|Rushden Echo, 31st August 1900, transcribed by Kay Collins
Licensing Applications 1900
Wellingborough Brewster Sessions
Rushden was responsible for nearly one-half of the applications for new licencesnine out of nineteenat the annual licensing sessions for the division on Monday. The number of applications was largely in excess of the average, and it was found to be impossible to complete the business on Monday, consequently the Court sat again yesterday (Thursday). The magistrates present on Monday were Messrs. N P Sharman, E Sharman, F Knight, J Crew, E B Randall, Spencer Pratt, and W Brown, and the Rev T Richards. Among those present from Rushden representing the Temperance Society and kindred organisations were the Revs. M E Parkin, C F Groom, and W F Harris, Messrs Geo Denton, C.C., John Claridge, C.C., John Jaques, Chas Bayes, D Darnell, Wm Green, B Vorley, Chas G Crick, and T W C Linnitt.
Supt. Alexander’s Report
Serving Young Children
Supt. Alexander, in his annual report, stated he was pleased to note a large decrease in the cases of drunkenness during the past year as compared with the previous one. The licensed houses as a whole had been well conducted. This year there were nineteen applications, and nine were from Rushden. For several years past at the Licensing Sessions reference had been made by the Justices and others to the habit of serving young children with intoxicating liquors for home consumption, and a hope had been expressed that such practices should be discontinued. From a report made to him by the officers and constables of the Division and from his own observations he believed many of the licensed victuallers had complied with but that it had not entirely ceased. He also noted those who were in the habit of sending children, and at the same time the remedy in most instances was in the hands of the parents. An exception to that, however, came before the notice of the Bench on the 24th inst., when a drunken character at Earls Barton sent a mere babe he found playing in the street to a beer house twice, when the little thing was served with liquor by the landlord’s wife without any hesitation. In that case he should ask the Bench to withhold the licence for further consideration at the adjourned meeting in September.
Supt. Alexander presented the following
Public-houses, 79 in 1898, 80 in 1899; beer-houses on 40, 39; beer-houses off, 74, 76; wine on 4, 4; wine and spirit on, 15, 16. Transfers: Public-houses, 9 in 1898, 9 in 1899; beer-houses on, 3, 1; beer-houses off, 10, 7; wine on , 0; wine and spirit off, 1. Drunkenness, etc.: Convicted, 110, 82; dismissed, 8, 8; arrested, 39, 29; summoned, 79, 61. Residents, 95, 67; non-residents, 23, 23. 1899, 7 drunk from clubs, one from Ironstone Pits. Licensed persons proceeded against: Public-houses, 1898 1, 1899 3; beer-houses on, 1, 1; beer-houses off, 0, 1; fined, 2, 5; dismissed, nil; withdrawn, nil.
Remarks from the Bench
The Chairman Supports the Children’s Bill
The Chairman, on behalf of the Bench, expressed satisfaction at the report as a whole, and said the Justices were pleased to observe the continuance in the decrease of cases of drunkenness. At the same time, they wished to repeat the strong opinion expressed on a former occasion as to the desirability of publicans refusing to serve very little children with liquor. There was a very strong public opinion against it, and he hoped it would not be long before they had legalisation which would make it illegal to serve children under a certain age. They regretted that there were still a few licensed victuallers who had not avoided serving children, and their names had been handed to the Bench. They did not think it was necessary to publish or to read them out, but they hoped those licensed victuallers would take warning and not allow their names to appear in the list another year.
Mr Parker, solicitor to the Wellingborough Licensed Trades’ Association, said he felt sure that by the majority of the licence holders the remarks of the Bench would be appreciated, and on their behalf he submitted that there was no objection to the renewal of the old licences, and he applied they might be renewed. As to the serving of young children he hoped the publicans would take to heart what Supt. Alexander had said, but added that the responsibility rested rather in the hands of the people than in the hands of the licensed trade. The Chairman hoped the police and the licensed holders would do all in their power to suppress the terrible curse of drunkenness, which had ruined many thousands body and soul.
An off spirit licence was granted to Messrs Burton and Sons, grocers, High-street, Rushden, on the application of Mr J T Parker.
The remainder of the Rushden applications were opposed by Mr F Newman, on behalf of the Rushden Temperance Society.
Mr Arthur Sargent
Arthur Sargent, shoehand, 86 Queen-street, Rushden, applied for an off licence.
Mr James said the applicant lived on his own premises, and there were five other applications from the same locality. This part of Rushden had developed greatly during the last two years, and was worse served than any other district in the town. Mr Sargent applied for the licence himself, which was not the case with all the other applications to be made, and he submitted the house was much better situated than the others.
Arthur Sargent said if the licence were granted he should work or live at home. There were 135 houses in Queen-street, and the nearest licensed house was about 400 paces distant. The nearest off licensed house was 700 yards distant.
By Mr Newman: Seven houses have been built in this street during the past year.
Mr Newman contended that the licence was not required in the district, and that sufficient accommodation already existed.
Mr James said a point might be raised hereafter as to the covenants respecting the property, but he submitted that did not affect the application, as it might be fought out should the licence be granted.
John O’Brien, 68 Cromwell-road, gave evidence as to obtaining the signatures to the petition in support of the application. Some of those who signed were lodgers.
By Mr Ryland Adkins, who appeared on behalf of Mr Chettle, another applicant: There were more houses on the side of Mr Chettle’s premises, and was in favour of his application being granted for a full licence as well as that of the applicant.
William Bazeley, Queen-street, a member of the Urban Council and president of the Rushden Branch of the Boot And Shoe Operatives’ Union, supported the application.
By Mr Newman: He appeared in his private capacity and not as representing the Union.
August Allebone, shoe manufacturer, Midland-road, Rushden, formerly of Queen-street, supported the application.
Mr Newman said that applications had previously been made for licences for Queen-street and refused. Only a few houses had since been built, and he contended the licence was not required. The premises in question were not adapted for a licensed house.
Chas G Crick, Queen-street, opposed the application, and said that people living in Queen-street could easily fetch beer from the Rose and Crown and the Feathers.
Benjamin Vorley, owner of some of the houses in Queen-street, said the character of this street was highly creditable at present, and the owners of houses would suffer if a licence were granted.
Mr Newman said that one great reason why this licence should not be granted was that there was a back entrance into Portland-street and this would make police supervision most difficult.
Mr Jack Green
Mr C C Becke, of Northampton, applied on behalf of Jack Green for an off-licence to a house in Queen-street, Rushden, at the corner of Cromwell-road. He said that if the Bench only granted one application this was the best adapted to meeting the requirements of the neighbourhood. Instead of having a frontage of 20 feet and being a very small and inconvenient house, as that of the last applicant was, it was particularly eligible. This district required additional accommodation. It might be brought against Mr Green that he had been a betting man, and if this was to be a fully licensed house he could quite understand that the fact might be detrimental to his chances of getting it, but this could not affect him in the same way, and the police would have a much greater command over him if they granted this licence than they otherwise would have. Mr Green was giving up betting.
Mr Clare said he had to make the same objection as in the last application, one of the conditions imposed by the Artizans Land and Mortgage Corporation being that no building erected on the estate should be used for the sale of intoxicating liquor, without permission of the vendors, which had not been given.
Applicant, the owner of the premises, was cross-examined by Mr Newman and said he had been a book-maker but had done nothing in that way in this district for a long time.
Mr Newman: You would have to go to race meetings and leave the house in the care of someone else?
Mr Green: I should give up betting if I got this licences.
In further cross-examination, he admitted a conviction for street betting in Rushden.
Mr Samuel Robinson
Mr A J Darnell, Northampton, appeared for Samuel Robinson, Alfred-street, Rushden, for a provisional indoor licence for a house in Portland-road, Rushden, and urged that the requirements of the locality would be better met by an indoor licensed house. Applicant would be prepared to give up an off-licence in High-street if the present application was granted. Petitions signed by a large number of persons in the neighbourhood were put in in favour of the licence being granted.
Mr Newman elicited the fact that Messrs. Praed and Co. were the owners of the house to which the off-licence was attached, and the trade there was diminishing.
Mr G Denton, C.C., (to applicant): What interest have you in this particular land for which you are applying for a licence?
Mr Robinson: None whatever.
Mr Denton: You are simply put forward as a puppet for Messrs Campbell Praed and Co.?
Mr Robinson: Well, yes. My only interest is to stand as tenant when the place is up.
Mr Newman said that last year they had another name before them on behalf of Messrs. Praed and Co., but the conditions were exactly the same. The development of this particular district had only been at the rate of three or four houses during the last year, so that there was no immediate hurry for a licence. Mr Darnell had intimated that the usual result of refusing these licences was the springing up of clubs, but he had opposed applications for this district during the past four or five years, and a club had not yet been established, and if it had had that effect he had no doubt they would have heard of a club before now. They had heard that a licence would be surrendered, but he was instructed that the reason for that was because of diminishing trade at the house in High-street.
James Bridgeway, of Westbourne Park, London, said he was the owner of dwelling-houses in Portland-road, and the granting of this licence would be detrimental to the letting of his property.
Wm Green, of Rushden, thought a public-house in the district would be very injurious to many of the residents.
Mr W Chettle
Mr Adkins applied for a full licence to the out-door beerhouse occupied by Wm Chettle at the corner of Pratt-road and Cromwell-road, Rushden. Of all the proposals before the justices that day his was the one which added least to the centres of drink in the neighbourhood. By granting this, therefore, the Bench would be doing less than by granting any other, and at the same time they would be meeting what was asked for by a large proportion of the people in the neighbourhood.
The Rev M E Parkin stated that he had been deputed by the Free Church Council to oppose the application. In his opinion an indoor licences was not required on Rock Estate and he believed that it would be a very great detriment to that district. The case of people who resided on the Rock Estate were not the class of people who would benefit by an indoor licence, the outdoor house already there being more than ample for their requirements. The district was occupied by a class of people who were poor, and a very considerable number of them were all the poorer through being addicted to drink. There were people on that estate today who had scarcely any food in the house simply because they had been drinking during the past week, and an additional house put amongst them would only have the effect of adding to their poverty.
Decision of the Court
The Five Applications Refused
The Bench then considered the five application form the Queen-st, and Cromwell-road district and decided to refuse the whole.
Yesterday, Samuel Robinson, Harborough-road, Rushden, applied for an outdoor licence, and the application was supported by Mr J T Parker, whilst Mr Newman opposed.The Bench, upon hearing that there was no change in the circumstances of the district since a similar application was made last year refused the licence.
Mr James applied on behalf of Thos. Lack, of the same street, for a similar licence but the Bench refused it.