Page Updated:- Monday, 07 June, 2021.


Earliest 1830+

Flower of Kent

Closed 1917




This was described as an Anti 1868 Beerhouse, meaning that it had first been awarded a license under the 1830 beer Act and allowed the house to continue to remain licensed by paying their annual fee without having to attend the licensing sessions, however, only beer was allowed to be sold.


Maidstone Telegraph, Saturday 11 September 1869.

Applications for Spirit Licenses. The "Flower of Kent."

Mr. Knott applied for a licence for the above house, situated in Burham, within a few rods of Mr. Colgates house. ("First and Last")

Mr. McCarthy Stephenson applied for Mr. Knott, and said that he should also opposed Mr. Colgate, as his client Mr. Knott, was applying for a licence, situated in the same vicinity, but having more accommodation the than Mr. Colgate.

Mr. Prall also opposed on behalf of the "Corn Exchange."

Mr. Norton then opened the case on behalf of Mr. Colegate, and contended that there was plenty of room for another licensed house in the neighbourhood in consequence of the number of houses built since the licence was granted to the last house, and also the increase of the population and the extension of the lime, brick, and other works in the neighbourhood. After describing the situation of the house Mr. Knott proceeded by stating that the beer house for which applied for a licence was a property of his client, and who had expended 150 in converted it into a house fit for a spirit licence. There were only two other licensed houses in the neighbourhood the "Fleur-de-Lis" and the "Royal Exchange" and they were some distance removed from the house for which he now sought a certificate.

Mr. Colgate was then called and spoke to his house being his own property.

Chairman:- How many rooms have you in your house?

Applicant:- One cellar (laughter).

Chairman:- You don't call the cellar a room.

Applicant:- I have 5 rooms on the ground floor, inclusive of kitchen, washhouse, and parlour (laughter). There is a good deal of traffic in the neighbourhood. About 200 people pass my house everyday if they don't go another way (the laughter here was irresistible, and in which the bench was compelled to lose its gravity.)

In cross-examination by Mr. Prall, applicant admitted that there had only been four houses built since his application last year. One had been built by Mr. Sheepwash and two by Mr. Carman; the fourth was an addition to his own house (laughter). He had a memorial signed by the inhabitants; not by the employers of the works at Burham. Did not expect they wanted him to get a licence, as they did not want to see any opposition. He let a part of his house off.

Applicant was then cross-examined by Mr. McCarthy Stephenson, in the course of which he said that Mr. Knott, the other applicant for a licence lived about 100 yards from him. He did not know that Mr. Knott's house was larger and more adapted for a licence then his own. He had some ground in the rear of his house. Mr. Knott certainly had more. Did not know Mr. Knott had a coach-house, or kind of stable.

Mr. Prall then stated his objections for granting the license both against the "First and Last," and against Mr. Knott, the landlord of the "Flower of Kent, which were to the effect that there were two other houses in the immediate neighbourhood the "Royal Exchange," and the "Fleur-de-Lis." With respect to the "Flower of Kent" there was a specific objection, in as much as Mr. Knott had not stated his profession in his notice of application, as enjoined by the Act of Parliament, nor had he signed his name to the notice.

Mr. Stephenson would have contended the point as to profession, as the substance of the notice gave it by describing the applicant as retailer of beer. With respect to Mr. Knott neglecting to sign his name he could not struggle against.

The bench refuse and licence to Mr. Colgate, and the notice of Mr. Knott being informal his application was void.


Kent Messenger and Gravesend Telegraph, Saturday 28th July, 1917.

The licensing (Consolidation) Act, 1910.

Notice as to Sending in Claims to be treated as Persons Interested in Licensed Premises.

County of Kent, Western Division.

Notice is hereby given that the Compensation Authority for the above area having decided at their Principal Meeting held on 12th day of July, 1917, to refuse the Renewal of Licences of the premises specified below, all persons claiming to be interested in the said premises for the purpose of the payment of Compensation under the said act other than the Licensees and the Registered owner of the said premises are required to send to the Compensation Authority notice of their claims before the 20th day of August, 1917, for the purpose of enabling the Compensation Authority to ascertain in manner provided by the Licensing Rules, 1910, the persons entitled to Compensation on under the said Act in respect of the said premises.

Notice of claims, giving particulars of the interests claimed, should be sent to the Clerk of the Compensation Authority at this Office at the Sessions House, Maidstone.

"Flower of Kent," Burham. Beerhouse (Ante 1869). Alfred Mills. Style and Winch, Ltd. Maidstone.

W.B. Prosser, Clerk of the Compensation Authority, Sessions House, Maidstone. Dated this 26th day of July, 1917.


Maidstone Telegraph Saturday 17th November 1917.

West Kent Licensing Committee. Compensation appointments.

Mr. Coles Child presided, on Thursday, at a meeting of this committee, at the Sessions House, Maidstone, the other members present being: Colonel J. M. Rogers, Colonel Grubb, Messrs C. Tuff, Joseph Barker, R Batchelor, P. Butt-Gow, S. Lee Smith, H. Hannem, W. A. Smith-Masters, J. H. Hay Rudton, H. J. Wood and G. Naylor with the Clerk (Mr. W. B. Prosser), and the Valuer (Mr. H. M. Cobb, of Higham).

It was the "supplemental" meeting for the awarding of compensation in respect of licences "referred" earlier in the year.


The Clerk announced that agreements had been arrived at in the following cases:-

"Flower of Kent," Beerhouse, Burham, 1,893 - 1,738 for the owners (Style and Winch) and 155 for the tenant, (Mr. Alfred Mills.)




MILLS Alfred 1917


If anyone should have any further information, or indeed any pictures or photographs of the above licensed premises, please email:-