Pages

Saturday, 29 March 2014

Star and Garter 1910 -



Folkestone Herald 14-10-1911

Obituary

We regret to announce that Mr. William Harry Arthur, the licensee of the Star and Garter public house, Harvey Street, died at his residence on Monday, after a rather short illness. Mr. Arthur was a well-known Folkestonian, having lived in the town for a large number of years. He was for many years a member of D Company, 4th Battalion, The Buffs, and was respected by all who knew him. The funeral took place yesterday.

Folkestone Daily News 30-11-1911

Wednesday, November 29th: Before Messrs. Stainer, Linton and Leggett.

The licence of the Star and Garter was transferred from the late Mr. Arthur to his widow, Mrs. Arthur.

Folkestone Express 2-12-1911

Wednesday, November 29th: Before J. Stainer and R.J. Linton Esqs., and Major Leggett.

Mr. G.W. Haines applied for a transfer of licence with respect to the Star and Garter Inn, Harvey Street. He applied on behalf of the widow (Mrs. Arthur), who from her earliest childhood had been associated with the business.

The application was granted.

Folkestone Herald 2-12-1911


Wednesday, November 29th: Before Mr. J. Stainer, Major Leggett, and Mr. R.J. Linton.

Mr. G.W. Haines asked for a transfer of the licence of the Star and Garter. The licence had been held by the applicant`s husband, who had recently died, and this was granted.

Folkestone Express 4-10-1919

Tuesday, September 30th: Before Mr. G.I. Swoffer, Councillors A. Stace, G. Boyd, C.E. Mumford and E.T. Morrison, Dr. Nuttall and Mr. L.G.A. Collins.

Mrs. Annie Arthur, landlady of the Star and Garter beerhouse, Harvey Street, was summoned for having sold one quart of stout to a young woman for consumption off the premises at 9.30 p.m. on the 25th September. The young woman was summoned for obtaining the stout. Both defendants pleaded Guilty.

P.C. Budgen said he had been on duty in Harvey Street, and seen a young woman enter the Star and Garter by a side entrance. After a few minutes she left the premises with a quart bottle, and he asked her if she had just got the beer. She replied “No, it`s stout”. Mrs. Arthur said she had quite forgotten the Order, and the woman said she did not know of the restriction.

Mrs. Arthur said she was very sorry, but she had quite forgotten the Order for the minute, as she was busy listening to a conversation in the bar.

The other defendant said she was not aware of the restriction in time, as she was not in the habit of going for any beer.

Mr. Reeve (the Chief Constable) said Mrs. Arthur had been at the Star and Garter for 26 years, and when her husband died eight years ago she took the licence over. There had been no previous complaint against her.

The Clerk said the woman could have bought the stout for consumption on the premises up to ten o`clock, but she could not buy it for consumption off the premises after nine o`clock.

The Bench fined Mrs. Arthur 10s., and dismissed the other case.

Folkestone Herald 4-10-1919

Tuesday, September 30th: Before Mr. G.I. Swoffer, Mr. A. Stace, Mr. G. Boyd, Mr. C. Ed. Mumford, and Mr. L.G.A. Collins.

Annie Arthur, landlady of the Star and Garter beerhouse, was summoned for selling a quart of stout after nine o`clock for consumption off the premises, and Miss L. Clariss was summoned for obtaining it. They pleaded Guilty.

P.C. Bugden deposed to seeing a lady leave the house with a bottle of stout at 9.30 p.m. on Sept. 25th.

Mrs. Arthur said she was very sorry. She quite forgot what the time was.

Miss Clariss said she was not aware of the restriction. She was not in the habit of fetching stout.

The Chief Constable stated there were no previous complaints against Mrs. Arthur, who had held the licence for 8 years since the death of her husband. She had been there 26 years altogether.

The Magistrates` Clerk remarked that a person could not buy liquor for consumption off the premises after 9 o`clock, but they could drink it on the premises until 10 o`clock.

The Chairman, in fining Mrs. Arthur 10s., said the Bench hoped she would be more careful in the future. The case against the purchaser was dismissed.
 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment