Sort file:- Dover, March, 2021.

Page Updated:- Wednesday, 31 March, 2021.

PUB LIST PUBLIC HOUSES Barry Smith and Paul Skelton

Earliest 1851-

Military Arms

Latest 1870

Snargate Street



Earliest mention of this public house I have found at present is from a list of public houses of 1851 documented at the Dover museum.

The Pout's officiated in 1854. The renewal was refused in 1869 but an appeal proved successful. It was refused again the following year however and it never showed again under this title.


From the Dover Chronicle, Saturday November, 1863.


Richard Burch the landlord of the "Miltary Arms," Snargate Street, was charged on the information of Police-sergeant Barton with having knowingly and unlawfully suffered common prostitutes to assemble, and continue in his house. The defendant's wife attended to answer the charge; but the Bench said Burch himself must be present, and the case was adjourned till Monday, for his appearance.


Dover Express, Saturday 12 March 1864.

The Robbery at the Military Arms.

Patrick Morgan, a young fellow who had the appearance of a soldier, was charged with stealing a half of a bullock's head and a jug from the "Military Arms" public house, Snargate Street, on the 29th February.

The case arose out of the charge before the Bench last week.

Richard Birch, landlord of the "Military Arms" deposed that about 1 o'clock in the morning of the 29th of February he was in his back room, and, in consequence of hearing a noise in the cellar, he went below, and their saw the prisoner and Morgan with the soldier Binn, who was committed to prison the previous week for entering the cellar.

Other evidence of a collaborative nature having been given, the Bench considered the case proved, and sentenced the prisoner to 14 days' hard labour.

Suspected Robber at Walmer.

Thomas Finch, Joseph Burrows, and Patrick Morgan, (the man convicted in the last case,) was brought up and charged on suspicion of stealing two coats and several other articles, the property of Mr. Humphries, at Walmer.

Remanded until next Monday.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 19 June, 1868.


Rosa Huntington, an unfortunate, was charged with drunkenness and disorderly conduct and with assaulting Mr. Higgins, the landlord of the "Military Arms" public-house.

Mr. Higgins, on presenting himself  before the bench, said he was quite willing to withdrawer the charge, if defendant would promise to keep away from his house and abstain from annoying him in future.

Rosa willingly gave the required promise. She said she belonged to London, whither she was desirous of proceedings as soon as possible. If, therefore, the Magistrates  would discharge her, she would quit the town forthwith.

The providing magistrate said that upon this understanding she would be set at liberty.


From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 16 March, 1861.


William Simmonds, a young man of fashionable though dirty exterior, who described himself as of no trade or profession, was charged with having assaulted the complainant, Mrs. Burch, landlady of the "Military Arms" public house, on the previous night. It appeared that the defendant, with another man, a suspected card-sharper, entered the "Military Arms" on the previous evening shortly before midnight and ordered some beer, which the landlady drew. After discovering that the rooms of the public house were emptied of customers, defendant and his friend endeavoured to leave the house without drinking or paying for the beer they had ordered; but the landlady although having no objection to their leaving their drinks insisted on their paying for for it, as it was then too late to expect that any fresh guests would make their appearance to require it. This request was not complied with, and a scrummage ensued, and will be seen by the appended evidence.

Charlotte Burch, wife of Richard Burch, examined:- About half-past seven o'clock last night the defendant came to my house with another man. They wanted some beer, and I drew them a pint. The other man went into one of the rooms, but returned again almost directly, saying "There's no one of any consequence there; we will go." They were then about leaving the house, when I asked who was going to pay for the beer? The defendant said he should not. I said, "You must have it now; no one else will, as it is nearly shutting up time." The men were going out of the door, but I put up my hand and the defendant's cap came off.

Dr. Astley:- What by accident?

Complainant:- No, I suppose I knocked it off in endeavouring to prevent him opening the door. The defendant thereupon caught hold of my hair net, at the same time pulling out a great handful of my hair; my apron also came off in the struggle; and the defendant, seeing hold of my hair net and apron, got out of the door. I followed him, and after asking him in vain to give up the apron and the net I gave him in charge of police-constable Faith.

By Defendant:- Your cap came off by accident. I had it in my hand - I picked it up and laid it on the counter.

Faith said he took the complainants hair net and apron from the defendant, and saw the defendant's cap lying on the bar of the complainant's house. He saw no blows struck, or anything of that sort. Witness saw a handful of hair, which Mrs. Burch said had been pulled out of her head. The defendant at first resisted violently, but he ultimately went to the station-house quietly. He seemed to have had plenty to drink, but knew what he was about.

Defendant denied that he had refused to pay for the beer, and submitted that the complainant was the aggravator in taking his cap; but as she had done so he took her hair net and apron in exchange, that was all.

Faith also stated that he ran after the defendant's compassion, suspecting that he had something about him he had no business with, and that in making his escape he threw away a pack of cards and some dice, which he (the officer) produced. A dice box was found on the defendant.

The defendant was fined 10s. and the costs 7s., and in default of payment was sent to the House of Correction, with hard labour, for seven days.


From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 21 December, 1861.


Matilda Croft, a dissipated looking woman about thirty years of age, was placed at the bar by police-constable Maxted, who charged her with obstructing the foot-pavement in Snargate Street in a state of drunkenness, on the previous Saturday night.

The constable said he was called to go to the "Military Arms" public-house, Snargate Street, on Saturday night, and on getting there he found the defendant creating a great disturbance inside the house. The landlord desired him to assist in putting her out, and he did so. After he had got her into the street who would not go away, and he therefore took her into custody.

Mr. Jennings: Did she cause an obstruction of the pavement?

Witness: Yes, Sir, a hundred and fifty people were collected.

Mr. Jennings: You cautioned her as to the consequence of remaining?

Witness: Yes, and she would not go. She also caught hold of police-constable Conner, who was with me, round the neck. (Laughter.)

Superintendent Corran said he rather thought the disturbance in the house was the cause of the people assembling outside. In reply to other questions from the Magistrates he said he knew nothing of the prisoner, except that she had been summoned on a previous occasion.

After a short conference with the other Justices, the Mayor said the Magistrates had taken a very merciful view of her offence, which might have been attended with a good deal of personal inconvenience or expense to her had they done otherwise. It appeared, however, that this was the first time she had had to answer such a charge as this, and if she would promise better behaviour in future -

Defendant: I shall not come here again, your worship.

The Mayor: No, I should hope not. Above all, don't get drunk again. (A laugh.)

Defendant was then discharged.


From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 28 March, 1863.


Patrick Molarty, a private in the 83rd regiment, was charged with wilfully breaking three panes of glass at the "Military Arms" public house; but although it was proved that the windows were broken shortly after the prisoner was seen near to them in the act of swinging his belt, there was no evidence that it was the prisoner who had broken them, and he was therefore discharged.


From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 5 March, 1864.


Thomas Binn and Thomas Hogarth, two soldiers of the 85th Regt., were charged with entering the premises of Mr. R. Burch at the "Military Arms," Snargate Street, and stealing there-from a bullock's head, a jug, and some firewood.

Richard Burch, landlord of the "Military Arms," Snargate Street, said that about one o'clock the previous morning he was eating his supper, with his wife, in a back room at his house. His wife went to the bar to fetch something, when she heard a noise in the cellar. He immediately went below, and saw there a soldier and a civilian. He told them to get out of his house, and they got out of the cellar window. Some time during the previous day he saw a bullock's head hanging in the cellar. When the soldiers were gone, he missed the bullock's head, a jug, and some firewood. The taps of the beer casks were turned on. The prisoner Binn was the soldier he saw in the cellar; and he had previously that evening seen Binn in the house. The shutters of the house were closed before eleven o'clock; but he could not say whether or not the cellar shutters were fastened. The value of the articles missing was 2s.

Charlotte Burch, wife of the last witness, stated that on Monday morning, about one o'clock, she was taking her supper, and went to the bar to fetch some beer; but she could not get any, as it was turned off at the pipes in the cellar. She heard a noise in the cellar, and, in consequence of what she said, her husband went down into the cellar. She fastened the house at a quarter to eleven, and barred the cellar shutters. There was a flap to the cellar window, to which there was no fastening; and it was very easy to lift up the flap and get in. The prisoner Binn was the last she let out of the house, and on leaving he enquired what time the house would be open in the morning, as he wanted to come in. Shortly after the men were turned out of the cellar, she missed the meat, jug, and wood.

Mr. Burch, on being recalled, stated, in reply to the Bench, that he found a shake produced upon a beer barrel in the cellar of the house.

Ann Briggs, servant at the "Military Arms," sad the prisoner Binn came in about eight o'clock on Monday morning, and remained in the house during the day. About twelve o'clock a civilian came in, and brought a bullock's head, which he asked her to "put in the pot." She did so, and the prisoner Binn and the whole company partook of soup made from it.

Thomas Woodhouse, a corporal of the 85th Regt. It was worn by Thomas Binn, of No.1 company, 85th Regt.

Police-constable Smith apprehended the prisoner at the "Red Lion," public-house, St. James's Street, on suspicion of having entered the "Military Arms."

Police-constable Campany said that about one o'clock on Monday morning he was on duty in Adrian Street, and saw the prisoner Binn going up Five Post Lane in company with a civilian, who appeared to be intoxicated. The prisoner Binn wore no cap or shake, and he saw him drop a jug, the fragments of which had since been identified by Mrs. Burch as the jug stolen from her cellar.

The Bench discharged Hogarth, as there was no evidence to implicate him in the robbery.

The prisoner Binn elected to be tried by the magistrates, but pleaded guilty, saying that on Sunday night he was in conversation with one of the girls at the "Military Arms," and as he was leaving she told him he might come back again to the house. When he returned the door was locked, and finding the cellar window was open, he got into the cellar, with a civilian, who said he wanted to get a pot of beer. The landlord of the house came and told them to get out. He knew nothing of the bullock's head.

Corporal Woodhouse, in reply to the Bench, said Binn bore an indifferent character, having just been released from prison after serving six months' hard labour for a military offence.

The Bench committed Binn to prison for one month, with hard labour.


From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 21 May, 1864.


Frederick Brown, a saddler, was charged with assaulting police-constable Perrott in the execution of his duty on the previous day. It appeared that there was a disturbance at the "Military Arms" public-house, caused by the wife of the defendant committing an assault on the landlady, Mrs. Burch, and on Perrott going to interfere, the defendant struck him.

The Bench fined defendant 5s. and costs 7s. which he paid.

Mary Ann Brown, wife of the defendant in the last case, for the assault on Mrs. Burch, was fined in the like amount, which was also paid.


From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 22 October, 1864.


William Adams, landlord of the "Military Arms," public-house, situate in Snargate Street, was charged with infringing his license, but there being mitigating circumstances in the case, and the house being generally well conducted, the Magistrates directed that the costs only should be paid.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 6 August, 1869.


Henry Alfred McQuillan, a man who had the appearance of a discharged soldier, and who, it appeared, was the landlord of the "Military Arms," a public-house in Snargate Street, was brought up in the custody of the police, charged with assaulting his wife and threatening to take her life, and with wilfully setting fire the bed-clothing of a room of the house, on the previous evening.

The case arose out of a great disturbance which had taken place at the "Military Arms" on the previous evening, and which necessitated the police being summoned. The defendant, it appeared, had assaulted the wife, whose cries caused a large crowd of people to assemble outside the house, and on the police getting to the spot it was found that the defendant had set on fire the clothing of a bed in which it was said one of his children was sleeping.

Margaret McQuillan, a middle-aged woman, whose face was somewhat disfigured with recent injuries, described herself as the wife of the prisoner, and said she was sitting at the bar on the previous evening, between eight and nine o'clock, when her husband came towards her, and without any provocation struck her in the face with his fist. He gave her two blows, and the mark on her cheek was caused by the injury he inflicted. He had been out all day, drinking, and when this occurred he was the worse for liquor. From the threats he had uttered the witness went in fear that he would do her some injury.

The defendant said his wife's statement was greatly exaggerated. he did not strike her with his fist, and it was not true that he did not receive provocation. The statement that he had been out all day drinking was also false. The facts were that he had been out for a week from about five o'clock until eight, and on his return his wife begun to abuse him in unmeasured terms. In his irritation he struck her across the face with his open hand, for which he was very sorry, but he narrowly escaped getting his head smashed in return, his wife throwing a pot and a glass at his head in succession. Her conduct in fact was as bad as his own. He hoped the Magistrates would take this view of the case and dismiss it. he was in the habit of receiving great provocation from his wife, but it was not true that he gave her provocation, for he challenge her to say whether his conduct was not generally kind both to herself and her children.

Superintendent Coram, in reply to the Magistrates, said there were frequent disturbances at the "Military Arms," owing to the disagreement of the complainant and defendant, and the street was sometimes blocked up by people attracted to the spot out of curiosity.

In reply to another question Mr. Coram said the charge of setting fire to the premises must be postponed, the agent of the office in which the property was insured being unavoidably absent.

The magistrates considered the charges of a very serious nature. They regarded the charge of assault as fully proved, and expressed their intention of sending the prisoner to gaol for one month, with hard labour, without the option of a fine, for that offence. The other charge would stand over.


From the Dover Express and East Kent Intelligencer, 16 September, 1870. Price 1d.



Application was made by Mr. Richard G. Beecham (supported by Mr. T. Lewis) for a licence to be granted to the “Military Arms,” Snargate Street; but the Magistrates declined to ascend to it on the ground that there were sufficient public houses in Snargate Street already.




POUT 1854

BURCH Richard 1860-64 Dover Express

ADAMS William 1864+

HIGGINS Mr 1868+ Dover Express

MACQUILLAN or McQUILLAN Henry Alfred 1869+ Dover Express

BEECHAM Richard G  Sept/19870 (Application refuced)


Dover ExpressFrom the Dover Express


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