Folkestone Express 9 September 1876.

Notice.

To Thomas Prebble, one of the Overseer of the Borough of Folkestone in the County of Kent, and to the Superintendent of Police for the same Borough.

I, Godfrey Lepper, now residing at Fenchurch Street, in the Parish of Folkestone, in the Borough of Folkestone, do hereby give you notice that it is my intention to apply at the adjournment of the General Annual Licensing Meeting for the Borough of Folkestone aforesaid, to be holden in the Town Hall in the said Borough, on the twenty seventh day of September next ensuing, for a license for the sale of Spirits, Wine, Beer, Porter, Cider, Perry, and other intoxicating liquors, to be drunk or consumed in a certain house, and in the premises thereunto belonging, situate at Fenchurch Street. In the Borough aforesaid, and known by the sign of George The Third, and which I intend to keep as an Inn, Alehouse, or Victualling House.

Given under my hand this thirtieth day of August, One Thousand, Eight Hundred and Seventy Six.

Godfrey Lepper.

Folkestone Express 30 September 1876.

Wednesday, September 27th: Before Aldermen Caister and Tolputt, Col. De Crespigny, and Mr. Clark.

On account of the peculiarities of the cases it was necessary that there should be four to constitute the Bench, and the fourth gentleman could not be obtained until after about three quarters of an hour kept in suspense Mr. Clark put in an appearance, when the following cas was recapitulated:

Mr. Godfrey Lepper, of Fenchurch Street, Folkestone, applied for a license for the sale of spirits, wine, beer, porter, cider, perry, and other intoxicating liquors to be drunk in a house known by the sign of “George The Third”.

For the applications, it was argued that formerly the house was known by the sign of the “Dewdrop”. Mr. Lepper had completely renovated the house at a cost of about £400, and it may be stated that there is no house near giving the accommodation which can be obtained at this place, and it is requisite that a spirit license should be granted.

The Bench decided not to grant the license.

Folkestone Express 10 February 1877.

Monday, February 5th: Before R.W. Boarer Esq., General Armstrong, Captain Crowe, and Captain Fletcher.

Elizabeth Scott, a dirty looking woman, was charged with being drunk and disorderly on licensed premises, and breaking a window, valued at 5s.

Mr. Lepper, the landlord of the George III public house, Fenchurch Street, stated that about half past one o'clock on Sunday afternoon the prisoner and another woman came into his bar, the former being intoxicated, and entered the back room. Witness hearing a noise there, went to them and told them to leave, as he did not allow women, particularly when intoxicated, in the back room. She refused, and he therefore put her out of the house and closed the door after her. The prisoner immediately thrust her closed right hand through the window of the bar door, and in doing so cut her hand. She then left, and afterwards returned and again behaved in a disorderly manner.

P.C. James Knowles proved taking the prisoner into custody at the George iii, where she was behaving in a very disorderly manner.

The Bench fined the prisoner 5s. and 5s. 6d. costs for being drunk and disorderly, and 5s. and 3s. 6d. costs for breaking the window.
 

Folkestone Express 25 August 1877.

Wednesday, August 22nd: Before Col. De Crespigny, Capt. Crowe, J. Clarke Esq., and Alderman Caister.

General Licensing Day.

Applications for Spirit Licenses.

Mr. Godfrey Lepper applied for a spirit license in respect of the George The Third, Fancy Street.

Mr. Minter supported the application, and stated that the house had recently been altered at a cost of £300, and every convenience for the public had been made. A Friendly Society known as the Prussian Hermits met at the applicant's house and there was every need for the license. Mr. Minter put in a memorial signed by persons living in the neighbourhood.

The applicant having made the required statement, and there being no opposition, the Committee granted the license.

Folkestone Express 23 August 1879.

Saturday, August 16th: Before Captain Crowe, Alderman Hoad, and M. Bell Esq.

Mr. Lepper, landlord of the George The Third Inn, Fenchurch Street, applied for a license to have a refreshment booth on the beach on regatta day. The Superintendent of Police produced the printed regulations of the regatta committee, which stipulated that no booth for the sale of intoxicating liquors should be erected on the beach, and the Magistrates at once refused the license.

Folkestone Express 14 October 1882.

Saturday, October 7th: Before R.W. Boarer and F. Boykett Esqs., Captain Crowe, General Armstrong, and Alderman Hoad.

John Gardner, a police constable in the borough force, was summoned for an assault on Amelia Lepper on the 1st October. He pleaded Not Guilty. Mr. Mowll appeared for the complainant and Mr. Minter for the defendant.

Godfrey Lepper was charged with opening his house during prohibited hours, and Sarah Lepper with assaulting P.C. Gardner. They pleaded Not Guilty.

John Lepper, charged with resisting the police, also pleaded Not Guilty.

The whole of the cases arose out of the same circumstances, and the Bench decided to hear them together.

Amelia Lepper, the daughter of Godfrey Lepper, landlord of the George III in Fenchurch Street, said on Sunday, October 1st she went out of the house, across the road to Miss Hart's, a dressmaker, to fetch a dress which was being altered for her. Miss Hart asked her to get some vinegar for pickling. Her father sold vinegar, and she fetched a pint, and afterwards some more. When she got to the door, a police constable took hold of her. She thought he was a tramp from the Bricklayers' Arms. He said that he wanted her. When he pulled her, the jug fell into the street and was broken. She struggled to get away and asked him what he wanted. He said she must go with him, as a police constable wanted her. She called out to her mother and brother, who both came. Her brother threatened to strike him, and he said “I am a police constable in disguise. Don't strike me”. He went away and fetched another constable, and when he came back Miss Hart took out the pickled cabbage and vinegar in a can, and said “This is what she brought”.

Cross-examined by Mr. Minter: I had been across about ten minutes before. I did not carry the jug under my apron. No-one came out of the house with me. There had not been two women come out of the house with jugs. Someone might have been in the house, but I should not know. I took a pint of vinegar across each time. Gardner did not say “What is in your jug?” He asked me for my name, and I said “Lepper”. I did not refuse to let him see what I had got. I did not deliberately throw the jug down and smash it. When they came back, and Miss Hart brought the vinegar, I did not hear the constable say “You are very clever to collect the vinegar after it has been spilt”. I saw mother push the constable in the road, before he wanted to search the house.

By Mr. Mowll: There were two lots of vinegar, one in the can, and the other lot was spilt.

Sarah Lepper, wife of Godfrey Lepper, said: My husband has held a license for 11 years. On Sunday morning I heard my daughter say “Here's a tramp got hold of me”. I had the key of the bar in my pocket, and had it all the morning. When I got there I said “You dirty-looking Pikey, what are you doing with my daughter?” My son said “What are you doing with my sister?” and threatened to strike him, but he put up his hands and said that he was a police constable. The house had not been open.

By Mr. Minter: An old lady came into my house and took an empty jug in and out. An old gentleman did not come, nor an old lady, or a young lady. I don't know how many people came, as we have a lot in on business matters. When the police constable in uniform came down, I asked him what was the matter, and he said “What is your name?”, and “Is that your daughter?” I said “What about it?” and he said “You have been serving beer”, and Miss Hart then brought out the vinegar. I did not say there was nothing the matter. I will swear that I said “That tramp has been dragging my daughter about the street”. He did not ask for admittance. I and my son did not prevent him coming in. I did not slap him in the face, but shoved him (defendant) in the head with my fist.

By Mr. Bradley: The vinegar was kept in the cellar, not in the bar.

John Godfrey Lepper, son of last witness, said: The first I heard of the case was that my mother called me, and I saw my sister lying against the post door. I threatened to strike the man who I thought was a tramp. I did not know he was a constable. From the time he left until he came back was two or three minutes.

By Mr. Minter: I found my sister lying on her side in the doorway, and my mother beside her. The constable was on the doorstep and had hold of her hand, trying to pull her up.

John Wettingstall, coal dealer, of Harvey Street, said: When I reached Lepper's I saw a navvy sort of man ill-treating a girl, as I thought. He had got hold of the girl round the shoulders. I heard the jug drop.

By Mr. Minter: I live not far from this house. I don't go to Lepper's. The girl was standing beside Hart's door. He had his right arm round her neck. Miss Hart's house is on the opposite side of the street. She got away from the policeman. He released her just off the kerb and he ran across and pulled her nearly down. He had hold of her round her neck at her mother's door.

By Mr. Mowll: I have been a Good Templar for five years.

Godfrey Lepper, landlord of the George III, said: I have held a license eleven years without a complaint ever having been made against me. I was not in the house during Saturday night. The key of the bar is as a rule in my wife's possession. We sell vinegar, which is kept in a cask.

Miss Hart was said to be ill, and the case was adjourned for a month for her attendance.

Folkestone Express 11 November 1882.

Saturday, November 4th: Before The Mayor, R.W. Boarer and M. Bell Esqs., and Alderman Banks.

Godfrey Lepper, of the George The Third, Fenchurch Street, was summoned for having his house open for the sale of liquor during prohibited hours on Sunday, the 1st of October. Mrs. Lepper, his wife, and John Lepper, his son, were summoned for assaulting Police Constable John Gardner on the same day, and Gardner was summoned for assaulting Lepper's daughter.

The case came before the Court a month ago, and was then adjourned for the attendance of a witness who was ill. Mr. Minter appeared in support of the police constable, and Mr. Mowll for Mr. Lepper and his family.

The particulars of the case will be remembered. P.C. Gardner was instructed to watch the George The Third, and he went in disguise for the purpose. Seeing Lepper's daughter leave with what appeared to be a jug concealed under her apron he accosted her and asked what she had got, and demanding her name. She dropped the jug, which was smashed, and said it contained vinegar which she was taking over to a Miss Hart, who lived opposite. The following evidence was called in addition to that already given.

Elizabeth Hart, a single woman, living opposite to the Leppers, said: Miss Lepper came for a dress I was altering. I requested Miss Lepper to bring across a pint of vinegar. That not being sufficient, I asked her to bring me another pint. She went to get it, but I did not receive it, because the jug containing the second pint was broken on the door step. I saw a man who looked like a costermonger pull Miss Lepper back, and the jug fell.

In cross-examination the witness said she was indoors, and saw all that took place. She did not hear what was said, but she saw the policeman talking to Miss Lepper, nor did she remember saying anything to the second policeman afterwards.

This was the case against the policeman.

P.C. Gardner said by direction of the Superintendent he went on Sunday, October 1st, to Fenchurch Street. It was about nine o'clock. He stationed himself by the Zion Chapel to watch the George The Third. He saw a woman go into the house with something under her apron. He saw her come out. She was then carrying a jug which appeared to be full. About 20 minutes later he saw a woman go in with a waterproof on. She carried something under her waterproof, but he could not say what it was. He drew closer to the house, and the saw a young woman come out and look up and down the street. She had something under her apron. He afterwards found it was Miss Lepper. He stood in front of her, told her he was a police officer, and asked her what she had under her apron. She said “Beer”. He asked her what she paid for it. She said “4d”. He asked her name. She tried to force past him, and he put his hand on her shoulder. The jug was either thrown down or dropped and broken. Some of the contents was spilt onto the front of his trousers. He put his fingers into the liquid on the pavement and tasted it. It was “malt liquor”. It was not vinegar. When he got across the road Mrs. Lepper and her son were standing at the door. He told them who he was and asked to go into the house. The son raised his fist to strike him. He did not refuse to let him go into the house. Mrs. Lepper said she did not care whether he was a policeman, or who he was, and gave him two or three slaps in the face, knocking his hat off. He went up the steps again and was pushed back, both by the son and the mother. He then went for P.C. Pay. On their return he pointed out the broken jug and asked Pay what it smelt of. He said it smelt very strong of beer. Miss Hart went out with a can and said “Here is the pint of vinegar Miss Lepper brought over”. Pay said she was very clever to gather it up after she had spilt it.

In cross-examination, witness said he said to young Lepper “Don't hit me. I am a police officer”. Did not hear Miss Lepper say to her mother “Here, Mother, a tramp has got hold of me”.

P.C. Pay said he went with Gardner at his request to Fenchurch Street. He smelt Gardner's trousers, and was sure they had had beer spilt on them, and the pavement smelt strongly of beer.

Mr. Mowll addressed the Bench on behalf of his clients, urging that if the Bench convicted Lepper, they would be relying more upon the sense of taste of one policeman, and the sense of smell of another, than upon the sworn testimony of four persons, one of whom, Miss Hart, had not the slightest interest in the case. It was not to be supposed that Lepper, his wife, and son and daughter had committed wilful perjury.

The Bench, after hearing Mr. Minter's arguments on behalf of the police, rose to retire and consider their decision. Before they left the Court, Mr. Mowll said he was willing to withdraw the summons charging Gardner with assaulting Miss Lepper.

On the return of the Magistrates, the Mayor announced that they had unanimously decided to convict Lepper of having his house open for the sale of liquor during prohibited hours, and to inflict a fine of 50s. and 16s. costs, or one month's imprisonment. They had also decided to convict Mrs. Lepper for the assault on Gardner, and she would be fined 10s. and 8s. costs, or 14 days' imprisonment. In the case of John Lepper, in consideration of his having held his hand when he was told that the man he was about to strike was a policeman, the summons would be dismissed.

Mr. Lepper gave notice of his intention to appeal against the decision.

Folkestone Express 14 July 1883.

Saturday, July 7th: Before Colonel de Crespigny, Alderman Caister, J. Fitness, J. Holden and W.J. Jeffreason Esqs.

Margaret Harrington was charged with being drunk and disorderly in Fenchurch Street, and also with breaking two panes of glass, value 15s. 6d., at the George III, on Friday, July 6th.

Mrs. Lepper, wife of the landlord of the George III public house, Fenchurch Street, said the prisoner went to the house on the previous evening a little before five o'clock. She went to the private bar and knocked, and asked if witness was Mrs. Lepper. She then said something about her daughter-in-law and slapped her face. She then shut the window. Prisoner then went across to the Bricklayers' Arms and fetched some beer. Another woman who was with prisoner took the glass from her, and as she was going into the house again she shut the door to keep her out and prisoner then smashed the windows. She was very drunk.

Henry Lepper, a son of the last witness, corroborated.

P.C. Knowles said that on the previous afternoon he saw the prisoner outside the George III. She was very drunk and shouting and made a great noise. He advised her to go away, but she swore at him. He then locked her up, having a “terrific job” to get her to the station. It was necessary to put her on a stretcher and strap her down.

The Bench fined the prisoner 5s. for being drunk and disorderly, and 4s. 6d. costs, and 15s. 6d. damage to windows, and 5s. fine and 5s. 6d. costs, or in default 14 days' hard labour.

Folkestone Express 30 January 1886.

Saturday, January 23rd: Before The Mayor, F. Boykett, W.J. Jeffreason and H.W. Poole Esqs.

The licence of the George III, Fenchurch Street, was transferred from Godfrey Lepper to Edward Harris.

Folkestone Express 22 May 1886.

County Court.

Tuesday, May 18th: Before Judge Selfe.

Godfrey Lepper v Robert Baxter: Claim £25 17s. 2d for beer returned, work done, &c. Mr. Bannon, of Romney, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Wightwick for the defendants.

Mr. Bannon said the claim arose out of some long dealings of the parties. There was an agreement made between the plaintiff and Mr. Colman, who was agent for the defendant, brewer of Sandwich, for the sale of beer at the following prices: Stout 46s. per barrel, Porter 28s. 6d., Beer 28s. 6d., Ale 48s., and another kind of Ale, 44s. Beer and Porter were to be supplied nett, and on the other beer there was to be five percent discount, and certain allowances for returns. From June 1882 up to some tome in 1885, plaintiff continued to deal with the defendant, and certain cash payments were made, and entered in a book Mr. Lepper kept for the purpose.

His Honour, interposing, said the only dispute seemed to be as to the allowances and discounts. The building account was agreed.

Mr. Wightwick said that was so.

Mr. Bannon, continuing, said the chief item in dispute was discount. In 1883 plaintiff commenced to carry out certain works for the defendants, and from that time to June or July 1885 he continued to carry out works at various houses belonging to the defendant, the total amount being £292 15s. 3d. Off that sum they made certain allowances which brought the amount down to £254 0s. 8d. In the books of defendant he had only allowed for returns his client had made as waste, and they contended they were entitled to an allowance for unsaleable liquor, for which they were to be allowed the same price as they were charged. From May up to the date of the last allowance they had purchased beer to the amount of £449 10s. 8d.

Plaintiff was called and gave evidence as to the various transactions between himself and the defendant's traveller.

The various items in the account were carefully examined by His Honour.

Plaintiff said all the casks he returned were labelled with what they contained. He never returned any waste, but it was always unsaleable liquor. His examination occupied nearly two hours.

Benjamin Colman said he made the arrangement with plaintiff, and it was the same as that usually made with customers of Mr. Baxter.

Mr. Wightwick contended that the plaintiff was not entitled to discount because he had not paid his account monthly. He called William Hopkins, a carrier, who proved the delivery of the various goods.

His Honour remarked that the evidence of Hopkins did not agree either with that of the plaintiff or the defendant, and later on he said his books were of no value whatever.

In reply to Mr. Bannon, Hopkins said none of the entries in his book were made in his handwriting. They were made by a man in his employ.

Mr. Baxter was called, and said he had applied to plaintiff frequently for payment of his account. He allowed discount where the payments were prompt only. There was still £8 6s. 5d. due to him after making all allowances.

In reply to Mr. Bannon, defendant said he drew a bill on Mr. Lepper for £25 8s. 10d., but it was dishonoured. It was subsequently met by work which plaintiff did. He did work for him to the amount of £292 15s. 3d., and extras £65 odd. He saw by the book that discount was being allowed plaintiff, and told Colman not to allow discount when the account got large, in May 1883.

James Slaughter, clerk to defendant, said he tested every cask returned. He could not define what waste was. What plaintiff returned was waste – it was not drinkable. In many cases it was what publicans washed their glasses in. (Laughter) They only allowed discount on monthly accounts.

In reply to Mr. Bannon he said in many cases waste was thrown down the drains.

Mr. Colman was re-called and said he received money from Lepper up to October last. He did not allow discount after 1883 because the account was never settled. Discount was supposed to be given on monthly payments. He could not remember saying anything to plaintiff about discount.

In answer to Bannon he said he had allowed discount where there were running accounts.

Plaintiff was re-called and said discount was never mentioned after the first agreement.

Mr. Bannon contended that the work done by the plaintiff for the defendant, for which it was shown there were only two cash payments, was virtually a payment of the plaintiff's account, and thereupon he was entitled to discount.

His Honour pointed out that the work was principally done in 1885. In giving judgement, he held that the allowance of discount was only a condition of payment within a reasonable time, and in that case it was shown that there were considerable arrears in respect of beer in 1884, and Mr. Baxter's contention was the work was done in 1885 in order to outset the account. He should therefore disallow the claim for discount. After reviewing the whole evidence, the allowances, and counter claims, he gave judgement for 18s. 8d., and expressed an opinion that the case ought not to have been brought. He only allowed the expenses of Colman, who was subpoenaed.

Afterwards, on the application of Mr. Bannon, judgement was entered for the plaintiff for £9 5s. 1d., and for the defendant on his counter claim for £8 6s. 5d.

Folkestone Express 18 August 1888.

Advertisement.

To Let, George III, Folkestone, a fully licensed house in populous district; free for spirits, good brewers, incoming about £125. Apply to Messrs. Worsfold and Hayward, Auctioneers and Valuers, Market Square, Dover.

Folkestone Express 29 September 1888.

Advertisement.

By Order of the Trustees of the Will of Elizabeth Cattaneo, deceased.

Auction Sale of all that fully licensed freehold public house known by the sign of the George The Third, situate in Little Fenchurch Street, in a most populated district.

Banks and Son will sell by Auction at the Clarendon Hotel, Folkestone, on Wednesday, October 17th, 1888, at seven o'clock in the evening.

Lot 1: All that fully licensed freehold public house, known by the sign of the George The Third, situate in Little Fenchurch Street, Folkestone, brick built with tile roof, two yards, and W.C. in the rear.

Containing in Basement – Two cellars.

Ground Floor – Public and private bars, parlour, tap room, kitchen and scullery

First Floor – Large club room and two bedrooms

Second Floor – Four bedrooms

Let on a repairing lease to Mr. A. Leney for a term of 14 years, from the 25th December, 1885, at the annual rent of £30, payable quarterly.

Particulars and conditions of sale may be had seven days before the day of the sale of the Auctioneers, 78, Sandgate Road, and of H.B. Bradley, Solicitor, 52, Sandgate Road, Folkestone.

Folkestone Express 20 October 1888.

Local News.

Messrs. Banks and Son sold by auction at the Clarendon Hotel, Folkestone, on Wednesday last the George The Third Inn, Fenchurch Street, for £500.

Folkestone Express 15 December 1888.

Monday, December 10th: Before Surgeon General Gilbourne, Alderman Banks, J. Brooke, and F. Boykett Esqs.

Frederick Webb, described as a plumber, and giving as his address Sussex Gardens, Devonport, was charged with stealing a coat, a walking stick, a pipe, and other articles, the property of George E. Peat.

George Edward Peat, a grocer, in business at 11, Dover Street, said he went to the George The Third public house about a quarter to nine on Sunday night. He went into the bar parlour. He hung his coat and stick behind the bar parlour door. Shortly after, he had occasion to leave the parlour, and returned about ten minutes to ten, and missed his coat and stick. When he left there were six persons in the room, and prisoner was one of them. When he returned the room was empty. In consequence of information received he went that morning to Shorncliffe Station, and saw prisoner on the platform. He had with him a black bag, a basket, a bundle tied in a white handkerchief, and an umbrella. P.C. Bailey spoke to prisoner, and he showed him the contents of the handkerchief. Bailey asked prisoner to go with him to the police station, and they all three returned together. The bag was unlocked, and inside was the coat produced, which he identified as his property. There were a pipe and other articles in the pockets. The value of the articles was about 50s.

P,C, Bailey said he went with prosecutor to Shorncliffe Station, and there saw the prisoner on the up platform. He asked prisoner if he would mind him looking into his parcel. He made no reply, but handed him the handkerchief and the basket. He examined the contents, and prisoner asked him if he was satisfied. He replied “Yes”, but he should like to look into the black bag. Prisoner refused to allow him to do so, but said he would go to the police station. He charged prisoner with stealing the property, and he said “All right. I'll go to the station with you”. On the way to the station prisoner threw the bag on to the road and said “Now look at it yourself”. Witness replied “I have no keys”. Prisoner said “Nor have I”, but afterwards handed over the keys produced. At the police station the bag was opened and the coat produced was found in it. There was a pipe and a tobacco pouch in the pockets. Prisoner was charged by Sergeant Pay, and said “All right”.

Prisoner at first pleaded Guilty to stealing the coat, but said he was Guilty of having it in his possession. He subsequently withdrew his plea, and said he went with others to the public house and stayed an hour. The bar was full of people. They gradually went away until only four were left. He went out, followed by his brother-in-law, and his wife was inside. His wife called out “Fred, someone has left their stick and coat in here”. He did not go inside. His brother-in-law said “We might as well have them as leave them here. Someone else will have them if we don't”. His wife came out with the coat, and his brother-in-law with the stick. They waited outside ten minutes or a quarter of an hour, and nobody came. They then went up Dover Street. His wife took the coat indoors and his brother-in-law went home. He and his wife went down the street again, and outside the public house they saw a policeman and three or four young men. His wife said “Good God. It's about that coat. I'll go back and fetch it”. She did not know what to do, but said “If I go and fetch it, they'll have me locked up, perhaps, for stealing it”. She was frightened, and said “We're going to Ashford tomorrow. We'll take it with us and send it back by rail to the landlord of the public house”. At six o'clock she started with the walking stick to send back with the bag, saying she would be back in time to catch the first train. He had his breakfast and started for Shorncliffe. He went there because he did not want to wait an hour at the Junction. He did not see his wife, who must have gone on by the train.

Mr. Bradley told the prisoner he did quite right in pleading Guilty, because assuming his statement to be true, he was an accessory both before and after, and therefore Guilty of stealing.

Prisoner was sentenced to a month's hard labour.

Folkestone Express 3 May 1890.

Local News.

The landlord of the George The Third Inn, Fenchurch Street, died suddenly on Tuesday.

Folkestone Express 23 April 1892.

Local News.

At the Folkestone Police Court on Thursday, John Godfrey Lepper, a carpenter, and who for some time past has been the leader of a small street band, was charged with assaulting his daughter, Florence Agnes Gertrude, aged 16 years. Evidence was given by the girl, Dr. Yunge Bateman, and Eliza Jane Hayward, the wife of a groom, residing at Horn Street, and the prisoner was then remanded until Wednesday, when he was again brought up. Mr. Haines, who appeared for Mr. Minter, said that gentleman was unable to be present, but enquiries were being made which would be completed by the next day, and he asked for a further remand, which was granted. On Thursday eveidence was produced to show that the prisoner had ill-treated his daughter, Florence, at various times and places since she was a child six years of age, and a most revolting state of things was disclosed. At the close of the case in respect of the girl Florence, the prisoner was further charged with misconduct with another daughter, a little girl named Annie Elizabeth, aged 13, who looked younger. The particulars were altogether too bad to be published. The prisoner was, after a very long investigation, committed for trial at the Assizes on both charges, Mr. H.W. Watts, who appeared for him, reserving his defence.

Folkestone Express 9 July 1892.

Local News.

At the Assizes on Wednesday, John Godfrey Lepper was indicted for criminally assaulting his two daughters. It will be remembered that the case was of a most revolting character, but it appears that, had not the prisoner been committed on the charge of assaulting his younger child, who is of very tender years, he would have escaped punishment. The Judge ruled that the charge in respect of the elder girl could not be sustained, as she appeared to consent; the jury convicted the prisoner of the assault on the younger child, and the prisoner was sentenced to two years' hard labour.

Folkestone Express 11 July 1903.

Wednesday, July 8th: Before Lieut. Col. Fynmore, W. Wightwick, W.G. Herbert, and J. Stainer Esqs., and Alderman Vaughan.

The licence of the George III Inn was transferred from Sarah Sanders to Henry Tomlin Cork.

Note: Date is at variance with More Bastions.

Folkestone Express 7 December 1907.

Wednesday, December 4th: Before E.T. Ward Esq., Lieut. Col. Fynmore, W.C. Carpenter, W.G. Herbert, R.J. Linton, and G. Boyd Esqs.

Mr. Watts made an application for the transfer of the licence of the George the Third from the late Mr. Cork to his widow. Mr. Cork's son would, he said, assist in the management of the house.

The Chief Constable said he should like to ask whether, having regard to their experience, it was advisable to transfer the licence to a female? He had nothing to say against Mrs. Cork.

The Chairman said in the instance referred to the woman was married. The application was granted.

Note: This transfer is not listed in More Bastions.

Folkestone Express 8 August 1914.

Monday, August 3rd: Before The Mayor, J. Stainer, G.I. Swoffer, E.T. Morrison, W.J. Harrison, A. Stace, and C.E. Mumford Esqs.

Francis John Maidment was charged with stealing six woollen mats in Wear Bay Road on Saturday.

Eleanor Hogben, a charwoman, of 10, East Street, said she was employed on Saturday at 11, Wear Bay Road, by Miss Louisa Remnant. She placed the mats in the back yard of the house about half past eleven. Later she went into the yard and the mats had gone. She saw Mrs. Cozzi, of Beach Street, who handed her the mat produced. The mats were valued at 34/6 and were Miss Remnant's property.

Teresa Cozzi, wife of Antonio Cozzi, of 9, Beach Street, said on Saturday about one o'clock she met the prisoner in Radnor Street. He was carrying the mat (produced) in his hand, and also a bulky bag on his back. He said “Would you like to buy this mat for sixpence?” She replied “No, I don't want it. It is no use to me”. He put the mat on the ground and said “Give me twopence, please”. She gave him the twopence, and the prisoner left the mat on the pavement and walked away. She picked it up and took it home.

The Clerk: It is rather a cheap way of getting a mat.

Witness: I did not want it, bit it would be silly to leave it on the ground for other people to take it. Proceeding, she said Mrs. Hogben came to her later, and from what she said she had at once handed the mat over to her. She had never seen the prisoner before.

Henry William Cork said he resided with his mother, who kept the George the Third, and assisted her in the work. The prisoner came into the public bar on Saturday afternoon shortly after two with the five woollen mats (produced). Prisoner said “Would you care to buy a few mats, guv'nor?” Witness was serving a customer at the time, and the prisoner repeated the question two or three times. Maidment was a stranger to him. After worrying him several times he (witness) asked him what the price was, and he placed two of them aside and said “One shilling”. He replied “I don't know that I want them”, and he placed a third mat with the other two, and said he could have the three for 1/4. He bought them for that money, and eventually took them out in the back yard and hung them on the line. When he returned into the bar the prisoner was still there. He served several customers, and the two remaining mats were on the counter. Prisoner said “Well, you may as well buy the other two”. He asked him what he would take for them, and he replied “Ninepence”, which he paid for the two mats. He placed them on the line in the back yard. He looked at the mats before he purchased them.

The Clerk: You did not pay too much for them?

Witness: The usual price for such mats from caravans is sixpence or eightpence. They were not very good mats. Continuing, he said the prisoner remained and had a drink, and a few minutes later Det. Sergeant Johnson came in. From what the officer said to him he handed the five mats to him, and Johnson then arrested the prisoner.

Det. Sergt. Johnson said on Saturday, from information received, he went to the George the Third, in Fenchurch Street, where he saw the last witness in the bar, and from what he said to him he handed him the five woollen mats produced. He then went to the prisoner, who was sitting in the public bar, and showed him the five woollen mats. He cautioned him, and told him he would be charged with stealing them from No. 11, Wear Bay Road, the property of Miss Remnant. He replied “I did”. He brought the prisoner to the police station, and the six mats were later identified by Mrs. Hogben, and subsequently by Miss Remnant. Prisoner had a sack and two fish bags in his possession.

The Chief Constable (Mr. Reeve) said if the Magistrates were satisfied that a prima facie case had been made out against the prisoner, he asked them to commit the prisoner for trial at the Quarter Sessions.

Prisoner, who had nothing to say, was then committed to take his trial at the next Quarter Sessions.

The Mayor said the Magistrates wished to express their regret at the readiness with which people in the town bought things which they must know must be considerably under their value. The five mats, which were at least valued at 25/-, were bought for 2/1. If there were not so many ready receivers in the town there would not be so many thieves.

Folkestone Express 3 October 1914.

Quarter Sessions.

Monday, September 28th: Before J.C. Lewis Coward Esq.

Francis John Maidment, aged 68, a tailor, pleaded Guilty to stealing six doormats valued at £1 14s. 6d., the property of Miss Remnant, on August 1st.

Mr. L.S. Fletcher prosecuted. In detailing the case, he said it was an extremely simple one, but there was one very remarkable circumstance about it, and that was the way in which the prisoner succeeded in disposing of those doormats. He seemed to have disposed of one to Mrs. Cozzi, who had never seen him before, for twopence. He then took the five remaining mats to a public house, where the son of the licensee, who had never seen him before, gave him 1/4 for three,, and then bought the remaining two for ninepence.

The Chief Constable (Mr. Reeve) said there were several convictions for felony against the prisoner dating back to 1888, when on October 20th he had three months at Dorking for stealing. On October 5th, 1891, 21 days' hard labour for stealing; 3rd March, 1892, 18 months at Surrey Sessions for housebreaking; 7th August, 1894, one month at Lambeth; 30th March, 1895, ten days for stealing; in 1897, 14 days for stealing; 17th May, 1902, two months for stealing at Taunton; 8th April, 1904, three years' penal servitude at West Kent Sessions; on 29th November, 1906, three months at Aldershot for failing to report himself; on July 13th, 1912, at those Sessions, twelve months' hard labour for stealing a window blind.

The Recorder asked why the prisoner was not prosecuted as an habitual criminal.

Mr. Fletcher said that was not for him to say, but there had hitherto been a considerable difficulty in getting the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions in such cases.

The Chief Constable, in reply to the Recorder, said the man was liberated from prison in May, 1913. Maidment was a man who tramped the country, and stayed in lodging houses.

Mrs. Teresa Cozzi, wife of an ice cream vendor, was called, and in reply to the Recorder she said she did not but the mat. She gave him twopence, and the prisoner left the mat on the floor. She gave him the money out of charity, and when the prisoner went she picked the mat up. She had it in her hands a quarter of an hour down Radnor Street, and then took it home.

The Recorder: Do you often buy things like that?

Witness: No.

The Recorder: You ought to be standing there where he (prisoner) is. It passes my comprehension why charges should not be made against you. If I had the power I would order a bill of indictment to go before the jury. I disallow your expenses. Get out of the Court and out of the way.

Henry William Cork was also called. He said he did not know the prisoner. He had never bought mats in that sort of way from a stranger before. He reason why he did so that time was a fortnight before they had put some new lino on the side of the bar, and it was slippery. The prisoner came into the bar, and he took the mats to be the usual type of mat sold by individuals who came round their neighbourhood.

The Recorder: You gave him at the rate of 5d. a mat for them. What did you do with them?

Witness: I carried them in the back yard and hung them on the line.

The Recorder: A good place for them.

Witness: Yes, because they smelt obnoxious.

The Recorder: I think your conduct is disgraceful. I think you ought to be standing there, too, with that man. Anyone could have seen the mats were worth more. If there were no receivers there would be no thieves. I am surprised to think that a man, the son of a licensee of a public house, should go and do such a thing as this. Stand down. I disallow all your expenses. Get out of Court.

Prisoner said he stole the mats through starvation. He sold the mat to Mrs. Cozzi to get twopennyworth of bread and cheese.

The Recorder said he was going to give the prisoner another chance. He gave it to him to mark his sense of the way in which he found so ready a market to dispose of the mats. He would have to go to prison for six months.

Folkestone Express 24 May 1919.

Thursday, May 22nd: Before Mr. E.T. Ward, Alderman G. Spurgen, Lieut. Col. Fynmore, the Rev. Epworth Thompson, Mr. E. Condy, and Mr. W. Griffin.

Mary Ann Williams was charged with being drunk and disorderly the previous evening.

P.C. Whitehead said he saw the prisoner about eight o'clock at the bottom of Seagate Street. She was drunk and causing a crowd to assemble owing to her conduct. He advised her to go away and she went up Fenchurch Street, and into the George the Third public house. She was, however, ejected by the landlady's son, and then attempted to smash the windows with two umbrellas she was carrying. He, therefore, took her into custody, and another constable and himself had a difficult job to get her to the police station.

Prisoner said she had only two small sunshades and could not break any windows with them.

P.C. Kettle said when the prisoner was brought into the police station she was very drunk and used very obscene language.

Williams said she was very sorry. Her husband was so bad to her that she got some drink. She was nearly blind, and if they would give her another chance she would not drink any more.

Mr. Reeve, the Chief Constable, said the prisoner was a perfect nuisance. She had been there no less than 20 times previously, 18 being for drunkenness. In June last she was sent to prison for a month.

The Chairman said the prisoner's record was a bad one. They were going to deal leniently with her, and she would be fined 10s., or 14 days' hard labour. A week would be allowed for payment.

Folkestone Express 16 August 1919.

Wednesday, August 13th: Before Mr. E.T. Ward, Col. Owen, Councillor Stace, Rev. Epworth Thompson, and Mr. Swoffer.

The following transfer of licence was granted: the George Third public house, from Mrs. Cork to Mr. Henry William Cork.

Note: No record of Mrs. Cork or Henry William Cork at George III in More Bastions.

Folkestone Express 12 May 1923.

Local News.

All the matches in the Folkestone Dart League have been completed, and the George the Third team have won the splendid cup with 16 points. The league has aroused much enthusiasm, and there has been keen competition amongst the various teams. The date and place of the presentation of the cup, and the final placing will be given next week. Mr. H. Cork has carried out the duties of Secretary in an admirable manner.

Folkestone Express 6 October 1923.

Local News.

A meeting of the Folkestone dart League was held at the George III, Little Fenchurch Street, on Monday afternoon, those present being the Chairman, Mr. Roy Smiles (White Lion), the Secretary, Mr. Cork (George III), Mrs. Summerfield (Royal Standard), Mr. Aird (Valiant Sailor), Mr. Mason (Shakespeare), Mr. MacEvett (West Cliff Shades), Mr. Gregory (West Cliff Shades), Mr. Cook (Gun Tavern), Mr. Bean (Railway Bell), Mr. Butler (Globe), Mr. Baldock (Royal Oak), and Mr. Purberry (British Lion).

The Chairman said one of the first points of the success of the League was that it brought men closer together, and consequently there was closer friendship. The smoking concert was very successful. It was up to them to do something for the customers. The darts teams would bring the customers together during the winter months, and he (the Chairman) hoped they would be able to hold a dinner this year. He would like to put to those present a resolution in favour of running a Darts League that year. The Dart League Cup was given to the League unconditionally by Sir Philip Sassoon.

Mr. Cook moved that a Darts League should be arranged for the autumn and winter. This was seconded by Mr. Cork and carried unanimously.

Mr. Cork was requested to carry on the duties of Secretary for another year. He said he would like to resign the position, as he had a lot of other duties to perform. Eventually he gave way and said he would endeavour to do his best.

Mr. Cook proposed Mr. Roy Smiles as the Chairman for the ensuing year, and this was carried unanimously. Mr. Roy Smiles then suggested Mr. Cook, Mrs. Summerfield and Mr. Mason as the Committee, and this was carried.

Mr. Roy Smiles said they were going to try to get a shield from the brewers. If a letter was written to them, undoubtedly they (the brewers) would support them.

Mr. Cook suggested having medals for the winners ad runners-up, limited to fourteen, and said they could also be had from the brewers. The Secretary could be instructed to write to the brewers. He moved that be done. This was seconded by Mr. Butler, and carried.

It was agreed that the competing area would be the same as last year, namely from the Valiant Sailor to the White Lion. The rules were gone through, and one or two alterations made.

On the motion of the Chairman, a vote of thanks was passed to the Press for the help accorded to the League.

Folkestone Express 20 July 1929.

Local News.

On Wednesday at the Folkestone Police Court several applications were made for music and dancing licences. The magistrates on the Bench wore Col. G.P. Owen, Mr. J.T. Blamey, Dr. W.W. Nuttall, Miss A.M. Hunt, Alderman T.S. Franks, Mr. F Seager, and Mr. W. Smith.

Mr. Cork, of the George the Third, Fenchurch Street, and Mr Fortune, of the Alexandra Hotel, both applied for a music licence in respect of their premises. They said they intended to have portable wireless receiving sets and they desired to use them at times during the hours of opening.

The Chairman said the licences would be granted.

Folkestone Express 11 January 1930.

Local News.

The Magistrates granted protection orders to Mr. William Henry Albert Best, of Canterbury, who was taking over the George the Third, in Great Fenchurch Street, and to Mr. Henry William Cork, who leaves the latter house to go to the Red Cow, Foord Road.

Folkestone Express 16 July 1932.

Local News.

The Folkestone Magistrates on Wednesday granted the transfer of the licence of the George the Third, in Little Fenchurch Street, from Mr. William Best to Mr. George Charles Prior, the son of the proprietor of the Ship Inn, Radnor Street. The new licensee has assisted his father for some years at the Ship.