Welsh Newspapers
Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles
2 articles on this Page
NOTICE TO SUBSCRIBERS.
NOTICE TO SUBSCRIBERS. It is particularly requested that all remittances be maJ. to the TRUSTEES, Herald Office,High-street.
[No title]
H t Mr B. K. S. Lawrence, of CowriJge School, has ju been elected Seholar of Jesus College, Oxford. This i>- the fourth of four Scholarships taken by Cowhridge boy- in four successive Octobers, direct from the School. An old Cowbridge boy. the Rev J A. Owen has just been elected Fellow 01 bniversity College, Oxford. LONDON SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIANITY AMONG THK JEWS.—Sermons in aid of this Society were preached in this town on Sunday last-in the morning at St. Mary's, and in the evening at St. Mai tin's,—by the Rev. John Drury, Association Secretary. On Monday evening the rev. gentleman delivered an instructive lecture at St. Mary's Schoolroom on "Abysslrlla-the mis- sionarics, the captive?, and th" war." The services and lecture were well attended, and liberal collections were made on behalf of the funds of the Association. CITAROK OF ROBBERY -At the Police Office on Monday, William Thomas, a draper's assistant, was brought before the Mayor, charged with stealing 12 five pound notes, £ i4 1(.11 in gold, £10 ] is in silver, a cheque for X7 2s 9J, bank and other books, a liat, a pair of kid gloves, a silk tie, a pair of braces, a pair of cuff's with metal studs, two silk handkerchiefs, a box of toilet soap, 12 boot laces, and other things, the property of Messrs Harries and Evans, drapers, ot Market-street. The accused was remanded until Thursday. R,JOSE PETTI SESSIONS. These Sessions were held at the Shire Hall, on Satur- day before J. P. Junes, Esq, and Rev P. Phelps. ASSAULTING THE POLICK. James Berry, Lewis Berry, James Jones, W. Jor.es, and John Danes were charged with assaulting Police Con- stable Price in the execution of his duty. Mr J. C. James appeared fer the defendants; and ap- plied for an adjournment for a week. The Bench granted the application. John Berry, Lewis Berry, and James Jones were charged with assaulting P. C. YVatts in the execution of his duty. On the application of Mr J. C. James, (who ap- peared for the defendants), this case was also adjourned for a week. DRUNKENNESS AND RIOTOUS CONDUCT. John Riley, Thomas Riley, find Robert Riley, travelling tinkers, were charged with drunkenness and riotous conduct. 'J be defendants did not appear. Police Constable John Williams proved the charge, and the d'jfendams were each fined 5s and costs. CHAHGE OF CUTTING AND WOUNDING. William Rees, shipwright, of Rjsemarket, was charged with cutting and wounding Thomas Jenkins, a private in the 36th regiment, at llosemarket, on the 10th oi October. Mr J. C. James appeared for the complainant, and Mr Price for tue defendant. The complainant deposed that about half-past seven o'clock in the evening of the 10th instant, he was at Kosercarket, where there were celebrations in honour of Mr Owen Scourfield, who had that day attained his majority. There was a large bonfire in a field at Basle- ford, aud a cask of beer in charge of Mr Harrah. He saw a man, named John Rees, on Mr Barrah on the ground; he pulled Rees of Mr Barrah, and told him it was a shame for him to stt.kc a mlln of Mr Barrah's age. He went towards the bonfire, and was asked to drill in sport a number of young fellows. The prisoner came up, and said he could do so better than he (com- plainant), and he replied, All right, mate, take it.' Some of the young men shoved the prisoner away, but he came back agfin, and told him (complainant,) that he would knock off his head. He told the prisoner that he could not do that, and some of the young men again shoved the prisoner away. He (';omplainaat) was going out of the fijid, when the prisoner came after him he was stripped for fighting, and said I Now if you are ready come on.' The jri-loner came on, and struck him to the ground. He felt what he then thought was a kick in the groin, but he discoveied afterwards that it was a stab. He felt a knife at his right shoulder and grasped the blade with his hand.. The knife cut his hand, and he was unable o hold it. The knife was in the prisoner's hand when ha seized the blade. He was kicked on the head and other par's A his body, and be came insensible. When he recovered his senses, he found himself sitting on a cart. There were a great many upon him, and he could not 'ell who kicked him. He was absent without leave from the 36th r. g m nt a the time, and he did not at once seek a doctor's as- sist nee for fear of being apprehended as a deserter. Jane Robeits djpo«ed that when the prisoner came after the complainant, the latter pulled off his jacket to defend himself. The complainant was struck to the ground by the prisoner, and she saw nothing more until he wts taken u^ i lsensible. The complainant after he recovered went to her (witness's) sister's house. There was much blood on his trousers, and his shoes and stock iugs werp also covered with blood. John Young, of Muor, deposed that he pulled somebody off the ccmplainnnt when he was on the ground, but who it was he could not tell. He saw no knife. There were five or six persons round him. Martha Thomas deposed that the complainant first struck the pig ner three times, and then the prisoner kt.ocked the tonplainant down. She saw nothing fur- ther of the pns ner, but s' e afterwards pulled four per- sons off the complainant. The names of the men whom she removed were Thomas Re- s, George Summons, J he Summon., and Richard Scurlock. She did not see a knife in the prisoner's hand. Dr J. B Evans, of Haverfordwest, deposed that he examined t':e comp!ainant and fmnd a small wound in his groin. There was a good deal of inflammation, and he could not tell whether it wae a con t used or an incised wound, or how it was produced. It might have been caused by a kuk. This was the case for the complainant. The Bench dismissed the case, stating that in their opinion it was one got i;p by the police, and hoping that the County would not be required to bear the expenses teat had baen incurred. HAVERFORDWEST QUARTER SESSIONS. These sessions were hdd to day before the Chairman, "W. S. Offen, Esq, John Harvey, E-q, "W. Owen, Esq, T. Rule 0 .ven, Esq, T. Rowland, Esq, and James Boven, Esq. Some difficulty was experienced in forming a Grand Jury in cor sequence of the non-attevidance of the gentle- men who had been summoned, There were seven gentle- men who did not attend, one of whom was reported to be seriously ill. The chairman inflicted a fine of 10s upon all tha absent jurors with the exception of the gentleman who was stated to be ill. Subsequently three cf the gentl.men fined attended, and the Court after hearing their explanations, remitted their fines. A Grand Jury having at length being formed by the addition of gentlemen selected from the Petty Jury I anel and from the audience in Court, the Chairman charged them, remarking that it was very necessary in the administration of justice that the Grand Jurors should endeavour as far as possible to be punctual in their attendance. He Was quite aware of the incon- venience many of them suffered, and he was certain that they wished to help the administration of justice as far as they were al le. The learned Chairman then referred to thi cases in the calendar, and briefly commented on the law bearing upon them. MAINTENANCE OF PRISONERS IN THE LCCK-UP. The Chairman called the attention of 'the Bench to a bill which had been presented by the police for the maintenance of prisoners in the Police Station. The prisO"'Jfs had been detained for 67 and 51 hours in the Pol ce Station, and some of them had been provided with seven, six,-and nine meals. He should like some explanation as to why the prisoners were detained for so ong a time in the Lock-up. t' Superintendent Cecil said that the parties were appre- heuded on Saturday morning in a state of drunkenness, and as they could not be brought before the magistrates in that condition, they were detained till Monday. The prisoners had never been detained without the authority of a magistrate. The Chairman said that it appearei to him to be a very long detention of people in the Lock-up, and requested Superintendent Cecil to have future bills certified by a member of the Court, and not by the Mayor, who was not a member of the Court, and did not attend to give explanations. COUNTY RATE. A county rate of lid in the £ was granted on the application of the Treasurer. TRIAL OF PRISONERS. A true bill having been returned, the Court proceeded with the trial of prisoners. CHARGE OF STEALING KNIVES. John Griffiths was charged with stealing four knives, of the value ot £ the property of Stephen Green, at St. Mary's, Haverfordwest, on the 25th August. The prisoner pleaded guilty. Mr B, T. WiMiams: 1 appear for the prosecution in this case, and I am requested by the prosecutor to recom- mend the prisoner strongly to your mercy. It appears that when he committed the act to which he has pleaded guilty, he had been for some days on what is called I the spree,' and was in a state of partial intoxication when he committed the offence. Mr Green, the prosecutor, in answer to the Chairman, said that the prisoner had been in his employ for nine years, and had borne a good character during that time. The Chairman, in passing sentence, said: John Griffiths, -You have pleaded. gni: ty to a very serious offtmce-th at of robbing your employer. The offence is very much more serious than stealing in the ordinary way because you were, to a certain extent, put in a position 01 trust, and not only stole his goods, but abused the confluence which your master placed in you. You have had a good character from your master, and he has very kindly recommended you to mercy. That recommendation coming from a pro- secutor, the Court always wish to give effect to, and I hope that the very lenient sentence which the Court is about to pass upon you, will be a lesson to you, for you must recollect that if you ever commit a similar offence Again, you will be liable, after this conviction, to a long term of penal servitude. The sentence of the Court is that you be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for the period of four calendar months. CRIMINAL ASSAULT ON A CHILD. Thomas Harold Mathias, 58. gardener, was charged with criminally assaulting a little girl of the age of nine years, at St. Martin's, Haverfordwest, on the 6th Sep- tember, 1868. Mr B. T. Williams, instructed by Mr Price, prosecuted and Mr W. Medway Davies defended. Afer the evidence adduced (which was unfit for pub lication), the Jury found the prisoner guilty of an in- decent assault. The Chairman, in passing sentence, said: Thomas Mal hias- You have been found gu ilty-and very pro- perly found guilty, of an indecent assault upon a little girl nine years old. The offence of which you have been found guilty is one of the most serious and most, disgust- ing character. You probably inflicted upon tlut litt: e girl an injury which it she lives to be an old woman, she will not get over. I am sorry to see a man who has occupied a decent position in life, and who ba-, as I am willing to believe, hitherto borne a good cha- rzieter-aii old mat.—occupy ins the place you do to-day. I take everything into consideration, your old age, and your previous good character, in inflicting punish- ment, and in the sentence I am about to pass upon you, the Court have mitigated the full penalty. The sentence of the Court is that you be imprisoned and kept to Jiard labour for the period of IS calendar months. This concluded the business, and the Court adjourned. PEMBROKESHIRE QUARTER SESSIONS; These sesssions were held on Tuesday, the 20th inst, at the Shire Hall, before the Chairman, J. H. Scourfield, Esq, and other magistrates. APPEAL CASE. .rathi(is v Pai,cell-This was an appeal against a conviction for trespass in search of g lrne in the day time before the justices in petty sessions at Pembroke. Mr Lascelles, instructed by Messrs. Powell, Ma- thias, and Evans, appeared tor the appellant, and Mr W. John for the respondent. It appeared from the statements made in Court, that the appellant, Mr Charles Mathias, son of Mr Lewis Mathias, of Lamphey, was summoned before the justices at Pembroke, on the 5th of September, on the charge of being in pursuit of game on lands within the Manor of Lampbey, in the occupation of the respondent, Mr James Thomas Parcell. The appellant admitted being on the land described in the information, but pleaded not guilty, and that he was in the exercise of a right. Mr Lewis Mathias was examined in behalf of the defendant, and deposed that he was Lord of the Manor, and in right of free warren he claimed the right of sporting over all the copyhold lands within the Manor, and that his son had his permisson to exercise all rights that he could exercise under the authority of free warren. The right of free warren was originally derived from a grant from the Crown in the Reign of Henry the 8th, and the property came into his possession on the death of his father, in 1851, who had obtained it by purchase of Sir John Owen in 1822. He had exercised the right of sporting during his father's life time, and was only interfered with once, and on that occasion no proceedings were taken against him, and he had never abandoned his right. Mr Mathias also stated that the grant of Ilenrv 8th was in existence, and he had read a translation of the original document, which was in Latin. The pro- perty was conveyed to his father, but he had not read the conveyance. He had been hundreds of times over the land and was never interrupted, excepting as above stated. It was contended by the attorney for the defendant (Mr J. E. Evans) that sufficient evidence had been given to oust tbe jurisdiction of the magistrates, and he declined to produce the conveyance of the property. The ma- gistrates held that the evidence was insufficient to oust their jurisdiction, and fined the defendant. Is and costs. Against this decision the defendant now appealed on the ground h-it the conviction was bad for want of jurisdic- tion that he was on the land with the license of the Lord of the Manor who was entitled to free warren over the lands within the manor, and that having proved the claim of right by the oath of the Lurd of the Manor, the magis- tral s had no jurisdiction in the case. Mr John, on the part of the respondents, argued in support of the conviction, contending that there was not sufficient evidence of a bona fide claim produced be- fore the Justices, to oust their jurisdiction. The docu- ments under which the right was claimed were in the Court held by the justices, but the advocate for the de- fendant had declined to prodiue them. Mr Lewis Mathiaa had stated that he had not read the documents the advocate bad also stated, as he (Mr John) was in- formed, that he had not read them; and the right was actually claimed under documents which Mr Lewis Mathias had declared he had not read. It was a mere assertion of a right on the part of the defendant, and he contended that there was no such evidence adduced as ousted the jurisdiction of the magistrates. Mr Lascelles, on behalf of the appellant, said that no amount, of evidence introduced into the case could at all affect the question before the Court. There was but one point before the Court, and that point was whether the question of title was In dispute, and it they were satisfied that it was. then the magistrates had no power to enter- tain it. Mr John had chosen to call it a simple assertion of light by Mr Mathias, but the Bench had before them evidence that he and his lather before him had enjoyed the right of shooting over the property for nearly forty years. He gave credit to the learned gentleman who appeared for the defendant, for refusing to produce the document befcre the justices, for if be had done so, It would have been permitting them t,) construe the document and to decide a question that ought to be tried before a Superior Court. All the authorities, which were voluminous, laid down that provided a bona fide claim of title was set up, the magistrates' juriediction was ousted. Mr John had said that it was not a bona fide claim it had been made on oath. Mr John had said that was nOL enough they Should have produced the documents, and that would j have been doina the very thing which they ought not do, for it would have assumed a jurisdiction in magistrates to decide a question of title. The learned gentleman cited several cases-in support of his argument. Mr Lewis Mathias and Mr Henry Mathias were ex- arnined in behalf of the appellant, but the Bench dis- missed the appeal with costs, observing, however, that the Court was not unanimous in the judgment which had been pronounced. On the application of Mr Lascelles, the court granted a case to go before the Court ol Queen's Bench. The Court then adjourned. WEDNESDAY. The Court assembled to-day at ten o'clock. The magistrates on the Bench were the Chairman, J. H. Scourfield, Esq, M.P., W. S. Owen, Esq, and John Harvey, Esq. The proclamation against vice and immorality having been read, 11 The Chairman proceeded to charge the Grand Jury. He said: Gentlemen of the Grand Jury,— On the present occasion there are six prisoners for trial but the cases generally do not present any remarkable feature either in the way of intricacy in examining them or as to their aggravated cha- racter. The value of the property, looked at col- lectively, is hut small, but still at the same time the prisoners' guilt will not, as far as the law is concerned, depend upon the amount. The oniy observation I think it necessary to make as to the law on those cases is this :-that where a person is charged with stealing a great number of different articles, if you can trace the unlawful possession of one or two of those articles, though there is no proof as to the rest, that will be quite sufficient for you to find a bill against the prisoner. If one or two of the articles are in his possession unlaw- fully, that will be quite sufficient to justify you in coming to that opinion, as if the whole had been traced to his possession. There is one case of assault, but that is a pure question of fact, with which you are perfectly competent to deal. I don't think there is any case with.regard to which per- sons of your competence require any observations from me and I have only t.o repeat the remark which I always make in this Court, and that is we shall be extremely obliged to you if you can select some bill which will not take much time in con- sidering, and enable the Court to discharge the persons who are on the Petty Jury, to whom it is a great object to be released from attendance as soon as possible. A true bill having been found, the Court pro ceeded with the trial of prisoners. IIOUSE-BREAKING. George Green, Q3, labourer, a native of Somerset- shire, was charged with breaking and entering the dwelling house of Francis Rees, and stealing one n 0. grey cloth coat, one grey cloth vest, one pair of grey cloth trousers, one black felt hat, one grey and white flannel shirt, and one pair of Wellington boots, the prooerty of Francis Rees, at Camrose on the 28th of July, 1868. The prisoner pleaded guilty. Chairman George Green—You have pleaded guilty to a very serious charge—a charge involving the breaking into a house. No facts of an aggra- vated nature have been brought to the knowledge of the Court, nor has any previous conviction been put in. Therefore we will give you the benefit of the doubt with regard to your previous conduct. The sentence of the Court is that you be imprisoned in the House of Correction and kept to hard labour for the period of nine calendar months. STEALING A CLOAK. John L(tycock, alias Haywood, 21, groom, native of London, was charged with stealing one cloak, value E3, the property of Ann Protheroe, at Nevern, on the 9th of August, 1868. The prisoner pleaded not guilty. Mr Powell prosecuted the prisoner was not defended. Mrs Protheroe: I reside at Dolwilim, in the county of Carmarthen. On the 9th of August I attended the evening service at Nevern Church. I drove to church in my carriage, and took a cloak with me. 1 went into clvurch, and left the cloak n the seat in the carriige. When I came out of church, I missed the cloak the value was near X3 I next saw it on Tuesday morning: a lady staying with me, named Mrs Humphrey, brought me the cloak, and I handed it to the policeman. The cloak produced is my property. Mrs Humphrey: I am staying at Dolwilim. J went with Mrs Protheroe on the 9th of August to Nevern Church. I saw the cloak on the front seat of the carriage. When I came out of church, I saw the cloak was not there. Mrs Protheroc"s servant girl brought the cloak to my bedroom on Tuesday, morning. P.C. David Pearce I am stationed at Newport in this county, I produce the cloak. I had it from Mrs Protheroe on the II th of August. P.C. William Evans: I am stationed at Fish- guard. I saw the prisoner in a Lodging, House at Fishguard on Monday, the 10th of August. He told me he had stolen a cloak from a carriage in a village he said he bad no conveniency to carry it away, and had hid in the hedge. He said he would show me the place.. I conveyed him to a field at Nevern he went to some trash, and took out a cloak, which he said he slole on the Sunday pre- vious. I handed the cloak to the last witness. P.C. David Pearce recalled I took the cloak home to my lodgings. When before the magis- trates, the cloak was handed over to Mrs Protheroe at the Petty Sessions by the order of the magis- trates. This was the case for the prosecution. The Chairman summed up the evidence. The Jury found the prisoner guilty. Prisoner It may be Welsh law, but I ——- if it is English. The prisoner was then further charged with having been previously convicted of house-break- ing at Carmarthen, in October 1867. The prisoner denied the charge. William Woozley I am a warder of Carmarthen Gaol. I was present at the prisoner's trial, nnd he was convicted for housebreaking, and was sentenced to eight months' hard labour, The Jury found the prisoner guilty. The Chairman, in passing sentence, said: John Lay- cock Y JU have been convicted, on perfectly clear evidence, of stealing a cloak, the property of Mrs Pro- theroe. The consequence of your offence is very much aggravated by the fact, which is equally clearly prove d, of your having only recea'ly come out of prison after a previous conviction for housebreaking. I am afraid the only opinion we can entertain is, that you are one of those characters who cannot be safely left,to go abroad, having regard to the interests of society. We must inflict penal servitude upon you, and by the statute we cannot, iaflict a less sentence upon you tban that you be kept in penal servitude for seven years. Prisoner: Thank you, sir. STEALING EARTHENWARE. John Toohig was charged with stealing certain earthenware, the property of Joseph Simcock, in the borough of Tenby, on the 3rd of October, 1868. The prisoner pleaded not guilty. Mr Powdl, instructed by Mr Dunn, prosecuted Mr Laacclles (instructed by Mr Lascellei, of Narberth), defended. Mr Powell having opened the case, called Joseph Simcock who deposed I reside at Pembroke Dock. I am a dealer in earthenware. I attend Tenby, and have a stand outside the market. The prisoner hai a stand near me. On Saturday, the 3rd of October, was at the market, and in the evening placed some goods in a store at Tenhy I afterwards drove my horse out" side the town, and returned to Mr Jenkins's shop. had not been there long before I saw the prisoner plaC, a basket of earthenware in his cart. He came out o Bank Lane. I did not see him come out of the bouse. I went to his cart. He asked me to lift up the sbaftg» and some china fell out. I asked him three times me see what he had in the cart: he said 4 all right at first, but did not seem willing. I called a policeman, and saw some articles which were my property. There were some plates, and a glas3 cream jug which cracked. There were dishes and jugs. There i8,8 manufacturer's private mark on the plate. The basi11 was the only one of tbe sort I had I took it up stairs a few minutes before I came away. The Ban Lane is near to the Church. I was present when the prisoner was given into custody. The prisoner said his way he had an account of the goods. I as' £ the prisoner if the goods were not mine, a od bill made no reply. I asked him a second and a third tiffle» and he said yes, and I will pay you for them.' Cross-examined The prisoner is a dealer in the saCS kind of goods. His stores are under the same ro0(aii mine, but not in the same room. Two or three out of tbe cart when I lifted the shafts. He sal Lower the shafts they are falling out.' The prisoner said on the way to the police station he would show Øle an account of the goods I will swear he did not pro" duce the paper. I will not swear that he did not men" tion an account when I first spoke to him. We baT been good friends: I never obliged him with goods. Abrtham Simcock: I reside at Pembroke Dock: I am the brother of last witness, and am a dealer earthenware. I have accommodated the prisoner Wit goods some times but not with goods from the man11' facturer of the plates produced. The property produce is my brother's. Police Constable John Beynon I am stationed Tenby. The prisoner was given into my charge on t" 3rd of October for stealing tearthenware. The prisoner said I need not, take him into custody he could give aI1 account fif all the goods. He did not give me an aC" count. I searched the prisoner, but only found money and a knife and some things of that kind. Cross-examined He did not produce anv paper jj said he would pay for ;he goods. When I joined prosecutor and the prisoner, there was nobody there. went up at once to the prisoner's cart. I never hear anything against the prisoner's character. Police Constable Carew I am stationed at Tenbt. On the 3rd of October, I watched the prisoner. I saf him take an empty basket and go down to the stores, 1 afterwards saw him with the basket of earthenware. The prosecutor stopped him, and asked him what he had in the basket. The prosecutor asked to see the articleS two or three times. The prisoner was locked up be said that we need not lock him up as a thief as we ko6 where he lived in Narberth. The prisoner did not glT ary ace unt of the goods. Cross-examined: I never saw the prisoner take IIn empty basket to the stores before that day. It \fall brofui daylight I, my brother constable, and the pro.se" cutor were standing close by. I never heard anything against the prisoner. This was the case for the prosecution. 's Mr Lascelles atly addressed the jury on the prisoner behalf. The Chairman summed up the evidence. i The jury retired, aid after a brief absence return nto Court with a verdict of Not Guilty. ASSAULTING WITH A KNIFE. James Thomas was charged with maliciously assault.. ing John Gaffney with a knife thereby inflicting grievo bodily injury upon the said John Gaffney at PtJmbro f Dock in the borough of Pembroke on the 22ad 0 August, 1868. The prisoner pleaded not guilty.. 11 Mr Lascelles and Mr Wilson prosecuted M1' efended. # John Gaffney I am a private in the 46th raginient, stationed at Pembroke Dock. On the 2:2nd of August, about half-past nine in the evening, I was going home to the fort. I saw a man bleeding in the street near tha Landshipping Inn. He appeared to have been beaten. I went back with him to the Inn. I knocked at the front door: I had no answer, and went round to the back door. There was a man at the back door insid0» and as the door opened, I was struck in the face, did not know him. The clothes produced I wore at to time there are marks of blood on them. I was in the face and the arm. as Cross-examined: I said on a former occasion I wounded on the breast. I had on a flannel garment • 1 is cut, but there is no biood on it. It was very dar that night. Tiiere might have been about nine Pe°P' about me at the time. I had been at two public toused that night. I had been drinking that evening. [I"a no conversation with any one. Some words in ange were spoken inside, but I don't know what they were. John George; 1 am a private in the 9-jth. I was the Landshipping Inn on the 22nd of August. 1 saw t prisoner there. VVe went out lrom the house. Macdo^6 came out, ani said he had been beaten. 1 heard a <"? in the back room: I saw the prisoner fighting WH Maodowell. The prisoner said he could settle him in twO minutes, and he went towards the bacti rooin. He C-'iOe hack with a knife. The landlady asked him to put down the knife. I went out, and Maodowell came out after; wards. We went round to the back door, and ijj prisoner rushed at Gafi'ney, and struck him with tjj knife in the face. After he gave the tirsi blow, 1 caug hold of both his hands. I asked what tie meant, ne intended to murder the man. He said he would muroe ine too. I let him go, and he made a charge and cut toy jacket. 1 went away from him and he went up struck Gaffney on the arm with a knife. It wassoaietbMj like a tab-la knife. I had seen the prisoner many I am sure he is the man. Gaffney was bleeding ve ? bad; he sang out lI am killed,' and the prisoner back into the house. Gaffney was not drunk. I only a pint of beer. The prisoner's front was me when ho made the two blows. ha Cross-examined: I was there during the whole of » row between tbe prisoner and Gaffney. I was in lordwest Gaol before I went into the Army. 1 was the tor six months. You find out what I was there for. j Ann Laugharne, examined by Mr Wilson: Hive Pembroke: 1 am a widow. I live in Middle-street, the 22nd of August, about half-past nine in tiie evening, 1 was in the Back Lane. 1 was present when the Pr secutor was stabbed. jnof Cross-examined: I was standing by the back d- when the prosecutor was stabbed. It was a little ,n°° »j Ii^tit. The prisoner had a knife in his hand: I d0" know what sort of knile. It appeared tome to be like j clasp kniie. I have known the prisoner lor two years. never knew any harm of him. i. Private Maedowell, 53ta regt.: I was at the La" shipping Inn on the 22nd of August. I had been ^ea,>ja at the Landshippiag Inn: Gaffney came wiLh me to iront door of the Inn: we could not get in. We weot j- the back door. 1 heard Gaffney say—' I am etuck. saw a man come out of the back door: he struck Gaffney. I am not sure who tiie riiau was. 1 only 4 one Olow given..jjfl Cross-examined: The door was not wide open: did man came out at the door, and rushed in again. 1 a not see anything in his hand. 1 saw no blood. H middling Uark night. lie-examined: I was in liquor that night. 46th 1"L Thomas Bennett: lam a lance-corporal in t^ r*iD0 regt. Ou the night ot the 22nd of August, Gaffney into Barracks about 10-o'clock. lie was bleeding, t5 his jacket was cut. 1 ordered bim to take off tiis ho did so. There was blood on it. I took hi011 Hospital in a band cart. He was unable to walh* P.S. Robert Irving: I saw the prosecutor ,l jjowiog of August in ho-piiat. I receivedth'e jacket the to evening. It is now in the state 1 received it jj0x in Cross-examined: 1 found a knife in the knit jc0Uid the Landshippimg Inn. There were marks on it, ?'. 0(j# not say whether they were the marks of rustor b 11 jepot Mr Henry Harries: I am staff surgeon 0f the Of tile battalion. I found the prosecutor in the suit > wa3 .a Military Hospital. I examined him. 1 n08tril> wound on tbe left side ot the nose, 4iv ,irloCe of ,be and another incised wound on the inner s very lore arm, about three inches in length. J* ,liree weeW* weak. He was confined about a fortnigut j ftfte*" 1 did not notice another wound that nig •