Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

9 articles on this Page

PONTYPOOL.

News
Cite
Share

PONTYPOOL. TOWN HALL.—Wednesday. [Before JOHN THOMPSON, Enquire] A WHOLESALE ORDER.—Clever Capture. A young woman from the country," who gave the name of Eliza. beth Williams, presented herself on the back of a grey pony, attired in a riding habit, and other suitable costume, at the shop door of Mr. Edwin Fowler, draper, of this town, on Wednesday week, when having dis- mounted, and taken her stand in the shop, she gave orders for goods in the name of Mrs. Jones, in whose service she formerly lived at Blaendare, worth upwards of ilo. The parcel, which contained several descrip- tions of drapery goods, was duly packed, and having remounted her dappel g'ey" the lady bore away her parcel in triumph but, as will be seen, her joy was only to be of short duration —Mr. Fowler, having dis- covered that he had been grossly imposed upon, commu- nicated with Mr. Superintendent Mcintosh, when that gentleman, in company with Serjeant Powell, started in pursuit of the delinquent on the following Friday, so that she had obtained one day's clear start of her pur- suers. The first intelligence the latter had of the fair fugitive was at the Crumlin toll gate, at which place ahe had been compelled to leave a silk tie for toll, in consequence of the exhausted state of her exchequer. As the officers proceeded on her track they discovered that she had been again obliged to have recourse to the same means, as another tie was found to have been left at another gate. Proceeding to cross Penmaine and Blackwood, and thence to the Argoed, the officers came up with the object of their pursuit at the house of Mr. David Jenkins, where she had borrowed the pony and riding habit. She and the goods were at once taken into custody, and on her being placed before the magis. trate this morning, Mrs. Fowler, and Mr. Hall, an assistant in t;;e shop, proved that the prisoner had the goods in the name of Mrs. Jones. The latter proved that she never gave her authority to obtain them, and Mr. Mcintosh deposed to having apprehended her.—The prisoner, having pleaded guilty, was committed to take her trial at the ensuing assizes. SATURDAY. (Before H. M. KENNAEII, and JOHN THOMPSON, Esqrs.) APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. — Mr Greenway applied to have the following c-ses adjourned for three weeks, viz Mary Greasly v. Mary Bath Richard Giles v. Mary Thomas, and Mary Phillips v. Mary Rogers.- Mr Alexander Edwards opposed the adj urnment of the last ca-e, and it was ultimately disposed of by defendant apologizing for what she had said, and both parties promising not to annoy eich other for the future, and paying -he costs between them. ASSAULT.—William Thomas charged George Challing- worth with having assaulted him.—Mr William Henry Lloyd appuared for complainant.—The latter slid: Defendant is a moulder at Bliemvon Iron Works, and I am in his employment. About 12 o'c'ock at noon on the 7th in t I was carrying a ladle full of melted brass to a mcul't-r, which I put down safely on a stand. Defendant found f.iu t with me, and stiuck me with a piece of iron, six feet long and thref inches in thickness, on the back part of my head. The iron is used to skim the bras?, and was red hot at the pointed end which hit me. I went down to defendant's house at night, in company with my fi her, who asked him why h" had struck me, when he said that he had no!, and that he did not care more fur S20 than he did for twopence, tnd I might summon him to-morrow.—John Thomas, father of complainant, spoke to th. re having been a larije lump on his son's head from the effects of tha blow, and corroborated the latter part of his statement. — For the defence Meredith Wiliarns and William Prothero were called, and said that defendant did not stiike complainant at all. He threatened to do FO, Irom the csrele-s m <nner in which he left the I sdle, which would have fallen if one in which he leit the I sdle, which would have fallen if one of them had rot caught it, and instead of the iron being three inches, it was only halt an inch in thickness. In I cross-examination the witness Prothero said that he went down to fhomas's house, where he spent ashil'ing in an endeavour to settle this case. He did so, he said, because he heard that complainant was going to f-tch a summons against defendant. -In reference to his state- ment of having been struck by the hot part of the iron comnlaii ant was asked why he had not pro Juced his cap as it must have had a burned mark, and would therefore have afforded clear evid nee that he had been struck as he had stated.-The witness Meredith having been re- called to throw some light on this point, said that lie and other men present examined complainant's cap at the time, and couli find no mark upon it—they had been induced to do so, he said, because complainant had said that he had been struck with the iron.—Mr Lloyd addressed the Bench. The Chairman remarked that the magistrates were under the impression that a blow had been given, but did not think it had been or severe a nature as complainant had stated.- Defendant was con- vie-e I in the penalty of 20s 6d including costs. TRESPASS AND ASSAULT.—A lad named Daniel Reed, who said that he was 16 years of age, was charged with offences of this nature.— It would seem that an elderly man, named William Thomas, is employed, amongst other work, in looking after a sluice gate on property belonging to Messrs. A. Darby, md oiht-rs, situate ac Cwmcantddu, near Pontypool. He stated that on look. ing cut of a window, he saw defendant pulling up the gate. On remonstrating with him he struck him, which formed the offences compliin^d of.—Defendant said that he did not pull up the gate, and that complainant struck him.-Alfemale, named Mary Thomas, deposed that she j was standing near the spot » here these offences were said to have been committed. That it was some children who J Meddled wi'h tbe gate, ard because defendant laughed at I complainant's not being able to catch the children, he b« 3ame angry with him and accused him of doing what tae children had done.—In answer to the Bench, com- plainant said, twice or thrice, I did not strike the boy, to the be-st of my knowledge."—Constable Humphries inf rmed the Bench that as the bar weighed a quarter cwt., children c'uld not have removed it.—The Chairman observed that the Bench believed that defendant had interferred with the water, but they were disposed to d»a! lightly with him by convicting him in the penalty of 158 for both offences. CASE OF DISPUTED RIGHT-Benjamin Smith was charged with having committed a trespass on property belonging to Thomas Allsop, and further charged w ith having assaulted his wife, Ann AHsop—Mr. Alexander Edwards appear ei for complainan'?, and Mr. Henry Lloyd for defendant.—From the evidence it appeared that these parties occupy adjoining premises at Snatch- wood, near Pontypool, and the point in dispute was the possession of a pis's stye, which defendant alleged belonged to him. He rented the premises from Mr. Da vies, ironmonger, who is agent to the Bridgwater Society.- William Nash was called to prove that he Occupied the premises previously to defendant, and there was at that time a pig's stye attached to them. It would leem that there was a partition in the stye which defen- dant had removed pushed the female complainant there- from, and claimed the whola aa belonging to his pre- mises, into which he put his pig.—Complainant, as it was proved, had no pig, but he alleged that he didn't know how soon he might have one.—Mr Lloyd contended that a'l the pig-stye was on the side of the Snatchwood Ian, which defendant occupied that they held an agree- mea* of possession given by Henry Carter, the original owner, and that as this was a dispute as to right, the case was out of the jurisdiction of this Cuurt.—The Bench suggested a private settlement of the case and ad- journed it for a week for that purpose. ALLZGSD THEFT OF TIMBER. — George Johns, ap- peared on remand at the instance of the Great Western Railwiy Company for having stolen a piece of timber belong!):* to them. Mr. W. H. Lloyd watched tha case for rrisoner. The engineer of the Company appeared and sai: they had no evidence to offer that the timber belong d to them. Ho could noi identify it; yet if it should appear that the property belonged to the Company he hoped the Bench, whilst dealing leniently with the prisoner, would still protect such property which, being -very much exposed, was easy to be stolen. He (witness) believed from what he had heard that prisoner bore a good character.—The policeman, Vaughac, deposed tha whilst ha was on duty in the neighbourhood of Sebas- topot about 2 a.m. on the 10th inst, he met prisones coming from the works of the Company where he was employed, with the property in his possession. In answer to him he said that he had taken it from the Company's works, t-nd that he had no authority or leave to do so.- In answer to the Bench, tha first witness that he couldn't say that the timber (which looked like a pieje of old fire vr-od) was worth anything. Mr. Lloyd was about to offer some remarks on the case, when the Chairman in- formed the p.isoner that he had run into a serious case, but owing to his good characterland other circumstances, the Bench would discharge him. ,n WOMEN'S SQUABBLES.—Ellen Macarthy was charged by Catherine Callaghan with having assaulted her.— The parties reside at Abersychan. Last Thursday week defendant came into Michael Sullivan s to borrow a tub. Complainant and other people were in the house at the time. A squabble appears to have arisen amongst them in which defendant, in true Hibernian fashion, knocked complainant down with the tub, and kilt her entirely." —Severe witness having given their testimony, the Chairman said it was impossible for the Bench to say wh,) first gave the provocation, but it was clear that an assault had been committed, for which defendant stood convicted in the penalty of 15s. including costs. JPVBNILR PUGILISTS.-A lad named William Curtis was charged by Charles Clark, shopkeeper, with having committed a trespass on his premises. It would seem that defendant was sitting on the ledge of complainant's window, when he commenced to box or spar with ano- ther lad, and his elbows went through the window. This was complainant's statement. Defendant said that the other lad whose name was Samuel Prosser pushed him through the window.- There appeared to have been an attempt made to settle the case. Complainant stated that be had MtUined damage to the amount of 8a. fel. from the window being broken, and the loss of and in- jury done to his goods.-The Chairman said the boys ought both to pay complaisant for the damage he had sustained, and the Bench ultimately ordered them to pay .403. 6:1. costs. BOTH ALIKE. — William Kendal charged William Henry Thomas with having assaulted him. Complain- ant said that as he was talking to a person on Monday evening on the Albion-road, Pontypool. Defendant, who was sitting on a wall got down and charged him with having said something disrespectful about a young woman, challenged him to fight, and struck him a vio- lent blow on the face.—David Davies corroborated com- plainant's statement.—Defendant alleged that the latter first pulled him off the wall, and challenged him to fight. -Herbert Lewis and Elizabeth Thomas gave testimony on behalf of defendant.—The Chairman said-We think one just as bad as the other.—The parties were ordered to pay 63. each expenses. GETTING OFF EASILY.—Mr. John Vincent, Prince of Wales Inn, Blaenafon, charged James Jenkins, and Daniel Morgan, with a trespass.—Complainant said defendants cut about five pounds of bacon off a piece on his premises, and he preferred the charge to warn them and other people that they could not commit such offences with impuci y. He hoped the Bench would deal leniently with them as he believed them to be in. dustrious young men from the iron workll.- The Chair- man remarked to defendants that the charge against them ought to be one of felony, which would have placed them in an awkward position, and they ought to be thankful to complainant for his leniency.-Defeodants were convicted in the penalty of 10s. each, which was getting off easily. James Sowey, Jaraes Williams, and William Price, of Blaenafon Wm. Canton, of the Tranch, Pontypool; Thomas Thomae, Walter Parry, senr., and Walter Parry, junr., of Garndiffaith and John Payne and John Stone were fined 7s. 6d. each for having been drunk and disorderly. A WELL-KNOWN CHARACTER.-Elijah Elton, who has obtained an unenviable notoriety for committing unprovoked assaults, was charged under the following circumstances. It seemed that he was drinking on Monday last in the Swan Inn, Pontypool, in company with Samuel Turner, when, having bad a little dispute, the former struck the latter, and judging from what transpired that he would be summoned to this Court, he repeated the blow with still greater severity.-A man of the name of Taylor gave corroborative testimony, when defendant, who did not appear, was convicted in the penalty of 40s. including costs. Ax UNFORTUNATE BLow.-Dennis Whitehouse was charged with having assaulted a mero child, named Daniel Tilley, at Garndiffaith.—From the statement of the child's mother it would seem that she was attracted to defendant's house by his wife crying Murder" from his beating her, when he threw a stone at her, which struck the child, cutting its face in a serious manner.— The Chairman remarked that the Bench were willing to believe that the blow was accidental yet, notwithstand ing, defendant must be held responsible for the conse- quences.—Defendant, who did not appear, was convicted in the penary of 40s. including; costs. OFFENCES AGAINST BEER LICENCES.—Mary Williams, John Jenkins, and Daniel Smith, residing in Pontypool and iis vicinity, were each fined 10s. for having cfFanded against their beer licence.—James Vaughan, Blaenavon, charged on the information of P.C. Lewis with a similar offence, was convicted in a like ppnahy.—John England, Pantrg, appeared on remand, through the medium of his wif., charged on the information of constable Humphries with having sold beer without a licence. This case had been adjourn-d for the attendance of Daniel Smith, who d = pos 'd that he and defendant h-id some beer at the house of the latter, of which he paid for two quarts, on Sunday week.—In answer to the Bench, witness said that he knew when he went to the house that he would have to pay for the beer.—The cinstable said that there were many complaint3 made about such houses—The Chairman observed that the Bench must endeavour to stop the practice, and that it was a great shame that private houses should sell beer whilst others were pay- ing for licences. -D,fenlant was convicted in the penalty of 40s. including costs.-Samuel Booth appeared on remand to answer a charge of having offended against his licence. Defendant resides at Pentiefreod, Ponty- pool. The case was adjourned on the 9th inst. for the production of additional evidence. At the date men- tioned this defendant charged a young man named Tap with assault and trespass. The latter charged Booth with having allowed his tap" to run during prohibited hours on the 3rd inst., or on the day when the other offences were said to have been committed. It had been alleged that a number of men were drinking in defend- ant's house until a quarter past three o'clock on Sunday, the 3rd that they took a gallon of beer away with them to drink in a field, and that they sent for ten pints of beer afterwards. This was the purport of Tap's evidence on the first hearing of the case, and a young man named Thomas Bower, was called to day to corroborate it, but he give his evidence in such a manner that the Bench could cot rely upon it, and therefore dismissed the case. MONDAY. [Before JOHN THOMPSON, Esq.' THE FOURTH CONVICTION.—Ann Shau (17), whose general appearance was of a very grimy and rtpulsive nature, was charged with vagrancy and prostiturion at Blaenavon.-P.C. Lewis deposed to having seen defen- dant wandering about with men, and otherwise conduct- ing herself in such a manner that could leave little doubt as to her general character and mode of procuring a livelihood.—Mr. Superintendent McIntosh eaid that de- fendant had been imprisoned three times previously for Bimilar offences, and he designated her as one of the district bush-rangers" in the county.—She was repri- manded by the Bench, and committed to prison for two m Inths' with hard labour. THE STOLEN COAT.-Daniel Evans was charged with having stolen a ooat, the property of Walter Down, Blaenavon.—It would appear that prosecutor is em- ployed as a watchman at the Iron Works, and he missed his coat from the office of which he bad charge, between five and six o'clock this morning.—Information having been given to P.C. Butler, he apprehended prisoner at six o'clock, with the coat in his possession he said that he did not know what put it into his head to take it.-Having pleaded guilty, prisoner was remanded to Usk prison until Saturday. A CASE OF BIGAMY FROM BLAENAVON. William Phillips was charged with having feloniously intermarried with Jane Ellis, his former wife being still alive. Mr. Alexander Edwards appeared for defendant. George Williams said I am a commission agent resid- ing at Newport. I produce a certificate of a marriage contracted between William Phillips and Eunice Sayce, at Abeydore Church, on the 5th October, 1848, which I have examined with the original register. I also pro- duce another certificate of marriage contracted between the aforesaid William Phillips and Jane Ellis, at Llan. wenarth Chapel, on the 4th of June, 1863, which I compared with the register. By Mr. A. Edwards: I was at Blaenavon 01 Friday last. Cannot tell when I slept at defendant's house. Don't keep dates of where I sleep. It was before I went to Abeydore that I slept at defendant's. I slept therf about two months ago. Did not say anything to him then about this case. His wife came to my house and told me what she had found out, and begged of me to interest myself in her favour. She is my cousin. She told me that she had money in an Industrial Store at Blaenavon. She told me that it had been in William Phillips's name, and that after she had heard reports re3pecting the former marriage she had put it in her own name. I did not advise her in any way respecting it. She did not tell me that the money amounted to from jE60 to £ 70. I cannot tell you that she mentioned any sum of money to me. Elizabeth Smith I was present at the marriage of the defendant, William Phillips, and Eunice Sayce, at Abeydore Church. Defendant is the same man. Eunice Sayce at alive at present. I saw her last week at my house. She lives in Abeydore parish. It is about 20 years since they were married, and after living together two years defendant left her. I have not seen him since. She lived with me before her marriage, but not sint:<?. Mr. A. Edwards declined to ask this witness any questions. Jane Ellis: I married the prisoner at Llanvvenarth Chapel, June 4th, 1863. He then told me that he was single or a widower. About six weeks or two months after we had been married he told me that he had mar- ried another wife, and ran away and left her. I asked him how long it was ago. lie said seven or eight and twenty years since. I asked him what had become of her. He said she was dead; that she died about two years after their marriage. His own brother told me that he really believed she was alive. By Mr. A. Edwards Defendant told me that his wife died two years after they were married. He did not tell me that John Ruck had said so. There was money put into the Industrial Stores in the name of defendant. I gave notice to take it all out. I signed the notice "Jane Phillips, wife of William Phillips." I put JE51 of the money back into the Stores iu my own name, and £ 20 in the name of William Pbillips. I also left £6 with Mr. David Lewis in my own name, and XI was left with him in the aame of Phillips. By the Bench The Industrial Store people did not object to my changing the names and money. By Mr. A. Edwards Defendant did not abuse me at the time for changing the money, but he did aftewards. We should not have gone on very quietly if it bad not been for this money. He sold the cows; the money was put in the Store. He wished to get the money, and leave me and the child. I received f2 draw belonging to him on Saturday. The child is about five years old; it belonged to the second wife. (Defendant had been married three times). I believe there were no children from the first marriage. The second wife was buried at Blaenavon about two years ago. She bad two ohildren by defendant. I don't know how long he had been mar. lied to hia mood wife* It might been ten month* after her death that we were married. Mr. Williams was at our house. I never spoke to him about the money. He never advised me at all to get the money put in my own name. I had X95 when I married de- fendant. Thomas Jones, farmer, Llansillo, Herefordshire, said I knew Wm. Phillips and his first wife when they were married. I don't know that I ever saw them together. She is at Cortobello, in the parish of Abeydore. She has lived there 13 or 14 years by herself since the de- fendant left her. I never saw them together during that time. I cannot give any proof that defendant knew she was living. This being all the evidence Mr. A. Edwards submitted that there was no case. The Bench observed that no proof had been afforded that defendant knew that his former wife was alive during the last seven years, which the law requires, and Mr. E. B. Edwards, the magistrates' clerk, read a case in point.—Defendant therefore was discharged, to the evident surprise of the witnesses. COUNTY COURT.—TUESDAY, JULY 19. Morgan v. JMM.—This was an action tried at the last court, and which involved a question of great importance to owners and occupiers of laud in the district (Mynyddis- lwyn) where the parties resided. It was brought by the off-going tenant of a farm called Nantgoy, belonging to William L. Williams, Esq., of Maesruddud, against the in-coming tenant, for recovery of certain tillage rights. These were rather peculiar, and embraced claims for ploughing, hedging, ditching, walling, liming, and dung- ing, and (as it was alleged) were payable by the custom of the parish. The remarkable feature in the claim for re- imbursement was in respect of the expenditure for lime, for it WAS attempted to be shown that where land had been limed so much as three years before the off-going tenant quitted, the custom warranted a claim to be repaid one-third of the cost, although it was shown on cross- examination that the tenant had taken a white crop each of the three years in succession, and in the first instance had expended a most inadequate quantity of lime. Where the lime had been laid on two years only, the claim for reimbursement was increased to two-thirds of the out- lay. These demands were resisted on the grounds that such a custom was inconvenient and unreasonable, and that in fact it had no existence in the district in question. The case had come on at a previous court, when wit- nesses were examined by Mr. Cathcart for the plaintiff, and by Mr. Waddington for the defendant, aad was ad- journed for further evidence. Accordingly at the last court further evidence was gone into at considerable length, and among other witnesses Mr. Collins, of Duffryn, the eminent agriculturist, and Mr. Jones, of Crosslanfro, were examined for the plaintiff; but they failed to prove the existence of the alleged custom in the parish of Mynyddislw-yn, although they spoke of valuations in which they bad been concerned between off-going and in-coming tenants in their own neighbourhood, which, however, was at a very consider- able distance from the district in question. These witnesses were cross-examined at great length by the defendant's advocate. On tbe plaintiffs case being closed, Mr. Waddington addressed the court in support of a nonsuit. He contended that from the fact of his Honour having adjourned the case for further evidence, it was reasonable to assume that his mind was not then satisfied that the plaintiff had established his case, and he went on to examine how hr the evidence now given had strengthened the plaintiff's position. He reviewed this minutely, contending that to support a custom of so important a nature, the evidence was of the most meagre and unsatisfactory character. Mr. Waddington then went ou to point out the inconvenience and unreasonableness of such a custom if it did exist, for it was imposible for an incoming tenant to know what he might be called upon to pay (in the present case the claims exceeded half a year's tent), nor could he possibly estimate the value of the benefit (if any) remaining in the soil after the small expenditure of lime, and the exhausting crops which followed. A man taking land, estimated, as well as 1 e could, its value as it then was, or appeared to be, and offered a rent accordingly, and if a farm had been actua'ly improvedjby the alleged liming, &c, it enabled the landlord to demand an increased rent, and in fairness, therefore, if anybody was liable, it was not the incoming tenant (who paid for it in his rent), but thelandiord who was benefitted, and who ought, therefore, to be charged with the cost of improvement. The Judge thought there was some evidence to go to a jury, and refused to nonsuit at this stage of the pro- ceedings, but after hearing a large body of evidence given by farmers from the parish of Mynyddislwyn, who had lived all their lives there, and but two or three of whom had ever heard of such a custom, his Honour decided that the custom had not been proved, and nonsuited the plain- tiff.

CARDIFF.

I ♦-

PICKINGS FROM PUNCH

GOODWOOD RACES.

Advertising

[No title]

NEWS BY ThE CITY Or' 13ALTIlrORE.

FOREIGN TELEGRAMS. If