Rhyl Journal

DELICIOUS MAZAWATTEE TEAS. DELICIOUS MAZAWATTEE TEAS. DELICIOUS MAZAWATTEE TEAS. DELICIOUS MAZAWATTEE TEAS. In sealed packets and tins only. 1/6 to 4/- per lb. Of LeadinL, Grocers Everywhere.

Father Blount on the Roman Church. TO THE EDITOR OF THE RHYL JOURNAL. SIR,-Having already weighed St Mark's gospel in respect of St Peter's gifts and privileges, and found it wanting and taking no notice of them, even when you would most expect it, we can proceed to the other gospels. In St Matthew, e.g. just before the bestowal of the power of binding and loosing in Ch. 18 :18 equally on all the apostles, the question of precedence of one apostle above the others arises and is answered in terms most inconsistent with the Romanist idea,—that one was to be chief Our Lord puts all the apostles on the same level "Verily I say unto you, ye (not S. Peter only) which have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit in the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." (St Matthew xix. 28). The text has a further bearing on the question, as establishing that Christ's grants are conditional and forfeitable as in the case of Judas. So again, in the case of the mother of Zebedee's children, S. James and S. John, our Lord assures her, that not one of the apostles should be Lord and master over the others. "It shall not be so among you (St Mat. xx. 26). St Luke tells us the very same warning-" The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. Bu t ye shall not be so." After supper He says, still marking their perfect equality, I am the vine, ye are the branches," So the last utterances of our Lord place the apostles on the same level, Go ye, therefore and baptise, &c." As the Father hath sent me, so send I you. Nowhere is St Peter set up to be the chief head. That the apostles were to have a guiding head, is certain, as Christ had promised again and again but who was he to be ? No man,; but the Holy Ghost, who was to take His place and teach them all things." I will pray the Father, and He shall give you another comforter, that He may abide with you for ever; even the spirit of truth, &c." (St. John xiv. 16). The visible coming I of the Holy Ghost was the installation of the Vicar of Christ, as so often promised. There is none other referred to in the Old or New Testament. Your space, I fear, will not allow me to quote more examples to the same effect, where Christ puts his Apostles, all on the same level. But we have some actions of our Lord (as it is said) pointing to a direct personal distinction conferred on St Peter. 1, S Peter's name stands first on the Apostolic list and thus points to a priority. Answer, the Gospels note undoubtedly that S. Peter was first called, but that does nor, raise him to any other priority than that of the call and nothing more. The other apostles apparently consider it so, as their lists vary in various places. -1 Now this I say that every one of you saith 'I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas." Whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas." When James, Cephas, and John." These lists point out to no priority of rank and without doubt the first two anathamatizes every one that follows St Peter as chief head Let the Papists lay this to heart. This answer is sufficient in a plain way. 2 But St Peter is chosen as a companion and a witness to Christ on three important occasions. Answer, So S. James and S John share the distinc- tion. 3 St Peter is directed to pay the tribute money for Christ and himself, and is especially coupled with Christ. Answer, Christ at this mo- ment, when the tax collectors came and demanded it of St Peter, was a guest of Peter, and naturally our Lord rewarded him for entertaining him at his house with the means to pay the tax for them both. 4 St Peter is sent to prepare the upper chamber for the Passover. Answer, So also is St John therefore St Peter has no special privileges conferred on him. From these examples and others that could be mentioned, but much weaker examples, I conclude that our Lord conferred no especial personal privi- lege on St Peter apart from the other apostles. But what says the Acts ? I, It was St Peter that proposed the filling up of the place of the traitor Judas. Answer, Yes, but if St Peter was the head of all, why did he not himself fill it at once, with- out any such proposal ? Why did he consult the other apostles, who evidently had as large a voice in the matter as himself ? This fact alone con- demns the claim set up for St Peter. 2 That he preached the first sermon on the Day of Pentecost. Answer, Yes, but not by himself, as prince and lord of all, for the other apostles join. "But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice." Therefore this gave no special privilege to St Peter for all were joined in the great work of that day. 3 St Peter works the first miracle on the lame man at the Temple Gate. Answer, Yes, but St John had a share in it. 4 He passes judgment on Ana- nias and Sapphira. Answer, This sentence has nothing peculiar about it. He evidently as the first apostle whose attention was fixed on the dis- honesty and lying of the two, pronounced the aw- ful judgment. St Paul did the very same thing, both in kind and degree, when he smote Elymas the sorcerer with blindness; or when he delivered Hymenceus and Alexander unto Satan or as in the case of the incestuous Corinthian, &c.—5, He is spokesman before the Sanhedrim. Answer, Yes, but not by himself, other apostles wert: joined with him. 6, He admitted the first Gentile converts to the Church. Answer, Yes, but he knew his responsibility as indicated in the question, Who can forbid water, &c," And he had, according to the Gh ii. to justify his conduct before the other apostles (see v. 4-18). This fact again completely does away with any claim to the privileges of S Peter.—7, S Peter argues in the Council of Jerusalem for the relaxation of the law of Gentile Christians. Answer, Yes, but it is in the second and lower place, not in the first place. S James, Bishop of Jerusalem, holds and stands in the first place no special privilege here. 8. S Paul goes up to Jerusalem to consult S Peter. Answer, Yes, but if (as Papists says) St Peter was bishop of Rome at this time why S Paul did not go to Rome, not to Jerusalem, has often been my my wonder, but besides we are told that there were others presen there of equal authority and jurisdiction "save James, the Lord's brother, and fourteen years afterwards he went up to see and consult the pillars of the Church, viz.: James Cephas, and John." Thus we have gone over the facts in which S Peter according the Acts is concerned in in those early years of the church, and we have seen that not one of them establishes the claim of S Peter to jurisdiction, rather they destroy hopelessly all grounds of claim to any such jurisdiction or primacy. We must leave the Acts but I would go more fully into them, as well as the epistles of S Peter, S James and S Jude, if you will allow me all the columns—including all the advertisement columns, of your Journal for the next two years or so, but I spare your paper, your readers, and yourself. What then does S Paul say of S Peter ? S Paul no more than any other apostle ever acknowledged any supremacy, power or priority in any point over the other apostles. In a word S Pauls testi- mony goes directly against all such supremacy and priority.—1, To follow S Peter as head or chief is to create schism in the Church, 1 Cor. i, 10-13, iii, 21-23. 5, He asserts most plainly that the Gospel of Circumcision was committed to S Peter and that the Gospel of the uncircumcision to himself as equally an apostle of the Gentiles, Gal. ii, 7-10. 3, So far from acknowledging the supremacy and infallibility of S Peter, he with- stood him to the face, for he was to be blamed, Gal ii, 11-14. In short, throughout S Paul's epistles there is not one word hinting at any special privilege, juris- diction or priority belonging to S Peter. S Paul says nothing of Rome being the head or the mother church of Christendom. But the Revelation of S John ch. xvii and xviii, gives an awful prophecy, which many writers apply to Rome, "as the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth." Many Romanist writers, indeed, confess as much. Thus from this brief review the New Testament gives S Peter no special privilege or priority above the other apostles. S Paul's witness is altogether against it, and St John's witness is that Rome will hereafter be the Mother of all abomination. of the earth," alas alas The privileges and priority of S Peter is simply a Popish, baseless fiction. A.C. [This correspondence is now closed.—ED.]

I ST. ASAPH COUNTY COURT. This Court was held on Friday, before His Honour Sir Horatio Lloyd and Mr Registrar Oliver George. An Injunction against Trespass in an Hotel. After the judgment summons had been disposed of, Mr J. Wallis Davies mentioned the case of Mrs Bates, of the Mostyn Hotel, Rhyl, against her son Joseph Bates, in which an injunction was asked to restrain the defendant from trespassing on his mother's premises. Mr Davies said he bad hoped at the last moment to have settled the matter, as it was a very sad ease. Although he did not caie to mention the facts, he was prepared, on the instructions of his client, to submit to an order for an injunction on the conditions that tho defendant should have returned to him all his goods and certificates.—Mr F. J. Gamlin (who ap- peared for Mrs Bates): What are they ?—Defend- ant Clothes, engineering books of all descrip- tion, andmy certificates as a mining engineer.—Mr Gamlin said that was opening up a very wide field. The plaintiff had already deposited the de- fendant's boxes, containing his clothes, in the en- trance hall of the hotel, but he had refused to remove them, allowing them to remain. At the last court an interim injunction was made against the defendant for contempt. He was prepared to waive that, provided the defendant would go into the box and consent to a perpetual order being made. But if the defendant was permitted to go on the premises of the Mostyn Hotel for his boxes, his books, and certificates, which defendant al- leged were in the possession of the plaintiff, the injunction would be practically nugatory.—Mr Wallis Davies replied thad he had impressed on the defendant the seriousness of his conduct, and he thought the defendant realised his position.— Mr Gamlin We will undertake to deposit all his belongings at the County Court Office at Rhyl.— His Honour I don't think that I can make the County Court Office a warehouse for stores of that kind (laughter). Are there any outbuildings where they can be deposited ? (laughter).—Mr Gamlin They can be put in my office, if you like. I don't want him to go near the hotel.—Mr Wallis Davies It is a licensed premises, and he has been advised that he has a right to go there.—His Honour I don't care whether it is licensed pre- mises or not. If I order him not to go there he is not to go.—Mr Wallis Davies: He has been told that as one of the public he has a perfect right to go there.—His Honour: Not after I have made my order. If he does I shall know what to do with him.—Mr Wallis Davies: I don't wish to argue the question with your honour.—His Honour: There is no argument about it. If I make an order he will have to obey it, whether it I is licensed premises or not. If he does not he will have to go to prison.—Mr Wallis Davies I would suggest then that the boxes be taken to the Police Station—His Honour In tho absence of the police-officer I cannot order that. Why not deposit them at Mr Gamlin's office?—Mr Wallis Davies Very well, we will arrange that that shall be done.—His Honour: Then all the goods are to be removed to Mr Gamlin's office, and I grant a perpetual injunction to restain the defendant from going on the premises. If anything which the defendant claims as belonging to him is not handed over, he can get it in the ordinary way.— Mr Gamlin The action nominally is for £10 damages for trespass, but we simply want him off the premises. It is only fair to tell your honour that since the interim injunction was granted— last Monday in fact—the defendant went upon the premises and was very quarrelsome and dis- orderly. He assaulted one of the daughters, and the police bad to he sent for.—Defendant (ex- citedly) Was not the police applied for before, and did they not accompany me to the house ? And did you not take your glasses off to fight me ? (laughter).—His Honour That is enough. You goods will be removed from your mother's house to Mr Gamlin's office to-morrow, and you can have them from there.— Defendant: That will do me.—His Honour I now make the injunction perpetual. You are to stay away from your mother's house. If you don't obey that order you are liable to be committed. The Merrie Men and the Song Books. Mr R Bromley asked his Honour to deal with the case in which Mr Tom Wood, of Rhyl, was the defendant in an action brought by Mr E Sykes, one of Mr Wood's minstrel troupe at Rhyl last season. He understood that Mr Watkin Parry had been instructed to appear for the plaintiff. He asked permission to mention the case then as Mr Wood had been obliged to abandon his morning performance at Rhyl that day in order to attend with bis witnesses. The claim was made by Mr Edward Sykes for money alleged to be duo from the defendant as a share of the prufits on the sale of a certain song book. He (Mr Bromley) had applied to the plaintiff for particulars of claim, but none had been delivered. As he had anticipated,!the plaintiff did not appear, and Mr Parry bad that day informed him that the plaintiff would not attend, as he was at Aberystwyth. He therefore &pplied on behalf of the defendant to have the case struck out with costs.—His Honour agreed to this course. In the hands of Money Lenders. Septimus Sherrett, Glan-y-morfa, Bagillt, ap- plied for an administration order, his debts being scheduled at £45 7s. lOd. The applicant stated that he had suffered from long continued illness and that he had borrowed money at the rate of 270 per cent with which to meet the expenses of his illness and assist in keeping his mother and two sisters.—The application was opposed by William Maitland, described as a financier, of 22, Chapel-street, Liverpool, on the grounds that the debts of the applicant exceeded £,50. The applicant, he said, had only scheduled him at j69, whereas there was JE4 16s 5d due for interest; that would bring the total to over ^50.—His Honour: Nearly £5 for borrowing JE9. I shall not allow that interest, nor say that the debts are over £50 if that is the only ground. I notice that nearly all these debts are owing to money lenders.—Applicant: I commenced with the man in 1890.—Mr Maitland: That is not so; it is about three years since he commenced with me. He got some money and paid it back again, and then borrowed some more which he has not paid back.—In reply to his Honour, the applicant stated that he was not doing anything now.—Mr Maitland When a man has no income I submit you cannot make an order of administration. The Liverpool Judges never make an order in such cases.—His Honour It will be time enough to enforce'it when he fails to comply with it. I am not going to suppose because he is impecunious to-day he is going to be impecunious all the days of his life.—Mr Maitland: But if he has no money he can't pay.—His Honour: I am not going to make him pay on the spot. I am going to mak9 an order for payment of so much a month; unless you can show that he has got into debt by gambling and improper practices, and not through bonafide misfortune? Are you prepared to say that be has not been ill ?—Mr Maitland: I have never heard of his being ill before.—His Honour: He also attributes his indebtness to having to borrow money at 270 per cent.—Mr Maitland Never from me.—His Honour It looks very much like it.—Mr Mait- land It is not a quarter of 270 per cent.—His Honour On the face of it it is pretty stiff. He borrows JE9, and you charge him JE5 interest.— Mr Maitland It was to defeat this application. —His Honour It is your business to get as much as you can, I know that.—Mr Maitland said there were debts owing by the applicant which bad not been scheduled.—His Honour replied that it was for the creditors to come there to prove that. He could not accept the statement from a third party.—In reply to Mr Maitland, the applicant said he had been engaged as a clerk I at the Liverpool County Court at a salary of JE75 per annum. He had never said that he was getting £100 per year.—His Honour said he had a medical certificate in which it was stated that the applicant had been ill for some time, suffering from a weak heart, and advising him to take a situation where he could get plenty of fresh air. There was also a letter from Mr Ballinger, Registrar of the Liverpool County Court, in which he said that he was sorry the applicant had had to resign his position, and offering to assist him in obtaining another situation. He (the judge) had decider to reduce the applicant's debts to 10s in the and to order the amount to be paid by instalments of 10s per month.—Mr Maitland: Does that include my interest?— His Honoui: N<, your debt will stand at £9, and you will get half of that (laughter). Extraordinary Defence to a Servant's Wages Claim. Mr and Mrs J '^Williams, John Street, Rhyl, were sued by Elledwards, a nurse, for the sum of JE8 5s, being due for services rendered as nurse from 28th ber, 1893, to June, 1894. n, Mr Gamlin appeared for the plaintiff, and said t Mrs Williams had kept the poor girl without her I wages for a long time, and when she left them she owed her £8 5s, out of a salary of £12 a-year. Mrs Williams now pleaded as a special defence that she was a married woman, while Mr Wil- liams contended that he was a bankrupt. He (Mr Gamlin) did not know when Mr Williams had been made a bankrupt, but he thought it must have been before the debt was incurred, so that it would not be a proveable one.—Plaintiff was called, and said the defendant was an absconding bankrupt, and would not obey the order of the court. There was great difficulty in serving him for his public examination.— Defendant: I must object to this, as it has something to do with proceedings in the High Court.—His Honour: And I overrule your ob- jection.—Defendant: Why import any barkruptcy matter into the case?—His Honour You brought it in yourself. You say you are a bankrupt, and want to get out of payment on that ground.— Plaintiff was cross-examined by the defendant, and said she had lived in Rbyl all her life. Previously to entering the defendant's service she knew Mrs Williams and her family. Mrs Williams engaged her in 1892, and she looked to her for her wages.—Defendant: Then why do you sue me? —His Honour: She has aban- doned the wife and brought the action against yon (laughter).—Cross-examined: I saw Mr Williams after entering Mrs Williams' service.— Defendant: Did yon know a clerk in the employ of Mr Gamlin, named Whittingham P-Witness I knew him, but never spoke to him.—His Honour What is the object of this ? Is she not to have her wages because she spoke to a young man ?—Defendant: If you will allow me to pro- ceed I will show the relevancy of the question.— No, I will not allow her character to be attacked in this way (applause).—In reply to Mr Gamlin, plaintiff said Mr Whittingham had an order for the arrest of the defendant. He arrested him, and was appointed by the London Court of Bank- ruptcy as a special bailiff to convey him to London.—Defendant: I should be pleased to submit these papers to your Honour, and they would reveal a state of things that would astonish you. I do not see that this matter is any concern of mine. — His Honour Yea, she was engaged by your wife to look after your children. The wife is presumably your agent, and you must pay.—Defendant It was well known at Rbyl that I had broken up my establishment.—His Honour You must prove that.—Defendant: She is no servant of mine, and never has been, and Mrs Williams engaged her. She entered Mrs Williams' service in March, 1892, and she left her employ in April, 1893. Mr Gamlin knew very well that I had to go up to London in February, 1893 for my public examination.—His Honour When was the Receiving Order made ? —Defendant: In 1891.-His, Honour: This debt was incurred after that, and was therefore not provable in bankruptcy.—Defendant: I don't know about that your Honour.—His Honour Bat I do (laughter).—Defendant: My public examina- tion took place whilst she was in Mrs Williams' service.—His Honour: That has nothing to do with it. The Receiving Order was made on a certain date, and this debt was incurred long afterwards, and therefore could not possibly be proved by this young woman inyour bankruptcy. The bankruptcy plea has gone, but what else have you got ?—Defendant: I have been in the habit of receiving thousands a year—not hundreds. I was the owner of a large brewery at Burton, but I got into the hands of company promoters and lost a fortune. My wife came to Rhyl out of the hurry and worry of the crash.—Mr Gamlin You married from Rhyl. She was a Rhyl lady ? —Defendant: You did not treat her as a lady, but held her up to public odium.—His Honour give judgment for plaintiff for £7 12s 6d, and refused to make an order for payment by instalments. A Hint to Lodging-house Keepers, Mr Hall, of Ruabon, sued Mrs M A Evans, of 12, Queen Street, Rhyl, for £2 10s money paid to her to release his luggage. Mr Richard Bromley appeared for defendant. It appears that the plaintiff sent a letter addressed Mrs Evans, 30, Queen Street, Rbyl," and as there was no person of that name at 30 Queen Street, the letter was deliverad to the nearest Mrs Evans (the defen- dant), who opened the letter and replied to it, with the result that the plaintiff engaged apart- ments at her house for two weeks at £2 10s per week, and sent her several letters addressed to No. 12, Queen Street, and ultimately sent his luggage. But having found out that she was not the person with whom he intended staying he paid her £210s and went elsewhere, and now sought to recover the £2 10s. The defendant obtained judgment with costs. Claim for Sent. Mr F Fisher Jones sued the defendant Robert Davies, of Plas Coch, Towyn, to recover £5. being quarter's rent due 1st of May. Mr Richard Bromley appeared for the plaintiff and Mr W W Parry for the defendant.—Mr Parry applied for an adjournment of the case to the next Court, which was granted subject to the defendant paying the costs of the day. Claim for Valuation. Messrs J E Roberts and Co., Auctioneers, Rhyl, sued Mr Charles Adie, of Old Colwyn, for £6 6s. for valuation of property. Mr Richard Bromley appeared for plaintiffs. Defendant wished the case adjourned to the next Court, but Mr Bromley objected, and judgment was entered for plaintiffs with costs. A Rhyl Ladies' School Dispute, Miss Jane Cormack, governess, now residing at 19, Water Street, Rhyl, sued Miss Trousdell, and Miss B Trou-del), Blenca'.hra, Rhyl, for the recovery of £ OO damages for wrongful dismissal. Mr J Pierce L'wia appeared for the plaintiff and Mr F J Gamlin for the defendant. In the course of his opening address, Mr J Pierce Lewis said the plaintiff, after being with the defendants for a short time, received a letter from Messrs Gamlin, Williams & Co., in which it was stated that the school was in a state of partial rebellion owing to plaintiff's intolerant- treatment of the scholars, and therefore gave her notice to terminate her engagement at once, offering her jE8 6s 8d. halE a-term's salary, pro- vided she would leave the following Saturday. Plaintiff declined those terms, and was subse- quently removed from the house by force. Plaintiff said she had upwards of 10 years' experience as a governess in first class young ladies' schools, and was an accomplished teicher. In Mny last she agreed with the defendants to enter their establishment as a resident English governess, at a salary of £.50 per annum, board and laundress. During the negotiations which precceded the engagement, the defendants told her by letter that they required a governess who would take a thorough interest in the pupils and entire chaTgof the schoolroom. She entered on her duties on May 7th, and got on all right with her pupils during the first three weeks. In that period she did a lot of extra duty owing to the other governess being away. She did not mind that. She had been instructed by the defendants to be very strict with the pupils, and was requested to see that they were rude to no one, and in particular to a French governess who brought a day pupil to the school. She was directed to make weekly reports of the progress of the scholars, and in the modal one which was shown to her, the late governess reported that a certain number of marks had been lost for conduct. On the 20th of May she was giving the pupil" their Scriptural devotion exercise. While they were going through their colleots they were very noisy, disorderly, and making rude noises as well as laughing at each other. She ordered them to write 100 lines as a punishment, which was usual in high-class, schools; and as they did not desist she iacreased them to 200. Then they stopped. She had first sent them out to Miss Trousdell, as ordered, but they returned and said that they could not find that lady. After dinner she requested the young ladies to proceed to write their lines, when they told her, for the first time, that Miss Trousdell did not approve of their writing lines, and besides it W.1S their afternoon for writing their home-letter, and that after that they were going out to spend the afternoon and evening. Miss Trousdell then entered the room, and said she had heard that the young ladies had lines to write; she did not approve of that sort of punishment, and that if anything occurred they were to be sent to her. Plaintiff replied that that was what she had done, and after she had told Miss Trousdell what had happened, Miss Trousdell did not give the young ladies any punish- ment, but said they were to be sent to her in the future. After Miss Trousdell left, the young ladies were greatly amused at what had happened, and said that it would be great fan for them to relate at the tea table at a certain i person's house that afternoon how their governess had had a slap in the face (laughter). That evening Miss Trousdell told plaintiff that her services would not be required after the end of the term. She was not as defendants had ex- pected, and so there was no necessity to say anything further about it. Plaintiff replied that she had done more than her duty, and more than she had ever done in any previous situation, as she had worked for 13i hours each day during the first fortnight. On the following Sunday she had occasion to remonstrate with three of the young ladies for talking slang to each other, such as Shut up," Hang it," You beast," and "You demon." The French governess com- plained of the young ladies' rudeness. The young ladies spoke slang to each other. His Honour: Terms of endearment, I suppose (laughter). Plaintiff rep'ied that she had never before heard such expressions used in a high-class ladies' school. She had had orders that the young ladies were not to go to the recreation ground alone, and on that day they wont without permission. Sho asked why they had done so, and the young ladies replied that they could go where they liked. His Honour They were trying it on with a new hand (laughter). Plaintiff said that was evidently the case, as they had never done so with former governesses. Subsequently she complained of one of the pupils calling her a beast." Miss Trousdell asked each of the pupils who had used the expression, but they all denied having done so. Miss Trousdell then said to plaintiff You see they all deny it, and I accept their word, and not yours you leave the room." She did so, and the same day she had a letter from Messrs Gamlin, Williams & Co. Two days afterwards Mr Gamlin's clerk called upon her, and at first offered her £2 9s 6d, and then £8 6s 8d, with a request that she should sign a paper to the effect that she had no farther claim on the defendants. Both offers she refused to accept, and at half-past four the same afternoon while engaged packing her boxes, Miss Trousdell asked her if she was prepared to go, as there were two men come to put her out. She declined to go,and thought that before she could be turned out a warrant from a Court of Justice would have to be issued. Soon after that two rough-looking and foul- mouthed men came upstairs to her room and asked for her boxes. She asked for their warrant, and then became frightened, as they were tipsy. She ran to the schoolroom, and afterwards saw the two men carry her boxes downstairs. As they commenced to bully her, she ran into the dining room, but Mrs Lambert, defendants' sister, pushed her out violently, saying You can't come here." That lady also urged the men to put plaintiff into the garden, and the rougher of the two men jaught hold of her and put her out into the pouring rain, where her things were. She had only her indoor costume on at the time, and she begged to be given her hat, jacket, and umbrella. After a great deal of bullying she was given her hat and jacket, and her things were crowded anyhow into band boxes and parcels, and they dropped out or came undone on the way to town. It was with difficulty she obtained shelter, as she knew no one in Rhyl. Her conduct at the school had always been what it should be, and it was not true that she was sharp and resentful to the young Jadis. she was tho opposite. No complaint had been made against her, other than the giving of the notice. She had suffered in consequence of the action of the defendants. Cross-examined It is the invariable custom in high-class schools to .give, a term's notice to leave. She was at Miss Graham's, of Malvern, for one term, but she left because she was required to do things, which were not stipulated for in the engagement. She gave Miss Graham notice several times before that lady accepted it" It was true Miss Trousdell did not, receive a reference from Miss Graham, because the letter was mislaid. She was on very good terms with the pupils, except during the last four days, when all the incidents referred to happened. She denied that the school was in a partial state of rebellion. Defendants had never complained of her having used slang terms. She might have used such an expression, Well, that takes the bun (laughter). She did so when she found that there were scarcely any books at the school for the teaching of grammar. She often used the expression, and certainly did not consider it slang, and there was a material difference belween that and what the young ladies used. She had never told the young ladies that they were common vulgar things, bat she might have said that their con- duct was not that of ladies. She bad never: accused any of them of being liars or dishonest, but she did say that she had lost several things at the house. She denied having made a disa- greeable face at Miss Trousdell when remon- strated with for allowing a child to shout whilst on the sands. She did not refuse to proceed with the lesson unless an apology was forth. coming when Miss Trousdell ordered her to leave the room. She taught in the school after that. She intended going on the Monday, but did .not tell the defendants so. She began to pack on Friday, and told the defendants that she would require all her things before she left. Defen. dants gave her every opportunity to leave. She did not tell one of the men, That's a woman, I'm a lady," referring to Miss Trousdell, although personally she would never take offence at being called a woman. By Mr Pierce Lewis: At first I was willing to take eight weeks' salary, but after defendants' treatment I refused to do so. I never acted rudely towards Miss Trousdell. Miss M P Trousdell was then called, and said she had kept the school in conjunction with her sister for nearly 20 years. She required, a lady who would take an interest in the school. On the first Saturday evening when she was there, plaintiff went to town without her permission, and when she returned she spoke to her about doing so. Plaintiff replied that she had always had her liberty in other places, and that she had always been able to do what she liked, after her school duties were over. On- the following -Saturday evening plaintiff wanted to go out again, saying that she had a letter to post, and witness told her that her letters would be posted if left on the hall table, and that she did not like hpr governesses going out on Saturday evenings. Subsequent to that, she asked plaintiff how the school was getting on, and in a very disagreeable tone plaintiff told her that she had better come md see for herself. Plaintiff was sharp with the children, and when she (witness) spoke to a child about shouting on the sands, she was told that the plaintiff made a very disagreeable face at her. The school was not getting on well under the plaintiff, and she told her so. Witness was told that plaintiff had treated the young ladies very harshly because a tennis net had fallen down while they were in the field. She did not consider that the children looked so well. They were pale, and unwilling to return to their work. With regard to the incident about giving the children lines, she did not at first speak to the plaintiff about it, but handed her a piece of paper on which she had written that she did not approve of that punishment. On May 30th, on entering the schoolroom, she found the plaintiff asking the pupils why they had come thsre without an explanation of their conduct the previous day. Witness thereupon told plaintiff that as she had had an explanation she desired the lesson to proceed. Plaintiff then said Certainly not, when a pupil calls her governess a beast it is time to have an explana- tion." All the pupils denied having heard the word used, and she then told the plaintiff that she was bound to believe the young ladies, as she had not found them untruthful. Plaintiff refused to go on with the lesson, and said if she did so it would only mean the sending of the girls from the room. Witness then said that the plaintiff, and not the girls, should leave the room. She gave plaintiff every opportunity to leave the house, but she declined to do eo. The men tried to persuade her to go, but she declined, and went to the schoolroom and frightened the young ladies. She did not see the plaintiff assaulted. Plaintiff did not mis- pronounce words, but she allowed the children to do so without correcting them. Mr J Pierce Lewis had jast started his cross- examination of the defendant, when the Court rose, and the case stood adjourned until the next Court.

They come as a boon and a blessing to men, The Pickwick, the Owl, and the Waverley Pen." THE SMALL HINDOO PEN is the latest addition to MACNIVEN & CAMERON'S RENOWNED SERIES OF PENS The Points are Oblique Cut, and are in 3 Grades. 6d and Is per box. WAVERLEY WORKS,ENIDBURGH

ANNUAL LICENSING SESSIONS AT RHYL. These sessions were held on Monday at the Town Hall, before Dr Girdlestone (in the chair), Messrs W Wynne, J Y Strachan, 8 Perks, and W Williams. Superintendent's Report. Deputy Chief Constable Hughes reported that there were 50 licensed houses, 35 of which were fully licensed, or one house to each 129 of the inhabitants. One innkeeper bad been proceeded I against for permitting drunkenness, but the case was dismissed. Twenty-two persons had been convicted for drunkenness, being an increase of I eight as compared with those of last year. In reply to the Bench, the Superintendent said that the sanitaiy arrangements were not what they should be in several cases. Mr Alun Lloyd Does that include the West- minster Hotel (a laugh) ? The Chairman thought the police should state what houses were defective. Supt Hughes replied that there was one house in particular. The Chairman suggested that there should be a report by the next meeting on the houses. Mr Alun Lloyd hoped that it would be clearly understood what was to be done. He represented several owners of property, and either the licenses would be renewed that day, or they would be held over until the adjourned meeting. After a consultation, the Magistrates' Clerk directed that all licensees should go into the next room, pay their fees, and get their license. Mr Alun Lloyd said he was not satisfied with that, and should like the Bench to make the announcement that all the licenses were renewed, as at Abergele on Saturday a technical objection was made after the people had left the Court, and matters were re-opened. Mr Gamlin said if there were any objections, notice should have been given seven clear days before the court. The Chairman replied that no notices had been served. Mr Gamlin said unless the Bench announced that all the licenses were renewed, the advocates would have to stay about the court all day to be ready to meet any objections that were raised. The Magistrates consulted together, and after- wards the list of licensed houses was read over, and as there were no objections to the licenses, they were all renewed. 9 A New Grocer's License. Mr Gamlin applied for a new grocer's license on behalf of Mr Charles Cooke, of Abbey Street. Formal proof of service of the necessary notices having been given, Supt Hughes gave Mr Cooke a good character, and the Bench granted the license. The Rowing Club Regatta. Mr Gamlin applied for an extension of time for the Royal Hotel on the oocasion of the Rowing Club Regatta on September 21st.—The Bench granted an extention until 11>30 p.m. Noise in High Street, The Chairman said the Bench desired him to call the attention of the police to the state of High-street. It was felt that the conduct in that thoroughfare was not always what it should be, and they hoped that an effort would be made to improve it. Dr Girdlestone then vacated the chair Untimely and Unlicensed Criticism." Mr Alun Lloyd said before the Bench concluded the licensing business he desired to call their attention to a very impudent and savage attack that had been made on the magistrates, police and publicans of the town with regard to the Licensing Sessions. He had only to inform the Court if the magistrates were going to treat with contempt the article in question that the Licensed Victuallers would not do so, and the editor of the paper would be called upon io specify the particular grievances which he complained or. He was bound to say that having the honour to appear in Court on behalf of the Licensed Victuallers' Association, that the Court had never unduly favoured the publicans as had been suggested by the paper. He thought it was a disgrace for a paper of that kind to publish, on the eve of the Annual Licensing Sessions, an article containing allegations which it was im. possible to investigate before the time, and then suggest that the magistrates unduly favoured the publicans. They said also that the police were discouraged because they could not get the con- victions they wanted, The duty of the police had been clearly laid down by Justice Hawkins that in case of doubt no case was determined by the police, but they should bring the case before the court. The time had come when Licensed Victuallers, the Polioe, and the Justices should express some opinion with regard to such infamous conduct as the editor of the paper had been guilty of. The Chairman (Mr Perks) said he had no cognizance of the article referred to by Mr Alun Lloyd. Mr Alan Lloyd I am glad you do not read the paper. The Chairman said he thought they could leave it to the public to decide whether they (the Magistrates) did or did not exeroise a proper discretion in all cases brought under their notice.

MOST IMPORTANT. Every person's future is, to a certain extent, in his own hand. Many a future which might have been brilliant has been darkened by lack of the spirit of self-help. Many a home might have been gladdened by life and health, and comfort, has been saddened by poverty, illness, and death, in many cases wholly preventible. The spring and summer months are, from a sanitary point of view, among the most important of the year. Due care may now mean a healthy and happy summer and autumn, and robust constitution to meet the trials of next winter. Neglect may now mean a joyless summer, a trying autumn, and a broken constitution to succumb under the attacks of any exceptional trial. There are indeed few that do not feel the system needs recruiting after the trying winter they have passed through With some it is only a little cough," tendency to bronchitis," and others, not quite up to the mark," "a sort of all over sinking feeling," too weak to do anything about the house," ":these recurring headaches," no appetite for his food," &c. These and a dozen others are common ex- pressions which all point to the urgent need of some good tonic. What change of air can do for you in a few months' time-if you are no worse then than you are now— a course of some good tonic mixture, a reliable medicine of established reputation and of proved virtue will do now. There are several tonic mixtures to be had, but none which have been so uniformly successful as Gwilym Evans' Quinine Bitters, the Vegetable Tonic. It has never been known to fail; send for a pamphlet of testimonials end read the voluntary testimony therein contained. Then get Gwilym Evans' Quinine Bitters, which will prove to be your self-help. CAUTION.—Avoid imitations. See that you get Gwilym Evans' Quinine Bitters. Do not be persuaded to try any other. See the name Gwilym Evans" on the Label, Stamp, and Bottle. Prices: Bottles, 2s. 9d.; double size, 4s. Gd. Sample bottles, Is. I-Iii. To be had of all Chemists, or direct from the Proprietors QUININE BITTERS MWUF ACTURING Co., LTD., LLANELLY, SOUTH WALES.

-=== MELIDIEN. THE good old custom of house-warming took place on Thursday evening last at Lekatue, the new house of Mr T M Edwards, a Monmouthshire gentleman, who has lately bought a pretty little estate here. About twenty friends and workpeople sat down to a first-class supper, provided by Mr and Mrs Lloyd, Miners' Arms Hotel, whose catering, as usual, gave the greatest satisfaction. Mr Roberts, C.C Dyserth Hall, in proposing the toast of the evening, viz., the health of Mr and Mrs Edwards and family, said it gave him great pleasure to be there on such a pleasing occasion. He was glad to have Mr Edwards as a neighbour and friend, and hoped other owners of property would follow his example and build some nice houses in this delightful place. He did not think there was a more beautiful situation along this coast-with Rhyl to the west, Prestatyn to the north, part of the Vale of Clwyd and a vast stretch of the St George'a Channel in the front, and in the far background a lovely range of mountains, so with mountain and sea air no lover of nature could desire more.—Mr and Mrs Edwards and their talented family afterwards entertained the company with songs, violin, and pianoforte solos. Mr Jones, the Schools, gave some Welsh songs in his usual good form. The company dispersed after wishing long life and happiness to their hospitable hosts. Printed and Published by PEARCE & JONES at 30, High Street, Rhyl, in the Parish Rhuddlan, County of F1 int.