Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

11 articles on this Page

fSrecottgiure*

WEDNESDAY.

News
Cite
Share

WEDNESDAY. The case tried the preceding night was continued this morning, and after some discussion between the counsel on either side, they consented to come to the following arrangement:—That a Verdict of Guilty be taken by consent against Abbott only. The prosecutor undertaking not tocall Abbott up for judgment; and the defendants undertaking to allow Mr Brigstocke and his tenants quiet possession until he shall recover by legal proceedings. Counsel for plaintiff, Messrs. Chilton, Q. C. and Mr Wilsoti.-Attoriiey, Mr R. Gardnor. Counsel for defendants, Messrs. Williams and in this town, against the defendant, to recover the sum of £ 71 2s. Id., for business done for the corporation, while Town clerk of the Borough. The plaintiff while holding the office of Town Clerk was appointed the Attorney for the Corporation, and a part of this de- mand was for business done by him in that capacity. Tho Corporation of Carmarthen was originally held under a charter granted in the reign of James the First, and the corporate body are now remodelled according to the provisions of the Municipal Reform Act. The defendant paid into Court the sum of £ 33, which it was held was sufficient to cover the plaintiff's just demand. Verdict for plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the Court above. Counsel for plaintiff, Messrs. Evans, Q. C., and James Evans; Solicitors, Messrs, Jones and Jeffries. Counsel for defendant, Messrs. Chilton, Q.C., and g. V. Williams; Solicitors, Messrs. Morris aud Jones. Jones v. Jones and others.-This was an action brought to recover the value of an ox, levied upon under the following circumstances:—The plaintiff is proprietor and occupier of lands adjoining the old ford connected with the river near Llandovery, adjacent to which a suspension bridge is erected. The plaintiff was convicted before the defendants, two of the county magistrates, for evading the toll of such bridge in crossing through the ford, and an ox in question was sold to pay the penalty, under the warrant of the de- fendants. The case being gone through for the plaintiff, Mr John Evans, on behalf of defendants, contended that this action had been brought too late, and that the plaintiff was precluded bringing his action by the statute, as it had not been commenced within three months after the offence had been committed. His Lordship held the objection to be fatal, and the plaintiff was consequently nonsuited. Solicitor for plaintiff, Mr John Williams; for de- fendant, Mr John Morgan. Philipps and wife v. Thomas.-This was an action brought to recover compensation in damages for de- famation of character, the defendant having stated in reference to plaintiff that she had given birth to a child, and poisoned it. The case possessed no feature of interest, and the jury not deeming the evidence suffi- cient to sustain the case, returned a verdict for the defendant. Cousins and others v. Bowser and others.-Tliis was an action brought to recover the sum of £66 18s. Od. a balance due to the plaintiffs on a promissory note. It was undefended, and the evidence on the part of plaintiffs being deemed ample, a verdict was given accordingly for plaintiffs. Jones v. Downrnan.-Tliis was an action brought by Mr Wm. Jones, solicitor, Carmarthen, to recover from the defendant, Mr Henry Ridout Downman, the sum of £ 527 5s. Od. being the amount of his under- taking given to the plaintiff in his capacity of account- ant at the time of the bankruptcy of Waters, Jones, & Co. bankers. The plaintiff had been professional adviser of Waters and Co. and after the Commission had been issued out against them, the defendant was appointed to wind up their affairs. The plaintiff had proved debts against the estate to the amount of the present claim, and having defendant's undertaking, now sought to maintain his action for the same. On the part of the defendant it was contended that the plaintiff was merely the agent acting under the Messrs. Esdaile and Co., and the undertaking itself being on plain paper, brought the case within the statute of frauds. On these grounds the plaintiff was non- suited. Counsel for the plaintiff, Messrs. Evans, Q C., and J. Evans; attorneys, Messrs. Jones and Jeffreys. Counsel for defendant, Messrs. Chilton, Q.C., and Vaughan Williams; attorneys, Messrs. Vaugban and Bevan.

ittomnmttiigfur?*

MONDAY.

TUESDAY.

THURSDAY.

FRIDAY.

ADDITIONAL LOCAL INTELLIGENCE.

CIRCUIT OF THE COMMISSIONER…

FROM THE LONDON GAZETTES.

Family Notices