Sort file:- Dover, July, 2021.

Page Updated:- Saturday, 31 July, 2021.

PUB LIST PUBLIC HOUSES Barry Smith and Paul Skelton

Earliest 1872

(Name from)


Latest 1914

12 Strond Street



Formerly the "Shipwright's Arms" this name applied from 1872. An outlet of George Beer which passed to Flint in 1908. Four a.m. opening was allowed from 1872 but on weekdays only.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 22 October, 1886. Price 1d.


Alfred Bartlett was charged with being drunk and disorderly in Strond Street, and striking T. Bond, captain of the yacht Glyndesmere, in Strond Street.

The complainant said he was in Strond Street talking to a pilot about a claim for assistance to the yacht. The defendant rushed upon them, struck down the pilot, and then hit the complainant in the eye. The defendant seemed to be drunk.

The defendant said he did not recollect striking the captain. The pilot was always down on him. He struck the pilot, and he supposed the captain must have taken his part.

Police-constable Brace said he was near the “Ship Hotel,” in Strond Street, when he saw the prisoner, the last witness, and another man. The prisoner, who was very drunk, was challenging them to fight. The last witness went towards the “Ship Hotel,” and as he was entering the door the prisoner struck him. The prisoner continued to cause a disturbance outside the “Shit Hotel,” and the Constable took him in custody.

The prisoner said he was going through Strond Street, when Carlton spoke to him. He was always on to him.

The prisoner was fined 9s. 6d. including costs, a week being allowed to pay.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 13 March, 1890. Price 1d.


Frederick Dorrington was summoned by Charles Andrew Grimes for assaulting him on the 3rd of March.

Mr. Martyn Mowll appeared on behalf of Mr. Grimes, and Mr. H. W. Frich, a barrister of the South-Eastern Circuit, appeared for the defendant.

Mr. Mowll, in opening the case, said that the assault occurred on Tuesday last. Mr. Grimes was acting under a distress warrant levied by the landlords of the house, and defendant being the caretaker or manager put in by the tenant. Mr. Grimes, accompanied by Mr. Meadows, who was compliant on another charge, went down to the “Ship Inn” to levy distress, when the assault occurred.

Mr. Charles Andrew Grimes said that he was a clerk to Messrs. Worsfold and Hayward, and had been for more than 25 years. He was an authorised bailiff, by the County Court Judge, under the distress law amendment Act 1888. he was authorised to levy distress for 50, which was due to the landlords from Mrs. Mary Ann Hannah Watson, the tenant. He went to the “Ship Inn” with that warrant about 10.30 on Tuesday last, accompanied by Mr. meadows, senior. He went into the private bar, and there saw Mr. Dorrington, and told him he wanted to speak to him privately. He then said, “say what you have got to say here,” calling a stranger from the back-room. He told him he had come to levy a distress, and read the warrant to him. Dorrington asked him to give him a copy of it, but this he declined to do, and told him he could read it. After he had read the warrant defendant said that it was illegal, it was not stamped. He told meadows to come if that was the case, and proceed to execute the distress, making for the staircase. Dorrington pushed him, and got on to the stairs, and refused to let them go up. He sent the stranger for a Policeman, and proceeded formally with the distress by taking the umbrella stand in the hall. After waiting a few minutes, and finding a Constable did not arrive, he went out for one, leaving the warrant with Meadows. He found Police-constable Knott, who went back with him to the house, he examined the warrant, and told Dorrington that it was perfectly legal, and that he must not obstruct it. He immediately allowed him to go upstairs then, and they took their inventory in the usual way. When they went upstairs Knott left at his request. The inventory took about an hour. The man who remained in possession, Mr. Meadows (jun.), arrived soon after twelve. About that time, Dorrington, who seemed very excited, came into the rioom where they were, and asked what business he had to take down his pictures. He told him he had not taken his pictures, and defendant replied with an oath that he was a liar. Dorrington then went back into the bar, after having some conversation with his wife, came back again, and began about the pictures. He then asked for the inventory, and said that he wanted that “list,” and he told him he should have it when he was entitled to have it. He then put his papers altogether in his bag, and told Meadows that they would go. He walked towards the front door with his bag and stick in his hand. Dorrington then rushed out, getting in front and took hold of his arm and held him, afterwards getting hold of his bag, and Meadows seeing that he was getting dragged backwards, came to his assistance, and took hold of the bag. All three of them had got hold of the bag, and went towards the front door in the scuffle, and as they neared it Dorrington took meadows by the neck and threw him off. He then managed to get sole possession of the bag, and in the scuffle one of the handles got broken. The defendant had placed himself in front of the door with a stick across it, they both tried to get out several times, but finding that they could not, Meadows went out of the back door, and he saw Mrs. Dorrington follow him. After he had gone he went to the back door, and found it locked, and the key missing. He went back to the front door, and again tried to get out, but Dorrington was still standing there. Meadows turned to the house, accompanied by Police-constable Ash, who came close to the door near which he was detained. He told him that he had been executing a warrant levying a distress for rent, and he wanted to leave the premises but was detained by Dorrington, also that he had endeavoured to wrench his bag from him, which contained legal documents. The defendant told Ash that he wanted the “list,” and witness told him he should have it when he was entitled to it. He then called upon Ash formally, telling him he was detained there as a prisoner against his will, and asking to be released. Ash said he did not know anything about it, and asked why he did not give the man what he wanted. He told him that it did not concern him as a Constable, he wanted him to do his duty; and the end of it was that Ash did not render him any assistance. This went on for about three-quarters of an hour after Ash got there, and during this time he was subject to all sorts of annoyances by Dorrington and his wife. The defendants took up a mat to rub it in his face. He sent Meadows to fetch the Superintendent of Police to lay the matter before him. After a time Police-constable Knott and Ash appeared, and he was released.

Cross-examined by Mr. Frich: He was kept in there about three-quarters of an hour after Ash arrived, before he was released. The disturbance from first to last was about an hour. He did not give Dorrington what he asked for because he was not entitled to it within 24 hours. The defendant wanted a list of the furniture distrained, and he and he made that a proviso for letting him go. He could have furnished him with it if he had felt so disposed. He had taken things by mistake of the wrong parties, and their remedy was to apply them, and they struck them out. He did not take any pictures down from the wall.

Mr. Frich said that when Mr. Dorrington first asked him for assistance, he was disposed to take a light view of the circumstances, and it was very much to his astonishment that an assault was committed by depriving any person of his liberty, and upon his behalf he had been obliged to pursue the case thus far in order to look at the facts. Had it not been for a mistaken idea on behalf of Mr. Dorrington that he was entitled to a list of the goods, he should never have raised an objection. Mr. Dorrington was not only protecting his own interests, but those of the tenant of the house for whom he had been manager, and for the services he had rendered he had not received one penny. Acting in that way, he was under the impression, erroneously, he admitted, that he was entitled to have the list of goods, and, thinking he had the law on his own side, he took the liberties. He might or might not have aggravated him a little too much. He begged, on behalf of Mr. Dorrington, to ask Mr. Grimes to accept his sincere expression of regret, and to rest assured that had it not been for this mistake he would have never resisted him. Under those circumstances he asked Mr. Mowll on his behalf to allow the summons to be withdrawn.

Mr. Mowll said that both Messrs. Worsfold and Hayward, for whom he appeared, and, he himself though it was avery serious matter. He could not shut his eyes to the fact that he did a great deal by mistake, and that it was honestly done, and if Ash had behaved as he ought, a great deal of the unpleasantness would not have occurred. He was prepared to accept that apology, and, with the permission of the Magistrates, would withdraw the summonses.

Mr. Brown said that Mr. Mowll and the witness had both made a serious allegation against Ash, and the matter would have to be enquired into elsewhere.

Mr. Mowll said that he could not withdraw that statement.

Mr. Frich suggested that Ash should speak for himself in the witness box.

The Chairman said that the Bench would allow the summonses to be withdrawn, and were very glad as far as Mr. Grimes and Mr. Dorrington were concerned, that the matter had been satisfactorily arranged. As for the Constable, the matter would have to be left to the Watch Committee.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 8 May, 1890. Price 1d.


On the application of Mr. Spain, permission to draw at the “Ship Inn” was given to Mr. William Graham.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 13 March, 1891. Price 1d.


The Magistrates, on Monday, were engaged with a case of considerable importance, in which Frederick Dorrington, the manager of the “Ship Hotel, Strond Street, was summoned for assaulting Mr. Grimes, the managing clerk of Messrs. Worsfold and Hayward, who had gone to the hotel to make an inventory. The insults to which Mr. Grimes was subjected, are described in our Police proceedings, and to crown it all, when he had done his unpleasant duty, the manager would not allow him to quit the house. Constable Ash was called, but he declined to assist in liberating Mr. Grimes, and he has, we hear, been called before the Watch Committee to explain his conduct; but Mr. Grimes, we understand, desired that the matter should not be pressed. On Wednesday, the owners of the property, Messrs. Beer and Co., took possession, having bought out the interest of the tenant, but still the manager was not willing to quit, and had to be evicted.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 27 November, 1891. Price 1d.


Louis Constant Bologne was charged on remand with obtaining food and lodging to the amount of 2 10s. by false pretences from Mr. Graham, the landlord of the “Ship Hotel,” and also with stealing a dinner napkin value 9d.

The Rev. I. Barnstem acted as interpreter.

Mr. Cattel, who lives at 19, Hawkesbury Street, said that he saw the prisoner last Thursday week, when he came to his door, and the landlady being unable to understand him, he was called. The prisoner's wife was with him. Witness asked him what he wanted, and he said he wanted to know if Mr. Lance was still living there. Witness told him that he was dead, and prisoner then asked him if he could recommend cheap lodgings, and he took him to the “Sip Hotel.” When they arrived prisoner said he had been in there before, and they wanted too much money. He asked Mr. Graham what he would board and lodge the prisoner and his wife for, for a week, and he said 2 10s., with which price they were contented. He then asked the prisoner in French if he would pay a deposit as they had no luggage, and prisoner said he was very short, and his luggage was coming the next day from Belgium. He told that he had written to his father, who was a retired timber merchant, and very rich, and that he expected a remittance by return of post, and if not, his father was sure to be here on Saturday or Sunday at the latest. He told all this to Mr. Graham, and then left. The prisoner came to see him every day, and promised him a handsome present. On Monday morning prisoner and his wife came to him in great trouble, as neither any money had come, not yet his father, and he begged of him to lend him money for his wife to go to Folkestone, and from there to Bolougne to go and see his father and bring money, and witness lent him 9s. About half an hour later he came back saying he had seen his wife off to Folkestone by train, thanking him for lending the money.

The prisoner was again remanded till this morning for further enquiries.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday 8 January, 1909.


Mr. Rutley Mowll appeared to make the application for the transfer of the licence of the "Ship Hotel," from Mr. Winnifrith to Mr. Newing, on account of his having been at the house less than nine months, the time limit imposed by the Bench. He said that at the time Mr. Winnifrith went in it was understood that the ownership was likely to change, and that the new brewers were likely to require a new tenant. That had turned out to be the case.

The Chief Constable said that Mr. Newing had been in Dover several years, and he had a good character.

The application as granted.



It had closed by 1907 but reopened and then continued to 1914, closing on 31 December that year. Flint received compensation of 314 and the freeholders, Dover Harbour Board, 10. The licence lapsed and the property became a private dwelling.


From the Dover Express and East Kent News, Friday, 6 February, 1914. Price 1d.


Mr. R. Mowll formally applied for the renewal of this licence.

The Chief Constable said that the tenant was Mr. Dibley and the owners were Messrs. Flint and Co., Canterbury. The house was transferred to Mr, Dibley in October 1910, and there had been transfers in 1905, 1908, and 1909. the rateable value was 25 gross and 20 net. The nearest licensed houses were the “Royal Mail,” 17 yards; the “Green Dragon,” 50 yards, the “Pavilion,” 129 yards; the “Imperial,” 138 yards; the “Swan,” 153 yards; and the buffet, Harbour Station, opposite.

Inspector Lockwood said that there was only one customer on his four visits, at 11.15 a.m. on the 22nd January.

The house was referred for compensation.




SIMS William 1874 Post Office Directory 1874

SIMS Mrs Sarah 1882 Post Office Directory 1882

WATSON R 1889+ Pikes 1889

WATSON Mrs Marion 1891 Post Office Directory 1891

GRAHAM William May/1891+ Dover Express

EDWARDS John 1895 Pikes 1895

CRISP Alexander 1896-Feb/97 Dover Express

RHODES/ROADS F Feb/1897+ Dover Express

MIDDLETON Frank 1899 Kelly's Directory 1899

GREEN Francis 1899-1903 Post Office Directory 1903Post Office Directory 1903Kelly's 1903Census

RICHARD Benjamin 1891 Census (in charge of hotel)

HOLT Isaac 1905-08 end

WINNIFRITH George 1908-Jan/09 Dover Express

Last pub licensee had NEWING William Henry Jan/1909+ dec'd Dover Express

WALKER George Edward 1910 retired

DIBLEY Charles Henry 1910-14 end (age 44 in 1911Census) Post Office Directory 1913


Post Office Directory 1874From the Post Office Directory 1874

Post Office Directory 1882From the Post Office Directory 1882

Pikes 1889From Pikes Dover Blue Book 1889

Post Office Directory 1891From the Post Office Directory 1891

Pikes 1895From Pikes Dover Blue Book 1895

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

Post Office Directory 1903From the Post Office Directory 1903

Kelly's 1903From the Kelly's Directory 1903

Post Office Directory 1913From the Post Office Directory 1913

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:-