in front and behind, and strangled manually. Injuries to the front of the throat consisted of bruising and tearing of the skin, as by the finger nails, at the level of the voice box on both the left and right sides. There was a fracture of the voice box on the left side, and bruising between the voice box and the spine. The injuries to the back of the neck consisted of a single bruise as from a thumb high up under the head and immediately to the left of the mid line and three similar bruises as from the strong pressure of averting fingers further round the right side of the neck. There were bruises to the brow and to the chin in keeping with the head being forced back and downwards on to some surface during this grip. The cause of death was asphyxia due to strangulation. Dr. Simpson said on July 5th he received from Det. Inspector Pierce a sample of dark hairs labelled “Leckey”. Microscopical examination of these in comparison with the foreign dark hairs found on deceased's body showed them to have identical characters.

Gunner Walter G. Bagnall, R.A., said on June 14th at 1 a.m. he mounted duty at the camp. Leckey came in about 1.30 a.m. Asked why he was so late, Leckey said that he had met a young lady and was going to take her home, but as she was going to meet a civilian she would not let him take her home, so he returned on his own. He told Leckey he was a fool to stay out so late as he was expecting his leave on the following Friday.

Sergt. Douglas N. Read, R.A., said he was guard commander on the night of June 13th – 14th. Leckey reported at the guard room between 1.30 and 2 a.m. He asked accused why he was so late and he said “I've seen a girl home”.

Flight Officer Margaret A. Cook, W.A.A.F., said night of June I3th – 14th she returned from leave arriving at Folkestone at 12.15 a.m. She walked from Folkestone Junction to her billet, carrying a small handbag. A soldier overtook her on the way and offered to carry her bag, which she gave him.

Mr. Robey: Did you notice anything about his manner?

Witness: Yes, he seemed slightly absent-minded.

Mr. Mountain: He offered to carry your bag for you? - Yes.

Sergt. Major Frank Sidney Barnes, R.A., said he twice spoke to Leckey on the morning of June 18th, and spoke to him once in the afternoon, because he was not maintaining his vehicle. In the afternoon Leckey “seemed different”. He was sitting in the Signal Store, which was nothing to do with maintenance, and when witness told him to go to his vehicle to get ready for inspection morning he did not answer, but just sauntered out. Previously he had been a good worker. Witness continued that after pay parade that day Gnr. Latham made a report to him, and he (witness) made everyone stand to their beds, whilst he and other N.C.O.s made an inspection. Leckey was not in his room and did not appear for guard duties, witness having to put another man on guard in his place.

Gnr. Robert Kenneth Pass, R.A., said be was temporary troop clerk from June 11th to June 20th. On June 14th he took into use a book of leave forms, which he missed at 11 a.m. on June 17th.

Lieut. Sidney Speeding, R.A., said the signatures on two leave passes which were handed him were not his, and they had not been made with his authority.

Mr. Robey said he had proposed to call an American soldier to give evidence, but the man had started rather late from the Midlands and had not arrived.

On the evidence which had been given he asked the Magistrates to commit Leckey for trial.

Mr. Mountain said that on behalf of Leckey he pleaded Not Guilty and reserved his ¡defence. No evidence for the defence would be given in that court.

Leckey was committed to take his trial at the Old Bailey on September 14th.

Inquest.

The inquest on Mrs. Caroline Ellen Traylor was resumed at the Town Hall on Thursday afternoon, and was adjourned until October 30th. The proceedings lasted only a few minutes.

Dr. Keith Simpson, of Guy's Hospital, London, said he held a post mortem on Mrs.Trayler on June 17th. The cause of death was asphyxiation, due to manual strangulation.

The Borough Coroner (Mr. B.H. Bonniface): What day do you think death took place?

Witness: Some four days prior; about June 13th.

The Coroner told the jury that since they last sat a man had been charged with the murder of Mrs. Trayler, and proceedings were being taken in the police court that day. He did not see any object in keeping them as a jury, because whatever was the result of those proceedings there would be no need for the Jury to return a verdict. He therefore proposed to adjourn the inquest until October 30th, and to discharge the jury, with his thanks for their services.

Folkestone Herald 25 September 1943.

Local News.

Gunner Dennis Edmund Leckey, aged 24, was sentenced to death at the Old Bailey on Wednesday for the murder of Mrs. Caroline Ellen Trayler, whose body was found in an empty shop in Foord Road, Folkestone, on June 17th. Mr. Justice Singleton, passing sentence, said to Leckey “You have been convicted of a very cruel murder”.

Mrs. Trayler was aged 18 and was employed as an usherette at a Folkestone cinema. A vivacious and cheerful girl she was popular among her friends. After she had been reported missing on June 14th police officers carried out extensive enquiries and also began a search of unoccupied premises in the town. In the course of this search Mrs. Trayler's body was found in the passageway of a shop at No. 94, Foord Road. She had been strangled.

Detective Supt. F. H. Smeed, Kent County Constabulary, C.I.D., took charge of the case and his investigations and those of other officers covered a wide area. As a result an announcement was made that the police wished to interview Gunner Dennis Edmund Leckey, of the Royal Artillery, who was absent from his unit. The man was traced to Manchester and towns in the Midlands, and on June 29th he was arrested in London after he had been in contact with some members of the United States Army. He was brought before the Folkestone Magistrates on July 1st. He was then remanded for 21 days and at the resumed hearing he was committed for trial.

The trial of Leckey opened at the Old Bailey on Monday before Mr. Justice Singleton. There were two women on the jury.

Mr. John Flowers, K.C., prosecuting, with Mr. H. Elam, said Leckey had been stationed at a camp about five miles from Folkestone. The dead girl lived with her parents, Mr. And Mrs. Stapleton, of Sussex Road, Folkestone. On Whit-Sunday, June 13th, she was at her work and left just before 9 o'clock. She was then wearing a wedding ring and engagement ring. She did not return to her home that night, and next day, when she did not report to the cinema, her mother reported her disappearance to the police. Four days later when she was found there were no rings on her hands. Mr. Flowers said that a soldier, called Knight, and Leckey were in a public house on the night of June 13th when Mrs. Trayler walked in. Leckey said “She's nice” and they got into conversation with her. Some time later Knight left saying that he would see Leckey later on at the truck that would take them back to camp. Mr. Flowers outlined what he said was known of Leckey's movements after the public house closed at 10 o'clock. There was a suggestion that about 12.15 he met a W.A.A.F. officer and carried her bag for her. He did not return to the camp until 1.30 a.m. and when asked why he was so late he said he had met a young lady who would not let him take her home so he had returned to the camp on his own. At the guardroom he was again asked why he was so late and he said that he had seen a girl home. Next day he told Knight that the girl they had met in the public house had said that she had a date. There would also be evidence, continued Mr. Flowers, that Leckey asked a man if he had heard of the girl “done in” at Folkestone. He said he had seen it in a paper, but, said Mr. Flowers, there was no paper in Folkestone that day containing such a notice. On June 18th Leckey left the camp and went home to Manchester. There he told his mother-in-law that he was on 48 hours’ embarkation leave and he asked her to look after the children while he was abroad. Actually he was not under orders for abroad. On the 20th he was in another town and there he told a man that he had an engagement ring which he said he had got from someone in Ireland. On June 22nd he was at Stafford where he met a woman to whom he said he was a fighter pilot. They went to Birmingham and spent the evening at a cinema and on the 23rd they both travelled to London together. He did not keep an appointment to meet her on the 24th. On June 28th he was with a corporal of the United States Army in Leicester Square and then he said that he was a flight sergeant and that his name was Allen. Next day he was seen in a public house near the Marble Arch and when asked by the police what his name was, he said it was Latham. He was told that he answered the description of Leckey, who was wanted by the Folkestone police, and he was alleged to have said “You have got nothing on me’’. At his hotel the police found a number of Army pay books. One was in the name of Latham. Certain pages had been extracted from it and others inserted, one bearing the photograph of Leckey. Leckey's own book was also found. The page with his photograph was missing from it. On June 30th, when he was seen at Marylebone police station, he was alleged to have replied “I know about it”. When asked about his movements on June 13th he said that he was with the girl but before he made a statement he would like to get advice. Leckey had left his uniform in Manchester and it was recovered. Mr. Flowers said that Dr. Keith Simpson, who conducted an examination of the dead girl, found dark hairs which were identical in colour and texture with those of Leckey. Under her fingernails he found scrapings of wool fibre which the prosecution suggested were identical in colour and size with the material of Leckey's shirt. Mr. Flowers said he supposed that the shirt was an Army one so that there might be many soldiers wearing shirts of similar material. When Leckey was charged June 30th he said "I have nothing to say until I see a solicitor”. It was clear, said Mr. Flowers, that the girl was murdered on the night of June 13th and the evidence was overwhelming that Leckey did it. She had been strangled. Her voice box was fractured and death was due to asphyxia.

Mrs. Ellen Jane Stapleton, the dead girl's mother, who is so crippled that she could not climb into the witness box and was allowed to sit in the well of the court, said that her daughter was always home by 10.30 p.m. unless she was going to a dance. She had her own key. Witness said that she went to bed on the night of the 13th between 10.30 and 11 but she woke about an hour later to find that her daughter had not returned. “I walked about in the house that night going to the windows and looking up and down the road, and in the morning I got Carol’s breakfast ready. She did not return”, said Mrs, Stapleton. “I got lunch ready for her too and when she did not come for it I went to the cinema. She was not one of these runabout parties. Her being out all night had never happened before”.

Replying to Mr. J.D. Casswell, K.C. (with Mr. Harold Brown for the defence), Mrs. Stapleton said that she knew that her daughter did not have a date that night. She had hung up her change of linen, and was coming home to have a bath. She would not go out after having a bath.

“I've got a date” was just a saying that her daughter often used and it did not mean anything.

Mrs. Dorothy H. Goldsworthy, Mechanics Arms public house, Folkestone, said on the night of June 13th she saw Mrs. Trayler and Leckey together in the public house. Mrs. Trayler said that she was going as she had a date but witness said to her “You don’t want to go. Stop at the old Mechanics”. Mrs. Trayler did remain and was one of the first to leave when the public house closed at 10 o’clock

Evidence was given by a member of the staff of the Central Cinema, Folkestone, that on the night of June 13th Mrs. Trayler was wearing two rings.

Kenneth Knight, a bombardier in the Royal Artillery, said he went to Folkestone on June 13th with Leckey and arrived about 6 o'clock. They went to a cinema and various public houses and eventually arrived at the Mechanics Arms public house about 9 o’clock. A photograph of a woman was then shown to Knight, who who said that it was of the woman who came into the public house and Leckey said “She looks nice”.

Knight said that Leckey got into conversation with this woman and eventually about 9.45 he (Knight) decided to leave. Leckey said to him “Don't go yet. There are girls here". The woman said “I don't want to break you up”. Knight said that he went back to his camp in an Army truck. He saw Leckey the next morning about 7.15, and Leckey told him that when he came out of the public house he kissed the girl and left her. He thought Leckey must have walked back, as he told him that he met a W.A.A.F. officer on the way and carried her bag for her. On Friday, June 18th, said Knight, Leckey borrowed 6/- from him. He said it was to pay a debt to a gunner.

In cross examination, Knight denied having had a quarrel with Leckey at a birthday party.

George Ellison, a gunner m the Royal Artillery, said he was in the Mechanics Arms public house on Sunday. June 13th and saw a girl, whose photograph he identified, leave the house with Leckey.

Police Constable John Lewis said on June 17th he was searching some unoccupied property at Foord Road. Inside a shop he saw a blue suede shoe and a large brown handbag. "In the passageway, leading from the back door of the shop, I saw the body of a woman. I immediately reported it to my superior officers at headquarters”, said the witness.

In answer to Mr. Casswell Lewis said that was a lot of dirt on the floor but he did not examine the premises for footprints.

Margaret Agnes Cook, a flight officer in the W.A.A.F., said she arrived in Folkestone 15 minutes after midnight on Sunday, June 13th and set out to walk to her destination. She was overtaken by a soldier outside Folkestone and he carried her bag part of the way. She would not recognise the soldier again.

Fred Latham, a gunner in the R.A., said on Thursday, June 17th, Leckey said to him “Have you heard about the girl being done in in Folkestone?” Leckey told him that he had seen it in the paper.

Mrs. Beatrice Shaw, Leckey's mother-in-law, said she saw him in Manchester on June 19th with his wife. Leckey told her he was on 48 hours embarkation leave.

Mrs. Winifred Wooley, West Twyford, said she met Leckey at Stafford railway station, and he told her he was a sergeant pilot in the R.A.F. He was in civilian clothes and told her his name was Alan Leckey. He said he had lost a case and was going to Birmingham to collect it. She was travelling on the same train and he went with her. The next day she went to London with Leckey. She gave him a small case and some shaving kit. The following day Leckey rang her up and made an appointment. He did not keep it and she did not see him.

Stewart Wilson Bier, a United States soldier, said that he was in a West End bar with another man and got Into conversation with a man. Pointing to the dock, Bier said “That’s the man right there”. Bier said that this man told him his name was Allan and that he was a pilot in the R.A.F. The three men spent the night at a West End hotel. When he woke up in the morning the man had gone, “and so had the wallets”, added Bier.

P.C. Alfred Riggs said that he saw Leckey at a public house in the West End. He asked him his name and Leckey said “Latham”. When told that he was wanted by the Folkestone police he said “You have nothing on me”.

Dr. Keith Simpson, pathologist, said he examined the body of Mrs. Trayler and found underneath a tom finger nail a short piece of wool fibre freshly torn away. This fibre was identical with the fibre of a shirt worn by Leckey. It was identical in weight, colour and wool structure. He made a post mortem examination and found injuries consistent with the woman being strangled manually by hand both from the front and behind. He found bruises behind the voice box, which was fractured. Death was due to asphyxia from manual strangulation. “I formed the view that death had taken place about four days previously”, Dr. Simpson added . “I made a microscopical examination of hairs taken from the girl and a hair taken from Leckey. The hairs found on the girl corresponded exactly in dimension, colour, and in character with the hair submitted to me from Leckey”.

Dr. James Davison, director of the police laboratory at Hendon, said he examined battle-dress trousers which Leckey had been wearing. He found human hair on the right leg. He compared that hair with hair taken from the deceased girl, and the hair found on the rousers was similar in all respects to the hair taken from the girl.

This closed the case for the prosecution.

Leckey then went into the witness box and described his movements on the night of Sunday, June 13th. He said he went to Folkestone with Gunner Knight and after visiting several public houses they were directed to the Mechanics Arms where they were told there was music. A girl came into the bar and after a time she came over and stood beside him. They started talking to one another and shortly before 9.30 Knight left them. The girl, whom he got to know as Caroline Trayler, told him she had a date but he persuaded her, with the aid of the landlady, to stay until closing time. By that time they were very friendly. He had quite a bit of beer but was not drunk. He got a bit merry”, as he started to drink whisky. “We left the public house together”, said Leckey, “and walked along the road for some way. We then walked along until we came to a quiet street, and after a few minutes I suggested that we should go into one of the entries. We did so”. Leckey said that intimacy then took place. The girl did not object. When they left there he told her that he would have to get back, and she said that she did not wish him to see her home. Leckey denied that he was anywhere near an empty shop. "I never saw her again after I left her”. he declared. The first I knew about the murder was when I went into a bar at Folkestone with four other men. The barmaid mentioned to us that a girl had been found dead in an empty shop in Folkestone, and the police were looking for a blonde sailor. The barmaid told us the girl was an usherette at a cinema and was a good looking girl with ginger hair. She said she was called Caroline. I put two and two together and surmised it was the girl I had been with that night. On the same night I heard two women in a bar discussing the finding of a girl’s body in a shop. I knew the police would want to know who she was with that evening. I decided to go home to Manchester at the weekend, and tried to see my Major to obtain leave. I failed to see him but I went to Manchester after taking two pay books and some money belonging to other soldiers. When coming back from a public house in Manchester with my wife I saw a police car standing at my door. I made some excuse to my wife and went to Manchester Station, where I spent the night. I went to Stoke on Trent and Birmingham, and finally to London. In the papers I saw that a man answering my description was wanted in connection with the murder at Folkestone. While in a public house in the West End a policeman entered with some American police in plain clothes. The policeman arrested me for larceny but when we got outside one of the Americans pointed me out und said “I believe this guy is wanted for murder too down in Folkestone””.

Asked by his counsel if he killed the girl, Leckey answered “No, sir”.

Mr. Flowers, in his final speech for the prosecution, stressed the point that if Leckey’s story, which he told in the witness box, were true, then it would mean that there must have been another man with the girl after Leckey had left her.”And this man”, said Mr. Flowers, “has hairs which are exactly the same as those of Leckey. One witness says that she looked out of her window and saw the girl in company with a soldier at 10.15 p.m. Another witness saw the girl and a soldier at 10.30 p.m., and still another witness saw the girl and a soldier at 10.40 p.m. in Foord Road where the girl's body was eventually found. All those witnesses knew the girl, and Leckey has said that he left the girl at about 10.20 p.m. In my submission it is quite clear that it was the prisoner who was seen with the girl at 10.40 p.m in Foord Road. His story is false.”

Mr. Casswell, in his speech for the defence, said “This case bristles with doubt. It is a case of uncertainty. This young man has thrown suspicion on himself by his own actions, but we are not here to consider whether he is an immoral young man or even petty thief. There was nothing on Leckey’s clothes to connect him with being in the shop where the murder took place. If Leckey had been in the shop that night and did what is suggested, surely there would be some marks on his clothes There was none”. Speaking about the fabric which was found under the dead girl’s fingernail, Mr. Casswell said “You might find a orange thread of similar fabric on some five million shirts today. Is the prosecution so bankrupt of evidence that they must rely on that?”

In the course of his summing up Mr. Justice Singleton said “If, as Leckey says, he left the girl about 10.20 p.m., why couldn’t he get to the place where the truck was waiting to pick up soldiers returning to camp by 11 o’clock? It was broad daylight at that time. He had ample time to get there even if he was ill through having mixed his drinks”. Referring to the fact that Leckey made no statement to the police when charged with murder, but said that he wanted to consult a solicitor, Mr. Justice Singleton said “This man is always cool and collected. If a man is charged with murder and is not responsible and has not committed murder, what do you expect him to say? Would you expect him to deny it?” “Ask yourself this”, said the Judge, “If this man be innocent, and if his sole purpose in going away was to make a confession of unfaithfulness to his wife, can you see him acting as he did?”

When the jury returned to court after deliberating for lust over half an hour, Leckey looked at them without any trace of feeling. The foreman said the word “Guilty” and Leckey looked at him for a fleeting few seconds and then turned to face the Judge. When asked if he had anything to say Leckey looked straight ahead of him and did not utter a word.

Mr. Justice Singleton, passing sentence of death, said “Yoiu have been convicted of a very cruel murder”.

A warder touched Leckey on the arm, and the condemned man immediately turned about and walked steadily down the stairs to the cells below.

Folkestone Herald 2 October 1943.

Local News.

Notice of appeal has been given by Gnr. Dennis Edmund Leckey, who was sentenced to death at the Old Bailey on Wednesday last week for the murder of Mrs. Caroline Ellen Trayler at Folkestone on June 17th.

Folkestone Herald 30 October 1943.

Local News.

An appeal on behalf of Dennis Edmund Leckey, a gunner in the Royal Artillery, found guilty at the Central Criminal Court on September 22nd of the murder of Mrs. Caroline Ellen Trayler, a cinema usherette, who was found strangled in an empty shop at Folkestone, will come before the Court of Criminal Appeal on Monday. Leckey was sentenced to death after a trial lasting three days. He is asking for leave to appeal against conviction.

Folkestone Herald 6 November 1943.

Local News.

The appeal of Gnr. Dennis Edmund Leckey, 24, Royal Artillery, against his conviction for the murder at Folkestone of Mrs. Caroline Ellen Trayler, a cinema usherette, was allowed by the Court of Criminal Appeal on Monday. Leckey, who showed no signs of emotion, was set free.

Dressed in a smartly-cut grey civilian suit, Leckey, tall, dark and good-looking, followed the lengthy legal arguments with the keenest attention, but remained unmoved throughout. He is a married man with two children.

Mrs. Trayler was found strangled in an empty shop in Foord Road, Folkestone, on June 18th.

Leckey's appeal was made on the ground that there had been a misdirection of the jury at his trial at the Old Bailey.

Mr. J.D. Casswell, K.C., for Leckey, pointed out that the judge commented in his summing-up on the fact that when cautioned by the police Leckey did not deny the charge, but said he would take advice. What the judge had said, he continued, was tantamount to saying “If a man says “I reserve my defence”, then you may rely on that evidence against him showing that he is the man responsible for the crime charged”.

Mr. J.D. Flowers, K.C., for the Crown, said that both he and Mr. Casswell at the trial told the jury that the fact that Leckey preferred to keep silent when cautioned by the police should not be held against him. The case was simply overwhelming against Leckey without the comments made by the judge, and it was impossible that the jury would have come to any other conclusion if the comments had not been made.

The Lord Chief Justice, giving the judgement of the Court, said there was a great deal of evidence upon which it was open to the jury, properly directed, to find that Leckey murdered Mrs. Trayler, but the judge's comments on Leckey's silence amounted to a misdirection and the Court could not say that, if the jury had been properly directed, they (the jury) would inevitably have come to the same conclusion. His Lordship said that three times the judge seemed to put to the jury the consideration that they might infer Leckey's guilt by considering the fact of his silence after being cautioned. But a man was entitled to remain silent. If that was not so it must be obvious that a caution might be a trap instead of being the means of finding out the truth in the interests of innocent persons as in the interests of justice against guilty persons. An innocent person might well decline to say anything from excessive caution or for some other reason and, if it were to be held out to a jury that that was a ground upon which he might be found guilty, innocent persons might be in great peril. The Court of Appeal had power, however, to disallow an appeal in such circumstances if they considered that no substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred. To do so the Court had to find that, if the jury had been properly directed, they would inevitably have come to the same conclusion. In the present case there was evidence in plenty which would have justified a verdict of guilty, but the Court was unable to say that the jury, on a proper direction, would inevitably have come to the same conclusion as they did. It was not the opinion of the Court that mattered: it was the minds of the jury, and nobody but the jury. Having regard to the importance which the passages must have had in the scheme of the summing-up, and the effect they seemed very likely to have had on the minds of the jury when considering their verdict, the Court could not say that the jury must inevitably have come to the same conclusion on a proper direction. The appeal was accordingly allowed and the conviction quashed.

During the long judgement Leckey stood in the dock like a soldier standing at ease and appeared to follow the points taken both for and against him clearly.

Five points of misdirection had been brought to the attention of the Court. The first four were decided against him. The fifth point taken by his counsel and the fifth dealt with by the Lord Chief Justice was that on which he succeeded.

Folkestone Herald 13 November 1943.

Local News.

After returning from North Africa, Sgt. Edgar Trayler, 22 years old husband of Mrs. Caroline Edward Trayler, a Folkestone cinema usherette, who was murdered last June, visited the dead girl's parents in Folkestone during the weekend. While staying with Mr. And Mrs. Stapleton, his wife's mother and father, Sergt. Trayler was joined by his mother and elder brother, who had not seen him for just over a year. Sergt. Trayler was in North Africa at the time of his wife's death, and it was not until July 20th that he read, in a London newspaper, of the discovery of her body in an empty Folkestone shop. At the time he was in hospital. No official news was received by Sergt. Trayler, and the first message giving some details of his wife's tragic death was an airgraph, written by a friend of Mr. And Mrs. Stapleton, which reached him on September 3rd. Other messages had been sent but these apparently did not reach him. Sergt. Trayler had already made an application for compassionate leave in order that he might return to Folkestone and settle his wife’s affairs, but the request was not granted. After a journey of 3,000 miles, which took 44 days, Sergt. Trayler arrived in this country from North Africa towards the end of October. He was placed under a nurse, but arrangements were made for him to visit his wife's parents last weekend. The journey is understood to have been made by air except for a hitch-hike of nearly 200 miles. Sergt. Trayler is 22. He was in the Territorials at the outbreak of war, and he served in France, being evacuated from Dunkirk and landing at Folkestone. He married Miss Stapleton in October, 1942, and they spent their honeymoon at Crook, Co. Durham, his home. Sergt. Trayler went overseas in April last.

Folkestone Herald 15 November 1952.

Local News.

Folkestone Magistrates on Wednesday approved the transfer of licence as follows: Mechanics’ Arms from Mr. J. Dennis to Mr. J.A. Clarke.

Folkestone Herald 14 November 1953.

Local News.

Transfer of the licence of the Mechanics Arms to Mr. Arthur George Darby was confirmed at Folkestone transfer sessions on Wednesday.