Hide Articles List

11 articles on this Page

EBWARIj Y11: falS C A [' •…

I---_._,--Bangor and Bsanmaris…

Advertising

Mueiza Subdued.

---_._---=-F---Bangor County…

Advertising

Are Otsters Refreshments?

Advertising

OLD FALSE TEETH BOUGHT.

I---_._,--Bangor and Bsanmaris…

---_._---=-F---Bangor County…

News
Cite
Share

renwea to toke the boy fcack, he nc/t been asked to do so A hill Jt:l2 damages had been made out by w/ hams the solicitor's clerk, but it wae re- duced to £ 0. It was not Williams who in- stigated him to enter the daim. — Mr Thornton Jones submitted that as a matter of law there was no technical bindinc of this apprentice, because there must be a principal before a surety could be bound. As a matter of jaw, it was not right, for the plaintiff to deduct the cost of the hone f rc yr, the wages of his apprentice, as was the <ase with domestio servants. Acting un the advice of his Honour, both the claim aLd counterclaim were withdrawn. The 1 uage said that the deed had not been pro- perly expressed, and that should be a warn- mg to people not to have their apprentice- hf deeds prepared by mcompoten: persons. A CURIOUS CASE OF MONEY-LENDING His Honour delivered judgment in mi broagbt by Mr Join gEvT« Of Dafarn Newydd, near Bangor LamA jrjf n Helen Jones, of the Antelcpv Inii, near Bangor, the administratrix c< tie estate of her late husband, Willia-n .•ones, ,11 which Mr John Evans, solicitor, Haiigor, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr .1. Bryn Robert, M.P. (instructed by Messrs Carter, Vincent, and Douglas Jones solicitors, Carnarvon) for the defendant. The action was brought by the plaintiff foi: £42 5s, part thereof, being insurance prtiinura paid by the plaintiff on behalf of William Jones, d £ 40 money lent Ly the piaintiff to William Jones on the 20th Sep- tember,1899. W m. Jones was the plaintifl 's nephew, and during the year 1899 Jones was second officer on board the S.B. "Hemi- sphere. The ship was in London in the month of July of that year, and from there William Jones wrote to the plaintiff in- icrming him that he intended to get mar- ned when the ship cajne back to this coun- try after making another voyage to Gal- vtaon, aitfl finding that he was short cf /•T;?ey' abked' the Pontiff to lend him Zt anc} pranged to deposit with the plain- a Pa°;1Cy °f irLsuranw ^100 as securi- ty. ihe plaintiff consented to lend the money, and on the arrival of the vessel at Antw erp after the. voyage to GairesLiari, William Jones came home to be married. u ,1^^rriVaI home OR the 20t-h Septem- ber, 1899 he went to see the plaintiff, and obtained from him the JC40 in cash, with- out giving acknowledgment for the same in writing. He arranged to call again that day, as soon as he came from Bangor, with a promissory note for the amount, together with the policy of insurance agreed to be de- posited with the plaintiff, William Jones went to Bangor the day he obtained the l-ioney to make arrangements for the wedding, which was to take place the follow- ing day. He bought a stamped paper upon which to make out the promissory note acr the amount of the loan, but having met some friends, and having to make arrange- ments for the wedding the following dav he failed to draw- out the note and to (k. Jnaer the P°llc7 of insurance to the plain- Vfi a8 arr/anf^- Tl* next day William TL!?'d. *he»def€ndant ?nd both left Bangor for AnWerp, whei-? Jones sbip wa, but before luring home VV illiam Jones av(' directions to his mother h take the policy of insurabdo t. tke plain- tiff, but he never said anything about the lean to. his wife. The mother delivered the policy to the plaintiff as directed, with the ntccs-ary explanation afi to William Jones' failure to call the previous day as ar- ranged. "V\ m. Jones never returned home, having died on board the s.s. "Hemisphere" a.tout. three months after obtaining the lean. The defence was that the plaintiff was not in a position to lend such a turn of money, and that the administratrix fcund no trace of the money after the death of her husband. His Honour gave judgment for the plaintiff for the full amount, viz., f42 5s and £3 2s court, fees but having regard to the fact that it was an action against the representative of a deceased person he directed each party to pay their own costs.