Somerset Guardian and Radstock Observer - 05 March 1920

TEMPLE CLOUD POLICE COURT

TUESDAY

Before Messrs. M. James (in chair), J. H. Tovey, and Colonel Mountstevens.

...

TWO MORE PAULTON HOUSES TO GO FOR COMPENSATION

Mr. W. A. Roberts, solicitor, of Bristol, on behalf of George's Breweries, Ltd., Bristol, submitted plans for the proposed alterations and improved accommodation of the Druids' Arms, Stanton Drew. The Bench approved of the plans in question, and gave permission for the work to be carried out.

Mr. Roberts also for the licensee of the Hunters' Rest, Clutton hill, and for the owners of the Earl of Warwick. At the annual licensing sessions the renewal of this license was objected to on the grounds of inadequate licensed accommodation. Mr. Roberts now informed the Bench he was instructed to say from his clients that they were quite prepared to draw up plans which would considerably improve the public part of the premises. He would, however, ask that they be given a reasonable time, say a month or so, in which to get those plans drawn for submission to their worships.

Police Supt. Ford gave evidence as to the population and the number of persons to each licensed house, viz..268, and in reply to Mr. Roberts said the Hunters Rest at present was very badly accommodating as far as the public was concerned. Personally, however, he would be in favour of accepting the owners promise to submit plans for improving the house. It was used mostly by coal miners going to and from Pensford and Bromley and was the nearest house in that direction to the collieries.

In the end the Bench decided to accept the promise given, the plans to be submitted for the approval of the bench within two months.

THE DOVE INN

This was an adjourned case from the annual licensing session, the renewal of the license having been objected to.

Mr. W. A. Roberts appeared for the owners, the Georges Brewery, Ltd., and for the licensee, Mr. George Simmons.

Mr. Roberts made reference to certain plans for the suggested improvement of the house, which was submitted and approved of by the Bench in January, 1915, the owners of the house being, at that time, the Welton Breweries, Co., Ltd. This was mentioned by their worships at the last court, but it was the first time he had heard anything of these plans, and he felt sure his clients, the Georges Breweries, did not then know of it. As a consequence an adjournment was made to allow him to report the matter to his clients. The cost of the alterations to the house according to those plans as approved of by the Bench in 1916, was more than £500, and of course today it would mean a considerable amount more than that. At the same time, however, his clients, the George's Brewery. Ltd. felt that they ought to adopt the contracts of their predecessors, and on their behalf he was now instructed to give an undertaking that they would put the work in hand, and within a reasonable time carry out those plans which were approved of and passed by the beach in 1915.

Subsequently, however, the bench decided to defer their decision until they had heard the case wlth reference to the Flying Dutchman. The renewal of the license of this home also been objected to by the police on the ground of redundancy. Mr. H. R. Wansbrough, of Bristol, appeared for the licensee. Mr. A. Langridge, and for the owners, the Dorsetshire Brewery Co. Police Superintendent Ford stated that the house which was situated at Brittens, Paulton had very poor public accommodation, and no sanitary convenience was provided. The bar was an ordinary room 12ft. 10in, 11ft. 5in., and the taproom was 14ft. 7in. by 9ft. 7in. There were 25 dwelling homes within the vicinity of the Flying Dutchman. The Somerset Inn was a quarter mile and 40 yards away from this house, and has ample accommodation. The distance from the Flying Dutchman to the nearest public house at Paulton was 800 yards, the Old Lottery Inn and 20 yards further away was the Britannia Inn. The distance from the Flying Dutchman to the New Inn at Bloomfield was 1,040 yards. The tap room could be used but was not used. He had visited the place on two occasions. The first time he found two customers there and the second time he saw one there. The landlord told witness that for the last 12 months his sale had been 77 barrels. Witness asked him what was a barrel and he replied it was not a butt. Mr. Langridge had kept the house for something like 26 years, and during the time witness had known him, for seven years, he had conducted the business without any complaints, and witness had nothing to say against him with regard to the conduct of the house.

By Mr.Wansbrough - Yes, he would think that the superficial area of the Flying Dutchman was greater than any other beerhouse Paulton. In his address to the Bench Mr. Wansbrough pointed out that there had been no conviction for drunkenness in the village last year, and went on to say here was a man who was suffering badly from rheumatism, and was 61 years of age. Here was a licensed house with 25 houses around it. On the other hand there were two Somerset Inn with only eight or nine houses around it. On the other hand there were two clusters of licensed houses in another part of the village. Mr. Langridge held the license before 1869, and without reproach for 27 years and he could not think that their worships were going to say that this man's livelihood and business was going to be confiscated, for that was what it meant if they refused to renew his license. The very utmost he would get if it went for compensation was a sum equivalent to one year's income. He appealed to them to grant a renewal of the license of the Flying Dutchman, and to say that they were not going to confiscate the only livelihood of this poor man. In support of his appeal Mr. Wansbrough handed in a petition signed by 201 (?) persons of the parish of Paulton, including that of Rev. J. Kempton Gate Baptist pastor, and the Vicar, the Rev. W. E. Hodgson.

Following a deliberation in private, the Chairman announced that they bench had decided to uphold the Police Superintendents objections. They thought there were too many licensed houses in Paulton and had decided that both houses, the Dove Inn and the Flying Dutchman be referred to compensation.