Oddfellows Arms, 1978 |
| Oddfellows Arms, 1920s (On left). Credit Roy Clare |
 |
| Former Oddfellows Arms, May 2012 |
 |
| Oddfellows Arms c1920 |
 |
| Oddfellows Arms 1999. Credit Martin Easdown |
Mr. Prior 1906 1906
Maidstone Gazette 16-2-1847, Kent Herald 18-2-1847
On Tuesday last the brig Susan put in here, one of her crew having fallen from the mast and broken his leg during the snow storm of Monday last, at sea. He was taken to the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, where he now remains. This is the fourth time the unfortunate man has broken the same leg.
Canterbury Journal 20-2-1847
On Tuesday last the brig Susan put in here, one of her crew having fallen from the mast and broken his leg during the snow storm of Monday last, at sea. He was taken to the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, where he now remains.
Maidstone Gazette 9-5-1848
Tuesday – Transfer Day: The licence heretofore granted to James Jordan, of the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, was transferred to William Edward Brooks.
Note: Earlier date
Kent Herald 11-5-1848
Petty Sessions: The license heretofore granted to James Jordan, of the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, was transferred to William Edward Brooks.
Kent Herald 20-11-1848
Petty Sessions: William Baker was charged with unlawfully assaulting and beating M.A.R. Brookes, of the Oddfellows Arms inn. Fined 5s. and costs.
John Eastwick was brought up in custody charged with unlawfully assaulting and beating the said M.A.R. Brookes. Fined 5s. and costs.
Maidstone Gazette
28-11-1848
Petty Sessions, Monday; Before C. Golder Esq., Mayor, and W. Major Esq.
William Baker was charged with unlawfully assaulting and beating M.A.R. Brookes, of the Oddfellows Arms Inn. Fined 5s. and costs.
Maidstone Gazette
19-2-1850, Kent Herald 21-2-1850, Dover Chronicle 23-2-1850
At the Petty Sessions on Tuesday the licence of the South Eastern Pavilion was transferred from T. Algar to James Gaby Breach, of the London Tavern, Bishopsgate, London, and the licence of the Oddfellows Arms was transferred from Edward Brooks to Frances Shovler.
Note: Oddfellows Arms; Earlier end date for Brooks – and different first name. Shovler previously unknown.
Maidstone Gazette 16-4-1850
Petty Sessions, Tuesday; Before D. Major Esq., Mayor, W. Major and S. Mackie Esqs.
License transferred from John Back, of the Radnor Inn, to Henry Waight; from Wm. Edward Brooks, of the Oddfellows Arms, to Neal Dawson; from George Featherbe, of the Cooper`s Arms, to George Bridgland.
Notes: Transfer at Radnor Inn is earlier date for Back leaving, and if this is Henry Wraight it is much earlier start. Oddfellows Arms earlier date. Should this read Dawson Neal? Cooper`s Arms earlier date.
Kent Herald 18-4-1850
Petty Sessions: License transferred from John Back, of the Radnor Inn, to Henry Waight; from Wm. Edward Brooks, of the Oddfellows Arms, to Neal Dawson; from George Featherbe, of the Coopers Arms, to George Bridgland.
Maidstone Gazette
20-5-1851, Kent Herald 22-5-1851, Dover Telegraph 24-5-1851
Petty Sessions, Wednesday; Before R. Hart Esq., Mayor, D. Major, S. Mackie, and W. Major Esqs.
Dawson Neal, victualler, of the Oddfellows Arms, was summoned for keeping a disorderly house. Mr. Sladden appeared for defendant, and objected to the form of summons, which was dismissed.
Kent Herald 15-1-1852
Petty Sessions: Dawson Neal, of the Oddfellows Arms, appeared to answer an information charging him with keeping his house open during divine service on Christmas Day. After hearing the evidence of Superintendent Steers, who visited the house between 10 and half past and found the back door open, he was convicted in the sum of 1s. and costs.
Dover Chronicle
3-7-1852
On Sunday evening last, about half past 5 o`clock, as the son of Mr. Neal, of the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street, and another person, were driving a horse and cart up the Tram Road, the horse, being a kicker, commenced plunging violently, and continued unmanageable until it released itself from the cart, carrying with it the two shafts, which had broken off short. It started up the road in the direction of Folly Lane, where it turned round by the Swan, Grove Terrace, and proceeded down Dover Street, knocking down and very much injuring a child of Mr. James Robinson, landlord of the Swan. It was at first feared the injury would terminate seriously; but it is now hoped that the child is going on favourably. The persons in the cart fortunately remained uninjured. The horse subsequently slipped off the kerb, and broke its foreleg just above the fetlock; it ultimately reached the Oddfellows Arms, whence it was removed to a field, and shot. It was a good horse of its kind, and worth about £18.
Kent Herald 21-9-1854
Annual Licensing Day
Before renewing the licenses, the Mayor addressed the publicans, informing them that a new law was passed, explaining to them the particular features of the Act, and hoped they would adhere to it. The whole of the licenses were renewed, with the exception of the Radnor Inn, Odd Fellow's Arms, and the Engine Inn. Applications for new licenses were made for the George, Gun, and Belle Vue Tavern; the first only was granted, on the ground that it was a new house in the room of one pulled down. The sign of the Fleur-de-lis was changed to the MartelloTavern.
Dover Chronicle
23-9-1854
Annual Licensing Day: Before the Mayor, S. Mackie, W. Major, T. Golder, G. Kennicott and T. Kingsnorth Esqs.
The whole of the licenses were renewed, with the exception of the Radnor Inn, Oddfellows Arms and Engine Inn. Applications for new licenses were made for the George, Gun and Belle Vue Tavern; the first only was granted on the ground that it was a new house in the room of one pulled down. The sign of the Fleur de Lis was changed to the Martello Tavern.
Canterbury Journal 2-6-1855
Petty Sessions, Saturday.
Dawson Neale, landlord of the Oddfellows Arms, was brought up by warrant charged with assaulting John Edward Freeman, a fisherman, the previous afternoon. The case not being proved to the satisfaction of the bench, the defendant was dismissed.
Folkestone Chronicle
9-8-1856
Petty Sessions, Wednesday: Before James Tolputt Esq., Mayor, W. Bateman, W. Major and J. Kingsnorth Esqs., and Capt. Kennicott.
Richard Charlton and George Clother, the master and a seaman on board one of the Dover fishing smacks, were charged by police constable Lewis, with creating a disturbance with some of the soldiers of the Foreign Legion, and obstructing himself and other constables in the execution of their duty.
Police constable Lewis sworn, stated that about half past seven on the previous evening, being in Radnor Street, he heard a great noise, and saw a mob of people. Clother was trying to get the prisoner Charlton away, who was much knocked about. When I first saw Charlton he was striking about in every direction, surrounded by 30 or 40 of the Foreign Legion, and some of the civilians. As I was attempting to take Charlton into custody, the other prisoner, Clother, took hold of me by the collar and flung me down. I recovered myself, and then endeavoured to get him to the station, which I had great trouble in doing. He was drunk and so violent I sent for the picket. The prisoner Charlton was rescued by several of the fishermen, carried away, and put to bed.
Charles Atkins sworn, said he saw the disturbance, although not the first of it. He saw Clother trying to rescue the other prisoner from the police, but he broke away from them and ran out amongst the soldiers, beating about them right and left.
Dawson Neal sworn, deposed that he was the landlord of the Oddfellows Arms, in Radnor Street, that about half past six the previous evening the prisoner Charlton came to his house, being very drunk, and swearing that he would kill all the ----- soldiers, and wanted to fight with them. They said they did not want to box with Englishmen. He then went out, came back soon after, and pulled one of the soldiers out of his seat, when they all got up and went out, and the row began.
Frederic George Francis sworn, stated that he was at work outside his shop on the harbour, with a dozen or more fishermen standing by looking on, when the prisoner Charlton came up and said “If you want to see a ---- spree, hold on and I`ll show you one in a minute.” He then went away, and came back in a few minutes with about 40 of the soldiers, lugging one by the collar, and pitching into the others right and left. None of the soldiers had any side arms then, or the consequences might have been very serious. Several came down afterwards waiting about ready for another outbreak.
Superintendent Steer deposed that the prisoner Charlton came to the station, and asked for a seaman that had been locked up. Lewis happened to come in, and said that he was the man who had been taken out of his custody. I then told him I must lock him up; he said we should not – used great violence, kicked police constable Hawkes, and it took 3 of us to get him into the cell. Both prisoners seemed mad with drink.
Charlton, being the principal, was fined £2 including costs, or one month`s imprisonment with hard labour, and Clother £1 or 14 days` imprisonment.
Kent Herald 14-8-1856
Petty Sessions: Before The Mayor, J. Kingsnorth, W. Major, and W. Bateman, Esqs., and Capt. Kennicott.
Richard Charlton, a mariner, was charged with being drunk and disorderly.
The defendant had gone into the Oddfellows Inn, Radnor Street, about half-past six in the evening of the previous day in a state of intoxication. He then commenced a disturbance, and seized hold of a Swiss soldier who was sitting down, and dragged him into the street, where he commenced a regular pugilistic encounter, which soon attracted a crowd of soldiers and civilians, the prisoner striking at every soldier of the Swiss Legion with whom he came in contact, and for whom he appeared to entertain a peculiar antipathy. The police then interfered and defendant was taken into custody.
Fined £2, or in default, two months’ hard labour.
Southeastern Gazette 3-8-1858, Kent Herald 5-8-1858
Assizes, Saturday, before Mr. Baron Bramwell.
Patrick Sweeney, 20, soldier, was indicted for wounding John Else, at Folkestone, with intent to murder him. Mr. Scobell prosecuted.
Prosecutor said he was servant at the Oddfellows Arms, Folkestone, on the 9th June. The prisoner was outside in the road and, as he passed, caught up a brickbat and struck him with it on the side of the head, at the same time threatening to knock his brains out. Witness then called assistance, and ran away, followed by prisoner.
David Marsh heard the prosecutor calling for assistance, and on going to the spot found him covered with blood, and the prisoner standing near with two brickbats in his hand. Prisoner was very drunk.
The jury found a verdict of unlawfully wounding, and the prisoner was sentenced to six months` hard labour.
Canterbury Weekly Journal 7-8-1858
Assizes: Before Mr. Justice Bramwell.
Patrick Sweeney, 20, soldier, was indicted for wounding John Else, at Folkestone, with intent to murder him. Mr. Scobell prosecuted.
Prosecutor said he was servant at the Oddfellows Arms, Folkestone, on the 9th June. The prisoner was outside in the road and, as he passed, caught up a brickbat and struck him with it on the side of the head, at the same time threatening to knock his brains out. Witness then called assistance, and ran away, followed by prisoner.
David Marsh heard the prosecutor calling for assistance, and on going to the spot found him covered with blood, and the prisoner standing near with two brickbats in his hand. Prisoner was very drunk.
The jury found a verdict of unlawfully wounding, and the prisoner was sentenced to six months` hard labour.
Dover Chronicle 7-8-1858
Assizes, Friday.
Patrick Sweeney, 20, soldier, was indicted for wounding John Else, at Folkestone, with intent to murder him. Mr. Scobell prosecuted.
Prosecutor said he was servant at the Oddfellows Arms, Folkestone, on the 9th June. The prisoner was outside in the road, and, as he passed, caught up a brickbat and struck him with it on the side of the head, at the same time threatening to knock his brains out. Witness then called assistance, and ran away, followed by prisoner.
David Marsh heard the prosecutor calling for assistance, and on going to the spot found him covered with blood, and the prisoner standing near with two brickbats in his hand. Prisoner was very drunk.
The jury found a verdict of Guilty of unlawfully wounding and prisoner was sentenced to six months` hard labour.
Kent Herald 27-11-1862
Petty Sessions, Friday: Before W. Bateman Esq., Capt. Kennicott R.N., James Tolputt and A.M. Leith Esqs.
John Rossiter, collector of rags and bones, lodging at the Oddfellows Inn, Radnor Street, was brought before the bench, charged with stealing from off a clothes line in Mummery`s Yard, a white gabardine, the property of Emily Tomsett, a laundress, residing in the yard.
From information received by the police, the prisoner was found by police constable Reynolds, wearing the gabardine in Radnor Street; he was taken into custody, and the gabardine being identified by the prosecutrix, the prisoner was remanded, to be brought up and tried under the Criminal Justice Act.
Folkestone Chronicle 6-2-1864Folkestone Chronicle 26-11-1864
On Wednesday night the fishing boat Charlotte, of Hastings, was obliged to run into Folkestone Harbour through stress of weather; the boat was run alongside the North quay, and the crew went ashore for refreshment at the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street. One of them, named William Noakes, left the house and went towards the quay to see to his vessel; in consequence of there being no chains alongside, the night dark, and being dazzled by the lights on the opposite side of the harbour, he unfortunately walked over the pier and fell a distance of about 16 feet, by which the poor fellow sustained a fracture of the left thigh bone. Assistance was immediately rendered, and he was conveyed to the Oddfellows Arms. Mr. Eastes and Dr. Fitzgerald were soon in attendance, and in about an hour`s time the poor man`s thigh was set, and he comfortably in bed. Much credit is due to Mr. Eastes and Dr. Fitzgerald for their prompt attendance, and for the very skilful manner in which the patient was attended to. A little assistance to the poor man by the charitably disposed would be gratefully received by the poor sufferer.
Kentish Gazette 29-11-1864, Dover Chronicle, Kentish Express 3-12-1864
On Wednesday night the fishing boat Charlotte, of Hastings, was obliged to run into Folkestone Harbour through stress of weather. The boat was run alongside the north quay, and the crew went ashore for refreshment, at the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street. One of them, named William Noakes, left the house and went towards the quay, to see to his vessel; in consequence of there being no chains alongside, the night dark, and being dazzled by the lights on the opposite side of the harbour, he unfortunately walked over the pier, and fell a distance of about 16 feet, by which the poor fellow sustained a fracture of the left thigh bone. Assistance was immediately rendered, and he was conveyed to the Oddfellows Arms. Mr. Eastes and Dr. Fitzgerald were soon in attendance, and in about an hour afterwards the poor man’s thigh was set, and he comfortably in bed. Much credit is due to Mr. Eastes and Dr. Fitzgerald for their prompt attendance, and for the very skilful manner in which the patient was attended to. A little assistance to the poor man by the charitably disposed would be gratefully received by the poor sufferer.
Kent Herald 1-12-1864
On Wednesday night last the fishing boat Charlotte, of Hastings, was obliged to run into Folkestone Harbour through stress of weather. The boat was run alongside the north quay, and the crew went ashore for refreshment, at the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street. One of them, named William Noakes, left the house and went towards the quay, to see to his vessel; in consequence of there being no chains alongside, the night dark, and being dazzled by the lights on the opposite side of the harbour, he unfortunately walked over the pier, and fell a distance of about 16 feet, by which the poor fellow sustained a fracture of the left thigh bone. Assistance was immediately rendered, and he was conveyed to the Oddfellows Arms. Mr. Eastes and Dr. Fitzgerald were soon in attendance, and in about an hour`s time the poor man’s thigh was set, and he comfortably in bed. Much credit is due to Mr. Eastes and Dr. Fitzgerald for their prompt attendance, and for the very skilful manner in which the patient was attended to. A little assistance to the poor man by the charitably disposed would be gratefully received by the poor sufferer.
Dover Telegraph
3-12-1864, Canterbury Weekly Journal, Faversham Mercury 10-12-1864
On Wednesday night the fishing boat Charlotte, of Hastings, was obliged to run into Folkestone Harbour through stress of weather; the boat was run alongside the North quay, and the crew went ashore for refreshment at the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street. One of them, named William Noakes, left the house and went towards the quay to see his vessel; in consequence of there being no chains alongside, the night dark, and being dazzled by the lights on the opposite side of the harbour, he unfortunately walked over the pier and fell a distance of about sixteen feet, by which the poor fellow sustained a fracture of the left thigh bone. Assistance was immediately rendered, and he was conveyed to the Oddfellows Arms. Mr. Eastes and Dr. Fitzgerald were soon in attendance, and in half an hour afterwards the poor man`s thigh was set, and he comfortably in bed.
Kent Herald 15-12-1864, Dover Chronicle
17-12-1864
At the Police Court last week, William George, a French mariner, speaking English, was charged with stealing a blue guernsey shirt, a pair of black cloth trousers, &c.
William
Benefield, mariner, living at the Oddfellows’ Arms, said that on Monday, the 7th
November, the prisoner was at the Oddfellows, and occupied the same bedroom
with him. On witness getting up on Tuesday morning, prisoner and witness’s
clothes were gone. The whole of the property was worth 14s. or 15s.
The prisoner was apprehended at Deal, with another man, by P.C. Smith, on a charge of stealing sacks, for which they were sentenced to three weeks’ hard labour, and prisoner, who was wearing prosecutor’s guernsey when apprehended, was now brought up on the above charge and committed for trial.
Kentish Express 17-12-1864
At the Folkestone Police Court, on Tuesday, William George, a French mariner, speaking English, was charged with stealing a blue guernsey shirt, a pair of black cloth trousers, &c.
William
Benefield, mariner, living at the Oddfellows’ Arms, said that on Monday, the 7th
November, the prisoner was at the Oddfellows, and occupied the same bedroom with
him. On witness getting up on Tuesday morning, prisoner and witness’s clothes
were gone. The whole of the property was worth 14s. or 15s.
The prisoner was apprehended at Deal, with another man, by P.C. Smith, on a charge of stealing sacks, for which they were sentenced to three weeks’ hard labour, and prisoner, who was wearing prosecutor’s guernsey when apprehended, was now brought up on the above charge and committed for trial.
Dover Chronicle 22-7-1865
Folkestone
Police Court, Saturday, July 15th: before Silvester Eastes Esq.
Alfred
Noel appeared in answer to a summons, charging him with receiving three pieces
of lead between the 6th and 8th of July, the property of
James Dawson Neal, well knowing the same to have been stolen. Mr. J. Minter
appeared for the defendant.
The
depositions of J.D. Neal, Zacharia Pettmen, John Reynolds and William Martin
(for the prosecution), and of William Solly and T.J. Ledger (for the defence)
having been taken, the magistrate discharged the prisoner.
Dover Chronicle 14-10-1865
On Wednesday morning a court was held at the Town Hall, before C. Doridant Esq., Mayor of Folkestone, and Messrs. Robert Temple and William Bennett, jun., the assessors for the borough, to revise the list of burgesses for the township and parish.
For the first time since the town of Folkestone has been a borough, an objection was raised against two of the burgesses, not mere ratepayers, but well established, well-to-do as inhabitants, one of them holding the position as a borough magistrate, and an alderman, in the Town Council, and the other an old-established townsman. The person who made the objections was Dawson Neal, a publican living in Radnor Street.
The question raised as to whether a lodging house keeper can let his house for a week or a month, or more, and be entitled to remain on the list of burgesses is one of great importance to all lodging house keepers in every borough town, and not only to them, for there are hundreds of cases in which gentlemen, visiting the Continent for a time with their families, prefer letting their houses rather than allow furniture to spoil for want of care. But that Dawson Neal had any real objection to Messrs. Alderman Boarer and Mr. James Banks is too ridiculous to contemplate, and the objection must be looked for by those well versed in the petty strife of the town, in an undercurrent running much higher than the unsavoury locality of Radnor Street.
The objection to Robert William Boarer was taken first.
Mr. Richard Hart appeared to support the objection of Dawson Neal, publican, of Radnor Street, and said that under the 18th section of the Municipal Corporation Act, he had only to prove that notice of the objection had been served on the persons objected to, and it rested with them to prove their claim.
Mr. Sturges, a clerk in Mr. Hart`s office, proved the service of the notice that an objection would be made to the name of Robert William Boarer being retained on the burgess list.
Alderman Boarer then came forward and said he was ready to answer any question that might be put to him.
Mr. Harrison (the Deputy Town Clerk) asked Mr. Boarer whether he claimed his qualification for an inhabited house in Bouverie Place?
Mr. Boarer said he had, and that he occupied it up to the end of August last, and for the whole of the two preceding years.
Mr. Hart said it was usual to swear the person making the deposition.
Mr. Boarer was then sworn, and repeated the statement given above, and said that the house he occupied was known formerly by the name of Ingress Lodge, but was now called No. 2, Bouverie Place.
Mr Harrison: Have you, during your occupancy of the house, paid all rates made for the relief of the poor?
Mr. Boarer: I have.
Mr. Harrison: At the end of the month of August, had you paid all the rates then due in respect to such house?
Mr. Boarer: I believe so. I have all the receipts here.
Mr. Harrison: And all the rates for the borough as well as the poor rates?
Mr. Boarer: I have paid all rates of all kinds.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hart: On the last day of August was your house let to another person?
Mr. Boarer: It was.
Mr. Hart: Had you any right to go there?
Mr. Boarer: No.
Mr. Hart: When did you cease to live in it?
Mr. Boarer: On July 13th.
Mr. Hart: Had you any dominion over the house?
Mr. Boarer: I had, as landlord, and I paid the rates and taxes for it.
The Town Clerk: When you let your house you did so with the intention of returning to Folkestone to reside in it?
Mr. Boarer: I mean to say that was my intention.
The Mayor: Did you leave any personal property in the house?
Mr. Boarer: I left a great deal.
Mr. Harrison: Had you any of your things locked up in a separate room?
Mr. Boarer: I had.
Mr. Hart objected to Mr. Harrison putting questions to Mr. Boarer, unless he was allowed to cross-examine upon them.
Mr. Harrison said he was there as the Deputy Town Clerk, and as an official he had the right to put questions for the guidance of the Court, and Mr. Hart had no right to cross-examine upon them. He (Mr. Harrison) did not appear there as Mr. Boarer`s advocate.
The Town Clerk said that Mr. Hart could put any question he liked to Mr. Boarer, but it must be through the Court.
Mr. Hart said he only wanted that which was fair, and he was sure Mr. Boarer would be the last to object.
Mr. Boarer said he did not care to make any objection, or he could have raised a preliminary objection to the name of the objector himself, which was placed on the burgess list as Dawson Neal, whereas his proper name was Neal Dawson. In answer to the Town Clerk he said he had locked up cupboards and places in the house, and one whole room to which the persons living in the house had no access at all.
The Town Clerk: You merely let the house furnished as many gentlemen do when they are going away for a time?
Mr. Boarer: It was so.
The Town Clerk: Should you consider that you had a right to go into the room in the house (which you say you locked up) without asking permission to do so?
Mr. Boarer: Certainly not.
The Town Clerk: Was it locked upon the understanding that by asking permission the room could be entered and the things taken?
Mr. Boarer: I have no doubt about it.
The Town Clerk: Have you any questions to ask, Mr. Hart?
Mr. Hart: No. Mr. Boarer confesses that he had no right to enter the house.
The Town Clerk: But he afterwards said that the house was let upon such an understanding that if it was necessary he could claim his right to go to the house, but as a matter of courtesy he would first ask permission. Any gentleman would do that. And it was also to be inferred from the very circumstance that he locked up the room that he had a right to go there. Let us understand Mr. Boarer`s meaning. What arrangement was made, Mr. Boarer?
Mr. Boarer: Nothing was said about it whatever.
The Town Clerk: You had the key of the room?
Mr. Boarer: I had.
Mr. Hart then summed up his case at length, and said it was quite clear that Mr. Boarer had parted with his dominion over the house, and contended that he was not the occupier at the end of his year of qualification – the last day of August – and for several days previous. He was not therefore a householder of the borough, and not entitled to have his name on the list.
The Court reserved its decision in this case.
The next case taken was the objection of Dawson Neal, of Radnor Street, against the name of Mr. James Banks, of Bouverie Square, remaining on the burgess list.
Proof of the service of notice of objection having been put in, Mr. Richard Banks was sworn, and said: I claim my vote in respect of the house, 27, Bouverie Square. I occupied that house on the last day of August, 1865. Part of the two preceding years I occupied a house in Marine Terrace, and up to August, 1863, and moved from that house to 27, Bouverie Square. Up to the end of August, 1865, I was an inhabited holder, and for the two years preceding. During the time I was rated to the poor rates with respect to those houses, and to all the rates. I had paid all rates demanded of me up to the last day of August, 1865, both for the borough and poor rates.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hart: Did your family reside with you at Marine Terrace?
Mr. Banks: They did.
Mr. Hart: Where do they reside now?
Mr. Banks: At Upper Norwood.
Mr. Hart: When did they leave Folkestone?
Mr. Banks: In May, 1864.
Mr. Hart: Have they returned?
Mr. Banks: No.
Mr. Hart: No portion of them?
Mr. Banks: I did not know that it was necessary that my family should live in Folkestone to qualify me as a burgess.
Mr. Hart: Have you lived in the house yourself?
Mr. Banks: Yes. I live here now, and have been in the house many times, and of course when I was there I lived there.
Mr. Hart: Have you slept in the house?
Mr. Banks: No.
Mr. Hart: Who lives there now?
Mr. Banks: Colonel Ady`s family.
Mr. Hart: And they occupy the house.
Mr. Banks: No. I occupy the house, but they reside there.
Mr. Hart: Have you any right to reside there, or to go in the house without their permission?
Mr. Banks: I cannot answer, because I do not understand the force of the question distinctly. I believe it is understood between both parties that I have a right to go in the house. As in Mr. Boarer`s case I have things locked up.
Mr. Hart: Have you any legal right to go into the house? Had you any legal right to go there on the last day of August?
Mr. Banks: I cannot answer the question positively. I had no legal right to go and sleep there on the last day of August.
Mr. Hart: Had you any right to go there and take a meal or for any other purpose on the last day of August?
Mr. Banks: I believe not.
Mr. Hart: You let it as a ready furnished house?
Mr. Banks: Yes.
Mr. Hart: For how long a time?
Mr. Banks: There was no arrangement as to time.
The Town Clerk: If you let it for an indefinite period it would make it a yearly tenancy. Do you let it by the year or not?
Mr. Banks: I have no written agreement. It was let on a verbal agreement till Colonel Ady comes home, and it is possible I might have possession next week. Mrs. Ady could leave at a week`s notice. I have no room in which I can lock up things and keep the key. I have retained the room ever since I let the house.
The Town Clerk: Did you let the house on the understanding that it was your intention to come back and live there?
Mr. Banks: I let the house on the understanding that I might return to live in Folkestone, at that house or some other. I live in Folkestone the greater part of the year, and have never been away for more than a month together. I wish to ask whether I have the right to make a few remarks to the Court on this subject?
The Town Clerk: I suppose you wish to remark on Mr. Hart`s summing up. I think you have a right to do so.
Mr. Hart then summed up. So far as he was concerned he had no personal feeling in the matter, but considered that a legal point had very properly been raised, and that the right to retain those two names on the burgess list had been very properly questioned. He contended that having a room in a house did not entitle a person to be on the burgess list, and said that if these two gentlemen were entitled to it every person similarly circumstanced were entitled to be placed on it.
Mr. Banks then addressed the Court, and said it was rather remarkable that the two persons objected to should have been selected, for if they were struck off the burgess list and disenfranchised it would disenfranchise nearly all the burgesses in Folkestone who kept lodging houses. He and the family came to Folkestone several times during the year, and he paid all the rates and taxes for his house. It had been decided in several cases where a man had only a warehouse or office he was entitled to remain on the burgess list. He considered the question was one of serious importance, for, as there was no limit to the time, if a lodging house keeper only went out for a week he would be disenfranchised, and he did not believe that was the meaning of the Act.
The Town Clerk: When you come to Folkestone where do you reside?
Mr. Banks: At Milton House when I come to stay for any time, but when I come for a night only I stay at an hotel.
Mr. Hart: You mean that you reside at Milton House as a lodger only?
Mr. Banks: Yes, as a lodger.
The room was then cleared until the Court decided the question, and, on the re-admission of the public, the Mayor said that, after a very careful consideration of the question, the Court had come to the conclusion that it had been satisfactorily proved that the names of both the gentlemen objected to should be retained on the list of the burgesses for the borough of Folkestone.
Folkestone Chronicle 14-10-1865
On Wednesday a court was held at the Town Hall, before C. Doridant Esq., Mayor of Folkestone, and Messrs. Robert Temple and William Bennett, jun., the assessors for the borough, to revise the list of burgesses for the township and parish.
For the first time since the town of Folkestone has been a borough, an objection was raised against two of the burgesses, not mere ratepayers, but well established, well-to-do as inhabitants, one of them holding the position as a borough magistrate, and an alderman in the Town Council, and the other an old-established townsman and an ex-councillor. The person who made the objections was Dawson Neal, a publican living in Radnor Street.
The question raised as to whether a lodging house keeper can let his house for a week or a month, or more, and be entitled to remain on the list of burgesses is one of great importance to all lodging house keepers in every borough town, and not only to them, for there are hundreds of cases in which gentlemen, visiting the Continent for a time with their families, prefer letting their houses rather than allow furniture to spoil for want of care. But that Dawson Neal had any real objection to Alderman Boarer and Mr. James Banks is too ridiculous to contemplate, and the objection must be looked for by those well versed in the petty strife of the town, in an undercurrent running much higher than the unsavoury locality of Radnor Street.
Mr. Richard Hart appeared on behalf of Dawson Neal, the objector to Mr. Boarer, and said that the objection was taken under the 18th section of the Municipal Corporation Act, the latter part of which states that it is only necessary for him to prove the service of the notification of the objection, and then it was for Mr. Boarer to prove his claim.
The formal notice of service of the objection having been proved, Mr. Harrison said it was necessary for the person objected to to attend the Court personally, and prove his qualification.
Mr. Boarer said he knew very little about it, but was ready to answer any questions which might be required of him.
Mr. Harrison then put the following question: Mr. Boarer, you claim your qualification for an inhabited house in Bouverie Place. Have you, up to the end of August last, and for the whole of the two preceding years, occupied such house in Bouverie Place?
Mr. Boarer: Yes.
Mr. Hart said it was usual to swear the burgess giving evidence.
The Town Clerk having entered the Court in the meantime, then administered the oath to Mr. Boarer, and asked: Have you, during that time occupied such house continuously?
Mr. Boarer: Yes.
Mr. Harrison: The house in Bouverie Place?
Mr. Boarer: Yes; the house was called Ingress Lodge, now called number 2, Bouverie Place.
The Town Clerk: Have you, during your occupancy of the house, paid all rates made for the relief of the poor?
Mr. Boarer: I have.
Mr. Harrison: Had you paid all such rates at the end of the month of August in respect of such house – all rates then due?
Mr. Boarer: I believe so. I have all the receipts here.
The Town Clerk: And all the rates for the borough as well as the poor rates?
Mr. Boarer: I have paid all rates of all kinds.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hart: On the last day of August was your house let to another person?
Mr. Boarer: Yes
Mr. Hart: Had you any right to go there?
Mr. Boarer: No.
Mr. Hart: When did you cease to live in it?
Mr. Boarer: On the 13th of July.
Mr. Hart: Had you any dominion over it after then?
Mr. Boarer: I had, as landlord.
Mr. Hart: And in 1864?
Mr. Boarer: In the same sense, in the previous year.
Mr. Hart: And over no other house in the borough, or within a distance of seven miles?
Mr. Boarer: I paid the rates and taxes of Bouverie Villas.
Mr. Harrison: When you let the house was it with the intention of returning to Folkestone?
Mr. Boarer: It was.
The Mayor: Did you leave any personal effects in the house?
Mr. Boarer: I had a great deal.
Mr. Harrison: Did you occupy a separate room in which your things were locked up?
Mr. Hart objected to the questions put by Mr. Harrrison, unless he was allowed to cross-examine on them.
Mr. Harrison said he did not appear as the advocate of Mr. Boarer, and only put such questions as were necessary for the information of the Court. He was entitled to sit there as Mr. Brockman`s partner, and as Deputy Town Clerk.
Mr. Boarer said that so little did he care about raising any objection that he had passed over a preliminary objection to the name of the objector himself, who was placed on the list as Neal Dawson, when his real name was James Dawson Neal.
Mr. Harrison put his question again.
Mr. Boarer: I had up cupboards and places in the house, and one whole room where things were placed to which the person in the house had no access at all.
The Town Clerk: You merely let the house as other gentlemen frequently do when they go out of time for a short time?
Mr. Boarer: Just so.
The Town Clerk: Should you consider that you had any right to go into that room and take your things?
Mr. Boarer: Certainly not without asking permission.
The Town Clerk: Was the room locked upon the understanding that you could go into it and take the things – of course any gentleman would first ask permission – if you required them?
Mr. Boarer: No doubt about it.
The Town Clerk asked Mr. Hart whether he had any questions to put.
Mr. Hart said he had not, as Mr. Boarer had frankly confessed that he had no right to enter the room.
The Town Clerk said that Mr. Boarer had afterwards told them that he had, and in order to come to a clear understanding about the matter he asked Mr. Boarer what was said with respect to entering the room between himself and the parties to whom he had let the house.
Mr. Boarer: Nothing was said about it whatever on either side.
The Town Clerk: You had the key of the room?
Mr. Boarer: I had.
Mr. Hart then summed up his case at length, and said it was quite clear that Mr. Boarer had parted with his dominion over the house, and contended that he was not the occupier at the end of his year of qualification – the last day of August – and for several days previous. He was not therefore a householder of the borough, and not entitled to have his name on the list.
The Court reserved its decision in this case.
The next case taken was the objection of Dawson Neal, of Radnor Street, against the name of Mr. James Banks, of Bouverie Square, remaining on the burgess list.
Proof of the service of notice of objection having been put in, Mr. Richard Banks was sworn, and said: I claim my vote in respect of the house, 27, Bouverie Square. I occupied that house on the last day of August, 1865. Part of the two preceding years I occupied a house in Marine Terrace, and up to August, 1863, and moved from that house to 27, Bouverie Square. Up to the end of August, 1865, I occupied an inhabited house, and for the two years preceding. During this time I was rated to the poor rates with respect to those houses, and to all the rates. I have paid all rates demanded of me up to the last day of August, 1865, both for the borough and poor rates.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hart: Did your family reside with you at Marine Terrace?
Mr. Banks: They did.
Mr. Hart: Where do they reside now?
Mr. Banks: At Upper Norwood.
Mr. Hart: When did they leave Folkestone?
Mr. Banks: In May, 1864.
Mr. Hart: Have they returned?
Mr. Banks: No.
Mr. Hart: No portion of them?
Mr. Banks: I did not know that it was necessary that my family should live in Folkestone to qualify me as a burgess.
Mr. Hart: Have you lived in the house yourself?
Mr. Banks: Yes. I live here now, and have been in the house many times, and of course when I was there I lived there.
Mr. Hart: Have you slept in the house?
Mr. Banks: No.
Mr. Hart: Who lives there now?
Mr. Banks: Colonel Ady`s family.
Mr. Hart: And they occupy the house.
Mr. Banks: No. I occupy the house, but they reside there.
Mr. Hart: Have you any right to reside there, or to go in the house without their permission?
Mr. Banks: I cannot answer, because I do not understand the force of the question distinctly. I believe it is understood between both parties that I have a right to go in the house. As in Mr. Boarer`s case I have things there locked up.
Mr. Hart: Have you any legal right to go into the house? Had you any legal right to go there and sleep on the last day of August?
Mr. Banks: I cannot answer the question positively. I had no legal right to go and sleep there on the last day of August.
Mr. Hart: Had you any right to go there and take a meal or for any other purpose on the last day of August?
Mr. Banks: I believe not.
Mr. Hart: You let it as a ready furnished house?
Mr. Banks: Yes.
Mr. Hart: For how long a time?
Mr. Banks: There was no arrangement as to time.
The Town Clerk: If you let it for an indefinite period it would make it a yearly tenancy. Do you let it by the year or not?
Mr. Banks: I have no written agreement. It was let on a verbal agreement till Colonel Ady comes home, and it is possible I might have possession next week. Mrs. Ady could leave at a week`s notice. I have no room in which I can lock up things and keep the key. I have retained the room ever since I let the house.
The Town Clerk: Did you let the house on the understanding that it was your intention to come back and live there?
Mr. Banks: I let the house on the understanding that I might return to live in Folkestone, at that house or some other. I live in Folkestone the greater part of the year, and have never been away for more than a month together. I wish to ask whether I have the right to make a few remarks to the Court on this subject?
The Town Clerk: I suppose you wish to remark on Mr. Hart`s summing up. I think you have a right to do so.
Mr. Hart then summed up. So far as he was concerned he had no personal feeling in the matter, but considered that a legal point had very properly been raised, and that the right to retain those names on the burgess list had been very properly questioned. He contended that having a room in a house did not entitle a person to be on the burgess list, and said that if these two gentlemen were entitled to it every person similarly circumstanced were entitled to be placed on it.
Mr. Banks then addressed the Court, and said Mr Hart had told them he had no personal feeling in the matter, and if it was so, it was rather remarkable that the two persons objected to should have been selected, and if they were struck off the burgess list and disenfranchised it would disenfranchise nearly all the burgesses in Folkestone who kept lodging houses. He and the family came to Folkestone several times during the year, and he paid all the rates and taxes for his house. It had been decided in several cases where a man had only a warehouse or office he was entitled to remain on the burgess list. He considered the question was one of serious importance, for, as there was no limit to the time, if a lodging house keeper only went out for a week he would be disenfranchised, and he did not believe that was the meaning of the Act.
The Town Clerk: When you come to Folkestone where do you reside?
Mr. Banks: At Milton House when I come to stay for any time, but when I come for a night only I stay at an hotel.
Mr. Hart: You mean that you reside at Milton House as a lodger only?
Mr. Banks: Yes, as a lodger.
The room was then cleared until the Court decided the question, and, on the re-admission of the public, the Mayor said that, after a careful consideration of the question, the Court had come to the conclusion that it had been satisfactorily proved that the names of both the gentlemen objected to should be retained on the list of the burgesses for the borough of Folkestone.
Kentish Express 14-10-1865, Kentish Gazette 17-10-1865
Revision of the Burgess List: On Wednesday forenoon a court was held at the Town Hall, before the Mayor and Messrs. Robert Temple and William Bennett, jun., the assessors for the borough, to revise the list of burgesses for the township and parish of Folkestone.
An objection was laid by a publican named Dawson Neal, of Radnor Street, to the names of Robert William Boarer, of 2, Bouverie Place, and James Banks, of Bouverie Square, being retained on the list of burgesses. Mr. Richard Hart, solicitor, appeared to support the objections, which were laid under the 18th sec. of the Municipal Corporation Act, on the ground that as the parties let their houses to families during the summer months they ceased to occupy them.
In each case it was proved that Messrs. Boarer and Banks paid the rates and taxes during the time they let their houses, and also had rooms with goods in them to which the persons to whom the houses had been let had no access. After deliberating for some time, the court decided that the objections had not been sustained, and that the names should remain on the list of burgesses. Mr. Boarer is an alderman of the borough, and would have had to give up his office if he had been struck off the list, and the question raised was one of great importance as affecting nearly all the lodging-house keepers in Folkestone.
Southeastern Gazette 17-10-1865
Revision of the Burgess List: On Wednesday forenoon a court was held at the Town Hall, before C. Doridant Esq., Mayor and Messrs. R. Temple and W. Bennett, jun., the assessors for the borough, to revise the list of burgesses for the township and parish. The proceedings excited more interest than usual, from the fact that objections had been raised against two inhabitants, one of them holding the position of a borough magistrate and an alderman, and the other an old-established townsman. The two gentleman in question were Mr. Alderman Boarer and Mr. James Banks; the objector being Neal Dawson, a publican living in Radnor Street. Mr. R. Hart appeared to support the objections. In both cases the point relied on was that the parties had not such dominion over the houses for which they claimed as to give them a legal right to vote. The Mayor said that, after a very careful consideration of the question, the Court had come to the conclusion that it had been satisfactorily proved that the names of both the gentlemen objected to should be retained on the list of burgesses for the borough of Folkestone.
Kent Herald 19-10-1865
Revision of the Burgess List: On Wednesday a court was held at the Town Hall, before C. Doridant Esq., Mayor and Messrs. R. Temple and W. Bennett, junior, the revising assessors, to revise the list of burgesses for the township and parish. The proceedings excited more interest than usual, from the fact that objections had been raised against two inhabitants, one of them holding the position of a borough magistrate and an alderman, and the other an old-established townsman. The two gentleman in question were Mr. Alderman Boarer and Mr. James Banks; the objector being Neal Dawson, a publican living in Radnor Street. Mr. R. Hart appeared to support the objections. In both cases the point relied on was that the parties had not such dominion over the houses for which they claimed as to give them a legal right to vote. The Mayor said that, after a very careful consideration of the question, the Court had come to the conclusion that it had been satisfactorily proved that the names of both the gentlemen objected to should be retained on the list of burgesses for the borough of Folkestone.
Dover Chronicle 12-6-1867, Dover Express 14-6-1867, Kentish Express 15-6-1867
Police Court, Monday: Before Captain Kennicott R.N. and James Tolputt Esq.
James Hammond, a private in the 8th Brigade, R.A., was charged with stealing one musical box, value 5s., the property of James Dawson Neal, on the 9th inst.
P.C. Edward Smith deposed: Last evening, about half past seven, I was sent to the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street. In consequence of what the landlord, Mr. Neal, told me I went in search of the prisoner, and found him close to the Fish Market. I stopped him and asked him if he had anything about him. He said “No, I have nothing.” I saw he had something under his tunic. I put my hand on it and said “What have you got here?” He did not reply. I then put my hand underneath his tunic and took out the musical box produced. I then took him into custody, and conveyed him to the police station. On the charge being read over to him he said he knew nothing about it, and he did not take it. I have had the box in my possession ever since I took it from the prisoner.
James Dawson Neal deposed: I am the landlord of the Oddfellows Arms, Radnor Street. Prisoner and another man came to my house about six o`clock yesterday evening. He went into the parlour, and he and his friend had a pot of beer. Prisoner remained in the room about three quarters of an hour. I did not see him leave the house. I had a musical box in the parlour. It was on the table while prisoner was there. In consequence of something my servant said to me I went into the parlour, but the box was not there. I then gave information to the police. The box produced is the one stolen. It is worth five shillings.
Prisoner pleaded guilty, and electing to be tried under the Criminal Justice Act, was sentenced to six weeks imprisonment with hard labour.
Dover Chronicle 28-8-1867, Dover Express 30-8-1867, Kentish Express 31-8-1867
Police Court, Tuesday: Before Mr. J. Tolputt and Captain Kennicott R.N.
Henry White, charged with assaulting John Ulse on the 23rd inst., pleaded not guilty.
Complainant, a labourer, residing at the Oddfellows Arms, said: Last Friday I was near the harbour about two o`clock, getting in some fishing nets, when defendant came to me on the beach, called me a cat and “Dawson`s whore.” I went and gave him a shove, and he struck me on the mouth with his fist and cut my lip open. Someone told him to let me alone.
Cross-examined: I did say I`d split your head open if you said cat again.
Henry May, fisherman, of Mill Bay, was on the beach on Friday afternoon, and corroborated complainant`s evidence.
Case dismissed.
No comments:
Post a Comment