The Carmarthen Weekly Reporter

Lhndilo Police i onrt SATURDAY.—Before Messrs J. L. Thomas, A. DuBuisson, L. N. Powell, Dr Southern. LICENSES. An occasional license was, granted to Air Hopkins, Cawdor Arras, for a ball to be held at the Drill Ha 1!.—Temporary licenses were granted to the following Thomas Roberts, sen. jo! the late licensee cf the Farmer's Arm- Llamgwad; to D. Morgan, occupying tenant; cf the Three Tuns, LlandiJo and to Mi.-s Trissy Roderick. dal1.ghtcer of the late licensse of the King's Head. EJECTMENT ORDER. An application for an ejectment order was made by Lewis Morgan, Plough Cottage, Glanamman, who said he was the tenant of Earl Cawdor for Cwmnantyglas. It was a sub-letting, and he did not reside there. A Mrs Da vies was tenant. and she _ref used to pay him rent.—By the Clerk: lhere was nothing between -him and the tenant to show she was tenant.—The case was adjouroea ror a fortnight to give the applicant an oppor tunity of properly completing the tenan.y. THE DRINK. Herbert Owen was charged with boi drunk.-P.C. Lewis, Ammanford deposed that at 7.45 p.m., on the 1st inst., he saw defendant in the village of Llandebie. He I entered the Golden Grove Arms, and van turned out by the landlady, Mrs Thomas. At 8 p.m., witness visited the Red Lien, and saw the defendant seated there. Mrs Morris the landlady told witness m presence cf the defendant, that she had refused to s-c-rve him and also asked him to leave, and he ef,j:c-d. Witness asked her to request him in witness presence to leave, and lie then left.J' iiitd 5s and costs 8s. P.C. Popkins, deptosed that at, 5.45 on Sun- day, the 5th, he saw the defendant drunk at Ammanford. He declined his name and his! address until he threatened to lock him up. —Fined 10s inducing costs. BRUMAGEM SHAMS." Thomas Roach, Wm. Morgan, W. Thomas, and D. Harris were charged with getting beer under false pretences. All pleated guilty.-P.S. Evan Davies deposed that on Sunday morning, the 28th, at 3 oclock, he visited the Dynevor Arms, Pantyffynon. There was an excursion returning from Birmingham, and a great number of people were in the house from the various localities round. Witness saw Thomas Roach in the bar with a pint of beer in his hand. Witness called the attention of the landlord to it. The landlord said Roach had told him he had been to Birmingham. Witness asked defen- dant. if he had not been at Ammanford a little while ago.-Defenda,nt: You did not say when.—Witness He was then turned out of the house. At 4.30, witness saw W. Morgan at the same inn, with a pint of beer in the kitchen. Witness asked him if he had been to Birmingham, and he said "Yes." Wit-mess asked when he went, and he replied "On Friday night." He went out, but later on witness saw him again, and asked him to tell the truth, and he then confessed that he had not been. Witness also saw Thomas in the inn with a pint of beer. He also said he had been to Birmingham. Witness raid he did not, believe him, and he cleared out at once. Witness spoke to Thomas outside, and :he said he was very sorry he went there. He was thirsty, and as he saw the house open, he thought he wolud get a pint of beer on the cheap. Witness saw D. Harris there a,t 4.30 in the; bar with a pint of beer, and he asked for a small bottle of Bass as well. Witness asked him if he had been to Birmingham, and he said yes, and that he had just, returned, but witness found out lie had been at work all that day.—Defendant Harris deniccl what the P.S. had said.—The Clerk You did not deny you were there. and had the drink.—Thomas said it was his first time, and hoped it would be his last to be at the court. So said all the rest.—The case caused a, great deal of laughter.—Each of them found that their early drink cost them 15s each. "CURSING AND SWEARING." David Jenkins was charged with using bad language by cursing and swearing. He pleaded guilty.—P.S. Evan Davies deposed that on Saturday, 4th October, at 11 p.m., he saw defendant on the platform of the Railway Station, Ammanford. There were a great number of passengers ut. The defendant was using fearful language, and when he saw witness and another policeman he ran away, but witness's comrade overtook him.—Defendant was fined 5s and cost; 8s.— Mr J. L. Thomas said it was a very objection able habit, and advised him not to come there again. DRUNK ON LICENSED PREMISES. Robert Morgan, collier, was charged with being drunk on licensed promises.-P.S. E. Davies de,posed that on the 6th of October, about. 5 to 10 in th-e evening, he was called to the Cross Inn Hotel, in company with Popkins. Witness there saw defendant with his cap off and in a fighting attitude, stagger ing drunk. Another man also present had to be ejected, and then defendant left, Defen- dant denied tha,t he was drunk, hut that he was only defending himself.—Witness said that, the landlady and others said that the defendant commenced the row.—P.C. Popkin corroborated.—Fined 3s and costs 9s. LOST HIS WAY. David Austin was charged with being drunk and disorderly.—P.S. Davies gnid that on the 6th October, about 11 p.m he saw tiie defendant drunk and cursing and swearing on Cwmamman ro-ad, in the parish ot Llandebie. Witness spoke to him. to ,a:nd to go away heme. He said he had lost his way. Witness took him nealv jialt a mile. Two of the women of the loca- lity came out of their houses, and complained to witness of defendant's conduct.—Defendant denied that he was drunk mr1 r!}.r>rl +! ,-&I.UJ.'ÇU Li.ldl be had lost his Way. P.C. Popkins corro- bora.t,ed .-Defendant deposed that he lived at 9, Ceidrim terrace. Glanamman, He a. labourer a,nd came from Blaengarw. He had been to PontarduJais.—Bv tire Cler.c rw!j b.a°k to Pailtyff.vnon at 7.30. In the Uld Castle, Ammanford, he got two pints of beer and was there till stop tap. At. Pont- aroulats, he had about four glasses, and one pint at the Salutation.—Mr J. L. Thomas n there was no doubt he was drunk with all that beer in his stemacli.-5s and costs. DRUNK AND DISORDERLY. Thomas Perkins, Nortcn road, Penygroes. was/Ciiarged with being drunk and disorder1 v at Llandebie on the 6th October.—P.C 71 saw defendant drunk and disorderly on the date referred to.—Previous convictions were put in, and defendant was mulcted in the sum of as and 7s costs. DESERVED PUNISHMENT. The same defendant was then C'hargc1 y;i1 an assault upon the constable. Deferd'-nf admitted the offence, but said he was drunk e., the time.P.C. Thomas deposed that when defendant was drunk he went up to him and advised him to go home, and with assistance St ? a fe"' miautcs ho came out -nd asked where the b bobby was" and again witness advised him to go. He refused and told witness that one of them woma De a dead man that night Wit ies^ got hold of him and tried to get him to "the bouse. He struck witness several t mes in the face, and gave him two black eyes, and several scratches. Witness got him in. rnd again he came out with a poker in his hand and threatened to split the witness's head open. Witness got him into the house again and be kept a disturbance up to the early morning.—Defendant said he only defended himself in his own house.—By defendant He drew .his truncheon to keep, defendant off when he came out, with a poker, but eL not, strike, him. Defendant- said- he meant no wrong and hoped the bench would for-ivf him this tinie.Dc,fendaiit, admitted bvina been fined on June 13th. 1900, for assauitinr a police constable, and was fined 2(): ai-.(, coists.-Defendant. in reply said that he was a ma,rried man with three children. Mr J. L. Thomas said defendant must be a i, when he was drunk.—The Head Constable ,said no doubt, he was. The only cure for him would be a thundering good hiding with r xruntcneon, which they dare not do.—Mr J. L. Thomas Perkins, it does not seem tr be any good fining you. You have been con- victed four times previous to tn-day. We must protect the police. You will go to gaol for fourteeen days hard labour to see what that will do for you. AN OLD OFFENCE. Rees Lewis, shoemaker, Llandiio, w' o had been convicted of poaching in 1900, and as a, result owed the court, the sum cf £ 5 10s Gel decamped without paying it. but was now brought up Ü!l a warrant. As lip could not find the money, a.nd had not sufficient furni- ture to distrain on. was informed he must do 28 days as au alternative. 1 FALSE PRETENCES BY A BLACK-PLATE WEIGHER. David Rowlands, pleailed guilty to getting money by false pretenses from the Haven Tin Plate Colliery, Company, Glanamman. Mr Powell, Llanelly, prosecuted on behalf of the Company. He said the defendant was engaged as a black plate weigher by the Haven Conipany, which carried on business in the Amman Valley. Defendant's duty was to weigh all the black plates produced in the milig, and to prepare a sheet for fenr weeks, showing the quantity produced. That sheet would then be handed to the cashier in the office, who would prepare the otnciaJ pay-pheet from it. On the day of the pay tickets were prepared by the cashier, and handed to the defendant, who would distribute them among the workmen. They indicated the amount due to eaeh man. I he custom was then for the workman—or an I agent, another workman—to present the ticket and there receive the amount of pay marked on it. On the 20th of September the defendant handed in a sheet, with particulars of the work done for the four weeks ended that day in No. 3 Mill, and the sheet borw amongst other names that of Thos. Jones, roller- man, and D. Davies, a doubler. The cashier, in making up his sheet, allowed for the work performed by these two men. The tickets were handed to the defendant, and a boy named Davies presented the tickets, and received the pay. From certain informa- tion the management obtained, enquiries were made, and it was ascertained that these two men did not exist. Defendant was called into the office, and on being taxed he admitted the offence, and prior to the issue of th° summons wrote a letter confessing he had taken the money. Defendant made a statement in the sheet, which was the basis of the pay for the men, and deliberately entered the names of the two men down, knowing they were not engaged, and then his snbsequent conduct in eriving the boy the tickets to get the money showed he did it with the intention to defraud. John Grey deposed he was the manager of the PavenTinplite Company, Limited. He lived at Frondeg. The defendant until recently was in the employ of the Company as black-plate weigher. lie had been in the employ of the Company for seveial years. He had to do as described in the opening statement by the solicitor. There was no man named Thomas Jones employed in the mill at the time referred to in the sheet handed in by the defendant as rollerman, in No. 3 mill, nor a man named D. Davies, as a doubler. Witness made enquiries, and ] spoke to the defendant about the matter, and asked him who Thos. Jones and D. Davies were. He said be would go out and see, as there had been so many changes lately." Witness told him he might as well own up, as they had been inquiring into the matter. He replied, I am very sorry, but I have done it." Afterwards witness received the produced letter from the defendant, which was iu his hand- writing. David Phillips deposed that he lived at Danyrallt, Glanamman. He was employed as cashier in the Raven Tinplate Company. It was part of his duty to uake out the pay sheets. He got his particulars from the defendant. He got the sheet produced from the defendant which was in his handwriting. He got it the week following September 20t.h, and in accord- ance with it made out pay tickets for Jones and Davies. The tickets produced were those he made out. On the 27th September he paid Evan Isaac Davies the amount of the tickets. He paid on Thos. Jones's ticket 13s (id and on Davies's ticket I Is. Evan Isaac Davies had signed the tickets before the money was given him. He was a boy working in the works. There were no such persons as Jones and Davies working in No. 3 Mill. Evan Isaac Davies, Pantybryn, Llandebie, deposed that he was a behinder at the works. The pencil writing on the tickets produced was his. He obtained the money from Mr Phillips, the cashier David Rowlands asked him to fetch the money. He gave witness the tickets at the time. Witness fetched the money, and gave it to Rowlands. He told witness to keep it quiet. He did not give witness anything. Defendant, in answer to the charge, said I am guilty and very sorry.for what I have done, and wish to be dealt with summarily. The Clerk informed the bench that was if they thought proper. Mr Powell said that as defendant had elected to be dealt with summarily, the Company had no desire to unduly press the charge, but they had a sense of public duty, and it was important to employers and workmen that the case should have been brought forward. Hitherto the defendant had borne a good > character, and had been in the employ of the Com- pany for many years, he (Mr Powell) was instructed to say he did not wish to press the charge severely. In answer to the bench, Mr Powell said he did not intend to go on with the other case. Defendant, in reply to the bench, said he had been employed in the works for five years, and was earning E-2 a week. He had a wife and five children dependent on him. Mr J. L. Thomas'said they had given the case a good deal of consideration, and if the Company had pressed the charge, they would have to send defendant to gaol, but the Company had behaved generously. You have betrayed a position of trust. It is an offence against them and your fellow work- men. You will be fined £ 5 and costs, or go to goal for 28 days. Defendant: Will you give me time to pay ? At the present time I am out of employment, and practically penniless. Mr J. L. Thomas How much time do you want ? Defendant A month. Sergt. Roberts, being called, said defendant was a householder, and not likely to go away. Defendant was allowed a month. CONVICTED ON HIS WEDDING MORN. George Davies, Arwydd Villa, High-street, Ammanford, with being drunk, and P.S. Evin Davies caused some amusement by saying that the defendant was not present, and was that day getting married at Treorky. The constable deposed to seeing another with him drunk in iVind-street, Ammanford. He was staggering and knocking against people going to chapel.—Defendants were fined 5s and costs each. OATH FOR OATH. George Bowen, Edward Popham, add W 0 Tones, all of Llandiio, were charged with an offence under the Fishery Laws. Supt. James Evans prosecuted, and Mr T G Williams defended. J Walters, water bailiff, deposed that on the 18th September, at 5 p.m., he was on duty on the 'rowy, aud he there saw the defendants Bowen and Jones in bushes with their sleeves pushed up above their elbows, and on their knees on a rail going from bush to bush, lying on the branches close to one another. Jones had the stick (produced) in his hands in the water, as if he was spearing. After about 15 minutes he saw the other defendant coming down on a rail a take a fish from the other two defendants and threw it on the bank. It was a big fish. It wa.s about four or five pounds weight. Then the three defendants went up to the bank behind the bushes, and were very busy there for some time. That is, they were moving from one place to another. Then they started again to search every bush alternately. They crme to a tree lying on the water out to the river. Jones and Popham went dowu to the tree and lay on the branches. Witness stood opposite. Bowen came out with the stick in his hands, passed the others, and went down to another bush, and into it. When witness saw them so busy that they did not see him he saw Glanyrafon people crossing in the boat, and he got in the boat. Bowen saw him, and witness shouted that he knew them. They all ran away and got into Dynevor Wood.—By Inspector Evans Witness watched them th-ee quarters of an hour, and was about W yards off them on the opposite side of the river. He stood on the bank, and they were so busy that they did not observe him.—By Mr T G Williamil, who defended Witness did not see them running until they had got to the far end of the iiieadow. -By the Clerk Witness loit sight of them from the time the boat was in the middle of the river 1-ntil it reached the bank.—By Mr Williams The river was only about 20 yards wide at that spot. The superintendent measared the distance from where the defendants were to where he was. It was between fifty and sixty yards.—A rough sketch of the locality was put in, to which Mr Williams took objection, and the ordnance map was sent for.—Witness saw a fourth man, but witness did not see him do anything. Witness had not mentioned the man until Mr Williams asked him. Witness did not know who the man was, but knew now. As fat as witness knew, the fourth man was innocent. Witness did not see a man reading a newspaper. Morgan Thomas the fourth man, was not sitting down with Popham cracking nuts. Witness was opposite the defendants the whole of the time.—The measurement by the ordnance map showed the distance was 11U yards.— Witness said there was nothing to hide him ftom the men when he stood on the bauk. Witness picked up a cane also. He did not produce it before, but meant I to produce it before the end of his case. He would swear Popham had the fish in his hand. He had never seen him on the bank of the -iver before. A rifle competition was going at the Dynevor Range on the day in question.—By the Clerk Salmon frequen- ted that particular place, and sewin particularly. He bad seen sewin there since, Mr Williams described the witness's evidence as somewhat staggering. That there was any mention of a fish was astonishing, and although entered on the minutes, it did not make the statement true He was instructed that the facts were diametrically opposite and that the bailiff had said that which was not true. The bailiff was worthy of his hire. It was to the interest of a water bailiff to obtain convictions. The bench had to consider his evidence, and aik if his motive was not an incentive to say what was untrue. The witness had made things twice as great as they were. The witness had seen four men there. and if one was guilty the four were. But only three were summoned. Every man had a right to look at fish in a river, but if they killed them it was another thing. He asked the bench to believe that the water bailiff, a man of not very intelligent type, was not immaculate. A fortnight ago there was no mention of a* fish. Walters must be committing perjury.—Mr L N Powell thought it was for the bench to decide.—Mr Williams If my witness is correct, and Walters incorrect, you may call it what you like, but I don't think it is anything but perjury,—Supt. Evans strongly resented the remark, and appealed to the bench for protection.—Mr Williams You may call it by any euphelftism you like, but the legal definition I is p-e-r-j u-r-y-.—Supt Evans This is too bad against a witness —Mr Williams replied that if Walters \Va speaking the truth, then Morgan Thomas, a respect- able tradesman of the town was' speaking an untruth. If they decided against the water bailiff, he would have given untrue evidence. A man by the river side seeing a bailiff would naturally have a scare, seeing what prosecutions they had at Llandiio. Morgan Thomas waa entitled to be believed, and the bailiff said Thomas was doing nothing but he (Mr Williams) held he was doing the same as the others-- that was nothing. Their running away was the only suspicious element. W 0 Jones had had reason to fear being seen near the river bank by a bailiff. Hence the panic. The evidence of the prosecution was of the l1"ual stereotyped character, and was tinctured with u truth. For the defence he called D. Morgan Thomns, who swore that he lived at the White Horse, Llandiio. Un the lbth September ho had been down on the Dynevor Ri ige, and was 1 ing about 5.30. W. O. Jones was with him. They started from the range together. Witness saw Popham and Bowen near the ferry. They were b, low the boat, and were ten yards from the river. Popham was sitting down near the river reading a paper, and Bowen was standing by with their backs to him. He ran up quietly, and sho itsd halloa to frighten them. They were certainly doing nothing. They were then four together. They looked into the river. He always did, as lie was a big fisherman himself. They were there seven or eight minutes. When they saw the bailiff, Jones said, We better make a run for it as he will swear we are poaching." lie would swear the stick produced was not in either of their hands. Wa'teis (excitedly) There is perjury for you if yov. like, io i know the remarks you made about me, Mr Williams. The witness paid it was untrue to say they were there three quarters of an hour. It was a deliberate lie that a fish was thrown up the bank. He had not heard of such a suggestion until that day. He could not say whether the bu-hes were flush with the bank. Witness gave Popham some nuts, and they were cracking them together. It was quite untrue anybody caught a fish. That cane belonged to defendant, and by cracking the nuts he left it on the ground, and forgot all about it. There was no slit in the cane.—By Supt. Evans He got to the range about five to quarter-past. Witness came from Golden Grove farm. Witness came back over Cihane Range. He was at busiuess about 20 minutes. Theie was a short cut alongside the r'ver. — Mr Williams pointed out that when Thomas got to the range, and went towards the river Jones was with him, and the bailiff had admitted Morgan Thomas was the fourth man.— By the Supt. I could recognise Popham at a distance of 100 yaids, and I could recognise you at a distance of four hundrtd yards (loud laughter). Being ask .id as to what the bailiff could see, he said he believed the bailiff w-s short-sighted.—The Clerk reminded him that he was on his oath.—In answrr to the Cleik, h said he Iud said it in fun.—Mr Powell You must not say anything in fun in that box.—Mr Williams again objected to the cross-examinacion, as Walters had admitted there were four men ti-iere.-I)r. Southern igr, ed.-Witness If Walters said he was I not with the other three, it was a down-right lie.—By Mr Williams He had heard a rumour that the bailiff was shortsighted. Mr Powell We don't want to hear any more. The case is dismissed. APPLICATION TO SET AN ORDER ASIDE Latt June the court was occupied for some hours in hearing aciee in which one Jane Jones, applied for an cider for maintenance against her husband, and after a lei gtiiy hearing an order for 12s (id a week wa,g iiixde. On the ground that conjugal rights had been le-established between husband and wife, Ml Claude Davies now applied on hehalf of the husband for an order to set the order referred to aside. Mr T. G. Williams opposed for the wife. William Jones, Ton, Pentre, Pontypridd, deposed he was the husband of the defendant, Jane Jones. An order against him was made in June for a judicial separation for 12s (id a week. He met his wife at Llandiio on Saturday, the 13th ult., by the Victoria Inn. They went for a walk to the Park. They were about an hour together. He left her by the Victoria again. She went to meet the 2 p.m. train. They arranged in the Park he was to go back to her on the following night. He went back, and found Hetty Hicks and Sarah A. Williams there. She offered him food at (nice, but he did not take anything u:.til supper time. He slept there that night. He went to bed about nine o'clock. He slept with Jane Jones. At 11 p.m. John Bevan, her son, came into the room. He was witness's step-son. Bevan asked who was there, and Jane Jones said there was no one but who had a right. Bevan then lit a candle, and asked what witness wanted there iu place of his father. Bevaii told witness to goluvay, as he was 21 years of age, and owned the house. The son threatened to kill him if he played any tricks with him. He remained there comfortably until Monday evening. His wife ) and he went to fetch a policeman, because Bevan was so violent. Witness did not return because he was afraid of Bevan. He and his wife were friendly when they met —Mr Williams Since the separation.— Witness was a perfectly sober man, and was willing to provide a home for her, but was afraid of his life to go and live with her.—By Mr Williams Witness did not wait on the 15th of September at the Cross Keys as asked. He was very much in love with his wife. He had been away from her two years and four months. Hia wife denied during the last case he had paid the money. Sergt. Robeits swore that he remombered Mr Jones comingto see hirr. to complain of the conduct of her son John, who had, she said, been very nasty to her and the children, and he has gone worse since William came by. On the 25th of September she came again and he wrote a letter for her. Hetty Hicks, a young girl of 14 years from Wauen- hen farm, Glanamman, deposed to being at Pentwyn Coch, where Mrs Jones lived. She was there from 5 o'clock to between 0 and 7 o'clock. She saw W Jones come into the house. Mrs Jones came with her to Llandiio that day (Saturday). At Lhndilo Mrs Jones went with her to Mr Williams' office. Before then Mrs Jones had not been telling her anything. At the office Mrs Jones did not tell what she was to say. Witness t"ld the gentleman that she only sawW Jones come over the mountain. Being asked if anyone had told her to say it, no answer could be obtained for some time, but at last she said Mrs Jones had told her to say it.—By Mi Wfiliams She told Mr Davies in his office something else. She had told him (Mr Williams) what was not true. It was before she went in to Mr Williams' office that Mrs Jones had told her. The giil again contradicted herself, and then again said that Airs Jones had told her to say what was not true, and she said it. She had told him (Mr Williams) what was not true.—Mr Williams She is not my witness, thank goodness.—Re-examined by Mr Claude Davies What she had told him she had told him in the presence of Sergt. Roberts. Ruth Roberts, the wife of David Roberts, said that W. Jones stayed at her house sometimes. He was with her on September 15th. He left her in the afternoon of that day, Fe told her where he was going on Sunday. He came hack on Monday, and said where he had been to.Nir Williams: My client is supoenaed by you don't you want to call her ?—Air CJaude Davies No, I don't. Mr Williams said that an order of the kind was not • made witnout deliberation, and nothing had been said to show why it should be set aside on the man's evidence without corroboration. He held that there way not sufficient evidence to make a prima facie case out. For the defence Thomas Bevan was called. He was the son of Mrs Jones by her first husbaLd. He remembered that Sunday, the 14th September. He saw W Jones on the mountain by the gate, about ten yards from the house. His mother told him to go away. He was not in the house at all, as wirness was there. He wouli swear he did not sleep there.—By Mr Claude Davies He saw Hetty Hicks at the house. He went out between four and five o'clock, and returned between (j and 7 o'clock. John, his brother, was there on Monday. His brother did not interfere with him, and as far as he knew there was no reason why his mother should go to the police aud complain. lie went to look for sheep on Monday evening. He had not told John to keep at home. Jane Jones, the defendant, denied going to the Park with the plaintiff, or that she aeked him to Pentwyncoch. He had aeked her to go to Swansea for a week, and he promised her a set of artitieinl te?j uf 8he -vent- Slle c]enicJ what plaintiff had ^aid about being at her house, and cohabiting with "er* -^y Claude Davies The reason why her son was so angry was because the plaintiff wanted to stay with her. She was willing for him to live with her, but he had uot kept his promises to behave. She objected to his stopping with her because of his demands.—The bench urged Mr Davies to bring out the cohabitation question.—Mr Williams said it was all old ground they were at.—The Clerk said it was oath against oath.—Witness What her husband wanted her to go to Sergt Roberts was to turn the son out. He had wanted before for her to turn her daughter out.—By Mr Claude Davies Hetty Hicks had not said the truth. She had no such conversation with the child as she said. The application was dismissed. It was now six o'clock, and other cases were after- wards taken, which were of minor importance. — *— ——■