Folkestone Express 29 August 1868.

Wednesday, August 26th: Before The Mayor, Captain Kennicott, and Alderman Tolputt.

The licensing day was held at the Town Hall on Wednesday.

Transfer: The license of J.D. Neal (deceased) for the Oddfellows Tavern (sic), Radnor Street, was transferred to James Barker.

Note: This transfer is not listed in More Bastions.

Folkestone Express 4 June 1870.

Saturday, May 28th: Before R.W. Boarer, J. Clark, and C.H. Dashwood Esqs.

John Carter applied for a temporary license to sell excisable liquors at the Oddfellows Arms under a license granted to James Carter at the annual licensing meeting.

The application was granted.

Note: Licensee before Carter is listed as James Barker in More Bastions.

Folkestone Express 9 July 1870.

Transfer of License.

Wednesday, July 6th: Before The Mayor, Captain Kennicott R.N., W. Bateman, and J. Tolputt Esqs.

Oddfellows Arms: The licence was transferred from James Barker to John Carter.

Folkestone Express 28 September 1872.

Monday, September 23rd: Before The Mayor, T. Caister and J. Tolputt Esqs.

Catherine Hall, wife of a hawker, was brought up on a charge of being drunk and riotous in Radnor Street on Sunday. Defendant was further charged with using obscene language.

Defendant, a powerful muscular woman, appeared in Court with an infant in her arms, who seemed to enjoy the process of lactation, the surroundings notwithstanding. She stated that she had three more children. On being called to plead, she admitted being drunk, but denied being riotous and using obscene language.

P.C. Keeler said he was sent for to the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, about half past ten on Sunday night, when Mr. Carter, the landlord, asked him to put defendant out. Witness told him he must eject her himself, but he would assist him in doing so. Defendant was then put out of the house. Witness told defendant she had better get home to her lodgings, when she used very abusive language and asked him what he had to do with it. Defendant was drunk and laid down in the street, and caused a crowd of from fifty to sixty persons to collect around her. Witness went away a short distance in order to see if defendant would go home, but she commenced again to make a disturbance and use bad language, and having obtained the assistance of P.C. Sharpe he apprehended prisoner and locked her up.

P.C. Sharpe corroborated the evidence of his brother officer.

Mr. Caister asked how it was the house was not shut up before half past ten.

Supt. Martin explained that prisoner and her husband were lodging at the house, and that it was cleared at the proper time, but prisoner became so violent it was necessary to send for the police.

Prisoner said the landlord said her husband could go to bed but he would not allow her to do so. They had been lodging there a week, and had been drinking all day on Sunday. She was very sorry she had got drunk.

The Clerk to prisoner: Are you prepared to pay a fine?

Prisoner's husband: I hope you will let us off as easily as you can, and it will never happen again.

Fined 5s. and 5s. 6d. costs for being drunk and riotous, or seven days hard labour, and 2s. 6d. and 3s. 6d. costs for using obscene language, or seven days hard labour, to commence at the expiration of the first term.

Prisoner was removed to the cells.

George Hall, husband of the last prisoner, was summoned on a charge of assaulting P.C. Keeler whilst in the execution of his duty on Sunday night.

P.C. Keeler deposed: I was employed in the execution of my duty in Radnor Street about half past ten o'clock on Sunday night, when defendant's wife came out of the Oddfellows Arms, and I was taking her into custody when defendant came up and asked me what I was going to do with his wife. I told him I was about my business and he had better not interfere with me in the execution of my duty. He said I should not interfere with his wife. I told him if he interfered I should take him into custody. He replied with an oath that it would take three or four like me to do that. His wife was lying on the ground at the time, and I was trying to get her up. Defendant then kicked me on my leg, and nearly threw me into the crowd. He followed me and P.C. Sharpe down Radnor Street when we took his wife away, who was using obscene language as we went along.

By defendant: I have no marks on my leg. You kicked me on my ankle.

Defendant: All the people said “Don't let him take your wife away”. If I kicked the policeman it was a mistake.

P.C. Sharpe corroborated.

Defendant: I tried to persuade my wife to come away.

The Clerk: Your wife is summoned to appear on Wednesday to answer two more charges of assault.

The Mayor said the police must be protected in the execution of their duty, and defendant must pay a fine of 5s. and 5s. 6d. costs, or go to gaol for seven days' hard labour.

Defendant was removed in custody.

Folkestone Express 12 October 1872.

Saturday, October 5th: Before J. Tolputt Esq., and Col. De Crespigny.

John Carter, Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, pleaded Guilty to a similar offence.

P.C. Hogben said he saw some soldiers in the house at twenty minutes to six on Sunday evening with pots and glasses before them. Defendant came downstairs and the soldiers went out. Defendant said he was not aware that he had to close until six.

Defendant said he was showing the men a catalogue of some things. He was certain that there were other houses open at the time.

Fined £1 and 9s. costs.

Folkestone Express 4 January 1873.

Wednesday, January 1st: Before The Mayor, Col. De Crespigny, J. Tolputt and J. Clarke Esqs.

Richard Spicer and Robert Weatherhead, fishermen, were summoned under the new Licensing Act for refusing to leave the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, when requested to do so on the 26th December.

Mr. Minter for complainant.

John Carter, landlord of the above-named inn, said Spicer came into his house between 7 and 8 o'clock on the evening of the 26th December, apparently having had a little drink. He went away and returned again about 11 o'clock very much the worse for drink; in fact he was tipsy. Weatherhead was with him. He called for a glass of beer, which he refused to serve him. Weatherhead was also the worse for drink. There was a party of men in the room who were enjoying themselves very quietly. Spicer and Weatherhead caused a disturbance in the house and caused a crowd to collect outside. His wife was kicked at and struck by someone. He ordered Spicer to leave the house and he refused to do so. There were 40 or 50 people collected outside the house.

By Spicer: You did not leave the house when you were requested to do so.

Mrs. Hannah Carter corroborated her husband's evidence, and said Spicer wanted to go into the room where there was a party of men, and she got in front of him for the purpose of stopping him, and he and Weatherhead tried to force their way into the room. She and her husband ordered them to leave the house, which they refused to do. She was struck on the breast and bruised by someone, but she could not say whom, and had to be attended by Mr. Eastes. A crowd collected inside and outside the house and broke up the party in the room. Spicer had come to the house at intervals for two years and had stood upon the doorstep for the purpose of annoying her.

By Spicer: I have shut the door in your face because the lodgers have been annoyed.

Spicer was told by the Clerk that under the new Act he could be sworn and give evidence on his own behalf if he chose. This Spicer declined to do.

In the case against Weatherhead Mrs. Carter said he went into the house with Spicer about 11 o'clock and called for a glass of beer, but as he was tipsy she refused to serve him. He kicked at her and began to use bad language, and offered to fight any three men in the house, and tried to get into the room to the customers. She stood in front of him to stop him. A crowd collected, and she was struck several times in the passage. She had not seen him in the house before that time.

By Weatherhead: You did not put your knee up to prevent your falling. You said before long you would have my nose off my face. There were not 14 or 15 men came out of the room drunk.

Mr. Carter confirmed what his wife had said and added that he had been compelled to apply to the police several times on account of defendant's conduct.

By defendant: You came in about 11 o'clock. My wife did not push you out of the door. You said you would not go out.

The defendant Weatherhead was sworn and he said he went to sea on the 26th December and came back at 5 o'clock in the afternoon, and afterwards went to the Pantomime at Sandgate, where he stayed until 10 o'clock, and he and another man had a quart of beer between them. He got home about half past 10, when Spicer asked him to go and have a glass of beer. They went into Carter's bar and Mrs. Carter put up her hands and pushed him out of the door, and if he had fallen he would have broken his neck. He did not kick at her and was quite sober, having only had one pint of beer in 24 hours. Carter refused to draw him a glass of beer. About 15 men came out of the tap room so drunk they could not speak. Someone knocked him down and kicked him under the chin. The landlord and landlady were drunk. P.C. Hills came and requested him to leave the house.

Mr. Minter contended that it was pretty evident from Weatherhead's own statement that defendants went to the house to make a row, and they had admitted that they had been requested to leave the house.

The Mayor said The Bench were of opinion that the case was proved against both defendants. Under the recent Act they had incurred a penalty of £5, but as it was the first case they would only be fined 10s. and 11s. costs each, or seven days in default.

The defendants paid the money. Weatherhead remarking that it was for keeping sober, which was no use doing.

Folkestone Express 18 January 1873.

Friday, January 17th: Before The Mayor, J. Kelcey and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

Matilda Batchelor, single woman, employed at the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, was charged with stealing a print dress, the property of Thomas Standing.

It appears that Mrs. Standing had hung a dress on a line in her back garden at Cheriton Road and missed it on Wednesday evening. Prisoner offered it in pledge at Mr. Joseph's and was handed over to the police.

Prisoner said the dress was given her by two men to pawn and she, having proved by two witnesses and alibi, was discharged with the caution not to be so accommodating in future or she might be charged with receiving stolen goods.

Folkestone Express 14 February 1874.

Monday, February 9th: Before The Mayor, J. Kelcey, J. Hoad and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

Catherine Wood, alias Kate Murray (23), whose career appears to be one of delinquency, having been three years in a reformatory, and against whom was registered some half-score convictions, was brought up on remand from Saturday, charged with stealing sundry books of the value of 1s. 6d., from the shop of Mr. Edward Dale, bookseller, Dover Street.

Annie Dale, prosecutor's daughter, deposed: I was in my father's shop on Wednesday afternoon, when prisoner came in and asked for a ticket for the Servants' Home. I told her to go to Mr. Birch's. She then left the shop and came back in a quarter of an hour and said she had been to Mr. Birch's and found she was too old to go into a Servants' Home. I then told her to go to Mr. Pope's and she went away. She had a bonnet or shawl on.

Prisoner to witness: I told you I could not find Mr. Birch's.

Elizabeth Dale, prosecutor's wife, deposed: Prisoner came to our shop on Wednesday evening between seven and eight o'clock, and said she wanted to get into the Servants' Home. I told her my husband had no means of getting her into such an institution and that it was of no use her calling again. She left the shop, and after she was gone I looked round and missed about a dozen “Churchman's Almanack” and “Dover and Deal Guide”s. The books now produced correspond with those I missed.

Hannah Carter, wife of John Carter, Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, said: Prisoner has lodged at my house. She came on Wednesday and called for a glass of beer and porter and paid a penny for it. She had a yellow covered book in her hand and asked if I liked reading, and I replied that I could not read and she then gave the book to my little girl. Prisoner went out after she had drank her beer. I gave the book to P.C. Keeler.

Harriett Hall, wife of William Hall, fishmonger, said: I saw prisoner come out of the fishmarket about half past three on Wednesday afternoon. She went through the arch in front of the Royal George, and was tossing up a number of books. She said “I am going to put these up for a pint of beer”. I said “You may as well give me one for my little girl”, and she gave me one and then went away.

Charlotte, wife of William Bourne, Hope, Fancy Street said prisoner came into her house in company with a tall man on Wednesday, and he paid for a pint of beer. Prisoner had several books in her hand and offered to give witness them, and as she said she did not want them, she gave her a “Churchman's Almanack”, and said if she kept the books she would only make away with them. Witness threw the book prisoner gave her on the tap room fire.

P.C. Keeler said: On Thursday morning, from information received, I went to the Oddfellows Arms and received the book I now produce from Mrs. Carter. I then went in search of prisoner and apprehended her in Tontine Street about noon. After being cautioned she said she was drunk and went into a shop, but she would not have done it if it had not been for a young man who was standing outside, and she gave him a portion of the books. She said she did not know his name, but they called him “Charlie”. Prisoner was searched by the female searcher, but nothing was found upon her. I have been to Dover and Hythe in search of the man, but could not find him.

Prisoner, after being duly cautioned, said: I came to Folkestone on Monday with a young man named Mackson, whose father keeps a farm. We went to the Dew Drop and got a bed there; we went into the tap room and had a pot of beer. I had just come out of prison and got a little beer, which upset me. If you will be so kind as to forgive me I will go into a Home: I could go in one today. I have lost my mother. I will go down on my hands and knees if you will forgive me. I don't want to go to prison again.

The Mayor said the Bench had no alternative but to commit prisoner for trial, and she was accordingly committed to the Quarter Sessions.

Folkestone Express 2 May 1874.

Quarter Sessions.

Tuesday, April 28th: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

Catherine Wood (22) was charged with stealing fourteen books, value of 1s. 4d., the property of Mr. Edward Dale, stationer, 1, Dover Street, on the 4th February. Mr. Minter for the prosecution.

Prisoner, on being called upon to plead, said she could not remember taking the books.

Mrs. Elizabeth Dale deposed: I am the wife of Edward Dale, carrying on business of stationer, 1, Dover Street. Prisoner came into the shop between seven and eight o'clock on the evening of Wednesday, 4th February last. She said she wanted to get into a servants' home. I told her Mr. Dale had no means of getting her into one, and it was no use her calling again. I missed some books after she was gone. I had a bundle of the “Dover and Deal Guide” on the counter between two and three o'clock. After she had gone I missed them. One contained “The Dover and Deal Guide”, and the other the “Churchman's Almanack”. The books now produced by P.C. Keeler correspond with those I lost.

By Prisoner: I did not see you take the books.

Annie Dale, ten years of age, deposed: On the 4th February I was in my father's shop in the afternoon between three and four o'clock . Prisoner came in and said she wanted to get into a home, and inquired if my father could get her in. I told her to go to Mr. Birch, the Relieving Officer. She then left and came back in about quarter of an hour, and said Mr. Birch could not get her into a home. I then told her to go to Mr. Pope's, Registry Office. She went away again. I was in the shop at half past seven, and heard mother tell her father had no means of getting her into a home.

By the Recorder: The books were on the counter, and prisoner stood near to them. I found her in the shop when I came downstairs. She was standing near the books.

Hannah Carter, Oddfellows Inn, Radnor Street, deposed: I have known prisoner some time. She came to my house on the 4th February between six and seven in the evening and asked for a glass of half-and-half. She had a book in her hand and asked if I would have the book. I said I could not read, and she gave me the book for my little girl. It had a yellow cover, and I believe it was a “Dover and Deal Guide”. I gave the book to P.C. Keeler on the following morning.

Harriett Hall deposed: I saw the prisoner on the 4th February between three and four o'clock. She came from the fish market, and had some books in her hand, which she was throwing up, and said “I am going to put them up for a pot of beer”. I said “You might as well give me one for my little boy”, and she did so. The book was put on the table by the side of my bed. P.C. Keeler came the next day and I gave the book to him, and at his request I put a mark upon it. The book now produced is the same.

Charlotte Bourne deposed: I live at the Hope, Fancy Street. I remember prisoner coming to my house on the 4th February about five o'clock, with a man. She had several books in her hand, and offered to give them to me, and she gave me a “Churchman's Almanack”, which I afterwards put in the fire.

P.C. Keeler deposed: On the 5th February I went to Mrs. Carter's house and received a “Dover and Deal Guide”. I also went to Mrs. Hall's and received a “Churchman's Almanack”, and requested Mrs. Hall to make a mark upon it, which she did. I then went in search of prisoner and found her in Tontine Street, and took her into custody on the charge of stealing a number of books from Mr. Dale's shop. She said she would not have “tooken” them if it had not been for a man who was standing outside. I asked her who he was, and she said “Charlie”, which was all the name she knew, and she had given a portion of the books to him. She said she had been in Mr. Dale's shop.

This was the case for the prosecution.

The statement made by prisoner when before the Magistrates was read, to which she now added: I had done a long sentence in prison, and I took a glass of beer or two, which one and another gave me, and it upset me. I came to Folkestone with the intention of seeing a Sister of Mercy, and have not the slightest memory of taking the books. A Sister of Mercy was going to put me in a home. My mother was killed, and my father ran away, and I have not a friend in the world. I had not broken my fast after coming out of gaol till I got to Folkestone.

In answer to the Recorder, Mrs. Dale said she did not think prisoner was tipsy when she was in the shop, but she smelt strongly of what she thought was rum; she seemed to know what she was about.

Prisoner: If you will be merciful to me I will never take another drop of beer as long as I live. It has been the ruin of me.

The learned Recorder summed up the case as favourably as he could for the prisoner and remarked that if she did not know what she was about when she took the books there was no offence, but there was great inconsistency in her statements. A second count charged her with having been convicted at the Dover Quarter Sessions of felony on the 27th December.

Prisoner pleaded Guilty to the former conviction.

Mr. Minter remarked that His Honour ought to know that there were no less than thirteen previous convictions against prisoner.

The Recorder said that from a document before him he saw that prisoner began her evil course when she was only fourteen years of age by stealing a silver spoon; after that there were convictions for being in workhouses for an unlawful purpose, assaulting a child, absconding from a reformatory, four times drunk and disorderly, stealing boots,, and breaking fourteen panes of glass in Dover gaol. She was really a habitual criminal.

Mr. Minter remarked that the Visiting Justices offered to get her into a Home, but she refused to go, and the chaplain of the prison offered to get her into a workhouse in order to see if that would do her any good.

Prisoner: Since the death of my mother my father ran away, and I have seven little brothers in the workhouse, and I did not want to go to see them there. Mrs. Smith wanted to get me in a Home, but Mrs. Quilter, the Matron of the gaol, told her an untruth that I used bad language when I was coming out of chapel. Mr. Simmons put me in a dark cell three days on bread and water. If you will be merciful I will leave England.

The Recorder: I really don't know what to do with such a habitual criminal. I have power to send you to penal servitude, but I will not go to that length. I cannot pass a less sentence than twelve months' hard labour.

Prisoner destroyed all faith of her professions of contrition and amendment by threatening Mr. Simmons as she was removed from the dock.

Folkestone Express 21 August 1875.

Monday, August 16th: Before The Mayor, J. Tolputt, T. Caister, and W.J. Jeffreason Esqs.

Peter Dorr, a member of the Royal Bavarian Band troupe, who has played a bass instrument in that band, was charged with stealing a gold watch and chain, pocket books, and £65 in Bank of England notes on the 14th inst.

The leader of the band, Moisenheimer, was put into the box by Superintendent Wilshere, when Mr. Minter, who appeared for the defence, said he had a right on behalf of the prisoner to ask who was the prosecutor in this case. He had looked on the charge sheet, but no name was mentioned as that of the prosecutor, and he was instructed that Herr Meisenheimer did not believe the prisoner took the property, and did not prosecute.

The witness said this was so. Superintendent Wilshere had asked him to prosecute, and he had declined.

Superintendent Wilshere said that the witness at first refused to prosecute, but eventually said he should not say any more against prisoner's apprehension, and he was accordingly apprehended.

After some further conversation the case proceeded.

Jacob Meisenheimer, who spoke English so imperfectly as to render it difficult for the Magistrates to comprehend the import of his evidence at all times, was then sworn, and said he was a musician and the manager of what was called the Bavarian Band. Prisoner was a musician in his employ and, with the other members of the Band, lodged with witness at the Oddfellows' Arms, in Radnor Street. Witness had a box in his bedroom there, containing some music, a watch, and two pocket books. One of the books contained some letters and Bank of England £5 and £10 notes, valued at £65. On Saturday morning witness missed the pocket books, which had been taken out of the box. Had seen the books on the previous day, as between eleven and twelve witness had put a letter for his wife in one of the books. Had kept the box unfastened, as he had gone to the box many times during the day. At five o'clock on Saturday morning he missed his coat and pocket handkerchief, and afterwards found his coat and waistcoat had disappeared. He made a communication to the landlord and the clothes were subsequently brought to him, having been found in the streets. After this the pocket books and other articles disappeared. A search was made, and £5 reward offered to anyone who should recover the property. Some time afterwards when all the party were in the sitting room the pocket books were put on the table by some person or other. The notes had been removed. The books produced were the same and were those he had lost. On Sunday at noon, Peter Moore, a boy in the band, brought the notes to witness in an envelope. Witness counted them and found they agreed in value with those he lost.

Cross-examined by Mr. Minter: Had known the prisoner six years and had trusted him with everything, and would do so again. Had not charged the prisoner with the theft, and did not believe that he stole the money. Did not give prisoner into custody. Ten or eleven men slept in the same room with prisoner, and had the same opportunity of getting to the box as he had.

The Mayor: I fear, Mr. Minter, there is a case of overcrowding there.

Cross-examination continued: I had offered a reward of £5 for the recovery of the notes, and prisoner looked for it as well as the others, and, I believe, searched the premises, as we thought someone might have hidden the property on them.

Harry Betts, costermonger, Radnor Street, said he was at work on Sunday at noon in his back yard, when he saw the prisoner standing on a wall in the yard of the Oddfellows Arms. He watched the prisoner and saw him put his hand in a hole in the wall, next the sailmakers' storehouse. The hole was such a one as would be made by taking out a brick. He stopped on the wall about five minutes, while witness spoke to him. About five minutes afterwards some man put his hand over the wall into the hole and directly afterwards the man sung out “Oh, I've found the money”. Witness could not say who this was, as only the arm of the man showed over the wall.

Cross-examined: I did not tell the police that the prisoner put the money into the hole. I did not at first point to another man in the band now in Court as the man that got on the wall, and I would not say so if I'm going to be hung for it next minute. (Laughter) I think it was my duty to watch the prisoner and speak about it afterwards when the money was hid on my premises. The hole was about six feet above the wall and nearly ten feet from the ground, but you could reach it easily by standing on some rubbish lying against.

The Mayor said the case appeared to be a very mysterious one, and the Bench felt they had not been able to get at the bottom of it. It was evident that the money had been stolen and that it was afterwards recovered. The prisoner must be discharged from custody as there was not sufficient evidence to convict him with the robbery.

Mr. Minter asked permission to say a few words to clear his client's character, as he had his living to get in the town and it was material that certain explanations should be made. The money had been stolen, and members of the band had pretty good suspicions of the manner in which it was taken, and by whom, but were convinced that the man recently a prisoner had no connection with the robbery. The facts were that they suspected some person of hiding the property in the neighbourhood in which it was eventually found. Had the Bench thought it necessary to hear witnesses for the defence, he should have called before them two persons who looked, just as the prisoner did, in this hole in the wall, but found nothing as they did not put their hands into it. He did so, and was at once accused of the robbery. So far was the first witness, the bandmaster, from thinking the prisoner guilty of the theft of the notes that he had authorised him (Mr. Minter) to say that he would receive him back again into his employment at once.

As the stolen property was being handed to Meisenheimer by the Magistrates' Clerk, the Mayor suggested to him that the Magistrates thought he ought, in justice to the late prisoner, if he knew who the thief was, to issue a summons against him.

Meisenheimer smiled, but declined to do so, and the Court, which had been crowded during the hearing of the case, was rapidly cleared.

Folkestone Express 30 October 1875.

Inquest.

About 3.30 a.m. on Saturday morning last the people dwelling in the neighbourhood of Radnor Street were awakened from their slumber by hearing loud cries for help. It afterwards turned out that a man named Alfred Harper, who was lodging at the Oddfellows Arms, was taken with a fit of delirium tremens, and after striking and threatening to kill a friend who was sitting up with him, jumped out of a window about twelve feet from the ground, and ran and threw himself over the quay close to the border of the South Eastern Railway Company's workshop, into the harbour. The man, who was a good swimmer, appears to have lost all power, and was drowned.

The inquest was held at the Packet Boat, Radnor Street, the same evening at six o'clock, before the Coroner, J. Minter Esq. and a jury.

The first witness called was John Malin, who described himself as a labourer, living with the deceased at the Oddfellows Arms: I have known the deceased, whose name is Alfred Harper, about six years. I identify the body as that of Alfred Harper. He is about forty years of age, and by trade a tin and wire worker, late of 1, Portland Court, King Street, Ramsgate. He has been in Folkestone about fourteen days, and lodged at the Oddfellows Arms, where he continued to reside until this morning.

The deceased has not tasted a drop of intoxicating liquor since last Monday (the 18th), but previous to that he had been drinking very heavily. He has not been out of bed since last Monday night (the 18th) except to have it made by me.

I was sitting up with deceased last night (Friday 22nd). I sleep in the same room and in an adjoining bed to the deceased. After I had been in bed a short time I asked the deceased (who was very restless) if I should light a candle, and he replied “Yes, Jack, light a candle and come and sit by me”. I did as he requested me, and about half an hour after he jumped out of bed and began grasping at something he imagined he saw on the wall, and said “I have got 'em. They have tried to kill me ever so many times”. I at last persuaded him to go to bed again. He was not in his senses. About 3.30 a.m. he got up and said “You still watch me”, and struck me in the face with his fist. After that he asked me to go out of the room. There was no-one else with him. After I left the room I stood and held the door, and then I suppose he jumped out of the window into Radnor Street. The room was on the first floor about twelve feet from the ground. I left the house after I had been holding the door about three minutes to go and seek assistance. I think he must have jumped out of the window while I was going downstairs.

Robert Smith, landlord of the Packet Boat, said: About half past three on Saturday morning I heard someone calling for help. I jumped out of bed and looked out of the window and saw a man lying face down and stark naked under my window. While I was dressing I saw him get up and run and then jump over the quay into the harbour. The tide was not quite high at the time. I finished dressing as quickly as possible and ran to the quay and saw the deceased floating head down in the water near the landing steps. I ran down and got him part of the way out of the water and called for assistance. My wife called my lodgers and all four came. We then got him to the top of the steps and rolled him. We afterwards brought him into the room and rolled him for one hour but without any success. There was about seven feet of water when he jumped in.

J. Malin, re-called, said: Soon after deceased struck me he pulled off his shirt and said “It is no use spoiling good things”, and told me to keep it in remembrance of him. I then said “You are worth twenty dead men yet”. Deceased had said he thought he was dying.

Dr. Mercer, a surgeon practicing at Folkestone, said: Last Thursday I was sent for to see the deceased. He was suffering from a slight attack of Elrysepsias in the face. I could see by the symptoms he had been drinking. I prescribed for him and sent some medicine.

On Saturday morning about three or four o'clock I was called and told the man at the Oddfellows was suffering from delirium. I gave them an ascetic for him.

About five I was again called and saw the deceased. I recognised him as the man I had been attending. He was suffering from delirium tremens, and in my opinion his death was caused by drowning. I examined the body and found bruises on the skull, face, and chest, but there was no fracture of the skull.

After a short consultation the jury gave a verdict of “drowned while in a state of temporary insanity”.

Folkestone Express 25 November 1876.

Wednesday, November 22nd: Before The Mayor, Alderman Caister and General Cannon.

Mrs. Hannah Carter, landlady of the Oddfellows Inn (sic), Radnor Street, was summoned for assaulting Thomas Cattermole, of Southend.

Mr. Minter appeared for the defence.

Thomas Cattermole deposed: I am a bathing machine proprietor and fisherman of Southend. On Friday last I walked from Deal to Folkestone, a distance of seventeen miles, to deliver some bills. I went into a public house near the fishmarket and called for a glass of ale. It was brought to me, and I paid for it. I then took out of my pocket a small loaf and cheese and commenced eating it. A girl came and told me I must not eat my bread and cheese there. That woman (defendant) then came in and called me some very abusive names. I went to the door, and she pushed me down some steps and then she slapped my face.

Cross-examined by Mr. Minter: I ordered a glass of beer. I think it was the servant who brought it to me. There were three other women cleaning the room at the time. Then I ate my bread and cheese. Mrs. Carter told me I had gone into the wrong room, and I refused to leave. I did not call her the most filthy names or strike her.

Mr. Minter then said the room was one which had been occupied by the German Band. They had hired it for the season. When Cattermole was asked to leave, he persisted in staying, and the defendant was therefore justified in putting her hands upon him and pushing him out. The language he used was most abominable.

He then called Martha Carter, who said: I was at the Oddfellows Arms, in the room that was occupied by the German Band, which they had hired for the season. They left on Tuesday. Four of us were in the room cleaning it. Mrs. Carter went to the prosecutor and said “Excuse me, sir, would you mind walking into one of the public rooms as we are busy cleaning this, and it is private?” He replied that he would sit there as long as he liked, and my sister said she would not allow him to. My sister was in the bar parlour. He then got up and went towards the door. He said “I am going now” and my sister replied “Very well, thank you”. He then said he should not go and tried to aggravate her. He then pushed her and she put her hand up and knocked his hat off.

The Bench, after deliberating a few minutes, dismissed the case.

Folkestone Express 4 May 1878.

Wednesday, May 1st: Before J. Kelcey and R.W. Boarer Esqs., and Captain Crowe.

George Godden was summoned for assaulting Hannah Carter on the 27th inst. He pleaded Not Guilty.

Hannah Carter said that she lived at the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street. The defendant went to her house on Saturday afternoon about six o'clock. He put his hand on her head, and afterwards put the dog on the table, and when remonstrated with used foul language. She told him if he could not use better language he would have to leave the house. He said that she could not put him out, and as she was going to the door to get someone to do so, the defendant took hold of her and threw her down in the street and kicked her.

Eliza Emery, a soldier's wife lodging at the Oddfellows Arms, corroborated, and the Bench fined the defendant £1 and 10s. costs, or in default one month's hard labour. The defendant had been convicted five times previously for assaults.

Gilderoy Scamp was summoned for damaging a clothes line, the property of Mrs. Carter, on the 29th April. The defendant pleaded Not Guilty.

Mrs. Carter said that she had been in the habit of drying clothes on the East Cliff bank, and on Monday morning she found that her line had been cut. She did not see the defendant do it, and had no witnesses to prove that he had done it.

The Bench therefore dismissed the case.

Folkestone Express 10 May 1879.

Monday, May 5th: Before Alderman Caister and W.J. Jeffreason Esq.

Mary Jane Philpot, wife of David Philpot, was charged with being drunk and disorderly in Stade Street on the 3rd inst.

John Carter, landlord of the Oddfellows Inn (sic), Radnor Street, said the prisoner went to his house about nine o'clock in the evening with her sister in law. They went away and returned a little before eleven. Prisoner was not sober then, and as he saw a window had been broken he ordered her out.

P.C. Bashford said the prisoner and her husband were quarrelling and fighting in the street. Twice he persuaded her to go indoors, but she came out a third time. Her husband wished him to take her into custody, and swore at him for not doing so. As she was extremely boisterous he took her into custody, but she resisted, and he had to obtain the assistance of two men to take her to the station.

P.C. Willis said he saw the prisoner and her husband fighting in front of the bar at the Oddfellows. The landlord and his wife pushed her out.

Prisoner said she was irritated by the conduct of her husband, and that the public houses ought to be more closely watched. She had a black eye, which she accused the constable of causing, and also charged him with tearing her clothes.

The Bench inflicted a fine of 10s., and 6s. 6d. costs, which she paid.

Folkestone Express 26 July 1879.

Saturday, July 19th: Before The Mayor, General Armstrong, Captain Crowe, Alderman Hoad, J. Fitness and M. Bell Esqs.

Anthony Wold, a fisherman, was summoned for assaulting Mrs. Hannah Carter, wife of John Carter, landlord of the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, on the 14th July. Mr. Minter appeared in support of the complaint.

John Carter stated that the defendant had been in the habit of frequenting his house for four or five years. On the day in question he went in and made use of the expression that he “meant for a row”. Witness and his wife tried to quiet him, when defendant struck his wife. In consequence of the disturbance he sent for a policeman, and Sergeant Ovenden came and turned him out. Defendant and a man named William Cornish had been in his house every night since trying to make a row. His wife's shoulder was still discoloured by the blow.

Hannah Carter, the complainant, said defendant was very violent and tried to strike her husband. He struck her on the right shoulder while she was standing in the bar. Defendant had no right to enter the bar. Her husband ordered the men out of the house, and they immediately jumped up to strike him. Defendant had been in the house twice since the occurrence but she refused to draw him anything.

Defendant denied the assault and called Elizabeth Johnson, who said she saw the two men go into the house. Defendant called for a pint of beer, and Mrs. Carter brought it. He complained that it was thick. Upon that Mrs. Carter at once walked into the public room and struck defendant in the face twice, and repeatedly taunted him to strike her in return, but he replied that he was not such a coward as to strike a woman.

In reply to Mr. Minter, this witness said she went to get her supper beer. She went to the bar, but hearing a disturbance she went into the room where the men were. Mrs. Carter broke the window with her elbow in trying to put defendant out. Neither of the men were violent, and Mr. and Mrs. Carter caused all the noise by shouting. She knew the defendant by sight, and he had asked her to give evidence.

William Cornish gave similar testimony.

Mrs. Carter was then re-called, and said that the young woman Johnson had kept company with the defendant for three years. She positively denied going into the room or serving the men with beer. Her husband drew it for them.

The Bench considered the assault proved, and inflicted a fine of 10s. and 12s. costs, or fourteen days' imprisonment.

William Cornish, another fisherman, was then charged with refusing to quit the Oddfellows Arms on the same day.

John Carter said the defendant was in his house on Monday. He had for some time been to sea in complainant's boat. Complainant mentioned that a line had been lost out of the boat, and defendant immediately jumped up and said he didn't steal it. Then he complained about the beer, and he and the last defendant used violent and threatening language. Witness requested him to leave the house. During the disturbance a window was broken.

Sergeant Ovenden said he was in Radnor Street and saw a crowd outside complainant's house and heard shouting. He went inside, and complainant asked him to eject defendant. He told him to leave and he did so. Witness saw no disorderly conduct. It was eleven o'clock, and witness cleared the house.

Defendant was fined 5s. and 10s. costs, or a week's hard labour. The fines were immediately paid in both cases.

Folkestone Express 13 December 1879.

Monday, December 8th: Before The Mayor, R.W. Boarer, M. Bell and J. Banks Esqs, Captain Fletcher and Alderman Hoad.

Hannah Hurst, a street Hawker, pleaded Guilty to being drunk in Radnor Street, and also to refusing to quit the Oddfellows Arms.

Hannah Carter, wife of the landlord of the Oddfellows Arms, said prisoner had lodged at their house for three nights. On Sunday evening she went in drunk and wanted some more beer, which was refused her, and she became very violent. P.C. Gardner took the prisoner into custody.

Prisoner was fined 5s. and 2s, 6d. costs in each case, or 14 days' in default.

Folkestone Express 13 March 1880.

Saturday, March 6th: Before The Mayor, R.W. Boarer, Captain Fletcher, and Aldermen Banks and Hoad.

Hannah Carter, wife of the landlord of the Oddfellows, Radnor Street, was summoned for having assaulted Sarah Baker on the 3rd March.

Complainant, who is sister to defendant's husband, said her brother sent for her on Wednesday afternoon between one and two, in order to settle a dispute between him and his wife as to whether he was in complainant's house on the previous night. When she said her brother had not been in her house for weeks, the defendant boxed her ears and knocked her head against the bar. She gave defendant no provocation.

Martha Carter, sister-in-law to both parties, said she was going past the defendant's house and saw her take complainant by the hair and throw her against the partition. Witness went in and assisted complainant to get away, and defendant used abusive language towards her.

Jane May, who lives opposite to the defendant's house, said she saw Mrs. Baker go in on Wednesday, and saw defendant strike her and push her out of the house.

Dora Zuschlag gave corroborative evidence, and the Bench fined the defendant 5s. with 12s. costs, or 14 days' imprisonment in default.

Folkestone Express 8 May 1880.

Thursday, May 6th: Before Colonel De Crespigny. General Cannon, W.J. Jeffreason Esq., and Alderman Sherwood.

John Knight was charged with obtaining two pairs of boots by false pretences from Mary Saunders, of Dover Road, on the 4th May.

Mary Saunders said she was the wife of Stephen Saunders, a boot and shoe maker, of 150, Dover Road. The prisoner went to their shop on the 4th May at ten o'clock in the morning, and asked for a pair of boots for his landlady. He said he had seen witness's husband and spoken to him about it the day before. He brought an old shoe to show the size he wanted. He said he wanted to get 3d. out of them. She showed him a pair which were 3s. 3d., and she marked them 3s. 6d., and also another pair, which she marked 5s. 9d. Prisoner took them away and promised to return with them in half an hour.

Stephen Saunders said the prisoner had worked for him for about a month. He saw him on the 3rd of May, but he said nothing about any boots.

Hannah Carter, wife of the landlord of the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, said the prisoner offered her two pairs of women's boots which he said he had for sale. She refused to buy them. He mentioned a price, but she could not remember what it was. The boots he showed her were similar to those produced, and she told him she did not wear “pegged bottoms”.

Jane Hughes said she kept a second hand bootshop in South Street. On Tuesday between eleven and twelve o'clock the prisoner went to her shop and took the two pairs of boots produced, which he asked her to buy. He said he was sent by another person to sell them. He said, in reply to a question, they were “all right”. He asked 5s. for the two pairs, and she gave him 4s. 6d. She knew the prisoner: he had worked for her some years ago and had frequently applied to her for work lately.

Prisoner, who had nothing to say, was committed for trial at the Quarter Sessions.

Folkestone Express 2 October 1880.

Wednesday, September 29th: Before The Mayor, General Cannon, Alderman Caister, M.J. Bell and W.J. Jeffreason Esqs.

Emma Barnes and John Newman were charged with stealing a pair of boots, value 21s., the property of Thomas Huntley.

John Carter, landlord of the Oddfellows Arms, said the prisoners went to his house on Tuesday evening about half past seven. They went into the bar, and Newman asked witness if he would buy the boots which he had on his feet. He saw that they were quite a new pair, and had only been worn a few minutes. He refused to buy them, and Newman put on the boot he had taken off. P.C. Gardner visited the house a little after eight and made some enquiries. Witness pointed out the prisoners to the constable, who took them into custody.

P.C. Gardner said from information he received he went to the Oddfellows Arms about a quarter past eight on Tuesday evening. The prisoners were pointed out to him by Carter. He asked the man if he had offered a pair of boots for sale, and he said “No”. Witness took him into custody and handed him over to P.C. Smith. Subsequently he found the woman in the kitchen at the Oddfellows Arms with a pair of boots in her lap. He charged her with stealing the boots and took her into custody. She said an officer from the Camp gave them to her husband.

George Huntley, assistant to his father, William Huntley, bootseller, of South Street, said he missed a pair of boots from the counter about a quarter past six on Tuesday evening and gave information to the police.

Both prisoners elected to be tried by the Magistrates and Newman pleaded Guilty. The woman said she knew nothing of the matter.

Newman was sentenced to one month's hard labour, and Emma Barnes was discharged.

Folkestone Express 16 October 1880.

Wednesday, October 13th: Before The Mayor, Aldermen Banks and Hoad, R.W. Boarer and M.J. Bell Esqs.

John Carter, landlord of the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, was summoned for assaulting Ellen Oram on the 8th October.

Complainant, who said she was a laundress, stated that she lodged on the 8th October at the house of defendant. She went to bed at a quarter to twelve o'clock. The room in which she slept was at the end of a passage, and there was no door to it. There was a bed in the passage, in which two men were sleeping, and she had to pass them to get to her room. Before she got into bed, and while she was undressed, defendant went to her room with nothing on but his shirt, and swore at her because she had not put out the light. He pulled the bed clothes down and fell upon her. She screamed, and to quiet her defendant put his hand over her mouth. In self defence she bit his finger. He had put the candle out by kicking it with his naked foot. He then went downstairs and returned with his wife, and another light, and again tried to drag her out of bed. Defendant sent for a policeman and gave her in charge for biting his finger. On the way to the Station they met the Superintendent, who enquired what was the matter, and on being told he ordered Carter to be fetched. When he arrived the Superintendent told him he had delirium tremens and told witness to go about her business. She requested the police to protect her for the night, and she was lodged in the tramp wards.

In cross-examination by Mr. Minter, who defended, prosecutrix said Carter attempted to outrage her, and she told the policeman so on the way to the station. She also said that the two men could have seen her undressing if they had been awake.

She called as a witness Henry Newman, an engine fitter, lodging at the Oddfellows Arms, who was one of the men sleeping in a bed on the landing. He said he saw all that took place. The defendant's son went and told complainant to put her light out. She said she would when she got into bed. The boy waited in the passage nearly five minutes for her to put the light out, and then told her a second time. She then used filthy language, and the boy fetched his father, who came up with his drawers and shirt on. Carter called to her to put the candle out and she would not. He then ordered her to get up and leave the house, which she refused to do, and he then took hold of her to make her get up, and in the scuffle the light went out. Carter went downstairs and returned with another light, and his wife also came. He had then got his trousers on. He again told her to get up, and she still refused, and used foul language. A policeman was sent for, and complainant was taken into custody.

The Bench refused to hear any more evidence and dismissed the case, as they discredited the complainant's statements. Superintendent Rutter also added that her account of what took place at the Police Station was false.

Folkestone Express 18 December 1880.

County Court:

Saturday, December 11th: Before G. Russell Esq.

Falkner v Carter: This was an action to recover a chestnut baking tin. Plaintiff had left it in charge of the landlady of the Bricklayers' Arms Inn, of whom the defendant obtained it. The chattel was produced in Court, and appeared to be of the very smallest value. Defendant is landlord of the Oddfellows Inn (sic), and he contended that the tin belonged to plaintiff's father, who had stayed at his house for years, and died recently, and that plaintiff took it away surreptitiously. Defendant, however, failed to show that he had the slightest claim to it, and His Honour ordered him to pay 1s. damages, and the costs, and directed plaintiff to take the tin away with him.

Monday, December 13th: Before The Mayor, W.J. Jeffreason and J. Holden Esqs., and Aldermen Sherwood and Caister.

William Joyce was charged with stealing 2s. 5d., the money of John Morgan, and also with an assault on the prosecutor.

John Morgan, who described himself as a cleaner of gold lace for the officers at Shorncliffe Camp, and sharpener of razors &c. for the soldiers, stated that he lodged at the Oddfellows Inn, Radnor Street. On Saturday nigh he slept with his wife in a bedroom on the third floor. There was another bed in the room, which was occupied by the prisoner and his wife. They went to bed about closing time. Witness had placed his clothes on a chair standing between the two beds. When he had been in bed about an hour he thought he heard his clothes slip off the chair. He got out of bed and felt in his trousers pocket for his money (10d.) which he knew was there when he went to bed. He got a light, and asked his wife if she had taken his money. She said she had not, and then got out of bed and looked in her pocket. She found her money gone also. She had 1s. 7d. Prosecutor then accused the prisoner of taking it. Prisoner's wife said to him “Get out and give it to him”. He immediately got up, and seizing hold of a chamber pot, struck him on the back of his head with it, cutting his head open. Prosecutor called out for the landlord, who told him to wait while he fetched a policeman, who came, and prisoner was given in charge.

Caroline Morgan, wife of prosecutor, corroborated her husband's statements.

P.C. Scott said he was called to the Oddfellows Arms about half past three on Sunday morning. He saw the prosecutor on the stairs. He was covered with blood. He told witness he had been robbed and violently assaulted by the prisoner, whom witness found lying in bed. Prosecutor gave him into custody. Prisoner made no reply, and they went together to the police station. On searching the prisoner, he found on him a shilling, four sixpences and a threepenny piece in silver, and 18¾ d. in bronze.

Prisoner elected to be tried by the Magistrates, and made a long statement in his defence. He denied having stolen the money, and the version he gave of the affair was that the prosecutor, after accusing him of the theft, made a furious attack upon him. He therefore got out of bed, and bending down, ran head foremost against the prosecutor, knocking him down, and he must have struck his head against a chair or something else, and so received the wound. He produced several documents, including his indentures as an apprentice on a ship of a thousand tons, and also his discharge with a certificate of good conduct as a second officer in 1874.

The Bench considered the prisoner to be Guilty, and sentenced him to a month's imprisonment with hard labour for each offence.

Folkestone Express 30 July 1881.

Wednesday, July 27th: Before The Mayor, General Cannon, Alderman Caister and J. Fitness Esq.

William Davis was charged with stealing a concertina, value 7s. 6d., on the previous day.

George Heatcote, a boiler maker, lodging at the Oddfellows Arms, said he was in the Royal George on the previous afternoon playing a concertina, and left about seven o'clock, leaving the concertina there. When he returned a few minutes afterwards the instrument was gone. He gave information to the police, and subsequently saw the prisoner at the Radnor lodging house, with the concertina in his possession.

P.C. Hogben said he received information from prosecutor that he had lost a concertina. He went to the common lodging house, and there found prisoner in the kitchen playing a concertina. He asked prisoner to let him look at it, and prisoner said it belonged to one of his mates. Witness took the concertina and showed it to prosecutor, who identified it as his property. Prosecutor went with witness to the kitchen and gave prisoner into custody. Prisoner was very violent and used beastly language all the way up the street.

Prosecutor, in reply to the clerk, said he had not known prisoner previous to Monday. They had been in company together on that day.

Prisoner said he took the concertina to his lodging, thinking prosecutor would go there for it. He had no intention of stealing it.

The Bench did not consider there was any felonious intention and dismissed the prisoner.

Folkestone Express 14 January 1882.

Local News.

An alarm of a fire was given at the Oddfellows Arms on Wednesday. Some members of the fire brigade with a hose were quickly in attendance, and the fire, which originated in a chimney, was extinguished without much difficulty. Very little damage was done.

Folkestone Express 7 April 1883.

Thursday, May 5th: Before The Mayor, Colonel De Crespigny, and J. Fitness Esq.

Henry Elliott was charged with stealing a clarionet, value 25s., the property of Jacob Redenbach.

Prosecutor said he left the instrument on the table at the Oddfellows, Radnor Street, and subsequently missed it.

Henry Seaton, a painter, lodging at the Oddfellows Arms, said he was in the kitchen on Wednesday about four o'clock, and saw the prosecutor place his clarionet on the table. He saw the prisoner take it in his hand. A man told him not to meddle with other people's property. Prisoner took it up, and putting it under his coat left the house. He was absent about half an hour and then returned to the kitchen, but did not bring the clarionet with him.

William Revell gave similar evidence.

The prisoner pleaded Guilty.

Superintendent Taylor said it was a very hard case for the prosecutor, who was a member of a band, and had lost his means of livelihood. The prisoner had refused to give information where the instrument was to be found.

The Bench adjourned the case for half an hour in order that the prisoner might, if he would, go with a policeman to the spot where he had disposed of it. It was found secreted in a hedge in the Tram Road.

Prisoner was sentenced to one month's hard labour.

Folkestone Express 30 May 1885.

Inquest.

An inquest was held at the Town Hall on Tuesday evening before J. Minter Esq., the Borough Coroner, on the body of a newly born child, which was found under the circumstances detailed in the following evidence.

Edward Jordan, a labourer, living at the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, said on Sunday, shortly after noon, he was walking along the Lower Sandgate Road, and saw a brown paper parcel lying in a little shrubbery close to the footpath. He tore the paper with his stick, and saw that it contained the body of a child. He returned to Folkestone and gave information to Police constable Swift, who went back with him to the spot where the body was lying, and removed it in a towel.

Police constable Swift said he went with the last witness to the Lower Sandgate Road and saw the parcel lying in a shrubbery. He took possession of it, and carried it to the police station. On examining it, he found that it contained the body of a female child. It was quite naked, with the exception of the covering of paper, and there were no marks on it to lead to the identification of the person who placed it there. It had been raining, and the brown paper was saturated with water.

Mr. E.C. Maynard, M.R.C.S., said he saw the body which the jury had viewed on Sunday, and made an external examination. There were no marks of violence, and no discolouration. The child had not been properly attended to at it's birth. On Monday he made a post mortem examination, and from that examination he had no doubt that the child had never breathed, but was still-born.

The jury therefore returned a verdict that the child was Found Dead.

Folkestone Express 29 May 1886.

Tuesday, May 25th: Before Dr. Bateman, Alderman Caister, J. Holden and J. Fitness Esqs.

James Leon and Thomas Leon were charged with stealing one bowl, containing 15s., the property of William Hearnden, landlord of the Oddfellows in Radnor Street. The prisoners lodged there, and on the previous morning they both kept asking him to trust them with beer. They were in the taproom which was close to the bar. He watched the prisoners and saw them go to the closet and come out, and afterwards he noticed the bowl in the closet. The money was all in silver.

Susannah Hearnden, wife of the prosecutor, said she went to the bowl on the morning in question between 9 and 10, and there was between 9s. and 15s. in silver in it. She went out a few minutes and when she returned she went to the drawer again and missed the bowl and the money.

Elizabet Macpherson, barmaid at the Royal George Hotel, recognised both the prisoners, who went to their bar between 10 and 11 o'clock that morning. She served them with beer and rum, for which the prisoner Leon paid each time with a sixpence.

Sergeant Butcher proved apprehending the prisoners. He found them lying on the embankment near the Junction Station at 12.45. He awoke them and found they were both very drunk. With assistance he took them to the police station. He searched the prisoners and found 4d. on Leon and 1s. 2d. on the other prisoner.

The prisoners were sentenced each to six weeks' hard labour.

Folkestone Express 27 August 1887.

Saturday, August 20th: Before Alderman Banks and J. Holden Esq.

William Harnett (sic) pleaded Guilty to a charge of having his house open during prohibited hours.

P.C. Lilley said on Sunday morning at 5.20 h saw the door of the house (the Oddfellows in Radnor Street) open and three men in the bar drinking.

Albert Watts, George Waterman and ---- Standing were charged with being on licensed premises on Sunday morning. The defendants were the three men who were seen in the Oddfellows by the police in the previous case.

The Bench fined the two first defendants 1s. and 8s. costs, and Standing, who did not appear, 10s. and 8s. costs.

Folkestone Express 17 December 1887.

Wednesday, December 14th: Before Capt. Carter, J. Hoad, J. Fitness and E.R. Ward Esqs.

The licence of the Oddfellows, Radnor Street, was transferred to Mr. George Hoare.

Folkestone Express 4 May 1889.

Saturday, April 27th: Before W. Wightwick and J. Fitness Esqs.

Jane May was summoned for assaulting Lucy Carter on the 18th April. In answer to the charge she said “I struck her, but she gave me provocation for doing it”.

Complainant said she lived at the Oddfellows. On the 18th April she saw Mrs. May at her door, and asked her if she knew anybody who had drawn the staples out of the wall, which her husband had “druv” in, after he had asked Mr. Franks, the landlord, if he could do it. Without anything further the defendant rushed at her and struck her.

Mr. Bradley: Where did she strike you? – In my own house.

But where – in what part of your body? – Oh, here. I saw her again between five and six, and she struck me again.

Mr. Fitness: You are muddling things up. Where did she strike you the second tome? – In my bar, sir. (Laughter)

But on what part did she strike you? – Oh, here (Pointing)

Who was there when she struck you? – My servant, and likewise Mr. Punnett. At five o'clock in the afternoon she struck me again.

Where did she strike you? – She struck me just leading up to the passage. (Laughter)

Yes, but what part of your body? – Oh, in my face.

Mr. Wightwick: What did she strike you with? – Her double fists.

Defendant: Have I ever been in your house? – Yes. Once you struck me in my house.

Defendant: You are a false speaking woman. I never keep such company as you.

George Punnett, of 23, Radnor Street, said he saw Mrs. May strike Mrs. Carter, who fell on her hands.

Defendant: You are a false speaking man.

Witness said the defendant dragged the complainant up a passage, punching her all the way.

Alice Bowden, servant to Mrs. Carter, said she saw Mrs. May strike her mistress “in her doorway”.

Mr. Bradley: On what part of her body? – On her back.

The parties then changed places, there being a cross-summons.

Mrs. May deposed that on Thursday afternoon she went out to see if her clothes were dry, and Mrs. Carter assaulted her out in the backway. She accused her of pulling the nail out of the wall, which she had “druv” in. She told Mrs. Carter she had never seen the nail. She did not use and abuse to Mrs. Carter, but Mrs. Carter abused her “with all the beastly conversations in the world”. She called her a “lying ----“ and a “b---- horse marine”. They were not a quarter of the beastly words she used. She flew at Mrs. Carter because she made up to her with a handful of pegs. While she was hitting Mrs. Carter, her husband came out. Mrs. Carter drew a knife across her fingers. Witness's husband parted them. She had lived next door to Mrs. Carter for five years. Before Mrs. Carter came they were all very comfortable.

Mr. Bradley: Did you strike Mrs. Carter? – Yes.

Where? – On the backway. (Laughter)

But where on her body? – On her face. She never fell or went backwards, or anything of that. I struck her two or three times.

Why did you strike her? – Because she abused me, and made at me with the pegs.

Mrs. Carter: You tucked up your sleeves. – They were already tucked up. I was washing.

Richard Kennett, market inspector, said he saw the two women quarrelling about half past two in the afternoon. They appeared to be quarrelling about a clothes line, but he did not know who commenced it. He heard Mrs. Carter call Mrs. May “a b---- horse marine”; what was the meaning of that he couldn't say. (A voice, sotto voce: Of course not). About five o'clock he was in the market washing down, and saw Mrs. Carter strike at Mrs. May. She had pegs in her hand, but whether she hit Mrs. May or not he could not say. Mrs. May took her clothes down and went indoors.

Mrs. May said the conduct of Mrs. Carter, and her language, was disgraceful – not fit for little children to hear.

The Bench said it appeared to be “six of one and half a dozen of the other”. They did not think that sort of thing should go on. So far as the actual assault was concerned, the parties seemed both to blame, and they would dismiss both summonses, and each would have to pay her own costs (7s). They would also be bound over to keep the peace for three months.

Mr. Bradley, addressing Mrs. Carter, said he was afraid to say how many times he had seen her either as complainant or defendant during the last 25 years.

Wednesday, August 14th: Before Captain Crowe, Alderman Banks, J. Brooke and H.W. Poole Esqs.
John Edwards and Charles Williams were charged with stealing two watches and several rings, value £27, the property of Edward Moat.

Prosecutor, a watchmaker, carrying on business at 146, Dover Road, said the younger prisoner, Edwards, went to his shop on Tuesday morning, about half past nine, and offered some wire bill files for sale. He told prisoner he did not want them, and he left the shop. Shortly afterwards he called again. Witness was in the room at the back of the shop. In the window of the shop, which was enclosed, there was a tray. The glass doors were fastened, but not locked. The tray contained watches and jewellery. At half past eight the trays and contents were all right. Among other articles there was a gold hunter watch, No. 704, and a gold Geneva watch 460052. On another tray there were 22 rings, all gold. About five minutes past ten he noticed that the trays had been interfered with. He missed first 10 rings, and afterwards the two watches. There were nine keeper rings and one gem ring. He gave information to the police. Anyone standing on the public side of the counter could open the glass doors of the window. The prisoner Edwards went into the shop twice on the previous day. One watch was worth £17 17s., and the other £2. The rings were worth £8 1s. 6d. The gem ring had not been recovered.

Sergt. Harman said he received information about eleven o'clock on Tuesday of the robbery, and went in pursuit of the prisoner Edwards, and found him at half past twelve, sitting in the kitchen of the Oddfellows lodging house, Radnor Street. He said “There has been a robbery of jewellery this morning in Dover Road”. He cautioned him that what he said would be used in evidence against him, and asked him if he had been out selling any wires that morning. He said “No, only out in the market a little way”. He asked if he had any wire bill files for sale, and he said “No”. He saw a number of wires in a corner of the kitchen, and prisoner admitted that they were his. He then charged him on suspicion of stealing jewellery and took him to the station. When searched in the kitchen nothing relating to the charge was found on him, nor was there anything in his bedding. On the way to the station they met the prisoner Williams. They poke to one another, but witness stopped them. He could not catch what Edwards said, but from information afterwards received he took Edwards back to the lodging house, and was shown by a woman a bag hanging in the kitchen. He asked Edwards if it was his bag, and he said it was. On opening it he found eight gold keepers and two watches rolled up in a handkerchief. He charged Edwards with stealing the property. He made no reply. At two o'clock he went again to the Oddfellows and saw the prisoner Williams, cautioned him, and asked him if the boy Edwards had given him any rings to sell that morning. Williams said “No”, nor had he seen any in his possession. He then took Williams into custody while further enquiries were made. On the way to the station he said “I may as well tell you, Sergeant, all about it. I didn't like to do it before my wife. That lad this morning gave me a ring to sell. I have let a bandsman of Mr. Sanger's circus have it on approbation. If it suits him he is going to pay me for it at five o'clock this evening. I'll point the man out to you if you like to let me”. Witness declined to do so, and charged him with being concerned with Edwards in stealing the jewellery that morning. He replied “It is very hard that I and my wife and family should suffer for him. I'll show you the man I gave the ring to”. Witness went in search of the bandsman, and found him, and received from him the ring produced. Prisoners were afterwards charged together by Supt. Taylor. Edwards made no reply. Williams repeated his statement. Witness understood Williams to say they were lodging together at Dover the previous night. The gem ring had not been recovered.

Elizabeth Braden, servant at the Oddfellows, said Williams went there to lodge with his wife and children on Monday. Edwards went in afterwards. She had not seen them in company. Williams asked the boy to have a cup of tea. After breakfast she saw them talking together in the yard, in a low tone. The bag produced she found hanging in the kitchen. She understood it belonged to the younger prisoner, and she took it to Mr. Carter, the landlord.

Witness said, in reply to Williams, that she knew him in Brighton, when he lived in a furnished room at his aunt's.

George Murray, a member of Mr. Sanger's band, said he recognised the prisoners. He saw them on Tuesday morning, between ten and eleven, at the Oddfellows Arms. Williams asked him if he would buy a ring for 6s. About a quarter of an hour after the lad Edwards went in, and Williams went to him, and then returned with the ring produced. Williams said it was all right – it was “a find”. Witness took the ring and wore it during the day, until the police sergeant went for it. At the kitchen door Williams said the ring belonged to Edwards, who was the finder.

Robert Carter, landlord of the Oddfellows Arms, said the bag produced was taken to him by his servant, and he found in it the watches and rings produced tied up in a silk handkerchief.

Edwards pleaded Guilty, and Williams Not Guilty. Edwards said he was 17 years of age, was a wireworker, and came from Birkenhead. His father was dead, and his mother had been living with another man for five years. He was sentenced to three calendar months' hard labour.

The Bench considered there was not sufficient evidence to warrant them in committing Williams for trial.

Folkestone Express 3 January 1891.

Wednesday, December 31st: Before The Mayor, J. Fitness Esq., and Alderman Pledge.

Thomas Marwick, summoned for being drunk, did not appear. Sergeant Harman said the defendant was a fisherman, and was probably at sea. He belonged to Brighton.

P.C. Stannage said on Wednesday he saw the defendant lying outside the Oddfellows, in Radnor Street, helplessly drunk. He and Boat Inspector Brice tried to stand him up, but he was too drunk to stand. They therefore took him to the police station and detained him.

The Magistrates desired to be informed where the man got the drink, and Brice said he saw him nearly drunk the first thing in the morning. He had probably been drinking all the day.

Fined 5s. and 9s. costs, or 14 days'.

Folkestone Express 10 January 1891.

Saturday, January 3rd: Before The Mayor, Alderman Pledge, J. Holden, J. Fitness and S. Penfold Esqs.

William S. Frodsham was summoned for assaulting George Carter on the 27th December. He pleaded Guilty, but said he had cause for doing it.

Complainant, a fisherman, of 9, Dover Street, said on Saturday he was in the Oddfellows, in Radnor Street, about half past three, talking with four other men. Defendant was there, but they were not talking to him, but he “up fist” and said “I'll give the ---- something”, and struck witness in the eye. He was not drunk, but he was “a little merry, as he would be Christmas time”. (Laughter)

Defendant said they were in the Oddfellows Arms. His missus went for him, and said “Bill, I want to speak to you”. While they were talking, Carter went in front of him, and taking a quart pot and a glass off the counter, asked his missus to drink. She replied that she drank with no man. Carter laughed at her, and he (defendant) lost his temper and struck him.

Defendant was fined 1s. and 9s. costs. He paid 5s. and was allowed a week to pay the balance.

Folkestone Express 17 January 1891.

County Court.

Tuesday, January 13th: Before Judge Selfe.

Lewis, Hyland and Goble v Robert Carter: Claim £1 0s. 9d. Defendant is a publican and a boatowner. His Honour asked if the Oddfellows was a house of entertainment of a high class. (Laughter) Committed for 14 days. Order suspended for 14 days.

John Francis v Robert Carter: Claim £1 10s. 6d. Fresh order 10s. a month.

Folkestone Express 4 April 1891.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Folkestone Express 23 May 1891.

Thursday, May 21st: Before The Mayor and J. Fitness Esq.

Wm. Marshall and Alfred Madden were charged with breaking a square of glass at the Oddfellows Inn (sic) on Wednesday, and further with being absentees from the Royal Marines, at Deal.

Mrs. Carter said on Wednesday night, about 20 minutes to 12, the inmates were having their supper. The house was closed. They heard a knocking at the side door, and asked who it was. A voice replied “We want a bed”. She told him she had no bed to let, and then the voice said “Let's have a drink”. She told him the house was closed. The man then made use of a bad expression, and directly after she heard a window broken. She was looking through the window, and saw Marshall put a stick under his arm. The value of the window which was broken was 15s. She sent the servant for a policeman. She did not see or hear the other man, but knew there were others in uniform. P.C. Lawrence brought the man back to the house.

Josephine Driscoll, servant to Mrs. Carter, said she saw four men outside, and heard Madden say “If I was you, I'd bash the ---- window”. Madden had his belt in his hand, and a stick. Marshall struck the window three times with his stick before it broke. They both used bad language, and ran away. Madden threatened to smash the larger window with his belt. The other two men took no part.

P.C. Lawrence said he saw the two defendants and two others in the Fishmarket. They were all Marines. They ran up The Durlocks by St. Peter's Church, and into Mr. Hyham's meadow. The four then made a stand, and took off their belts. He called to some fishermen who were following to help him, and the soldiers ran away. Marshall fell as he was getting over a fence, and he secured him. The servant identified him as the man who broke the window. He was searched and had no pass.

P.C. Dawson said he stopped three soldiers on East Cliff, and asked or their passes. They said the had none – they were militiamen. He took Madden into custody.

The defendants were each fined 5s., damages 7s. 6d., costs 6s. 6d., or seven days' imprisonment.

Folkestone Express 18 July 1891.

Thursday, July 16th: Before Alderman Dunk and J. Fitness Esq.

James McCarthy was charged with stealing a quantity of house linen, value £5 12s., the property of Miss Campbell, from a house in Brockman Road.

P.C. Walter Down said he went on Wednesday at 9.30 a.m. to the Oddfellows in Radnor Street, and there saw a bundle containing the property now produced. Prisoner afterwards came in, and he asked if the bundle belonged to him. Prisoner said it did, and he bought the goods in Folkestone, but declined to say where he got them.

Prisoner: I object to leading questions. It is against all order. It don't give me a chance. I haven't got much as it is.

Witness: He said he came by them honestly, but declined to say where he bought them, or who he bought them of. At the police station Superintendent Taylor asked prisoner where he got the clothes. Prisoner replied “In the ordinary way of dealing, but I decline to tell you where”. The bundle contained ten sheets, two tablecloths, a towel, a toilet cover, 16 pillow cases, two pairs of curtains, four valances. They were all marked “Owen”, and had lot tickets upon them.

Henry Robus said on the 17th July, 1889, he attended a sale of the effects of Mr. D. Owen, at 67, Brockman Road, and purchased through Smith, a broker, lots 215 to 225, and afterwards made them up into a bundle, and took them to a house in Brockman Road belonging to Miss Mary Campbell. There was no other furniture in the house at the time. The house was in his charge – securely locked and the windows were fastened. He was in the house on Sunday at 11.30, and the articles were then safe, just as he put them there two years ago. He went to the house on Wednesday, and the goods were then missing. He examined the house, and found the glass of the storm sash at the back of the drawing room broken, and also the glass of the inner window, so that anyone could get in.

Prisoner: Where did you get your information?

Witness declined to answer.

Prisoner: Could a man of my size get in the window? – Yes. I could get in.

Jane Davis, wife of a labourer, lodging at the Oddfellows Arms, said she saw the prisoner there on Wednesday morning. He asked her to go down into the scullery and see his night's work. She went down, and he untied the bundle of linen. He gave her 18 towels to take up to Mrs. Carter to sell to get a drink. She was to ask 2s. for them. She returned and told him Mrs. Carter refused to buy them, saying they were stolen property.

Stephen Bailey said on Wednesday he saw the prisoner in the scullery at the Oddfellows. He showed him a bundle, and asked “What do you think of my night's work?”, and asked him to feel the weight of it. He opened it and showed him the sheets and pillowcases, and offered to sell him a pair of sheets for a shilling, and also asked him to stand a drink. When Mrs. Carter came down she sent him for a constable.

Lucy Carter, landlady of the Oddfellows Inn, said the prisoner was staying at her house three weeks ago, and remained 10 days. He went away and returned on Saturday evening, and slept at her house on Saturday, Sunday and Monday. He was absent all night on Tuesday, and came in about seven o'clock on Wednesday. She went into the scullery and saw prisoner there with a large bundle of linen. She asked him to show her the things he had to sell. He opened the bundle and showed her tablecloths and shirts. She told him he had not come by them honestly, and that he was to take them away. She then sent for a policeman. Prisoner left the house with some of the articles in a handbasket.

Edith Ralph, wife of the landlord of the Duke Of Edinburgh, Tontine Street, said the prisoner went to her private bar on Wednesday with some towels, which he asked her to buy. She bought ten for 1s. 10d.. She saw they were marked “Owen”, and took them to the police station.

Jemima Davison, of 6, South Street, produced two towels which she purchased of prisoner in the Duke Of Edinburgh for 3d.

Prisoner said he wished to be remanded or committed for trial, and then he would make a statement to the police which would very likely clear him, which it would not do if he spoke it in open court. He believed he was quite justified in selling the things, and came by them in a perfectly honest manner. He expected someone would have been present when they knew he was in trouble, to say how he came by them.

Prisoner was committed for trial at the Sessions.

Folkestone Express 26 September 1891.

Adjourned Licensing Day. The Oddfellows.

Wednesday, September 23rd: Before J. Clark, J. Holden, H.W. Poole, W. Wightwick, F. Boykett and J. Pledge Esqs.

Robert Carter applied for a renewal of the licence to this house.

Superintendent Taylor said complaints were made to the Mayor as to the conduct of the house, and also to Messrs. Rigden, the owners. The complaint was made by a woman who had been quarrelling with Carter's wife. Carter had on two occasions rendered valuable assistance to the police, and they had no complaint against him. Granted.

Folkestone Express 17 October 1891.

Quarter Sessions.

Monday, October 11th: Before John Charles Lewis Coward Esq.

James McCarthy, 29, described as an engine fitter, was indicted for stealing two dimity curtains, three pairs of linen sheets, and other articles, the property of Mary Campbell, and which articles were left in an unoccupied house in Brockman Road.

Mr. Glyn, instructed by Mr. Minter, prosecuted.

P.C. Down said on the 15th July he went to the Oddfellows Arms, in Radnor Street, and was there shown the bundle of things produced. He saw the prisoner come in and asked him if the bundle belonged to him. Prisoner said “Yes”, and added that he came by them honestly - he bought them in Folkestone. Witness asked him to go with him to the place where he bought them, and he said “No”. He then told prisoner he should take him to the station on a charge of stealing them.

By the prisoner: You took the matter lightly and good-humouredly, as though there was nothing in it. You went into the Rendezvous and had a drink while I stood outside.

The Recorder: Do I understand you allowed him to go into a public house and have a drink while you had him in charge? – He was determined to go, sir.

Supt. Taylor said he had a conversation with the prisoner at the police station. He asked him to account for the possession of the goods. He said “I bought them. I am a dealer”. He asked who he bought them of, and he did not say – he said he came by them honestly.

Prisoner asked for the statement he made before the Magistrates, and a letter he wrote from Canterbury to the Superintendent to be produced and read to the jury.

Supt. Taylor put in a long statement made by the prisoner after his committal, and the Recorder read it. It's purport was that he received the articles of a soldier belonging to the 17th Lancers, who, he said, was an officer's servant, and wanted to find a purchaser for them, and on his (prisoner's) suggestion he was allowed to carry the bundle to the Oddfellows. Next morning he sold some of the towels quite openly to get a drink. The Recorder also read a long letter written by the prisoner from Canterbury, in which he said he had been the landlord of a public house at Devonport. He married the landlady and they separated by mutual consent. His wife had allowed him upwards of a guinea a week. He had also received two small legacies, and had written stories for weekly journals, and had won money in newspaper prize competitions, so that he had no necessity to work.

In reply to the prisoner, Supt. Taylor said all the information he gave as to his antecedents was correct. The London police knew nothing. He found by enquiry that the prisoner was in company with a man in uniform two days previous to his arrest. There was no man in the 17th Lancers of the description given by the prisoner. There was no Capt. Owen in the 17th Lancers. Prisoner said a man named Stone or Lucas could identify the man, and he took Stone to the Hounslow Barracks, where the 17th Lancers had just arrived, but he could not identify anyone. The statement made by the prisoner about his wife was not true. She had not made him an allowance.

Henry Rebus proved purchasing the articles at a sale of Mr. Owen's goods in 1889, for Miss Mary Campbell. The articles were all marked “Owen”, and had lot tickets on them. He took them to a house belonging to Miss Campbell, 29, Brockman Road, and locked them up in a room. He saw the things safe as late at the 14th or 15th July of this year. He missed the things on the 19th. The storm sash of the window had been broken open, and the things were gone.

Jane Davis, wife of John Davis, a lodger at the Oddfellows Arms, said on Wednesday morning, the 15th July, she saw the prisoner, who asked her to go into the kitchen to see his night's work. She went, and untied the bundle. He gave her thirteen towels to take up to Mrs. Carter to sell for 2s. to get him a drink. She took them to Mrs. Carter, and brought them back. Mrs. Carter said she would see about them when she got up. She had seen Mrs. Carter that morning. She had been ill for a week and was unable to attend.

Prisoner: What is the matter with Mrs. Carter? – I don't know.

Prisoner: Perhaps she has got perjury the matter with her. I can prove she committed perjury before the Magistrates.

Witness said she had a doctor's certificate.

In answer to prisoner, witness said she lent him an open basket to take the towels out in. There were about 20 people in the house.

Prisoner caused some amusement by reading a list of the people who were in the house.

Stephen Bailey, another lodger at the Oddfellows, said the prisoner asked him to feel the weight of a bundle of linen. He then asked him to lend him 2d., or to give him 1s. for a pair of sheets. When Mrs. Carter came down she sent for a policeman.

Mr. Glyn put in the deposition of Lucy Carter, and told prisoner the doctor had been sent for, and when he arrived he would be allowed to put questions to him. The deposition stated that the prisoner lodged in her house on Saturday, Sunday and Monday, but was absent on Tuesday night. He returned early on Wednesday.

Edith Ralph, wife of the landlord of the Duke Of Edinburgh Inn, Tontine Street, said the prisoner went to her house with some towels in an open basket. He asked her to buy some, and she bought 10 for 1s. 10d. In the afternoon she examined them, and finding a name on them, she took them to the police station. Prisoner told her he got the towels honestly.

In answer to the Recorder, witness said she had not heard of the robbery before she took the towels to the Superintendent.

Jemima Davidson said she bought two towels of the prisoner in the Duke Of Edinburgh for 3d.

Prisoner called Charles William Young, Master of the Elham Union Workhouse, who stated that the prisoner was admitted to the infirmary on the 24th June and discharged on the 13th July.

Prisoner said that proved the perjury of the witness Carter, who was so ill she could not come.

Henry Stone, who said “Lucas” was his nickname, said he was a plasterer, residing at Folkestone. He saw the prisoner in the Perseverance on Monday from twelve o'clock until five or ten minutes to eleven, and on Tuesday from 12.30 until eleven. There was a man there in soldier's clothes on Tuesday night. His uniform was like that of the 17th Lancers. Prisoner said he should like to get work in the town, and they went together about eight o'clock onto the Pavilion Fields to see if they could get work. When they returned the soldier was still there, and they left about eleven.

In reply to Mr. Glyn, witness said he went to Hounslow, and saw the regiment paraded, but did not recognise the soldier among them.

Prisoner made a long statement, in which he attempted to show that he was innocent in “thought, word, or deed”. Had he been guilty, it was not likely he would have stayed in the town to be arrested.

Mr. Glyn, in his closing remarks to the jury, said that on his own statement the prisoner was a thief, because he said he received goods from a soldier and agreed to find a customer for them, instead of which he sold a portion of them and spent the money on drink.

The Recorder, in summing up, said they must all regret to see a man possessing the ability the prisoner had displayed standing in such a position. He commented on the statements of the prisoner, and compared them with the evidence, pointing out that there was proof that the prisoner was dealing with the goods very shortly after they were stolen.

The jury, without leaving the box, found the prisoner Guilty of receiving the goods knowing them to be stolen.

Superintendent Taylor produced a copy of the prisoner's discharge from the army and a letter he had received relating to that part of the prisoner's statement as to his keeping a public house. Nothing was known about him by the London police. The address he gave was that of a court which had been pulled down for improvements.

The Recorder said the jury had taken a merciful view of the case. Prisoner had been in prison three months, and he would be sentenced therefore to only three months' hard labour.

County Court.

Tuesday, October 12th: Before Judge Selfe.

Thomas Watson v Robert Carter: There were two other judgement summonses against the defendant, by Mr. Brooks and Mr. P.C. Upton. Mr. Fearon, for Mr. Brooks, said the defendant was doing a large trade. Mr. Watts said the defendant had been frequently committed, and always paid. Committed for 14 days in the first case; order suspended for 28 days, and in the others, fresh order of £1 a month.

Folkestone Express 6 February 1892.

Before Alderman Banks and W.G. Herbert Esq.

John Wilson was charged with stealing two coats, value £3 15s. 0d., the property of John Bristow.

Prosecutor, a fly driver, in the employ of Mr. Jackson, Osborne Mews, said on the previous evening he placed two coats in the office on the inner door. At half past seven he missed them, and subsequently saw them at the police station.

Mrs. Lucy Carter, of the Oddfellows Arms, said the prisoner lodged with her on Monday and Tuesday. He went in on Wednesday about twenty minutes to nine and she saw him in his bedroom doubling up the coats produced. He was wearing them when he came in. She sent for the police.

P.C. Dawson said he apprehended the prisoner. On the way to the police station he said the coats were on his bed, and he knew nothing about them. Nothing was found on him but a pedlar's certificate, stating his address to be 6, Fair Road, Chatham.

He was sentenced to one month's hard labour.

Folkestone Express 7 May 1892.

Saturday, April 30th: Before Surgeon General Gilbourne, W.G. Herbert and H.W. Poole Esqs.

Robert Carter, landlord of the Oddfellows Inn, (sic) Radnor Street, was summoned for having his house open for the sale of liquors during prohibited hours on the 12th April, and also for permitting drunkenness on his premises at the same time.

Sergeant Swift said on the 12th inst., at midnight, he went to the Oddfellows Inn with P.C. Knowles. He saw a light burning in a room between the two bars, and saw several persons there drinking. There was loud talking, and two men apparently quarrelling and using threatening language to one another. Defendant's wife was there. A man named Rolfe came out of the door and went towards the urinal. Upon seeing witness he tried to escape. In the house there were eight persons; four of them were lodgers, and three were Folkestone residents, Fagg, Rolfe, and Aldridge. He asked defendant's wife what they were doing , and she said they were lodging there that night. Aldridge had, she said, come to call her husband up to go to sea. There were two pint glasses half full of beer on the table, and one half full of beer and ginger beer, and three other glasses which had recently contained beer. Aldridge was very drunk, and also a lodger named Friend. He called defendant's wife's attention to them, and she said they were not drunk. He told her he should report her, and she said “You can do what you like”. He subsequently saw Fagg leave the house and go towards his home.

P.C. Knowles gave corroborative evidence. Aldridge, he said, was talking very thick, and could scarcely sit in his chair. He saw Aldridge, Rolfe and Fagg leave the house. Aldridge rolled against the wall as he walked.

Defendant said he was in bed and knew nothing about the matter. There wasn't any beer in the house.

Mr. Mallam, who appeared for the owners of the house, said he could understand that probably his clients were “cutting short”.

Stephen Bailey was called by the defendant, and said he was in the house from ten till twelve. He saw Aldridge go in at ten minutes to eleven – the worse for drink. He did not hear him call for any beer. He did not see Mr. or Mrs, Carter draw any beer all the time he was there. Mrs. Carter told Aldridge she hadn't anything to serve him with. Witness was reading the paper and the other men were listening to him.

Supt. Taylor said it was the first charge which had been made against the house. Defendant and his wife had on several occasions rendered valuable assistance to the police in cases of robberies. It was a low class house.

Mr. Mallam said Messrs. Rigden had got defendant out of the house by giving him three months' notice at Christmas. When their agent went to the Magistrates' Clerk's office about the transfer, they then heard that there was a summons against the defendant.

Defendant was fined 10s. and 9s. costs in each case.

Folkestone Express 14 May 1892.

Wednesday, May 11th: Before J. Fitness and E.T. Ward Esqs.

William Fagg and Henry Aldridge were summoned for being found on licensed premises at midnight on the 18th April. The defendants were the two men who were found in the Oddfellows Arms at midnight.

They were fined 1s. and 9s. costs, which they paid.

Folkestone Express 9 July 1892.

Bankruptcy.

At the sitting of the Bankruptcy Court on Friday, a local debtor presented himself for examination.

Robert Harold Carter.

The debtor is a fisherman, and formerly kept the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street. The total liabilities were £176 17s. 5d. Creditors for rates &c., £6 8s. 2d., and there were no assets.

In reply to the Official Receiver, the debtor said he now resided at 4, East Cliff; he formerly kept the Oddfellows Arms, and previous to that the Star Inn. He took the Star about eight years ago. About four years ago he was put into the Oddfellows. He was paid no salary, but had the profits on the beer – really he carried the business on in his own name, and the licence was in his name. He paid no valuation when he went in, but had paid it by instalments. He carried on business until April the 26th, when he left, the landlord giving him notice to quit. The valuation then came to £97. He had considerably increased the valuation. He owed the brewers £165 6s. 7d., and the £97 was deducted. He continued to carry on the fishing business, but his lugger, the “R.H.C.”, got waterlogged and sank in Folkestone Harbour. She got waterlogged through the men leaving the plug out whilst he was engaged one day in connection with his licence. The next day she foundered. He did not get her up again.

The Registrar: Then she couldn't have been much good before she foundered? – No. She was an old vessel.

The Registrar: I can't quite see how a vessel sunk in Folkestone Harbour could not be got up again if she was worth anything.

The Official Receiver: Was she insured for £100? – Yes.

How was it you did not apply for the amount to be paid? – Because our insurance is only for total loss.

It would not be the case, then, if the vessel was sunk in Folkestone Harbour? – No.

She was on her last legs, wasn't she? – Yes.

The Registrar: Did you ever try to get the insurance? – No. It was no use unless she was a total loss.

Haven't you had a meeting with the committee to try to get the money? – Yes.

Did you argue the matter with them? – No. It was no use.

Didn't you assert that you were entitled to it? - No. There was a rule under which I was not entitled.

The Official Receiver: Your wife claims the furniture. When were you married? – Fourteen years ago on the 30th of last May.

Why does she claim the furniture? – She bought it.

What with? – Her own money.

Where did she get it from? – I don't know. It was her own earnings.

How did she earn the money? What did she do? – She kept a lodging house.

Where? – She used to take lodgers at the Oddfellows.

But that was your business, wasn't it? – She took in lodgers before.

The Official Receiver said he could not allow the wife to have the furniture.

The Registrar: What did you do with the boat? Did you sell it? – No. I made off with it.

But the wood was worth something? – Yes. The wood was sold for a sovereign.

Who sold the material? – I was £2 in debt for harbour dues.

Then the harbour people had the sovereign? – Yes.

Would not the stores and sails realise more than £1? – The stores were all washed away when she sunk.

I suppose they were not worth much? – No.

The Official Receiver: Do you occupy 35, Radnor Street at 5s. 8d. a week? – I have taken it for my daughter and my nephew. The furniture in it is my daughter's. She has lived there about three or four years. She was my daughter by my first marriage. She is married, and the husband earns the living by fishing. None of my furniture is there. I have no property there belonging to my creditors.

Be careful. Mr. Banks informs me that there is. – No.

No sails, or ropes, or spars, or anything? – No.

Nothing from the public house? – No.

No sails, or wines, or spirits? – No.

Now, be very careful! If I find it out you know you will get into trouble? – There is nothing whatever.

You have nothing except this furniture, which is claimed by your wife? – I have nothing, only what I stand upright in.

During the 14 years you have been in business you have always been in trouble? – Always.

The examination was then adjourned till the 29th.

Folkestone Express 10 June 1893.

Wednesday, June 7th: Before J. Fitness and W. Wightwick Esqs., and Major Poole.

Alec Johnson, a black man, was placed in the dock, charged with assaulting Catherine Whiddett with intent to do her bodily harm.

Mr. Haines watched the case on behalf of the Licensed Victuallers' Association.

Catherine Whiddett said her husband was the landlord of the Oddfellows in Radnor Street. It was a licensed house and they took in lodgers. On Thursday the 1st of June at ten minutes past eleven in the evening, prisoner went into the house and asked for lodgings. She told him they were full up. He was a stranger to her entirely, and had never been in the house before. She said it was past eleven and told him he had better go or he would not get a bed anywhere. He appeared to be perfectly sober, and stood and talked for some time. She put her hand upon his shoulder and asked him to leave. She did not put it on roughly. When she got to the bar, prisoner struck her on the chest with his clenched fist. He then took hold of her by the front of the dress and pushed her back. She fell against the stove and caught the back of her head. A man named Watts picked her up. Prisoner ran away immediately. She went to the police station, had the injury to her head dressed, and charged the prisoner with the offence, the prisoner being in custody when she arrived there. She had been ill since from the effect of the blow. Witness felt it now very much, and was still weak. She was now under medical treatment.

In answer to the prisoner, she said she did not push him out of the door and tell him to go away.

George Watts said he lodged at the Oddfellows and was a whitesmith. He was not in the bar of the house at five minutes to eleven, nor was he there when the prisoner came in. Prisoner was there when he came into the bar, and he heard him ask Mrs. Whiddett for a bed. She said she had got no room – she was full up. The prisoner was in her private bar. She put her hand on his shoulder and asked him to leave – she did not push him at all. It was close on eleven when this occurred. Prisoner turned round and hit her on the chest, but did not say anything. He saw the blow struck, and noticed defendant's fists were clenched. She fell against the stove, and her head struck against the corner. The prisoner went out directly and left her on the floor. Witness helped complainant up, and noticed that she was bleeding from a cut on her head. In his opinion prisoner was sober.

Prisoner: You say I was sober. I was not – I was drunk. I remembered nothing until the next morning, when I awoke and found myself in the police station.

Albert Edward Philpott corroborated.

Dr. Marcus Yunge Bateman said he was called to the police station at half past eleven on Thursday night. He made an examination of complainant and found she was bleeding profusely from a wound at the back of her head. He sent her home, and told her to send for her medical attendant. The wound was such as might have been caused by a fall against a stove as described.

The prisoner pleaded that he was drunk and knew nothing of the occurrence. He had met a friend whom he knew very well, somewhere out Cheriton way, and they had both had a lot to drink.

The Magistrates fined prisoner 20s. and 10s. costs, or in default 14 days' imprisonment with hard labour.

Prisoner was removed in custody.

Folkestone Express 16 September 1893.

Adjourned Licensing Session.

The special sitting for the hearing of those applications for renewals to which the Superintendent of Police had give notice of opposition was held on Wednesday. The Magistrates present were Messrs. J. Clark, J. Hoad, W.H. Poole, W.G. Herbert, J. Fitness, J.R. Davy, J. Holden, C.J. Pursey and J. Pledge.

Mr. Lewis Glyn and Mr. Bodkin supported the applications on behalf of the owners, instructed by Messrs. Mowll and Mowll, with whom were Mr. Minter, Mr. F. Hall, and Mr. Mercer (Canterbury), and Mr. Montagu Bradley (Dover) opposed on behalf of the Good Templars.

Before the business commenced, Mr. Bradley handed to Mr. Holden a document, which he carefully perused, and then handed to Mr. J. Clark, the Chairman.

Mr. Glyn, who appeared for the applicants, speaking in a very low tone, made an application to the Bench, the effect of which was understood to be that the Justices should retire to consider the document. The Justices did retire, and on their return Mr. Holden was not among them.

Mr. Glyn then rose to address the Bench. He said he would first make formal application for the renewal of the licence of the Queen's Head. It was known to all the gentlemen on the Bench as an excellent house, and the licence had been held for a considerable number of years. The present tenant had held it since 1887; it's value was £1,500, and the present tenant had paid no less than £305 for valuation for going into the house. The licence was granted a great many years ago, and had been renewed from time to time. The Superintendent of Police now opposed on the ground that it was no longer required and was kept in a disorderly manner. First, with regard to the objections of the Superintendent, he thought he would admit when he came into the box that it was not he who was making the objections to all those licenses, but that they were made in consequence of instructions received from some members of the Licensing Committee. Of course in his view, and in their view, a very serious question might arise, whether the Licensing Committee had any locus standi. His general observations in that case would apply to all the cases. The Superintendent, in raising those objections, was acting under instructions from the Licensing Magistrates, so that they were really in this position, that they were sitting to adjudicate in a case they themselves directed. He felt certain the Bench would not refuse to renew one of those licenses, but he thought it right to put the facts before them, in order that when they retired they might consider what their position was. He also pointed out that there was not a single ratepayer objecting to any of the renewals. The first ground of objection was that the houses were not required. Before going further he referred to the very important action of the Watch Committee, who were the parties one would expect to put the law in action. But they declined to have anything to do with it, and declined to sanction any legal advice to the Superintendent for the purpose of depriving his clients of what undoubtedly was their property. He ventured to think that in all his large experience in these matters that there never was a case where a licence was taken away simply because it was not required, or simply because some of the learned Magistrates thought it ought to be done and instructed the Superintendent to raise objections. There were two or three of the houses existing before 1869, and therefore his clients were entitled to a renewal of their licenses, there having been no convictions against them during the year. With regard to the other licenses, they were granted a great many years ago, at a time when th population of this borough was about half what it is now, and the Magistrates then thought they were required. They had been renewed from time to time by that body, and were they willing to say now that they were not required, and deprive the owners and tenants of their property and of their licenses? There was not a single Bench in the county, which, up to the present time, had deprived any one tenant of his licence and his property, simply because a suggestion had been made that it was not required. There had been one case in the county two years ago, but the party appealed to the Court of Quarter Sessions, and that Court said the licence ought to be granted. It would be very unfair to his clients, several of whom had spent large sums of money on their property, to refuse a renewal of their licenses, especially having regard to the fact that they were granted a great many years ago, and against which there had not been a single conviction during the year. In order to save time, he put two questions before the Magistrates:- first, were they prepared to deprive the owners and tenants of their property, and secondly, the licenses having all been renewed since any conviction had taken place, were they prepared to deprive the owners of their property without their having an opportunity and investigating the charges brought against them. It would save a great deal of time if the Bench would consider those two points.

Mr Bodkin followed with a few supplementary remarks. He referred to the case of “Sharpe v Wakefield”, in which the decision had been given that a licence, whether by way of renewal or whether it was an annual matter to be considered year by year, and not renewed as of right. He quoted from the remarks of Lord Halsbury, who seemed to consider that in dealing with renewals they ought not to deal with them exactly in the same way as in new applications. He dwelt upon the fact that last year all the licenses were renewed, and that though no new licenses had been granted for many years, the borough had increased in population, and there had been an entire absence of legal proceedings against any of the houses in the past year.

Mr. Minter, who appeared, he said, for the tenants, emphasised what had fallen from the other two legal gentlemen, and said it would be unnecessary for him to make any lengthy remarks. Mr. Glyn had referred to the population having increased twofold since those licenses were granted. There was another very important matter for consideration, and it was this. That although the population had increased twofold since the whole of those licenses were granted, during the last twelve years no new licenses had been granted. Mr. Glyn had also referred to the hardship on the owners if they lost their property, having regard to the fact that there had been no conviction against the tenants during the year, but in addition to that he desired to call attention to what was the intention of the legislature. The legislature had provided that in all cases where owners of licensed houses were brought before the Bench and charged with any offence against the licensing laws, the Magistrates had the power, if they deemed the offence was of sufficient importance, to record that conviction on the licence. They could do that on a second conviction, and on the third occasion the legislature said that the licence should be gone altogether. He was happy to say there was no record on any one of the licenses of the applicants, notwithstanding that they might have been proceeded against and convicted before the last annual licensing meeting. That showed they were of such trivial account that the Magistrates considered, in the exercise of their judgement, that it was not necessary to record it on the licence. Was there any stronger argument to be used than that the Magistrates themselves, although they felt bound to convict in certain cases, did not record the conviction on the licence? He cordially agreed with the suggestion of Mr. Glyn that the Magistrates should retire and consider the suggestion he had made, and he thought they would come to the conclusion that all the licenses should be renewed. There were cases where the houses could claim renewals as a right, and in which he should be able to show the licenses existed before 1869. That course would save a great deal of time.

Mr. Montagu Bradley claimed to be heard on behalf of the Good Templars.

The Court held that Mr. Bradley had no locus standi, as he had not given notice to the applicants that he was going to oppose.

Mr. Bradley thereupon withdrew.

The Magistrates again retired, and on their return the Chairman said the Magistrates had decided that where it was a question of disorderly conduct, it was to be limited to during the year just ended, and not to go into questions prior to the annual licensing day of last year. They thought it right that the cases should be gone into, in order that they might know what the objections were.

Mr. Glyn enumerated the houses, and they were then gone into separately in the following order:

The Oddfellows.

Mr. Glyn said this house had a licence in 1810, and belonged to Messrs. Rigden. It was let at £25 a year and doing four or five barrels a week. The only ground of objection was that it was not required.

Sergeant Swift said there were seven other licensed houses within 100 paces.

Superintendent Taylor said there were 63 houses, and eight licensed.

Mr. Minter: Perhaps the book is wrong. I think there are 200.

Superintendent Taylor: It was my mistake with regard to South Street.

Charles Edward Goddard, agent for Messrs. Rigden, said the house was purchased by them for £1,100 in 1810. During the last ten years they had spent £600 in improvements. The present tenant took possession in 1891. He had increased the business considerably. The business was done with seafaring men, and he let lodgings.

George Widdett, tenant of the house, said he was previously County Court Bailiff at Canterbury. He had experience in six other houses. He was doing about five barrels a week. About eight or nine lodgers used the house – working men and seafaring men. His trade had increased lately.

By Superintendent Taylor: The sale of beer has increased. He averaged five barrels a week for the first year. There were several houses near.

By Mr. Minter: I do not take any females in.

Mr. Glyn then addressed the Bench on the whole of the cases, and urged that no Bench had ever refused a licence where there had been no complaint or conviction. He said the Superintendent had conducted the cases ably and fairly, but he had picked out several houses and asked the Bench to refuse licenses to them. How, he asked, could they do so? It would be very nice for the owners of other houses, no doubt. He emphasised his remarks that no Bench in the county had refused a licence on the ground that it was not wanted. Nothing had occurred in the neighbourhood to alter the position of things, yet Folkestone was asked, as it were, to set an example to other boroughs in the county, and to confiscate his clients' licenses, when there was no ground whatever for that confiscation. It was not a small matter. It was not a question of £15. The lowest value was put at £800. The ground of objection was merely that the licenses were not wanted, although they had been in existence many years, and the owners had spent large sums of money on the houses on the faith of the licenses which the justices' predecessors had granted, and which they themselves had renewed. The population had largely increased, and the Magistrates had refused to grant fresh licenses because they thought there were sufficient. He ventured to submit that they would not do what other Benches had refused to do, and deprive his clients of their property. They looked to the Magistrates to protect their property and their interests. If there had been any strong views in operation against the licenses among the public, it would be different. But they had not expressed any such views. There was the Watch Committee, the proper authority to raise those points, who had declined to support the objection, which came from a member of their body, who was not present, and who had not taken part in the proceedings. He asked them, without any fear of the result, to say that under all the circumstances they were not going to deprive his clients of their licenses.

There was some applause when Mr. Glyn finished his speech.

The Justices then adjourned for an hour to consider all the cases.

On their return Mr. J. Clark, the Chairman, said: The Magistrates have had this question under consideration, and they have come to the decision that all the licenses be granted, with the exception of the Tramway Tavern. (Applause)

Mr. Glyn said he need hardly say they were much obliged to the Chairman and his brother Magistrates for the care they had given the matter. With regard to the Tramway Tavern, he asked if they would allow him, in the event of the owners deciding to appeal, which it was probable they would do, to serve the notice on their Clerk.

Mr. Bradley said there was no objection to that.

Mr. Glyn said his friends felt they ought to acknowledge the very fair manner in which Superintendent Taylor had conducted those proceedings.

The business then terminated.

Folkestone Express 30 May 1896.

Local News.

On Monday Ernest Greaves, who described himself as a law clerk, was charged with doing wilful damage to a window at the Oddfellows, Radnor Street, to the amount of 7s. 2d.

The defence was that he pushed at the window accidentally and broke it. The defendant is a young man of considerable artistic ability, and gave the police proof of his talent, a little composition in which an erring youth undergoing chastisement being very cleverly done. He said his fondness for whisky was his great weakness – on Saturday he swallowed seven shillings worth.

He was fined 5s., 7s. 2d. damages, and 5s. 6d. costs, and in default 14 days'.

Folkestone Express 18 December 1897.

Local News.

On Tuesday the Borough Coroner opened an inquest on the body of the newly-born infant of a young woman named Alice Bail, of 22, East Cliff, who was in service at the Oddfellows Inn (sic), Radnor Street, where the infant was born. The inquiry was adjourned for three weeks.

Folkestone Express 24 June 1899.

Monday, June 19th: Before The Mayor, J. Banks, J. Fitness, C.J. Pursey, and others.

Daniel Collins, labourer, was charged with wilfully breaking a jug, a decanter, and a lamp, value 6s., the property of Frederick Coleman, landlord of the Oddfellows, Radnor Street.

Prosecutor's wife said on Saturday night the prisoner entered with another man and called for two pints of beer. He was not quite sober, and disputed about paying for the beer, using very bad language. He took up the water jug and threw it on to the counter. It struck the lamp and a decanter and broke them. The decanter contained brandy, which was spilt. Witness was standing near the brandy decanter, but she could not say whether he threw at her. The amount of damage was 6s.

Prisoner said his mate called for the drink and paid for it. His mate also threw the jug.

George Marsh, a labourer, said he was in the house and saw what occurred. No money was put down. The lamp which was broken was hanging from the ceiling. Prisoner was the man who threw the jug.

Prisoner said it was his companion who threw the jug. His companion had had “a tidy drink”, and at several public houses they would not serve him.

Prisoner, who is a stranger, was fined 5s., 6s. the damage, and 5s. 6d. costs, or 14 days' hard labour.

Folkestone Express 9 June 1900.

Saturday, June 2nd: Before J. Banks, W. Wightwick, and J. Fitness Esqs., and Liuet. Col. Hamilton.

Frederick Coleman, landlord of the Oddfellows Inn, in Radnor Street, was summoned for permitting drunkenness on licensed premises. Mr. Haines appeared for the defendant.

P.C. T.D. Sales said at 8.25 p.m. on the 22nd ult. he was on duty in Radnor Street, where he saw a man named Warman drunk and using obscene language. He was standing on the footpath opposite the Star Inn. He was irritable, and struck a blow at his wife during an altercation, and over-reaching himself he fell on the pavement. He got up and was advised by witness to go indoors, which he did after about 20 minutes. Later on witness saw Warman's wife, who informed him that her husband had entered the Oddfellows Inn. He obtained the assistance of P.C. Earl, and both proceeded to the defendant's house. It was 8.55 p.m. when they entered the bar, and there saw the man Warman sitting in a chair asleep. There were two glasses on the counter containing liquor. Witness asked the landlady, who was behind the counter, to call the landlord, and he came forward. Witness said to him “You see the condition this man is in?”, and at the same time he woke him. Warman reached for the pint glass and took hold of it, when a customer intervened and told him that he had the wrong glass. Warman then drank the contents of the half pint glass. Witness told the landlord he would report him. He replied “You won't be too hard on me for the sake of a half pint”. Witness also told Warman he would report him for being drunk, and persuaded him to go, which he did.

Witness, in answer to Mr. Haines, said Warman was drunk, and prior to his entrance to the Oddfellows Inn he was disorderly. There were four or five other customers in the bar. He did not follow Warman after he left defendant's house.

P.C. Charles Earl corroborated the last witness's evidence, and added that when Warman left the house he staggered as if intoxicated.

Mr. Haines addressed the Bench, saying that the defendant was Not Guilty unless he knew that Warman was drunk. The evidence which he would submit to them would show that neither the landlord nor his wife, who was serving at the time, had any knowledge that Warman was intoxicated. With regard to the staggering, he thought the police constable must have mistook it for the peculiar walk the “old salts” or fishermen had. If the Bench were satisfied that the defendant had no knowledge of Warman's drunkenness, he asked them to dismiss the case.

James Tiddy was then called, and said he resided at 17, East Street, and was a carpenter. At the time in question he was in the Oddfellows Inn, and there saw a man named Warman, who called for half a pint of beer. He was served by the landlord's wife. He knew Warman sometimes had the appearance of a drunken man, and he had a peculiar gait, but when he was served with the liquor his appearance was that of a sober man. It would take more than a half pint to intoxicate him. Four times that amount of whisky was nearer the mark.

Mr. Fitness: How much?

Witness: A quart of whisky. (Laughter)

In answer to Supt. Reeve, witness said that Warman came in very quietly, and after ordering his beer he sat in a chair and dosed off. It was usual of him to do so. His opinion of Warman's condition was that he was sober.

Edward Dalby stated he was a fisherman and was in the bar before Warman came in. When Warman called for his liquor there was noting in his appearance to indicate he was drunk. He was there about 15 minutes, and during that time Warman was perfectly quiet, and did not enter into the conversation that was going on.

The Bench considered the case proved, and fined the defendant 50s. and 12s. costs, and informed him he was liable to a penalty of £10. As it was his first offence they would not endorse his licence.

Folkestone Express 16 June 1900.

Saturday, June 9th: Before J. Banks, J. Fitness, W. Wightwick, and W. Salter Esqs., and Lieut. Col. Hamilton.

Thomas Warman was summoned for being drunk on licensed premises on the 22nd ult.

P.C. Sales deposed that at 8.25 in the evening of the 22nd May he was on duty in Radnor Street and saw defendant there drunk and having an altercation with three women. He struck a blow at his wife, who was amongst them, but over-reached himself and fell on to the pavement. Subsequently he went to the Oddfellows Inn, and was there served with beer by the landlord's wife.

The landlord, it will be remembered, was fined for permitting drunkenness on his premises.

The defendant was fined 5s. and 9s. costs, or in default 14 days' imprisonment.

Folkestone Express 24 January 1903.

Saturday, January 17th: Before W. Wightwick Esq., Lieut Col. Hamilton, W.G. Herbert and C.J. Pursey Esqs.

Edward Mockeridge was summoned for assault, and further with refusing to quit licensed premises. He pleaded Guilty to both charges.

Mr. Rook appeared for the complainant, and asked that the defendant might be bound over, as with the duties now required of publicans, unless they took strong measures they would soon get into trouble.

Fredk. Coleman, landlord of the Oddfellows Arms, in Radnor Street, said the previous Saturday defendant came to the bar and called for a half pint of beer. As he was drunk, witness refused to serve him. Defendant then came round the counter and threatened him. Defendant went out, but came back later with two other men. Witness served the two men, but on refusing to serve defendant he struck witness over the head with a basket. Witness then went for a policeman.

In reply to Mr. Rook, complainant said defendant had caused him a great deal of trouble.

Defendant was bound over for three months in the sum of £5 and 8s. 6d. costs for the assault, and on the other account £1 and 9s. costs; in default one month's hard labour. The money was paid by a friend.

Folkestone Express 3 October 1903.

Tuesday, September 29th: Before Alderman Spurgen, Lieut. Col. Westropp, and J. Stainer Esq.

Andrew Anderson and Ivan Ernholm, two foreign seamen, were charged with being drunk and disorderly.

P.C. Weller deposed that at 10.40 the previous night he was called to the Oddfellows Arms, in Radnor Street, where he saw the prisoners challenging people to fight. Witness advised them to go away, and they returned to their ship, which was lying in the Harbour. They used obscene language, and called out to passers-by, and eventually came ashore and started hitting at everyone who went by. Witness took prisoners into custody, and with assistance brought them to the police station. Their conduct had caused a considerable crowd to collect, and it was with difficulty that witness prevented prisoners from being mobbed.

The Bench imposed a fine of 10s. and 4s. 6d. costs; in default seven days' hard labour. The prisoners were removed in custody.

Folkestone Express 17 March 1906.

Inquest.

An inquest was held on Saturday evening at the Town Hall on the body of Frederick Coleman, the licensee of the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, who died suddenly the previous day. The inquest was conducted by the Borough Coroner (Mr. G.W. Haines).

Frederick William Coleman, a carman, residing at 11, Orange Street, Canterbury, said that the body viewed by the jury was that of his father, who was the landlord of the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, Folkestone. His age was 63. Witness last saw him in October, when he appeared to be in very good health. He had, however, been ill, but nothing out of the way.

Mrs. Coleman, the widow of the deceased, said her husband had since last Easter been short of breath. The previous day the deceased was all right when she went out at a quarter to three, and on her return at half past four he was dead. He had not complained to her at all during the day. Deceased had had a hearty dinner.

Jane Featherby, residing at 43, Radnor Street, said she was the wife of Frederick Featherby, a fisherman. The previous afternoon she went into the Oddfellows Arms at half past three, and the deceased served her with a glass of beer. When she came out with a Mrs. Dawkins she was alone. Deceased then appeared to her to be all right.

Henry Bailey, a labourer, of 48, Radnor Street, said the previous afternoon at four o'clock he went into the Oddfellows Arms. He called for a pint of beer, but could get no answer. After a time he looked over the bar and saw the landlord lying on the floor with his head under the counter. Witness called Mrs. Featherby, who came over and said he was dead.

Mrs. Featherby, re-called, said when she saw the deceased his eyes were open and his face was black. He was dead.

Dr. Barrett said at about 4.30 he was called to the Oddfellows Arms. He went down, and found Coleman in the bar dead. He had apparently been dead twenty minutes. Last Easter he attended the deceased for pleurisy and pneumonia and he got perfectly well. As far as he could make out, he had not any heart trouble then. He made a post mortem examination, and found the aorta was enlarged and diseased. There was also a disease in the lungs and a quantity of fat round the heart. Deceased died of syncope caused by atheroma.

A verdict on accordance with the medical evidence was returned.

Folkestone Express 14 April 1906.

Wednesday, April 11th: Before The Mayor, Alderman Vaughan, Lieut. Colonel Fynmore, and R.J. Linton Esq.

Temporary authority was granted to Percy Mockett to sell at the Oddfellows Inn, Radnor Street.

Note: This does not appear in More Bastions. All other reports give a Mr. Prior.

Folkestone Express 2 June 1906.

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

Mr. G.W. Haines applied for the transfer of the licence of the Oddfellows alehouse, Radnor Street, from Mr. J. Pryor to Mr. E.R. Shaw. Granted.

Note: No mention of Pryor in More Bastions.

Folkestone Express 8 December 1906.

Wednesday, December 5th: Before W.G. Herbert Esq., Lieut. Colonels Hamilton and Fynmore, J. Stainer, C.J. Pursey, T. Ames, and R.J. Linton Esqs., and Major Leggett.

An application was made for permission to carry out some alterations at the Oddfellows Inn (sic), Radnor Street. The application was granted, subject to the stipulations made by the Bench.

Folkestone Express 14 January 1911.

Wednesday, February 11th: Before E.T. Ward abd R.J. Linton Esqs., Alderman Vaughan, and Lieut. Col. Fynmore.

An application was made by Mr. George Skinner, of Deal, for the transfer of the licence of the Oddfellows Inn (sic), Radnor Street, from Mr. Shaw.

The Chairman asked the outgoing tenant why he was leaving the house.

Mr. Shaw: I want a change, sir. I have been there just on five years.

The Chairman: If you have a good thing, I wonder you leave it.

Mr. Shaw: A change is good for everyone sometimes.

The Chairman told the applicant that the licensing sessions were coming on in about a month's time, and the Magistrates did not know what they were going to do yet. However, there were such things as houses being referred to the Quarter Sessions and being closed in consequence. He did not say anything about that house at present, but he warned Mr. Skinner that he was taking a risk in taking the house before the licensing sessions.

Mr. Skinner said he would take the risk.

The Magistrates thereupon granted the transfer.

Folkestone Express 29 July 1911.

Friday, July 21st: Before W.G. Herbert, J. Stainer, G.I. Swoffer, and R.J. Linton Esqs.

John King was charged with being drunk and disorderly the previous night.

P.S. Sharpe said at about 10.30 the previous night he was on duty on the Stade, when he saw the prisoner, who was carrying a bundle of bulrushes, go into the Oddfellows public house. He was drunk, and was ejected by the landlord. When outside he used most filthy language, so he (witness), with the assistance of Inspector Lawrence, took him into custody.

Prisoner said he never spoke to anybody when he came out of the house.

The Chief Constable said the man was there two years ago for begging.

Fined 5s. and 4s. 6d. costs, or seven days' hard labour. He went to prison.

Folkestone Express 6 July 1912.

Saturday, June 29th: Before Lieut. Col. Hamilton, J. Stainer, and G. Boyd Esqs.

Albert Phillips was brought up on remand charged with stealing a Mackintosh, the property of Mr. T.F. Stalley, 14, Alexandra Gardens.

The Chief Constable (Mr. Reeve) said the prisoner was remanded a week ago on the charge so that he could bring further evidence. He had two further witnesses to call, and if the Magistrates considered a prima facie case had been made out he should ask h them to commit him for trial at the next Quarter Sessions.

William Harris, a fisherman, of 8, St. Michael's Square, said on Thursday, June 6th, he was in the public bar of the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, at half past eight in the evening. The prisoner came into the bar wearing the Mackintosh coat produced. He asked him to buy it for 2s. He (witness) told him he did not want it, and he then offered it to him for 1s. 6d. He gave that money for the Mackintosh, which he took away with him. He did not ask the prisoner any questions about the coat, but he understood him to say that a gentleman gave it to him. He had seen the prisoner about the fishmarket for the last eighteen months when they came in from sea. He knew nothing more about it.

Cross-examined by prisoner: Phillips did not say anything to him about having the coat to sell for another man.

John Baker, a fisherman, 21, Rossendale Road, said about half past eight on the evening of June 6th he was in the bar of the Oddfellows with the last witness, when the prisoner came in wearing the Mackintosh. He offered to sell the coat for 2s. to the company in the bar. He said a gentleman had given it to him. Harris eventually bought it for 1s. 6d.

The Magistrates then committed Phillips for trial at the Quarter Sessions.

The Chairman, addressing the witness Harris, told him that he ought not to have bought the coat, as it was practically a new one, from a man of prisoner's description. His expenses would be disallowed.

Folkestone Express 20 July 1912.

Quarter Sessions.

Saturday, July 13th: Before J.C. Lewis Coward Esq.

Albert Phillips, 62, labourer, was charged with stealing a Mackintosh coat, valued at £1 10s., the property of Mr. T. Stalley, Alexandra Gardens, on June 6th. He pleaded Not Guilty. Mr. Weigall prosecuted.

Thomas Stally, a grocer, said the Mackintosh coat was his property, and he valued it at £1 10s. On June 6th he hung it outside on a nail in the backyard to dry. There was a passage from Oxford Terrace to the gates of the backyards in Alexandra Gardens. He locked his gate at a quarter past five, but he did not notice that the coat was missing until the following day. He next saw it on the 12th.

Prisoner: Can you swear on oath that you saw me steal the coat?

Witness: No.

Detective Johnson said at 11 p.m. on June 21st he saw the prisoner in Fenchurch Street. When he charged him with stealing the coat, he replied “I had it given to me to sell by a man”. At the police station, when charged, he said “I am innocent of the stealing”.

William Harris, a fisherman, of 8, St. Michael's Square, said on June 6th, at about half past eight in the evening, he was in the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, when the prisoner came in wearing the Mackintosh coat, which he understood him to say was given to him by a gentleman. He asked him to buy the coat for 2s., but he told him he did not want it, as it was no good to him. Prisoner then said “Give me 1s. 6d. for it”, so he bought it for that.

In reply to the Recorder, the witness said he had seen the prisoner about the Fish Market, but had never seen him doing any work.

John Baker, a fisherman, of 21, Rossendale Road, corroborated Harris's evidence, and cross-examined by the prisoner, he said he did not see him steal the coat, nor did he know it was stolen.

Prisoner made a statement from the dock, refusing to give evidence on oath. He said he was out selling old clothes on the Fish Market, when a man came up to him and asked him to sell the coat, which he was wearing. He asked him where he got it from, and he said it was his own. He further said he was a stranger and could not sell the coat, for no-one would buy it from him, and he had no money for his lodgings or food. He promised to try and sell it for him, and he went into the public house wearing the coat. He sold it for 1s. 6d., which he gave to the man, and refused to take a pint of beer out of it. Later he was called to go to Southampton Docks to fill the place of the strikers. He earned £3 6s. 6d. there in ten days, in addition to his railway fare, and that would have been sufficient to take him to any part of the country. If he had stolen the coat, was it likely he would have come back to Folkestone? It was not reasonable to think he would have done so. He was Guilty of selling the coat, but not of stealing it.

The Recorder, in summing up, pointed out that the prisoner had not told the police who the man was from whom he bought the coat, so that they could have tried to find the man; neither had he told them who the man was that day.

The jury found the prisoner Guilty.

The Chief Constable said there were 20 convictions altogether against the prisoner, dating from March 9th, 1891. On February 18th, 1895, he received twelve months' hard labour at Surrey Sessions; twelve months' the following year at the Surrey Sessions for stealing; on April 14th, 1899, six months' hard labour and two years' police supervision at Surrey Sessions; on September 8th, 1903, at the Central Criminal Court, three years' penal servitude for warehouse-breaking; on July 4th, 1904, he was charged unlawfully wounding a warder in prison at Maidstone, whilst undergoing the previous sentence, and was sentenced to a further twelve months' hard labour. There were nine of the convictions for summary offences. For the past fifteen or eighteen months he had been selling flowers, gathering rags and bones about the town, and he had no idea the prisoner had such a record behind him as that.

Prisoner said he had been trying to get an honest living during the time he had been there.

The Recorder ordered the prisoner three years' penal servitude.

Folkestone Express 15 March 1913.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

At the annual licensing sessions seven licences were deferred to the adjourned sessions, which were held at the Town Hall on Monday. The Magistrates on the Bench were E.T. Ward Esq., Lieut. Col. Hamilton, Alderman Jenner, and W.G. Herbert, J. Stainer, R.J. Linton, G. Boyd, W.J. Harrison, J.J. Giles, E.T. Morrison and A. Stace Esqs.

Mr. Jennings, of Canterbury, presented plans for alterations at the Oddfellows Arms, in Radnor Street, and they were approved of.

Folkestone Express 31 October 1914.

Saturday, October 24th: Before E.T. Ward Esq., Lieut. Col. Fynmore and Col. Owen.

Edward Albert King, a soldier, was charged with wilfully breaking a window at the Oddfellows Inn, Radnor Street, the previous evening. He pleaded Guilty.

George Skinner, the landlord of the Oddfellows Inn, Radnor Street, said the previous evening, about 7.20, the prisoner came into his house and asked to be served. He, however, refused him and told him he had had sufficient to drink. Prisoner commenced to use bad language, and he told him to get outside. King came back two or three minutes after, and his (witness's) wife, who was in the front of the bar, asked him why he did not go away. The prisoner it the plate glass windows with his hand, but did no damage to them. He then went into the passage and smashed a glass window, five feet five inches from the ground. Prisoner's hand was cut, and he immediately ran away. Later he (witness) saw him in the Ship public house, and gave him into custody. He asked him why he had broken the window, and the prisoner replied that he slipped and fell through the window.

Prisoner said he really did not know what did occur as he was under the influence of drink.

An officer from the battery to which prisoner belonged said King's conduct as a soldier had been satisfactory.

The Chairman said they were also sorry to see one of His Majesty's soldiers before them. They hoped the prisoner would take that as a lesson. He would have to pay the damage, 7/6, and 3/- costs.

Folkestone Express 16 October 1920.

Local News.

On Sunday a quaint harvest festival took place in the Oddfellows Arms public house on The Stade, and as a result the Royal Victoria Hospital has benefitted to the extent of 15 cwt. of garden produce and £4 which was collected on the day.

There have been other services in the house on a Sunday evening, but nothing has approached the harvest festival service on Sunday. The public room presented a sight never to be forgotten, for it was lined from floor to ceiling with gifts of produce from fishermen and others. A giant marrow, weighing 34lbs., was a noteworthy exhibit. Fishing nets and cod lines were used in the arrangement of the gifts, which was undertaken by Mr. and Mrs. G. Skinner (host and hostess), Mr. W. Boorn, and Reg Spicer. Several hyumns were sung with Congo Milton at the organ. Dick Milton gave the address, in the course of which he said they should thank God for the bounteous harvest.

Among the congregation were Darkie Fagg, Mitteeman Walker, Hoggamy Hall, Tom Page, Brum Wheeler, Tich Banks, Alf Baker, Steve Starling, Harry Hall, Tiny Barton, Hoppy Hall, Tich Weatherhead, Red'un Fagg, Pout Fagg, and P. Hoile.

Folkestone Express 18 February 1928.

Obituary.

We regret to report the death of Mr. George Skinner, the licensee of the Oddfellows Inn, The Stade. The deceased, who was 54 years of age, had been the licensee of the inn for seventeen years. He was well-known in Folkestone, and was held in high esteem by the local fishing fraternity and their families. He assisted in carrying out the Blessing of the Fisheries on an inspiring scale, and inaugurated the harvest festival at his house, which was an annual event that created considerable interest, especially amongst the fishermen. Deceased had not been well for some time, and passed away suddenly, leaving a widow and three sons to mourn his loss, and with whom great sympathy will be felt. He was Treasurer of the Sick and Dividend Club, which has a large membership.

The funeral takes place today (Friday), at noon, at the Folkestone Cemetery.

Folkestone Express 10 March 1928.

Adjourned Licensing Meeting.

Wednesday, March 6th: Before Mr. G. I. Swoffer, Mr. A. Stace, Mr. J.H. Blamey, Mr. W. Griffin, Dr. W.W. Nuttall, and Col. Broome-Giles.

The licence of the Oddfellows public house, The Stade, was transferred from the late Mr. George Skinner to Mrs. Florence E. Skinner, the widow.

Folkestone Express 7 April 1928.

Wednesday, April 4th: Before Mr. G.I. Swoffer and other Magistrates.

Mrs. F.E. Skinner applied for the transfer and renewal of the licence of the Oddfellows Arms, The Stade, and also for the transfer of the music licence held on the business.

The Bench granted the application.

Folkestone Express 13 February 1932.

Annual Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, February 10th: Before Alderman R.G. Wood, The Mayor, Alderman A.E. Pepper, Mr. J.H. Blamey, Alderman T.S. Franks, Eng. Rear Admiral L.J. Stephens, Mr. F. Seager, Mr. W. Griffin, Dr. W. Nuttall, Miss A.M. Hunt, Councillor Mrs. E. Gore, Mr. S.B. Corser, and Councillor the Hon. Mrs. N.E. Howard.

The Chief Constable presented his report as follows:- I have the honour to present my ninth annual report relating to the administration of the licensing laws within the Borough for the year ending 31st December, 1931.

Licensed Premises: There are in the Borough 114 premises licensed for the sale of intoxicating liquor, the number being made up as follows: Full licences 69; beer on 7; beer off 10; beer and spirit dealers 9; grocers, etc., off 6; confectioners wine on 4; cider and sweets off 7; chemists wine off 2; Total 114. No licensed premises were referred back on the ground of redundancy by the Annual Licensing Committee.

Alehouse Licences: Of the alehouse licences, one is a six days' licence.

Licences Transferred: The following licences were transferred during the year: Earl Grey, from William Charles Dixon to Clara P. Dixon; Alexandra Hotel, Stanley A. Bishop to Frank Allwood; Bouverie Arms, Frank E. Hedges to Frederick Hedges; Guildhall Hotel, Ellen Cozens to Richard Rivers; Black Bull Hotel, Frederick A. Bray to Eric Anderson; Harvey Hotel, Charles Waghorn to Harold Sherrin; Foresters Arms, Charles Ovenden to Kate L. Ellers; Richmond Tavern, Adam Ingleton to Edward Jordan; Clarendon Hotel, Harry Whittaker to Wm. A.J. Taylor. At the adjourned annual licensing meeting held on the 11th March, 1931, application was made for the transfer of the beer off licence of the Gun Brewery, Cheriton Road. The licensee of these premises having died in 1900, and the licence not having been transferred, the Justices declared this licence null and void.

Alterations to Licensed Premises: No applications have been made to the Bench during the year for sanction for alterations to licensed premises.

Occasional Licences: One hundred and eleven occasional licences were granted to licence holders to sell intoxicating liquor other than on their own premises.

Extension of Licensing Hours: Three hundred and six extensions have been granted to licence holders when dinners, etc., were being held on their licensed premises, and in no case has any abuse of the privilege been recorded.

Proceedings against Licence Holders: During the year no licence holders have been proceeded against for committing any breach of the Intoxicating Liquor Laws.

Visits by Police to Licensed Premises: All licensed premises have been periodically visited at irregular intervals by my officers to see that they are being conducted in a satisfactory manner, and no adverse reports have been submitted to me. The total number of visits was 1,868.

Drunkenness: During the year 26 persons (22 males and four females) were proceeded against in the Borough Court for drunkenness. These were dealt with as follows: Convicted 13 males, three females; discharged nine males, one female. The persons proceeded against were: Residents of Folkestone, four males, two females; non-residents, five males, one female; no fixed abode, six males, one female; and seven soldiers. The total proceedings for drunkenness are the same as the preceding year, when eight persons were convicted and 18 discharged.

Comparative Return of Drunkenness: The following table shows a comparative return for drunkenness with towns similarly situated to Folkestone: Folkestone, population 35,890, number proceeded against per 1,000 population .723; Chester 41,438 and 1.134; Hastings 65,199 and 1.02; Canterbury 24,450 and .61; Margate 41,312 and 1.02; Cambridge 66,803 and ,439; Gravesend 35,490 and 1.4; Scarborough 41,791 and .31; Ramsgate 33,597 and .35; Bedford 40,573 and .69. It will be seen that Folkestone's record for sobriety still stands very high.

Permitted Hours: The permitted hours as allowed by the Licensing Act of 1921 have been fixed by the Licensing Justices for this Borough as under: Weekdays, from 10.30 a.m. to 2.30 p.m., and from 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. Sundays, from 12 noon to 2 p.m., and from 7 p.m. to 2 p.m. During the months of June, July, August and September, 1931, an extension of half an hour on weekdays, from 10 p.m. to 10.30 p.m. was again allowed by the Bench, and I am pleased to state that no ill-effects have been observed.

New Licences: No licences have been granted for new premises during the year.

Clubs: Seventeen clubs where intoxicating liquor is supplied are registered under the Act, this being the same number as was in existence in the preceding year.

Hotels: Six hotels and two restaurants have authority under Section III of the Licensing Act, 1921, to supply intoxicating liquor with meals for one hour after 10 p.m. on weekdays, namely: Metropole Hotel, Grand Hotel, Majestic Hotel, Regina Hotel, Esplanade Hotel, Royal Pavilion Hotel, Central Cafe and Savoy Cafe. During the year under review, the Regina Hotel closed down, but the licence in respect of the premises is still in existence.

Music and Dancing: Forty eight licences for music and dancing have been granted or renewed under the provisions of Part IV of the Public Health (Amendment) Act, 1890. This is an increase of four as compared with the previous year. Of this number 15 are for the use of wireless for public entertainment in licensed premises.

Billiard Licenses: There are three premises licensed for billiards in the Borough, namely: The Queen's Hall, Tontine Street; 24, Rendezvous Street; and the Fishermen's Institute, The Stade. The licence in respect of the last named premises is a new one, having been granted by the Justices on the 11th February, 1931. Supervision of these premises has been kept, and no adverse reports have been received.

Conclusion: In conclusion, I should like to draw the particular attention of the Bench to the high standard of conduct of the licensees within the Borough. Despite the large number of official visits made, and the casual observation which is kept from time to time, no single instance has come to light which would justify police interference. To this may be attributed in no small measure the high place that Folkestone occupies in the comparative table. I have again to tender my thanks to the Bench and to Mr. Charles Rootes for their unfailing consideration and assistance freely given whenever occasion demands it.

The Chairman said the Justices had had an opportunity of seeing the Chief Constable's report, and he was instructed to say they regarded it as of a very satisfactory nature. If he might begin where the Chief Constable left off, with reference to the high standard of the licensee in the Borough, he thought that it was very conclusive, because no-one had been in any difficulty, and there were no proceedings against any licensee in the year. He thought that went to the credit of the licensee, and showed they exercised great care in carrying out the law touching those matters, which was somewhat difficult and complicated at times. With reference to the drunkenness, he would like it to be less, of course, but having regard to the fact that they were a health and pleasure resort and thousands of visitors came there, they thought it was very creditable indeed. Of those 26 persons, only six of them were residents of the Borough, and they thought that went to the credit of the residential population anyhow, considering that was one whole year. The Justices were glad to think that they gave way to the point with reference to the summer season, giving the half hour's extension. They were glad to know that no ill-effects had been accrued in consequence of that, but that the convenience in reference to the visitors had been appreciated.

The Chairman then announced that the public house licences and beer licences would all be renewed, with two exceptions, and they were the Granville and the Oddfellows. Those would not be renewed that morning, but would be referred to the adjourned meeting for further consideration on the ground of redundancy.

The date of the Adjourned Licensing Sessions was fixed for March 9th next.

The Chairman stated that music and dancing licences which had been in existence were also renewed that day, and the billiards licences were also renewed.

Folkestone Express 12 March 1932.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, March 9th: Before Alderman R.G. Wood, The Mayor, Col. G.P. Owen, Alderman A.E. Pepper, Mr. J.H. Blamey, Dr. W. Nuttall, Miss A.M. Hunt, Alderman T.S. Franks, Mrs. E. Gore, Eng. Rear Admiral L.J. Stephens, and Mr. F. Seager.

The question of the renewal of the licences of the Granville Inn, Dover Street, and the Oddfellows Arms on the Fish Market was considered at the adjourned general licensing meeting at the Folkestone Police Court on Wednesday. The objection to both licences was on the ground of redundancy.

The case of the Oddfellows Arms, The Stade, was then considered, the Chief Constable having objected to the renewal of the licence on the grounds of redundancy.

The Chief Constable again gave formal evidence of the particulars of the congested area as in the previous case. There was, he said, nothing against the character of the tenant.

Chief Inspector Pittock said the rateable value of the house was £52. There was entrance from Radnor Street and The Stade, both frontages. There had been four transfers since 1894, and the present tenant had been there since 1928, and her husband was there before that from 1911. There were six public houses within 100 yards of the premises, five additional ones within 150 yards, and another five within 200 yards, making 16 within 200 yards. He made twelve visits between 8.05 and 9.35 p.m. in January and February to see the number of people in the house. For the Jubilee the number of people was 253, in the Oddfellows 91, in the Ship 249, and in the Packet Boat 157. The percentage was for the Jubilee 21, the Oddfellows 7.6, the Ship 20.7, and the Packet Boat 13. He suggested that the house was redundant from the observations he had kept. He was of the opinion that any two of those houses were redundant, having regard to the requirements of the neighbourhood.

In reply to Mr. L.S. Fletcher, who appeared for the applicants of the licence, witness said he considered there were too many houses in that neighbourhood. It was to form an opinion as to the trade that he paid visits to the licensed houses. He would say that the Oddfellows did more than double the trade of the Granville. He did not know it did 7 barrels a week.

Mr. Fletcher: You know that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has put a tax on beer?

Witness: Yes.

Is it correct to say that that has discouraged trade? – It is obvious.

Mr. Fletcher: I won't say whether I express any regret about that. (Laughter)

Continuing, Mr. Fletcher said would it alter witness's opinion if he told him that the Oddfellows had increased its trade in 1931?

Witness: No. I am still of the opinion that the whole of the trade in that district could be done by two houses.

Continuing cross-examination, witness said the house was mainly visited by fishermen. There was a club room there and a slate club. He did not know of a conviction with the house during the past three years.

Mr. William Joseph Jennings, managing director of Messrs. George Beer and Rigden Ltd., said the trade in barrels was 294¾ for 1929 at the Oddfellows. In 1930 it was 391 5/8, and in 1931 it was 416 3/8. It gave an average of seven barrels per week. The spirits had decreased as the beer had gone up. In 1929 it was 133 4/5 gallons, in 1930 it was 93½, and in 1931 it was 99 2/3.

Mr. George Skinner, the elder son of Mrs. Skinner, the licensee, said he acted as the manager of the house, and his younger brother acted as barman. They made a good living out of the house, and they had no other sort of income. They had very much extra trade in the summer.

Mr. Fletcher said there was a gentleman, the Rev. W.H. Pickburn, who would like to say a word about the house.

The Chief Constable said they were not entitled to give that.

The Chairman said they were only dealing with the redundancy of the house.

The Chairman said the Justices had decided to renew the licence.

Folkestone Express 9 September 1933.

Monday, September 4th: Before The Mayor, Alderman G. Spurgen and Alderman R.G. Wood.

Sidney Allen Crockitt, a soap salesman, was charged on remand with obtaining food to the value of 2s. 8d. by other than false pretences.

The prisoner was before the Court last week, when evidence was given that he went into the Corner Restaurant after ten o'clock at night, had a good supper, and then told the proprietress that he had no money, and she had better call the police. She called the police and he was arrested. Prisoner now pleaded Guilty and asked the Magistrates to deal with the case.

A second charge was then preferred against him, that of giving a false alarm to the Fire Brigade on August 27th. He pleaded Not Guilty to this charge.

Alexander Louis McLaren, of the Folkestone Fire Brigade, said at 11 p.m. on Sunday, August 27th, he received a telephone message, and in consequence of what he was told he turned out the Fire Brigade. They went to the Oddfellows public house, Radnor Street, but there was no fire at those premises or any place on the Fish Market. The cost of the turn-out was £2 9s.

Arthur John Grant, a night telephone operator at the G.P.O. telephone exchange, of 37, Clarence Street, said he received a call from the street telephone box at the Fish Market. In consequence he connected with the Fire Brigade Station.

James Albert Fagg, a fisherman, of 7, Clout's Alley, Radnor Street, said at 11 p.m. on August 27th he was sitting on the chains in the Fish Market when he saw the prisoner standing inside the telephone box. He struck a match and put his ear to the telephone. He saw him come out two minutes later and walk away.

Witness, in reply to the prisoner, said the prisoner was wearing the same clothes as that day. He was of the opinion that the prisoner was perfectly sober.

Defendant: What makes you so sure it was me?

Witness: I recognised you.

In what manner? – The way you were dressed and the way you walked.

Were you of the opinion that I was perfectly sober that night? – I did not take any notice.

Defendant asked leave to call P.C. McFazdean and Inspector Hollands as witnesses.

He Deputy Clerk said they had already been called as witnesses, but he could have them in the box again and ask them questions.

P.C. McFazdean, in reply to the defendant, said that when he arrested defendant he was perfectly sober.

Inspector Hollands, cross-examined by defendant, said that when defendant was arrested and he saw him at the police station, he (defendant) was sober and normal.

Defendant, addressing the Bench, said he was a soap salesman, running his own business. While in Dover, being a stranger in a strange place, he went with four sailors who persuaded him to go and have a drink. He was more or less drunk for four days afterwards. With regard to the fire charge, he knew nothing about that. His nerves were so shattered, he did not know what he was doing. With regard to the meal, he was in the same state of mind then.

The Clerk, reading a statement handed by the defendant to the Magistrates, said it stated that during the last month and a half, after being placed on probation at Greenwich, he realised that crime did not pay. He had been going round the coast towns in business with soap and haberdashery. That was the first time he had ever slept in Folkestone, and it would be the last. He asked the Bench not to send him to prison, as his business would be lost.

The prisoner said if the Bench would deal leniently with him, he would pay all expenses in that case. He was very sorry for what had actually happened.

Inspector Hollands said the prisoner was a stranger to the town. At first he refused all information about himself. As far as he knew, the only information they had was his record from London. There were six previous convictions against him. He had been in a reformatory, and had received a sentence of 18 months on a charge of burglary. In 1930 in Winnipeg, Canada, he was charged with vagrancy, and sentenced to six months and deportation from that country. On April 24th last when charged at Greenwich he was bound over on probation in the sum of £25 for two years. On the night of the alleged offence of sending that fire alarm, defendant put up at a lodging house in the town, and the next morning there was an allegation that he stole some money while there, but there was insufficient evidence to charge him.

Defendant: I know nothing about that.

An elderly woman, who stated that she was the defendant's mother, came forward and said that her son had not been short of money, and he must have got into bad company and got drunk. His record was a bad one, but he had been improving. He had been sending money home.

The Chairman said the Magistrates were convinced that the prisoner was Guilty of both offences. For obtaining credit by fraud, they committed him to prison for one month with hard labour. The sentence was governed to some extent by the record of his past behaviour, because they heard he was already on parole to be of good behaviour for two years.

Defendant's mother: He will never be able to get a living after this, and he has worked up a decent connection.

Folkestone Express 7 October 1933.

Council Meeting Extract.

The Folkestone Town Council on Wednesday approved of the Health Committee's recommendations concerning the scheme for dealing with the whole of Radnor Street as a slum clearance, and further progress will therefore be possible in connection with the rebuilding of the area. The scheme include the compulsory purchase of four licensed houses, lodging houses, a restaurant, stores, temporary buildings for amusement, and workshops.

The Health Committee's recommendations dealing with the matter were as follows: (extract)

Resolved: That Compulsory Purchase Orders be made for the purchase by the Council; that there shall be included in the above-mentioned Compulsory Purchase Orders the under-mentioned properties and such other properties which are surrounded by or adjoin the clearance area, including: Radnor Street, No. 59, public house (Packet Boat Inn); No. 24, public house (Jubilee Inn); No. 30, public house (Oddfellows Arms); No. 38, public house (Ship Inn)

Councillor Dallas Brett said with regard to the four public houses those were matters presenting somewhat of a difficulty. It was a difficulty which had not been got over at the present moment, because it had not been tackled, but he was informed at the Ministry in other schemes throughout the country, where public houses had existed and had to be got rid of, private arrangement with the brewers had been made, which had been more satisfactory than would have been thought possible He proposed to ask his Committee to give instructions to himself and the Town Clerk to see what arrangements could be made. Whatever they did, they had got to realise that the whole area had to be cleared, and that they included in their plans two very valuable sites for public house property, to take the place of one or two or more of the houses which were in existence in Radnor Street at the present time. It was a matter of negotiations.

Councillor Barfoot said he believed that the scheme would be materially reduced if the stores and two public houses on the Fish Market were left as they were, and if the houses which it was proposed to build on that site were built on what was now the amusement park.

The resolution confirming the adoption of the recommendations was almost unanimously carried.

Folkestone Express 6 October 1934.

Council Meeting Extract.

On Wednesday the Folkestone Town Council had before them the letter from the Ministry of Health in which they practically approved of the Council's scheme for making a slum clearance area. They made suggestions, however, for a few properties to be excluded in order to lessen the cost of the scheme.

The Health Committee, in consequence, in their minutes recommended the preparation of fresh plans in order to provide for forty houses on the site, and also that the three licensed houses, which were to be dealt with under the original scheme, should be allowed to remain. The Council, without any discussion, approved of the recommendations.

The Town Clerk submitted the following letter from the Ministry of Health (extract): Ministry of Health, Whitehall, S.W. 1. 30th August, 1934. “At the same time the Council will appreciate that when the inclusion of expensive properties is proposed it is necessary to consider carefully whether the cost of their acquisition does not outweigh their benefit to the scheme, and in this connection the estimated cost of acquiring the licensed premises in the area is of particular importance. The conclusion which the Minister has reached is that the properties reference Nos. 88, 91, and 97 should be excluded”.

Note: It is unclear which three properties this refers to, as originally there were to be four licensed houses cleared. I suspect that it means the Oddfellows, Ship, and Jubilee.

Folkestone Express 24 November 1934.

Council Meeting Extract.

A general scheme for the re-housing of the Radnor Street area was definitely approved by the General Purposes Committee of the Folkestone Town Council at their meeting yesterday (Thursday).

The Borough Surveyor submitted a report and description of the proposed lay-out of the Radnor Street area.

The proposal assumes that the licensed houses will be moved to alternative and more commodious sites, and it is desirable that these premises should be moved, as only by these means can a symmetrical and generally accepted lay-out be obtained.

Folkestone Express 26 January 1935.

Editorial.

The Folkestone Council are making material progress with the scheme for the clearance of the slums in Radnor Street, and this will undoubtedly be pleasing to the majority of Folkestone people. Practically all opposition to the scheme in the Council Chamber has vanished, and it is clear that the members are determined that without any delay now the operations will be pushed forward to a successful conclusion. Yesterday the General Purposes Committee considered the Health Committee minutes in connection with the further development of the scheme, and the members were almost unanimous concerning the Committee's decisions. These were mainly concerned with the licensed houses in teh area. These might have provided a very knotty problem, for they were left out of the proposed scheme by the Health Minister's order. Unless something had been done in this direction three of the houses would have remained as they were, and would have undoubtedly proved an eyesore set amidst a modern and what will be a model housing estate. The Town Clerk (Mr. C.F. Nicholson) was instructed to negotiate with the owners of the Jubilee Inn, the Oddfellows Arms and the Ship Inn, and he is certainly to be complimented upon the able manner in which he carried out those negotiations, and which will certainly contribute towards the ultimate success of the scheme. The present three houses will, if the proposals go through as it is hoped, be demolished and will be re-built within the layout of the whole scheme. This will necessitate an exchange of land, and the owners will receive an added piece of land. Another licensed house in the area will disappear, but that will be a matter of purchase. The re-erection of modern licensed houses will certainly add to the effectiveness of the clearance of the whole of the area. The purchase of three houses in Radnor Street not included in the order will also give added scope for dealing with the whole of the area in a manner which will resound to the credit of Folkestone. In order that the re-housing of people from the area and other areas can be efficaciously carried out, the Committee yesterday also agreed to the erection of 32 additional houses on the Hill Road Housing Estate. Everyone who has consideration for those people who have had to live in houses not worthy of being called houses will assuredly agree with this extension of the Corporation estate. It looks like being full steam ahead now with regard to the Radnor Street slum clearance, and those who have regard for the fair name of Folkestone will be exceedingly pleased.

Council Meeting Extract.

Yesterday (Thursday) the General Purposes Committee of the Folkestone Town Council had before them the recommendations of the Health Committee regarding the Radnor Street slum clearance scheme, and by their approval considerable progress will be made in the proposals for the demolition of the property. The recommendations include the demolition of three of the licensed houses on the sit and their removal on to different sites, and the removal of one house altogether.

The Health Committee's recommendations were as follows:- Radnor Street Area: (a) Licensed Houses: The Town Clerk reported that, as instructed by the Committee, he had been in negotiation with the owners of the licensed houses excluded from the provisions of the Folkestone (Radnor Street No. 1) Housing Confirmation Order, 1934. The result of the negotiations is as follows: Jubilee Inn: The owners of this house are prepared to erect a new house on the site provisionally allocated for this purpose in the lay-out plan approved by the Council, subject to the cleared site being conveyed to them in exchange for the site of the existing Jubilee Inn. Oddfellows Arms: The owners of this house are also prepared to erect a new house on the site provisionally allocated for this purpose in the lay-out plan approved by the Council. This proposal will also involve an exchange of lands, and is subject to the Corporation agreeing to compensate the tenant for his trade fixtures and fittings, such compensation to be fixed by a valuer to be agreed upon. Ship Inn: No definite decision has yet been received from the owners of this house, but it is likely that they will also agree to demolish and re-build this house on a site in the vicinity of the present house. The arrangement will also involve an exchange of lands. The whole of the above mentioned arrangements are, of course, subject to the approval of the Licensing Justices.

Resolved that the committee approve in principle of the above mentioned arrangements.

Councillor Lillie said that meeting was brought forward a week in order that the negotiations which the Town clerk had had in connection with the licensed houses could be considered. If the licence holders had to transfer their licence from the present house to the house it was proposed to build no time should be lost in considering the recommendations in order that the owners could be informed so that they could appear before the Justices at the Brewster Sessions and make application for their transfer. He would like the Committee to express their approval of those negotiations, and also to make any remarks they wished in regard to any items on those proceedings. He moved that the minutes be approved. Alderman Mrs. Gore seconded.

Councillor Barfoot: Do you not think as the public houses are to be pulled down an attempt should be made to reduce the number there? There certainly does not appear to be any need for three in teh area. Cannot an application be made to the licensing authorities to have the number reduced?

Councillor Mrs. Thiselton: How many houses have to be sacrificed if the Ship Inn is to be given a plot?

The Town Clerk: If it remains as it is it will take the site of two houses.

Councillor Hart asked the Town Clerk whether the Ministry of Health did not state that the licensed houses should not be reduced.

The Town Clerk: They did not say that. The Ministry excluded the licensed houses under the Compulsory Purchase Order, which prevented you from acquiring the properties. The point raised by Councillor Barfoot is quite a different matter. I understand representations were made comparatively recently to have one removed.

Alderman Stainer: That was about a year ago.

The Town Clerk: And the licensing Justices decided not to refuse the licence.

Councillor Barfoot: The circumstances have altered.

The Mayor: In what respect?

The Town clerk: There is one house going. We are acquiring one of the four there at present.

Councillor Johnson: Have we any information about trade done by these houses – the barrelage?

Councillor Gadd: On a point of order. Is this not a question of slum clearance and not redundancy of licence? Have we any authority for dealing with redundancy this morning?

The Mayor: We have not. It will have to be brought up by an outside authority. At the present time it is not before us.

Councillor Mrs. Thiselton said they offered doubling the plot of land for the re-building of the public houses. Land constituted wealth, so they were offering something in the shape of wealth to the owners of the licensed houses. They were having to buy those new houses, and they had a number of deficiencies which were caused through having to give up that land.

The Town Clerk: It is not so.

Councillor Mrs. Thiselton said when they were in Committee the Town clerk asked the Borough Engineer why he could not squash the houses up a little more, and the Borough Engineer said it was impossible. It was then discussed that they should buy the three additional houses.

The Mayor: That was more from the point of view of giving a better approach to the houses.

Councillor Thiselton: I deny that.

The Town Clerk said he wished to explain that the Minister merely said that they were not to spend £20,000 to buy public houses.

Councillor Mrs. Thiselton said it was no use discussing that; the public houses were there. She was referring to the first meeting after the Ministry's decision was published.

The Town Clerk said the Minister's order excluded the public houses in order that the expense of acquiring them might be avoided. As, at any rate, two of them interfered with the lay-out it became incumbent upon them to arrange for their removal on some terms. The owners had agreed to remove them all to other sites on the terms of exchanging land. They, therefore, got the houses removed from their present sites as they desired, at no cost other than that the sites on which they were going were slightly larger than the sites on which the present houses stood. “I have”, he said “seen the Ministry of Health of those proposals. They think the proposals before you are extremely satisfactory”. They had got the removal of the three licensed places from their present lay-out at a very small cost indeed.

Councillor Davis said in four or five years' time the question of redundancy might come up again. Would it not then cost more than it would today to reduce the number? That was what he thought Councillor Barfoot was driving at.

The Town clerk: Why should it be suggested in five years that you would want to buy a new house?

Councillor Davis: It would not cost so much now.

The Town Clerk said the question of redundancy had nothing to do with the Council. If there was a wish to reduce them in five or six years' time there was the question of redundancy to consider, and that would have to be decided by the Compensation Authority.

The Mayor: This question does not come within the scope of this Council.

Councillor Barfoot: Was it not understood that on the site of Nos. 5, 7, and 9 a public house would be built on that corner?

Several members: No.

Councillor Kent said if that scheme was carried out they would have three modern public houses with adequate accommodation, which they did not possess now. The arrangements were, he considered, splendid.

The Mayor said he was present at the meeting of the Health Committee, and he thought they were all indebted to the Town Clerk for the very able manner in which he had carried out very delicate negotiations. He thought the Council had done exceedingly well, and he considered the best thing they could do was to agree to those recommendations unanimously.

The resolution approving the minutes was carried, only Mrs. Thiselton voting against it.

Folkestone Express 16 February 1935.

Annual Licensing Sessions.

The annual Licensing Sessions was held on Wednesday at the Folkestone Town Hall, when the Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) reported that there had only been 15 convictions for drunkenness, the number being the same as the previous year. One licence, that of the Mechanics Arms, was referred to the adjourned licensing sessions, all the others being renewed. The licensing hours were extended for the whole of the summer time period by half an hour, from 10 p.m. to 10.30 p.m. on weekdays.

Mr. R.G. Wood presided, and a number of Magistrates were on the Bench.

Radnor Street Licensed Houses.

Several of the clergy and ministers and representatives of various religions and temperance bodies were present in Court, evidently with a view to watching the proceedings concerning the licensed houses in the Radnor Street area. Mr. C.F. Nicholson, the Town Clerk, was also present.

The Chairman asked the Town Clerk if he had anything to say.

Mr. Nicholson said he really did not quite understand the position with regard to the licences in the Radnor Street area. Did they want him to explain what the Corporation's proposals would be?

The Clerk (Mr. C. Rootes): These licences will be renewed today?

Mr. Nicholson: Certainly.

The Clerk: Nothing comes in force until next year?

Mr. Nicholson: The Corporation do not own any of the licences for the moment. I did not anticipate I should have to explain anything today.

The Chairman: We are asked to renew four licences in the area. We have no official information. It is a question whether they should be renewed or referred to the adjourned sessions. We know something by newspapers. We can defer the renewal and in the meantime think over what action we shall take.

Mr. Nicholson: The owners of these houses are not represented this morning. Is it proper for me to say anything about it?

The Chairman: Why are you here?

Mr. Nicholson: I did not ask to be here.

The Rev. Dr. Carlile: Is this an application now being made for the renewal of the four licences? If so, have the applications been made in order?

The Clerk, to Mr. Nicholson: Is there anything you have to officially mention? In the ordinary course there is an application for the renewal of all the licences, which does not affect what you are doing in the Radnor Street area.

Mr. Nicholson: I am not making any application this morning.

The Chairman: We would like to have some information of what is likely to happen.

Mr. Nicholson said as they were probably aware the Corporation had submitted to the Ministry of Health a compulsory purchase order. There were four licensed houses in the area. The Ministry declined to allow the Corporation to purchase three of the houses and they were struck out of the order. The remaining house, the Packet Boat, would be acquired by the Corporation as a going concern. It so happened that the Jubilee, the Ship, and the Oddfellows Arms, where they now stood, interfered with the proposed lay-out of the new houses, and on instructions he entered into negotiations with the owners. Two of them, the Jubilee and the Oddfellows Arms, agreed to re-erect, subject to the approval of the Magistrates, on alternative sites that would enable the Corporation's lay-out scheme to be proceeded with. With regard to the Ship Inn, he had not yet received the decision of the owners as to whether they were prepared to pull down and re-erect a new house. The terms of the arrangements with the Jubilee and the Oddfellows were subject to applications which would be made to them in due course. There was to be an exchange of land in connection with them. There was to be no cost to the Corporation other than paying the tenant for the trade fixtures. With regard to the Ship Inn, he had not obtained information whether they were prepared to pull down. That house did not interfere with the scheme so much as the other two. It would be much better for the scheme if that house was pulled down and re-erected, but the Corporation could not insist upon it. The other owners had done all they could to assist in their scheme. The Packet Boat would be definitely acquired. Notice to treat had been served and a claim had been sent in. The Ministry confirmed the order which included that house.

Mr. E.H. Philcox, who stated he represented a number of residents in that area, said he would like to raise a question on the renewal of the houses.

The Clerk: I cannot see you have any locus standi.

Mr. Philcox asked if the matter for the removals would come up at the adjourned sessions. If so, he would be there to object. It seemed to him they would be able that day to only provisionally renew the licences for the time being, or mention that they would be referred on the ground of redundancy.

Dr. Carlile said a very considerable number of residents were interested in those four licences. If there was any consideration of the question of the renewal of the licences they definitely asked that their views might be considered in reference to redundancy.

The Chairman enquired what the police view was.

The Chief Constable said at the Magistrates' primary meeting he received instructions to go into the question of redundancy and ascertain whether it would be possible to differentiate between the houses. He did so and he found some considerable difficulty in saying because it was an established fact that there were not too many licensed houses for the summer trade in the area. All the houses did extremely well. Whether they were structurally adapted or not was open to enquiry. The houses less structurally fitted were doing a better trade. More customers were in those pokey houses than in the better houses. There was, he supposed, a psychological reason for it. He had had a system of paying monthly visits and it gave him a line on the trade. He had selected a certain number of houses and they had put them into three groups.

The Chief Constable then described the groups and gave details of the numbers of customers in them at certain times. The first group consisted of the Mechanics Arms, the Honest Lawyer, and the Harvey Hotel. The second group included the Harbour Hotel, the True Briton, the London and Paris Hotel, and the Princess Royal. The third group were the Alexandra Hotel, Royal George, South Foreland, the Wonder, the Pavilion Shades, the Chequers, the Wellington, the Royal Oak, and the Lifeboat.

The Magistrates retired to consider the matter and on their return the Chairman said they had decided to renew all the licences with the exception of the Mechanics Arms, which they renewed until the adjourned licensing sessions when it would be considered with regard to redundancy.

Dr. Carlile: Then no objection can be taken here and now, or in any other place, to the four licences involved in the scheme?

The Clerk: There will be applications for removals later and anyone can be heard at the time those applications are made. That is the position.

The Chairman: It will be better for the objections to be raised when the transfer comes along.

Dr. Carlile: It puts us at a very serious disadvantage. There will only be a question of renewal then.

The Chairman: It is a question of renewing them for one year now.

Dr. Carlile: It will be a question of the removal of licences that have already been granted.

The Chairman: That is the position.

Folkestone Express 7 September 1935.

Tuesday, September 3rd: Before Alderman T.S. Franks, Alderman Mrs. E. Gore, Dr. F. Wolverson, and Mr. R.J. Stokes.

William Richard Page and Henry Waller, two Folkestone young men, were summoned for being idle and disorderly persons on August 24th, by fighting. The defendants admitted the offence.

P.S. Lawrence said at 10.50 p.m. on August 24th he was outside the police box in Beach Street when he saw Page walk towards him. He was rather unsteady and had been drinking, but he was quiet and orderly. When he got about 25 yards past him and opposite the Royal George public house, Page stopped and approached about ten or twenty youths talking under the railway arch. Without any more to do one of the youths stepped out from the crowd. They both took off their coats and struck a fighting attitude. There was only one blow struck, and the next he saw was that both men were on their backs on the ground. He got Waller away from the ground and told him to go home. He did so. Waller had been drinking, but was not drunk. He (witness) went back to the crowd, and Page was still knocked out unconscious. He was bleeding from a cut at the back of his head, and he (witness) summoned the motor ambulance, and Page was taken to the Royal Victoria Hospital, where two stitches were inserted in the wound, and the defendant was detained.

The Clerk (Mr. C. Rootes): Was there anyone else involved in it?

P.S. Lawrence said apparently the defendant struck the road pretty hard. It was all over in less than a minute.

Page told the Magistrates he knew nothing about it until he woke up in the Hospital on Sunday morning. Waller started the trouble when they were in the Oddfellows, where he was throwing his money about. That caused the bother.

Waller said he was in the same place having a drink. He could not have flashed his money about, as he had only 17/2½. Page had the money, not he. Page caused the trouble, and that was the result.

The Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) said Waller was fined on May 31st, and had various convictions against him, but he had been going on very well recently. With regard to Page, there was only one minor conviction against him, but during the last two or three weeks he had become a general nuisance, always ready to pick a quarrel and backed it up with a strong right arm.

The Chairman said the defendants would be bound over to be of good behaviour for a period of twelve months, and would have to pay the costs, 4/- each.

Folkestone Express 5 October 1935.

Local News.

L/Bomb. Frederick Shenton, Royal Artillery, appeared before the Folkestone Magistrates on Saturday charged with committing wilful damage the previous evening. It was alleged that he broke a window in the door of a bar in the Oddfellows Inn, the property of Mrs. Florence Skinner, and further with doing damage to a pane of glass at the Jubilee Inn, the property of Harold Chawner.

George Taylor said he was in the Oddfellows public house the previous evening when he saw seven or eight men including the prisoner there. They had been drinking and were swearing. The licensee asked them to stop swearing and refused to serve them. As they were going out the prisoner put his fist through the window of the door. He followed the men out and when they got to the Jubilee Inn he saw the prisoner break away from his companions and put his fist through another window. He pointed the prisoner out to the police and they arrested him. In his opinion the prisoner was not drunk.

The prisoner said they were playing about and his arm swung through the window.

James Albert Skinner, a son of the licensee of the Oddfellows Inn, said there were seven or eight men in the bar and they began to get a little rowdy and in his opinion had had enough. The prisoner's mates had to lift him into the passage as he did not want to go and seemed excited. He banged on a door in the passage and then put his fist through the window. It would cost 1/- or 1/6 to replace the glass.

In reply to the prisoner, witness said he served the men with beers and whisky.

Defendant said he had four whiskies, and that was the cause of the trouble because he was not used to it.

Harold Chawner, licensee of the Jubilee Inn, said at 10.15 p.m. he was in the cellar when he heard the smashing of glass. He went out into Radnor Street and found a window about ten inches by nine inches broken.

P.C. Williams said at about 10.15 p.m. he received a complaint from the first witness, who said a crowd of soldiers in civilian clothes were coming along Radnor Street smashing windows. He went into the street and saw the prisoner and noticed that his right hand was bleeding. The men were not drunk. He told the prisoner he would be taken into custody. He was charged at the police station, and he replied “I do not want to say anything”. When he took him into custody he saud “Won't you let me pay for it now?”

Defendant said he was full of drink and he was sorry it had happened.

An officer in the prisoner's regiment said the prisoner was a non-commissioned officer. He was a good soldier and it was just a foolish prank, as he said.

Chief Inspector Pittock said in May last year Shenton assisted police officers to bring a prisoner to the police station. The trouble the previous night was due to the fact that he had some drink.

The Chairman (Alderman G. Spurgen) said it was a sad case for one in the defendant's position. He had received his first step in the Army by being a N.C.O. The Bench did not want to be hard with him, and if he paid the value of the broken windows, 3/6, and 4/- costs the case would be dismissed.

Folkestone Express 12 February 1938.

Annual Licensing Sessions.

The annual licensing sessions for Folkestone were held at the Police Court on Wednesday, when the Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) presented his annual report, from which it appeared that although there was an increase in the number of cases of drunkenness, only three of them concerned residents of the whole of the borough. A satisfactory feature was that the licence holders had conducted their premises exceedingly well and no proceedings had been taken against any of them.

The Magistrates on the Bench were Councillor R.G. Wood, Dr. W.W. Nuttall, Eng. Rear Admiral L.J. Stephens, Alderman Mrs. E. Gore, Alderman W. Hollands, Alderman J.W. Stainer, Mrs. Saunders, Mr. P. Fuller, Miss Grace Broome-Giles, and Alderman G.A. Gurr.

The Oddfellows Inn.

Plans were submitted for building the Oddfellows Inn on The Stade and the Magistrates approved of them on condition one slight interior alteration was effected.