Carnarvon and Denbigh Herald and North and South Wales Independent

liLANRWST PETTY SESSIONS. MONDAY. — Before Colonel Johnstone (chairman), Dr Jones, and H. J. W. Wat- ling, Esq. MAINTENANCE ORDER.—Robert Ro- berts, Yspytty, was summoned by Mr Tho- mas Williams, relieving officer, on behalf of the Llanrwst Board of Guardians, to show cause why he should not contribute towards the maintenance of his father.—The Bench made an order for the payment of Is per week. DRUNKENNESS. — The following were fined for drunkenness :—Edward Williams, Pentir; O. Thomas, shoemaker, Llanrwst; J. Jones, Graig, Glan Conway Edward Wil- liams, carter. Deunant; John Williams, Scot- land-street, Llanrwst; O. Evans, Tanygris- I iau; and Bridget Ann Jones, Graig, Glan Conway. CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. — Inspector Hunt, R.S.P.C.A., summoned William Ev- ans, Ty nyffordd, Llanddewi, for working a horse in an unfit condition.—Mr W. P. Ro- berts (Messrs D. Jones and Roberts) de- fended.-The Bench imposed a fine of 5s and costs.

-.u- CARNARVON BOROUGH PETTY SESSIONS. MONDAY.—Before Dr Parry (mayor), R. Thomas, Esq., J. R. Hughes, Esq., R. Roberts Esq., and J. P. Gregory, Esq. BREACH OF THE FACTORIES ACT. -Thomas Litherland, printer, Carnarvon, was summoned by Mr Augustus Lewis on a charge of employing a young person named Lewis Owen Jones, under 16 years of age, without having him medically examined. Defendant pleaded ignorance of the law, and said he did not think a certificate was neces- sary for a lad employed as this one was.- John Hillditch, inspector of factories, swore that on the 4th of December he saw the lad in the printing works and found he had been employed there for four months. That morning he visited the works again and saw the lad setting type. Witness asked for his medical certificate and it was not forth- coming.—Mr Augustus Lewis said he had written to the defendant asking for the certificate, but he had had no reply.—A fine of 2s 6d and costs was iiifileted. -Messrs Lake and Company were summoned for a similar offence. In this case a boy named Bracegirdle (13 years) was employed at the Menai Factory on the 4th of December for a month without having had a certificate of fitness.—Mr R. G. Davies appeared for the company and pleaded guilty. They had made efforts to get a certificate of birth, and some delay was occasioned in getting it because the lad's father was away and when that was eventually obtained, the school cer- tificate had to be procured, but further de- lay was caused because the schoolmaster was away. Since then the boy had been re- gistered.-A fine of 5s and costs was im- posed. Owen Morris, Constantine-terrace, was also summoned for a similar offence. Mr Gordon Roberts defended, and explained that a mistake had occurred because the branch of the works where the lad was en- gaged was managed by defendant's son who was young and did not quite understand the requirements of the law.-A fine of 2s 6d and costs was imposed. BREACH OF CORPORATION BYE- LAWS.—Mary Ann Hughes, Crown-street, was summoned by Mr Evan Roberts, the sanitary inspector, for a breach of the bye- laws.—Mr John Hamer defended, and said that he had a medical certificate to the effect that the accused was too ill to attend. She admitted having technically committed an offence, but was now ready to give up the house to the landlord who would put in a tenant better able to manage a common lodging house.—The case was adjourned for a week. DRUNKENNESS. — Robert Evans Waencwmbrwynog, Llanberis, was sum- moned by P.C. 39 for drunkenness, and was fined 2s 6d and costs.—For a like offence John Jonim, an Italian, of Wesley-street, was also fined 2s 6d and costs.

EXTRAORDINARY COOGH CURE. Powell'R Balsam of Aniseed-For Coughs, Powell's Balsam of Aniseed-For Colds, Powell's Balsam of Aniseed-For Asthma, Powell's Balsam of Aniseed-For Bronchitis, Powell's Balsam of Aniseed-For Lung Trouble Powell's Balsam of Aniseed—For Night Coughs, Powell s Ralsam of Aniseed -For Influerza. Powell s Balsam of Aniseed Rr lieves Instantly Powell s Balsam of Aniseed—Safe and Reliable. Powell s Balsam of Aniseed—Established 70yrs. Powell's Balaam of Aniseed—Refuse Imitations. Powell's Baisam of Aniseed-Sold by Chemists Powell's Balsam of Aniseed—BottIesl/l £ 2/3. &0 See Trade Mark, Lion, Net & Mouse, on u rapper. y545c525

COLWYN AND COLWYN BAY 1 DISTRICT COUNCIL. TUESDAY.—Under the presidency of Mr John Roberts. THE MEDICAL OFFICER OF HEALTH.—The sanitary committee report- ed as follows:—The medical officer's report dated 23rd December, 1897, having reference to a serious breach of the sanitary law in the district, was read. The committee ser- iously considered the circumstances, but were not prepared to pass any stricture as the case had been immediately removed to the hospital. Embodied in the report, Dr Fraser in reference to the proposal to dis- pense with his services as medical officer of health in accordance with the resolution of the council, enumerated several reasons which he considers should be brought under notice before the council finally decided upon a resident practitioner as medical officer. After due consideration of the remarks con- tained in the letter, thd committee beg to recommend That an advertisement be in- serted in the press, giving notice that the council would receive applications for the post, and proceed to the appointment of a resident medical officer, on terms and con- ditions as heretofore at the next ordinary meeting of the council in February.-At the last general meeting of the council, the fol- lowing resolution was passed:—"That from the expiration of the term of office of the present medical officer (Dr Fraser, Carnar- von), a medical officer be appointed, who shall be resident in the district, and that the clerk be instructed to take what steps are deemed necessary to bring about the pro- posed new arrangement."—On the agenda, the following resolution stood in the na.me of Mr G. Bevan :—"That the resolution passed at the last general meeting to dispense with the services of the present medical officer of health in favour of a resident officer be re- scinded and that notice be hereby given that the council will at the next monthly meeting proceed to the reappointment of Dr P. Fraser for another year, from the 31st of March next, with the approval of the Local Government Board.On Mr Bevan rising to propose the latter motion, the Chairman moved it out of order, as it had not been signed by three other members.—-Mr Bevan observed that if that was the case, he would propose as an amendment to the committee's report that no advertisement be inserted in the newspapers. They were all in receipt of a letter from Dr Fraser pointing out certain reasons why they should not adopt that course, and in his opinion those reasons were of vital importance.—Mr Robert Evans ob- jected to Mr Bevan proceeding, as he was out of order, because there was no material difference between his amendment and the motion he had on the agenda. Besides, they had confirmed the resolution passed at the last meeting, and if Mr Bevan wanted to move his resolution, he should have done so before that had been confirmed.-The Chairman But he can move an amendment to a recommendation of the committee. Is there any seconder ?—Mr J. Porter I will second Mr Bovan's amendment, because I believe it a most important matter.—Mr W. Davies also protested against Mr Bevan pro- ceeding, remarking that the chairman should deal with all alike. At the last meeting, he was stopped from proceeding under the same circumstances.—The Chairman Sit down. —Mr Davies I second Mr Evans that Mr Bevan is out of order.—Mr Bevan proceed- ed to state that he moved his amendment in order that he might bring up a proper re- solution at the next meeting. — Mr ,R- Evans You must give three months' notice to rescind.—Mr Bevan No, a month. Mr Evans According to the standing orders, you must give three months' notice.-Mr Bevan. continuing, said that he did not think that any medical gentleman in that district would accept the position, and besides, there was no one qualified for such a position under the Local Government Board. He had spoken to the leading medical gentlemen in the town, and they had all expressed an opinion that it would be a grave error to dispense with the services of Dr Fraser. His reputation was not only known in that district, but throughout the country. Be- cause he had closed the Colwyn schools with- out consulting the sanitary committee was no reason why he should be dismissed. The medical officer had acted in the best inter- ests of the district, because it was an urgent question, and it was a shame that because he had done so that they should adopt the attitude they did (hear, hear). As he had stated before, they could not get a man in the district who would accept the post for £40, and if they could, would he report his own clients for infringing the laws, and bring himself into antagonism in the neigh- bourhood ? Their reason in the first instance for appointing an outside medical officer was that he might be able to do his duty with- out fear or favour, and that Dr Fraser had accomplished.—Mr Robert Evans said that he was not against the re-election of Dr Fraser, but against the illegality of the pro- ceedings.—The Chairman (excitedly) It is not illegal; don't throw that in my face. What do you know of the law ?—Mr Evans It is not according to the standing orders.— The Chairman It is so. Two or three members have done all they could to abuse me since I am in this chair.—Mr Blud said that unnecessary heat was being imported into the matter, and he was afraid that they had proceeded rather hurriedly. The ques- tion affecting the medical officer had arisen out of a feeling of resentment by the sani- tary committee that the schools of the town had been closed without any necessity, in their opinion, for it. But since then mat- ters had turned up which had entirely changed his mind (hear, hear). Dr Fraser was a good, efficient, and in every respect a trustworthy omcer.—Mr H. Hughes having explained his position, Mr Nunn quoted an expression by Dr Bruce Lowe, of the Local Government Board, in which he said that the appointment of local medical officers was a hindrance to the progress of sanita- tion. In the face of such an opinion, could they advisedly proceed?—On a division, Mr Bevan's amendment was carried nem. con. THE PROPOSED NEW PIER AND PAVILION.—The Rev Tomas Parry, refer- ring to the minute relating to the proposed new pier and pavilion, asked whether any reply had been received from the promoters, after the recent interview.-The Clerk None, as far as I am concerned.—Mr G. Bevan Has the solicitor to the council not received any ?—The Clerk replied that Mr Amphlett had told him that be was in com- munication with the Parliamentary agents.— Mr Bevan said that the council had given notice that they were going to oppose the Pier Company's bill in Parliament. This was a serious matter, especially after the council had agreed to support the company to the utmost. He believed the council's solicitors, Messrs Jones, Porter, and Amphlett, had re- ceived a letter from the Pier Company.—Mr Amphlett subsequently attended, and read a letter he had received from Mr Bellis (sol- icitor to the council) that day. The letter stated that the agreement was Irawn by the council, and the Pier Company were prepared to abide by it. If any portion of it did not appear in the order, it would be included in the lease, and the council would get all that was necessary to protect them. If the Board of Trade objected to certain claines being included in the order, it was unfair for the company to have to pay heavy legal expenses as between the council and the Board of Trade. The object of the company was to erect a pier at Colwyn Bay, but if the proceedings went on, as the council ap- peared to hint, all the receipts the share- holdars would get would be a large bill of costs. If such matters were insisted upon, he should advise his company not to pro- ceed with the order.—Mr Amphlett said he failed to see any necessity for the incurring of heavy legal costs. If the clauses in ques- tion were settled between the two Parlia- mentary agents, and sent to the Board of Trade as agreed upon, there could be no great difficulty. Any objection to clausMt in the order by the council must be put in by next Saturday.—It was eventually resolved, on the motion of Mr W. Davies, seconded by Mr Nunn, that the council's solicitors take all necessary steps as to the lodgment of ob- jections, if any, on behalf of the council, and that they be requested to keep down the expenses as much as pjssible, and that the Pier Company's solicitor give a guarantee to pay the costs.—Some discussion ensued as to combined action with other seaside resorts to obtain Dower to enable the local authoiities of seaside resorts to expend money out of the rates in advertising the towns.—The Chairman said the council had done its ut- most to get those powers in its new Aet, but was absolutely refused.—It was eventually agreed to combine with other resorts to ob- tain the desired end. THE PIER AT RHOS.— Mr Stafford Ho- ward, of the W 001S and Forests Depart- ment, wrote that negotiations were pending which would result m the conveyance to Mr He i ton of the pier erected at Rhos and of certain foreshore adjacent to the pier. If the negotiations were carried through the piemises would become vested in Mr Horton in fee simple. The district council appeared to be very remotely interested in the mat- wter, but should they have any observations V make, Mr Howard would be glad to have them as soon as possible.—Mr Blud said this was a most important matter. lie moved that a special meeting be held to con- sider it.—Mr Nunn seconded. He did not know why Mr Howird said the council was "only remotely interest 1." Ithos was in the council's district, and the proposal was an important one.—The resolution was car- ried, and the clerk instruct.* 1 to write to Mr Howard that the council would have some observations to make.

Having provided the Welsh Church witfi a new hymnal, the Bishop of Banker is now superintending the publication of a collec- tion of original an the ma and other furwfi of Church music for the use of the Eeetahlieh- ment. The work is issued in parts, and the stoond contribution consists of a fine anthem with organ accompaniment entitled, "Daionus vw'r Arglwydd," composed by Mr Herbert C. Morris, organist of St. David's Cathedral.

MtfMiiifeiniM ] Sore Throats. t j You cannot do better than gargle J with'CONDY. 3 Sir Morell Mackenzie, M.D., j Physician to The Throat Hospital. J (largle l°:rcoNDY's t < Remedial FLUID. I M iiWARi OF SUBSTITUTES. M I Insist on buying "CONDY'S." S WHY I VAN HOUTEN'S COCOA IS I f 'J .The best for Children I ( 1 Because it is the richest in that digestible | Albumen which nourishes the body, and in | Phosphates which build up the bones 1 and tissues. The best for Mothers Because it repairs waste, nourishes the frame, and is rich in the refreshing & stimu- 8 lating properties natural to the finest Cocoa. The best for Family use I Because it has the highest nutritive value, | 6 and being more soluble and digestible, you can get out of it more strength and nourish- ment than out of any other. The Lancet says:—" It yields a maximum proportion "of the valuable food constituents < easy of "assimilation and digestion."

THE BISHOP OF ST. ASAPH AND HIS CLERGY. CANON ROBERTS'S STORY OF THE MYSTERIOUS LETTER. Canon Roberts, writes (Jan. 8th):—In the interest of all concerned, and to prevent er- roneous conclusions with regard to the source and substai ce of the supposed letter from Dean Howell, I think the time has now come when my version of what actually took place had better be given. The facts are these:—On December Ilth, that is, two days after the Bishop's circular re the Wrexham meeting appeared in the press, I received a note from a friend, en- closing a portion of a postscript torn off from Dean Howell's letter to him, and at the same time calling my attention to the Dean's opinion of the Wrexham meeting. Being only a portion of a letter, it had no address, date, or signature. I was asked to treat it privately, as it was strictly a personal com- munication between the Dean and his cor- respondent. Regarding our meeting at Chester as strictly private, 1 read portions of private letters, and among them I read the opinion of one whom I termed a high digni- tary, remarking at the same time that it had not been asked for, and that the writer knew nothing of our meeting that day. This was the opinion of the Dean of St. David's as given on the slip of paper already men- tioned. He referred to the open discus- sion "m of matters in dispute between the clergy and their Bishop in a meeting with the Bishop in the chair, and used, as far as I can recollect, these words—" The public will surely see the unfitness of the Bishop for the post;" that is to say, for the post of chairman of the meeting where his own ac- tion was to be criticised. My remarks were quite informal and unprepared, and I may not have read the whole paragraph and so created the misunderstanding but such are the facts. It has been remarked that I seemed to lay great stress on the above re- mark. The important point was that the Bishop would be, as chairman, judge of his owb cam. In the reply drawn up in the room afterwards, there was reference made to the tribunal composed of the Bishop (presumably chairman) whose action is ealled in question. Mr Morris may have seen the Dean's handwriting, bur there was no "signature," the "letter" was not passed round," the Dean's name was never mentioned, ncr was there any reflec- tion on the Bishop's fitness for "his office." The postscript I returned to its owner after the meeting, and has, I learn, been destroyed. I owe and made to the Dean of St. David's and my friend my most heartfelt apologies for making use, even in the manner I die of words that were not meant to go into my hand, much less into any meeting. Let me state once for all that as far as I know Dean Howell has had nothing to do, directly or in- directly, with the memorial in any of its I stages. The memorial had been drawn up, signed, sent to the Bishop, and returned be- fore the meeting of December 13th, at which the Dean's words were read. And it is quite evident that the Dean was ignorant of our meeting when he wrote, for his words were in my bands on the noon of Saturday, December 11th, whereas I had not received any notice of the meeting until the evening of that day. This show3 that his words were only a com. ment from a friend to a friend on a matter of interest just then to all Welsh Churchmen, viz., whether the memorialists would or would not attend the Wrexham meeting on the 16th. But as their circular of December 10th shows they had decided not to go; they had therefore come to this decision before any words from the Dean were received. Had the identity of other correspondents from whom I read extracts been guessed, I fear that a good many other II hares would have been started. As my name has been mentioned in con- nection with the memorial, I would like to take this opportunity of stating that, though I am prepared to bear my full share of re- sponsibility for anything I may have done, it must not be supposed that I had any griev- ance, or that the movement originated with me. All the memorialists will bear me out that my influence throughout has been of a decidedly moderating kind. I had no intima- tion I should be asked to take the chair until I was in the room, and it was only when pressed to preside on the ground that I was known to be moderate in the matter, and that they all wanted to conduct the move- ment temperately, that I consented. Owing to thl> secrecy of the matter, many mistakes have been made as to our action and motives, and, alas, it is in human nature to suspect the worst. We tried to keep it secret, and to send the memorIal to the Bishop within a few days of the first meet. ing, that the public might not know of the matter. But owing to the Bishop's absence from home, the posting of it was delayed. There was nothing further from the memor- ialists as a body than the idea that they were acting disloyally or in any but a constitutional manner. I am sure we had no feeling of disloyalty whatever towards our Bishop, and, personally, I have much more faith in his administration of patronage than in a board of patronage. It was thought that if a representativa number of his clergy were jast to point out to him what was causiag dissatisfaction, he would give the matter his attention. I have said ail along that I have had m jre than my deserts, and I do not want anything better, and never asked for anything. It was uu- charitable and wrong for anyone to attribute unworthy motives to us. Men who hive worked hard for their Church, up and down the Welsh hills, aud have grown grey in the work. auct have stood to their pists iirou^li all the tithe wars, &3., in great poverty too, should not have been accused of thioking only of the loaves and fishes,"when once at least, in the interest of their parishes, as well as a change for themselves, they ventarol re- respectfully to bring their case before their Bishop in a constitutional way. Fair play to the Bishop, he did not attribute these un- worthy motives. It has been said that the memoriulists are deserting. I kuow of ontv three su?h, but inasmuch as the memorialists only came to- gether to presant a memorial to their Bishop, having doue so their work is doue. It must noi be supposed they are a permanent body. As far as I can see, they are memorialists no longer, and I feel sure that now the Bishop and ourselves have had our say, we shall go on with our work as usual under our Bishop, ready, in his own words, to forgive and forget." But I have no right to speak for others, though I am sure this must be the eeling of all. A WELSH CLERGYMAN'S VIEW. A clergyman who was beneficed in the diocese of Bangor for many years, aud who now is rector of an important parish in England, writes :— The Bishop of St. Asaph quite fails to show why he, who was app )inted bishop over a Welsh diocese because he knows Welsh, should appoint to the dignities of his cathedral those who do not know Welsh. At the same time, I must bear in mind that he has appointed Canon Evans, vicar of Aber. gele, to the archdeaconry of St. Asaph and I know him personally to be a I Cypnro glan gloyw. ac un da iawn hefyd.' I am afraid the Bishop is not liked in his diocese; hence the dispute. Bishop Mostya should remember Mark Twaio's injunction, I Never prophecy unless you know.' It is im- probable to me that Wales will ever become either Anglican or Roman. The roots of Nonconformitv are too deep in her soil. Bishop Owen is in full sympathy with the national life of his country-and not so fool- ish as to be bitter against Nonconformists. He may change, of course-bishops often do. I think, and have long thought, that the clergy in Wales and in England must learn to be more tolerant of and pleasant with those who are outside the national Church, and must endeavour to reproduce in our island the good feeling prevalent iu the United States." JlEAN HOWELL'S STATEMENT. Dean Howel', writing on January 10th, observes Now that Canon Roberts has stated how any writing of mine came into his hands. I am advised that the whole of the words used by me in the portion of the postscript referred to should be made public. They were these:— He (meaning the Bishop) challenge the memorialists to an open discussion at a meeting of which he is chairman. '.L'he public will surely see the bishop's unfitness for the post. It borders on the grotesque. Besides, to discuss the merits of individuals might be libellous. The memorial itself is the answer to the challenge." I was writing a private letter to a great personal friend not in the affected diocese, and commenting upon a matter of interest, whether the memorialists would attend che Wrexham meeting. I emphatically assert that the words above were never to bear the meaning Archdeacon Wynne Jones has sought to put upon them. 's But the grave charge which the arch. deacon has levelled against me is that I was a "spring of the disturbance." I can only repea.t again my solemn declaration that I have taken no part direct or indirect in the present disturbance or the memorial. I have interfered in no way with affairs in the diocese of St. Asaph, and I challenge any signatory to the ruemcrial to say that I had anything to do with his action. FURTHER RECRIMINATIONS. In a very Wrongly-worded letter (January lvi V Morris, rector cf Llan- elidan, comments upon Canon Robe/iss statement. He insists that be saw the Dean's handwriting and signature, and re- peats that the werds were The Bishop a action was a proof of the Bishop's unfitness for his office." He is confirmed by the Rev? J. S. Jones, vicar of Llantysilio, and Morgan Hughes, rector of Derwen. Canon Roberts (January 11th) adheres to the correctness of his statement. If clergymen were so prone to litigation as laymen, these letters might be expected to produce a plentiful crop of libel actions.

CARNARVON COUNTY PETTY SESSIONS. SATURDAY.—Before Captain Wynn Grif- fith, Issard Davies, Esq., John Hughes, Esq., J. Menzies, Esq., John Davies, Esq., R. Ro berts. E-q G. J. Roberts, Esq., D. P. Wil- liams, Esq and Trevor Hughes, Esq. DRUNKENNESS. — Robert Pritchard, Llanrog, .,ai summoned for being drunk and disorderly, and he was fined 2s 6d and costs. DEFRAUDING THE RAILWAY COM- PANY. Wm, Griffiths, Cambrian House, Penyproes, was summoned for travelling on the London and North-Western Railway to Peoytroes without a ticket on November 12th.—Mr J. Fenna prosecuted.—Mr Morris Hughes, stutionmasfcer at Penygroes, swore that on the 12tb of November, when the 9.5 train arrive(i. be saw a man on the platform goina towards the old bridge. He called out to the man, but got no reply. Witness then crossed over, but failed to see the man, but after searching be saw the defendant hiding bahiud a shrub. Witness asked him for his ticket, an, the. defendant replied that he had come from Pantglas, but witness told him that the train di,i not stop at Pantglas. Then defendant off red to pay from Brynkir, but witness refused to accept the money, and took his nntue and address.—Wm. Williams, stationmas'er, Brynkir, said that ho did not see the defendant enter the train at Brynkir. -C. J. Rogers, a detective on the railway, siid he saw the defendant on the following day, and had a conversation with him, and defendant s..id he had offered to pay.-He was fined 10s and costs. INTERESTING TO RAILWAY TRA- VELLERS—a. D. Pearsoll, civil engineer, IB Willow road, Hampstead, London, was Bu'mmoned by the London and North-West- ern Railway Company for interfering with the comfort of passengers on November 29th. Mr Fenna prosecuted, and Mr H. Lloyd Carter defended.—The case was an interesting one inasmuch as the' question arose as to whether one man in a carriage had a right to control the window of a com- partment.-The defendant was the first to enter a comp-irtroent in the 9.15 a.m. train from Bangor on the day in queftion, and having placed his rug and paper on the seat open the door and the windows, and when other passengers came in, it being a bitterly cold though a clear and fine morning, they desired that the wiudow should be closed. The defendant, however, insisted in keeping it open, and after passing Carnarvon a scuffle took place between him and another passenger named Manby, which resulted in the matter being reported to the guard at Dinas Station.- Evan Thomas Griffiths, a draper's assistant, Dean-street, Bangor, said that be was a passeuger in the train on the 29th November. The defendant was in. Defendant faced the engine, and witness had his back to the engine. It was a very cold morning, and he tried to close the window, and the defend- aut resisted, saying "You are not going to close the window on such a lovely morning to shut out the fine fresh air. At Menai Bridge other gentlemen came in, but defend- ant refused to let them close the window. All the passengers wished to have the window up, and there were seven altogether. At Carnarvon Mr Manby came in. The window was closed going through the Car- narvon tunnel, bnt as soon as they went through he op ned it again. Mr Manby said he was suffering from a cold, and said he would likt-j to have it closed. Defendant again refused to close it, and then Mr Manby caught hold of the strap and attempted to close the window, but defeadant resisted, and talsing off his spectacles said, "If it is fight you want I can do that too." Defend- ant was going to strike the other man, but witness stopped him, and when the train arrived at Uiuas he called the guard.—Cross- examined Mr Manby did not speak rudely. I The (.nly complain made to the guard was that defe-dant assaulted Manby. — Mr Metjzies asked if there was any custom with regard to the windows—Mr Fenna said there was no rule.—Mr Issard Davies But is it not a custom that the man who has his face to the engine has more control over the window than those who have their back to the engine ? — Mr Fenna: It generally depends upon the passengers' courtesy to- wards each other. It is a custom generally observed by passengers that the gentleman I using the corner seat facing the engine has the choice of opening the window. There is no bye-law >- bout it.—John A. Peters, com- mercial traveller, Bangor, corroborated, and said that his comfort as a passenger was in- terfered with. He had to move because of the draft. William Rolfes gave similar evidence, and said that he did not enjoy the ¡ fresh air very much that morning (laughter). —John Jones, the guard of the train, said that a complaint was made to him at Dinas ) Station by Mr Manby, who told him that the defendant bad assaulted him, and that he d^ v (1 witness to take the names and; au»-itessv8 of the gentlemen and the I witnesses—Mr Carfer, in addressing the Bench, contended that there was no bye- law which dealt with the opening and closing of the window, and as far as that in- terference went it simply amounted to the result of the scuffle between defendant and the man Manby. Had that man not come into she compartment and insisted by force that the window should be closed, the pro- bability is that they would have heard nothing of tne case. However, this man came into the compartment, and in spite of defendant's contention that he wished to have the window open, caught hold of the strap, and by brute force closed the window. The charge, if there was a charge at all, ought to be that of assaulting Manby, but that man had not tbought it worth while attending, though the defendant had come I all the way from Loudon to fight the matter out. In that case the Bench should discard the testimony relating to the alleged assault and confine themselves to what happened between the defendant and the other passengers, not one of whom complained. The defendant suffered from an affection of the chest, and it was necessary for him to have as much fresh air as possible, and con- sequently he had kept open the window, as he had every right to do. With regard to the complaint made by Manby that he was suffering from a cold he (Mr Carter) had been instructed to say that the defendant fcever heard him say so.—The Bench retired to consider their decision, and imposed a fine of 10s and costs. I BREACH OF THE FACTORIES ACT. Mr Augustus Lewis, Swansea, H.M. s io- spector of factories, summoned Messrs Lake I and Co. for four breaches of the Factories j t-—-Mr J• T. Roberts defended.—Mr Lewis explained that the charges were (1) neglect- ing to fix an abstract of the Act in their works at the Peblig Mills Woollen Factory; (2) neglecting, under section 5 of the Act, to neglecting, under section 5 of the Act, to the mill gearing, and (3 and 4) of em- ^W0 .b°ys under the age of 16 years +. out having presented them forexamina- T?°ik i a Eae 'ical gentleman.—Mr J. T. «berts held that the factory was not yet in tn» l order, and was in course of struc- J* alterations. Technically, of course, thofr ■ + co.m fitted an [offence, but it was Wwo ^ntention as soon as the alterations fonnprl anc* the mill properly trans- was npppR« a actory have registered it as manarin?S\ As a matter °< th° of tr. asked the inspector milht X, ,ae ia order that he onpht tn i,A fi suggestions as to what jjjhw-"ijwof teen carried ont—Thl^S?" had.,I10i; SSSEi each offence.—David°Robert2, ^ontnewvd^ was also summoned for neglecting to fence a water ^heel at his mill. He admitted the j offence, and was fined 5s and costs.

I BANGOR PETTY SESSIONS. TUESDAY.—Before Alderman Thomas Lewis, J. B. Roberts, Esq., M.P., H. Clegg, Esq., J. E. Roberts, Esq., John Hughes, Esq., W. Edwards, Esq., W. Pughe, Esq., T. Roberts, Esq., and R. Hughes, Esq. A JEALOUS HUSBAND AND HIS WIFE.—Mary Thompson, Bethesda, sum- moned her husband, Robert Thompson, on a charge of persistent cruelty.—Mr S. R. Dew appeared for the wife, and Mr Twigge Ellis for the defendant.—The complainant, in the course of her evidence, said she was married in December, 1888, but since then he had abused her, and lately, threatened to kill her. On the izth November, he charged her with unchastity, and threatened to kill her un ess she confessed. She said she had nothing to confess, and he reached a reaping hook from the ceiling. She ran out of the house and stopped in the policeman's house that night and for two or three subsequent daYA. On the followina Wednesday, she met her hus- band at MrOTwigge Ellis s office, where he promised to behave better m future but when she went back to live with him be^an to curse and swear, and she was obliged to leave him again. For about a month before she finally left him he kept her without money, and was continually threatening to kill her^-Cross-examined by Mr Twinge Ellis: He took care not to strike her, but he often threatened her. He had squeezed her in the door on one occasion. Some months he used to keep all his wageo and pay the shop himself. It was not true that she lived happily with her husband be- fore a man came there to lodge, and she denied any charges of unfaithfulness. She left her husband in December and took some of her things with her. She had gone away to Amlwch with the lodger, and stopped there from Saturday to Monday, but had never been alone with him. He had not been to see her at Aber since she had left her husband.—Re-examined Her husband had threatened to throw her out of the bed- room window.—Robert Tudor Roberts,, the lodger referred to, swore that nothing im- proper had ever taken place between him and the defendant's wife. He never saw the husband cruel to her, but often heard the man cursing and swearing, and the woman moaning and sighing. On the 12th of Nov- ember, he came home to breakfast. Thomp- son came in and went out again. Then Mrs Thompson came to the room where he was, trembling with fear. She refused to tell the witness what she was afraid of. In the even- ing, of the same day, he heard the little girl crying and saying that her father was going to kill her mother. After the wife left, wit- ness noticed the defendant keeping the reap- ing hook by the side of the fire and close to the chair.—Cross-examined He had a wife living in Anglesey, and he was obliged to go about the country to find work.-P.C. Hugh Thomas gave evidence to the effect that he often received complaints from the wife that her husband was cruel to her. On the 12th of November, the wife stopped at the witness's house, because she was afraid to go back.—Mr Twigge Ellis contended that there had been no cruelty, at any rate there had been no legal cruelty, no ill-treatment or bodily injury.-Robert Thompson, the de- fendant, then entered the box, and swore that up to November last he had lived hap- pily with his wife. His suspicions were aroused when his wife went away in company with the lodger to Amlwch. He also found two bottles of rum hid in the house, and when he asked his wife about it she said it was some medicine which Roberts used to take. He was also suspicious because Ro- berts stayed down with his wife after he (defendant) went to bed, and these suspicions were confirmed later when he came home suddenly, and unexpectedly, one morning. He had a row with his wife and ordered her to send the man away, and asked her to confess, but she would not reply to him. He did not threaten to kill his wife, and simply reached for the bill-hook, in order to go to the wood and cut birch. On one occasion, when he stopped up late, Roberts started to go to bed, and his wife said to him "Won t you stay for a smoke, Roberts?™ That, of course, made him suspicious. He used to give her all his money. During the strike he used to get £ 2 a month from the fund, and he had B17 saved besides.—Cross-ex amined He did not try to stop his wife go- ing away with Roberts; and he did not like to turn him out of the house, because he did not wish to have a bother. He did not curse and swear at his wife, and he could not see why she went to complain to the police.—Margaret Jones, next door neigh- bour of the Thompson's, swore that so far as she knew they had always lived happily until now. They appeared more happy than any man and wife living near by. She did not think Thompson swore more than any man, and Mrs Thompson never complained to her that Thompson was cruel to her.- Evan Evans said he was on the Aber-road last week. He had been to chapel, and m he went along the road, he met the mas Roberts, coming from the direction of Aber, He was certain of the man. — Cross-ex- amined He did not speak to the man.- The Bench retired to consider their decision, and on returning the Chairman said tlhat, after taking the whole of the evidence into consideration, they did not think there was sufficient evidence to prove persistently cruelty, and, therefore, the case would be dismissed. They also desired to say that possibly Thomp- son had been over-jealous of his wife and imagined things about her. They, therefore, expressed a strong recommendation if it was possible for the two to live together as be- fore.—Mr Twigge Ellis said he would try his best to bring about this desirable state of things. BREACH OF THE FACTORIES ACTS. -Mr Augustus Lewis, H.M. Inspector of Factories, summoned John William Roberts, draper, High-street, Bangor, for a breach of the Factories Acts.—John Hillditch, inspec- tor, gave evidence to the effect that when he visited the premises at 9.15 p.m., one even- ing, he saw two girls, named Annie Jones and Annie Williams, at work. Defendant had not given notice that he intended to work overtime, nor had he made a record of the fact on the overtime register.-He was fined 10s and costs in each case. TRANSFERS.-The license of the Glan- adda Inn was transferred to Mr E. D. Tho- mas, and that of the Bardsey Island Inn to Mrs Jane Jones. AS? £ 2LTING HIS WIFE.—Mary Tho- mas, Ivymn-square, summoned her husband, Wilham Thomas, for assault. She said that on the 3rd of January he struck her, because she had not darned his stockings, and when she ran out into the street he followed her and struck her again.—He was sent to prison for a month. CHIMNEY FIRING.-Fcr allowing his chimney to take fire, D. G. Roberts, Baneor was fined Is and costs. ASSAULTING THE POLICE. Peter Williams was summoned for assaulting P 0 22. The officer said he was called to the defendant's house, in Garden-square, where he was making a row, and when he entered the house he saw him standing on the bed. The officer tried to keep him quiet but the man struck him and held him to the floor. P C 58 came to the rescue, and the man was taken to the cell.-He was fined 10s and costs for the assault, and 5s and costs for I being drunk. DRUNKENNESS.—Robert Jones, Beth- esda, was fined 5s and costs for drunkenness and for similar offences Catherine Collins was ordered to pay the costs. John Clarke, a tramp, was fined 5s; William I nomas, Kyffin-square, 10s and costs Joseph Davies, Kyffin-square, 2s 6d and costs; Robert Hughes, 2s 6d and costs Osborne Williams, 5s and costs; William Roberts, Bethesda, 2s 6d and costs; John Jones, Bethesda, 2s 6d and costs; John Hughes, Bethesda, 2s 6d and costs; Moses Williams, 5s and costs and William Pierce, Caellwyngrydd, 5s and costs. THREE YEARS' FOR A THREE- PENNY BIT.-J eremiah Davies, Cilfodan- street, Bethesda, was charged with stealing threepence on the first of January, the pro- perty of Robert Jones, a servant in the Douglas Arms Hotel.-P.C. Thomas (40) said that Robert Jones gave Davies tnreepence to fetch tobacco, but he bought oranges with it, and never bought the tobacco.—Previous convictions having been proven, the defend- ant was sent to a reformatory for three years. AN UNHAPPY COUPLE.-Alice Wil- liams applied for a separation order against James William^, Well-street, Bangor, for cruelty. Mr Howell Evans, who appeared on behalf of the applicant, stated that the parties had been married 16 years. Until re- cently they had lived peaceably together. The defendant commenced to abuse her about six months ago, at which time her father died. She then left him and went to Hirael to stay for two weeks. He then came to visit her in company of two ministers, and he promised that he would not give way to drink. On receiving that assurance she went back to live with him. He soon broke his promise, and on several occasions ill-treated her, once by pulling her by the hair round the room. On behalf of the defendant, for whom Mr Twigge Ellis appeared, it was stated that the cruelties which she complained of were only family quarrels. It was also stated that the defendant came home one night and there was no fire nor food in the house, and that started him to drink. She also annoyed him by not helping him at a tripe shop which he kept in High-street. The Bench unanimously decided to grant an order for a certain amount a week, and the mother to have the custody of the children. NOT BONA-FIDE.—Richard Roberts and William Edwards, both of Llanfairfechan, were charged with having, on the 2nd inst., represented themselves as bona-fide travellers and obtained drink at the Bulkeley Arms Hotel, Aber. It was stated that they repre- sented themselves having come from Beth- esda, and made a false entry in a book at the hotel. They were each fined 20s and costs.—A warrant was also issued against Hugh Roberts, of Llanfairfechan, for a like offence.

DENBIGHSHIRE QUARTER SESSIONS. The Quarter Sessions for Denbighshire were held on Friday, at Ruthin, before Capt. B. T. Griffith-Boscawen (chairman), Colonel Mesham (vice-chairman), and other justices. Mr W. Davies, Llysfasi, was the foreman of the grand jury. CHARGE TO THE GRAND JURY. In his charge the Chairman pointed out that there was a small decrease in the num- ber of cases in the calendar. He had re- ceived an advance copy of the chief-con- stable's report on the state of crime in the county during 1897, which would be laid before the joint police committee the follow- ing week. This indicated a small decrease in indictable offences, and an increase in non-indictable offences, due to the greater number proceeded against for drunkenness. Last year 969 persons were proceeded against for drunkenness, including 112 for Sunday drinking, as against 899 and 85 re- spectively. The law as to drunkenness was strictly observed by the police in the county of Denbigh, and it might be that this in- crease was due to increased strictness dur- ing the past year. He thought they might congratulate themselves upon the fact that the county had maintained its good reputa- tion for practical immunity from serious crime. COUNTY BUSINESS. The court proceeded to appoint fire justices as the visiting committee of Ruthin Gaol.—Mr A. O. Walker moved that the retiring justices be re-elected—namely, Col. W. Cornwallis-West, Chancellor Bulkeley- Jones, -)Ir G. H. Denton, Captain F. B. O. Cole, and Mr G. Blezard.—Mr J. W. Lum- ley urged that the practice of re-electing the visitors to the prison ought to be abandoned, and that there were sound reasons why this appointment should not be virtually regarded as a life one. He moved that Captain Wynne Edwards (Denbigh) and Mr R. D. Roberts (Corwen) be elected in place of the .two first retiring visitors.—Mr Owen Wil- liams seconded. -Captain Wynne Edwards declined to act.—Mr Dodd then moved that Mr Lumley's name be substituted for that of Captain Wynne Edwards.-The retiring members were re-elected by a large majority. —Colonel Heaton moved that the following be the representatives of the court on the standing joint committee of the county for the next three years.—Captain Griffith- Boscawen, Mr W. D. W. Griffith, Sir W. G. Williams, Sir R. E. Egerton, Captain Best, Mr A. O. Walker, Colonel A. Mesham, Captain F. B. O. Cole, Mr J. Briscoe, Mr W. S. Gregson-Ellis, Mr J. B. Burton, and Mr T. P. Jones-Parry.—Mr A. Hogan se- conded.—Mr W. G. Dodd moved that Mr Edward Hooson's name be substituted for that of Mr Jones-Parry.—This was seconded by Dr Medwyn Hughes, but on a vote being taken the original list was carried by a con- siderable majority.—A statement was sub- mitted to the court in favour of the forma- tion of Colwyn Bay and Llysfaen and the township of Eirias into a separate petty sessional division. The court decided that the notices shall be duly published and considered at the next sessions.—The court passed a resolution in favour of flogging be- ing inflicted in cases of assaults on women and children.—On the application of Mr 8. Moss, M.P., an order was made to divert a highway near Plas Newydd, Llangollen, the advantage of the diversion being a better gradient and the avoidance of a dispute as to the public dedication of the road. TRIAL OF PRISONERS. Thomas Williams, 37 years of age, was found guilty of attempting to take his life at Wrexham on November 30th. Mr R. V. Bankes prosecuted.-The Chairman, in send- ing the prisoner to gaol for seven days, said drink was undoubtedly the cause of his pre- sent trouble, and he recommended Williams, on coming out of prison, to make a vow not to touch intoxicants again. Evan Pritchard, 16 years of age, farm labourer, was indicted for an assault upon Margaret Jones, under 12 years of age, at Llangerniew, on November 9th.—Mr E. J. Griffith, M.P. (instructed by Mr E. Davies Jones, Llanrwst), prosecuted, and Mr S. Moss, M.P. (instructed by Messrs David Jones and Roberts, Llanrwst), defended.- He was sent to six weeks' hard labour. Robert Samuel Williams was convicted on two indictments of embezzlement at Wrex- ham. As agent of the New Era People's Friendly Society, of Bristol, he collected premiums on policies, and failed to account for them. Mr Moss, M.P., prosecuted, and after the prisoner's conviction said that the society now knew of over JB60 which had been misappropriated by the prisoner. The frauds were discovered owing to numerous applications being received, of which they knew nothing, and in one case civil pro- ceedings were started against them. — The prisoner admitted two previous convictions for obtaining money by false pretences. He was sentenced to 18 months' hard labour.