• Pubs & Taverns Home
• Featured Pubs & Taverns
• Featured Articles

The Market Inn was a tavern which has all but been erased from living memory. It stood in Coupland Place and was the home of the Somercotes Market, before the Market Place itself was built. It was located at one end of Coupland Place, adjacent to fields which, for some reason, were never developed for housing. As Somercotes grew, the centre of the village moved away from Coupland Place to the Church, and the junction between Nottingham Road and Birchwood Lane, where the new Market Place would eventually be established.

The building was contemporary with many of the workers cottages erected on Coupland Place, and would have been built around the 1860s. One of the earliest references to the Market Inn can be found in the Ilkeston Pioneer, dated 9th August 1866. An advertisement placed in the newspaper read: “For sale – that well-known carrier’s van called ‘Slap Bang’ in excellent condition with two horses in complete harness and an increasing trade – Apply to Mr. Booth, Market Inn, Somercotes, Derbyshire.” In 1868 William Booth applied for a licence to sell alcohol. It is not clear if this was a renewal of a beer licence or an application for a new wines & spirits licence. The Derbyshire Times & Chesterfield Herald published on 19th September 1868 reported: “BREWSTER SESSIONS - William Booth, beerhouse keeper, Somercotes, was represented by Mr. Smith, who stated that if a license was granted to the house it would prove a great accommodation to parties attending Somercotes market, being in the centre where the market was held, and produced a memorial signed by a number of respectable inhabitants…” The newspaper reported that the application was refused.

The establishment seems to have very quickly gained a reputation and many of its clients appeared before magistrates at the Alfreton Petty Sessions, including William Booth himself. The Derbyshire Times & Chesterfield Herald of 31st July 1869 records: “ALFRETON PETTY SESSIONS…. William Booth, Market Inn, Somercotes was charged with being drunk and guilty of riotous behaviour on the 16th inst. at Somercotes… Fined £1 and 17s 6d costs.”

William Booth may have been the original landlord and owner of the Market Inn, but by 1870 the landlord was Thomas Flowers. The Derby Mercury published on 21st September 1870 records that “… A plan for the erection of some outbuildings adjoining the Market Inn, Somercoates occupied by Mr. Thos. Flowers was presented to the board and passed.” It is known that the Market Inn had a covered area for market stalls, as well as stabling and piggeries. The outbuildings were probably connected to the market, which appears to have been a private concern and not under the jurisdiction of the Alfreton council.

The Market Inn may well have started life as a lodging house and beer house. Beer Houses were common in Somercotes in the second half of the 19th century, and subject to the relevant licencing regulations. Like many such establishments in the district the fortunes of the Market Inn were subject to the granting of a beer licence, which was not always granted. There were many reasons why licences were refused, not least the number of beer houses within a set area. It was not unusual for landlords of other beer houses and inns close by to object to the granting of licences in order to increase their own custom. The Derbyshire Times & Chesterfield Herald on 16th September 1871 reported on one such licencing session: “POLICE INTELLIGENCE – The following application for new licences were refused: Thomas Goodwin, Travellers Rest Alfreton, Thomas Flowers, Market Inn Somercotes, Henry Carlin, Devonshire Arms Somercotes…” No reason was given for the refusals in this case.

MAP: A map of Coupland Place, Somercotes showing the old Market Place. The map dates from 1884.

In Reginald Johnson’s book “The History of Alfreton”, the Market Inn is mentioned specifically, probably due to certain documents he had located. One was an advertisement for the Inn which appeared in a local almanac dated 1871. Following is a transcript from Johnson’s book: “THE MARKET INN - SOMERCOTES - Thos. Flowers – Proprietor - The arrangements of this inn, which is attached to the market, are well adapted for the convenience of persons attending the market from a distance. There is good stabling, a commodious house, well aired beds provided. Botanic and other beers supplied."
 

Thomas Flowers was still the landlord in 1876, when he was listed in the Post Office Directory.

The refusal of a beer licence did not often stop the selling of beer illegally, but Thomas Flowers seems to have navigated his way around the problem by declaring the Market Inn a private club, which was not subject to the same regulations. Under normal circumstances this probably would not have been accepted by the authorities, but as the Market Inn also had a private market business it appears that it made the matter less straight forward. In 1883 the authorities finally brought Thomas Flowers before the courts to legally challenge the validity of the private club, and the case drew extensive coverage in the local press. The report on the court case is an interesting comment on local affairs at the time, and has been transcribed from the Sheffield Daily Telegraph published on 27th October 1883 in full. Note in the report that the Market Inn is referred to as the Market House: “What is a Bona Fide Club? — Important Case — Thomas Flowers of the Market House, Somercotes, was summoned having sold intoxicating liquors without a license. - Mr. Middleton (Chesterfield) appeared in support of the information, and Mr. Whittingham (Nottingham) was instructed for the defence. — Mr. Middleton, in stating the case observed that the defendant up to the licensing day of the year 1881 held license to sell beer off the premises in question. On the 10th October that year when the excise license expired, he took down his notice board, and opened his house, calling it a club for the consumption of liquor the premises. From that time until the present, he had been in the habit of permitting people to congregate there, in fact, he had gone to such an extent that the police determined to bring the case before the Bench, to test whether the club was a bona fide institution. Sunday morning, the 7th October, at about ten o'clock, a police sergeant and a constable, in consequence of something they heard, entered the premises. They found eleven men in the rooms, and whilst they were there four other men came in. Beer was supplied to them, for which money was passed. A girl was serving, and she gave the money to the defendant's wife. The point was, was the club bona fide, and were these people in the house duly elected members? Or was not the institution carried on for the benefit of the defendant? It certainly did seem a very queer circumstance that directly the defendant's license was refused the house was turned into a club. Sergeant Cholerton gave evidence bearing out Mr. Middleton's statement. He saw the defendant in the kitchen with his wife. The people in the house were all ‘natives’ except one man named Sharman. Four pints of beer were supplied and paid for in his presence.— ln cross-examination witness stated that he never saw the defendant take any part in the business. — The register of licenses was then put in, but the defendant's name was not upon it. — Mr. Whittingham pointed out, in defence, that there was an express section in the Act of Parliament under which the defendant might have been charged as occupier of the premises, but he would waive his objection to the information. He was not there that morning to show that the club was conducted as well as the Carlton Club in London, nor to show that it had been conducted with the provident and economical management of a club which was held not 100 miles from that building. The club had been carried on as a working men's club for the past two years. If the Bench were satisfied that this was the case they would relieve the defendant from the charge that had been brought against him. Whilst in possession of his license the defendant permitted a club to be held on his premises. The club was re-commenced again 1881, and it had now 118 members.—Mr. Hall: ‘Why has not notice been taken of this before’.—Superintendent Coope: ‘We have viewed the house scores of times, but never could see a sale of drink before’. Mr. Whittingham went on to say that there was a feeling on the part of the innkeepers against the club being carried on. It was a very natural feeling on the part of those people who were taxed in order that they might carry similar trade. Books were commenced at the time the club was opened in 1881, and each member was required to pay in advance a subscription of 1s. per annum. For the four large rooms used for the purposes of the club the defendant received £30 per annum. The liquor consumed was ordered by the committee, and the profits which accrued were devoted to the carrying on of the club. —David Rhodes, miner, of Alfreton, the secretary, produced the books of the institution He had been in office since 1881. Defendant was paid 25s. a year for acting as treasurer.—Cross examined: The balance in hand was £29 10s. 9d. They had no banking account, and the money was left in the defendant's hands. Defendant had given no security. They had never had the accounts balanced by an accountant until the summons was issued. Visitors were not allowed in the club, a rule to that effect having been passed about three months ago. They had no food on the premises for the members.—Joshua Redgate, chairman the club, and Mr. Joseph Kitt, accountant, Derby, who had examined the books, gave evidence. — The magistrates held that the club was a bona fide establishment, although there had been rather lax management in regard to it.”

The outcome of the court case must have been a blow to the authorities, but must have also been difficult for the landlords of other fully licenced establishments in the area. The reputation of the Market Inn and the continual cases of drunkenness and violence reported in the newspapers must also have been noted by the members of the parish council. Nonetheless Thomas Flowers continued in business until his death in 1886, when his wife, Hannah, took over the running of the club.

In 1890, the premises were put up for auction by Hannah Flowers. Several local newspapers carried the same advertisement: “All that Commodious House, now called the Market House (formerly a beer-house) situate in Market Place, Somercotes with large clubroom, stabling for eight horses, large shed with 16 market stalls, wherein is held the market.” It is not known if the premises sold, but a further auction was held the following year. The Derbyshire Times & Chesterfield Herald, dated 13th June 1891 reported that the auction lot, one of many, did not sell: “…The last lot, a commodious house called the Market House in Market Place, Somercotes with two cottages and a quantity of building land was withdrawn at £750…”

Perhaps in part due to the geographical changes in Somercotes and also the reputation of the Market House, as it was then titled, the councillors representing Somercotes began to enquire whether or not a new market place could be established. At a council meeting it was reported by the Derbyshire Times & Chesterfield Herald on 11th May 1895 that the “…. present market had been in existence for over 30 years, and there had been things arise that had not been satisfactory. It was probable that the present market would soon be discontinued, and they were desirous of having a new market…” A year later, the authorities once again summonsed the owner for running a fraudulent club and selling intoxicating liquor without an appropriate licence. At the time, the Market House was run by Jane Lander. The evidence presented this time to the court could not be refuted. The Derbyshire Times & Chesterfield Herald ran a long article on the case in their edition dated 2nd May 1896. Part of the article read: “A BOGUS CLUB AT SOMERCOTES - Jane Lander, a widow, was prosecuted for selling alcohol without a licence. The police arranged to purchase beer without being a member of a private club…”  Jane Lander was found guilty by the court. In summing up the case the leading magistrate commented: “…Although there is no direct previous conviction against the defendant there is against the house. The Magistrates think an example ought to be made in the case but at the same time they do not put the full penalty of £50. You will be fined £20 and the costs. Superintendent asked for the costs and the solicitor’s fees to be paid. The Bench allowed this, the costs reaching £3 1s. 10d.”

With no likelihood of ever being granted a beer licence and the premises under scrutiny by the police and councillors the Market House was effectively shut down by the court case. On 18th November 1896 the premises were auctioned: “All that Commodious HOUSE called the Market House [formerly a beer-house] situate in Market Place, Somercotes, with large club room, stabling, shed with market stalls, piggeries and other outer buildings…” The auction was followed days later by another on 25th November: “Instructed by Mrs. Lander, Market House, Somercotes. Unreserved Auction Sale of Weighing Machine, 10 Couple Fowls, Market Stalls, Forms, Sheds and other items…”

There are no photographs of the premises, and their history after 1896 is not known. The new market at Somercotes was officially opened in June that year.