The Cambrian News and Merionethshire Standard

ABERYSTWYTH. COUNTY COURT, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15TH.-Before His Honour Judge Bishop. 6herwin v. Jenkins (t)itl was an action in which the plaintiff, Edward Sherwin, formerly school- master of theNational School, Llanfihangel-y-Creuddyn, but now of 19, Harbour-terrace, Stafford, claimed the ina of 160 from Thomas Jenkins and John Jones, of anShangel y Creuddyn, and managers of the tional School in that parish, for salaries as master of School for nine moiaths.—Mr T. Merchant "iams, barrister, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr ur J. Hughes, solicitor, Aberystwyth, for the dauts.—Mr Williams having briefly stated the of the case, called upon the plaintiff, who said he 'een trailing at the North Wales Training College, irvon. He had b?en apprenticed as pupi! teacher, was now qualified for the post of school master, .aw an advertisement in a scholastic paper, wanting schoolmaster for the school at Llaufihangel-y- reuddyn, and he applied for the post. He wrote to ae Rev B. Edwardes (deceased), late vicar of the parish, and another manager of the School, who replied that he could not offer more than £85 as the salary, made up of school fees, portion of grant, and a fixed amount, but it would be increased according to success and if he accepted the position he was to go at his earliest convenience. He (the plaintiff) wrote back, and received a reply, in consequence of which he went to Aberystwyth, and thence to Llanfihangel-y- Creuddyn, having been appointed of the School. Soon after he reached there he saw Mr Edwardes, who mentioned the same terms as in the letter. He entered upon his duties a few days afterwards, and he soon had to pay the assistant master and sewing mistress the sum of £ 30, and met Mr Gardiner and the correspon- dents of the School to discuss the financial position of the School. On the 14th February an agreement was drawn up and was signed by him (the plaintiff) the following day.—Mr Marchant Williams then read the agreement which was between the ratepayers on the one part, ar.d Edward Sherwin on the other who should continue to take charge of the School in a creditable and efficient manner, and should receive the school fees, part of the grant, and £3 as his salary, to the amount of £ 85 per annum. He (the plaintiff) signed the agreement but had not received a farthing from the ratepayers. The examination at the School took place CM the 14th March, a month after the sign- ing of the agreement. Mr Gardiner's signature was not on the agreement, when he (the plaintiff) signed it. He had not seen the agreement from that time until that day. On the 15th March he received the follow- ing notice We do not require your services after three calendar months from this da"?. B. Edwardes, vicar, John Jones and Thomas Jenkins, church- wardens." After the expiration of the three months, he (the plaintiff) remained in charge of the School on a week's notice of leave. He received his salary from the newly-formed School Board, which, he believed, he was under for about three weeks. The Board was formed in August, and be was paid the same as under the original agreement.—Cross-examined by Mr A. J. Hughes There was no other agreement. He wanted a formal agreement drawn up. He drew one up. but it was not signed and therefore was destroyed. He had no purpose for destroying it; but he thought it was use- less. The managers refused to sign it or any agree- ment unless twenty managers c-r more also signed it.- Mr Hughes I heard the school was not a success. I suppose there were too many managers then ?-His Honour Too many cooks. (Laughter).—Mr Hughes: Now I put the question to you again. Did the managers refuse to sign any agreement unless they were supported by twenty or more ratepayers ?— Plaintiff: The managers said that unless they were supported they declined to sign any agreement.— Cross-examination continued The headmaster had access to the Log Book as long as he was headmaster., Mr Edwards was the general manager. He had con- versed with the two defendants as to the financial position of the school on two or three occasions, but he could not give the precise dates. The words This agreement is only supplementary weie written the same time as the rest on the same page in the diary. He could not see there was any difference. The defendants agreed to his appointment of master to the school. They were in want cf funds at the time, and Mr Edwards had a concert held, but the proceeds could hardly meet the expenses. Mr Edwards told him that he was afraid the parishioners believed the managers misappropriated the raoney. but that was not true. He got paid a portion of the grant. The result of the examination was net satisfactory.—Mr Hughes said he did not attribute the blame at allto Mr Sherwin.—"Phintiff said, for thr°e months previous to his going there tha school was without a headmaster, and an assistant taught the six standards. No master cou!d have taught the children in such a aii,rt time as he had before the examination was held. —His Honour thought Mr Sherwin was quite right.— By Mr Hughes He had made applications for money on several occasions to Mr Edwardes.Re-examined by Mr Marchant Williams The grant was not reduced because of the fall of instruction.—Mr Williams then read the report of Her Majesty's Inspectors in which they stated that the school was in a very backward and unsatisfactory condition. For three months it had been v/ithcut a headmaster, and had also suffered from want of books, apparatus and proper manage- ment by the managers.—Ee-5?:.imiuatioa continued: Plaintiff said the fixed amount o: £ 23 was based upon the previous year's income. The grant for the previous year was zC54 the school fees came to £18 and the £ 23 to cover the amount.—Mr Williams said Án¡¡¡ wjs his case,—Mr Hughes submitted that the plain tiff had not made on ft is "gainst the defend- ants, Jones and Jenkins. The agreements Set up by plaintiff were distinctly declined to be signed by the defendants. He did not say what possible grounds the plaintiff had for claiming the amount. The plaintiff, finding he did not get on well there, went to Mr Gardiner and bad a conversation with him on the matter. He was surprized at his friend not calling him.—Mr Williams You may call him if you wish,— Mr Hughes said it was competent for him to call anybody. He submitted the agreement im- pressed the whole arrangement between the parties. He could say nothing more, but upon the evidence he did not think the case for the plaintiff had been made out. He hoped His Honour would not call upon him to prove the case for the defence, and that he was entitled to a non-suit. If His Honour was against him he would call the witnesses for the defence.—His Honour said he was against Mr Hughes as he believed Mr Edwardes wrote on behalf of the other managers.—Mr Hughes said he should then cal! his witnesses.—Robert Gardiner said he was agent for the Croswood Estate. The reason he took so much interest in the matter waa because his Lordship (Earl oc Lisburne) was one of the largest ratepayers in the district An agree. ment was drawn up on the Hth February and the contents were mentioned before Mr Sherwin. He was aware Mr Sherwin had entered upon the duties of the office. Mr Sherwin showed him some letters he had had from Mr Edwardes. From what Mr Edwards and Mr Sherwin said he understood that there had been a discussion on the matter. Hie cs.me to him (witness) to discuss the terms. They had a long conversation together, and he suggested that instead of it being made up as an, agreement between Mr Sherwin and the managers it should be made an agreement between Mr Sherwin and the rate- payers. It was further discussed and understood that the gran4: should be from £ oQ and upwards that the school fees should he from £ 13 to £ 20 and £ 23 or more to cover the arrangement come to before. It was arranged that he should have the Government grant. —Cross-examined by Mr Marchant Williams He was not a manager. He drew up an agreement. There was nothing said about the grant in the agreement. He did not go to the schools on the day of examination to say that the ratepayers would not agree. The -natter was entirely in Mr Edwards's hands. The ratepayer?, were responsible then. He signed on behalf of the ratepayers. Mr Sherwin was a servant of t e Managers, and remained a servant of the Managers to the ecd of the chapter.—Re-examined by Mr A. J. Hughes Mr Sherwin collected the school fees himself. —Mr Jenkins, one of the defendants, was then called and said he had heard his name mentioned in regard to this matter. Ho had hllld nothing to do with Mr Sherwir.'s appointment. He ™ not a ratepayer in the parish and he had not signd the agreement. He had had ne conversation with Mr Sherwin about the agreement, not a word. He only signed a paper Mr Edwardes brought to him while he was ill as a warning. He never authorised Mr Edwardes to appoint ilir -Sher -4-;n, -Cross- examined by Mr Marchant Williams He signed the notipe to quit. He never signed the log book. He did not remember signing the return from the Correspondents of the School to the Education Department.—Mr Williams said the return must have been signed by the managers aud correspondents before it could be sent to the Edu- cation Department.—Mr Hughes said that was his case. He kMr Hughes) understood that his Honour appeared to hold that the agreement with Mr Edwardes was binding with his clients because they gave notice with Mr Edwardes terminating the appointment. He submitted to his Hocour that there was not a tittle of evidence against his clients. Mr Edwardes was the person who was responsible, and there was nothing to connect them with this matter. There was not one tittle of evidence except that notice of terminating the appointment to connect the defendants with the matter. The simple fact of their giving the notice in March relates back and confirms everything that Mr Edwardes did. That is the only tittle of evidence his Honour had. Because they were managers in 1S87, they were of course responsible for all that Mr Edwardes did. He submitted with confidence that hi3 Honour would not hold it so. He knew it was very iiard for hia friend's client if he lost the money, but it was ten times harder that his clients should have to pay the amount. Defendants were not parties to it, and did not authorise Mr Edwardes to take the steps he had taken. He hoped his Honour would not hold his clients liable for the amount.—The Judge As managers.—Mr Hughes Yes, your Honour. It is hard for Mr Sherwin to lose his salary, but of course he. could get the sum if he only went to the proper source for it.—Mr Williams said he did not see it so great a hardship for the managers as it was for his I client. The plaintiff became the servant of the rate- payers, but in March the managers of the school 'say —We are the managers of the school, we are the masters, and therefore we can give you notice ^to leave. We will give you notice to leave." The managers are the responsible persons for everything done iu regard to the school, and they are responsible in this case. Be was sure the plaintiff had made out his case. The meaning of the notice to quit vvas this I I. We can't pay 2d. in the pound, we must therefore f transfer the school to the School Board, and if a Board I is formed, it will be responsible, and everything will j be out of our hands." He submitted that plaintiff Iiad j made out his case, and he should repeat this, that the Managers must have signed the return before it could have been sent to the Education Department.—His Honour said there was no evidence on that question. He should have to take time to consider his verdict. Claim for Lodgings.—Amelia Annie Jones, formerly of Aberystwyth, but now of Birkenhead, sued Thomas I Williams, mason. Borough Gate, Pontrhydfendigaid. for the sum of £ 4 Is. being balance of an amount for lodgings for defendant's daughter for two years.—Mr R. G. Smith (Messrs Griffith Jones and Co., Solicitors) appeared for the plaintiff, who said the defendant's daughter had lodged with her fro.n January 1SS4 to Jauuary 1SS6 at Aberystwyth at Is. 9J. per week. One year had been satisfied, while 10s. had been paid on account for the second year, and the sum claimed was the balance still due.—Mr Smith said the matter had been adjourned because defendant made a statement at the last court that the house &c. in which his danghter lodged was plaintiff's mother's property. He should ask plaintiff whether that was so? Plaintiff said it was not so. It was her own property, and she kept her mother.—Defendant admitted that the amount was owing, but he had been out of work for a considerable time, and neglected paying it.- His Honour gave a verdict for the plaintiff, defendant to pay £ 1 a month. Adjournment.— Mr Hugh Hughes, solicitor, made an application cn behalf of the defendant in the case of Messrs Powell and Co., grocers, Market street, against Mr John Rowland, Goginan, as an important witness was unable to attend the Court that day. jir T. W. Powell opposed the application on the ground that he had been there the whole of the day awaiting the case to come ou. He however should consent to an adjournment on payment of costs.-His Honour therefore granted the adjournment. Claim of Daraayts JOJ" Trcspass.-In this action. Mr John Evans, sobcitor, appeared for tho plaintiff, David Davies of the Shop, Ystrad Meurig, and of Cilfacbyrhew, and Mr Arthur J. Hughes, solicitor, for the defeudant Mary Morgan, cf Cruglasucha. The claim was for jE42 for damages for injuries to land of plaintiff's by defendant's aheep trespassing and grazing thereon from October 1883 until the action was brought on for five winters.—Mr Evans said they omitted the summers, and therefore only claimed for the winbers. He had received a set off from the defendant for damages for trespass fram 1SS3 to 1888 of plaintiff's cattle and from 1SS5 to 1SSS of plaintiffs sheep on her land Ci-tiglasuel)a,The plaintiff was first called and said he was owner and occupier of Cilfachyrhew. Defendant was occupier of Cruglasucha, aud kept about one hundred and fifty sheep on the land. He made use of his land by keeping about twenty bullocks and about eight or nine horses in the summer, and he sometimes kept about sixty sheep on the land. Daring the winter months from October to April of each year he frequently kept nothing on the land. When he visited the farm in the spring, he found on each occasion several sheep on the land, and there was no grass there. That occurred every spring. From the state of the ground and the large quantity of manure about, he was of opinion that there had been a large number of sheep there everyday, and he could trace the tracts of these sheep to Cruglasucha going under the wire fencing. From 1833 to the present time there was no fence between the two farms, but an open bank. He put a small fence there in 1835 to keep the catfcls out. On several occasions he found the sheep belong to Cruglasucha straying all over the land. He remembered visiting the place in February, 1887, when he saw fifty to sixty sheep on the lanj. He went down to Cruglasucha, and saw defendant who said, "You must make a better fence. I can't keep my sheep out." She then sent her son for the sheep. The same thing occurring again, he instructed his solicitor to write to deimclaub. The next time he saw her after that, she came up to him crying and eaid" I cannot help ir. I have tried my best to keep them off but I cannot." In October of the same year aboat the 26'11 thy carpenter c?me up and put two more wins to the fence, xoar wire3 being there previously. On the 24th of October he slept there and woke about six o'clock the next morning. He then saw the sheep scattered all over the land. The servant girl sent the dog after them, and they went to Cruglasucha. He went there on several occasions afterwards and again saw the sheep there, and they still trespassed upon his land. He occupied all the land except one field which Mary Morgan occupied from 1884 to 1S85. He con- sidered what he had charged a fair aud reasonable price for the injury and damage done. He was sure it was under the value.—Cross-examined by Mr A. J. Hnerhe3 He did not know the mark" ou defendant's sheep. H«} C'i'ited about a hundred and fifty sheep on defendant's land Qi? one occasion. He could trace the tracts of the sheep for a long distance. His son went up to the farm about a week previous to that day. He was up at the farm about a month previous. He saw about seven sheep there. He was not sure whose sheep they were. He believed at the time that they belonged to Edwards, of Gwarffordd, but he was not sure. He only heard a complaint once that his cattle trespassed on defendant's land.—Re-examined by Mr John Evans He visited the place after the case had been entered into the County Court, and he found about seven sheep there. When turned off, however, they did not go i8 the direction of Cruglas-ucha. He did not think Glanrafon had any sheep at all. On the side of the mountain there are no sheep within a distance of two miles. The nearest place was Tynlone, a sheepwalk on the mountain side, where there would be no sheep in the winter. It was not possible for one herd of sheep to separate—one half go to one farm and the other half to another farm.—Margaret Thomas, in service with plaintiff at Cilfachyrhew, said she went to Cil- facbyrhew two years next April. She saw sheep on the land in May, 1S37, and again in the autumn of tho year. She only missed plaintiff's sheep once off the land in the mornings. She found them in an outbuilding at at Cruglasucha. She never left them on Cruglas Und longer than she saw them there. She was a shepherd for living in the house. She never missed the cattle and horses off the land during the night, neither did she miss them during the daytime. She and her children were always looking after them. The cattle were often driven on to Cruglas land by Evan. Edwards' dogs. They went on to Edwards' land several times, and were coursed away by the dogs there. During the year 1887 she bad seen sheep on Cilfach land, and when sent off went to Cruglas and Gwarfforda. They mostly came from Cruglas, very few came from Gwarffordd. They were generally there during the night, as she was there during the daytime to drive them away. When she saw Cruglas sheep on plaintiffs land she always told defendant. and Morgan Morgana, the son, would go and send them on to their own land.—Cross-examined by Mr A. J. Hughes Morgan Morgans came very often for the sheep. She could not say how many times he came for them. She remembered making a mistake as to the ownership of some of the sheep. She turned them on to Cruglas, but they turned out to belong to some other people. He also made a similar mistake on another occasion. She coursed them on to Cruglas land, and afterwards found they belonged to some other people. She did not know the mark on Cruglas sheep. They only went toCruglas land. -Re-exatyi aed by Mr John She went to Mrs Morgan several times, because siie told witness not to course the sheep but to come and tell her they were on the land. The number of times she told Mrs Morgan were beyond her counting them. When she went to defendant the son each time came for them. His Honour then adjourned the Court soon after six o'clock to Saturday morning at 10.30. SATURDAY. The case was continued on Saturday morning, when the following evidence was tendered :—David Benjamin, joiner, Gwenhafdre, said he was engaged by Mr Davies to put up a fence at Gilfachyrhiw. The first time was in ISS-1. In 1885, March and April, put up a fence between Cilfachyrhiw aud Cricklas. Saw sheep on the land and saw them driven eU towards Cricklas. Last October was there for a week changing the fence and saw sheep on Cilfachyrhiw. Never counted the sheep, but sometimes there would be be- tween twelve and fifteen, and sometimes as many as fifteen. Cress-examined The fence was two feet two inches'and thepcsta four yards apart.—Evan Edwards, Gwarffordd, adjoining Cilfachyrhiw, said he was en- gaged in the summer of 1884 in watching Mr Daviess cattle. During that time miseed them twice off Cilfach. Found three in Geufron, others on the read near Cefn Meurig, and others beyond Tanrhidiau, where some of e them had been bought at. On the second occasion he found some at Glanrafon and others at Mary Morgans's. 1Prevented them from Cricklas as much as possible, and if he found they had got over the fence turned them back as soon as possible. To get on to Cricklas land sheep from Bryncoryn and Tynddol would have to go over his land. Had seen sheep going over his land, but he did not know whose sheep they were.- Charles Davies said last December he saw from 100 to 120 sheep on Clfach. and drove them off. They went to Cricklas farm. Crick'as flock comprised a great many black ones, and there were black sheep among the trespassers. Complained about it once and said that aj action would have to be brought in the County Court, when plaintiff to whom he complained, said "What is the good of County Court? You must fence."—Cross-examined Went up once with a police officer but saw no sheep then. Told the officer that he wanted him to catch the sheep, but did not tell him that it was in order to see whether they were Cricklaa sheep or not. Would have been "more sure if saw the marks. No doubt told the officer in December that there was good grass there, but did not say that he hoped no sheep would como there. -Willian Owen, I Swydd Farm, said he saw marks of sheep leading from Cricklas. The land would hold about sixty sheep, for the winter, and from 3s. to 4s. a head was paid for wintering sheep. Three shillings a head would be a fair average. A two-foot fence on a four-foot mound I would be a sufficient fence.—Cross-examined If the mount was bad it would not be a good fence. The plaintiff had entered the matter in Court before he .(witness) went there to value. Distance was the only obstacle between his place and Cilfach. His sheep, like all mountain sheep, strayed, and probably two or three of his sheep found their way to Cilfach. There were farms nearer his place to Cilfach.—The Judge said that Mr Hughes's contention probably was that if witne^ses's sheep a mile and a half away got on to Cilfach. two or three sheep from intervening farms, when they got to the fat lands ac Cilfach would from a comparatively large flock.-By Mr Evans There was nothing witness saw on Cilfach to attract sheep a distance.—John Lloyd said he went with the last witness and Mr Davies to see the sheep marks in January, agreed with what had been said.-This was plaintiff's case.—Mr Hughes said, assuming trespass had been committed, there was no means provided by the evidence of arriving at the daosl There was no specific act of trespass or any specific number of sheep belonging to the defendant having trespassed.— His Honour said there was also in addition the fact that the w:ion had been lumped from 1883. He was never very willing to assist such cases as it rather suggested that some other reason than trespass prompted the action.—Mr Evans pointed out that a claim had been made in 1887.—Mr Hughes said his client was more reasonable than bhe plaintiff. He had claimed C42, and she had claimed £ 25. Quite without prejudice to her right, he should not be disposed to proceed with the counterclaim if there was a nonsuit. No doubt there had been tres- pass on both sides. When a claim was made in 1887 the woman shed tears, and those tears appeared to have settled the matter until a disagreement renewed the whole matter. After conversation between Mr Evans and the Judge, plaintiff suggested that the matter should be referred to arbitration.—His Honour said it would be much batter if the neighbours would live neighbourly.—Mr Hughes And the plaintiff put up a good and substantial fence.—A lengthened time was occupied in trying to come to a settlement, it being suggested that each side should withdraw and pay his own costs.—Defendant agreed, if the plaintiff paid a guinea, but the plaintift would not consent, and Mr Hughes then said the plaintiff had not shown specific damage a nor had he given the number of sheep. Mr Hughes therefore asked for nonsuit, stating that, with- out prejudice, he would withdraw his eounterelaim.- Mr Evans, on the other hand, contended that some trespass had bten proved and asked for a verdict on that evidence.—His Honour said he could not grant a nonsuit, as there was evidence of trespass.—Mr Hughes then said he would go into his counterclaim, and called Jane Edwards, Tanrhidiau, who, beginning with 1884 and going on to 18S8, stated frequent acts of trespass by plaintiff's cattle and sheep in corn on rye-grass, grass, and turnips. She estimated damage in 1884 to amount ts £ 6. and f,3 for eating up nearly an acre of turiiipe.- Witness was cross-examined at great length, but with- out effect.—Thomas Jones, Gwarffynon, said in July, 1884, he went to Cricklas, and in consequence of what was said by Mary Morgan, went to see what damage was done by cattle to the land. Saw thirteen of the Cilfach cattle in growing hay. and would not take dE3 for such damage to a field of his. Was rate collector. Then saw steers come often from C Ilf-sch and go on h Cricklas land. Plaintiff kept cattle over the summer and not in winter.—John Evans, Morgan Morgans, James Morgan, Pantyfedwen, P.C. James Lewis and Mrs Morgan were called, all, with the exception of the officer, giving evidence of various acts of trespass.— Mrs Morgan valued the damage at £5 a year until the last two years, and for those she mentioned the sum of £ 2 a year. Mentioned the trespass to plaintiff, and he wa3 very cross with her. Her animals probably trespassed on plaintiff's land, but she told her children to keep them away, and she believed they did so.— Cross-examined She estimated the damage she had sustained at 914-95 for two years and f2 a year for two year-His Honour, summing up, said it was to be regretted that the case had ever come into Court. The plaintiffs were neighbours living oa mountain land, which was too poor to be properly fenced in. However, he had to decide the matter, and he should give £10 damages to plaintiff and £ 10 to defendant, and make no order for costs on either aide. An Application.—Mr Edgar Atwood said he had to ask his Honour's opinion on a matter of law and of principle.—The Judge said his opinion was his judg- ment.—Mr Atwood continued by saying that in 1887 Mr Watson, who was a visitor at Aberystwyth, living on the Terrace.—Mr W. P. Owen, who appeared on the other side, said that was gone, and his Honour asked Mr Atwcol to confine himself to the cs\se,—Con- tinuing, Mr Atwood said that Mr Watson contracted a debt of £ 4 5s. 3d. with Eliza Felix, a greengrocer, in Terrace-road, which was left unpaid until last month, when the matter was placed in his (Mr Atwood's) hands. That applieation was made in January, and Mr Watson aaked him to wait and to be furnished with particulars. The particulars were supplied and Mr Watson remitted the money in an envelope.—Mr W. P. Owen In four days after application.—Mr Atwood said that Mr Watson paid £ 4 5s. 6d., but omitted to send costs?, saying that he would see him (Mr Atwood) again. The costs had not been paid, and he wanted his Honour's opinion of it.—The Judge said he would not say a word before Mr Atwood showed he was en- titled to the cots. -Mr Owen said that Mr Atwood had sought to mislead the Court. On the 21st January application was made by letter, and within four days after the money was paid. -The Judge said that if Felix had instructed Mr Atwood to put Watson in Court he should have carried out the instructions, and then he could have recovered costs.—Mr Atwood said he was quite satisfied with his Honour's ruling. He thought that Mr Watson ought to be shown up for the way he treated solicitors.—H^Qonour thought it was rather a novel way of proceeding. TOWN COUNCIL, TUESDAY, FHBRCARY 19th.-Pre- sent: Alderman C. M. Williams, mayor, presiding, Mr D. C. Roberts, ex-mayor, Aldermen Peter Jones, and John James. Councillors Wm. Thomas, Griffith Williams, W. H. Palmer, Thomas Griffiths, George Green, John Evans, John Mathias, John Morgan, T. W. Powell. and J. E. J. Lloyd, Messrs A. J. Hughes, town clerk, Rees Jones, borough surveyor. and H. L. Evans, accountant. AUDITOR'S RBPOBT. The Auditors reported that they had audited the accounts of the borough. They appended a recom- mendation that a strong room should be provided for the storage of the valuable documents of the town. The MAYOR said no doubt it was of great import- ance that the Corporation should have a strong room. The town bad valuable documents, and in case of fire they, in all probability, would be destroyed. Mr T. W. POWELL also thought it a matter of great importance, especially when it was considered that the deeds of the Corporation were in the hands of the late Corporation Solicitor. It was essential that the work should be carried out at The MAYOR thought t'r e subject might be put on the agenda for consideration at the next meeting. Then the Conucil could empower a committee to carry Then the Conucil could empower a committee to carry out the work. Alderman JAMES said it was contemplated making a place at the Town Hall, but when the alterations at the Town Hall were deferred the subject of a safe was also deferred. It was agreed to have the subject put on the agenda paper for the next meeting. THE TEMPORARY BRIDGE. The Mayor read a letter from Mr John Lloyd ask- ing for power to remove the wooden bridge over the' Rheidol. Alderman JAMES said the temporary bridge was no longer required, and moved that power begivenMr Lloyd The MAYOR said that as there might be matters of detail to be considered the subject had better be re- ferred to the Publio Works Committee who had charge of that matter. Mr WM. THOMAS asked if the county should not be consulted ? The TOWN CLERK replied that the Corporation took upon itseif the construction of the bridge, and he did not think the county was privy to the contract made between Mr Lloyd and the Corporation. The Cor- poration did not bind themselves to keep up the bridge for any time. He suggested that power should be granted to Mr Lloyd, subject to his (the Town Clerk's) looking at the agreement and ascertaining whether the Council had power to grant the application. It was also agreed, on the suggestion of Mr Joirs EVAss, that access to the temporary bridge should be now Bvopped. I NORTH PARADE TREES. } The MAYOR said he had received the following petition from the occupiers of houses on the north side of North Parade :—" We, the undersigned owners and 'occupiers of houses on the north side of North Parade, [consider that the aation taken by the Council in con- nection with disfiguring the trees to be damaging to property by causing the moat picturesque street in Aberystwyth to wear a most dilapidated appearance. We therefore trust to your Council to prevent any further mutilation in that direction. Trimming the trees we do not object to." The Mayor added that the petition was signed by all the occupiers of houses on She north side of the street. He might be allowed to I say that he happened to bo passing North Parade when I the Surveyor was carrying out the resolution of the I |Council, and took upon himself the responsibility of stopping the cutting down of the treea. Since that time he (the Mayor) had seen several of the people iliving in North Parade, and he believed they were perfectly satisfied with the work that had been done [since, that was pruning. He thought the work was inow completed. Mr WM. THOMAS thought the matter required just a word of explanation, especially as it was understood in some quarters that there waa no demand from that aide jof North Parade to cut the trees. In his own ex- .perience, however, he had heard visitors during past 'summers who either were lodging in North Parade or were looking for lodgings say that they would not stay ou that side on any account whatever owing to the trees. He might say also that he ha<l received many ,and many a strong complaint from the inhabitants of the street in the matter. Hu could name Mr and Mrs iMorgan, cabinet maker, who could not keep visitors on* account of the trees. Dr Roberts, also, had repeatedly pressed him (Mr Thomas) to bring the matter before the Council. In the middle of last summer 'the Council had to cut several branches of the trees in order to prevent visitors leaving the place and [when the summer was over Mr Thomas Williams, Rheidol Foundry, attended the Council on his own behalf and on behalf of the neighbours, and pressed the I Council to take the matter in hand, saying at the same time that Mrs Atwood had lost three parties from her house on account of the trees. Well, it was then I understood that the matter was to be taken in hand but it was delayed, and about three weeks ago, Dr Roberts suggested that he should wait on the Council and renew the matter. He (Mr Thomae), however, told Dr Roberts that the Council had written to Mr Gold, Aberayron, at the same time adding that he (Mr Thomas) would bring the matter to the attention of the next meeting of the Council. He did so. Dr Morgan Jones aiso had pressed the matter. Finding ( that several of the inhabitants, including two doctors, were crying out about; the matter he thought it high time that the matter should be taken up. There were then one or two courses to take. One was to cut off the branches leaving the leaders to grow up to the skies out of control altogether, leaving nothing to adorn North-parade but the bare trunks, as they were now and the other was to cut off the loaders and compel the trees to start a kind of new life, making them handsomer—something like those in front of the station. Mr Gold was consulted,, and, without hesita- tion, he, a an of experience, recommended that the branches should be cropped off within twenty-two feet of the ground. The SURVEYOR—Twenty feet. Mr WHo THOMAS (continuing) said they would find on reading the Cambrian News' report of the last meet- ing that he had the courage to suggest a few feet higher. It strrck him at the time that it was rather low but he felt diffidence in disputing the matter with Mr Gold. Adopting that report the work was taken in hand, and hence the great outcry against *he Council. Though he might be held up to some ridicule, he thought that the plan 6f cutting off the leaders would after all have been the best to adopt, though perhaps not so low as twenty feet. He believed that if that was done, there would be beautiful trees on North-parade in two or three years, and that the people of Aberystwyth would bs generous enough to admit it. Mr GREF. said he should like to know whether Mr Thomas had ever seen the horrible sight in North- parade. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Like the Parnell Commission, he seemed to take too long a time to prove his case. He (Mr Green) must say that he did not think thera wa3 any person in Aberystwyth but who would condemn what had been done as one of the worst thins ever done in the town. To his know- ledge, those trees had taken thirty-nine years to grow, and they were the greatest ornament in the town. It must be hone in mind that the Council had spsnt an extremely large sam of money in plausing trees, and he thought it showed that they were lacking in their duty when thAY destroyed the trees in the shameful way in which that tree on North-parade had been destroyed. If the officials did not understand work that was put into their charge, they should either look cut for some one who could give them proper advice, or the Council should take it in hand themselves. The Council only gave instructions to trim. Did they call that trimming ? Mr WM. THOMAS-No, I do not. Mr GREEN (continuing) t'aid that one of the things tha Council were hoping to do WM to take away branchea that were obstructing the light. How rvas the tree to grow so as not to obstruct the light when it was cut down so that the new branches would be right opposite the windows. Having spent money in growing trees, he thought it absurd to spend money in destroying them. He thought the Council ought to take some action in the matter. Alderman JAMES asked Mr Green if he was going to propose a vote of censure on Mr Thomas, because it so he (Mr James) would second it. The MAYOR thought it hardly fair that they should connect Mr Thomas with the matter more than any other member of the Council, because the resolution was a resolution of the Council. Mr GmŒ said he was only connecting Mr Thomas's apology. Mr THOMAS said he made no apology. The MAYOR said that Mr Thomas had only conveyed to the Council the opinion of the people living on North-parade, and he did not think it fair to put the blame on him. The matter was fully considered at a committee meeting before in--truct ons were given. First of all, Mr Williams attended the Council, and implored the Council to do something, as people living in the houses were continuously losing visitors, and as the houses were dark and damp. He (the Mayor) coald support Mr Thomas in hia statements that several people living on North-parade asked what the Council were going to do in the matter. Mr Gold was asked to report. That report was read at the Council meeting and adopted, aud it was agreed that the trees should be cut down to twenty or twenty-three feet from the ground. Immediately the Council saw the effect of having the fitst tree cut down they saw that a mistake had been made, and the evil was at once put an end to by preventing the cutting down of the other trees. Mr GRIFFITH WILLIAMS hoped the Council would take a lesson from that incident. There was no advan- tage in sending to people living ata distance for advice. That was not the first, second or third time the Council had done it, and it had always been foun/1 to be disadvan- tageous. He thought the Surveyor coufd have done the work of trimming better than Mr Gold. He did not think the Council should spend money iji sending away for people to advise the Council. The ¡A.YOR supposed that the matter had been discussed at sufficient length. The evil had been prevented, and in that way the wishes of the petitioners had been met. POSTAL IMPROVEMENTS. The MAYOR stated that they knew the interest Mr D. C. Roberts, the Town Clerk and other members of the Council took in the matter of obtaining increased postal facilities for Aberystwyth. In accordance with a promise, Mr Clancy forwarded valuable informa- tion with regard to similar agitation in Ireland. He suggested that that information should be handed over to the General Purposes Committee and that the Town Clerk should be requested to convey the thanks of the Council to Mr Clayey for bis courtesy. The TOWN CLERK said that the memorial was very ably drawn and contained facts of great use to Aber- ystwyth. If the matter was pursued he believed the Council would be able to make progress. Alderman JAMES remarked that recently an im- ,proved delivery was accorded. There were now three deliveries daily from London. Mr D. C. ROBERTS said the carrying out of that improvement in Ireland cost £11,000 a year. What Aberystwyth required would not cost a tenth of that sum. He proposed that the matter should be referred to the General Purposes Committee. Alderman JAMES seconded the proposition and it was f agreed to, and the Town Clerk was requested to thank Mr Clancy for his courtesy. COMMUNICATIONS. A letter was read saying that the Cardigan Assizes I would henceforth be held at Lampeter instead of at The Lord Mayor invited subscriptions to the Chinese relief fund. A letter was read from the secretary to the proposed Welsh Exhibition asking to be allowed to put Aber- ystwyth Corporation in list of patrons. Alderman JAMES thought that every town in Wales should support the Exhibition. On his proposition, ifcecouded by Mr GREEN, it was agreed to grant the application, and to refer the matter to the General Purposes Committee. THE GAS COMPANY. The TOWN CLERK stated that he had been instructed to write to the GAS Company asking them to forward to the council the annual statement of accounts up to date in accordance with the section of the Act an 1 received no reply. He wrote again on the 18th and received the same day the statements f)r the pa3t two years -4_ only. He had written again saying that the Council wanted statements up to the date when the last state- ment was sent and up to that morning had received no reply. It was agreed to hand all the statements when re- ceived to the Public Lights Committee. ADVERTISING. The TOWN CLERK said he had received a letter from Mr Conacher, secretary of the Cambrian Railway Co.. a,;king if the Council were di-posec; to advertise the Aber ystwyth district as last year, and whether they were dis- posed to advertise ou a more exteusi ve scale than last year. The MAYOR and Alderman JAMES thought that the town was satisfied that much good had resulted from last year's advertising, and it was eventually agreed to put on the agenda p-iper for the next meeting that a sum not exceeding £ 50 should be spent in that direction this year. FOOTPATHS. It was agreed to pay Mr T. Owen, Paris House, JE17 I 10s. for six feet deep of land sixty-one feet in length, for the purpose of making a footpath on LIanbadarn- road. Mr Owen was willing to grant four feet at Elf), and at first wanted £ 20 for six teet, saying that the removal of the hedge and adjoining land would cost a large sum of money and that he should get practically nothing for the land he gave up. Mr GEORGE GRKEX naid he gave a footpath io the public on Llanbadarn-roaci, and also thought he shotud be compensated. Alderman PETK.E JONES thought that if Gogerddan had carried out an arrangement with the County Roads Board a footpath would have been reserved along Lhu- badara-road. He believed the County had a piece of 'land near St David's-road on which stones used to be broken, and in consideration"of allowing St David's- road to be made near that spot he understood that a footpath was to be reserved when the adjoining property was sold. There was, however, no stipulation to that effect made when Mr Owen bought his land. It was much to be regretted that the matter was not reduced to writing by the County Roads Board. He believed Mr Fryer observed the under standing as long as he was agent of the estate.. Mr GREEN said that no such stipulation was made [ with him, documentary or verbal. FINANCE COMaiTTKB'S REPOET. A meeting of the Finance Committee woa hdd on February 6th. present, Alderman C. M. Williams, mayor, Messrs Peter Jones, Wm. Thomas, Thomas Griffiths, D. C Roberts, chairman, and the Borough Surveyor. The meeting was convened to take into consideration the Corporation property for 'which it would not be advisable to grant renewals of leaser. The Committee, after a complete perusal cf the town plan, recommend that renewals be not granted for the following properties Northern side of Portland-lane and the Courts on the opposite side south side of Vulcan-street between Prospect-street and High-street the Public Baths, Msriae-torrace Moor-lane Nes. 43 and 45, North-parade Poplar-row the two houses on the corner of Skinner-street; and a portion of the premises on the opposite side as marked on the plan; and Northgate-oourt, A meeting was also held on 13th February, present, Messrs C. M. Williams, Peter Jones, Wm. Thomas, George Green, D. C. Roberts, chairman, the Borough Accountant and the Surveyor. The labour sheets and bills were examined and passed. Mr D, C. ROBERT? said he did not purpose asking the Council to adopt the report that day. It would be put on the agenda for the next meeting, and in the meantime councillors would have an opportunity of reading the report and inspecting the plan. In reply to Mr JOHN MORGAN, Mr Roberts added that the two houses in North-parade were reserved in order to make a roadway through North-parade, Brewer-street, to Plascrug.—The report was received. PUBLIC LIGHT'S GOMMITTHES REPORT. A meeting of tha committee waq held on 18th February present: Messrs C. M. William-, mayor, John Evans, John Mathias, John Morgan, Griffith Wiliiauia, George Green, William Thomas, chairman, the Borough Surveyor and the Borough Accountant. The committee recommended that three temporary pillars should be placed on the new bridge. The com- mittee instructed the Surveyor to purchasesix new lamps Mr THOMAS moving the adoption of the report, ex- plained that the Council had not received permission to crect handsome lamps Oil the bridge, and the pillars were temporary. Mr GREEN seconded the adoption of the report and it was agreed to. MARKETS COMMITTEE'S REPORT. A meeting of the committee was held on the 14t.h February, present Messrs C. M. Williams, T. W. Powell, John Mathias, John Evans, J. E. J. Lloyd and John James, chairman. The committee recom- mended the moveable hurdles should be fixed in Smithfie'ld-road just below the entrance to the Gas Work's, and that a gate should be erected in the new- road adjoining the station opposite the Board School at a cost not exceeding £20. The committe also asked the consent of the Council for authority to purchase a weigh bridge and erect a covered shed for the same forthe purpose of weighing cattle at the Smithfield on fair days The report was adopted on the proposition ot Alderman JAMES seconded by Mr JOHN EVANS. Mr JAMES, in reply to a question, stated that it was proposed to put the alterations at the Smithfield in force after the 1st April of this year. HARJiOUa C031MITTSES REPORT. A meeting of the committee was he!d cn Monti the 18th February, present, Messrs C. M. Wflliarns, William Thomas, John Mathias, T. W. Powell, D. C. Roberts. Griffith Williams, chairman George Green, the Borough Surveyor and the Borough Accountant. Bills and labour sheets amounting to £ 1.4 15-3. 2d. were examined and passed. The tender of Mr John Morgan in respect of timber for jetties. Mr Evaua. of Liangwyryfon having applied for half 01 the vacant stores, the cornmitaee instructed Harbour Master to write to Mr Edwards offering the same at £ 6 per annum In reply to questions, it stated by tbe MAYOR and Mr GREEN that it was intended, in compliance with Mr Hopkins's letter, to employ ship carpenters in repairing the jetties on Rofawr. The report was adopted on the proposition of Alderman James. PUBLIC WORK'S CO-MMITU'ES REPORT. A meeting of the Public Works Committee was held on the 16th February present, Messrs C. M. Williams, William Thomas, John Morgan, John Mathias, P-.ter Jones ceairman, and the Borough Surveyor. The Committee reeommended that the portion of the northern side of Portlaul Street from the house occupied by Mr Hall to No. 42 be ffagged with blue slabs forthwith and the tenders be invited for the same ineludihg fittings and laying down the slabs. Also that the portion at the lower end of the southern side be flagged the Council inspected that roadway opposite the house in course of erection owned by Mr Thomas Owen with the view of continuing the footpath an equal width to that in front of Mr Green's houses. The Committee recommended that the Town Clerk should be instructed to write to Mr Owen offering the sum of £ 17 Is. as compensation for widening the road an extra 6 feet, for the length of the piece of land owned by him and fronting the road- way. The application of Mr W. B. Powell for leave to erect bay windows ia Nev-street was considered, and the Committee did not see any objection, to the request being accedeil to, provided that the pro- jeotion did not exceed fifteen inches which would be in a line with the present door steps. The report was taken in sections and adopted. VOTING POWER. The TOWN CLERK explained that the Council, pay- ing poor rates, had power to vote by one of its officials in elections of guardians and so on, and he thought it right to bring the matter before the Council. Mr WM. THOMAS remarked that the Council was non-political, and tha other members did not seem desirous of exercising the power conferred upon them by the section. The Council ultimately adjourned to Poplar-row to meet the Rev Prebendary Williams.