Kentish Express 7 December 1861.

Saturday Nov. 30:- Before Captain Kennicott R.N., William Major, James Tolputt and A.M. Leith esqs.

Richard Bailey, landlord of the "Queen's Head" beer-house, Queen Square, was charged with assaulting P.C. Reynolds in the execution of his duty. Mr. Minter appeared for the defendant.

P.C. Reynolds said that on Thursday morning, at ten minutes before one o'clock, he was on duty in Queen Square, and saw that the gas was fully lit in the Queen's Head beer-house. Going to the window, he heard two men talking, one of them calling for beer, and the beer engine going. He knocked at the door, and the lights were then instantly extinguished. He then called to Bayley, and after six or seven minutes he opened the door. Remonstrating with him inside the house for not opening the door quicker, and inquiring for the men who had been in the bar, Bayley, who had himself been drinking, used violent language, and struck him in the chest. He shook his fist to witness a second time, but his wife and daughter interfered. He could not find anyone in the house, but one room was locked.

Mr. Minter cross-examined Reynolds, but failed to shake his evidence, and then addressing the Bench he concluded by calling the daughter of defendant, who said that angry words passed, but her father did not strike Reynolds.

The magistrates considered the charge to be proved, and fined Bayley 10s. with 10s. costs.

About 7 o'clock on the evening of the 18th ult., two privates of the 2nd battalion, 21st Fusiliers, lying at Shorncliffe, and who were returning from the Fleetwood School of Musketry, went into the bar of the Royal George Hotel in this town, and called for rum. The barmaid, seeing they were already the worse for liquor, refused to supply spirits, but offered any sort of malt liquor. This offer they refused, and Private Cox then drew his bayonet, fixed it to his rifle, and told the girl he would give her that; or if she did not like that he had some ball cartridge he would give her. The other soldier took up his belt and attempted to strike the civilians present, but P.C. Swain, who had been sent for, after long persuasion at personal risk, persuaded them to go off to the Camp. They are now in custody for trial by district court martial.

Folkestone Express 28 March 1868.

Monday, March 23rd: Before Captain Kennicott and Alderman Tolputt.

James White, 28, was charged with being a deserter from the 17th Dragoon Guards.

P.C. 6F deposed: That morning about 25 minutes to one o'clock he was on duty in the lower part of town, near the Royal George, when he met the prisoner without jacket and cap, and he was very wet. I asked him where he was going to; he said he did not know. I then asked him whence he came from, and he said he did not know. I then charged him with being a deserter. He said he did not want to desert – he wanted to find his clothes. At the police station he said he belonged to the 17th Dragoon Guards. I asked him if he had a pass, when he said he had not. He was the worse for liquor, but not so drunk but what he knew what he was about. I found his jacket, stock, and cap at the Queen's Head beerhouse, where he had been allowed to sleep in the tap room.

The Clerk said that according to the Articles Of War the prisoner would be liable to be charged with being a deserter.

The prisoner said he hoped the Bench would look over this case as he was drunk.

Captain Kennicott said that to look over one would be to look over a hundred.

The prisoner was ordered to be returned to the Camp, to be dealt with as his Commanding Officer may think fit.

Folkestone Express 29 May 1869.

Wednesday, April 26th: Before J. Gambrill, R. W. Boarer, and W. Bateman Esqs.

Mr. Henry Augustus Herwigg applied for a license for a house called the Queen's Head, Queen's Square. Mr. Minter supported the application. He said the house belonged to Mr. Jeffrey, who let it to Daniel Hall. Mr. Hall removed to the South Foreland, and closed this house, and the license was forfeited. The house was now opened again, and the Bench would understand this was not an application for a fresh license, but merely a renewal of that purposely lost by the last occupier. The applicant had previously held a spirit license in the town, and the police Superintendent could testify that he never had any complaint against him.

The Magistrates' Clerk said there was a special clause in the Act of Parliament to meet a case of this kind. It says the application can be made at any time within three years of the forfeiture of the license. If it was over three years the Bench would have to treat it as a fresh license. The Bench granted the application.

Note: According to information in More Bastions, the house had changed it's name to the Oxford Tavern by 1869!

Folkestone Express 12 October 1872.

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

Daniel Hall, Queen's Head Inn, Queen's Square, was summoned for a similar offence on the same day.

Defendant: I am Guilty, I suppose.

P.C. Hogben said he went into the house at half past five, when he found a ship's crew there. The landlady said some of them were lodgers, and she was not aware that they were required to close the house before six o'clock.

Defendant said: The men had been working for me and I called them in for the purpose of paying their wages. I had a trap at the door and was going away directly. The police ought to watch other people, who he knows have their houses open at improper hours.

Mr. Tolputt: You can turn informer if you like. You must pay a fine of £1 and 9s. costs.

Folkestone Express 3 May 1873.

Thursday, May 1st: Before The Mayor, J. Kelcey and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

Eliza Stewart was charged with stealing the articles named in the evidence given below, the property of Henry Hills, Lifeboat Inn, North Street. The goods were valued at £15.

Jane Hills deposed: I am the wife of Henry Hills, Lifeboat Inn, North Street. Prisoner came to lodge at my house on the 15th April and stayed there up to yesterday. I went to a chest of drawers in one of my rooms yesterday for a pinafore for my child, when I missed five yards of alpaca, two nightgowns, two chemises, three pieces of calico, a little embroidered frock, a small piece of linen, a waistcoat, a white jacket, an apron, a sheet, and a pillow case. The articles produced I identify as my property. I last saw the articles the day after prisoner came to my house. The Superintendent showed them to me last night.

Ann Dennard deposed: I am servant to prosecutrix. I bought five yard of alpaca, two chemises, and a scarf of prisoner on the 22nd and 29th April. I gave her 1s. each for the chemises and 2s. 6d. for the alpaca. P.C. Keeler came to me yesterday and I told him I had bought the goods of prisoner.

Sophia Huxley deposed: I am housekeeper at the Queen's Head Inn. I bought a pawn ticket of prisoner referring to two nightgowns and a child's jacket on the 28th. On Tuesday morning she came to the Queen's Head for a glass of beer and I gave her 1s. 6½d. to get the articles out of pledge, which she did and gave them to me. On Tuesday she brought three pieces of stuff, a child's bead belt, and a piece of linen, and said she was going back to Derby and would give them to me. I gave the goods to a policeman last night.

Sarah Aldridge said: I am wife of Henry Aldridge, fisherman, Radnor Street. I was in the Queen's Head on Monday evening when prisoner came in and said she had a child's frock to sell, which I took to Mrs. Fagg, a neighbour, for her and brought one shilling back. The frock produced is the same. I gave the frock to P.C. Keeler after fetching it back from Mrs. Fagg.

Superintendent Wilshire deposed: I received the alpaca now produced from the witness Dennard yesterday afternoon.

P.C. Keeler deposed: I apprehended prisoner about half past six last evening in Harbour Street and charged her with stealing three yards of alpaca from Mr. Hills. I then went to the Queen's Head and the witness Dennard gave me two chemises which she said she had bought of a woman. She went upstairs and gave me two nightgowns, three pieces of stuff, a pianoforte, a piece of linen, a belt, and a child's jacket. She said she bought the pawn ticket referring to the two nightgowns and jacket of prisoner. She said the pieces of stuff were given to her by prisoner. Mrs. Aldridge gave me the child's dress and said she took it of prisoner and sold it to Mrs. Fagg.

This was the case for the prosecution.

Prisoner pleaded Guilty, and said her husband was at the School of Musketry, Hythe, and was married February 16th, at Derby.

Superintendent Wilshire said a soldier of the 60th Rifles had sent money from Derby to pay her fare to that place.

Prisoner was sentenced to three months' hard labour.

The Mayor cautioned the witnesses to be careful purchasing goods in future.

Folkestone Express 16 August 1873.

Saturday, August 9th: Before The Mayor, J. Tolputt and J. Clarke Esqs.

The convictions in the following cases show the determination of the police and the magistrates to put down what is far too common in the neighbourhood of Radnor Street and Beach Street.

Daniel Hall, Queen's Head Inn, was charged with permitting disorderly conduct in his house, contrary to the tenor of his license.

P.C. Swaine said his attention was called to a noise in the Queen's Head about a quarter before eleven on the night of the 28th July. On going there he found three woman and several men drunk. Mrs. Pope, of the Star Inn, Radnor Street, and her two daughters were there, the mother being drunk. Language was being used which was unfit to repeat. There appeared to be a general quarrel all round. He heard Hall say he wished the parties would leave the house. There were about thirty of forty people round the house. Hall did not ask witness to interfere. Mrs. Pope and her two daughters left the house and witness went away. About a quarter before twelve he was passing the house, when he heard a great disturbance again; told defendant to clear his house, when witness was called away to assist the military picket.

In cross-examination by Mr. Till, who appeared for defendant, witness said Hall tried to interfere, and he knew he had been very ill. Hall told the parties he would not have his house disturbed by them.

Sergt. Reynolds corroborated as to the disturbance and as to Mrs. Pope being drunk. Hall said he should go away as he could do nothing with them. Witness told the people in the Queen's Head if they did not go away he should summon them.

In answer to Mr. Till witness said the noise was disturbing the neighbourhood and several persons were looking out of their windows.

Mr. Till said he had not much to answer. Defendant had been very ill, and was ill at that time. There was a family quarrel and no doubt the words used were very shocking to people not accustomed to such language. Hall told them they must go home, and interfered so far as he was able, short of using force, which he was not in a condition to do, being very ill; and not only so, but he complained to the police.

William Saunders was called for the defence, and said he was in the Queen's Head just before the row commenced. Hall was not there at the commencement, but when he came he remonstrated with the parties and asked them to go away.

James Crumby was also called for the defence, but showed such levity when about to be sworn that Mr. Till very properly refused to examine him.

The Mayor said defendant had rendered himself liable to a penalty of £10 and to have his license endorsed with the conviction. No doubt he was in ill health, but he was bound to know the law, and had every opportunity of calling in the aid of the police. Considering the state of his health the fine would only be £2 and 11s. costs and his license would not be endorsed.

Defendant paid the money.

Mrs. Mary Ann Pope was charged with being drunk in the Queen's Head on the 28th July.

Mr. Till for the defence.

P.C. Swain said he saw defendant in front of the bar in the Queen's Head on the night of the day in question. He had no doubt she was drunk, and she was acting and talking like a woman out of her mind. She came out of the house with her two daughters; when he went again he found her there again, still drunk.

By Mr. Till: Her two daughters had to lead her out of the house. She was very much excited. I think from her appearance and her staggering about she was drunk; she reeled backwards and forwards and was disputing with someone. She is in the habit of getting drunk in her own house.

By Mr. Clarke: I have seen her when sober, and know she was drunk.

Sergt. Reynolds corroborated, and said he had no doubt defendant was drunk.

Mr. Till said it might appear when two constables stated the same thing that it was proved. The same quantity of drink taken when a person is calm might have a different effect if taken when excited, and the excitement on the night in question might have been taken for intoxication. He should call defendant's two daughters, whom he knew were charged with misdemeanour, but that ought not to make any difference.

Mary Pope, defendant's daughter, said she was sure her mother was not drunk, but was excited by a dispute with her sister.

Emily Pope, another of defendant's daughters, said she was sure her mother was sober. They had a quarter of brandy and a bottle of ginger beer among three of them, and her mother went into the house sober.

The Mayor said the Bench considered the case proved, and as defendant kept a public house she ought to set a better example. She must pay 10s. fine and 12s. costs, and if she were convicted again the fine would be doubled.

Mary Ann, Emily, and Mary Pope were charged with using obscene language in Beach Street on the 28th July.

P.C. Swaine said he heard Mrs. Pope and Emily using very bad language. They were on the doorstep and stepped into the street. Mary was in the street. Several of the neighbours complained.

By Mr. Till: Mr. Worsell and Mr. Ashtell complained, but they were not present to give evidence. He followed defendants to the arches; they had ceased making a noise and were walking home quietly.

John Johnson, inspector under the C.D.A., deposed to hearing Emily using bad language; he did not hear Mrs. Pope or Mary say anything.

Mr. Till asked that Mary might be discharged as there was no evidence against her, and said it was a superfluous act on the part of the police to summon her.

Mary was then discharged.

Mr. Till contended that the doorstep was not a part of the street, but he would leave it to Mr. Bradley, the Clerk, to advise the Bench on that point. He wished to point out discrepancies in the evidence of the police and Johnson as to the words alleged to have been used.

The Mayor said the Bench were determined to put a stop to the practice of using bad language in the streets. As it was the first offence the defendants would be dealt leniently with. They must pay a fine of 10s. and 9s. costs each.

Folkestone Express 21 March 1874.

Monday, March 16th: Before The Mayor, J. Tolputt, and J. Clark Esqs.

William Cole, a private in the Kent Artillery Militia, was charged with being drunk and disorderly, and using obscene language on Saturday night.

Supt. Wilshere said he saw prisoner in Queen's Square, outside the Queen (sic) public house, about a quarter to eleven on Saturday night, surrounded by thirty or forty persons, chiefly boys. Prisoner was drunk and rushing about in a frantic state, striking wildly about him with his belt, and saying “Let me get at the ----“. Witness took the belt from prisoner, and assistance being procured he was taken to the station. He appeared to have been badly treated, as his tunic was torn. He had a pass to twelve on Saturday night, and would be punished on his return to quarters at Dover as an absentee.

Prisoner pleaded Guilty and expressed sorrow for what had occurred, and appeared to feel his position acutely, shedding tears copiously. He should have to pay 18s. 6d. for a new tunic.

The Bench, taking into consideration the prisoner had been locked up since eleven on Saturday night, and that he would be punished on his return to quarters, discharged him.

Folkestone Express 19 December 1874.

Wednesday, December 16th: Before The Mayor, R.W. Boarer Esq. and Col. De Crespigny.

License Transfer.

This was one of the days appointed for the transfer of licenses. The following application was heard:

That of the Queen's Head, Beach Street, from George James Young to Thomas Masters.

Folkestone Express 28 August 1875.

Wednesday August 25th: Before The Mayor, J. Tolputt, W.J. Jeffreason and T. Caister Esqs., and Capt. Crowe.

Wednesday being the sessions for the hearing of applications for licenses and transacting licensing business, the Magistrates present sae as a licensing committee, and were occupied for three quarters of an hour in renewing the licenses.

Wine, Spirit and Beer Licenses.

The Bona Fides Of A License Holder.

Thomas Marshall applied for the renewal of the license to the Queen's Head, temporarily transferred to him about six months since.

Mr. Mowll supported the application.

Mr. J.M. Wilshere, as Superintendent of Police, opposed it on the ground that the applicant was not the bona fide landlord of the premises.

Mr. Mowll having made the application, Superintendent Wilshere said that there was reason to believe that Marshall was not the real applicant, but that the house would be managed by a man named Alfred Pope, who in 1873 conducted the Star Inn, Radnor Street, so badly that witness opposed it's renewal. The Magistrates then granted it conditionally on his conducting his house better, and he did so, but soon afterwards transferred his business to another man, and went to Dover. Since the present applicant, Marshall, had held the license of the Queen's Head, he had not lived in the house, as he was a driver for Mr. Williams, of the ginger beer works. The house had been managed by Alfred Pope, his wife (who, when landlady of the Star, was convicted of drunkenness), and two daughters. It was at first a “quiet house” under Marshall, but lately had attracted more custom, and was visited by soldiers and similar company, who, he feared, were drawn thither by questionable attractions. He must therefore oppose the granting of the license to applicant, as he considered him entirely unfit to conduct the house.

In reply to the Bench, Superintendent Wilshere said he had had occasion to caution the applicant once on account of the disorderly manner in which the house was being conducted.

Police sergeant Woodlands corroborated this statement on oath.

The applicant was then examined, and swore that he was the only person responsible for the conduct of the house, that Pope and his wife were simply acting as his servants, but had, like him, to “get a living” out of the house, and that he (Marshall) had full responsibility and control over the house. Although employed at Williams's ginger beer factory in the day, he came home at night, and had always slept in the house since having the license.

Mr. Mowll having addressed the Bench in support of the application, the Mayor said the Bench must believe the applicant, who had sworn that he was the responsible holder of the license, and should therefore grant the renewal, subject, of course, to confirmation at the annual licensing sessions.

Folkestone Express 4 March 1876.

Inquest.

On Saturday morning a little after six o'clock, a little boy, who was under the tramroad, noticed the body of a man lying beneath the ship Christian. He at once gave information, and assistance being procured the body was rescued, when it was found to be a man named James Henry Goldsack, mate of the brigantine Expert, of Faversham.

On Monday morning an inquest was held before J. Minter Esq., Coroner, and a jury.

The following evidence was taken:

Onslow James Foreman said: I am a dredger, living at Whitstable. The deceased Henry Goldsack was my brother-in-law.

The jury having viewed the body, the witness Foreman said he identified the body as being that of James Henry Goldsack. He was mate of the Expert brigantine of Faversham. He was 39 years of age, married, and his wife was living at Whitstable. He produced a letter which his wife had received on Saturday morning, and dated Friday night, saying he was quite well, and asking her to come down and spend the Sunday with him.

Henry Wootton Gunn said: I am the master of the brigantine Expert. Deceased was mate, and we arrived at Folkestone laden with coals on Friday morning. We were berthed in the middle of the outer harbour. At five minutes past eight o'clock on Friday evening deceased left the vessel and walked ashore. The tide was coming up. Deceased was perfectly sober, and had been on board all day. He said he was going to post a letter. I went to bed at 9.30, and he had not returned then. The water at that time was round the vessel. The vessel would be afloat by eleven o'clock. She drew twelve feet of water. I expected that he would have got on board the Christian, and have taken her boat to get on board the Expert. At half past six on Saturday morning the mate of the Polly called out “Here's Jim under the tramway”. I went there and saw deceased in a boat.

Mr. Richard Mercer, M.R.C.S. said: I examined the body of deceased, and found a slight bruise on the right cheek, and a few abrasions on the forehead. All the marks were of a very slight character. In my opinion he met his death by drowning. There are no marks to show that death resulted from violence.

Alfred William Temple: I am fourteen years of age, and live with my father, who is a tailor. On Saturday morning I was underneath the tramway picking up coals; it was twenty minutes past six o'clock. I saw deceased lying under the bottom of the brigantine Christian, which was lying alongside the tramroad at the upper berth in the outer harbour. Deceased was lying on his face on the west side of the vessel. There was no water. I called a man named Redmond, alias Colley, and then went for further help. Deceased had his clothes on, but not his hat.

Joseph Colley: I am a shipwright, living in Dover Road. On Saturday morning I was at work when the last witness called me. I went and crawled under the ship, where I found deceased lying on his face. The body was half covered with sand. I called the mate of the Polly who came and assisted me to get him out. We put the body into a boat lying near. Deceased was dressed, but his hat was off.

P.C. Charles Ovenden said on Saturday morning last he was on duty at the police station. From information he received he went to the harbour and saw the body of the deceased in a boat. He obtained assistance, and had the body taken to the old police station. On searching the body he found nothing except a little wet tobacco and a tobacco pipe.

Alfred Pope said: I am a publican, and live at the Queen's Head. On Friday nigh I saw the deceased at my house. He came in at half past ten and left at eleven. I have known him for twenty years. I went out with him. He was perfectly sober. He told me that he was going aboard as he thought they were going to move her. I walked with him to the entrance gate of the tramroad. He told me that he should have to tak a boat of another vessel to get aboard. When he was at my house he had no hat on and complained of his head. We had one glass of ale at my house. I shouted to him to ask if he was all right and he said he was. It was quite dark, and was very dangerous for anyone to go in consequence of there being so many cross-metals.

The witness Foreman was re-called and said deceased had been unwell for some time and it was believed that he was suffering from heart disease.

Several jurymen spoke of the danger to persons whose business led them to cross the tramroad in order to get to their ships at night, and thought that some lights should be provided.

The jury returned a verdict of “Found Drowned”, and added that they considered that lights ought to be placed for the safety of those whose duty led them to use the tramroad, and also that the ladders should be extended to the bottom.

The Coroner said he would forward the recommendation to the proper quarter.

Note: No mention of Pope at the Queen's Head according to More Bastions.

Wednesday, March 1st: Before The Mayor, Dr. Bateman, Captain Fletcher, and Alderman Caister.

Minnie Smith was charged with being drunk and disorderly at the Queen's Head Inn on the previous evening. Prisoner was further charged with using obscene language, with wilfully breaking a pane of glass at the Queen's Head, and also with resisting the police.

On reference to our police report of Saturday, it will be seen that the prisoner was then fined for being drunk and disorderly.

Thomas Masters, landlord of the Queen's Head said that on Tuesday evening the prisoner came in with a private belonging to the Lancers. He noticed that she was tipsy, but he served the soldier with some beer, which the latter handed to the girl. Prisoner then used bad language, and he requested her to go out, but she refused. He then put her outside, when she immediately smashed the square of glass in the door. The value of the glass was 5s.

P.C. Ovenden said that about half past ten o'clock on the previous evening he was sent for to the Queen's Head. He went there and prisoner was given into his custody. She was drunk and resisted violently. On the road to the station she used bad language and witness had to procure the assistance of another officer. Witness put her in the old police station until she became quiet. He had frequently cautioned her as to her conduct on previous occasions.

The Mayor said that the prisoner was before the Bench on Saturday, when she was let off with a fine, but that did not appear to have had any deterring effect upon her. The Bench on the present occasion had therefore determined to punish her more severely. For the first offence, viz. being drunk and disorderly, she would have to pay a fine of 10s. and 10s. 6d. costs, or in default seven days' imprisonment, and for the other charges she would be committed for fourteen days.

Folkestone Express 5 August 1876.

Saturday, July 30th: Before R.W. Boarer Esq., and Captain Crowe.

Alfred Pope was charged with having on the 25th of July unlawfully sold by retail certain intoxicating liquor, which he was not then licensed to sell.

Mr. Mowll, of Dover, appeared in support of the information, and Mr. Minter for the defendant.

Mr. Mowll, in opening the case, said the facts were very simple, and could hardly afford matter of dispute between him and Mr. Minter, though there might be some contention as to the construction of the Act of Parliament. At the last licensing day a license was granted to Thomas Masters of the King's Head (sic). The defendant came into the house under certain circumstances which would be explained, and remained there until some days since, when a dispute took place between them and Masters, who had to go for the protection of the police. A policeman went down to the house, and was present while Masters left it with the license in his pocket. The defendant nevertheless remained in the house, and though by his having turned Masters out any authority which he might previously have derived from Masters had terminated, he continued to sell beer, spirits and tobacco without any authority. The sale would be clearly proved by two soldiers, and the magistrates, he thought, would have no option but to say that the offence had been committed.

Thomas Adams Masters produced the license of the Queen's Head Inn, Queen Street (sic), which, he said, was granted to him by the magistrates on the last licensing day. He continued in the occupation of the house from that time until the previous Monday, when he was obliged to go for the assistance of the police. An officer returned with him and remained while he removed his goods and papers, including the license. The defendant remained in the house and continued to sell spirits, beer and tobacco against his (witness's) orders.

Cross-examined: This was a renewed license, which witness had transferred from Mr. Young, of Dover. Mr. Young did not hold it for witness's brother, William Masters. He had no brother, but a son, William Masters. Mr. Young did not hold it for him. He swore before the licensing magistrates when he applied for the license that he was tenant of the house to Mr. Young, and so he was. He was a quarterly tenant, at £32 a year rent. He could not swear whether or not he had paid any rent since last licensing day. The defendant paid the rent this year, and also paid the money for the license.

The defendant here began to make a number of grimaces, upon which Mr. Minter, addressing him rather sharply, said “If you like to conduct your own case you can, but if you wish to perform those antics you must do so in my absence”.

Cross-examination continued: Witness had not slept three nights at a time out of the house since last licensing day. The defendant bought the beer and spirits, but the business had been carried on in witness's name. He knew that it had been arranged for the business to be transferred to William Brunt, who was entitled to his discharge on his return from India in October, and he and Mrs. Brunt had £150 to keep on the business until this time. He agreed to stop to October if they would give him £50 more.

Police Constable Hills deposed to going with Masters to the Queen's Head and seeing Masters carry away his boxes, which were searched by defendant.

James Rushton, a corporal in the Coldstream Guards, deposed that he went to the house about ten o'clock on Tuesday night, and saw the defendant, his wife, and two daughters. He called for a glass of ale, twopennyworth of gin, and half an ounce of tobacco, with which he was served by Mrs. Pope. The defendant was standing at the bar at the time and took the money.

Cross-examined: He saw the Superintendent of Police before he went to the house. He saw him hourly every night, but Mr. Wilshere did not tell him to go into the Queen's Head and call for ale, gin and tobacco.

Robert Watson, a private in the 26th Regiment, gave similar evidence. He was present when Adams left the house. Someone belonging to the family gave him (witness) into custody.

Mr. Minter then addressed the Bench on behalf of the defendant. He observed that Mr. Mowll had very carefully concealed for whom he appeared, but it transpired that Adams was the person who was putting the law in motion and taking these proceedings against the defendant. Mr. Mowll opened the case somewhat unfairly, because he stated that Pope was the occupier of the house. This must have been a mistake, and his friend must have known better, for he himself, at the last annual licensing meeting, examined Masters, who swore positively that he was the occupier of the house. There was no mystery whatever in the matter. It appeared from Masters' own statement that under a written agreement he obtained £150 from the defendant's daughter, Mrs. Brunt, for the purchase of the furniture and goodwill of the house. Masters himself, however, was said to be the tenant and carry un the house for twelve months, until Mrs. Brunt's husband, who was a soldier in India, could return. But it appeared that he did not pay a penny piece for rent, or what was consumed by the customers, and that even the license was paid by Mrs. Brunt. And yet they found Masters behaving in this way. The reason of his conduct was quite clear. He knew that October was drawing very close, and that he could then have no excuse for transferring the license to William Brunt on his return from India. Accordingly he turned round and said “The license is in my name, and I can levy blackmail upon you. It it true that among us we have got £150 out of you, but that £150 will be perfectly useless if I destroy this house as a licensed premises. Unless you submit to my coertion and give me another £50 I will shut the house and ruin you”. The £50 was refused, upon which a disturbance took place, and Adams was unfortunately enabled to get the Superintendent of Police to lay this information against Pope. But was the case proved by the soldiers' evidence? This was a highly penal statute, and he asked the Bench to say that the defendant was not responsible for the act of his wife in selling the ale, gin and tobacco. The real tenant of the house was Mrs. Brunt, who was keeping it on until her husband returned from India, and who would state that she did so by Masters' direction. He submitted that under the circumstances the Bench would be justified in saying that the defendant was not responsible for the sale of this ale, gin and tobacco.

Mr. Minter then called Emily Brunt, who said she was the wife of William Brunt, a private in the 9th Regiment of Foot, now in India, but who would be entitled to his discharge on coming home in October. In June, 1875, she entered into an agreement with Masters for the purchase of the goods at the Queen's Head for £120, Mr. Mowll acting as solicitor between all parties. (The agreement, which was produced, was between William Masters, of Dover, hairdresser, and William Brunt, whereby Masters agreed to sell the effects for the sum of £120, £100 of which he received at the time, and to remain in Emily Brunt's service in the house as long as his services were required.) Masters was to take returned, but the business was really her husband's. Masters remained in her service until the other day. Witness had also had the assistance of her sister in carrying on the business, and when she had the baby in her arms she sometimes told her father (the defendant) to draw. This was by the direction of Masters, who had been away working for a ginger beer manufacturer. The defendant was a carrier and merely lodged in the house. On this occasion she asked her mother to draw as she had the baby in her arms.

During his examination of this witness Mr. Minter said there was too much interference on the part of the Superintendent of Police, adding “We will have to put you in your place, Mr. Wilshere”.

Mr. Mowll said he was taking his instructions from the Superintendent, who had done nothing but what was perfectly regular.

Mr. Minter said the place where Mr. Wilshere was sitting – at the solicitors' table – was not the proper place for him at all. There was too much interference on his part.

The Bench said if there had been any interference – and they hadn't noticed any – it would have had no influence whatever upon them.

Mr. Minter: Immediately I am saying something about the license the Superintendent takes upon himself to snatch it up, which he has no right whatever to do. The liberties taken by the Superintendent of Police here would not be permitted anywhere else I go.

Mr. Mowll said he had observed nothing on Mr. Wilshere's part which could not be done by Superintendents at other Courts which he was in the habit of attending.

Mr. Minter said it was only natural that Mr. Mowll should constitute himself the champion of those who instructed him.

The Bench retired to consider their decision, and on their return to Court the Chairman said that they considered a great deal had been said that day which had no bearing on the case. For the purposes of the day they considered that Masters was the holder of the license, and if he had wronged the defendant in any way the latter had his remedy. They repeated, however, for the purposes of the day, Masters, in their opinion, was the holder of the license, and the defendant had sold illegally. Therefore, according to their view, the defendant was liable. The penalty was £50, and they could not fine him less than £12 10s. and 15s. 6d, costs, though it was their wish to have made it still lower if they could. In default he must go to gaol for one month without hard labour. There was an appeal to the Quarter Sessions for the County. They were acting under legal advice, which, no doubt, was the best that could be given to them.

Mr. Minter: I am very sorry you should view it in that light. It is a question of evidence, and if the daughter's evidence is carried your decision is wrong. Mr. Minter next asked what the defendant must lodge as security for an appeal, and was told £60, or two sureties of £30 each.

The Chairman observed that he assumed the Watch Committee would support the conviction.

Mr. Minter said he did not suppose that the Watch Committee would allow themselves to be made a party to such a prosecution. There were a great many extenuating circumstances, and these poor people would be grievous sufferers.

Eventually the defendant said he would pay the fine and costs.

Mr. Minter then applied that the license might be re-transferred to Mr. Young, but as no notice had been given the Bench said the house must remain closed until the next licensing meeting.

Folkestone Express 19 August 1876.

County Court.

Saturday, August 12th: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

Thomas Masters, lately residing at the Queen's Head Inn appeared on a judgement summons in respect of a debt of 9s. 1d., issued by Godfrey Lepper, carpenter. He declared that he was utterly unable to pay the amount. He was sixty years of age and afflicted with rheumatism, and had no employment.

The plaintiff said the defendant and his son pocketed £50 by the sale of the business of the Queen's Head.

The defendant again declared that he had spent every farthing he received in paying bills he owed and keeping himself from starving.

His Honour declined to make any order, but said the defendant must pay when he had the money.

Folkestone Express 16 September 1876.

Wednesday, September 13th: Before The Mayor, Alderman caister and Captain Crowe.

Application was made on behalf of Mr. Young, lessee of the Queen's Head, in respect to the license of the same.

Information was given to the effect that some time ago a man was convicted for selling without a license. Mr. Young, being the lessee of the property, had underlet it to Masters, by whom it was again underlet. Now Masters had some private arrangements to which Mr. Young was no party. This came before the Bench and there was a fine imposed of 40s.

It was now desired to question Mr. Ogden's right and to prevent this, Mr. Young wished openly to transfer it to Mr. Ogden, who formerly carried on business at Sandgate.

Charles George Young deposed to his living at Dover, and being the lessee of the Queen's Head, Folkestone, owned by Mrs. Jeffoy. He let the premises to Mr. Masters, who has gone out of possession, and who has neglected to apply at the Annual Licensing Meeting, but, as lessee, he was desirous of obtaining the license for the object of transferring it to Mr. Ogden. They did not acknowledge Pope in any shape whatever.

Arrangements to be made in accordance with application.

Note: No mention of Ogden in More Bastions.

Folkestone Express 7 December 1878.

Wednesday, December 4th: Before Captain Crowe, General Armstrong, Captain Fletcher, James Kelcey, and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

James Jordan, of the Queen's Head, was summoned for having his house open during prohibited hours.

P.C. Ovenden said on Sunday morning, about 11.25, he knocked at defendant's door and defendant opened it. He went into the back parlour, and there saw two men – Charles Vye and William Coleman. He asked the landlord what they were doing there, and he said Vye had come to order a fly for his father, who was ill, and that Coleman had come with him. There were three glasses on the table, one with liquor in it. He told defendant he should report the circumstance. A little while after, he saw a fly coming, driven by defendant's son, and defendant said to him “You see, I was not telling you a story”. Defendant was a fly proprietor, and had stables near Marine Terrace.

Defendant called Charles Vye and William Coleman, who both denied having anything to drink.

Mr. Boarer said a majority of the Bench had decided to convict the defendant, who would be fined £2 10s., the lowest penalty, and 11s. costs.

Charles Vye and William Coleman were summoned for being found on licensed premises during prohibited hours on the same day. Vye pleaded Guilty, and Coleman said he was not there for an unlawful purpose.

They were each fined 1s. and 8s. costs, or three days' imprisonment.

Folkestone Express 28 December 1878.

Monday, December 23rd: Before The Mayor, Capt. Carter, Colonel De Crespigny, General Cannon, Captain Fletcher, Alderman Caister, R.W. Boarer, J. Clark, W.J. Jeffreason and J. Fitness Esqs.

Joseph West, a plasterer, pleaded Guilty to being drunk and disorderly in Beach Street on Saturday. He was also charged with breaking a pane of glass at the Queen's Head Inn.

James Jordan, the landlord of the house, said he ejected the prisoner, who was fighting in the bar. Directly he was outside he thrust his fist through one of the embossed windows. The damage was about 30s.

The prisoner's hand was severely cut, and a doctor had to be obtained to dress the wounds.

He was fined 5s. and 3s. 6d. costs, or seven days' hard labour, for being drunk and disorderly, and for the damage he was fined 1s., 4s. 6d. costs, and ordered to pay 30s., the value of the window, or be imprisoned for 21 days.

Folkestone Express 4 January 1879.

Shortly before eight o'clock on Saturday morning the body of a man was seen lying in the inner harbour, having apparently been left there by the receding tide. On examination it proved to be that of a plasterer, a comparative stranger in the town – in fact his name was found out almost accidentally to be Henry Dickenson, whose home would appear to have been at Peckham, in Surrey. He was known to a soldier at the camp, and a day or two ago had been there to see him. The soldier gave the address of a friend who knew a friend of the deceased's relatives, and a telegram was sent to request him to acquaint them with the occurrence. An inquest was held on Saturday evening at the Town Hall, when the following evidence was given:

James Jordan, landlord of the Queen's Head Inn, identified the body as that of a man whose name he believed to be Henry Dickenson, and who was at his house about half past eight o'clock on Friday night. He had known him as a frequenter of the house for a few days, but did not know where he lived. Witness saw him go out with a baked potato can belonging to a man named Brand, for the purpose of going into the streets to sell them. There was no fire in the can. Deceased was sober.

John Freeman Hall, a mariner, living in East Street, said a little before eight that morning, James May, a fisherman, went to him and said there was a man drowned in the harbour. He went directly to the east side of the tramway, and on crossing the metals he saw the body lying by the side of the steamer Maud, to the west of the Pent Stream. The potato can and a knife were near the body, which was lying face downwards on the mud.

P.C. James Knowles said about eight o'clock that morning he went to the harbour. He saw deceased lying face downwards on the mud, close to the steamer Maud in the inner harbour. He procured a stretcher, and with assistance placed the body on it. Deceased was dead and cold. He was lying five or six yards from the edge of the slipway leading down to the sluice, with his head to the east, and a knife was lying nearer the corner. He should think deceased fell over when the water was up. The can was lying near the quay opposite the Pavilion. They put the body in the tan house and searched it, but only found a comb and a piece of a pencil.

Hall was recalled and said it would have been high tide about two o'clock. There would have been no water in the inner harbour at nine, as the tide only then began to flow.

Mr. Richard Mercer, surgeon, said he had examined the body, and found no marks of violence, scratches, or bruises. Deceased had been dead some hours. The hands and face were covered with mud, and the clothing was soaked with water. In his opinion death was caused by drowning.

Henry Stone, a plasterer, living in North Street, said he had known deceased for about a fortnight. He was a plasterer, and came from Margate. He believed he belonged to Peckham. He said his name was Harry Dickenson, and that he was known to a soldier at the camp. Deceased told him that he had work to go to on Monday if the frost broke up. Witness last saw deceased at ten minutes to eleven on Friday night. He had previously seen him just before nine. He said he was going to lodge at the Eagle in High Street. When he saw him at just before eleven he had had something to drink, but was sober. Witness found deceased's boot in a boat in the harbour. He wore no stockings.

Hall explained that when the body was found, it only had one shoe on. The other was picked up and placed in the boat.

The jury, in the absence of any evidence to show how deceased came in the harbour, returned a verdict of “Found Drowned”.

Folkestone Express 1 March 1879.

Monday, February 24th : Before R.W. Boarer Esq., Alderman Hoad, M. Ball and J. Kelcey Esqs.

John Maginnis was charged with being drunk on Saturday in Queen's Square, and also with begging. He pleaded Guilty to being drunk.

P.C. Hogben said about half past seven on Saturday evening he had a complaint made to him that the prisoner had been begging and abusing Mr. Worsell. A few minutes after, Mr. Jordan, of the Queen's Head, called him to eject prisoner from his bar. He did so, and when in the street he used threats to Mr. Jordan, and he was taken to the police station.

Edward Jordan said the prisoner went into his house and begged of the persons in the bar, asking for a copper for a night's lodging. He ordered him out, but he said he would not go. Prisoner was drunk.

Harry Goodwin, a lad employed by Mr. Worsell, butcher, said the prisoner came into the shop on Saturday evening and asked for a copper. When he was refused, he swore, and would not leave the shop.

He was convicted in November, 1877, for being drunk and disorderly.

He was sentenced to 21 days' hard labour.

Folkestone Express 20 January 1883.

Saturday, January 13th: Before The Mayor, Colonel De Crespigny, and J. Holden Esq.

Charles Barringer was charged with keeping open his house during prohibited hours for the sale of intoxicating liquor on Sunday, the 7th inst.

George Hawkins, Henry Bull, and John Taylor were charged with being in the house during prohibited hours.

All the defendants pleaded Guilty.

Sergt. Pay said that he was on duty in plain clothes about 11 o'clock on Sunday and saw the three defendants go into the house, and when he, in company with P.C. Gardner, entered, he saw two pints of beer had been drawn, and a half pint was drawn and paid for in his presence.

Mr. Barringer said that the door had been left open by his servant and the three men walked in. He thought the best and quickest way to get rid of them was to let them have what they wanted.

The Bench fined Barringer 50s. and 8s. costs. The three other defendants were fined 5s. and 8s. costs, or in default 7 days'.

Folkestone Express 16 August 1884.

Friday, August 8th: Before The Mayor, General Armstrong, Alderman Hoad, and F. Boykett Esq.

A woman named Rigg, apparently a native of the sister island, and the wife of a stonemason, was charged with being drunk and disorderly, and also with breaking a plate glass window, value £2, the property of Mr. Barringer, landlord of the Queen's Head Inn. She pleaded Guilty.

The prosecutor said the prisoner went into his house about seven o'clock in the morning of Thursday, and asked for half a pint of beer. He did not notice at the time that she was not sober, but subsequently he saw that she was the worse for drink, and was drinking out of other people's glasses. He took a glass out of her hand, and in doing so spilt some of the contents on her dress. She accused him of throwing a pail of water over her. He removed her from the premises, when she said she would have her revenge, and thereupon took off her shoe and with the heel smashed a pane of glass over three feet square. He then gave her into custody.

The Bench fined her 5s. and 3s. 6d. costs for being drunk, and 1s. and 3s. 6d. costs for the damage, together with £2, the value of the window, and in default seven days' hard labour for the first offence and 21 days' for the second.

Folkestone Express 20 November 1886.

Saturday, November 13th: Before The Mayor, J. Fitness, J. Clark and J. Holden Esqs.

Benjamin Freeman, a labourer, who said he came from Bexhill, was charged with stealing a quantity of whisky, cherry brandy, and cloves, the property of Henry Spillett.

Henry Spillett, landlord of the Tramway Tavern, Radnor Street, said the prisoner was in his house several times during Friday, drinking. The last time was about half past five. He then remained about ten minutes. No-one else was in the bar whilst prisoner was there. Witness was in the bar parlour getting his tea when he heard the prisoner leave, and when he went back into the bar two or three minutes after prisoner had left, he missed two bottles from a shelf, one containing about a pint of Scotch whisky, and the other about a pint of cloves. Previous to that, about four o'clock in the afternoon, he missed two bottles – one of cherry brandy, and the other a show bottle.

William H. Paul, landlord of the Marquis Of Lorne, said the prisoner went to his house about two o'clock on Friday and took lodgings. He went away and returned about three. He had a pint of beer, and took a bottle from his pocket, and poured some of the contents into the beer. He asked witness to taste it. He did, and said “That is funny stuff. What do you call that?” He replied that he had a lot of it, brought from a shipwreck at Romney. Two other lodgers came in, and they tasted the liquor in the bottle, but none of them could say what it was. It tasted like a weak solution of rum, sugar, and water. After that prisoner pulled out a full bottle and offered to sell it for 2s. It had a capsule on it, but no label. He drew the cork from the bottle and tasted it, and gave the prisoner 2s. for it. He thought it was home made cherry wine. Prisoner went away, and returned a few minutes before six. He then pulled another bottle from his pocket, and witness found it was whisky. He told prisoner he did not want it. Prisoner had another half pint of beer, and poured something out of another bottle into it. He asked witness to taste that, but he declined. He smelt the glass afterwards, and it smelt strongly of cloves.

P.C. Lilley said he received information from the prosecutor that he had lost a quantity of spirits. In consequence of what was said he went with prosecutor to the Queen's Head, where they found the prisoner, and prosecutor gave him into custody. Prisoner, in answer to the charge, said “There is no charge. You can't find anything on me”. He at first refused to go to the police station, but another constable came up, and with some difficulty they conveyed him to the station. He had the appearance of a man who had been drinking, but was not drunk. He had 6s. and some bronze in his possession.

Prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, and said he bought three bottles of a man, to whom he gave 3s. 6d. for them, and the other bottles he brought from Romney. He was sentenced to one month's hard labour, and the Bench recommended Mr. Paul in future not to buy bottles of liquor in his bar.

Folkestone Express 1 September 1888.

Saturday, August 25th: Before The Mayor, J. Holden and J. Fitness Esqs.

Jemima Davidson was charged with using obscene language in Seagate Street.

Mrs. Major, landlady of the Queen's Head, was the complainant. She said on Monday, shortly after six, the defendant went to the house and made a disturbance. She did not appear to be sober, and was ordered to go outside. When she got outside she was very abusive and used most offensive language. In consequence of her conduct, complainant sent for a policeman.

Benjamin Harris said he was in the house when the defendant went in. He heard her use filthy language.

Defendant said her husband left her on Monday morning, taking with him all the money she had, and which was owing for rent. She went to look after him, and found him in complainant's house with a black eye and one boot off.

Mr. Minter said the man had no drink in complainant's house. He and his wife were a perpetual nuisance to her, and she wished to keep them from using the house.

The Bench fined defendant 10s. and 10s. costs, or seven days'.

Folkestone Express 18 May 1889.

Saturday, May 11th: Before W. Bateman, J. Holden, J. Hoad and J. Fitness Esqs.

David Philpot was summoned for being drunk and disorderly in Beach Street on the 3rd of May. He admitted that he was “a little the worse for drink”.

P.C. Osborn said he saw the defendant in Beach Street, very drunk and creating a disturbance. He used very bad language, and caused a large crowd to assemble. Witness had previously ejected him from the Queen's Head Inn. Defendant's wife eventually took him away.

Defendant, who was one of the witnesses in the smuggling case, said he had been a teetotaller for two years, but he had a little to drink that day.

The Magistrates' Clerk: I suppose you had some of that champagne?

Defendant: Yes, I had a little drop. (Laughter)

Mr. Fitness: That was the Skylark, wasn't it?

The Superintendent: Yes, and this is a lark arising from it.

The Bench inflicted a fine of 5s. and 9s. costs, and recommended the defendant to again become a teetotaller.

Folkestone Express 22 June 1889.

Thursday, June 20th: Before Captain Crowe and J. Brooke Esqs.

George White was charged with stealing a cheese, value 2s. 6d., the property of Joseph Baxendale.

Herbert Major, landlord of the Queen's Head Inn, said on Wednesday afternoon one of Pickford's vans was standing opposite the Royal George. Prisoner was standing by the van. Witness saw him take something out of the van, put it under his coat, and run in the direction of Radnor Street. He told the driver of the van what he had seen, and afterwards went with P.C. Bailey to the Radnor lodging house, where he pointed out the prisoner. There was a cheese on the table, cut into pieces.

William Rye, carman in the employ of Messrs. Baxendale (Pickford and Co.), said he was delivering beer at the Royal George Inn, and had 25 Dutch cheeses in his van. He was in the cellar, and when he came up Mr. Major told him what had occurred. He counted the cheeses and found one was missing.

P.C. Bailey proved apprehending the prisoner at the Radnor and finding the cheese on the table. When charged he said he knew nothing about it.

Prisoner was sentenced to two months' imprisonment.

Folkestone Express 12 October 1889.

Monday, October 7th: Before J. Banks and J. Brooke Esqs., and Surgeon General Gilbourne.

James Loveday was charged with wilfully damaging the woodwork in the Queen's Head. He pleaded Guilty. He was further charged with resisting the police.

The landlord of the Queen's Head, Beach Street, said the man went into his house on Saturday evening with a friend. The friend called for a pint of beer, which they drank between them, and the friend left. Defendant remained and called for another half pint, which he refused to draw, as he appeared to be under the influence of drink then. He said he would kick the front of the bar in, which he did, breaking a panel. A constable came in and he gave the defendant in charge. The damage was 5s.

Sergeant Butcher said the prisoner was given over into his custody, charged with wilful damage. He said he should not go. Witness caught hold of one arm, and P.C. Hogben the other. He went a few paces and then tried to throw them both down. He was very violent and his conduct was like that of a madman. He knocked witness on the nose. They had to handcuff the prisoner, tie his legs, and carry him up the High Street. At the police station he commenced to tear his clothes up with his teeth. He tore his coat up, and in the police cell he tore his trousers. Witness had to buy the prisoner a “new suit”.

P.C. Lawrence said he saw the prisoner behaving very violently, kicking and biting. He assisted in securing the prisoner, and as they were carrying him up High Street he bit witness's leg.

Supt. Taylor said the prisoner was before the Court on the 6th October, 1885, when he was sentenced to six weeks' hard labour for assault, and six weeks for larceny. He was fined 10s., 5s, the damage, and 4s. 6d. costs for the first offence, and 20s. and 4s. 6d. costs for the second, and in default 14 days' imprisonment for each.

Folkestone Express 30 August 1890.

Wednesday, August 27th: Before The Mayor, Dr. Bateman, Alderman Pledge, J. Clark, F. Boykett and H.W. Poole Esqs.

The Brewster Sessions were held on Wednesday. Most of the old licenses were renewed, but some were objected to by the Superintendent of Police.

The Queen's Head.

Supt Taylor said this was a house conducted in a very unsatisfactory manner. At 25 minutes to one on the 12th January some persons were found in the house, and they claimed to be the landlord's friends, and since then there had been another complaint of a similar nature. The general conduct of the house was unsatisfactory.

Dr. Bateman thought it was a pity the parties were not brought before the Magistrates for them to deal with.

Supt. Taylor said every difficulty was put in the way of the police. Before they were admitted there was time to concoct a story and to put away any glasses which might be on the counter.

This application was ordered to stand over.

Folkestone Express 27 September 1890.

Wednesday, September 24th: Before The Mayor, Colonel De Crespigny, J. Clark, J. Pledge, W.G. Herbert, and H.W. Poole Esqs.

Adjourned Licenses.

This was the adjourned licensing session, and several certificates which had been postponed were applied for.

The Queen's Head.

In this case the Superintendent had reported that on the 12th of January three persons were seen to leave the house after hours.

P.C. Lilley gave evidence as to the facts, and said Mr. Thane had told him they had been to the house on business. He had visited the house previously and found no-one there, but there was a window open through which persons could pass out.

Mr. Minter, who appeared for the applicant, cross-examined the witness with a view to show that the parties in the house were friends of the landlord.

Mr. W.H. Harrison appeared in this case also on behalf of Messrs. Nalder and Colyer.

Sergt. Harman said on the 6th of July he visited the house at 20 minutes past one. He saw a man there named Barton, who said he was a lodger, sitting in the bar. He searched the house and found a man named Frank Lester, belonging to Foord, in bed partly dressed. He tried to wake him, but the landlord said he was drunk, and he took compassion on him and put him to bed. He thought Lester was shamming – he looked as though he had been put to bed in a hurry. The house was surrounded by the police, so that no-one could make his escape.

In answer to Mr. Minter, Sergt. Harmer said he should say the man Lester was sober. The landlord said he got drunk there, and he put him to bed.

P.C. Lawrence corroborated Sergt. Harman's statement.

Superintendent Taylor said on the 13th of January, in consequence of the report made to him by Lilley, he saw the defendant and cautioned him as to the way in which he conducted his house.

Mr. Minter assured the Bench that the two persons who were in the house were guests of the landlord, and he contended that if there was an offence the landlord should have been summoned at the time. With regard to the man Barton, he was a lodger, and resided at Dover, and in support of this contention he put in a postcard received from him by the landlord in July last. The man Lester was taken ill there, and the landlord put him to bed.

James Carter, living in Dover Street, said on the 5th July he was at the Queen's Head, and saw Lester there from half past ten till a quarter to eleven. He heard Lester ask to be allowed to go to bed before closing time. Lester appeared to be ill.

The Mayor said the Magistrates thought this to be a very aggravated case – far different to the others. He believed when the applicant went to the house he was a respectable man, and conducted the house properly. The police were again blamed for being too merciful; there were such things as sham friendships and sham hospitality, and it was foolish for publicans to set up such defences. They believed defendant had committed a flagrant breach of the Act. The licence was, however, renewed with a caution.

Folkestone Express 8 April 1893.

Saturday, April 1st: Before F. Boykett, W.G. Herbert, H.W. Poole, J. Brooks, and J. Pledge Esqs.

Thomas Warman was summoned for being drunk on licensed premises. Mr. Haines appeared for defendant.

Sergt. Dawson said about half past nine on the 20th March he was called to the Queen's Head. He found there P.C.s Osborne and Earl ejecting Warman, who was drunk. His nose was bleeding, and there was a quantity of blood on the floor. After he was ejected he wanted to go back again to fight a man named Philpott. He was taken away by his friends.

In answer to Mr. Haines, the witness said the defendant could not stand. He was taken away by his friends.

P.C. Osborne said he was called on the 20th March at 9.30 by three women to go to the Queen's Head. They said murder was being done in the house. He went into the bar and found defendant there very drunk, and fighting with Philpott. With the assistance of P.C. Earl he ejected him, and he wanted to return. There was no doubt about his being drunk. He was taken away in the direction of Radnor Street. He wanted their support, and they were afraid they would have to lock him up.

P.C. Earl gave similar evidence.

Mr. Haines said he should prove by several witnesses that defendant was not drunk – he was excited and fighting – of that there was no doubt.

David Philpott said he was in the Queen's Head on the 20th. Defendant went in. He was not drunk. There was a disturbance between them over money matters. They got to words. Defendant said he would not pay him, and he gave him “a wipe across the face”. The landlord went round, and then a constable rushed in “directly minute”. Warman went out. He could not say if the constables threw him out. They got him out.

By the Clerk: I went to the house about half past eight. Defendant came in about a quarter to ten. He called for half a pint of beer, and the landlord served him in a pint glass.

Robert Day said he lodged with the defendant. He went home on the 20th March about ten o'clock. He was sober, but bleeding from the nose.

Henry Vickers, of 46, Black Bull Road, said he was in the Queen's Head on the occasion referred to. He saw the defendant there about ten. He was perfectly sober. He only had one drink of beer, and then he was knocked over. He heard something said about a shilling, and saw Philpott strike defendant. The landlord was in the bar, and went round to the lobby. The disturbance did not last two minutes.

There was a previous conviction against the defendant for drunkenness. The Bench considered the case proved and fined the defendant 5s. and 14s. costs, or seven days'.

Walter Thame was then charged with permitting drunkenness on his premises, the Queen's Head, on Monday the 20th March. This case arose out of the preceding.

Sergeant Dawson said when all was quiet he saw the defendant and asked him what the noise was about, and he said there had been a dispute about a shilling, and Philpott struck Warman. Next morning he asked Thame if he was going to summon Warman for being drunk and refusing to quit. He said “No. If you had not been here, I should have put him out myself, and you could have done as you liked afterwards”.

In answer to Mr. Haines, the witness said he went by the instructions of the Superintendent to ask Thame whether he was going to summon Warman. He said Warman was not drunk. He did not see any blow struck, but saw Warman struggling with a constable.

Without troubling Mr. Haines to address them, the Bench at once dismissed the case.

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 Queen's Head.

This was the first case taken.

Sergt. Dawson said on the 13th April, 1893, he was in the Police Court, Folkestone, when a man who was found drunk was fined 5s. and 14s. costs. On that date Mr. Walter Tame was summoned for permitting drunkenness, and the summons was dismissed.

By Mr. Minter: I think it was not proved that the man had been served with drink. I could not prove that he had.

Mr. Minter said a drunken man went into the house and they were going to turn him out.

Sergeant Swift said he had measured 100 paces from the Queen's Head, and found 17 other licensed houses.

Mr. Glyn: Those are all old licenses which have existed for several years? – Yes. They have not moved.

By Mr. Minter: I do not know that the police often have rung Tame up at night to take in lodgers.

Mr. Glyn submitted that there was nothing to answer. There was a charge against the tenant, but it was dismissed without calling upon his legal adviser to reply. £1,500 was paid for the house, and the tenant had put in £305.

Mr. Minter said he could prove that the business was good, and had not decreased.

Mr. Glyn said if the Bench thought the Superintendent had made out a prima facie case he would call evidence to rebut it. But he did not wish to call a lot of witnesses to rebut what was not made out. He was only suggesting that to save time.

The Bench said with respect to the disorderly conduct, they decided there was none; with respect to whether the house was required, they would decide that after.

Walter Foster Crouch, manager to Messrs. Nalder and Cloyer, the owners, said he had supervision of the houses. This house was valued at £1,500. Mr. Walter Tame was admitted as tenant in 1887, and paid £305 for valuation. He paid £40 a year rent. He did an excellent trade – about six barrels a week. That was exclusive of spirits or wine. Tame was a thoroughly respectable man.

By Mr. Minter: He has much improved the house.

Superintendent Taylor desired to put a question with regard to notice of opposition in September, 1890, but it was held that he could not put it.

Walter Tame, the tenant, corroborated Mr. Crouch's evidence. He said the trade was increased considerably. The licence had been renewed by him year by year.

By Superintendent Taylor: I remember the police coming, because they were told there was a disturbance. There was a slight disturbance and the police ejected one man. He was certainly not drunk.

Superintendent Taylor: I can't expect you to say he was drunk.

By Mr. Minter: The police very often rap me up to take in lodgers.

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 12 April 1902.

Saturday, April 5th: Before W. Wightwick, W.G. Herbert, G.I. Swoffer, C.J. Pursey, and W. Salter Esqs., and Colonel C.J. Hamilton.

Michael Riley pleaded Guilty to a summons for being drunk on licensed premises on Easter Monday afternoon.

Inspector Lilley said at three o'clock on March 31st he saw prisoner drunk, and a woman was holding him up in the bar of the Queen's Head.

The defendant said he was drunk, and he went into the Queen's Head for a pint of beer, which the landlord refused to serve.

Fined 5s. and 9s. costs or seven days' imprisonment.

Walter Tame, landlord of the Queen's Head, Beach Street, was summoned for permitting drunkenness on his premises on March 31st. Mr. G.W. Haines defended, and entered a plea of Not Guilty.

Inspector Lilley said about 3.05 p.m. on Monday he saw a man named Riley (the last defendant) in the Queen's Head. He was very drunk. He kept observation until 24 minutes past three o'clock, when P.C. Philip Prebble joined him. They went to the Beach Street bar and saw Riley leaning against the partition. Witness informed the landlord of the condition of Riley, and he said “Yes, I have told him to go out”, and speaking to Riley said “What have I told you Riley?” He assured witness he had not had anything to drink in the house. Witness told defendant he had had plenty of time to eject Riley, and he would report him for the offence. He and Riley then left.

Supt. Reeve: You had the premises under observation for 19 minutes, Inspector? – Yes.

The Chief Constable: And it would be impossible for Riley to leave the premises without your seeing it? – There is another entrance.

Mr. Haines: Was there anyone else in the bar? – Yes, seven or eight.

Did you see Riley drinking? – No, I cannot say he was.

When he left, did he require any assistance? – No.

P.C. Philip Prebble corroborated.

Mr. Haines, in defence, said the town ought to be congratulated upon having only one case of drunkenness on Bank Holiday, and it reflected much credit upon the conduct of the licensed victuallers. It was idle to deny the facts in this case, but the defendant did not knowingly permit drunkenness on his premises.

The defendant went into the witness box, and said he had been the landlord of the Queen's Head for nearly 13 years. About three o'clock on Easter Monday Riley entered the bar, and knowing he had had enough, he went up to him and told him to leave, which he did very civilly and quietly. Witness did not see Riley again in the bar until the Inspector entered. He did not serve Riley with any liquor at all.

The Chief Constable: Is it a fact that Riley went right off your premises?

Witness: It is a fact he went out of my sight.

You cannot say he went right off the premises into the street? – He went out of the door.

Mr. Haines: How far are the doors from the street? – About three or four yards.

The Chairman said the evidence was not sufficiently conclusive to convict the defendant, who had borne a good character at this house for many years.

Folkestone Express 6 January 1906.

Inquest.

An inquest was held at the Town hall on Monday afternoon by the Borough Coroner (Mr. G.W. Haines), respecting the death of John Brann, a fisherman, who was found dead in his bedroom on Sunday morning.

John Charles Hagg (son-in-law) said he identified the body as that of John Brann. He lived at the Queen's Head. He was 67 years of age, witness believed, and was a fisherman. He was always a hearty man, and was of a cheerful disposition. On Thursday last he attended a funeral of his son, and seemed to be worried by the absence of another son. On Saturday he came to witness's house, and left about tea time. He seemed a little quiet, but witness did not think he was strange in his manner. There was nothing about deceased which would lead witness to think he would take his own life.

Walter Tom Tame said he was the landlord of the Queen's Head Inn, Beach Street. Deceased had lodged with him about two months. When he was ashore he had meals with them. He had no monetary troubles. He was a healthy man. Witness knew he had attended a funeral on Thursday, and under the circumstances he did not seem depressed. On Friday he went to sea, and came back early on Saturday morning. He had his dinner at the Inn that day, and a cup of tea in the afternoon. He was a man of sober habits. Witness saw deceased last time on Saturday evening between half past nine and half past ten in the bar. He then said he was going out. He seemed very quiet, and told witness he had had to consult a solicitor about his son's affairs. Witness's daughter told him that deceased had gone to bed. Deceased shared his bedroom with two other men, Spearpoint and Bailey. Witness went to bed on Saturday about twelve o'clock. His bedroom was on the same floor as that of deceased. He heard no sound during the night. On Sunday morning his wife got up about seven o'clock, and just before nine o'clock she came in to him and said “There is something happened to old Jack”. Witness said “What do you mean?” She said “Do come; I believe he has hung himself”. Witness then went into the adjoining room, and found deceased was on the ground in a sitting position at the foot of the bedstead occupied by the other two men. Deceased's body was not more than a foot from the floor. Round his neck was the handkerchief produced. He was only attired in his shirt. The handkerchief was twisted round the knob of the bedstead twice, and the ends came down and were tied round deceased's neck. His face was discoloured and the eyes were shut. The hands were clasping the rail at the foot of the bed. Witness cut the handkerchief and lowered the body down, and sent for a constable and a doctor. Deceased used to wear a handkerchief similar to the one produced.

Elizabeth Tame, wife of the last witness, said she saw the deceased the last time on Saturday at half past nine. She got up about seven o'clock on Sunday morning, and said “Good morning” to Spearpoint and Bailey. Shortly after witness went to deceased's bedroom with a letter. She opened the door and looked round the room and saw deceased in a sitting posture near the bedstead. Witness then communicated with her husband.

John Spearpoint, a fisherman, said on Saturday he was sharing a room at the Queen's Head with deceased and Bailey. He and Bailey had one bed. They went to bed at half past ten. Deceased came to bed afterwards, but witness had gone to sleep. He had seen him in the bar previously. About five o'clock witness woke up and heard a mumble, but took no notice and went to sleep again. At a quarter to eight witness woke up again and called Bailey. While he was waiting for Bailey, deceased mumbled something, and deceased spoke to him, but he made no answer. Bailey and he then went downstairs and went out for about an hour and a half. When they came back they heard what had happened, and went to the police station and gave all the information they could.

Frederick Bailey, a fisherman, corroborated Spearpoint's evidence.

P.C. Harry Johnson said on Sunday at nine o'clock, from information received, he went to the Queen's Head, and on the first floor in a back room he saw the body of the deceased. Mr. Tame accompanied witness and showed him the handkerchief produced. Deceased was lying on the floor. His face was a dark blue, the eyes were closed, and there was a slight impression round the neck. His body was warm, and witness applied artificial respiration. Dr. Gilbert arrived some ten minutes afterwards. There were no signs of a struggle.

Dr. Thornton Gilbert said about 9.30 a.m. on Sunday last he was called to the Queen's Head Inn, where he found the deceased lying on the floor. A police constable was applying artificial respiration. There was no response, and he found the man was dead. The body was cooling down, and witness thought deceased had been dead about twenty minutes. There was a discolouration at the back of the neck, and a slight mark of constriction on the left side of the neck. The body was well nourished. In witness's opinion death was due to strangulation.

The jury returned a verdict of “Suicide during temporary insanity”.

Folkestone Express 24 March 1906.

Friday, March 16th: Before E.T. Ward and T. Ames Esqs.

George Thomas Boreham, a Rye fisherman, was charged with being drunk and disorderly in Beach Street the previous evening.

P.C. Butcher said at eleven o'clock the previous night, when on duty in Beach Street, he saw the prisoner come out of the Queen's Head public house. He was drunk, and as he would not go away, witness told him to do so. Boreham then put himself in a fighting attitude, and eventually began to pull off his coat. As he would not go away, witness, with the assistance of P.C. Sales, took him into custody.

In answer to the Chairman, witness said the landlord of the public house told him he had served the prisoner with half a pint of beer.

Boreham said the constable shoved him, and also used a filthy expression to him.

Fined 2s. 6d. and 4s. 6d. costs, the money being paid by one of his friends.

Folkestone Express 5 May 1906.

Saturday, April 28th: Before W.G. Herbert and R.J. Linton Esqs.

Henry Todd was charged with being drunk on licensed premises. He pleaded Not Guilty.

P.C. Sales said about 1.40 on the afternoon of April 19th he saw defendant in High Street. He was drunk. Shortly afterwards witness saw Todd go into the Queen's Head public house. Witness went in too, and told the landlord not to serve Todd. The landlord refused to serve him, and told him to leave the house. Witness told defendant he should report him for a summons, and defendant made no reply.

P.S. Osborne said shortly after three o'clock on the afternoon in question, he saw defendant in Dover Street. He was carrying a basket containing primroses, and shouting “Primroses”, etc., at the top of his voice. He was reeling as he came up the street. Witness saw he was drunk.

George Pitcher said Todd was not drunk.

The Chief Constable said defendant had been before the Magistrates once that year, when he was fined 2s. 6d. and costs for being drunk and disorderly.

Todd was fined 5s. and 11s. costs, or seven days'. He went below.

Folkestone Express 11 August 1906.

Tuesday, August 7th: Before Alderman Spurgen, Lieut. Colonel Fynmore, and T. Ames Esq.

William Bradshaw was charged with being drunk and disorderly in Beach Street the previous night. He admitted the offence.

P.C. Sales said he was in Beach Street at 8.30 p.m., when he saw the prisoner, who was drunk, fighting with another man. He was also flourishing a stick and attempting to smash the windows of the Queen's Head public house.

Prisoner said he did not try to smash any windows.

Fined 2s. 6d. and 4s. 6d. costs, or seven days' hard labour in default.

Folkestone Express 9 February 1907.

Annual Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, February 6th: Before E.T. Ward Esq., W.G. Herbert, R.J. Linton, C.J. Pursey and W.C. Carpenter Esqs., Lieut. Col. Fynmore, and Lieut. Col. Hamilton.

The Chief Constable read his report as follows:

Chief Constable's Office, Folkestone, 6th February, 1907.

Gentlemen, I have the honour to report that there are at present within your jurisdiction 128 places licensed for the sale by retail of intoxicating liquors, viz.:- Full licences, 80; beer “on”, 9; beer “off”, 6; beer and spirit dealers, 14; grocers, 12; chemists, 4; confectioners, 3; total 128. This gives an average, according to the census of 1901, of one licence to every 239 persons, or one “on” licence to every 344 persons. This is a reduction of 8 licences as compared with the return presented to you last year, as the renewal of 3 “off” licences was not applied for at the last annual licensing meeting, and at the adjourned licensing meeting the renewal of one full licence was refused on the ground that the premises had been ill-conducted, and four other full licences were referred to the Compensation Committee for East Kent on the ground of redundancy. These four licences were subsequently refused by the Compensation Committee, and after payment of compensation, the premises were closed on 31st December last. Since the last annual licensing meeting 22 of the licences have been transferred, viz:- Full licences, 15; beer “on”, 5; off licences, 2; total 22. During the year three occasional licences have been granted by the justices for the sale of intoxicating liquors on premises not ordinarily licensed for such sale, and thirty extensions of the ordinary time of closing have been granted to licence holders when balls, dinners, etc., were being held on their premises. During the year ended 31st December last, 131 persons (106 males and 25 females) were proceeded against for drunkenness. 114 were convicted and 17 discharged. This, it is most satisfactory to find, is a decrease of no less than 52 persons proceeded against as compared with the preceding year, when 164 were convicted and 19 discharged. Six of the licence holders have been proceeded against, and five of them convicted, for the following offences: Selling adulterated whiskey, 1; permitting drunkenness, 1; delivering beer to a child in unsealed vessels, 2; supplying drink to a constable when on duty, 1; total, 5. In the latter case notice of appeal against the conviction has been given by the licensee. Eleven clubs where intoxicating liquor is sold are registered in accordance with the Act of 1902. There are 16 places licensed for music and dancing, and two for public billiard playing. I offer no objection to the renewal of any of the present licences on the ground of misconduct, the houses generally having been conducted during the past year in a satisfactory manner, but on one occasion one of the licence holders was cautioned (as the evidence was insufficient to justify a prosecution) for receiving slips and money relating to betting, which practice he immediately discontinued, bit I desire to intimate to all the licence holders that if in future any such practice is allowed, or any illegal gaming whatever is permitted on their premises, I shall take such steps as may be necessary to detect and prosecute the offenders. I beg to submit a plan showing the situation of all “on” licensed premises within the congested area, which I have marked on the plan, and would respectfully suggest that the Committee again avail themselves of the powers given by the Licensing Act, 1904, and refer the renewal of some of the licences within this area to the Compensation Committee to deal with under the Act. Within this area there are 920 houses, with a population approximately of 4,600, with 37 “on” licensed houses and 8 other licences, giving a proportion of one licence to every 20 houses or every 102 persons, and one “on” licence to every 24 houses or every 124 persons. This number of licences I consider excessive for the requirements of the neighbourhood. I have received notices from eight persons of their intention to apply at these sessions for the following new licences, viz.,:- Full licence 1; beer off 1; cider and sweets off 1; wine off 3; music, etc., 2; total 8.

I am, Gentlemen, your obedient servant, H. Reeve, Chief Constable.

The Chairman said the report seemed to be highly satisfactory. The Magistrates were very pleased to see the diminution in the number of cases of drunkenness brought before the Bench. One point about the report he wanted to make a remark upon, and that was the prevalence of gaming in public houses. In several houses the Committee visited they saw automatic machines, in which customers placed pennies and pulled a trigger. Occasionally they got something out for their pennies. That was gaming. It had been decided to be illegal, and they warned all licence holders that they would be watched, and that the machines would not be allowed, and proceedings would be taken against the offending publicans, whose licences would be jeopardised next year. There was one other point of a similar nature with regard to musical instruments, which were reported to be a great nuisance. They warned all licence holders to be careful not to create a nuisance with those pianos and other instruments, which were now very common indeed in public houses.

The following houses were ordered to be opposed as not required: The Channel Inn, High Street; the Queen's Head, Beach Street; the Railway Tavern (sic), Beach Street; the Chequers, Seagate Street; and the Perseverance, Dover Street.

Adjourned: The Black Bull Hotel, the Alexandra Tavern, the Imperial Hotel, Black Bull Road, and the Railway Hotel, Coollinge.

Folkestone Express 9 March 1907.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

The adjourned licensing sessions were held on Monday at the Police Court, when the principal business to be considered was whether or not the five licences should be referred to the East Kent Licensing Committee for compensation. The Licensing Justices on the Bench were E.T. Ward Esq., Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Lieut. Col. Hamilton, W.G. Herbert, C.J. Pursey, R.J. Linton and W.C. Carpenter Esqs., while other justices present were Major Leggett, Mr. G. Boyd, and Mr. J. Stainer.

The Chief Constable said the next business was to consider the opposition to five licences.

The last house for consideration was the Queen's Head, Beach Street.

Mr. De Wet appeared on behalf of the tenant and landlords.

The Chief Constable stated that notice of opposition had been served upon the tenant and landlords of the house, on the ground that the licence was not needed for the requirements of the neighbourhood. The house was situated in Beach Street. Walter Tom Tame, who obtained the transfer of the licence on August 7th, 1889, was the tenant. The registered owners were Messrs. Nalder and Collyer, of Croydon. The rateable value of the house was £32. The house adjoined the Wonder Tavern, and the back-way was directly opposite the South Foreland. The rateable value of the Wonder Tavern, although only a beerhouse, was £36, while that of the South Foreland was £72. There were twenty four houses in Beach Street, and six of them were licensed houses. The entrance was at the back of the house. The door opened into a passageway. The serving window overlooked the bar. There was also a tap room, which was 9 ft. 9 in. by 9 ft. 10 in., and about 7 ft. 6 in. high which opened from the passage. There was really no light to that room except that obtained from the window overlooking the front bar. Within a radius of 150 yards there were twenty six other on licensed houses. There was no yard to the premises, and the whole of the accommodation of the premises was inferior to the immediate adjoining houses. He considered, with the exception of the Railway Inn, those premises were less suitable than any of the licensed premises. The majority of the customers appeared to be men working at the fish market and employed about the fish market, and a few working on the Harbour. He considered the licence to be unnecessary for the needs of the neighbourhood, and if the house was closed there would still be ample accommodation for them to be supplied at the remaining houses.

The Justices decided to refer the house to the Licensing Committee.

Folkestone Express 15 June 1907.

Inquest.

The circumstances surrounding the death of Charles Foster, a Rye fisherman, will always remain to a certain extent a mystery. Early on Friday morning he was found severely injured on the railway line leading from the Junction to the Harbour Stations, almost immediately below the Radnor Bridge. His injuries, however, were plainly not the result of a railway accident, and there was hardly any doubt that they were caused by a fall from a good height. He was taken to the Victoria Hospital, where he succumbed several hours after without becoming conscious. The inquest was held on Saturday afternoon at the Town Hall, the Borough Coroner (Mr. G.W. Haines) conducting the enquiry, but nothing of a definite nature came to light as to how the unfortunate man came to fall off the bridge.

John Henry Baker, mate of the fishing boat No. 48, registered at Rye, said he identified the body as that of Charles Foster, who resided at Church Square, Rye, and who was master of the fishing lugger, the Florence, No. 48, registered at Rye. On Thursday evening the boat was lying in Folkestone Harbour. He saw the deceased, who was 27 years of age, at seven o'clock, when they went aboard after they had been shopping. He left the deceased on board at eight o'clock, and the deceased said he was going ashore. Foster told him to have steam ready by eleven o'clock. When he left the deceased he was sober, but he had had a glass or two.

Mr. Blake, solicitor, said he represented Mr. Kingsford Read, the owner of the smack, and he would like to ask the witness whether the deceased had any reason to go up to the bridge in the course of his work.

The Coroner: I do not think you need trouble with that question at this enquiry.

Mr. Blake: Very well.

George Knight, of 26, Greenfield Road, said he was an engine driver in the employ of the S.E. and C.R. Company. On Friday morning, about four o'clock, he was driving his engine, with a bank brake attached, from the Junction to the Harbour, and just before coming to Radnor Bridge he noticed something fifty yards in front of his engine on the Harbour side of the crossing, lying about two feet from the outside rail. When he got closer to it he saw it was the body of a man. The body was quite clear of the rails, and he ran past it. They then applied the brakes and got down. On going to the man, he found he was alive, but unconscious. His mate went for a police constable, and he returned with P.C. Lawrence. The body was never touched from the first time he saw it.

P.C. Lawrence said on Friday morning, about half past four, from information received, he went to the Tram Road, and the last witness pointed out to him the body of a man, who was lying about two feet clear of the down rails. The body was about three feet on the Harbour side of the bridge. The man was unconscious, lying on his stomach, and bleeding from the nose and ears. He at once went for Dr. Gilbert and sent for the stretcher. Dr. Gilbert came immediately, and under his directions he removed the body to the hospital. When the doctor arrived they had got the man on the stretcher. The sleeper was marked with blood just where the man's head was resting.

P.S. Osborne said on Friday morning, just after six o'clock, he went to Radnor Bridge and examined it. On the Harbour side of the bridge at the end nearest the East Cliff, there were some marks on the outside of the bridge, as if someone had climbed over. The marks appeared to have been caused by the toe, the moss being scraped from the wall, and on a ledge about four or five feet down there was the impression of a foot in grit. The ledge was about 10 inches wide. The grit appeared to be the same as that in the roadway. There had been a lot of rain during the night. The marks were almost perpendicular with the place where the man was found. On one of the chains of the rails he found a piece of hair.

Dr. Thornton Gilbert said on Friday morning, at twenty past four, he was called by the police to the crossing, and on his arrival he found they had got the body on the ambulance. He examined the body, which was that of an unconscious man. He found an abrasion on the face, a cut over the right eye, and blood oozing from the nose and ear. The jaw was broken in three places, and the right thigh was also broken. Having dressed the wound on the face, he ordered the man's removal to the hospital. He saw the man again in the hospital and he was dying. The injuries were such as would be caused by a fall from a height. He should not think there were any marks which could have been caused in a brawl. The distance from the arch of the bridge to the ground was 28 feet. The man, who smelt slightly of alcohol, but not much, might have been near the rails half an hour, the blood on his face having commenced to coagulate. It was very difficult to give an accurate idea of how long he had been lying on the railway.

Dr. Cecil Hadley, the house surgeon at the Victoria Hospital, said on Friday morning, at five o'clock, the deceased was brought into the Hospital suffering from a fracture of the right thigh, fracture of the jaw, and fracture of the base of the skull. Deceased died at one o'clock in the afternoon from the fracture of the base of the skull. The injuries were such as would be received from a fall of 28 feet. They were not of such a character as would have been received in a brawl.

John Allen, 3, Kenley Bridge Road, Lower Sydenham, said he was a bricklayer. On Thursday evening last he was going across the Radnor Bridge, about 11.30, from Dover Road, and saw a man on it nearest the Warren end. The man, who appeared to be a fisherman, was leaning over the bridge, looking down on the rails below. When he passed the man he said to him “It is time you were aboard”, and he replied “I will ---- well go when I like”. Witness then passed on. He could not tell from the man's voice whether he was drunk or sober.

Mrs. Bertha Fagg, who offered to give evidence, said she lived at 5, Fenchurch Street. She was a widow. She knew the deceased as “Shamrock”, a name by which he was generally known. On Friday night, about nine o'clock, she left off work and went into the Queen's Head, where she saw the deceased and several other fishermen with other women. They all came out of there and went into the North Foreland (sic), where they had another drink. She then went with the deceased, in company with other men and women, to the Clarence Inn, where they remained until eleven o'clock. She left the deceased at five minutes past eleven, at the bottom of Dover Road, near St. Michael's Church. She asked him to go along with her, and then go aboard his boat, but he refused to do so. When he left her he had about a quartern of rum in a bottle with him. Deceased was not sober, and was the worse for drink. She had had no more drink than the other women.

The Coroner, in summing up, said there was nothing to show that the injuries were received in a brawl or from any instrument.

Mr. Hopper, the station-master at the Harbour Station, in reply to the Coroner, said two trains came from the Junction Station during the night – one at 12.35 and the other at 2.08. He had had no report from the drivers as to having seen or struck anyone, and there were no marks on the engines when they were examined the same morning.

The jury held that death was caused by the fall from the bridge, but there was no evidence to show how the deceased got there.

Folkestone Express 13 July 1907.

Local News.

At the Folkestone Licensing Sessions the Justices decided to refer four licences to the County Licensing Authority with a view to the houses being closed and compensation given.

The Committee held a meeting on Thursday, and decided to withdraw the licences from the Channel Inn, High Street; the Queen's Head, Beach Street; and the Perseverance, Dover Street. The fourth licence, that of the Railway Inn, Beach Street, was renewed. The owners and tenants of the others will be compensated.

Folkestone Express 24 August 1907.

Saturday, August 17th: Before The Mayor, T. Ames and G. Boyd Esqs.

Henry Jones was summoned for assaulting Mercy Simpson. He pleaded Not Guilty.

The parties were of the “'Arry and 'Arriett” type, and the evidence was very amusing.

The complainant narrated how on August Bank Holiday night she and her husband, who live at 14, Mill Bay, went to the Queen's Head to have a glass of stout. Defendant, with some women, was there. Witness saw something was “working”, and advised her husband to get out. As they left the bar, witness's husband, who was leading his father-in-law, who was blind, was set upon, while defendant caught hold of the complainant by the hair and tore her down to the ground. “I have been under the doctor for four days” said Mercy, very impressively, “and I have lived on soda and milk”.

Ellen Simpson said she saw defendant put his knee in complainant's back.

Defendant denied the assault, but the Magistrates were of opinion that the case had been fully proved and fined him 10s. and 10s. costs.

In default of payment, he was taken below to do fourteen days' hard labour.