nothing at all really

Horse and Jockey (2)

by

1838 Joseph Dell, Horse and Jockey, Launceston

I don’t know if this has any association with the other houses of the same name. Dell owned property in Brisbane Street, so it might have been located there.

The undermentioned individuals have obtained licenses to retail wines and spirits:–
Buckinghamshire–Alexander Gore Ward, Saracen’s Head, Sorell ; Henry Brown, Bird in Hand, Hamilton.
Cornwall-Geo. Coulstock, London Tavern, Launceston; Joseph Dell, Horse and Jockey, do ; Philip Davis, Horse and Groom, do.
Hobart Town Courier, 17 November 1837

Longevity— It is not generally known that Samuel Day, one of the oldest hands, and, perhaps, one of the oldest men in the colony being upwards or ninety five, is at present residing with Mr. Joseph Dell, of the Horse and Jockey, who has kindly offered to him in his extreme old age, that asylum and shelter of which he so much stood in need of.
Cornwall Chronicle, 28 April 1838

** Prince Albert Inn

by

Charles and Elizabeth St

(inomplete)
1867 Martin Blake

Cornwall Chronicle, 5 October 1867
Cornwall Chronicle, 5 October 1867

The Workmen’s Club has boon removed from Patterson-street to the promises at the corner of Charles and Elizabeth-streets, formerly the Prince Albert Hotel, and formal possession was taken on the the inst., when supper-was given. An excellent spread was provided and a very pleasant evening was passed, the President, Adye Douglas, E q., occupying the chair.
Launceston Examiner, 18 June 1868

** Duke of York

by

Wellington Street.

cornwall-chronicle-15-august-1846
Cornwall Chronicle, 15 August 1846

cornwall-chronicle-2-september-1846
Cornwall Chronicle, 2 September 1846

Edward Fiddyment, from Duke of York, Wellington-street, to premises on the opposite side of the street, to be called the Lord Raglan. Mr. Rlocher and Mr. A. Douglas appeared to support the application.
Major Welman stated his opinion in favor of the application on the ground that Mr. Fiddyment was a respectable man and that the house occupied by him at present is in a very dilapidated state, where as and the one to which it was intended to transfer the license was a new one.
The Chairman questioned whether they had the power to transfer a license from one premises to other.
Mr. Rocher quoted the section of the Act referring to granting of transfers, and submitted that it was at the discretion of the meeting whether they granted a transfer from one house to another.
Mr. Douglas said that if the house was in such a dilapidated state the Justices would in a manner impose a penalty upon the applicant in refusing to grant the transfer and thereby compelling him to get a now licence; he considered that as the laws in this colony were getting more liberal than they were some years ago the section of the act should have a liberal construction put upon it; and in the applicants case nobody could possibly be a sufferer by the transfer but some would be gainers.
The Chairman observed that the application was made out in the form for a license, not for a transfer; and taking the application to be for a new license it was a question whether they could grant a licence to one already holding a licence. After a little further discussion Mr. Douglas said the application should be taken as an original licence and the applicant could then petition the treasury for a remission of the licence fee. A licence was then granted on the understanding that Mr. Fiddyment closes the premises now occupied by him on his removal to the opposite premises.
Launceston Examiner, 8 February 1859