EAGLE TAVERN (Guildhall Street) Pubs of Folkestone

DOVER KENT ARCHIVES

PUB LIST

PUBLIC HOUSES

Paul Skelton and Jan Pedersen

Earliest 1859

Eagle

Latest 1966

87-89 Guildhall Street

Folkestone

Above picture taken from Google maps, shows the site of the former Eagle Tavern.

Building opened as a public house in 1855 and was addressed as Darlington Place when the name was the "Darlington Arms". The house remained with this name till 1858 when John Baker replaced Thomas Taylor.

From the Folkestone Chronicle 10 December 1859. Transcribed by Jan Pedersen.

STEALING FOWL

Monday December 5th:- Before W.F. Browell, James Kelcey, and R.W. Boarer esqs.

Henry Godfrey and William Burvill, the younger, were brought up in custody, charged with stealing a gander and three geese, the property of Hunt Jeffery, of Walton, farmer.

Mr. Minter appeared for Burvill.

Godfrey was undefended.

Hunt Jeffery, being sworn, deposed, that he had lost a gander and three geese; saw them last on Friday afternoon, they were near the pond in the farm yard, was told next morning that they were missing, and the place where they were kept, open; could swear to the gander and two geese now produced, as being those lost.

Mr. Minter declined to cross-examine the witness.

James Winton, being sworn, deposed, he was employed by Mr. Hunt Jeffery, the last witness, had to attend the pigs and geese; his master had a gander and three geese; on Friday evening about 5 o'clock he drove them into the goose house and shut the door, which was fastened with a latch, missed the geese about 6 the next morning (Saturday); the door of the goose house was open; found there the head of the gander and a quantity of feathers; looked for the geese but could not find them; believed the geese now produced to be the same that were lost – identified them by certain marks in the feathers.

P.C. Charles Ovenden, being sworn, deposed, on Saturday, from information received, he went to Walton Farm, and received the head of a goose now produced from the last witness; was present when the geese were found in a garden, in the joint occupation of the prisoner Burvill and his father; the garden adjoins Wiltie Lane; they were found buried in a sack in the garden. The Superintendent of Police asked the prisoner Burvill previously, where the geese were; to which he replied he knew nothing of them. After the geese were found the question was repeated, and then prisoner answered, a man named Godfrey had brought them there in the morning, and asked him to take care of them for him; he also admitted the sack they were found in belonged to them, meaning his father and himself; he added, that hearing there was a stir about the geese, he had buried them himself.

Cross-examined by Mr. Minter – The Superintendent told the prisoner that he came to look after some stolen geese, and that he (Superintendent) believed they were there. Burvill denied the geese were there first, and only admitted that they were when some feathers came to the top of the ground after probing it with a crowbar.

Superintendent Martin deposed, from information received that some geese had been stolen, he went to Darlington Place, and met the prisoner Burvill in the road, asked him if he had the key of his cow-shed, he said he had. Witness asked him to allow him to look in there, as some geese had been stolen, and they wished to discover where they were. The prisoner said he might look anywhere he pleased, as he knew nothing whatever about any geese. Witness then cautioned prisoner to take care what he said, and then told him there was a man named Godfrey in custody on suspicion of stealing some geese. Prisoner again denied all knowledge of any geese. Witness then left prisoner and met P.C. Ovenden, they returned together and found the prisoner Burvill at work in a garden behind the railway; asked him to let him look in a lodge in the garden; prisoner took a key from his pocket and opened the door. Witness then told him he knew the geese were about there, and he ought to be very cautious what he said, or he might get himself into trouble. Witness then commenced a search, and noticed behind the lodge that the earth had been recently removed. Witness got a crowbar, and probing the place, found some feathers come up with the clay. Witness turned round to prisoner and said “Burvill, the geese are here”. He replied “I put them there, I had them from a man named Godfrey, in the morning, and did not know what to do with them, so I buried them, I did not know they were stolen”. He also admitted the sack belonged to him. Prisoner got a shovel and took them out at witness's desire. Prisoner was then taken into custody; the geese and sack produced are those found.

P.C. Busbridge deposed, that from information received on Saturday, he found some geese had been stolen from Walton Farm; he went to No. 20, Darlington Place, the residence of the prisoner Godfrey, and knocked at the door, heard a shuffling, and then opened the door and found the prisoner going out the back way; told him some geese had been stolen from Mr. Jeffery, at Walton, and charged him with stealing them; he said he knew nothing about them. Witness then took him into custody, took him to the station, and on him was the frock produced, inside which was found some goose down and feathers, with spots of blood; the Superintendent asked him how the feathers came there, to which he made no reply.

Jane Baker deposed, she was wife to John Baker, landlord of the "Eagle Tavern," Darlington Place; knew both the prisoners; saw them together at her husband's house on Friday night about half past 11; could not say whether they left together or not; they were using the house as ordinary customers. Burvill was in the habit of coming in and out of the house seven or eight times a day; had known him five or six years, and always thought him a well conducted young man.

Mr Minter cross-examined this witness, to show that the prisoners being together in the house was accidental, and not as companions, which the witness admitted.

Mr. Minter then addressed the bench to the effect that the prisoner Burvill had hitherto borne a good character, and that what he had done was not an actual proof of guilty knowledge; he had certainly committed a grave fault in telling a lie to the Superintendent, but that was all.

The Bench having consulted together, committed both prisoners to trial, at the next quarter sessions. Application for bail was made for the prisoner Burvill, which was granted, with 24 hours notice.

Note: Appears to confirm change of name from "Darlington Arms" to Eagle in Baker's time. Jan Pedersen.

From the Folkestone Chronicle 7 January, 1860. Transcribed by Jan Pedersen.

QUARTER SESSIONS STEALING FOWL

Thursday January 5th: - The Grand Jury then retired, and returned very soon with a true bill against Henry Godfrey for stealing four geese, the property of Mr. Hunt Jeffery, and William Burvill for receiving the same, well knowing them to have been stolen.

Mr. Minter appeared for Burvill.

The prisoner Godfrey was undefended.

The examination having appeared so recently in this journal, in the report before the magistrates, it is not necessary to fully detail them. The prisoner Godfrey pleaded “Guilty”, and William Burvill “Not Guilty”.

The Recorder then said, that the prisoner Godfrey having pleaded guilty, could be taken as a witness against the prisoner Burvill.

He was then put into the box, and the Recorder, addressing the jury, said, they must take Godfrey's evidence for what it was worth. If, however, they believed that he was speaking the truth, they were bound to believe him.

The witness was then sworn, and after being strongly cautioned by the recorder as to what evidence he had to give, he proceeded to examine him, and elicited from him, that on the 3rd December, about 3 o'clock in the morning, he went to Mr. Jeffery's farm at Walton, and took the geese from the lodge, and gave them to the prisoner Burvill to keep till he could sell them; Burvill put them in the Lodge, and told witness he might leave them there for a short time; was slightly acquainted with Burvill; - did not see Burvill afterwards until both were apprehended; the geese were all dead when he gave them to Burvill; he had killed them himself before he left the lodge.

The Recorder asked the witness how he had killed them. Witness, with the greatest coolness, and with a lurking smile on his lips, said, “he pulled the head off one”. The Recorder, seemingly surprised, repeated his question, but got the same reply.

Cross-examined by Mr. Minter – Lived in Darlington Place, near the prisoner Burvill; the lodge was in the occupation of Burvill's father; prisoner was feeding his cows when he asked him to take care of the geese; had to pass the lodge on his way from Mr. Jeffery's; it was about 7 o'clock in the morning when the geese were left with the prisoner.

P.C. Ovenden repeated the evidence given before the magistrates as to being present when the prisoner was informed by the Superintendent of Police that some geese had been stolen from Mr. Jeffery's, and that Godfrey was in custody on suspicion of having stolen them; prisoner denied all knowledge at first, but afterwards when found, admitted that Godfrey had given them to him, and he had buried them for fear of being implicated in the matter.

Superintendent Martin deposed that in company with last witness he searched the garden of prisoner, and noticing the ground had been recently disturbed he probed it with a crowbar, on which some feathers came up to the surface; witness then addressing prisoner, who had previously denied all knowledge of the geese, although told Godfrey was in custody, and was strongly cautioned by witness to be careful as to how he answered, he said “oh, yes, the geese are there, I buried them myself, but I did not know they were stolen”. The geese were in a sack which prisoner said was “his” or “theirs” – meaning his father and himself – Godfrey was in custody before Burvill was spoken to by witness.

Police constable Busbridge deposed, he apprehended the prisoner Godfrey on the 3rd inst., (sic) about one o'clock. Saw the prisoner Burvill, who was in the road when witness went into Godfrey's house.

Cross-examined by Mr. Minter, who asked witness how in his depositions he said 12 o'clock when he went to prisoner Godfrey's house – the witness explained this by saying he was twice at the prisoner's house, at 12 and 1 o'clock.

Jane Baker (wife of landlord of the "Eagle") was examined but her evidence had no bearing on the case.

Mr. Minter then made a forcible address to the jury on the whole of the evidence, and impressed upon them that his client might have been guilty of an indiscretion in telling a lie when spoken to at first by the Superintendent of police; there had been nothing proved against him that he had stolen the geese, or that he knew in fact that they were stolen. He is found at 7 o'clock in the morning feeding his cows, when asked to take care of the geese by Godfrey. Afterwards seeing the police go into Godfrey's house, he begins to suspect something is wrong, and afraid that he might be implicated, he buried the geese; this is almost a natural conclusion for a person in his position to arrive at, and though an act of indiscretion, still it was no proof of guilt, and he pressed upon the jury that if they had a doubt that the prisoner received the geese knowing they were stolen, they were to give him the benefit of the doubt and acquit him.

Mr. Minter then called Joseph Samson and John Garland, as witnesses as to character, who gave the prisoner an excellent one; the former as his schoolmaster, the latter as his employer.

The Recorder then summed up the evidence, minutely showing that against the prisoner, and that in his favour, and put it to the jury, if they had any doubt about the guilty knowledge of the theft committed by Godfrey being known to the prisoner when the geese were left with him, they would give him the benefit of it, and bring in an acquittal – if on the other hand they believed the prisoner had that knowledge required by the law, they were bound to return a verdict of Guilty.

The jury then retired, in about ten minutes returned into court and gave a verdict of Not Guilty.

The Recorder then addressing the prisoner Godfrey, said, having pleaded guilty to the crime of having stolen these geese; he the Recorder might tell him he had had a very narrow escape from a charge of burglary, for if the lodge from which the geese had been stolen had been attached to the house, and he had lifted the latch, it would have amounted to that crime, and a few years ago the punishment for that crime was death. He the Recorder was afraid however the prisoner was not only a thief by his own confession, but also a cruel one, for the manner in which he had described what he had done together with the fact that he had pulled the head off the goose while alive, showed he was a very cruel person. The prisoner had been a month in prison, and he should imprison him to six months' imprisonment with hard labour.

Licensee John Baker seemed to be suffering from lack of funds during the 1860s and having been proved to owe money was deemed insolvent.

From the Folkestone Chronicle 25 August, 1860. Transcribed by Jan Pedersen.

ADVERT

To Publicans And Others.

The "Eagle Tavern" Public House.

To Be Let.

Enquire of Messrs. Brockman and Harrison, Folkestone.

From the Folkestone Chronicle 29 September, 1860. Transcribed by Jan Pedersen.

COUNTY COURT INSOLVENCY

Thursday September 27th:- Before C. Harwood Esq.

John Baker. This insolvent keeping the "Eagle Tavern," Folkestone, petitioned under the protection acts, owing debts amounting to £208 15s. 11d. No assets. Mr. Minter supported.

The insolvent passed his first examination and His Honour named the next sitting for the final order.

From the Folkestone Chronicle 3 November, 1860. Transcribed by Jan Pedersen.

COUNTY COURT INSOLVENCY

Wednesday October 31st:- Before Charles Harwood Esq., Judge.

John Baker, an insolvent, came up for his final order. Supported by Mr. Minter. There was no opposition and the order was signed. His Honour upon signing the petition cautioned insolvent that if any debts were contracted after this he would allow no time for payment but make forthwith orders. Insolvent then received his final order.

From the Folkestone Observer 23 February, 1861. Transcribed by Jan Pedersen.

ASSAULT ON A PUBLICAN

Friday February 22nd: - Before James Tolputt, A.M. Leith, and James Kelcey, Esqs.

Frederick Jones, of Brentwood, Essex, umbrella maker, was charged with assaulting and beating George Francis Ball, landlord of the "Eagle Tavern," Darlington Place.

George Francis Ball, who appeared in court with one eye tied up, said – I am landlord of the "Eagle Tavern," Darlington Place. This morning, about 10 minutes past 12, I was sitting in the tap room of my house. I ordered two cigars, which were brought me. The prisoner, who was sitting in the room, took one of the cigars. I told him he must either pay for it, or put it down. He did neither, and I attempted to take it from him. He then seized me with both hands by the hair of the head. I made my way to the bar, and on going there we both fell down together. As I was down he kicked me several times in the eye, and all over the body, causing the injuries which now appear. In reply to the prisoner witness added, “I did not come to strike you first”.

Sarah Baker deposed that she was housekeeper to Mr. Ball, at the "Eagle Tavern." About ten minutes past twelve that morning Mr. Ball ordered her to bring two cigars into the tap room. The prisoner took one, and she left the room. Shortly afterwards she saw Mr. Ball and the prisoner fall down together just in the bar. As they were lying down she saw the prisoner kick Mr. Ball several times in the face. She tried to prevent him but she could not. She saw him pulling Mr. Ball by the hair at the time he was kicking him.

By the prisoner – Prisoner took the cigar out of another man's hand. She did not know whether Mr. Ball had been gambling for the cigars.

John Dyer said he was in the tap room that morning, when the affair about the cigars took place. Mr. Ball went to prisoner, and asked him for the money for the cigars. After that they got tussling in the tap room, and went into the passage. After a short time witness heard Mr. Ball's housekeeper call. They were then in the bar. When he came out to go towards the bar, there was Mr. Lee out there; and Mr. Lee, and Mr. Ball, and prisoner lay on the ground. Mr. Ball asked witness to go for the police, which he did. He saw no blow struck.

In reply to prisoner, the witness said he saw Mr. Ball toss for two cigars, which he lost. He saw Hammon take up two cigars and give prisoner one.

In reply to Mr. Leith, witness said neither prisoner nor Mr. Ball was drunk.

This was the case for the prosecution.

For the defence prisoner called Elizabeth Lee, licensed hawker, who said she saw Mr. Ball toss for the two cigars that morning, and lose them. William Hammon won them. Hammon took two out of the box; one he gave into prisoner's hand, and one he kept himself. Mr. Ball asked prisoner for the money for the cigar, and prisoner said he had had the cigar given him, and would not give it up. They both tussled in the passage, but which struck the first blow she could not say. She did not see prisoner kick Mr. Ball. Mr. Ball brought dice into the room, and witness rattled them with the young lady (the housekeeper) for two pints, and lost. She beat witness out of two pints of small beer, after twelve o'clock.

In reply to Mr. Ball, witness said the dominoes were there when she came, but he (Ball) brought the dice, which they shook in a pot. It was half past eleven when she raffled the young lady for a pint of beer. Ball won half a crown.

William Hammon, licensed hawker, said, about eight o'clock the previous night he went into the public house, and had half a pint of beer. Soon after that he got another. The landlord wanted to spar. He said he thought he should get some boxing gloves, and have a spar. He then wanted to have some throwing with dice for money. Then about twelve o'clock he pulled off his clothes, everything but his shirt and trousers and flannel he believed. About ten minutes past twelve he tossed Ball for two cigars.

Dyer being re-called, said he saw the landlord strip himself, but did not see him fight. He had his shirt on. It was not one time in a hundred that Mr. Ball was to be seen in the bar with his coat on. He saw dice.

Hammon proceeded to say that when he won the cigars he took them, and gave prisoner one of them. Before twelve o'clock prosecutor said he should beat all three of them if they did not pay for a pint of beer apiece – that was him (witness), Elizabeth Lee, and prisoner.

Ball said as witness was on his oath, he did not wish to ask any questions. He had sworn perjury.

In reply to Mr. Leith, Hammon said that after he had given the cigar to the prisoner, Mr. Ball asked prisoner for the cigar. Prisoner said witness had given it to him, and he should not give it up. They then began tussling, and Mr. Ball took hold of him by the head. Witness followed them out into the passage, and when they got there Mr. Ball knocked prisoner into the bar, and prisoner dragged Mr. Ball down with him, and knocked his head against the bar.

In reply to Mr. Ball, witness said he did not turn round to him, when he was ordered out of the house, and say “You ------, you have got one eye bunged, and I will bung the other for you”. He said nothing of the sort.

George Clayton saw Mr. Ball pull off his clothes, chuck one brace down by the side of him, throw the other back across his shoulder, and turn up his shirt sleeves and show his muscle. He talked so much of fighting that witness began to be afraid of him. He said he would thrash them all three if they did not pay for a pint of beer each; and witness said he would not pay, but prisoner said he would pay rather than fight.

Elizabeth Lee, re-called, said she saw the housekeeper holding prisoner by the hair, and beating him on the head, saying, “Get away, you rascal”.

Sarah Baker – It was because prisoner was kicking Mr. Ball so.

Elizabeth Lee – I don't know about that; I did not see it.

After a brief consultation, the Bench said they were of opinion that the case was proved against the prisoner, and notwithstanding that provocation had been given, there was no justification for such brutal kicking. The prisoner would be fined 5s., with 9s. 6d. costs, or 7 days imprisonment. The bench added a caution to the prosecutor as to the conduct of his house, which had been reported before. If such things as these went on he would lose his licence.

Prisoner asked for time to pay the fine in, as he was expecting goods down in a day or two, when he could pay it. But this was refused, and he was committed to Dover jail.

From the Folkestone Chronicle 9 March, 1861. Transcribed by Jan Pedersen.

ENTERING UNLAWFULLY

Wednesday March 6th:- Before the Mayor, James Kelcey and W.F. Browell, Esqs.

George Milligate was brought up charged with being found in the "Eagle" public house for an unlawful purpose. It appeared that the house in question had been empty some time, the landlord having absconded, and that a number of lads had been in the habit of loitering about these premises of an evening, and on the occasion in question the prisoner and another lad had been seen to get into the house by a broken window; but from the contradictory statements made by the principal witness, Maria Peel, the magistrates reprimanded her, and ordered the prisoner to be discharged, with a caution.

From the Folkestone Observer 9 March, 1861. Transcribed by Jan Pedersen.

UNLAWFUL ENTRY

Wednesday March 6th:- Before the Mayor, W.F. Browell, and James Kelcey, Esqs.

George Milligate, 17, labourer, was charged with being found in the "Eagle" public house, Darlington Place, for an unlawful purpose.

Maria Peal, wife of William Peal, Darlington Place knew the prisoner. About seven o'clock the previous night she saw him get into one of the windows of the "Eagle Tavern," Darlington Place, which is unoccupied. She did not know whether he opened the window or not. Prisoner came to her house for a box of lucifers. She saw a light in the house during the evening.

In reply to the prisoner, witness said his legs were outside the window. She did not know whether he got into the house.

P.C. Peel said that about a quarter to nine the night before he went to the "Eagle Tavern;" he found the back and side doors shut, but unfastened. He found the front window unfastened, and the lower sash about an inch up. A square of glass at the bottom of the window was broken out. He saw the door and window fastened about four o'clock the morning before. There are lead fittings and gas pipes in the house.

The Bench thought the defence charge was not clearly made out, and discharged the prisoner.

From the Folkestone Observer 13 April, 1861. Transcribed by Jan Pedersen.

GRANTING A LICENSE

Mr. Fowle, clerk to Messrs. Brockman and Harrison, applied for a fresh licence to John Taylor, at present a police constable for the borough (7F), for the "Eagle Tavern," Darlington Place, Francis Ball, the late holder for that house, having gone away. Evidence was given of Taylor being in possession of the house, and Superintendent Martin spoke to his good conduct while in the force, saying that he found the night duty irksome and injurious, and being in possession of a small pension, he was desirous of taking a public house, that he might have more regular hours of rest. The Bench, reminding the applicant of the former character of the house, granted the licence.

From the Folkestone Observer 26 October, 1861. Transcribed by Jan Pedersen.

SUNDAY AMUSEMENT

Tuesday October 22nd:- Before Captain Kennicott R.N., and James Tolputt, Esq.

William Hoad, a young man, was brought up on warrant, charged with wilfully damaging the smithy of Mr. Hoile, Darlington Place.

William Rye said he was at Mr. Taylor's public house, Darlington Place, on Sunday afternoon, about half past two o'clock, when he saw the prisoner standing on the batten of the railway, throwing stones at Mr. Hoile's forge. He heard the noise of stones going into the window, and the smashing of glass. He was with another man, who was not present in court, and they were both throwing stones at the forge. They might have been throwing stones for about five minutes.

John Taylor, landlord of the "Eagle," also saw prisoner throwing stones, and heard the glass smash.

William Hoile, shoeing smith, and owner of the forge, on Monday morning found 20 or 30 large stones and bricks inside the shop. The windows of the shop were all out, and the frames smashed in. On Saturday he left the frames all right, and partly filled with glass. This was not the first, nor second, nor third time that this had been done. The damage done was £1. The young fellows were in the habit on Sundays of getting on the railway banks and throwing stones at his windows. The very last time they did it they agreed to pay 1s 6d each towards the damage done.

The prisoner said he only threw one stone, and that fell on the roof and bounded off. He saw two others throwing stones, but he was lying on the bank himself.

The magistrates inflicted a fine of 10s. with 9s. costs, or 14 days' hard labour. The fine was paid.

Trading till 1966 when the premises was demolished. The house reverted back to the "Darlington Arms" briefly during Edwin Holloway's time to avoid confusion between the "Eagle Tavern" in the High Street, but didn't remain with that name long and again reverted back.

The following is a transcript of a passage describing the "Eagle" by a person going under the name of G.H.C. Dated May 1967.

The Eagle

Rather more than forty five years ago, Bill Medhurst recently returned from five years of war service, which had begun placidly driving the Yeomanry water cart at Dumpton (the happiest days of his life) but had included the Dardanelles Campaign, skirmishes with the Senussi in the Western Desert, duty with the Camel Corps in Palestine, and garrison work in Egypt, would lament the monstrous prospect of the future to his fellow clerks in the Gas Office. Here we are scribing them in (the records of the slot-meter collections) and so I suppose it will go on to the end unless something happens to the Old Chief and Old (indecipherable) (his deputy) comes to the throne. Then there might be a few alterations and what should he do then? It would be a good thing to take a pub, but certainly not The Eagle in Guildhall Street. It must be a little one in the country, where he might get a bit of rough shooting during the afternoon closing. The Eagle killed all it's landlords. The statement, though not entirely accurate, could be supported by considerable evidence.

One man who kept it at the turn of the century, retired into private life, but getting bored, took another and retired a second time, then some years after shot himself. Another took his life at The Eagle, and a third died by a tragic accident at his new home on the first night of his retirement.

However within ten years an alteration came without anything happening to the Old Chief. The Company passed under other control and the new owners dealt generously with Bill. With his compensation and his small patrimony he realised his ambition to have his own car and follow his own devices. Whether those days proved as happy as the ones at Dumpton, I never knew, nor whether he regretted the hypothetical good job in Egypt he turned down because his old mates wanted him home. Anyway neither the "Dog" at Clambercrown nor the "Cat" at Paddlesworth nor any other pub repeated the inscription on the old "Kings Arms" at Folkestone. He eventually served in Civil Defence through the Second World War and died early in 1946.

Now May 1967 The Eagle itself is dying slowly under the hands of the demolition men, and is revealing what a good job it's builders made of it.

John Brown and I must have passed it four or six times a day during our Grammar School and Technical School days, and I think it stood for all the temptations, world, flesh and Devil. My most vivid memories of it are on Sunday evenings about 1900. Father had a widowed aunt and her bachelor brother who lived in Guildhall Street, nearer the Town Hall. We used to call on them on Sunday evenings and leave about half past eight. We had to pass The Eagle on our way home. It would be crowded to overflowing. From inside came loud noises of talking, laughing, and maudlin singing. This was repeated by the crowd milling outside the door. Opposite stood Miss Flude`s Gospel Mission Hall. By that time the congregation would be gathered round a preacher who stood on a kitchen chair in the forecourt. I suppose his address was directed to the revellers at The Eagle, but he seemed to me to be as intoxicated with religious fervour as they were with drink.

One feature of The Eagle, and incidentally left to the last, was a bay window of the bar which projected on to the pavement.

In later years the landlord had previously been a railway signalman and during the afternoon closing he was frequently to be seen standing at the window and looking along the street, just as he might have watched the line from his box in earlier days.

After the Second World War the neighbourhood became a clearance area and trade must have declined and habits changed. When do all the ghosts return? Drinkers and preacher alike? Perhaps in those year when Halloween falls on a Sunday? Do the police consider that an extraordinary occasion and not oppose an extension to midnight?

G.H.C.

LICENSEE LIST

BAKER John 1859-60