Kentish Gazette 21 October 1848.

East Kent Sessions.

The Michaelmas session was held at St. Augustine's on Friday, before J. B. Wildman, Esq. (chairman), and other magistrates, among whom were: Sir Brook W. Bridges, Bart., the Hon. H. S. Law, J. P. Plutnptre, Esq., M.P., J, Godfrey, Esq., G. Gipps, Esq., E. Foss, Esq., G. M. Taswcll, Esq., W. C. Fairman, Esq., W. Delmar, Esq., M. Bell, Esq., E. N. H. D’Aeth, Esq., Rev. J. Hilton, &c.

Thomas Cooke, alias Stickals, 44, John Stroud, 42, George Marshal, 32, and Henry King, 51, charged with having, on the 3rd of August, stolen nine quarters of malt, value £30, the property of Thomas Higden, of Newington, next Hythe. The prisoners, who had been committed to Maidstone gaol, had been brought thence for trial. A great number of witnesses had been subpoenaed. The extent to which robberies of this description have been carried, increased the degree of interest generally felt, the more especially as most of the parties were well known, two of them having formerly kept beer-shops at Canterbury, and one of the others being a market-gardener of Littlebourne, who was always thought to be an industrious and honest man.

Messrs. Horn and Tassell were for the prosecution, and Messrs. Rose and Russell for the defence.

Mr. Horn, in opening the case for the prosecution, observed that it was not necessary in order to convict all the prisoners, that they should have been bodily engaged in stealing the malt. It was sufficient if they were found so near, as to be enabled to assist in it. It was necessary to bring home the guilt of the actual thieves, before others could be charged with aiding and abetting. Cooke and Marshall resided at Canterbury; Stroud at Littlebourne, and King at Ramsgate. On the morning previous to the robbery, as he would show, Cooke, King, and Marshall, were together at the Chance public-house, in Canterbury. In the afternoon of the same day, two, if not three, of them, were at the White Lion, in the same place; and on the evening prior to the rubbery, about half-past eight o’clock, one of them, King, and another person, were together at Elmsted, having with them a horse and cart, which had been hired of a person in Canterbury. The prisoners had two horses and carts with them on the occasion of the robbery, one of them belonging to Stroud. The learned counsel produced a plan of the premises, to show the situation in which the prisoners were seen, especially Marshall, to lead to the inference that he was aiding and abetting in the removal of the stolen property; and after detailing a variety of particulars connected with the concert of the prisoners, together with their arrest, proceeded to call the following witnesses:-

J. B. Horn, assistant to Mr. Messenger, architect, of Folkestone, was examined as to the correctness of the plan produced, as regarded distances.

H. Rigden, maltman to prosecutor, deposed that on Wednesday, the 2nd of August, he left the malt-house locked and barred. There were forty or fifty quarters of malt in bin, but none in sack. Next morning found nineteen sacks, not belonging to his master, filled with malt.

John Attwood, landlord of the Chance, at Canterbury, knew the prisoners; Cooke, Marshall, and King, were at his house on the 2nd of August, between ten and eleven o’clock; Cooke and Marshall lived at Canterbury, -Stroud at Littlebourne, and King at Ramsgate. King met with an accident at his house on the previous Tuesday night, by which he was marked across the nose, and be put on a brown patch, which he had on the Wednesday.

Thomas Taylor, landlord of the White Lion, Canterbury, knew the prisoners Cooke, Stroud, and Marshall, and spoke positively of the former two being at his house in the afternoon of the 2nd August; he could not state so positively in respect of the last mentioned, though a man came in with a patch on his nose, but he believed that he did not communicate with the others.

Cross examined: Never, to his knowledge, before saw King, and, therefore, was not able to say that he was the one who came with the patch on his nose.

Benjamin Barnes, licensed to let horses at Canterbury, remembered the prisoner Cooke hiring of him a bay horse, in the afternoon of the 2nd of August, for the purpose, as be stated, of going about six miles into the country. The horse not being returned, he made inquiry, and found it at prosecutor's house a week after.

Thomas Philpot, a boy in the employ of Mr. Church, at the George, at Elmsted, deposed to two men coining to the George with a bay horse, about half-past eight, on the day in question, one of them having a patch on his nose. He pointed out the prisoner King as one of the men, and who bore the patch; he believed Cooke was the other. They came from Canterbury, and told Mr. Church they were going to Hythe, in which direction they went. They wore white coats or gaberdines, like those produced, though he was not quite sure, and did not stay long.

Cross-examined: Could not recollect, when before the magistrates, whether they were gaberdines or coats worn by the men.

Re-examined: Only King was before the magistrate; had not seen Cooke since that night.

James Fisher, shepherd to T. Rigden, of Cheriton, was at the Star, at Newington, on the 2nd of August; had been to a cricket match, and on leaving the Star saw two carts with horses standing by the side of the road, about one hundred yards from the Star. A man, who was with them, asked if the people were all gone from the Star, which raised his suspicion, and he proceeded to Longport Farm, about one hundred and fifty yards from the Star, and there saw Sawkins, who agreed to watch with him (witness). Witness then proceeded towards the malt-house which was about a quarter of a mile from the Star. Hearing a noise as he thought within the malt-house, or outside, he proceeded to the gate near the malt-house, and saw a man come from it with a sack on his back. He rushed towards the man who dropped the sack and ran away towards Mr. Dunn’s stack-yard; after that he saw another man, whom he pointed out to be Stroud, come out of the malt-house with another sack on his back. Witness collared him, and threw him down, on which another man came up and threatened him, with a violent expression, if he (witness) did not let his mate go. A third also struck him two blows. Witness did not let the one go of whom he had hold, but called loudly for assistance. They scuffled ‘til they got into the river, where witness held him (the prisoner Stroud) full twenty minutes till assistance was rendered by Mr. Dunn, and then they took the prisoner to the Star, and delivered him into the hands of Rye.

Cross-examined: Saw some man with the carts as soon as he (witness) left the Star; it was a light night; did not see the man who ran away go into Dunn's stack-yard.

James Dunn, farmer at Newington, who was also at the Star on the night in question, deposed to seeing the two horses and carts standing by the side of the road, which excited his suspicions, and be went back and asked him for whom he was waiting; he replied his “governor.” Witness returned to the Star, but on hearing a hallooing went towards the malt-house, when he met two of the party who had been at the Star with a man who was stated to be King. On reaching the malt-house he found Fisher and Stroud in the river. Witness helped them out, and went to Mr. Rigden’s. On going to his father’s stack-yard he found a man, who proved to be Cooke, behind a wheatstack. He spoke to him three times but received no answer; on which witness collared him, who in return kicked him (witness). Witness threw him down, and with the aid of others gave him into Rye’s custody. Witness, with others, afterwards secured Marshall, who was standing by the side of the horses and carts. Next morning witness found a bundle of clothes, consisting of two coats, in a field adjoining the road where the carts stood. Witness also took the other coats produced out of the carts.

Cross-examined: Witness was of the cricketing party, but had not drunk more than to excite him a little.

John Oldham, carpenter, of Newington, who was one of the party at the Star on the day aforementioned, corroborated the evidence as to seeing Marshall with the horses and carts, and asking him if he had got a waiting job; to which he replied in the affirmative, and stated that the party was at the Star. On that witness repaired again to the Star, and finding that there was no one there for whom he could be waiting, returned towards the cart with the last witness, in doing which he heard a hallooing in the direction of the malt-house, and met King, who was walking very fast towards Folkestone, and was out of breath. In reply to a question from witness, he said he was going to Hythe, but witness told him he was in the wrong direction; and on his walking fast, witness bade him not to walk so fast, as be heard a hallooing, which he supposed the prisoner did also; but he said he did not, as he was deaf. On witness collaring him, he said he was in a hurry and wanted to get off. He replied in answer to a question by another person that he knew nothing of either Marshall or the carts; and, after detaining him twenty minutes, witness let him go again. He had no doubt of the prisoner King being the same man. Witness on a subsequent day, the 14th of August, went to Ramsgate, and there identified King as the man whom he had seen in the road. In reply to a question whether or not he knew anything of the malt robbery, he replied in the negative; and Kemp then took him into custody. Had a good opportunity of seeing King when detaining him on the 2nd of August; he had a patch on his nose. When taking him the second time he had a scar on his nose, at the same place where the patch had been.

George Rigden, son of prosecutor, who was at the Star on the evening in question, corroborated the evidence as to seeing Marshall in the way described, by the side of the road and the conversation that took place with him, as to its being suspicious that he was there with the carts and hearing the hallooing; together with King's coming up, with a brown patch on his nose, and his subsequent arrest at Ramsgate. He spoke positively as to the identity of King, being the same man who was met on the road.

Cross-examined: King had a mark on his nose when apprehended at Ramsgate; that was a part of his reason for believing him to be the same person who had been met on the road; beside which a lantern was held up to his face when on the road.

Thomas Kemp, constable at Hythe, who went with the last two witnesses to Ramsgate on the 14th of August, corroborated their testimony. On taking Cooke, Stroud and Marshall to Maidstone, Cooke said they had thrown some garments over the hedge. King did not appear deaf when apprehended.

James Rye, constable at Newington, received into his custody, on the night in question, Cooke, Stroud, and Marshall. Picked up a pot near the Star door, when Cooke said “It appears someone was going to serve that pet as we were going to serve the malt.” Found a box of Lucifer matches on Cooke.

Cross-examined: Was quite sure the expression was what he had stated, and that Cooke used the word “we,’’ and not “they.”

Thos. Rigden, the prosecutor, deposed to the malt in the malt-house being his property. Had seen the notices put in, sent to Mr. Delasaux on the behalf of Cook and Stroud, claiming the two carts and one horse which were in his (witness’s) possession, being those which were taken on the night in question. On one of the carts were the words “John Stroud, fruiterer, Littlebourne.” The horse and carts were still in his (witness's) possession. (The notices were then read threatening the prosecutor with actions of trover if the horse and carts were not given up).

Cross-examined: Was ordered by the committing magistrate to detain the horse and carts.

Henry Rigden, son off the prosecutor, who went to the malt house after seeing the prisoners safely lodged at the Star, found the door unlocked, two sacks filled with malt outside, and seventeen others filled inside. One of them bore the name “Collard, Hoath Mill, 45,” and the other ”J. Sharpe, Canterbury.’’ None of the sacks belonged to his father.

Mr. Rose objected to this evidence relating to the sacks when none were produced.

Examination continued: Found a dark lantern in the malt-house and a cap outside. There were about nineteen and a half quarters of malt in the sacks, the value being about £30.

Mr. Rose, in defence, did not attempt to dispute the evidence as regarded Stroud; but submitted there was not sufficient to convict either of the other three. In respect of King that there was not sufficient identity, and that as regarded Cook it was inexplicable how, if he had been concerned in the robbery, he should have remained so long in the stack-yard, as was alleged, after the man having been seen go thither, and his being taken out. In reference to Marshall also, he contended that he was not found to have been sufficiently near to render assistance as he was above a quarter of a mile from the place whence the malt was taken. The learned counsel then called two witnesses to speak to Stroud's previous good character.

The Chairman, in summing up, directed especial attention to Cooke’s expression on being taken to the Star as sufficient proof of his guilt; that King was amply identified, beside which he was seen running very much out of breath in the opposite direction whence the call for help came; and he directed attention to the account he gave of himself when accosted as to where he was going, and his pretence of deafness when there wasno proof of it. As regarded Marshall there could be no doubt that he was in the road with the horses and carts, with the view of rendering assistance in the removal of the malt, which he substantiated by reading the law on the question, pointing out that if a man watched at a convenient distance for the purpose of preventing surprise to his companions and to favour their escape, or if necessary to come to their assistance, the knowledge of which was calculated to give them additional confidence, he was present aiding and abetting.

The jury, after a very brief consultation, returned a verdict of Guilty against all the prisoners.

The Chairman expressed his perfect concurrence in the verdict; and in passing sentence, said it was with great pain he addressed the prisoners, as the crime of which they had been guilty was one of a most serious nature, which they had evidently conducted in a way that proved to the Court they had made it their business, and that it was by no means the first attempt they had made in such a course. The planning of the robbery and the manner in which it had altogether been conducted convinced the Court that the prisoners were old offenders in the crime of which they stood convicted. It was absolutely necessary that the desperate attempts which were continually made in this way, on the property of the country should be put a stop to; and he knew of no other way in which that could be, but by making a most serious example of those cases which, like this, were brought home. The sentence which he was directed by the Court to pass was, that each of them be transported beyond the seas to the place which her Majesty should think fit, for the term of ten years.

The severity of this sentence produced a great sensation in Court. The culprits bad scarcely left the dock before they were re-called, when the Chairman stated that he had been in error, in thinking that he could not pass a lighter sentence than ten years’ transportation. Having been set right, be was directed to sentence the prisoners severally to be transported seven years. This, sorrowful as it was, came ns some relief to the convicts, who, in the moment or two that had elapsed since the first passing of the sentence, had suffered something, as their countenances indicated.

The trial lasted nearly four hours.

From the Kentish Gazette, 24 October 1848.

THE MALT ROBBERY.

Thomas Cooke, alias Stickals, 44, John Stroud, 42, George Marshal, 32, and Henry King, 51, charged with having, on the 3rd of August, stolen nine quarters of malt, value £30., the property of Thomas Rigden, of Newington, next Hythe. The prisoners, who had been committed to Maidstone gaol, had been brought thence for trial. A great number of witnesses had been subpoenaed. The extent to which robberies of this description have been carried, increased the degree of interest generally felt, the more especially as most of the parties were well known, two of them having formerly kept beer-shops at Canterbury, and one of the others being a market-gardener of Littlebourne, who was always thought to be an industrious and honest man.

Messrs. Horn and Tassell were for the prosecution, and Messrs. Rose and Russell for the defence.

Mr. Horn, in opening the case for the prosecution, observed that it was not necessary in order to convict all the prisoners, that they should have been bodily engaged in stealing the malt. It was sufficient if they were found so near, as to be enabled to assist in it. It was necessary to bring home the guilt of the actual thieves, before others could be charged with aiding and abetting. Cooke and Marshall resided at Canterbury; Stroud at Littlebourne, and King at Ramsgate. On the morning previous to the robbery, as he would show, Cooke, King, and Marshall, were together at the "Chance" public-house, in Canterbury. In the afternoon of the same day, two, if not three, of them, were at the "White Lion," in the same place; and on the evening prior to the robbery, about half-past eight o'clock, one of them, King, and another person, were together at Elmsted, having with, them a horse and cart, which had been hired of a person in Canterbury. The prisoners had two horses and carts with them on the occasion of the robbery, one of them belonging to Stroud. The learned counsel produced a plan of the premises, to show the situation in which the prisoners were seen, especially Marshall, to lead to the inference that he was aiding and abetting in the removal of the stolen property; and after detailing a variety of particulars connected with the concert of the prisoners, together with their arrest, proceeded to call the following witnesses:—

J. B. Horn, assistant to Mr. Messenger, architect, of Folkestone, was examined as to the correctness of the plan produced, as regarded distances.

H. Rigden, mailman to prosecutor, deposed that on Wednesday, the 2nd of August, he left the malt-house locked and barred. There were forty or fifty quarters of malt in bin, but none in sack. Next morning found nineteen sacks, not belonging to his master, filled with malt.

John Attwood, landlord of the "Chance," at Canterbury, knew the prisoners; Cooke, Marshall, and King, were at his house on the 2nd of August, between ten and eleven o’clock; Cooke and Marshall lived at Canterbury, Stroud at Littlebourne, and King at Ramsgate. King met with an accident at his house on the previous Tuesday night, by which he was marked across the nose, and he put on a brown patch, which he had on the Wednesday.

Thomas Taylor, landlord of the "White Lion," Canterbury, knew the prisoners Cooke, Stroud, and Marshall, and spoke positively of the former two being at his house in the afternoon of the 2d August; he could not state so positively in respect of the last mentioned, though a man came in with a patch on his nose, but he believed that he did not communicate with the others.

Cross examined:— Never, to his knowledge, before saw King, and, therefore, was not able to say that he was the one who came with the patch on his nose.

Benjamin Barnes, licensed to let horses at Canterbury, remembered the prisoner Cooke hiring of him a bay horse, in the afternoon of the 2d of August, for the purpose, as he stated, of going about six miles into the country. The horse not being returned, he made inquiry, and found it at prosecutor’s house a week after.

Thomas Philpot, a boy in the employ of Mr. Church, at the "George," at Elmsted, deposed to two men coming to the "George," with a bay horse, about half-past eight, on the day in question, one of them having a patch on his nose. He pointed out the prisoner King as one of the men, and who bore the patch; he believed Cooke was the other. They came from Canterbury, and told Mr. Church they were going to Hythe, in which direction they went. They wore white coats or gaberdines, like those produced, though he was not quite sure, and did not slay long.

Cross-examined:— Could not recollect, when before the magistrates, whether they were gaberdines or coats worn by the men.

Re-examined:— Only King was before the magistrate; had not seen Cooke since that night.

James Fisher, shepherd to T. Rigden, of Cheriton, was at the "Star," at Newington, on the 2nd of August; had been to a cricket match, and on leaving the "Star" saw two carts with horses standing by the side of the road, about one hundred yards from the "Star." A man, who was with them, asked if the people were all gone from the "Star," which raised his suspicion, and he proceeded to Longport farm, about one hundred and fifty yards from the "Star," and there saw Sawkins, who agreed to watch with him (witness). Witness then proceeded towards the malt-house which was about a quarter of a mile from the "Star." Hearing a noise as he thought within the malt-house, or outside, he proceeded to the gate near the malt-house, and saw a man come from it with a sack on his back. He rushed towards the man who dropped the sack and ran away towards Mr. Dunn’s stack-yard; after that he saw another man, whom he pointed out to be Stroud, come out of the malt-house with another sack on his back. Witness collared him, and threw him down, on which another man came up and threatened him, with a violent expression, if he (witness) did not let his mate go. A third also struck him two blows. Witness did not let the one go of whom he had hold, but called loudly for assistance. They scuffled till they got into the river, where witness held him (the prisoner Stroud) full twenty minutes till assistance was rendered by Mr. Dunn, and then they took the prisoner to the "Star," and delivered him into the hands of Rye, the constable. On their way thither he saw Marshall on the road, with two horses and carts, at the place where he first saw him. He took him also into custody, and delivered him into the hands of Rye.

Cross-examined:- Saw some man with the carts as soon as he (witness) left the "Star;" it was a light night; did not see the man who ran away go into Dunn's stack-yard.

James Dunn, farmer at Newington, who was also at the "Star" on the night in question, deposed to seeing the two horses and carts standing by the side of the road, which excited his suspicions, and he went back and asked him for whom he was waiting; he replied his "governor." Witness returned to the "Star," but on hearing a hallooing went towards the malt-house, when he met two of the party who had been at the "Star" with a man who was stated to be King. On reaching the malt-house, he found Fisher and Stroud in the river. Witness helped them out, and went to Mr. Rigden's. On going to his father’s stack-yard he found a man, who proved to be Cooke, behind a wheat stack. He spoke to him three limes, but received no answer; on which witness collared him, who in return kicked him (witness). Witness threw him down, and with the aid of others gave him into Rye's custody. Witness, with others, afterwards secured Marshall, who was standing by the side of the horses and carts. Next morning witness found a bundle of clothes, consisting of two coats, in a field adjoining the road where the carts stood. Witness also took the other coats produced out of the carts.

Cross-examined.— Witness was of the cricketing party, but had not drunk more than to excite him a little.

John Oldham, carpenter, of Newington, who was one of the party at the "Star" on the day aforementioned, corroborated the evidence as to seeing Marshall with the horses and carts, and asking him if he had got a waiting job; to which he replied in the affirmative, and stated that the party was at the "Star." On that witness repaired again to the "Star," and finding that there was no one there for whom he could be waiting, returned towards the cart with the last witness, in doing which he heard a hallooing in the direction of the malt-house, and met King, who was walking very fast towards Folkestone, and was out of breath. In reply to a question from witness, he said he was going to Hythe, but witness told him he was in the wrong direction; and on his walking fast, witness bade him not to walk so fast, as he heard a hallooing, which he supposed the prisoner did also; but he said he did not, as he was deaf. On witness collaring him, he said he was in a hurry and wanted to get off. He replied in answer to a question by another person that he knew nothing of either Marshall or the carts; and, after detaining him twenty minutes, witness let him go again. He had no doubt of the prisoner King being the same man. Witness on a subsequent day, the 14th of August, went to Ramsgate, and there identified King as the man whom he had seen in the road. In reply to a question whether or not he knew anything of the malt robbery, he replied in the negative; and Kemp then took him into custody. Had a good opportunity of seeing King when detaining him on the 2nd of August; he had a patch on his nose. When taking him the second time he had a scar on his nose, at the same place where the patch had been.

George Rigden, son of prosecutor, who was at the "Star" on the evening in question, corroborated the evidence as to ageing Marshall in the way described, by the side of the road and the conversation that took place with him, as to its being suspicious that he was there with the carts and hearing the hallooing; together with King’s coming up, with a brown patch on his nose, and his subsequent arrest at Ramsgate. He spoke positively as to the identity of King, being the same man who was met on the road.

Cross-examined.— King had a mark on his nose when apprehended at Ramsgate; that was a part of his reason for believing him to be the same person who had been met on the road; beside which a lantern was held up to his face when on the road.

Thomas Kemp, constable at Hythe, who went with the last two witnesses to Ramsgate, on the 14th of August, Corroborated their testimony. On taking Cooke, Stroud, and Marshall to Maidstone, Cooke said they had thrown some garments over the hedge. King did not appear deaf when apprehended.

James Rye, constable at Newington, received into his custody, on the night in question, Cooke, Stroud, and Marshall. Picked up a pot near the "Star" door, when Cooke said, "It appears some one was going to serve that pot as we were going to serve the malt." Found a box of lucifer matches on Cooke.

Cross-examined.— Was quite sure the expression was what he had stated, and that Cooke used the word "we,"’ and not "they."

Thos. Rigden, the prosecutor, deposed to the malt in the malt-house being his property. Had seen the notices put in, sent to Mr. Delasaux on the behalf of Cook and Stroud, claiming the two carts and one horse which were in his (witness's) possession, being those which were taken on the night in question. On one of the carts were the words "John Stroud, fruiterer, Littlebourne." The horse and carts were still in his (witness's) possession. (The notices were then read threatening the prosecutor with actions of trover if the horse and carts were not given up).

Cross-examined:— Was ordered by the committing magistrate to detain the horse and carts.

Henry Rigden, son of the prosecutor, who went to the malt-house after seeing the prisoners safely lodged at the "Star," found the door unlocked, two sacks filled with malt outside, and seventeen others filled inside. One of them bore the name "Collard, Hoath Mill, 45," and the other "J. Sharpe, Canterbury." None of the sacks belonged to his father.

Mr. Rose objected to this evidence relating to the sacks when none were produced.

Examination continued:— Found a dark lantern in the malt-house, and a cap outside. There were about nineteen and a half quarters of malt in the sacks, the value being about £30.

Mr. Rose, in defence, did not attempt to dispute the evidence as regarded Stroud; but submitted there was not sufficient to convict either of the other three. In respect of King that there was not sufficient identity, and that as regarded Cook it was inexplicable how, if he had been concerned in the robbery, he should have remained so long in the stack-yard, as was alleged, after the man having been seen go thither, and his being taken out. In reference to Marshall also, he contended that he was not found to have been sufficiently near to render assistance as he was about a quarter of a mile from the place whence the malt was taken. The learned counsel then called two witnesses to speak to Stroud’s previous good character.

The Chairman in summing up, directed especial attention to Cooke’s expression on being taken to the "Star" as sufficient proof of his guilt; that King was amply identified, beside which he was seen running very much out of himself in the opposite direction whence the call for help came; and he directed attention to the account he gave of himself when accosted as to where he was going, and his pretence of deafness when there was no proof of it. As regarded Marshall there could be no doubt that he was in the road with the horses and carts, with the view of rendering assistance on the removal of the malt, which he substantiated by reading the law on the question, pointing out that if a man watched at a convenient distance for the purpose of preventing surprise to his companions and to favor their escape, or if necessary to come to their assistance, the knowledge of which was calculated to give them additional confidence, he was present aiding and abetting.

The jury, after a very brief consultation, returned a verdict of Guilty against all the prisoners.

The Chairman expressed his perfect concurrence in the verdict; and in passing sentence, said it was with great pain he addressed the prisoners, as the crime of which they had been guilty was one of a most serious nature, which they had evidently conducted in a way that proved to the Court they had made it their business, and that it was by no means the first attempt they had made in such a course. The planning of the robbery and the manner in which it had altogether been conducted convinced the Court that the prisoners were old offenders in the crime of which they stood convicted. It was absolutely necessary that the desperate attempts which were continually made in this way, on the property of the country should be put a stop to; and he knew of no other way in which that could be, but by making a most serious example of those cases which, like this, were brought home. The sentence which he was directed by the Court to pass was, that each of them be transported beyond the seas to the place which her Majesty should think fit for the term of ten years.

The severity of this sentence produced a great sensation in Court. The culprits had scarcely left the dock before they were recalled, when the Chairman stated that he had been in error, to thinking that he could not pass a lighter sentence than ten years’ transportation. Having been set right, he was directed to sentence the prisoners severally to be transported seven years. This, sorrowful as it was, came as some relief to the convicts, who, in the moment or two that had elapsed since the first passing of the sentence, had suffered something, as their countenances indicated.

The trial lasted nearly four hours.

Kentish Gazette 19 December 1848.

Inquest by Mr. Delasaux: On Monday, at Newington, near Hythe, on Richard Barton. It appeared that deceased, with a number of others, among whom was one John Baker, were drinking at the Star-tap on Friday evening, when deceased, taking offence at some words, struck at Baker, upon which the latter stabbed him with a large knife, which caused his death.

Kentish Gazette 27 June 1854.

On Friday Mr. Eaden held an inquest, at the Star Inn, Newington, next Hythe, on the body of Edward Nutley, who died a short lime after going to bed.

Mr W. Bateman, surgeon, examined the body, and had no doubt that death was caused by the rupture of a blood vessel on the brain. He had attended deceased, and from bit full habit of body, he believed immediate death from apoplexy had resulted.

Ann Nutley, widow of deceased, stated to her having retired to rest with her husband at about nine o'clock, in his usual good health, - that about 12 she was awoke by his suddenly turning in bed. She spoke to him but received no reply. She lifted his bead from the pillow but he died immediately. Deceased was 67 years of age.

Verdict, “Natural Death.”

Southeastern Gazette 6 February 1855.

Death: Jan. 31, at Cheriton, Mr. Wells, of the Star Inn, at an advanced age.

Petty Sessions, Monday; Before the Mayor, and James Kelcey, J. Kingsnorth, W. Kelcey, W, Bateman and G. Kennicott Esqs.

Mr. John Minter, solicitor, and Mr. John Jeffery, of Walton Farm, appeared to answer the complaint of police constable Nichols for an assault on him. The examination lasted several hours, and the magistrates' room was crowded by persons anxious to hear the evidence. Mr. Minter's case was taken first.

Police constable Nichols deposed – On Tuesday morning last, between 2 and 3 o'clock, I saw the defendant and his friend, Mr. John Jeffery, come out of the North Foreland public house and proceed up the Tram Road; he walked behind them and heard them talking, one saying, using a vile expression, “You look out, Jack, and I will twig him off”; this was near the Shades Inn. They went on, and when passing the end of London Street, they both rushed at me, asked if I was watching them, and spoke ill of the Mayor, Mr. Hart, and Inspector Steer, using very bad language. Mr. Jeffery was swearing with all of his might. The defendant Minter with his left shoulder pushed me off the curb. Jeffery said he would roll me in the snow; I felt his fist across my nose.

Cross-examined by defendant – I can swear it was past 2 o'clock and not half past 12, and that you made use of the language I have stated. The second time you came up to me I drew my staff in self-defence, and you then went indoors.

Defendant, in answer to the charge, said that he was going quietly home, when he saw the policeman behind him; he went to his own door, and saw on it a paper with the words “Old knockers bought here”, which caused him to stop. On looking round he saw his cousin Jeffery and the policeman having high words, and he went back and separated them, slightly pushing the policeman. As to the bad language imputed to him, he utterly denied it; he had always been on friendly terms with the Mayor, and had no cause for using such vile language as had been sworn to by the constable; and as to Mr. Hart, everyone knew his opinion of him, which he should always express wherever he went, but he had had no recent altercation with him to induce him to use such language, or to the inspector, with whom he was on friendly terms. He should call Mr. Jeffery as a witness to prove his statement.

John Jeffery deposed – I am living with my father at Walton Farm; do not remember hearing the defendant use bad language. I saw the policeman, and asked him who he was watching, and he said he should watch whom he pleased. I was in conversation with the policeman when the defennt came up and collared me, and pushing the policeman gently he said he should have no quarrelling. I never heard any bad language spoken by the defendant, or mention of the Mayor, Mr. Hart, or Superintendent Steer.

The magistrates, having consulted, fined the defendant 20s. and costs, which were paid.

The next case was against John Jeffery, son of Mr. Hunt Jeffery, of Walton Farm, for an assault on police constable Nichols, who deposed that on the same night as previously stated by him, the defendant came and thrust both his fists in his face, and made use of foul language, threatening him that if he came to Walton again with a message from Superintendent Steer, he would drag him through the horse pond; he felt his fists against his nose. He also said he would roll witness in the snow, and he drew near him in a fighting attitude. The defendants appeared to be the worse for drink. After some time, Mr. Minter came and took the defendant away, and they went indoors.

The defendant, in answer to the charge, said that he felt very much annoyed at being followed about by a policeman, and was much excited, but did not recollect using the language stated by the policeman. He called Mr. Minter to substantiate his statement.

Mr. Minter, the defendant in the first case, deposed to seeing the defendant go to the policeman and ask him what he meant by following him, and said he supposed his Superintendent had ordered him to do so. The policeman replied that he should follow who he liked. Angry words ensued between the policeman and the defendant, the policeman saying “Strike me now, Mr. Jeffery”. He said “No, I shall not; I am not such a fool as to strike a policeman, and tell your Superintendent that if he thinks I wrenched the knockers off and can prove it, as he says he can, by a witness, he had better summon me before a magistrate, and not ask me, as he did, to settle it by paying him a sovereign, or as he did by getting young Gambrill down to the station and offering to get it settled by his paying him 15s.”

Mr. Hart said he considered it his duty to tell the magistrates that the evidence of Mr. Minter was doing the defendant a great injury.

Mr. Kingsnorth – It is an imputation upon the character of our police.

Mr. Wm. Kelcey – Which must be investigated by the Watch Committee.

Witness continued – The policeman also taunted the defendant with being the ghost last year, and a great deal of recrimination was going on. The defendant did not raise his fist against the policeman.

The magistrates, after some consultation, unanimously fined the defendant £5, which was paid.

The Mayor, by the advice of Mr. Hart, would wish to hear what the Superintendent had to say in answer to the offer made by him to compromise the matter with the defendants; as no doubt the press would publish that statement, it was but fair that he should have an opportunity to say a few words.

Superintendent Steer said, with respect to the matter when the knockers were destroyed, he had reason to suspect Mr. Jeffery, and he called to see him, but not finding him at home left word for him to come and see him; he did call, and he told him he thought he was one of the parties who broke the knockers. Mr. Jeffery laughed, and said it was the first he had broken, and wanted to know what the damage was. He told him that Mr. Davidson (Mr. Hart's clerk) had said if they paid the damage done, Mr. Hart would not proceed against him; he asked what he thought the cost would be, and witness said he thought about 2s. a knocker, and as there were ten taken off, it would be about 20s. Jeffery said that Joseph Gambrill had helped break the knockers, and he would go with him to try and find him; they went to one or two places, but could not find him. He denied entirely the charges made of attempting to compromise the offence.

The Mayor said, in answer to a question put to him by the defendant Jeffery, that if he had any complaint to make against the inspector, he could make it before the Watch Committee, as the matter must go before them.

Southeastern Gazette 22 October 1855.

East Kent Quarter Sessions, Tuesday last; Before J.B. Wildman esq.

Joseph Gess, hawker, for stealing a quantity of barley, value 1s., the property of Mr. Fredk. Brockman, master of the East Kent Foxhounds, on the 28th August last. Mr. Biron prosecuted, Mr. Horn defended.

Richard Philpott, bailiff to Mr. Brockman, at Cheriton, went to the Star Inn, at Newington, on the 28th August, and saw the prisoner's horse eating barley, with other horses. Witness inquired how it was they were eating Mr. Brockman's barley, when the prisoner said “Hasn't anyone else got barley but Mr. Brockman?” Was sure it was his master's property, because the barley was strewed on the ground all the way from the field to where the horses were feeding.

Wm. Raynes was at the Star Inn, Newington, on the 28th August last, and saw the prisoner's horse eating some barley there.

Henry Maycock, constable of Newington, was sent for on the evening in question by Mr. Brockman's bailiff, about the barley; he knew all the men, including the prisoner, and therefore let them go.

Mr. Horn, in his address to the jury, stigmatised the case as a stupid one, which had never to have been brought forward.

The jury acquitted the prisoner.

Caroline Hunter and M.A. Hunter were convicted of stealing a tablecloth, at Cheriton, on the 13th inst., from the canteen of the British German Legion. The prisoners were proved to have offered the cloth for sale to a person named Collins, who suspected it had been stolen and gave them into custody. Verdict, both Guilty.

Policeman A528 then said the prisoners could not have stolen the cloth from the camp as they were not allowed there at all, but he believed they had received it from some soldier who had stolen it.

The Chairman then directed the jury to consider the second count in the indictment, that of receiving the property, knowing it to have been stolen.

The jury also found a verdict of Guilty on this count, and the prisoners were sentenced to one month's imprisonment.

Kentish Gazette 23 October 1855.

East Kent Quarter Sessions: The Michaelmas Sessions was held on Tuesday last before J.B. Wildman Esq. (Chairman), and the following Magistrates: Sir Norton J. Knatchbull, Bart, Right Hon. S.R. Lushington, E. Foss, W.A. Munn, G.E. Sayer, W. Delmar, W.H. Forley, T.H. Mackay, W.A. Burra, F.F. Lonsdale, G. Gipps, W. Hyder, Esqs., Revs. E. Biron, G.W. Sicklemore, and H. Hilton.

Joseph Gess, 41, charged with having, on the 28th August, stolen a quantity of barley, the property of Frederick Brockman, at Cheriton.

The prisoner underwent examination with another party before the magistrates; that other party was acquitted. and the prisoner would have been dealt with summarily, it being a petty offence, but for his preferring trial by a jury.

Frederick Philpott, farm bailiff to prosecutor, deposed that on going to the stable at the Star, Newington, he saw prisoner’s horse, as well as those of the two Bakers, eating some barley, and he asked stated that Otto evinced no hesitation in reply to his questions.

Mr. Biron having addressed the jury for the defence, called Lieutenant Carel Stucker, of the British Foreign Legion, who deposed that, having ordered a pair of trousers of Otto, he saw him on the 1st October, when he informed him (witness) that he had purchased for 30s.. some clothes of a man who had had them sent to him from Germany, and which were too small for him. The clothes produced were the same excepting the trousers. Knowing Otto he believed him to be a very honest man.

Edward F. Barnard Von Roff, a German advocate residing in London, also spoke highly of the character and respectability of Otto.

The prisoner Karstadt’s statement before the magistrate», which was put in, was to the effect that one of his comrades said the man Wilkins wanted to sell the case for a shilling, which he gave for it; that it was placed down, and some of the soldiers kicked it open, when it was found to contain the clothes, and, by their advice he sold them.

The Chairman, in summing up, observed that the best proof of a person knowing goods to be stolen when he bought them was that of his giving a very inadequate price for them; but this was not the case in the present instance, a.» Otto had given 33s. for four articles, and sold three of them for 30s. They might therefore infer that there was no object on his part to make a considerable profit by them. With respect to Karstadt, him how it was their horses were eating Mr Brockman's barley , upon which Gess asked if no one else grew barley; but seeing it littered from the field to the spot where the horses were eating, he had reason for supposing it was Mr. Brockman’s. Afterwards, when he got into the road with his horse, he said to witness, “Now come and stop me with my horse in the high road,” to which witness replied, that “he had nothing to do with the horse; all that concerned him was Mr. Brockman's property."

Wm. Raines, who was at the Star on the evening in question, spoke to seeing the horses eating the barley.

Henry Maycock, constable of Newington, went to the Star in consequence of having been sent for, and saw Gess and the Bakers, whom he did not lake into custody, as he knew them. The barley in the road corresponded with that in the field. He slated, in cross-examination, that Gess said if he wanted him, he would stay till the morning; but witness knowing him, told him that he did not wish then to detain him.

Mr. Horn, in defence, ridiculed the case as trilling and absurd, when it was alleged against the prisoner simply because In asked whether nobody else but Mr. Brockman grew barley. All three of the parties were equally guilty, but the one who was had before the magistrate was discharged, and the other was not brought up at all. The prisoner was no more guilty than they, and had it not been for his electing to come here, in all probability he would have been discharged with Baker.

The Chairman took quite a different view, and pointed out that the prisoner had laid particular claim to the barley when the bailiff interfered, which perhaps distinguished his case from the other’s in the eyes of the magistrates. Not Guilty.

Caroline Hunter, 21, and Mary Ann Hunt. 28. charged with having, on the 13th October, stolen a tablecloth, the property of George Ward, at Cheriton. Prosecutor was an innkeeper and mess-master to the British Foreign Legion at Shorncliffe, and saw the cloth on the table of the mess-room on the 9th.

George Collins, who kept the White Lion at Cheriton, deposed to the prisoners coming there to sell a tablecloth; and seeing the name of George Ward on it. he asked them if they knew to whom it belonged, on which they said they received it from a soldier. He detained it and sent for a policeman, to whom he gave it and the prisoners.

W. F. Green, Police Constable, took the prisoners as detailed by last witness, and to whom they stated that a soldier of the name of George Ward had given it to them.

The jury returned a verdict of Guilty.

The last-mentioned witness, on being recalled, stated that it was impossible the women could have stolen the cloth, as they were not allowed to enter the camp; and the prosecutor himself stated his belief that some of the soldiers bad stolen it when they were clearing away the things after a party.

The jury were asked if they intended to find the prisoners guilty of receiving as well, with which they were charged, upon which the foreman observed that they ought to have had such evidence before. However, reconsidering their verdict, they pronounced them guilty of having unlawful possession of it.—One month in the House of Correction.

South Eastern Gazette 12 October 1858

Hythe: Yesterday week, before G. Gidley and W.F. Browell Esqs., Peter McGowan was brought up on remand, charged with obtaining money under false pretences, viz. £1 from Mr. Wells and £1 from Mrs. Wells, of the Star, Newington; and £2 from Mr. Howland, of Boughton. It appeared that the usual plan of the prisoner, who is of respectable appearance, is to inquire for timber to purchase, and in some cases to make large purchases; he then states that his money is in some neighbouring bank, and as he was running short he would borrow as much as he could. He had just been discharged from custody at Folkestone on similar charges. There are a number of charges against him at Sheerness. He was further charged with stealing a pair of trousers, which he had obtained from Mr. Howland, under the pretence of having fallen into a ditch. Remanded to the 12th inst.

Kentish Gazette 11 October 1859

Hythe Magistrates' Clerk's Office, Wednesday: Before Major-General Sandilands.

James Williamson, a gunner belonging to No. 7 Battery, 4th Brigade of Royal Artillery, was charged by Sergt. Smith, K.C.C., with having committed a rape on Sunday night last on Susannah Turner, a respectable young woman, 22 years of age, residing at Newington.

The only thing the prisoner said in his defence was that he had never seen the young woman in his life before he was given into custody. The worthy Magistrate considered the evidence quite sufficient, and fully committed the prisoner to take his trial at the next assizes at Maidstone.

It was a very painful thing to see a person of prisoner's description placed at the bar on such a serious charge, he having but a very short period to complete his time in the Army, was in possession of two good conduct stripes, and two medals with four clasps for services in the Crimea.

Kentish Gazette 13 December 1859

Assizes, Wednesday; before Mr. Justice Williams.

James Williamson, soldier, (who wore two medals on his breast, and had two good conduct stripes), was indicted for a felonious assault on Susannah Turner, at Newington, on Sunday evening, the 2nd of October. Mr. Addison prosecuted. The prisoner was acquitted, the jury not being satisfied as to the identity.

Southeastern Gazette 3 July 1860.

Inquest.

An inquest was held at the Star, in this parish, on Wednesday last, by T. T. Delasaux, Esq., touching the death of William Jenkins, a gunner in the Royal Artillery stationed at Shorncliffe. The circumstances will be found detailed in the following evidence :—

Thomas Coppin, an artilleryman, deposed that the deceased was in the same regiment as himself, and slept in the same room in the bed adjoining his. On Sunday night witness went to bed at about nine o’clock, when he saw the deceased in bed. At twenty minutes past ten he was awoke by something rattling on the floor, and found that the deceased was out of bed. The last time witness spoke to the deceased he appeared in his right senses.

William Neale, a gunner in the Royal Artillery, proved that he was called at twenty minutes past ten on Sunday night by the last witness. He got up, put his hand into his box, and found that his razor and case were gone. On perceiving the deceased lying on the floor, bleeding from the throat, witness procured a light, and afterwards spoke to the deceased, but he made no reply and threw the razor towards him.

Mr. Thos. Grey, surgeon, Royal Artillery, deposed that he had known the deceased for the past two months, and had attended him professionally during that time. On Sunday last he saw deceased twice, when he was exceedingly weak and complained of a choking sensation in the upper part of his throat. He had not noticed anything in the conduct of the deceased to induce him to think that he was insane. It was not infrequent in the complaint under which the deceased was suffering that delirium should supervene.

Wm. Kinseller, a private in the Army Hospital Corps, had attended upon the deceased for the past two months, and with very few exceptions he considered he was in a sound state of mind.

The jury returned the following verdict: That the deceased destroyed himself by cutting his throat, but there is no evidence to show the state of mind in which he was at the time.

South Eastern Gazette 13 August 1861.

On Thursday last T.T. Delasaux Esq., county coroner, held an inquest at the "Star Inn," Newington, near Hythe, touching the death of a woman named Eliza Stockwell, 29 years of age, the wife of a miller, who had committed suicide by taking a large quantity of opium. The particulars of the case are detailed in the following evidence:-

Henry Maycock, a licensed victualler, deposed that between 9 and 10 o'clock on the previous Sunday evening the deceased went to his house and requested that she might have a bed for the night, as she wished to proceed to Hythe on the following morning to see her uncle. Witness told her that she could be accommodated, and she then sat down in the bar and had a little gin and water. She remained there about an hour, and then partook of some supper in the kitchen, where it was remarked to her that she did not drink her gin and water. In answer to that observation she replied that she thought she would take the gin and water upstairs with her, as, being in a strange bed she might not sleep, which she did shortly afterwards. On the following morning, at half past seven, witness heard a moaning noise proceeding from the deceased's room, and on having heard it a second time, he sent his female servant into the room and afterwards went in himself, he saw the deceased lying on the bed insensible. On looking round the room he saw the bottle produced, and the glass that had contained the gin and water. He immediately sent for a doctor.

Mr. Thomas Walsh, surgeon, of Cheriton, said he went to the deceased, and found her insensible, she having taken a large quantity of opium. From what he extracted from the stomach, he was satisfied that she had died from the effect of a narcotic poison. The bottle produced had a small quantity of opium in it.

Ann Dray proved that the deceased was her cousin, and that she had noticed her to be in a strange state of mind for some time past, sometimes appearing high-spirited, and at others low and melancholy.

Verdict “Temporary insanity.”

Kentish Gazette 24 September 1861

Stockwell v Keeler:

Dover County Court, Wednesday; before Chas Harwood Esq.

This action arose out of very distressing circumstances, and was the result of family dispute. The plaintiff claimed £19, or the restoration of certain property belonging to himself and to his deceased wife, of which the defendant, who is the husband of her married sister, held possession. It appeared that in the early part of last month the deceased, accompanied by her sister, Mrs. Keeler, came from Newington on a visit to her friends at Dover, bringing with her four or five boxes containing her clothes, £14 or £15 in money, and several articles of household furniture. The deceased woman, it would seem, had lived rather unhappily with her husband; for on leaving home she is said to have declared that she would leave him and go into service. However, after staying at Dover a few days, she returned to Newington leaving the boxes of clothes &c., which she had brought with her, with her relatives. The unhappy woman, on her return home, stopped at the Star Inn, at Newington, and there she poisoned herself. The husband (the present plaintiff) made application to her friends at Dover for the restoration of the property in their possession, and they not having complied with his demands he sought to enforce them by bringing the present action. Mr. Minter appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Towne for the defendant.

Joseph Fred. Stockwell deposed: My wife left her home at Newington on the 2nd August to come to her friends at Dover. Her death occurred on the 6th of August. After her death I went to Keeler's, and applied to them to give me the things that belonged to my wife. They said the things were theirs, as she wished them to have them. They also said that they had got a paper from my wife to say they had bought these things. On going to Keeler's house I saw five boxes which were shown to me by Keeler's wife. They were my boxes. My wife took them away on the 2nd of August. They contained her clothes. She likewise brought away a carpet, but I did not see that. I saw a quantity of furniture which she (the deceased) had removed from the house. I did not see the china, the fire irons and the blankets. I only saw the boxes and the earthenware. When I asked about the watch, Keeler's wife said that my wife had disposed of it. I told her my wife had taken a quantity of money with her, and she replied that my wife wished her father to have that, as he stood most in need of it. I applied to them for the keys to the boxes, which they have delivered to me, but they refuse to give up the different things I have mentioned.

Cross-examined: They gave the keys of the boxes to me, and the reason I did not take them away was because I had nothing to take them in. At the time Mrs. Keeler spoke to me about the money, she did not tell me she knew nothing about it, but what she said was that her sister had told her she wished her father to have it. I was married to the deceased twelve months ago last August; she had saved up a few pounds when I married her – a little over £30. She did not separate from me, but merely went on a visit for a short time. I deny that in consequence of my behaviour she went away and poisoned herself. She did not leave my house with the expressed intention of not returning to me. I did not write to my wife telling her that she might sell the things. I told her not to make off with them. Keeler, when he saw me, did not tell me he had bought the furniture, but said he had given £3 12s. for her clothes.

To Mr. Minter: My wife laid bad for two days – from Sunday night till Tuesday afternoon.

Mr. Towne here handed up to His Honour a letter received by the defendant from the plaintiff, which, he said, contradicted the evidence of plaintiff that he did not authorise his wife to sell the things.

Lydia Keeler, the defendant's wife, was then called by Mr. Minter, and said: I left for Dover with plaintiff's wife on the 2nd of August, and we brought away four boxes which were at her house. We also brought away with us a carpet, some earthenware, fire irons, and some sheets and blankets. I never saw anything of a watch during the time deceased was at our house. My sister never left any money with us. I believe the four boxes referred to contain her clothing, but I have not opened them.

His Honour: I suppose if plaintiff takes away his boxes as they are, he may have them?

Witness: Yes, sir. We gave £3 12s. to the deceased for the other things. She had the money on the 3rd of August, and, for aught I know, she might have spent it.

By Mr. Towne: I gave plaintiff the keys of the boxes, and he might have taken them away. Heard deceased say that she should leave her husband and go into service, and plaintiff, when this was told him, said “She might go, and be d----- for what he cared.”

This was all the evidence.

His Honour then decided to order the restoration of the four boxes to the plaintiff, whereupon Mr. Towne endeavoured to show that the plaintiff had no locus standi in that Court, and that “he ought to be sent out as he came in,” inasmuch as he had not taken out a deed of administration in respect of his wife's property before he came there, and which the Act required that he should do. Mr. Towne then proceeded to quote the opinion of Mr. Justice Williams as bearing upon this point, and which was to the effect that a deceased wife's “paraphernalia” was her separate property, and could not be touched by the husband until he complied with the form of law above stated.

His Honour intimated that that opinion did not affect the present case.

Mr. Towne, however, was confident that it did, and working himself up to a pitch of great excitement he went so far as to say that when His Honour had got a certain notion of law into his head, whatever it might be, he would stick to it whatever the opinion of others.

His Honour (who had heard Mr. Towne very patiently up to this point) said: I will not hear another word.

(To the Bailiff of the Court) Call the next case, if you please.

The Bailiff did as requested.

Mr. Towne, notwithstanding, proceeded with his argument, and after a few moments had elapsed, His Honour, addressing him, said: After the very disrespectful way in which you have treated the Court, just tell me briefly what are your legal objections. If you insist on proceeding I shall be compelled to resort to other means. I will give you two minutes to state your reasons.

Mr. Towne then proceeded to state his reasons, but in doing so he considerably exceeded the limit of time allowed him for that purpose. He contended that if was first necessary that he (plaintiff) should come there as the administrator of his wife, and then it was necessary that he should prove a proper demand and refusal to give up the property in the possession of the defendant. If either of these courses were necessary, then plaintiff had come there too soon and ought to be nonsuited. Here was property distinctly within the meaning of the term “paraphernalia.”

His Honour, however, ruled that it was not separate property or paraphernalia, but was the common wearing apparel of the deceased wife. He therefore confirmed the order he had already made, that the boxes should be delivered up at once to the plaintiff.

Kentish Gazette 13 August 1861

A married woman named Eliza Stockwell, who had been to Dover to see her friends, returned to Newington on Sunday night week, and slept at the "Star Inn." Next morning the landlord heard the woman making a strange noise, and her room being entered she was found to be insensible, a laudanum bottle being near her. The surgeon of the 21st Regiment was speedily brought from the camp, and other medical assistance was obtained. The stomach pump was then used, and the proper appliances made, but without permanent effect as the poor woman expired on Tuesday afternoon. An inquest was held on the body by Mr. Delasaux on Thursday, and a verdict of “Temporary Insanity” returned. It was elicited at the inquest that deceased had attempted self destruction before.

Southeastern Gazette 4 December 1866.

Hythe County Sessions.

Thursday: Before the Rev. E. Biron, Captain Kirkpatrick, and T. Denne and J. J. Lonsdale, Esqs.

John Gaines, of Lyminge, carrier, was summoned for assaulting Henry Maycock, of Newington, innkeeper, on the 17th ult.

Fined 2s. 6d., costs 12s. 6d.

Southeastern Gazette 5 April 1892.

Inquest.

An inquest was held at the Star Inn, Newington, on Tuesday on the body of a man named Jessie Poughdon, belonging to Barham, and in the employ of the County Council who was crushed to death on the previous day whilst acting as flag bearer to a steam roller which was at work on a road near Frogholt. The unfortunate man was in front of the engine in the act of lighting his pipe. At the time the engine was at a standstill, but, as a horse and trap was approaching, the driver started the engine to make room. It is supposed that the heel of the deceased’s boot was caught in the wheel of the roller, the result being that he was thrown down, and the ponderous machine passed over him, smashing his head, flat and cutting off his foot, which was found embedded in the earth.

A verdict of “Accidentally killed” was returned.

Folkestone Gazette 4 November 1959.

Townsman’s Diary.

Three local inn signs will be displayed in Brussels shortly. Perhaps you may have noticed that the colourful sign of your favourite hostelry has disappeared recently and been replaced with a notice such as is pictured on this page. What’s behind their disappearance? Well, the enterprising House of Whitbread are taking part in an exhibition one of the big stores in the Belgian capital is staging from November 19th to January 1st. The accent will be on the British way of life and many British goods will be on sale. Included in the exhibition are signs from Kent inns. Whitbreads are displaying the signs at their prefabricated public house. From Folkestone the brewers have taken the signs of the British Lion on Folkestone’s old Bayle, the Lifeboat Inn, North Street, and The Star, Newington. The signs were on their way to Brussels yesterday.

Folkestone Gazette 9 August 1961.

Local News.

A safe gang got away with over £500, wines and spirits worth £60, and 6,000 cigarettes from the Star Inn, Newington, on Friday night. They forced a back door and carried the 2 cwt. Safe from a small room adjoining the bars to a waiting vehicle. Then they helped themselves to cigarettes and 75 bottles of wines and spirits without disturbing the landlord and his family. The safe, its back ripped open, was found near Wingham the following day. “There was £580 in the safe, but all the thieves left behind was £17 in silver, £11 10/3 worth of threepenny pieces and some cheques”, said the landlord.

Folkestone Gazette 23 August 1961.

Local News.

Alleged to have taken part in a safe robbery at a public house at Newington on August 4th, Desmond John Penrose, aged 33, painter and decorator, of no fixed address, was at Folkestone Magistrates’ Court on Friday sent for trial at West Kent Quarter Sessions on September 4th. He was charged with breaking into the Star Inn and stealing a safe containing money, and other articles to the total value of about £750. The property included jewellery, bottles of wines and spirits, 6,000 cigarettes, a radio set and £594 12/4 in cash.

Penrose admitted to the Court “I was concerned in the theft”.

Mr. P.B. Langford, prosecuting, said Penrose told police that he was involved in the offence with two other men who had not been apprehended. The prosecution was prepared to accept his story that he waited outside the inn in a car keeping watch for the others.

Mr. Geoffrey Edward Cross, licensee of the Star Inn, said at 12.15 a.m. on August 4th he made sure all exterior doors and windows at the premises were locked and bolted. When he went downstairs at 6.15 a.m. he found that the door of the sun lounge had been forced, and that property worth about £750 was missing.

D. Inspector Packman said at 10.05 p.m. on August 7th he arrested Penrose in Hythe in connection with another mater. The following day he admitted being concerned in the offence at Newington, stating “I can take you to where some of the property is hidden but I cannot tell you where it is”. That evening he was driven in a police car along roads in the area of Canterbury, Adisham, Bekesbourne and Wingham. While on a road between Wingham and Barham he stated “There’s the place”, indicating a disused quarry. Police made a search and found two pillowcases containing seven bottles of wine and seven of spirits. During the search Penrose told him “I never break. I drove the car and left them to do the job while I drove round, and returned when they were ready. We then drove and they dumped the safe while I kept the car on the move. Then we drove here as it was getting light, and I remained here while they hid the stuff you have found. I was with them and had some of the money so it’s no good me saying I don’t know, anything about it”. When charged with the offence, Penrose replied “If that is the money supposed to have gone I did not have my full share.” Later he said “I had £100 in all”.

Folkestone Gazette 13 September 1961.

Local News.

For his part in the raid on the Star Inn, Newington, Folkestone, on August 4th, when property and money worth £750 were stolen, Desmond J. Penrose (33), painter, of no fixed address, was jailed for five years at the West Kent Quarter Sessions at Maidstone. Penrose, a man with four findings of guilt and seven previous convictions, who asked for other offences to be considered, pleaded Guilty to breaking in and stealing about 78 bottles of wines and spirits, 6,000 cigarettes, 302 cigars, jewellery, etc., and about £594, total value £750.

Mr. C. Nichols, prosecuting, outlined the details, and said that while Penrose was at Folkestone police atation about another matter, he was asked about the offence and his part in it. He was told that certain property had been recovered, and he then said he would take the police to where some of the property was hidden. He went with the police to a quarry on the Barham – Wingham road and a quantity of wines and spirits in two pillowcases – taken from the Star Inn – were recovered. He made a statement that two other men were involved in the “breaking”. He did not break in; he only drove the car, he said.

Speaking from the dock, Penrose said he was not trying to shield the others; in fact, he had friends who were trying to trace them. They engaged him to collect some stuff - he thought it was black market stuff.

Passing sentence, the Chairman said that the accused was not wholly unknown to him. “There is no question, you are rapidly developing into an habitual criminal”, he said. “If you go on as you are going, it will not be long before you are sent away for a long period of preventive detention”. He took part in the break, and whether he tried to trace the others or not was neither here nor there. He had the motor car to carry the things away.

Folkestone Gazette 16 September 1964.

Local News.

A total of £13 4/3 was collected by a pile of pennies at the Star Inn, Newington. It was pushed over on Monday night by Miss Folkestone, 20-year-old Miss Valerie Atkins, in her first official engagement. The pile took over nine months to build; the proceeds will go to the Spastics Society. The customers at the inn have now started another pile, which will be the third they have built.

Folkestone Gazette 24 June 1970.

Local News.

Thieves who broke into the Star Inn at Newington in the early hours of Saturday morning got away with about £50 in cash from a till. They are thought to have got in through a window at the side of the building.