Updates

29th Decembar, 2012: Folkestone Up To Date Reports for 1898 Added.

Updates

22nd December, 2012: Folkestone Chronicle and Folkestone Visitors` List Reports for 1898 Added

Harvey Hotel 1880s

Folkestone Express 13-8-1881

Saturday, August 6^th: Before The Mayor, Alderman Caister, J. Clark and J. Holden Esqs.

Henry Clements, a jeweller`s assistant, was charged with stealing a watch and chain, and 19 francs, the property of Mr. Dernbach, on the 31^st July.

Prosecutor, who is bandmaster of the town band, and resides at Charlotte Terrace, said that he had known the prisoner for some weeks as a jeweller`s assistant, working for Mr. Reich in Tontine Street. On Sunday, July 31<sup>st</sup>, he was at the Harvey Hotel, about eight o`clock in the evening. The prisoner was there when he went in. They conversed together, and he asked if he could give him a job, as he wished to earn a few shillings. He said “Yes” and gave him a watch to regild and clean, a chain to repair, 20 half francs, one franc, two francs and five franc pieces to make a necklace of. Prisoner said that he would do what witness required, and he was to return the watch and chain, and the coins made into a necklace on Thursday at the latest, but he did not do so. He enquired on the Thursday if the prisoner was in Folkestone and found that he was not, and in consequence of what he heard he issued a warrant for his apprehension. He identified the property produced as his; it`s value, including the money, was £8.

Superintendent Rutter said that he received the warrant for the apprehension of the prisoner on Friday. Prisoner was taken to the police station about nine o`clock that evening by Hogben, and he told prisoner that he held a warrant for his apprehension. He cautioned him, and he said “All right, sir, I have got all that gentleman`s property in my pocket”. He was then charged, and on searching him he found one metal watch, a chain, and eight francs in French money.

The Superintendent asked for a remand until Wednesday, which was granted.

Wednesday, August 10^th: Before The Mayor, Captain Crowe, General Cannon, Alderman Caister, A.M. Watkin and F. Boykett Esqs.

Henry Clements was brought up on remand, charged with converting to his own use a watch, metal chain, and other articles, with which he had been entrusted. The following further evidence was taken:

William Robinson, hairdresser, of St. John Street, said the prisoner on Monday week offered him a chain for sale. It was similar to that produced, but he did not examine it as he had no intention of buying it. He asked prisoner if he came by the chain honestly and he replied “Yes”, and asked if witness came by his money honestly.

The magistrates considered there was not sufficient evidence to justify a committal, and discharged the accused man.

Folkestone Express 15-12-1883

Wednesday, December 12^th: Before The Mayor, Aldermen Caister and Sherwood, J. Holden and J. Fitness Esqs.

Samuel Barker was charged with obtaining a horse and cart by false pretences from William Swan.

Mr. Minter prosecuted, and Mr. Martin Mowll defended.

Prosecutor said he was a labourer, living at Postling, and on the 5^th of December he owned a pony and cart. He came into Folkestone on that day, and put up at the New Inn. Had not seen the defendant previously. He saw him at the New Inn stables, and afterwards at the bar. Witness was going to “chop” his horse and cart with a man named Stone, and he was waiting for Stone to come. Defendant told him Stone would not come back, he told him “straight”, and it was no use his waiting. Between three and four o`clock he told defendant that he would sell the lot and go to work again. He said he wanted £7 for it. Baker said he would give £5. He refused to sell it for £5, but afterwards told the defendant he could have it for £5 5s. Defendant said he would have it, and if witness would go with him he would pay him. They went to the Harvey Inn, and defendant asked if someone was in. The landlord said “No”. Defendant then took 10s. out of his pocket and gave it to witness, saying he would go out and get the remainder. He told Baker he was not going to have the horse and cart without the money. He replied “O h, you needn`t be afraid of your money. You come along with me”. They went together to a public house in Dover Street, where defendant said he could “get a bit of money”. He said he was the owner of houses, and had lots of property. Then they went to the Eagle Tavern, High Street, where defendant had a paper written out (two or three scraps of paper were put in). He told witness he would pay at ten o`clock the next morning. Witness still refused to let him have the horse and cart. In the presence of the landlord, Baker said he was the owner of houses, and believing that statement was true, he allowed him to take the horse and cart, and defendant promised to pay him at ten o`clock the next morning. Witness went to defendant`s house at Foord at ten o`clock the next morning and saw defendant`s wife, but defendant was not at home. He could neither find defendant nor his pony and cart. He searched about the town for him that day and the next, and then went to the police.

Cross-examined: I came to Folkestone with the intention of “chopping” the pony away with a man named Stone, a horse dealer, of Dover, whom I saw the day before. The 10s. was paid me at the Harvey, and the agreement was drawn up at the Eagle Tavern by the landlord. It was drawn up to show Baker would have to pay me £4 15s. on the next day. I made an entry in my pocket book. I saw the police on Thursday morning. A policeman told me I must summons him. I believe I told the policeman that Baker said he had property.

Re-examined: I should not have parted with the horse and cart if Baker had not said he was the owner of houses. I proposed to come to your office. Baker said you closed at four o`clock. The sergeant of police told him the character Baker bore.

Sergeant Ovenden said he had known Baker about ten years. Never heard of his having any house property. Could not say whether the furniture in his house belonged to him.

By the Court: Defendant is a dealer in ducks, horses, rags and bones, and bottles.

Mr. Minter asked the Bench to commit the prisoner for trial on the evidence.

Mr. Mowll contended that there had not been a prima facie case made out, but that on the contrary, the complainant, a dealer, sold his property to another dealer, and that there was not the slightest possible cause for saying the defendant had been guilty of a criminal act.

The Magistrates` Clerk said if the defendant did not intend to pay for the property, and if all those papers were a mere trick, then it was a case of larceny.

The Bench decided to commit the prisoner for trial at the Quarter Sessions.

Folkestone Express 12-1-1884

Quarter Sessions

Monday, January 5^th: Before W. Frederick Laxton Esq.

Samuel Baker was indicted for obtaining by false pretences a horse and cart and harness, value £5 5s., from Wm. Swan, at Folkestone on the 5^th December. Mr. Denman prosecuted, and the prisoner was undefended. The case was heard so recently before the magistrates that it is only necessary now to give a summary of the evidence.

William Swan, a labourer, living at Postling, stated that he came into Folkestone on the 5^th December and put up at the New Inn, where he expected to meet a man named Stone, who had arranged to buy his horse and cart. Stone did not come, but he saw Baker, who said Stone would not be back, and asked him what he wanted for the horse and cart. He asked £7. Prisoner said he would give him £5, but afterwards offered £5 5s. Prosecutor agreed to sell for that amount. They went together to the Harvey Hotel, where prisoner gave him 10s. He told him that he need not be afraid about his money – that he owned lots of houses round about there, and had plenty of money. He wanted prisoner to go to Mr. Minter`s office and get an agreement drawn up. Prisoner replied “Mr. Minter shuts up at four o`clock”. They afterwards went to the Eagle Tavern, where the landlord wrote a memorandum in prosecutor`s pocket book to the effect that prisoner would pay the balance at ten o`clock the next morning. He believed that prisoner was the owner of houses, or would not have consented to part with the horse and cart. The next morning at ten o`clock he returned to Folkestone, and went to prisoner`s house at Foord. His wife said he had gone down town. The money was not there. He searched all round the town for prisoner, but could not find him. He never received the money, nor had he seen the horse and cart since. He gave information to the police.

In reply to prisoner, witness said he did not order Mr. Back to hand the horse over to him. Prisoner paid for the stabling. He went three times to his house on the 6^th, and again on the following day, and delivered a bill. He told him not to pay his sister, but told prisoner`s wife he would take part of the money and leave the rest for a week or two.

Sergeant Ovenden was called, and in reply to Mr. Denman he said he had known prisoner for about ten years as a dealer in bottles, rags and bones, &c., going round with a cart. Never heard that prisoner had any property.

In reply to prisoner, witness said he had never known him to be before the magistrates.

Prisoner alleged that he bought the horse and cart, paid a deposit, and agreed to pay the balance in a few days.

At the close of the case, the Deputy Recorder asked Mr. Glyn if he had no evidence to negative the statement by the prisoner that he had lots of houses. It was quite possible that he had property which the police sergeant knew nothing of.

Mr. Glyn replied that if it were true that the man had houses it would be very easy for him to rebut the charge of false pretences.

The Deputy Recorder said it was a question whether he ought not to withdraw the charge and direct the jury to return a verdict of Not Guilty. However, in deference to Mr. Glyn, he would allow the case to go to the jury. He then summed up strongly in the prisoner`s favour, pointing out that it was possible the prisoner had property, and it was not necessary that it should be situated in Folkestone. They must be careful not to allow a Criminal Court to become a Court for collecting or enforcing the payment of debts, because the prosecutor could recover the balance of his money in the County Court. Further, he referred to the fact that the prisoner, who had been known to the police for ten years, had nothing against his character, and that, considering his avocation was that of a dealer, a class of men likely to be thrown into contact with the police, it was very much in his favour.

The jury, however, retired for a few minutes, and returned with a verdict of Guilty.

Two previous convictions at the East Kent Quarter Sessions were then proved against the prisoner, and it appeared that on that occasion there was a prior conviction. This was in July, 1873, and prisoner then went in the name of Henry George, and was sentenced to six months` hard labour.

Superintendent Taylor said he had known the prisoner two or three years, and had had repeated complaints about him. He associated with three or four other persons who frequented fairs and markets in the neighbourhood to get hold of weak-minded people to swindle them out of their goods in such a manner as to evade the criminal law.

The Deputy Recorder, in sentencing the prisoner, said the facts of the case as just stated were not known to him, and perhaps it was quite right that a judge should not know them until after the prisoner was convicted. But the jury had found him guilty after having carefully considered their verdict, which they had not arrived at hastily. There was no doubt that the countryman parted with his property on the faith of the misrepresentations he had made, and the law held that to be an offence. Unfortunately for the prisoner, that was not his first offence. He did not pay particular heed to the statements of Superintendent Taylor, but there was the record against him, that he was convicted at the East Kent Sessions in July, 1873, and there was a conviction, it appeared, previous to that, and he was sentenced to six months imprisonment. Therefore that was the third offence known against him. Of course such cases must be severely dealt with. It was an unfortunate thing for the prisoner`s family, but the law must take it`s course without contemplating what would be the effects on a man`s family. He had consulted the magistrates on the Bench and they quite concurred that it was his duty to pass a sentence of twelve months` imprisonment with hard labour.

The Court then rose.

Folkestone News 12-1-1884

Quarter Sessions

Monday, January 7^th: Before W.F. Laxton Esq.

Samuel Baker was charged with on the 5^th December obtaining by false pretences a horse and cart, value £5 5s., from William Swan, with intent to defraud. Prisoner pleaded Not Guilty.

Mr. Denman, who appeared on behalf of the prosecution, addressed the jury.

Mr. Swan was then examined, and said he was a labourer at Postling. On the 5^th December he had a pony and cart, and brought them into Folkestone. He went to the New Inn with the intention of meeting a man of the name of Stone, about twelve o`clock. He saw the prisoner there, but he did not know him before. Prisoner said Stone would not be back that day. Witness told the prisoner he was waiting for Stone. Witness saw prisoner again in the afternoon, and told him he should sell the horse and cart and go to work again. Prisoner was then at the New Inn stables, and said he would buy the things. Witness said he wanted £7 for them, and prisoner said he should only give £5. Witness refused to sell them for that price, and he afterwards came to the agreement to sell them for five guineas, whereupon prisoner bought them and said “Come along with me, and I will get the money”. They then went to the Harvey Inn, and prisoner asked for someone, but the party was not there. Prisoner then gave witness 10s., but witness said he should not have the horse and cart without the money. They then went into a public house in Dover Street, and when they got into the street again prisoner said “You need not be afraid of me, for I am the owner of houses all round here”. Witness then wanted to go to Mr. Minter`s office to get an agreement drawn up, but prisoner said Mr. Minter shut up his office at four o`clock, and that it was no use going there. They then went to the Eagle Tavern in High Street, where they had a paper written out by the landlord. Prisoner signed it, and witness wrote a line at the bottom saying “the remainder on the sixth”. Prisoner promised to pay the balance at ten o`clock the next morning. Witness then let the prisoner have the horse and cart as he believed prisoner was the owner of houses and property. If it had not been for that belief he would not have allowed prisoner to have the things. Witness went to prisoner`s house next morning, but prisoner was out and had left no money. Witness went at ten o`clock, the time fixed for the payment of the balance. Witness went about the town to find him, and returned to prisoner`s house again about twelve o`clock. Witness never got either the money or his horse and cart. Witness gave information to the police. Witness again went on Friday, two days afterwards, with the bill. Prisoner paid the stabling of the horse to Mr. Back.

In reply to prisoner, witness said defendant`s wife told him the prisoner was gone to Dover to sell the cart. Witness told the prisoner`s wife that he would take a part of the money, and leave the rest for a week or two if they did not cause him any trouble. Witness did not call at prisoner`s house again. Prisoner asked if he should leave the money with his (witness`s) sister, Mrs. Bisco, but witness told him not to pay anyone but himself. Witness said he should not call at the house again.

Sergeant Ovenden, on being sworn, said he had known the prisoner about ten years. He was a dealer, dealing in poultry, bottles, rags, bones, iron, and such things. Prisoner went about with a cart, and lived at 7, Castle Terrace, Foord. Witness never heard that he was the owner of property. Witness had no recollection of prisoner having been before the Folkestone Bench of Magistrates.

Prisoner then addressed the Court, and said he bought the things of Swan, paid him a deposit, agreeing to pay the remainder in a few days. On the following morning prisoner waited till the time when he had promised the money, a quarter to ten, and then went out to look for Swan. He meant to pay the money. He did not say he had property in the town.

The Judge then summed up the evidence, stating that he thought the charge of false pretences had not been fully proved.

The jury, after retiring for a short time, returned a verdict of Guilty.

The prisoner was then asked by the Clerk of the Peace if he were the same man as one Henry George, who was indicted at Canterbury in July, 1873, for larceny in regard to two offences.

The prisoner replied that he was.

Supt. Taylor stated that he wished to give evidence as to the prisoner`s character, and on being sworn said he had known the prisoner for between two or three years, and had repeatedly had complaints made to him by persons whom prisoner and some others had swindled. They got people to part with their goods in such a manner as to evade the criminal law.

The Judge, addressing the prisoner, said unfortunately for him it was not the first offence he had committed. It was recorded against him that he was charged at the East Kent Quarter Sessions of the Peace, at Canterbury, in July, 1873, with two offences, and was sent to gaol for six months for each offence, therefore the present was the third offence known against him. He (the Judge) should sentence him to twelve months` imprisonment with hard labour.

Folkestone Chronicle 29-11-1884

Friday, November 28^th: Before Gen. Armstrong C.B., and Alds. Banks and Hoad

Charles Snelling was brought up in custody, charged with stealing a pair of slippers, the property of Mr. George Marsh, landlord of the Harvey Hotel, and was also charged with a gold mourning ring, the property of William Hart, barman of the hotel, of the value of £3 3s.

It appears from the evidence given that prisoner came to the hotel on the 20^th inst., in the evening, where he had tea, and engaged a bed for the night, being served with a pair of slippers for his use. The next morning, on coming downstairs, he made an excuse that he was going to the bootmaker to have some trifling thing done to his boots, and walking out of the hotel with his slippers on, and without paying the bill. Subsequently it was found that a ring was missing from the pocket of a waistcoat belonging to Hart, which was in his room, and to which prisoner had opportunity on the morning in question of gaining access, and he had artfully contrived to substitute a worthless ring in it`s place.

Information was given to the police, and the Superintendent contrived to trace prisoner to Faversham, where he discovered the ring had been pawned. It is conjectured that prisoner is one of a gang of swindlers and that his antecedents will not bear examination.

The Bench committed him for trial at the next Quarter Sessions.

Folkestone Express 6-12-1884

Friday, November 28^th: Before General Armstrong and Alderman Banks.

Charles Snelling was brought up and charged with stealing a pair of slippers, value 1s., the property of Mr. G. Marsh, of the Harvey Hotel.

Prosecutor, proprietor of the Harvey Hotel, Dover Road, said prisoner went to his hotel on Thursday evening, the 20^th, and engaged a bed for the night. After he had had his tea he said he should not go out again, and was supplied with a pair of slippers. He afterwards left the house and took the slippers with him. He identified those produced as his property, and he valued them at 1s.

William Hart, manager at the Harvey Hotel, said he saw prisoner about six o`clock on Thursday in the bar parlour. About eleven o`clock he saw him wearing the slippers. He again saw him next morning between nine and ten o`clock. He then had his boots in his hand, and asked to be directed to a cobbler`s shop. Witness directed him to Tontine Street, and he left the house wearing the slippers. He did not return, nor did he pay his bill.

Edwin Kelway, a lad, living at 40, Canterbury Road, a coffee house, said the prisoner went there on the 21^st, early in the morning. He had some refreshments, and remained about an hour. Before he left he said he would leave the slippers till dinner time and would call for them again. The slippers were wrapped in a piece of brown paper, on which the name of Mr. Marsh, Harvey Hotel was written. Prisoner did not return for the slippers and they were given up to Supt. Taylor on Thursday evening.

Supt. Taylor said he received the prisoner at the police station at Faversham on Thursday. He told prisoner the charge, and prisoner replied “Very well. You will find the slippers at the Welcome Coffee House, Canterbury Road”. Prisoner was detained in custody by the Faversham police. Witness received the paper and slippers from Mrs. Kelway on Thursday evening.

Prisoner was then charged with stealing a gold ring, value £3, and a silk handkerchief, value 3s., the property of William Hart.

Prosecutor said the prisoner slept in a room at the Harvey Hotel, opposite to the room where he (witness) slept. Prisoner went upstairs about twenty minutes before witness. Witness`s bedroom door was unlocked. He got up about a quarter to seven, and prisoner came downstairs about nine. He left the house between nine and ten. On the following Sunday witness missed a gold mourning ring which he had left in the pocket of his waistcoat, and a silk handkerchief from his coat pocket. The coat and waistcoat were hanging on a peg near his bed, and covered over. He found a common ring in the place of his ring. He identified the ring produced as his property. He knew it by a slight flaw in the glass. He bought the ring at Mr. Darley`s for £3 10s. or £3 5s., and valued it at £3. The silk handkerchief was, he believed, one he missed from his coat, and it`s value was 3s.

John Edward Allen, manager to Mr. Samuel Barnard, pawnbroker of Faversham, said the prisoner went to their shop between two and three on Monday afternoon last, and offered the ring produced in pledge, asking 5s. on it. He advanced him 5s. at first, and subsequently 3s. 6d. more. He asked prisoner how he came by the ring, and he said he bought it in Oxford Street, second hand. He said he gave either 25s. or 35s. for it, he forgot which. He gave the name of Thomas Stacey, 23, Maison Dieu Road, Dover. Prisoner was respectably dressed, and was not in the same apparel as he wore in court. Witness gave up the ring to Supt. Taylor.

Supt. Taylor said he received the ring produced from Mr. Allen, and the handkerchief from the Superintendent of police at Faversham. He charged the prisoner with stealing the articles, and he made no reply. Prisoner had lived in the borough, but had no fixed residence. That morning he showed the prisoner the common ring which was found in Mr. Hart`s pocket and asked him if it belonged to him. He replied “Yes, that`s mine”.

Prisoner was committed for trial at the Borough Quarter Sessions.

Supt. Taylor wished to draw the attention of the Bench to the action of Mr. Allen, through whose instrumentality the prisoner was arrested. On several occasions he had been of great assistance to the police.

General Armstrong commended Mr. Allen`s conduct.

Folkestone News 6-12-1884

Friday, November 28^th: Before General Armstrong and Aldermen Banks and Hoad.

A young man giving the name of Charles Snelling was charged with stealing a pair of slippers, value 1s., the property of Mr. Marsh, proprietor of the Harvey Hotel, and a ring, value £3, and a silk handkerchief, value 3s., the property of Mr. Hart, the manager of the establishment, the articles being taken from the Harvey Hotel. The things belonging to the two owners were made the subject of separate charges.

From the evidence of Mr. Hart and Mr. Marsh and a lad named Kelway, it appeared that the prisoner went to the Harvey Hotel on Thursday evening, the 20^th November, and engaged a bed for the night. He appeared to be a very respectable person, and the landlord lent him a pair of slippers. He slept in a room opposite Mr. Hart, who had hanging up in a cupboard, but not locked up, a coat and a vest, in the pockets of which respectively were a silk handkerchief and a ring. Mr. Hart rose and came downstairs before the prisoner. The next morning (Friday) Snelling asked to be directed to a cobbler`s shop, and was told where to find one. He left the hotel without paying for his bed, etc., and did not come back again. On Sunday Mr. Hart found out that the ring and handkerchief had been taken. On the following Thursday, the prisoner went to the Welcome coffee house and had some refreshment. He there left Mr. Marsh`s pair of slippers, saying he would call for them at dinner time. He did not come back, however, but, as it subsequently transpired, went to Faversham. The police having been made aware of the thefts, prisoner was detained at Faversham, and Superintendent Taylor proceeded thither and arrested him on the same day.

From the evidence of Mr. Allen, assistant to Mr. Barnard, pawnbroker at Faversham, it seemed that prisoner went and pawned the ring for 8s. 6d. He said that he bought it in Oxford Street for 25s. or 35s. (the witness could not remember which), that his name was Thomas Stacey, and that he lived at 23, Maison Dieu Road, Dover. The handkerchief Superintendent Taylor found upon him at Faversham Police Station. In Mr. Hats waistcoat, in the place of Mr. Hart`s gold ring, had been left a very common and worthless ring. Superintendent Taylor showed this to prisoner, and said upon apprehending him “I am going to ask you a question. You need not answer it unless you like. Does this ring belong to you?” He replied “Yes, that`s mine”.

The prisoner, who declined to say anything in his defence, was committed for trial at the next Borough Quarter Sessions.

Superintendent Taylor called the attention of the Bench to the fact that Mr. Allen had been of great assistance to the police in this case, it being mainly through that assistance that the man was apprehended. It was not the first time Mr. Allen had aided the police in the interests of justice.

The Bench suitably thanked Mr. Allen.

Folkestone News 5-12-1885

Saturday, November 28^th: Before The Mayor, Colonel De Crespigny, H.W. Poole and F. Boykett Esqs.

Henry Ealding was charged with being drunk and disorderly in Dover Road. He pleaded Not Guilty.

P.C. Woods said he was on duty in Dover Road about half an hour after midnight. He heard a great disturbance outside the Harvey Hotel. About fifteen people were gathered round the defendant in the middle of the road. He asked defendant what was the matter, and defendant told him to “go to ----“. He was in a very excited state and wanted to fight. He refused to go indoors and witness told him if he did not go in he should lock him up. Defendant was drunk and very excited. Defendant`s wife was outside and said he had been ill-treating her and she refused to go indoors with the defendant.

Sergeant Pay said the defendant was very excited and drunk when taken to the police station.

A fine of 10s. and 3s. 6d. costs was imposed, or fourteen days.

Defendant said he would be sent to gaol for fourteen days.

Folkestone Chronicle 19-5-1888

Local News

A robbery of a somewhat extensive nature took place on Saturday night. It would appear that during the night the fowl house belonging to Mr. Marsh of the Harvey Hotel was broken into and great havoc made amongst the fowls. On Sunday morning nineteen fowls were found dead in the house and tied up in a sack, evidently having been killed and packed up ready for the thieves to carry away, but it supposed that they were disturbed. A lot was also left behind near the sack. Several robberies of a similar nature have been committed in the town during the past few weeks, but no clue has yet been obtained.

Folkestone Express 19-5-1888

Local News

On Saturday night the hen roost belonging to Mr. Marsh, of the Harvey Hotel, near the viaduct, was broken into, and 21 fowls killed. Nineteen were found dead in a sack, having been killed and left ready for carrying away. It would appear that the robbers were disturbed and made off in a hurry, a hat being left in the hen house. No clue has yet been discovered, but it is supposed that the thieves belong to a party who have perpetrated several similar robberies in the neighbourhood west of Folkestone during the past week or two.