 |
| From Stock`s Directory and Illustrated Handbook, 1847. |
Licensees
William Field 1847 1853
Thomas Adams c1853 c1854
Thomas Wilson c1854 1857 To George
John Paine Adams 1855 ????
Maidstone Gazette
7-9-1847
Petty
Sessions, Tuesday; Before Capt. W. Sherren, Mayor, S. Bradley, J. Bateman and
S. Mackie Esqs.
General
Licensing Day: All the licenses were renewed. There were ten applications for
new licenses, two of which only were granted for spirit vaults, one for Mr.
Smith, of the King`s Arms, for a house in the High Street, conditionally, and
the other to Mr. Thomas Maycock (the agent for Guinness`s stout). Liberty was
also granted to Mr. Field to remove his licence from his present house to more
commodious premises opposite.
Notes: It is not known that the licence granted to Smith was ever
taken up. Also the only person by the name of Field(s) to hold a licence at
that time was William Fields who was at the short-lived Folkestone Arms Tavern
and it is at present not known that that house ever moved. It is not outside
the realms of possibility that Fields DID move premises across the road and
that the original “Folkestone Arms Tavern” is the unknown “old Folkestone
tavern” which was demolished in January, 1848.
Maidstone Gazette
4-7-1848
Petty
Sessions, Thursday; Before C. Golder Esq., Mayor, W. Major and S. Mackie
Esquires.
Patrick
Orcan and John McMullen were brought up in custody by police constable Pearson,
No. 1, charged by Isaac Fields, bricklayer, with having assaulted, beaten, and
intended to rob him. It appeared from the evidence that at about half past two
o`clock that morning the complainant was returning from the fair. When near the
Earl Grey, four men rushed upon him, knocked him down, and kicked him while
lying on the ground struggling with his assailants. Several of their companions
came out of the Earl Grey and assisted in the outrage. At the same moment two
brothers of the complainant came up the street; the prisoners then ran away,
and were followed, and when near the Folkestone Arms (their father`s house) one
of them was apprehended and the other, after a chase, was secured.
Fined
£5 each, or two months` imprisonment.
Mary
Spicer, alias Greenwood (who had been out of prison only a few days), Henry
Walsh and Alexander Phillips, were also charged with aiding and assisting the
above prisoners. The female prisoner fined £2, or one month`s imprisonment, and
the others £5, or two months.
Maidstone Gazette,
Maidstone Journal 25-2-1851
Advertisement:
Folkestone, Kent. Mr. Godden is instructed to sell by public auction, on
Monday, the 17th day of March, 1851, at Folkestone, the Folkestone Arms inn, situate at the bottom
of High Street, in Folkestone, aforesaid. Possession will be given on the
completion of the purchase. The owner, who is the occupier, is retiring from
the public business.
For
particulars apply to Messrs. Hart and Kipping, Solicitors, Maidstone and
Folkestone, and to Messrs. Bower and Son, 46, Chancery Lane, London.
Maidstone Gazette
10-6-1851
An
inquest was held yesterday week before J. Bateman Esq., coroner, and a jury of
tradesmen, upon the body of James Johnson, otherwise James Newbury.
James
Steer, inspector of Folkestone police, deposed that on Saturday afternoon he
saw the deceased much intoxicated, and very disorderly; he had just quitted the
Folkestone Arms, his conduct being so bad there that they had turned him out;
he locked him up in the station house, where he became very violent, kicking
the door of his cell, so that witness was forced to take his shoes off for some
time. He constantly supplied him with water, bought a two pound loaf, and gave
him half of it. He left the station at about a quarter to six, and returned at
twenty minutes to seven. In looking through the small aperture in the door he
perceived the breast of the deceased, and on looking up saw a handkerchief
fastened to the bars. He immediately cut it and heard something fall; he called
for assistance, opened the door, and saw that deceased had suspended himself,
and appeared dead. He found upon his person a ticket of membership for a
Teetotal Society at Hastings, in the name of James Newbury, also part of a
charge sheet, wherein he was charged with ill-using his wife. He had
ascertained that the gaoler of Dover knew him there by the name of Johnson.
Edward
Harris, tailor and draper, deposed that he was called by the inspector to
assist him, and deceased appeared to be dead.
Mr.
Wm. Bateman, surgeon, was called by the police, and found life had been extinct
about half an hour, apparently from strangulation.
The
Jury returned a verdict “That the deceased destroyed himself while labouring
under a fit of temporary insanity”, and they wished the coroner to request the
Corporation to remove the iron bars of the cell to prevent a similar occurrence
in future.
The
deceased obtained his living by making moss baskets, and was well known at
Dover and Hastings; from the latter place the inspector received a reply to a
letter he sent, stating that they knew of no relatives there belonging to the
deceased, but that they had had him in custody eleven times.
Maidstone Gazette
7-10-1851
Advertisement:
Folkestone, to be let or sold, the Folkestone Arms Tavern; it is a free house,
and well situated for business.
For
further particulars, apply on the premises.
Dover Telegraph
9-6-1855
Petty
Sessions, Wednesday: Before W. Major and G. Kennicott Esqs.
The
following licenses were transferred: The Folkestone Arms, from Thomas Willson
to John Paine Adams, of Appledore; Radnor Inn, from Charles Hill to George
Baker, of Cheriton; and the Royal Oak from Richard Hill to Alfred Lukey (sic),
of Cheriton.
Note: Folkestone Arms Tavern transfer previously unknown.
Folkestone Chronicle
21-7-1855
Advertisement:
J.P. Adams, Folkestone Arms, High Street, Folkestone.
Wines
and spirits of first quality. Bottled ale and stout. Good beds. Supper beer
sent to order.
Folkestone Chronicle 28-2-1857
Council Meeting Extract
The Mayor then read a
letter received from Mr. Hart, in which that gentleman stated that it having
been reported and named in the council meeting, that he (Mr. Hart) had had a
sinister motive in not scheduling the Folkestone Arms Inn, South Street, it
being his own property, he therefore begged to offer the corporation the power
to purchase such property under the compulsory clauses of the Improvement Act.
Some little discussion took
place upon the offer, and Capt. Kennicott moved, seconded by Mr. Cobb, that the
letter be accepted and entered on the minutes.
To the Editor of The Folkestone
Chronicle
Sir, - I
avail myself of the medium of your valuable publication to ask the following
question: Why is it that the corporation have virtually resolved to leave the Folkestone
Arms standing, thus making it the starting point of the continuation of Tontine
Street to the Harbour? I take it, Mr. Editor, that if this house is left
standing, the contemplated improvement will be interfered with to a very
considerable extent, seeing that the line of the new street will be of course
extended too far to the eastward, thus leaving the present narrow entrance to
the High Street, as well as the `Box-iron`
projection which narrows Tontine Street ten feet at that point, it being
understood that all new streets shall be at least forty feet in width.
If this and
the Folkestone Arms were removed, and the line of the new street struck from
the hairdresser`s shop, we should get rid of the narrow and inconvenient passage called South Street. I have heard that the council at
their last meeting decided to adopt a new line laid down by the surveyor,
without any deviation. If such be the case, a strong remonstrance ought to be
addressed by the inhabitants to the council, calling upon them to re-consider
their decision, and vary the plan so as to meet the objection of South Street remaining a worse nuisance than
ever. This could be easily done by purchasing the property on the west side of
that thoroughfare, commencing with the fourth house, and gradually bringing
forward the frontage to the east side of the pavement; this would give ample
room for commodious houses and back premises, as well as rendering the
frontages much more valuable by diverting the whole of the foot passenger traffic into the new street.
I am, Sirs, Yours Obediently,
A.
RATEPAYER
Kentish Gazette
3-3-1857
Council
meeting, Wednesday, extract: To neutralise the imputation of his having a
sinister motive in not scheduling the Folkestone Army Inn (sic), which was his
own property, Mr. Hart offered it for sale to the Corporation under the
compulsory clauses of the Improvement Act. The offer was ordered to be entered
into the minutes.
Southeastern Gazette
3-3-1857, Canterbury Weekly Journal 7-3-1857
Council
Meeting Extract: The Mayor read a letter from Mr. Hart, offering to give up the
Folkestone Arms Tavern to the Corporation, on the same terms and under the same
clauses of the Improvement Act, as other property required for the purposes of
the new street. The letter was ordered to be entered on the minutes
Southeastern Gazette
5-5-1857, Canterbury Weekly Journal 9-5-1857
Local News
The Improvement Committee, finding considerable difficulty
in getting the property required for the new street to the Harbour, have had
brought to their notice another plan. By the Folkestone Arms Tavern being
removed, with a slight curve, as good a thoroughfare may be had as previously
marked out. We believe Mr. Hart (the owner of the tavern) is willing to take a
reasonable sum for it. The council have as yet done nothing in furthering the
improvements, or carrying out the Act.
Folkestone Chronicle
11-7-1857
Local News
Purchase of the Folkestone Arms Inn by the Corporation: The
Council met in Committee yesterday evening, and decided on the purchase of this
property for the sum of £1,200, for the purposes of the Tontine Street
extension, having previously offered the owner (R. Hart Esq.) £1,000 for the
same. We have on a previous occasion advocated the purchase of these premises,
on account of the improvement the pulling down of them would make to the lower
part of High Street, but we should have preferred the sum of £1,000 being paid
for the property, instead of £1,200, especially as it was sold by the executors
of the late Mr. Jeffrey (as we are informed) for the sum of £850, when
Folkestone was in a much more flourishing state than it is at present.
Southeastern Gazette
14-7-1857, Canterbury Weekly Journal 18-7-1857
Local News
The corporation have agreed to purchase the Folkestone Arms Tavern
of Mr. Richard Hart, for the sum of £1,200.
Kentish Gazette 14-7-1857
Purchase of the Folkestone Arms
Inn (sic) by the Corporation: The council met in committee on Friday, and
decided on the purchase of this property for the sum of £1,200, of R. Hart,
esq., for the purposes of the Tontine Street extension.
Folkestone Chronicle
12-12-1857
Council
meeting extract, December 7th: The Mayor said that as the question
of pulling down the Folkestone Arms would have to be brought before them at the
adjourned meeting on Thursday, and if decided upon, the next property would
also have to come down, he had now to ask the corporation if they would agree
to sanction his offer given to Mr. Cobb of half a year`s rent, to go out by the
end of this month. He required one year`s rent (£14 6s.) and £10 as
compensation.
Mr.
Gambrill asked if it was absolutely necessary to pull down the Folkestone Arms,
especially now there was a diversion from the original plan.
Mr.
Major (across the table) Yes! We mean to have that house down, you may depend
upon it. We have a majority strong enough to carry that at any rate.
Mr.
Tite said: We may not all be of the same opinion about the necessity of taking
down the Folkestone Arms, and if decided against, then this property would not
be required. He had put a question to the Town Clerk at the last meeting,
whether the council can legally purchase and pull down any unscheduled
property, especially if they were not unanimous upon it.
The
Town Clerk said he was of opinion that they had the power to buy any
unscheduled property if required for the improvement of the town, that it did
not require unaniminity, but that the decision of the majority of the council
would be quite sufficient.
Mr.
Tite then moved that this question be deferred until it is decided about taking
down the Folkestone Arms. Seconded by Mr. Jeffery, of Coolinge.
Mr.
Gambrill said the question was whether the town, being in such a state as at
present, was prepared to pay £1,400 or £1,500 for a property to pull down,
merely to get a good opening into High Street, whilst the collector even now
was complaining that he could not get the rates in.
Mr.
Meikle observed that the property was bought and paid for, therefore in his
opinion the matter was settled.
The
motion was then put to the meeting, when there were 6 against the motion and 4
for, viz., Mr. Tite, Mr. Gambrill, and Messrs. Jeffery.
Mr.
Pledge then said as it was clearly understood that when the Folkestone Arms was
bought it was to be pulled down, and as it would greatly improve the
neighbourhood, he should move that it be taken down at once.
Mr
Tite was surprised that Mr. Pledge should get up and propose such a motion as
that at this meeting, there being no notice of it in the paper, as it was a
very serious affair.
Mr.
Pledge then, in answer to Mr. Tite, consented to withdraw it, and gave notice
that he would bring it forward at the next monthly or special meeting.
Council
meeting extract, December 10th: Mr. Pledge moved, and Alderman
Kennicott seconded that the Town Clerk be instructed to complete the purchase
of the brewhouse &c., from the trustees of Mr. Elgar, for £700, as early as
possible; being £607 for the property and £93 as compensation to Messrs.
Calvert and Tweed, which was thought to be a very satisfactory arrangement.
Folkestone Chronicle
19-12-1857
Council
meeting extract, December 17th: Mr. George Pledge said he had given
notice of bringing forward a motion that the Folkestone Arms should be pulled
down, and the materials sold; he was of opinion that it ought to be done; he
should therefore move that the materials of the Folkestone Arms be sold.
Seconded by Mr. Baker.
Alderman
Tolputt thought that the premises ought to be pulled down; it would make in his
opinion a very nice house as a starting point for the new street, if the
materials were preserved, and it was rebuilt at the corner near the site of the
old brewhouse.
Alderman
Golder said the house was sold by Mr. Hart for the purpose of pulling down. He
(Mr. Hart) would not have sold it, had it not been upon that understanding.
A
question was here asked whether the council were compelled to take the premises
down.
The
Town Clerk said: No, the house had been purchased unconditionally; Mr. Hart
wished to have a clause of that sort inserted into the deed, but it was not
acceded to.
Mr.
Tite could not understand why this business should be pressed so; he, for one, should
like to see the line of both sides of the streets before the removal of the
houses; he quite agreed with Mr. Tolputt. The purchase of the house at first
was a job, as great a job as the purchase of the council hall – it was a
complete party question. The pulling down of the house would involve a loss of
£1,500. He concluded by moving as an amendment that the pulling down of the
house be deferred. Seconded by Mr. Boorn.
Alderman
Tolputt asked if the house left standing would interfere with the sewer.
The
surveyor said it would not.
Mr.
Baker repudiated the idea of this being called a party question; he thought Mr.
Tite made more of party than anyone else; he should like to know if the house
had not belonged to Mr. Hart, would there be such a noise made about it.
Mr.
Pledge objected to the term job used by Mr. Tite; he could not understand it.
Mr.
Fagg was of opinion there was some reason in what Mr. Tite said, but he
disagreed with him, and his application of the term job; in his opinion it was
a good job the town had purchased the house.
The
amendment was then put, when 12 voted for, and 2 against.
Southeastern Gazette
9-3-1858
Local News
The council met on Wednesday last. Present, the Mayor,
Aldermen Tolputt, Kennicott, and Gardner ; Councillors Tite, Tolputt, Jefferey
(Walton,) Jefferey (Coolinge,) Boorne, Gambrill, Baker, Fagg, Major, Pledge,
Meikle, Jinkings, Banks, Caister, and Cobb.
Taking down the
Folkestone Arms Inn.
This ridiculous affair, after being fully
discussed some time since and a line drawn which included the building, which
consequently must have been pulled down, was the subject of two memorials to the
council. One commended the council for deciding that it should be pulled down,
but urged them to do it at once, and had 105 signatures of the most respectable
ratepayers from all parts of the town; the other by 64 names, 7 being members
of the council and the remainder mostly old ratepayers, and averse to any
improvement.
The Mayor appeared to feel the matter to be
very important, as it had been the subject of a special notice on the paper,
and he hoped the subject would be fairly discussed by all.
Mr. Jinkings had an impression that it had
been already disposed of, and the seal of the corporation affixed to the
minutes; but on its being read it was found that a plan for the new street had
been decided upon, and a line drawn which included part of the Folkestone Arms.
Mr. Major moved, and Alderman Tolputt
seconded, the motion that the Folkestone Arms be pulled down and the materials
sold.
Mr. Tite moved an amendment that it be not
pulled down, and in an excited strain said the signatures to the memorial were
falsely obtained, and he should be glad to see it thrown under the table; the
town would be ruined, and the poor suffer.
Mr. Gambrill seconded the amendment, which,
after a lengthened and uninteresting discussion, was put, when there
appeared—for it, 8—Messrs. Banks, Caister, Jefferey, Tite, Bovin, Jefferey,
Gambrill, and Gardner; against the amendment, 9.
The original motion was therefore carried
amidst loud cheers, by a number of the inhabitants who were present.
At the adjourned meeting held on Thursday
evening, after some discussion, it was agreed to put the Folkestone Arms up by
public tenders, to be delivered by the 6th April, with an intimation that land
adjoining might be had for rebuilding the same.
Folkestone Chronicle
27-3-1858
Notice
To be sold by tender: The materials of the Folkestone Arms,
and the house adjoining, situate at the bottom of High Street and South Street,
Folkestone, in one Lot. The two houses to be pulled down, and the materials to
be cleared away at the expense of the purchaser, in accordance with certain
conditions, to be obtained at the office of the Town Clerk.
Tenders to be addressed to the “Corporation of Folkestone”,
and be delivered at the Guildhall, on Wednesday, the 7th April, at 6
o`clock.
The Corporation will not be bound to accept the highest or
any tender.
By order of the Corporation,
R.T. Brockman,
Town Clerk.
N.B. The Corporation will at the same time be prepared to
consider any proposals for the purchase of a freehold site in the New Street,
upon which the Folkestone Arms may be re-erected.
Information to be obtained on application to the Town Clerk,
or to Mr. Bamford, surveyor.
Folkestone Chronicle 10-4-1858
Monthly
meeting of the Town Council
Wednesday
April 7th: - Among the business; To receive tenders for the purchase
of the materials of the Folkestone Arms and the house adjoining, and make order
thereon.
TENDERS FOR
THE FOLKESTONE ARMS
There were
three tenders for the purchase of this and the adjoining house.
Mr. Charles
Stockwell, (of Dover) £61
5s.
Mr. John
Dunk, Tontine Street £65
0s.
Messrs.
Conway, Sherwood, Weld, Rose and Co. £60
0s.
Mr. Meikle
moved and Mr. Jinkings seconded that Mr. Dunk`s tender be accepted.
Mr. Tite
thought it a terrible thing that so much property should be sacrificed for so
little a money. They had much better wait a short time, until a line of the new
street could be got out, and the several plots laid out, so that a plot might
be offered with it – it would then fetch a better price. With this view he
should move as an amendment that neither tender be accepted for the present.
Alderman
Gardner concurred with Mr. Tite entirely, and seconded the amendment.
Mr. Jinkings
thought the line of the street could not be properly defined until the property
was removed.
Upon the
amendment being put from the chair there were five votes, and fro the original
motion six.
The original
motion was therefore declared to be carried.
Southeastern Gazette
13-4-1858
Council
Meeting, Wednesday: The tenders for the purchase of the Folkestone Arms and
adjoining house (to be pulled down and removed) were as follows: Charles
Stockwell, auctioneer, Dover £61 5s; John Dunk, builder, Folkestone, £65;
George Canley & Company, Folkestone £60. Mr. Dunk`s tender was accepted.
Folkestone Chronicle 24-8-1861
Annual
Licencing Day & Petty Sessions
Wednesday
August 21st:- Before the Mayor, James Tolputt, W.F. Browell, W.
Major, W. Bateman, and A.M. Leith esqs.
New Licences
Mr. Harrison
said he appeared to support an application made by Mr. Thomas Golder, for a
licence to be granted him for a house he had lately erected in Harbour Street.
Mr Golder was no doubt well known to some of the bench, having lived in
Folkestone all his life. He of course was determined to keep the house highly
respectable; he might add that a house stood a short time ago near the spot
where his new house was erected called the Pilot Cutter, but which was removed
when the improvements were carried out; and also another house called the
Folkestone Arms, which was in the vicinity, was removed. He trusted therefore
to have shown sufficient to induce the bench to grant the application. Mr.
Harrison also produced a petition numerously signed in favour of the application.
Mr. Boult
said he was a publican in the immediate neighbourhood, and if this licence was
granted there would be five licenced houses without a single house between
them, three adjoining at one side of the street, and two at the other. There
had been many houses pulled down in the immediate neighbourhood and very few
rebuilt; some that had been were not let.
The Mayor in
answer said that the bench had unanimously agreed to grant the licence.
Folkestone
Herald 16-3-1929
Felix
“I thank you very much for your last week`s article,
and particularly that part referring to the Assembly (Corporation) meeting at
the old Kings Arms Hotel and the Marquis of Granby”. Thus Mr. F. Hedges, of the
Bouverie Arms, Cheriton Road, spoke to me on the bright and beautiful morning
of Monday last. It is nice to have a “Thank you” now and then, because it is my
main desire to please in these small weekly efforts of mine. I do not soar
towards the impossible, viz., to please everybody. I remarked this much, many
years ago, to a gentleman, who was then, as he is now, associated with the
Folkestone Herald. His reply was brief and to the point. It was this “You will
be a darned big fool if you try. Do the right as far as you can and let the
rest alone”. I have tried to follow this advice. Now, to return to Mr. Hedges
and his thanks. His establishment is a place where men congregate largely, and
naturally many subjects crop up for discussion. There are arguments, friendly
and sometimes highly controversial. It is tha latter that this particular
gentleman mostly dreads.
It appears one of the company at the Bouverie Arms on
Saturday night, after reading my paragraph, asked of another “Where was the
Marquis of Granby situate?” That was enough. The argument as to its whereabouts
went on fully for a couple of hours, and it was only when the Speaker called
“Time” that the controversy ceased. Now, to be fair, I must plead guilty to
providing, what after all was a friendly argument, for discussion. In my last
paragraph on this subject I declared the Marquis of Granby was situate in
Seagate Street. This was wrong. It should have been High Street. I can`t give
the exact site, but there are those living amongst us who can. It is probably
difficult for the present generation to realise that this present beautiful
town of Folkestone was confined to three, four, or five thoroughfares (not
paved in some cases) when the late Queen Victoria came to the throne in 1837.
Such however was the case.
Perhaps the Cheiton Road unofficial debating Society
would like to discuss the whereabouts of the Folkestone Arms. The site of it
appears, as far as I can make out, to have been where now stands the commanding
corner premises at the bottom of High Street at the junction formed by Harbour
and South Streets. The Folkestone Arms, it would seem, was an important
establishment in those days. I will prove it. Here is an extract from an old
Kentish newspaper and it will be read, I feel sure, with interest by all true
Folkestonians. “September 11th, 1812. Tuesday last being the Mayor`s
choice for the town of Folkestone, Thomas Baker Esq. was elected to the chair,
who after taking the necessary oath adjourned to the Folkestone Arms Inn,
accompanied by the jurats and the principal residents of the community, where a
sumptuous and well-served dinner was prepared for them. After the cloth was
drawn (removed), the following toasts, etc., were pronounced from the chair;
“The King and God Bless Him”; “The Prince Regent” (and under his benign
auspices may the Imperial Eagle be experimentally taught to fly the wing at the
roaring of the British Lion); “The Queen and Royal Family”; “Alexander (and may
the Gallic Cock (France) be finally brought to feel the ascending influence of
the Northern constellation)”. Thus passed the fleeting hours, interspersed with
convivial song and merry joke, until “Nox” was contemplating to withdraw her
sombre curtain from the dusky landscape, which suggested to the company the
idea of “iit domum”, and on which they unanimously rose and congratulated the
Mayor (Thomas Baker) on his tenth election to the honour of the white wand”.
The foregoing, although an involved and rather complicated composition, gives
an insight into the life of Folkestone 117 years ago, and incidentally reminds
us that our forefathers well enjoyed themselves in their own way, not only at
the table, but with convivial song and merry joke.
Note: Felix again gets it wrong. The
Folkestone Arms referred to was located at the top of High Street, and closed
in 1846. The Folkestone Arms Tavern, at the bottom of High Street, opened in
1847.
No comments:
Post a Comment