From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 23 May, 1863.

SUPPOSED UNLAWFUL PURPOSE

A charge of "supposed unlawful purpose" was brought by police against William Bowman, a Dutch seaman employed in the packet service, having been found in the middle of the night concealed under the bed in the room of a maid servant at the "Old Post Office Inn," Snargate Street. He was also charged with assaulting the police.

The landlady of the "Old Post Office" said that the prisoner came into his house between eleven and twelve o'clock at night, and she thought he went out again soon afterwards, but after the house was closed and she was getting to bed, he was found, much to the terror of herself and the other female inmates, concealed under one of the beds. He either was, or effected to be, under the influence of drink, and as she could make nothing of him she sent for the police, who took him into custody. She now believed that he might have been under the influence of drink and not quite conscious of what he was about, and she therefore did not desire to press the charge.

The charge of assaulting the police was then gone into, it appeared, according to police-constable Maxted, that the prisoner "took violent" on his way to the station-house, and assaulted both him and police-constable Russell.

The Mayor said the Dutchman could not be permitted to do unpunished what Englishmen had to suffer for, and fined the prisoner 2s. 6d. and the costs, which he paid.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 9 April, 1864.

ASSAULTING THE POLICE

Abraham Gore and Reuben Kettle, two young fellows, the former being no stranger to the officers of the Court, were charged with assaulting the police in the execution of their duty.

 Police-constable Corrie: This morning, shortly after twelve o'clock, there was a disturbance outside the "Old Post Office" public-house at the lower part of Snargate Street. The two defendants were among the mob, and they were making a great noise by jumping, hollowing, and pushing each other against  the shutters of the houses. I warned them that if they wanted to keep out of trouble they had better go home quietly, upon which Gore said he should stop there as long as he liked. As they continued to make a disturbance, I took Gore into custody, whereupon Kettle struck me several times across the head with an umbrella. Gore was very violent: he kicked and struck me, and tore the hair from my head by the handful. During our progress to the station-house, the defendant Kettle incited a soldier to strike me with his belt, saying that would soon make me drop my prisoner. Police-constable Maxted then came to my assistance, and he took Kettle into custody, but in consequence of the obstruction I received from the mob, was afterwards obliged to release him to help me in removing Gore to the lock-up. Kettle was taken into custody again this morning in King Street.

Police-constable Edward Maxted corroborated the major part of the last witness's evidence, and added that in the scuffle Corrie's hat was knocked into the road, and the mob immediately set to playing "kick-ball" with it.

Gore, in defence, asserted in the first place that he was unnecessarily taken into custody, and in the second place that the constable used a great deal more force than he was justified in doing, and that it was not until he had nearly strangled him by forcing his knuckles into his throat that he offered and resistance. He called a witness named Edward Allen to corroborate his statement, but his evidence did not materially effect the constable's assertions.

Kettle averred that he "said nothing to nobody," and denied that he attempted anything like assault upon the police. He was waiter at the "Old Post Office," and when Gore was taken into custody he was endeavouring to get a noisy soldier away from the house.

In reply to the Bench, the Superintendent of Police said he knew nothing against the character of Gore.

Mr Stride: But we know you Kettle. You belong to the East Kent Militia, don't you?

Kettle: Yes, sir, and I have to go up for further training next week.

Mr. Stride: That is rather bad; for this may prevent you.

The Bench then fined the defendants, 5s. and 6s. costs, and allowed them till the evening to find the money.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 23 April, 1864.

ALLEGED DISORDERLY HOUSE

Amelia Halliday, landlady of the "Old Post Office Inn," Snargate Street was summonsed for unlawfully permitting drunkenness and disorderly conduct at her house on the 14th instant. Defendant made application for the case to be adjourned till Friday (yesterday), as her solicitor was unable to attend, which the Bench granted.

CHARGE OF KEEPING A DISORDERLY HOUSE

It appeared that on the night of the 14th inst. there was a great disturbance and fighting at the defendant's house. Police-constable Faith entered, and found a lot of disorderly persons assembled, including some prostitutes. Mr. Minter appeared for the defendant. Sergeant Barton one of the witnesses said the scenes of drunkenness and disorder that were to be witnessed nightly at he "Old Post Office" were disgusting. He himself had seen commissioned officers, non-commissioned officers, private soldiers, and prostitutes, all bundled out of the house drunk together. Mr. Minter addressed the Bench and called several witnesses to contradict the statement of the police, which he declared were influenced by a certain animus of the cause of which he was ignorant. The cause of the disturbance, it was contended, was the conduct of a man named Newington, who came into the house drunk, and got enraged because the landlady would not supply him with more drink. - The case was dismissed.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 15 June, 1866.

CHARGE OF STEALING A WATCH

Ellen Jane Pollard, a woman of the town, was charged with having a watch in her possession supposed to have been stolen, and Henry Harrington, a private in the 44th Regiment, was charged with having committed the robbery.

Superintendent Coram said he desired to have the charge amended, and requested that both the persons might be charged jointly with stealing the watch.

The woman, on the charge being read, said; "The watch was given me by this man (pointing to Harrington) between six and seven o'clock in the morning, on Sunday.

Henry Smith, one of the borough constables, said that in consequence of information received by the police as to the robbery of a watch, he went to the "Old Post Office Inn," Snargate Street, about nine o'clock on the previous evening. He then found the female prisoner had apprehended her on a charge of  stealing the watch in question. She gave the watch up to him, and told him it was given to her by a soldier of the 44th Regiment named Joseph Harrington. In consequence of this statement he went to the quarters of the 44th Regiment that (Tuesday) morning, and apprehended the male prisoner. He had previously taken the woman into custody.

The police believed that if the prisoners were remanded till Friday, they should be able to discover the owner of the watch, who it appeared was supposed to be a "young man from the country."

The magistrates remanded the case accordingly till Friday (this day).

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 17 May, 1867.

LADY-LIKE AMENITIES

Susan North, a soiled and ruffled dove, was charged, on the information of Winnifred Elliott, a young woman whose face was disfigured with marks of recent bruises, with assaulting her.

The defendant said she was guilty of striking the complainant, but had received ample provocation.

Miss Elliott said she lived in Peter Street, Charlton, and was in front of the bar at the "Old Post Office Inn," between eleven and twelve on Friday night, when the defendant came up, and without any cause whatsoever struck her a blow in the face. Witness did not say a word to the defendant, but was addressing her conversation to a mutual friend. She told defendant she was "wrong," when the defendant struck her a second time, and challenged her to fight. Witness declined to fight, when the defendant hit her a terrible blow in the mouth knocking out one of her teeth. She took out the tooth from her mouth and showed the defendant, who coolly put it into the fire. The black and blue marks on her face were occasioned by the defendant's blows.

The defendant did not attempt to rebut the complainant's statement, but said the complainant gave her the first insult. She begged to say, however, that she should not have forgotten herself so far as to strike her, had she not been overcome with liquor. The truth was, she was drunk.

The complainant: I did not speak to her, gentleman.

The defendant: Begging your pardon, Madam --

Police-constable Sabin (posted between the fair litigants to preserve the peace): Come, come, that'll do. (A laugh.)

Complainant said the state of her face had prevented her from going out to work since the occurrence.

This observation was responded to with a glance of withering scorn from the defendant.

The Magistrates said the defendant certainly could not be justified in striking complainant, and she must pay a fine of 5s. and the costs; in default, seven days' imprisonment.

The defendant said she would "do the imprisonment," and was removed in custody.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 14 June, 1867.

PUBLIC HOUSE ROBBERY

Annie Philips, a respectably dressed woman, who, however, had been previously convicted, was charged with stealing from the kitchen of the "Old Post Office Inn," one silk and four other pocket handkerchiefs.

May Ann Attwood, the landlady of the "Old Post Office Inn," said she last saw the handkerchiefs in the kitchen a little after twelve the previous day. The prisoner came into the house shortly before the handkerchiefs were missed and had two or three glasses of porter. before she left she went to the back part of the premises, and as she was leaving the house witness saw the corner of one of the handkerchiefs, which had escaped from under her cloak, and detained her. The rest were found upon her, and the prisoner then asked witness to forgive her.

This prisoner also asked to be summarily dealt with, and pleaded guilty.

The Magistrates sent her to prison for twenty-eight days, and told her that if she should come before them again she would be committed for trial.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 20 December, 1867.

DRUNK AND DISORDERLY

William Thomas Pacey, a discharged  bugler of the 51st Regiment, was brought up for being drunk and disorderly and causing an obstruction of the footpath in Snargate Street, on the previous night.

Police-constable Sabin said he was on duty in Snargate Street, when his attention was called to the "Old Post Office Inn." He found that the defendant had been put out of the house, and that he was in a very excited state. A mob of nearly 200 people had collected, and the prisoner, who was in liquor, was clamouring for re-admission to the public-house. On the witness appearing prisoner said he had been assaulted by some people in the house, and he wanted witness to go inside and take them into custody. He told prisoner he could not do that, and the prisoner said he should wait outside till the parties came out. He (Sabin) informed him that he could not be suffered to do so, unless he conducted himself in an orderly way; and as he continued to create a disturbance, and witness found it impossible to disperse the mob, he took him into custody.

The prisoner, who was respectably dressed in civilian's clothes, and who possessed a very good address, said he was discharged from the 51st on the previous day, and on going into the "Old Post Office" the people there took him for a man with plenty of money. They wanted him to treat them, and on his declining, they endeavoured to pick a quarrel with him and assaulted him. As soon as he got outside he looked about for a policeman, being desirous of giving some of the parties into custody.

In reply to the Magistrates, the man said he was discharged from his regiment with a good character and was desirous of making his way to Boston in Lincolnshire.

The Magistrates dismissed him with a caution, on condition of his making his way to Boston in Lincolnshire forthwith.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 3 April, 1868.

DISORDERLIES.

Elizabeth Killerby was charged with disorderly conduct in Snargate Street, early the same morning.

Police-constable Terry, hearing a disturbance near the "Old Post Office Inn," endeavoured to persuade the brawlers to go home. The defendant declined to comply with his request, and on his attempting to remove her she struck him.

James Dun, Edmund Gillespie, George Lewis, and Henry Irons, four men, were charged obstructing the police, and endeavouring to rescue the woman from Terry's custody.

Terry said he had taken the woman into custody when she called out to the prisoners to come back and assist her. The four prisoners returned and declared that witness should not take the woman into custody. Sergeant Stevens and police-constable Bowles came up at this time, and rendered him assistance.

Sergeant Stevens saw the men round Terry when he had the woman in custody near the "Old Post Office," and again in another part of Snargate Street near the police station. He and Bowles then took the three men, Dun, Gillespie, and Lewis, into custody. The other man escaped.

Police-constable Bowles corroborated the other evidence.

The Magistrates had no doubt that the defendants did interfere with the police; but considered that an admonition would meet the case, and dismissed them with a caution.

The woman was also dismissed.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 24 April, 1868.

DISORDERLY CONDUCT.

Alexander Gun, Mate of the Niagara, a vessel lying in the harbour, and George Smith, a seaman belonging to the same ship, were charged by police-constable Corrie with drunkenness and disorderly conduct, early the same morning, in Snargate Street.

The defendants, who professed great indignation at finding themselves in custody, denied the charge and declared that the police had unwarrantably interfered with them, and that they were, therefore, the injured parties by having been justifiably taken into custody. They stated that they had witnesses to prove their vision of the story.

The Magistrates told them that any testimony they liked to bring forward should be heard, and directed the witnesses to leave the Court.

Police-constable Corrie said he was on duty in Snargate Street, early the same morning, when he saw four men, the two defendants and two others, leave the "Old Post Office" public-house. Some prostitutes were near the spot; and as the whole of the parties were very noisy, he went up to them, and tried to get them to disperse. They went away, and the two defendants with a couple of other sailors entered a fish shop near the spot, after which they went into the "Lord Warden" public house. After leaving the "Lord Warden" they were very disorderly in the street, and he went up to them and told them they must not make such a noise at that hour in the morning. The defendants, however, were heedless of his interference, and declared they meant to have a lark. One mounted a ladder which was tied to a scaffold-pole near the spot. On telling them they were the worse for liquor and had better get to their ship, they boasted of being "cunning drunk," and said they knew perfectly well what they were about. They ultimately ran down the street, cheering at the top of their voices. Shortly afterward he saw the two defendants coming up the street again, and he then, with assistance of another constable, took them into custody.

Police-constable Bowles was in Snargate Street about ten minutes past one, and heard the disturbance. He ran towards the spot, and met Gun, whom he advised to go home. Gun asserted that this was "a free country," and declared his intention of doing as he liked. He saw the defendants go over Palmerston Bridge, in the direction of the ship, and told them that if they returned and made any further disturbance he should have to lock them up.

The defendants declared that they were sober, and were improperly interfered with in the first instance by Corrie. They were on their way to the police-station to report him, when they were taken into custody.

They called, William Quinn, a seaman on board the Niagara, who corroborated their story, as did Walter Penfold, another seaman of their ship. It transpired, however, that these two witnesses were the two other men who were in the defendants' company. The last witness, in cross-examination  by Corrie, admitted that they were singing and making a little more noise than they ought to have made at that hour in the morning.

The Magistrates, said that Gun, as an officer of the ship, ought to have known better than to defy the police. It was impossible to permit the peace of the town to be disturbed in this way, in the middle of the night, with impunity. The Bench though that Gun was the most to blame, and they would therefore fine him 14s., including costs. The case against Smith would be dismissed. As for the police, the Magistrates thought  there was no ground for complaining that they had exceeded their duty; indeed they appeared to have acted with great forbearance.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 21 April, 1870.

CHARGE OF STABBING AT DOVER

Joaquim José Carreria, a Portuguese seaman, was charged with unlawfully and maliciously wounding Samuel Pascall, at Dover, on the 25th December last. He pleaded not guilty.

Mr, Smith appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Biron, instructed by Mr. T. Lewis, solicitor, of Dove, on behalf of the Portuguese consulate, for the prisoner.

Mr. A. Grossman was sworn as interpreter; and it appeared that the prisoner had had the opportunity of being tried by a mixed jury of foreigners and Englishmen; but had elected to be tried by a Jury composed entirely of Englishmen.

Samuel Pascall sworn: I am a sailor, and live at No. 1, Round Tower Lane, Dover. On the night of the 25th December last, about a quarter past eleven, I was in Snargate Street, opposite the “Old Post Office Inn,” in the company of another young man named John Rigden. I saw a crowd opposite the “Post Office Inn,” and suddenly three men rushed from the direction of the public-house. Two of them tackled Rigden, and the other tackled me. The one who tackled me, finding that I was getting the better of him, pilled out his knife, and stabbed me. I cannot say whether that man was the prisoner. I called out that I was stabbed, and I was taken to the Grand Shaft Guard, where I saw the prisoner. I afterwards saw him at the Police Station, where a doctor attended to the injuries I had received.

By the Court: two other young men, Hicks and parsons, were in our company; but were behind us.

Henry Hicks, a costermonger living in Middle Row, said he was in company of the prosecutor on Christmas evening. When near the “Old Post Office Inn” he saw the prisoner run across the road with a knife in his hand. The prisoner rushed at Pascall and knocked him down. Two others went towards Rigden. Witness ran back to Parsons, and on coming back to the spot they found the prisoner and Pascall on the ground. While the prisoner was on the top of Pascall, Pascall cried, “I am stabbed, I'm stabbed.” The prisoner then got up and endeavoured to get away, but was stopped by some soldiers at the bottom of the Shaft. He did not lose sight of the prisoner till the soldiers stopped him.

By Mr. Biron: There were three foreigners; but although I am positive as to the identity of the prisoner, I could not swear to the other two.

By the Court: A great many people were present on the spot. I had not been drinking. When I returned with Parsons the prisoner was on the top of Pascall. No other person was upon Pascall but the prisoner, though the struggle between Rigden and the other men was close to the spot where Pascall was struggling with the prisoner.

John Rigden, a mariner, said he recollected being opposite the “Old Post Office Inn,” about a quarter past eleven on Christmas night. He had been in company during the evening with Pascall, Hicks, and Parsons. Three men rushed from the “Post Office Inn” as they were passing. One knocked Pascall down, and the other two knocked down witness. He afterwards assisted to take prisoner off Pascall. He had no doubt as to his identity. He picked up the prisoner's belt, which he had thrown off. He saw the prisoner with a sheath-knife in his hand. He kept the prisoner in view till the police took him into custody.

By Mr. Biron: two men were on me, and my hands were pretty full with them (a laugh), but I afterwards got clear of them and went to Pascall's assistance. I could not identify the men who struggled with me.

By the Recorder: I saw the prisoner actually stab Pascall; but I could not say where the blows took effect. There was a lamp near the spot, and it had been snowing just before.

Police-constable Bowles: About half-past eleven on Christmas night, I was near the “Old Post Office Inn,” when I found a knife, partially covered with snow, just in the gutter. On shaking the snow off the blade I found blood upon it.

Police-constable Henry Nixon deposed to taking the prisoner into custody. He found near the “Old Post Office Inn” a sheath which the knife which had been produced fitted.

The other man in company with the prosecutor Parsons, was also sworn, and he identified the prisoner as the man who was struggling with Pascall. He saw the prisoner have the knife in his hand.

Mr. Biron remarked that the witness did not say before the Magistrates that he saw the prisoner with a knife.

The witness said he only answered the questions put to him before the Magistrates, and he did not recollect that that question was asked him.

Mr. John Walter, a member of the Royal College of Surgeons, said he was called to see the prosecutor at the Police Station. He found that he had three incised wounds on the arm and a puncture wound in the side. The latter was not deep – about half an inch. The wounds he found on Pascall might have been caused by the knife produced.

Br Mr. Biron: The wounds were not serious; but one – the wound in the side – was near a vital part.

The statement of the prisoner was read, from which it appeared that there had been a disturbance in the public house previous to the struggle in the street, and that he and his companions, suddenly rushing out, thought that Pascall and the other men were some of those who had insulted them.

Mr. Biron, who said he appeared at the instant of the Portuguese consul, then addressed the Jury on the prisoner's behalf, impressing on them the possibility of the witnesses who had sworn to the prisoner's identity being mistaken. Seeing the nature of the struggle and all the circumstances of the case it might well have happened that the prosecutor was stabbed by one of the two other men who had escaped. He said he should show that the prisoner had no knife in his possession on the evening in question. It would be seen, from the evidence he would call, that the prisoner, while at a public-house in the early part of the evening, borrowed a knife to cut some food with which he had provided himself, and as he should show that he must have passed his time between this hour and the hour he was found at the “Old Post Office Inn” in another public-house, it would be seen that he had no opportunity of returning to the ship to obtain it. Indeed, he should show that the prisoner's effects were handed over to the Portuguese consul, on the vessel to which he belonged leaving the port of Dover, and that among those effects was his knife in the proper place in his chest. He thought, therefore, there was a strong reason for a doubt as to the prisoner's guilt, and he besought the Jury, if they shared that opinion, to give the prisoner the benefit of it.

He then called Mr. James Squire Stone, the landlord of the “Clarendon Inn,” Snargate Street, who said he remembered the prisoner coming into his house on the evening of Christmas Day. He called for a pint of ale and took from his pocket some bread and cheese, and asked witness if he would lend him a knife to eat with it. Witness lent him a small white-handled knife (not the one produced).

Bt Mr. Smith: The prisoner was wearing a sailor's jacket. I did not notice that he was wearing a belt.

J. W. Weidmann: I keep a beer shop. ("Northampton Arms") The prisoner came to my house shortly after nine on the evening of Christmas Day, and remained there with his comrades till about half-past ten. He had been in the house frequently before while the vessel had been in the harbour, so that I knew him.

By Mr. Smith: I did not notice whether the prisoner wore a belt.

Mr. Grossman was called to speak to a statement made to him by the prisoner after the examination before the Magistrates was over, to the effect that he had left his knife on board his vessel on the evening in question; but the Court ruled that his evidence was inadmissible.

Charles James Driver, clerk to the Portuguese consul, deposed to receiving the effects of the prisoner from the captain of the ship to which the prisoner belonged. The inventory produced was a list of the articles.

Mr. Uriah Bradford, in the employ of Mr. Latham, the Portuguese vice-consul, said he received from the last witness a chest and bags, with the inventory produced. He examined the goods in the presence of a policeman, and found in its proper place in the chest a knife.

Mr. S. M. Latham, the Portuguese vice-consul at this port, said he had received a letter from the captain of the ship Juanita, to which the prisoner belonged, and in consequence he had taken steps to have the prisoner defended.

Mr. Smith briefly addressing the Jury in reply, pointed out that the evidence on the part of the defence was entirely negative, while the evidence on the part of the prosecution was positive, and it was the duty of the Jury to give their verdict according to the evidence adduced before them.

The learned recorder then summed up, and the Jury found the prisoner guilty.

The Court, in consideration of the long period the prisoner had already been detained, sentenced him to only one month's imprisonment, with hard labour.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 16 September, 1870. Price 1d.

THE ANNUAL LICENSING DAY

The Borough Magistrates held their annual licensing meeting on Monday last at the Sessions House. The Magistrates on the bench were E. F. Astley (in the Chair), J. F. Crookes, T. E. Back, C. Stein, J. G. Churchward, J. G. Smith, and W. R. Mowll Esqs. Most of the licenses were renewed pro forma. The exceptional cases were the following.

THE OLD POST OFFICE

In this case, the landlady, Mrs. Mary Ann Attwood, was cautioned, and informed that if the general conduct of the house was not improved during the ensuring year she would run great risk of having her licence taken from her at the next licensing day.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 3 March, 1871. Price 1d.

ALLEGED DISORDERLY HOUSE

Mary Ann Atwood, the landlady of the "Old Post Office Inn," Snargate Street, had been summoned on a charge of harbouring disorderly persons at her house, and the case had been adjourned from Friday until to-day. A letter, however, was now handed in to the Bench, after which it was stated that the case would be further adjourned until Friday.

HARBOURING DISORDERLY CHARACTERS

Mary Ann Atwood, whose case had been remanded from Wednesday last, on a charge of harbouring disorderly characters, was dismissed with a caution.