Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

15 articles on this Page

'----------.-------,.---THE…

News
Cite
Share

THE TITHE AGITATION IN CARDIGANSHIRE. ACTION FOR POUND-BREACH AT LAMPETER. At Lampeter County-court on Tuesday (before the deputy-judge, Mr Cecil Beresford) two cases of pound-breach under distress for tithes were entered for hearing. In the first case the plain- tiff, the Rev. Herbert Hughes, vicar of Llanfi- hangei-rhosycorn, sued the defendant, Mr D. T. Gilbert, schoolmaster, late of Gwernogle-bach, and now of Britannia House, Gwernogle, Llanfihangel- rhosycorn, for 25, being treble damages and costs for pound-breach or rescue of goods dis- trained upon for tithe rent-charge. In the other ca-e the plaintiff was the same and the defendant was Mr Daniel Davies, farmer, Ffynonygog, Llaufihangel- rhosycorn. Mr A. J. Hughes, sohcitor, Aberystwyth, was for the plaintid, and Mr C. M. Bailhache (instructed by Mr T. Walters solicitor, Carmarthen) defended.—The cases were heard under uncomfortable conditions, or the hall was bitterly cold, and the appeal of the officials to have the gas lighted was dis- regarded by the constables. illr A. J. Hughes, in opening the case against Mr Gilbert, said the action was brought under Ihe old statute of William and Mary (2 W. and M., Ses*. l? c. 5? s. 4). On the 18th of September the hailifl acting for the plaintiff distrained for 12s 9d. —being 10s 3d tithes due October 1. 1888. on defendant's holding at G wernogle-bach and 2s 6d fee f,.r statutory notice-and seized two pigs, a calf, and S<llllt' hay. On September 30th he went there to sell and could not find the pigs or the calf, and could not sell the hay because one of the crowds which attended tithe sales in that part of the country was present and violent. He would prove that, and that the animals were after September 30th seen on defendant's holding, and, further, that the defendant and another person were seen early on the morning of the 30th of September removing those animals from the holding. Evidence was given of formalities, and David Owen, bailiff, Tregaron, was called. He said that on the 18th of September he visited the defendant's holding, and Mrs Gilbert, in reply to his demand, offered to pay the tithe, 10s. 3d., but would nor, pay the 2s. 6d. fee. He distrained on two pigs a calf, and some hay. He found the pigs and hay in a field adjoining the house, and thP fi T g° m "ext field- The ^nces of 8 we the fields were in good condition, and the animals could not have got out unless they were driven out. He fold Mrs Gilbert he was coming to look ami f' a? dld 80 ou the 20th, 21st, self rn ]\t! rPH?mbur- 0n fche 30th he went to Gilbert met him and gave him a written notice to appraise. He caused an appraisement to be m«de, and after he failed to sell he told Mr Gilbert that the goods distrained were still in possession of the law, and he would be responsible if the hav w** J consumed. 7 Wd8 rera0™d or Cross-examined by Mr Bailhache: When he d,Stamed Mr Ben Evans, auctioneer, wa8 there! and persuaded Mrs Gilbert not to pay the 2s. 6d. He refused the 10s. 3d. Mr Bailhache All these subsequent proceedings are for the sake of 2s. 6d. ? Witness That has nothina tn ..1" "1-1. 'IV n'J.lJil I11tJ. The Tiidge Had he right to accept it without the 28. 6d. ? Mr A. J. Hushes It cuts both ways 2s. 6d. would have settled it. Cross-examination continued He sent printed bills into the neighbourhood about the sale, but there was no date on them. He searched the fields on the 30th, and could see the rest of the farm from those fields. At the attempted sale conditions were read, and he told the crowd the reserve bid was C3 odd. He had no bid. He ha,, t0 the far,n since He valued the calt at £ 1 10s. Re-examined There was a large and disorderly crowd at the place. He could swear there was no ealf or pigs on the farm. The Jud,e Perhaps they were in the hedge ? Witness It is not the habit of calves to lie in the hedge. John Herbert, bailiff of Lampeter County- court, corroborated Owen's evidence, and swore th.e P1?8 and cal* were not ou the farm on the oUtli ot September. PilOSmexam"ied Owen °nly went into one field. They did not search the cowhouse or the other outbuildings at all. Mr Hughes asked permission to ask Owen if the cowhouse was locked. The Judge I don't know what the defence is, but it seems to me to go to the gist of the whole thin. It is a most important point. Mr Bailhache: Precisely; that is one point of the defence. As a matter of fact, we say that whatever was distrained upon was on the farm on the 30th of September, Evan Jones, a lad of about twelve years old, said that one morning, between six and seven 0 clock, in the autumn of twelve months ago, he saw Mr D. T. Gilbert and Mr James Thomas Saloch, taking a calf belonging to Mr Gilbert from the defendant's place towards Saloch. It was the second day the bailiffs and the police came there. This was the case for the plaintiff. Mr Bailhache, for the defence, submitted there was no evidence of such actual seizure as the plaintiff should prove, and there had been no sufficient impounding. It was a reductio ad abmrclnm to say that two pigs were impounded when they were left in a field for twelve days. There was no obligation on the owner to keep the animals in the fields the obligation was that the owner should not take them out. The Judge-But don't you fail if you don't satisfy me as to the calf? I am with you as to the pigs. Mr Bailhache contended there had been no seizure and impounding of the calf. The bailiff seemed to regard a distress as a sort of lethal weapon, lme a Martini-Henry rifle, and needed only to take a sight at the animals in the dis- tance. There should be a separate act of im- pounding and a separating of the things im- pouiideii, ivlilcli should be shut up in a place suit- able for their keeD. The J uJge--I certainly think the bailiff should have put a padlock upon the gate. Mr Hughes maintained that the bailiff had remained m possession of the goods just as long as it was safe for him to be in the district. It was a notorious fact that the state of the country was such that the bailiff had to be accompanied by police on his visits to that district. It was admitted on the other side that there was no h adWn'Bnt ? u° SePtember 30th, and there otX Sff-S hetookHote •whetber by Mr Bailhache, said tW examined he had a si x ZnX'tT He removed the yearling himself, but theather animal was in the field next to the hayfield on animal was in the field next to the hayfield on September 30th. No one could see all over the farm from the hayfield- Cross-examined by Mr Hughes—His farm was about ten acres, and undulating in surfaee, with groves of trees. He saw the calf in the field at nine o clock on September 30th, and again at mid- Cidy about a quarter of an hour before the bailiff atict nis party got there. Two cows and the calf were m a field together, and it was necessary to go into that field to see what was in it. There was a high bank in it, and high hedges and trees around it. The bailiff Owen told him he would Bring an action, of pound-breach against him. Witness did not tell him where the calf was, but tW to take his action- He did not know unit anyone else saw the calf on the 30th. There r8 £ je?fc crowd of people about, but although hailiff i■ T?,d °f Poundbreach actions, and the think •+ eatened him with one, he did not rit-P a !1.ecessary t0 §efc any°ne else to corrobo- aboutV ° °a'^ being there. The hay was used middle !Ur ,montlls after the distraint—from the Tr R I end of February. train t K!011? contended that the notice of dis- traii)t Ilavilig failed to describe the calf, the mi T choose which it should apply to. th t t-lif.U(' ge SuPP°se I hold there is no evidence R nWer,e two calves] r cU lac e said that defendant's evidence was uncontradicted, but if the Judge held against him on that point it was no use his saying any- thing, except that it would be a very strong con- clusion. As to the hay, he contended that no steps being taken for four months furnished clear evidence of abandonment. The Judge said it was clear to his mind that the distress was good, and that there had been pound- breach. It was time for the good people of that district to learn that pound-breach was a very serious offence. He gave judgment for the full amount and costs. Mr Bailhache That is for 24 10s.—treble value of Pl 10s. Mr Hughes asked for costs on the higher scale and advocate's fee. Mr Bailhache asked for leave to appeal on the points of law which he had raised, and intimated that, as the case was of considerable importance, he would not oppose Mr Hughes's application ie costs. Mr Hughes remarked that "the plaintiff was fighting an association. Mr Bailhache s iid his honour would see he had had some provocation to make remarks of a political character, but had studiously refrained. He did not think that such remarks should be made on the other side. The Judge (after a little more conversation) said the points were of importance, and he would give leave to appeal. He also granted Mr Hughes' application. With regard to the other case, of Hughes against Davies, Mr Bailhache said he thought they might decide it that day but, in stating the facts he was prepared to admit, a serious differ- ence as to a matter of fact arose between the counsel and plaintiff's solicitor. The Judge said he preferred to go into that fully, for he found when such case came up to town they were often decided upon points which were never raised in the case of the country. He also preferred to have a jury to try such cases. Mr Hughes said he would withdraw the case if the tithes were paid-the plaintiffs only wanted their rights. Mr Bailhache said,that was a very reasonable offer; it was a pity Mr Hughes's clients were not as reasonable. He would submit that offer to his side, and if it were not accepted, would undertake not to proceed with the case without a jury. Mr Hughes opposed a jury in the case. He would take the case before a jury in any other county, but not with a jury of Cardiganshire farmers. The Judge did not agree with Mr Hughes. ,9 z, Mr Bailhache said that magistrates often sat on a case of pcaching, and he did not see why farmers should not sit on a tithe case. As the sum claimed did not exceed R5, he asked the judge to allow him to give an effective notice for a jury. After a little protest from Mr Hughes, The Judge granted Mr Bailhache's application for a jury, in case defendant did not accept the plaintiff's offer to settle the case on payment of the tithe without costs, and the case came on for trial at another court.

LLANWRDA NOTES.

"GLAMOURS" FROM GARNANT.

-------NARBERTH COUNTY COURT.

LLANDOVERY COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS.

FARMERS, CAIO.

PENDINE.

LLANWENOG.

LLANDYFRIOG.

LLANGADOCK.

ST. CLEARS.

WHITLAND.

"---CENARTH.

ABERAYRON.I

LAMPETER.