Hide Articles List

8 articles on this Page




Trade Intelligence.




MONTGOMERYSHIRE ASSIZES. These assizes were opened at the Public-rooms, New- town, for the trial of prisoners, at ten o'clock on Tuesday morning, July 3, before the Rt. Hon. Sir Fitzroy Kelly, Knight, Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer Division. His Lordship arrived in Newtown by the 4 15 p.m., train on the afternoon of the previous day, and he was met by Mr. William Walton, acting high sheriff, the Rev. Mr. Evans, Abergele, chaplain, Mr. G. D.. Harrison, deputy sheriff, the chief constable, and a retinue of policemen. His Lordship opened commission at half-past four o'clock, and attended divine service in the parish church, when the sermon was preached by the Sheriff's Chaplain. THE GRAND JURY. Charles Watkin Williams Wynn, ESi., M.P. (foreman), John Robinson Jones, Esq., Brithdir Hall, Robert Davies Pryce, Esq., Cyfronydd, John Pryce Davies, Esq., Fron- felin, William Henry Adams, Esq., Plas Llvssin, Richard Edward Jones, Esq., Cefn Bryntalch, Major William Corbett, Vaynor Park, Colonel John Hey ward Hey ward, Crosswood, Captain Offley Malcolm Crewe-Read, Plas- dinam, Edward Hilton, Esq., Rhiwkiriarth, Thomas William Hare, Esq., Berthddu, Sir Thomas Gibbons Frost, Knight, Dolcossllwyn, Richard Woosnam, Esq., Llanidloes, John Campbell, Esq., Gwernydd, Offley John Crewe-Read, Llandinam Hall, Arthur Charles Humphreys Owen, Esq., Glansevern, Christopher John Naylor, Esq., Brynllywarch, William Henry WJiitaker, Esq., Penybryn, Joseph Henry Blytlie, Esq., Hendidley, Samuel Powell, Esq., Welshpool, CommodorelGriffith Jenkins, Garth. After the usual proclamation, His LORDSHIP, in charging the Crand Jury, said he was proud to congratulate them upon the state of the calen- dar, considering that the county consisted, he supposed, of some 50,000 inhabitants. Looking at the number and nature of the offences, it was really a subject for congrat- ulation. They were neither in number nor in character such as to cause apprehension for the state of the county. At the same time, although he would not, under ordinary circumstances, trouble the Grand Jury with any observa- tions, but dimply dismiss them to proceed to discharge the duties imposed upon them, he must detain them for a few minutes to make a few remarks. He had ob- served that with the exception of the first of the nine or ten cases set down for trial, which was for forging, or uttering certain forged receipts with intent to defraud certain persons of certain susof money, they were all com- mitted to the Quarter Sessions, or intended to be tried at the Quarter Sessions. He had thought that the same custom prevailed in Montgomeryshire as he understood prevailed in the neighbouring county of Chester. He had desired that those offences and persons should be excluded from the calendar, intending that they should be tried before the Court of Quarter Sessions, and not at the As- size, but upon consideration he had come to the conclusion to clear the gaol, and leave no person untried, under whatever circumstances he might have been com- mitted. Under those circumstances the Grand Jury would have to consider the bills laid before them belonging to the Court of Quarter Sessions. This was a state of things which ought not to be. The judges of assizes had very onerous duties to perform without having the cases committed to the Quarter Sessions imposed upon them. He hoped that the magis- trates of the county would be good enough to remember that great changes had taken place in the administration of justice in the country. One defect had been that the assizes throughout the kingdom were appointed to be held, -and the circuits and attendances of the Judge were regulated under circumstances which rendered it necessary that the Assizes should begin much earlier than at former times. It had pleased the legislature so entirely to change, which he hoped would prove for the better, the adminis- tration of justice, that under the Judicature Act it had become necessary to hold the ci "cuits at an earlier period in order that the whole business of assize all over the country might be closed by the 8th August. It had been as much as a week, and in some parts of the kingdom a fortnight, earlier than pre- viously. Under these circumstances that state of things had arisen in Montgomeryshire, and those persons who had been committed to the Quarter Sessions appeared in the calendar of the assizes occupying the time of the judges, who ought not to be so occupied. This could be prevented for the future if the magistrates of the county appointed an adjourned 8essions just previomdy to the assizes. Looking at the high character which the magis- trates had obtained for the faithful discharge of their duties, he thought they should have some little sympathy with the judges. Seeing also that the Legislature had in ts wisdom or unwisdom reduced the common law judges from eighteen to fifteen, by reason of those changes they were charged with larger and more burdensome labours than had ever been known in the history of this country. Should they be burdened with the business of the sessions in their respective circuits with the reduction of the number of judges, night itself would not be enjoyed.. He happened to be the oldest member on the Bench, and he might say for himself he was blessed with a good consti- tution, but in consequence of the pressure of business in London connected with the administration of justice, and with the exception of the two vacations, Christmas and Easter, he had not had one single day of leisure to attend to private business or even health, and therefore it was for the magistrates of the county to contrive to reduce the labour of the judges by the method he had suggested. The Grand Jury were then dismissed to their duties. NISI PRIUS COURT. CLAIM FOR LOSS OF A HORSE. GRIFFITH LEWIS V. JONATHAN EDWARDS. Mr. Morgan Lloyd, Q.C., and Mr. Ignatius Williams, instructed by Mr. Chaudler, of Shrewsbury, were for the plaintiff, and Mr. Higgins and Mr. Grosvenor, instructed by Messrs. Richards and Son, Llangollen, [were for the defendant. From Mr. Morgan Lloyd's opening statements, it appeared that plaintiff lived at Trefnanney farm, and the defendant lived at the adjoining farm of the Mount. The plaintiff had a valuable mare, which he valued as a brood mare at JB120 or £150. It was alleged that the mare was kicked by an animal belonging to the defend- ant, and she died in consequence of the injuries received, and the plaintiff now songht to recover £120 damages. Griffith Lewis, the plaintiff, said the plaintiff occupied the adjoining farm of the Mount. On the 1st October last some of his horses were in the field, and they were separated from defendant's field by a ditch and hedge. It was a bad hedge, with three er four gaps in it that any animal could go through. The hedge had been in that state for some months. Inconsequence of the state of the fences he called defendant's attention to it nine days after he took possession in May previously. Witness had been in his farm nine years. On going into the field where his horses were he saw two of defendant's horses. On seeing the latter he attempted to drive them out, when one of them, a grey mare, galloped up, and commenced kicking his mare. He then succeeded in driving defendant's horses out of the field, and then returned to look after his own mare, and to attend to her injuries. He afterwards fetched the defendant to look at the injuries, and the de- fendant said it was an old wound. He took the mare home, fomented the wound, and sent for the local farrier. He went for a veterinary surgeon from Oswestry, and also for another one. She was a valuable brood mare, and he had sold a foal from her two years old for £180. By Mr. Higgins—I told defendant I saw his mare kick my mare. There was a little blood on the wound, but no scab. Defendant never complained to me about my bull getting into his field. I have seen my bull in defendant's field many times. By Morgan Lloyd—The wound was on the back of the hock, and was not much to look at, but on closer inspec- tion it was clear that the tendons were cut through. On the Wednesday following the joint oil began to run. William Jones said he was last autumn a waggoner in the employ of the plaintiff. He remembered the mare being hurt. He then attended to plaintiff's horses. There were four horses, including the mare. When they were turned out that morning she was quite well, and had no wound on her hock. His master afterwards brought her home, and she was then hurt. There were six or seven gaps large enough for horses or cattle to pass through. Heard his master speak to the defendant about the bad state of the fences about a week before the occurrence. The bull was a quiet bull. Thomas J ones said he was a waggoner in the employ of the plaintiff in October last, and he noticed tlie mare was all right between one and two o'clock on the day of the accident. Richard Lewis, son of the plaintiff, said he remembered the Sunday on which the mare was kicked she was quite well before that. He knew of the gaps in the fence, and had been sent with a message to the defendant to tell him to make the fence up. He had taken the messages re- spectedly. r John William Drury, farmer, said that he lived in the neighbourhood of plaintiff and defendant. He had seen he mare about a fortnight hefore he was kicked, and she was then quite well. She was a good worker, and was a very valuable ma-re for breeding. The fence in question was in question was in such a state that anything could pass through it. It belonged to the defendant, In Xo- vember witness saw defendant 'and asked him what com- pensation he was going to offer Mr. Lewis, when defend- ant replied, "Do yoi: think I am a fool ?'" and turned away. Cross-examined—If lie had had to Imy the mare, he would not have thought £80 too much for her. Henry Wilde said his father was tenant of the Mount Farm for fifty years. Witness was forty-two years of age, and had lived on the farm thirty-eight years. Witness always repaired the fences upon the farm. Damiiel Jones and James Evans, who had been in plain- tiff's employ, were called to speak as to the fences, and the latter said the grey mare of the defendant's wae a vicious animal, and would kick any hJrse but those she was accustomed to work with. Mr. T. Roberts, M.R.C.V.S., Oswestry, said he keld several appointments. He was sent for by the plaintiff to see the mare on the 3rd Oct. The back tendons vere severed to such an extent that he at -once told Lewie that it would be useless for him to attendhe mare again The injury appeared to be the result of a kick. The mare was a grand one to breed from, and in the market she was worth £80. As a brood mare she would be worth more. John Jones, farrier, said he was called to attend to the mare on Thursday, the 3rd October. The tendons were partly severed and protruded. He attended the mare from October 3 to October 28. He did all he could to cure the mare. It was such a wound as would have been I caused by a kick. He had known the mare for six years. He valued her at about £75, but as a brood mare she .might be wor:h S150 to her owner. She was eight years old, and might have lii ed twenty years longer. William Williams, farrier, said tie attended the mare from the 25th October until she died on the 5th November. From all appearances the injury was from a kick. From her produce he would have valued her at JS200 if she had feeen his property. This was the case for the plaintiff. Mr. Higgins opened the case for the defendant, and called the following evidence. Jonathan Edwards, the defendant, said he lived at the Mount, Sarney4 a farm of 1GO acres. It adjoined the plaintiff's farm. He recollected taming his two mares out on Sunday, Oct. 1st, about four o'clock in the after- noon. They were turned into a field leading into that in which the accident liappened. Some ten minutes after, when witness had returned to his house, plaintiff ame to the house. Plaintiff asked him to come down to the field to see one of his horses, which had been kicked. He went to the field and saw that the aiare was lame. He examined her and found dry blood upon the two hind legs. He saw the wound and a dry scab upon it. Wit- ness said to plaintiff This is not my mare's work. Come and look, this has been done some hours ago." Plaintiff took the mare to the houee Plaintiff never said on that occasion that he had seen tke defendant's mare kick her. Never heard that plaintiff saw the kick until that momeait. The mare was hooded. The fences had been repeatedly repaired by a. man named Summerfield. The fence between the two fields, into which the different horses were turned, had been repaired manytimes, he might say thirty. He had seen thebull in his 1 field. He had been injjthe habit of turning seventeen cows into the fields, and the plaintiff's bull covered them. He complained of this, as by an agreement with his landlord he was to have the use of a. more valuable bull. The bull also covered a number of heifers which had calves, some of which died, and some of the heifers had died. He had also been prevented from feeding a number of cattle. The grey mare never kicked other animals either in the field or the stable. In his opinion the plaintiff's mare was not worth £30, By Mr. Morgan Lloyd—He had that morning put the horses in the stable about half-past six to feed. Thev were turned out at four o'clock. He usually took them up in the warmth of the day. When they got to the field plaintiff told him his mare had kicked the other; that was why he said it was not the work of his mare. A Mr. Drury had since come to him and asked him to settle the thing by agreeing to pay something as compensation. His landlord had advised him to refer the matter to two neighbouring farmers to settle. He had repaired the fence he thought every month since he had been at the Mount. Summerfield had done the work. He denied the evidence of the witnesses on the other side. He had been tried in the Welshpool court before a gentleman who wore a wig. He was charged with the manslaughter of William Jones. Re-examined by Mr. Higgins—He was acquitted by the jury after a full investigation. The repairs to the fence were in consequence of the damage done by plain- tiff's bull. Richard Summerfield, the brother-in-law of the defend- ant, said he had been repairing the fence all the summer and autumn. He had repaired it strongly just before the plaintiff's mare was kicked. Sarah Edwards, the wife of the defendant, said she remembered the plaintiff coming to the house on the 1st October. She did not hear the conversation. The I plaintiffs bull was continually in her husband's field from May on during the year. He came through the fence. Richard Jones, defendant's landlord, said plaintiff had never been to him to complain about defendant's hedges. He had seen the hedge between the plaintiff's and de- fendant's fields, and in his opinion it was always kept in such a state as would render it safe for horses. He had not heard plaintiff say anything about having seen de- fendant's mare kick his mare. William Edwards. son of the defendant, said he had turned plaintiff s bull off his father's field repeatedly once and twice in the day. Mr* Higgins summed up the case for the defendant, and Mr. Morgan Lloyd replied on the whole case. His Lordship then carefully summed up, and the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages £80. fr. Higgins applied for time to meet the demand, and his Lordship said he would stay execution for a week. Judgment for plaintiff for £80 accordingly. CROWN COURT. STEALING CLOTH AT MACHYNLLETH. William Brown (63), shoemaker, was indicted on the charge of having, at Machynlleth, on the 12th April, stolen a piece of cloth of the value of 12s., the property of Anthony Gallagher. Mr. Coxon prosecuted. Anthony Gallagher said he watf a painter and glazier, and lived at Dolgelley. He stayed at Machynlleth in April last in the house of Jane Charles, where the pris- oner also lodged. While there he lost two yards of blue pilot cloth, for which he had given 12s. He next saw it in the hands of P.C, Hamer. The cloth produced was the piece in question. Jane Charles, keeper of a lodging house fin Machyn- lleth, who gave her evidence in Welsh, said Gallagher and Brown lodged at her house in April last. The cloth had been in her house a week. On the 12th April Galla- gher brought the cloth down and asked withess to roll it up, which she did, in brown paper, and placed it in the kitchen. She heard the door open, and saw Brown walk- ing away with the parcel. He returned in about twenty minutes, and in reply to a question told witness he had sold it for 7s. She afterwards saw Gallagher on the sub- ject. John Rees, watchmaker, Machynlleth, said the prisoner brought the piece of cloth produced to his house on the 12th April, and witness bought it for 8s. Prisoner was then working for a shoemaker close by he said it was his own cloth. He afterwards gave the cloth to P.C. Hamer. P.C. Hamer proved apprehending the prisoner on the 13th April, near Newtown. Prisoner said he had had the cloth given him by Gallagher, and that he had sold it to John Rees. Gallagher (recalled) denied that he had given prisoner authority to sell the cloth. Prisoner, addressing the jury, stated that the cloth had been given to him to sell to Rees. His Lordship summed up, and the jury found the pris- oner guilty. He also pleaded guilty to a former conviction for felony at Welshpool in 1860. Sentenced to twelve calendar months, with hard labour. SECOND COURT. Before Mr. Morgan Lloyd, Q.C., Deputy Juge. STEALING A PURSE AT WELSHPOOL. Mary Gardner was indicted on the charge of having at Welshpool, on the 14th May, stolen a purse containing 7s., the property of Thomas Ingram, of Welshpool. The jury found the prisoner guilty, and she was sentenced to one month's imprisonment, with hard labour. STEALING AN ASS AT LLANLLWCHAIARN. John Vaughan (59), hawker, was indicted on the charge of having at Llanllwchaiarn, onltlie 17th April, stolen one ass, the property of Thomas Roberts. Prosecutor proved losing the donkey, and his son went to look for it. The animal was afterwards found at Mr. Francis's, Llanwnog, to whom the prisoner had taken it with a view to his buying it, but it had ended in an ex- change for another Air. Francis had previously purchased from the prisoner. P.C. Pearson apprehended the prisoner. The jury found the prisoner guilty, and he pleaded guilty to a previous conviction for felony at Ruthin in 1849. Sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment, with hard labour, and three years' police surveillance. BILL IGNORED. The Grand Jury threw out the bill charging Sarah Francis with having, at the parish of Llandyssul. on the 2nd March, unlawfully, and in the day time, broken into the house of William Roberts with intent to commit a felony therein. PLEADED GriLTY. William Jones (33), letter carrier, to having, at Berriew, on the 4th February, 1876, uttered a forged acquittance and receipt for 4s. Id., with intent thereby to defraud one Mary Morgan. Also at Bettws, on the 31st March, 1876, to uttering, well knowing the same to be forged, an ac- quittance or receipt for 6s., with intent to defraud one Clementina Hamer. Also to having, at Newtown, on the 20th February, 1877, stolen 16s. 2d. out of a letter, the property of the Postmaster-General. James H. Wilson (43), watchmaker, to having, at Llanidloes, on the 30th April, stolen a silver watch, a pair of spectacles, and watchmaker's eyeglass, the property of William Williams. John Davies, to having, at Montgomery, on 4th May, stolen ten hair combs, five blacklead brushes, one pair of scales, three boxes of matches, one packet of blacking, six packets of pins, and five dozen boot laces, the property of William Jones. David Howells (57). labourer, to having, at Newtown, on the 5th June, stolen one brass candlestick, the pro- perty of Alfred Powell. Thomas Williams (21), labourer, to having, at Welsh- pool, on the 9th June, stolen from the person of David Edwards, one watch and chain and one knife. Ellen Hughes (65), hawker, to having, at Llanidloes, on the 31st March, 1874, stolen one shirt, the property of Edward Williams. Sentence on all the prisoners who pleaded guilty was deferred until the following morning.


[No title]