Above postcard 1910.

Above postcard, 1917.

Above photo, Christmas 1917.

Above postcard, 1925.

Above photo showing the ballroom in 1930.

Above photo 1965.

The Bioscope, Thursday 14 October 1915.

Nathaniel Lyons, formerly of the "Beresford Hotel," Birchington, Kent, late cinema theatre proprietor.

The first meeting of the creditors interested in this recent failure took place at the London Bankruptcy Court, on Monday, before the assistant receiver. The Chairman reported that the debtor had been examined, and he stated that he was not know in business, but acting in control of a cinema theatre at Bulford, Salisbury, at a salary of £5 a week, out of which he had to pay his travelling expenses. He had been thus employed about 5 months, prior to which he was joint managing director of the Supreme Film Company, Limited, which company had since gone into liquidation. For four years prior to September, 1914, he had carried on business as a hotel manager and proprietor. In or about 1907 or 1908 he promoted a company to take over the premises of Beresford Lodge, Birchington, and to run it as an hotel. The necessary money was never found, however, so he took steps to find what was necessary to carry on the hotel. A company was formed under the name of the "Beresford Hotel," Birchington, Limited, with a nominal capital of £10,000, and the debtor was appointed managing director at a salary of £300 a year. The company carried on the hotel for 3 years, and finally went into liquidation early in 1914. In June of the same year the debtor took over the property, together with the furniture, at an annual rent of £300. He opened the hotel for visitors in the July, and three weeks later, on the outbreak of war, the hole of his customers left, and those who had taken rooms in advance had cancelled the bookings. He kept the hotel open until the September, and then the freeholder took possession, and released him from further liabilities. Last December he entered into arrangements for the building of the cinema theatre at Bulford, Salisbury. That was a speculation on his part, and he had no money at the time. The theatre was built and equipped at a cost of about £1,300, and he subsequently assigned his interest in it for a sum of £1,100, which he paid away for the equipment. Since which time, as stated above, he had acted as manager. He now owed £300, and his assets were about £14, most of his liabilities were for the hotel, but one was due in respect of the building of the theatre in Salisbury, and he attributed his failure to losses sustained in the hotel business, in consequence of the war. There was some discussion as to whether the meeting should be adjourned to enable the data to submit an offer, but the chairman thoughts that no useful purpose would be served by such adjournment.
 

Thanet Advertiser, Friday 01 July 1932.

MASQUERADED AS A WOMAN.

BIRCHINGTON HOTEL SCENE. POLICE COURT SEQUEL.

There was a sequel at the Cinque Ports Petty Sessions, at Margate, on Monday, to a disturbance at the "Beresford Hotel," Birchington, on Sunday evening.

Captain Stephen Phillips, aged 35 years, of Graywalls, Birchington and Gordon Douglas Hobson, aged 23 years, of Mayfair Hotel, London, were fined £5 and £3 respectively for being disorderly on licensed premises and refusing to leave when requested to do so.

A second charge of being drunk and disorderly in Spencer road, Birchington, at 11.54 p.m., on Sunday, was preferred against both defendants, but was withdrawn at the request of Inspector Beer.

Ernest Remnant, chairman of the company controlling the "Beresford Hotel," said he was at the hotel when the defendants refused to leave. He was in the ballroom when he noticed one of the guests take the floor with a person who was obviously a man masquerading as a woman. He saw them dancing together, and, at the conclusion of the dance, the man who was disguised as a woman, fired off a toy pistol. They were laughing and shouting and making a noise and he immediately approached the pair. He lifted the hat worn by the “woman” and said “Who are you?” and immediately recognised the defendant Phillips, whom he had previously told not to visit the hotel again.

Declined to Leave,

Witness told Phillips that he would not have a man in the hotel masquerading as a woman. The other man, who was not Hobson, was very excited and dared him to have Phillips put out of the hotel. Both men were under the influence of drink and were as insolent as they possibly could be. As there were a large number of ladies in the ballroom and the men adopted a threatening attitude witness intimated that he had no alterative hut to call the police. He asked the men to leave the premises, but they declined to do so and made a considerable amount of noise, used insulting and obscene language and wanted to fight.

Phillips had previously broken the rules of the hotel on several occasions and had been informed that he would not be admitted again, and Hobson, who was not in the ballroom at the time, had also been warned out the previous night.

Replying to Phillips, witness repented his statement that defendant wanted to fight and added that Phillips intimated that he was going to make short work of him (witness) when he met him outside the hotel premises.

Witness denied that he suggested that Hobson was keeping Phillips and the other man and that his remark was the cause of the trouble. What he did say was that Hobson had given Phillips and his companion their drink and that Hobson would not have been in trouble were it not for the fact that he was egged on by the other two. It was a fact that Phillips’ companion attempted to strike witness, but only succeeded in knocking his pipe out of his mouth. Witness stated that he intended summoning the other man for that assault. Witness added that Hobson did not come into the ballroom. He was in the entrance to the hotel and remained there until Phillips gradually made his way out of the ballroom. At the hotel entrance both Phillips and Hobson declined to leave the premises and the police were informed.

A Fighting Attitude.

Mrs. Susanne Austen, manageress of the hotel, said she had retired for the night. At about midnight she was aroused by a noise beneath her bedroom window, and, donning her dressing gown, she went downstairs and saw Phillips and Hobson at the lintel entrance. She asked the men, who had obviously been drinking, to leave the premises', but they flatly refused. They were shouting and laughing and making considerable noise. Witness later went to Broadstairs police station in her dressing gown.

P.C. Giggins, who went to the hotel in response to a telephone message, said he saw the two defendants sitting outside the hotel entrance. They were both requested to leave, but refused and adopted a fighting attitude and threatened to enter the building. Witness arrested them and took them to Broadstairs police-station. The defendant Phillips was dressed as a woman and on the way to Broadstairs he threw certain articles of clothing out of the window. Witness produced a lady’s frock and other garments which he recovered on the way back from Broadstairs. In the car he found a lady's handbag which contained a large slip of paper on which was printed the words "Looking for trouble." On the way to the station the defendants were very noisy and made use of disgusting language.

P.C. Mount, who accompanied P.C. Giggins to Broadstairs, said both men were swearing and using awful language.”

Inspector Beer said the men were the worse for drink when be saw them at Broadstairs at 2 a.m. They made a terrible noise at the station, shouting and swearing, and disturbed practically nearly all the residents in Gladstone-road. At 2.50 the defendant Phillips asked to see a doctor. A doctor subsequently examined the man and expressed the opinion that Phillips was not then drunk.

An Alleged Frame-Up.

“It is an absolute frame-up from the "Beresford Hotel" point of view,” declared Phillips, in the witness box. “We were accused of being drunk and asked for the police. Remnant made a remark and my companion struck at him, but, unfortunately, did not hit him properly.”

The Clerk (Mr. O. C. Maughan):- You think he should have been assaulted properly?

Defendant:- I most certainly do!

“They have framed the whole thing,” Phillips continued, “for we were not drunk. I only had one beer and one whisky from six o'clock. We were not trying to get a drink at the hotel, for we were aware that the bar was shut at eleven o'clock. We simply went there purely as a joke. That was the reason I had the woman’s clothes on.”

The Chairman of the magistrates (Mr. D. T. Evans):- You went there looking for trouble. (laughter.)

Defendant:- We went there purely as a joke, only some people cannot understand jokes.

Replying to one of the magistrates, defendant said he certainly did swear in the car when they were being driven to Broadstairs. He took exception to the driver of the car for reasons which he preferred to keep private. There were no women in the car, only the two policemen, and he told the driver exactly what he thought of him.

Defendant added that he did not know what the second charge meant for they went to the hotel by car and left it by car. When outside the hotel entrance they were in the hotel grounds.

Phillips said he had no occupation.

In the witness box Hobson told the magistrates he had no occupation. Phillips and another gentleman went into the hotel on the previous evening and he waited at the entrance. Remnant suggested that Phillips and his companion were scroungers and were scrounging on him. He had about five drinks during the evening, and he refused to leave the premises. Phillips’ companion was a perfect stranger to him.

The Clerk:- Why do it? You would not do these things in cold blood.

Defendant:- I was certainly not excited by drink.

The Chairman:- The weather?

Defendant:- No, I don’t think so.

Magistrates’ Warning.

Bertram Harold Benjamin, of Park-street, London, who described himself as a gramophone manufacturer, said he entered the hotel accompanied by Phillips, who was dressed as a lady. They danced together, and may have been making a little noise, but were certainly not making themselves a nuisance. They were simply laughing. The whole of the trouble was caused by the unfortunate remark made by Remnant. Remnant suggested that Phillips and he were being kept by Hobson, and witness struck at Remnant and knocked the pipe out of his mouth.

The Chairman said the Bench considered that a hotel of the character of the "Beresford Hotel" had to be protected. It was exceedingly unfair that such disturbances should be caused by people who had had too much to drink.

The magistrates, continued the Chairman, considered that Phillips was the ringleader of the little gang and he would be fined £5. The magistrates regretted that the maximum penalty was not more. In view of the statement made by Mr. Remnant concerning the other defendant, the bench had decided to fine Hobson £3. The magistrates suggested that the defendants, Phillips in particular, should keep away from the premises in future.

They felt it was very easy to get into trouble without going about looking for it.

In conclusion. Mr. Evans declared that people coming down to the seaside from London should not think they could behave exactly as they pleased, for the magistrates were going to put a stop to it.

From The Advertiser, Friday 7 June, 1935.

MUSIC LICENSES.

Margate magistrates, on Wednesday, granted music and dancing licenses in respect of the "Bay Hotel," the "Powell Arms," the "Beresford Hotel," the "Bungalow Hotel," and the "New Inn," Birchington.

Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer, Monday 2 August 1954.

The Beresford Hotel Birchington Ltd.

One of Britain's fine hotels.

The Beresford. Birchington-on-Sea, Kent.

Squash, tennis, dancing, etc, Fully licensed. Central heating, winter weekends 4 guineas. R.A.C. and A.A. Four Star. Thanet 41345.