Folkestone Herald
11-2-1922
Friday. February 10th: Before Mr. G.I. Swoffer,
Mr. G. Boyd, Mr. A. Stace, Cr. C. Ed. Mumford, Dr. W.W. Nuttall, and Colonel P.
Broome-Giles, C.B.
Floyd McKinn Garrison as summoned for assaulting Edward
Haines. Mr. A.K. Mowll prosecuted, and Mr. C.J. Roberts appeared for the
defendant, who admitted the offence.
Mr. A.K. Mowll, in his opening remarks, said that the
defendant had offered to give the prosecutor £15 as compensation, and pay the
costs in the matter. No doubt the Bench would bear that in mind. Otherwise he
would have strongly pressed that the only punishment defendant should receive
would have been imprisonment.
Edward Haines, night porter at the Royal Pavilion Hotel,
said he was on duty there on Sunday about midnight when the defendant and another
man, both strangers to him, called at the hotel and wanted to be supplied with
drinks. He told them that he could not do that. They pressed witness several
times, and he told them several times he could not serve them. Defendant said
he would make it worthwhile for him to do so, but witness told him that it was
more than the job was worth. He then requested them to leave, but defendant
took up his position with his back to the door and said “You don`t intend to
serve us, then?” Witness replied “No”.
Defendant then suddenly lashed out at witness, striking him three or
four blows with his fist on the face. One eye was blackened and a tooth
loosened.
Cross-examined, witness said he did not accuse defendant of
being an American.
Mr. Roberts said his client understood the foolishness of
his action, and he informed him that he only acted as he did after being
accused of being an American. He was of Canadian origin, and he thought it
spoke rather well for his honour for his flag that he took it so seriously to
heart. That was the reason he became excited. He quite realised the seriousness
of his conduct, and he called the next day and apologised to the prosecutor and
offered compensation. He had done everything in his power to apologise and
satisfy the prosecutor, and he asked the Bench to take this into consideration.
Mr. Haines, re-called, said on the night after the
occurrence the defendant came and saw him. He pulled out a bunch of Treasury
notes, but witness would not have anything to do with him. Defendant offered to
square it then. He said it was a very serious matter to him, and that he did
not remember anything that happened, but his friend told him afterwards.
The Bench then retired, and upon returning the Chairman said
they were unanimously agreed that this was one of the most brutal cases they
had had for some time, and the licensed victuallers must be protected. This man
was carrying out his duties, very arduous duties. If it had not been for the
pleading of Mr. Mowll with regard to compensation they would have sent him to
prison without the option of a fine. He would be fined £5 or 14 days`
imprisonment.
Folkestone Express
18-2-1922
Friday, February 10th: Before Mr. G.I. Swoffer,
Col. Broome-Giles, Mr. C.E. Mumford, Dr. Nuttall, Mr. G. Boyd and Mr. A. Stace.
Floyd McKinn Garrison was summoned for assaulting Edward
Haynes, night porter at the Royal Pavilion Hotel, on the 6th
February. Mr. C.J. Roberts appeared for defendant and pleaded Guilty.
Mr. A.K. Mowll appeared on behalf of the prosecution, and
said defendant had undertaken to give the prosecutor £15, and to pay his costs.
It was a matter no doubt the Magistrates would bear in mind, or otherwise he
would strongly press that the defendant should receive the punishment of
imprisonment.
Edward Haynes said he was the night porter at the Royal Pavilion
Hotel, and he was on duty there on Sunday night last. About midnight the
defendant and a friend, who were strangers to him, went into the hotel, and
defendant asked to be supplied with drinks. He told him he could not do that.
The defendant pressed him several times, and said he would make it worth his
while. He told defendant it was more than his job was worth. He requested
defendant and his friend to leave on three occasions. Defendant stood with his
back to the door, and said “You don`t intend to serve us”, and he replied “No”.
Defendant suddenly lashed out; struck him on the jaw, cut his eye and ear, and
also hit him on the mouth, loosening a tooth. It was a very great shock.
Cross-examined by Mr. Roberts: He did not accuse defendant
of being an American.
By the Clerk: The conversation probably continued five
minutes before defendant struck him.
Mr. Roberts said his client quite understood the foolishness
of his action, and had informed him that he only got excited after being called
an American. Defendant was, in fact, a Canadian, and he took it rather
seriously to heart that he was accused of being an American. Defendant called
at the hotel the day following the occurrence, and apologised to Haynes and
offered him compensation. His client had done everything to satisfy prosecutor
before coming into Court in endeavouring to make amends even before he had
instructed him, and it was an evident sign of his good faith that he was
genuinely repentant for his foolish act.
Mr. Haynes was re-called, and said defendant went to the
hotel the following night, and asked him to go outside. He pulled a roll of
Treasury notes out of his pocket and offered to settle it, stating it was a
very serious matter for him, and he did not want his name to appear in the Press.
Defendant said he did not remember anything about it, but his friend had told
him about it in London.
The Magistrates retired, and on their return to Court the
Chairman said they were unanimously agreed that this was one of the most brutal
cases they had had for some time, and licensed victuallers must be protected.
The prosecutor was carrying out his duty, and a very arduous duty the man had
to perform. If it had not been for the plea of Mr. Mowll that defendant had
decided to compensate Haynes, defendant would have been sent to prison without
any option. He would be fined £5.
Folkestone Express
10-2-1923
Local News
On Tuesday morning the Magistrates heard applications for
the extensions of licences for various functions, and the Clerk called
attention to the supplying of refreshments to outsiders.
Mr. Bright (Pavilion Hotel) applied for extensions for
February 15th to 11 p.m. for the dinner of Master Bakers; February
24th until 12 midnight for the Post Office officials` dinner and
smoker; February 28th until 1 a.m., Masonic dinner and dance
(ladies` night).
The Chairman (Mr. Swoffer) said the licence on February 15th
would be granted until 11 p.m., and those for the 24th and 28th
to 12 midnight. The Magistrates considered that twelve o`clock was late enough
for the supplying of drink. There was no reason why they should not dance on
until three o`clock in the morning, but drinks must not be supplied.
Mr. Bright said he only based his application on the fact
that a similar licence was granted a few months ago.
The Clerk said that with regard to a matter arising out of
the recent granting of some of these extensions of hours for the purpose of a
ball, it had been brought to the knowledge of the Licensing Justices that the
letter and spirit of the Act of Parliament, which enabled the Magistrates to
grant these exemptions from ordinary closing hours, had been transgressed.
Precise information had been brought to the Licensing Justices in one or two
instances of gentlemen who were not patrons of the ball driving up to a certain
hotel in the town, and they went in, and were supplied with refreshments for a
considerable time. The Magistrates desired him to point out to the licence
holders that that was a distinct infringement of the Act of Parliament, and the
conditions on which they granted the extension of hours. He need not tell them
that the Act o Parliament merely allowed the Magistrates to grant them for the
accommodation of people attending the hotel on special occasions, and not for
outsiders to go and get a drink after hours.
Folkestone Herald
10-2-1923
Local News
At the Folkestone Police Court on Tuesday (Mr. G.I. Swoffer
in the chair), Mr. Bright, on behalf of the Royal Pavilion Hotel, asked for
three extensions: on Thursday, February 15th, until 1 o`clock, on
the occasion of a dinner; on Saturday, 24th, until 12 o`clock, for a
Post Office dinner; and on Wednesday, February 28th, until 1
o`clock, for a Masonic dinner.
The Bench, after retiring, stated that in respect of the
first application they would allow an extension to 11 o`clock. For the Masonic
dinner and dance and the Post Office dinner an extension would be granted to 12
o`clock in each case. In their opinion that was quite late enough for the
supply of drink. There was no reason why the guests should not dance on later,
but drinks could not be served after that time.
The Magistrates` Clerk (Mr. J. Andrew) said the Justices
wished him to explain a matter arising out of these recent applications for
extensions of hours for balls. It had been brought to the knowledge of the
Licensing Justices that the letter and spirit of the Act of Parliament which
enabled them to grant these orders of exemption from the ordinary closing hours
had been transgressed. Precise information had been brought to the notice of
the Justices that in one or two recent instances gentlemen who were not patrons
of the ball, and who had not ball tickets, had driven up to a certain hotel in
the town, gone in, and had been supplied with refreshments for a considerable
time. The Bench desired him to point out to licence holders that the
Magistrates granted these extensions solely that those taking part in the ball
could obtain drinks, and outsiders should not be supplied with drinks after
hours.
Folkestone Express
29-9-1923
Tuesday, September 25th: Before Mr. G.I. Swoffer,
Dr. Nuttall, Col. P. Broome-Giles, and Mr. W.R. Boughton.
Priscilla Burton was summoned for receiving from a person,
whose name was unknown, a tablecloth and serviettes, well knowing them to have
been stolen, belonging to the Frederick Hotels Ltd. Mr. A.K. Mowll defended.
Det. Sergt. Johnson said that on the 11th inst.
he received a search warrant to search the premises of the defendant. About 4
p.m., in company with P.C. Allen, Mr. Bright (Manager of the Pavilion Hotel)
and Miss Drake (the housekeeper), he went to 21, St. Michael`s Street, a
dwelling house in the occupation of defendant`s husband. A second hand business
was carried on there by the defendant. Defendant was not there, and in her
absence he searched the premises. In the front room he found one serviette,
marked Hotel Burlington, Dover; 5 serviettes were found in a drawer in the back
bedroom, all marked in the same way, and 10 serviettes in a drawer in the
kitchen, four marked Pavilion Hotel, Folkestone, and six marked Hotel
Burlington, Dover. They were identified by Mr. Bright and Miss Drake as the
property of the Frederick Hotels Ltd. On the 18th he received a
summons for the defendant. About 6.50 he went to 21, St. Michael`s Street,
where he saw defendant, and read the summons to her, and she replied “I found
them here with the linen when I came back in February of this year. I had let
my rooms furnished. A Mr. Frank, who worked at the Royal Pavilion Hotel, has
also lived here”. The serviette and tablecloth produced were handed to him by
P.C. Allen, and the corner of the tablecloth had either been cut or torn away.
Cross-examined by Mr. Mowll: As far as he knew defendant had
borne an excellent character up to the present. The front room was full of all
kinds of things, boxes packed and unpacked. Defendant did say “I should not be
so foolish as to ruin my character by buying such things”.
Miss W.V. Drake, linen-keeper at the Royal Pavilion Hotel,
said she took stock of the linen in June last. Since then she had missed three
tablecloths and sixteen serviettes. They supplied daily linen from the hotel
for use on the boats, and after use it was returned to the hotel, and then sent
to the Folkestone Sanitary Steam Laundry. All the serviettes were marked,
either with Burlington Hotel, Dover, or Royal Pavilion Hotel, Folkestone. The
serviettes belonged to the hotel, and she identified the tablecloth by the
pattern. All the tablecloths were marked in one corner. The serviettes were
worth 2s. each, and the tablecloths 49s. each. No linen was ever sold, but was
used for other purposes. Since June she had missed 21 serviettes, and had
missed some previous to her stocktaking. Practically every time she had made
her quarterly stocktaking she had been short of serviettes and tablecloths.
Mr. F.C. Bright, Manager of the Royal Pavilion Hotel, said
that on the 8th September he received a communication from the
manager of the Folkestone Steam Laundry, and in consequence he communicated
with the police. The serviettes marked “m213” had probably been in stock for
years. The undated ones had been in use recently, and were a later stock.
Miss Hilda Burbridge, employed at the Folkestone Sanitary
Steam Laundry, said the tablecloths and a serviette bore their mark. The
tablecloth had been at the laundry about three weeks ago, and the serviette
about a fortnight ago.
Defendant pleaded Not Guilty.
The case was adjourned until today (Friday).
Folkestone Herald
29-9-1923
Local News
At the Folkestone Petty Sessions on Tuesday (Mr. G.I.
Swoffer in the chair) Priscilla Burton was summoned for, on or about August 20th,
receiving from a person unknown tablecloths and serviettes to the value of £3
4/-, well knowing them to have been stolen. Mr. A.K. Mowll defended.
Det. Sergt. Johnson said from information received he made
enquiries. On the 11th instant he received a search warrant, and, in
company with P.C. Allen, Mr. Bright, Manager of the Royal Pavilion Hotel, and
Miss Drake, housekeeper at the hotel, he went to 21 St. Michael`s Street, where
defendant lived. A second hand business was carried on there by defendant, the
front room being devoted to the purpose. The defendant was then absent. He
searched the house, and in the front room he found one serviette, marked “Hotel
Burlington, Dover”. He found five serviettes in a brawer in the back bedroom,
these being marked in the same way, and he found ten serviettes in a drawer in
the kitchen downstairs. Some were marked “Royal Pavilion Hotel, Folkestone”,
and others “Hotel Burlington, Dover”. They were identified by Mr. Bright as the
property of Frederick Hotels Ltd. He took possession of them. On the 18th
instant he received a summons for the defendant, and about 6.50 p.m. he went to
St. Michael`s Street, where he saw her. He read the summons to her, and she
replied “I found them here with the linen when I came back in February of this
year. I had let my rooms furnished. A Mr. Frank, who worked at the Royal
Pavilion Hotel, has also lived here”. A serviette and tablecloth were handed to
him by P.C. Allen. The corner of the tablecloth had been torn off.
In reply to Mr. Mowll, witness said that up till then
defendant had borne a good character.
Miss Violet Drake, linen keeper at the Royal Pavilion Hotel,
said that she took stock of the linen in June last. Since then she had missed
three tablecloths and sixteen serviettes. They supplied from the hotel linen
for use on the boats. After use the linen was returned to them, and then sent
to the Folkestone Sanitary Steam Laundry. Every serviette supplied to the boats
was marked. The serviettes produced were part of the stock. She identified the
tablecloth by the pattern as belonging to the hotel. The tablecloths were
marked in one corner. The serviettes were worth about 2/- each, and the
tablecloth about 49/-. The linen was all in good condition. Actually she had
missed twenty one serviettes since the stocktaking. Practically every time she
had taken her quarterly stock she missed serviettes and tablecloths.
Mr. Frank Bright, Manager of the Royal Pavilion Hotel, said
on the 8th September he received a communication from the manager of
the Sanitary Steam Laundry with regard to a tablecloth sent to the laundry, and
in consequence he communicated with the police. Six of the serviettes had been
in use at the hotel for some years past. The others were portion of a later
stock, and had been in use quite recently.
Miss Dolly Berbridge, employed at the Sanitary Steam
Laundry, said the tablecloth and serviettes bore their laundry mark. The
tablecloth was received about three weeks ago, and the serviettes about a
fortnight ago.
Defendant pleaded Not Guilty.
Mr. Mowll objected to the tablecloth being included in the
summons. He said he considered that this part had not been proved.
The Chief Constable said he could call witnesses to prove
that part of the summons.
The Magistrates` Clerk said the Bench considered it was a
case for the Quarter Sessions.
The Bench adjourned the case until yesterday (Friday).
At yesterday`s hearing Mrs. Grace Swift, of 6, Garden Road,
a niece of the defendant, stated that she had suggested to her aunt that she
should sell some of her linen to Mrs. Fairburn, of 32, Bouverie Square,
witness`s employer, who was not willing to pay the price of new stuff. Mrs.
Burton told her to ask 27/6 for the goods, which consisted of two tablecloths,
five or six serviettes, half a dozen knives, and half a dozen tea cloths. As
defendant was in bed at the time, having been seriously ill, witness got the
linen from a chest of drawers and took the things to Mrs. Fairburn, who paid
the 27/6, which she handed over to defendant.
Defendant, on oath, stated that in July she found the linen
in two boxes, which she took down to Encombe, Sandgate, in 1920, when she
looked after the house. She determined to return them to the Royal Pavilion
Hotel when she had sorted out the things, but as she fell ill she did not think
much about it. At no time had she purchased any serviettes belonging to the
Frederick Hotels Company.
The Bench dismissed the case.
No comments:
Post a Comment