From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 21 January, 1865.

From the Court Sessions.

KITTLE v. NEWING

This was an action for the storage of goods at the "London Hotel;" but the plaintiff did not appear to support this claim; and Mr. Minter, for the defendant, therefore applied for costs of the attendance of two witnesses, which was granted.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 10 May, 1867.

CHARGE OF FELONY

Robert Reade, a stableman, was charged with stealing from the stable of Mr. Kittell, proprietor of the "City of London Hotel," a rug.

The rug was the property of a gentleman named Furnival, whose horse had been put up at Mr. Kittell's stables, where the prisoner had been employed as groom. The horse was sent away without the rug, and the prisoner was subsequently found dealing with it, having taken it to the "Phoenix," a public-house near to the "City of London" stables.

The prisoner said he was not guilty of stealing the rug. On Wednesday he went to fetch some hay from the loft, and ran his fork into the rug, which was lying among the hay. He brought it down and gave it to a man who had charge of two horses, telling him that he supposed it did not belong to Mr. Kittell, and that it had better be taken care of. He put it over one of the horses, where it remained till the next day, when he (prisoner), having completed his engagement with Mr. Kittell, told another man who was employed about the stables to take it over to the "Phoenix" where he subsequently took possession of it, believing that, if any one should claim it, he as the ostler would be held responsible.

The Magistrates, after a brief consultation, conspired the evidence insufficient to prove felonious intention on the part of the prisoner and discharged him, but directed that the rug should be handed over to Mr. Kittell.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 30 August, 1867.

AFTER THE RACES

John Kittel, landlord of the "London Hotel," Council House Street, was charged on the information of James Murray, the landlord of the "Clarence Hotel," which adjoins the "London," with loitering on the footpath in Council House Street and using obscene language.

Mr. Minter appeared on behalf of the defendant, who pleaded not guilty.

James Murray: I keep the "Clarence Inn," in Council House Street. On Thursday evening last, at half-past seven o'clock, as my family were taking tea, I heard my name associated with language as foul as could be made use of by some person in the street. I went to the door and others followed me; when I found the defendant in front of my house using the mist disgusting language. He came again, at intervals, from half-past seven in the evening till two o'clock on the following morning. At one time, about nine, there were from 150 to 200 people collected in front of my house. The defendant was excited by drink, but he was sober enough to know what he was saying.

By Mr. Minter: The defendant had been to the races. We have not been good friends for the last ten months; but there is no jealousy because we are "rival landlords," that I am aware. The reason we have not been friendly is owing to the defendant misconducting himself in my house, and I have not spoken to him since.

William Baker, an assistant to Mr. Murray, confirmed his testimony. Witness went to bed at half-past one, and defendant was still continuing his abusive language at that hour.

William Lemon, 150, Snargate Street, was standing with Mr. Murray at his door, and heard the defendant make use of most obscene and abusive language. That was about twelve o'clock at night. If he (witness) had been in complainant's place he should have "dressed down" the defendant much earlier in the evening, and would have taken the consequences.

By Mr. Minter: I told the defendant that if he continued his abuse I should "dress him down" on my own account (A laugh.) He made some offensive observations with regard to myself. He said I was a -------- Englishman who had married a French staymaker in order that she might get my living for me.

This was the evidence, and Mr. Minter submitted it was a neighbours' quarrel, which really did not call for the intervention of the Magistrates. The defendant had been to the races, and he was no doubt excited and quarrelsome, and the Magistrates would probably think that a threat to "dress down" a man under such circumstances would not be calculated to restore him to an equable frame of mind.

The Magistrates said there could be no doubt that the defendant's conduct had been very bad. He had no right, whatsoever to stand in front of a neighbour's house and make use of the filthy language which had been described. The fact of his having been to the races and being excited was no excuse. He would be fined 8s. 6d. and 11s. 6d. costs.

The defendant paid the money.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 20 March, 1885.

The "London Hotel" in Council House Street, and abutting on Round Tower Street, is about to be demolished , and on its site about fifty Artizans' dwellings will be erected by the Dover Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings Company. This will be a very good movement , because the Deal railway swallowed up some seventy dwellings for which no substitutes have been since built, causing great inconvenience to the many working men employed at the Pier who now have to walk long distances to their employment.