Folkestone Express 3 May 1873.

Local News.

Mr. Robinson of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, died very suddenly on Wednesday night.

Folkestone Express 12 August 1876.

Wednesday, August 9th: Before The Mayor, General Cannon, Alderman Caister, J. Tolputt, J. Clark, and R.W. Boarer Esqs.

Joseph Holden and Harriett Holden, his wife, were charged with being drunk and disorderly in the Dover Road, and the woman was further charged with using obscene language.

The case was proved by Mr. William Robinson of the Swan Inn, where the defendants had called for some matches.

The man, who said he was a boiler maker, and had come from Ashford to work, expressed great regret and said he had done his best to get his wife quietly away.

The Bench discharged the male defendant, but committed his wife for 21 days.

Folkestone Express 4 May 1878.

Wednesday, May 1st: Before J. Kelcey and R.W. Boarer Esqs., and Captain Crowe.

Charles Peters was charged with assaulting John Griffiths, a collector of fossils, on the 27th of April. Mr. Gardner appeared for the complainant.

John Griffiths said that on Saturday evening he went to the Swan Inn about 8.30, and remained there until eleven o'clock. On leaving the house he heard a noise, and the defendant went up to him and said that he was “no man”. He wanted to know why and the defendant said it was because he was trying to kick up a row with someone. He dragged him towards the field, and wanted him to fight. He declined, and defendant separated from him. The pulling lasted about five or ten minutes.

Henry Care, for the defendant, said he was at the Swan Inn on Saturday night about eleven o'clock. Witness was larking about with defendant's son, who knocked witness' pipe out of his mouth. Mr. Griffiths said “If I was you I would give him a good hiding. He never was a man”. He did not see Peters strike Griffiths.

Henry Goodchild and his wife both corroborated, and the Bench dismissed the case, each to pay his own costs.

Folkestone Express 5 April 1879.

Wednesday, April 2nd: Before R.W. Boarer Esq., General Armstrong, J. Fitness and M. Bell Esqs.

Thomas Williams, a tramp, pleaded Guilty to begging in the Swan Inn, and to assaulting Charles Croucher and P.C. Loveday on the previous day.

Charles Croucher proved seeing the prisoner begging in the Swan, and when he left he met him down the road, when he assaulted him. He threw the prisoner, and P.C. Loveday then took him in charge.

P.C. Loveday stated that the prisoner was very violent, and tore his clothes nearly off.

The Bench sentenced the prisoner to 21 days' hard labour for begging, and to one month's hard labour for the assault.

Folkestone Express 1 November 1879.

Saturday, 25th October: Before The Mayor, Aldermen Caister, Hoad, and Sherwood, Col. De Crespigny, General Cannon, Captain Carter, W.J. Jeffreason, J. Clark, and J. Fitness Esqs.

John Spicer was charged with stealing a fowl, value 2s. 6d., the property of Wm. Robinson, landlord of the Swan Inn.

James Fleet, a labourer, living at 1, Nelson Place, said about half past eight on the previous evening he went into the yard of the Swan public house. He saw the prisoner leave a water closet, look around to see if anybody was about, then return immediately, and took a live fowl from the closet and put it under his coat. He followed the prisoner, and told him he ought to be ashamed of himself. In the meantime prisoner had killed the fowl. He said he did not mean to take it away, but was going to give it to Mr. Robinson. He took prisoner to the bar, and the fowl was given up to Miss Robinson.

Prosecutor identified the bird produced as his property. It's value was 2s. 6d.

Prisoner pleaded Guilty, saying he was the worse for liquor, and did not know what he was about at the time.

Prosecutor gave him a good character, and did not wish to press the charge.

Prisoner was committed for one calendar month with hard labour.

Folkestone Express 18 December 1880.

Thursday, December 16th: Before W.J. Jeffreason and Aldermen Caister and Sherwood.

Patrick Eiray was charged with stealing a spade of the value of 4s. 3d., the property of Messrs. Francis, ironmongers, High Street.

P.C. Knowles said from information he received he went in search of the prisoner, and found him at the Swan Inn, with a spade standing close to him. In reply to witness, prisoner said it was his property, and he took him into custody on a charge of stealing it. He said a captain bought it and gave it to him. When charged at the station he made no reply.

Mr. Charles Francis said he missed the spade in the evening of Wednesday. He remembered seeing it just inside the doorway of the shop in the morning. He identified it by the private mark on the handle. The selling price of the spade was 4s. 3d. He had no knowledge of prisoner, and from inquiries he had made he had ascertained there was not a spade sold from their shop on Wednesday.

Prisoner pleaded Guilty, and was sentenced to a month's imprisonment with hard labour.

Folkestone Express 15 July 1882.

Saturday, July 8th: Before The Mayor, J. Holden Esq., and Colonel de Crespigny.

Richard Mercer appeared to a summons charging him with assaulting James Unwin on the 6th inst. Complainant appeared in court with his left eye much discoloured, and the defendant informed the court that the black eye was the result of a fight with another man.

Complainant said he was a bricklayer, living at 70, Dover Road. On Thursday afternoon he went into the Swan Inn about half past three o'clock to get a pint of beer. Mercer was there, using abusive language to the landlady. Witness said “If I was the woman's husband I would come and throw you out of the house”. Mercer wanted him to fight, but he said he was no fighter, and put his hands in his pockets. Mercer struck him two blows on the nose, and he then put up his hands to defend himself. In reply to the Bench, complainant said he had “a part of a black eye” before, but the blows from Mercer increased it.

Henry Williams and John Boxer corroborated complainant's evidence.

Defendant did not deny striking complainant, but said he did not strike the first blow. Complainant was annoyed with him because he had not taken his part in a fight he had had with another man. The witnesses called were not present. He and Unwin were alone in the bar.

The bench fined defendant 10s. and 11s. costs, or 14 days' hard labour. Allowed a week for payment.

Folkestone Express 26 August 1882.

Licensing Day.

Application For New Licence.

Wednesday, August 23rd: Before J. Clark, F. Boykett and J. Holden Esqs., and Alderman Caister.

James Boxer, residing at 28, Rossendale Road, applied for an off license. Both Mr. Minter and Mr. Mowll opposed the application.

Mr. Clark said there were two members of the Blue Ribbon Army present on the Bench, and two who were not. He should propose that those two gentlemen decided the application.

Mr. Minter said he opposed on behalf of the landlord of the Swan Inn, which was close to the house where it was proposed to sell beer. Until within the last week, he remarked, the magistrates had no discretion in those licenses, but happily the legislature had decided that the magistrates ought to have power to put a stop to what was found to be a great nuisance, and they could now refuse to grant any license. He ventured to say there could be no possible reason for granting the application then made. He mentioned several public houses in the vicinity – in fact, within an area of about a hundred yards there were six or seven licensed houses. What possible reason there could be for that application, or what good or convenience could rise, he was utterly at a loss to conceive. He therefore asked the Bench to refuse the application.

Applicant, a dairyman, said he had no special reason to urge why the license should be granted, except that he wished to make a profit by selling beer.

The license was refused.

Folkestone Express 2 June 1883.

Inquest.

An inquest was held before the Borough Coroner on Monday evening on the body og George Pearce, a labourer, aged 29, who was found in the harbour on Sunday morning.

Syephen Hogben, labourer, living at Uphill, Folkestone, identified the body as that of George Pearce, a labourer, who lived at White Gate, Acrise, and worked for Mr. Clayson. He came to Folkestone with deceased on Saturday, arriving here about eight o'clock. They went into the Swan, where they remained about a quarter of an hour, and then went to the Cutter and stayed there nearly an hour. They went to another public house, where they stayed nearly an hour, and then went round to the harbour. Witness left deceased near the clock house about half past ten or a quarter to eleven, and got lodgings at the Radnor. Deceased was a “little beery”, but there was nothing the matter with witness. Deceased was sober when he came into Folkestone. When witness left him he knew what he was about and could walk all right. It rained hard and that was the reason witness got lodgings. He heard on Sunday morning there was a man found dead in the harbour. His appearance was described, and he went to the police station and identified the body. There was no-one else round the harbour when witness left.

Henry Bailey, night watchman on the harbour, said he was called on Sunday morning at a quarter past five by two young men, who said there was a dead body in the harbour. He went towards the Stade quay, and saw the deceased lying on his belly. His feet were about five or six feet from the quay. He sent for the police, after having felt his hand and found that he was quite dead. The body was placed on a stretcher and conveyed to the old police station. Witness saw the body searched, and saw deceased's watch taken out of his watch fob. It had stopped at one o'clock. It was high water at one minute past two. There were three halfpence, a tobacco box, a dinner bag, and a small book in his pockets. His dress was not disarranged in any way.

Dr. Perru said he had examined the body of deceased at the police station. There were no marks about the body, and in his opinion death was caused by drowning.

A verdict of Found Drowned was returned.

Folkestone Express 16 June 1883.

Auction Advertisement Extract.

T.J. Harrison has been favoured with instructions from the Trustees of the late William Hall Robinson, deceased, to sell by Auction, at the Clarendon Hotel, Folkestone, on Thursday, July 19th, 1883, at Six o'clock in the evening, in Five Lots, the following Valuable Freehold and Leasehold Properties.

Lot 5 – All that Valuable Leasehold Fully Licensed House, known as the Swan Inn, Dover Road, Folkestone. Close to the S.E.R. Junction Station, containing Double Fronted Bar, Tap Room, Bar Parlour and Living Room. First Floor – Three Bedrooms and Sitting Room, Two Attics. Together with Kitchen, Store House, and Yard in Rear, with commodious cellarage in Basement. Let to Mr. W.H. Robinson (the son) as a yearly tenant, which expires on the 1st December next, at the nominal rental of £38 a year.

Folkestone Express 23 June 1894.

Monday, June 18th: Before J. Brooke and W.G. Herbert Esqs.

Frederick Archer and Margaret Noble were charged with being drunk and disorderly in Dover Road on the 16th June, and the male prisoner was further charged with damaging a square of glass, value 35s., the property of Mr. Robinson, landlord of the Swan Inn.

Mrs. Elizabeth Robinson said the prisoner was ejected from the house just before eleven on Saturday morning. The man and woman appeared to be sober when they went in. They were very quiet for a time, and then they began to get quarrelsome and used obscene language. They had a quart of beer when they went in. The female had a small soda. There were three in the party. The third, a man, was not present. They were ordered out several times before they would go, and then they were put out. Archer smashed the window with his fist.

P.C. Nash said Mr. Robinson gave Archer into custody. He was very violent, and he had to get assistance to put the handcuffs on. The damage was put at £1 15s. The female struck him when he was on the ground.

The female had previously been charged with breaking a square of glass at Sandgate, and there were several other convictions against her. Superintendent Taylor said she was a very violent woman.

Archer was fined 5s. and 4s. 6d. costs for drunkenness, or seven days'; and for the damage 5s. and 4s. 6d. costs, and 35s. the value of the glass, or one month. Noble was sent to prison for 14 days.

Folkestone Express 7 August 1897.

Wednesday, August 4th: Before Captain Willoughby Carter, J. Pledge, J. Holden, J. Fitness, and T.J. Vaughan Esqs.

William Vye and Thomas Waddell were charged with assaulting Leon Laine on July 24th.

Prisoners pleaded Not Guilty and said they only acted in self-defence.

Complainant, who gave his evidence through an interpreter, said he was an engineer at the Canning Factory, and lived at 43, Warren Road. On Saturday night, July 24th, he had a glass of beer at the Swan Inn, and left there at eleven accompanied by another Frenchman, a cook by trade. They went down Dover Road, and on coming back met four men, one of whom called him “a b---- Frenchman”. He protested, and was then assaulted by two of the men, who knocked him down three times. When on the ground he was kicked in the stomach. He got up and tried to walk, but owing to the loss of blood he could not do so, and he was assisted home by the landlord of the public house opposite. He was still under a doctor.

Elie Gauchot, another Frenchman, gave corroborative evidence, and said he was also struck in the side. He subsequently gave information of the occurrence to a policeman.

In answer to Waddell, witness said he was quite sober.

P.C. Willes said on the night in question he saw about twenty people lounging about, and he told them to move on. Prosecutor came forward with his nose bleeding, and said he had been struck. The Frenchmen had been drinking, but were not drunk. He told them that as they knew the men who struck them they must take out a summons against them.

P.S. Dawson said on Friday last he went to the Cyprus, where he saw Waddell, whom complainant pointed out as the man who “boxed with him”. At the bottom of High Street, complainant identified Vye, and on being taxed with the offence, said “I did it”.

Vye said Leon threw his stick down and called him an English pig. He kept making a noise so he knocked him down. He only struck him twice.

Waddell said he did not strike Leon. He simply told him to go away.

Vye, who had been previously convicted, was fined £2 and 12s. 6d. costs, or in default one month's hard labour, and Waddell was fined £1 and 12s. 6d. costs, or in default 21 days' with hard labour.

Folkestone Express 20 May 1899.

County Court.

Tuesday, May 16th: Before Sir. Wm. L. Selfe.

Ash and Co. v Brett: Mr. G.W. Haines appeared for the plaintiffs. It wa a claim for beer sold and delivered to Mrs. Brett, and for bottles, stoppers and cases not returned.

Thomas Payne, traveller for plaintiffs, proved receiving orders from Mrs. Brett, then Mrs. Robinson, the landlady of the Swan Inn. Mr. Robinson, he said, died last summer, and she subsequently married Brett, who was the manager. He said he took orders for bottles of ale and stout and they were supplied to the house. A quarterly statement of accounts was always rendered. When bottles came back they were credited to the parties who sent them. Defendant had not advised them when bottles were returned. The last statement showed 1,141 bottles and 13 cases missing. Since the action 180 bottles and five cases had been returned. Defendant denied that the ale (X.P.A.) and stout had been delivered.

Mr. Brett said the account gave no date when the bottles were returned.

Stephen Rye, carman in the employ of the S.E.R., proved delivery of the goods, and put in a delivery note.

Mr. Brett declared that the signature was a forgery.

Witness said he could not say who signed it. The daughter sometimes signed.

Mary Ann Elizabeth Brett said Mr. Robinson died on the 2nd June, 1898. He left his property solely to her, and she had since married. She knew nothing at all about the stout or the bottles. Her husband always gave all the orders. She had no account of bottles sent back. She knew 17 and 13 and five cases had been sent back at different times by the S.E.R., but she had no receipts for them.

Mr. Payne said the firm signed for them when they were returned. He could not bring the ledger, but the statement was a copy of the account in the ledger.

Rye said he got signatures for goods delivered, but not for bottles and cases returned.

Mrs. Brett said she dealt with several firms. She did not often have 24 dozens of bottles of beer in.

Mr. Payne said the trade of the house was not an even one. The account for returns extended over four or five years, and there were 1,141 bottles missing – two thirds of those supplied.

His Honour remarked that the claim was for a hundred dozen of bottles.

Mrs. Brett said when they sold the bottled beer out they charged 1d. for bottles.

Mr. Haines said defendant did a large trade with navvies, who had bottled beer.

His Honour: They don't drink bottled beer – they want a longer drink than that, don't they – gallon jars?

Mrs. Brett: No, mostly pints.

His Honour: Only pints! I am disappointed.

Mr. Brett said there was a similar error in 1894. He did not owe the plaintiffs a penny either for beer or bottles. He had never put a receipt on one of the invoices.

His Honour examined a number of receipts, and said in one case the receipt was dated three days before the goods were delivered.

Witness said he paid for them in advance. He never had a quarterly statement, nor was it usual to put a memo as to bottles on the accounts.

His Honour said the evidence was by no means clear as to the bottles, but there was no doubt as to the beer being delivered. There would be judgement for the plaintiffs for £9 10s. and costs at £2 a month.

Folkestone Express 29 July 1899.

Saturday, July 22nd: Before W. Wightwick and W.G. Herbert Esqs., and Col. Hamilton.

Mr. Reginald Pope presented a plan of alterations to be made at the Swan Inn, Dover Road.

Supt. Reeve said it would increase the public drinking facilities, and also provide another public entrance.

The plan was approved.

Folkestone Express 26 August 1899.

Folkestone Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, August 23rd: Before Captain Carter, J. Hoad, W.G. Herbert, J. Fitness, C.J. Pursey, and J. Pledge Esqs.

In the case of the Swan Inn, Supt. Reeve said he had received certain complaints against the manner in which it was conducted, and considered it necessary to ask that the application for renewal should be postponed until the adjourned licensing session in order that he might investigate the matter. The applicant, Mr. Brett, was accordingly told to renew his application at the adjournment.

Folkestone Express 23 September 1899.

Adjourned Licensing Session.

Wednesday, September 20th: Before Capt. Carter, Lieut. Col. Hamilton, W. Wightwick, C.J. Pursey, W.G. Herbert, J. Pledge, and J. Hoad Esqs.

In the case of the Swan Inn, the renewal of the licence to which was adjourned till this session in order that Supt. Reeve might investigate certain complaints, the Superintendent said he had made enquiries, and did not feel justified in opposing the renewal. The licence was therefore renewed to Elizabeth Brett.

Folkestone Express 10 February 1900.

Saturday, February 3rd: Before J. Hoad, T.J. Vaughan, and W. Medhurst Esqs., and Col. Westropp.

Elizabeth Brett was summoned for permitting gaming on licensed premises, the Swan Inn. Mr. G.W. Haines appeared for the defendant.

Inspector Swift said at a quarter past nine on the evening of the 27th of January, in company with detective Officer Burniston, he was near the Swan public house and heard voices from the taproom, which abuts on the Folly Road. He listened, and heard a voice say “I'll try one”, another “Pass me”, another “I'll try two”, and another “You get 'em”. He heard cards being placed heavily on the table, and in some instances the name of the card was given – such as “Ten”, “Jack”. Another voice said “Got 'em. Pay up”. He then heard the chinking of money. Shortly after, another voice said “Deal 'em out”. Then came other remarks, similar to those mentioned, indicating gaming. At the end of each hand he heard the chinking of money. After about five minutes they entered the room by the door in Folly Road. The defendant was in the bar, and the door was open which led from the bar into the smoking room, where the men were. They entered the room and saw five men seated at a table close to the window where they had listened. They each had three cards in their hands, and two cards were lying on the table in front of each. On seeing witness, they dropped their hands under the table. One of them, named Clark, remarked “Oh, you did not see any money on the table”. He called defendant's attention to it, and said to her “I shall report you for permitting gaming on licensed premises”. She replied “I did not know they were gambling”. Anyone in the bar could hear all that was passing in the smoking room if the door was open.

In answer to Mr. Haines, he said he did not see any cards stating that gambling was not permitted, nor did defendant show him four of them. There were other men in the room, who were not playing. He, of course, could not say whether money was put on the table to pay for drink when he heard the chinking. He was certain the words he heard used were “Pay up” and not “Play up”. He believed they called the game “Nap” they were playing. There was only one pack of cards – an incomplete pack – ten were missing. He did not suggest that it was usual to play “Nap” with a pack of cards with 10 missing.

Detective Officer Burniston gave similar evidence, and with the pack of cards in Court he demonstrated the noise of shuffling and cutting, manipulating them quite expertly.

In answer to Mr. Haines, Burniston said if other men in the room said there was no playing for money, it would not be true. He saw no cards about gambling in the house. He could not tell the difference in the chink of money paid for cards and that paid for drink. He thought it was a suspicious act for men to put cards between their legs under the table.

Mr. Haines: But you don't suppose they were going to show you what sort of hands they had, do you? (Laughter)

Mr. Haines said it was not suggested that it was an unlawful game, unless it was played for money, and he contended there was no evidence that money was played for, except the statement of the constables that they heard money put down on the table. He submitted that there was no knowledge on the part of the defendant or her husband that there was any playing for money. If the Bench thought differently, he should show them that every step had been taken to prevent it.

Mrs. Brett, the defendant, was sworn, and said there were four cards in the room stating that no gambling was permitted. On the evening in question, she and her husband and her daughter were all busy in the bar. Her daughter attended on the smoking room when anything was knocked for, and the door was usually kept open. Nothing occurred to lead her to suppose money was being played for. From the bar, in the ordinary way, they could not see what was going on at the further table. Had she known that playing for money was going on she would have stopped it.

In answer to Supt. Reeve, witness said the cards were hers – they were on the shelf in the smoking room.

Percy William Brett said the table was not in view of the bar. He did not allow gaming and had the cards printed to warn people. He allowed customers to play whist or cribbage, but not for money.

The Bench retired to consider the points raised, and on their return said they considered there was a doubt in the evidence, and they gave the defendant the benefit of it. The summons was dismissed.

Folkestone Express 23 June 1900.

County Court.

Tuesday, June 19th: Before Sir William L. Selfe.

Alfred Finn, Hawkinge v Perrin Brett: Claim of £7 for money alleged to have been withheld by defendant and £3 damages. Mr. Haines appeared for plaintiff and Mr. Stainer for defendant.

The plaintiff said on May 9th he cashed a cheque at the London and Counties Bank for £20 14s. 9d., receiving four £5 notes and the balance in small change. After dining at Sharpe's eating house and settling a little account for 6s. at the Royal George, he went up to the Swan in Dover Road. Defendant made some remark about his not having paid £2 which he had promised to contribute towards a free and easy to celebrate some addition to defendant's premises. He said he would pay it, and took out the four £5 notes from his inside pocket, and while he was undoing them defendant snatched the lot out of his hand and put them in his pocket. There were several people in the bar when defendant took these notes. He waited for some minutes, thinking he was joking, and then asked him to give them to him back. Defendant said he had not got them. He then gave him one back over the counter. A man named Bryan snatched another out of defendant's hand and gave it to him. Brett laid three sovereigns down on the counter and then said he would raffle him for £10 or nothing. He refused, saying he wanted his money back. He asked him for the other notes, and defendant said he had not got them, called him a liar, and told him he could search him. Next morning he went to the police station, and also obtained the numbers of the notes. When he went to get a warrant, the Magistrates' Clerk advised him to consult a solicitor before taking any steps. He had advertised for the notes, but up to the present without any result.

Mr. Sharpe gave evidence to the effect that plaintiff dined at his eating house in Harbour Street on the day in question, and afterwards, in company with Lee and himself, went across to the Alexandra Hotel and had a small Bass each. A conversation arose regarding a cart which witness had for sale and plaintiff said if he bought it he would pay for it. He then pulled out a bundle of notes to show that he could pay for it. Plaintiff was perfectly sober.

William Warne, the landlord of the Black Bull Hotel, said that plaintiff came to him on the day in question and complained that he had lost some money. He was perfectly sober.

John Bryan said he was in the Swan on the 9th May. Plaintiff came in and called for a drink and said “Don't think I haven't got any money to pay for it”, and pulled the notes out of his pocket. Brett snatched them away and put them in his pocket and kept them there about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour. When they were talking, Finn said he would do £2 to defendant's £2 for a free and easy in the big room. Brett gave him one £5 note back and £3 in gold. Finn said “I want two more £5 notes. You took four out of my hand”. Brett said “I never – I only took two”. Brett had one note in his hand, and witness took this out of his hand and gave it to plaintiff with the remark “Here's one of them”. Brett had been having a little too much to drink. He drove him up from the Fishmarket, and when he got to the Swan his wife jawed him.

The defendant said on the 9th May he was in the Fishmarket with Mr. Spearpoint. His legs were queer, and his back also, and he asked Bryan to give him a ride. They saw Finn's horse outside the Swan. Bryan went into the bar and saw Lee, who went out, and afterwards returned with plaintiff. Plaintiff said “Don't think I haven't got any money”, and waved four notes before him. He took thm out of his hand, and after looking at them, put them in his pocket for a joke. After keeping them there a minute or two he handed them back to plaintiff. Plaintiff said he would do £2 to his £2 for a free and easy in the big room, and gave him back a note, which he held in his hand, and at the same time gave plaintiff three sovereigns. Bryan then snatched the note out of his hand and gave it to plaintiff. Plaintiff asked witness to give him back the other notes, but he said he had not got them, and told him to search him. He came round and searched him and found nothing on him. Next day Finn came down again and demanded the notes from him. He was three sovereigns out of pocket over the matter.

By His Honour: When Finn took the notes out of his pocket they were in a bundle. He kept them in his pocket for about three minutes and then handed them back without untying them.

Mrs. Brett, the defendant's wife, said on the afternoon in question Bryan and Lee came in first and said “Has Mr. Finn been here?” She said “I have not seen him”. Lee said “I know where he is. I'll go and fetch him”. He drove away in Bryan's cart, and Finn and Lee came back together. Finn said “I have got some money”, and took out of his pocket some notes, which he put in Mr. Brett's face. Mr. Brett snatched them out of his hand and put them in his pocket. Finn asked for his notes back, and Mr. Brett passed them back to him. Plaintiff then said “I'll be as good as my word. I'll put £2 to your £2 for a free and easy in the big room”. Mr. Brett said “Alright”. Finn took a £5 note from his bundle of notes and Mr. Brett took out his purse and put three sovereigns on the counter. Finn took them and put them into his pocket. Mr. Brett was holding the note which Mr. Finn had given him, when Bryan snatched it away and gave it back to plaintiff. She afterwards saw Lee put his hand in Finn's pocket and show him some papers. Finn said Mr. Brett had got two of his notes. Mr. Brett said “I have not. In your own interest come round and search me”. Finn said “I'd rather not”. He, however, came round and searched him, and then said “I am satisfied you have not got them”.

His Honour said he did not pretend to know what had become of the notes, but there would be judgement for the defendant with costs.

Folkestone Express 13 February 1904.

Annual Licensing Meeting.

Wednesday, February 10th: Before W. Wightwick Esq., Lieut. Col. Hamilton, Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Lieut. Colonel Westropp, and W.G. Herbert, E.T. Ward, and C.J. Pursey Esqs.

The following was the report of Supt. Reeve: Chief Constable's Office, Folkestone, 10th February, 1904. To the Chairman and Members of the Licensing Committee of the Borough of Folkestone. Gentlemen, I have the honour to report for your information that there are at present within your jurisdiction 139 premises licensed for the sale of intoxicating liquors, namely: Full licences 87; Beer on 11; Beer off 6; Beer and Spirits (dealers) 16; Grocers 12; Confectioners 3; Chemists 4; Total 139 – an average of one licence to every 220 persons, or one “on” licence to every 313. This is a decrease of one full licence as compared with last year's return, the licence of the Marquis Of Lorne having been refused at the adjourned meeting in March. Twenty of the licences have been transferred during the year, namely, 14 full licences, two beer on, two beer off, and two grocers. One beer off licence was transferred twice during the year. One licence holder has been convicted since the last annual meeting of committing drunkenness on his licensed premises. He has since transferred his licence and left the house. The alterations which the Justices at the adjourned meeting last year directed to be made to the Packet Boat, Castle, Tramway, Bricklayers' Arms, Granville, and Star Inns have all been carried out in a satisfactory manner, and none of the licensed houses are now used as common lodging houses. Ten occasional licences, and extensions of hours on 21 occasions, have been granted to licence holders during the year. There are 14 places licensed for music and dancing, and two for public billiard playing. Eleven clubs where intoxicating liquors are sold are registered in accordance with the Licensing Act of 1902. For the year ending 31st December last year, 154 persons (131 males and 23 females) were proceeded against for drunkenness. 131 were convicted and 23 discharged. This is an increase of 65 persons proceeded against, and 51 convicted, as compared with 1902. The increase is chiefly due to the additional powers given to the police under the Licensing Act, 1902. Up to the present time no person within the Borough has been convicted the necessary number of times within the 12 months to be placed on the “black list” as provided by Section 6 of the Act of 1902. With very few exceptions the whole of the licensed houses have been conducted in a satisfactory manner. The only objection I have to make to the renewal of any of the present licences is that of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, and I would ask that the renewal of this licence be deferred until the adjourned meeting. I have the honour to be, gentlemen, your obedient servant, H. Reeve (Chief Constable).

The Chairman: I think, gentlemen, you will agree that the report of the Superintendent is a satisfactory one – in fact, I may say very satisfactory – for the whole year. With your permission I well read the report we now make to you. At the adjournment of the last general licensing meeting we stated that in our opinion the number of licences for the sale of intoxicating liquor then existing in the borough of Folkestone, especially in the part of the immediate neighbourhood of the Harbour, was out of all proportion to the population, and that we proposed between then and the general annual licensing meeting of this year to obtain information on various matters, to enable us to determine what reduction would be made in the number of licences. We invited the owners of licensed houses in the meantime to meet and agree among themselves for the voluntary surrender at this general meeting of a substantial number of licences in the borough, and to submit the result of their united action to the Licensing Justices for acceptance. Failing any satisfactory proposal for reduction by the owners, the Licensing Justices last year intimated that in the exercise of their discretionary powers they would at this year's meeting decide in a fair and equitable spirit what reduction should be made. But at the opening of Parliament last week it was announced in the King's speech that the Government intended to introduce in the House of Commons during the present session a Bill to amend the Licensing Laws. In view of this legislation we are of opinion we ought not, pending the passage of this Bill through Parliament, exercise the discretionary powers vested in us, and take measures for effecting a further reduction in the number of licences within the borough on the ground that certain licensed premises are not required for the public accommodation. We have recently inspected certain houses known as the Imperial Brewery Tap, the Hope, East Cliff Tavern, Victoria, Lifeboat, Duke Of Edinburgh, Railway Tavern, and Channel Inn.

With regard to the Swan Inn, the police will serve notice upon the owner.

Folkestone Express 12 March 1904.

Adjourned Licensing Sessions.

Wednesday, March 9th: Before W. Wightwick Esq., Lieut. Cols. Fynmore and Westropp, W.G. Herbert, E.T. Ward, and C.J. Pursey Esqs.

The Swan Inn.

Mr. W.G. Haines, on behalf of the tenant (Mrs. Brett), applied for the renewal of the licence, adjourned at the last licensing meeting. The police had served notice of objection to the renewal, on grounds simply applicable to the tenant and not to the house. It was felt that a change should be made, and he was pleased to say that he had a new tenant in the person of Mr. Alfred Robert Clark, on whose behalf he would also apply for a temporary authority to sell until the actual expiration of the licence held by Mrs. Brett.

The Superintendent stated that Clark had held a licence before, and he bore a high character for the manner in which he conducted his house. Under the circumstances he would withdraw his objection.

The Chairman: We grant this licence.

Folkestone Express 16 April 1904.

Wednesday, April 13th: Before W.G. Herbert Esq., Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Lieut. Col. Westropp, G.I. Swoffer and J. Stainer Esqs.

Mr. G.W. Haines applied for the transfer of the Swan Inn from Elizabeth Brett to Alfred Robert Clark. Granted.

Folkestone Express 4 May 1907.

Saturday, April 27th: Before W.G. Herbert, J. Stainer, R.J. Linton, T. Ames, G. Hawkesley, and G. Boyd Esqs.

Alfred Robert Clark, the licensee of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, was summoned for permitting drunkenness. Mr. R.M. Mercer, solicitor, appeared on behalf of the defendant, who pleaded Not Guilty.

P.C. Allen said on Wednesday evening, April 17th, he was on duty in Dover Road. About 10.25 he arrived opposite the Swan Inn, which was kept by the defendant. Witness was on the opposite side of the road to the Inn. He had been there about three minutes, when he saw a man named Suckling coming out of the public bar, which was at the corner of the public house and faced the Skew Bridge. He was very drunk, and was holding himself up by the sides of the doorway. He went a few yards, staggered about, and fell down in the road. He fell down again twice after that, and then went towards the Skew Bridge. He went through the arch, staggered across the road, and then hung on to the railings. Witness took him into custody, and with the assistance of P.C. Eason brought him to the police station. Suckling could not have entered the inn during the time witness was there without him seeing him. He did not see the landlord or any of jis servants put Suckling out.

P.C. Eason said on the evening of the 17th of that month he was on duty in Dover Road. About 10.25 he was near the Skew Arch, when he saw a man by the name of Suckling come out of the bar of the Swan Inn. He staggered about and then fell into the road. He got up and went a few yards further, and then fell again. After falling a third time Suckling walked up the road to the Skew Bridge, and the propped himself up against the arch. He was subsequently arrested by P.C. Allen and brought to the police station. He was very drunk and practically helpless. Witness had passed the Swan Inn about ten or twelve minutes past ten, but at that time he saw nothing of Suckling. During the five minutes witness had been standing at the Skew Bridge Suckling could not have entered the bar without him seeing him.

In cross-examination Eason said he was a good judge of the time, but on being put to the test he turned out to be incorrect, and his guesses at the correct time caused much laughter.

Florence Hambrook said she was employed by Mr. Morrison, who kept a fish shop in Dover Road. The shop was just above the Swan Inn, Folly Road running down between the shop and the Swan. On Wednesday, 17th April, about twenty minutes past ten in the evening, she saw a man named Suckling come out from the public bar of the Swan Inn. He was very drunk. Witness saw him fall down in the road, about a yard from the inn. She saw him fall down again, and the next time she saw Suckling was in charge of two constables.

Horation Albert Suckling said he lived at 74, Bridge Street, and was a fish hawker. He remembered Wednesday, the 17th April. He was not working at all that day. He was down in the fish market. About eight o'clock in the evening he left the fish market, and went into the Swan about 8.30. Previous to going into the Swan he had not been to any other public house that day. He was perfectly sober. He had a pint of beer. He remained there until a little after ten. He did not remember leaving the house. He could not remember how many drinks he had. He did not remember what happened after he left the Swan. He remembered being arrested, but he did not remember falling down. When he went into the Swan he did not have a cut over his eye. He was not sober when he left the Swan. He had been in a public house in the morning.

Cross-examined, witness said he could not remember anything after 8.30.

Inspector Swift said on April 18th he went to the Swan Inn, where he saw defendant. He told him about Suckling, who had made a statement that morning to the police that he went into those premises at 8.30 the previous evening and remained there until the time he was arrested, at twenty five minutes past ten. Defendant replied that Suckling came in twice, but he did not attend to him himself until ten minutes past ten. He (defendant) then said that Suckling had already had enough and had better have some ginger beer. Suckling then took up a pint of beer belonging to Mr. Pope and drank it off. Witness told defendant that information would be laid against him.

Before calling witnesses for the defence, Mr. Mercer drew the Magistrates' attention to Section 4 of the Licensing Act of 1902, and Section 13 under which that summons had been issued.

The defendant then went into the witness box. He said he had been a licensed victualler in that town for twelve and a half years – eight years at the Eagle, eighteen months at the Eagle in High Street, and three years at the Swan. During that time there had never been a complaint or a summons against him. He had invested in the Swan £1,400, which was practically all his money. Witness knew Suckling and knew his proclivities. He remembered Suckling coming in on the 17th April. He came in a little before eight o'clock and remained there about half an hour, during which time he sold some fish. Witness believed he was supplied with some drink. He did not serve him. Witness next saw Suckling a little before ten. He was drunk when he came in, and wanted a pint of beer. A Mr. Pope was in teh public bar, and a Mr. Boxer in the saloon bar. Witness told him he had had enough to drink. Suckling then asked Mr. Boxer to treat him. Witness told Suckling he was not to have anything. Then Mr. Pope said Suckling had drank his beer, and, looking round, witness saw the glass was empty. Witness told Suckling to clear out. He had a barman there ready to put him out, but before he could get round Suckling was gone.

Cross-examined, witness admitted that the Chief Constable had cautioned him about the conduct of his house, but he did not think it was serious.

Mr. Mercer said he ventured to say, if the facts should prove to their satisfaction, they would say he was right, after having read that Section of the Act, and he (defendant) rebutted the prima facie presumption of permitting drunkenness in doing his best to get Suckling out directly he recognised he was drunk. He ventured to say the balance of the evidence must preponderate in favour of his case.

John Hatfield, barman at the Swan Inn, said Suckling came into the bar about ten minutes past eight. He was perfectly sober, and witness served him with some beer. There was no truth in the statement that he was there from eight to ten.

Thomas Pope said he lived in Princess Street, and was a house painter. He called in at the Swan on the 17th April, about five or ten minutes past ten. There was no-one in the bar then. While he was there he saw Suckling come in. He was intoxicated. In further evidence Pope generally corroborated defendant's statement. Suckling was on the premises about three or four minutes.

James Boxer, of Gladstone Road, ginger beer manufacturer, said shortly after ten o'clock on the evening of the 17th April he went into the saloon bar of the Swan Inn. Suckling entered the public bar two or three minutes later. He saw Suckling take Mr. Pope's beer after being refused by defendant. He could not suggest anything that the landlord did not do to get him out.

The Magistrates retired, and upon their return the Chairman said that they had come to the decision that there was not sufficient evidence on which they could convict defendant for permitting drunkenness, but they did not consider defendant ejected Suckling from the bar as quickly as he should have done.

Note: No mention of Clark at the Eagle, High Street in More Bastions.

Folkestone Express 28 December 1907.

Local News.

Just before one o'clock on Monday a collision occurred at the top of Shellons Street, between a cab belonging to Mr. A.R. Clarke, of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, and a London and South Coast motor coach. The motor coach was proceeding down Cheriton Road towards Shellons Street, while the cab was coming across Guildhall Street by the Shakespeare Hotel. Apparently both drivers were unaware of each other's presence until they were practically in collision. The driver of the cab, in order to avoid the motor coach, turned into Shellons Street. He was hardly quick enough, and before the chauffeur could pull up the coach had crashed into the horse, which fell and broke its leg. The front part of the coach ran on to the pavement by Mr. Strood's shop, where it came to a standstill. The cab was not damaged at all,, but the horse had to be shot, which was done by Mr. Attwood.

Folkestone Express 22 February 1908.

County Court.

Tuesday, February 18th: Before Judge Shortt.

Alfred L. Clarke v London and South Coast Motor Service Ltd.: The plaintiff claimed £70 for damages done to his horse and motor coach, owing, he contended, to negligence. A jury was empanelled in this case.

Mr. Theodore Matthew, instructed by Mr. Mercer, of Canterbury, represented the plaintiff, and Mr. F. Dodd, instructed by Messrs. Reynolds and Son, 5, Arundel Street, Strand, London, for the defendants.

Mr. Matthew said the issue the jury had to decide was a simple one, whether a horse, the property of the plaintiff, was injured so that it had to be killed owing to the negligence of the defendant's driver, and they would also be asked to estimate the value of the animal.

George Benjamin Phillips, living at 15, Darlington Street, said he was employed by the plaintiff, who was a fly proprietor. On Monday, December 23rd, he went out with his fly. About half past twelve he was returning with his fly from his home in Guildhall Street. When he got to the corner of Shellons Street he saw a motor coming from the direction of Cheriton Road. Directly he saw him the driver blew his horn. The only possible thing he could do was to pull his horse up, but the rear wheel of the motor struck the horse's foreleg. The horse stood holding its leg up, so he jumped down at once. The motor ran onto the pavement near Strood's shop. The driver said he could not stop on account of the road being slippery and the brakes skidding. He would not allow anything to be touched until the police saw the position of the vehicles. Mr. Hogben, the veterinary surgeon, was sent for, and he ordered the horse to be shot. The motor was about five or six yards from him when the horn was sounded. He (witness) was going about four or five miles an hour.

Cross-examined, witness said he saw no other motor car close to the kerb. At the time of the accident he was in the middle of Guildhall Street, with the horse turning down Shellons Street. The skin of the horse's leg was not caught. The roads were a little greasy that day. The off-side wheel and the engine of the car were on the pavement, but had not the near side wheel caught the kerb it would have gone further. He told the police constable who came that the horse cost 35 guineas. He did not tell him the motor was going fast. He (witness) was not going at a considerable pace. He was going to a cab stand, and had no job to which he was going.

Re-examined, he said if he had not pulled up the motor would have caught him broadside.

Graham Bell, of Lyndhurst Road, Peckham, said he was going from the Drill Halls up Shellons Street, when he saw the fly crossing at the top of the street and the motor coming down Cheriton Road. The driver of the fly pulled his horse facing him and the motor car, which came rather quickly, ran into the horse. The car ran onto the pavement, and both off wheels of the car were on the pavement. The fly was going slowly. He was not able to say whether the motor skidded. He could not say that he formed an opinion of who was responsible for the accident.

Miss Margaret Wylie, 1, Cornwall Terrace, Regent's Park, London, said on December 23rd, at half past twelve, she was in Strood's shop, looking out of the window. She saw a motor car coming far too quickly for a wet day down Cheriton Road. The motor never “tooted” at all until it got to the corner. It was too late, and it caught the horse, which the driver had pulled with its head down Shellons Street. She afterwards gave her name to the driver of the fly. She was noticing the car because she was intending to go to Hythe by one of them, but she did not go by one of them afterwards.

Cross-examined, witness said she did not notice any motor standing near the Shakespeare Hotel.

Archibald Edwards, a carrier, of 12, Gladstone Road, said he was coming down Cheriton Road when he noticed the motor coach passing him. The motor car driver sounded his horn when on the corner, and, no doubt, when he saw the horse. He did not see the fly until the two vehicles were pretty well on to each other. The fly could not have been going very fast by the manner in which it was pulled up. The car was going from six to eight miles an hour. There was a drop in the road halfway across Guildhall Street.

Cross-examined, he said he did not see any other vehicle near the Shakespeare Hotel.

Frederick George Mercer, a builder, of 33, Tontine Street, said he asked the fly driver how the accident happened, and the driver of the coach said he could not help it, because the road was slippery and the car skidded.

Frederick Tritton, a fishmonger, of 20, East Cliff, said he was crossing Guildhall Street at the time of the accident. The motor coach came straight down Cheriton Road. It was going fast, while the fly was going at a jog trot, as though the driver was looking for a job. There were two off fore wheels of the coach on the pavement, and it seemed to him that half of the car was on the pavement.

Henry Dawkins, of 2, Ingles Mews, a coachman in the employ of Alderman Banks, said Mr. Clarke asked him to examine the horse before he purchased it, and he told him, when he advised him to buy it, it was dirt cheap at £45. Later he (witness) asked him to sell it to him for £55.

Cross-examined, he said the horse was six years old next spring. It was bred by Mr. Heritage, who evidently did not know its value.

John Murphy, a horse dealer, of Ingles Mews, said he should value the horse at £50. If he had had him he would not have taken that for him, because he was fit for a weight-carrying hunter.

This concluded the plaintiff's case.

Richard Littlehales, the driver of the coach, residing at 17, Bradstone Avenue, said he had been driving for four years. On December 23rd he was driving down Cheriton Road. It had been raining and the road was greasy. In Cheriton Road there was a motor by the Shakespeare Hotel. He had no passengers in the coach, and before he got to the corner he was going about four or five miles an hour. He pulled up when he saw the horse. He sounded the horn twice, the first time just a little lower down than Leney's yard, and the second time just before he saw the horse. When he got to the corner he saw the horse coming along at rather a fast pace. He put his brakes on and, he supposed, owing to the roads being slippery, they locked and the wheels skidded. When he saw the horse he kept straight on and he went on to the pavement. He thought they were blocking the traffic, and he suggested they should move, but he did not move until P.C. Kettle came. After the horse hit his nearside wheel the back of the cab was towards Guildhall Street. His brakes were in perfectly good order. From the time he saw the horse until he pulled up he covered about eight yards. The horse was not knocked down.

Cross-examined: The witnesses who said he was going at a fast pace were wrong. It was right the horse was going at a fast pace. The fly man had more chance of avoiding the accident than he had. His coach weighed 2 tons 13 cwt., and the driver of the fly really drove into him at a fast pace. Two days before that case he had a little collision with a fly, and he paid the damage for it because he thought people were prejudiced against motors. He did not run into a team of horses in Dymchurch Road last year. He had had two accidents before, but he had not done so much damage as he had done in that case. He was always careful about his driving.

Re-examined, he said the near side front wheel caught the horse.

William George Want, the conductor of the coach, said he was sitting on the front seat with the driver. They were going to the garage. When they came down Cheriton Road he saw another motor near the Shakespeare Hotel. The driver sounded his horn twice, for it was a dangerous corner. He did not see the horse until they got to the corner and the coach ran on to the pavement. The horse was coming along far too fast for it to be pulled up, and its leg shot out and went under the wheel.

Cross-examined, witness said they had not time to turn into Guildhall Street. They were going about four miles an hour. He had only been on the car once when they had an accident. That was when they ran into a cab coming out of Cheriton Gardens.

Robert Charles Hind, a motor car driver, of Cheriton, said he had nothing to do with the defendant company. He was outside the Shakespeare Hotel with his car at the time of the accident. He heard the driver sound the horn twice, and he saw the horse strike the coach. The coach came past him at about five miles an hour and when the brakes were applied it seemed to swerve. Only one wheel of the car went on to the pavement. The horse, which was going at a brisk trot, was struck by the front wheel of the coach.

Cross-examined, he thought the driver of the fly was really the cause of the accident, for the horse was going at eight miles an hour. The coach could have been pulled up in its own length, but the horse ran into it. He had a little sympathy for a motor having had an accident. In that case it was a landau.

P.C. Kettle said he did not see the accident. He saw the vehicles after the accident. The front wheel of the coach was on the pavement. The roads were wet. He did not see Hind's motor near the Shakespeare Hotel.

Both Mr. Dodd and Mr. Matthew addressed the jury, and his Honour, in summing up, said there was no doubt the burden of proof was on the plaintiff. It was not for the defendant to disprove the case, but it was incumbent upon the plaintiff, if he was to succeed, to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that it was caused through the negligence of the driver of the coach.

The jury retired to consider their verdict, and on their return they announced they had found for the defendant, and his Honour gave judgement in accordance with the jury's finding.

Folkestone Express 6 May 1911.

Saturday, April 29th: Before W.G. Herbert, J. Stainer, G.I. Swoffer, R.J. Linton, and G. Boyd Esqs.

Robert Death was summoned for assaulting Charles Andrews. He pleaded Not Guilty.

Charles Andrews, 16, Athelstan Road, a limeburner, said on Sunday, 2nd April, about ten o'clock in the evening, he was in Dover Road, near the Skew Arches. He had come out of the Swan public house with a man named Tutt. He said “Goodnight” to a man named Gillam, and was going over to the urinal, near the arches, when he received a blow in the left eye and fell down and became insensible. He underwent medical treatment as a result of the blow. He did not know the defendant.

Frederick Tutt, 19, Canterbury Road, a carter, said he remembered Sunday night, the 2nd of April. He left the Swan withthe last witness at ten o'clock. Gillam and Andrews were walking together, and witness was just behind. Andrews said “Goodnight” to Gillam and told witness to wait. Witness then saw defendant come up and strike Andrews in the face with his fist. Andrews fell on his back, and witness picked him up and helped him home. He was insensible, and bled at the nose and mouth. Witness saw defendant in the public house. There was no quarrel.

Charlotte Andrews, wife of the complainant, said she was at home when her husband was brought home. He was insensible, and it was five o'clock the next morning before he knew anything. There was a cut at the back of his head, and he had a black eye. Witness called in a doctor on the following Friday, and complainant did not get up until Thursday in last week. Defendant called on witness on the Friday following the occurrence. He said he was the man who struck her husband. He had had words with him before he struck him. Andrews said that if he (defendant) had said as much to him as he (defendant) said to Gillam he would have floored him.

Death said it was because Andrews threatened him that he did what he did.

The Chief Constable said there was one conviction for gambling six years ago against defendant. He was in the employ of the railway company.

The Chairman said defendant was liable to a fine of £5, or two months' hard labour without the option of a fine. It was a most unprovoked and brutal assault, and he would be fined 40s. and 11s. costs, or one month's hard labour.

Folkestone Express 17 August 1912.

Tuesday, August 13th: Before J. Stainer, G.I. Swoffer, G. Boyd, W.J. Harrison, E.T. Morrison, and A. Stace Esqs.

The Clerk said there was notice of an application that morning for a protection order in respect of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, but Mr. Phillips, on behalf of the owners, informed him that there was some hitch, and the application would not be made.

The Chief Constable said he had inquired into the character of the proposed incoming tenant. He understood the hitch had arisen out of the outgoing tenant not being there.

Mr. Phillips said that was so.

The Clerk (to Mr. Phillips): Then you do not make any application. You must come again in due course.

Folkestone Express 24 August 1912.

Inquest.

Mr. A. Clarke, the licensee of the "Swan Inn," Dover Road, who had been missing from Folkestone for about three weeks, was found dead on Sunday evening in a secluded spot about four miles west of Hythe. His body was discovered by a man named Percy Cheeseman, who at once gave information to the police. Close to the dead man's head was a revolver, by which it is almost certain that the unfortunate man shot himself. The body was in an advanced state of decomposition, and it was impossible to identify the man by his face, as it was practically eaten away. However, several articles found in the pockets of the clothing proved who the man was. With assistance the police had the body removed to the "County Members Inn," at Lympne, where an inquest was held last Tuesday.

It appeared that Clarke, after leaving Folkestone, went to West Hythe, where he took lodgings and remained until the day after Bank Holiday, since when all trace was lost of him until his dead body was discovered. It is therefore probable that he met his death about that time. When the clothing was searched a considerable sum of money was found on him. On Tuesday week an application was made to the Borough Magistrates to transfer the licence of the "Swan Inn," but it could not be proceeded with owing to the fact that the present licensee (Clarke) was not present. The deceased man had not lived with his wife for a considerable time, and on Monday the County Police were making enquiries as to her whereabouts.

The inquest was held at the "County Members Inn," Lympne, on Tuesday afternoon, when the inquiry was conducted by Mr. A. K. Mowll, the Deputy Coroner for East Kent.

Alonzo William Alexander Clarke, a baker, of 10, Russell Street, Dover, said he was the brother of the deceased. He identified the clothes on the body viewed by the jury as those belonging to his brother, Alfred Robert. He had seen him wear them at Folkestone. His brother was a publican, and was the landlord of the "Swan Inn," Dover Road, Folkestone. He recognised the gold watch and Albert, gold seal, gold pin, and two rings (produced) as his brother's property. His brother was fifty years old last September. He was married, but had no children. His wife was not living with him, but left him about two years and a half ago. He was then holding the licence of the "Swan Inn." He last saw his brother alive on August 2nd, a day before he was missing. It was between five and six in the afternoon he met the deceased in Biggin Street, Dover. He asked him (the deceased) how he was, and he replied that he was not at all well, and was taking steps to get rid of his business and to be out within a fortnight. Previous to that he saw him some weeks ago. His brother complained to him on the last occasion he saw him that he was not up to the mark, his teeth troubling him a great deal. He knew there were things on his brother's mind in relation to his family life. He was upset at the time his wife left him, and he never seemed to recover properly from it. He heard by telegram that his brother was missing on the following Tuesday.

John Hadfield, of the "Swan Inn," Folkestone, said he was employed by the deceased as barman at the house. Mr. Clarke had been tenant at the "Swan Inn" for nine years. He left because he saw how things were going between the deceased's wife and another man. He told Mr. Clarke what was happening, and he left six months before Mrs, Clarke eloped with the man. He last saw his employer at 11 a.m. on August 3rd, when he told him he was going to the bank to get change, and he would not be long. He never came back. On the following Tuesday he informed the deceased's brother and sister, and the brewers that he was missing. On the 13th August he told the police that Mr. Clarke was missing, that being the day when the licence was to have been transferred. The deceased had got mixed up with a woman who lived in one of his cottages, and she had given birth to a child four months ago. The woman said he was the father of the child, and the deceased said he was not. He used to sleep off the premises about fifteen months ago. He had informed witness that she was trying to get some money out of him. The deceased's house was doing a good trade, and the accounts were all in good order. Mr. Clarke had threatened to take his wife's life, but had never threatened to take his own life. He never said he was worrying over anything, and he never gave him the idea that he was going to put an end to his existence. He never seemed at all strange in his manner. He, however, complained of pains in his head the Friday previous to his going away, and he said he had dropped his false teeth and had broken them. When he came back from Dover on the Friday he told deceased that he was thinking of going in for the "Richmond" house, and the deceased said that he had practically got rid of the house, and if he (witness) stopped with him until he went he would give him a cheque.

Peter John Uden, of the "Carpenters Arms," West Hythe, said a man, who was a stranger to him, came to his house at six o'clock on the evening of the 3rd August. He asked for tea, and he was served with it. He asked for a bed, and he (witness) got him one at Nightingale Cottage, close by. He left the house about eight o'clock and went to bed. He came on the following morning about ten o'clock and had breakfast. He stayed about the place all day on Sunday, and on Monday morning he came to the house again. After breakfast he came to the bar and asked if he could put him half a quarter of whisky in a bottle for him to take away. As the weather was bad, he asked him (witness) to lend him a Mackintosh, as he was going for a stroll. He said he would be back for dinner, but he did not return until evening. On the Tuesday morning he came in to breakfast about 9.30, and afterwards he had another half quartern of whisky to take away. He then paid up his account for the time he was staying there, it including his night's lodgings and amounting to 15s. He said he might not be back until evening, and asked him to lend him his Mackintosh again. He went on the canal bank, and proceeded in the direction of Hythe. That was the last he saw of him. The body viewed by the jury had his Mackintosh on it. The man did not appear to be strange in his manner, but was very quiet. On the Sunday he was in the smoke room all day, and smoked several cigars. He was very pleasant when spoken to. He (witness) had other people staying in the house, or they would have put him up. His (witness's) wife asked him for his name, and he replied “Oh, it's all right”. He had no luggage with him. The man only had one pint of beer in his house, and that was the only intoxicant, besides the whisky, he had in his house.

John Hadfield, re-called, said the deceased was practically a teetotaller.

Walter Cheeseman, a farmer, of Court-at-Street, Lympne, said he had been to look at some sheep near Aldergate Bridge at a quarter to seven on Sunday evening, the 18th, when he smelled something very offensive. He thought it must be the body of a dead sheep, so he looked into the bracken. He then noticed the body of a man in the bracken, on a bank in a meadow, five or six rods away from the road leading to Aldington. It was impossible to see the body from the road. The deceased was lying on his back, with his arms on his chest. It was getting dusk, and he immediately sent for P.C. Kingsbury at Sellinge, but could not find him until one o'clock in the morning, as he was on duty. As soon as it was light the constable came to his house, and they went to the spot, where they saw the body lying in the same position. He then saw a revolver in the man's right hand. He saw the constable take the two envelopes (produced) from the pockets of the clothing.

The Coroner was then handed the two envelopes, the writing on which was not easily distinguishable. He said the first one had on one side of it “Mr. Clarke, "Swan Hotel," Folkestone”. On the other side was “Mrs. Looker. I am sorry for what I have done to you. Get the deeds of Ivy Cottage at Lloyds Bank. The house you can have, also the furniture. Ever, A. R. Clarke”. The second ran as follows: “I find those papers I signed were false, not what you told me they were. They told me they were for £600 valuation, to be paid in bills”. Mr. Mowll thereupon asked if anyone could explain either of the letters. The witness Hadfield said Mrs. Looker was the woman to whom he had referred; and Mr. Battiscombe, of Messrs. Flint and Co., said he could explain the other letter.

Witness, continuing, said he was present when the constable searched the body, and took from the clothing a gun licence, which was taken out on August 3rd, the five chambered revolver (produced) with one discharged cartridge and four loaded cartridges in it, an account from Messrs. Upton Bros., another account from Messrs. Lee and Son for £1 12s. 6d., the jewellery previously identified, a note with £700 and £16 upon it, a box containing 42 loaded cartridges, and £14 16s. 7d. in money.

P.C. Kingsbury, stationed at Sellindge, said he searched the body and found the articles previously described. He conveyed the body later to the "County Members."

Mr. C. W. Battiscombe, Managing Secretary for Messrs. Flint and Co., said he could throw a little light on the second paper read by the Coroner. On Aug. 1st Mr. Clarke came to his office in the afternoon to see him in regard to a contract he had seen in respect to the change at the house he was giving up. The contract was between him and the prospective tenant. Deceased said he did not think the contract was quite in order and he asked him if he would read it through. He (witness) did so, and then pointed out that it was all in order. So far as he could see, it was perfectly in order, and Clarke was quite satisfied when he left the office that it was so. The contract was drawn up by Messrs. Phillips and Son, valuers, of Dover, who were acting on behalf of the prospective tenant. Deceased's accounts were up to date, and there were no debts owing to them. He was in a most happy position, so far as their accounts were concerned – in fact, they could not be better. Deceased would have come out of the house with over £700. He was a first class tenant, and so far as he (witness) knew there was nothing for him to worry about.

Dr. Clifford Hackney said he examined the body at seven o'clock on Monday evening in the coach house of the "County Members Inn." The features were unrecognisable, as they were in a state of advanced decomposition. An examination of the body revealed no injury of any kind until he came to the head, when he found a hole in the right upper jawbone, and a fracture of the bone, which was splintered from the hole. The hole suggested to him gun trouble. The point of entry was all eaten away, but the hole went in the direction of the base of the skull. The right hand was clenched in the typical position for gripping a revolver, the position of the trigger finger being projected. The man must have been dead for fourteen days. The cause of death was the injury to the upper jawbone, probably from the revolver. The size of one of the undischarged cartridges was about the size of the hole in the jaw.

The Coroner, in summing up, said he thought the jury must come to the conclusion that the body was that of Alfred Robert Clarke. He also thought it was quite clear from the evidence that the deceased must have taken his own life. It was for the jury to say whether at the time the deceased was temporarily insane.

The jury returned a verdict of “Suicide whilst temporarily insane”.

Folkestone Express 28 September 1912.

Friday, September 20th: Before Alderman Vaughan, Alderman Jenner, Lieut. Col. Fynmore, Captain Chamier, J.J. Giles Esq., and Captain Owen.

Mr. G. W. Haines applied for the temporary transfer of the "Swan Inn" to Mr. Norman. He said they would remember the landlord recently died, and his widow, to whom letters of administration had been granted, applied for the temporary transfer to Mr. Norman, who was well-known in the town, having some time ago kept the "Gun Tavern" for twelve years.

The Bench granted the temporary authority asked for.

Folkestone Express 5 October 1912.

Local News.

At the police court on Wednesday the following transfer of licences was sanctioned by the Magistrates: Swan Hotel, Dover Road, from the late Mr. A.R. Clarke to Mr. Norman.

Folkestone Express 12 October 1912.

Notice.

Alfred Robert Clarke, Deceased.

Notice is hereby given that all persons having claims against the estate of Alfred Robert Clarke, late a licensed victualler, of the Swan Inn, 176, Dover Road, Folkestone, Kent, who died on the 6th day of August, 1912, intestate, are herby required to send particulars of such claims to me the undersigned on behalf of the Administratrix on or before the 30th day of November next, after which date the Administratrix will distribute the assets having regard only to claims then notified.

Dated this 3rd day of October, 1912.

Geo. W. Haines, 18 & 20, Church Street, Folkestone, Solicitor for the Administratrix.

Folkestone Express 29 August 1914.

Saturday, August 22nd: Before Mr. E. T. Ward and Col. Owen.

Lucy Foreman was charged with stealing a ring, the property of a fellow servant at the "Royal Pavilion Hotel."

Maud Ellen Lambert, a chambermaid employed at the "Royal Pavilion Hotel," said the prisoner had also been employed there as staff maid from July 28th until August 14th, when she left without notice. The ring (produced) was her property. On Thursday week she placed the ring in a hatpin box in her bedroom, and she saw it safe on the following morning at ten o'clock. The same evening she went to the box, but the ring was missing. She made a search for it, but could not find it, and on Saturday she gave information to the police. On Friday she was shown the ring with two others, and identified it as her property. She valued the ring at 32/6. On Thursday before the prisoner left she was sweeping he (prosecutrix's) room at four o'clock. She did not give the prisoner permission to take the ring; in fact, she had not even shown it to her.

Harrison Prescott, manager to Mr. S. W. Joseph, pawnbroker, of High Street, said the previous day, at half past eleven, the prisoner came to the shop and offered the ring produced in pledge, and asked a loan of 5/- or 6/-. She said it was her property, and had been in her possession five or six years, it having been given to her by a young man. He ultimately advanced 5/- on it. Prisoner gave the name of Lily Gilham, 85a, Marshall Street. Later in the day he handed it over to Det. Sergt. Johnson.

Det. Sergt. Johnson said from information received he made inquiries. The previous evening at 9.45, he, in company with P. C. Butcher, saw the prisoner in the public bar of the "Swan Inn," Dover Road. He called her outside, and told her they were two police officers, and asked her her name. She replied “Lucy Foreman”. He then cautioned her, and showed the ring (produced), which had been given to him by the last witness, and told her she answered the description of a woman who had pledged the ring, which had been stolen, at Mr. Joseph's, and had been identified by Maud Lambert as her property. He informed her she would be charged with stealing it from a bedroom at the "Royal Pavilion Hotel" on the 14th. She replied “My young man, named Carter, gave it to me two years ago”. He saw Carter in the prisoner's presence, and showed him the ring produced, and told him that the prisoner said he gave her the ring two years ago, He replied “I did not. She asked me to pledge it for her. I took it down to the pawnshop, and they refused to take it in”. Prisoner then said “I may as well tell you the truth. My husband gave it to me as an engagement ring ten years ago, but he is now in Canada”. He brought her to the police station and formally charged her, and she again said her husband gave it to her ten years ago. Prisoner had not a wedding ring on.

Prisoner asked the Magistrates to decide the case, and pleaded Not Guilty. She said her husband gave her the ring ten years ago when she was in the Victoria Hospital.

The Clerk pointed out that she told Det. Sergt. Johnson that her young man gave it to her two years ago.

Prisoner said what she told the Magistrates was the truth.

The Chief Constable (Mr. Reeve) said they knew nothing about the prisoner there. She had, however, been drifting about a good deal. Mr. Easton, the Police Court Missioner, told him that she was eight or nine years ago in service in the town, and bore a very good character then. She was married, but her husband had deserted her, and she had one or two children in the Cottage Homes at Chatham. He was afraid she had not been leading a very good life since she had been down there.

The Clerk said Mr. Easton informed him that the prisoner had been in a Salvation Army Home from January to July, when she was found that situation down there.

Prisoner agreed to go into a home.

The Chairman said they did not wish to send her to prison. They wished to give her another chance. They had decided to bind her over for twelve months, the condition being that she was to go into a home for that period, during which time she would be under the supervision of the Probation Officer.

Folkestone Express 24 October 1914.

Local News.

On Tuesday, application was made at the Police Court with regard to the transfer of the licence of the Swan Inn from Mr. Norman to Mr. E. Miles.

The Chief Constable said it was a similar application to that of the previous day, and was done for safety. Mr. Miles was a very respectable man, and he had had a licence at Canterbury.

Mr. Norman said he was a naturalised Englishman, and had lived here for forty years. He had a public house for twenty two years at Postling, and had been two years at the Swan. He had no objection to the transfer,

The application was granted.

Note: This does not appear in More Bastions.

Folkestone Express 28 November 1914.

Wednesday, November 25th: Before E.T. Ward, G.I. Swoffer, R.J. Linton, G. Boyd, and E.T. Morrison esqs.

Mr. Phillips, on behalf of Messrs. Nalder and Collyer, said he wished the Bench to give Mr. E. Miles, now in possession, temporary permission to sell at the Swan Inn. They would shortly ask for the transfer of the licence to Mr. Clarke, of Watford.

The request was granted.

Note: This does not appear in More Bastions.

Folkestone Express 16 January 1915.

Wednesday, January 13th: Before Lieut. Col.Fynmore, J. Linton, G.I. Swoffer, W.G. Harrison and G. Boyd Esqs., and Colonel Owen.

The transfer to Mr. W.H. Clarke from Mr. Norman of the licence of the Swan Inn was granted.

Folkestone Express 24 May 1924.

Wednesday, May 21st: Before the Rev. Epworth Thompson, Mr. L.G.A. Collins, Councillor W. Hollands, Mr. Blamey, and Col. P. Broome-Giles.

The licence (temporary authority) of the Swan Hotel, Dover Road, was granted to Mr. S.C. Herbert, late of the Clarendon Hotel, Snargate Street, Dover.

Folkestone Express 5 July 1924.

Local News.

On Wednesday the Folkestone Magistrates transferred the licence of the Swan Hotel, Dover Road, to Mr. S.C.W. Herbert.

Folkestone Express 5 September 1931.

Wednesday, September 2nd: Before Mr. J.H. Blamey and Mr. S.B. Corser.

Percy George Savage, a fruiterer, of Dover Road, Folkestone, appeared in the dock on five charges of obtaining five sums of £6 each by false pretences with intent to defraud. Mr. B.H. Bonniface appeared to defend.

Harry Franklin, a grocer, of 103, Dover Road, Folkestone, said that defendant, whom he knew, called on him on the 22nd August at about six o'clock. He said “I was late for the bank. Could you cash a cheque for me?” Defendant then produced a cheque for £6, payable to “Self”, and signed P.G. Savage. It was already endorsed. Witness cashed it, and gave defendant £6 for it. He quite thought the cheque would be met. He paid it into the bank on August 24th, and it was returned to him the next morning marked “Refer to drawer”.

Mr. Banniface reserved his cross-examination in the case of each witness.

Thomas William Andrews, of 65 Tontine Street, Folkestone, a boot and shoe dealer, said he knew the defendant quite well. On 22nd August, at about 6.15 p.m., defendant called on him at the shop. He asked him if he would change him a cheque. He produced a cheque, already drawn, signed P.G. Savage, and payable to “Self”. Witness cashed the cheque and gave defendant £6. He paid the cheque into his bank on the following morning, and it was returned the next day marked “Refer to drawer”. He had never changed cheques for the defendant before.

Miss Doris Minnie Martin, bookkeeper to Mr. E.C. Hann, butcher, of 104, Dover Road, Folkestone, said she knew the defendant. He came to the shop at about 8.30 p.m. on the 22nd August and asked her if she would cash a cheque for him as the bank was closed and he wanted some change. He produced a cheque, already drawn, for £6, payable to “Self”, and signed P.G. Savage. She cashed the cheque and handed the defendant £6. The cheque was paid into Mr. Hann's bank on the following Monday and returned the next day marked “Refer to drawer”.

Harry Edward Carey, tobacconist, of 135, Dover Road, Folkestone, said he knew the defendant by sight. Defendant called at his shop at about 8.45 p.m. on the 22nd August, where he produced a cheque for £6. It was already drawn and endorsed. Defendant said “Would you mind cashing a little cheque for me? I have bought a wireless set and have not enough ready cash to pay for it”. He cashed the cheque and gave the defendant the money. At about 8.15a.m. on the following morning, defendant came with a cheque to the shop, marked £6, payable to “Self”. It was endorsed P.G. Savage. He said “Could you cash another little cheque for me? I am going to London for the day and will be leaving before the bank is open”. He cashed the cheque, expecting it to be met by the bank. He paid the cheques into his bank on Wednesday, August 26th, and they were both returned marked “Refer to drawer” on the 27th August.

Harry Godfrey Read, licensee of the Railway Tavern, Dover Road, said he had known defendant casually for about six years. At about 9 p.m. on the 22nd August defendant came to him and produced a cheque, asking him if he would change it for him as he was short of cash. It was marked payable to “Self” and endorsed P.G. Savage. He gave defendant £6 and received the cheque in exchange. He paid in the cheque on the following Monday at the bank and it was returned the next day marked “Refer to drawer”.

Police Sergeant Lawrence said at 3 p.m. the previous day he saw the defendant detained at Gillingham Police Station, Dorsetshire. He informed him that he was a police officer from Folkestone and held a warrant for his arrest. He read the warrant over to him and cautioned him, and he replied “I have nothing to say”. He brought him to the Folkestone Police Station, where he was charged and cautioned. Defendant replied “There is nothing for me to say. I thought there was enough security for me at the bank”. On being searched, in his possession he had £125 5s. 8d. in Treasury notes and silver, and three cheque books of the National Provincial Bank, Folkestone.

The Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley) said that that was as far as he could take that case that day. There were enquiries to be made and further evidence to bring before the Court.

The Chairman said that the case would be adjourned until today (Friday) and bail granted, the defendant in £50, and two sureties of £25 or one of £50.

Folkestone Express 12 September 1931.

Friday, September 4th: Before Mr. J.H. Blamey and Mr. S.B. Corser.

Percy George Savage, a fruiterer, of Dover Road, Folkestone, appeared on remand on five charges of obtaining, by false pretences, with intent to defraud, five separate sums of £6 each. There were four further charges brought against the prisoner of obtaining three further sums of £6 each and also a sum of £10 by false pretences with intent to defraud. Mr. B.H. Bonniface appeared to defend.

P.S. Lawrence, cross-examined, said that he had found a Southern Railway cloakroom ticket in his possession.

Roland Oliver Wiltshire, a cycle dealer, of 51, Dover Street, Folkestone, said prisoner called upon him on August 23rd at 5.30 p.m. Prisoner had a cheque with him, signed .G. Savage, payable to “Self”, and it was for £6. He asked if he could cash the cheque for him and take out the 13s. 6d. he owed him. He cashed the cheque, deducted 13s. 6d., and gave prisoner the balance. He paid in the cheque on Tuesday, August 25th, and it was returned on the following Thursday marked “Refer to drawer”.

Sidney Charles W. Herbert, licensee of the Swan, Dover Road, Folkestone, said he had known the prisoner for a number of years. He called at the bar on Saturday, August 22nd, at about seven o'clock, and asked him if he could change a cheque for him as he wanted to get away on business, and he had not been able to get to a bank as he had been too busy. Prisoner had a new cheque book in his hand, and he wrote out a cheque for £6 in the bar. It was marked payable to “Self”, and signed P.G. Savage. Witness gave prisoner six £1 notes. He presented the cheque on the following Monday morning at the National Provincial bank, Sandgate Road, and it was returned to him “R.D.” on August 25th.

Albert Edward Palmer, an outfitter, of 69, Tontine Street, Folkestone, said he knew prisoner quite well. He called at eight o'clock on Saturday, August 22nd, and said he wanted to pay for a wireless set. He gave him a cheque made out for £10, payable to “Self” and endorsed P.G. Savage, and asked him to cash it. He paid it into his bank on August 29th, and on August 31st it was returned marked “Refer to drawer”.

William Edward Miles, a butcher, of 129, Dover Road, said he knew the prisoner and had had business dealings with him. He came into his shop in the evening on August 22nd at about eight o'clock, and asked him if he would oblige by changing a cheque as he was too late for the bank. He produced a cheque fro £6, payable to “Self” and signed P.G. Savage. He gave prisoner £6 in Treasury notes. He paid the cheque into his bank in Tontine Street on August 24th, and it was returned to him marked “Refer to drawer”.

Mr. H.A.E. Roberts, manager of the National Provincial Bank, Folkestone, on sub-poena, produced a copy of the prisoner's account. The copy went back to the 30th June, 1930, and carried on to August 24th, 1931. It showed on the 24th August debits of £25, £25, and £10, making a total debit balance on that day of £565 2s. 6d. He saw prisoner on August 24th at about 10.20 a.m. Prisoner had asked to see him, but he had not been expecting to see him from anything that had transpired before. He did not think he had seen prisoner for twelve months, but he could not be certain of the date. He had written him a letter. Prisoner produced a cheque for £25, payable to “Self”, and asked him if he would cash it. He agreed to do so, and the cheque was met by the bank. He did not mention any other cheques and did not tell him that he had drawn cheques which were unpresented. The ten cheques produced were drawn on the National Provincial Bank and were signed by the prisoner. In each case they were returned marked “R.D.” Prisoner had no reason to expect those cheques to be met from anything he had said to him (witness) or from anything witness had said to him. He did not tell prisoner at the interview that he would cash another cheque for £25 or for £10.

By Mr. Bonniface, witness said that he could not say which of the £25 he had cashed marked in the account. It was a fact that the first £25 was cashed before prisoner came to witness with the second cheque. He could not say definitely when the cheque for £10 was cashed. The bank had security upon the prisoner, being the conveyance of a shop and premises bought for £800. There was no reason for prisoner to tell him that the other cheques had been drawn. His account was a perfectly open one until three o'clock on the 24th August. He very possibly might have tried to help the defendant if he had disclosed his true position and that he had drawn the other cheques mentioned. He would think the bank held ample security to meet the overdraft in addition to cheques mentioned in the charge, subject to the property being of the same value.

In reply to the magistrates' Clerk (Mr. C. Rootes), witness said that prisoner had been given a limit of overdraft. This was £500, and had been given him over a year ago. If he had been aware of the prisoner cashing £25 at the bank, he would not have cashed the other £25. Prisoner did not tell him that he was going away that day.

Mr. Bonniface: As a matter of fact, this account shows that the defendant has been allowed to draw over the £500?

Witness: That is so.

Mr. Bonniface: That was in July last?

Witness: Yes.

Mr. Chard, a cashier at the National Provincial Bank Ltd., said he was acting manager at the bank on the 24th August. A letter was received at the bank on August 25th, addressed to last witness, in the prisoner's handwriting.

The Magistrates' Clerk read the letter over to the Magistrates, but upon the instructions of Mr. Bonniface, did not do this aloud.

Mr. Bonniface, cross-examining, said that in the letter the prisoner asked him to sell the property and to reimburse the bank. He also stated that he had taken certain monies.

Witness said that was so.

The Chief Constable (Mr. A.S. Beesley), on oath, said that he also received a letter from the prisoner on the morning of the 25th August. It contained similar phrases to those in the previous letter produced.

The Magistrates' Clerk read this letter over to the Bench, but it was inaudible to the public.

Cross-examined, the Chief Constable said that he received £2 by letter from the prisoner two days later, as stated in the letter.

Mr. Bonniface said that, in law, he submitted that there was no case of obtaining the sum by false pretences at all. If the defendant had a reasonable belief at the time he gave the cheque that it would be met, then the crime of false pretences went. The bank manager told them that it was still an open account until three o'clock of the afternoon of the 24th August, so that on the 22nd and 23rd the account was an open account, and on the morning of the 24th it was an open account. So open was it that the bank over the counter paid £25 after ten o'clock, and also £10 over the counter after ten o'clock. There was no doubt about it that the bank paid over £25. They knew it was an open account. If the bank met the cheque, could they say that on the 22nd these other cheques would not be met? £800 was the price given for that property. They read a letter in which the man told the bank to sell the property. He anticipated that that would be met. It was for the prosecution to show that he knew from the bank manager beforehand that these cheques would not be met. The bank manager told them that he did not expect him to call. He submitted that on the evidence they had before them they could not commit that man for trial. He submitted to them that the prosecution had fallen short of what in law they were bound to prove.

The Bench retired.

The Magistrates' Clerk, on their return, said they had decided that the case must proceed.

Mr. Bonniface said the prisoner would elect to go for trial.

The Magistrates' Clerk asked Mr. Bonniface to discuss this with the prisoner. This was done, and prisoner then pleaded Not Guilty and elected to be dealt with by the Bench.

Mr. Bonniface, addressing the Magistrates, said that he had decided to rely solely upon the statements in the letters. Had prisoner gone into the box, he would have submitted on oath those statements contained in those letters. He aws most anxious in that submission not to hurt anybody's feelings, because there were rights and wrongs in every case, and there might be rights and wrongs in the case of that particular trouble. He was sure they would appreciate that he must refer to the fact that undoubtedly at that time there was family trouble between the wife and the husband, and je did not ant to enlarge upon that, but it apparently came to such a pass that on that particular occasion the defendant felt that he could not live with his wife any longer. That was the position, and undoubtedly foolishly – though he still contended not criminally – that man obtained that money by those cheques. He was entitled to say that he received instructions that morning that even if the case was dismissed, as he confidently anticipated it would be, he was to pay each of those tradesmen from the money which was in that man's possession the amounts of the cheques which were cashed for him. He had never had any intention of obtaining money from them that they should lose. He had every intention and every hope and every anticipation that those cheques would be met, more especially having regard to the instructions he gave to the bank to sell his property. He suggested that the Bench should discharge the prisoner under the Probation of Offenders Act.

The Chief Constable said there were no previous convictions against prisoner.

The Chairman said that taking into consideration the circumstances of the case, they were going to bind the prisoner over for two years under the Probation Act, and an order would be made for the restitution of the money to the people concerned. Prisoner would also pay the costs of the prosecution, which would amount to £6. The Bench had taken a very lenient view of the case, and hoped that would end his troubles.

Before leaving the Court, Savage shook hands with Mr. Bonniface.

Folkestone Express 24 March 1934.

Local News.

Four silver cups, awarded by the United Friendly Societies (Folkestone) Royal Victoria Hospital Saturday and Sunday Fund to the licensed houses collecting the highest amount of money in the town during the year, were presented on Monday evening.

The principal award went to Mr. T.I. Jordan, of the Richmond Tavern, who collected £16 15s. towards the fund. The second prize was gained by Mrs. E.A. Summerfield, of the Royal Standard, collecting £8 6s. 8d.; third place by Mr. S. Herbert, of the Swan, with £4 7s. 6d.; and finally Mr. H.W. Cork, of the Red Cow, who collected £3 12s. 8d. Messrs. B. Todd, S. Burvill, G. Spicer, and Mr. G. Dunkling, who superintended the collecting at the respective houses, were the recipients of presents of cigarettes.