*** York Wine Vaults – York Hotel

York St, northern side, between St John & Charles St.

[incomplete]
1836 John Main, York Wine Vaults
1837 David Murray, York Wine Vaults
?
1838 Daniel Judson, York Wine Vaults, York Street
1839 ”
1840 John Tildesley, York Wine Vaults, York Street
1842 Caroline Tildesley, York Wine Vaults, York Street
1843-46 John King, York Wine Vaults, York Street
1846 License refused
[James Hewitt, 4 November 1748 – refused)
?1847 John King, York Hotel, York Street

?1848-49 John King, York Wine Vault, York Street
William King?

1849-50 Robert Radford, York Wine Vaults, York Street (refused, renewed on appeal]
1850-61 Robert Blake, York Hotel/York Wine Vaults, York Street
1860 Robert Blake, York Hotel, York-street.
1863 Wm. Job Harris, York Hotel
1870-71 William Job Harris, York Hotel, York-street
1871-78 William Hurst, York Hotel, York Street
1878-79 Henry Pittard

1879-80 Steel Traill
1880–1881 Daniel Connolly
1881 Henry Pittard
1882 Frank Watts, York Hotel, York Street

1890 Frederick E. Howes, York Hotel,

Transfer

–1899 W. Spearman, York Hotel
1899– F. E. Howes

May10, 1837. — The undermentioned parties residing in the division of the Island of Van Diemen’s Land commonly called Cornwall, having applied for, and obtained certificates from certain of the Magistrates at a Meeting holden on the 2nd instant, licences have been granted to them accordingly, to retail wine and spirit!-. Sic. for the period ending the 29lh day of September now next ensuing, provided it be not forfeited before such day.
David Murray, the York Wine Vaults, Launceston ; Joseph Moore, Grazier’s Delight, Magpie Hill.
Launceston Advertiser, 18 May 1837

The York Wine Vaults, York street, Launceston, has been transferred from Robert Bell to Marion Murray.
Hobart Town Courier, 17 November 1837

From “PUBLICANS LICENSES, LAUNCESTON ”
Permission was also given to Caroline Tildesley to continue the business of John Tildesley, Licensed Victualler, deceased, at The York Wine Vaults, in York-street, Launceston–Dated this 9lh day of August, 1841
The Courier, 20 August 1841

From Annual Licensing Meeting:
The owner of a house occupied as a common brothel near his own premises.
Mr. Bartley — This is the only openly established house in the line in Launceston, and a man who knowingly lets a house to such characters, could not be a person of good fame and character, according to the act.
Mr. Gleadow was called as a witness, who said he had spoken to Mr. King about “Mother George,” but he refused to interfere—his public-house was the nearest to the brothel.- Unanimously refused on account of character.
Cornwall Chronicle, 2 September 1846

John King, York Wine Vaults, York-street. The Police Magistrate’s report was unfavourable as regarded the house. He also reported the existence of a disorderly house in the neighbourhood belonging to King. Mr. Bartley opposed renewal of the license on account of applicant’s conduct in respect to the house referred to by the Police Magistrate, and appealed to Mr. Gleadow respecting the house in question. Mr. Gleadow’s testimony went to show that the house was a notorious brothel ; that it was situated in one of the most public thoroughfares of the town, and in the immediate neighbourhood of respectable residents; and that he had spoken to King upon the impropriety of retaining such persons as tenants, to which King had replied, that he had let it thus for the express purpose of annoying some neighbours. Mr. Bartley argued, that an individual who would avow such intention, and persist, in hiring out any house for such purposes, was not a person of good fame as the act contemplated, and lie therefore pressed upon the meeting the necessity of marking their sense of the indecency of such conduct by rejecting the application. On being put to the vote, the application was rejected.
Launceston Advertiser, 3 September 1846

From “Launceston Quarter Sessions”:
John King, ‘York Wine Vaults,’ York-street. Mr. Macdowell, for the appellant, said he thought the alleged grounds for taking away this man’s license were insufficient. They had taken away his license for letting a house, his properly, to improper characters. This was done during his absence in Adelaide by Mrs. King, who was unaware of the character of the party. As soon after his return as possible, be had endeavoured to remedy the evil complained of, but the party would not leave until the time of hiring had expired. Some com plaint had been made of the appellant, that when a gentleman (Mr. J. W. Gleadow), who had observed the nuisance, had spoken to King, he had replied that he would keep them there to annoy an obnoxious neighbour. Such a reply might have been the result of an abrupt off-handed kind of question, such as was calculated to ruffle appellant’s temper. Mr. Macdowell spoke at considerable length, the gist of his argument being that a landlord could not always know the character of tenants, and it would be hard to take away a man’s license on such grounds. To this was opposed the fact, that thirty-one magistrates bud voted against the renewal of the license ; and that they (appeared to have decided upon the avowal of the appellant, that he had established a brothel in a public thoroughfare of the town, to annoy respectable neighbours. The bench confirmed the decision by an unanimous vote.
Launceston Advertiser, 24 September 1846

NEW APPLICATIONS. James Hewitt, for the York Hotel, formerly York Wine Vaults, York-street.
The application was signed by a number of the most influential inhabitants of Launceston.
Mr. Wales was desirous to decrease the number of licensed houses instead of increasing them, but this was an application which required public consideration, and one which he would support. Hewitt was entitled to public consideration, because the lives of themselves and families had been frequently in his hands, as driver of the Hobart Town Coach — he had been noticed, whilst acting in that capacity, for steady conduct and civility.
Capt. Neilley thought if those things which were urged by Mr. Wales were taken into consideration, they would never reduce the number of public-houses, which was the object to be desired.
Capt. Gardiner staled that the house in question had been licensed for a number of years, it belonged to a widow who would become completely an object of charity, if the license was taken from the property.
Messrs. Moore and Bartley used the same arguments almost word for word as those recorded at the annual and appeal meetings.
Mr. Sams contended that in the instance before the meeting it was fortunate that there was an art to review and revise. (Cries of oh ! oh !) Yes, it was consistent to do so where the license was refused on ‘account of character, and not on account of premises ; he was convinced that a great portion of the objection against the last applicant was founded in surmise, and being taken on a non-plus he was unable to rebut it ; to interfere with properly vested in public houses, is no more justifiable than doing so with the haberdasher or linen draper, and the owners are as much entitled to their licenses, as they (the magistrates) had, to let their houses to whom they pleased ; if there were too many public houses, the trade would find its own level, and shut themselves up ; but, on principles of morality they had no right to deprive a man of his license, for, let there be as few houses as possible, the. drunkard would always find his way to one or the other of them to satisfy the cravings of his debasing vice (Hear, hear).
Mr. Douglas, in a good argumentative speech supported the application, pointing out the superior description and capabilities of the premises, and the high character of Hewitt, and concluded by saying, that in granting licenses to such men, the magistrates would arrive at the proper means for decreasing drunkenness and vice, which are so constantly going on in public houses.
Mr. Tarleton had no objection as far as Hewitt’s character was concerned, but the competition was so intense, that the licensed victualler could not obtain an honest livelihood— be is obliged to allow all sorts of disorders and bad practices, and obtains his money the best way he can.
Mr. Youl said he had come into town at a great inconvenience, being in the middle of sheep shearing, on purpose to oppose the granting of any new licenses — he was sorry to oppose Hewitt, on account of his good character, but a respectable publican had told him, that he could not gain an honest living, and was obliged to have bad women about his premises to encourage people to come there, and spend their money.
Mr. Wales — Hewitt is an old public servant, and one to whom their lives had been daily intrusted–he was so steady a man that he was certainly due for public consideration, and therefore, he (Mr. Wales) wished to see if Hewitt’s case could be made one of special favorable notice.
Mr. Bartley — Then make a subscription for him.
Capt. Neilley— Yes, make a subscription.
Mr. Tarleton, said it was his painful duty to oppose Hewitt; bat the sense of the annual meeting was so marked, and others had distinctly told him that any increase of licenses would be attended with pernicious consequences, that he was obliged to do so. It was then put to the vote, when all the justices, including Mr. Wales, voted against the application, with the exception of Capt. Gardiner and Mr. Sams, who were the only gentlemen who held up their bands in its favor.
Cornwall Chronicle, 4 November 1846

[Hewitt as driver of Hobart Town coach]

King, John, York Wine Vaults, York-street; Mr. Tarleton thought it his duty to mention, that some men had entrusted Mr. King with £20, to take care of for them, and that he said he had been robbed of it. Mr. King, Mr. Tarleton said. Had afterwards compromised the matter, by giving the men £10, and a check of £10 more, which was dishonoured, and had not been paid. Mr. King contradicted the statement and said that the cheque had been paid. It was true he was robbed of the money, and had afterwards traced a £5 note. Mr. Sams thought the loss of the money only a misfortune.
Launceston Examiner, 2 September 1848

CLEVER FEAT -Quinn, the celebrated Australian tight-rope dancer[?] attracted several hundred persons at the wharf on Monday, to witness the really clever feat of ascending the fore-stay of the brig Martha, which he accomplished cleverly, though the wind was blowing fresh at the time. Some thousands of people assembled in the evening in York-street, to see another wonderful achievement of the same genius. Quinn had been announced to ascend a rope from the “Horse und Jockey” Inn, to the top of Mr King’s the “York Wine Vaults” opposite, and to fly back enveloped in a shower of fire works; the latter feat was performed amidst the cheers of the spectators, but the ascension” part of the business was abandoned, owing to the darkness of the evening.
Colonial Times, 13 March 1849

Robert Radford, York Wine Vaults, York-street, from William King. Mr. Radford was cautioned by the Chairman as to his management, observing that when he kept the “Horse and Jockey,” there were several complaints against him.
Cornwall Chronicle, 9 May 1849

The attention of the bench was called to the application of Mr. Robert Radford, for a renewal of the York Wine Vaults, York-street. Mr. Tarleton stated that the house since the applicant had resided there, had been very badly conducted. It was true no conviction had taken place, but he was sure there had been opportunities for doing so. On Circus nights, the neighbourhood was in a terrible state; in fact Radford’s house was open all night. This statement was confirmed by several of the magistrates. The transfer had been granted at a Quarterly meeting. On the chairman putting it to the vote, Dr. Casey said he should vote for a renewal, on the ground that a conviction ought to exist, in which opinion Major Welman and Mr. Cameron concurred. Mr. Tarleton said he should vote against a renewal, from conscientious motives. On the votes being counted, the majority was against the applicant. Refused on account of character. The premises eligible.
Cornwall Chronicle, 5 September 1849

After the business of the jury list had terminated, the appeal of Mr. Robert Radford, of the “York Wine Vault”, was read by Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Douglas on behalf of Mr. Radford, addressed the chairman and magistrates, and said at the last general Annual Licensing meeting the magistrates had refused a renewal of Radford’s licence. In reference to the first objection urged against his client namely: the Circus, he, Mr. Douglas begged to observe that at the time of granting the license to Radford, no objection had been made to the Circus, which was duly licensed and carried on by Radford. As to the other objection of impropriety going on in one of the rooms, at the “York Wine Vaults” on the day the magistrates inspected the Licensed Victuallers’ houses, the Act specifics “that before the renewal of a license can be refused, convictions must take place.” Radford’s house had since been visited by other magistrates, and their report was favorable—-the premises were eligible, and Radford’s intentions were to give up the Circus; as there was not anything against his character, he hoped that the license would be granted.

As the chairman and several of the magistrates were not present at the Annual meeting, Mr. Tarleton at the request of Mr. Knight stated what he saw, and also, what had been reported to him, the substance of which, was—-the disorderly state of the house—-the doors were ostensibly closed at 10 o’clock, but in fact they were open at all hours—-the lowest prostitutes resorted there–the people attached to the Circus were disreputable characters-—there had also been a party robbed at Radford’s of £22, the suspected person has since gone to Port Phillip–Mr. Tarleton at the time the license was granted to Radford, deemed him an unfit character.

Mr. Radford here stated that a man named Macquarie, brought a desk and other things from Hobart Town, which the man Bolton reported to have been broken open, and money taken therefrom, he, Radford, knew nothing about it; he thought it hard to be censured for an occurrence that he himself was ignorant of. With respect to Kelley, he begged to state that he knew him in Hobart Town, and Kelley, who had been to Sydney, on his landing at Launceston, insisted on being brought to his house ; his companions came with him ; Kelley was drunk at the time ; he was brought up from the wharf on a dray, with his luggage ; he, (Radford), ordered him up stairs, into a room by himself, he also refused letting him have any more drink.

Mr. Knight.—-The question is—-whether the magistrates refusal is to be revoked or confirmed? he should, therefore, put it to the vote.

Mr. Wales intimated that he was determined to support Radford. “There are,” he said “‘wheels within wheels, and were I to listen to all I hear, I should entertain a very bad opinion of many persons, and I think it very hard to deprive a man of his license, for which he paid a large sum of money, and the deprivation to be grounded on hear-say reports. It would have been much more satisfactory if the police had laid the informations openly; he, therefore, should vote in favour of Radford (applause, which was with difficulty repressed by the officers).

Mr. Atkinson, on being asked as to which way he voted, intimated, that from what he had heard, added to his own ideas on the matter, and also considering that magistrates had only the power of refusing a license after three convictions had taken place, in his opinion, the constables ought to have laid informations against the offence complained of, which he considered would be a great act of injustice to deprive Radford of his license on the grounds stated; he, therefore, should vote in his behalf (applause, but restrained by the officers).
Mr. Sams perfectly agreed with Mr. Atkinson.
Mr. Tarleton said that, certainly informations would have been preferable ; they could have been preferred-—but he then feeling confident convictions would have followed, it was not his wish to punish the party twice ; he had voted against Radford, and not having had any reason to alter his opinion, he should most decidedly vote against a renewal. On Mr. Kennedy counting the votes, there were nine for, and eight against the application.
The Chairman — He must say that he had not originally intended to have voted, but from what had been stated that good conduct certainly constituted the law for allowing a person to retain a licence. The P.M. had descanted at the General Meeting upon Radford’s having allowed improper parties, &c, to be drinking on his premises ; had he taken warning, as no proof existed to the contrary, he would give Radford the benefit by supposing that he has done so. If abuses existed, why had not the Chief District Constable been ordered to do his duty ; and if wrong existed, to have laid informations according to the 41st clause of the Licensed Victuallers’ Act ; every difficulty was there met, and it empowered magistrates to prefer a complaint to the Quarter Sessions, but as no conviction or information had taken place, he certainly felt bound to vote in behalf of Mr. Radford.
Cornwall Chronicle, 3 October 1849

INFORMATION.-TWO informations were laid by the chief constable against Robert Radford, of the “York Wine Vaults,” for a breach of the licensed victuallers’ act, in keeping open his public house till two o’clock on the morning of the 1st instant, and again on the morning of the 7th instant. Convictions ensued in both cases: for the first offence a fine of £10 was inflicted; for the second, in consideration of the heavy penalty on the first, Mr. Radford was fined 10s. and costs.
Launceston Examiner, 19 January 1850

Lease and Goodwill, Furniture, Bar Fittings, &c. of the
YORK HOTEL, YORK STREET,
MR. LEWIS COHEN has received instructions from the proprietor, Mr Robert Blake, to sell by auction, at his rooms, York Street, on Tuesday next, the 20th instant, at twelve o’clock, prompt,
The lease and goodwill of that centrally situated house, known as the York Hotel, York-street. The lease has five years to run, at a rental of £120 per annum.
Also.
The whole of the household furniture, bar-fittings, billiard and bagatelle table, skittles, &c.
Terms liberal at Sale. Immediate possession will be given.
The above is a first rate opportunity for any one wishing to enter into that line of business, the house is in the heart of the town and doing a business second to none ; the only reason of the present proprietor disposing of it is he intends entering into another line of business. The whole will be offered in one lot, and such an opportunity may not occur again for a very long time. The house is in first rate order, having been lately papered and painted throughout.
Catalogue of furniture may be had on application to Mr Robert Blake, or at the office of the auctioneer.
The Cornwall Chronicle, 14 November 1860

An application put in by John Sullivan, for a license for the York Hotel, York-street, was withdrawn.
Launceston Examiner, 2 December 1862

Launceston Examiner, 3 December 1863

CONVEYANCE TO. GEORGE TOWN.
WILLIAM SPEARMAN intends starting a conveyance from Launceston to George Town next Saturday, 12th December, at 10 o’clock in the morning, from Mr. Job Harris’s, York Hotel, York-street, returning on Monday to Launceston.
Launceston Examiner, 10 December 1863

From “Quarterly Licensing Meeting”
York Hotel, York.street. From Wm., Job Harris to Wm. Hurst.
Launceston Examiner, 8 August 1871

William Stokes was charged, on remand from Thursday, with stealing a pint measure, the property of William Hurst. Mary Hurst deposed that she was the wife of William Hurst, who kept the York Hotel in this this town. She identified the pint pot produced as her husband’s property. The letters W. H. scratched on the pot were put on by her. . She had no knowledge of the defendant having bean in her house on Saturday last. Her husband was in the bar for a short time assisting on Saturday night. He might have let the pot, but she did not think he did. Constable Denis M’Auliffe deposed that on Saturday night be apprehended the defendant in Brisbane-street. He was lying down drunk in the pathway. The pewter measure was close to the back of his head, on the ground. The magistrates said they would discharge him, as they were of opinion that he did not take it with any felonious intention.
Launceston Examiner, 25 November 1871

Absent Without Leave.–Enoch Dean. was charged by Mr. W. Harris with having absented himself from his employment. Mr Harris stated that he had engaged defendant to paint the front of the York Hotel for 50s; defendant commenced the work, and after working for a day or two came and asked for a few shillings; witness gave him 15s; since that money had been paid defendant had not returned to the work; defendant had told witness that he was too unwell to finish the, work. Defendant said he had been too ill to work, and handed in the following certificate :– “I certify that Enoch Dean has been under medical treatment for the last six weeks, and is at present unable to do any hard work. CHARLES MARTIN, Launceston General Hospital, 9th Nov., 1872.”
The Bench dismissed the case.
Launceston Examiner, 14 November 1872

W.T. Bell is instructed by Mr W. Job Harris, to sell by auction, at his mart, on Monday, 12th February, at 12 o’clock,
The well-known hotel and premises in York-street known as the York Hotel, and now in the occupations of Mr Wm. Hurst. The hotel is substantially built of brick, contains 12 rooms, with kitchen and stabling in the rear.
Launceston Examiner, 1 February 1877

From “Quarterly Licensing Meeting, Launceston”:
The following transfers were granted.— The license for the Sydney Hotel, Elizabeth street, from Mr Charles Walter to Mrs Ellen Edwards ; the license for the Tasmanian Inn, Patterson street, from Mr Duncan McGregor to Mr John Mitchell ; and the license for the York Hotel, York street, from Mr Wm. Hurst to Mr Henry Pittard.
Cornwall Chronicle, 8 May 1878

From “Court of General Session”:
Mr Douglas stated the reason that Hurst left the York Hotel was because his lease was up.
Mr Ditcham said he believed that there had been some disagreement between Hurst and his wife, which caused Hurst to leave for Victoria.
The Cornwall Chronicle, 7 January 1879

LICENCE OF A BAGATELLE BOARD — Steel Trail, the landlord of the York Hotel , was granted a licence for a bagatelle table.
The Tasmanian, 6 September 1879

LICENSE TRANSFERS.–At the Police , Court yesterday morning the following transfers of existing licenses were made : -From Henry King, Caledonian Hotel, to William Maltman; from Steel Traill, York Hotel, to Daniel Connolly; from Benjamin Crow, Tamar Hotel, to Steel Traill.
Launceston Examiner, 3 April 1880

WANTED KNOWN
That D. H. CONNOLLY has taken the York Hotel, York-street, and hopes by strict attention to business to merit liberal support. Best brands only kept. Billiards, stabling, etc. N.B.-Assorted parcels of liquors carefully packed and forwarded to any address in town or country.
Launceston Examiner, 5 April 1880

From “Annual Licensing Meetings”
Frank Watts, York, York – street. Granted, conditional, on improvement being effected before next licensing meeting.
“ANNUAL LICENSING MEETINGS.” Launceston Examiner, 3 December 1883

Colonist, 11 May 1899