COCK INN Pub of Canterbury

DOVER KENT ARCHIVES

Sort file:- Canterbury, October, 2024.

Page Updated:- Tuesday, 29 October, 2024.

PUB LIST

PUBLIC HOUSES

Paul Skelton

Earliest 1769-

Cock Inn

Latest 1867+

(Name to)

5 Westgate Grove (Water Lane 1832) (Cock Lane 1838)

Canterbury

Above map 1874 identified by Rory Kehoe.

Above photo, August 2017, kindly sent by Rory Kehoe.

Kentish Gazette 22 February 1769.

On Tuesday next will be a Match for One Hundred Guineas, between Two Horses, which are to Trot from the Sign of "Sir John Falstaff," in St. Dunstan's, or the "Cock" without Westgate, Canterbury, to the Fifty-One Mile Stone on Boughton-Hill, and back again, computed about nine Miles and a Half: To start at Ten o'clock precisely.

There will be a genteel Ordinary at the "Three Tunns" in St. Margaret's, exactly at One o'Clock; where the horses may both be seen on Tuesday Morning before starting.

From the Kentish Gazette, 1 February 1842.

Burial Societies.

We understand that the second anniversary of the Westgate £10 Burial Society, held at the "Cock," in Cock-lane, will be held this evening, for the purpose of passing the yearly accounts, and admission of new members. This Society is proceeding in the most satisfactory manner.

Southeastern Gazette, 15 March 1853.

Assault and Robbery at Canterbury.

Richard Miles, 18, and Charles Howell, 24, were indicted for assaulting Charlos Gilbert, and stealing from his person 8s. 1d., and a purse, his money and property, at Canterbury.

Mr. Rose appeared for the prosecution; Mr. Ribton defended both prisoners.

From the statement of the prosecutor, a clerk in the employ of the South Eastern Railway Company, it appeared that in October last, he lodged at the "Cock Inn," Canterbury, and that he went to the "True Briton" public-house, where he met the two prisoners, who entered into conversation with him, and asked him to drink. While there, prosecutor called for bread and cheese, of which Howley partook. On paying for it, prosecutor took out his purse. Howell afterwards said he would have 5s. to go to the fair with. Howell left the house before prosecutor, who upon leaving sometime after, asked Miles to show him the way to the "Cock Inn." Miles promised to do so, but led him down into an orchard, where he struck him a blow in the eye, and afterwards got up a brick for the purpose of striking him, but prosecutor succeeded in taking the brick away from him, and ran away. While running, he was met by the prisoner Howell, who demanded his money, and Miles then pulled out a knife and threatened him that if he did not give Howell his money he would strike him. He then gave the purse to him. Howell then ran away, but Miles followed him into a house, into which Gilbert had run and "knelt before a woman, craving her protection," where he admitted having struck prosecutor, but denied having robbed him, and said the soldier had the money. The prosecutor then gave him into custody, and on the following morning Howell was apprehended at the barracks.

Mr. Ribton admitted that the story of prosecutor was a most improbable one, and called two witnesses to prove an alibi on the part of the prisoner Howell.

The jury found Miles guilty, and acquitted Howell. Prosecutor recommended Miles to mercy, and he was sentenced to eight months’ hard labour.

Kentish Gazette, 22 February 1853.

A Strange Freak.

On Thursday evening a young man engaged a bed at the "Cock" public house in this city, and at about three o'clock on Friday morning got up and left the house by placing some casks, which were in the yard, against the premises, and escaping over the roof of the next house, breaking two panes of glass by placing his feet on them in his descent. He was seen to run down Pound-lane. He left his hat and waistcoat behind, and it is supposed he is insane. He is about twenty-one years of age, of light complexion, with little or no whiskers; and wore on leaving a dark overcoat. In his waistcoat pocket was found the following address — "Alfred Place, near the "Swan" beer shop, New Kent Road."

From Cock Inn Report to Mayor and Magistrates. Guildhall May 22 1856.

"I beg leave to report that the inhabitants about the neighbourhood of the "Cock Public House." Westgate Grove, complain of the manner the House is conducted, there being Prostitutes kept in the House and frequent disturbances with them and soldiers who use this House."

J. Clements, Supt. of Police.

Kentish Gazette, 17 March 1857.

CANTERBURY POLICE COURT. Thursday.

Crim. Con. AND Robbery of a Husband.

Sarah Brown and Richard Adley were brought to the bar on a charge of having robbed the husband of the former under the following circumstances:-

It appeared that John Brown, a shoeing smith, of Old Dover-lane, had had reason for some time past to suspect the fidelity of his wife, the mother of seven children; and on Thursday week she suddenly disappeared, in company of Adley, a blacksmith, with whom she cohabited some days in this city, and afterwards proceeded to Chilham, where Adley had friends, and where Brown caused his wife’s detention on the ground of her having taken with her a considerable sum of money, which she had realised from outstanding bills, she being a dress-maker, and run him into debt at various places, beside taking a shawl belonging to a lady of this city. After the wife was brought to the police-station at Canterbury, her paramour came to see her, when he was also detained, on the ground that he had instigated her to such misconduct and been accessary to her decamping with the money and the shawl. Well — this was a lame sort of case for the magistrates to deal with, for they could sec no offence for which the wife was legally responsible; and though she had taken the shawl belonging to another party, still it was doubted whether it was an net of felony — and it was a long time before the bench could get to handle it at all. Mr. Delasaux appeared for the accused, and after a deal of twisting and turning the following evidence was taken:—

Brown, the prosecutor, stated that his wife left her home on Wednesday week; he waited up till one o'clock in the morning, but she did not return. Having subsequently discovered her whereabouts he went to Chilham, where he found her, and received from her the key of a box. He gave her into custody for stealing a shawl, the property of a lady in this city. This was a little before five o’clock the previous afternoon. She was brought to Canterbury, and when at the station Adley came, on which his wife said to him (Adley), "I want my money." Adley then took from small bag six sovereigns, which he said was not his (Brown's) as he had never earned it. He refused to take it, and told the police to take charge of it. In cross-examination he admitted that his wife was in the habit of receiving a goodly sum at dress-making, and out of the proceeds she paid for the materials that she used; she did not account to him generally, though sometimes she handed money to him. She had not done so within the last month, though she had within three months — particularly a sum of 30s., — because he wanted to make up a bill.

T. F. Russell, of the "Cock" public-house in Westgate Grove stated the couple came to his house on the Wednesday in the previous week, where they stayed till Monday, lived as man and wife, and slept together. Sometimes one and sometimes the other paid for what was had; he sold her a box, which she paid for, and it was addressed to "Mr. Smith, London Bridge station, - to be left till called for."

Thomas Goldup, constable of Chilham, took the wife into custody the previous day at the instigation of her husband, who charged her with having stolen a shawl. He afterwards went to the house of Mr. Adley (father of the male prisoner) where there was a box, which the prisoner said, he knew nothing about. He afterwards accompanied them; to the police station.

Police constable Holloway was at the station when the two were there. On Adley's appearing the female demanded of him her money, on winch he gave her six sovereigns, stating that she had had the seventh which she entrusted him with. The husband then gave him in charge for receiving some of his money from his wife. Adley produced 53 sovereigns which he had in his pocket, and 5s. 2d. in silver and copper, which he claimed as his own.

Mr. Delasaux said, admitting all the money that the wife claimed belonged to her husband, there could be no charge against the other prisoner unless he received it with a guilty knowledge.

The bench having decided upon hearing Mr. Delasaux in answer, he said that, as regarded the six sovereigns, they were given to Adley by the female to take care of for, her. And it was for the bench to say whether they thought there was any guilty knowledge on his part of the woman having stolen them. She could not be prosecuted for, stealing them. She had earned them — they had never reached the hands of her husband; and therefrom she could not be charged with stealing them. If no felony was committed by her, how could the possession of the money by Adley be construed into a felony? He participated in no felony. With respect to the woman there could be no charge as affected the money, nor as regarded the shawl, which he should be enabled to show came legally into the possession of Mrs. Brown.

The clerk observed that if a wife took away goods belonging to her husband — even her own clothes — and gave them to an adulterer, or a person with whom she intended to live in a state of adultery, then he was guilty of larceny. There were numerous cases on this point.

After a private consultation, the bench called upon the other prisoner for his defence to answer the charge of possessing six sovereigns, the property of the prosecutor, intending to steal and carry them away; but discharged the woman.

The prisoner stated that the wife gave him the money to take care of for her, thinking he would keep it more safe. She said she had earned them, and that her husband had nothing to do with it. She at first gave him seven sovereigns, half a sovereign and 11s. of which she afterward had of him; and when she demanded the remainder at the police station he gave them to her.

The bench fully committed the prisoner for trial; and when bail was asked for, prosecutor stated that it was the intention of the prisoner to proceed to Australia or Sydney, which as the bench said would subvert the bail; for if they had proof of it, bail would be withheld. In the absence of that proof they demanded two sureties of £20 each, and prisoner to be bound himself in £40 to appear.

The court was crowded to overflowing during the investigation. The female prisoner was accommodated with a chair, and fainted, or pretended to do so, two or three times. To heighten the character of his wife, Brown stated that on one occasion of his recently expostulating with her, about her hankering after Adley, she retaliated by beating a pair of tongs about him, and scratching his face.

Adley, on being conveyed from the hall, received the yells of the populace outside — who were particularly anxious to treat the female to something of the kind, and waited in the purlieus for three hours, but by a dexterous manoeuvre they were foiled, by a cab driving up to the side-door; and while all expectation was there raised, she was clandestinely convoyed out of the front into another cab and whisked off, to the infinite chagrin of those who were desirous of manifesting their indignation against her shameful conduct.

From the Kentish Chronicle. 23 July 1859. Price 1½d.

CANTERBURY POLICE COURT. MONDAY.

(Before the Mayor, Alderman Plummer, W. Mount, Esq. and Captain Love.)

SHOCKING CASE.

A woman, respectfully dressed, named Fanny Beal, was charged by Mr. Russell, of the “Cock” public-house, with starving her child for purposes of begging. The child was brought into Court in the arms of an honest navvy a wife, whose name did not transpire. A more horrible sight was never witnessed in a court of justice. The child - a mere baby - was reduced to a perfect skeleton, its face discoloured and distorted with pain, and in fact, in such a condition that it seemed wonderful that it should be alive.

It appeared that some women had spoken to defendant about the child, and she said it would not take the breast from her, although it would from others. Indignant at this assertion they held her back while one of them placed the child to her breast, and found that it sucked eagerly. The mother was the only person in court unmoved when the child was exhibited.

Mr. Russell said the woman had lodged at his house. She used the child excite compassion and get money by begging, and he had reason to believe the child was hired out by the day to other women.
Mr. Ratcliffe, the overseer of Westgate Without, was sent for by the Bench.

Mr. T. S. Cooper entered the room and stated that the woman had once brought the child to him and he prescribed for it. He thought there might have been no neglect as “there were many pour sickly children like that.”

Mr. Ratcliffe having arrived said he would keep a watch on the woman, and if it could be proved that she neglected the child he would have her apprehended “if she remained in his parish.”

The Bench upon this, without any further inquiry, directed the child to be given up to its mother, and the parties left the Court.

From the Kentish Chronicle, 21 January, 1860.

CANTERBURY POLICE COURT.

Mr. Russell, landlord of the "Cock" public-house, Westgate Without, applied to the Bench respecting what he designated a case of peculiar hardship. He said his house was "extensively patronized" as a lodging-house; and a woman was staying there who was suffering from extreme debility and destitution. She had had medical assistance sent to her by a benevolent lady, and Mr. Rigden had given a certificate that she was suffering from want of proper nourishment. He (Mr. Russell) had applied, on behalf of the woman, to Mr. Ratclifle, overseer of the parish, to whom he gave Mr. Rigden’s certificate. Mr. Ratcliffe said he would see to the case, and relieve the woman. His complaint was that, though Mr. Ratcliffe promised to relieve the woman, he had not done so.

In reply to a question from the Bench, Mr. Russell said the woman was not in a fit state to be removed to the workhouse.

The Mayor said the Bench had no power to make any order or to interfere with the case. They could send for Mr. Ratcliffe, and urge him to attend to the woman.

Mr. Ratcliffe was accordingly sent for, and he as soon as possible presented himself before the Court. Mr. Russell again stated the circumstances; and Mr. Ratcliffe stated that if Mr. Russell would get another certificate from the surgeon (as was legally requisite), he would at once attend to the case.

The parties then left the Court.

South Eastern Gazette, 19 June, 1860.

Disbanded East Kent Militia-men in Trouble.

At the sitting of the City Justices, on Saturday last (before Capt. Love, and Messrs. Brock and Martin), the following charges against privates in the East Kent Militia, disembodied the previous day, were gone into:—

The first case was against James Kelley (a powerful young fellow) who was charged with having assaulted Sarah Ann Postlethwaite.

The prosecutrix, living at 3, Westgate-grove, said:— The defendant entered my house between three and four o’clock yesterday afternoon. I told him to leave. He said he should not. Be then tried to push past me, and struck at me. I warded off the blow with my arm, but his fist slightly struck my forehead. I sent for Mr. Bussell, who came to my assistance. The prisoner was not so drunk but that he knew well what he was about.

Defendant:— Everybody took advantage of me, because I had a little drink. There were ten or a dozen women all round me at once.

Fined 10s. and 6s. costs; in default, fourteen days’ imprisonment.

The same defendant was then charged with assaulting Mr. T. F. Russell, landlord of the "Cock" public-house, Westgate-grove, who said that, on being sent for by the last witness, he tried to persuade prisoner to go away, but he refused to do so, and took hold of witness’s collar. A scuffle then ensued in which both fell, but witness got up and went to his own house, where he stood leaning against the door, upon which prisoner came up, took hold of his legs, and threw him down, partially stunning me. While on the ground, defendant caught hold of Mr. Russell's hair, and struck him in the face and head, blacking both his eyes, and contusing, his head all over. He was rendered completely insensible by the usage he received.

The Superintendent said the prisoner was very violent, and it required the assistance of four or five civilians to get him to the station-house.

Fined 40s. and 6s. costs, or one month’s imprisonment.

Defendant (in an insolent tone):— I’m much obliged to you.

P.C. Epps then preferred a further charge against Kelley, of having assaulted him, while in the execution of his duty.

The constable told the defendant he must take him into custody for the assault on Mr. Russell, when defendant swore he would not go, suddenly sprang forward, and putting his foot behind the constable threw him to the ground. The officer fell across the kerb, and hurt his right arm very much. It required six men to take defendant to the station-house.

Fined 10s. and costs, or an additional fourteen days.

Defendant:— Very well, sir. Has nobody else got a charge to make against me.

From the Kentish Chronicle, 23 June, 1860.

SATURDAY.

(Before William Brock, Esq., Captain Love, and Peter Martin, Esq.)

There were six prisoners for examination this morning belonging to the East Kent Militia.

James Kelley, E.K.M., was brought up in custody, charged with three assaults—one committed on Mrs. Sarah Ann Postlethwaite, of 3, Westgate Grove, the second on T. J. Russell, landlord of the "Cock" public-house, and the third on P.C. Epps, while on duty in Black Griffin-lane. All the offences were committed on Friday afternoon, and all arose out of the same circumstances. It appeared that the prisoner, in a state of intoxication, went into the house of Mrs. Postlethwaite between three and four o'clock. She requested him to leave, but instead of doing so he tried to push past her and struck her. She tried to ward off the blow, which fell upon her forehead.

She sent for Mr. Russell who came to her assistance, and got the prisoner out. The prisoner was drunk, but he knew well enough what he was doing.

The bench decided to hear the second charge before deciding upon the first.

Mr. Russell deposed that on the previous afternoon he was called to the assistance of the last witness. When he went the prisoner took hold of him by the collar, and he was thrown down. After that, and while the complainant was leaning against his own door, the prisoner laid hold of him by the legs and threw him down again, struck him on the head and face, blackened both his eyes, and contused his face very much. The prisoner was given into custody, but he was so violent that the police required the assistance of four or five civilians to take him to the station.

The bench fined the prisoner 10s. and expenses for the first offence, or 14 days' imprisonment; and 40s. and expenses, or a month's imprisonment, for the assault on Mr. Russell.

P.C. Epps then stood forward to prefer a charge of assault against the prisoner. On the officer attempting to apprehend him in Black Griffin-lane, the prisoner threw him down on his back by which his arm was very severely injured. For this offence the bench inflicted an additional fine of 10s. and expenses, or a fortnight's imprisonment, to commence at the expiration of the six weeks for the two previous offences.

South Eastern Gazette, 4 September, 1860.

Important to Publicans.

On Thursday last Thomas Russell, the landlord of the "Cock" public-house, Westgate, attended before the city justices, to complain of his not having received the billet money for two recruits who had been placed at his house for lodgings. It appeared that the two recruits had been enlisted by a sergeant in the Rifle Brigade named Robertson, who placed them at Mr. Russell's house for two nights. They slept there the first night, but on the following morning they deserted. Mr. Russell informed the bench that the sergeant had tendered him 8d. for the one night, but which he had declined to accept, as he considered that as the billet was taken for two nights, he was entitled to 1s. 4d. The sergeant said that if be paid the full amount it would be out of his own pocket, as he was sure it would not be allowed by Government. Superintendent Davies remarked that the recruits had not been attested, and consequently the sergeant was responsible for the billets he had taken. The bench were of opinion that the landlord of the house was entitled to payment for the two nights, and as the recruiting sergeant had engaged the billet, he would have to pay for it.

South Eastern Gazette, Tuesday 10 September 1861.

CITY PETTY SESSIONS. THURSDAY.

Most of the old licenses were renewed, but those of the following publicans were left for consideration until an adjourned licensing day (the 12th inst.) in consequence of complaints having been made of the way in which the houses have been conducted. Robert Whittaker, "Princess Royal," Northgate; Thomas Denne, "Wellington," Broadstreet; Richard Drew, "Three Grenadiers," Military Road; William Taylor, "True Britton," Northgate; and Charles Moore, the "Cock," Westgate.

From the Kentish Chronicle and General Advertiser, 14 December, 1861. Price 1 1/2d.

Catherine Keene was charged with stealing one half-sovereign and seventeen shillings, the property of Edward Burnett.

The prosecutor said:- Yesterday, about half-past twelve o'clock, I went to the “Cock” public house, I saw the prisoner there. I gave her some gin and glass of whisky. We went upstairs together, and I fell asleep. On my waking I misled a half-sovereign and 17s. in silver out of my purse. I had previously given the defendant 2s. The prisoner had left the house. I went into several public-houses looking for her during the evening, and at last found her at the “Three Grenadiers,” in Military Road. I told the landlady there what had occurred, and she sent for a policeman.

Mrs. Moore said:- My husband keeps a public-house called the “Cock.” The prisoner lodges at my house. Yesterday afternoon she came down stairs and wanted her bonnet and shawl in a great hurry, so that I expected there was something wrong. The prosecutor told me afterwards that he had missed some money.

Richard Drew:- I keep the “Three Grenadier” public-house in the Military road. The prisoner came to my house about five o’clock last night, and stayed about half an hour. During that time she spent about eighteen-pence. She came again about seven o'clock and changed a half-sovereign. The prosecutor came to my house, and the prisoner was given into custody.

P.C. Cherison said that when the prisoner was searched, 10s, was found on her.

She was committed for trial.

From the Kentish Chronicle and General Advertiser, 4 January, 1862. Price 1 1/2d.

John Kelley, a private in the 70th Regiment, was charged with being drunk and disorderly in Westgate Grove, between twelve and one o'clock on Sunday morning.

It appeared that the prisoner and several other soldiers were beating at the door of the “Cock” public-house and demanding admission.

An officer belonging to the regiment was present, and gave the man a good character.

The Bench, considering the circumstances, and the previous good character or the man, and the fact of his having been in custody since Sunday, decided to discharge him without punishment.

From the Kentish Chronicle, 7 February, 1863.

CANTERBURY POLICE COURT. MONDAY. DRINK AGAIN.

James Baxter, a labourer, was charged with being drunk and creating a disturbance at the “Cock” public-house, in Westgate. On being removed to the police station he made an attack upon the constable and attempted to trip him up.

Fined £5, or one month's hard labour, having been before the court on a previous occasion, under similar circumstances.

From the Kentish Chronicle, 21 February, 1863.

STEALING FROM THE PERSON IN A PUBLIC-HOUSE.

At the Canterbury Police Court, on Monday, Barnes, a tramp, was charged with stealing some money from the person of Walter Harwood, labourer, of Herne Bay, at the “Cock” public-house, Westgate Without on Saturday evening. It appeared that the prosecutor was sitting asleep in a chair, at the “Cock,” when the prisoner was seen by the landlord and another man in the room, to kneel down and put his arm behind him. The other man in the room said, “come none of that” on which the prisoner drew back his hand and some money consisting of a half crown, a penny, two half pence, and a foreign coin fell on the floor.

The landlord sent for the police, and the prisoner was given into custody.

The prosecutor deposed that when he went to sleep he had two half crowns and some copper in his watch pocket but when he awoke it was all gone. He identified the foreign coin as his property. The prisoner pleaded “guilty” and was sentenced to two months’ imprisonment with hard labour.

From the Kentish Chronicle, 28 May, 1864.

CANTERBURY POLICE COURT.

ASSAULT AND ATTEMPTED ROBBERY.

Two gunners in the Royal Horse Artillery, named Harry Page and Thomas Cormick. was charged with assaulting and attempting to rob John Wills, servant to J. W. A. Wright, Esq., Barton Fields. Wills stated that he was returning from between 10 and 11 o’clock on Thursday night, when he met three soldiers near the railway bridge. The prisoners were two of the three. One of the soldiers struck him across the face with a stick and his hat fell off. The prisoner Cormick picked his hat up and offered to give it him, first for 2s. and then for 1s. He refused to give them any money, and they then ran off taking his hat with them. He followed them through Chantry-lane, Ivy-lane, and Broad-street, but eventually lost them. On Saturday morning he went to the Barracks, and the men being paraded he pointed out the prisoners as two of those who attacked him.

The prisoners attempted to prove an alibi. A gunner named Dendy deposed that the prisoners were in his company from Wednesday until Friday evening. On Thursday night they went to the “Cock” public house, Westgate Grove, between five and six o'clock, and remained there till about 11. They then went up the road past the railway bridge, and slept under a hedge. Another gunner named Tyrrell gave similar evidence.

John William Thomas was then called to rebut the evidence for the prisoners. He said that between half-past ten and a quarter to eleven on Thursday night he met the prisoner Page running down Broad-street.

The Magistrates decided to deal with the case as one of assault only, and convicted the prisoners, who were each sentenced to hard labour for three weeks in the City Gaol.

From the Whitstable Times and Herne Bay Herald, 4 May, 1867. Price 1d.

William Constant was charged, on suspicion, with stealing a horse's hood, a rag, and a brash, the property of some person unknown.

P.I. Hayward said:- From information I received last night, I went to the “Cock” public-house, at about half-past twelve, into a room where prisoner was sleeping. I asked prisoner if he had been in the “Britannia” public-house, and, I believe, he said he had. There was a bundle in a chair close to the bed which contained a home's hood and a rag. I asked the prisoner if he brought the handle from the public-house where he had been lodging, and he replied that he had no bundle. Prisoner had given the landlord the brush for his bed. The landlord gave the brush to me, and I took the prisoner to the station-house. The charge was then, entered in the book, and read to prisoner, who said he could not give us any information about the articles then, but that he would tell us all about them, the nest (Thursday) morning. He has not done so, and I, therefore, ask for a remand.

In answer to the Bench, witness stated that no information had been given him that the things were actually stolen.

Mr. Aris remarked that it was very strange prisoner should have things in possession he was a painter and glazier.

Prisoner said he bought the things off an officer's servant named Thompson, for 2s. 6d.

The Magistrates remanded the prisoner.

From the Historic Canterbury web site www.machadoink.com date unknown.

The four tenements in Cock Lane, now called Westgate Grove, are immediately beyond the Westgate, two of them are old, and one of these is a public house of the sign of the "Cock"; the corner house is, or has very recently been, a worsted manufactory. (A 10-ply yarn). A large manufactory of parchment faces them.

I believe this pub changed name to the "Westgate Tavern." The area used to be called Cock Lane, hence the name of this house.

I do have reference to a William Small, victualler in 1838 and 40, addressed as Cock Lane.

Situated at number 5 (now 8) is a building called Tavern Cottage. I do not yet know whether there is a connection with the "Cock Inn."

LICENSEE LIST

SMALL William 1824-51+ (age 49 in 1851)