Some history of the Broom Inn at Broombank in Lindridge in the County of Worcestershire


Click or tap here

Located at Broombank, the Broom Inn was originally a cider house but was later licensed to retail beer. The house was kept by William Davies for the last quarter of the 19th century.

Lindridge : Former Broom Inn at Broombank [2018]

Lindridge : Woodston Lodge at Broombank [2018]

There are not too many buildings on the main road at Broombank. One interesting dwelling is that of Woodston Lodge. This has been extended in recent times. The house stands at the top of an old lane to Woodston Manor. In the late 19th century the large house was also home to a hop grower named James Adams Partridge, along with his wife Constance. Other families worked the land from both Upper and Little Woodston. The lodge was generally occupied by a farm labourer or house-keeper.

Click or tap here

More information to follow ....

Click or tap here

Licensees of the Broom Inn

1845 - Mrs. Hardwick
1903 - William Davies
Note : this is not a complete list of licensees for this pub.

Click here to share your story or memories OR to send a genealogy query

Click or tap here

Related Newspaper Articles

"John Timmins, described as of Sommer Street, Stourbridge, labourer, was brought up in custody charged with indecently assaulting Mary Ann Element, at the Broom, Lindridge, on the 9th August. From the evidence of the prosecutrix, an aged and infirm woman, it appeared that the prisoner called at her house and asked for a hat. She told him she had not one, and ordered him off the premises. The prisoner then came in the house. He pulled up her dress and caught hold of her legs. He tried to kiss her and pushed her against the wall. She struggled against him. The prosecutrix stated that she then fainted. She was taken from Court in a fainting condition. Sophia Ryder, granddaughter of the prosecutrix , corroborated, and said she pushed prisoner out of the house and fetched a neighbour named William Tomkins, who put him in the road. In cross-examination by prisoner, witness said that prisoner remarked that her grandmother looked bad, and asked if they gave her enough to eat. He did offer her money to fetch spirits for her grandmother. He said he would send the next policeman he met. He said they "clemmed" the old woman. William Tomkins, the Broom, blacksmith, stated that he put the prisoner into the road. P.C. Butler, stationed at Clows Top, proved arresting the prisoner at Bayton. When charged he replied, "I am not guilty."" Prisoner was committed for trial to the ensuing Quarter Sessions."
"Assault on an Old Woman"
Tenbury Wells Advertiser : August 22nd 1905 Page 5

"John Griffiths, labourer, Lindridge. was charged with being drunk on licensed premises, to wit, the Broom Inn, Lindridge. on June 5th. Police Sergeant Speake stated that on the day in question he visited the Broom Inn in company with P.C. Tombs. In the kitchen they found the defendant, who was very drunk. He called the attention of the person in charge, and she replied "He has not had it all here." Defendant staggered towards the door, and witness had to threaten to lock defendant up. P.C. Tombs corroborated the statement of the previous witness. Defendant was very drunk: he was soddened with drink. The defendant was fined 5s., including costs, it being his first offence. As a segue to the preceding case, William Davies [73], the licensee of the Broom Inn, Lindridge, was charged with permitting drunkenness on his premises on June 5th. Mr. Thursfield prosecuted on behalf of the police, and Mr. C. B Cottam [Ludlow] defended. Police Sergeant Speke stated that on June 5th he visited the Broom Inn in company with P.C. Tombs. In the kitchen he found six persons. Among them was John Griffiths, the defendant convicted of drunkenness in the previous case. The granddaughter of the defendant [Jane Davies] was in charge. He saw Griffiths, who was very drunk, drink a glass beer. He asked Jane Davies how she accounted for having Griffiths on the premises in such a condition. She replied, "I ordered him to go half-an-hour ago, but he would not." She also told witness that Griffiths had been there about an hour and a half. She ordered Griffiths to go, and he went staggering out. Witness had to threaten to lock Griffiths up if he did not go home. Defendant was working in an orchard close by. Witness called him and told him what had happened. Defendant said he was sorry, and that he should have to look after the business himself. By Mr. Cottam : He denied that Miss Davies told him that Griffiths had not had any drink. She said, "He has not had it all here." Defendant had held the licence for many years. P.C. Tombs gave corroborative evidence, and said he saw Griffiths, who was soddened with drink in the kitchen. There was a jug of beer and glasses in front of Griffiths. He saw Griffiths drink a glass of beer. By Mr. Cottam : There were men sitting near Griffiths in the room. Miss Davies did not say that she noticed that Griffiths was drunk, and that she had ordered him out. For the defence. Mr. Cottam called Jane Davies, granddaughter of the defendant, who stated that on Friday, June 5th, she saw a man named Griffiths come into the house. She could see that he had had enough to drink. She told him he had had enough, and told him to go home. He did not go, and she told him again to go. She did not serve him with anything to drink. It was not quite half an hour till the police came. She did not tell the police that Griffiths had been there an hour and a half. Her grandfather was not there. She told Sergeant Speke that Griffiths had not had any drink there. She did not say, "He has not had all the drink here." She never mentioned "all." Cross-examined by Thursfield : If she told the policeman that Griffiths was in the house an hour and a half it was a mistake. A relation of hers was in the house, a cousin named Davies. She did not ask him to turn Griffiths out. By the Chairman : She had assisted in the business for 12 years. She did not know of anyone being drunk in the house. She had known her grandfather turn people out if they were quarrelsome. Witness answered in a hesitating manner, and showed reluctance to answer questions. The Chairman said she had given the Bench the impression that she was not a fit and proper person to be in charge of a licensed house, and the magistrates would have to consider that at a future date. They expected those in charge of a licensed house to answer questions submitted to them by the Court in proper manner. Defendant, sworn, stated that he had kept the house 28 years. It was formerly a cider house. He had to work some land. He had been very careful. No policeman in England could say a word against him. No one called him till the policemen came. Cross-examined by Mr Thursfield : He had been down to see what Griffiths was "rattling about": drunken men always made a noise. Griffiths did not have any drink there. He did not turn him out. Griffiths might have had a drink out of other people's glasses. He [defendant] was 73 years of age. The Chairman remarked that it made the case more serious. It was represented to them that Miss Davies could not get anyone to turn Griffiths out. Mr. Cottam said those were his instructions; he did not wish to deceive the Court. He should not be there if he had known. James Tomkins, labourer, Lindridge, stated that he heard Miss Davies refuse to serve Griffiths, who was in the porch with witness till within a few minutes of the police coming. Griffiths then went into the kitchen. Griffiths was not making a noise. Miss Davies [recalled] said her grandfather had made a mistake. He meant the previous day. He never came in on June 5th while Griffiths was there. Mr. Cottam submitted that defendant in his evidence had mistaken the day. On the preceding day, June 4th, there had been a row or something of the sort the Inn. The Chairman said the Bench had come to the conclusion that there had not been sufficient care taken to prevent drunkenness in the house, and they had gathered the impression that the defendant and his grand-daughter were not fit and proper persons to have charge of a licensed house. Defendant would be fined £2 and 5s. costs, and would have to pay the fee of the solicitor for the police. £1.1s."
"Drunk on Licensed Premises"
Ludlow Advertiser : July 11th 1903 Page 8

Click or tap here for more information

Click here to visit the W3C Markup Validation Service