Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

26 articles on this Page

ABERYSTWYTH. tr

News
Cite
Share

ABERYSTWYTH. tr ^COUNTY COURT, FRIDAY, JANUARY ISTH.—Before His Honour Judge Bishop. Jenhim v. Morgan.—"Thomas Jenkins, late cf Aber- ystwyth, Church-atreet, Festiniog, sued John Morgan. Queen Vrcad, executor of the late Isaac Morgan, for the recovery of E28 3s. for work done &c. Mr W. P. Owen (Messrs Griffith Jones and Co.) appeared for the phitltiff, and Mr A. J. Hughes for the defendant. The case which vi.9 one mainly of account, had been partially heard at the last Court. The plaintiff stated that the terms of his employment were that he was to receive XO jd. per load for stone quarried and --Is. 6d. a day for work done at other places. He received 10s. on acconrst per week. and a settlement was come to at the end of the year by calculating the number of hours worked and loads of stone quarried and putting against the total, the amounts received on account.^ Settlement had been come to up to 1883, and plaintiff now claimed from 1884 onwards.—On behalf of the defendant it was stated that no claim had been made until the death of Mr Isaac Morgan, Mr Morgan died worth f,60,000 and did not owe a fraction in the world. The plaintiff had been for years in Isaac Morsr».?vs employ as malster, and was kept on after more as a pensioner than anything else. The accounts were settled up to 1832. Before lSq2 the payments were generally on account. Afterward, the payments were 10 a. wages," and that he was paid each week up to Mr Morgan's death in May,lS8S and the last pay- ment made was 5s. for attending Mr Morgan s funeral. Subsequently, plaintiff went to Aberayron and claimed 915 from the Rev Henry Morgan, executor of Isaac Morgan, The Rev Mr Morgan repudiated the claim, but I!ai: there was some stone stacked at the quarry and he could have a portion of the value of them. He was accordingly paid £ 2 when the stones were sold. Evan Lie yd, clerk and manager of the late Isaac Morgan, said that after 18S2 plaintiff was paid 10s. a week ^'acjes. It was not a payment on account. Plaintiff sometimes grumbled at the amount but said it was better than going to the workhouse. When working at the quarry the plaintiff brought in the quantity of stone sold like other men employed there, and never made a claim of 10id. per load.—Cross- examined In the diary produced kept by him (witness) there "were payments of Sa., 9s. and E-1. For five ,jl in Is, liece9sion no wages at all had been paid to rlaintift or anyone else by him (witness). Sometimes Mr Morgan advanced something to plaintiff on the street and sometimes paid him altogether. The plaintiff had dictated to him his claim for 928 at 2s. 6d, a day, and the undated memorandum produced was in hit handwriting.—Re- examined The entries of 6s. 93. and El were made according to Mr Morgans' direction. The fl might have beer given in charity on plaintiff's daughter com- ing and F-aviag the money was wanted for rent.—It then transpired that there was no entry of El for wages in thf, explained that he bad drawn up the memorandum in order to show Isaac Morgan that he (plaintiff) worth his wages.—In reply to the Judge, witness stated that it was on his suggestion that plaintiff was paid £ 2 as a compromise, because he went about Aberayron saying that Mr Morgan owed him money.—Henry Jones said that he went into Mr Morgan's'employ in 1883 at the same time as plaintiff. Wages were paid by Mr Morgan on passing down the road and when he was not so paid weat down to the office. Pb;ntiff was paid 103. a week. Never heard him make any claim for payment by the load. In fact there was no means of checking the stones rajsed by plaintiff, as the stones raised v.-pre all put together.— Cross-examined Witness got 2s. 61. a week and the same sum when he worked some time at the quarry and some time elsewhere. Never heard plaintiff say he received more than lOs, a wpek when he worked elsewhere than at the quarry. W hen stones were sold each man who sold them took the account down to David.— Reexamined All stones quarried were thrown into one heap. Was never himself paid so much a load. -i-)rry Wright gave corroborative evidence, and this concluded the defendant'3 m-e.-His Honour believed the plaintiff was to he paid lOd a load for stone and 2s. 8d. a day when net vrorkiu^ at the quarrv, and that was borne out by the account made out bv one of Mr Morgans' clerk on that basis. Plain- tiff however, had not shown the value of the stone quarried or the balance due to him, and on that ground he would be non-suited.—Mr Owen asked that no costs should be granted whereupon Mr Hughes said that the defendant would not enforce costs if plaintiff did net" shoot at defendant again.Eis Honour said he could not refuse tae consequence of the plaintiff having failed but auvised the defendant to look into the matter and see if any money was due to plaintiff McJlquham 1:1. Jenh*.—James Mdiquham, merchant, Aberystwyth, sued Henry Jenks. Garden Lodge, Ruabon. mine proprietor, and A. H. Jenks, min e agent. Talvbont, for the sum of £ -i 5s. Od., being com- mission. due to him on the sale of a waterwheel at Bwlchsjwyc.—Mr W. P. Owen appeared for the plaintiff and Mr A. J. Hughes for the defendant.—The plaintiff paid that in Octiber,:ISSO, Mr A. H. Jenks went to him and wanted to purchase s. waterwheel at Bwlchcrwvn, as he was; not very friendly at that time with Mr Green. Went to Mr Green and negotiated for the sale of the wheel at £ 50, and plaintiff was to have 10 per cent. commission. Expected another call from Jenks to know the result of the interview with Mr Green, but he did not again call. The wheel was sold and he (plaintiff) subsequently received from Mr Green a stamped memorandum dated November 1886, signed A. H. Jenks, undertaking to pay him J[plaintiff) the commission., Had written to the defend- ants a?j]r.ir»g for the commission.—Cross-examined Had not held a commission to sell the wheel from Mr Green before Mr Jenks came to him. Had sold a pump set to Mr Jenks for JE19. They had cost him £ 28 or £ 30, and he thought he had the right to remove the set. If Mr Jenks stated that he (plaintiff) said in conversation about the pump set, "Well I got nothing out of that wheel," he would say a deliberate lie.—Mr Hughea objected to the reply, and his Honour said it was not generally the way witnesses replied and perhaps plaintiff would withdraw it.—Plaintiff said if it was objectionable he would withdraw it. Continuing, plaintiff said he did not know that Jenks had brought the wheel direct from Mr Green for £ 45 before the set was gol-I.-Re--r--xamine,,l Got the undertaking from Mr Green some months after the set was sold.— George Green said that in 1886 he had a wheel at Bwlchgwyn. He told Mr Mcllquham that the price of the wheel was 150. Mr Mcllquham asked for com- mission and witness said five per cent. Mr Mcllquham asked for ten per cent. and witness gave him a note to that effet. When Jenks went to him after- ward told him that he (the witness) had agreed to give corainienlon. Sold the wheel to Jenks for £ 45 n condition that he was to settle with Mr Mcllquham. Told Jenks that Mr Mcllquham had been there. After- ward gave Mr Mcllquham the undertaking produced. The cheque produced (Nov. 12th) was given for the wheel.—Thomas Parry, draughtsman'in the employ of Mr Green, said that he heard Mr Green say that as he had quoted a price to Mr Mcllquham he could not sell it without reference to him. Mr Jenks then said he would settle with Mclllquham and gave the under- taking.-W. R. Hall, reporter, stated that he was present at the November Court and beard Jenks, the younger, say that he bought the wheel at Bwlchgwyn Mine for his brother.—Cross-examined Believed it was bought from Mr Green.-This wast'neplaintiff'scase. —For the defence, Mr Hughes said that Mr Mcllquham, not being a. party to the undertair.ng. he could not sue upon it. The contract was made by Mr Green and he alone could sue on it.-His Honour held Mr Hughes' objection insuperable and nonsuited plaintiff. Jone.9 v. Darnes.—John Jones and Co., coal merchant, Bridge End, sued Elias Davies, shoemaker, North-parade, for the recovery of E7 17s. for coal supplied.—Mr W. P. Owen appeared for plaintiff.— Defendant admitted that he owed £6 odd, and the case was adjourned in order to investigate the balance. Morgan v. Da?yies.-Rjwlanc, l Morgan, draper sued Gabriel Davies, Brewe^treef, and his wife hr the recovery of 910 15s. id. for 30003 sold. Mr W. P. Owen appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Edgar At- wood for the defeodant--The Jadcre said the defend- ant had pvt in statutory defence which was read, amid laughter, saying that he did not acknowledge the debt and pleaded the "brrd WOman's Liability Act."—Plaintiff said he sold goods to M3 Davies. and I that he saw defendant, wife and daughter selling the goods from a stall in the fair. Some ci the good, he saw Gabriel wearing. Looked to Gabriel for payment. —For tbe defence, Mrs Davies said her husband dealt I in knives and such things. She dealt in drapery. Gabriel had. no more to do with the stall than Mr Atwood Had a licence in her own name, and had nothing at an to do with her husband.—The Judge gavo a verdict against Mrs Davies only for the amount claimed, to be paid by instalments of £ 1 a month. A Shipping case.-D. C. Roberts and John Mathias, liquidators of the Aberystwyth Marine Insurance Company, fcr whom Mr Ev,vi Evans (Messrs Roberts ai.-d Evans) appeared, sued William P?rry far the re- covery of call?. Mr Evans s?id that Mr Parry owned the Idrih and vas a member of the society in 1882 and 1883. When the society went into liquidation, the liquidators found it necessary to make calls upon the members. A call at the rate of 19s. 2d. per cent for losses of 1882, and a call of lis. per cent for 1S33 were made. A further call was made of £ 2 per member towards expenses of winding up. The defendant had paid the jE2. and the calls were now sued for.—The defendant said he had paidall the calls for losses and was told that that was the final call. The calls he was now asked to pay was in order to make good arrears which the company had allowed their neighbours to iall into to the losa of outsiders who had joined the otten thing.—Mr Evans admitted that the calls on defendant were to make good what other people had [ failed to pay but the liquidators had exhausted all the means in their power to make them pay, and had the right to make further calls until the members who It sustained losses received 20s. in the pound. The creditors had s,greed to receive 15s. in the pound. His Honour said that having belonged to the company, defendant was respons ble for his share of all acts and liabilities of the company. He therefore would have to pay the money.—The defendant said there had been scandalous neglect; and His Honour remarked that people who belonged to companies must run such risks.

DOLGELLEY.

ABEBDOVEY.

LONDON.

HARLECH.

TOWYN.

YSTRAD MEURIG.I

MACHYNLLETH.

BLAENCARON.

PENRHYNDE UDRAETH. i

PORTMADOO.

T RE MA DOC.

ABERAYRON.

TREGARON.

CASTELL FLEMISH.I

Advertising

. LLANFIHANGEL. {

LAMPETMJg.

iCO R WEN.I

,LONDON AMI) PRavmciAL BANK.

.NORTH CARDIGANSHIRE TEACHEB'S…

. A HEROIC NEGRO.t

ARREST OF MR. SHEEHY, M.P.

- SUBSTITUTES FOR COAL

J AN EXCESSIVE DISTRESS

Advertising