Hide Articles List

4 articles on this Page



DENBIGHSHIRE STANDING JOINT COMMITTEE. THE COMMITTEE AND THE COUNTY COUNCIL. MR. LUMLEY SCORES. THE POLICE AND REFRESHMENTS. The quarterly meeting of the above com- mittee was held at the County Hall, Den- bigh, on Friday. Captain Griffith Boseawen presided, and there were present Colonel Mesham, Capt. Best, Capt. Cole, Lieut. Col. Heaton, Mr. Simon Jones, Mr. G. Roberts (Llanelidan), Mr. Thomas Morris (Llan- silin), Mr J. T. Jones-Parry, Mr. E Hooson, Mr. Thomas Parry (Colwyn Bay), Mr. J. Watkin Lumley, Mr. A. O. Walker, Sir R. E. Egerton, Col. Gregson Ellis, Sir W. Grenville Williams, Mr. William Griffith, Mr. 0 Isgoed Jones, Mr. John Roberts (Plas Heaton farm), Mr. W. G. Dodd, and Mr. A. O.Evans, vith Mr. John Roberts (deputy clerk), Mr. R. Humphreys Roberts (county accountant), Major Conran (county trea- surer), the Chief Constable (Maior Lead- better), Col. Lloyd Williams (county sur- veyor), Supts. Hugh Jones (Denbigh), Geo. Jarvis (Llanrwst), and Inspector Beresford (Wrexham). APOLOGIES. Letters of apology were read from Mr. Pen Dennis and Mr. W. D. W. Griffith. THE LATE CLE n K, A letter was read from Major General Carey, in which he acknowledged, on behalf of the family of the late Mr. Adams, the kind V te of sympathy passed by the com- mittee upon his decease THE VACANT CLERKSHIP OF THE PEACE. THE QUESTION OF SALARY. The Chairman, having reported the death of Mr Ll. Adams, explained the steps taken at a special meeting of the commit- tee, held the previous Friday, to appoint a Deputy Clerk of the Peace. Mr. John Roberts had been appointed by a majority of one, to hold office at the pleasure of the committee. Personally, he favoured the appointment of a deputy clerk to hold office until a permanent clerk was appointed, but the resolution was carried in the other form, which made a great difference indeed in the appointment, although only carried by a majority of one vote. Mr. Lumley said there was one observa- tion dropped by the chairman which he should like to refer to, and he did so on a point of order He wished to ask the question whether the chairman should take upon himself to inform the committee that the motion adopted at the last meeting of the committee had only been carried by a majority of one. Should the chairman not be content to state the fact that the motion was carried. The Chairman There is nothing what- ever in your point of order. Mr. Lumley: Let me say that you, sir, are only in tne chair by a casting vote. You are chairman by one vote only, and the want of importance which you a. e seeking to attach to a vote last week, applies also to your election. The Chairman Your point of order is, as I understand, that I said the resolution ap- pointing Mr. Roberts a Deputy Clerk of the Peace was only carried by one vota. I say that that point of order is absurd. It is stated in the minutes that the resolution was carried by one vote. Capt. Cole And it was also in the news- papers. The Chairman said it was the committee's duty to take the necessary steps for the ap- pointment of Clerk of the Peace, and went on to explain that prior to the passing of the Local Government Act of 1888. the ap pointment was in the hands of the custos rotulorum of the county. By that statute the Standing Joint Committee now appoint- ed a Clerk of the Peace. The committee had also the power to go into the question of salary. He also informed the committee that although the Lord Lieutenant formerly appointed the Clerk of the Peace, the ques- tion of his salary was settled by the magis- trates at the Quarter Sessions after having gone into former salary and emoluments. He proposed that the same course be adopted now, and that the Standing Joint Committee, which had the appointment, should appoint a committee to go into the question of salary and fix the same, after the emoluments and salary of the clerk in the past had been considered. This would be done before taking any steps to the ap- pointment, which he presumed would be done in the most open and fair manner pos- sible (applause) and duly advertised in this county. They must first decide what the salary would be for the Clerk of the Peace Mr. Lumley: I wish to rise to a point of order (order, order, and shouts of chair). The Chairman: I am perfectly in order in what I am going to suggest. Mr. Lumley: I rise to a point of order, upon the standing orders. I do not wish to be at all obstructive or to interfere unduly, but I wish to ask you a question, sir. Ac- cording to the standing orders, are we not to take the business on the agenda in the order placed thereon ? Col. Mesham said that if Mr. Lumley looked at the end of Rule 6, he would find that it was in order for the chairman to introduce a subject mentioned on a supple- mental agenda, before that of the ordinary. The Chairman then explained that the matter which they had now in considera- tion, and which was placed on the supple- mental agenda was of the utmost impor- tance, and should therefore be taken immediately after the reading of the minutes. Mr. Lumley contended that the commit- tee could only vary the order of business, on a vote being taken as to how that should be done. The Chairman then ruled that the busi- ness should be taken then, and then moved that the committee consisting of an equal number of members representing the Quarter Sessions, and the County Council on the Standing Joint Committee, be ap- pointed to go into the whole question. of salary and general emoluments: of all kinds received by the late Clerk of the Peace, and that the committee be empowered to call for all documents and informations relating to the matter, and that the same committee should also fix the salary of the Deputy Clerk of the Peace. Mr. W. G. Dodd seconded. Lieut.-Col. Saxon Gregson Ellis said as he understood it, the committee vvould go into the question of the Deputy Clerk of the Peace's salary. He presumed that with re- gard to Mr. Roberts they would fix the salary from the time he was appointed up to the election of a Clerk of the Peace, on a different scale to that of deputy clerk, because what would be ifair remuneration .as deputy clerk, would not be fair for him when he is doing the whole work of the -county (applause). The Chairman agreed that Mr. Roberts stood in a different position until the Clerk of tha Peace should be appointed, therefore he thought the salary should only be fixed until then. After further discussion, the chairman said Mr. Lumley had stated he had been appointed chairman by a casting vote. He did not think that was true, but as long a.* he was chairman, he was to carry out his duties as such. As chairman, he had never taken upon himself to suggest what mem- ber, or who should sit upon any committee, and his present motion was that the mem- bers appointed should equally represent the two parties on the Standing Joint Com- mittee. The motion was then carried. Sir William Grenville Williams moved that the committee should consist of six members, three representing the magis- trates, and three representing the County Council. The Chairman thought that three was rather too small. Mr. Isgoed Jones was of the same opinion, and suggested that five each side should compose the committee. Mr. Lumley proposed that four from each side should be appointed. Mr. Hooson, seconded Mr. Lumley, and suggested that five should form a quorum. Sir Grenville Williams then withdrew his motion. Mr. Thomas Parry seconded Mr. Isgoed Jones' motion, that the number be five. It being put to the meeting, Mr. Lumley's motion was lost by one vote, and the amend- ment carried, ten voting for the amend- ment, as against nine for the resolution. The following were then appointed to form a committee:—For the magistrates, the Chairman, Col. Heaton, Capt. Cole, and Col. Saxon Ellis; for the County Council, Messrs. Simon Jones, J. W. Lumley, W. G. Dodd, Isgoed Jones, and Edward Hooson. It was then decided that the committee should meet at Denbigh. THE DISPUTE WITH THE COUNTY COUNCIL RE COUNTY BUILDINGS. VICTORY FOR THE COUNTY COUNCILLORS. Mr. Lumley calling upon the Chairman to Apologise The next business was to consider the correspondence which had taken place with reference to the case to be submitted to the High Court under the provisions of Section 29 of the Local Government Act, 1888. It will be remembered that a dispute arose be- tween the Standing Joint Committee and the County Council with reference to the alteration, &c., required at the Llanrwst Court House. The members of the Quarter Sessions sitting on the Standing Joint Com- mittee, who, through the casting vote of the chairman, are in a majority on the commit- tee, contended that the committee have a right of ordering the provisions of buildings to be used for magisterial and police pur- poses, without consulting in any way, the County Council, the body responsible for the expense thus incurred. On the other hand, the County Council argue that they should not be called upon to provide the money, without having first of all an oppor- tunity of inspecting the plans and specifica- tions of the buildings so required. At a recent meeting of the Standing Joint Com- mittee, it was decided by a majority, to submit a case with a view of settling the dispute, to the High Court, without sub- mitting the case so prepared to the County Council. Subsequent to this, a lengthy correspon- dence took place between tie Clerk of the Peace and his London agents, and between Captain Griffith-Boscawen, and also Mr. Lumley and the Clerk of the Peace. The following are the letters addressed on the subject by the two gentlemen last named.- Heulfre, Ruthin, 3rd Dec., 1898. To the Clerk of the County Council. DEAR SIR, Re case for submission to the High Court. As this is a matter of very great impor- tance, I wish to draw your atcention to the rule of the High Court, affecting the sub- mission of cases under Section 29, where it appears that a special case must be agreed upon by the parties,' and as I take it, that the County Council are parties interested, as well as the Standing Joint Committee, the County Council have a voice in agree ing to settling the cse, and if neces- sary, to be represented at the hearing. You know that at present, the County Council have had no voice in this matter, and although I know your London agents' views on this point, I would be glad if you would refer them to the terms of the resolution of the Standing Joint Committee of the 14th October last, and obtain their further opin- ion on the question now. raised by me as chairman of the County Council. Yours faithfully, J. WATKIN LUMLEY. Trevalyn Hall, Rossett, Dec. 7th, 1898. MY DEAR SIR, Case under Section 29 Local Government Act, 1888. I have received your letter of yesterday's date, with copy of letters from Mr. Lumley and your London agents. Looking-to the very distinct terms of Section 29, it appears to me that it is competent for any one of the persons acd bodies named therein to submit a case, and I certainly take the view stated in your agents' letter, as your Joint Committee could not be over-ruled by the opinion of any individual. If you as clerk, and legal adviser, have come to the conclu aion that the committee acted ultra vires in deciding to send up the case independently, the committee could be called together again, and so told, before their case is hand- ed over to the County Council. Yours faithfully, T. B. GRIFFITH-BOSCAWEN. Ll. Adams, Esq. The correspondence, which was read by the clerk, showed that the Clerk of the Peace submitted the case to his London agents, to be lodged at the Crown Office in accordance with the requirements of the rules of the High Court, and that they were informed by the officials there, that it was absolutely necessary that the case should be agreed to by the County Council as the other party thereto. After the correspondence had been gone through, The Chairman said he had consulted the members of the committee residing in the Wrexham District as to whether a special meeting should be called to consider the subject, but they were of opinion that it should be left to the present meeting. Capt. Cole: I hope we shall never give up, but that we fight to the end. I am sure we are right. The Chairman said there was nothing to he done now but refer the case to the C unty Council, on the understanding that it should come back to the Standing Joint Committee. He, however, still held to his original view, that this dispute was a dis- pute between the two halves of the com- mittee, and not between the Standing Joint Committee as such, and the County Council. He would now move that the case be sub- mitted to the County Council at its next meeting. Mr. Lumley. I should like to say a word or two on the matter. The Chairman We cannot go into the case now, as it has already been settled by the committee. Mr. Lumley: I am not going into the case. The Chairman: The only question to be discussed now is, whether the case should now go into the County Council or not. Mr. Lumley said he was going to make one or two observations on what had fallen from the chairman. If the members of the committee would just look on the draft case as submitted to them,! in the first instance, they would find that it was the opinion of whoever drafted the case that the dispute was one between the Standing Joint Committee and the County Council, whatever may have been the opinion of the chairman on the question. For in the case as originally drafted, there was a clause- the very last clause which the Standing Joint Committee, at the Wrexham meeting, took care:to eliminate from it; that clause read as follows:—' The said County Council concurs in the statement and submission of the above facts, and agrees that the facts herein stated are correctly stated.' The very fact that that clause had been origi- nally inserted, showed that the person who drafted the case, was of opinion that the dispute was one between the Standing Joint Committee and the County Council, and not between the two factions of the committee, as stated by the chairman. The Chairman: Have you any motion to make. Mr. Lumley If you wish to stop me from proceeding, Mr. Chairman, I will sit down with all grace. The Chairman I do not wish to stop you, but is it worth our while to discuss the matter at all ? Mr Lumley then said that every member of the committee, whoever he might be, deserved the respect due to a man, and when even the chairman took upon himself to write letters to the clerk of that com- mittee, he should refer to the members of that committee with due respect, and not refer in his letter when speaking of a par- ticular member as 'one individual.' He (Mr. Lualey) had every right to his opin- ion, just as much as the chairman had. The chairman had already taunted the commit- tee with disregarding the law-- The Chairman I never did anything of the kind. Mr. Lumley: Pardon me, you did so at Wrexham. Mr. Walker rising to a point of order said there was no motion before the committee. Mr. Lumley I am speaking on the mat- ter in the communication, relative to the submission of this case, and I have a perfect right, when I have a grievance against the chairman of the committee, to call atten- tion to the disregard and disrespect with which he referred to myself. The Chairman said he had no intention of showing any disrespect towards Mr. Lumley. Mr. Lumley: But you have done so, and I want you to withdraw the impertinent word individual.' Why don't you call me a member of this committee ? The Chairman I repeat that no disres- pect was intended. Surely I have the right to speak of persons as individuals. Mr. Lumley complained that some mem- ber referred to him some time ago as a 'unit'with no individuality or something of the kind (laughter). He had a perfect right to defend himself in the committee. The Chairman Will you move that the case be referred to the County Council ? Mr. Lumley; lam going to move that this case be referred Col. Mesbam pointed out that Mr. Lumley had already spoken for 5 minutes, and was therefore out of order according to the standing orders. Mr. Lumley: I now move that this case be submitted to the County Council as originally drawn out. The Chairman said that would not do. The case would have to be submitted as settled by the Standing Joint Committee, or not submitted at all. He would rule that as-- Mr. Lumley: I think it is quite imma- terial-- The Chairman I again rule that we can- not re-open the case. Mr. Lumley: But we can re-open it when we get it (laughter). And there is another step that we can take, viz., to call in an arbitrator if we don't agree. The Chairman ruled that the case must be submitted as already settled upon, and refused to accept Mr. Lumley's motion. Ultimately Mr. Lumloy moved his resolu- tion in the terms suggested by the chair- man. Mr. Hooson seconded. The Chairman said that if Mr. Lumley was offended with anything he had said, the offence was quite unintentional on his part He did not say anything in the correspon- dence which he was ashamed of in any way. The motion was then agieed to. CRIME IN THE COUNTY. CHIEF CONSTABLE'S REPORT. The Chief Constable submitted his report for the quarter ended the 31st of December as follows :— Crime and Offences as compared with the corresponding quarter of last year, show an increase of 15 in Indictable Offences, a decrease of 23 in Non-Indictable Offences, and an in- crease of £ 722 9s. 5d. in the value of Property Stolen. 194 Indictable Offences were reported during the year being an increase ot 45 as compared with last year, 157 persons were proceeded against, 35 of whom were discharged, 97 sum- marily convicted, and 25 committed forjirial for the following offences:- Murder, 1; sending threatening letters, 1; unlawful wounding, 3 indecent assaults on females, 1; rape, 2; bigamy, I; sheep stealing, 2; larceny person, 2; larceny dwelling-house, 1; larceny simple, 5 receiving stolen pro- perty, 1; forgery, 2; obtaining food, &c., by false pretences, 1; embezzlement, 2; total, 25. 2,449 persons were proceeded against for non- indictable offences, 1,909 of whom were fined, 4 delivered to the army, 9 to industrial schools, 20 bound in recognizances, 56 other punish- ments, 129 committed to goal, 319 discharged, and 3 committed for trial. 25 publicans and beerhouse keepers were pro- ceeded against for breaches of the Sunday Closing Act, permitting drunkenness, harbour- ing prostitutes, &c., 11 of whom were dis- charged and 14 convicted, 1 license being en- dorsed, as against 22 last year, 9 discharged, and 13 convicted. 983 persons were charged with drunkenness, 80 of whom were for being drunk on Sundays, as against 969 and 112 last year. 5 men have left the force during the year, 1 dismissed, 2 resigned, and 2 superannuated, these vacancies have been filled and the strength of the force is complete. SERVING POLICEMEN IN PUBLIC HOUSES. SEQUEL TO A DENBIGH POLICE PROSECUTION. Mr. Lumley asked whether the Chief Con- stable's attention had been called to the evid- ence that came before the Denbigh juiitices with reference to a policeman being in the public houses, and obtaining refreshments. It was a case that the police had against Mr. P. E. Story, when it came out in evidence that policemen in Denbigh were in the habit of hav ing permission from their superior officers to have refreshments at public houses. The Chief Constable I know about the case. I saw it in a newspaper, and I immediately wrote to the Superintendent at Denbigh asking him if he had given permission for such a thing to take place. The Superintendent is here, and will tell you upon what occasion it occurred. Superintendent Hugh Jones then said that he had given the Sergeant such a permission once. The Chief Constable: And I hxve issued orders that that once' shall not occur again. Mr. Lumley: Knowing what the general re gulations issued by the Chief Constable are, I knew that the policemen were not entitled to refreshments as described in the evidence ten- dered at the Dbnbigh court. The Chief Constable: No it was all wrong. Mr. Lumley said that as the Chief Constable had taken cognizance of the matter, he would not take any further notice of it. At the same time, he thought it a hardship on the publicans for the police to place them in the difficult position of risking their licenses by having police on their premises. If a publican were summoned for supplying a policeman on duty with drink, he was liable to Jose his license. On the other hand, if he refused to serve an officer. he was liable to be a marked man in the future. The Chairman A publican is certainly liable to a heavy penalty if any constable on duty is served by him without the authority of his superior officer. Mr. Lumley That is the reason I mentioned the matter. I think it is our duty to do all we can in this matter, by instructing our Chief Constable to direct the police not to enter pub- lic houses for refreshments whilst on duty. The Chief Constable Every publican in the county has been served with a notice to that effect. Mr. Gomer Roberts referring to the clause of the Act quoted by the Chairman, in which it was stated that no policeman on duty should be supplied with driuk 'except by authority,' asked what was meant by this authority. The Chief Constable sab that if the Super- intendent found that a policeman was really in want of refreshments, he gave him a written order. Mr. Gomer Roberts: Then, the written or- der is not given to the publican ? The Chief Constable: No, the policeman. Mr. A. O. Evans said he should not like to see this discussion affecting the police officers of Denbigh prejudically. He had an office nearly opposite the police station, and could say that the town was never supplied with better officers (hear, hear). Mr. Isgoed Jones: If the men here are equal to our men in the Llanrwst division, no com- plaint of this nature can arise. The subject then dropped. INCREASING THE INSPECTORS' PAY. The Chief Constable said he had been peti- tioned by Inspectors Roberts (Abergele), Beres- ford and Bagshaw (Wrexham), for an increase of pay, and begged to recommend that their petition be acceded to, as he found that they were paid much less than Inspectors serving in other forces of similar, and a good deal less strength than the Denbighshire force. The scale now in vogue was as follows :-Salary on appointment, £ 86 13s. 9d.; after three years, 991 5s. after five years, £ 95 16s. 3d. after eight years, £100 7s. 6d. The new scale which he recommended was:—On appointment, £ 91 5s after two years, JE97 15s. 6d.; after five years, £ 104 6s. and after eight years, £110 16s. 6d. Mr. Hooson said he should like to know the ages of the three Inspectors. He did not object to an increase, because he did rot think that the officers of the Denbighshire force should be under-paid. At the same time, the pension allowed to the officers on retiring was very large, and he would not willingly agree to an increase of salary in the fcase of an officer likely to retire in two or three years. The Chief Constable replied that not one of the Inspectors would be entitled to retire be- fore 12 years at least. Mr. Lumley said that the salary of Inspec tor Beresford had only just been increased. The Chief Constable said he had held his pre- sent post for over 20 years, and the pay of the Inspectors had not been increased during that time. Mr. Lumley again reiterated that Beres- ford's salary had been recently increased. The Chief Constable: Not his salary as In- spector. He got an addition for extra work done by him as my Clerk. The Chairman: That is so. The extra allowance must not be considered as his salary. Mr. Lumley: A man cannot do two thing!?. If Beresford is obliged to stay in the Chief Constable's Office as Clerk, he cannot be out to carry out his duties of Inspector. I am not going to speak against an increase of salary to these officers, but I think some reference should be made to the increase already granted to Beresford. The Chief Constable: But Inspector Beres- ford is always as available for dutjy as the other Inspectors. Mr. Lumley But he does not do his duty as Inspector if he acts as Clerk. The Chief Constable: No. because he has no time. Mr. Lumley: Then if that is so, why should he be put down as Inspector. The Chairman Because he holds the rank of Inspector. Mr. Lumley again contended that if Beres- ford was the best Clerk the Chief Constable could get, he should resign as an Inspector, and receive salary as Clerk. If the force could not be complete without three Inspectors, then the fact that Beresford as holding both offices, deprived some other member of the force from the right of having the Inspector- ship. The Chairman: The question now is whether au will advance the pay or not. Mr. Lumley then proposed that the matter be refe red to a Committee, to report to the next meeting of the Joint Committee. Mr. Hooson seconded, suggesting that it be referred to the Committee appointed to con- sider the salary of the Clerk of the Peace, &c. Mr. Lumley agreed to the suggestion. Mr. A. O. Walker proposed, and Captain Cole seconded, thas the scale as revised be now adopted. Eleven voted for the amendment and five for the motion. On being put as a substantive motion, the amendment was unanimously agreed to. SEQUEL TO THE LLANARMON ASSAULT CASE. THE FINE AND COSTS IMPOSED ON A POLICEMAN TO BE PAID BY THE COUNTY. The Chief Constable applied that the sum of JE3 3s. 6d., being a fine of £1 and costs imposed by the Ruthin magistrates on P.C. Evan Wil- liams, Llanarmon, on the previoua Monday, for committing an assault upon a man named Hughes, be paid by the Committee. He (the Chief Constable)- believed that the man, who was a poor witness at best, was telling the truth, although the decision of the bench went to prove that he was perjurying himself. If a policeman incurred such expenses as these in the execution of his duties, he would hesitate before doing the same thing on other occasions. Mr. Lumley characterised this as a most ex- traordinary statement. It was as much as to say that the opinion arrived at by a court of law was wrong. He thought it a monstrous thing for a Chief Constable to make such a statement. In his (Mr. Lumley's) opinion, the Committee had nothing to do with the matter. Mr. Gomer Roberts proposed that the appli- cation be refused. Mr. Lumley: Take no notice of it. Mr. Gomer Roberts: If the man b-is been wrongly treated, he can proceed in the proper court. The Chairman was of opinion that it would be a great hardship if the man had to pay the money. Captain Cole: Have we power to pay it? The Chairman: Yes, I think, nnder section 66 of the Local Government Act, 1888. Capain Best moved, and Captain Cole se- conded, that the amount be paid by the Com- mittee. i Mr. William Griffith considered that a grea question was involved in the application of the Chief Constable. The county could not get their police officers to do their duties, if that went hard with their pockets. He favoured the payment of the money. Mr. Lumley moved, as an amendment, that the Committee be not saddled with expenses of this character. He would suggest thac the members of the Committee, and particularly those gentlemen who showed such kindly feel- ing towards the police, should put their hands in their pocket and subscribe the money (laughter). The Chairman You do not seriously mean that, Mr. Lumley ? Mr Lumley: I do, and I shall give a sub- scription along with other members. The Chairman Your amendment is a direct negative, and cannoi be put. Thirteen voted for the resolution and two against, and the application was, therefore, agreed to. There was no other business of interest be- fore the Committee.