Sort file:- Dover, September, 2021.

Page Updated:- Wednesday, 29 September, 2021.

PUB LIST PUBLIC HOUSES Barry Smith and Paul Skelton

Earliest Sept 1884

(Name from)

Nottingham Castle

Latest 1907

28 Adrian Street


Nottingham Castle

Above picture sent to me by Paul Wells.


Fully licensed and once known as the "Great Gun", the sign changing in 1884.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 19 August, 1904. Price 1d.


George Moor was charged with being drunk and disorderly in Adrian Street.

Police Constable Hughes said that on the previous night he was on duty in Bench Street. He was informed that there was a row in Adrian Street near the “Nottingham Castle” public house. He went there in company with Police Constable Greenland, and found a number of people, including the prisoner, who was drunk. He went to witness and made some rambling statement. Witness advised him to go away. He refused to do so as he said he lived in the neighbourhood. He then got the other people dispersed. The prisoner insisted on staying as long as he liked. His father came out and suggested him to go indoors. He still refused to go and defied witness to shift him. The witness gathered from the other people that the prisoner was the cause of the trouble. He was then taken into custody and brought to the Police-station.

The magistrates' Clerk: How was he disorderly?

Witness: He insisted on being noisy, causing a crowd to assemble, and followed me about.

The prisoner denied being drunk and following the Police Constable about.

The Magistrates' Clerk: this is the fourth time this year; you will be put on the Black List soon.

The Chairman: We are inclined to give you one more opportunity of seeing whether you will turn over a new leaf. But we cannot let the thing go; you will be fined 10s. You understand you have been up here four times this year. If you come here again, in all probability you will be put on the Black List.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 16 February, 1906. Price 1d.


The last objection was to the “Nottingham Castle” at the top of Adrian Street, the landlord of which was Mr. A Garson. The objections were that the license was not required and that was so situated as to make proper and efficient Police supervision very difficult.

Inspector Fox said that the licence was transferred to the present tenant on October 7th 1904. It was held from 1878 to 1903 by John Bailey, and there had since then been one other tenant besides the present one. The nearest licensed premises was the “Liberty Inn” 122 yards distant, and there were four other licenses in the vicinity. The house was so arranged as to be difficult for Police supervision, as the Police could be seen a long distance away.

Cross-examined by Mr. Mowll : One could walk round two sides of the house. He believed that three houses had been closed on the opposite side of the road.

Mr. Mowll said that on an old Ordnance plan dated 1861, which eh had there were three licensed houses shown which did not exist now.

Witness admitted that since Albony Place and other houses had been built and there were now three more houses in the locality and less licensed houses.

Mr. Mowll, addressing the Bench in regard to the houses in respect to which had appeared said that he thought the Bench would appreciate that to take away a license, even with compensation, was not conferring a benefit on the persons concerns. In regard to the “Three Compasses” the house the Inspector would like approached by balloon (Laughter) that was the only freehold property of Mr. Gardiner, who owned a small brewery at Herne Bay and he would ask the Bench to allow him to retain his one we land. (Laughter.) The “Devonshire Arms” stood out as an isolated case. Only two years ago they had gone into the question of the “Devonshire Arms” very fully, and found no ground to refuse the licence. The “Nottingham Castle” also stood on rather peculiar ground from the fact that there had only been three changes in 28 years, it was shown that the tenant had been able to make a good living, and he would have no difficulty in proving that the business was doing a very considerable trade. He could not follow the suggestion that the house was difficult for Police supervision. The house was situated in a locality from which licenses had been taken away, and where the number of houses had considerably increased. He therefore, asked the Magistrates to allow his clients to supply the reasonable nourishments of the neighbourhood.

The Chairman said that before they retired to consider their decisions, he should like on behalf of the Magistrates to express their regret at the absence of the Chief Constable Knott, and of his illness, and the hope that he will soon be better and shortly, able to resume his duty. (Applause.)

Inspector Fox thanked the Bench, and said he would see Chief Constable Knott after Court and deliver the kind message to him.


After a short consultation in private, the Magistrates turned to the Bench. The Chairman said “The following houses will be referred to the Kent Compensation Committee of the Quarter Sessions in due form: The “William and Albert,” The “Three Compasses,” the “Wellesley Inn,” the “Old Commercial Quay,” the “Duke of York,” and the “Half Moon.” The licenses for these houses will run until the time when the compensation is paid, and then the licences will cease. With respect to the “Devonshire Arms” and the “Lord Roberts,” and the “Nottingham Castle,” they will be withdrawn from the list.- These licences will be renewed in the ordinary way.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 9 March, 1906. Price 1d.


At the Police Court this morning, Mr. A. K. Mowll asked permission of the Bench to make alterations to the structure of several public houses.

At the "Nottingham Castle" it was proposed to make an alteration so that the premises might be easier for Police supervision. The entrance at the side of the premises would be closed., and a small alteration be made to the counter.

The Magistrates approved of the various plans showing the alterations.


Dover Express 29 June 1906.


This morning, at the Dover Police Court, before Messrs.. J. L. Bradley and J. Scott, Esqrs., application was made for the transfer of the licence of the "Nottingham Castle," Adrian Street, from A. Gasson to A. W. Matthews, who had been a driver of an electric landau in London. Amongst the testimonials was one from Lord Grimshaw. Applicant had previously served in the Royal Horse Guards. He produced his certificates of efficiency in driving an electric motor car.

The Magistrates' Clerk:- That does not prove ability to draw beer. (Laughter.)

Mr. J. L. Bradley, in gathering the application, asked Mr. Matthews if he was aware of the circumstances under which the charge was made.

The new tenant said that he was.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 15 July, 1906.


At the Dover police Court this morning before Messrs. Thorpe in the Chair, Messrs. Chitty, Wright, Scott, J. L. Bradley, and W. Bradley, Albert Gasson, the landlord of the “Nottingham Castle,” Adrian Street, was charged on the information of the Chief Constable, that being the landlord of the “Nottingham Castle” on Sunday, Mat 20th, he did within and during the period when such licensed premises were required to be closed, viz. between the hours of 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. did open and keep open such premises for the sale of intoxicating liquors to persons not being bona fide travellers.

Mr. Rutlet Mowll appeared for the defence and pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Reginald Knocker appeared to prosecute, instructed by the Watch Committee. On Sunday, 20th May, watch was kept on the house by the Police and several men were observed to go to the “Nottingham Castle” and tap at the window, and bottles were handed through the window to them. One man paid four visits, and the person handing the bottles through the window was seen to take money on more than one occasion. In most cases the men took the bottles to the rear of the house, and there drank the contents. In one case the bottle fell as it was handed to the man and the Police visited the house, where they found a form underneath the window through which the bottles had been handed. The landlord was warned that the case would be reported. Mr. Knocker quoted legal authorities showing that the offence in keeping open for the sale of intoxicating liquors during prohibited hours included supplying liquor to people outside the house.

Before evidence was taken, all witnesses were ordered out of Court.

Detective Police Constable Mount said: In company with Police Constable Southey, I kept watch on the “Nottingham Castle” on Sunday, 20th May. I commenced observation at 9 a.m. At 9.10 a man named Charles Jenkins went to the window facing the allotments, tapped, and after waiting a minute or two, the window was opened, and a bottle put through to Jenkins, who put it in his pocket, going away to Cowgate Hill. It looked like an ordinary beer bottle. At 10.15 James Brown and Frederick Dilnot came along, brown went to the window, tapped, and received two bottles through the window. He took them to a lane at the rear of the house, and with Dilnot drank the contents. I could not see anyone in the house. The men's hands went in from the outside. At 10.25 Police Constable Turner, in uniform, passed the house, Dilnot was then close to the window. Just before Turner reached him he turned round with the other man, and walked away towards Albany Place. At 10.28, when the uniformed man had gone, Dilnot again went to the window, passed something looking like a bottle in, and then waited. He put his hand into his trousers pocket, and selecting something from its contents passed it through the window, and then received three bottles through the window. One he put in each coat pocket, and one under his coat. He walked away as far as the lane at the back of the house. He handed one bottle to James King, of 3, Adrian Row and stood in the lane drinking another. King stood looking round at the top of the lane. At 10.40, Dilnot again tapped the window, and then went and looked down Adrian Street, at the corner, returning four minutes later to the window, put his hand in the window, and then received three more beer bottles, taking them one at a time, and putting them in his pocket. He walked away, and handed one to Edward Blackman, 9, Durham Hill, another to Thomas Spice, 7, Pleasant Row, and Dilnot stood outside the public house in the middle of the road, drinking his own. All the men remained standing about. At 10.45, a woman named Louisa Sharp, 36, George Street whose mother lives near the house, went to the window and tapped. She had a rather large cape over her head, which nearly covered the window. She waited about two minutes at the window, but because of the cape, I cannot swear that she received anything, but from her actions she appeared to take something. She walked away and went down the lane. The window is on a swivel and turns back into the house. The bottom of the window is 5ft. from the ground outside, but inside it is higher from the floor. At 10.55 Dilnot again went and tapped the window. I then left Southey watching the window, and ran to the house. On the bottom of the 64 steps a man named Royce spoke to me, trying to call my attention to something else, but I went on, and when about half way between the 64 steps and the Albany Flats, I saw a bottle passed out of the window of the “Nottingham Castle,” and Dilnot apparently was in such a hurry to get it that he dropped it, and it broke, all the liquor running out. It contained beer. This is the bottle produced. Dilnot picked it up and put it just round the post in an allotment garden. I told him I wanted that bottle, and I went and got the pieces. Southey had run up by this time. He went to the door of the “Nottingham Castle” and called to the landlord, who came out in his shirt sleeves. Southey pointed to the broken bottle and the beer spilt on the ground, and told him, in the presence of myself, Dilnot, and others, that we had had his house under observation for some considerable time, and had seen bottles of beer passed out to men whose names he mentioned by name. he pointed to the mess on the ground, and the broken glass, and asked how he accounted for it. The defendant made no reply. I said to Southey, “You will find a bottle or two on the allotment ground.” He went round, and found two there against the top house of Adrian Street. I saw two of the men place them there. One was full, and one empty. (Smelling the bottles) I should say the full one contains beer. (Laughter.) I am Police Constable Southey visited the house. Inside the window, which was then closed, a form was placed. This window is in a space partitioned from the bar. The window looks on to Adrian Row, facing the allotments where there was previously a door. The landlord pulled the form away. I tried to reach the window from the ground, but I could only just manage to touch the bolt. I then told the landlord he would be reported. He said, “Look over it and give me another chance,” but we said we were sent there specially for such, and could not do otherwise if we wanted to.

Cross-examined: You were in ambush.

Some people might call it so.

Where were you?

In a straight line 180 yards away, on the hill beyond the Sixty Four Steps. You go up the steps, along a pass, cross a ditch, go along the tunnel, and we were on top of this.

Did you notice a sentry at the magazine.

We were nearer than the sentry. We happed to know the sentry, and got to the spot conveniently. From the spot we could see the whole of Adrian Street and the neighbourhood.

Mr. Mowll: And the bay, I suppose?

Yes, up Snargate Street.

Between you and the house were allotment gardens?

Yes, but they were out of sight. We could see the “Nottingham Castle” first.

Mr. Mowll: It seems a wonderful place.

You could see what was distant and not what was near. (Laughter.)

Had you a pair of opera glasses.


What for?

To recognise the people as they went to the house.

Not to see what they did?

No, I could see that with the naked eye.

Did you see what Dilnot handed in at 10.28.

No, I could not see.

Did you not see him pass in some fish?


Did you see some fish in the house?

On the public bar counter lay three crabs and some dirty glasses. The crabs were boiled being red. I noticed no fish brought to the house. All the transactions went on through the window.

In answer to several questions, witness said he did not notice a tablet on the wall near the window. He did not keep observation on the house for that purpose, and was too much interested on watching the bottles and the men.

Mr. Mowll said they had been to the spot where the Constables were, and he could not read the name plate of the street owing to the distance. Could witness read it?

Witness: I never went there for that purpose. I might have noticed it if I knew you wanted it.

Mr. Mowll: It is necessary to test what could be seen. Could you tell if the bottle had a label?

No, but I would have seen a label if the bottle had not been passed so quickly. I have not measured the distance we were from the house. It is not far from the end of the allotment ground.

Mr. Mowll said he thought the distance was more.

Detective Southey gave evidence that he kept observation with Detective Mount on Sunday, may 20th. He corroborated the evidence of Detective Mount. They both went up to Dilnot and asked him to go with them to the Police house to see the landlord but he would not go, so they called the landlord out and asked what he had to say about the bottles being handed out of the window. He put his hand to his breast and sounded dumfounded.

Cross-examined: The distance we were as the crow flies would be about 180 yards. We did not measure it because if you went round it would be at least 300 yards to walk. They had field glasses to recognise the men. He took no notes, but Mount did and they made a joint report at 12 o'clock that day. King looked after all the gardens. Spice also has garden grounds. Both men garden on Sundays when the grounds are generally full.

The following evidence was called for defence:-

Albert Gasson, licensee of the “Nottingham Castle”, said that previously he had a license at Ashford, and before that was 12 years employed in the Railway Works at Ashford.

From the inside of the premises can you see what is going on in the road through the window described?

Not unless one puts his head right up to the window.

Witness continuing said: On Sunday, may 20th, I was scrubbing my place out, when Mr. Jenkins came and tapped. I opened it and he passed me through an empty bottle and said he thought he would leave it as he was going up to the Heights. I supplied him with nothing. I need hardy say it was very foolish of him to pass an empty bottle.

Who called next?

Mr. Brown who used to live at the back, but has moved near to the Town hall recently. He came to the allotment gardens on that Sunday, and handed me through the window two empty bottles, which he said he had taken away with him when he moved. I think he had the bottles the day he moved. Brown had nothing to drink from the house. Dilnot next came and tapped the window and put his hand in and asked me how I was. He had left me some fish, red gurnet, overnight. I said it was not clean, and I asked him if he would clean it. He said he would, and I took it to him, and he sat on the wall cleaning it. I saw him doing it when I came and shook the mat. I afterwards locked the door.

The Clerk: The fish was not in a bottle; I suppose.

No. (Laughter.)

Witness continuing said: At the time no bottle whatever was handed to Dilnot. I asked Dilnot if he had and “Heavers” as I call crabs. He often leaves me fish, because I let him have money to buy the fish from week to week, and he generally gives me a little fish when he returns the money. He went to get some crabs, and returning, tapped the window and handed me six crabs. This was about 10.40. He was there twice. When he came the second time I asked if he could do with a drink. He said “Yes,” and I handed him out two bottles of beer like those produced. I did not expect to receive money, but I thought he was thirsty after being good to me about the fish. The next thing I heard the arrival of the Police. With the exception of these two bottles, I handed no bottle whatever out of the house that Sunday morning. Dilnot did not pay, and I did not intend him to. They were entirely a present to him. On Saturday night I supplied Dilnot with three or four bottles of beer to take away on Sunday.

Cross-examined: Do men usually call on Sunday with empty bottles?

No. It's curious they should have done so this day.

How long has that window been there?

About a week.

Was not there a door there before which was stopped up?


The window is quite as convenient as the door?

To let the air in.

And for passing bottles?

I don't believe in passing bottles.

Mr. Knocker: And fish, and so on.

Why did you put your hand to your chest on that Sunday, had you something on your chest?

No. I had an apron.

Charles Jenkins, baker and hawker, 34, Hartley Street, said that on Sunday, May 20th, he went to the Heights with a basket of cress, etc. to sell there. Defendant had ordered some greens from him. But witness could not supply them, and went to tell the defendant so, and at the same time took an empty bottle to the “Nottingham Castle.” He would swear that he did not receive a bottle of beer or any other liquor from Mr. Gasson that morning.

Cross-examined: he had the bottle on Friday night, and Mr. Gasson said bring it back as it was worth more than the beer.

James Brown, 6, Biggin Court, general labourer, said that he moved from 6, Albany Row on May 12th, and on Sunday, May 20th, he went back to his old house about 10.30 taking two empty ale bottles. He tapped at the window of the “Nottingham Castle” and handed them through the window to him saying, “Here are your empty bottles.” He then went back to his house to get some flower pots up, but they were gone, so he went back to Biggin Court. Heb received nothing from defendant, and was certain that no bottle was passed out to him.

Cross-examined: He was not in the habit of taking bottles away from the “Nottingham Castle.” He had these a fortnight earlier.

By the Magistrates: He drank no beer outside the house.

In reply to Mr. Knocker, witness said he was surprised when Mount and Southey came later that Sunday and asked about ale, because he had had none. He admitted saying, “Supposing even I had had some, what can you do?” He was trying to pump them the same as Mr. Knocker was trying to pump him.

Frederick Henry Dilnot, living at 34, Hartley Street, Deal, said: On Sunday 20th May I went to the “Nottingham Castle.” I looked in the fanlight window in the passage and asked him how he was. He said, “All right.” He asked me to clean some fish. He passed it to me and I cleaned it outside, and gave it back when he came to shake a mat. He asked me to let him have some crabs, he used the word crabs, not anything else. Witness had not had anything to drink at the “Nottingham Castle” then. He went home and got some crabs, and also put these full bottles of ale in his pocket, which he had bought overnight at the “Nottingham Castle.” He took the bottles with him and gave Mr. Spice one, Mr. King one, and Mr. Blackman one.

The Chairman: Very generous indeed.

The Clerk: Where did this take place?

In Adrian Row, about eight yards from the house.

Witness continuing said that he then went to the window of the “Nottingham Castle” and handed the crabs to the landlord who gave him two bottles saying, “There's a drop of porter for your wife, and a drop of ale for yourself.”

He had the misfortune to drop one and break it. These were the only bottles he received.

Cross-examined: The reason I was generous was because this man had been generous to me when I was laid up 16 weeks, and funds were low, but on Sunday I had a bit of luck and I thought I would return the compliment.

Mr. Knocker: The police say they saw you take something out of your trouser pocket. Was that crabs?

Crabs, certainly not! You don't think I would carry crabs in my trousers pockets?

Witness denied that he went to the house at 10.28, 10.40, 10.44, and 10.45. He only went twice. He never went to public houses on Sundays.

Mr. Knocker; What never?

Well, when I was fined 5s. for going top the “Commercial Quay Inn” but that was many years ago, the landlord was fined 8.

Thomas William Spice, of 7, Pleasant Row, a painter, said that he saw the last witness at the “Nottingham Castle” pay for and take away several bottles of ale on Saturday evening almost 10.10 p.m. Witness had a garden near the “Nottingham Castle,” and on Sunday, May 20th, as he was getting into the garden, Dilnot came and gave him a bottle of beer, which he took into the garden, and put behind a water butt. The Police took it away before it was drunk.

Cross-examined. Witness know the “Nottingham Castle” well. He did not know that his wife objected to the renewal at the Licensing Sessions in February.

Do you always come home sober from there?

I don't know about “always” sober.

Mr. Mowll objected to this evidence.

In reply to the Bench, witness said that they took it in turns to provide beer for the gardeners on Sunday morning, as it was hard work, and there was no water laid on.

They made a regular meeting place of it on Sundays in the gardens, and took it in turn to get beer.

Joseph James Clark King, 3, Adrian Row, a musician, said that Dilnot took some bottles of ale away on Saturday night from the “Nottingham Castle.” Dilnot met him in Adrian Row on Sunday morning and handed him a bottle of ale, which he drank in his private house.

Cross-examined. He did not know where the ale came from.

What is your opinion?

Study your opinion. You know as much as I do.

Where did you think it came from?

Canterbury, I expect.

Louisa Sharp, 36 George Street, said she passed the “Nottingham Castle” on Sunday, May 20th, and she looked in the window to see the time by the clock. She received nothing at the “Nottingham Castle.”

Cross-examined. She had been to Cowgate Hill, and was going home.

Is that the shortest way home?

No, I always like to take the longest way home.

Mr. Knocker: Especially if it goes by the “Nottingham Castle.”

Witness: I drink no beer on a Sunday morning.

Mr. Knocker: A most irreproachable witness.

Mr. Mowll for the defence, said that the reason for the variation of the evidence was the distance that the Police were away from the public house. He suggested that the Bench should visit the spot in question. In visiting the spot where the Police were himself, he could not read the metal street name plate with glasses. The Police said that at that distance they saw bottles handed out, whereas his witnesses who were on the spot, said that they handed empty bottles in. It was a tall order to say that his witnesses had come here and had deliberately perjured themselves. He thought that it was more reasonable to say that the Police were mistaken owing to the distance they were away. His witnessed had been unshaken, and had not varied their statements from the first. The only bottles handed out were a present to Dilnot from the landlord. The Bench had two courses – the one that the two excellent Police officers were mistaken, and the other that the host of witnesses on the other side were perjurers. They had no right to take that view.

The Magistrates retired to consider their decision, and on returning into Court Mr. Thorpe said. We have given your case great consideration, and it is the unanimous opinion of the Bench that you are guilty. The evidence of the Police is very strong against you, and we don't say that your witnesses have perjured themselves, but we don't believe that some of them are truthful. You will be convicted, and fined 5 and 16/6 costs.



It avoided the redundancy net in 1906 but seems to have been cornered the following year. Within one hundred and twelve yards were the "Prince Louis", "Beaconsfield Arms", "New Mogul" and "Criterion". The police described the premises as not only ill conducted but also difficult to supervise.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 15 February, 1907. Price 1d.


The Annual Licensing Meeting of the Dover Magistrates was held at the Police Court on Monday at noon. The Magistrates on the Bench were:- The Mayor (G. P. Raggett, Esq.), Sir William Crundall, Messrs. J. L. Bradley, M. Pepper, W. J. Barnes, W. J. Adcock, H. W. Thorpe, H. F. Elwin, J. W. Bussey, F. G. Wright, E. Chitty, J. Scott, F. W. Prescott, and T. A. Terson.


In respect to the licence of this house M. R. Mowll said that he proposed not to make any objections to the licence being referred to Quarter Sessions for compensation, but if it were proposed to take away the licence without compensation, he would vigorously oppose such a suggestion.

Mr. A. W. Matthews, the tenant was informed that in addition to two grounds of opposition as the Superintendent of the Police objected to the renewal of the licence. (1) Having regard to the character and necessities of the neighbourhood and the number of licensed houses in the immediate vicinity being excessive, the licence now held by him was unnecessary. (2) That in the interests of the public the renewal of the licence was undesirable. The Superintendent of the Police also objected to the licence on the ground that the situation of the house was such as to make proper Police supervision very difficult, and that the licensed premises had been ill-conducted.

Chief Constable Knott said that the “Nottingham Castle” was a fully licensed house situated in Adrian Street. The present tenant A. W. Matthews had the house transferred to him on August 3rd, 1906. There had been three changes in three years. Since the last tenant T. Garson, there had been a conviction against the house for Sunday trading on the 1st June, and a fine of 5 inflicted and 16/3 costs. There was nothing against the present tenant. The house was badly situated for Police supervision. The other houses in the neighbourhood were the “Liberty,” Adrian Street, 112 yards away, and there were five other houses quite close to the “Liberty,” the “Beaconsfield Arms,” “Adrian Restaurant,” the “Prince Louis,” the “New Mogul,” and the “Criterion.” The rateable value was 19 gross 15. The sanitary accommodation was good. On Friday February 1st at 7.10 p.m. there were seven customers. On Tuesday February 5th, at 11.12 a.m., no customers. The house was so situated that it was difficult to approach it without being seen.

Cross-examined: One tenant was in the house 25 years. There have been four tenants in 29 years. The house had been properly conducted since the present tenant had been there.

Mr. Mowll said that the present tenant was a man of very good character. He had been a chauffeur for three years without a conviction, (laughter,) which Mr. Bradley told him was a record. (Laughter.)

Inspector Fox gave corroborating evidence.

Cross-examined: There were two or three licensed houses in the neighbourhood that had been closed.

Mr. Mowll said that if the license were refused instead of being referred to Quarter Sessions he would have a good deal to say.

The Magistrates' Clerk: There has been no suggestion of that.

The decision of the Magistrates was reserved.

After the luncheon adjournment:

The Magistrates' Clerk announced that all the five houses, i.e. those at the “Star,” the “Volunteer,” the “Comet,” the “Nottingham Castle,” and the “Ordnance Arms,” would be provisionally renewed so that they could go before the Compensation Authority the Quarter Sessions at Canterbury with a view to compensation.


From Dover Express 12 July 1907.


The previous action of the Dover Magistrates in refusing the licences of the "Nottingham Castle," Adrian Street, the "Star," Trevanion Lane, the "Comet," Priory Road, and the "Volunteer," London Road, was at the Licensing Committee of the County Magistrates yesterday at Canterbury, confirmed, the owners making no objection.



Last pub licensee had BAILEY John 1884-Dec/1903 (age 35 in 1891Census) Pikes 1889Pikes 1895Kelly's Directory 1899Dover ExpressKelly's 1903

NEWBLE or NEWLAND Robert Frank Dec/1903-Sept/04 Dover Express

GARSON or GASSON T Sept/1904-06 Dover Express (Formerly kept an off-beerhouse at Ashford)

MATTHEWS Mr A W Aug/1906-07Dover Express

The Chairman reminded the above tenant of a conviction against the previous tenant of the house, and that it would be necessary for him to be careful.


Pikes 1889From Pikes Dover Blue Book 1889

Pikes 1895From Pikes Dover Blue Book 1895

Kelly's Directory 1899From the Kelly's Directory 1899

Kelly's 1903From the Kelly's Directory 1903

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:-