Dover Express 19 July 1862.

Dover Police Court, Wednesday: Before Captain Noble and G.F. Jennings Esq.

Charles Struckell, a mariner who has several times previously appeared before the Bench on charges of varying descriptions, was again placed at the bar by Johnson, charged with stealing from the schooner Perseverance, lying in Dover harbour, January opera glass, value 10s., January tape measure, value 1s., March pairs of trousers, value 3s., and March shirts, value 2s., the property of the captain.

George Bushell: I am master of the schooner Perseverance, of Dover. Last Monday she was lying alongside the Commercial Quay, and the articles now produced were then on board, and under my care. The same afternoon I was informed they were missing and when I again saw them they were at the station-house. The opera glass and tape measure belong to me and the March pairs of trousers and March shirts produced belong to my brother, who had command of the vessel on Saturday last. I value the whole at 16s.

William Martin, Superintendent of the police at Folkestone: On Monday night the prisoner came to the station at Folkestone and said he wished to give himself up for having committed a robbery at Dover. I told him that one of the Dover constables was in search of him, and having cautioned him that what he might say would be used as evidence against him, he told me he had sold March pairs of trousers and March shirts to the landlady of the Radnor public house. The glass and tape measure were sold to a person named Austen. I then went to the Radnor and there received the March shirts which I now produce from the landlady and the March pairs of trousers from a person named Spearpoint living at the back of the Radnor. The glass and measure I received from a man named William Austen. I took the articles to the station and showed them to the prisoner, and he admitted that they were the things he had sold and that they belonged to Captain Bushell of the schooner Perseverance.

Ann Tindall said that she lived at the "Radnor" public house. She knew the prisoner. She had seen him in her house about 12 o'clock on the previous Monday morning when he offered the trousers and shirts produced for sale. She bought the shirts of him for 1s. The same evening the Superintendent enquired if she had purchased any shirts and she then fetched those she had bought of the prisoner and have them to the Superintendent.

Margaret Lightfoot said she lodged at the "Radnor" public house, Folkestone. The prisoner offered for sale some shirts and trousers in the bar on Monday last. The landlady bought the shirts and prisoner left the trousers produced lying on the table to see if anybody would purchase them for a shilling. She took them, at prisoner's request, into the next house, and sold them for a shilling to Mrs. Spearpoint.

Mary Spearpoint said she lived at the back of Radnor Street, Folkestone, and that she bought the trousers produced of the last witness for 1s. She gave them to the Superintendent when he came to her house in the evening.

William Austen said he was a general dealer living in Radnor Street, Folkestone. On Monday afternoon the prisoner offered the glass and tape produced for sale. He told prisoner they were of no use to him, but prisoner said he wanted to raise a few shillings to take him to Hastings, and he ultimately bought the glass and tape for 3s. Prisoner said he bought the glass of Mr. Long, at Dover. The same evening Superintendent Martin knocked him up, and enquired if he had bought any goods. He told him that he had and gave the glass and tape to him.

Peter Bushell said he was master of the schooner Perseverance on Saturday night, but had since given up command to his brother. The goods produced were then all in the chest together.

Prisoner, having no questions to put to any of the witnesses, and having been cautioned in the usual way, pleaded Guilty to the charge.

The Bench sentenced him to February months imprisonment, with hard labour, and ordered the property to be given up to the prosecutor.

Folkestone Express 6 February 1869.

Monday, February 1st: Before J. Gambrill and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

George Sheppard was charged by P.C. Swain with sleeping in the open air and having no visible means of subsistence. The police constable found him on Saturday night at the back of the Earl Radnor, and on waking him and finding he could not give a satisfactory account of himself, he took him into custody. He searched him at the station, but found nothing in his pocket.

The prisoner said he formerly belonged to the 53rd Regiment, and he went to Sandgate and met some of his old comrades. He did not arrive at his lodgings till late, when he found himself locked out. He got his living by selling bones for sharpening razors.

The Bench dismissed the prisoner on his promising to leave the town.

Folkestone Express 28 August 1869.

Spirit License (Renewal)

Wednesday, August 25th: Before Captain Kennicott R.N., W. Bateman. J. Tolputt, A.M. Leith, and J. Gambrill Esqs.

John Rossiter, of the Radnor, Radnor Street, applied. Mr. Martin said the same complaints existed against this house as against Peel's.

Applicant said he could not tell what the people were who came to lodge at the house. The license was suspended till the adjourned meeting.

Folkestone Express 5 June 1875.

Monday, May 31st: Before The Mayor, J. Kelcey, R.W. Boarer and J. Tolputt Esqs.

Francis Hartley, labourer, was charged with stealing a watch, value 25s., belonging to Charles Dadd, on the 30th inst.

Prosecutor, Alfred Smith, and P.C. Keeler having given evidence in support of the charge, prisoner was committed to the next Quarter Sessions for trial.

Folkestone Express 19 June 1875.

Saturday, June 12th: Before The Mayor, Col. De Crespigny, J. Clark and J. Tolputt Esqs.

Charles Dadds, Thomas Welsh, and Alfred Smith were charged with being found drunk on the licensed premises of the Radnor Inn on Sunday, the 30th ult.

Mr. Mowll, of Dover, appeared to prosecute.

Mr. Till appeared for defendant, who pleaded Not Guilty, with the exception of Dadds, who admitted being a little beery.

At the same time, John Rossiter, landlord of the Radnor Inn, was charged with allowing drunkenness to take place on his premises.

Mr. Till also appeared for this defendant.

P.C. Keeler deposed that on Sunday afternoon week he visited the Radnor Inn at about ten minutes to two. He saw the landlord and landlady in the house, and in the same room, the tap room, were the other defendants, Dadds, Welsh, and Smith, all three drunk. Eight or ten other men and women were there, none of whom were sober. Witness left and returned to the house with Superintendent Wilshere. Witness heard the Superintendent of Police call Rossiter's attention to the state of the men.

Cross-examined by Mr. Till: The landlord was in the tap room with the men, some of whom were what I call incapable. It is true that the landlord fetched me to the house with reference to a charge of stealing a watch.

Cross-examined by defendant Smith: I found the man who committed the robbery. You were drinking beer or ale. You were drunk.

Superintendent Wishere deposed that on the day in question P.C. Keeler brought Dadds to the police station. The defendant was very drunk. Witness returned with the constable to the Radnor Inn and found Smith and Welsh there, drunk. The latter wanted to fight witness, but was held back by one of the women present. Witness saw Rossiter and his wife in the house.

Cross-examined by Mr. Till:Had cautioned the defendant several times as to the manner in which he was conducting his house.

Mr. Till addressed the Bench for the defence, arguing that it was not likely that defendant would have sent for a constable to make enquiries about the watch robbery if he had drunken men in his house; he would have hushed the case up. He contended that the men were not drunk, only excited.

He called the defendant John Rossiter, who swore that no-one in the house on the afternoon in question was “exactly drunk”. He was clearing his house when the Superintendent came in. He had never been warned by the police before.

Dadds admitted having had a drop too much, which made him sleepy.

Smith also said he had had a drop of beer, but could not have been very drunk as he helped the policeman to look for the man who stole the watch.

Welsh allowed that he was a little excited.

Rossiter, on being appealed to by Welsh, replied that Welsh was a little beery, but knew what he was doing.

The Mayor said the Bench had no doubt that the defendants were in a state of drunkenness in the house. Dadds, Smith and Welsh would be fined 2s. 6d. and 8s. 6d. costs each, in default, seven days. As to Rossiter their decision would be reserved till they had heard the next case.

Rossiter was then charged with allowing his house to be used as a brothel.

The evidence of Dadds and P.C. Keeler proved the charge beyond a doubt.

Mr. Till contended that the defendant ought to have been warned before being prosecuted on so serious a charge.

The Bench retired for a quarter of an hour, and on their return the Mayor said that with reference to the first charge the magistrates were unanimous in their opinion that Rossiter had knowingly permitted drunkenness in his house. He would for that offence be fined £2 and 11s. costs, or one month's imprisonment. On the second charge, defendant must have known the character of the woman, who had been lodging in his house, it had been proved by his wife's admissions, for a fortnight. He would be fined £5. Unless paid forthwith, a distress warrant would be issued, and in default of sufficient goods to meet the levy he would be committed for two months. Mr. Till had alluded to the consequences of a conviction, but the Bench could but carry out the law, and defendant must lose his license.

Folkestone Express 31 July 1875.

Quarter Sessions:

Friday, July 30th: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

Francis Hartley, 44. Labourer, was indicted for stealing a watch, value 25s., the property of Charles Dadds, labourer, Elham, at Folkestone, on the 30th May.

Mr. Forbes Moss appeared for the prosecution, and briefly opened the case.

Prosecutor deposed that on the night of the 30th of May he went to the Radnor Inn and took lodgings for the night, leaving his watch with the landlady. Next day (Sunday) he went into the tap room, having received his watch of the landlord. Soon afterwards prosecutor had “a little beer” and went to sleep. During the afternoon prosecutor was awakened by a man named Smith, and then found that his watch had been torn from the chain. Prosecutor had bought the watch for 25s. of a man named Hardiman, whose name was in the watch. The glass was cracked. Prosecutor then identified the watch produced as his property.

Cross-examined by prisoner: Cannot remember who advised me to go to sleep.

To the Recorder: I was sober in the morning when I came down (although I had no breakfast), but was not so when I went to sleep.

Alfred Smith, a rag and bone dealer, deposed that he was lodging at the Radnor Inn on the 30th May. On that afternoon prosecutor got drunk, and leaned forward on his arms and went to sleep. While witness was drinking with another man he saw prisoner go up to him and heard a click, and saw prisoner remove the watch. The prisoner then went out of the house. Witness made a communication to the man with whom he was drinking and to the landlord.

Cross-examined by prisoner: I am a tramping rag and bone man. I did not try to stop you from going out because I wanted to finish up my beer. (Laughter) I had a little drink myself and was convicted before the Magistrates of being drunk on the day of the robbery. I will not swear I was quite sober when I gave information about your stealing the watch.

P.C. Keeler deposed to apprehending prisoner, who said when charged that he might as well have it as anybody else. Witness found the watch that had been produced on the prisoner.

Cross-examined by prisoner: When the witness Smith gave me information of the robbery he was beery, but not exactly drunk, nor exactly sober. Smith was the worse for liquor when before the Magistrates.

Prisoner called Superintendent Wilshere to prove that the witness Smith was not sober when the case was heard before the Magistrates. Superintendent Wishere said that the man had evidently been drinking heavily before he came into Court, and the Magistrates were at first doubtful if they should take his evidence.

The prisoner then made a long speech, asserting that the other four people in the room with prosecutor were loafing on him, getting drunk at his expense, and that they attempted to steal the man's watch when he had gone to sleep. Prisoner said that he woke the man and then took the watch off before the men, in order to keep it for him till he became sober. He argued that he would have left the house and gone out of the town if he had meant to steal the watch, but on the contrary he remained in the kitchen. In impassioned tones and with natural eloquence the prisoner appealed to the jury to say whether he had not acted like an honest man in protecting the prosecutor from being robbed, and insisted that the last witness was the intending thief, and when he found himself foiled laid the blame upon the man who had stopped the game.

The learned Recorder said he always regretted when counsel appeared for the prosecution and the prisoner was undefended. In this case, however, he did not do so, for he was sure that no counsel could have made an abler or better speech for the defence than the prisoner had done. It was for the jury to say whether the arguments of this very clever speech were borne out by the evidence; whether, in fact, the prisoner took the watch with the intention of stealing it or whether he simply took care of it for the prosecutor. It was clear that he was dead drunk, and the witness Smith was nearly drunk, but not so far gone but that he could tell the landlord that he had seen something going on. The jury must bear in mind the fact that prisoner did not offer to hand over the watch to the landlord for safe custody, but kept it in his pocket. He asked the jury to consider whether this fact was consistent with the prisoner's line of defence.

The jury deliberated for about ten minutes, when the foreman said the jury found the prisoner Guilty.

The Recorder, in passing sentence, said he quite agreed with the verdict of the jury. He was very sorry to see such an intelligent man convicted of such a crime. Prisoner had pleaded that he was not an educated man, but no-one could have listened to his speech and marked the choice of words he had made without feeling that he must have moved in a better position in society than they now found him in. For himself he could say he never heard a more powerful or able address from counsel. However, it was his painful duty to sentence prisoner for this crime. Seeing that he had been in gaol two months, he should sentence him to four calendar months imprisonment with hard labour.

Folkestone Express 1 April 1876.

Monday, March 27th: Before The Mayor, General Armstrong, Captain Crowe, R.W. Boarer, J. Kelcey, and W. Bateman Esqs.

Julia Johnson was charged with maliciously cutting and wounding her husband Thomas Johnson on the previous Sunday afternoon.

Thomas Johnson said: I am a labourer, staying at the Radnor lodging house. Prisoner is my wife. Yesterday (Sunday) afternoon I was in the kitchen at the Radnor between four and five o'clock, and we had some words through drink. We were both the worse for drink. I struck her with my fist in the face. I was going to hit her again. She was cutting some food. She had a knife in her hand, with which she attempted to ward off the blow, and it entered my hand. I did not hear her threaten.

By the Bench: I struck my hand upon the knife.

The Bench said that under the circumstances they would dismiss the case, but cautioned the parties to abstain from drink in future.

Folkestone Express, Sandgate, Shorncliffe & Hythe Advertiser, Saturday 30 June 1877.

Public House and Lodging House to let. The "Radnor Inn," Radnor Street, Folkestone. Inquire on the premises, or of Mr. Woodcock, Lower Brewery, Maidstone.

Folkestone Express 14 July 1877.

Advertisement.

Public House and Lodging House to let. The Radnor Inn, Radnor Street, Folkestone. Inquire on the premises, or of Mr. Woodcock, Lower Brewery, Maidstone.

Folkestone Express 22 December 1877.

Tuesday, December 18th: Before The Mayor and Alderman Caister.

Mary Harris, who has recently been lodging at the Radnor Inn, was charged with begging on the Leas on the morning of Monday. When searched at the Police Station 6¾d. was found upon her, and a quantity of food.

She was committed for 10 days with hard labour.

Folkestone Express 20 April 1878.

Tuesday, April 16th: Before The Mayor, Col. De Crespigny and Alderman Caister.

Peter Kelly, a labourer, was brought up charged with assaulting his wife, and to show cause why he should not be bound over to keep the peace.

Maria Kelly, prisoner's wife, said she was living with her husband and five children at the Radnor public house. They had been there since last hop-picking season. Her husband had work for about two months before Christmas, but since then all the money she had received from him was 2s. 10d. The children earned a trifle sometimes by selling flowers, and she herself went out scrubbing. On Monday while she was eating her dinner and having a glass of ale he husband and herself had some words because there was nothing but potatoes for his dinner. He knocked her down and “gave her a kick here and a kick there, and in fact she could not tell exactly where he did kick her”. She had a great bruise over the eye, which was caused by one kick. She had left him to get out of his way, but he always found her out. He frequently ill-used her, and had threatened to kill her.

In reply to the Bench, the woman said she did not wish her husband to be punished, but that he should be bound down not to molest her.

The prisoner was ordered to find one surety in £10 to keep the peace for a month, and to enter into his own recognisances for a similar sum. He was removed to the cells.

The costs, 2s. 6d., which the complainant paid, were returned to her, and the Mayor told her that the Bench sympathised with her.

Folkestone Express 23 November 1878.

Monday, November 18th: Before Captain Carter, Alderman Caister, and Col. De Crespigny.

John Price was charged with being drunk and disorderly in Queen's Square on Saturday evening. P.C. Hogben said he was called to defendant, who was taking off his clothes in the street and using disgusting language. He persuaded him to go to his lodgings at the Radnor, but he refused, and as he was drunk and wanted to fight, he took him to the police station.

Defendant denied that he was drunk, but admitted that he had a quarrel with another man who had struck him, and as there was a doubt about his having been drunk the case was dismissed.

Folkestone Express 18 January 1879.

Inquest.

On Wednesday afternoon the borough coroner held an inquest at the Town Hall on the body of a woman named Elizabeth Jeffery, whose death took place under the following circumstances:

P.C. William Butcher identified the body as that of Elizabeth Jeffery, wife of William Jeffery, a tailor, working at the Camp, and who lodged at the Radnor Inn. He also said on Christmas Day, at Sandgate, at 7.15, he was fetched by James Lilley, a porter of Ashford, who said there was a man and woman drunk at the bottom of the Military Road, and that the woman had fallen down near the drinking fountain and hurt herself. Lilley had seen them previously coming down the Military Road. On proceeding to the place, witness found the woman sitting in the road near the kerb. There were several persons round her, and her husband was trying to get her up. He was very drunk, and as he lifted her by the arms he tumbled over her. He swore at her, and told her if she had kept sober, as he had done, nothing would have happened to her. Witness saw they were both very drunk, and he obtained the assistance of P.C. Bashford, who took the man in charge. It was a severe frosty night. Witness asked deceased if she had hurt herself. She replied that she had hurt her leg a little bit. He asked how she did it, and she said she had slipped down. She said she could not stand. Finding that she could not stand, he sent to Mr. Keeler's for a conveyance, and with assistance he placed her in it and took her to the Folkestone Police Station, and immediately sent for Dr. Bateman, who found her leg to be broken, and she was removed on a stretcher to the infirmary.

Mr. William Bateman, surgeon, said, on the 25th December last, about nine o'clock, he was sent for to the Police Station. He saw the deceased, who was sitting on a chair in the charge room, supported by a constable. She was very drunk. He had been told that her leg was hurt, and that it was bleeding. On examining her left leg he found that the large bone was broken below the knee. It was a compound fracture, and the end of the bone was protruding through the flesh. Having secured her leg with splints he ordered her to be taken to the Infirmary. The fracture was in all probability caused by a fall. There was no appearance of any blow. The bone was broken very obliquely, which would not have been the case had it been caused by a blow. On further examination he found that the fibula bone was broken near the head. That part of the leg was bruised, and in his opinion that bone was broken either by a blow or fall, and probably was caused by the deceased falling on the edge of the kerb. The leg was set, as no considerable artery was injured, and witness thought there might be a chance of saving the leg. In the course of a few days there was extensive suppuration from the wound where the bone had protruded, and on Tuesday the 7th of January he found an abscess had formed over the other fracture, that there was no chance of saving the leg, and that the only chance of saving her life was to amputate the limb. Next morning, after consultation with his colleagues, he amputated the limb above the knee. She did remarkably well, and witness had great hopes of saving her life, but on Sunday evening last, between eight and nine o'clock, he was called to the Infirmary in a hurry, and on his arrival found that a secondary haemorrhage had taken place and that there had been considerable loss of blood. With the assistance of Mr. Mercer and Mr. Tyson he stopped the blood. The deceased, however, died about half past eleven. He saw the husband at the police station on the 26th. He was then very drunk. He asked deceased if her husband had ill-used her, and she replied “No. It was the fall. My husband never ill-used me in his life”.

The jury found that the broken leg was caused by a fall, and that death resulted from secondary haemorrhage after the amputation.

The Coroner commended P.C. Butcher for his conduct in connection with the matter, and regretted that he had no power to award him a sum of money in recognition of his services.

Folkestone Express 20 March 1880.

Local News.

A man is in custody and will be brought before the magistrates this morning on a charge of assaulting a woman. They were staying at the Radnor Inn, and having quarrelled, the man first threw some boiling fat over the woman, scalding her, and then beat her about the head and face with the frypan. She made her way to the police station, bleeding profusely all the way. Her injuries were attended to, and she was removed to the lodging house.

Folkestone Express 27 March 1880.

Friday, March 19th: Before J. Clark Esq., and General Cannon.

Patrick Higgins was brought up charged with an assault upon Sarah Richards at the Radnor Inn on the previous day. The prisoner was a man about six feet in height, while the complainant was a little mite, whose head was only just visible above the witness box. She wore a great bandage round her head, and presented a most miserable picture. The story she told the Magistrates was as follows:

On Thursday morning about half past eight she was in the kitchen at the Radnor taking her breakfast, when the prisoner made his appearance. A cup was standing on the table, intended for common use by the frequenters of this aristocratic hostelry, and prisoner asked who was using it. Complainant replied that it was for “her Johnny”, meaning the gentleman who was the sharer of her lot in life, although it appeared they had dispensed with the nuptial rite. Prisoner said he should have the cup if he wanted it, and complainant retaliated, daring him to touch it. Thereupon a war of words ensued, and the complainant admitted that when she was called foul names by the prisoner, she retorted with equally choice invectives. The prisoner so far forgot himself as to strike the little woman, who threatened to return the blow, nothing daunted by the disparity in size between herself and the prisoner. She held the cup tightly in her hand and prisoner attempted to force it out of her grasp, but without success, and in the struggle she fell on the floor, her apparel becoming woefully disarranged. On getting up she threw the contents of the cup at her assailant, who was then engaged in frying a pan of potatoes at the fire. Without a thought for the loss of his breakfast he immediately turned the contents, boiling as they were, over the woman, and followed up the attack by striking her on the head with the utensil, inflicting a very severe wound, from which the blood flowed most alarmingly. The complainant wisely abandoned the fight and rushed off, all besmeared with blood and grease, to the police station, where her wounds were dressed, and an officer went at once in search of the prisoner.

A witness named Thomas Hughes corroborated the complainant's account of the fracas, adding that there were about five and twenty people in the kitchen, including the “Johnny” for whose cup the little woman had done battle, but not one attempted to interfere. The witness feared to do so himself lest a general fight should have resulted, and he had been threatened with violence for appearing as a witness in the case.

The prisoner did not attempt to refute any of the statements, but said it was complainant's own fault that she was struck because she rushed at him just as he was in the act of throwing the potatoes at her.

The Bench told the prisoner that he had been guilty of a cowardly and brutal assault, and sentenced him to a month's hard labour, a little boy he had with him being sent to the Union, there to await the expiration of his father's sentence.

Folkestone Express 2 July 1892.

Auction Advertisement.

Banks and Son are instructed to sell by Auction at the Rose Hotel, Folkestone, on Thursday, 7th July, 1892, at three o'clock in the afternoon, in one Lot, the following properties:

All that brick-built with tiled roof Copyhold House, No. 14, Radnor Street, formerly known as the Radnor Inn.

Containing in Basement: Kitchen, Cellar, and W.C.

On the Ground Floor: Two Parlours.

And on the First and Seconds Floors: Five Bedrooms.

And also a wooden built with tiled roof Copyhold Cottage (in the rear of and adjoining the last mentioned premises). Containing Cellar, Parlour, and Two Bedrooms.

Both properties, which have the joint use of a yard and passage leading to The Stade and Fishmarket are in the occupation of Harry Wiles Spillett and his under-tenant, at the annual rent of £22, payable quarterly.

The above properties are held of the Lord of the Manor of Folkestone, at the annual quit rents of 8d. and 5d.

Particulars and Conditions of Sale may be had seven days before the day of sale at the office of th Auctioneers, 73, Sandgate Road, Folkestone, and of Messrs. Kingsford, Wightwick and Kingsford, Solicitors, Canterbury.

Folkestone Express 9 July 1892.

Local News.

On Thursday afternoon Messrs. Banks and Son offered for sale by auction at the Rose Hotel several lots of freehold and copyhold property. The first was No. 14, Radnor Street, formerly the Radnor Inn, copyhold, now let, with a cottage at the rear, at £22 per annum, and after a brisk competition between tow bidders, it was sold for £465.

The Old “Radnor Hotel”. This antiquated house, in Radnor Street, was sold by auction on Thursday afternoon by Messrs. Banks and Son. Mr. John Banks told a string of anecdotes concerning it. According to his account, it was once the Radnor Hotel, and the principal licensed house in the town, and a most lucrative business was carried on in it. He remembered, he said, the Riot Act being read in it, when there was a disturbance which Captain Kennicott tried to quell. He drew his sword and knocked down a woman, whereupon he was set upon by the crowd. But it was as a place for the reception and retail of contraband goods that it was best known. Indeed, Mr. Banks said, there was a secret cellar, which no-one could find in less than a month, and which might, he said, contain tubs of gin. Whether there is or not, the house fetched the large sum of £465. The licence was lost some time since, but it is still a house of call for “uncommercial travellers”, who. Whenever they come to court, speak of the “hotel” as the Rodney.