Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

19 articles on this Page

HOLYWELL.

News
Cite
Share

HOLYWELL. COUNTY COURT TUESDAY.—Before his Honour Sir Horatio Lloyd, Judge, and H. A. Cope, Esq., Registrar. Tirna DISPUTE.—SINGTJLAB PROCEEDINGS. Mr W. H. Churton, solicitor, Chester, made application for costs ia an aition-the Earl of Denbigh v. Captain Goodman Elli-3, North Hendre, a claim for tithe rent charge, JE31 16s. 3d., and in doing so stated that correspondence had passed between Messrs Bromley and Jones, and Mr Cope, in regard to tha matter, Mr Cope informed Messrs Bromley and Jones than it was intended to proceed in the County Court. An understanding was arrived at that the summons was to ba served a reasonable time before the Court. As the money was not paid the summons was issued, when the arrangement of short service was repudiated. On Monday night, instead of communicating with Mr Feildiog, someone was sent to Mr Bakewell, who kcowing nothing about the matter, reaeived the money and gave a formal receipt.—Mr Llewellyn Jones said the difficulty would not have arisen were it not that the Registrar coadnctad the case uotil just upon its being brought into Court. On May 10th Mr Cope called at his office and arrange- ments were made for a meeting with Mr Goodman Ellis for Friday last, and if the arrangements failed for settlement be was to accept service on his behalf. Mr Bromley met as arranged, but no settlement was arrived at. He had written to plaintiff's solicitors stating that the tithe would be paid, and they had written to their client for his cheque. He never heard anything about the matter until Monday morning, when the Registrar's ohrk called at the offioe with the summons. He felt he was not justified in accepting service. He could not deal with Mr Cope, as being registrar he was precluded from oonductiDg the ess3. He bslieved that Mr Cope was above suspicion, but it would be admitted that it would be more sad-fa t )rv to all parties concerned that in any a tion that came into Court that the Registrar shoul,l riot iutarfere in any way. It was in view of that fact that he sent his clerk to Mr Bakewell w?th whom the bookit were gone throngb.-Yr Churton: Why should the ragistrar be depriTed from practicing ? The sammons wa, issued by me, signed by me, and not by Mr Cope. It is admitted that Mr Cope actad up to a certain point, but from the vary moment that proceedings were to be taken, I have aoted, and I have a perfect right to act. Did Mr Jonei agrfe to accept short service in order to enable proceedings to be tabea in the May Court? He admits he did and as an honourable man he ought to have carried it out. We waited the receipt of the cheque for the amount of the claim until the last moment and as it did cot come summons was taken out, for the May Court. This is a very unnecessary reflection upon Mr Cops. Lord Denbigh has a perfect right to employ him.- Mr Llewellyn Jones By Friday night's post I intimated that payment would be made in the course of the week. On Saturday morning that notice was received but on Monday morning I was asked to accept service of summon?.—His Honour: There is only one point to determine; whether it was or was not agreed to accept short service. With refe ence to the general question of the Registrar practicing the law is clear. A Registrar cannot practice in his own Court. There is nothing in his own Court. There is nothing in his own Court until the summons is ifiiued-the summons is the origin of the case. It is an every day occurrence fur a regular client of a Registrar to find it necessary to go into oourt, and immediately that is obvio-is the Registrar at once transfers the case to someone else. That is done here. Mr Cope oannot say to a client Don't speak to me, this affair may possibly come to court." He is obliged to ad visa his client as becomes necessary in ordinary business, and when it oomes to court the case is transferred to someone else. A Registrar of a small County Court could not be expected to abandon his praotice. The initiation of the case is signed by Mr Churton who appears for the plaintiff. There is nothing irregular in that. Over anc over again this question whether a registrar should practice has been discussed. It is absurd the matter has been gone into ad nauteum. The present system goes on until the country gets more liberal on that question. As I said, the question is whether or not there was an agreement to accept short service. It there was, then the defendant has gone behind the back of the plaintiff's agent on the eve of the trial.-Ur Liew. Jonea: I would not have complained if the summons had been served on Saturday morning. After my letter was sent the action was entered into the County Court. That was not a straightforward action.—Mr Ohurton I don't know what he means by not a straightforward action." It was an understood arrangement.—His Honour pointed out that thu letter stated the cheque would be sent in the course of next week." That would tarow it over the court day. He took it the agreement was made that the cheque should ba received before the next court day. Costs were granted as applied for. A SINOULAE TITHS DISPUTB. This was an aotion brought by the Earl of Denbigh (through his agent Mr J. B. Feilding) against Mr J. V. Lean, of Somersetshire, late of Mertyn Isa, Whitford, for the recovery of tithe rent charge, S17 15s. 4d. A counterclaim was entered for t22 I Os. 4d., the particulars of which was stated to be tithe paid on behalf of plaintiff, 99 2s. IOd.; five years taxes omitted to send in receipts, 13 7a. 6d. damage done by game, ZIO.-UR W. H. Chnrton, Chester, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr F. Llew. Jones defended. In stating the case Mr Churton said the claim was in respect of two half-year's tithe rent of Mertyn Farm, Whitford. Defendant gave Lord Denbigh notice to quit; he gave up the laud on the 30th November, and the hocse an the 1st of May last. The tithe was in respsct of the past half year, and the defendant bad derived the benefit of the crops. The counter- claim he characterised as a "bogaa" one as con- cerning the nret particular, the second as to taxes was not understood, whether land or pro- perty tax, and as to the claim for game damage, the owner of the shooting Mr M'Cullooh and not the plaintiff was the responsible person.— Mr W. Bakewell said the defendant was a sitting tenant, that was one responsible for the tithe. Two half-year 8 rent barge were claimed, £ 2 17s 4d Defendant gave notice to Mr Feilding of his inten- tion to give up the land in November, and the house in May. Defendant bad the benefit of last year's crops, in respect of which the tithe was due.—By Mr Llewellyn-Jonas: Defendant entered into the tenancy of Mertyn in 1881 before that time the Earl of Denclga farmed that land. The contract was at that time that the tenant paid the tithe direct to the Vicar. But when the new Tithe Act came into operation, the landlord paid the tithe and recovered it in the rent. A separate reoeipt; was given for the tithe. He was not aware of any notice of occupiers' liability having been served.—Mr Llewellyn-Jones contended that Lord Denbigh was entirely out of Court, aud quoted See. 1, sub-seo, 3, and Se- 2, Sub-aec. 6, of the Tithe Act, of 1891, as the groaiid of his contention. It was cleirly the intention of the legislature thit th* tenant should be put in no wore position under the new act than he WM before. Previous t) that Act the remedy was undtr the Act of William IV. by distress.—Mr Churton: I do out underpaid why this question should be rai-ed now the defendant has paid the tithe regularly hitherto without objeotion.-His Honour fhe objection is as to the present remedy. You carinot take this or any other proceeding until you aave mervttd the oocnp era wit liability notice or not an excuse from the County Oourt.-Mr Churton Ara w«$u,9 whether thjg tioulstJ. witness juat examined know, of M** notioe whether served or notr'-Mr Llewellyn Jones: I contand thar. the only remedy in tha ca.e of the landlord is disir^sit, but talandlord cannot distrain for tithe an-il he has erv"d the occupier* liability notire.- His Honour: Firt of all the defence says you eaunot b i'jg this action, and if you proceed if at all, by distress, he would tay where ia your occupiers liability notice? Mr Llewellyn Jones: We are prepared to d.) thin, without prejudice. if the plainriff wiil withdraw the cliim, we will withdraw the counter-olaim.—Mr Churton That 18 very kind, but I should like to a,k for an adjourn- ment to consider the case. I admit the matter seems rather complicated, Pwonid subm t that: my friend ha put himseli ont of court in not having givdn mtiue of special de'eoce, at least statntjry defence.-His Honour: The question is whether I am not b >ui\d to take uotice oi it, I may be aoting without jurisdiction und should make myself re- sponsible.—8jr Churton: Let the whole matter be adjourned, and if I find I have De right to sue I snail perhaps acoept my fneud's suggestion. This course was agreed to and the cabs stood adjourned*

TERRIFIC THUNDERSTORM.

. JLIjANASA.

[No title]

HOLYWELL URBAN COUNCIL.

. THE POVERTY OF THE CLERGY…

Advertising

. OARMEL.

. SCIENCE NOTES.

LIGHTING-UP TABLE.

MOLD.

+ NANNEROH.

♦ BODF ARl.

[No title]

Advertising

THE SECRET OF ITS SUCCESS.

RAILWAY TIME TABLE.

BRYNFORD. BRYJNFORD.

-"""-I yaliti UJf OJJVVYD,…