 |
| Former Bricklayers` Arms, c1928, on left. Credit Folkestone Library |
Licensees
John
Pope 1838 1850
Mr.
Watch 1850 1852
Robert Winch 1852
George
Kennett 1852 1858
William Wormwell 1859 1859
Joseph
Bromley 1859 1867 To Dew Drop Inn
William
Peel 1867 c1871
Anne
Whiting c1871 1884(1871 Census)
Joseph
Whiting 1884 1906
Frances
Whiting 1906 1907
Joseph
Wormald 1907 1908
Dover Chronicle
28-5-1842
Dover
Police, yesterday: James Austen, a tall, raw-boned urchin, about 18, was
charged with carrying, conveying, and concealing, on Wednesday last, 3½ gallons
of foreign brandy, contrary to the statute. He pleaded Not Guilty. By the
testimony of James Wittingstall it appeared that the defendant was seen
carrying a trunk, which he (witness) immediately traced and found it in the
Romney mail cart while it was standing in Bench Street, previous to it starting
for the west. On taking the trunk from the mail cart and opening it witness
found it to contain six bladders of brandy. Defendant seemed surprised at the
discovery, and said the trunk was left at Mr. Rayner`s (his master`s) house,
and said that Mr. Rayner had told him to take it to the mail. Defendant said he
did not know what the trunk contained, and he (witness) thought he did not seem
to know.
The
trunk was addressed to “Mr. Collins, to be left at Mr. Pope`s, Bricklayers
Arms, Folkestone”, but the direction was altogether ficticious. Witness did not
see defendant put the box into the mail, but could swear the box seized was the
one he saw defendant carrying.
The
defendant`s master, Mr. Rayner, was examined as a witness, and admitted that he
directed Austen to take the box to the mail, but denied having any knowledge of
its contents.
The
case was dismissed, defendant being (it was believed) ignorant of what the box
contained.
Dover Telegraph
28-5-1842
Dover
Police, Friday.
James
Austen, charged with an offence against the Excise. James Whittingstall, a drop
boatman in the Excise, said: On Tuesday morning, about half past five, I saw
Austen carrying a trunk in Beach Street, when he turned a corner leading to
Rayner`s stable. I followed and opened the fore part of the Romney mail cart,
which was standing in the yard, where I found the trunk, which I examined and
found therein six bladders, containing about four gallons of spirits of brandy.
Austen was there when I examined the trunk. I asked him where he brought it
from, and he replied a man left it at his master`s (Mr. Rayner`s) house the
night previous, about nine o`clock, and that his master told him to take it to
the mail cart, which he did, and put it in the cart.
By
Mr. Kennett: When I went to search I asked what the trunk contained, and Austen
said he did not know. He offered no resistance, and was very civil.
Mr.
Bayford produced the direction on the box, which was addressed “To Mrs.
Collins, to be left at the Bricklayers Arms, Folkestone”. He had since made
enquiries, and found out the address was fictitious. He knew the handwriting
very well, as he had seen it on many previous occasions.
Mr.
Cotton, Collector of H.M. Customs, said he considered, after this evidence, the
information for illegally carrying was fully sustained, although he felt
satisfied that the defendant was unacquainted with the contents of the trunk,
which would be represented to the Board of Customs.
Mr.
Rayner was then called and said: The trunk was left at my house that morning
about 5 o`clock by some man who called out “Rayner, I`ve got a box for you to
take to Folkestone”. I told him to leave it in the passage, and when I came
down I told Austen to take it to the yard.
By
Mr. Kennett: I do not believe Austen knew the contents, nor did I, so help me
God.
The
Bench, after a consultation, dismissed the case, believing the defendant had no
knowledge of the contents of the trunk.
Dover Chronicle
13-1-1844
The
annual meeting of the Folkestone £10 Burial Society was held on Thursday
evening at the Bricklayers Arms, Fancy Street; Mr. Viney, President, in the
chair. We are sorry to say but few of the members attended. The abstract of the
Treasurer`s accounts is very flattering – all demands paid, and £13 in hand; in
addition to which we would notice that during the past year, of upwards of 500
members, the deaths have been but six – a remarkable proof of the health of the
members.
Canterbury Weekly
Journal 26-4-1845
An
inquest was held on Monday last at the Bricklayer`s Arms, Fancy Street, before
J.J. Bond Esq., Coroner, and a respectable jury, on the body of Thomas Dorrell,
who died on the previous day in consequence of an accident. The jury found
“That the deceased`s death had been accidentally caused by concussion of the
brain, falling from a height to the ground”.
Maidstone Gazette 22-4-1845, Dover Telegraph
26-4-1845
On
Monday last an inquest was held at the Bricklayers Arms, Fancy Street, before
J.J. Bond Esq., and a respectable jury, on the body of Thomas Dorrell, who died
on the previous day in consequence of an accident by falling from the new works
into the harbour. The jury found “That the deceased`s death had been
accidentally caused by concussion of the brain, falling a height from the
ground”.
Kentish Mercury
26-4-1845
On
Monday last an inquest was held at the Bricklayers Arms, Fenchurch Street,
before J.J. Bond Esq., Coroner, and a respectable jury, on the body of Thomas
Dorrell, who died on the previous day, in consequence of an accident as
reported in our paper of last week. The jury found “that the deceased`s death
had been occasioned by concussion of the brain, falling from a height to the
ground”
Note: There was no Folkestone news reported in the previous week`s
paper.
Canterbury Journal
9-9-1848
Court
of Bankruptcy, Sept. 4: Re. Richards, Folkestone.
This
was the first meeting for the proof of debts and choice of assignees under the
of Thomas Richards, of Mill Lane, Folkestone, brewer, &c. Mr. Bower, of
Chancery Lane, agent for Mr. Hart, of Folkestone, attended as solicitor to the
fiat, which was issued on the 16th of August last, upon the petition
of Mr. John Isaac Pope, of Folkestone, builder, a creditor for £77 17s.
It
appeared that the bankrupt packed up his furniture and property on the 16th
of August last, and was assisted by G. Fynn, a labouring man, to remove it to
the railway for London, when the present summary mode of taking possession of
it was adopted by Mr. Pope, the petitioning creditor.
After
the admission of several proofs, Mr. Pope was chosen assignee, and accepted the
choice, and further proceedings were adjourned until the 13th
October next, on which day the bankrupt must come up to pass his last examination.
Protection
was granted the bankrupt in the interim.
Viaduct Brewery, most likely Mill Bay.
Dover Telegraph
21-10-1848, Canterbury Weekly Journal 28-10-1848
Court
of Bankruptcy: Re. Richards, Folkestone.
The
bankrupt, Thomas Richards, of Mill Lane, Folkestone, Kent, brewer and beer
seller, came up on Friday, as that day had been fixed for him to pass his last
examination
Mr.
Bower, of Chancery Lane, agent for Mr. Hart, of Folkestone, solicitor, attended
on behalf of the trade assignee, Mr. J.I. Pope, of Fancy Street, Folkestone,
builder, whose debt is £77 17s.
It
appeared that the bankrupt was not prepared with his accounts and had not filed
any balance sheet, and the Court, with the consent of the assignees, adjourned
his examination until the 17th November next. The debts proved at
this meeting were about £340.
Dover Telegraph 2-6-1849, Kentish Gazette, Maidstone Gazette, Maidstone Journal
5-6-1849
Auction
Extract:
Canterbury:
Important sale of the extensive brewery of Messrs. Flint, including thirty
old-established inns and public houses. Mr. V.J. Collier has received
instructions to sell by auction, at the Fountain Hotel, Canterbury, on Tuesday
and Wednesday, the 26th and 27th of June, at twelve
o`clock each day (in consequence of the death of the senior
acting Partner and the retirement of the surviving Partners), the valuable property
known as Messrs. Flint`s Brewery, in Stour Street, Canterbury, and the inns,
public houses, and other valuable property connected therewith
The second day`s sale, on Wednesday, 27th
June, will comprise the following property:
Lot 46 – The Lord Nelson, Radnor Street,
near the harbour, Folkestone – Freehold
Lot 47 – The Bricklayers` Arms, Fancy
Street, Folkestone - Freehold
The Public Houses are for the most part in the occupation of
unexceptionable tenants, and the majority of them are doing trades, both in beer and spirits, considerably above
the average run of country houses, (none
of them here been beer-shops; they are old licensed houses, with connections
of long standing, thereby affording ample security for the permanence of the trade.
The premises
generally are in a superior state of repair.
Particulars and plans (price 1s. Each) may be had of Messrs.
Furleys & Mercer Solicitors, Canterbury; at the Fountain Hotel; and of Mr.
V. J. Collier, 3, Moorgate Street, London.
Canterbury Journal
30-6-1849
The
sale of the extensive premises of Messrs. Flint, brewers, of this city, took
place on Tuesday and Wednesday at the Fountain Hotel. The competition for most
of the lots was very keen. The following is a statement of the result.
Lord
Nelson, Folkestone, £360, Mr. Ash: Bricklayers Arms, not sold.
Kentish Gazette
3-7-1849
Messrs.
Flint`s Property: The sale of the
extensive property of Messrs. Flint, brewers, Stour Street, Canterbury, took
place on Tuesday and Wednesday, at the Royal Fountain Hotel, under the able
administration of Mr. V.J. Collier. The sale room was crowded by respectable company, and the
competition for most of the lots was very keen. At the close the auctioneer
received many compliments for the gentlemanly and straightforward manner in
which he conducted the business throughout. The following is a statement of the
result:
Second day`s sale:
Lot 46 Lord Nelson, Folkestone £300 Mr. Ash
Lot 47 Bricklayers` Arms, Folkestone Not sold
Dover Chronicle
11-5-1850
Dover
Petty Sessions, Monday, before the Mayor, and C.B. Wilkins and W. Cocke Esqs.
George
Marley, a joiner, residing at Folkestone, was brought up on suspicion of being
concerned in stealing a cigar case, value 1s., from the Fountain Inn, Market
Place, Dover.
Mr.
Henry Church, prosecutor, stated that on the day previous four young men came
into his house and called for refreshment, with which they were supplied. The
cigar case was then in the room. The parties stopped about ten minutes, and
soon after they had left he missed the case. He gave information to the police,
and the parties (who, it appeared, had remained in the town about an hour or
two afterwards) were traced to the railway terminus, from which they started
for Folkestone, only a few minutes before the police arrived there in search of
them. This morning Marley, one of the party, came to the prosecutor`s house
with the case, which he wished to deliver up, but prosecutor, having informed
the police of the affair, considered no compromise could be made, and refused
to receive the box. A policeman being called in, the box was given to him, and
Marley was taken into custody.
Marley,
on being called upon for a reply to the charge, said that he, with three
others, visited the Fountain to obtain refreshment on their arrival from
Folkestone. They remained there about 10 minutes, during which one of the
party, named Hutchings, took the cigar case from the mantel but, being
immediately remonstrated with for meddling with other people`s property, he
replaced it, where he (Marley) supposed it was remaining when they left the
house. In one hour afterwards, Hutchings (who must have retaken it unseen by
any of the party) produced it from his pocket. Marley adverted to the
impropriety of Hutchings`s conduct, and advised that they should all return to
the Fountain, and by having more refreshment endeavour during the time that
would elapse to replace the abstracted article, without awakening any
unpleasant suspicion in the mind of the landlord. The suggestion, however, was
not attended to, and it was hinted that it would be better to destroy the case.
To this Marley would not consent, and proposed that they should adjourn to some
house in the vicinity of the terminus and, after packing it up, forward it to
the owner. Hutchings dissented, saying the case must either be destroyed or
taken from Dover. They left, by rail, for Folkestone, and there, between 9 and
10 o`clock, Hutchings delivered the box to Marley, to forward it to Dover, as
he himself should not have an opportunity of doing so, in consequence of having
to go to work at Newington, some five miles from Folkestone. Marley took the
case, and on Monday morning, fearing that to retain too long possession of it
might place him in an awkward position, he hired a fly, at an expense of 8s.,
to convey him to Dover, where he arrived at an early hour, and immediately
proceeded to the Fountain, when his interview resulted as stated by the
prosecutor.
The
Bench were disposed to credit the statement of Marley, but decided on
adjourning the case till next day, in order to have the other parties brought
from Folkestone.
Tuesday,
before C.B. Wilkins and W. Cocke Esqs.
George
Marley, James Hutchings, John Welch and Jas. Williams, the parties connected
with the cigar case brought before the Bench on Monday appeared today.
Hutchings (whose friends reside at Deal) stated that he found the box in his
possession when he returned to Folkestone, but as he was intoxicated he had no
recollection of taking it from the Fountain. The others said they were innocent
of the transaction, through which they had been much inconvenienced.
Welch
said that he himself kept a public house at Folkestone, and if a case of this
kind had taken place there he should not have taken any notice of it had anyone
returned the missing article, as Marley had done in the present instance.
The
Bench remarked that it would seem as if the innocent had been hardly dealt
with, but the steps taken had been considered necessary. Those who had no part
in taking away the box ought to have seen that it was returned before leaving
the town, as they were aware of it being in Hutchings`s possession. They hoped
the inconvenience to which they had been put would operate as a caution as to
whom they associated with in future.
After
a full explanation had taken place, Mr. Church declined to press the charge.
As
Hutchings consented to pay the whole of the expenses incurred, the case was not
further proceeded with, the Magistrates reminding him that he had escaped being
committed for trial.
Dover Telegraph
11-5-1850
Dover
Petty Sessions, Monday, before the Mayor, and C.B. Wilkins and W. Cocke Esqs.
George
Marley, a joiner, residing at Folkestone, was brought up on suspicion of being
a party to the stealing a cigar case, value 1s., from a room in the Fountain
Inn, Market Place, Dover.
Mr.
Henry Church, prosecutor, stated that on the previous day four young men came
into his house and called for some refreshment, with which they were supplied.
The cigar case was then in the room. The parties stopped about ten minutes, and
almost immediately after they were gone the case was missed, of which
information was given to the police, and the parties (who appeared to have
remained in Dover nearly two hours after the transaction) were ultimately
traced to the railway station, from which they had taken their departure for
Folkestone, but a few minutes before the arrival at the Dover station of the
police in search of them. This morning Marley, one of the four, came to the
Fountain with the box in his possession, which he wished to deliver up, but as
witness had already put the affair into the hands of the police, he considered
no compromise could take place, and declined receiving the box. A police
officer after attended, by whom the box and Marley were taken into custody.
Marley,
on being called for a statement in reply to the charge, said that, as observed
by Mr. Church, he, with three others, visited the Fountain to obtain
refreshment, having previously just from Folkestone. They stayed at the inn
about 10 minutes, during which one of the party, whom he had heard called
Hutchings, took the case from the mantel, remarking at the time that “it was a
very handy concern” &c. Some remonstrance in reference to meddling with
other people`s property induced Hutchings to replace the case on the mantel,
where Marley supposed it was remaining
when they left the house, and for an hour afterwards, when Hutchings, who
unseen by any of the others had again taken it from the mantel, produced it
from his pocket. Marley adverted to the impropriety of Hutchings`s conduct, and
advised that all return to the Fountain, and by having more refreshment
endeavour during the time that would elapse to replace the abstracted article,
without awakening any unpleasant suspicion in the mind of the landlord. Either from fear or shame, or some other
cause, the suggestion was not attended to, and it was hinted that it would be
better to destroy the case. To this Marley would not consent, and proposed
adjournment to some house in the vicinity of the terminus, where the case might
be packed in paper, and forthwith forwarded to its owner. Hutchings dissented
to the proposition, saying the case must either be destroyed or taken from
Dover. The party then proceeded by railway for Folkestone, and there, between 9
and 10 o`clock, Hutchings delivered the case to Marley, to forward it to Dover,
as he himself should not have an opportunity of returning it, in consequence of
having to go to work at Newington, some 5 miles from Folkestone.
Marley
took the case, and on Monday morning, fearing that to retain too long
possession might place him in a rather awkward position, he specially hired a
fly, at an expense of 8s., to carry him to Dover, where he arrived at an early
hour, and immediately proceeded to the Fountain, when his interview resulted as
detailed in the evidence of the prosecutor.
The
Bench were disposed to credit the statements of Marley, but as they were
unsupported by confirmatory evidence, it was considered necessary for the ends
of justice that the other parties should be brought forward, and Marley was
subsequently liberated on bail till Tuesday, Sergeant Back and Police Constable
Pine being in the interim despatched to Folkestone for the attendance of the
other three, who in the course of the day were brought to Dover, and safely
lodged in the police station overnight, to brood over the unpleasant and
discreditable position into which three guiltless men had been placed by the
disreputable praksa of a fourth.
Tuesday,
before C.B. Wilkins and W. Cocke Esqs.
George
Marley, James Hutchings, John Welch and James Williams, the parties connected
with the cigar case brought before the Magistrates on Monday appeared before
the Bench today. Hutchings admitted that he found the box in his possession
when he returned to Folkestone, but being intoxicated he was hardly conscious
of having taken it from the Fountain. The others said they were unconscious of
the transaction, and through it had been put to great inconvenience.
Welch
remarked that he himself kept a public house at Folkestone, and if a similar
case had occurred there he should have looked over it had anyone returned the
missing article, as Marley had done in the present instance.
The
Bench observed that it would seem as if the innocent had been hardly dealt
with, but the steps taken had been necessary and proper. Those who had no part
in taking away the box ought to have persisted in it being returned ere they
left Dover, as they were aware, before their return to Folkestone, of its being
in the possession of Hutchings. It was to be hoped that the inconvenience to
which they had been put would operate as a caution with respect to whom they
associated with for the future.
After
a full explanation had taken place, Mr. Church declined to press the charge,
and Hutchings consenting to pay the expenses incurred by the Police in going to
Folkestone, &c., the case was no further proceeded with, the Magistrates
reminding the only offender that he had narrowly escaped being committed for
trial.
We
have since heard that Hutchings has agreed to refund the disbursements by
Marley on Monday. As the whole were involved in disgrace by Hutchings, he
certainly could not do less than pay the expenses throughout.
Maidstone Gazette
18-2-1851
Petty
Sessions; Before R. Hart Esq., Mayor, S. Mackie, W. Bateman, W. Major, T.
Golder and J. Bateman Esqs.
There
were six publicans charged by the police with serving beer, &c., contrary
to the law. Mr. R.T. Brockman appeared for the Watch Committee; Mr. Delasaux
(Canterbury) for several of the defendants.
James
Hall, Old Marquis of Granby, was charged on the information of police constable
Collins with serving beer before the hour of half past twelve o`clock p.m., on
Sunday, the 2nd instant. Police constable Collins having proved the
case, the Mayor addressed the defendant, telling him that the only object of
the magistrates was to keep the town in an orderly and proper manner. The
magistrates or the police were not actuated by any ill-feeling towards him or
anyone else in his business, but they felt that the law had been disregarded,
and that it was necessary now for all parties that the public houses should not
now do as they had done; the Bench taking all circumstances into consideration,
would mitigate the penalty to 1s. and costs.
Note: The name “Old” Marquis of Granby suggests that this was the
house in the High Street. However, at the time of the 1851 Census, he was in
Radnor Street at what was the Ship, the name of which was crossed out and
Marquis of Granby overwritten. Also, the Post Office Directory for 1851,
information for which would most likely have been compiled in 1850, has him at
the Marquis of Granby in Radnor Street. I feel, therefore, that this report
refers to the Marquis of Granby, Radnor Street.
John
Welch, Bricklayers Arms, for a similar offence, was fined 1s. and costs.
Margaret
Harrison, Lord Nelson, was similarly fined.
The
case against William Burvill, Carrier`s Arms beer shop, was dismissed, for want
of sufficient evidence.
William
Vigor, Rose Inn, for a similar offence, was fined 1s. and costs.
Maidstone Gazette
10-6-1851
Advertisement:
Folkestone, to be let and entered on immediately, an excellent public house in
the above improving town; the rent is low, and more than made by lodgers/
Fixtures, &c., to be taken at a valuation.
Apply
at the Bricklayers Arms, Fancy Street, Folkestone.
Southeastern Gazette
20-4-1852
Wednesday, April 14th: Before W. Major and S.
Mackie Esqs.
The
following licence was transferred: From John Welch, Bricklayers Arms, to Robert
Winch, late of Barham.
Notes: Date for Welch is at variance with More
Bastions, and no record of Winch.
Southeastern Gazette
27-2-1855
Local News
Petty Sessions: Before W. Major and Wm. Kelcey, Esqs.
George Kennett, landlord of the Bricklayer’s Arms,
Fancy-street, was summoned for an assault on Wm. Hobday, a carpenter, on the
morning of the 15th inst.
It appeared that the complainant, with several others,
called at the above-named house about 1 o’clock, and after partaking of several
glasses of brandy and water, a dispute arose respecting the payment of three
glasses, when the landlord (who appeared a powerful man) took his coat off, tucked
up his shirt sleeves, and stating that if they did not pay him he would pay
them, struck Hobday a severe blow on the eye and another on the side of the
head, as he was sitting in his chair.
Several witnesses were called, clearly proving that the
complainant had given no offence, and had paid for what he had as it came in.
The magistrates fined the defendant in the full penalty of
£5, at the same time giving him a severe reprimand; being the landlord, it was
his duty to have done all in his power to have prevented a breach of the peace,
and he was given to understand that it would not be forgotten next licensing
day.
Southeastern Gazette
10-8-1858
Local News
On Wednesday, George Kennett, of the Bricklayers’ Arms,
Fancy Street, was charged with having his house open for the sale of beer at 11
o’clock a.m., on Sunday. Six persons were found in the tap-room, with a quart
jug of beer, by police-constable Swain.
Fined 20s. and costs.
Southeastern Gazette
31-8-1858
Wednesday: Before the Mayor and J. Kelcey,
Esq.
George Kennett, landlord of the Bricklayers’ Arms, Fancy Street,
was summoned for refusing to admit police.
Sergeant Newman and constable Ovenden, who
had gone to the house at 12 o’clock at night, in consequenece of having heard a
noise of several persons talking inside.
He had incurred a penalty of £5, but the
magistrates reduced it to £1 6s.
Wednesday: Before the Mayor and J. Kelcey,
Esq.
The
license of George Kennett, Bricklayer’s Arms, Fancy Street, was refused
Folkestone
Chronicle 2-10-1858
Wednesday September 29th:- Before the Mayor,
G. Kennicott and W. Major esqs.
This
was the adjourned licencing day. The
licence of George Kennett, Bricklayer`s Arms, Fancy Street, was refused.
Canterbury Journal
9-10-1858
At
the sitting of the Magistrates on Wednesday, the following licenses were
transferred: The Bellevue Tavern, from William Hills to Charles Griggs; The
Princess Royal, South Street, from William Tumber to Edward Sturges; and the
Duke of York, Sandgate, from William Wood to Richard Graves Wood. The license
of George Kennett, Bricklayers Arms, Fancy Street, was refused. John Dent, of London, applied for a license
for the London Stores, wine and spirit vaults, Bail Street, was refused, he
having failed to comply with the requirements of the Bench, in producing a
certificate of character from where he last resided.
Southeastern Gazette
26-10-1858
Local News
The licence of the Bricklayers’ Arms public-house, Fancy Street,
which had been refused to Mr. Kennett by the magistrates at the adjourned
licensing day, was now granted to William Wornwell, of Dover.
Note: Date is at variance with More Bastions. No
mention of Wornwell.
Southeastern Gazette
22-2-1859
Local News
At
the Petty Sessions on Wednesday, the licence of the, Brioklayer’s Arms, Fancy Street,
was transferred from Wm. Wormwell to Joseph Bromley.
Folkestone
Chronicle 15-6-1861
Thursday June 13th:- Before Captain
Kennicott, William Major and James Tolputt Esqs.
George Kennett was brought up on a warrant charged with
assaulting his wife.
Ann Holness deposed that on last Saturday week she saw
the prisoner push his wife out of doors, previously to which she had heard
blows struck. The wife went home to her father`s at Uphill, where she remains
in a very precarious state.
Prisoner was admitted to bail until Saturday, the wife
being too ill to attend.
Note: Kennett was previously at Bricklayer`s Arms
Folkestone
Observer 15-6-1861
Thursday June 13th:- Before Captain
Kennicott R.N., W. Major, and J. Tolputt Esqs.
Aggravated Assault On A Wife
George Kennett, brickmaker, and formerly landlord of
the Brickmaker`s Arms (sic), Fancy Street, was charged with viciously
assaulting his wife.
Ann Holness deposed that she lived in New Zealand,
Folkestone, near to the prisoner`s house. About half past seven o`clock of the
evening of Saturday week (June 1st), she was outside the door of her
house. She heard blows inside the prisoner`s house, and heard the prisoner`s
wife call out “Oh don`t”. Shortly afterwards the prisoner opened the door, took
hold of his wife by the shoulder and pushed her into the street, calling to her
to go and fetch a policeman, and when he came he would split his nose down with
a poker. He looked as if he had been drinking.
Ann Hayward also heard the blows, and also heard the
wife exclaim, “Oh don`t kick me”.
The magistrates remanded the prisoner until Saturday,
consenting to take bail, himself in £10, and one surety in £10. His brother
became his surety, and he was liberated.
The poor woman, who is very ill from the effects of her
husband`s treatment, could not make her appearance at the court, and hence the
remand.
Folkestone
Chronicle 22-6-1861
Saturday July 15th:- Before the Mayor,
Captain Kennicott R.N., W. Major. W.F. Browell and A.M. Leith Esqs.
George Kennett was brought up on remand, charged under
the 16th and 17th Victoria, with an aggravated assault on
his wife.
Mr. Minter appeared for defendant.
Hannah Hayward deposed that she heard blows struck in
the prisoner`s house; heard complainant say “Oh, George, do not kick me”.
Harriett Kennett, who appeared very weak, and who was
accommodated with a chair whilst giving her evidence, said she was the wife of
defendant. On Saturday, between 7 and 8 in the evening, defendant came home,
and without any provocation he thrashed me very much with a strap, and turned
me out of doors. He struck me all over and kicked me; he was very spiteful. I
went to my brother`s house. I have been ill and nervous ever since. When
defendant struck me he said he would be the death of me. I have had no medical
advice, but medicine from Mr. Hammon.
Complainant was then cross-examined by Mr. Minter, who
elicited from her that she had put on her bonnet and shawl after she was
beaten, and that she walked as far as Arpinge afterwards, and that she spent
some time on the road at the Red Cow, with her brother, and that she had had a
fit lately.
Mr. Minter then addressed the bench for the defendant,
and submitted there was no evidence to substantiate the aggravated assault, but
would not struggle against a conviction for common assault.
The Mayor said, after a short consultation with his
brother magistrates, that they had taken a very lenient view of the case
against defendant, and had come to the resolution to fine him 10s. and 11s. 6d.
costs, and hoped it would be a warning to him for the future.
Folkestone
Observer 22-6-1861
Saturday June 15th:- Before the Mayor, Capt.
Kennicott, R.N., and W. Major, W.F. Browell, J. Tolputt and A.M. Leith Esqs.
Assault on a wife
George Kennett, (remanded on a charge of assaulting his
wife), was brought up, and the evidence of his wife was taken. Mr. Minter
appeared for the prisoner.
Harriett Kennett said she was the wife of the prisoner.
Between seven and eight o`clock in the evening of that day fortnight her
husband came to her house in New Zealand. He thrashed her about very much with
a strap, and turned her out of doors. He hit her all over with the strap, and
kicked her very spitefully. He told her not to come back to the house any more,
and she went to her brother`s house. She was very ill and nervous after she got
home. The marks of the blows were still on her person. Several times he
declared he would be the death of her. She had since been living with her
father at Uphill.
Cross-examined by Mr. Minter – She could not tell why
her husband struck her. She had been suffering in her health from the blows
received from her husband. When he turned her out of doors he took her
violently by the shoulders. Her present weakness was caused by the beating she
received. She was subject to fits, and sometimes fell down and bruised herself.
In reply to Mr. Browell, witness stated she had had one of these fits lately.
Mr. Minter, addressing the bench, said that if the
bench would take the case as a common assault, the prisoner would be willing to
pay any fine that might be imposed, because no doubt he had put his wife out of
the house; but if the bench deemed the case to be one coming under the
provisions of the Act for Aggravated Assaults, he should call evidence to rebut
the allegations of excessive violence.
The Bench then convicted the prisoner of a common
assault, fining him 10s. with 11s 6d costs, or one month`s imprisonment.
Folkestone
Observer 12-12-1863
Tuesday December 8th: Before the Mayor, J.
Kelcey and R.W. Boarer Esq.
James Lennard was charged with being drunk and riotous
in Seagate Street.
P.C. Hills said: This morning, about 2 o`clock, I saw
the prisoner coming down Dover Street, hallooing and shouting. I asked him if
he had any lodgings. He said he had had lodgings in the Bricklayer`s Arms. I
told him to go to his lodgings. He did not go, and therefore took him into
custody and brought him to the station. He was drunk and making a great noise.
Prisoner said in reply to the Mayor: I came from
Yorkshire. I am a hatter by trade. I travel about and clean hats and old
clothes. I can earn 4s. or 5s. per day when fully employed.
He was discharged with a caution.
Folkestone
Observer 24-12-1864
Wednesday December 21st:- Before Captain
Kennicott R.N. and James Tolputt Esq.
Elizabeth Cox was charged with drunkenness, rioting and
obscenity.
P.C. Swain said he was called into the Bricklayer`s
Arms on Saturday last and requested by the landlord to remove the prisoner
because she was making a disturbance in the house. Prisoner then left the
house. She was drunk. He saw her later in Queen Square, and a a quarter to one
on Sunday morning she was in High Street, using very obscene language towards a
man, and he took her into custody.
Fined 1s. or seven days` imprisonment for each offence.
Folkestone
Observer 17-8-1866
Wednesday August 15th:- Before Captain
Kennicott R.N. and James Tolputt Esq.
Henri Bertrand and Charles Soissons, well educated
Frenchmen, who have lately been exhibiting in this neighbourhood, and very
cleverly, in the line of the Brothers Davenport, were charged with breaking
into the dwelling house of Jacob Wratten, at Stanford, on the 13th
of August, and stealing sundry articles.
Mr. Olivier was sworn as interpreter.
P.C. Swain received information yesterday morning from
the county police that there had been a robbery at a house in Stanford, and a
quantity of wearing apparel taken, and while on duty in High Street, about
eleven o`clock, he received information that a female had been offering a coat
for sale. He went to the Bricklayers` Arms, bottom of Fancy Street, and found a
female with a coat doubled up under her shawl. She said the coat had been given
to her by a Frenchman to sell for 6s. The coat (produced) is of black cloth,
has been worn, and answers to the description of a coat stolen at Stanford. He
brought the woman to the police station, where she described her husband and
the prisoner Soissons. Then went in search, and found the husband and the
prisoner Soissons at the Radnor Arches, Radnor Street. Brought Soissons to the
station, and then receiving further information, went in search of Bertrand and
another man not in custody, and apprehended Bertrand on the down platform of
the Junction Station. From information then received he took possession of a
portion of the property produced, which had been placed by Bertrand, and
another not apprehended, in the ticket room. Opened the parcel and found it to
contain one coloured print dress usually worn by women working in the fields, 2
cotton napkins, 5 women`s nightdresses, a flannel shirt, 5 pillowcases, 6
chemises, 8 men`s shirts, 3 sheets, a white slop, a table cloth, 2 window
blinds, and a pair of india rubber braces. A porter saw Bertrand in company
with the man who left the parcel in the ticket room. On Bertrand was found a
razor in a case. A pair of razors and spectacles were found on Soissons and he
said they were not his.
Mary Braconier (an Englishwoman), wife of Eugene
Braconier, picture maker, said she and her husband were lodging at the
Oddfellows Arms. Had not before seen the other man. He handed a coat to
Soissons, who gave it to witness, and said in very broken English she was to
get 6s for it, or 5s, and bring it to him. Went with the coat to the
Bricklayers` Arms, and offered it to the landlady, and in about five or ten
minutes the policeman came and took her to the station. Never before saw the
prisoner Bertrand.
Lydia Strover, wife of Henry Strover, carter, living in
Tontine Street, and daughter of Jacob Wratten, Stanford, labourer, identified
the coat as her father`s, and the other articles named in the policeman`s
evidence, and also many other articles.
The bench deemed the evidence sufficient for detention,
and sent the prisoners to Hythe, within which district the offence was
commited.
(The prisoners were brought up at Hythe the next day
and remanded)
Kentish Gazette 21-8-1866
On Tuesday last a shameful robbery was
committed at the cottage of a labourer named Wratten. Wratten`s cottage is a
lone one, and is situate between Newingreen and Sellindge, at a place called “Benham`s
Watering," where there is a large piece of water almost level with the
road. The family were out on Tuesday at harvest work and when they left home
the doors and windows were fastened up. On returning in the evening, it was
found that a piece of wood had been cut out of the back door, by which means two
bolts bad been removed - a wooden bar with staples, and an iron bolt with
staples. An entrance having been thus effected, the house
was completely ransacked, the wearing apparel of Wratten and his wife, their
sheets, some pork in a tub, and everything worth taking that was portable
having been stolen. The depredators searched every place in which they thought
it likely monev might be kept, even to the clock case and an oldd teapot in
which sundry small articles were kept. Some suspicious-looking characters were
seen lurking about the house during tie dav. It is a somewhat singular fact
that the house next to this on the road to Hythe was broken into last year, and
the house beyond that one the year before, so it would seem the thieves are
taking these dwellings in turn.
Two Frenchmen named Henri Bartrand and Charles Soissoin, were
brought before Thomes Denne Esq., at the County Sessions Hall, at Hythe, on
Thursday. On suspicion of being concerned in the burglary, and remanded till
Saturday, when they were again brought up charged with breaking and entering
the dwelling-house of Jacob Wratten, a labourer, living at Stanford, and
stealing therefrom two pairs of trousers, one coat, one shawl, three pairs of
sheets, two window curtains, nine caps, eight shirts, six
chemises, a quantity of pocket handkerchiefs, table cloths, silver pencil case,
pair of spectacles and various other articles. M. Ollivier, of Folkestone, was
sworn to interpret.
Prosecutor stated that he and his wife had born out at work
all day, and on their return to their cottage, between seven and eight o'clock
in the evening, found that it had been broken open. The
back door had been forced open and everything was lying about in confusion.
They missed very many things and now identified several of those produced.
On the 14th inst. Police constable Swain, of the
Folkestone Borough Police, received information of the robbery, and went to the
Bricklayer's Arms, Fancy Street, Folkestone; he there saw a woman named Mary
Braconier, and took from her a black coat, one of those lost. From what she
told him he went in search of the prisoners and found Soissoin at the Radnor
Arches, Radnor Street. He took him into custody and then
went in search of Bertrand, and found
him at the Junction Railway Station, and a bundle was in the waiting room. He
(Swain) opened it and found it to contain many of the articles stolen. He asked
Bertrand it the bundle was his, and he replied “No.”
Mary Braconier stated that she was lodging at Folkestone, and
knew the prisoner Soissoin. About half-past ten o’clock in the morning of the
14th inst., she saw Soissoin
and a man not in custody outside the Oddfellows Arms. Soissoin gave her a coat to
sell for six shillings. She took it to the Bricklayers Arms and offered it to
the landlady there. After she had been there about ten minutes the constable
came in and took possession of it.
Frederick Spicer, assistant to Mr Hart, of Folkestone, pawnbroker,
proved that on Wednesday evening Soissoin offered him the coat produced, and
also a pair of spectacles.
The Magistrate discharged the prisoner Bertrand, but
committed Soissoin for trial at the next East Kent Quarter Sessions.
Folkestone
Observer 24-8-1866
County Police, Hythe
Saturday August 18th:- Before Thomas Denne
Esq.
Henri Bertrand and Charles Soissons, on remand, were
charged with stealing a quantity of wearing apparel from the dwelling house of
Jacob Wratten, labourer, living at Stanford.
M. Olivier, of Folkestone, was sworn to interpret. The
following evidence was then taken –
Prosecutor said: I am a labourer, living at Stanford.
On the 13th inst., between seven and eight o`clock in the evening,
on my return from work, I found my house had been broken open and everything
was lying about the room in confusion, and a number of things gone. I identify
the coat and two pair of trousers now produced as my property, and I believe
the razors and spectacles are mine, but I don`t like to swear to them. My wife
was in the house when I left to go to work in the morning.
Elizabeth Wratten, wife of the prosecutor, said: On the
13th inst. I left my cottage about 8 o`clock in the morning, after
having locked it up. I returned with my husband in the evening and found the
house in the state he has described it. I have missed many things. I identify
the handkerchiefs and other articles produced as belonging to my husband. The
spectacle case belongs to me, but I can`t swear that the spectacles are mine. I
left all the things safe in the house when I left to go out in the morning.
Frederick Spicer said: I live at Folkestone, and am an
assistant to Mr. Hart, pawnbroker. On Wednesday evening last I took in pawn the
two pairs of trousers produced. The prisoners were not the men who pawned them.
The same evening the prisoner Soissons came and offered the coat produced, and
also a pair of spectacles like those produced.
The prisoner Soissons handed in a written defence to
the magistrates stating that the things which he had in his possession had been
handed over to him by his companion (one of the men not in custody) in presence
of the woman Braconier and that he had not seen him since.
The magistrates dismissed the prisoner Bertrand, and
committed the other prisoner for trial at the next East Kent Quarter Sessions.
Folkestone
Observer 20-10-1866
East Kent Michaelmas Sessions
These sessions were held on Tuesday last before Sir Brooke
Bridges, Bart., M.P. (Chairman)
Charles Soissons, 45, shoemaker, (one of the imitation
Davenport Brothers) was indicted for stealing in a dwelling house two pairs of
trousers, one handkerchief, and other articles, value about £5, the property of
Jacob Wratten, at Stanford, on the 13th of August, 1866.
Mr. Biron prosecuted, and prisoner defended himself.
The accused is a Frenchman, and as he represented that
he could not speak nor understand English, an interpreter was engaged to assist
in conducting the trail. Prisoner on being informed that if he wished the jury
might be composed of half foreigners, intimated that he had no desire to avail
himself of that privilege.
Prosecutor and his wife gave evidence as to their
leaving their house on the 13th of August between the hours of seven
and eight, and on their return in the evening found that it had been broken
open, and the articled above-named and described stolen therefrom, most of
which produced and identified by them, consisting of shirts, chemises, shirts,
and other linen, a coat, two pairs of trousers, a razor and case, a pair of
spectacles and a pocket handkerchief.
William Fright, stationmaster at the Westenhanger
railway station, stated that on the day named on the indictment he saw the
prisoner, in company of another man of short stature, coming from the direction
of prosecutor`s house at about half past two o`clock in the afternoon. Each had
a large sized bundle, and they passed on to the road leading to Canterbury.
Joseph Clapson, police constable, saw the prisoner and
another man, much shorter than the prisoner, each with bundles, pass near
Seabrook at about half past four on the same day.
Frederick Spicer, assistant to Mr. Hart, pawnbroker at
Folkestone, identified the prisoner as the person who brought the coat (now
produced) to his master`s shop at about seven o`clock the same evening and
wanted to pledge it, but witness declined taking it in.
Ingram Swain, a police officer from Folkestone, from
information received respecting the robbery went in search of the parties
suspected, and found a Frenchwoman, the wife of an itinerant picture seller
attempting to effect the sale of the coat in question for 6s. Witness took
possession of the coat and afterwards took the prisoner at the bar in custody
on the charge of having stolen it, and on searching him found the razor and
spectacles, and a new pocket handkerchief, partly hemmed, in his pocket. The
razor and spectacle cases were sworn by the prosecutor and his wife, but they
declined swearing to either the razor or spectacles, though they were both like
those that had been stolen from their house. With respect to the handkerchief,
Mrs. Wratten clearly identified it. She said she had partly hemmed it and
placed it in her cotton box with the needle in in, and in that state it was
found in the prisoner`s possession. The constable further stated that having
ascertained that some bundles had been left at the railway station he went
there, and found nearly all the articles of linen &c., now produced, with
the exception of the coat and the two pairs of trousers, which had been pledged
by the short man that had been seen in the prisoner`s company, but who had now
absconded.
These were the main features of the evidence, and the
prisoner being called upon for his defence told a long and very tedious story,
but with considerable method, denying that he was near Westenhanger, but said
he did carry a bundle in the evening for a woman, who gave him a small quantity
of writing paper for his trouble; that he was asked to pledge the coat by the
person described as the “short man”, and who gave him the razor, the
spectacles, and the handkerchief.
Neither the Court, nor the Jury, believed this tale and
he was found Guilty.
Prisoner was then charged with having been convicted at
Maidstone in December, 1864, of passing counterfeit coin, and sentenced to 18
months imprisonment with hard labour. This he denied, and said he was never in
Maidstone in his life, but he was fully identified as the person so convicted,
and the court sentenced him to five years` penal servitude. He was described by
the police authorities as one of a gang of foreigners that have been giving the
police so much trouble for some time past, some of whom are in custody at
Maidstone. One of them, it is believed, will prove to have been his companion
in the depredations for which he is convicted It was very evident by his
attention to the proceedings that he was well aware of all that was said in
court, and was several times told that the bench was well satisfied that he
understood and could speak the English language if he thought proper to do so.
On Wednesday Soissons was again called that his
sentence might be altered. The prisoner on Tuesday gave a great deal of trouble
by persisting that he did not understand English, which it was very evident was
false.
The Chairman, now addressing him, said “Do you
understand English?”, to which he very readily replied, amidst considerable
laughter, “Oh, no, sir”. A gentleman in court then explained to him in French
that his sentence would be altered from five years` penal servitude to seven
years` penal servitude, the previous convictions proved against him not
allowing of a shorter term than the latter period.
Folkestone
Chronicle 15-5-1869
Tuesday May 11th: Before Captain Kennicott
R.N., J. Gambrill, and A.M. Leith esqs.
William Peel was summoned for assaulting John Bromley
on the 30th April. Pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Minter appeared for plaintiff, but said the
information was taken out without his advice, and as he knew the charge could
not be substantiated, so as to bring it home to the defendant, by his (Mr.
Minter`s) advice the summons would be withdrawn. He would, however, state the
case to the Bench, who would probably tell the defendant that he must not allow
anything of the kind to be done. Complainant had for many years occupied a room
under the Bricklayer`s Arms in Fancy Street, as a workshop for shoemaking, and
defendant, who keeps the Bricklayer`s Arms has lately felt annoyed because
complainant has opened an opposition establishment, the Dew Drop Inn, a
respectable house a little higher up, on the upper side of the street, and is
jealous of the good business done by complainant. Complainant has, for some
time, been annoyed at his work, and there was no moral doubt that defendant was
the instigator of them. Sometimes chamber utensils were emptied down, so that
the water would percolate through into the workshop. Another time a stream of
boiling water would pour down onto complainant. It would be impossible to prove
that defendant had committed these acts himself; he should ask permission to
withdraw the summons, and advise complainant, if the annoyance continued, to
sue defendant for damages in the County Court. He might remark that the parties
had often been to the court before; complainant, always as complainant,
preferring too seek protection from the Bench, rather than take the law into
his own hands.
Defendant said he never saw complainant on 30th
April. It was only a poor old woman had the misfortune to upset her tea pot.
The Bench told defendant he was undoubtedly the cause
of the annoyance, and warned him to be careful.
Folkestone
Observer 15-5-1869
Tuesday, May 11th: Before Captain Kennicott
R.N., J. Gambrill and A.M. Leith Esqs.
William Peel was charged with assaulting William
Bromley on the 30th April.
It appeared that the defendant kept the Bricklayer`s
Arms, Fancy Street, and the plaintiff hired a room below to carry on his trade
as shoemaker. He had also recently opened a public house named the Dew Drop, in
rivalry to the Bricklayer`s Arms. The complainant said defendant had emptied
hot water &c. on the floor above, so that it dropped through into his shop
beneath, but he brought forward no evidence.
Defendant said all that was done was the upsetting of a
teapot on the fender by his wife.
The Bench dismissed the charge.
Folkestone
Express 15-5-1869
Tuesday, April 11th: Before Captain
Kennicott R.N., A.M. Leith and J. Gambrill Esqs.
George Peel was charged with assaulting John Bromley on
the 30th of April last.
Mr. Minter, who appeared for the complainant, said the
summons had been taking out without consulting him, and he found, on looking
over the evidence, that they would not be able to bring the charge home to the
defendant. It appears that for many years the plaintiff has occupied a room
under the Bricklayers` Arms, Fancy Street, which belongs to the defendant.
Bromley has thought proper to open a house called The Dew Drop in the same
street, and from that some sort of jealousy has existed between them, and there
was no moral doubt that the defendant was the instigator, if not the actual
perpetrator, of the offence for which he was summoned. While plaintiff has been
at work in the said room, the contents of chamber utensils, and at other times
hot water, have been poured down on him from the room above. This, no doubt,
irritated the plaintiff, and he at once took out the summons. His (Mr.
Minter`s) advice was to withdraw the summons, leaving it to the discretion of
the Bench to tell the defendant that he is not entitled to do this thing
himself, or allow others to do it, and he would advise the plaintiff that
should the offence be repeated he must issue a summons against him in the
County Court.
The defendant: It was only a poor old woman who had the
misfortune to upset a teapot.
The Bench cautioned the defendant to be more careful in
the future, and dismissed the summons.
Folkestone
Observer 7-8-1869
Local Intelligence
Elizabeth Hare was brought up on a warrant on Tuesday,
charged with threatening and assaulting Mary Ann Lee, and Mary Ann Lee was
summoned for an assault on Mary Robertson. The assaults were committed at the Bricklayer`s
Arms, Fancy Street, on the evening of Sunday last. Mrs. Lee entered the house
to purchase a pint of beer about six o`clock, when, she stated, that Mrs. Hare
assaulted her. Mrs. Hare and Mrs. Robertson both averred that Mrs. Lee was the
aggressor. Several witnesses were called on both sides, and they included Mr.
William Peel, the landlord of the house, and Mr. Lee, the husband of one of the
defendants. The last witness stated that his wife was drunk, and she had been
drinking in defendant`s house during the afternoon, beer being served to her
during prohibited hours. The Bench bound both defendants over to keep the peace
for three months in a sum of £10.
Note: It is unclear where Lee had been
drinking from this report. No record of a Hare or Robertson is listed in More
Bastions.
Folkestone
Express 7-8-1869
Tuesday, August 3rd: Before J. Tolputt Esq.,
and Colonel Crespigny
Elizabeth Haze was charged with assaulting and
threatening Mary Ann Lee on Sunday. Mr. Minter appeared for the plaintiff.
Plaintiff said she was the wife of Richard Lee, and
lived in Fancy Street. On Sunday afternoon about half past five she went to Mr.
Peel`s, at the Bricklayers` Arms, for a pint of beer. The defendant was
standing at the bar drinking. She said “You`re come, Lady Lee”, and after calling her some bad names she
knocked plaintiff backwards and gave her a black eye, and she hammered away for
five minutes. Witness gave her no provocation. She followed plaintiff to her
own house and took up a knife and threatened to murder her.
Prisoner said plaintiff scratched her face.
Mary Smith deposed to hearing plaintiff cry “Murder!”
three times.
The prisoner called Frederick P. Swain, who said he was
a shoemaker. He heard a little “jangling” and Mrs. Lee came and struck Mrs.
Haze. Mrs. Lee struck the first blow.
By Mr. Minter: I heard no cries of “Murder!”. Mrs. Lee
was drunk.
Mary Ann Robertson, wife of George Robertson, living in
Fancy Street, said: Mrs. Lee came into the Bricklayers` Arms at one o`clock and
insulted me, and the prisoner repeated that conduct at six o`clock. Mrs. Lee
hit Mrs. Haze, and Mrs. Haze struck at Mrs. Lee, but did not hit her. Mrs. Lee
called her husband in, and they all three had a scuffle. Mr. Peel put Mrs. Lee
out of the house several times, but she would come in again. Mrs. Haze did not
go to Mrs. Lee`s house, and there were no cries of “Murder!”.
By Mr. Minter: There was no knife taken up.
Mary Ann Lee was summoned by Mary Robertson for
assaulting her.
Mary Robertson said on Sunday afternoon she was in Mr.
Peel`s yard taking up the dinner, when Mrs. Lee came in and abused her. She
came in again about six o`clock, and witness was waiting at the bar. She called
her fearful names, and struck and scratched her face.
Elizabeth Haze deposed to the above.
Mr. Minter called Richard Lee, who said he went to the
Bricklayers` Arms about six o`clock, when he found his wife on the floor, and
Mrs. Roberston and Mrs. Haze pitching into her. Mrs. Haze followed them home
and picked up a knife on the table, and said she would be the death of them.
Witness took the knife away and put her out.
By the Bench: His wife was drunk. She had been drinking
from three to six in the house. They drew her beer during the prohibited hours.
William Peel said he saw a scuffle in the passage of
his house, and he put Mrs. Lee and Mrs, Haze out; did not see the beginning or
end of it.
By Mr. Minter: Was in the bar from six to half past
six.
The Bench ordered both defendants to be bound over to
keep the peace, in a sum of £10, for three months.
Folkestone
Chronicle 28-8-1869
Monday August 23rd: Before S. Eastes, J.
Tolputt and J. Clark Esqs.
William Peel, landlord of the Bricklayer`s Arms, Fancy
Street, was summoned for maliciously injuring certain tools, the property of
John Bromley, of the Dew Drop Inn, in the same street. Mr. Minter appeared for
the complainant, and Mr. Creery, of Ashford, for the defendant.
Mr. Minter said the injury to the tools was small, but
the annoyance, inconvenience, and damage, consequent on the conduct of
defendant was considerable, and necessitated this application to the Bench. The
facts of the case were that complainant rents, and has for several years past
occupied a room under defendant`s house as a shoemaker`s shop, and as both
parties keep similar establishments – lodging houses – with the same class of
customers, there was a certain amount of rivalry between them. Plaintiff on
going to his work has found the place flooded with water, the tools and work
spoiled, and the room altogether uninhabitable, so that his men refused to work
any longer, and his business was being destroyed. A few weeks ago defendant was
summoned for pouring hot water through on the complainant, and the excuse was
that an old woman had upset her teapot. The 51st sect. of the 24th
and 25th Vic., cap. 97, rendered defendant liable to three or five
years` penal servitude, or not less than two years` imprisonment with hard
labour, and the 52nd sect., under which the information was laid,
rendered him liable to a penalty of £5, or two months` imprisonment. He would
only call sufficient evidence to justify the case, and ask for a remand, and a
summons to be issued against James M`Donald, an important witness who had
absconded.
Complainant said on the 18th instant he left
his shop about nine o`clock in the evening, and on going to it next morning
found the place soaked in water, work spoiled, and tools rusted. The expense of
putting them right would be about 2s. The same thing had happened before.
Cross-examined: The tools cost about 12s. M`Donald was
a tailor who lodged at his house before the 17th instant. He left
and went to lodge at defendant`s. He had told him that he saw a man named
Johnson turn on the tap of the boiler, and defendant said “Scald him out of
it”. There were twenty others in the room. He had traced Johnson to Canterbury,
and heard that he said he was not coming there to get paid for his time, when
he could get pounds to stay away.
James Neale, a cordwainer who worked for complainant,
deposed to the state of the workshop through the water that was continually
running through from the room above, so that he refused to work any longer.
Mr. Minter then applied for an adjournment for a week,
so as to procure M`Donald`s attendance. It would have been no use to call any
of the others that were in the room, for they were strangers, and some of them
were fined by the Bench the other day for annoying complainant.
The adjournment was granted, the question of costs
being reserved.
Southeastern Gazette 30-8-1869
Local News
Annual Licensing Day.—A full bench of magistrates attended on Wednesday to
grant renewals and hear fresh applications.
Several licenses were suspended owing to the
complaints of the public, and the renewal of the licences of the Bricklayers’
Arms, kept by Mr. William Peel; the Prince Albert kept by Henry Stay; and the
Royal Engineer, kept by George Dawkins, was refused altogether.
William Peel, the landlord of the Bricklayers’ Arms, was summoned on
Monday last by John Bromley, the landlord of the Dewdrop Inn, both houses being
situated in Fancy- Street. Mr. Minter appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Creery
for the defendant.
It appeared from the evidence that the plaintiff hired a room of the
defendant to carry on his business as a shoemaker The room was let on a lease,
but since the plaintiff had opened a beerhouse in opposition to the defendant,
the latter had instituted a series of petty annoyances, such as pouring water
down on the plaintiff from the room above. Plaintiff could not bring the charge
home to the defendant, but got a lodger of his, named McDonald, to go and lodge
at defendant’s house and watch what was going on. This lodger informed the
plaintiff that Mr. Peel instigated a man to turn a tap on when the defendant
was at work, hence the present proceedings.
It was now stated that the important witness to prove the case,
McDonald, had kept out of the way, and it was surmised that he had been bribed
to do so by the defendant or his friends. Mr. Minter applied for an adjournment
on these grounds. Mr. Creery opposed, as he said it was a trumped-up charge,
and if Mr. Bromley had intended to persevere he could have called other
witnesses who were in the room at the time.
The magistrates, however, decided to grant an adjournment for a week.
Folkestone
Observer 11-9-1869
Wednesday, September 8th: Before Capt.
Kennicott R.N., James Tolputt, A.M. Leith and W. Bateman Esqs.
William Peel, on remand, was again charged with doing
damage to Mr. Bromley`s property.
The complainant applied for another adjournment as he
had met with a severe accident and had been unable to procure the witness
Johnson.
Mr. Towne, Margate, opposed the adjournment as he said
the accident spoken of was caused by plaintiff`s own misconduce, and the
accident had nothing to do with the case.
The Bench, after a consultation, said when a case was
brought before them the means of proving the case must be procured. They now
declined to adjourn and dismissed the case.
Folkestone
Express 28-8-1869
Wednesday, August 25th: Before Captain
Kennicott R.N., W. Bateman. J. Tolputt, A.M. Leith, and J. Gambrill Esqs.
Spirit License (Renewal)
William Peel, of the Bricklayers`Arms, Fancy Street,
applied for a renewal of his license. Mr. Martin had received great complaints
of this house, as it was the resort of thieves and other loose characters. The
license was refused.
Folkestone
Express 4-9-1869
Monday, 30th August: Before Captain
Kennicott R.N. and J. Tolputt Esq.
Wm. Peel, of the Bricklayers` Arms, and a tramp named
Johnson, again appeared to answer a charge of pouring boiling water over him.
Mr. Minter, who appeared for the prosecutor, said owing
to the absence of an important witness named James MacDonald, he must ask for a
remand, and he would apply for a Bench warrant for him to be brought up, as he
believed witness had either been bribed or intimidated. The case was
accordingly adjourned till Wednesday next.
Folkestone
Chronicle 11-9-1869
Police: During the week there have been some cases
before the Bench, chiefly arising from the rivalry between the Dew Drop Inn and
the Bricklayer`s Arms.
Folkestone
Observer 11-9-1869
Thursday, September 9th: Before Captain Kennicott
R.N., and James Tolputt Esq.
Thomas Drew was charged with using threatening language
to George Bromley on the 8th instant.
George Bromley said he lived at Dover, and was at his
son`s house dining on Wednesday. When in the private room prisoner came in and
said “What do you think about it now?”. His son said “I have nothing to say to
you. The best thing for you to do is to leave the house”. He said he would not
for his son or witness, and used most filthy language. When in the street he
said he would knock witness`s brains out. On witness saying he would send for
the police he used most filthy language. From these threats he went in bodily
fear of prisoner. There was nothing said about a handkerchief. He did not know
the man at all.
John Bromley, son of the last witness, gave
corroborative evidence, adding that a man came across from Peel`s and threw a
pint pot at his head some days ago. He put up his hand and cut his thumb
frightfully.
The Bench said the offence was of so serious a nature
that they must bind prisoner over to keep the peace in the sum of £5, and a
householder in the sum of £5 for 3 months.
Folkestone
Express 11-9-1869
Thursday, September 9th: Before Captain
Kennicott R.N. and James Tolputt Esq.
Thomas Drew, hatter, was charged with using threatening
language towards Mr. George Bromley senr.
The prisoner said he was only charged with this out of
spite.
Mr. Minter appeared for the prosecutor and detailed the
circumstances of the case. It appeared that the prisoner had been lodging at
Mr. Bromley`s, the Dew Drop, Fancy Street, and going home after the case had
been heard on the previous day, the man went to Mr. Peel`s. He then came into
Bromley`s while they were at dinner and used the language the witnesses would
describe. There was no spite on Mr. Bromley`s part, as he was quite prepared to
hear the decision of the court the previous day.
He called George Bromley senr., who said he lived at
Dover, and was dining at his son`s house yesterday, when the prisoner came in
and said “What do you think of it now?”. His son answered “I want nothing to
say to you. The best thing you can do is to go out of my house”. He used most
filthy language, and said he would not. He then went into the street, and said
to witness he would knock his b---- brains out. He repeated this threat, and
witness sent for a policeman. Not a word was said about a handkerchief. Witness
did not know the man.
John Bromley was then sworn and deposed to the truth of
the above statement. A man came from Mr. Peel`s house and threw a pot at his
head a week ago. He warded it off with his hand and it cut his thumb in a very
dangerous manner.
The Bench bound the prisoner over to keep the peace,
himself in £5, and a householder in £5, for three months.
No comments:
Post a Comment