Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

12 articles on this Page







LAMPETER. BOARD OF GUARDIANS, FRIDAY. AUGUST 26TH.-Present Mr Dd. Davies. chairman, prc- siding the Rev R. C. Jones and Mr John Da\ ies, Lampeter; Messrs Dd. Daves, Cellan Evan" D avies, Llanwenog John Davies, Llanybyther Thomas Evans, Llanfihangelrhosyeorn Wdliiam Edwards, Pencarreg Messrs D. Lloyd, clerk E. Jones, master D. Evaos and D. Parry, relieving officers. -Out- relief administ red during the past fortnight, Llanyoyther district, per Mr David Evans, f:36 6s Od to 142 paupers. Lampeter district, per Mr D. Parry, relieving officer, £34 ISs Od to 142 paupers. Number of vagrants relieved during the past fortnight, 42 corresponding period last year. 42. Number of inmates, 12. The Home.—Messrs J. Fowden, R. C. Jones, D. Price, and James Jones reported in the visiting boak having visited the House and found every thing clean and comfortable. The Rev— Morgan, rector of Llanrwst, had also made the following entry in the book: — "I congratulate the Master and all concerned on the tidy and neat condition of the establishment. There was no business of public interest tr IIJsacted by the Board. SPECIAL LICENSING SESSIONS, FRIDAY, AUGUST 26TH.-Before John Fowden, Esq. (in the chair) Lewis Davies and W. Inglis Jones, Fsqrs. Ther e were no objections by the pdice to the renewal of any of the licenses of the public houses. They had been satisfactorily con- ducted during the year. School Boar(i Case.-D]. Jone9, Tanrallt, Cellan, labourer, was summoned by E. J. Davies, Cellan, attendance officer, for the non-attendance of his children.-The case was proved and defendant was fined five shillings. Admitted. Drunkenine*—Philip Cousin, Bryn- madog, labourer, was charged with having been drunk and disorderly at Lampeter on July 27th by P.C. Thomas. D,fend ant admitted the offence and was fined five shillings and costs. A Di>Jtntl*d Dritnk' nness Case.—David Edwards, Llwyngroes, Garthelij blacksmith, was charged with having ben drunk at Lampece on August 5th.—P.C. Thomas stated that he was called to eject defendant from the Station because he was drunk and annoyed people there. -Defendant: Was I not walking as steady as yourself Mr Thonias?-\Vituess No, I had to send you a3 far as Tanfhreit. — Defendant said lie was not drunk but a little noisy, which was the result of a blow from a tongs which he received some years ago, and he showed the magistrates a deep indent ou the side of his head. Defendaut added, becoming a little noisy, that some people would say he was drunk that moment.. However, he never did any harm to anyone except Liza fach and liin-istlf.- The Bench asked defendant whether he admitted that he was drunk or not?—Defendant said be was not drunk and could bring dozens of witnesses to prove it. Lorking around the Court, defendant fixed upon one p'r=on and called loudly upon him to com" forward. The person addresssd seemed busy looking the other way, whereupon defendant ejaculated, "Daniel Rees come forward and tell the rutl1, now. Come oil Daniel Rees."—Daniel Rees then reluctantly advanced and was sworn.-De- fendant Did you see me on this day?—Witness Yes.—Did you see anything wrong?—No.—Did you see n.e failiog to walk along the road ?—No.— In reply to the Bench, witness said he saw the Stationm-igt, i- refusing to give defendant a ticket and P.C. Thomas came and lead him away. —D.C.C. Williams: Was defendant drunk, or was he not ? Witness He had had a drop of drink. I cannot say he was irauk.-Had you had some drink yourself *No. -But you were fined for being drunk? (Laughter)—Yes.—Although you were not drunk ? You know what I said then ?-De- fendant-aid this Air Thomas (the policeman) was always following him about as if he were a pick- pocket. (To the policeman) What have I done to you, Mr Thomas? (Lati-,nter.)-The Bench fined defendant ten shillings and costs. COUNTY COURT, SATURDAY. Before his Honour Junge Bishop. A Remitted Action.—This was an action brought by John Ean-, labourer, formerly in the employ of Wm. Rees, Waunfawr, Tregaron, against the latter to recover 920 7s, balance due in respect of work from 1882 to IS97.- -Plaintiff was in the em ploy of the defendant as labourer for eighteen years at the wage of Is 3d a day during the winter months and Is 6d during the summer months. The action was commenced in the High Court when defendant filed a counterclaim for f80 14s 6d and denied plaintiff's claim. The action was re- mitted to the Lampeter County Court.—Mr WTm. Davies (Messrs Smith and Davies) appeared for the plaii.tiff and Mr David Lloyd for the ddendant.- Defendant admitted all the items in the plaintiffs particulars with the exception of items amounting to £1 4s 3d which plaintiff alleged he had paid on be- half of defen,l ant, Defen,latit denied that plaintiff raid the said sums at his request or at all. Defendant further contended that plaintiff was before the action, and still was, indebted to him in the sum (¡f £80 14s 6d beyond the sums credited to the de- fendant in the plaintiff's particulars, which sum was made up of the items jEll, JE40 6s 6d, and f29 8s Od, the first sum being the difference be- tween f 119 rent really due by the plaintiff and EIOS credited by plaintiff to defendant in his par- ticulars; the second sum being in respect of horses' work (the plaintiff having only credited defendant with i;7 19s 6d for this, instead of f48 6s) and the last-named sum being in respect of the house occupied by plaintiff being burnt down owing, he alleged, to the latter's nealect. -Plaintiff and his wife and Hannah Davies, fregaron, gave evidence in support of the claim, and for the defence and counterclaim, defendant, Evan Thomas, Llanelly, formerly in defendant's service, and David Jones, mason, Penuwch. were called.—The Judge gave a verdict for the plaintiff for the full amount of his claim and disallowed the counterclaim. He also gave plaintiff his costs on thV claim and counter- claim in the County Court and superior Courts. Master and Servant. -E.eanor Jones, Panty- crwys, Pencarreg, claimed from William Thomas, Carmalwasfawr, Ltanveitho, the sum of f4 lis wages due from November 13th, 1897, to May 26th, 189S.-Defendant had filed a counterclaim against plaintiff for deserting his service.—Mr Dl. Watkins appeared for the plaintiff and Mr William Davies (Messrs Smith and Davies) represented defendant —Plaintiff was called and stated that she was engaged in November at a wage of £9 10s. On May 26th her mistress asked her to run a message at eight o'clock in the night. She refused because it was too late, whereupon her mistress told her to go about her business and that she would go her- self. -Plaintiff's mother and father also gave evi- dence.—For the defence, defendant stated that he hired plaintiff on October 21st and denied that the latter was dismissed from his service.—Defendant's wife also gave evidence denying having dismissed plaintiff.—The Judge held that the contract of service was void under the Statute of Frauds, but thought plaintiff was entitled to something for her service and allowed her the JE4 lis. On the counter- claim he gave a verdict for defendant for fl 10s. and refused to allow GJurt or other fees to plaintiff

[No title]




[No title]