Saturday, 7 March 2015
Blue Anchor 1905 -
Folkestone Express
22-7-1905
Wednesday, July 19th: Before W.G. Herbert, J.
Stainer, C.J. Pursey and G.I. Swoffer Esqs.
The licence of the Blue Anchor was temporarily transferred
from Walter Whiting to George Walter Stoner.
Folkestone Herald
22-7-1905
Wednesday, July 19th: Before Alderman W.G.
Herbert, Mr. C.J. Pursey, Mr. Stainer, and Colonel Hamilton.
The licence of the Black Anchor Inn was transferred from Wm.
Stone to George Waller.
Note: A misreporting of the 1st
order. This is the Blue Anchor from Whiting to Stonar!
Folkestone Daily News
30-8-1905
Wednesday, August 30th: Before Ald. Herbert,
Messrs. Carpenter, Salter, Fynmore, Vaughan, Westropp, and Hamilton.
An application for the transfer of the Blue Anchor from
Joseph Whiting to George Edward Stoner was granted.
Folkestone Chronicle
2-9-1905
Wednesday, August 30th: Before Alderman W.G.
Herbert, Lieut. Cols. Fynmore, Westropp, and Hamilton, Aldermen Salter and
Vaughan. Alderman Vaughan did not adjudicate.
The Blue Anchor: Temporary authority having been previously
granted, Mr. G.W. Stonar applied for the transfer of the licence of the Blue
Anchor from Walter Whiting.
Mr. Loftus Banks (an agent) proved the service of the usual
notices, and the application was granted.
Folkestone Express
2-9-1905
Wednesday, August 30th: Before W.G. Herbert Esq.,
Aldermen Vaughan and Salter, Lieut. Cols. Fynmore, Westropp, and Hamilton, and
W.C. Carpenter Esq.
Application was made for the transfer of the licence of the
Blue Anchor from Walter Whiting to George Walter Stone (sic).
The Chief Constable explained that the temporary transfer
was granted in June.
The application was granted.
Folkestone Herald
2-9-1905
Wednesday, August 30th: Before Aldermen W.G.
Herbert, W. Salter, and T.J. Vaughan, Councillor R.J. Fynmore, Lieut. Colonels
Hamilton and Westropp, and Mr. W.C. Carpenter.
The licence of the Blue Anchor was temporarily transferred
from Walter Whiting to G.W. Stonar.
Folkestone
Daily News 7-2-1906
Annual Licensing Sessions
Wednesday, February 7th: Before Messrs.
Ward, Hamilton, Pursey, Ames, Herbert, Fynmore, and Leggett.
The Chief Constable presented his report (for details
see Folkestone Chronicle)
Mr. Ward called attention to the increase of 12 cases
of drunkenness, and asked the licensed victuallers to assist the police in
carrying out their duties.
The Welcome public house was objected to on the ground
of misconduct. The Hope, the Channel, the Providence, the Tramway and the Blue
Anchor were objected to on the ground that they were nor required. All the
other licences were granted.
Folkestone Chronicle
10-2-1906
Annual Licensing Sessions
Wednesday, February 7th: Before Mr. E.T. Ward,
Alderman W.G. Herbert, Col. Fynmore, Lt. Col. Hamilton, Mr. C.J. Pursey, Mr. C.
Carpenter, Mr. C. Ames, and Mr. Linton.
On the Court being opened the Chief Constable read his
annual report, which was as follows:-
“Gentlemen, I have the honour to report that there are at
present within your jurisdiction 136 premises licensed for the sale of
intoxicating liquors, viz.:- Full licences 85, Beer “on” 9, Beer “off” 6, Beer
and Spirit Dealers 16, Grocers 12, Chemists 5, Confectioners 3.
This gives an average, according to the Census of 1901, of
one licence to every 225 persons, or one “on” licence to every 326 persons.
Three of the “off” licences (two held by spirit dealers and
one by a chemist) will not be renewed, as the premises are no longer used for
the sale of drink, thus reducing the number of licensed premises to 133, or one
to every 230 persons.
At the Adjourned Licensing Meeting, held in March last, the
renewal of six licences was referred to the Compensation Committee for East
Kent on the ground of redundancy, with the result that four of the licences
were refused and two renewed,
The licences which were refuse were:- the Victoria Inn,
South Street; Star Inn, Radnor Street; Duke of Edinburgh, Tontine Street; and
Cinque Port Arms, Seagate Street. Compensation was paid in each case and the
houses closed.
Since the last Annual Licensing Meeting 24 of the licences
have been transferred, viz:- Full Licences 17, Beer “on” 2, Off licences 5.
During the year 13 occasional licences have been granted by
the justices for the sale of intoxicating liquor on premises not ordinarily
licensed for such sale, and 25 extensions of the ordinary time of closing have
been granted to licence holders when balls, dinners, etc., were being held on
their premises.
During the year ended 31st December last 183
persons (135 males and 48 females) were proceeded against for drunkenness; 164
were convicted and 19 discharged. This is an increase of 12 persons proceeded
against, and eight convicted, as compared with the previous year.
Only one licence holder has been convicted during the year,
viz., the licensee of the Welcome Inn, Dover Street, who was fined £5 and costs
for permitting drunkenness on his licensed premises. He has since transferred
the licence and left the house.
Eleven clubs where intoxicating liquors are sold are
registered in accordance with the Act of 1902.
There are 16 places licensed for music and dancing, and
three for public billiard playing.
With very few exceptions, the licensed houses have been
conducted in a satisfactory manner during the year. The only licence to which I
offer objection on the ground of misconduct is that of the Welcome Inn, Dover
Street, and I would ask that the consideration of the renewal of this licence
be deferred until the Adjourned Licensing Meeting.
I would respectfully suggest that the Committee again avail
themselves of the powers given by the Licensing Act, 1904, and refer the
renewal of some of the licences in the congested area to the Compensation
Committee for consideration, on the ground that there are within the area more
licensed houses than are necessary for the requirements of the neighbourhood.
I beg to submit a plan on which I have marked out the
congested area, also the public houses within the area.
Within this area there is a population approximately of
4,600, with 42 “on” licensed houses, giving a proportion of one licensed house
to every 109 persons.
There are also situate within the area six premises licensed
for sale off the premises, one confectioner with a licence to sell wine on the
premises, and four registered clubs, with a total membership of 898”.
The Chairman said with regard to the report just read by
Chief Constable Reeve the Bench were pleased to hear that the houses had been
so well conducted, but he must point out that over the preceding year there had
been 12 more cases of drunkenness. The Bench earnestly asked the licence
holders to do their utmost to stop excessive drinking on their licensed
premises. It was a curious circumstance that although there were many
convictions there was no information where the drink was obtained.
The whole of the licences, with the exception of six, were
then renewed. The six licences objected to were the Welcome, Dover Street, in
which case the Chief Constable was instructed to serve notice of opposition on
the ground of misconduct. In the five other instances the Chief Constable was
instructed to serve notices of objection on the grounds that the licences were
not required, the houses opposed being the Channel, High Street; Hope,
Fenchurch Street; Blue Anchor, Beach Street; and Tramway, Radnor Street.
Folkestone Express
10-2-1906
Annual Licensing Sessions
Wednesday, February 7th: Before E.T. Ward Esq.,
Major Leggett, Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Lieut. Col. Hamilton, W.G. Herbert, C.J.
Pursey, W.C. Carpenter, and R.J. Linton Esqs.
The Chief Constable presented his annual report. (See
Folkestone Chronicle for details)
The Chairman said they were pleased to see that the whole of
the licensed houses had been well conducted. There had only been one conviction
during the year. He wanted to point out that that year there was an increase of
twelve cases of drunkenness in the borough. They earnestly asked the licence
holders to help the police as much as possible to prevent drunkenness. It was
always a curious thing where those people got their drink, and they must ask
the licence holders to try and do their utmost to stop drunkenness on their
premises.
All the licences were granted with the exception of six. The
Chief Constable was instructed to serve notices upon the tenants and owners of
the following public houses on the ground that they were not necessary; The
Channel Inn, High Street; the Hope, Fenchurch Street; the Providence, Beach
Street; Blue Anchor, Beach Street; and the Tramway, Radnor Street. He was also
instructed to serve notices with regard to the Welcome Inn on the ground of
misconduct.
The adjourned licensing sessions, when the six licences will
be considered, were fixed for March 5th.
Folkestone Herald
10-2-1906
Annual Licensing Sessions
The annual licensing sessions were held on Wednesday
morning. The Police Court was crowded with those interested in the trade and
the general public. The Magistrates present were Mr. E.T. Ward, Lieut. Colonel
Hamilton, Mr. C.J. Pursey, Alderman W.G. Herbert, and Mr. R.J. Linton.
The Chief Constable presented his report. (For details see
Folkestone Chronicle)
It was intimated that at the adjourned licensing sessions
the licences of the Blue Anchor, the Providence, the Welcome, the Tramway, the
Channel, and the Hope would be opposed, on the ground that they were in excess
of the requirements of the neighbourhood. The licence holders of those houses
received this information as they stepped forward to ask for their renewals.
Southeastern Gazette
13-2-1906
Local News
The annual
Licensing Sessions for the Borough of Folkestone were held on Wednesday, before
E.T. Ward Esq., in the chair.
The Chief
Constable reported that there were 136 premises licensed for the sale of
intoxicating liquors, viz., full licenses 85, beer “on” 9, beer “off” 6, beer
and spirit dealers 16, grocers 12, chemists 5, and confectioners' 3. This gave
an average, according to the census of 1901, of one license to every 225
persons, or one “on” license to every 326 persons. Three of the “off” licenses
(two held by spirit dealers and one by a chemist), would not be renewed, as the
premises were no longer used for the sale of drink, thus reducing the number of
licensed premises to 133, or one to every 230 persons. During the year ended
31st December, 183 persons (135 males and 48 females) were proceeded against
for drunkenness; 164 were, convicted and 19 discharged. This was an increase of
12 persons proceeded against, and 8, convicted as compared with the preceding
year. Only one license holder had been convicted during the year. All the
licenses were granted with the exception of six. The Chief Constable was instructed
to serve notices upon the tenants and owners of the following houses on the
ground that they were not necessary: The Channel Inn, High Street; the Hope,
Fenchurch Street; the Providence, Beach Street; Blue Anchor Beach Street; and
the Tramway, Radnor Street. He was also instructed to serve notice with regard
to the Welcome Inn, on the ground of misconduct.
Folkestone
Daily News 24-2-1906
Saturday, February 24th: Before Messrs. E.T.
Ward, G. Spurgen, T. Ames, and Lieut. Col. R.J. Fynmore.
Mr. George Stonar appeared to answer a complaint of
letting his chimney catch fire.
P.S. Lawrence stated that on Tuesday he saw a chimney
on fire at the Blue Anchor, Beach Street, kept by the defendant. He went into
the bar and saw a small fire, with soot falling down. Defendant`s wife was
trying to put the fire out, and witness assisted her. He told her he should
report the circumstance. She informed him that there had been no fire
previously in the grate during the seven months they had occupied the house.
He was fined 2s. 6d., costs remitted.
Folkestone
Daily News 5-3-1906
Adjourned Licensing Sessions
Monday, March 5th: Before Messrs. E.T. Ward,
W.G. Herbert, C.J. Pursey, R.J. Linton, T. Ames, Lieut. Col. Fynmore, and
Lieut. Col. Hamilton.
The Blue Anchor
This licence was opposed on the grounds of its not
being required, and the Bench decided to refer it to Quarter Sessions.
Mr. Mercer appeared in the above case for the owners.
Folkestone Chronicle
10-3-1906
Adjourned Licensing Meeting.
The Adjourned Annual General Licensing Sessions were held at
the Town Hall on Monday, when the Chief Constable opposed the renewal of five
licences on the ground of redundancy, and one on the ground of misconduct. The
evidence was of the usual technical order, where a whole host of police
witnesses testified to an extraordinary state of things which had apparently
gone on for years. The sitting lasted from 11 a.m. until 4.30 p.m., and was
only relieved by one little light episode when Mr. Mercer on two occasions
quoted the Folkestone Herald as bearing upon a case heard at the Court, and on
each occasion the Chairman saying that the report was wrong, whereupon Mr.
Mercer intimated that he should give up taking the Herald.
The Bench sitting on Monday morning were Mr. E.T. Ward,
Alderman W.G. Herbert, Lt. Col. Fynmore, Lt. Col. Hamilton, Mr. C.J. Pursey,
Mr. W. Linton, and Major Leggett.
The Blue Anchor
This house is next door to the Providence, is the property
of Messrs. Ash and Co., and the tenant is George Walter Stonar.
Mr. Mercer again appeared for the brewers and tenant to
oppose the application for the non-renewal of the licence. The facts as to
statistics relating to the congested area were the same as the last case, and
admitted without reiteration.
The Chief Constable said there was an entrance to the house
on both sides. The accommodation for the public was a bar and tap room. The
licence had been transferred eight times in 12 years. There appeared to him to
be a very small trade done, and in his opinion the renewal of the licence was
not required for the needs of the neighbourhood.
By Mr. Mercer: The house was well conducted.
Mr. Mercer, addressing the Magistrates, wondered why the
Chief Constable had got the idea that the house was not wanted. They had an
average of 175½ barrels and 77½ gallons of spirits for a five years` average,
besides extra profits, such as from teas (laughter) and refreshments. Only that
morning, when viewing the property, he had seen a man emerge from one of the
houses with a large piece of bread, etc. There was a very good trade with this
class of refreshment.
The Chairman: The Bench have decided to report to Quarter
Sessions.
Folkestone Express
10-3-1906
Adjourned Licensing Sessions
The adjourned licensing sessions were held on Monday, when
the six licences which were adjourned from the Brewster Sessions were
considered. On the Bench were E.T. Ward Esq., Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Lieut. Col.
Hamilton, W.G. Herbert, C.J. Pursey, and R.J. Linton Esqs.
The Blue Anchor
The licence of the Blue Anchor Inn was next considered. The
tenant and the owners were represented by Mr. Mercer.
The Chief Constable said he would first put in a plan on
which he had marked the whole of the public houses in a congested area, which
was formed by a line from the Harbour, up High Street, along the Dover Road to
the Raglan Hotel, and then over Radnor Bridge to the sea. Within that area there
were 920 houses, with a population approximately of 4,500, five to a house.
There were 42 on-licensed houses within the area, being 36 fully-licensed and
six beer “on”, giving a proportion of one on licence to every 109 inhabitants
within that area, whilst for the borough at large the number was one to every
326 inhabitants. There were also situate within the area six licences for the
sale of beer, liquor, and spirits off the premises, one refreshment house with
a licence, and one off licence, making a total of 50 houses for the sale of
drink by retail, being one licence for every 92 persons within that area,
against one to every 230 in the borough. There were also four registered clubs
for the sale of drink, with a membership of 898, within the area. During the
year 1905, out of 183 charges of drunkenness, 93 arose within that congested
area. The Chief Constable said the house was situate in Beach Street, and the
licensee was George Walter Stoner, who obtained a transfer of the licence on
August 30th last year. The registered owners were Messrs. Ash and
Co., Canterbury. The rateable value was £20. The house was one of the block to
which was referred in the last case, and it adjoined the Providence. The
licence had been transferred eight times within the past twelve years. There
appeared to him to be a very small trade done at the house, and in his opinion
it was not in accord with the requirements and needs of the neighbourhood.
In answer to Mr. Mercer, the Chief Constable said the house
was well conducted. There had been three changes of the licence within seven
years, and two within six.
Mr. Mercer said he could not imagine a place where they had
better provision for police supervision. In that case he would like to hear why
the licence was not wanted. The trade done at the house averaged 175½ barrels
and 77½ gallons of spirits for the past five years.
The Chairman: You will have to go to the Quarter Sessions.
Mr. Mercer: I am afraid I shall be busy if I go on.
Folkestone Herald
10-3-1906
Adjourned Licensing Sessions
Monday, March 5th: Before Mr. E.T. Ward, Alderman
W.G. Herbert, Mr. R.J. Linton, Mr. C.J. Pursey, and Mr. T. Ames.
The Blue Anchor
In the case of the Blue Anchor Mr. Mercer also appeared for
the owners.
The Chief Constable said the house was situated in Beach
Street. The present licensee was George Walter Stoner, who obtained a transfer
of the licence on 30th August last year. The registered owners were
Messrs. Ash and Co., Canterbury. The rateable value was £20. The house was also
one of the block referred to in his last evidence, and adjoined the Providence.
There was an entrance on each side of the house. The accommodation consisted of
a bar and tap room for the use of the public. The licence had been transferred
eight times within the past twelve years. Within a radius of 100 yards there
were 21 other on licensed houses; within a radius of 150 yards 31; and within a
radius of 200 yards there were 33. The house appeared to do a very small trade,
and, in his opinion, the licence was unnecessary for the requirements of the
neighbourhood.
Cross-examined by Mr. Mercer: The house had been well
conducted. There had been two changes in six years.
Mr. Mercer said this house had a back entrance, and he could
not imagine any position better for police supervision. The trade was 175½
barrels in five years, and 77½ gallons of spirits. That was good enough.
The Chairman said the case would have to go to Quarter
Sessions, but Mr. Mercer was right in saying that it was very hard to choose
one house among so many.
Folkestone
Daily News 30-6-1906
Saturday, June 30th: Before Alderman Banks,
Messrs. Herbert, Swoffer, Leggett, and Stainer.
George Walter Stonar was charged with permitting
drunkenness at the Blue Anchor.
Mrs. Sings deposed that she went to the Blue Anchor in
Beach Street, and saw her husband leaning at the counter of the bar. He was
very drunk. The landlady was behind the bar, and her husband`s beer was on the
counter. Her husband swore at her, and she took the glass of beer and threw it
out the door. She told the landlady she should fetch a policeman.
Cross-examined: It was my husband`s beer that I threw
away.
P.C. Smith deposed that he went to the Blue Anchor, and
saw the beer had been thrown away. He went into the bar and found Sings very
drunk. The landlady was behind the counter, and there was an empty glass on the
bar. The landlord said “I want this man outside”. Sings said he was a better
man than witness. Witness, however, ejected him and took him to the police
station, where he was charged with being drunk.
By Mr. De Wet: Mrs. Sings said “Here he is”. I asked
him to leave the house. When he got outside he called his wife a bad name. I
told him to go away. A man and a boy were singing. The other men had beer.
Sergt. Osborne said he was at the police station when
Sings was brought in drunk.
G.W. Stonar, landlord of the Blue Anchor, deposed that
Sings came into his house with two other men. They hadthree pints of beer, and
were all sober. Some others came in, and they went on chatting for an hour.
Sings then became excited. Mrs. Sings came in, and left to fetch a policeman.
Witness asked Sings to go. The policeman came, and then Sings went out himself.
Mrs. Sings came to the house three months since and complained of drunkenness,
and said if they served her husband with drink she would report them.
Mrs. Stonar, landlady, deposed that between 6 and 7 she
served the three men with a pint of beer each. She said to Sings “Teddy, you
had better go, or your wife will come and swear you are drunk”, as she had
previously threatened to do. Sings had two pints and a half of beer. Mrs. Sings
went for a policeman, who came and took Sings into custody.
The Chairman: The Bench are unanimously of opinion that
the case is proved. He defendant knew perfectly well that the man was in teh habit
of getting drunk, therefore his conduct was very bad. The penalty is £10, but
the fine will be 50s. and 13s. costs, or one month.
The fine was at once paid.
Folkestone Express
30-6-1906
Friday, June 22nd: Before W.G. Herbert and G.I.
Swoffer Esqs.
Edward Sings was charged with being drunk and disorderly the
previous night in Beach Street. Defendant admitted the offence.
P.C. Smith said at ten minutes past nine the previous
evening he was called to the Blue Anchor public house, where he saw the
prisoner sitting just outside. The landlord was ordering him out as he was
drunk. However, he refused to leave, so he (witness) ejected him. When outside
he began to use very bad language, and refused to go away when requested. He
caused a large crowd to assemble, so witness had to take him into custody.
Owing to his violence prisoner had to be handcuffed in order to get him to the
police station.
Inspector Lilley said the prisoner had not been before the
Magistrates for the last six years.
Fined 5s. and 4s. 6d. costs, or seven days` hard labour.
Prisoner`s wife was in the Court and refused to pay the
fine.
Folkestone Express
7-7-1906
Saturday, June 30th: Before W.G. Herbert Esq.,
Major Leggett, and J. Stainer Esq.
George Walter Stonar, the landlord of the Blue Anchor public
house, was summoned for permitting drunkenness on his licensed premises on June
21st. Mr. De Wet represented the defendant.
Emma Sings, of 9, St. John`s Road, said she was the wife of
Edward Sings, a pilot and boatman. On Thursday, June 21st, she went
to the Blue Anchor in Beach Street between eight and nine o`clock. She went
into the bar, where she found her husband leaning on the counter. He was very
drunk. The landlady was behind the bar, and there were three other men in the
bar. Her husband had a pint glass half full of beer in front of him. She asked
him if he was going home and he swore at her. He took up the glass and drank
some of the beer, and then stood the glass on the counter, and she took it up
and threw the contents out into the street. She told the landlady she should
fetch a policeman. Her husband had been there frequently drunk. She went and
fetched P.C. Smith, who was at the bottom of the Tram Road. She took him to the
house, and on the way she showed him the beer which she had thrown out of the
door. The constable went into the bar, and as her husband abused him he put him
out. Outside there was a disturbance and a large crowd collected, and
eventually her husband was arrested. When she saw her husband leaning on the
counter, she could tell he was drunk by his attitude.
Cross-examined, she said she was not aware that it was
someone else`s beer her husband was drinking. She had had a lot of trouble with
her husband. She went into the Blue Anchor three months ago and told the
landlady not to serve him. She denied calling the landlady a bad woman. She had
threatened to fetch a policeman before if they served her husband with drink.
She had known him go into the house sober, and come out drunk.
Re-examined, she said she did call the landlady a bad woman
for trusting her husband to the amount of 35s. for beer.
P.C. Smith said the last witness came to him on the evening
of June 21st and made a complaint to him. In consequence he went to
the public bar of the Blue Anchor with her. On the path outside the house he
saw a wet mark, and Mrs. Sings made a statement with regard to it. He entered
the public bar, which was a very narrow one. Inside he found Edward Sings with
three other men. The defendant was behind the bar. Sings was drunk, and was
standing about a foot away from the counter. There was an empty glass opposite
to where he was standing. As he entered the house, the landlord pointed to
Sings and ordered him out. He (witness) asked him to go out quietly. As he
refused to go, he ejected him on account of his disorderly conduct, and at the
landlord`s request. Outside the house the prisoner became disorderly, so he
took him into custody. Anyone could have noticed he was drunk.
Cross-examined, he said when outside he told Sings to go
away quietly. Sings was of an excitable nature when he was drunk. A boy was singing,
and a man was playing outside the Queen`s Head. The landlord told him he wanted
Sings out of the house. He certainly ejected him.
P.S. Osborne said shortly after nine o`clock on June 21st,
Sings was brought into the police station by two constables. He was very drunk.
Cross-examined, witness said Sings was not charged with
being found drunk on licensed premises, but with being drunk and disorderly in
Beach Street. He was convicted for the latter offence.
The defendant went into the witness box. He said he had held
the licence since July 9th of last year. Previous to that he had
held an off licence in Sharlston, near Wakefield. Sings came into his house on
June 21st with two other men, Philpott and Peden. His wife served
them with a pint of beer each. All three were perfectly sober. Two others came
in, and they all began chaffing one another. They bagan to ask Sings questions
about his work as a pilot, and also suggested that he could not do certain
things. Sings became excited, and it went on for an hour, when the two who had
come in last went into another room, because they were asked to stop the
chaffing as Sings was making too much noise. His wife also said to Sings “You
know what your wife has promised to do. You had better get out before she comes”.
Soon after that Mrs. Sings came. The beer which was by the side of Sings on the
counter was his (defendant`s) beer, for which a customer had paid. After Mrs.
Sings went out he asked her husband to go, so as not to get them into any
bother. Sings then turned stupid or stubborn, and said he would stop there
until his wife returned with the constable. He advised Sings to go when the
policeman came, and he went out without being ejected. When he got to the door
he said all the policemen in Folkestone could not lock him up. When his wife
came Sings got agitated, and he did not know whether he was on his head or his
feet.
Cross-examined by the Chief Constable, he said the chaffing
went on for an hour. Sings` wife made him stupid, and added to his excitement.
He had read in the papers that Sings pleaded guilty to being drunk and
disorderly. He saw Sings supplied with a pint and a half after the first pint
of beer.
Mrs. Elizabeth Stonar said on June 21st she
served Sings and his two companions with a pint of beer each. She corroborated
her husband as to the chaffing, and said it went too far. Shortly after, Mrs.
Sings came and said she would fetch a policeman and swear he was drunk. She
also said she (witness) encouraged him there, and further said she was a bad
woman. The man was only served with two pints and a half during the time he was
in the house. Sings was only excited, and became more excited when his wife
came and threw the beer into the street. There was no truth in the statement
that he owed 30s. for beer.
Mr. De Wet alluded to the fact that Sings was not charged
with being drunk on licensed premises. That case was an act of spite on Mrs.
Sings` part. He urged that every reasonable step was taken by the defendant
that drunken people should not be served, and he thought the evidence of Mrs.
Stonar would show that everything possible to be done was done.
The Chairman, in announcing their decision, said they
thought the defendant knew perfectly well Sings was in the habit of getting
drunk, and they considered his conduct was very bad. They were unanimously of
opinion that the case was proved. They could fine him £10, but they would
mitigate the penalty to a quarter of that amount, 50s., while he would also
have to pay 15s. costs.
Folkestone Herald
7-7-1906
Saturday, June 30th: Before Alderman W.G.
Herbert, Major Leggett, and Mr. J. Stainer.
George Walter Stonar, landlord of the Blue Anchor, was
summoned for permitting drunkenness on licensed premises. Mr. De Wet appeared
on his behalf, and denied the offence.
Mrs. Sings, 9, St. John`s Road, deposed that her husband was
a pilot. On Thursday, 21st June, she went to the Blue Anchor, in
Beach Street, a few minutes nine o`clock. She saw her husband inside at the
counter of the public bar. He was leaning against the counter, and was very
drunk. The landlady was behind the bar, and there were three other men on the
same side of the bar as her husband. He had a pint glass, half full, close to
him on the counter when witness went in. She asked him if he was coming home,
and he swore at her – a thing he usually did when he was like that. He took the
glass up and drank some beer, and when he put it down on the counter witness
took it up and threw the contents out of the bar, saying he was very drunk, and
ought not to have any more beer. She then told the landlady she would fetch a
policeman, as she could not stand it any more, and she should fetch one because
the landlady had served her husband with the beer, and he was very drunk. She
could not tell what answer the landlady made, because she did not wait to hear.
She found a policeman (P.C. Smith) at the bottom of the Tram Road, and took him
to her husband inside the bar. Mr. Sings would not go out when the policeman
asked him to. He was accordingly put out, and as there was a disturbance
outside, her husband was eventually arrested. She could tell her husband was
drunk by the attitude in which he was leaning against the bar counter.
Cross-examined by Mr. De Wet: She was not aware it was
someone else`s beer she threw away. If it had been, the landlady would have
told her. She had had a great deal of trouble with her husband. She remembered
going into the Blue Anchor about three months ago. She called Mrs. Stonar a bad
woman, and said at that time “If ever he comes in here again I will fetch a
policeman, and I shall report you for serving my husband when he is drunk” Her
husband might have called her a bad name, and said it was all her fault when
the policeman put him outside. It was outside that he was arrested.
Re-examined by the Chief Constable: They had had a most
unhappy life through her husband`s drunkenness. When she called Mrs. Stonar a
bad woman, she was referring to her trusting her husband for the money for the
beer.
P.C. Smith deposed that he went with Mrs. Sings to the Blue
Anchor. He entered the public bar; it was a very small and narrow one. Inside
he found Edward Sings with three other men. Defendant was behind the bar. Sings
was drunk, and was standing just inside the bar when witness entered. An empty glass was on the counter opposite
Sings. As witness entered the house the landlord pointed to Edward Sings,
ordering him out, and said “I want this man outside”. Witness told Sings to go
outside quietly. The landlord did not say why he wanted Sings out. The latter
refused to go, and said “I am a better ---- man than you are”. Witness
accordingly ejected him. Outside Sings became disorderly, and witness took him
into custody. Sings was in such a state of drunkenness that anyone could notice
it. His conduct caused such a crowd to assemble that the street was blocked up.
It was necessary for witness and another constable to handcuff Sings on the way
to the station.
Cross-examined by Mr. De Wet: Mrs. Sings did not say “That
is him”. Witness did not say “Come along, Ted, and get off home”. When Sings
got out of the house, he turned round to his wife and called her a bad name.
Sings seemed all right when he was sober, but was rather excitable when he was
drunk. Witness was aware there was a boy singing and playing outside the
Queen`s Head at the time, and there were several people listening. He only saw
one empty glass on the counter, but there were others containing beer.
P.S. Osborne deposed that he was on duty at the police
station on the night that Sings was brought in by the last witness and another
constable. Sings was very drunk, and had handcuffs on.
George Walter Stonar, the defendant, called by Mr. De Wet,
said he was the licence holder of the Blue Anchor, and had held it since 1905.
Previously he had had an off licence in another part of the country for several
years. He had never before been summoned for any contravention of the licensing
laws. He knew Sings, and saw him come into his house on the 21st
June. He came in with two other men. Witness`s wife served them with three
pints of beer. This was between 6.30 and 7 p.m. The men were perfectly sober,
and there was nothing to lead one to suppose that they were otherwise. They
remained there “talking and chaffing”, and afterwards someone else came in. They
were asking Sings certain seafaring questions, suggesting he could not do this
and that. The chaff went on for about an hour. The two men, Hart and Featherbe,
then went into another room. During the whole time Sings was in the bar witness
personally did not serve him. The other men had excited Sings too much by their
chaff, and witness asked them to stop it, as he was getting too excited.
Witness`s wife said to Sings “Well, look here. Ted, you know what your wife has
promised to do, and you had better get off before she comes”. Witness was not
there when Mrs. Sings entered, but came in when she had gone to fetch a
policeman, and said to Sings “Don`t get us into any bother; your wife has gone
to fetch a policeman, and you be outside when he comes”. What with the
chaffing, and the excitement of his wife`s coming, Sings had turned
stupid-like, and refused to go. Witness was advising him to go when the
policeman came and ordered him out. Sings was not ejected, but went out of the
house himself, and when he got to the door he said that all the policemen in
Folkestone could not lock him up. What with the chaffing, and his wife throwing
the glass away, he did not know whether he was on his head or his heels, and he
made a dirty remark to his wife. About three months ago Mrs. Sings came into
the house seeking her husband, and said she had had too much drunkenness at one
place and another, and if she saw him in the Blue Anchor again she would fetch
a policeman at once. On that occasion
her husband was there. The day on which Sings was ejected was the first time
Mrs. Sings had been to the Blue Anchor and found her husband there since the
threat. She had, however, been in three or four times, and not found him there.
He had given his wife instructions as to the requirements of the Licensing Act.
They were that if anyone came in the worse for drink she was not to serve them,
and also if she thought it was better that they should not have any more she
was not to serve them.
Cross-examined by the Chief Constable: Sings had never been
indebted to him to a greater extent than a shilling at one time for drink. The
man`s excitement had been on for about an hour. He did not think the drink had
anything to do with that, because he had not had enough. Witness was not
present in Court the next day when Sings was brought up, but he saw in the
paper that he pleaded Guilty to being drunk and disorderly in Beach Street.
Mrs. Elizabeth Stonar, the wife of the defendant, said that
on June 21st she was in the bar. She corroborated her husband`s
evidence as to the chaffing taking place. It went a bit too far, and she asked
the other people to desist, saying if Sings` wife came in she would swear he
was drunk, as she had threatened to. Mrs. Stonar also confirmed her husband`s
testimony as to Mrs. Sings` threat about three months before. She was the only
person who served Sings on this occasion, and he had two pints and a half of
beer altogether. It was very usual for a person to come into a house and buy a
glass of beer, and remain in the house for about an hour with that one glass.
The witness then detailed the scene in the house. When the policeman came she
said “This is nothing to do with us”. In her opinion Sings was only in a very
excited condition. There was no truth in the statement that at one time Sings
owed her 30s. for drink.
Cross-examined: Sings was very excited and became stupid. He
became more excited when the policeman came. Two and a half pints of beer
should not make him excited. She supposed that as he was excited the policeman
was justified in arresting him outside. She asked him to go outside before the
policeman came.
Re-examined: She asked him to go before Mrs. Sings came.
Mr. De Wet contended that in view of the seriousness of the
charge and inconclusiveness of the evidence, the Bench should give his client
the benefit of the doubt, and dismiss the case. He had intended to call one of
the three men concerned to prove the chaffing, but they were at sea.
Alderman Herbert said the Bench were unanimously of the
opinion that the case was proved, and that defendant knew perfectly well that
Sings was in the habit of getting drunk. It was a very bad case, and defendant
would be fined 50s. and 13s. costs.
Folkestone
Daily News 1-10-1906
Canterbury Licensing Sessions
At the Canterbury Licensing Sessions today the question
of the renewal of the licences of The Hope, The Tramway, The Providence, and
The Blue Anchor came up for hearing. Lord Harris presided. The Folkestone
Licensing Justices were represented by Mr. T. Matthew, instructed by Mr. H.B.
Bradley.
The case occupied some time, and eventually the
justices unanimously decided not to grant the renewal of either of the
licences, but to uphold and confirm the decision of the Folkestone Licensing
Bench.
The question of compensation will come up for
consideration at a later date.
Folkestone Express
6-10-1906
Local News
On Monday last the East Kent Licensing Bench at Canterbury
considered the question of renewing the licences of the Providence, the Hope,
the Tramway Tavern, and the Blue Anchor, public houses referred to them by the
Folkestone licensing justices. In each case they decided to refuse the granting
of the licence, and the next matter for them to consider will be how much
compensation is to be paid to the brewers and holders of the licences for the
closing of the houses.
Folkestone Herald
6-10-1906
Local News
The Compensation Authority for East Kent sat at Canterbury
on Monday and Tuesday last, Lord Harris presiding.
Amongst the 31 houses scheduled, there were four from
Folkestone. These were; The Providence, Blue Anchor, the Hope, and the Tramway.
In the cases of the Blue Anchor and the Tramway, the owners
and tenants did not seek for renewals, but the owners of the Providence and the
Hope sought for renewals.
On Tuesday the Committee fixed the compensation of the
Tramway at £894, the owners to have £745, and the tenant £149.
In the cases of the Providence, Blue Anchor and the Hope,
the fixing of the compensation was adjourned to a subsequent meeting.
Folkestone
Daily News 16-10-1906
Tuesday, October 16th: Before Messrs.
Stainer, Ames, and Leggett.
Mary Ann McCarthy was charged with being drunk on
licensed premises.
Mrs. Stonar deposed that she was the landlady of the
Blue Anchor. The prisoner came into the bar and begged of two customers. She
asked her to go, and she threw a glass at her. It just touched her face. Two
men held her till her husband came, when she went for a constable and gave her into
custody.
Mary Ann McCarthy said nothing.
The Chief Constable said she was a nuisance to East
Kent. She had numerous convictions against her.
She was sentenced to a month`s hard labour.
Folkestone Express
20-10-1906
Tuesday, October 16th: Before J. Stainer Esq.,
Major Leggett, and T. Ames Esq.
Mary Ann McCarthy was charged with assaulting the landlady
of the Blue Anchor Inn the previous evening, and also with being drunk on
licensed premises.
In answer to both charges she said she did not know anything
about them whatever. She had certainly had a drop of drink.
Elizabeth Stoner, the landlady of the Blue Anchor public
house, said the previous evening the woman came to her house about ten minutes
to seven. She was drunk, and went up to two customers in the bar and asked for
some coppers, so that she could get a night`s lodgings. Witness requested her
to leave the house, in answer to which McCarthy picked up a half pint glass and
threw it at her. The glass hit her on the cheek, and was broken by catching on
the shelf behind her. She then fetched a policeman and gave the prisoner into
custody.
P.C. L. Johnson said about seven the previous day he was
called to the Blue Anchor public house, where he saw the prisoner in the public
bar drunk. The last witness told him she wanted to give her into custody for
assaulting her. He took prisoner to the police station, where she was charged with
the two offences.
Prisoner said she did not wish to say anything.
The Chief Constable said the woman was a nuisance to the
whole of East Kent, and she had been convicted in almost every Court. She was
only before that Court a week ago, and was liberated from prison the previous
day. He had seven convictions in his book against her at Folkestone, Dover, and
Margate, but there were a number of others throughout the county.
For being drunk on licensed premises, McCarthy was fined
10s. and 4s. 6d. costs, or 14 days hard labour, and for the assault she was
sent to prison for 14 days` hard labour, the sentences to run consecutively.
Prisoner: I have no money whatever. I will do the time.
Folkestone Herald
20-10-1906
Tuesday, October 16th: Before Mr. J. Stainer,
Major Leggett, and Mr. T. Ames.
Mary Ann McCarthy was charged with being drunk on licensed
premises, and also with assaulting Mrs. Elizabeth Stonar, of the Blue Anchor,
Beach Street.
Mrs. Stonar said the prisoner, who was drunk, came to her
house. She did not ask for any drink, but asked two men in the bar for coppers
to keep her for the night. As prisoner was going out she took up a half pint
glass (the remains of which were produced), and threw it at witness. It caught
the side of her face, and hit the shelf behind. One of the customers took hold
of prisoner till her husband came, and witness fetched a policeman.
P.C. Leonard Johnson stated that at about 7 p.m. on Monday
night he went to the Blue Anchor, where he saw prisoner in the public bar,
drunk. The last witness said to him “I wish to give this woman into custody for
assaulting me”.
Prisoner, on being asked if she had anything to say, replied
in the negative, adding that she did not know anything at all about it.
The Chief Constable said prisoner was a nuisance to the
whole of East Kent. There were seven convictions against her at Folkestone,
Dover, and Margate, and there were numbers of others throughout the county.
The Chairman said the prisoner was an old offender and would
be fined for being drunk 10s. and 14s. costs, or 14 days`, and for the assault
she would have 14 days` imprisonment, the sentences to run consecutively.
Prisoner said she could not pay, and “would have to do it”.
Folkestone Herald 2-5-1970
Stroller
One thing leads to another. My reference recently to the mini-display
of old documents and photographs of the wine trade in Folkestone before and
after the turn of the century has prompted a townsman to let me see some more
interesting papers and early photographs of Folkestone.
In particular, they reveal that 100 years ago there
was a Railway Inn in Beach Street, not many steps from the Tram Road and the
Fishmarket. No doubt it took its name from the nearby railway, linking the old
Junction station with Folkestone Harbour. The licensee, James Hart, one of a well-known Folkestone
family, paid Thomas Ash, “common brewers of the City and County of Canterbury”,
a yearly rental of £15. In those days £15 was £15. One of the conditions of the
tenancy was that Mr. Hart should “bear and pay all rates and taxes whatsoever,
with the exception of the land and property tax, chargeable in respect of the
said premises”. Twenty-nine years later the licence was transferred from father
to son, Arthur James Hart. At that time the licensee paid a publican`s licence
of £14 5s. 3d. to the Inland Revenue for the privilege of carrying on business.
There`s no doubt that the Beach Street of those
days was almost the hub of Folkestone`s business life. There were other inns, notably
Horlock’s Royal George Hotel (almost destroyed in the last war). Its immediate
proximity to the railway and harbour was described as being “peculiarly
adapted to the convenience of the continental tourist . . . with extensive
and beautiful views of the sea and the coast of France”.
For all the faults of our civic
fathers, they cannot be blamed for the disappearance of Beach Street and
adjacent narrow, picturesque streets with their little shops. The Luftwaffe did
the deed in the later part of 1940. The instrument-in-chief was a land mine.
For those who knew old Folkestone well and never failed to be charmed by a
stroll through the narrow, cobbled thoroughfares, that particular piece of
Blitzkreig is still hard to forgive.
The Railway Inn had disappeared
before 1914, also the Blue Anchor at the entrance to The Stade. There were,
however, plenty of other drinking and eating-houses in the closely-knit huddle
of byways and highways.
For a number of details I have to
thank Mr. Bill Hart, one of the senior members of the printing staff at the
Folkestone offices of Messrs. F.J. Parsons (Kent Newspapers) Ltd. His father
was Mr. Arthur James Hart, who became licensee of the Railway Inn in 1899. Mr.
Arthur Hart`s brother, Albert, was long associated with Folkestone Football
Club before and after the First World War, and will still be remembered by some
older townsmen. He was also a Folkestone Councillor, builder and Kent football
legislator.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)