HAVELOCK INN, 48 WILLOW STREET

Charles Agar comes across as quite a character:  an entrepreneur in manufacturing who divided opinion.  It is hard to get to the soul of the man from records, so we will leave you to judge for yourselves.

Charles Agar lived in the Willow Street area prior to 1841, with his wife, Louise.

By 1861, Agar is recorded as running the Havelock beerhouse, which was a little premature as he applied for a licence for his own property.  This was met with objections by several ladies engaged in religious and philanthropic movements.  The ladies won the day, so Agar’s application was refused.  He later applied again in September 1863, and this time the licence was granted. 

Some background to Charles Agar.  A glove hand in 1841, by the next census in 1851, he was listed as a hosiery manufacturer with 100 FWK frames.

In 1853, Agar accused a boy with cruelty to a bird when the boy placed the bird in a street gas lamp. The boy was cautioned for his cruelty to a bird.

In August 1854, Agar chased a boy who was pulling up potatoes from a neighbour’s garden in Willow Street.  Agar followed the boy- – William Ward into Russell Square – with the potatoes still on him. Ward was sentenced to two months hard labour.

In 1857, Charles Agar would sit as a juror with the ‘great and good’ so his respectable credentials were firmly in place.

March 1855, Agar assigned his hosiery business to (possibly), Fielding Johnson. A month later sold his surplus stocking frames at auction.  His business ventures are quite obscure for a time being, but 1859 saw Agar again charge William Stevenson with assault.  Stevenson threatened to ‘screw Agars head off’ and Agar claimed he was scared for his life.  Stevenson admitted the offence, significantly stating that Agar owed him money for two houses he had built for him.  

Around this time, Charles Agar opened his beerhouse. It doesn’t appear to have been smooth running.

In June 1863, James Ball was charged with assaulting Agar.  An argument over borrowed money resulted in Ball trying to drink someone else ale, then tipping the ale over a customer, then striking Agar on the jaw.  Agar barricaded himself in the living quarters, which Ball tried to kick the door in. Ball wasn’t finished though, as he then indecently exposed himself to Louise Agars wife. Fined 10/-, Ball probably thought it was worth it.

A year later, Fred Pywell knocked Charles Agar to the floor after refusing to quit the Havelock. Then Agar himself was charged with assaulting William Hammersly with an iron weight.  

Although long closed, the Havelock is tantalising just out of shot in this picture (photo above).  It stood next door but one from the Willow Street School, so the decorative brickwork is most likely the end of Havelock Inn building.

In 1871, George Firth, a slaughter man who lived opposite according to Louise Agar, had been in the Havelock one morning for a drink at 7am  where he had some ale with ginger.  His countenance she claimed was different to his usual self – he looked haggard with a nervous ‘tick’.  After he left, later in the day the landlady heard a muffled bang (as did a neighbour), who went into the slaughterhouse where he found Firth slumped with his back to a wall, half his head blown away. The Inquest concluded ‘temporary insanity’.

In 1874, Charles Agar offered the pub for sale: ‘Old Licensed Inn with Wine & Spirit vaults for sale known as the Havelock Inn for sale.’ 

The freehold was purchased by Henry Windram for £1,200 which he thought ought to have been the end of the matter. Walter Ball became licensee in 1875, followed by John Cramant.

In November 1877, the pub was up for sale again, together with a dwelling house adjoining, and a two story warehouse, stabling and further outbuildings at rear. It is unknown if it was sold as the advert appears again in 1880.

John Cramant passed the licence to John Davis in January 1880, and in the same year – six years after he sold the Havelock to Henry Windram. Agar sued Windram for some barrels of beer left in a shed that he claimed hadn’t been paid for in the transaction.  Windram counter claimed that the shed had been knocked down by Agar and sold for firewood. Agar admitted this, so the magistrates ordered Windram to pay Agar the value of the beer less the value of the firewood.

Why Charles Agar would dispute beer payment after six years is not known.  Perhaps he had fallen on hard times as at the time Agar was now in his seventies, living still with wife Louise in Gresham Street, but now listed as a FWK worker.

John Davis is listed as victualler at the Havelock through most of the 1880s, before Elizabeth Mossendew, only twenty-one years old, tooks the licence.  She had Arthur Fletcher, also aged about twenty, helping her. 

In 1890, Maria Thomas was fined for refusing to quit the Havelock Inn.  She demanded to be served gin by Arthur Fletcher, refusing to be served by the landlady, slamming the servery window in Mossendew’s face. Maria Thomas claimed she was Fletcher’s sweetheart, but was still fined 10/6 or seven days.  In July of that year Elizabeth Mossendew married Arthur Fletcher (we can now see what irked Maria Thomas).  Arthur becomes landlord with Elizabeth helping him.

A few years later, Elizabeth was living in Pocklingtons Walk (still listed as victualler), with two children. Arthur is now not on the scene.

John Warren was licensee of the Havelock circa 1898. Isaac Smith 1899, Samuel Blackwell 1902  George Almey, 1906. LBM Brewery the owners.

In April 1909, the Havelock closed, and the licence was transferred to an offie on Ross Walk/Hildyard Road.  This was not before a debate on the practice of the ‘long pull’ (giving extra beer), which the magistrates insisted would be forbidden, or the police would be informed. The hours of the new offie were also restricted.

The Pub History Project has a podcast. Please subscribe and have a listen with a pint of your favourite ale.