From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 11 September, 1868.

THE ANNUAL LICENSING DAY

THE GRAND SULTAN, SNARGATE STREET

William Henry Stiles applied for a license to this house, which, Mr. Coram said, had all the necessary requirements, whilst the good character of the applicant was beyond all question.

Mr. Fox, while stating that there could be no personal objection to the applicant, who was known to be a most respectable man, opposed on the ground of the number of licensed houses within sixty yards of the "Grand Sultan," but the license was granted.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 7 July, 1873.

ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT OF THE LICENSING ACT

William Henry Styles, the landlord of the “Grand Sultan Inn,” Snargate Street, was charged with having sold intoxicating liquors after the hours prescribed under the new Licensing Act.

Police-sergeant Johnson deposed: On Saturday morning, the 5th of July, at about one o’clock, my attention was called by police-constable Bath to the defendant, who, with another man was carrying some cans of beer along the quay. I followed them, and I saw them serving out the beer to some men near the racquet court, and I saw one of the men pay Stiles some money. When asked, Stiles said the money was for some biscuits and cheese.

Stiles said the beer was ordered early in the evening and was taken out of the “Grand Sultan” before half-past eleven.

Mr. Thomas Sutton said he ordered the beer, for a gang of men who were working under his superintendence, early in the evening. The beer was brought out before half-past eleven.

The Bench dismissed the case.

From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 24 May, 1872. Price 1d.

ONE PINT AND ITS EFFECTS

George Jackson, a labourer, was charged with being drunk and causing an obstruction of the footway in St, James's Street.

It appeared from the constable's statement that the defendant was drunk at the bottom of St. James's Street at half-past one the same morning .The defendant was so drunk that he had to get assistance to convey him to the police-station.

The defendant said he had only had one pint of beet at the "Grand Sultan."

Major Crookes, thought inclined to disbelieve the prisoner's statement, dismissed him on his payment of the costs of the hearing.

From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 16 January, 1885.

ROOK v. FAGGETER – TEA VERSUS BEER

This is a judgement summons, the plaintiff a tea dealer, and the defendant the keeper of the “Grand Sultan,” public-house, Snargate Street.

In reply to the Judge, the defendant said: I keep the “Grand Sultan Inn,” Snargate Street, for Mr. Flint, brewer of Canterbury. I am put in there to make all I can. I do not pay rent for the place. I sell what I can at a certain price. I pay Mr. Flint 34s. per barrel for the beer. I make what I can upon that. I am put in to see if anything can be done with the house. The license is in my name, but Mr. Flint holds it. I have been in the house for a little over twelve months. This debt is for tea supplied to sell again. They pressed me to take the agency, but there was no trade for it. It is very hard for me to pay anything as I can hardly pay my expenses.

The Judge: How is it you do not have to pay rent?

Defendant: I pay it by paying a long price for the beer.

The Judge: Who is the freeholder of the house?

Defendant: Mr. Flint, and he supplies the beer.

The Judge: You pay for the beer of course. What else do you pay?

Defendant: I pay 8s. a week for the things in the house and furniture.

The Judge: What are your average takings?

Defendant: The most we take is from 10s. to 12s. per day.

The Judge: You take that, do you, even in this cheerful season. I think you must pay 10s. a month off this debt.

The plaintiff asked for expenses for coming from London, but they were not allowed.