Bouverie Hotel 1930s

Folkestone Express 28-6-1930

Saturday, June 21^st: Before Alderman C. Ed. Mumford, Mr. W. Smith, Dr. W.W. Nuttall, Alderman T.S. Franks, Mrs. E. Gore, and Mr. R.J. Stokes.

Albert Henry Whitley, an electrician, was charged with being drunk on licensed premises on the previous evening, at the Bouverie Hotel, and refusing to quit on the request of the landlord. Prisoner pleaded Guilty.

Inspector Pittock said at 9.45 p.m. on the previous day, in consequence of what he was told, he went to the Bouverie Hotel in company with Detective Sergeant Rowe. On entering the smoke room bar he saw the prisoner and he formed the opinion that he was drunk. He went round to the landlord and made a communication to him and he went to the smoke room bar. Prisoner came out almost immediately and went round to the saloon bar. He followed him in there and told him that he was a police inspector (he was in plain clothes) and said that he was of the opinion that he had had enough to drink and should go. Prisoner refused to go outside, and the licensee then went into the saloon bar and said to the prisoner “I told you to go out of the other bar. How is it you are here?” Prisoner still refused to leave, and the landlord came to the public side of the bar. He took him by the arm and witness took the other and they put him outside the premises. Witness requested prisoner several times to go away and gave him every opportunity to go home, but he used bad language and would not go, so he took him into custody. They had some difficulty in getting him to the police station.

Prisoner said he was afraid he had nothing to say, but he was sorry for what had happened.

Inspector Pittock said the prisoner had been in the town about four years, and was an electrician by occupation. He understood he was an excellent workman, but he was addicted to drink. He believed he had had some trouble recently with his wife.

The Clerk (Mr. J. Andrew) said it was no prejudice against the prisoner to say that his wife had applied for a maintenance order and separation against him.

Prisoner: I did not know that.

The Chairman said that the Magistrates wished to remind the prisoner that not only had he acted wrongly, but he had, through his conduct, endangered the licence of the licensee of the hotel. They wanted to say that they knew very well that he had home troubles, but that might be his own fault. He had not been up there before, and they were taking into consideration that at the present time he was out of work, but whatever he did, he must not try to do that again. He would be fined 5s. If he could keep away from drink he would be a useful citizen.

Folkestone Herald 28-6-1930

Saturday, June 21^st: Before Alderman C.E. Mumford, Dr. W. Nuttall, Alderman T.S. Franks, Mrs. Gore, Mr. William Smith, and Mr. R.T. Stokes.

Albert Henry Whitley was charged with being drunk on licensed premises the previous evening and refusing to quit on the request of the landlord. Prisoner pleaded Guilty.

Chief Inspector Pittock said that at 9.45 the previous evening he went into the smoke bar of the Bouverie Hotel, in company with Detective Sergeant Rowe, in plain clothes. In the smoke bar they saw Whitley, and witness formed the opinion that he was drunk. They went into the saloon bar and got into communication with the landlord. Almost immediately Whitley came into the saloon bar and witness told him that he was a police inspector, and in his opinion, he (prisoner) was drunk. Witness told him to leave the premises, but he refused to go. The landlord got hold of one of Whitley`s arms, and witness got hold of the other, and they ejected him. When outside, witness requested Whitley to go home several times, but he refused to, and used bad language. Witness took him into custody, and had difficulty in getting him to the police station.

Prisoner said he was sorry for what had happened.

Chief Inspector Pittock said Whitley had been in the town for about four years, and was an electrician by occupation. He was an excellent workman, but was addicted to drink. He had had difficulty recently with his wife.

The Magistrates fined Whitley 5s., and dealt with the case leniently because of his being out of work. They told him that if he kept away from drink he would be a useful citizen.

Folkestone Express 28-1-1939

Quarter Sessions

Allegations that a man, whose name was not disclosed, plied Ely John Michael Ivory (30), described as a manager, of Alexandra Gardens, Folkestone, with drink and then suggested that he should break into a house in the west end of Folkestone were made by Ivory’s defending counsel at the Folkestone Quarter Sessions on Satur­day, when Ivory was sentenced to six months’ hard labour for breaking and entering the house No. 27, Grimston Avenue, with intent to steal. Mr. Norman Parkes, who represented Ivory, said the suggestion rather ap­pealed to the prisoner in his condition.

Brinley Dobbs (35), of Grace Hill, Folkestone, described as a waiter, was found guilty of aiding, abetting and assisting Ivory and was remanded in custody until the next Sessions, when the Recorder stated he would make known his decision.

When the prisoners were placed in the dock together Ivory pleaded guilty, but Dobbs pleaded not guilty. The charge against Dobbs was there­fore heard by a jury.

Mr. B H. Waddy (instructed by Mr. B.H. Bonniface) prosecuted on behalf of the Crown, and Mr. H.J. Baxter (instructed by Mr. J.E. Chapple, Hythe) defended. Mr. Norman Parkes (instructed by Mr. M.J. Attle) appeared on behalf of Ivory.

Mr. Waddy said one prisoner had pleaded uilty to a burglary at the house, and Dobbs was charged with aiding and abetting him. Evidence would be called to show that Dobbs was walking up and down outside the house, as schoolboys said “Keeping cave” for ivory, and if the jury were satisfied on the evidence then he would be Guilty of the charge against him.

Mr. W.J.H. Miller said he was a handyman employed by Mrs. F.M. King, of 29, Grimston Avenue. The house was furnished but it was not occupied on the night of December 19^th. Mrs. King and he went to the house during that day. They both left at half past six, the house being secure, and there were no broken windows in the kitchen or scullery. On the following morning he found the glass door in the butler`s pantry had been broken.

Mr. R.M. Bedford, of 205, Dover Road, Folkestone, said he was a chef employed at No. 31, Grimston Avenue, which was next door to the house broken into. On Monday evening, Dec­ember 19^th, he started to go home from his work about ten minutes past nine. At the time it was snowing and the wind was howling. As he was going out of the drive pushing his cycle he saw two men passing the gate, going towards Sandgate Road. One was Dobbs and the other Ivory. He was quite certain about Dobbs. One of the men said “This is the house”, and the other replied “No, this is the one”. The men passed the gate of No. 31, but stopped by No. 29. He got on his bicycle and rode up towards Bouverie Road West, but as he did so he turned round and saw Dobbs, but Ivory had disappeared. Dobbs was walking up and down in front of Nos. 27 and 29. He knew at the time that Mrs. King was not staying in No. 29 at nights. When he got to the corner of Bouverie Road West he stood at the corner and Dobbs was still walking up and down, there was no sign of Ivory. He rode down Bouverie Road West into Earl’s Avenue and went into Grimston Gardens, coming out of the gardens by the gate in order to get into Grimston Avenue. He then saw Dobbs outside No. 29 and as he (witness) crossed the road he heard a sound of splintering glass from the back of No. 29. He went to No. 31 in order to telephone to the police, but the telephone was out of order. He therefore went to No. 33 and left a message there to be telephoned. When he came out of there he saw Dobbs walk across the road and turn from Grimston Avenue into Grimston Gardens. He stood by the side of a tree for a few seconds. Immediately after P.C. McNaughton came along on his bicycle and he spoke to him. Dobbs, by that time, had disappeared. He saw P.C. McNaughton go to the back entrance of No. 29, Grimston Avenue, and later he saw detective officers arrive in a car.

Cross-examined, witness said he had never, so far as he knew, seen Dobbs previous to that night. He was positive Dobbs was the man outside No. 29. About a quarter of an hour or ten minutes elapsed from the first time he saw the two men to the detective officers arriving. Later he saw some people standing near the two police cars, but he did not recognise Dobbs as one of them because he did not take particular notice of them.

Mr. Baxter: You never saw the man whom you had seen outside the house from the moment the police officer arrived until you attended at the Police Court next morning?

Witness: No, sir.

In reply to the Recorder witness said the man whom he saw walking up and down was short and fat. When he passed, behind the two men as he came out of No. 31, Grimston Avenue they were quite close to a street lamp. Proceeding, witness said as he came out of No. 33, after leaving a message to be telephoned, Dobbs was standing under a tree and remained there until P.C. McNaughton arrived.

P.C. McNaughton said he inspected the furnished and unoccupied house, No. 29, Grimston Avenue on December 19^th at 8.55 p.m. It was then all cor­rect. He went round Grimston Gar­dens on his cycle and he returned into Grimston Avenue, where he saw two men, one of whom was Dobbs. The other, whom he learned subsequently, was the witness, Bedford. Dobbs was practically opposite No. 25 and was walking towards Grimston Gardens, and was going away from No. 29. In consequence of what Bedford said he made an inspection of No. 29 and he found two panes of glass had been broken in the kitchen.        

Shortly after lie met two detective officers with whom he had a conversation, and he immediately went after Dobbs whom he saw in Grimston Gardens walking towards Earls Avenue. He said to him “Dobbs, I want you”. Dobbs replied “What for?” He then said “I have seen you coming away from the direc­tion of a house that has been entered and I shall detain you for enquiries”. Dobbs made no reply to that. He took him back to the house, where he saw Ivory in the company of the two detec­tives. Dobbs waited outside the house with him for five or seven minutes before being taken away in the police car.

Det. Sgt. Johnson said that at 9.33 p.m. on December 19^th he went with Det. Constable Bates in a police car to No. 28, Grimston Avenue in consequence of a telephone message received. As the car was going along Grimston Gardens he saw Dobbs walking along on the garden side. He (witness) proceeded in the car into Grimston Avenue where he saw P.C. McNaughton, to whom he gave certain instructions. He went to No. 29 and examined the rear of the premises. He found that a window in the scullery and another window had been broken. Det. Constable Bates, and he entered the           premises and found Ivory hiding behind an armchair in the kitchen. They searched him and in his possession were found a torch, a screwdriver and a table knife, while he was also wearing gloves. When he got outside with Ivory, P. C. McNaugh­ton and two other officers were there with Dobbs. As Dobbs was about to be put into the police van he made a re­mark as to what he was being taken in for and he (witness) believed his reply was “If you do not know, you soon will”. He did not then explain anything to him. Dobbs and Ivory were taken to the Police Station and at about 11.20 they were formally charged and cautioned. Ivory replied in Dobbs’ pre­sence “I saw Dobbs earlier in the even­ing, but he had nothing to do with it”. Dobbs said “I was not near the house. I was fetched to the house by a policeman”.

Inspector Rowe gave evidence that he was in charge of the Police Station when Ivory and Dobbs were brought in, and they were cautioned and charged.

Cross-examined, witness said he believed Dobbs had a perfectly good character.

Mr. Waddy: I can tell Mr. Baxter Dobbs has a perfectly clean record.

The Recorder intimated to Mr. Baxter that there was certainly a case for him to meet.

Dobbs, giving evidence, said in Dec­ember he was employed at the School of Education at Shorncliffe. He had never been charged with any offence before. He joined the Army when he was 14½ years of age and had to be dis­charged because he was under age. He later joined the Army and after serv­ing ten years he was discharged with exemplary character. He was employed as a night watchman at the Astoria Theatre for two and a quarter years and left there because of a reduc­tion in the staff, being given a good reference. He obtained his present employment in May last year. On December 19^th he went to the Circle Club in Sandgate Road at about twenty minutes past eight, leaving there about twenty minutes later. He had a drink in the Club and during the time he was there Ivory came into the Club. He had a conversation with him, but he did not leave the Club with Ivory. When he left he walked up Sandgate Road as far as the Metropole Hotel and he was going on to the Leas, but owing to the weather he turned into Grimston Avenue and then turned along Grimston Gardens towards his

home. He was not with Ivory in Grimston Avenue at any time that night, neither did he walk up and down outside No. 29, or any other house in Grimston Avenue that evening. P.C. McNaughton came up to him in Grimston Gardens and said “Dobbs, I want you”.  He replied “What do you want me for?” and the constable said “You will soon find out”. He there­fore went back with him to the police car, which was standing outside No. 29. He talked to one of the drivers of the two cars there and said “What is wrong?” and he replied he did not know. He agreed that Det. Sgt. Johnson when he spoke to him as to why they wanted him, said “You will soon find out”.

Cross-examined, witness said Ivory left the Circle Club a few minutes before him, but he did not know where he was going. It was quite wrong for Det. Sgt. Johnson to say he saw him walking on the gardens side of Grimston Gardens. He did not see the police car pass him. It was not the truth to say that he knew Ivory was going to break into the house and that he was waiting outside in case he was disturbed.

The jury were absent about seven minutes considering their verdict and when they returned to the Court the foreman announced that they found Dobbs Guilty.

Ivory was then placed in the dock with Dobbs.

Det. Sgt. Johnson said Ivory was born at Folkestone. His father was the licensee of the Bouverie Hotel, Folkestone. The defendant’s mother was now the proprietress of a boarding house. Ivory attended school until the age of 16 years and on leaving was apprenticed to motor engineers at Folkestone for two years. From 1926 to 1929 he assisted his father in his business at the Bouverie Hotel. When the family left the hotel, Ivory went to Germany as a teacher of English, being employed with the Berlitz Schools at three different towns for eighteen months. He returned to England as he saw no prospects of advancement and was out of employ­ment until January, 1932, when he went to Jamaica to try and find employment. Being unable to find employment he returned to England in June, 1932. In November of that year his mother opened the boarding house and since then Ivory had lived there and assisted in the business.  He was married on the 21^st May last year. “Ivory has long been suspected of being concerned in breaking offences”, continued Det. Sgt. Johnson, “in this borough and has been interrogated respecting the same on more than one occasion. He has been closely associ­ated with two men who have recently been convicted and sentenced to im­prisonment for burglary and other offences with two other men. It is also known that he has associated with well- known members of the criminal fraternity in London. He is a heavy i drinker and spends most of his time in clubs and public house bars. There are no previous convictions recorded against him”.

Witness, proceeding, said Dobbs was bom at Llanharran, Glamorgan, and both his parents were dead. His father was a colliery fireman. Prisoner attended the Llanwood School, Ponty­pridd, until 14 years of age. He was then employed as an engine driver in the Great Western Colliery, Pontypridd, for three years. In July, 1920, he joined the Royal Corps of Signals and served in Sierra Leone, West Africa, and Ireland until 1924. He was then unemployed for a year, when he again enlisted into the Dragoon Guards, being discharged time expired in 1932. He was then unemployed until April 15^th, 1935, when he obtained employment as night watchman and cleaner at the Astoria Cinema, Folkestone. He lost the situation on December 4^th, 1937, when the staff was reduced. He was again unemployed until May, 1938, when he obtained a situation as waiter in the Warrant Officers and Sergeants’ Mess at the Army School of Education. He was in that situation at the time of his arrest. His Army character was ex­emplary. He was a single man. There were no previous convictions recorded against him.

Mr. Parkes said he would like to ask the witness if it was right that the aspersions he had made about Ivory’s previous conduct was largely based upon his association with certain men together with statements he had made. At any rate, neither his associations nor his associations with other men had led the police to place any evidence before a jury?

Det. Sgt. Johnson: That is so.

He has never been charged before? -  Never.

After this burglary, to which he has pleaded guilty, did a police officer visit his mother’s house and search the premises? - I did.

Doubtless you make a thorough search and it is right to say nothing could be found there of which complaint could be made? - That is so.

Mr. Parkes said Ivory desired him to express his very sincere regret for hav­ing committed that serious crime, the seriousness of which he now fully appreciated and more so that his arrest had brought considerable trouble upon himself and his mother, a very respect­able woman, who carried on a good class boarding house business in Folke­stone. Added to the natural anxiety of a mother finding her son in that situa­tion, one could understand the harm a charge of that kind must do to her business. More than that, Ivory’s wife, to whom he was married a short time ago, had left him as a result of his arrest. He did urge upon the Recorder that one of his reasons for asking him to deal as leniently as he could with Ivory it might be that if dealt with leniently, his wife would be the more ready to return to him, the other alter­native being the possibility if they were apart for a time the estrangement between them might be permanent. The police had told the Court that Ivory had been suspected for some time of having been connected with house breaking in that borough. He (Mr. Parkes) asked the Recorder to ignore that suggestion completely. It arose through his association with undesir­able persons. The prisoner admitted he had associated with undesirable persons, but he denied quite definitely ever before taking part in any adventure of this kind. Ivory when arrested said “I expected you would get me sooner or later”. The explanation he desired him (Mr. Parkes) to put forward for that was that as they had heard through his associa­tions he had been frequently inter­rogated by the police. It was the fact of the numerous frequent interrogations caused some resentment in his mind against the police, whether it was right or not, and the expression he used arose from that resentment. “The prisoner tells me”, (Mr. Parkes proceeded, “on the evening on the day on which he committed this burglary he was approached by a certain man. I do not think it would be right for me to mention this unless I gave the name of the man and where to find him. I have written it down and written down his occupation, and I should be glad to hand it up to the Recorder or if the police would like to know it it is here for them. The prisoner was approached by this man in a motor car; he called to him at his home and took him to Hythe and there he plied him wit drink and then brought him back to Folkestone. On the way back, Ivory being under the influence of drink he had taken, this man suggested to him he should break into this house and gave him the information in regard to it being empty and so forth. Having made that suggestion, which in his con­fused condition rather appealed to the prisoner, they went to the Circle Club, as you have heard.” Mr. Parkes, continuing, said after leaving the Club they went to an hotel, where the prisoner was again plied with drink by that man. He had a witness whom he would call to tell the Court that that particular man was there and that the prisoner was being supplied with drink, and just after nine he was definitely showing the result of the drinks he had taken. He (Mr. Parkes) could not put forward, as they knew, that he was drunk as any excuse for the course the prisoner took, but be did ask the Recorder to take into consideration that there was a man of good character, who had had more drink than was good for him and who, at the suggestion of another man, an older man, took part in that crime. When they left the hotel he was instructed that Ivory was driven off in a car by a man, presumably in the direction of this house. He (Mr. Parkes) appreciated at the time of his arrest Ivory was found in possession of certain articles of which the Court might desire some explana­tion. He instructed him to say the screwdriver was given him by that man and the torch was given to him for the purpose of returning it to a man from whom it was borrowed some time ago. “That it is not the work of a pro­fessional housebreaker”, Mr. Parkes con­tinued, “is supported by the way in which it was carried out. If one had listened to the evidence in the case the first thing that would strike one is the very amateurish way these two men set about their project. These two men set about their project by discussing on the public footpath the house they were going to enter. That is obviously the conduct of persons who were neither experienced housebreakers nor persons who, at the time they committed the crime, were really wholly responsible for their actions as they would be if they were sober”. He proposed to call two witnesses, and having heard that evidence he would ask the Recorder to treat that case as leniently as possible with Ivory, who had committed that crime at the instigation of someone else and com­mitted at a time when he had visited public house after public house and was definitely suffering from drink. His learned friend, Mr. Baxter, asked him to make it clear that the other man of whom he had spoken was not the prisoner Dobbs. He wished to add that it would be foolish for him, on behalf of the prisoner, to make those sugges­tions about another man unless he was prepared to give his name and such particulars as were necessary to identify him.

Mr. Aubrey McElroy, 75, Shornclifle Crescent, Folkestone, said on December 19^th he went into the Queen’s Hotel, where he saw Ivory at eight minutes to nine. He would say he was very drunk. He was with another man and they left together eventually. He saw them at about four or five minutes past nine standing by a saloon car outside tile hotel. He had known Ivory for two years and was one of his great friends. He spoke to Ivory and tried to persuade him not to have any more drink. He could not say that Ivory was plied with drinks because he was not there sufficiently long enough.

Cross-examined, witness said he did say they were serving Ivory with drink, but he had a glass by the side of him.

Mr. Waddy: Did you see him drink?

Witness: I really only noticed a glass by the side of him.

Is it your opinion that he was, as my friend talks about, being plied with drink at that hotel? - I should not think so.

In answer to further questions, wit­ness said in view of Ivory’s condition he did not think he could have climbed through a broken window.

Mr. Waddy: Do you think he would be likely at half past nine to be in the condition as described by the police officer?

Witness: I suppose the shock of see­ing the police officers might have sobered him.

He was found not only with a screw­driver, a torch and a table knife, but he was wearing gloves? You know gloves are things to prevent finger prints being left? - Yes, but they are also for wearing in cold weather.

Questioned by the Recorder, witness said he did not think Ivory would drink a terrific amount. He had seen him be­fore as intoxicated as he was on Decem­ber 19^th. He should think it was obvious to everyone that he was drunk. He did not know if he was refused, but merely noticed a glass by the side of him.

Mrs. E.J. Ivory, the mother of the prisoner, said she kept a boarding house and he had been living with her for two months.   In spite of that case she would provide him with a home, for he was her right hand. If the Recorder found it possible to let him go on cer­tain conditions, with someone looking after him, she would be prepared to co-operate with that particular person.

Questioned by the Recorder, Mrs. Ivory said her son was married in May and his wife lived with him until Christmas Eve. Her son and his wife lived at a flat first and later they came to live in the boarding house with her. They appeared to get on well together.

Mr. Baxter, on behalf of Dobbs, said that he had had not merely a good character, but an excellent character, which his Army discharge papers showed as exemplary. He had many testi­monials from officers under whom he had served, and when he left the Astoria in December, 1937, the manage­ment stated he was excellent in every way. At the School of Education his services had been perfectly satisfactory. It was difficult under those circum­stances to understand why he had committed the offence with which he had been found guilty. He had had a conversation with him since the finish of the case against him and he assured him he had never been out with Ivory before and that he was completely un­able to give any explanation why he went with Ivory on that occasion. He, however, assured him he would not commit any offence of that kind again. He had been already in custody for five weeks, and the Recorder might think that that fulfilled the function which he might think was necessary. He had had his lesson. He (Mr. Baxter) said he was instructed to say from an officer of the School of Education that if a certain course was taken it would permit the matter of his employment being referred to a higher Authority. If he was sentenced he would lose his position.

The Recorder, addressing Ivory, said he had pleaded guilty to burglary. Very few burglars would meet with but little encouragement in that Court. He had listened to the very eloquent and able speech on his behalf by Mr. Norman Parkes, but he did not find himself in the position to be able to take the lenient view which he was asked to do. Ivory’s character was not good, but he was not sentencing him on the character he might have been given, but sentencing him for the offence he had committed. He noted when considering the matter whether he be an amateur or professional burglar, he  had in his equipment a torch and a screwdriver. He also had a most useful weapon, a knife which could easily be slipped between the sash of a double window. Whether he was proposing to use that in that way he did not know. He (the Recorder) did not think he would be doing his duty towards the community if he did not impose a sentence upon him, and he did not think he would be doing justice if he sentenced him to a term of less than six months` imprisonment.

Concerning Dobbs, he had been found guilty, and he thought very properly so, of aiding and abetting Ivory. It might seem to Dobbs not quite so serious an offence, as Mr. Waddy said, to fill the part, of “keeping cave”, but it was a very necessary part if a burglary was to be successful. He would have been surprised if the jury had come to any other decision, having regard to the very clear evidence of the young chef, who would not say anything without thought and evident delibera­tion. He (the Recorder) bore in mind that he had a good character and that it might be possible for him to be taken into his employment again if a certain course was adopted. He was not going so far as that, but he proposed to remand him and he would have enquiries directed to that department of the Army. If, when he came up for Judgment at the next Sessions, he would be able to be taken into employment he would be in no worse position than being bound over. He therefore passed no sentence upon him, but remanded him in custody until the next Quarter Sessions.

Folkestone Herald 28-1-1939

Local News

A suggestion that a man had been “incited” to commit a burglary after be­ing plied with drinks was made by counsel at Folke­stone Quarter Sessions on Saturday, when Ely John Michael Ivory, of Alexandra Gardens, Folkestone, a board­ing-house manager, pleaded guilty to a charge of burglary. Ivory admitted breaking and entering 29, Grimston Avenue, the residence of Mrs. Florence Murial King, with intent to steal, on the night of December 19^th. Brinley Dobbs, 35, of Grace Hill, Folkestone, a waiter, was found guilty of aiding and abetting Ivory.

The Recorder (Mr. Tristram Beresford, K.C) sentenced Ivory to six months’ imprisonment, and postponed sentence on Dobbs to the next sessions.

Mr. B.H. Waddy prosecuted, Mr. Norman Parkes represented Ivory and Mr. H.J. Baxter appeared for Dobbs.

After Ivory had pleaded guilty, a jury was empanelled to hear the case against Dobbs, who pleaded not guilty to “being present and aiding and abetting and assisting Ivory to commit such crime”.

Opening the case, Mr. Waddy said while Ivory was breaking into this house, 29, Grimston Avenue, with intent to steal, the prosecution alleged that Dobbs was outside doing what j schoolboys called “keeping cavey”. The house had for some little time been left unoccupied at night, but the owner had been there during the day (December 19^th) and everything was to order when she left at 6.30 p.m. Shortly after 9 o’clock a young man named Bedford, who was employed next door and was leaving for home, saw two men. He would tell them that he was perfectly certain Ivory and Dobbs were the two men, and he heard one say to the other “This is the house”, and the other replied “No, this is the one”.

Counsel, continuing, said later a police officer arrived and Dobbs, who had been seen outside the house for some time, was detained.

William J.H. Miller, 30, Millfield, Folkestone, a handyman employed by Mrs. King at 29, Grimston Avenue, said the house was not occupied at night on December 19^th but he had been there during the day. Witness and Mrs. King left at 6.30 p.m. and the house was secure.

Robert M. Bedford, 225, Dover Road, Folkestone, a chef employed at 31, Grimston Avenue, next door to No. 29, said on Monday, December 19^th, he started to go home about 9.10 p.m. He left by the drive; it was snowing and the wind was howling. As he came out of No. 31 he saw two men passing the first gate of No. 31. One man was Dobbs and the other was Ivory. He heard one say “This is the house”, and the other said “No it isn’t, this is the one”. They passed the gate and stopped by No. 29. Witness got on his bicycle to ride away, but on turning round he noticed that Ivory was no longer there. Dobbs, however, was outside, walking up and down between Nos. 27 and 29. Witness rode as far as Bouverie Road West, about 200 to 250 yards away, and then stopped at the corner. Looking back he could see Dobbs, who was still walking up and down. Witness got on his bicycle, rode into Grimston Gardens by way of Earl`s Avenue and eventually got back to Grimston Avenue, opposite Nos. 29 and 31. Dobbs was then outside No. 29. As he crossed the road he heard the splintering of glass coming from the back of No. 29. Witness attempted to telephone from No. 31, but the phone was out of order and he sent a message from No. 33. When he came out he saw Dobbs walking across Grimston Avenue to Grimston Gardens. Dobbs then stood beside a tree for a few seconds. P.C. McNaughton arrived and witness spoke to him. Dobbs had then gone. P.C. McNaughton went to the back entrance of No. 29, and then to the front door. As he went to the rear of the house detectives arrived in a car.

Mr. Baxter: As far as you know, you had never seen Dobbs before that night?

Witness: No.

And it was a very dark, snowy night? - It was.

When you were coming out of the drive of No. 31 the men whom you saw had passed the gate? - Yes.

You never saw their faces? - Yes, there is a lamp post outside our house.

From the time you heard the men speaking to the time the police arrived, how long do you think it was? – About 11 minutes.

Replying to further questions, witness said Dobbs was wearing the same coat on that night as he was that day.

The Recorder: The man whom you saw and identified was Dobbs, apart from the heavy coat he had on, can you describe him to the jury?

Witness: He was short and fat.

How near did you pass these two men? - I passed behind them.    

Replying to a further question by the Recorder, witness said he could see the men quite distinctly by the street lamp outside No. 31.

P.C. McNaughton said on December 19^th at 8.55 p.m. he inspected 29, Grimston Avenue and found everything correct. He returned to Grimston Avenue shortly after and saw two men there. He knew one of them as Dodds: the other was Bedford. When witness came back to Grimston Avenue Dobbs was practically opposite No. 29. Bedford spoke to him and, making an inspection of No. 29, Grimston Avenue, he found that two panes of glass of the kitchen had been broken. Returning to the front of the house he met two detective officers. Withes spoke to them and then went after Dobbs. He found him between Nos. 7 and 9, Grimston Gardens. He said to him: “Dobbs, I want you''. He asked what for and witness replied “I have seen you coning away from 29, Grimston Avenue, which has been entered and I shall detain you for enquiries”.  Dobbs made no reply. He took Dobbs back to No. 29, where the police van was; after getting back there, witness saw Ivory in company of the two detectives. While waiting outside No. 29, he did not hear Dobbs ask why he was being detained.

Mr. Baxter: Didn’t you say to Dobbs when he asked what he was wanted for, “I will tell you later?”

Witness: No.

The Recorder: The first time you saw Dobbs that night he was in Grlmston Avenue or Grimston Gardens?

Witness: Grimston Avenue.

Det. Sergt. Johnson said at 9.33 p.m. on December 19^th he went with Det. Const. Bates to 29, Grimston Avenue in consequence of a telephone message. On the way, when going through Grimtston Gardens, he saw Dobbs. Witness went to No. 29 and found a casement window in the scullery been broken. He entered the premises and searching the kitchen he found Ivory hiding behind an armchair. In his possession were a screwdriver, an electric torch and a table knife. He was wearing gloves. When Ivory was brought out of the house P.C. McNaughton and other officers were there with Dobbs. As Dobbs was about to be put into the police van he made a remark about what he was being taken in for, and witness replied something like “If you don’t know now you soon will”. The defendants were charged at 11.20 p.m. Ivory replied “I saw Dobbs earlier in the evening but he had nothing to do with this”. Dobbs replied “I was not near the house. I was fetched to the house by the policeman”.

Inspector J. Rowe, who also gave evidence, was asked by counsel: “This man has a perfectly good character?” and he replied: “I believe he has”.

Dobbs, giving evidence, said at the time of his arrest he was employed at the School of Education, Shorncliffe Camp. He had joined the Army when he was 14½ and had to be turned down when his age was discovered. Later he joined the Army and was discharged with an exemplary character. He had been employed as a night watchman at the Astoria Cinema, Folkestone, for nearly three years before being discharged owing to a reduction in the number of the staff. He had been at the School of Edu­cation since May, 1938. On Monday, December 19^th, he went to the Circle Club, Sandgate Road, arriving there at 8.40 p.m. after leaving home at 8.20 p.m. He had one glass of beer there. While there Ivory came into the club and he said “Good evening” to him. Ivory went before he (Dobbs) left. Dobbs said he left the club at 9.10 p.m., walked up Sandgate Road as far as the Metropole. He turned right into Grimston Avenue and turned again into Grimston Gardens towards his home. He was at no time in Grimston Avenue with Ivory. He denied walking up and down outside the house; or any other house in that district. P.C. McNaughton came up and said “Eh, Dobbs, I want you”. He said “What do you want?” McNaughton replied “You will soon find out”. Later he asked Sergt Johnson what he was being taken in for. He said: “Haven’t they told you yet?” He (Dobbs) said “No” and the detective then said “You will soon find out”.

Mr. Waddy: Do you know Ivory?

Dobbs: I know him as a casual acquaintance.

Was Ivory at the club that evening? - He came in while I was there.

What time did he leave? - A few minutes before me.

Did you know where he was going? – No.

Mr. Waddy: It was quite a coincidence that you and he both weny up to Grimston Avenue, wasn’t it?

Addressing the jury, Mr. Waddy said in his submission the case against Dobbs had been proved up to the hilt.

The jury were absent only a few minutes before they returned and announced a verdict of Guilty.

Mr. Waddy said when Ivory was discovered in the house he said “All right. I expected you would catch me sooner or later”.

Det. Sergt. Johnson said Ivory`s father was the licensee of a hotel the town. His mother was the proprietress of a boarding house. Ivory was educated at a local school until he was 16. On leaving he was apprenticed to a local firm of motor engineers, remaining there for two years. Then for three years from 1926 to 1929 he assisted his lather in the bar of his hotel. Ivory later went to Germany as a teacher of English, remaining there for 18 months, but seeing no prospects of bettering himself he returned to England and was unemployed until January, 1932  He then went to Jamaica to find work but as there was nothing doing there he returned to Folkestone in June of that year. His mother had opened a boarding house and since then he had assisted his mother in the running of that establishment. Ivory was married on Mat 21^st last year. “Ivory has long been suspected of being concerned with breaking offences committed in this borough and has been interrogated respecting some on more than one occasion”, added the officer. “He has been closely associated with two men who have recently been con­victed and sentenced to imnrisonment for burglary and other offences. It is also known that he is asso­ciated with well-known members of the criminal fraternity in London. He is a heavy drinker and spends most of the time in clubs and public house bars. There are no previous convictions recorded against him”.

With regard to Dobbs, continued the police officer, he was born in Wales and his parents were dead. He joined the Royal Corps of Signals, serving with that unit from 1920 to 1924. He rejoined the Army in 1925 and served until 1932. He was again unemployed until the opening of the Astoria Cinema, Folkestone, in 1934, where he had been employed until 12 months ago as a night watchman. He was discharged owing to a reduction in the staff. At the time of his arrest he was a civilian waiter at the School of Educa­tion, Shorncliffe. He had an exemplary character on leaving the Army and he had never been in trouble with the police.

Mr. Parkes, questioning Det. Sergt. Johnson, asked “Is it right that the suspicions which you entertained about Ivory’s previous conduct are based largely on his association with undesirable persons?”

Det. Sergt. Johnson: Yes, tgether with statements he has made to us at different times.

Mr. Parkes: At any rate, neither his statements nor his association with other persons have ever led the police to be in a position to place any evi­dence before a jury except in regard to this case?

Det. Sergt. Johnson: That is true.

Mr. Parkes: He has never been charged before? - That is a fact.

On the night of the burglary did police officers visit his mother’s house and search the premises? - I did.

Mr. Parkes: He was under arrest from the time of being found in the house until well after you had visited his home? -Yes.

Doubtlessly you made a thorough search but nothing was found there about which complaint could be made? - No.

Addressing the Recorder on behalf of Ivory, Mr. Parkes said defendant desired him in the first place to express his very sincere regret for having com­mitted that serious crime, the serious­ness of which he now fully appreciated, more so as his arrest had brought considerable trouble on himself and his mother. As the Recorder, had heard, Ivory was a married man who had been living with his mother, a respec­table lady carrying on a good class boarding house business in Folke­stone. Added to the natural anxiety of his mother to find her son in that position, one could quite understand the harm a charge of that kind must do to her business. But more than that, defendant’s wife, whom he had married only last year, had left him as a result of his arrest. He (Mr. Parkes) urged upon the Recorder in asking him to deal as leniently as he could with defendant,  that if he did so there might be some hope of his wife returning to him. The police had said that Ivory for some time had been suspected of breakings in the borough. He asked the Recorder to ignore that suggestion completely. It arose from his asso­ciation with undesirable persons, and that defendant had associated with un­desirable persons to some extent Ivory admitted, but he denied that he had ever before taken part in any adven­ture of that kind. Counsel referred to the statement Ivory made when caught and said that defendant wished him to put forward the following explanation. As they had heard, through associations with undesirable persons he had been fre­quently interrogated by the police and that fact caused some resentment in his mind against the police, rightly or wrongly, and that expression he used arose from that resentment. Ivory had told him that on the day he committed this burglary he was approached by a certain man, whose name he (counsel) had written down together with his occupation. That man had a motor car and he called for Ivory on that evening and took him to Hythe. There he plied Ivory with drinks and on the way back to Folke­stone while Ivory was under the in­fluence of the drink he had had, the man suggested to him that he should break into this house, giving him information as regards it being unoccupied. Having made the suggestion which rather appealed to defendant in his condition, they went to the Circle Club and from there to the Queen’s Hotel bar, where Ivory was plied with more drinks by this man. He had a witness who would tell them that it was a fact that this man was there and Ivory was being given drinks. Further, when Ivory left the hotel just after 9 o’clock he was definitely showing the effect of all the drinks he had had.

Counsel said he could not put that forward as any excuse for the crime, but he asked the Recorder to take it into consideration. At the suggestion of another man, an older man, Ivory gave way to the temptation. He (counsel) was instructed that Ivory was driven away by this man, jpresum­ably in the direction of the house which was entered. Continuing, counsel said at the time of his arrest Ivory was found in the possession of certain articles. He (Ivory) instructed him that the screw­driver was given to him by this man and the pocket torch he had borrowed some little time before. That Ivory was not a professional housebreaker was rather supported by the way in which the burglary was carried out. The first thing which must strike one was the very amateur­ish way in which dependants discussed the burglary outside the house. It was the conduct of persons who were not experienced housebreakers or who were not sober. Counsel said the man to whom he had referred was not Dobbs. The name of the man he proposed to hand up on a piece of paper, together with such particulars as were necessary to identify him.

Mr. Parkes then handed to the Recorder the paper, which was afterwards shown to the police.

Aubrey McElroy, a salesman, gave evidence that on the evening of December 19^th he saw Ivory in the Queen`s Hotel at about eight minutes to 9. He was very drunk. He was with two other persons.

Counsel handed to witness the piece of paper bearing the name of the man already referred to and asked him if that was one of the men he saw with Ivory.

Witness said it was. The man in question was talking to Ivory, and when witness went outside he saw them standing by a saloon car. That was four or five minutes after 9.

Cross-examined by Mr. Waddy, witness said he had known Ivory for about two years. He spoke to Ivory on this night at the Queen`s Hotel, but he did not recognise him at first.

Mr. Waddy: Were they serving a very drunk man with more drink?

Witness: I did not actually see him being served.

Mr. Waddy: Is it on your information that my friend says Ivory was being plied with drinks? – I don`t know. He was very drunk.

Mr. Waddy: Able to walk steadily? -  No.

Do you think he could have climbed through a broken window as we know be did? - I should not have thought so.

Do you think that by 9.30 he was likely to be sober as the police officers say he was? - The shock of being found by the police officers might have sobered him.

The Recorder: Do you agree with what the police have said, that he is a very heavy drinker?

Witness: I should not think so.

The Recorder: Have you seen him as intoxicated before as he was on this night? - Not quite.

The Recorder: Was it obvious to everyone that this man was drunk? - I should have thought so.

Mrs. Lilian J. Ivory, mother of de­fendant, said that for a very consider­able time her son had been managing her boarding house business for her. In spite of what had occurred she was prepared to let him continue to reside with her; he was her right hand.

Replying to the Recorder, Mrs. Ivory said her son and his wife had lived at a flat but she got him to come to reside with her because the flat was damp. Her son`s wife left him on Christmas Eve.

The Recorder: Did they appear to get on well together before?

Mrs. Ivory: Very well.

Mr. Baxter said Dobbs wished him to say that he had never been out before with Ivory and he was quite unable to give any explanation as to why he went with Ivory on this particular evening. Dobbs also wanted to say he would not commit any offence of that kind again. He had been in custody five weeks and it had been a lesson to him. He (Mr. Baxter) was informed that Dobbs might be able to return to his work, but it would be a matter for a higher authority to decide.

The Recorder, addressing Ivory said he had pleaded Guilty to a very serious offence, one for which, as long as he was Recorder of the borough, would meet with no encouragement from him. He had listened to counsel’s very eloquent and able speech on his behalf, but he did not find himself in a position to be able to take the lenient view suggested.

His (Ivory’s) character was not good, but he was not sentencing him on his character; he was sentencing him for the offence he had committed. Whether he was an amateur or a professional, he had, apart from the screwdriver and torch, a most useful weapon in the knife found in his possession. He (the Recorder) did not think he would be doing his duty if he passed on him a less sentence than six months’ imprisonment.

Addressing Dobbs, the Recorder said he had been found guilty of aiding and abetting Ivory. It might not seem such a serious offence. It was not a very meritorious part “keeping cave” but it was a necessary part if the burglary had been successful. Bearing in mind, so far as Dobbs' was concerned, that he had a good character and it might be possible for him to be taken back into employment again, he was going to remand him in custody until the next sessions. He would have enquiries made to whether he could be taken back into his former job.