DOVER KENT ARCHIVES

Sort file:- Folkestone, September, 2022.

Page Updated:- Monday, 12 September, 2022.

PUB LIST PUBLIC HOUSES Paul Skelton and Jan Pedersen

Earliest 1839

Swan

Latest 1940

176 Dover Road

Folkestone

Swan remains

Above photo showing the remains of the pub after being destroyed on the 6 October 1940. Photo from Alan Taylor.

Swan sign 1937

Above sign 1937.

 

Maidstone Gazette 24 March 1840.

On Saturday an inquest was held at Folkestone by John James Bond Esq., Coroner, on the body of John Hills, aged seventy, an oversea pilot, who expired that morning at three o'clock, from the effects of eighteen grains of opium taken by him on the previous Thursday evening to allay a cough and cause sleep.

Mr. John Boorn, druggist, deposed that deceased bought at his shop on Thursday afternoon two-pennyworth of opium, which weighed about thirty six grains, and that while witness was weighing the article deceased remarked that he was troubled with a bad cough, and he had frequently found relief by taking an opium pill.

Deceased was at the "Swan" public house on Thursday evening playing cribbage. He drank about a pint and a half of beer, and took the opium in pills just before he left to go home to bed, washing the pills down with the remainder of his beer. He was in good health, with the exception of a cough.

It appeared probable, from other evidence, that deceased took about half the quantity he purchased. One of his neighbours, finding that he was not up at two o'clock on Friday, went into his bedroom and found him lying in his bed, foaming at the mouth and speechless. Mr. Major, surgeon, was sent for and promptly attended, and had recourse to the usual remedies in such cases, but without any effect. Deceased lingered until three o'clock the following morning, when he expired.

Verdict: Accidental death from incautiously taking too large a dose of opium as a remedy for a cough.

 

Kentish Gazette 23 September 1845.

Folkestone, Sept. 22: The traffic between this place and Boulogne during the past week has been immense, and notwithstanding the violent gales, only on one day interrupted. We hear that it is contemplated to erect increased accommodation for the public by extending considerably the "Pavilion Hotel," for although the "Royal George Hotel" is opened and in full business there is yet a want of means to meet the tide of demand, which is daily increasing here.

 

Kentish Gazette 12 May 1846.

On Saturday last an accident of a serious nature befell John Rayner, the engine driver of the 4.15 p.m. up train, from the statement of his driver, it appeared that the unfortunate man was stooping over the side of the engine as it was entering the Shakespeare Tunnel and his head came in contact with the wall with such force as to precipitate him into the tender. On the arrival of the train at the station the poor fellow was taken in a state of insensibility to the "Swan," where he was speedily attended by Mr. Eastes, surgeon, and was found to have sustained frightful injuries of the head. But slight hopes are given of his recovery.

 

Southeastern Gazette 28 March 1854.

Kent Assizes.

Tuesday, March 21st.

George Stone, a soldier in the Artillery, was charged with uttering a counterfeit sovereign, at Cheriton, having at the same time other counterfeit coin in his possession.

Prisoner went to Mr. Collins’s, the White Lion, at Cheriton, on the 1st February, for a pint of porter, for which he tendered to Mrs. Collins what she supposed to be a sovereign, and received the change. On her husband’s return, she gave it to him, when it was found to be spurious. Prisoner had told her that he had received it from his pay- sergeant.

Mr. Collins having given information to the Folkestone police, Superintendent Steers apprehended the prisoner at about 11 o’clock in the morning, at the Swan, in the Dover Road. He acknowledged that he had changed a sovereign that morning, and took from his pocket five half-crowns, two shillings, and the piece produced, resembling the tendered coin. He said he had received a 5 note from his pay-sergeant about two days previous, which he had changed at the foot of London-bridge. The coins had a man on a horse on one side, and “To Hanover” on the reverse.

Prisoner said he had received the coins in change for the note. He produced a good character from his commanding officer.

He was found guilty of putting off the piece knowing it be counterfeit.

The learned Sergeant said that he had a document before him, which gave prisoner a good character, but stated that all that he had received from the regiment was 11s. 4d. He then sentenced him to five months’ hard labour, and ordered the change of the sovereign found on him to be given up to Mr. Collins.

Note: Date for Collins is at variance with More Bastions.

 

Southeastern Gazette 10 July 1855.

Inquest.

An inquest was held last week before the S. Eastes Esq., coroner at the Swan Inn, Folkestone, on the body of William Wibourn, aged 27, stonemason.

Deceased was at work on the 12th June at Cheriton churchyard doing the brick work of a grave, when he attempted to get a bird’s nest in the buttress of the church; he got on to a plank, and held on to a stone in the buttress, which came out, and he stepped off the plank, falling on to some iron railings around a tomb, one of the spear-headed rails entering into his arm and the elbow joint. He was taken to Mr. William Bateman’s, surgeon, who found a very extensive wound in the right arm, and the muscles were torn. The skin was torn down over the elbow about 4 inches. The wound did well for twelve days, when the deceased was attacked with tetanus or lockjaw; he lingered until the 3d July, when he died in great suffering.

Verdict ’‘Accidental death.” The deceased was a very steady young man, and has left a wife and one child.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 13 October 1855.

Tuesday October 9th :- Present W. Major Esq., G. Kennicott Esq., and J. Kelcey Esq.

The Adjourned General Licencing Meeting was held this day, when the following licence was granted: William Franks, Swan

 

Folkestone Chronicle 6 June 1857.

Wednesday June 3rd: - Before R.W. Boarer esq., Mayor, and J. Kelcey, J. Tolputt, W. Bateman esqs., and Capt. Kennicott.

The following licence was transferred: Swan, licence granted to William Hall Robinson, in the place of Mr. Franks, who is rendered by sickness incapable of keeping a public house.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 17 April 1858.

Death:

On April 9th, at the County Lunatic Asylum, Barming Heath, Mr. W.T. Franks, formerly landlord of the Swan Inn, Grove Terrace, aged 34 years.

 

Southeastern Gazette 9 October 1860.

Quarter Sessions.

Tuesday: Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq.

Benjamin Clark, 18, labourer, was indicted for stealing a watch from the person of William Terry, on the day of the regatta. It appeared that prosecutor was taking some refreshment at the Swan Inn, when he felt a tug at his pocket, and caught the prisoner’s hand on his chain. He then found that his watch was gone, and saw the prisoner pass his hand behind him. The ring of the watch was found at his feet, having been cut off by some instrument.

The Recorder summed up greatly in favour of the prisoner, and the jury acquitted him, much to the astonishment of every one in court.

 

From the Folkestone Chronicle 15 February, 1862.

CAUTION TO DRIVERS OF PUBLIC CARRIAGES

Friday February 14th:- Before Gilbert Kennicott and James Tolputt, Esqs.

William Philpot, a licensed driver, No. 6, was summoned for a like offence.

Ingram Swain P.C. deposed on Saturday evening last about 10 o'clock he saw two carriages standing at the door of the "Swan Inn," Dover Road, about 6 or 8 feet from the door; defendant, the driver of one of them stood by the door; the other carriage was not attended by anyone. About 11 o'clock witness returned to the "Swan" and found that one of the carriages were gone; defendant still stood at the door; the other was inside the tap room. Witness asked defendant if that was his carriage outside and he said yes. The place where the carriage stood was alongside the high road.

Edmund Kingsford proved the defendant as a licensed driver, No. 6, the licence having been granted on the 1st June, 1857.

Defendant in answer to the charge attempted to prove the plea where his carriage stood was private property, and called the landlord of the "Swan," Mr. Robinson, to corroborate him.

The magistrates however considered the case proved and fined defendant 1s. and costs 11s. 6d. The fine and costs were paid at once.

 

Walter Woolgar, licensed fly driver No. 8, was summoned for a similar offence, at the same time and place. It appeared he was the driver of the other carriage, referred to in the previous case, belonging to Mr. Henry Laker.

Police Constable Swain deposed the horse and carriage was seen going down Mill Lane, without any driver with it. Swain proceeded to the "Swan," and found defendant sitting in the tap room. He told him the fly had gone away, when defendant said “Oh, I dare say the old mare has gone home all right”; he didn't think she'd run away. (A laugh)

Mr. Kingsford proved the defendant was a licensed driver.

Defendant, who had pleaded not guilty, justified himself on the plea that Mr. Laker had discharged him on a minute's notice, and was not therefore the driver of the carriage.

The magistrates, however, considered it a bad case, and fined him 5s. and 10s. costs, if brought up again the full penalty to be inflicted.

Defendant said he had neither money nor goods, so they must take his body.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 6 September 1862.

Breaking and Entering.

Wednesday September 3rd:- Before Captain Gilbert Kennicott R.N., W.F. Browell, James Tolputt, A.M. Leith and W. Wightwick esqs.

Thomas Joy, 28, described as a baker, James Burns, 25, engine driver, Sarah Walker, 23, and Jane Jemima Castle, 20, were then placed at the bar, charged with feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of William Hall Robinson, and stealing 3 0s 6d in gold and silver, 7s or 8s in coppers, two boxes of cigars, 1 silk handkerchief, 1 concertina, 2 coats, 1 monkey jacket, 4 clocks, 1 letter, 1 public house licence, pair sugar tongs, 1 gold pin, 1 frock, 1 child's coat.

William Hall Robinson, sworn, deposed he was landlord of the Swan Inn, Dover Road. On Tuesday morning last, witness was awoke by his servant, about 20 minutes to 7, who told him the house had been broken into. On going downstairs, witness found that a pane of glass had been removed in the back parlour, and the fastenings undone – the window was a small distance open. Witness had fastened the window the last thing on the previous night, and was the last person to go to bed; the things in the parlour were all in a state of confusion. A writing desk had been broken open, and a small gold pin abstracted from it; the cupboard had been opened and the things in it turned topsy turvy. Witness missed the clock from the top of the cupboard, the right hand one as the room was entered. Witness then went to the bar, and found the bar window over the counter had been forced open, and two boxes of cigars taken, 3 0s 6d in gold and silver from the till, 7 or 8 shillings worth of coppers from the same till, a pint of pale brandy, a letter directed to witness, and the magistrates certificate of the licence, all from the same bar. Witness then went to the police station and informed the police. Witness had securely closed the bar window on the previous night by a flush bolt on the inside; the 3 0s 6d was club money, which had been collected the night before, and was in a large cup; saw the two male prisoners between the hours of 9 and 11 o'clock at his house, on Monday night; they had refreshments there; had not seen them before, nor the women prisoners at all. The gold pin now produced by Police constable Smith, witness identified; it had a red stone in it; witness also missed three coats, now produced by Police constable Smith.

Mary Jane Stace, being sworn, deposed she was servant at the Swan Inn; came downstairs on Tuesday morning about a quarter to 7, and saw the door of the back parlour was open, also saw two empty cigar boxes lying in the passage; also saw a pint pot half full of beer, and a glass standing on the floor in the front parlour; in the back parlour witness saw that five little clocks were gone from a sideboard in the room. Witness went out of the back door, and found a ladder standing against the gate, and that the window of the back parlour was opened a little way. Witness then called her master. Previous to this witness found the bar window was open, and also the till drawer. Witness was the first one down in the house that morning.

William Taylor, being sworn, deposed he was landlord of the General Havelock public house, at Canterbury. Between 1 and 2 yesterday afternoon James Burns and Sarah Walker came into witness's house and called for some refreshment. They had not been more than 10 minutes in the house when the bundle now produced by Sergeant Newman was given into witness's charge. The prisoners left the house, the male prisoner saying “Take charge of this. I shall be back directly”. Witness had not seen them until now. Witness did not examine the bundle. Inspector Dodd, of the Canterbury police, came to witness's house about 4 minutes afterwards with the witness Robinson, and witness gave the bundle to the Inspector.

By the prisoner Sarah walker:- You asked if you might have a bed, to which I said yes.

Police sergeant Thomas Newman, sworn, deposed he was sergeant of police. From information received, witness proceeded to Dover yesterday morning in company with police constable Smith and Mr. Robinson. They traced the prisoners from Dover to Canterbury by the London and Chatham Railway. Witness followed, went into the Wellington public house, Broad Street, Canterbury, and found the prisoner Thomas Joy and the female prisoner Jane Jemima Castle. Police constable Smith took Joy, and witness assisted him in securing Joy, as he was rather violent; prisoner was taken to the Canterbury police station and witness told the prisoner he should search him. The prisoner pulled from his coat pocket 53 cigars, and 2 knives, one in a case, the other clasp, two boxes of matches, a letter addressed to Mr. W Robinson, The Swan Inn, Folkestone, a magistrates certificate of licence to W. Robinson, dated 22nd August, 1862. When the prisoner took out the paper he said “Those are not my property”; also 4s 11 1/2d – 3s 6d in silver, and the rest in coppers; prisoner gave his name as John Asson. The other prisoners Burns and Walker were then brought in, and also Castle, and they were all brought to Folkestone. Witness received the bundle produced, identified by Taylor, from Inspector Dodd, in the presence of the witness Robinson, which contained a quantity of wearing apparel, not identified, four clocks, and a pair of scissors; the second bundle now produced, witness obtained from Inspector Dodd, in the presence of witness Robinson, and contained a quantity of children's wearing apparel and a quantity of baby linen, A good deal of amusement was caused by the Clerk asking the witness if he could describe the baby linen, in which the prisoners joined heartily.

Questioned by James Burns – Did not see you come into the police station at Canterbury.

Police constable Edwin Smith, sworn, deposed than on Tuesday morning, in company with police sergeant Newman and the prosecutor, Robinson, he went to Dover and from thence to Canterbury; Robinson went with witness to the Wellington Inn, at Canterbury, and there saw the prisoner Joy and Castle; the prisoner Joy had a concertina, tied up in a silk handkerchief; witness enquired where he got it from, and he answered it was his own property; the witness Robinson immediately identified the concertina and handkerchief as his property; Joy said nothing. The three coats now produced were lying on a table, which Robinson also identified; previously witness asked prisoner where he got them from, and he said they were his property, he had bought them. Witness, who was in plain clothes, told him he was a police constable, and he should apprehend him on a charge of burglary at Folkestone. Prisoner said “You -----, you take me”, and put himself in a fighting attitude; with assistance the prisoner was secured and taken to the Canterbury police station, and also the prisoner Castle, who was also taken to the station. The prisoners Castle and Joy were sitting close together; she was the worse for liquor, and had a bundle of clothes with her, which she claimed as her property. Whilst in the station at Canterbury, witness saw the prisoners Burns and Walker brought into the station by superintendent Davis, of the Canterbury police; as soon as the prisoners were brought in, Robinson identified the prisoner Burns as the one who was in company with at his house the night previous. Witness commenced to search the prisoner Burns, who put his hand in his pocket and pulled out two pence. Witness then found in Burns' left hand pocket of his coat 4 clock weights and an alarm weight, in his waistcoat pocket two ear drops and a small gold earring, a gold pin with part of a red stone in it, and five cigars. All these articles witness produced. Witness then assisted in bringing the prisoners to Folkestone.

Examined and questioned by James Burns – You did not come into police station voluntarily, you were brought in by the collar by Davies. You did not say to me “The man who stole the weights is on the way”.

Mr. Robinson re-called – Identify the gold pin, the 4 clocks, 1 child's frock, a child's jacket, a letter, a magistrate's certificate, three coats, a silk handkerchief, sugar tongs, pair of scissors, 5 pieces of baby linen, clock weights and an alarm, and concertina as being his property, produced by police sergeant Newman and police constable Smith. The property taken exceeds 5 in value. Witness also identified the bundles produced as those which he saw delivered to the police at Canterbury, and saw them hand the bundles to police sergeant Newman.

Capt. Kennicott said the magistrates had decided on discharging the female prisoners, as they had not found any of the property on them, but cautioned them as to their future conduct; they having had a very narrow escape.

Both the male prisoners, having been cautioned made long, rambling statements in defence.

The depositions were then formally completed, and the prisoners were committed to take their trials at the next Quarter Sessions for the borough, the witnesses being bound over to appear and give evidence at the trial.

 

Folkestone Observer 6 September 1862.

Burglary.

Wednesday September 3rd:- Before Captain Kennicott R.N., James Tolputt, A.M. Leith and W.F. Browell Esqs

Thomas Joy, 28, baker, James Burns, 25, engine driver, Sarah Walker, 23, prostitute, and Jane Jemima Castle, prostitute, were charged with burglariously entering the Swan Inn, Dover Road, and stealing various articles.

William Paul Robinson, landlord of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, said that his servant came to him about 20 minutes to 7 on Tuesday morning and told him that the house had been robbed. He got up and went downstairs, when he found that a pane of glass in the back parlour had been broken, and the window itself was raised about 2 inches. He had himself fastened the window last thing on Monday night. All the things in the parlour were in confusion. A writing desk had been forced open, and a small gold pin with a real stone was abstracted from it. The cupboards had also been opened, and things turned out. A clock had stood on the cupboard, which he missed. At the time he did not notice the absence of anything else, but afterwards he missed a child's frock coat, and some babies' clothing. Going into the parlour, he missed two boxes of cigars, 3 0s 6d in gold and silver money from the till, 7s or 8s in copper money, a bottle of pale brandy (a pint), a letter, a magistrates' certificate of licence, and 3 coats. Witness then came to the police station to give evidence. The bar window, which was fastened by a small inside bolt the night before, had been forced open. There was no mark on the window, or on the writing desk, to show how either of them was forced open. The gold and silver was club money that he had incautiously left in a large packet in the till the night before. The two male prisoners came into his house between 9 and 10 on Monday evening, and went away between 10 and 11. The men came in for refreshment. The women were not with them. Witness then identified the gold pin (which P.C. Smith produced) but the red stone was missing.

Mary Jane Stace, servant at the Swan Inn, came downstairs on Tuesday morning at a quarter to 7, and found the side door of the back parlour open. An empty wine glass was on the floor on each side of the passage; the cupboard doors were open. Five little clocks were gone from a box that stood on the sideboard. Going to the back door, she saw a ladder standing against the gate. The back parlour window was up a little way, and the bar window and till drawer were open.

William Taylor, landlord of the General Havelock, Canterbury, said that between 1 and 2 yesterday afternoon, the prisoners Burns and Sarah Walker came into his house and ordered some refreshment. They had not been there more than 10 minutes when the bundle on the table (produced by Sergeant Newman), was given into his charge by the prisoner Burns, and both prisoners then left the house. Burns said “Take charge of this. I shall be back directly”. Witness had not seen the prisoners since until this morning. Inspector Dodd, of the Canterbury police, came to witness in company with Mr. Robinson four minutes after prisoners had left, and claimed the parcel. Walker, when she came in, asked if he had a bed to let.

P.S. Newman, having received information from Mr. Robinson, proceeded with him and P.c. Smith to Dover, and then to Canterbury, to the Wellington public house, where he fornd the prisoners Joy and Castle. He apprehended Joy, and took him to the Canterbury police station, where he told him he must search him. Joy then pulled from his pocket 53 cigars, a case knife and clasp knife, two boxes of matches, a letter addressed “Mr. W.h. Robinson, Swan Inn, Folkestone”, and a magistrates' certificate of excise licence, dated 22nd August, 1862. When he pulled out the letter and licence he said “These are not my property”. He also produced 4s 11 1/2d. He then, at witness's request, wrote his name as John Ason. The other prisoners, Castle, Burns, and Walker were brought into the station while witness was there, and he assisted in bringing all of them to Folkestone. The bundle identified by Taylor witness received from Inspector Dodd in presence of Mr. Robinson. (The bundle was then opened, and was found to contain a quantity of wearing apparel not identified, 4 clocks, pair of German sugar tongs and a pair of scissors. Witness also produced a second bundle, that he had received i the same way, which contained several articles of childrens' clothes, baby linen &c.)

P.C. Smith said he went to Dover with Mr. Robinson and Sergeant Newman, and found the prisoners Joy and Castle at the Wellington public house. The prisoner Joy had a concertina tied up in a handkerchief, and said it was his own property, and also three coats that witness found on the table on the room in which the prisoners were. Witness asked him where he got the coats from, and he said he bought them. Witness then took Joy and Castle to the Canterbury station. Castle was rather the worse for drink. The bundle which she had she said was her own property, and she knew of nothing else. On examining her bundle nothing was found in it but her own wearing apparel. Prisoner and Castle were sitting near each other, but other persons were in the same room. While in the Canterbury station, the Superintendent brought in Burns and Walker, having found them outside the station. Robinson immediately identified Burns as the man who had been in company with Joy. Searching Burns, 2d in coppers, 5 clock weights, 2 ear drops, small gold earring, gold pin, with part of a red stone in it, and 5 cigars were found upon him.

In cross-examination by the prisoner Burns, witness said he (Burns) did not come voluntarily into the Canterbury station to enquire for a person, but was brought in by the Superintendent by the collar. Burns did not say that a man had sold him two of the things on the road. He said that he had sold the clocks to a man on the road.

Mr. Robinson, being again called, identified the gold pin, four clocks, child's jacket, letter, magistrates' certificate, three coats, concertina, silk handkerchief, sugar tongs, scissors, five pieces of baby linen and five clock weights as his property, and exceeding 5 in value.

This being the case against the prisoners, Captain Kennicott stated that the Bench had decided to dismiss the women, no property having been found on them, but he cautioned them as to their choice of companions in the future.

The prisoners then being called on for their defence, Joy said that on Monday morning he met Burns in Dover, on the road to Folkestone, and in reply to Burns he said he was going to Folkestone to look for work. He said he was also going to Folkestone. They stayed in Folkestone until about 9 o'clock, and then seeing that there was no work in the town they returned to Dover. They got up early on Tuesday and were going to Canterbury, and when they came to the station it was too early. There was a man there with two large bundles in his hand. He asked if anyone wanted to buy anything, as he was out of employment and without any money. They told him they ould not do so, as they were short of money themselves. He then said he would sell them things very cheap, as he was in want of money. Burns asked him how much he wanted for the lot. At firt he asked 35s. He (Joy) told him they could not give him so much, as they had only 2 between them. He then wanted 30s., but he (Joy) told him he would give him 1 8s., and he went and changed a sovereign and came back and paid him the money. Then the man offered them a lot of cigars for 2s., and so the man received 30s. for the whole, and left them, and they started for Canterbury.

Burns said the man who offered the things said they need not be afraid to buy the goods. He brought them from London. They were his own property. He had carried them a long way, and he was hard up for money. He said he would not carry them any further, for they were no use to him as he intended to go to sea. When he was leaving them, “this gentleman here” (the prisoner Joy), went to get two tickets, and the man put his two fingers in his white waistcoat pocket, and asked him (Burns) if he was married. He said he was not, but he intended to be; and the man then gave him two large ear drops and a small pin, and said “I'll bid you goodbye. Keep them in remembrance of me” (laughter). He then went away, and they went to Canterbury, where he went to the General Havelock. Sarah Walker went out to get something to eat, but she came running back, and said the young man and woman who came with them from Canterbury were locked up. Giving the two bundles to the landlord at the bar, and asking them to keep them for a few minutes, he went to the police station, where there was a great crowd. Pressing through the crowd, he asked the Inspector if So-and-So (giving description of Joy and Castle) were locked up. He said “Yes. Come along with me”, and he (Burns) went. After he got inside the Inspector caught him by the collar of his coat, and searched him.

Both prisoners were then committed for trial at the next Quarter Sessions to be held in the borough.

One of the male prisoners (Joy) is believed to be an old convict who has served a four year sentence; and the other (Burns) is a notorious character in the neighbourhood of Chatham. He was formerly in the 17th Lancers, and subsequently worked in the Chatham dockyard. The two female prisoners, who are well known on the Camp, were arrested by Sergeant Smith of the County Police immediately on their quitting the Court, their bundles containing various articles stolen, with others, from the premises of R. Oakenfold, of Ashford, on Tuesday se'ennight. They will be brought before the magistrates at Ashford this morning.

 

Southeastern Gazette 9 September 1862.

Local News.

At the Police Court on Wednesday last, Thomas Joy, 28, baker, James Burns, 25, engine driver, and two “unfortunates,” named Sarah Walker and Jane Jemima Castle, were charged with burglariously entering the Swan Inn, Dover Road, and stealing various articles.

William Paul Robinson, the landlord of the Swan Inn, stated that on Friday morning he found tbat a pane of glass in the back parlour had been broken, and the window itself was raised about two inches. He had himself fastened the window the last thing on Monday night. All the things in the parlour were in confusion. A writing desk had been broken open, and a small gold pin with a red stone was abstracted from it. The cupboards had also been opened, and the things turned out. A clock had stood on the cupboard, which he missed. He afterwards missed a child’s frock coat, and some babies’ clothing. From the parlour he missed two boxes of cigars, 3 0s. 6d. in gold and silver money from the till, 7s. or 8s. worth of copper money, a bottle of pale brandy (a pint) a letter, a magistrate’s certificate of license, and three coats. The bar window, which was fastened by a small inside bolt the night before, had been forced open. There was no mark on the window, or the writing desk, to show how either of them was forced open. The gold and silver was club money that ho had incautiously left in a large packet in the till the night before. The two male prisoners came into his house between nine and ten on Monday evening, and went away between ten and eleven. The men came in for refreshment. The women were not with them. Further evidence was then given to show that most of the missing property had been found in the possession of the male prisoners, against whom suspicion had fallen, and they were committed for trial, but the women were discharged.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 4 October 1862.

Quarter Sessions.

Tuesday September 30th: - Before J.J. Lonsdale, Recorder.

Thomas Joy, 28, baker, and James Burns, 25, engine driver, were charged with stealing 1 gold pin, 4 clocks, 3 7s 6d in money, and other articles, the property of William Hall Robinson, in his dwelling house, at Folkestone, on the 2nd September, 1862.

After a short absence the grand jury brought in a true bill against both the prisoners, who pleaded not guilty.

The petty jury were then sworn, and a long enquiry into the facts of the case was gone into, the result being that they were both found guilty. Former convictions were proved against the prisoner Thomas Joy, who had a ticket of leave unexpired, and the learned Recorder said he felt bound to inflict a severe sentence on him: the sentence would be one of penal servitude for 15 years; the other prisoner not having any previous convictions, he would not punish so much; he should therefore sentence him to 5 years' penal servitude.

 

Folkestone Observer 4 October 1862.

QUARTER SESSIONS

Tuesday 30th September:- Before J.J. Lonsdale Esq., Recorder.

The Grand Jury retired and in a short time returned with true bills against Thomas Joy and James Burns for housebreaking.

Anson Polaski, otherwise Thomas Joy, 28, baker, was charged for that at the general sessions for the county of Kent, held at Maidstone, on 9th of March, 1857, he was convicted of felony; at the quarter sessions held at Sandwich, on the 7th April, 1859, he was convicted of felony; an that having been so convicted of felony, he, on the 2nd September of the present year, broke and entered the dwelling house of William Hall Robinson, situate in Dover Road (the "Swan Inn"), and feloniously stole and carried away 3 0s 6d in gold and silver money, a gold pin, four clocks, a child's frock, a child's cloak, five pieces of baby linen, two boxes of cigars, a bottle of pale brandy, a letter, a magistrates' victuallers' licence, three coats, a concertina, a silk handkerchief, a pair of sugar tongs, a pair of scissors, two ear drops and a gold earring, altogether to the value of 5 and upwards. There was also a count for stealing from a dwelling house to the value of 5, and a count for larceny.

The prisoner pleaded Not Guilty.

Mr. Minter, who appeared for the prosecution, briefly stated the case to the jury, and then called William Hall Robinson.

Examined by Mr. Minter, he deposed that he was the landlord of the "Swan Inn," and that he closed his house at half past twelve on the night of 1st of September, and went to bed about 1 o'clock. In consequence of what had been told him he came downstairs about a quarter to seven the next morning, and found the pane of glass close to the sash fastening of the back parlour window broken, and the window a little way up. The writing desk had been broken open and a pin with a red stone, four clocks, and some children's wearing apparel were missing. The clocks were in a box. He then unlocked the door leading into the bar and went into it, and observed that the window looking into the passage was open. It fastened on the inside by a thumb bolt, but by shaking the sash the bolt would loosen. It was witness's habit to fasten the bar window every night. He missed three pounds and sixpence from the till, and about seven or eight shillings in copper. He also missed three coats, a concertina, a letter, and a magistrates' certificate from the bar. He saw the prisoner on the previous evening in his house. He came in for refreshment. On Tuesday morning he gave information to the police, and went with them to Dover and Canterbury. He got to the "Wellington Inn" at Canterbury, with P.C. Smith, about half past 12. The prisoner Joy was there, and they found a concertina and three coats there in his possession. Joy said the concertina and the coats were his property, and he had bought them. He was then taken to the station and searched, and a letter, a magistrates' certificate and five cigars were found on him. The concertina and coats produced were his property. He saw police sergeant Newman searching Joy at the station house, and find the letter and magistrates' certificate produced, which were safe in his house on the Monday night.

By the Recorder – The desk had not been opened for 12 months before. All the money was taken from the till.

Mary Jane Stace, a servant of Mr. Robinson, came downstairs at a quarter to seven on Tuesday morning, 2nd September, and saw that the five little clocks that the night before were in a box on the sideboard were gone. The back parlour window was open a little way. The bar window and the till were also open. Going into the back yard she saw her master's ladder leaning against the gate. The was was rather high.

Police sergeant Newman said that he went to Canterbury on Tuesday, 2nd September, with Mr. Robinson and P.C. Smith. At the "Wellington Inn" they saw the prisoner Joy, and took him to the Canterbury police station. When witness said he should search him, prisoner said he would produce all he had, which was his own property. He then produced from his pocket 53 cigars, clasp knife, a magistrates' certificate, and a letter addressed to Mr. Robinson. When he took the latter articles out he said they were not his property. When asked his name, he said he would write it. He wrote “James Asan”.

P.C. Smith gave evidence in confirmation of Sergeant Newman.

The statement made by Joy before the magistrates was then read.

The prisoner being called on for defence said he could not make any further statement than he had already made.

The learned Recorder then summed up the case to the jury, remarking that when a person is found in possession recently stolen and failed properly to account for it, the law allowed the jury to presume his guilty possession.

The jury immediately found the prisoner Guilty on the first indictment – housebreaking.

Inspector Spratt of the Canterbury police was then called to prove a former conviction, and not presenting himself, the learned Recorder then said a most serious complaint should be made.

The prisoner was, however, called on to plead to the indictment for former convictions already given, and he pleaded guilty to both.

A further indictment was then proceeded with for feloniously stealing five shillings, a watch, and a walking stick, from the premises of the "Duke of York," Sandgate, on the 31st August, to which the prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, saying that he was not in England at that time. He came from Calais on the 1st of September.

This case had not been previously before the magistrates, and as no legal gentleman represented the prosecution, the examination of witnesses was conducted by the Recorder.

William Wood said he was a builder, but had control over the till at the "Duke of York." On the 31st of August he missed all the money out of his till, a walking stick, and a bundle of cigars. He had seen the watch on the 30th of August hanging over the mantel piece. Had not seen the watch since until today. Could not say that the prisoner was at his house on the Saturday or Sunday, but he had seen him at his house several times. (This witness gave his evidence in a manner that called from the Recorder several reproofs. At last the Recorder said it was disgraceful to see a man behaving himself in the Court as he was doing that day. It was shameful. He had a great mind to commit him for contempt of Court. It was shameful the state in which he was.)

---- Wood, the son of the preceding witness said he got up on the 31st of August and came downstairs and found the front bar sash thrown open. Going down the passage, he saw the back door was open.

James Long, shopman to Thomas Long, pawnbroker, Dover, had a notion that he had seen the prisoner before, but he could not identify him as having pledged the watch, which he had taken in.

The Recorder here stopped the case, no person being able to identify the person who pledged, and then he proceeded to sentence the prisoner on the indictments on which he had been found or pleaded guilty, remarking that he had very little moral doubt himself that in the last case he stole the watch and stick, although, as the case had been got up under rather peculiar circumstances, the evidence was not satisfactory. It was quite clear that he was a professional housebreaker. He was such a person that the law must protect persons against when they went to bed at night to take their rest. He was one of those persons, evidently, who if interfered with in the carrying out of their purposes would not hesitate to use violence. He meant therefore to do what would perhaps send him out of the country for a time – though it did not necessarily follow that a sentence of penal servitude removed a criminal from this country. The sentence he meant to pass on him was that he be kept in penal servitude for fifteen years (sensation).

James Burns, 25, engine driver, was then indicted for breaking into the "Swan Inn," and stealing articles as enumerated in the indictment against Joy. The prisoner pleaded Not Guilty.

Mr. Minter, for the prosecution, recapitulated the evidence, and called various witnesses, whose evidence was the same, with unimportant variations as to possession of goods &c., as in the last case, and the prisoner's statement before the magistrates as to his being accosted by a person on Tuesday morning at the Dover railway station, from whom he bought the articles found upon him, was read. To this statement the prisoner would now add nothing.

The Recorder then summed up the case to the jury, who immediately returned a verdict of Guilty, and he was thereupon sentenced to five years penal servitude.

This closed the business of the sessions.

 

Southeastern Gazette 7 October 1862.

Quarter Sessions.

The quarter session for the borough was held on Tuesday last, at the Town-hall, before the Recorder (J. J. Lonsdale, Esq.)

Anson Polaski, alias Thomas Joy, 28, and James Burns, 25, engine driver, were charged with stealing a gold pin, four clocks, 3 7s. 6d. in money, and other articles, the property of William Hall Robinson, in his dwelling-house, at Folkestone, on the 2nd September, 1862, Mr. Minter appeared for the prosecution.

The prosecutor deposed that he was the landlord of the Swan Inn, and that on the night of the 1st of September, he went to bed about 1 o’clock. In consequence of what had been told him he came down stairs about a quarter to seven the next morning and found the pane of glass close to the sash fastening of the back parlour window broken, and the window a little way up. The writing desk had been broken open, and a pin, four clocks, and some children’s wearing apparel, were missing. The clocks were in a box. From the bar he missed 3 0s. 6d. in silver, and about seven or eight shillings in copper. He also missed three coats, a concertina, a letter, and a magistrates’ certificate from the bar. He saw the prisoner on the previous evening in his house. He came in for some refreshment. On Tuesday morning he gave information to the police, and went with them to Dover and Canterbury. He got to the Wellington Inn, at Canterbury, with P.C. Smith, about half-past 12. The prisoner Joy was there, and they found a concertina and three coats there in his possession. Joy said the concertina and the coats were his property, and he had bought them. He was then taken to the station, and searched, and a letter, a magistrates’ certificate, and five cigars were found on him. The concertina and coats produced were his property. He saw Police-sergeant Newman searching Joy at the station-house, and find the letter and magistrates’ certificate produced, which were safe in his house on the Monday night.

Evidence corroborative of the above was given, and also tracing some of the stolen articles to the possession of Burns.

There was a further indictment against Joy, for stealing five shillings, a watch, and a walking stick, from the premises of the Duke of York, Sandgate, but this broke down from the want of identity.

A previous conviction having been proved against Joy, the Recorder, on the first charge, sentenced him to fifteen years’ penal servitude, remarking that he was evidently one of those persons who, if interfered with in carrying out his nefarious purposes, would not hesitate to use violence; Burns, five years’ penal servitude.

 

Folkestone Express 3 May 1873.

Local News.

Mr. Robinson of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, died very suddenly on Wednesday night.

 

Southeastern Gazette 3 May 1873.

Local News.

On Wednesday evening Mr. William Robinson fell down in a fit and expired. The deceased, who was the landlord of the Swan Inn, had apparently enjoyed good health up to within a recent period.

 

Southeastern Gazette 31 January 1876.

Local News.

On Wednesday morning early two retriever dogs belonging to Mr. Robinson, of the Swan Inn, found their way to the Copt fields, in which were ten sheep, which they commenced to worry. When the shepherd arrived one sheep was dead, four were so badly injured that it was found necessary to slaughter them at once, and the remaining five had escaped from the field, and were discovered some distance off.

 

Kentish Gazette, 1 February 1876.

FOLKESTONE SHEEP WORRYING.

On Wednesday morning early two retriever dogs belonging to Mr. Robinson, of the "Swan Inn," found their was to the Copt fields, in which were ten sheep, which they commenced to worry. When the shepherd arrived one sheep was dead, four others so much injured that immediate slaughter was necessary, and the other five were found some distance from the field, from which they had escaped.

The sheep belong to Mr. Timothy Harrison.

 

Folkestone Express 12 August 1876.

Wednesday, August 9th: Before The Mayor, General Cannon, Alderman Caister, J. Tolputt, J. Clark, and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

Joseph Holden and Harriett Holden, his wife, were charged with being drunk and disorderly in the Dover Road, and the woman was further charged with using obscene language.

The case was proved by Mr. William Robinson of the Swan Inn, where the defendants had called for some matches.

The man, who said he was a boiler maker, and had come from Ashford to work, expressed great regret and said he had done his best to get his wife quietly away.

The Bench discharged the male defendant, but committed his wife for 21 days.

 

Folkestone Express 4 May 1878.

Wednesday, May 1st: Before J. Kelcey and R.W. Boarer Esqs., and Captain Crowe.

Charles Peters was charged with assaulting John Griffiths, a collector of fossils, on the 27th of April. Mr. Gardner appeared for the complainant.

John Griffiths said that on Saturday evening he went to the Swan Inn about 8.30, and remained there until eleven o'clock. On leaving the house he heard a noise, and the defendant went up to him and said that he was “no man”. He wanted to know why and the defendant said it was because he was trying to kick up a row with someone. He dragged him towards the field, and wanted him to fight. He declined, and defendant separated from him. The pulling lasted about five or ten minutes.

Henry Care, for the defendant, said he was at the Swan Inn on Saturday night about eleven o'clock. Witness was larking about with defendant's son, who knocked witness' pipe out of his mouth. Mr. Griffiths said “If I was you I would give him a good hiding. He never was a man”. He did not see Peters strike Griffiths.

Henry Goodchild and his wife both corroborated, and the Bench dismissed the case, each to pay his own costs.

 

Folkestone Express 5 April 1879.

Wednesday, April 2nd: Before R.W. Boarer Esq., General Armstrong, J. Fitness and M. Bell Esqs.

Thomas Williams, a tramp, pleaded Guilty to begging in the Swan Inn, and to assaulting Charles Croucher and P.C. Loveday on the previous day.

Charles Croucher proved seeing the prisoner begging in the Swan, and when he left he met him down the road, when he assaulted him. He threw the prisoner, and P.C. Loveday then took him in charge.

P.C. Loveday stated that the prisoner was very violent, and tore his clothes nearly off.

The Bench sentenced the prisoner to 21 days' hard labour for begging, and to one month's hard labour for the assault.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 1 November 1879.

Saturday, October 25th: Before The Mayor, Alds. Caister, Hoad, and Sherwood, Col. De Crespigny, Gen. Cannon, Capt. W. Carter, W.J. Jeffreason, and J. Fitness Esqs.

John Spicer was charged with stealing a fowl, of the value of 2s. 6d., the property of William Robinson, landlord of the Swan Inn.

The prisoner pleaded Guilty and was sentenced to one month's imprisonment with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Express 1 November 1879.

Saturday, 25th October: Before The Mayor, Aldermen Caister, Hoad, and Sherwood, Col. De Crespigny, General Cannon, Captain Carter, W.J. Jeffreason, J. Clark, and J. Fitness Esqs.

John Spicer was charged with stealing a fowl, value 2s. 6d., the property of Wm. Robinson, landlord of the Swan Inn.

James Fleet, a labourer, living at 1, Nelson Place, said about half past eight on the previous evening he went into the yard of the Swan public house. He saw the prisoner leave a water closet, look around to see if anybody was about, then return immediately, and took a live fowl from the closet and put it under his coat. He followed the prisoner, and told him he ought to be ashamed of himself. In the meantime prisoner had killed the fowl. He said he did not mean to take it away, but was going to give it to Mr. Robinson. He took prisoner to the bar, and the fowl was given up to Miss Robinson.

Prosecutor identified the bird produced as his property. It's value was 2s. 6d.

Prisoner pleaded Guilty, saying he was the worse for liquor, and did not know what he was about at the time.

Prosecutor gave him a good character, and did not wish to press the charge.

Prisoner was committed for one calendar month with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Express 18 December 1880.

Thursday, December 16th: Before W.J. Jeffreason and Aldermen Caister and Sherwood.

Patrick Eiray was charged with stealing a spade of the value of 4s. 3d., the property of Messrs. Francis, ironmongers, High Street.

P.C. Knowles said from information he received he went in search of the prisoner, and found him at the Swan Inn, with a spade standing close to him. In reply to witness, prisoner said it was his property, and he took him into custody on a charge of stealing it. He said a captain bought it and gave it to him. When charged at the station he made no reply.

Mr. Charles Francis said he missed the spade in the evening of Wednesday. He remembered seeing it just inside the doorway of the shop in the morning. He identified it by the private mark on the handle. The selling price of the spade was 4s. 3d. He had no knowledge of prisoner, and from inquiries he had made he had ascertained there was not a spade sold from their shop on Wednesday.

Prisoner pleaded Guilty, and was sentenced to a month's imprisonment with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Express 15 July 1882.

Saturday, July 8th: Before The Mayor, J. Holden Esq., and Colonel de Crespigny.

Richard Mercer appeared to a summons charging him with assaulting James Unwin on the 6th inst. Complainant appeared in court with his left eye much discoloured, and the defendant informed the court that the black eye was the result of a fight with another man.

Complainant said he was a bricklayer, living at 70, Dover Road. On Thursday afternoon he went into the Swan Inn about half past three o'clock to get a pint of beer. Mercer was there, using abusive language to the landlady. Witness said “If I was the woman's husband I would come and throw you out of the house”. Mercer wanted him to fight, but he said he was no fighter, and put his hands in his pockets. Mercer struck him two blows on the nose, and he then put up his hands to defend himself. In reply to the Bench, complainant said he had “a part of a black eye” before, but the blows from Mercer increased it.

Henry Williams and John Boxer corroborated complainant's evidence.

Defendant did not deny striking complainant, but said he did not strike the first blow. Complainant was annoyed with him because he had not taken his part in a fight he had had with another man. The witnesses called were not present. He and Unwin were alone in the bar.

The bench fined defendant 10s. and 11s. costs, or 14 days' hard labour. Allowed a week for payment.

 

Folkestone Express 26 August 1882.

Licensing Day.

Application For New Licence.

Wednesday, August 23rd: Before J. Clark, F. Boykett and J. Holden Esqs., and Alderman Caister.

James Boxer, residing at 28, Rossendale Road, applied for an off license. Both Mr. Minter and Mr. Mowll opposed the application.

Mr. Clark said there were two members of the Blue Ribbon Army present on the Bench, and two who were not. He should propose that those two gentlemen decided the application.

Mr. Minter said he opposed on behalf of the landlord of the Swan Inn, which was close to the house where it was proposed to sell beer. Until within the last week, he remarked, the magistrates had no discretion in those licenses, but happily the legislature had decided that the magistrates ought to have power to put a stop to what was found to be a great nuisance, and they could now refuse to grant any license. He ventured to say there could be no possible reason for granting the application then made. He mentioned several public houses in the vicinity – in fact, within an area of about a hundred yards there were six or seven licensed houses. What possible reason there could be for that application, or what good or convenience could rise, he was utterly at a loss to conceive. He therefore asked the Bench to refuse the application.

Applicant, a dairyman, said he had no special reason to urge why the license should be granted, except that he wished to make a profit by selling beer.

The license was refused.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 2 June 1883.

Inquest.

An inquest was held before the Borough Coroner on Monday evening on the body of George Pearce, a labourer, aged 29, who was found in the harbour on Sunday morning.

Stephen Hogben, labourer, living at Uphill, Folkestone, identified the body as that of George Pearce, a labourer, who lived at White Gate, Acrise, and worked for Mr. Clayson. He came to Folkestone with deceased on Saturday, arriving here about eight o'clock. They went into the Swan, where they remained about a quarter of an hour, and then went to a public house named The Cutter and stayed there nearly an hour. They went to another public house, where they also stayed nearly an hour, and then they went round to the harbour. Witness left deceased near the clock house about half past ten or a quarter to eleven, and got lodgings at the Radnor. Deceased was ”a little beery” but there was nothing the matter with witness. Deceased was sober when he came into Folkestone. When witness left him he knew what he was about and could walk alright. It rained hard, and that was the reason he (witness) got lodgings. He heard on Sunday morning there was a man found dead in the harbour. His appearance was described, and he went to the police station to identify the body. There was no-one else round the harbour when witness left.

Henry Bailey, night-watchman on the harbour, said he was called on Sunday morning at a quarter past five by some young men, who said there was a dead body in the harbour. He went towards the Stade quay, and saw deceased lying on his belly. His feet were about five or six feet from the quay. He sent for the police, having felt his hand and found that he was quite dead. The body was placed on a stretcher and conveyed to the old police station. Witness saw the body searched, and saw his watch taken out of his watch fob. It had stopped at one o'clock. It was high water at one minute past two. There were three half pence, a tobacco box, a dinner bag, and a small book in his pockets. His dress was not disarranged in any way.

Dr. Perry said there were no marks about the body, and in his opinion death was caused by drowning.

A verdict of “Found Drowned” was returned.

 

Folkestone Express 2 June 1883.

Inquest.

An inquest was held before the Borough Coroner on Monday evening on the body og George Pearce, a labourer, aged 29, who was found in the harbour on Sunday morning.

Syephen Hogben, labourer, living at Uphill, Folkestone, identified the body as that of George Pearce, a labourer, who lived at White Gate, Acrise, and worked for Mr. Clayson. He came to Folkestone with deceased on Saturday, arriving here about eight o'clock. They went into the Swan, where they remained about a quarter of an hour, and then went to the Cutter and stayed there nearly an hour. They went to another public house, where they stayed nearly an hour, and then went round to the harbour. Witness left deceased near the clock house about half past ten or a quarter to eleven, and got lodgings at the Radnor. Deceased was a “little beery”, but there was nothing the matter with witness. Deceased was sober when he came into Folkestone. When witness left him he knew what he was about and could walk all right. It rained hard and that was the reason witness got lodgings. He heard on Sunday morning there was a man found dead in the harbour. His appearance was described, and he went to the police station and identified the body. There was no-one else round the harbour when witness left.

Henry Bailey, night watchman on the harbour, said he was called on Sunday morning at a quarter past five by two young men, who said there was a dead body in the harbour. He went towards the Stade quay, and saw the deceased lying on his belly. His feet were about five or six feet from the quay. He sent for the police, after having felt his hand and found that he was quite dead. The body was placed on a stretcher and conveyed to the old police station. Witness saw the body searched, and saw deceased's watch taken out of his watch fob. It had stopped at one o'clock. It was high water at one minute past two. There were three halfpence, a tobacco box, a dinner bag, and a small book in his pockets. His dress was not disarranged in any way.

Dr. Perru said he had examined the body of deceased at the police station. There were no marks about the body, and in his opinion death was caused by drowning.

A verdict of Found Drowned was returned.

 

Folkestone Express 16 June 1883.

Auction Advertisement Extract.

T.J. Harrison has been favoured with instructions from the Trustees of the late William Hall Robinson, deceased, to sell by Auction, at the Clarendon Hotel, Folkestone, on Thursday, July 19th, 1883, at Six o'clock in the evening, in Five Lots, the following Valuable Freehold and Leasehold Properties.

Lot 5 – All that Valuable Leasehold Fully Licensed House, known as the Swan Inn, Dover Road, Folkestone. Close to the S.E.R. Junction Station, containing Double Fronted Bar, Tap Room, Bar Parlour and Living Room. First Floor – Three Bedrooms and Sitting Room, Two Attics. Together with Kitchen, Store House, and Yard in Rear, with commodious cellarage in Basement. Let to Mr. W.H. Robinson (the son) as a yearly tenant, which expires on the 1st December next, at the nominal rental of 38 a year.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 14 July 1883.

Auction Notice Extract.

By Order of The Trustee.

Notice of Auction Sale of Valuable Leasehold and Fully Licensed Inn, and other Valuable Freehold and Leasehold Properties.

T.J. Harrison has been favoured with instructions from the Trustees of the estate of the late Mr. William Hall Robinson, deceased, to sell by Auction, at the Clarendon Hotel, Folkestone, on Thursday, July 19th, 1883, at Six o'clock in the evening in Five Lots, the following Valuable Freehold and Leasehold Properties.

Lot 5 – All that valuable and substantially built leasehold fully licensed house known as The Swan Inn, 160, Dover Road, Folkestone, containing on the:

Ground Floor: Double fronted bar, tap room, bar parlour and living room

First Floor: Three bedrooms, sitting room, and two attics, together with kitchen,

Store House and Yard in rear, and commodious cellarage in basement.

Let to Mr. W.H. Robinson (the son), as a yearly tenant, which will expire by notice on the 1st December next, at the low annual rental of 38.

And also all those two leasehold cottages in the rear, known as No. 1 and 2, Nelson Place, Dover Road, Folkestone, let to weekly tenants, Mr. Suckling and Mr. Fleet, and producing the annual rental of 23 8s.

The whole of this lot is held under a lease from the Earl of Radnor and Viscount Folkestone, for the term of 99 years from the 25th day of March, 1844, at the low annual ground rent of 4 4s.

The Swan Inn is a well known Inn for business, and is situated close to the Junction Station of the South Eastern Railway Company. It is in one of the principal thoroughfares of the town, and there are every available means for carrying on a large and profitable trade. It has been conducted with public credit and profit by the late Mr. W. Robinson, and since his death by his Trustee and Tenant, during the last 30 years, and the present affords an excellent opportunity either for a man of business, or for investment.

The bar fixtures and all fittings, and the licenses will have to be taken by the purchaser at a valuation in the usual way, an inventory of which will be produced at the sale.

Particulars and Conditions of Sale may be obtained at the offices of the Auctioneer, 14, Guildhall Street, Folkestone, and of W.G.S. Harrison, Vendor's Solicitor, 4, Cheriton Place, Folkestone.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 21 July 1883.

Sale of Property.

On Thursday evening Mr. T.J. Harrison conducted a sale by auction at the Clarendon Hotel of property belonging to the executors of the late Mr. W.H. Robinson.

For the Swan Inn, Dover Road, and two cottages adjoining, there was a keen competition, and it was ultimately knocked down to Mr. Flint for the good sum of 1,900.

 

Folkestone Express 23 June 1894.

Monday, June 18th: Before J. Brooke and W.G. Herbert Esqs.

Frederick Archer and Margaret Noble were charged with being drunk and disorderly in Dover Road on the 16th June, and the male prisoner was further charged with damaging a square of glass, value 35s., the property of Mr. Robinson, landlord of the Swan Inn.

Mrs. Elizabeth Robinson said the prisoner was ejected from the house just before eleven on Saturday morning. The man and woman appeared to be sober when they went in. They were very quiet for a time, and then they began to get quarrelsome and used obscene language. They had a quart of beer when they went in. The female had a small soda. There were three in the party. The third, a man, was not present. They were ordered out several times before they would go, and then they were put out. Archer smashed the window with his fist.

P.C. Nash said Mr. Robinson gave Archer into custody. He was very violent, and he had to get assistance to put the handcuffs on. The damage was put at 1 15s. The female struck him when he was on the ground.

The female had previously been charged with breaking a square of glass at Sandgate, and there were several other convictions against her. Superintendent Taylor said she was a very violent woman.

Archer was fined 5s. and 4s. 6d. costs for drunkenness, or seven days'; and for the damage 5s. and 4s. 6d. costs, and 35s. the value of the glass, or one month. Noble was sent to prison for 14 days.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 22 March 1895.

Local News.

Samuel Baker and William Kemp had their little experience of the Magistrates' Court on Saturday, and if they are not satisfied they ought to be.

They met at the Swan Inn, Dover Road, on Thursday morning, and got to words. From words they got to spitting in one another's faces, and then to blows. Hence their appearance in the Police Court, each being summoned by the other for assault.

The Bench listened in patience to the story of this public house squabble, and the dismissed both summonses, leaving each of the litigants to pay his own costs, 3s. in each case.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 6 March 1897.

Saturday, February 28th: Before Messrs. J. Fitness and T.J. Vaughan.

Charles Stone, otherwise Bailey, was charged with refusing to quit licensed premises when requested on February 23rd. He pleaded Guilty.

William Brett, the manager of the Swan Inn, said the defendant came in about 9 p.m. He was drunk, and witness refused to serve him. He was requested to leave, but refused and used filthy language. He was ejected, but returned and upset a large number of people in the bar.

Defendant had nothing to say to the charge.

Fined 20s., or 14 days'.

 

Folkestone Herald 6 March 1897.

Folkestone Police Court.

On Saturday – Mr. Fitness presiding – Charles Stone, otherwise Bailey, was charged with refusing to quit licensed premises on 23rd February. He pleaded Guilty.

Mr. Wm. Brett, the landlord of the Swan Inn, gave evidence that the defendant came in the bar drunk between nine and ten in the evening of the day in question, and when requested to leave used disgusting and threatening language. He was then ejected, but returned and struck at the landlord over the bar, which was full of customers.

Fined 20s., 9s. costs, or 14 days' hard labour.

Note: Brett is not listed in More Bastions.

 

Folkestone Express 7 August 1897.

Wednesday, August 4th: Before Captain Willoughby Carter, J. Pledge, J. Holden, J. Fitness, and T.J. Vaughan Esqs.

William Vye and Thomas Waddell were charged with assaulting Leon Laine on July 24th.

Prisoners pleaded Not Guilty and said they only acted in self-defence.

Complainant, who gave his evidence through an interpreter, said he was an engineer at the Canning Factory, and lived at 43, Warren Road. On Saturday night, July 24th, he had a glass of beer at the Swan Inn, and left there at eleven accompanied by another Frenchman, a cook by trade. They went down Dover Road, and on coming back met four men, one of whom called him “a b---- Frenchman”. He protested, and was then assaulted by two of the men, who knocked him down three times. When on the ground he was kicked in the stomach. He got up and tried to walk, but owing to the loss of blood he could not do so, and he was assisted home by the landlord of the public house opposite. He was still under a doctor.

Elie Gauchot, another Frenchman, gave corroborative evidence, and said he was also struck in the side. He subsequently gave information of the occurrence to a policeman.

In answer to Waddell, witness said he was quite sober.

P.C. Willes said on the night in question he saw about twenty people lounging about, and he told them to move on. Prosecutor came forward with his nose bleeding, and said he had been struck. The Frenchmen had been drinking, but were not drunk. He told them that as they knew the men who struck them they must take out a summons against them.

P.S. Dawson said on Friday last he went to the Cyprus, where he saw Waddell, whom complainant pointed out as the man who “boxed with him”. At the bottom of High Street, complainant identified Vye, and on being taxed with the offence, said “I did it”.

Vye said Leon threw his stick down and called him an English pig. He kept making a noise so he knocked him down. He only struck him twice.

Waddell said he did not strike Leon. He simply told him to go away.

Vye, who had been previously convicted, was fined 2 and 12s. 6d. costs, or in default one month's hard labour, and Waddell was fined 1 and 12s. 6d. costs, or in default 21 days' with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Herald 7 August 1897.

Police Court Record.

Two young men named William Vye and Thomas Waddell were charged with assaulting Leon Laine on the 24th July. The former said it was in self-defence and the latter pleaded Not Guilty.

The complainant gave evidence through an interpreter to the effect that he lived at 43, Warren Road, and was engineer to the Canning Company. On the night of the 24th he had a glass of beer at the Swan Inn, and remained there five minutes. It was 11 o'clock. There was another Frenchman with him, a cook. They went down Dover Road when leaving the Swan and remained there five minutes talking, and then they came back about 11.20. As they were coming up the street again they met two men, who used a foul expression towards him, and both struck him. He had three successive blows, and three times was knocked down. While he was on the ground they kicked him on the stomach and below the belt. He got up and tried to walk, but he was losing blood fast through the mouth. Four men struck him, but he only knew two, the defendants, whom he knew very well. The two prisoners struck him. He never spoke to them. He had been under a doctor, and was still under one. The two defendants knocked him down.

In answer to Vye, witness added that he saw Vye strike him.

Elie Gaucho, who was with defendant at the time, gave corroborative evidence. There were seven or eight men sitting down, and it was very dark. When complainant was on the ground they struck him with their fist and kicked him. One of them struck witness a blow on the side. He told a policeman what had happened.

In answer to Vye, witness said he was not drunk.

P.C. Wiles gave evidence that on Saturday night, 24th, he was on duty in Dover Road about a quarter to twelve just opposite the Swan. He saw about twenty persons, and heard loud talking going on. He went up there and told them to clear away. The complainant came and said someone had struck him in the nose. His nose was bleeding. Witness asked if he knew who it was who struck him, and he said “Yes, he knew the men”. Witness told him he could summons them. Complainant did not point out the men to him. The Frenchmen were not drunk, but they had been drinking. He saw them come out of the Swan at eleven o'clock on that same evening.

In answer to defendants, witness said that they went away when he spoke to them. He could not make them properly understand about the summoning. Complainant only spoke of the slap in the nose.

P.S. Dawson stated that on Friday last he went round with the complainant, and in the Cyprus public house he saw Waddell. The complainant pointed him out and said that was the one that boxed him. He left and went down High Street, and about 12 yards from the bottom he pointed out Vye, saying that was the other one that boxed him. Witness went to Vye, who, in answer to witness, told his name and address, 13 Young's Road. He said “What is the matter, Mr. Dawson?” Witness told him the Frenchman had identified him as one of two men who assaulted him on Saturday night. He said “I did it”.

In answer to Vye, witness added that Vye was about to make a statement, and he told him to keep it to himself.

Mr. H.B. Bradley, the Clerk to the Magistrates, said that was very good advice.

Vye said that he and Waddell were sitting on the wall up the Dover Road on Saturday night, and the two Frenchmen were standing by the side of the Swan, talking to a young lady, who went away with someone, and they walked over the road before them. One threw a stick down and said “You English pigs” and struck him. He took no notice for two or three minutes, but he would not go away, and made a noise. Witness struck him twice, and then he got up and went away.

Vye, who had been brought up previously for assault, was fined 2, 12s. 6d. costs, or a month's hard labour, and Waddell was fined 1, 12s. 6d. costs, or 21 days' hard labour.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 30 April 1898.

Saturday, April 23rd: Before Messrs. J. Pledge, G. Spurgen, and T.J. Vaughan.

John Bryant was charged with being drunk in charge of a horse and cart in Dover Road on April 22nd.

P.C. Burniston said he ejected the prisoner from the Swan Inn. He got up into a cart and drove off, but stopped at the New Inn. Prisoner was further charged with refusing to quit the Swan Inn.

Mr. Brett, manager, said the prisoner was drunk in his house and refused to leave. He did not get drunk in his house.

P.C. Burniston said he ejected the prisoner as he refused to leave. He used very bad language. He had seen him previously at the Red Cow, when he was sober.

He was fined 5s. and 4s. 6d. costs for the first offence, and the second charge was dismissed, the Bench believing he got drunk in the house.

 

Folkestone Herald 30 April 1898.

Police Court Report.

On Saturday last – Alderman Pledge presiding – John Bryan pleaded Guilty to being drunk in charge of a horse and cart.

P.C. Burneston deposed that on the previous night he ejected the defendant from the Swan public house. He drove twice on to the pavement. He was drunk, and unfit to be in charge of a horse and cart.

There was another charge against defendant of refusing to quit licensed premises. He pleaded Not Guilty.

Mr. Brett, manager of the Swan Inn, deposed that defendant came into the Swan. Witness saw him about 4 o'clock. He refused to leave. The constable put him out. Defendant was in a drunken state.

Defendant said he only went in there.

P.C. Burneston deposed that he was called at ten past six to eject prisoner.

Defendant said he had several twos of whisky.

The Bench fined him 5s., 4s. 6d. costs, or 7 days' hard labour. They dismissed the second charge of refusing to quit, it being the firm impression of the Chairman that defendant got drunk at this house.

 

Folkestone Up To Date 30 April 1898.

Saturday, April 23rd: Before Ald. Pledge, T.S. Spurgeon, and T.J. Vaughan Esqs.

John Brien, horse dealer, Folkestone, was charged with having been drunk on licensed premises, and refusing to quit, and also in being unfit to take charge of his horse and cart on the 22nd inst.

P.C. Burniston said that about 6.10 on the previous evening he was called into the Swan to eject the prisoner and another man. The prisoner had a horse and cart standing outside, and drove several times on the pavement while proceeding to the New Inn, where he was taken into custody by Burniston.

Mr. Brett, of the Swan, said: The prisoner and his friend came into the Swan Inn last evening, and called for drink. I was not in at the time. I asked the prisoner to leave the house, but he would not do so.

For the first offence the prisoner was fined 5s., and 4s. 6d. costs, and for the second dismissed.

The Chairman said the Magistrates had dealt so lightly with the second offence because they believed that the prisoner got the principal part of his drink at the Swan.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 6 August 1898.

Wednesday, August 3rd: Before Messrs. J. Pledge, W.G. Herbert, W. Wightwick, and C.J. Pursey.

Mrs. Robinson was granted the transfer of the licence of the Swan Inn. Mr. Mowll appeared for the applicant.

 

Folkestone Herald 6 August 1898.

Police Court Report.

On Wednesday licence was granted to Mrs. Robinson, of the Swan Inn.

 

Folkestone Up To Date 6 August 1898.

Wednesday, August 3rd: Before J. Pledge, W.C. Herbert, W. Wightwick, and C.J. Pursey esqs.

On the application of Mr. Mowll, Mrs. Robinson, of the Swan Inn, was granted a renewed licence in her own name.

 

Hythe Reporter 13 August 1898.

Folkestone Police Court.

At the sitting of the Bench of Magistrates last Wednesday, the following licence was transferred:

Mr. E. Rutley Mowll applied on behalf of Mrs. Robinson, widow of the late landlord of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, for a new licence; granted.

 

Folkestone Herald 15 October 1898.

Police Court Report.

On Saturday last John Bryant was summoned for leaving a horse and cart unattended.

P.C. Simpson deposed that on the 23rd he saw a horse and trap outside the Swan public house, Dover Road, 20 minutes. Defendant was called out, and he said it belonged to him. Witness told defendant he had seen it there 20 minutes, and he would report him. The defendant replied “You can report your grandmother if you like”.

Defendant denied some of the evidence. He asked a lad to mind the horse a few minutes.

Fined 5s. and 9s. costs.

 

Folkestone Up To Date 15 October 1898.

Saturday, October 8th: Before J. Hoad, J. Pledge, J. Holden, and T.J. Vaughan Esqs.

John Bryan, a driver, was summoned for leaving a horse and conveyance outside the Swan, Dover Road, on Friday, 23rd September.

The constable who had charge of the case said the horse and conveyance were standing unattended from 12.25 p.m. to 12.45 p.m., twenty minutes. He asked the defendant how long he had been there, and the answer was “Don't know”. He then said he should report the case, and the defendant said “You can report your old grandmother if you like”.

The defendant told their Worships that when he went into the Swan he asked a boy if he would mind the horse a little, and the boy replied “Yes”. He thought the lad was outside with the horse. The statement as to the language about the old grandmother was false.

He was fined 5s. and 9s. costs.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 20 May 1899.

County Court.

Before His Honour Sir W.L. Selfe.

Thomas Payne, traveller for Ash and Co., the well known brewers, sued Mrs. Brett, landlady of the Swan Inn, for value of 1,141 bottles and stoppers and 13 cases, empties not returned. The articles, when filled, were delivered to the Swan when Mrs. Brett's former husband, Mr. Robinson, was the landlord. Mrs. Brett disputed an item of 4 8s., saying the goods represented by the amount were never delivered.

Stephen Rye, S.E. Railway carman, produced his delivery note, dated August 20th, 1898, and signed “C. Obinson” in blue pencil.

Mr. Brett was called, and declared the signature a forgery. A similar case, he said, arose in 1894, when he was employed at the house, and the firm proved the forgery by finding out that the goods in that case had not been delivered at that house. He knew there was not a farthing due from Mrs. Brett to the complainants.

Mr. Haines suggested that the bottles had been sold to navvies over the bar, and thus the loss had occurred.

His Honour expressed the belief that navvies preferred deeper draughts than bottled beer, and he complained of the absence of the brewers' ledger. The evidence was not so clear as he could have wished, but from what he had heard he decided to give judgement for Ash and Co. for 9 10s. and costs, to be paid by instalments of 2 a month.

 

Folkestone Express 20 May 1899.

County Court.

Tuesday, May 16th: Before Sir. Wm. L. Selfe.

Ash and Co. v Brett: Mr. G.W. Haines appeared for the plaintiffs. It wa a claim for beer sold and delivered to Mrs. Brett, and for bottles, stoppers and cases not returned.

Thomas Payne, traveller for plaintiffs, proved receiving orders from Mrs. Brett, then Mrs. Robinson, the landlady of the Swan Inn. Mr. Robinson, he said, died last summer, and she subsequently married Brett, who was the manager. He said he took orders for bottles of ale and stout and they were supplied to the house. A quarterly statement of accounts was always rendered. When bottles came back they were credited to the parties who sent them. Defendant had not advised them when bottles were returned. The last statement showed 1,141 bottles and 13 cases missing. Since the action 180 bottles and five cases had been returned. Defendant denied that the ale (X.P.A.) and stout had been delivered.

Mr. Brett said the account gave no date when the bottles were returned.

Stephen Rye, carman in the employ of the S.E.R., proved delivery of the goods, and put in a delivery note.

Mr. Brett declared that the signature was a forgery.

Witness said he could not say who signed it. The daughter sometimes signed.

Mary Ann Elizabeth Brett said Mr. Robinson died on the 2nd June, 1898. He left his property solely to her, and she had since married. She knew nothing at all about the stout or the bottles. Her husband always gave all the orders. She had no account of bottles sent back. She knew 17 and 13 and five cases had been sent back at different times by the S.E.R., but she had no receipts for them.

Mr. Payne said the firm signed for them when they were returned. He could not bring the ledger, but the statement was a copy of the account in the ledger.

Rye said he got signatures for goods delivered, but not for bottles and cases returned.

Mrs. Brett said she dealt with several firms. She did not often have 24 dozens of bottles of beer in.

Mr. Payne said the trade of the house was not an even one. The account for returns extended over four or five years, and there were 1,141 bottles missing – two thirds of those supplied.

His Honour remarked that the claim was for a hundred dozen of bottles.

Mrs. Brett said when they sold the bottled beer out they charged 1d. for bottles.

Mr. Haines said defendant did a large trade with navvies, who had bottled beer.

His Honour: They don't drink bottled beer – they want a longer drink than that, don't they – gallon jars?

Mrs. Brett: No, mostly pints.

His Honour: Only pints! I am disappointed.

Mr. Brett said there was a similar error in 1894. He did not owe the plaintiffs a penny either for beer or bottles. He had never put a receipt on one of the invoices.

His Honour examined a number of receipts, and said in one case the receipt was dated three days before the goods were delivered.

Witness said he paid for them in advance. He never had a quarterly statement, nor was it usual to put a memo as to bottles on the accounts.

His Honour said the evidence was by no means clear as to the bottles, but there was no doubt as to the beer being delivered. There would be judgement for the plaintiffs for 9 10s. and costs at 2 a month.

 

Folkestone Herald 20 May 1899.

County Court.

Tuesday, May 16th: Before Sir W. Lucius Selfe.

Ash and Co. v Brett: This was a claim for goods supplied, and bottles not returned. Mr. G.W. Haines appeared for the plaintiffs.

Mr. Thomas Payne, a traveller for the plaintiffs, deposed that he had been representing the firm in Folkestone, and had called on the defendant, Mrs. Brett, then Mrs. Robinson, whose late husband had left the Swan. Mr. Brett, the defendant's husband, was then manager, and gave him orders. In August, 1898, he took an order for stout, and other liquor, which was forwarded by the firm. They had supplied the house with bottled beer for nearly five years. A number of bottles and cases had been returned, but others had not.

Stephen Rye, carman in the employ of the South Eastern railway, produced a note delivered on the 29th August, and said he delivered the goods.

Mrs. Brett deposed that hr late husband died on the 2nd June, 1898, leaving the property solely to her. She knew nothing about the bottles, except that they had always been sent back when they were emptied. She had no receipts from the railway for returned empties.

Mr. Brett said the signature for the 29th October was entirely false. They had the same trouble in 1894. He did not owe a single farthing.

His Honour ultimately gave judgement for the plaintiff for 9 10s, at 2 a month.

 

Folkestone Up To Date 20 May 1899.

County Court.

Tuesday, May 16th: Before Sir William Selfe.

Ash and Co. v Mrs. Brett: This was an action for the recovery of 15 17s. 2d. for goods delivered. Amongst other items were 9 10s. for 1,141 bottles and stoppers, and 1 19s. for cases not returned. Mr. Haines appeared for the plaintiff.

Thomas Payne said: I am a traveller to Messrs. Ash and Co., and have called on Mrs. Brett, who was lately Mrs. Robinson. She recently married again. Her late husband died last summer. I think Brett, the husband of the present defendant, was manager, and generally gave the orders for beer and stout. I have also kept the bottle and stopper account. There has been a statement presented to the defendant as to the amount outstanding. The defendant never advised me. There were over 1,141 bottles and stoppers, and some dozen cases not returned.

Mr. Brett, as representing the defendant, complained that the bill presented to him did not contain proper date entries.

A carman in the employ of the S.E. Railway Company deposed that a note showing the delivery of certain goods to the defendant was duly signed.

Mr. Brett said the signature was a forgery. The note was never signed either by himself or by Mrs. Brett.

Mary Ann Elizabeth Brett said: My husband died on the 2nd June, 1898. He left a will, leaving his property solely to me. I have since married again. As to the goods in question, I don't know anything about them. There are no receipts for returned entries. The empties are sent back free. I could not say what the year's consumption of bottled stout and ale is at the Swan.

Mr. Payne, further examined by His Honour, alleged that two thirds of the bottles supplied to the defendant had not come back.

Mrs. Brett: We charge a penny on bottles that are not returned to us.

Mr. Brett, as manager of the defendant's business, emphatically stated that not a single farthing was due to the plaintiffs for goods of any description.

His Honour considered that the evidence in the case was by no means clear, but gave a verdict for 9 10s. and costs with respect to the bottles and stoppers, payment to be made at the rate of 2 a month.

 

Folkestone Herald 1 July 1899.

Folkestone Police Court.

On Tuesday last, Mr. Pope, architect, submitted plans showing proposed alterations to the Swan Inn, Dover Road, which he explained to the Bench. The case was adjourned so that the Superintendent may inspect the premises.

 

Folkestone Express 29 July 1899.

Saturday, July 22nd: Before W. Wightwick and W.G. Herbert Esqs., and Col. Hamilton.

Mr. Reginald Pope presented a plan of alterations to be made at the Swan Inn, Dover Road.

Supt. Reeve said it would increase the public drinking facilities, and also provide another public entrance.

The plan was approved.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 26 August 1899.

Brewster Sessions.

The Session for renewing old licences and granting new ones for the sale of intoxicating liquors in Folkestone was held on Wednesday last at the Town Hall. Captain Willoughby Carter presided, and the other members of the Bench were Messrs. Pursey, Fitness, and Herbert.

The whole of the existing licences were renewed, with the exception of the licence of the Swan Tavern, Dover Road. In that case the renewal was held over for an adjourned sitting, the house being in course of re-construction, and the Chief Constable not being prepared to make a report upon it until the work had been proceeded with further.

 

Folkestone Express 26 August 1899.

Folkestone Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, August 23rd: Before Captain Carter, J. Hoad, W.G. Herbert, J. Fitness, C.J. Pursey, and J. Pledge Esqs.

In the case of the Swan Inn, Supt. Reeve said he had received certain complaints against the manner in which it was conducted, and considered it necessary to ask that the application for renewal should be postponed until the adjourned licensing session in order that he might investigate the matter. The applicant, Mr. Brett, was accordingly told to renew his application at the adjournment.

 

Folkestone Herald 26 August 1899.

Annual Licensing Sessions.

On Wednesday last the Annual Licensing Meeting was held at the Court Room, Town Hall, the sitting justices being Capt. Carter, Mr. Fitness, Mr. Pursey, Mr. Hoad, Mr. Alderman Pledge, and Mr. Alderman Herbert.

Chief Constable Reeve applied that the renewal of the licence of the Swan Inn, near the Junction Station, be allowed to stand over to the adjourned meeting. His application, he said, had no reference to the extensive alterations now in progress.

The application was granted, and the renewal adjourned accordingly.

 

Folkestone Up To Date 26 August 1899.

Licensing Day.

The Swan.

Wednesday, August 23rd: Before Captain Willoughby Carter, J. Hoad, J. Fitness, W.G. Herbert, J. Pledge, and C.J. Pursey Esqs.

The consideration of the application of Mr. Brett for a renewal of his licence was postponed until the adjourned licensing sessions, Chief Constable Reeve wishing time to investigate certain complaints against the place.

 

Southeastern Gazette 26 August 1899.

Local News.

Captain Willoughby-Carter presided at the Folkestone Licensing Sessions on Wednesday. The Chief Constable, Mr. H. Reeve, reported that there were at present within the borough 138 persons licensed for the sale by retail of intoxicating drink, viz.: 58 full licence holders, 14 beerhouse keepers for consumption on the premises, four chemists for wine off the premises, six beer-sellers for consumption off the premises, three confectioners for wine on the premises, and 26 others holding various licences to sell beer, spirits, &c„ off the premises. There were 12 places licensed for public music and dancing, 10 of which were premises also licensed for the sale of intoxicating drink. There was also one place licensed for public billiard playing. During the past year, five of the licence holders had been proceeded against for offences against the Licensing Acts, but only four of them were convicted. 89 persons were proceeded against for drunkenness, 84 were convicted, and five discharged. Six persons were convicted for being on licensed premises during prohibited hours, and one for refusing to quit licensed premises when requested.

The consideration of the renewal of the licence of the Swan Tavern, Dover Road, was adjourned, in consequence of the house being in course of reconstruction, but all the remaining existing licences were renewed.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 23 September 1899.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

At these Sessions, on Wednesday, Mr. Brett applied for a renewal licence for the Swan Inn, Dover Road.

The Chief Constable said he had asked the Bench to defer consideration of this application until this session in order to give him an opportunity of enquiring into certain complaints made as to the conduct of the house. He had thoroughly enquired into the matter and found that, though there was some improvement necessary in the manner of the business, there was nothing so serious as to justify his opposing the renewal.

Mr. Brett stated that the licence had been held for many years by his wife's late husband, Mr. Robinson, and there had been no complaint or prosecution throughout the time.

The Bench granted the renewal and cautioned Brett to see that the house was conducted in a manner which would prevent any complaint arising, or he would risk the revocation of his licence.

 

Folkestone Express 23 September 1899.

Adjourned Licensing Session.

Wednesday, September 20th: Before Capt. Carter, Lieut. Col. Hamilton, W. Wightwick, C.J. Pursey, W.G. Herbert, J. Pledge, and J. Hoad Esqs.

In the case of the Swan Inn, the renewal of the licence to which was adjourned till this session in order that Supt. Reeve might investigate certain complaints, the Superintendent said he had made enquiries, and did not feel justified in opposing the renewal. The licence was therefore renewed to Elizabeth Brett.

 

Folkestone Herald 23 September 1899.

Folkestone Police Court.

On Wednesday, with regard to the renewal of the licence of the Swan Inn to the wife of Mr. Brett, Chief Constable Reeve said that this application was before the Bench at the Annual Licensing, but he suggested that it stay over until the adjourned meeting to enable him to make inquiries into certain complaints received as to the conduct of the house in the meantime. He had a thorough inquiry made with reference to the management, and although he was satisfied that there were some grounds for complaint, he did not feel justified in opposing the renewal any further. He trusted that in future the house would be better managed than it had been in the past. There had, however, been no convictions.

The Chairman, addressing Mr. Brett, said that he had heard what the Chief Constable said. He must be very careful for the future conduct of the house, otherwise no doubt his licence would be revoked. On the understanding that the house would be well conducted for the future, the licence would be renewed.

 

Folkestone Up To Date 23 September 1899.

Adjourned Licensing Day.

The Swan.

Wednesday, September 20th: Before Captain Willoughby Carter, J. Hoad, J. Pledge, W. Wightwick, and C.J. Pursey Esqs., and Lieut. Col. Hamilton.

With reference to the adjourned application by Elizabeth Brett for the renewal of the licence of the Swan Inn, the Chief Constable remarked that after making inquiries he did not feel justified in opposing.

The licence was renewed.

 

Folkestone Express 10 February 1900.

Saturday, February 3rd: Before J. Hoad, T.J. Vaughan, and W. Medhurst Esqs., and Col. Westropp.

Elizabeth Brett was summoned for permitting gaming on licensed premises, the Swan Inn. Mr. G.W. Haines appeared for the defendant.

Inspector Swift said at a quarter past nine on the evening of the 27th of January, in company with detective Officer Burniston, he was near the Swan public house and heard voices from the taproom, which abuts on the Folly Road. He listened, and heard a voice say “I'll try one”, another “Pass me”, another “I'll try two”, and another “You get 'em”. He heard cards being placed heavily on the table, and in some instances the name of the card was given – such as “Ten”, “Jack”. Another voice said “Got 'em. Pay up”. He then heard the chinking of money. Shortly after, another voice said “Deal 'em out”. Then came other remarks, similar to those mentioned, indicating gaming. At the end of each hand he heard the chinking of money. After about five minutes they entered the room by the door in Folly Road. The defendant was in the bar, and the door was open which led from the bar into the smoking room, where the men were. They entered the room and saw five men seated at a table close to the window where they had listened. They each had three cards in their hands, and two cards were lying on the table in front of each. On seeing witness, they dropped their hands under the table. One of them, named Clark, remarked “Oh, you did not see any money on the table”. He called defendant's attention to it, and said to her “I shall report you for permitting gaming on licensed premises”. She replied “I did not know they were gambling”. Anyone in the bar could hear all that was passing in the smoking room if the door was open.

In answer to Mr. Haines, he said he did not see any cards stating that gambling was not permitted, nor did defendant show him four of them. There were other men in the room, who were not playing. He, of course, could not say whether money was put on the table to pay for drink when he heard the chinking. He was certain the words he heard used were “Pay up” and not “Play up”. He believed they called the game “Nap” they were playing. There was only one pack of cards – an incomplete pack – ten were missing. He did not suggest that it was usual to play “Nap” with a pack of cards with 10 missing.

Detective Officer Burniston gave similar evidence, and with the pack of cards in Court he demonstrated the noise of shuffling and cutting, manipulating them quite expertly.

In answer to Mr. Haines, Burniston said if other men in the room said there was no playing for money, it would not be true. He saw no cards about gambling in the house. He could not tell the difference in the chink of money paid for cards and that paid for drink. He thought it was a suspicious act for men to put cards between their legs under the table.

Mr. Haines: But you don't suppose they were going to show you what sort of hands they had, do you? (Laughter)

Mr. Haines said it was not suggested that it was an unlawful game, unless it was played for money, and he contended there was no evidence that money was played for, except the statement of the constables that they heard money put down on the table. He submitted that there was no knowledge on the part of the defendant or her husband that there was any playing for money. If the Bench thought differently, he should show them that every step had been taken to prevent it.

Mrs. Brett, the defendant, was sworn, and said there were four cards in the room stating that no gambling was permitted. On the evening in question, she and her husband and her daughter were all busy in the bar. Her daughter attended on the smoking room when anything was knocked for, and the door was usually kept open. Nothing occurred to lead her to suppose money was being played for. From the bar, in the ordinary way, they could not see what was going on at the further table. Had she known that playing for money was going on she would have stopped it.

In answer to Supt. Reeve, witness said the cards were hers – they were on the shelf in the smoking room.

Percy William Brett said the table was not in view of the bar. He did not allow gaming and had the cards printed to warn people. He allowed customers to play whist or cribbage, but not for money.

The Bench retired to consider the points raised, and on their return said they considered there was a doubt in the evidence, and they gave the defendant the benefit of it. The summons was dismissed.

 

Folkestone Herald 10 February 1900.

Folkestone Police Court.

On Saturday morning last a case of considerable interest to licensed holders was heard before the Borough Justices; Mr. Hoad, Col. Westropp, and Mr. Medhurst being on the Bench.

Mrs. Elizabeth Brett, the landlady of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, was summoned for permitting gaming on licensed premises. Chief Constable Reeve conducted the prosecution, and Mr. G.W. Haines, solicitor, appeared for the defence. The defendant pleaded Not Guilty to the charge.

Inspector Swift deposed: At a quarter past nine on the evening of the 27th ult., accompanied by Detective Burniston, I was near the Swan public house, Dover Road, and heard voices from inside the tap-room, the window of which abuts on the Folly Road. I listened and heard a voice say “I will try one”. Another voice said “Pass me”, another “I will try two”, and another “You get them”. Then the cards could be heard being played on the table with the knuckle. In some instances the name of the card was given; “Ten” and “Jack”. Then a voice said “Got them. Pay up”, after which I heard the chinking of money. Shortly after another voice said “Deal them out”, and there were similar voices making like remarks, indicating gaming. At the end of each hand I heard the chinking of money. After about five minutes we entered the room by the door on the Folly Road side of the house. The door was open which leads to the bar on the smoking room I am speaking of, where the men were. I then went into the smoking room and saw five men seated at a table close to the window where we had listened. They had each three cards in their hand, and two cards lying on the table in front of each. On seeing me they dropped their hands under the table. One man named Clark remarked “Ah, you did not see any money on the table”. I then called the attention of the defendant to it, and said “I shall report you for permitting gaming on your licensed premises”. She replied “I did not know they were gambling”. The door opened from the bar to the smoke-room when the door was opened.

Cross-examined by Mr. Haines, witness said that when standing at the head of the room he could see the defendant, her daughter, and Mr. Brett. The bar was in the form of a crescent. He did not see any cards. The windows were not open. He might have been outside ten minutes. Had the men called for a drink, he thought that he might have heard it. There were several other men present, but these players were very close to the window, a cottage one. The words used were “Pay up”, not “Play up”. When he got in there was no money on the table. He believed they called the game “nap” which the remarks indicated.

Mr. Haines: A sort of blind chess-man business. He believed that ten cards were missing from the pack.

By the Chief Constable: He was quite clear about “Pay up”, and he heard the chinking of money immediately afterwards. No-one was seated at the table except the men playing cards. He did not hear drinks ordered whilst listening at the window.

Detective Burniston corroborated the evidence of the last witness. In his cross-examination as to the men's reaction on the police entering, Mr. Haines suggested it was natural for the players to put their cards under the table when they did not want to show what hands they had.

Mr. G.W. Haines, for the defendant, said that he need hardly say that the section under which the proceedings were taken was that of suffering gaming. It was not suggested that the game of “nap” was an unlawful one, but it was unlawful if played for money. It was for the police to satisfy the Bench that the game being played was played for money, and he contended that the words used might have been “Play up”. The men might have been wanting to go on. It was simply trusting to their ears, and he suggested that the money might have been for drinks ordered before, or put down for when the waitress might come in. The Magistrates must be satisfied that the police could actually swear it. The licensed holder could not be everywhere, and there were three bars to serve. They could not fix him with the knowledge of it.

The Clerk to the Justices (Mr. H.B. Bradley) said that in this section the word “knowingly”, which occurred in most sections, was omitted.

Mr. Haines thought that Mr. Justice Day had said that the absence of the word did not prevent knowledge being necessary.

Mr. Bradley said of course not.

Mr. Haines said that it was for the defence to show that they had no knowledge. The cases were somewhat conflicting. It was hard on the licensed holder if he did not know that he should come within the section. He quoted a case in which the licensed person was engaged in another part of the house, and the justices dismissed the information. In this case he submitted that it was not within his connivance, and he had no knowledge that money was played for. He asked the Bench to dismiss the case, or, on the other hand, it would be a serious question for the licensed holder.

Mrs. Brett, the defendant, deposed: I caused cards to be printed with the object of preventing any gambling, and four were fixed round the smoke room, where the cards were being played. Their attention was drawn to it. On the evening in question my daughter, husband, and myself were busy in the bar. My daughter went to wait in the smoke room when anything was knocked for. The door of the smoke room was usually kept open. Nothing attracted my notice to lead me to believe that money was being played for. I cannot see the table from the bar when serving. I must come to the bottom of the bar to see what they really did want. There were many people in that evening, several being in the room. When the police came in, Mr. Brett called their attention to the cards. Had I known the gambling was going on I should have stopped it. It is not my wish that it should take place. I did not know they were playing.

Cross-examined by Chief Constable Reeve: The playing cards were for private use. They were not provided for her customers, although they were allowed to use them. The men seated at the table were drinking beer. She could not tell how long before. If the men knocked they could not hear, as business was brisk. They had only had one drink, and did not empty their glasses. Her daughter served them. They called for their beer and paid for it as they came in. They did not pay on the table. If the police heard money chinking, it might be for the other gentlemen's beer.

By Mr. Bradley: She fancied they had taken the cards from the shelf in the smoke room. They could not hear all that went on in the smoke room; it was a very long way to hear.

Re-examined by Mr. Haines: She did not take particular notice of these five men. She had not served them. They came in from the room.

Mr. Bradley thought that the witness had just said that they came and took it in the bar.

Witness said that she did not notice them when they first came in.

Mr. W. Brett, the defendant's husband, deposed that on the night in question he was busily engaged at the other end of the bar with his wife. He did not know that there was any gaming, and had never allowed it. He allowed them to play whist and cribbage, but not for money. They sat down and played a game quietly.

Cross-examined by Chief Constable Reeve: He did not see the five men enter the house. The men took the cards off the shelf. He had always thought that whist or cribbage was permitted, but not for money. Sometimes these men had played. He had been in the room when they were playing cards. He did not know that the men were there, and he had not served them with any drink in that room. He could not say whether his daughter served.

After retiring, the Chairman announce the decision of the Bench in these terms:- Mrs. Brett, the Magistrates have considered this matter. They think there is a doubt in the evidence, and therefore give you the benefit.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 17 February 1900.

Before Messrs. J. Hoad, W. Medhurst, and Vaughan, and Col. Westropp.

Elizabeth Brett, landlady of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, was charged with permitting gambling on licensed premises. Mr. Haines defended.

Inspector Lilley stated that at 9.45 p.m. on Saturday, January 27th, in company with Detective Burniston, he was near the Swan Inn, on the Folly Road side. Listening near the window, he heard a voice say “I'll go one”, another voice “I'll go two”, then “Pass me”, “You get 'em”, “Pay up”, etc. A chinking of money followed, and shortly afterwards another voice said “Deal them out”, and some cards were played. After about five minutes witness and the detective entered the room by the door on the Folly side of the house. The defendant was in the bar. The door opened which led from the bar into the room near which witness had been listening, and there he saw five men seated at a table close to the window. Each man had three cards in his hand, and two in front of him on the table. A man named Clark remarked “Ah! You did not see any money on the table”. Witness called the attention of the defendant to the circumstances and said “I shall have to report you for allowing gambling to take place on licensed premises”. She replied “I did not know they were gambling”.

Cross-examined by Mr. Haines: He did not see a card in the bar “No Gambling Allowed”, but he would not swear there was not such a card in the room. From the outside he could not see the men through the window. There were no drinks called for while he stood outside. He was certain the words he heard used were “Pay up”, and not “Play up”. There was no money on the table when he went in. He believed the game was Nap.

Detective Burniston corroborated.

Mr. Haines, addressing the Bench, said that the fact of playing cards in a public house was not unlawful; the illegality came in when cards were played for money. He suggested that in this case the police had had to rely entirely upon their ears, and listening on the outside of a window they could not properly distinguish between the words “Play up” and “Pay up”. Their ears had deceived them. He should produce evidence that four cards hung round the room notifying that gambling was prohibited, and that his client had done all that was possible for the proper conduct of the house. Unfortunately there were several conflicting decisions as to whether a tenant was responsible if he or she were unaware of what was taking place.

Mr. Bradley (the Magistrates' Clerk): The summons is for permitting, etc. The words “knowingly permitted” are not used.

Mr. Haines, continuing, said that even if gambling had taken place, which was not admitted, it would be hard on his client to be convicted, seeing that she had done everything that she could to prevent this kind of thing. In giving their decision he hoped the Magistrates would take this into consideration.

Elizabet Brett, the licensee, then stated that she had six of the cards produced printed – stating that anything in the way of gambling was not permitted – and four of them hung in the smoking room where the men were playing. She could see the men, but had no idea that money was being played for. Had she known, she would certainly have stopped it.

Cross-examined by Chief Constable Reeve: The cards are my property; my customers are allowed to use them.

Would it not have been more effectual to do away with the playing cards? – (No reply).

The men at the table, the defendant continued, were drinking beer; they had not been in the room ten minutes.

Dain William Brett, the husband of defendant, corroborated her evidence, but did not do very well under the cross-examination of the Chief Constable.

Mr. Haines said he would not address the Bench further, unless their decision were against him.

The Bench (except Mr. Vaughan, who did not adjudicate), retired. On returning to Court, the Chairman said there seemed to be a slight doubt in the evidence, and they gave the defendant the benefit of it. The case was, therefore, dismissed.

(By a printer's oversight the above case, though in type, was omitted from our last issue.)

 

Folkestone Chronicle 23 June 1900.

County Court.

Tuesday, June 19th: Before Sir W.L. Selfe.

Alfred Finn, farmer, Hawkinge v Perrin Brett, husband of the landlady of the Swan Inn, Dover Road: The plaintiff was represented by Mr. Haines, and the defendant by Mr. Stainer. This action was mixed, and terminated with the mystery of the vanishing note being unsolved.

The plaintiff said: I cashed a cheque on May 9th for 20 14s. 9d., receiving four 5 notes, and the balance in small change. I went to dinner at Mr. Sharp's eating house, and settled an account for 6s. with Mr. Kirby at the Royal George. I then went to the Swan in Dover Road. Defendant made a remark about a sum of money I had promised to contribute for a “free and easy” to celebrate the alterations at his house. I said I would pay it, and removed the four 5 notes from my pocket. While I was undoing them, Brett snatched them from my hand and put them in his pocket. There were several people in the bar. I waited some minutes, thinking he was joking, and then asked him to give me the notes back. Defendant then said he had not got them, but afterwards he gave me one back over the counter. A man named Bryan snatched another out of his hand and gave it back to me. Brett then laid three sovereigns on the counter, and said he would raffle me 10 or nothing. I refused, and said I wanted the other notes back. Brett said he had not got them, called me a liar, and said I could search him. Next morning I obtained the number of the notes, and went to the Magistrates' Clerk to take out a warrant. He advised me to consult a solicitor before taking steps.

Mr. Sharp and Mr. William Warne, landlord of the Black Bull Hotel gave evidence to the effect that plaintiff was perfectly sober on the day in question. Mr. Sharp added that earlier in the day a question arose about the purchase of a cart. Plaintiff then pulled out a bundle of notes from his pocket, but did not buy the cart.

John Bryan, a dealer, corroborated the evidence of Finn. He added that previously he had driven Mr. Finn up from the Fish Market, that Brett had been having a little too much to drink, and that when he got home his wife “jawed” him.

Perrin Brett said: on the 9th of May I was in the Fish Market with Mr. Spearpoint. My legs and back were “queer”, so I asked Bryan to give me a ride. When we got to the Swan we saw Finn's horse outside. Bryan went into the bar, and saw a man named Lee. Lee went out and down Dover Street, and returned with the plaintiff. Finn said “Don't think I have not got any money”, and waved four notes before me. I took them out of his hand, looked at them, and put them in my pocket for a joke. After keeping them there a minute or two, I handed them back to plaintiff. Plaintiff said “I will put 2 to your 2 for a free and easy in the big room”, and gave me back a note which he held in his hand. I then gave him three sovereigns from my pocket. Bryan then snatched the note out of my hand, and gave it to the plaintiff, who then asked me to give him back the other notes. I said I had not got them, and told him he could search me. He came behind the bar and did search me, and found nothing. Next day Finn came down and demanded the notes. I am three sovereigns out of pocket over the matter.

In cross-examination by Mr. Haines, witness said things a little to the detriment of Bryan. Then came the sharp query “How was it that you came to be riding with him on the day in question?” Witness replied that his legs were painful, and he was glad to ride home.

Mrs. Brett, wife of defendant, entered the box, and corroborated her husband's evidence in detail.

His Honour, who looked rather puzzled, said he did not pretend to know what had become of the notes, and gave judgement for the defendant with costs.

 

Folkestone Express 23 June 1900.

County Court.

Tuesday, June 19th: Before Sir William L. Selfe.

Alfred Finn, Hawkinge v Perrin Brett: Claim of 7 for money alleged to have been withheld by defendant and 3 damages. Mr. Haines appeared for plaintiff and Mr. Stainer for defendant.

The plaintiff said on May 9th he cashed a cheque at the London and Counties Bank for 20 14s. 9d., receiving four 5 notes and the balance in small change. After dining at Sharpe's eating house and settling a little account for 6s. at the Royal George, he went up to the Swan in Dover Road. Defendant made some remark about his not having paid 2 which he had promised to contribute towards a free and easy to celebrate some addition to defendant's premises. He said he would pay it, and took out the four 5 notes from his inside pocket, and while he was undoing them defendant snatched the lot out of his hand and put them in his pocket. There were several people in the bar when defendant took these notes. He waited for some minutes, thinking he was joking, and then asked him to give them to him back. Defendant said he had not got them. He then gave him one back over the counter. A man named Bryan snatched another out of defendant's hand and gave it to him. Brett laid three sovereigns down on the counter and then said he would raffle him for 10 or nothing. He refused, saying he wanted his money back. He asked him for the other notes, and defendant said he had not got them, called him a liar, and told him he could search him. Next morning he went to the police station, and also obtained the numbers of the notes. When he went to get a warrant, the Magistrates' Clerk advised him to consult a solicitor before taking any steps. He had advertised for the notes, but up to the present without any result.

Mr. Sharpe gave evidence to the effect that plaintiff dined at his eating house in Harbour Street on the day in question, and afterwards, in company with Lee and himself, went across to the Alexandra Hotel and had a small Bass each. A conversation arose regarding a cart which witness had for sale and plaintiff said if he bought it he would pay for it. He then pulled out a bundle of notes to show that he could pay for it. Plaintiff was perfectly sober.

William Warne, the landlord of the Black Bull Hotel, said that plaintiff came to him on the day in question and complained that he had lost some money. He was perfectly sober.

John Bryan said he was in the Swan on the 9th May. Plaintiff came in and called for a drink and said “Don't think I haven't got any money to pay for it”, and pulled the notes out of his pocket. Brett snatched them away and put them in his pocket and kept them there about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour. When they were talking, Finn said he would do 2 to defendant's 2 for a free and easy in the big room. Brett gave him one 5 note back and 3 in gold. Finn said “I want two more 5 notes. You took four out of my hand”. Brett said “I never – I only took two”. Brett had one note in his hand, and witness took this out of his hand and gave it to plaintiff with the remark “Here's one of them”. Brett had been having a little too much to drink. He drove him up from the Fishmarket, and when he got to the Swan his wife jawed him.

The defendant said on the 9th May he was in the Fishmarket with Mr. Spearpoint. His legs were queer, and his back also, and he asked Bryan to give him a ride. They saw Finn's horse outside the Swan. Bryan went into the bar and saw Lee, who went out, and afterwards returned with plaintiff. Plaintiff said “Don't think I haven't got any money”, and waved four notes before him. He took thm out of his hand, and after looking at them, put them in his pocket for a joke. After keeping them there a minute or two he handed them back to plaintiff. Plaintiff said he would do 2 to his 2 for a free and easy in the big room, and gave him back a note, which he held in his hand, and at the same time gave plaintiff three sovereigns. Bryan then snatched the note out of his hand and gave it to plaintiff. Plaintiff asked witness to give him back the other notes, but he said he had not got them, and told him to search him. He came round and searched him and found nothing on him. Next day Finn came down again and demanded the notes from him. He was three sovereigns out of pocket over the matter.

By His Honour: When Finn took the notes out of his pocket they were in a bundle. He kept them in his pocket for about three minutes and then handed them back without untying them.

Mrs. Brett, the defendant's wife, said on the afternoon in question Bryan and Lee came in first and said “Has Mr. Finn been here?” She said “I have not seen him”. Lee said “I know where he is. I'll go and fetch him”. He drove away in Bryan's cart, and Finn and Lee came back together. Finn said “I have got some money”, and took out of his pocket some notes, which he put in Mr. Brett's face. Mr. Brett snatched them out of his hand and put them in his pocket. Finn asked for his notes back, and Mr. Brett passed them back to him. Plaintiff then said “I'll be as good as my word. I'll put 2 to your 2 for a free and easy in the big room”. Mr. Brett said “Alright”. Finn took a 5 note from his bundle of notes and Mr. Brett took out his purse and put three sovereigns on the counter. Finn took them and put them into his pocket. Mr. Brett was holding the note which Mr. Finn had given him, when Bryan snatched it away and gave it back to plaintiff. She afterwards saw Lee put his hand in Finn's pocket and show him some papers. Finn said Mr. Brett had got two of his notes. Mr. Brett said “I have not. In your own interest come round and search me”. Finn said “I'd rather not”. He, however, came round and searched him, and then said “I am satisfied you have not got them”.

His Honour said he did not pretend to know what had become of the notes, but there would be judgement for the defendant with costs.

 

Folkestone Herald 23 June 1900.

County Court.

Tuesday, June 19th: Before Sir W.L. Selfe.

The plaintiff in this case was Alfred Finn, farmer, Hawkinge; the defendant was Perrin Brett, of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, Folkestone, husband of the landlady of that house. The action was brought to recover the sum of 7, under the peculiar circumstances explained in the evidence. Mr. Haines appeared for the plaintiff; Mr. Stainer for the defendant.

Plaintiff, examined by Mr. Haines, deposed: My father lives at Hawkinge. I know the defendant. At one time I promised to pay or give 2 towards the opening ceremony of his house, as we supply him with milk. On the 9th May I cashed a cheque for 20 14s. 9d. at the Capital and Counties Bank, and got four 5 Bank of England notes, half a sovereign, two 2s. pieces, and ninepence. That was about 2.20p.m. After that I went down to Mr. Sharpes, in Harbour Street, and had my dinner and paid for it. I then went round to Mr. Kirby, at the Royal George. I owed him 6s. on a little deal we had, and I paid him and had a glass of ale. Then I went to the Swan, Dover Road, and got there about 3.15. Defendant made a remark about my not having paid this 2. He said I was a pretty fellow. I said “I will pay it”, and I took out the four 5 notes from my side pocket. While I was doing so, the defendant snatched the lot out of my hand and put it in his pocket. There were several persons in the bar at the time, but I don't know who they were. When he took the notes I waited some few minutes because I thought he was joking, and I then asked him to give them back. He said “I have not got them”. I said “You took them”. He then gave me one note back over the counter; he took it out of his pocket. He said “Here you are; here is one”. A man named Mr. Bryan, who was standing by, snatched another note out of defendant's hand and gave it to me. I then had two of the notes. As regards the next note, defendant gave me three sovereigns and said “I will raffle you 10 or nothing”. I said “No”. I asked him to return the other two notes, and I would give him the 3 back. He said “I have not got them”, and called me a ---- liar. He said “You can search me if you like”. The other men in the bar said they wanted to go, and asked me to search them. I said “No; I know that Mr. Brett took them out of my hand”. I paid nothing else in the town that dat, except this 6s. In fact, I wanted to change one of the notes, and asked Mr. Sharpe to change it, but he could not. After I left the Swan I went to see my brother, and on my way home I called at the Black Bull and had a glass of ale. I gave information to the police. I went to the bank with the Inspector, and obtained the numbers of the notes. The police issued an advertisement. As a fact I went to get a warrant issued, but the Magistrates' Clerk thought it was a matter in which I should be advised by a solicitor.

Cross-examined by Mr. Stainer: A man named Ben Lee was in the bar. The cheque I cashed was for goods, and I paid a counter account.

Have you not a good many judgements against you in this Court? – I might have.

Do you think it is proper to spend 2 on a free and easy when you owe several judgements in the Court? – Never mind that; it was my own money.

Did Bryan go into the bar with you? – No, sir; he was there. Lee came in after him.

Where was your horse when you were there? – Outside. I gave a man an allowance to look after it, a man named Richards, who I felt was capable of taking charge of it.

You have advertised the numbers of these notes, have you? – I don't know whether the Super has. I have been to him twice. He said it was not likely that he could hear anything about them yet.

John H. Sharpe, examined, deposed: I keep an eating house in Harbour Street. As a rule the plaintiff, when in Folkestone, comes for his dinner. He came on this day on horseback, and asked me to get a steak ready in ten minutes. When he came back, after having his dinner, he asked me if I could change a 5 note. He paid the girl 2s., and she gave him change. He asked me if I would go across to the Alexandra and have a drink. I and Lee and Finn went across and had a drink; we had a small Bass each, and Lee had a gin. They wre talking about horses and carts. I said “I have a good sort of cart which I could sell you”. He said “If I buy I will pay for it”. He put his hand in his pocket and pulled out some notes. We stayed in the bar, drinking. Finn said “I shall not be a minute”, and went out. He was perfectly sober. You don't often see a drunken man ride a horse.

Wm. Warne deposed: I keep the Black Bull. On the 9th May the plaintiff came to my house and made a complaint to me that he had lost money. He was perfectly sober when he came and asked me for refreshment.

John Bryan, called on subpoena, deposed: I was in the Swan on the 9th May and saw Finn come in. I saw him take some notes out of his pocket. They were folded up, and I could not say what notes they were. I was having a conversation with defendant. Plaintiff called for a small bottle of ale, put his hand in his pocket, and said “Don't you think I have the money to pay for it?” Mr. Brett snatched them out of his hand and put them in his pocket and kept them there for ten minutes or a quarter of an hour. They went on talking, and Finn said “I will put 2 to your 2”, and Brett then gave him one 5 note back and 3 in gold, and then Finn said “I want two more 5 notes. You took four 5 notes out of my hand”. Brett had a 5 note in his hand, and I took it and said “Here is one of them, Mr. Finn”. Lee, myself, and ever so many more were in the bar. I drove the defendant from the fishmarket up home, because he asked me to give him a ride. He appeared to have had a little too much to drink, and I thought I would drive him home. (Defendant: Speak the truth, and don't tell lies.) When he came home his wife jawed. Mrs. Brett said “My husband has not got them (meaning the notes); some of the people in the bar have got them”. We all asked to be searched, and Mr. Finn refused to do it.

This was the case for the plaintiff.

Defendant, on being sworn, deposed: On the 9th of May I was in the fishmarket with Mr. Spearpoint. Mr. Bryan was down there with his horse and trap. As I was going up the road he said “Jump up here”. I did so, and rode up with him as far as the Swan. He got out and saw Finn's horse with a man. Lee was in the bar, and Bryan turned round to him and said “Go down and fetch Finn; he is down below” When they came back, all three came into the bar. Finn said “How are you, old Brett? I have got plenty of money”. I said “Let's have a look”. I don't know what he took out of his pocket, whether it was one, two, three, or a dozen, but I took them and put them in my pocket. I then took them out of my pocket and gave them back. He then undid his notes and said “I'll be 2 to your 2 and give a free and easy in the big room”. He took one of the notes out and I put down three sovereigns. Bryan snatched the note out of my hands, and Finn snatched up the three sovereigns. I asked Finn to come round and search me, and I stood quite still. He did search me, and could find nothing else on me. There were plenty in the bar, and my wife was close to me and saw all that happened. The next day Finn came down and demanded the notes of me. I said “I have not got them”. He said “I will make it hot for you; I will ruin you”. The next day, Lee, Bryan, and Finn came in together, and I refused to serve them. I did not have those notes, and I am three sovereigns out of pocket.

Mrs. Brett gave corroborative evidence, adding that she saw Lee put his hand in Finn's pocket, but could not say whether he took anything out or put anything in.

His Honour gave judgement for the defendant, with costs.

 

Folkestone Herald 7 March 1903.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

The Adjourned Licensing Sessions for the Borough of Folkestone were held in the Town hall on Wednesday. In view of the opposition by the police to a number of the existing licences extraordinary interest was evinced in the meeting, and when the proceedings commenced at eleven o'clock in the morning there was a very large attendance, the “trade” being numerously represented. Representatives of the Folkestone Temperance Council and religious bodies in the town were also present, prominent amongst them being Mr. J. Lynn, Mrs. Stuart, and the Rev. J.C. Carlile. Prior to the commencement of business the Licensing Justices held a private meeting amongst themselves. When the doors were thrown open to the public there was a tremendous rush for seats. The Justices present were the following:- Mr. W. Wightwick, Mr. E.T. Ward, Mr. W.G. Herbert, Lieut. Col. Hamilton, Mr. J. Pledge, Lieut. Col. Westropp, and Mr. C.J. Pursey.

Before proceeding with the business, the Chairman announced that at the Annual Licensing Meeting the Justices adjourned the renewal of 23 full licences and five on beer licences, and directed the Chief Constable to give notice of objection to the owners of the licences of the following nine houses:- Providence (Arthur F. East); Marquis Of Lorne (William R. Heritage); Granville (Charles Partridge); Victoria (Alfred Skinner); Tramway (Frederick Skinner); Hope (Stephen J. Smith); Star (Ernest Tearall); Bricklayers Arms (Joseph A. Whiting); and Blue Anchor (Walter Whiting). Since the former sessions the Justices had inspected all the houses objected to, and considered the course which they ought to pursue with respect to the same, with the result that they had directed the Chief Constable to withdraw the notices of objection served by him with respect of the Victoria, Hope, and Blue Anchor, and to persist in the opposition to the following:- Providence, Marquis Of Lorne, Granville, Tramway, Star, and Bricklayers Arms. As regarded the remaining 15 full licences and five beer licences they would renew the same this year, and deal with them next year according to the circumstances.

In renewing the licence to the owner of the Swan Inn, they warned Mrs. Brett not to permit her husband to manage the house when in a state of intoxication, as they were informed was frequently the case.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 13 February 1904.

Gossip.

The Licensing Sessions were held on Wednesday. Only one licence was refused – to the Swan Inn, Dover Road. No new licences were granted. Mr. Wightwick, the Chairman of the Sessions, holds very strong views upon the subject. He regards the possession of a licence as a piece of property, which it is not just to take away without proof of misconduct. The Temperance advocates will not be able to make much headway in reducing the number of public houses in Folkestone under these circumstances.

 

Folkestone Express 13 February 1904.

Annual Licensing Meeting.

Wednesday, February 10th: Before W. Wightwick Esq., Lieut. Col. Hamilton, Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Lieut. Colonel Westropp, and W.G. Herbert, E.T. Ward, and C.J. Pursey Esqs.

The following was the report of Supt. Reeve: Chief Constable's Office, Folkestone, 10th February, 1904. To the Chairman and Members of the Licensing Committee of the Borough of Folkestone. Gentlemen, I have the honour to report for your information that there are at present within your jurisdiction 139 premises licensed for the sale of intoxicating liquors, namely: Full licences 87; Beer on 11; Beer off 6; Beer and Spirits (dealers) 16; Grocers 12; Confectioners 3; Chemists 4; Total 139 – an average of one licence to every 220 persons, or one “on” licence to every 313. This is a decrease of one full licence as compared with last year's return, the licence of the Marquis Of Lorne having been refused at the adjourned meeting in March. Twenty of the licences have been transferred during the year, namely, 14 full licences, two beer on, two beer off, and two grocers. One beer off licence was transferred twice during the year. One licence holder has been convicted since the last annual meeting of committing drunkenness on his licensed premises. He has since transferred his licence and left the house. The alterations which the Justices at the adjourned meeting last year directed to be made to the Packet Boat, Castle, Tramway, Bricklayers' Arms, Granville, and Star Inns have all been carried out in a satisfactory manner, and none of the licensed houses are now used as common lodging houses. Ten occasional licences, and extensions of hours on 21 occasions, have been granted to licence holders during the year. There are 14 places licensed for music and dancing, and two for public billiard playing. Eleven clubs where intoxicating liquors are sold are registered in accordance with the Licensing Act of 1902. For the year ending 31st December last year, 154 persons (131 males and 23 females) were proceeded against for drunkenness. 131 were convicted and 23 discharged. This is an increase of 65 persons proceeded against, and 51 convicted, as compared with 1902. The increase is chiefly due to the additional powers given to the police under the Licensing Act, 1902. Up to the present time no person within the Borough has been convicted the necessary number of times within the 12 months to be placed on the “black list” as provided by Section 6 of the Act of 1902. With very few exceptions the whole of the licensed houses have been conducted in a satisfactory manner. The only objection I have to make to the renewal of any of the present licences is that of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, and I would ask that the renewal of this licence be deferred until the adjourned meeting. I have the honour to be, gentlemen, your obedient servant, H. Reeve (Chief Constable).

The Chairman: I think, gentlemen, you will agree that the report of the Superintendent is a satisfactory one – in fact, I may say very satisfactory – for the whole year. With your permission I well read the report we now make to you. At the adjournment of the last general licensing meeting we stated that in our opinion the number of licences for the sale of intoxicating liquor then existing in the borough of Folkestone, especially in the part of the immediate neighbourhood of the Harbour, was out of all proportion to the population, and that we proposed between then and the general annual licensing meeting of this year to obtain information on various matters, to enable us to determine what reduction would be made in the number of licences. We invited the owners of licensed houses in the meantime to meet and agree among themselves for the voluntary surrender at this general meeting of a substantial number of licences in the borough, and to submit the result of their united action to the Licensing Justices for acceptance. Failing any satisfactory proposal for reduction by the owners, the Licensing Justices last year intimated that in the exercise of their discretionary powers they would at this year's meeting decide in a fair and equitable spirit what reduction should be made. But at the opening of Parliament last week it was announced in the King's speech that the Government intended to introduce in the House of Commons during the present session a Bill to amend the Licensing Laws. In view of this legislation we are of opinion we ought not, pending the passage of this Bill through Parliament, exercise the discretionary powers vested in us, and take measures for effecting a further reduction in the number of licences within the borough on the ground that certain licensed premises are not required for the public accommodation. We have recently inspected certain houses known as the Imperial Brewery Tap, the Hope, East Cliff Tavern, Victoria, Lifeboat, Duke Of Edinburgh, Railway Tavern, and Channel Inn.

With regard to the Swan Inn, the police will serve notice upon the owner.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 12 March 1904.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, March 9th: Before Mr. W. Wightwick, Lieut. Colonels Westropp and Hamilton, Messrs. E.T. Ward, W.G. Herbert, and C.J. Pursey.

Mr. Minter applied for a renewal of the licence of the Swan Inn, Dover Road. The only objection on the part of the police had been to the tenant, and now a new tenant – Mr. Alfred Robert Clarke – was about to occupy the premises.

The Chief Constable had no objection to urge against the incoming tenant.

The Bench allowed the renewal of the licence on condition that the transfer to Mr. Clarke should be effected.

 

Folkestone Express 12 March 1904.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, March 9th: Before W. Wightwick Esq., Lieut. Cols. Fynmore and Westropp, W.G. Herbert, E.T. Ward, and C.J. Pursey Esqs.

The Swan Inn.

Mr. W.G. Haines, on behalf of the tenant (Mrs. Brett), applied for the renewal of the licence, adjourned at the last licensing meeting. The police had served notice of objection to the renewal, on grounds simply applicable to the tenant and not to the house. It was felt that a change should be made, and he was pleased to say that he had a new tenant in the person of Mr. Alfred Robert Clark, on whose behalf he would also apply for a temporary authority to sell until the actual expiration of the licence held by Mrs. Brett.

The Superintendent stated that Clark had held a licence before, and he bore a high character for the manner in which he conducted his house. Under the circumstances he would withdraw his objection.

The Chairman: We grant this licence.

 

Folkestone Herald 12 March 1904.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

Swan Inn.

Wednesday, March 9th: Before Messrs. W. Wightwick, E.T. Ward, C.J. Pursey, W.G. Herbert, and Lieut. Colonels Fynmore and Westropp.

Mr. G.W. Haines applied, on behalf of the brewers, for the renewal of the licence for the Swan Inn. Notice had been served by the police, objecting to the renewal on grounds simply applicable to the tenant and not the house. The brewers had thought that a change should be made, and with that view, before asking for the renewal, he would produce a new tenant, to whom it was desired permission to draw until transfer day should be given.

The licence was then temporarily transferred from Mrs. Brett to Mr. Alfred Robert Clarke.

 

Folkestone Chronicle 16 April 1904.

Wednesday, April 13th: Before Mr. W.G. Herbert, Lieut. Cols. Westropp and Fynmore, Mr. G.I. Swoffer, and Mr. J. Stainer.

The Bench granted transfer of the licence of the following premises: The Swan Inn, from Elizabeth Brett to Alfred Robert Clarke.

 

Folkestone Express 16 April 1904.

Wednesday, April 13th: Before W.G. Herbert Esq., Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Lieut. Col. Westropp, G.I. Swoffer and J. Stainer Esqs.

Mr. G.W. Haines applied for the transfer of the Swan Inn from Elizabeth Brett to Alfred Robert Clark. Granted.

 

Folkestone Herald 16 April 1904.

Wednesday, April 13th: Before Ald. W.G. Herbert, Lieut. Colonel Fynmore, Mr. J. Stainer, Mr. G.I. Swoffer, and Lieut. Colonel Westropp.

Licence was transferred as follows:- The Swan, from Elizabeth Brett to Alfred Robert Clark.

 

Folkestone Daily News 27 April 1907.

Saturday, April 27th: Before Messrs. Herbert, Stainer, Leggett, Hawksley, Ames, and Boyd.

Alfred Robert Clark, landlord of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, was summoned for allowing drunkenness on his premises. Mr. Mercer appeared for the defence.

P.C. Allen deposed that on Wednesday, the 17th of April, he was on duty in Dover Road. About 10.25 he was near the Swan Inn. He was on the opposite side of the road, and had been there about three minutes when he saw a man named Suckling come out of the public bar of the Swan Inn. He was very drunk, and was holding himself up by both sides of the doorway. After staggering about for a few minutes, he fell down into the road. He got up again, commenced to stagger, and then fell down. He got up again, went a few yards, and then fell down again. He was going in the direction of the Skew Arches. Seeing he was unable to take care of himself, he (witness) took him into custody. Suckling could not have gone into the public house without witness seeing him.

P.C. Eason said he was on duty in Dover Road about 10.25 on the evening in question. He saw a man named Suckling come out of the Swan Inn, and after staggering about for a few second he fell into the horse road. He got up, went a little further, and again fell down. He got as far as the Skew Bridge, and then propped himself up against the wall. Witness passed the Swan Inn a few minutes earlier, but saw nothing of Suckling, who could not have entered the house without witness seeing him.

Florence Hambrook said she was employed by Mr. Morrison of Dover Road. She remembered the evening of the 17th April, and saw a man named Suckling, about 10.20, come out of the Swan Inn door. He was very drunk, and she saw him fall down into the road. He got up, and again fell down on the pavement in front of Mr. Morrison's shop. The next she saw of him was that he was in charge of two constables.

Horatio Albert Suckling, of 74, Bridge Street, said: I am a fish hawker. On Wednesday, April 17th, I was down at the fish market, and after leaving the market I went to the Swan. That was about 8.30. Previously to going to the Swan I had not been in any public house before that day. On entering the Swan I went to the public bar, and was served by defendant, Mr. Clark. There were other people present, but I do not know their names.

The Chief Constable: Can you tell us how long you stayed in the house?

Witness: Yes. I stayed in there until I came out. (Laughter)

The Chief Constable: When did you come out?

Witness: About 10.30.

When you went to the Swan, had you a cut over your eye? – No.

When did you discover it? – The next morning.

Where were you? – In here.

Mr. Mercer: Suckling, are you given to drink? – No, sir.

Have you been convicted here before or anywhere else for drunkenness? – No, sir.

Which way did you come from the Market? – I came straight up Dover Street.

You had 1s. 6d. when you went to the Swan? – Yes, sir.

How much had you when you counted your money next morning? – Elevenpence.

What do you remember after half past eight? – I can't remember anything.

Suppose I call witnesses to prove that you went into the house at 8.30 and were turned out, went back again, and were again turned out, would that be true? – No.

You don't remember anything, and yet you remember that you remained on the premises? – I might have gone out the back, but not off the premises.

As a matter of fact you don't remember anything, eh? – No.

Inspector Swift deposed that he went to defendant and told him he would in all probability be prosecuted for permitting drunkenness on his premises, and defendant replied “You mean Suckling”.

Mr. Mercer then called the defendant Clark, who said: I have been 12 years a licensed victualler in the town. I have 1,400 invested in this house. I know Suckling. On the 17th he came in the room about 8 o'clock and sold some fish. When I next saw him it was between ten minutes and a quarter past 10. When he came in I saw he had had enough. At that time Mr. Pope and Mr. Bull were in the bar. I told Suckling to clear off home. Mr. Pope said to me “He has drunk my beer”. I looked and found that he had. Suckling was then gone. I replaced Pope's beer. I was about the bar from 6 p.m. until closing time, only being absent about ten minutes for supper.

Cheif Constable Reeve: Now, Mr. Clark, the very first statement you made to Mr. Mercer was that you have never been summoned or cautioned. Is that true?

Witness: Yes.

Come, let me refresh your memory. Have I not cautioned you? – Yes, but nothing serious.

I'm sorry for you if you do not think it serious. Did I not meet you myself and caution you as to the conduct of the house? – Yes.

Do you seriously mean to say that the man Suckling was not in your house between 8.30 and 10? – I do.

And that he came in drunk soon after ten? – Yes, that is so.

And did you refuse to serve him? – I did.

When Suckling came in, where was the barman? – In the club room.

How long did Mr. Pope remain after Suckling left? – I don't know.

When Suckling left the house, did you follow, or anyone else, to see what became of him? – No, I did not.

Is not Suckling a regular customer, spending hours in the house daily? – No, only a casual customer. He would not stay longer than any other casual customer.

Mr. Boyd: You say you have been a licensed holder about twelve years? – Yes, sir.

Mr. Boyd: Yet you know this man has been addicted to drink, and serve him. Extraordinary!

Mr. Mercer, before calling further evidence, asked the Bench to find that the balance of evidence must preponderate in favour of the defendant, whose evidence and that of his witnesses must weigh against that of the man Suckling, who in evidence remembered nothing.

John Hatfield, barmanat the Swan, said on Wednesday, April 17th, Suckling came into the bar about 8.15; the man was then sober, and fater selling his pennyworth of fish had a pint of beer and went out after about twenty minutes. About 10.10 witness again heard Suckling enter the bar, and Mr. Clarke refused to serve him and told witness to put the man out. By the time he got there Suckling had gone out.

The Chief Constable: Is it possible that Suckling could have gone into the public bar from the private bar without your seeing him? – It was not possible.

Did you see Suckling take up the pint of beer? – No, I did not.

Then you cannot tell me whether he was served or not? – Yes, I know he was not served.

That's funny. You did not see him drink the beer, but know he was not served.

Thomas Pope, painter, of Princess Street, said while at the Swan on the night of the 17th, Suckling, who was intoxicated, came in. Suckling had asked fo a pint of beer. Mr. Clark replied “You have had quite enough” and refused to serve him.

James Boxer, of 32, Gladstone Road, a ginger beer manufacturer, said on the 17th inst., shortly after 10 o'clock, he visited the saloon bar of the Swan. Suckling entered the public bar a few minutes later. Suckling said “Hello, Mr. Boxer. Are you going to treat me?” Clark said “No, Mr. Boxer. He has had too much already.

After cross-examination the Bench retired, and on returning the Chairman said: We have come to the decision that there is not sufficient evidence of permitting on which we can convict you, but at the same time we have come to the conclusion that you did not use sufficient caution, or eject the man at the proper time.

 

Folkestone Express 4 May 1907.

Saturday, April 27th: Before W.G. Herbert, J. Stainer, R.J. Linton, T. Ames, G. Hawkesley, and G. Boyd Esqs.

Alfred Robert Clark, the licensee of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, was summoned for permitting drunkenness. Mr. R.M. Mercer, solicitor, appeared on behalf of the defendant, who pleaded Not Guilty.

P.C. Allen said on Wednesday evening, April 17th, he was on duty in Dover Road. About 10.25 he arrived opposite the Swan Inn, which was kept by the defendant. Witness was on the opposite side of the road to the Inn. He had been there about three minutes, when he saw a man named Suckling coming out of the public bar, which was at the corner of the public house and faced the Skew Bridge. He was very drunk, and was holding himself up by the sides of the doorway. He went a few yards, staggered about, and fell down in the road. He fell down again twice after that, and then went towards the Skew Bridge. He went through the arch, staggered across the road, and then hung on to the railings. Witness took him into custody, and with the assistance of P.C. Eason brought him to the police station. Suckling could not have entered the inn during the time witness was there without him seeing him. He did not see the landlord or any of jis servants put Suckling out.

P.C. Eason said on the evening of the 17th of that month he was on duty in Dover Road. About 10.25 he was near the Skew Arch, when he saw a man by the name of Suckling come out of the bar of the Swan Inn. He staggered about and then fell into the road. He got up and went a few yards further, and then fell again. After falling a third time Suckling walked up the road to the Skew Bridge, and the propped himself up against the arch. He was subsequently arrested by P.C. Allen and brought to the police station. He was very drunk and practically helpless. Witness had passed the Swan Inn about ten or twelve minutes past ten, but at that time he saw nothing of Suckling. During the five minutes witness had been standing at the Skew Bridge Suckling could not have entered the bar without him seeing him.

In cross-examination Eason said he was a good judge of the time, but on being put to the test he turned out to be incorrect, and his guesses at the correct time caused much laughter.

Florence Hambrook said she was employed by Mr. Morrison, who kept a fish shop in Dover Road. The shop was just above the Swan Inn, Folly Road running down between the shop and the Swan. On Wednesday, 17th April, about twenty minutes past ten in the evening, she saw a man named Suckling come out from the public bar of the Swan Inn. He was very drunk. Witness saw him fall down in the road, about a yard from the inn. She saw him fall down again, and the next time she saw Suckling was in charge of two constables.

Horation Albert Suckling said he lived at 74, Bridge Street, and was a fish hawker. He remembered Wednesday, the 17th April. He was not working at all that day. He was down in the fish market. About eight o'clock in the evening he left the fish market, and went into the Swan about 8.30. Previous to going into the Swan he had not been to any other public house that day. He was perfectly sober. He had a pint of beer. He remained there until a little after ten. He did not remember leaving the house. He could not remember how many drinks he had. He did not remember what happened after he left the Swan. He remembered being arrested, but he did not remember falling down. When he went into the Swan he did not have a cut over his eye. He was not sober when he left the Swan. He had been in a public house in the morning.

Cross-examined, witness said he could not remember anything after 8.30.

Inspector Swift said on April 18th he went to the Swan Inn, where he saw defendant. He told him about Suckling, who had made a statement that morning to the police that he went into those premises at 8.30 the previous evening and remained there until the time he was arrested, at twenty five minutes past ten. Defendant replied that Suckling came in twice, but he did not attend to him himself until ten minutes past ten. He (defendant) then said that Suckling had already had enough and had better have some ginger beer. Suckling then took up a pint of beer belonging to Mr. Pope and drank it off. Witness told defendant that information would be laid against him.

Before calling witnesses for the defence, Mr. Mercer drew the Magistrates' attention to Section 4 of the Licensing Act of 1902, and Section 13 under which that summons had been issued.

The defendant then went into the witness box. He said he had been a licensed victualler in that town for twelve and a half years – eight years at the Eagle, eighteen months at the Eagle in High Street, and three years at the Swan. During that time there had never been a complaint or a summons against him. He had invested in the Swan 1,400, which was practically all his money. Witness knew Suckling and knew his proclivities. He remembered Suckling coming in on the 17th April. He came in a little before eight o'clock and remained there about half an hour, during which time he sold some fish. Witness believed he was supplied with some drink. He did not serve him. Witness next saw Suckling a little before ten. He was drunk when he came in, and wanted a pint of beer. A Mr. Pope was in teh public bar, and a Mr. Boxer in the saloon bar. Witness told him he had had enough to drink. Suckling then asked Mr. Boxer to treat him. Witness told Suckling he was not to have anything. Then Mr. Pope said Suckling had drank his beer, and, looking round, witness saw the glass was empty. Witness told Suckling to clear out. He had a barman there ready to put him out, but before he could get round Suckling was gone.

Cross-examined, witness admitted that the Chief Constable had cautioned him about the conduct of his house, but he did not think it was serious.

Mr. Mercer said he ventured to say, if the facts should prove to their satisfaction, they would say he was right, after having read that Section of the Act, and he (defendant) rebutted the prima facie presumption of permitting drunkenness in doing his best to get Suckling out directly he recognised he was drunk. He ventured to say the balance of the evidence must preponderate in favour of his case.

John Hatfield, barman at the Swan Inn, said Suckling came into the bar about ten minutes past eight. He was perfectly sober, and witness served him with some beer. There was no truth in the statement that he was there from eight to ten.

Thomas Pope said he lived in Princess Street, and was a house painter. He called in at the Swan on the 17th April, about five or ten minutes past ten. There was no-one in the bar then. While he was there he saw Suckling come in. He was intoxicated. In further evidence Pope generally corroborated defendant's statement. Suckling was on the premises about three or four minutes.

James Boxer, of Gladstone Road, ginger beer manufacturer, said shortly after ten o'clock on the evening of the 17th April he went into the saloon bar of the Swan Inn. Suckling entered the public bar two or three minutes later. He saw Suckling take Mr. Pope's beer after being refused by defendant. He could not suggest anything that the landlord did not do to get him out.

The Magistrates retired, and upon their return the Chairman said that they had come to the decision that there was not sufficient evidence on which they could convict defendant for permitting drunkenness, but they did not consider defendant ejected Suckling from the bar as quickly as he should have done.

Note: No mention of Clark at the Eagle, High Street in More Bastions.

 

Folkestone Herald 4 May 1907.

Saturday, April 27th: Before Mr. W.G. Herbert, Councillor G. Boyd, Messrs. T. Ames, R.J. Linton, J. Stainer and G. Hawksley.

Alfred Robert Clark, of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, was summoned for permitting drunkenness on his premises on the 17th inst. Mr. R.M. Mercer appeared on behalf of defendant, who pleaded Not Guilty.

P.C. Allen deposed that on the 17th April, at about half past ten, he saw a man named Suckling coming out of the Swan Inn very drunk. He left the door at the corner which faced the Skew Arches. Suckling was holding himself up by both sides of the door. He came out a few yards, staggered about, and fell down.

Mr. Mercer, interposing, said that he did not deny that Suckling was drunk.

Continuing, P.C. Allen said that he took Suckling into custody, and with the assistance of P.C. Eason brought him to the police station. Witness said that accused did not enter the public house during the time (about three minutes) he was outside. No-one was behind Suckling when he left the house, and no-one ordered him out.

P.C. Eason stated that he saw Suckling leave the Swan Inn. He was very drunk indeed, being in a practically helpless condition. Witness had passed the Swan Inn previously, at about 10.10 or 10.12 p.m., and he did not see anything of the man then. He looked down towards the Swan Inn, but did not see Suckling enter the house.

Florence Hambrook, in the employ of Mr. Morrison, Dover Road, said she saw Suckling come from the door of the Swan Inn in a very drunken condition.

Horation Albert Suckling deposed that he lived at 74, Bridge Street, and was a fish hawker. On the 17th inst. he was not working, but went down to the fish market and stood about there. He went to the Swan Inn at about 8.30 p.m. He had not been in any public house before that evening, and he was perfectly sober. He had a pint of beer on entering, and Mr. Clark served him. He went into the public bar, where there were some other people whom he knew by sight. He remained there till he came out after ten o'clock. He did not remember leaving the house, and did not remember how many drinks he had. He knew, however, that he had more than one pint. He was not sure if Mr. Clark was in the bar the whole time. He knew that he had no cut on his face when he went to the Swan, but found out that he had a cut in the morning, when he was in the police station.

Mr. Mercer, in cross-examining Suckling, asked him if he remembered anything after 8.30 p.m. – No.

Although you remember nothing after 8.30, yet you remember that you were in the house the whole of the time? – Yes.

Mr. Mercer: It is inconceivable that you remember being in the house the whole of the time if you remember noting after 8.30.

Inspector Swift deposed that on the 18th April he went to the Swan Inn, Dover Road. He saw Mr. Clark, and said to him “I have come about the affair that took place last night. At 10.25 p.m. a man in a drunken condition was seen to leave your premises. He was taken into custody, and he made a statement this morning to the police to the effect that he came to your premises at 8.30 last evening, and remained till the time he was arrested at 10.25”. Defendant said he knew the man Suckling, who came to the house twice the previous evening. Defendant further stated that he did serve Suckling when he came at about 10.10 p.m., for he (defendant) said “You have already had enough, and you had better have some ginger beer”. It appeared, from what defendant said, that Suckling thereupon took up the pint of beer belonging to Mr. Pope and drank it off. Witness told defendant that in all probability he would be prosecuted for permitting drunkenness.

Defendant, on oath, stated that he had been a licensed victualler in the town for 12 years. He had never had a summons or a complaint against him. He had invested 1,400 in the house, and was an experienced man. He remembered the day in question when Suckling (whom he knew very well) came to the house a little before eight o'clock. Witness did not serve him then, but his man did. Suckling left the house at about 8.30, and did not come back till 10. When he came into the public bar at about 10 p.m. he was drunk; witness noticed it at once. Suckling called for a pint of beer, but witness told him he had had enough to drink. At this time witness was serving Mr. Pope with a pint of beer, which he placed in front of him. Mr. Pope took a drink, and just afterwards Suckling picked it up and drank it off, then asking Mr. Boxer, who was in the saloon bar, to treat him to a drink. Witness told Suckling to clear off home, and refused to give him a drink. Suckling only stayed there about two or three minutes, and on being told went out without making a row. Witness told the barman to put Suckling out. Suckling had, however, gone before the barman got to him.

The Chief Constable: You say that you have never been summoned or cautioned? – Yes.

Did I not caution you once, about three months ago? – Defendant said he did not consider that that was a caution when the Chief Constable spoke to him on that occasion.

Mr. Mercer, in addressing the Bench, asked if they were going to take the evidence of a drunken man, who remembered nothing that occurred after 8.30.

John Hadfield, barman at the Swan Inn, said Suckling came in at about 8.10 p.m., and was perfectly sober. He had half a pint of beer, and went into the private bar. He saw Suckling go out about twenty minutes later. He returned again at about 10.10 or 10.15 p.m., and Mr. Clark told him to clear off home. There was no truth in the statement that he was in the house the whole of the time.

Thos. Pope, a painter, of 5, Princess Street, stated that he went to the Swan Inn about 10.05 p.m., and while there Suckling entered in an intoxicated condition and asked for a drink. He was told by the landlord that he had had quite enough, and the best thing he could do was to get home. Suckling then took his (witness's) glass of beer and drank it. He drew the landlord's attention to it, and he was supplied with some more. The landlord then told Suckling to go. Suckling was only there about three or four minutes, and the landlord, in his opinion, could have done nothing to get Suckling out of the premises quicker.

James Boxer, 32, Gladstone Road, said he saw Suckling drink Mr. Pope's beer. Suckling called to him (witness), and asked if he would treat him. Mr. Clark said he would not give him anything to drink. Suckling went out after being there two or three minutes.

The Chairman said the Bench had come to the decision that there was not sufficient evidence to convict defendant, but they did not think that Suckling was got out of the premises as soon as possible.

 

Folkestone Express 28 December 1907.

Local News.

Just before one o'clock on Monday a collision occurred at the top of Shellons Street, between a cab belonging to Mr. A.R. Clarke, of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, and a London and South Coast motor coach. The motor coach was proceeding down Cheriton Road towards Shellons Street, while the cab was coming across Guildhall Street by the Shakespeare Hotel. Apparently both drivers were unaware of each other's presence until they were practically in collision. The driver of the cab, in order to avoid the motor coach, turned into Shellons Street. He was hardly quick enough, and before the chauffeur could pull up the coach had crashed into the horse, which fell and broke its leg. The front part of the coach ran on to the pavement by Mr. Strood's shop, where it came to a standstill. The cab was not damaged at all,, but the horse had to be shot, which was done by Mr. Attwood.

 

Folkestone Daily News 18 February 1908.

County Court.

Tuesday, February 18th: Before Judge Shortt.

Clark v London and South Coast Motor Co: This was a case tried before a jury.

Mr. Theodore Matthew appeared for the plaintiff, and said that his client lived at the Swan Inn. He was a proprietor of carriages, and on the 23rd December last one of his carriages was passing along Guildhall Street, and when at the junction of Shellons Street and Cheriton Road, it was run iton by one of the defendant's motor cars, with the result that the horse in the carriage had to be destroyed.

George Benjamin Phillips, a driver in the employ of the plaintiff, said on the 23rd December he went out with his fly. On returning home about 12 o'clock, and when within two yards of the Shakespeare, he saw a motor car coming from the direction of Cheriton Road. As he saw an accident was inevitable, he tried to turn his horse and get out of the way, but failed, and the motor ran into his horse, breaking one of its legs.

In reply to Mr. Frame Dodd, for the Company, witness said there was no other vehicle there. P.C. Kettle came up and took the position of the motor car, and witness told him the horse cost thirty five guineas.

Grecian Bell, of Linhurst Road, Peckham, said he was on his way to the Post Office on 23rd December last. When in Shellons Street he saw a motor car coming down Cheriton Road and a fly crossing the top of Shellons Street. The car struck the horse's leg, but he could not say what rate it was going at.

Miss Margaret Wylle, of Regent's Park, said she was looking out of Mr. Strood's window, and saw the motor car coming down Cheriton Road, and the fly coming from the direction of Darlington. The car, in her opinion, was travelling at much too fast a pace for a wet day. When opposite her the car ran into the horse. The driver of the car did not blow his horn until he was within a few yards of the fly.

Archibald Edwards, of Gladstone Road, said he was coming down Cheriton Road and the motor car was in front of him. He saw the car strike the horse on the near side, and the driver tried to avoid an accident by turning his horse down Shellons Street. Had he not done so, the car would have struck him broadside.

Frederick George Mercer, of Dover Road, said he was going up Shellons Street on the 23rd December last, and saw the driver jump off the fly. He did not see the accident happen, but heard the driver of the car say he could not help it, as the roads were slippery.

Frederick Tritton, of 20 East Cliff, said he was in the vicinity of the accident and saw the motor car run into the fly. The driver of the latter tried to turn his horse down Shellons Street to avoid an accident.

Henry Dawkins, 2 Ingles Mews, said he examined the horse in question for Mr. Clark, and advised him to buy it. He considered it well worth 45 guineas.

John Morphy, of Coolinge Road, said the horse was well worth 50.

This concluded the case for the plaintiff.

Richard Littlehale, a motor car driver in the employ of the defendant Company, said he was driving a motor car down Cheriton Road on the 23rd December last. The roads were very greasy, and when near Shellons Street he was going about four miles an hour. As soon as he saw the horse and fly he put on his brakes, and this caused his car to slip down the road. One of his wheels went on to the pavement. Had he been going at eight miles an hour and a clear road he would have pulled up.

Cross-examined by Mr. Matthew: The witnesses who said I was travelling fast are wrong.

You say the fly was coming along rather fast? – I don't think I said anything about seeing the driver coming along at a fast pace.

Oh, yes, you did.

His Honour said he had taken a note of what the witness had said, and he found he had said the fly was coming along at rather a fast pace.

William Want said he was the conductor of the car in question on December 23rd. There was another car near the Shakespeare Hotel. The driver sounded the horn twice. Witness did not see the horse until they were right on it, and the driver tried to avoid an accident by running on to the pavement.

Cross-examined by Mr. Matthew: They were going about four miles an hour, but they were too far over the fly to allow them to turn into Guildhall Street.

Charles Hinds, a motor driver, said he was outside the Shakespeare Hotel when the accident happened. He heard the horn twice, and saw the car run into the horse. It was impossible to avoid an accident, although the fly driver did all he could to avoid one.

Cross-examined by Mr. Matthew: How fast was the fly going? – About eight miles an hour.

Then you mean to say the fly ran into the car? – Yes.

P.C. Kettle said he was called to the scene of the accident just after it occurred. One wheel of the car was on the pavement. A veterinary surgeon was sent for, and he advised that the horse should be shot. Witness did not see Hinds' car there.

Mr. Dodds, for the defendant Company, briefly addressed the jury, pointing out that it was not the duty of a defendant to prove that he was innocent, but for the plaintiff to prove that the defendant was the guilty party. He submitted that in the present case proof of negligence had not been produced, and therefore he was entitled to a verdict in his favour.

Mr. Matthew said all the plaintiff's witnesses were independent people, whereas the witnesses on the other side were, to a certain extent, prejudiced. It was absurd to say that the fly ran into the motor car. He contended that a case of negligence had been proved against the Company.

His Honour briefly summed up, and the jury returned a verdict for the defendant.

 

Folkestone Express 22 February 1908.

County Court.

Tuesday, February 18th: Before Judge Shortt.

Alfred L. Clarke v London and South Coast Motor Service Ltd.: The plaintiff claimed 70 for damages done to his horse and motor coach, owing, he contended, to negligence. A jury was empanelled in this case.

Mr. Theodore Matthew, instructed by Mr. Mercer, of Canterbury, represented the plaintiff, and Mr. F. Dodd, instructed by Messrs. Reynolds and Son, 5, Arundel Street, Strand, London, for the defendants.

Mr. Matthew said the issue the jury had to decide was a simple one, whether a horse, the property of the plaintiff, was injured so that it had to be killed owing to the negligence of the defendant's driver, and they would also be asked to estimate the value of the animal.

George Benjamin Phillips, living at 15, Darlington Street, said he was employed by the plaintiff, who was a fly proprietor. On Monday, December 23rd, he went out with his fly. About half past twelve he was returning with his fly from his home in Guildhall Street. When he got to the corner of Shellons Street he saw a motor coming from the direction of Cheriton Road. Directly he saw him the driver blew his horn. The only possible thing he could do was to pull his horse up, but the rear wheel of the motor struck the horse's foreleg. The horse stood holding its leg up, so he jumped down at once. The motor ran onto the pavement near Strood's shop. The driver said he could not stop on account of the road being slippery and the brakes skidding. He would not allow anything to be touched until the police saw the position of the vehicles. Mr. Hogben, the veterinary surgeon, was sent for, and he ordered the horse to be shot. The motor was about five or six yards from him when the horn was sounded. He (witness) was going about four or five miles an hour.

Cross-examined, witness said he saw no other motor car close to the kerb. At the time of the accident he was in the middle of Guildhall Street, with the horse turning down Shellons Street. The skin of the horse's leg was not caught. The roads were a little greasy that day. The off-side wheel and the engine of the car were on the pavement, but had not the near side wheel caught the kerb it would have gone further. He told the police constable who came that the horse cost 35 guineas. He did not tell him the motor was going fast. He (witness) was not going at a considerable pace. He was going to a cab stand, and had no job to which he was going.

Re-examined, he said if he had not pulled up the motor would have caught him broadside.

Graham Bell, of Lyndhurst Road, Peckham, said he was going from the Drill Halls up Shellons Street, when he saw the fly crossing at the top of the street and the motor coming down Cheriton Road. The driver of the fly pulled his horse facing him and the motor car, which came rather quickly, ran into the horse. The car ran onto the pavement, and both off wheels of the car were on the pavement. The fly was going slowly. He was not able to say whether the motor skidded. He could not say that he formed an opinion of who was responsible for the accident.

Miss Margaret Wylie, 1, Cornwall Terrace, Regent's Park, London, said on December 23rd, at half past twelve, she was in Strood's shop, looking out of the window. She saw a motor car coming far too quickly for a wet day down Cheriton Road. The motor never “tooted” at all until it got to the corner. It was too late, and it caught the horse, which the driver had pulled with its head down Shellons Street. She afterwards gave her name to the driver of the fly. She was noticing the car because she was intending to go to Hythe by one of them, but she did not go by one of them afterwards.

Cross-examined, witness said she did not notice any motor standing near the Shakespeare Hotel.

Archibald Edwards, a carrier, of 12, Gladstone Road, said he was coming down Cheriton Road when he noticed the motor coach passing him. The motor car driver sounded his horn when on the corner, and, no doubt, when he saw the horse. He did not see the fly until the two vehicles were pretty well on to each other. The fly could not have been going very fast by the manner in which it was pulled up. The car was going from six to eight miles an hour. There was a drop in the road halfway across Guildhall Street.

Cross-examined, he said he did not see any other vehicle near the Shakespeare Hotel.

Frederick George Mercer, a builder, of 33, Tontine Street, said he asked the fly driver how the accident happened, and the driver of the coach said he could not help it, because the road was slippery and the car skidded.

Frederick Tritton, a fishmonger, of 20, East Cliff, said he was crossing Guildhall Street at the time of the accident. The motor coach came straight down Cheriton Road. It was going fast, while the fly was going at a jog trot, as though the driver was looking for a job. There were two off fore wheels of the coach on the pavement, and it seemed to him that half of the car was on the pavement.

Henry Dawkins, of 2, Ingles Mews, a coachman in the employ of Alderman Banks, said Mr. Clarke asked him to examine the horse before he purchased it, and he told him, when he advised him to buy it, it was dirt cheap at 45. Later he (witness) asked him to sell it to him for 55.

Cross-examined, he said the horse was six years old next spring. It was bred by Mr. Heritage, who evidently did not know its value.

John Murphy, a horse dealer, of Ingles Mews, said he should value the horse at 50. If he had had him he would not have taken that for him, because he was fit for a weight-carrying hunter.

This concluded the plaintiff's case.

Richard Littlehales, the driver of the coach, residing at 17, Bradstone Avenue, said he had been driving for four years. On December 23rd he was driving down Cheriton Road. It had been raining and the road was greasy. In Cheriton Road there was a motor by the Shakespeare Hotel. He had no passengers in the coach, and before he got to the corner he was going about four or five miles an hour. He pulled up when he saw the horse. He sounded the horn twice, the first time just a little lower down than Leney's yard, and the second time just before he saw the horse. When he got to the corner he saw the horse coming along at rather a fast pace. He put his brakes on and, he supposed, owing to the roads being slippery, they locked and the wheels skidded. When he saw the horse he kept straight on and he went on to the pavement. He thought they were blocking the traffic, and he suggested they should move, but he did not move until P.C. Kettle came. After the horse hit his nearside wheel the back of the cab was towards Guildhall Street. His brakes were in perfectly good order. From the time he saw the horse until he pulled up he covered about eight yards. The horse was not knocked down.

Cross-examined: The witnesses who said he was going at a fast pace were wrong. It was right the horse was going at a fast pace. The fly man had more chance of avoiding the accident than he had. His coach weighed 2 tons 13 cwt., and the driver of the fly really drove into him at a fast pace. Two days before that case he had a little collision with a fly, and he paid the damage for it because he thought people were prejudiced against motors. He did not run into a team of horses in Dymchurch Road last year. He had had two accidents before, but he had not done so much damage as he had done in that case. He was always careful about his driving.

Re-examined, he said the near side front wheel caught the horse.

William George Want, the conductor of the coach, said he was sitting on the front seat with the driver. They were going to the garage. When they came down Cheriton Road he saw another motor near the Shakespeare Hotel. The driver sounded his horn twice, for it was a dangerous corner. He did not see the horse until they got to the corner and the coach ran on to the pavement. The horse was coming along far too fast for it to be pulled up, and its leg shot out and went under the wheel.

Cross-examined, witness said they had not time to turn into Guildhall Street. They were going about four miles an hour. He had only been on the car once when they had an accident. That was when they ran into a cab coming out of Cheriton Gardens.

Robert Charles Hind, a motor car driver, of Cheriton, said he had nothing to do with the defendant company. He was outside the Shakespeare Hotel with his car at the time of the accident. He heard the driver sound the horn twice, and he saw the horse strike the coach. The coach came past him at about five miles an hour and when the brakes were applied it seemed to swerve. Only one wheel of the car went on to the pavement. The horse, which was going at a brisk trot, was struck by the front wheel of the coach.

Cross-examined, he thought the driver of the fly was really the cause of the accident, for the horse was going at eight miles an hour. The coach could have been pulled up in its own length, but the horse ran into it. He had a little sympathy for a motor having had an accident. In that case it was a landau.

P.C. Kettle said he did not see the accident. He saw the vehicles after the accident. The front wheel of the coach was on the pavement. The roads were wet. He did not see Hind's motor near the Shakespeare Hotel.

Both Mr. Dodd and Mr. Matthew addressed the jury, and his Honour, in summing up, said there was no doubt the burden of proof was on the plaintiff. It was not for the defendant to disprove the case, but it was incumbent upon the plaintiff, if he was to succeed, to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that it was caused through the negligence of the driver of the coach.

The jury retired to consider their verdict, and on their return they announced they had found for the defendant, and his Honour gave judgement in accordance with the jury's finding.

 

Folkestone Herald 22 February 1908.

County Court.

Tuesday, February 18th: Before Judge Shortt.

Alfred R. Clark v London and South Coast Motor Service Ltd: Claim for damages amounting to 70, for loss alleged to have been caused by negligence on the part of the defendant Company. A jury was empanelled in this case.

Mr. Theodore Matthew, barrister, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. F. Dodd, barrister, for the defendant Company.

Mr. Matthew said it would be for the jury to judge as to whether or not the defendants were guilty of negligence, and whether a horse was worth 70.

Mr. George B. Phillips, of 15, Darlington Street, said that he was employed by the plaintiff, who was a fly proprietor. He had been in that employ for eight years. On Monday, December 23rd, he was out driving, and after dinner, about 12.30 p.m., he was returning by way of Guildhall Street to the Town Hall. Within a few yards of the Shakespeare Hotel he saw a motor car coming from the Cheriton Road. Witness thought the only thing to do was to pull his horse's head to the left. He did so, and the car ran into the horse's foreleg, which was broken. The driver said that he could not stop, as his car skidded. The police and a veterinary surgeon were sent for, and by the advice of the veterinary surgeon the horse was shot. When witness first saw the motor it was five or six yards away from the corner. Witness then pulled to the left, but notwithstanding that, the car ran into him, and on to the pavement, on the right side of Shellons Street.

Cross-examined: There was no other vehicle standing on the corner, or opposite to the Shakespeare. The horn was only sounded once. Witness was going about four miles an hour. In Guildhall Street, and on the north side of Shellons Street there was a cab rank, but there were no vehicles there. When he turned down Shellons Street, he was in the middle of that road.

Witness pointed out on a plan to Mr. Dodd the positions of the vehicles at the time of the occurrence and before. He added that the skin on the horse's leg was not cut. The roads were a little greasy that day. The engine and off-side wheel wee on the pavement. P.C. Kettle came to the scene, and examined the horse. He told the policeman that the horse cost 35 guineas. He did not tell him that the motor bus was driving furiously. The horse was kept where it was struck until the arrival of the veterinary surgeon and the policeman. Witness did not on that day have a job to go to. He was going to the cab stand.

Re-examined: Had he not turned his horse's head down Shellons Street, he would have been run into broadside on, and probably would have been killed.

Mr. Graham Bell, living at Peckham, said that he was coming up Shellons Street at the time of the accident. He saw the head of the motor coming across the head of Shellons Street. The cab driver pulled his horse's head round facing witness, and the motor ran into the horse's legs. The fly was going slowly. He could not tell whether the motor skidded. He did not form any opinion at the time as to whose fault the accident was.

Cross-examined: Witness said that he was on the Drill Halls side of Shellons Street at the time. Both off-side wheels of the motor were on the pavement. Plan produced by Mr. Dodd was not a correct one. The wheels of the motor and cab were locked.

Re-examined: The two vehicles were a little farther down the road than the corner.

Miss Wiley, of 1, Cornwall Terrace, Regent's Park, London, said at the time of the accident she was in Strood's shop in Guildhall Street, looking out of the window. She saw a motor coming down the road opposite. It was coming far too quickly for a wet day. The fly was coming along Guildhall Street. The motor man never “tooted” till he got to the corner, when he ran into the horse. She gave her name to the driver of the fly.

Cross-examined: She was in the Shellons Street side of the shop, right inside. She did not see the cab coming along, and did not see them until they were nearly in contact. She had only seen the motor bus a moment before the impact – about 15 yards before it came to the corner.

Mr. Archibald Edwards, 12, Gladstone Road, said that at the time of the accident he was coming down Cheriton Road, when he saw a motor coach pass him. He saw it crossing Guildhall Street; He was about five yards away at the time. The motor driver sounded his horn as he saw the horse. He did not see the fly until they were pretty well hitting one another. The fly could not have been going very fast. He saw the fly man pull up, and then pull round. If he had gone right on, the coach would have gone into him. The coach was going at about six or eight miles an hour.

Cross-examined: The horse was not knocked down at all. It was hit between the knee and the first joint.

Mr. eorge Mercer, of 33, Tontine Street, builder, said that at about the time of the accident he was coming up Shellons Street. He saw the fly and the motor just after the accident. He said to the fly driver “What is the matter?”, and the flyman said “The car ran into me”. The car driver said “Yes, the road was so slippery I could not help it”.

Mr. Tritton, 20, East Cliff, said he was crossing Guildhall Street towards Shellons Street at the time of the accident. He was coming across from Singer's to Strood's. He saw a cab coming along at a jog trot. The motor came fast down Cheriton Road and dashed into the fly. The fly driver pulled his horse round to avoid the accident if he could, but the motor was coming too fast. He should say that there were two wheels and half the car on the pavement.

Cross-examined: His view of the accident was an instantaneous one. He was about half way across the street. When both the vehicles were at rest the cab was slightly inclined towards Shellons Street – more towards Guildhall Street – but the horse was turned right down Shellons Street.

Mr. Hy. Dorkins, of 2, Ingles Mews, coachman for over thirty years, said that he examined the horse before Mr. Clark bought it. He told him it was “dirt cheap” at 45.

Cross-examined: The horse would have been six years old next spring.

Mr. Job Murphy, horse dealer, of 52, Coolinge Lane, valued the horse at 50. If he had had it he would not have sold it at that price.

This concluded the plaintiff's case.

Mr. Richard Littlehales, 17, Bradstone Avenue, said he was a driver in the employ of the defendant Company. He had been a driver for four years. At the time of the accident he was driving down Cheriton Road to Shellons Street. There had been rain, and the road was slippery. There was a slight drop in Cheriton road, and a bigger one in Shellons Street. There was another motor by the Shakespeare Hotel in charge of a man named Hynes. He had no passengers in the coach, and was going at about four or five miles an hour to the garage. When he saw the horse he put his brakes on. He sounded his horn in Cheriton Road, just below Leney's yard, and also just before he saw the horse. Just as he came to the corner he saw the horse coming along at a rather fast pace. He put all his brakes on rather suddenly. The road being slippery, the brakes locked the wheel, and the car ran a little down before stopping. When he saw the horse coming along he went straight on, and one wheel only ran on to the pavement opposite Strood's. He suggested that they should move because he thought they were blocking the road. At the time everything was at a standstill; the horse was turned right down Shellons Street, and the back of the cab was towards Guildhall Street. The brakes of his motor were in perfectly good order. After seeing the horse he travelled about eight yards before stopping.

Cross-examined: The witnesses who said that he was coming down at a rapid rate were wrong. The flyman had more chance of avoiding the accident that witness. He drove into witness. Witness's coach weighed two tons 13 cwt.

Mr. Matthew: Have you had an accident before?

Witness: I should like to see the motor driver who had not. (Laughter) In further reply, witness said that a few days before the accident he had a slight accident, and paid compensation. Guildhall Street was a dangerous place to cross.

Re-examined: Having had accidents before he was specially careful now. The nearside front wheel came in contact with the horse's leg.

Mr. Wm. George Want, conductor of the motor coach, said that at the time he was sitting on the front seat with the driver. There was another motor opposite the Shakespeare. He was certain that the driver sounded the horn twice before coming to the corner. The horse was coming too fast to pull up. The coach ran on to the pavement, and the horse's front leg shot out and went under the wheel.

Cross-examined: They did not have time to turn into Guildhall Street. The coach was travelling at about four miles an hour. They would have run into Strood's shop if they had turned. He had only been on the coach once before when there was a slight accident.

Mr. Charles Hynes, 83, High Street, Cheriton, motor driver to another Company, said that he was outside the Shakespeare Hotel at the time of the accident. The horn was sounded twice. The coach came down at about five miles an hour. By the sudden application of the brakes the coach swerved a little. Only one wheel of the coach went on to the pavement. The horse was coming along at a brisk trot, and the driver pulled his horse back when he saw the coach. The near front wheel of the coach hit the horse's leg.

Cross-examined: It was entirely the fault of the fly, which was going at about 8 miles an hour. The car could have pulled up in less than its own length, but the horse ran into the motor. The horn was sounded just opposite witness, and again when the driver saw the horse. Witness had some sympathy with motor drivers who had accidents.

P.C. Kettle said that he did not see the accident occur. He was called to it, and found the vehicles at rest. The horse was standing, and one front wheel of the motor was on the pavement opposite Strood's.

After Mr. Dodd and Mr. Matthew had addressed the jury, his Honour complimented them on the brevity with which the case had been conducted. He pointed out that the burden of proof was entirely upon the plaintiff. It was not for the defendant to disprove liability; it was for the plaintiff to prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the cause of the accident was some negligence on the part of the motor driver.

The jury retired at 3.40 p.m. to consider their verdict, and after an absence of ten minutes they came back, and returned a verdict for the defendant company.

Judgement was accordingly entered for the defendant company.

 

Folkestone Express 6 May 1911.

Saturday, April 29th: Before W.G. Herbert, J. Stainer, G.I. Swoffer, R.J. Linton, and G. Boyd Esqs.

Robert Death was summoned for assaulting Charles Andrews. He pleaded Not Guilty.

Charles Andrews, 16, Athelstan Road, a limeburner, said on Sunday, 2nd April, about ten o'clock in the evening, he was in Dover Road, near the Skew Arches. He had come out of the Swan public house with a man named Tutt. He said “Goodnight” to a man named Gillam, and was going over to the urinal, near the arches, when he received a blow in the left eye and fell down and became insensible. He underwent medical treatment as a result of the blow. He did not know the defendant.

Frederick Tutt, 19, Canterbury Road, a carter, said he remembered Sunday night, the 2nd of April. He left the Swan withthe last witness at ten o'clock. Gillam and Andrews were walking together, and witness was just behind. Andrews said “Goodnight” to Gillam and told witness to wait. Witness then saw defendant come up and strike Andrews in the face with his fist. Andrews fell on his back, and witness picked him up and helped him home. He was insensible, and bled at the nose and mouth. Witness saw defendant in the public house. There was no quarrel.

Charlotte Andrews, wife of the complainant, said she was at home when her husband was brought home. He was insensible, and it was five o'clock the next morning before he knew anything. There was a cut at the back of his head, and he had a black eye. Witness called in a doctor on the following Friday, and complainant did not get up until Thursday in last week. Defendant called on witness on the Friday following the occurrence. He said he was the man who struck her husband. He had had words with him before he struck him. Andrews said that if he (defendant) had said as much to him as he (defendant) said to Gillam he would have floored him.

Death said it was because Andrews threatened him that he did what he did.

The Chief Constable said there was one conviction for gambling six years ago against defendant. He was in the employ of the railway company.

The Chairman said defendant was liable to a fine of 5, or two months' hard labour without the option of a fine. It was a most unprovoked and brutal assault, and he would be fined 40s. and 11s. costs, or one month's hard labour.

 

Folkestone Herald 6 May 1911.

Saturday, April 29th: Before Messrs. W.G. Herbert, J. Stainer, G.I. Swoffer, R.J. Linton, and G. Boyd.

Robert Death was summoned for assaulting Charles Andrews. Defendant pleaded Not Guilty.

Charles Andrews, of 16, Athelstan Road, said that on April 2nd at about 10 p.m. he was in Dover Road, near the Skew Arches. He was coming out of the Swan public house with a friend, when he saw defendant talking with a man named Gillam, and bade Gillam goodnight. Shortly afterwards, witness left his friend to go across the road, when he received a blow which caused him to become unconscious. He did not see who struck him, nor did he hear defendant come up to him. He was confined to bed for 17 days as a result of the blow, and had been under the doctor's hands for that period. Witness had never spoken to defendant in his life.

Frederick Tutt, of 19, Canterbury Road, a carter, stated that he left the Swan Inn with the last witness on the evening of April 2nd at about 10 o'clock, and proceeded in the direction of the Arches. Gillam and Andrews walked on ahead of him for a moment or two, but afterwards witness joined complainant again. As they got near the Arches, Andrews left witness and went across the road. Thereupon defendant came across the road and struck the complainant in the face with his fist, causing him to fall heavily on his back and head. Witness picked him up and took him home. Witness was about seven or eight yards from complainant when the blow was struck, and did not hear any word spoken.

Defendant: Did you see anybody pick me up?

Witness: No.

The Chairman: Was there any fighting going on of any description?

Witness: Not that I know of.

The Magistrates' Clerk: As far as you know then, it was an unprovoked assault?

Witness: Yes.

Mrs. Charlotte Andrews, wife of complainant, said she was at home when her husband was brought in. He was unconscious, and was suffering from a cut on the eye and a bad cut on the back of the head. So bad did he become that during the week she called in the doctor, and he had been under his hands ever since. Defendant called to see her on Friday, and said he was the man who had struck her husband, and that he had had words with him.

Defendant then said he had been threatened by complainant in the public house. He had no witnesses.

The Chairman said defendant was liable to be fined 5 or imprisonment without the option of a fine for two months. The Bench were of the opinion that he was guilty of a brutal and unprovoked assault, and he would be fined 40s. and 11s. costs.

 

Folkestone Daily News 13 August 1912.

Tuesday, August 10th: Before Messrs. Stainer, Swoffer, Harrison, Morrison, Boyd, and Stace.

Mr. Phillips was present to ask for the transfer of the licence of the "Swan," Dover Road.

It was explained, however, that a difficulty arose through the absence of the landlord, who could not be traced.

The application was therefore adjourned.

 

Folkestone Express 17 August 1912.

Tuesday, August 13th: Before J. Stainer, G.I. Swoffer, G. Boyd, W.J. Harrison, E.T. Morrison, and A. Stace Esqs.

The Clerk said there was notice of an application that morning for a protection order in respect of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, but Mr. Phillips, on behalf of the owners, informed him that there was some hitch, and the application would not be made.

The Chief Constable said he had inquired into the character of the proposed incoming tenant. He understood the hitch had arisen out of the outgoing tenant not being there.

Mr. Phillips said that was so.

The Clerk (to Mr. Phillips): Then you do not make any application. You must come again in due course.

 

Folkestone Daily News 20 August 1912.

Local News.

Mr. Clarke, proprietor of the "Swan Hotel," Dover Road, mysteriously disappeared some few days since. Such disappearance has caused a good deal of speculation as to his whereabouts and the reason as to his absence. Some thought he might have gone for a holiday, and others that he had gone abroad.

All doubts were settled on Monday morning by the news reaching Folkestone that he had been found shot in a lane near West Hythe, leading to the canal. He was in a very decomposed condition and presented a fearful sight.

Clarke was a native of Hythe, but had resided in Folkestone for many years. He was a man greatly respected and is reported to have been very successful in the licensing victuallers' trade.

The County Coroner will hold an inquest on Tuesday at the "County Members Hotel," Lympne.

 

Exeter and Plymouth Gazette 21 August 1912.

Mr. Alfred Robert Clarke, landlord of the "Swan Hotel," Dover-road, Folkestone, was found dead under a hedge at Lympe, near Hythe. Mr. Clarke disappeared on August 6th.

 

Folkestone Daily News 23 August 1912.

Local News.

The County Coroner held an inquest at the County Members Hotel, Lympne, on Tuesday, when the jury returned a verdict that Robert Clarke committed suicide while temporarily insane.

 

Folkestone Express 24 August 1912.

Inquest.

Mr. A. Clarke, the licensee of the "Swan Inn," Dover Road, who had been missing from Folkestone for about three weeks, was found dead on Sunday evening in a secluded spot about four miles west of Hythe. His body was discovered by a man named Percy Cheeseman, who at once gave information to the police. Close to the dead man's head was a revolver, by which it is almost certain that the unfortunate man shot himself. The body was in an advanced state of decomposition, and it was impossible to identify the man by his face, as it was practically eaten away. However, several articles found in the pockets of the clothing proved who the man was. With assistance the police had the body removed to the "County Members Inn," at Lympne, where an inquest was held last Tuesday.

It appeared that Clarke, after leaving Folkestone, went to West Hythe, where he took lodgings and remained until the day after Bank Holiday, since when all trace was lost of him until his dead body was discovered. It is therefore probable that he met his death about that time. When the clothing was searched a considerable sum of money was found on him. On Tuesday week an application was made to the Borough Magistrates to transfer the licence of the "Swan Inn," but it could not be proceeded with owing to the fact that the present licensee (Clarke) was not present. The deceased man had not lived with his wife for a considerable time, and on Monday the County Police were making enquiries as to her whereabouts.

The inquest was held at the "County Members Inn," Lympne, on Tuesday afternoon, when the inquiry was conducted by Mr. A. K. Mowll, the Deputy Coroner for East Kent.

Alonzo William Alexander Clarke, a baker, of 10, Russell Street, Dover, said he was the brother of the deceased. He identified the clothes on the body viewed by the jury as those belonging to his brother, Alfred Robert. He had seen him wear them at Folkestone. His brother was a publican, and was the landlord of the "Swan Inn," Dover Road, Folkestone. He recognised the gold watch and Albert, gold seal, gold pin, and two rings (produced) as his brother's property. His brother was fifty years old last September. He was married, but had no children. His wife was not living with him, but left him about two years and a half ago. He was then holding the licence of the "Swan Inn." He last saw his brother alive on August 2nd, a day before he was missing. It was between five and six in the afternoon he met the deceased in Biggin Street, Dover. He asked him (the deceased) how he was, and he replied that he was not at all well, and was taking steps to get rid of his business and to be out within a fortnight. Previous to that he saw him some weeks ago. His brother complained to him on the last occasion he saw him that he was not up to the mark, his teeth troubling him a great deal. He knew there were things on his brother's mind in relation to his family life. He was upset at the time his wife left him, and he never seemed to recover properly from it. He heard by telegram that his brother was missing on the following Tuesday.

John Hadfield, of the "Swan Inn," Folkestone, said he was employed by the deceased as barman at the house. Mr. Clarke had been tenant at the "Swan Inn" for nine years. He left because he saw how things were going between the deceased's wife and another man. He told Mr. Clarke what was happening, and he left six months before Mrs, Clarke eloped with the man. He last saw his employer at 11 a.m. on August 3rd, when he told him he was going to the bank to get change, and he would not be long. He never came back. On the following Tuesday he informed the deceased's brother and sister, and the brewers that he was missing. On the 13th August he told the police that Mr. Clarke was missing, that being the day when the licence was to have been transferred. The deceased had got mixed up with a woman who lived in one of his cottages, and she had given birth to a child four months ago. The woman said he was the father of the child, and the deceased said he was not. He used to sleep off the premises about fifteen months ago. He had informed witness that she was trying to get some money out of him. The deceased's house was doing a good trade, and the accounts were all in good order. Mr. Clarke had threatened to take his wife's life, but had never threatened to take his own life. He never said he was worrying over anything, and he never gave him the idea that he was going to put an end to his existence. He never seemed at all strange in his manner. He, however, complained of pains in his head the Friday previous to his going away, and he said he had dropped his false teeth and had broken them. When he came back from Dover on the Friday he told deceased that he was thinking of going in for the "Richmond" house, and the deceased said that he had practically got rid of the house, and if he (witness) stopped with him until he went he would give him a cheque.

Peter John Uden, of the "Carpenters Arms," West Hythe, said a man, who was a stranger to him, came to his house at six o'clock on the evening of the 3rd August. He asked for tea, and he was served with it. He asked for a bed, and he (witness) got him one at Nightingale Cottage, close by. He left the house about eight o'clock and went to bed. He came on the following morning about ten o'clock and had breakfast. He stayed about the place all day on Sunday, and on Monday morning he came to the house again. After breakfast he came to the bar and asked if he could put him half a quarter of whisky in a bottle for him to take away. As the weather was bad, he asked him (witness) to lend him a Mackintosh, as he was going for a stroll. He said he would be back for dinner, but he did not return until evening. On the Tuesday morning he came in to breakfast about 9.30, and afterwards he had another half quartern of whisky to take away. He then paid up his account for the time he was staying there, it including his night's lodgings and amounting to 15s. He said he might not be back until evening, and asked him to lend him his Mackintosh again. He went on the canal bank, and proceeded in the direction of Hythe. That was the last he saw of him. The body viewed by the jury had his Mackintosh on it. The man did not appear to be strange in his manner, but was very quiet. On the Sunday he was in the smoke room all day, and smoked several cigars. He was very pleasant when spoken to. He (witness) had other people staying in the house, or they would have put him up. His (witness's) wife asked him for his name, and he replied “Oh, it's all right”. He had no luggage with him. The man only had one pint of beer in his house, and that was the only intoxicant, besides the whisky, he had in his house.

John Hadfield, re-called, said the deceased was practically a teetotaller.

Walter Cheeseman, a farmer, of Court-at-Street, Lympne, said he had been to look at some sheep near Aldergate Bridge at a quarter to seven on Sunday evening, the 18th, when he smelled something very offensive. He thought it must be the body of a dead sheep, so he looked into the bracken. He then noticed the body of a man in the bracken, on a bank in a meadow, five or six rods away from the road leading to Aldington. It was impossible to see the body from the road. The deceased was lying on his back, with his arms on his chest. It was getting dusk, and he immediately sent for P.C. Kingsbury at Sellinge, but could not find him until one o'clock in the morning, as he was on duty. As soon as it was light the constable came to his house, and they went to the spot, where they saw the body lying in the same position. He then saw a revolver in the man's right hand. He saw the constable take the two envelopes (produced) from the pockets of the clothing.

The Coroner was then handed the two envelopes, the writing on which was not easily distinguishable. He said the first one had on one side of it “Mr. Clarke, "Swan Hotel," Folkestone”. On the other side was “Mrs. Looker. I am sorry for what I have done to you. Get the deeds of Ivy Cottage at Lloyds Bank. The house you can have, also the furniture. Ever, A. R. Clarke”. The second ran as follows: “I find those papers I signed were false, not what you told me they were. They told me they were for 600 valuation, to be paid in bills”. Mr. Mowll thereupon asked if anyone could explain either of the letters. The witness Hadfield said Mrs. Looker was the woman to whom he had referred; and Mr. Battiscombe, of Messrs. Flint and Co., said he could explain the other letter.

Witness, continuing, said he was present when the constable searched the body, and took from the clothing a gun licence, which was taken out on August 3rd, the five chambered revolver (produced) with one discharged cartridge and four loaded cartridges in it, an account from Messrs. Upton Bros., another account from Messrs. Lee and Son for 1 12s. 6d., the jewellery previously identified, a note with 700 and 16 upon it, a box containing 42 loaded cartridges, and 14 16s. 7d. in money.

P.C. Kingsbury, stationed at Sellindge, said he searched the body and found the articles previously described. He conveyed the body later to the "County Members."

Mr. C. W. Battiscombe, Managing Secretary for Messrs. Flint and Co., said he could throw a little light on the second paper read by the Coroner. On Aug. 1st Mr. Clarke came to his office in the afternoon to see him in regard to a contract he had seen in respect to the change at the house he was giving up. The contract was between him and the prospective tenant. Deceased said he did not think the contract was quite in order and he asked him if he would read it through. He (witness) did so, and then pointed out that it was all in order. So far as he could see, it was perfectly in order, and Clarke was quite satisfied when he left the office that it was so. The contract was drawn up by Messrs. Phillips and Son, valuers, of Dover, who were acting on behalf of the prospective tenant. Deceased's accounts were up to date, and there were no debts owing to them. He was in a most happy position, so far as their accounts were concerned – in fact, they could not be better. Deceased would have come out of the house with over 700. He was a first class tenant, and so far as he (witness) knew there was nothing for him to worry about.

Dr. Clifford Hackney said he examined the body at seven o'clock on Monday evening in the coach house of the "County Members Inn." The features were unrecognisable, as they were in a state of advanced decomposition. An examination of the body revealed no injury of any kind until he came to the head, when he found a hole in the right upper jawbone, and a fracture of the bone, which was splintered from the hole. The hole suggested to him gun trouble. The point of entry was all eaten away, but the hole went in the direction of the base of the skull. The right hand was clenched in the typical position for gripping a revolver, the position of the trigger finger being projected. The man must have been dead for fourteen days. The cause of death was the injury to the upper jawbone, probably from the revolver. The size of one of the undischarged cartridges was about the size of the hole in the jaw.

The Coroner, in summing up, said he thought the jury must come to the conclusion that the body was that of Alfred Robert Clarke. He also thought it was quite clear from the evidence that the deceased must have taken his own life. It was for the jury to say whether at the time the deceased was temporarily insane.

The jury returned a verdict of “Suicide whilst temporarily insane”.

 

Folkestone Herald 24 August 1912.

Inquest.

A sensation was caused on Monday by the news that the body of Mr. Alfred Robert Clarke, the landlord of the "Swan Hotel," Dover Road, Folkestone, had been found a few miles west of Hythe. It was discovered near a hedge not far from Aldergate Bridge, in the parish of Lympne, by a man whose attention was drawn to it on account of a strong odour.

There was a bullet wound in the head, and in one hand was clasped a five-chambered revolver containing four full cartridges and one empty one. On the body were about forty other cartridges. The corpse was decomposing.

Mr. Clarke left the "Swan Hotel" on the 3rd August. He stayed at West Hythe until August 6th, when he disappeared. Formerly the deceased held the licence of the "Eagle," Guildhall Street, and was likewise known as the owner of bath-chairs.

An inquest on the body was held at the "County Members Inn," Lympne, on Tuesday afternoon by Mr. A.K. Mowll, Deputy Coroner. Mr. G. W. Haines, solicitor, of Folkestone, was present.

Previously to the jury going to view the body, the Deputy Coroner asked each to put in his mouth a medical lozenge, a quantity of which he had brought with him.

Mr. Alonzo William Alexander Clarke, a master baker, identified the clothes of the deceased as those belonging to his brother. (The Deputy Coroner had previously remarked that it was impossible to recognise the features of the deceased.) Witness had seen his brother wearing those clothes when he had been over to Folkestone. His brother was a publican, and kept the "Swan Inn," Dover Road, Folkestone. Witness identified the gold watch, chain, rings, and other articles now produced, as having belonged to his brother. The age of the deceased was fifty last December; he was married, but there were no children. His wife was not living with him, she having left him about 2 years ago. Witness last saw his brother on Friday, August 2nd, between the hours of five and six in the afternoon. The deceased was then on his holidays in Dover, and they met in Biggin Street. They stopped and had a talk. Deceased said he was not very well, that he was taking steps to get rid of his business, and was hoping to leave it in a fortnight's time. Witness had not seen him for some time previously, though Alfred had called at his house a fortnight before his death, when he (witness) was out. His brother had complained about his teeth, and witness told him that he wanted a change. Deceased had a season ticket on the railway, and witness had suggested to him that he should travel up and down a bit. Witness knew that there were things on his brother's mind which he would not reveal to him. Deceased did not seem to have properly recovered from his wife leaving him. Witness was informed by telegram of his brother being missing.

Mr. John Hadfield stated that he was now manager at the "Swan Inn," but had been in the employ of deceased as barman. Witness was with him some time before Mrs. Clarke eloped with another man; he could see that there was something coming off, and so he (witness) left the Swan Inn in order that he would not be placed in any difficulties. He came back in the employ of Mr. Clarke afterwards. Witness last saw the deceased on August 3rd, at about 11 a.m., when the latter said that he was going to the bank to get some change, and that he would not be long. However, he never came back. Witness informed the brewery, and also the brother of the deceased on Tuesday, August 13th; that was the day of the transfer. He told the police the same day. He knew the deceased had been accused by a woman of being the father of her child, but he had denied it. He also knew that Mr. Clarke had slept away from the house for the past fifteen months. Deceased had told him that the woman had been trying to get some money out of him. Witness knew that there was no worry in connection with the house; there was a good trade, and all the accounts were in order.

The Deputy Coroner: Did he ever threaten to take his life?

Witness: No, but he threatened once to take the life of his wife if ever she came to Folkestone.

I didn't ask you that. Did he ever threaten himself?

No, I never heard him.

Did he ever complain?

Only about his head and his teeth.

Continuing, witness said that, in the course of a conversation he had with the deceased, the latter talked about going to Richmond, and said that he had practically got rid of the "Swan." He also told witness that if he stayed with him he would write him a cheque. Witness understood by this that if he stayed with Mr. Clarke until he left the Swan he would receive the cheque as a little present.

Mr. Peter Uden, licensee of the "Carpenters Arms," West Hythe, said that on August 3rd, at about six in the evening, a stranger came to him and asked for tea, and afterwards for a bed. Witness got the latter for him at Nightingale Cottage, which was close by. Deceased came to the "Carpenters Arms" for breakfast the next morning (Sunday), and stayed about the place all day. He came in again for breakfast on the Monday, and he afterwards came to the bar and asked witness if he would put a half quarter of whisky up in a bottle for him to take away. He also asked if, as the weather was bad, witness could lend him a Mackintosh, as he was going for a stroll, and said that he would be back for dinner. However, he did not come back that day until supper time. Deceased had breakfast on Tuesday morning at about 9.30, and after that he had another half quarter of whisky in a bottle. He paid up all his accounts that morning, including that for the night at Nightingale Cottage, the total being 15s. He then said that he might not be back before the evening, and asked witness if he would lend him the Mackintosh again, which he did. Deceased then went up on the Canal bank, and proceeded in the direction of Hythe. That was the last which witness saw of him. Witness identified the Mackintosh as the one which he had lent to the deceased, and he also recognised the clothes as having been worn by the deceased.

The Deputy Coroner: How did he behave while he was with you?

Witness: He was a very quiet man; he did not speak unless he was spoken to. There seemed nothing strange about him, however.

You say that he stayed about your place all day on Sunday. What was he doing with himself?

He was smoking sometimes, and sometimes he was reading.

What was he reading? Do you know?

He was reading the Folkestone Herald; he seemed rather anxious to have the Folkestone Herald.

In reply to further questions, witness said he could not provide a bed for the deceased at the "Carpenters Arms," because he already had ten people sleeping there. Witness's wife did ask him his name, but he said “Oh, it doesn't matter”. They (witness and his wife) had wondered who he was and where he had come from. The deceased had no luggage with him. While he was at the "Carpenters Arms" his drinks consisted of stone ginger beer chiefly, but he had a pint of beer on the Sunday. He had never asked witness as to where he could get a revolver or anything else of that sort.

Mr. John Hadfield was re-called at this point, and, in reply to a question put by Mr. Mowll, said the deceased was practically a teetotaller, drinking ginger beer during the day, though he usually had some port wine during the evening.

Mr. Walter Cheeseman, a farmer, of Court-at-Street, Lympne, described how he found the body. He said it was at about 6.45 on Sunday evening, August 18th. He had been round to have a look at some sheep which he had near Aldergate Bridge (about two miles west of the "County Members Inn") when, smelling something offensive, he looked amongst some bracken, thinking that the cause of the smell was a dead sheep. He found it to be the body of a man. The spot was near a by road, though it could not have been seen from the thoroughfare. The corpse was in a meadow which belonged to Mr. Frederick Uden, of Hythe. The deceased was lying on his back with his arms across his chest. Witness noticed no revolver then; it was getting dusk. He went to the police at Sellinge, but could not find P.C. Kingsbury there, as he was on duty elsewhere. It was after midnight before he found him and told him of his discovery. When witness again saw the body in the morning he noticed that a revolver was in the right hand.

The police then produced various documents which had been found upon the body. One was a note written on the back of an old envelope addressed to the decease at the "Swan Inn;" the note was partially indecipherable, but the Deputy Coroner read it as best he could. It was addressed to Mrs. Looker, of Ivy Cottage, and apparently ran as follows:- I am sorry for what I have done to you. Hope you will forgive me. Get the deeds of Ivy Cottage at the bank; the house you can have. Ever (?) A .R. Clarke.

Then followed a postscript in which some mention was made of 709, and also the passage “I have found that the papers I signed were false”.

The police also produced a gun licence taken out on August 3rd, and other documents relating to the business of the deceased. The contents of these, however, were not made public. The revolver was also produced, and it was mentioned that when found it contained four loaded cartridges and a blank one. There was also a box of 42 cartridges, while the sum of 14 in gold and 16s. 7d. in other coin were likewise found upon the deceased. The false teeth were broken.

P.C. Kingsbury deposed to having his attention called to the body, and to searching the clothes, etc., on Monday, August 19th. He found the articles and documents produced that afternoon.

Mr. Christopher William Battiscombe, Secretary to Flint's Brewery, Canterbury, was called with the object of throwing, if possible, some light upon the passage written by the deceased “I have found that the papers I signed were false”. Witness stated that Mr. Clarke once called to see him in regard to a contract he had signed about giving up the "Swan Inn." Deceased then seemed to think that the thing was not in order, but after hearing the document read through with some explanations he went away quite satisfied. Witness added that the accounts of the deceased were absolutely up to date.

The Deputy Coroner suggested that the 709 mentioned in the note might have been the amount Mr. Clarke was going to receive at the termination of his tenancy of the "Swan Inn."

Witness: I can throw no light upon that. He would get a few hundred pounds; it would be more, I think.

Dr. Clifford Hackney, of Hythe, gave evidence as to his examination of the body on Monday evening in a shed attached to the "County Members Inn." The features were unrecognisable, owing to decomposition. There was no injury to the body, but in the head was what appeared to be a shot hole, the direction of which was towards the base of the skull. The right hand was clenched; this would be a typical position for gripping a revolver, the position of the trigger finger being particularly well marked. The deceased must have been dead not less than fourteen days. The cause of death was the injury to the jawbone; this injury could have been caused by a shot from the revolver produced.

The Deputy Coroner reviewed the evidence taken, and said that to his mind there was only one question for the jury to decide – that of sanity. There was no doubt that the body was that of Mr. Clarke, and, to his mind, he had come to that part of the district with the idea of taking his life. He was a man who was practically a teetotaller, and he had got the whisky perhaps to get his heart high enough to commit the deed. They also had that letter to Mrs. Looker written on the back of the envelope, which also showed that the idea was in his mind.

The jury, with but little discussion, returned a verdict of “Suicide whilst temporarily insane”.

 

Southeastern Gazette 27 August 1912.

Local News.

The Deputy Coroner for East Kent (Mr. A. K. Mowll) held an inquest at Lympne, on Monday on the body of Alfred Robert Clarke, aged fifty.

Alonzo William Alexander Clarke, of 10, Russell Street, Dover, a master baker, identified the body as that of his brother who was the licensee of the "Swan Inn," Dover Road, Folkestone. The deceased was married but had no children. His wife left him some two and a half years ago. Witness saw his brother alive last on Friday, August 2nd, but he then said he did not feel at all well.

John Hadfield, barman at the "Swan Hotel," Folkestone, said the deceased was the tenant of the house for eight or nine years. Witness left his employ about three years ago, but came back again after Mrs. Clarke had eloped with another man. Witness left because of the unpleasantness. Witness saw deceased alive at 11 a.m. on August 3rd. He said he was going to the bank to get change and that he would not be long, but he never came back. Some four months ago a, woman who lived in one of the deceased's cottages gave birth to a child, and deceased told witness that she said it was his and had been trying to get some money out of him.

Peter John Uden, of the "Carpenters' Arms," West Hythe, stated that the deceased came to his house at 6 p.m. on Saturday, August 3rd. He. asked for tea, and subsequently witness got him a bed at Nightingale Cottage close by. The deceased remained about until Tuesday, the 6th August, when he paid his account. He borrowed witness's mackintosh and said he would be back in the evening, but he never returned.

Walter Cheeseman, grazier and farmer, of Court-at-Street, Lympne, stated that at 6.45 on the evening of Sunday. August 18th, he was looking at some sheep of his near Aldergate Bridge when he smelt something which might be a sheep. He went into a meadow in the occupation of a Mr. Uden and saw on the top of a bank hidden by bracken the body of a man. He was lying on his back with his arms on his chest. Witness did not notice whether there was a revolver as it was getting dusk. He communicated with the police. The next day on going to the spot with a police constable he saw the revolver in the deceased's right hand lying across his chest.

P.O. Kingsbury gave a list of the articles he found on the body, including 14 16s. 7d. in cash.

Mr. C. W. Battiscombe, manager and secretary of Messrs. Flint and Co., Ltd., stated that the deceased owed nothing to his firm except on the. current account. As far as witness knew there was nothing for the deceased to have worried about.

Dr. Hacknev, who examined the body, stated that the deceased's features were unrecognisable, being in an advanced state of decomposition. There was a hole in the right upper jawbone and a splinter of the jawbone from the hole. The hole suggested to him a gunshot wound. The man must have been dead for about fourteen days.

The jury returned a verdict of “Suicide during Temporary Insanity”.

 

Folkestone Herald 21 September 1912.

Friday, September 20th: Before Alderman T.J. Vaughan, Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Alderman C. Jenner, Col. Owen, Capt. Chamier, and Mr. J. J. Giles.

Mr. G. W. Haines applied on behalf of Mrs. Clarke, of the "Swan Hotel," Dover Road, the landlord of which, Mr. Clarke, was recently found dead near Hythe, for the transfer of the licence to Mr. Norman. Letters of administration had been granted to Mrs. Clarke. Mr. Norman was well-known in the town, and had formerly been landlord of the "Gun Tavern" for 12 years.

The application was granted.

 

Folkestone Daily News 21 September 1912.

Friday, September 20th: Before Messrs. Vaughan, Giles, Fynmore, Jenner and Chamier.

The licence of the "Swan," Dover Road, was transferred to Mr. Norman, who some years since held the licence of the "Gun," Cheriton Road.

 

Folkestone Express 28 September 1912.

Friday, September 20th: Before Alderman Vaughan, Alderman Jenner, Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Captain Chamier, J.J. Giles Esq., and Captain Owen.

Mr. G. W. Haines applied for the temporary transfer of the "Swan Inn" to Mr. Norman. He said they would remember the landlord recently died, and his widow, to whom letters of administration had been granted, applied for the temporary transfer to Mr. Norman, who was well-known in the town, having some time ago kept the "Gun Tavern" for twelve years.

The Bench granted the temporary authority asked for.

 

Folkestone Express 5 October 1912.

Local News.

At the police court on Wednesday the following transfer of licences was sanctioned by the Magistrates: Swan Hotel, Dover Road, from the late Mr. A.R. Clarke to Mr. Norman.

 

Folkestone Herald 5 October 1912.

Wednesday, October 2nd: Before Mr. E.T. Ward, Mr. W.G. Herbert, Mr. G.I. Swoffer, and Mr. R.J. Linton.

Mr. G.W. Haines appeared on behalf of Mrs. Robert Clarke, whose husband died recently. The licence was transferred to the applicant, who now wished to transfer it to Mr. Norman. The application was granted.

 

Folkestone Express 12 October 1912.

Notice.

Alfred Robert Clarke, Deceased.

Notice is hereby given that all persons having claims against the estate of Alfred Robert Clarke, late a licensed victualler, of the Swan Inn, 176, Dover Road, Folkestone, Kent, who died on the 6th day of August, 1912, intestate, are herby required to send particulars of such claims to me the undersigned on behalf of the Administratrix on or before the 30th day of November next, after which date the Administratrix will distribute the assets having regard only to claims then notified.

Dated this 3rd day of October, 1912.

Geo. W. Haines, 18 & 20, Church Street, Folkestone, Solicitor for the Administratrix.

 

Folkestone Express 29 August 1914.

Saturday, August 22nd: Before Mr. E. T. Ward and Col. Owen.

Lucy Foreman was charged with stealing a ring, the property of a fellow servant at the "Royal Pavilion Hotel."

Maud Ellen Lambert, a chambermaid employed at the "Royal Pavilion Hotel," said the prisoner had also been employed there as staff maid from July 28th until August 14th, when she left without notice. The ring (produced) was her property. On Thursday week she placed the ring in a hatpin box in her bedroom, and she saw it safe on the following morning at ten o'clock. The same evening she went to the box, but the ring was missing. She made a search for it, but could not find it, and on Saturday she gave information to the police. On Friday she was shown the ring with two others, and identified it as her property. She valued the ring at 32/6. On Thursday before the prisoner left she was sweeping he (prosecutrix's) room at four o'clock. She did not give the prisoner permission to take the ring; in fact, she had not even shown it to her.

Harrison Prescott, manager to Mr. S. W. Joseph, pawnbroker, of High Street, said the previous day, at half past eleven, the prisoner came to the shop and offered the ring produced in pledge, and asked a loan of 5/- or 6/-. She said it was her property, and had been in her possession five or six years, it having been given to her by a young man. He ultimately advanced 5/- on it. Prisoner gave the name of Lily Gilham, 85a, Marshall Street. Later in the day he handed it over to Det. Sergt. Johnson.

Det. Sergt. Johnson said from information received he made inquiries. The previous evening at 9.45, he, in company with P. C. Butcher, saw the prisoner in the public bar of the "Swan Inn," Dover Road. He called her outside, and told her they were two police officers, and asked her her name. She replied “Lucy Foreman”. He then cautioned her, and showed the ring (produced), which had been given to him by the last witness, and told her she answered the description of a woman who had pledged the ring, which had been stolen, at Mr. Joseph's, and had been identified by Maud Lambert as her property. He informed her she would be charged with stealing it from a bedroom at the "Royal Pavilion Hotel" on the 14th. She replied “My young man, named Carter, gave it to me two years ago”. He saw Carter in the prisoner's presence, and showed him the ring produced, and told him that the prisoner said he gave her the ring two years ago, He replied “I did not. She asked me to pledge it for her. I took it down to the pawnshop, and they refused to take it in”. Prisoner then said “I may as well tell you the truth. My husband gave it to me as an engagement ring ten years ago, but he is now in Canada”. He brought her to the police station and formally charged her, and she again said her husband gave it to her ten years ago. Prisoner had not a wedding ring on.

Prisoner asked the Magistrates to decide the case, and pleaded Not Guilty. She said her husband gave her the ring ten years ago when she was in the Victoria Hospital.

The Clerk pointed out that she told Det. Sergt. Johnson that her young man gave it to her two years ago.

Prisoner said what she told the Magistrates was the truth.

The Chief Constable (Mr. Reeve) said they knew nothing about the prisoner there. She had, however, been drifting about a good deal. Mr. Easton, the Police Court Missioner, told him that she was eight or nine years ago in service in the town, and bore a very good character then. She was married, but her husband had deserted her, and she had one or two children in the Cottage Homes at Chatham. He was afraid she had not been leading a very good life since she had been down there.

The Clerk said Mr. Easton informed him that the prisoner had been in a Salvation Army Home from January to July, when she was found that situation down there.

Prisoner agreed to go into a home.

The Chairman said they did not wish to send her to prison. They wished to give her another chance. They had decided to bind her over for twelve months, the condition being that she was to go into a home for that period, during which time she would be under the supervision of the Probation Officer.

 

Folkestone Herald 29 August 1914.

Saturday, August 22nd: Before Mr. E. T. Ward and Col. G. P. Owen.

Lucy Foreman was charged with stealing a ring, the property of Maud Ellen Lambert. She pleaded Not Guilty.

Miss Maud Ellen Lambert said she was employed at the "Royal Pavilion Hotel," and prisoner was employed there as staff maid from July 24th till August 10th. On the 14th inst. accused left without giving notice. The ring produced was identified by the witness as her property. On Thursday, August 13th, witness placed the ring in a hairpin box. At 10 o'clock on Friday morning it was safe there, but on the same evening when witness went to the box it was gone. She made a search, but was unable to find it. On Saturday afternoon witness gave information to the police, and on Friday afternoon, the 21st inst., she was shown the ring with two others. She identified hers. She valued it at 32s. 6d. On the day it disappeared prisoner swept out her room. Accused left about seven in the evening. Witness had not given or lent the ring to prisoner.

Mr. H. Prescott, employed by Mr. S. W. Joseph, pawnbroker, deposed that on Friday, 21st inst., at 11.30, prisoner came into the shop and asked for a loan of 5s. or 6s. on the ring. Witness asked her if it was her property, and she said it had been in her possession for about two years, it having been given to her by her young man. Witness advanced her 7s. in the name of Lillie Gibbons, 85a, Marshall Street. Later in the day witness handed over the ring to Detective Sergt. Johnson.

Detective Sergt. Johnson deposed that on Friday night, at 9.45, he saw prisoner at the "Swan Hotel," in Dover Road. In the company of P.C. Butcher he called her outside and told her they were two police officers. Witness asked her for her name and she replied “Lucy Foreman”. He then cautioned her and showed her the ring, telling her that it had been stolen and that Miss Lambert identified it as her property. Witness added that she would be charged with stealing it from a bedroom at the "Royal Pavilion Hotel" on the 14th inst. She said “My young man, Carter, gave it to me two years ago”. Witness then saw Carter in prisoner's presence and showed him the ring, but he said he did not give it to her. Carter said she had asked him to pledge it, but they refused to do so at the pawnshop. Accused then said “I may as well tell you the truth. My husband gave it to me ten years ago, but he is now in Canada”. Witness brought her to the police station and there formally charged her. Prisoner again said her husband, who was in Canada, gave it to her ten years ago.

Prisoner, in defence, said her husband had given it to her ten years ago when she was in the Royal Victoria Hospital.

The Chairman asked her if she would go in a home. At first she refused, but on second thought she said she would. She was then bound over for 12 months, and to go into a home selected by Mr. Easton, the Police Court Missioner, for that period.

 

Folkestone Express 24 October 1914.

Local News.

On Tuesday, application was made at the Police Court with regard to the transfer of the licence of the Swan Inn from Mr. Norman to Mr. E. Miles.

The Chief Constable said it was a similar application to that of the previous day, and was done for safety. Mr. Miles was a very respectable man, and he had had a licence at Canterbury.

Mr. Norman said he was a naturalised Englishman, and had lived here for forty years. He had a public house for twenty two years at Postling, and had been two years at the Swan. He had no objection to the transfer,

The application was granted.

Note: This does not appear in More Bastions.

 

Folkestone Express 28 November 1914.

Wednesday, November 25th: Before E.T. Ward, G.I. Swoffer, R.J. Linton, G. Boyd, and E.T. Morrison esqs.

Mr. Phillips, on behalf of Messrs. Nalder and Collyer, said he wished the Bench to give Mr. E. Miles, now in possession, temporary permission to sell at the Swan Inn. They would shortly ask for the transfer of the licence to Mr. Clarke, of Watford.

The request was granted.

Note: This does not appear in More Bastions.

 

Folkestone Herald 28 November 1914.

Wednesday, November 25th: Before Mr. E.T. Ward, Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Mr. G.I. Swoffer, Mr. R.J. Linton, Councillor G. Boyd, Alderman C. Jenner, Mr. E.T. Morrison, and Mr. J.J. Giles.

A temporary transfer of the licence of the Swan Inn from Mr. Ernest Miles to Mr. Butler, of Ramsgate, was applied for.

The Bench decided that Mr. Butler was not a suitable person, and the application was withdrawn until December 9th, when Mr. Clark, of Watford, would be proposed, Mr. Miles remaining in control until that time.

Note: No record of Miles in More Bastions.

 

Folkestone Herald 9 January 1915.

Correction.

We desire to apologise for the insertion in our issue of 28th November, 1914, of an erroneous report of application for transfer of the Swan Inn, Folkestone, in which we wrongly stated that “the Bench decided that Mr. Butler (the applicant) was not a suitable person”.

We desire to state that the application was withdrawn by the holder of the licence, and the question of Mr. Butler's fitness did not arise before the Justices.

 

Folkestone Express 16 January 1915.

Wednesday, January 13th: Before Lieut. Col.Fynmore, J. Linton, G.I. Swoffer, W.G. Harrison and G. Boyd Esqs., and Colonel Owen.

The transfer to Mr. W.H. Clarke from Mr. Norman of the licence of the Swan Inn was granted.

 

Folkestone Herald 16 January 1915.

Wednesday, January 13th: Before Lieut. Col. R.J. Fynmore, Mr. R.J. Linton, Mr. G.I. Swoffer, Councillor G. Boyd, Councillor W.J. Harrison, and Col. G.P. Owen.

An application for the transfer of the licence of the Swan Inn to Mr. W.H. Clark was granted.

The Magistrates' Clerk (Mr. Andrew) stated that the applicant had been in the house for a month, and everything was satisfactory.

 

Folkestone Herald 24 November 1923.

Local News.

At the Folkestone Police Court on Wednesday (before Mr. G.I. Swoffer) the licence of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, was transferred to Mr. Alfred James Parker, who was licensee of the Dolphin Inn, Dover, for sixteen years.

 

Folkestone Express 24 May 1924.

Wednesday, May 21st: Before the Rev. Epworth Thompson, Mr. L.G.A. Collins, Councillor W. Hollands, Mr. Blamey, and Col. P. Broome-Giles.

The licence (temporary authority) of the Swan Hotel, Dover Road, was granted to Mr. S.C. Herbert, late of the Clarendon Hotel, Snargate Street, Dover.

 

Folkestone Express 5 July 1924.

Local News.

On Wednesday the Folkestone Magistrates transferred the licence of the Swan Hotel, Dover Road, to Mr. S.C.W. Herbert.

 

Folkestone Herald 5 July 1924.

Local News.

At a special transfer sessions of the Folkestone Licensing Magistrates on Wednesday the Magistrates granted Mr. Sidney Charles W. Herbert the full transfer of the licence of the Swan Hotel.

 

Folkestone Herald 23 January 1926.

Obituary.

We regret the death, at the Swan Inn, Dover Road, of Mrs. Annie Buller Saunders, at the age of sixty years. Deceased was the widow of the late Mr. “Sid” Saunders, who was successively landlord of the Railway Bell Hotel, Folkestone; the White Lion, Cheriton; East Cliff Tavern, and the Fountain Hotel, Seabrook. Her happy and cheerful disposition endeared her to all. To do a good and deserving turn to others afforded her real joy. To her only child, Mrs. Herbert, the wife of Mr. S. Herbert, of the Swan Inn, sincere sympathy is extended.

The funeral took place at the Cemetery.

 

Folkestone Express 5 September 1931.

Wednesday, September 2nd: Before Mr. J.H. Blamey and Mr. S.B. Corser.

Percy George Savage, a fruiterer, of Dover Road, Folkestone, appeared in the dock on five charges of obtaining five sums of 6 each by false pretences with intent to defraud. Mr. B.H. Bonniface appeared to defend.

Harry Franklin, a grocer, of 103, Dover Road, Folkestone, said that defendant, whom he knew, called on him on the 22nd August at about six o'clock. He said “I was late for the bank. Could you cash a cheque for me?” Defendant then produced a cheque for 6, payable to “Self”, and signed P.G. Savage. It was already endorsed. Witness cashed it, and gave defendant 6 for it. He quite thought the cheque would be met. He paid it into the bank on August 24th, and it was returned to him the next morning marked “Refer to drawer”.

Mr. Banniface reserved his cross-examination in the case of each witness.

Thomas William Andrews, of 65 Tontine Street, Folkestone, a boot and shoe dealer, said he knew the defendant quite well. On 22nd August, at about 6.15 p.m., defendant called on him at the shop. He asked him if he would change him a cheque. He produced a cheque, already drawn, signed P.G. Savage, and payable to “Self”. Witness cashed the cheque and gave defendant 6. He paid the cheque into his bank on the following morning, and it was returned the next day marked “Refer to drawer”. He had never changed cheques for the defendant before.

Miss Doris Minnie Martin, bookkeeper to Mr. E.C. Hann, butcher, of 104, Dover Road, Folkestone, said she knew the defendant. He came to the shop at about 8.30 p.m. on the 22nd August and asked her if she would cash a cheque for him as the bank was closed and he wanted some change. He produced a cheque, already drawn, for 6, payable to “Self”, and signed P.G. Savage. She cashed the cheque and handed the defendant 6. The cheque was paid into Mr. Hann's bank on the following Monday and returned the next day marked “Refer to drawer”.

Harry Edward Carey, tobacconist, of 135, Dover Road, Folkestone, said he knew the defendant by sight. Defendant called at his shop at about 8.45 p.m. on the 22nd August, where he produced a cheque for 6. It was already drawn and endorsed. Defendant said “Would you mind cashing a little cheque for me? I have bought a wireless set and have not enough ready cash to pay for it”. He cashed the cheque and gave the defendant the money. At about 8.15a.m. on the following morning, defendant came with a cheque to the shop, marked 6, payable to “Self”. It was endorsed P.G. Savage. He said “Could you cash another little cheque for me? I am going to London for the day and will be leaving before the bank is open”. He cashed the cheque, expecting it to be met by the bank. He paid the cheques into his bank on Wednesday, August 26th, and they were both returned marked “Refer to drawer” on the 27th August.

Harry Godfrey Read, licensee of the Railway Tavern, Dover Road, said he had known defendant casually for about six years. At about 9 p.m. on the 22nd August defendant came to him and produced a cheque, asking him if he would change it for him as he was short of cash. It was marked payable to “Self” and endorsed P.G. Savage. He gave defendant 6 and received the cheque in exchange. He paid in the cheque on the following Monday at the bank and it was returned the next day marked “Refer to drawer”.

Police Sergeant Lawrence said at 3 p.m. the previous day he saw the defendant detained at Gillingham Police Station, Dorsetshire. He informed him that he was a police officer from Folkestone and held a warrant for his arrest. He read the warrant over to him and cautioned him, and he replied “I have nothing to say”. He brought him to the Folkestone Police Station, where he was charged and cautioned. Defendant replied “There is nothing for me to say. I thought there was enough security for me at the bank”. On being searched, in his possession he had 125 5s. 8d. in Treasury notes and silver, and three cheque books of the National Provincial Bank, Folkestone.

The Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) said that that was as far as he could take that case that day. There were enquiries to be made and further evidence to bring before the Court.

The Chairman said that the case would be adjourned until today (Friday) and bail granted, the defendant in 50, and two sureties of 25 or one of 50.

 

Folkestone Herald 5 September 1931.

Local News.

At the Folkestone Police Court yesterday, Percy George Savage, a local trader carrying on business in Dover Road, was bound over for two years following the hearing of a number of indictments charging him with having obtained various sums of money by false pretences.

Savage was first brought before the Magistrates on Tuesday, when he was charged with having by false pretences and with intent to defraud obtained 6 from Mr. Henry Franklyn on August 22nd. Four separate charges of having on the same day (August 22nd) obtained by false pretences the sum of 6 from each of the following: Thomas William Andrews, Doris Minnie Martin, Harry Edward Carey and Henry Godfrey Reed were also preferred. Mr. B.H. Bonniface appeared for Savage.

Evidence was given by Henry Franklyn, a grocer, of 103, Dover Road; Thomas William Andrews, a boot and shoe dealer, of 96, Tontine Street; Doris Minnie Martin, cashier to E.C. Hann, a butcher, of Dover Road; Harry Edward Carey, a tobacconist, of 137, Dover Road; and Harry Godfrey Reed, licensee of the Railway Tavern, Dover Road, that on August 22nd they had cashed cheques for 6 each for defendant and that the cheques had later been returned marked “R.D.”. Mr. Carey stated that he had also cashed a further cheque for 6 for Savage on August 24th and it had been returned.

Detective Sergeant Lawrence said at 3 p.m. the previous day (September 1st) he saw prisoner detained at Gillingham Police Station, Dorsetshire. He told him he had a warrant for his arrest and cautioned him and he replied “I have nothing to say. I thought there was enough security at the bank”. He brought him to the Folkestone Police Station, where he was again charged and cautioned. He replied “There is nothing for me to say. I thought there was enough security at the bank”. Defendant had in his possession 125 in Treasury notes and some silver, and three cheque books of the National Provincial Bank, Folkestone (produced).

The Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) asked for an adjournment of one week.

The Bench adjourned the hearing until Friday, bail being granted.

When savage was again before the Magistrates yesterday (Friday), four further charges of obtaining by false pretences with intent to defraud four sums amounting together to 28, were preferred against him. Mr. Bonniface again appeared for Savage.

Robert Oliver Wiltshire, a motor cycle engineer, of 51, Dover Street, Folkestone, said that he knew Savage, who called upon him on August 23rd at about 5.30 p.m. He had a cheque with him (produced), endorsed P.G. Savage, for 6. He asked if witness could cash the cheque for him, and deduct 13s. 6d. he owed witness. This witness did. The cheque was returned marked “R.D.”.

Sidney Charles Windsor Herbert, licensee of the Swan Hotel, Dover Road, said Savage called at witness's bar on August 22nd, and at his request he changed a cheque for 6 for him. It was returned marked “R.D.”.

Albert Edward Palmer, an outfitter, of 69, Tontine Street, Folkestone, said Savage called upon him on August 22nd. He said he wanted to pay for a wireless set, and asked witness to cash a cheque for 10. It was signed and endorsed P.G. Savage. He cashed the cheque, which was later returned marked “R.D.”.

William Edward Miles, of 129, Dover Road, Folkestone, a butcher, gave evidence of changing a cheque for 6 for Savage. It was not honoured by the bank.

Alexander Eustace Roberts, manager of the National Provincial Bank, said Savage was a customer at his bank. He produced a certificate copy of Savage's account. The account went on from June 30th, 1930, till August 24th, 1931. On August 24th it showed debits of 25, 25, and 10, the total debit balance on that date being 565 2s. 6d. Witness was in his office on August 24th and saw Savage at about 10.20 a.m. He had not seen Savage for 12 months, but he had written him a letter. Witness was not expecting a visit from him. Savage produced a cheque for 25, payable to self, and asked if witness would cash it. Witness agreed to do so, and the cheque was met by his bank. Savage did not mention any other cheque; he did not say he had drawn other cheques which were unpresented.

Witness examined ten cheques which the Clerk (Mr. C. Rootes) produced, all drawn on the National Provincial Bank, and signed by Savage. They were all presented at witness's bank for payment, and were returned marked “R.D.” in each case. Savage had no reason to expect that these cheques would be met by the bank from anything he had said to witness, or from anything witness had said to him. He had not told Savage he could cash another cheque for 25, or a cheque for 10.

By Mr. Bonniface: Witness could not tell which of the cheques for 25 was authorised by him. A cheque for 35 was cashed by Savage before he came to interview witness. The bank had securities deposited with them. The bank had a security upon Savage, being a conveyance for a shop and premises which were bought for 800. There was no reason for Savage to tell him during their interview that he had cashed other cheques. Savage's account was a perfectly open one until 3 o'clock on August 24th. Witness would certainly have tried to help Savage if he had disclosed the fact that he had drawn the other cheques. He thought the security his bank held would be ample to secure the overdraft as shown in the account in addition to the cheques mentioned in the charge, providing the property was of the same value.

In reply to the Clerk, witness said that Savage had been given a limit of overdraft of 500 over a year ago. If he had known that Savage had cashed a cheque for 25 he would not have cashed another cheque for 25. He was not aware that Savage was going away that day.

Further, in reply to Mr. Bonniface, witness admitted that in July last, Savage had been allowed to exceed the limit of his overdraft.

Mr. W. Chard, a cashier and acting manager at the National Provincial Bank on August 25th, produced a letter in Savage's handwriting which was received at the bank on August 25th. It was addressed to Mr. Roberts.

The Clerk read the letter to the Magistrates, but at the request of Mr. Bonniface he did not read it aloud.

In reply to Mr. Bonniface, witness said Savage had in the letter asked him to sell the property, and to reimburse the bank.

The Chief Constable put in a letter from Savage received by him on August 24th. This the Clerk also read to the Magistrates. A day or so afterwards, he (the Chief Constable) received two 1 notes in an envelope from Savage.

Mr. Bonniface here submitted that there was no case in law of obtaining those sums of money by false pretences.

After a short retirement, the Bench decided that the case should proceed, and Savage elected to be tried summarily, and pleaded Not Guilty.

In addressing the Bench, Mr. Bonniface said that he was not anxious to give pain to anybody, and so he had decided to rely entirely upon the statements contained in the letters which were before the Bench, and to say that, had his client gone into the box, he would have substantiated on oath those statements which were contained in those letters. He would have given an explanation of what was undoubtedly, to say the least, a most foolish action on his part on Saturday, August 22nd, when he asked those various tradespeople to cash the cheques.

Mr. Bonniface, continuing, said that he had received instructions that morning, even if the case were dismissed, as he confidently anticipated it would be, to pay each of the tradesmen from the money which was in Savage's possession the amounts of the cheques which they had cashed for him. Savage never had any intention of obtaining money from them in a fraudulent manner; he had every intention and hope and anticipation that those cheques would be met, more especially having regard to the instruction he gave in his letter to the bank to sell his property. He was honest enough even after that to send to the Chief Constable within two or three days the amount he had written saying he would send. They had before them a man who had never been in any trouble before, a man who had carried on a business in Folkestone for some years. He was upright and had never overdrawn his account during the time he had operated it at the National Provincial Bank. If a good character could not stand a man in that position in his stead, then a good character was not worth having. He asked the Bench to say that that was a case where they could rightly discharge defendant under the Probation of Offenders' Act.

Without retiring the Bench arrived at their decision, and asked the Chief Constable if there were any previous convictions against Savage.

The Chief Constable said there were not.

The Chairman said that, taking into consideration the circumstances of his case, they were going to bind Savage over for two years under the Probation of Offenders' Act. An order would be made for the full restitution of the money in respect of the charges, and for the payment of the costs (6) of the prosecution. They hoped that that would be an end of his trouble.

On hearing this decision, Savage went across to the solicitors' table and shook Mr. Bonniface heartily by the hand.

 

Folkestone Express 12 September 1931.

Friday, September 4th: Before Mr. J.H. Blamey and Mr. S.B. Corser.

Percy George Savage, a fruiterer, of Dover Road, Folkestone, appeared on remand on five charges of obtaining, by false pretences, with intent to defraud, five separate sums of 6 each. There were four further charges brought against the prisoner of obtaining three further sums of 6 each and also a sum of 10 by false pretences with intent to defraud. Mr. B.H. Bonniface appeared to defend.

P.S. Lawrence, cross-examined, said that he had found a Southern Railway cloakroom ticket in his possession.

Roland Oliver Wiltshire, a cycle dealer, of 51, Dover Street, Folkestone, said prisoner called upon him on August 23rd at 5.30 p.m. Prisoner had a cheque with him, signed .G. Savage, payable to “Self”, and it was for 6. He asked if he could cash the cheque for him and take out the 13s. 6d. he owed him. He cashed the cheque, deducted 13s. 6d., and gave prisoner the balance. He paid in the cheque on Tuesday, August 25th, and it was returned on the following Thursday marked “Refer to drawer”.

Sidney Charles W. Herbert, licensee of the Swan, Dover Road, Folkestone, said he had known the prisoner for a number of years. He called at the bar on Saturday, August 22nd, at about seven o'clock, and asked him if he could change a cheque for him as he wanted to get away on business, and he had not been able to get to a bank as he had been too busy. Prisoner had a new cheque book in his hand, and he wrote out a cheque for 6 in the bar. It was marked payable to “Self”, and signed P.G. Savage. Witness gave prisoner six 1 notes. He presented the cheque on the following Monday morning at the National Provincial bank, Sandgate Road, and it was returned to him “R.D.” on August 25th.

Albert Edward Palmer, an outfitter, of 69, Tontine Street, Folkestone, said he knew prisoner quite well. He called at eight o'clock on Saturday, August 22nd, and said he wanted to pay for a wireless set. He gave him a cheque made out for 10, payable to “Self” and endorsed P.G. Savage, and asked him to cash it. He paid it into his bank on August 29th, and on August 31st it was returned marked “Refer to drawer”.

William Edward Miles, a butcher, of 129, Dover Road, said he knew the prisoner and had had business dealings with him. He came into his shop in the evening on August 22nd at about eight o'clock, and asked him if he would oblige by changing a cheque as he was too late for the bank. He produced a cheque fro 6, payable to “Self” and signed P.G. Savage. He gave prisoner 6 in Treasury notes. He paid the cheque into his bank in Tontine Street on August 24th, and it was returned to him marked “Refer to drawer”.

Mr. H.A.E. Roberts, manager of the National Provincial Bank, Folkestone, on sub-poena, produced a copy of the prisoner's account. The copy went back to the 30th June, 1930, and carried on to August 24th, 1931. It showed on the 24th August debits of 25, 25, and 10, making a total debit balance on that day of 565 2s. 6d. He saw prisoner on August 24th at about 10.20 a.m. Prisoner had asked to see him, but he had not been expecting to see him from anything that had transpired before. He did not think he had seen prisoner for twelve months, but he could not be certain of the date. He had written him a letter. Prisoner produced a cheque for 25, payable to “Self”, and asked him if he would cash it. He agreed to do so, and the cheque was met by the bank. He did not mention any other cheques and did not tell him that he had drawn cheques which were unpresented. The ten cheques produced were drawn on the National Provincial Bank and were signed by the prisoner. In each case they were returned marked “R.D.” Prisoner had no reason to expect those cheques to be met from anything he had said to him (witness) or from anything witness had said to him. He did not tell prisoner at the interview that he would cash another cheque for 25 or for 10.

By Mr. Bonniface, witness said that he could not say which of the 25 he had cashed marked in the account. It was a fact that the first 25 was cashed before prisoner came to witness with the second cheque. He could not say definitely when the cheque for 10 was cashed. The bank had security upon the prisoner, being the conveyance of a shop and premises bought for 800. There was no reason for prisoner to tell him that the other cheques had been drawn. His account was a perfectly open one until three o'clock on the 24th August. He very possibly might have tried to help the defendant if he had disclosed his true position and that he had drawn the other cheques mentioned. He would think the bank held ample security to meet the overdraft in addition to cheques mentioned in the charge, subject to the property being of the same value.

In reply to the magistrates' Clerk (Mr. C. Rootes), witness said that prisoner had been given a limit of overdraft. This was 500, and had been given him over a year ago. If he had been aware of the prisoner cashing 25 at the bank, he would not have cashed the other 25. Prisoner did not tell him that he was going away that day.

Mr. Bonniface: As a matter of fact, this account shows that the defendant has been allowed to draw over the 500?

Witness: That is so.

Mr. Bonniface: That was in July last?

Witness: Yes.

Mr. Chard, a cashier at the National Provincial Bank Ltd., said he was acting manager at the bank on the 24th August. A letter was received at the bank on August 25th, addressed to last witness, in the prisoner's handwriting.

The Magistrates' Clerk read the letter over to the Magistrates, but upon the instructions of Mr. Bonniface, did not do this aloud.

Mr. Bonniface, cross-examining, said that in the letter the prisoner asked him to sell the property and to reimburse the bank. He also stated that he had taken certain monies.

Witness said that was so.

The Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley), on oath, said that he also received a letter from the prisoner on the morning of the 25th August. It contained similar phrases to those in the previous letter produced.

The Magistrates' Clerk read this letter over to the Bench, but it was inaudible to the public.

Cross-examined, the Chief Constable said that he received 2 by letter from the prisoner two days later, as stated in the letter.

Mr. Bonniface said that, in law, he submitted that there was no case of obtaining the sum by false pretences at all. If the defendant had a reasonable belief at the time he gave the cheque that it would be met, then the crime of false pretences went. The bank manager told them that it was still an open account until three o'clock of the afternoon of the 24th August, so that on the 22nd and 23rd the account was an open account, and on the morning of the 24th it was an open account. So open was it that the bank over the counter paid 25 after ten o'clock, and also 10 over the counter after ten o'clock. There was no doubt about it that the bank paid over 25. They knew it was an open account. If the bank met the cheque, could they say that on the 22nd these other cheques would not be met? 800 was the price given for that property. They read a letter in which the man told the bank to sell the property. He anticipated that that would be met. It was for the prosecution to show that he knew from the bank manager beforehand that these cheques would not be met. The bank manager told them that he did not expect him to call. He submitted that on the evidence they had before them they could not commit that man for trial. He submitted to them that the prosecution had fallen short of what in law they were bound to prove.

The Bench retired.

The Magistrates' Clerk, on their return, said they had decided that the case must proceed.

Mr. Bonniface said the prisoner would elect to go for trial.

The Magistrates' Clerk asked Mr. Bonniface to discuss this with the prisoner. This was done, and prisoner then pleaded Not Guilty and elected to be dealt with by the Bench.

Mr. Bonniface, addressing the Magistrates, said that he had decided to rely solely upon the statements in the letters. Had prisoner gone into the box, he would have submitted on oath those statements contained in those letters. He aws most anxious in that submission not to hurt anybody's feelings, because there were rights and wrongs in every case, and there might be rights and wrongs in the case of that particular trouble. He was sure they would appreciate that he must refer to the fact that undoubtedly at that time there was family trouble between the wife and the husband, and je did not ant to enlarge upon that, but it apparently came to such a pass that on that particular occasion the defendant felt that he could not live with his wife any longer. That was the position, and undoubtedly foolishly – though he still contended not criminally – that man obtained that money by those cheques. He was entitled to say that he received instructions that morning that even if the case was dismissed, as he confidently anticipated it would be, he was to pay each of those tradesmen from the money which was in that man's possession the amounts of the cheques which were cashed for him. He had never had any intention of obtaining money from them that they should lose. He had every intention and every hope and every anticipation that those cheques would be met, more especially having regard to the instructions he gave to the bank to sell his property. He suggested that the Bench should discharge the prisoner under the Probation of Offenders Act.

The Chief Constable said there were no previous convictions against prisoner.

The Chairman said that taking into consideration the circumstances of the case, they were going to bind the prisoner over for two years under the Probation Act, and an order would be made for the restitution of the money to the people concerned. Prisoner would also pay the costs of the prosecution, which would amount to 6. The Bench had taken a very lenient view of the case, and hoped that would end his troubles.

Before leaving the Court, Savage shook hands with Mr. Bonniface.

 

Folkestone Herald 22 July 1933.

Local News.

There was a sequel at the Folkestone Police Court on Monday to a scene at a Folkestone licensed victualler's house on Saturday, when William D. Thomas was charged with committing wilful damage at the Swan Hotel, Dover Road. Homas was found Guilty and sentenced to two months' hard labour.

Sidney Charles W. Herbert, landlord of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, said at about 8.10 on Saturday night the prisoner came into his house begging. Witness was attending to his customers at the time, but told Thomas that he did not allow begging on his premises, and he asked him to leave. He then became rather abusive and witness told him to go. When he refused to do so witness opened the door wide and stepped back into the bar, again requiring Thomas to go. Prisoner then took his hat off and said “Ladies and gentlemen”. Witness then put him out and shut the door. As he turned to go back he put his foot against the door. Thomas then raised his hand, struck the glass panel in the door and shattered it. It was a deliberate action on prisoner's part. Thomas then ran away into Folly Road. Witness chased him and he went into Rossendale Road. The next he saw of prisoner was that he was in charge of P.S. Southey. The damage amounted to 4 2s. 6d.

P.S. Southey said at 8.10 p.m. on Saturday he was in Warren Road when he saw Thomas being chased by the last witness. He followed, and caught prisoner in Rossendale Road. He said to him “What have you been doing?”, but Thomas made no reply. He then took prisoner back to the last witness, who said “That man has broken a panel in the saloon bar of my house. I wish to charge him with it”. When charged at the police station, Thomas said “I plead Guilty”. The third and fourth fingers of prisoner's right hand were cut across the knuckles. They were bleeding freely and had to be dressed.

Defendant said he was very sorry that it had happened. He had been out all the previous night. He had no intention of breaking the glass panel.

Mr. Herbert, re-called, said Thomas appeared to be sober at the time.

Chief Inspector H.G. Pittock said Thomas had only arrived in the town on the previous day. There was no doubt that he was getting his living by begging. At Uxbridge on June 10th, 1930, he was sentenced to 14 days' imprisonment for stealing a cycle. There were other convictions for drunkenness. He had been in the Army, prisoner told them.

The Chairman (Mr. W.R. Boughton) said the prisoner made himself a perfect nuisance. He would go to prison for two months with hard labour.

 

Folkestone Express 24 March 1934.

Local News.

Four silver cups, awarded by the United Friendly Societies (Folkestone) Royal Victoria Hospital Saturday and Sunday Fund to the licensed houses collecting the highest amount of money in the town during the year, were presented on Monday evening.

The principal award went to Mr. T.I. Jordan, of the Richmond Tavern, who collected 16 15s. towards the fund. The second prize was gained by Mrs. E.A. Summerfield, of the Royal Standard, collecting 8 6s. 8d.; third place by Mr. S. Herbert, of the Swan, with 4 7s. 6d.; and finally Mr. H.W. Cork, of the Red Cow, who collected 3 12s. 8d. Messrs. B. Todd, S. Burvill, G. Spicer, and Mr. G. Dunkling, who superintended the collecting at the respective houses, were the recipients of presents of cigarettes.

 

Folkestone Herald 12 June 1937.

Local News.

Mr. Sid Herbert wishes to announce that he has no intention of leaving the Swan, Dover Road. He will be pleased to welcome old and new friends as usual. There is always a warm welcome at the Swan, and Mr. Sid Herbert, the landlord for the past 13 years, hopes to stay for many years to come.

 

Folkestone Herald 25 April 1942.

Local News.

At a Transfer Sessions, held at the Folkestone Police Court on Wednesday, several licences were dealt with.

The licence of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, destroyed by enemy action in 1940, was transferred from Mr. Sidney Herbert to Mr. Fullager, Secretary of Fremlin’s Ltd.

Note: This does not appear in More Bastions.

Alderman R.G. Wood presided with Alderman J.W. Stainer.

 

Folkestone Gazette 12 February 1964.

Obituary.

A well-known personality in Folkestone for many years, Mr. Sidney Charles Windsor Herbert, of 43, Stanley Road, Cheriton, died suddenly on Sunday last week.

Mr. Herbert, who was 74, was born in Canterbury Road and, after leaving school, entered his father’s boot and shoe business in that road. Later he handed over the business to his brother, Leslie, and went to Dover, where he had a hotel in Snargate Street for a time. His home town, however, strongly appealed to him and he returned to Folkestone to become licensee of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, in the early 20’s. Mr. Herbert and his wife were there until the premises were badly damaged during an air raid in October, 1940. Mr. Herbert was injured and never recovered his full health although he continued to take a great deal of interest in town affairs. Before the last war his close association and interest in Folkestone Football Club was one of his numerous activities. He was connected with the club as far back as the days when it played on the Canterbury Road ground, not far from his home. Then when the club re-formed after World War I at Cheriton Road ground, he became one of its keenest workers, and his interest in the club’s welfare continued for a considerable time. He was Chairman of the Folkestone and District Licensed Victuallers’ Association for some years. A Freemason, he belonged to a Dover lodge. Since the last war he found great pleasure in bowls and was a Vice-President of Folkestone Bowls Club, and he was similarly honoured by Cheriton Bowls Club. In the pre-World War I years he took a great deal of interest in darts and was one of the founders of the original Licensed Victuallers’ League. Mr. Herbert was married three times. His first wife died the early 20’s. He married again and his second wife died in 1952. He is survived by the wife his third marriage, 10 years ago.

The funeral took place on Friday, a service in St. Martin's Church preceding interment in his second wife’s grave. The Rector, the Rev. C. Munt officiated.

 

 

LICENSEE LIST

ROBINSON James Golder 1847-55 Next pub licensee had (age 35 in 1851Census) Bagshaw's Directory 1847

FRANKS William (rendered by sickness incapable of keeping the house) 1855-June/57 Next pub licensee had Folkestone Chronicle

ROBINSON William Hall June/1857-73 dec'd (age 38 in 1861Census) Folkestone ChronicleMelville's 1858Post Office Directory 1862

ROBINSON William Hall 1873-98 dec'd (age 38 in 1891Census) Post Office Directory 1874Post Office Directory 1882Post Office Directory 1891Kelly's 1899

ROBINSON Elizabeth 1898-1904 (married Brett)

BRETT Perren William 1901-03+ (age 44 in 1901Census) Post Office Directory 1903Kelly's 1903 (married to Elizabeth Robinson, but her name over the door)

Last pub licensee had CLARKE Alfred Robert 1904-Aug/1912 dec'd

Last pub licensee had NORMAN Christian 1912-14 Post Office Directory 1913

MILES Ernest Mr Oct-Dec/1914

CLARKE William P 1914-23 Post Office Directory 1922

PARKER William 1923-24

HERBERT Sidney Charles W 1924-40 Kelly's 1934Post Office Directory 1938

FULLAGER Mr 1942 (protection)

 

Bagshaw's Directory 1847From Bagshaw Directory 1847

Melville's 1858From Melville's Directory 1858

Post Office Directory 1862From the Post Office Directory 1862

Post Office Directory 1874From the Post Office Directory 1874

Post Office Directory 1882From the Post Office Directory 1882

Post Office Directory 1891From the Post Office Directory 1891

Kelly's 1899From the Kelly's Directory 1899

Post Office Directory 1903From the Post Office Directory 1903

Kelly's 1903From the Kelly's Directory 1903

Post Office Directory 1913From the Post Office Directory 1913

Post Office Directory 1922From the Post Office Directory 1922

Post Office Directory 1930From the Post Office Directory 1930

Kelly's 1934From the Kelly's Directory 1934

Post Office Directory 1938From the Post Office Directory 1938

Folkestone ChronicleFrom the Folkestone Chronicle

 

If anyone should have any further information, or indeed any pictures or photographs of the above licensed premises, please email:-

TOP Valid CSS Valid XTHML

 

LINK to Even More Tales From The Tap Room