NORFOLK PUBLIC HOUSES norfolkpubs.co.uk
NORFOLK NORWICH GT. YARMOUTH KINGS LYNN NAME SEARCH PUBLICATIONS LINKS MYSTERY HOME
QUEENS HEAD NORWICH Q index
Queens Head index
PUMP STREET
Castle Ditches
St. MICHAEL AT THORN FULL LICENCE
later BEERHOUSE
CLOSED
  -
Licensees :
-  
........ PLUMMER
(Died 1804)
to 1804
-  
-  
WILLIAM HUMPHREY 1860 - 1861

The Public House, by name of the QUEENS HEAD, Castle Ditches, late in occupation of .....Plummer, deceased, was offered for sale by Mr. Martin, at the Maids Head Inn, on Thursday 4th October 1804.


See QUEENS ARMS Pump Street 1856 - 1859

William Humphrey is recorded 1859 as shopkeeper and bricklayer, Pump Street.

16th June 1860 - William Humphrey of the QUEENS HEAD, Pump Street, convicted of refusing to admit a policeman when there were disorderly characters in the house. Fine 50s.

31st January 1861 - Fined 40s for having convicted thieves in his house - apparently the magistrates not taking the original offence into consideration since the fine for a second offence should have been not less than £5.

At the Sessions held Monday 26th August 1861 William Humphrey of the QUEENS HEAD beerhouse, Pump Street was charged with threatening to stab Police-sergeant Smith. Police-constable Kirk had visited the house on the Saturday night and Humphrey had said to him that since Sergeant Smith had got another summons sent to him, if he entered his house again, when it was open, he would stick a knife through his ***** heart. Police-sergeant Smith said that in view of the reported conversation, Humphrey should be restrained, else he may suffer bodily harm.
The Mayor called the defendant to enter into his own recognizance of £50 and two sureties of £25 to keep the peace for three months.

The following day, Tuesday 27th August 1861 William Humphrey was again before the bench charged with harbouring disorderly characters. The prosecution asked for the highest penalty, not less than £20 or more than £50, on the grounds that twice before, the defendant had been convicted of similar offences. The defence said that the previous convictions had not been mentioned in the court papers. The prosecution asked to amend the information but the defence objected. In consequence the charge was withdrawn, the prosecution saying another case would be prepared.

Wednesday 28th August 1861. William Humphrey was again before the bench, this time charged with having knowingly suffered and permitted notoriously disorderly characters to assemble at his house, having twice before being convicted of a similar offence whereby he had rendered himself liable to forfeiture of his licence and a penalty of of not less than £20 or more than £50.
Police-sergeant Smith said that he visited the house on the night of Wednesday 21st August and witnessed Humphrey playing cards with a man unknown. ` We are only playing cards for amusement; it's a hard thing we can't do that.'
In the room were women named Tyce, Dover and Paul; all were prostitutes. Another prostitute known as `the Cheesecutter' was there. They were reading the newspaper and talking about the past proceedings against Humphrey. No refreshments were seen.
These characters had been mentioned in the former case as being reputed or former thieves.
Police-sergeant Smith visited the house again at twenty past ten and about twenty yards from the house he could hear the women using the most disgusting language inside the house. The same parties were in the house and had been joined by others of similar character.
The evidence was supported by Police-constables Kirk and Chambers. Superintendant Barnard proved that the women Tyce, Dover and `Duckey' Metcalf were convicted thieves.

The defence argued that there was no evidence that the persons were assembled at the house for any other reason than refreshment and complained that it was apparent that the defendant had been singled out by the police, since other beerhouse keepers had customers who were chiefly prostitutes.

The Mayor, after considerable conferring with the magistrates, thought that everybody would be convinced that a hasty decision had not been made, but would convict the defendant. It was adjudged to be only a second offence and so a fine of £5 with 34s costs must be paid. Half the penalty to be paid to the Police Superannuation Fund.


Note:
The earlier conviction had not been signed by the Clerk of the Peace, but by his deputy. In that, the place of residence of the defendant had been entered as St. Peter per Mountergate, instead of St. Michael at Thorn.

See QUEENS HEAD - St Peter per Mountergate.