Maidstone Telegraph, Saturday 10 September 1870.

Tunbridge intelligence. Selling beer without a licence.

Solomon Page, Hadlow, was charged with selling beer without a licence at Hadlow, on 14th July.

Mr. Williams, excise officer, prosecuted, and Mr. Palmer appeared for defence.

Robert Armstrong deposed he was a labourer, residing at Shipbourne. On the 14th July, he went to defendant's house and got a pint of beer, for which he paid 2d. He drank the beer on the premises. A man named James Neville was with him, and also had a pint. He had had beer there previously.

By Mr. Palmer:- Have worked with defendant. Page has sometimes brought beer into the field, and they had clubbed around and paid for it on the Saturday night. He saw Page's son on the 14th, but did not ask him to get some beer on the sly. He knew the landlord of the Bull, at Shipbourne, but never heard him say he will give anyone a pound if they would prove that Page had sold beer. He told the policeman the same night as he had the beer. They had a few words about an axe. Witness brought an axe, and defendant asked him for the money. Neville was in the house when witness paid for the beer, but he did not think he saw the money paid. He had never told a different tale this.

Mr. Palmer denied that any beer had been sold. The two men have given some beer by a gentleman, and had entered defendants house, which they would not leave until some more was given them. He would prove to their worships that the evidence of Armstrong was perfectly unreliable. He had sworn that he never asked the young man to draw him some beer. He will call the young man who would swear that he did ask for beer, and if they believe this he would ask them to put no reliance in Armstrong's statement. He would also call them and Neville, he would say that he never saw any money paid, and it would be impossible in a small room like defendant's, if any had been paid for him not to have seen it.

He then called Albert Page, son of defendant, who deposed that on the 14th of July, Armstrong and Neville came to his father's house. His father and Neville went into the garden, but Armsrong remained behind. Armstrong asked him twice to give him some beer, but witness refused. Armstrong and Neville had not been in the house since. About a fortnight after witness heard that Armstrong had charged his father with selling beer.

Armstrong was drunk.

By Mr. Williams:- My father does not keep a cask in his house. He had one 4 1/2 gallon during the harvest.

By Mr. Goldsmid:- He had not told talked the matter over with his father. He had not told him what to say.

James Neville deposed that he went with Armstrong to defendants house, and left him there while he and defendant went into the garden. When they came back they had some beer given them. He did not pay for it. He had been there before and had beer, but had not paid for it. They clubbed around on the Saturday night, and paid for the beer. Witness did not see any money paid except 3s. for the axe. If any had he must have seen it. After they left defendant's house they went to Shipbourne "Bull", and witness paid for some beer he owed for. It was the custom for one of them to get the beer and carry into the fields, and they then all helped to pay for it. Armstrong told him the next morning he had paid for the beer, and witness replied that he did not see him if he did.

The magistrates were of opinion that there was not sufficient evidence to convict the defendant, especially as the man Armstrong was drunk when he gave the information, and had had a quarrel with defendant.

Mr. Williams gave notice of appeal.

Mr. Palmer applied for costs, but they worships declined to make any order.