Welsh Newspapers
Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles
2 articles on this Page
TENBY AND SOUTH PEMBROKESHIRE…
TENBY AND SOUTH PEMBROKESHIRE (DAMES) HABITATIONS OF THE PRIM- ROSE LEAGUE. The South Pembrokeshire (Dames) Habitation of the Primrose League observed Primrose Day by inviting the associates of their own Habitation and the members of the Tenby Habitation to a tea in the Royal Assembly Rooms at seven o'clock. The following dames and associates of the South Pem- brokeshire Habitation presided at the tea tables, which were beautifully decorated with primroses —Mrs W. H. Richards, the Misses Fetherston, Miss H. Milman, Mrs Philipps, Mrs Blake, Mrs Mackenzie, Miss Ingram, Miss Bright, Miss Wil- son, Mrs Parrott, and Miss Kingdom. Through the liberality of some of the members part of the provisions, and all the milk, butter and cream were given for the tea, to which over 230 sat down. At 8 o'clock a concert and dramatic performance were given in the large room, to which members of the Teuby Conservative Association were invited. The decoration of the room was most effectively and artistically carried out by members of both Habitations, including Captain and Mrs Mackenzie, Mr Brook, (R.C.), Miss Ingram, Mr Richards, Misses H. and C. Milman, Mr and Miss Buckley Miss Franklin, Miss Reid and other ladies. On the dais on the platform was a monogram of the League and a portrait of Her Majesty, surmounted by a crown of primroses, and flanked with the royal standard and Union Jack. On each side of the proscenium, which was draped in crimson as well as the back of the stage, were monograms of the League, wrought in primroses and the numbers of the Tenby and South Pembrokeshire Habitations. In front of the footlights was a bank of moss, on which was traced in letters of primroses "Success to the Primrose League." The walls of the room were draped with flags, and on the side and front galleries were "Salisbury," "Beaconsfield," and "God save the Queen," wrought in primroses on a red ground. The general effect of the whole was most artistic and striking, and reflected much credit upon the ladies and gentlemen charged with the duty of carrying through this part of the undertaking. Mr R. J. H. Parkinson, in an address of some length, dwelt upon the amount of the Queen's income and the cost of the English monarchy as compared with the other leading nations of the world. The speaker mentioned that a great deal of misconception existed on this head, nob only amongst Liberals as would be expected, but amongst some Conservatives, and for that reason he would endeavour to put before them the facts of the case. The Queen did not receive one penny from the taxes of the country, certainly it was allowed by Parliament, but only in this way, that it was an agreement entered into with each Sovereign from the days of George I., whereby the nation took the control of the Crown estates. Now the private property of the Queen brought in a revenue of 9390,000 a year, and she received in return only £ 385,000, therefore she "actually got less than her own. These estates from which the 9390,000 was derived always belonged to the Crown, and not to the nation, therefore the nation derived great ad- vantage from this arrangement. In addition to this, Parliament agreed to provide for the Queen's family, the Duchy of Cornwall being always in the sole right of the Prince of Wales as much so as the property of a private gentleman. Comparing these allowances with the cost of government of other nations he (the speaker) found that England stood in a very favourable position. England paid 9385,000; Germany, £ 615,000; Italy, £ 650,000; Austria, £ 930,000; France, £450,000; America, £ 700,000; Russia, £ 2,000,000 in addition to these sums the Sovereigns, with the exception of the Queen, enjoyed the revenues of. their private estates. The English Monarchy cost the British taxpayer less than one half-penny for every pound of the national income. The cost of the Republican form of government in France was three times as great, and that of the United States of America four times as great as that of England. Another point to be remembered was that the Queen could not spend her income as she liked, for Parliament stipulated it should be spent in a certain way, with the exception of the Queen's privy purse, which amounted to one-sixth of her income. There was another advantage, Parliament had control over the sons and daughters of Her Majesty, which would not have been the case had the estates been retained in the power of the Queen. Her Majssty also paid income tax in the same manner as a private person, so that her royal purse did not exempt her from the same taxes as her countrymen and countrywomen. The speaker concluded by inviting the audience to look at the colossal wealth of some of the great nobles and successful manu- facturers; some of them of long descent, others of yes- terday; one man inherited wealth and added to it; another was the architect of his own fortunes; but whether amongst old families or new, amongst those whose history for centuries was woven into the history of their country, or among new men who had raised themselves to deserved distinction- there were many subjects both in the United King- dom and in the far-off hemispheres whose income far exceeded that of the gracious lady who reigned over them. And to go farther afield, in the United States of America, there were men with their millions, not of dollars, but pounds—such as the men who controlled the great railways of the Republic; the men who exploit its marvellous silver mines; the men who owned its land by the thousands of acres-whose incomes in some cases would be, it is said, more than ten times that of the sovereign of these realms. These men were so rich that it was impossible for them to spend their money, and so it went on accumulating. They had no Parliament to tell them whether to spend in this way or that; they had no duties to perform as heads of society. Should it be said that Englishmen grudged their Queen the enjoyment of the moderate fortune which had from her ancestors, forgetting that she couLl not enjoy it in the way open to all her subjects of whatever degree; that she not only condescended to come to Parliament for means to live, but allowed Parlia- ment to regulate the manner in which she should spend her own money. He did not believe that the men who lived in England, certainly not the men of Wales, and most emphatically not the men of Pembrokeshire ever wished their Queen to be de- prived of her own property, but would with one mind, one heart and one voice proclaim their un- swerving loyalty to that sovereign under whose beneficent sway they had the happiness to dwell. (Loud cheers.) Mr Parkinson then moved that this meeting views with indignation the systematic obstruction which the Government is receiving in its en- deavours to carry out its fundamental duties of securing the lives, liberty and property of Her Majesty's subjects, and begs to assure Lord Salis- bury of its unabated confidence in his policy and its entire approval of the proposed amendment of the Crimninal Law by which alone the system of in- timidation and illegal conspiracy now rampant in Ireland can be crushed. This was seconded by Colonel Saurin who ex- pressed the pleasure he felt at being present at the meeting, and his regret at the inability of the Dame President—Mrs Saurin—to be with them. Colonel Saurin then unveiled a very handsome banner subscribed for by the dames and associates of Habitation 812, as a jubilee memorial. The banner was worked by the Ladies Working Guild, 3, Lower Grosvenor Place. The portrait of Her Majesty was also part of the same memorial. The resolution was put to the meeting by Captain Brook, and carried amidst loud cheers. This incident was followed by the song" The Prim- rose Knight" by MrW. Rees, who got a very good reception, but we have heard him in better voice. Mr Jervis Statham's character song, "I Borrowed It," was applauded to the echo and evidently much appreciated, especially by the more juvenile portion of the audience. This was in turn followed by a song exceedingly well rendered by Miss Williams of St. Florence, entitled "Much Ado about Nothing." We wish Miss Williams would give the Tenby public an opportunity of hearing her more frequently. Mr Graham Thomson got a good reception with "Lads in Red," and was loudly applauded. Then Miss Helen Milman gave the company a specimen of her histronic powers by reciting "The Death of Montrose." As would be expected she was listened to with deep attention. The more telling parts in the story were brought out with deep feeling, and on the conclusion the fair reciter received a burst of well deserved approval. Miss Fetherston was set down for the next song, "Close to the Threshold," but being unable to comply her place was filled by Mr Graham Thomson who sang accompanied on the violin by Mrs Graham Thomson. Mr J. K. Buckley's character song, "I schmokes mein Pipe," f,Lirly brought down the house, and although there v, ere loud demands for a repetition the rule of no encores was rigidly enforced. Miss Williams thun sang another pretty song, "Old Fashions," and again met with a hearty reception. "I haven't for a long time now" was rendered by Mr Jervis Statham, and then Miss Fetherston and Miss Constance Milman sang a duet, "To the Woods," which gave a great deal of pleasure. Mr J. K. Buckley wound up the first part of the entertain- ment with another of his character songs, Sour Krouts farewell," which like his first song was received with rapturous applause. The second part of the entertainment consisted of J. M. Morton's well-known farce Box and Cox. CHARACTERS John Box (journeyman printer) Mr L. R. Wood James Cox (journeyman hatter).Mr W. H. Richards Mrs Bouncer (a lodging-house keeper).Mr J. Statham In the hands of such able amateurs the hits in the old farce lost none of their piquancy and point, and from first to last the audience were kept in a con- tinual titter by the striking and at times remark- able situations of the actors, the curtain falling amidst loud applause. The audience then joined heartily in "The National Anthem" and afterwards dispersed. The accompaniments were played by Miss Con- stance Milman in her usual felicitous manner. Taken altogether the entertainment must be pronounced a great success. Between 600 and 700 persons were present. They included not ouly members of the League in Tenby, but also dames and associates from the neighbouring villages-for the League, has taken as firm hold upon the country districts in South Pembrokeshire as it has in the agricultural districts of England, and no more satisfactory proof of the spread of the principles of the League could be afforded than the vast audience that assembled on Tuesday evening to do honour to the memory of one of England's greatest statesmen.
-------...----THE TENBY TOWN…
moment put themselves in the position of Mr Parkinson, and ask themselves whether such impu- tations if made against themselves were not calcu- lated fcto bring them into contempt amongst their friends and acquaintances. Mr Parkinson was there charged with attempting to smash Mrs Bon- ville, and with doing the most dastardly thing a man could do, strike a woman. Did the jury not think that was calculated to bring Mr Parkin- son into contempt? Did they not think this a serious imputation on the character of a gentleman who was a justice of the peace for his county ? He believed the jury would agree with him that it was. But while he pressed this home on their attention he also wished to point out that Mr Parkinson did not want vindictive damages. If Mr Bonville had apologized nothing would have been heard of this action. But he kept them at arm's length. On the 6th Jan. Mr Lock wrote to Mr Bonville asking for an apology. Not a word was heard from Mr Bonville in reply. If Mr Bonville had then determined to give as much publicity to a contradiction of his letter as his letter had obtained, no more would have been heard about it. But Mr Bonville declined to do anything of the kind. The Western Mail with their usual spirit of fairness immediately published an ample apology. On the 14th January, not having heard anything from Mr Bonville, Mr Lock wrote demanding an apology. Even then there was no desire to push matters, and it was not until the 26th that the writ was issued. Mr Bon- ville did not appear, and judgment was signed in default of appearance. A writ was ordered to be taken out for the assessing of damages on the 12th March. Still Mr Bonville made no move until the 5th March, seven days before the date of the hearing of the case, when he called on Mr Lock asking if some compromise could not be effected. Mr Lock said he would consult his client, but it could only be considered upon payment of costs already in- curred, and that if Mr Bonville would call again in the afternoon he would let him know. Mr Bonville did not call, but two days afterwards he came and offered JE5 as part payment of costs, and an apology to be written by himself and pub- lished in the Tenby Observer only. This was de- clined of course, for the JE5 would not have paid the Sheriff's expenses for holding his court on the 12th March. What did Mr Bonville then do? On the 9th March he took out a summons to set aside the writ. It was referred to the Registrar for consideration, and at which hearing Mr Bon- ville was represented by his solicitor. The summons was dismissed and Mr Bonville ordered to pay the costs that had been incurred through his own con- duct in not putting in an appearance to the writ. The conduct of Mr Bonville throughout the whole case pointed to the fact that he did not intend to defend the action, and in that he (the learned barrister) thought the explanation of his conduct lay. Even now Mr Bonville could not keep quiet, for on the 7th April he wrote the following letter to the Tenby Observer:- TENBY LIBEL CASE! To the Editor of the Tenby Observer. SIR,—I beg leave through your columns to inform my fellow-townsmen, and the inhabitants of Tenby in general, of the existence of the above libel, as it has been hitherto kept so quiet, and the attempt now to obtain from me, for Mr Parkinson, over Y,80 (taxed to £ 47) in costs, run up by Mr Lock his solicitor and him- self in order, to pay him for smashing in the doors (in the form of a libel) and severely injuring Mrs Bonville's health; also lost the sale of the building ground. This quiet and celebrated case" is to come off on Saturday, the 16th inst. at 12 o'clock, at a public house called the Rutzen Arms, Narberth. I may say I have heard of inquests being held at such places, but never a libel. Trusting many of the inhabitants of Tenby will attend to hear how I am still persecuted by Mr Parkinson. I am, Sir, to be crushed (if possible) out of existence. Tenby, April 6,1887. J. BONVILLE. Even at the eleventh hour Mr Parkinson was willing to listen to some reasonable proposal, but all to no effect. Even now he did not ask for vindictive damages, but such damages as would mark their sense of the injustice of such attacks and teach defendant a lesson for the future, Mr Lewis then called for the letters of January 6th and 14th, which Mr Bonville did not produce. Mr Robert Lock, examined by Mr Arthur Lewis, said-I am the solicitor for Mr Parkinson. By his instructions I wrote to Mr Bonville on the 6th and 14th January. The letters were duly posted by me. On the 5th March he called at my office with a view to know on what terms Mr Parkinson would compromise the action. Without prejudice I told him on payment of costs and a written apology in the Western Mail. He asked what the costs would amount to. I told him I could not tell. I asked him to call again in the afternoon. He did not call. On the 7th he called and offered £ 5 towards the costs and an apology in the Tenby Observer to be written by himself. At this time Sheriff's costs had been incurred, and would have nothing to do with Mr Parkinson's costs. I told him his offer could not be accepted. On the 9th I had a summons as to the case. The case was to have been tried on the 12th. It was appealed against and dismissed, costs taxed, but Mr Bonville did not appear. I have kept Mr Bonville duly informed of every step I was taking, and for- warded him copies of proceedings. In fact I have done more than I was obliged to do in keeping him informed of what I was doing. In reply to the Under-sheriff, whether he wished to crosd-examine the witness, Defendant proceeded to make a statement, but The Under-sheriff requested him to confine his remarks to a cross-examination of Mr Lock. The Defendant said he observed from the affi- davits of five persons, Mr Lock, Mr Blankley, Mr Hurrell, Mr Lewis, Mr Mathias, that they saw the writ served. The writ was never served. The Under- slieriff-We have nothing to do with the writ, that has already been decided upon. Ask Mr Lock any question on the case before us. Defendant—What is the use of asking Mr Lock any question. He won't answer me. How could you swear that you saw the writ served ? Mr Lock-1 have not sworn it. A Juryman-I believe the question of the writ is not before us. The Under,sheriff-It is not. That has been decided by Mr Justice Manisty to have been pro- perly served. Defendant-It is stated that Mr Hurrell saw the writ served, but I have a witness to swear that Mr Hurrell never saw anything of the kind; that Mr Lock got him to sign a paper he knew nothing about. The Under-sheriff—You must confine your re- marks to asking the witness questions upon his evidence. We are not here to try whether you were properly served with a writ or not. That has been decided. Defendant-I have a letter here that I should like to read. Mr Arthur Lewis-You cannot read it. Defendant-I must do so. It is for the informa- tion of the jury, Mr Arthur Lewis-Let me see it please. Defendant handed the letter in and after perusing it the learned counsel objected to it being read. Defendant persisted in reading the letter, when Mr Arthur Lewis said he must direct the atten- tion of the Under-Sheriff to the matter. If Mr Bonville had been represented these difficulties would not occur. He was quite willing to make all allowance for a defendant conducting his own I. case, yet he must insist upon the court being con- ducted like any other court of law. The Under-sheriff- You must not read the letter. I have already told you to confine your remarks to a cross-examination of Mr Lock. You must pro- ceed in the regular way. You were represented before Mr Justice Manisty, and he decided that you might put in an appearance subject to the payment of costs. You have not done so, therefore you cannot go into the circumstance of the service of writ. Defendant-I shall read the letter. (Laughter.) Under-sheriff-You must not. Confine yourself to the cross-examination of Mr Lock. Defendant-Mr Lock won't answer me. I want to know how you could swear that the summons was delivered to me. (Laughter.) Mr Lock-I did not swear that the summons was delivered to you. Under-sberiff-I say again, Mr Justice Manisty gave you four days to pay costs. You would then have been allowed to appear, but you have not paid costs, and consequently you cannot go into the service of writ. Defendant then sat down. Mr Blankley sworn said-I am managing clerk to Mr Robert Lock, Tenby. I attended the taxing of costs before the Registrar. Mr Bonville was represented by Mr Howells' managing clerk. I forwarded the allocatur to Mr Howells. The costs were not paid within the time stipulated. They are not paid now. Mr Arthur Lewis-Do you call any witnesses, Mr Bonville? Defendant—No. Mr Arthur Lewis-That is my case. Defendant-Perhaps I shall call a witness. Mr Arthur Lewis-I should like to know Mr Under-sheriff what defendant intends to do. You see my object ? Under-sheri.ff-Ye.s, I do. Defendant then said he would make a statement on oath, was sworn, and proceeded Mr Sheriff and Gentlemen of the Jury,—In order that you may arrive to a just conclusion of this strange case of the so-called libel, which I trust I shall be able to prove to you beyond any doubt whatever that this charge brought against me by Mr Parkinson, with whom lays all the original offence, that there is no libel in this case whatever, which I shall be able to make plain to you, though unassisted by a barrister or a solicitor, as I feel, gentlemen, that simple truth in itself must prevail. Although I am quite'a stranger at any courts of law having never been mixed up with a case of law in my whole life before. And I may here say that I have been dragged into this case by the very man that ought to remain in silence for ever after his disgraceful and wilful actions of injury to my- self, by destroying those private doors, and to all appearance for life injured Nirs Bonville's nervous system, by the great and sudden fright she ex- perienced by smashing the doors with a crowd at his back and threatening to smash Mrs Bonville and myself as well as the private property. And gentlemen, I wish to call your particular attention to the following facts in this case. Had I at the time half-a-dozen men inside those doors there would have been a regular riot, and perhaps the loss of life by an unhappy blow. Now I wish to inform you, gentlemen, that this case in the first place was proceeded with when I knew nothing whatever about it. In this way on Thursday evening, January the 27th, at half-past seven o'clock at night, as I was crossing the street to a prayer meeting, to my astonishment I was waylaid by a boy from Mr Lock's office with a letter. I told him to take it back to Mr Lock, I wanted no more of his letters. He then tried to push it into my pocket and it fell on the street. It was his duty, gentlemen, to tell me it was a summons. It was picked up on the street and sent back to Mr Lock. I never saw the contents or knew where to appear. I can prove this by many respectable witnesses. Hence this judgment was procured to assess damages against me, when at the same time I knew nothing whatever about it. Kindly notice, gentlemen, how this case at this point has been conducted against me. Why did not Mr Lock send me the summons in a registered letter instead waylaying me in the street as if I had been a common thief. I ask the question did Mr Lock anticipate a refusal from me as I took no notice of his other letter, seeking a public apology for the very man that ought to have given me an apology and a large recompense for his wilful and un- warrantable conduct. I wish now to ask Mr Parkinson a few questions. Is he here ? Mr. Arthur Lewis—Did you subpoena him ? Defendant-No Sir. Mr. Arthur Lewis-If you wanted him you should have done so. It was no business of ours to do it. Defendant-I saw him at the station and I thought of course he was coming here. If he had been present I should have asked him these few questions:—In what way has he been injured by any part of that letter ? Has his trade or business suffered in any way? Has he lost any of his good reputation ? How much pay did he receive for breaking the law as a private individual ? Did he injure himself by his exertions in smashing the doors and now require compensation as damages for his gentlemanly conduct? I wish to say, gentle- men, that the printed letter complained of is a true account, describing to the public exactly what took place, and although written under great provo- cation there is no malice or revenge whatever in it, therefore it cannot, gentlemen, come under the heading of a libel as it is a narrative of facts and not falsehood. Now Mr Parkinson wants your verdict in his favour for damages so as to throw upon me their reckless costs which they rushed into regardless of everything. But I tell the jury it will be no use for them to give damages because I shall not be able to pay, as my property is in the hands of Mrs Bonville and has been for some time. I ask then, gentlemen, why should Mr Parkinson take the law in his own hands and wilfully break that law. In that way alone a man makes himself an outlaw by wilfully breaking that law and order which binds society together. I assure you, gentle- men, that it is well known in Tenby that this case is intended to ruin me. Therefore now, gentlemen, I leave this shameful case to your impartial sense of jnstice, and that which is noble and right before men and God, who is the searcher of the hearts and to whom you and me will have to give an account. Therefore I feel certain that you will dismiss this case without one farthing damages or costs against me as a case unworthy to have been brought before you. Cross-examined by Mr A. Lewis defendant said I have some property in Tenby; there has been no rent received for it recently, it is empty. The outrage took place on the 17th December. I did not take proceedings against anyone. I am not fond of law. I tried to get a summons, but I could not get one. I did not summon Mr Parkinson, because I was willing to suffer anything rather than go to law. I have not taken any legal proceedings for the injuries inflicted on Mrs Bonville. Her nervous system has been shattered. She is not here. I have a letter from Dr. Leslie. He is not here. Defendant-There is one other point I should like to mention. That Mr Parkinson wilfully broke down the doors. He had no more right to do so than any of the gentlemen of the jury. The town wall is mine, the openings are mine, and the doors are mine. Mr Arthur Lewis then proceeded briefly to address the, jury, pointing out that his client had done all he could to prevent the suit- coming on. If Mr Bonville had made any sign that he regretted what he had written all would have ended. He did not want vindictive damages, he did not ask for that, but he would ask them to give such damages as would teach defendant that he could not act in the way he had acted with impunity. The Under-sheriff then charged the jury, pointing out to them that all they had to do was to assess the amount of damages Mr Parkinson was entitled to. Defendant—Not damages. The Under-sberiff--Yes, the amount of damages. The jury retired, and after an absence of about three-quarters of an hour returned into court, and in reply to the Under-sheriff said they had not found a verdict-they could not agree. The Under- sheriff-Tb en you must go back again. The foreman-We are not likely to agree. The Under-sheriff-Yon must go back again. A juror—We shall never agree. The Under-sheriff-Y ou must agree. I shall lock you up until twelve o'clock, if you do not sooner agree, and then you will be discharged. The jury again retired, and returned into court about a quarter past eight o'clock. Damages 10s.