The Welsh Coast Pioneer and Review for North Cambria

DENBIGHSHIRE QUARTER SESSIONS. CHILD NEGLECT AT COLWVN BAY. tfTHE JURY AND BENEFITS OF THE DOUBT." These Quarter Sessions were held on Friday, at Ruthin. The whole of the day was occupied in dealing with five indictments, but only one of the prisoners was found guilty. It was necessary during the afternoon to divide -the Court, and while the Chairman (Sir Watkin .Will in ms Wynn, Bart., C.B.) presided in one Court, Mr Jelf Petit (the Vice-Chairman) took the cases in the second Court. The other justices present wereDr. Medwyn Hughes, Colonel feromhead, the Hon. E. Hewitt, Mr E. O. V. Lloyd, Mr J. W. Lumley, Mr Joseph Nanson, -ancf Mr G. H. Denton. THE CHARGE TO THE GRAND JURY. The Chairman, in his charge to the grand jury, 4aid he did not think there would be much diffi. culty in dealing with the case?. although be asked the jury to carefully consider in the alleged .horse-stealing case against James Pilling from e 03 Ruabon whether there was any fraudulent in ten- tion on the part of the prisoner. If there was none, then the man should not be put on his trial. The grand jury threw out the bill in this -Case. THE LICENSING COMMITTEE. The Clerk reported that tho Home Secretary had c-onfirmed the resolution of the Quarter Ses- sions reducing the quorum in the Licensing Com- ■cniUee from five to three. NEGLECT OF CHILDREN AT COLWYN | BAY. Charles James (47), labourer, and his wife, 'Catherine James (44), described as of Moorlands, ^Abergcle-road, Colwyn Bay, were indicted for cruelty to their five children by neglecting them. Mr Dawson (instructed by Messrs Nunn and Co., Colwyn Bay) appeared for the prosecution, and Mr Artemus Jones and Mr Austin Jones (instructed by Mr T. H. Morgan, Colwyn Bay) appeared for the male prisoner. The female prisoner was not represented. During the hcarng of the case both of the .prisoners became very excited, and contradicted the evidence of the witnesses. The husband in particular made himself objectionable, and do- spite warnings from the ViceChaicman and his own Counsel he persisted until removed from the Court. He was later on brought back to Court. Mr Dowson explained that he did not intend to proceed with anything but the charge of neglect. The parties appeared to have led a very unsettled life, for they had lived at various times at Llan- ddulas, Llanrwst, Colwyn Bay, and Birkenhead. They returned to Colwyn Bay from Llanrwst, in May, and the charge against them of neglect- ing their children was laid for May the 8th, and divers other dates. The male prisoner had worked at the quarry at Dolgarrog, and it was only fair to him to say that he was away from liome for a considerable time, and that while it did not appear that he was addicted to drink there was little doubt but that the wife had given way to it, and the result was that the jchildren were not only half-starved, but were neg- lected, dirty, and verminous; their clothing were pinned about them, while the bedroom they occu- pied was anything but a desirable place for a family. The children were:—Kate (16), Harriet (10), G:adys (7), Maud (4), and Violet (1). Coun- sel was proceeding to give the history of the family, when Mr Austin Jones took exception to anything being said against the male prisoner beyond what took place six months previous to May 8th, upon the grounds that the Act did not permit anything jto be gone into beyond six months. Counsel proceeded to say that Inspector James bad had the family under his observation for some time, and on the 8th of May he found it necessary to secure an order for the admission of the children to the Conway Workhouse, where they ha.d been ever since. It was a very sad case, and it was clear that the wife was not a fit and proper person to have the custody of chil- dren. Inspector James, of the N.S.P.C.C., said that for two or three years he had had knowledge of the circumstances of the family, and three years ago they resided at Llanddulas. In August, (1907, they were living at 41, Park-road, Colwyn Bay. He found it necessary to report them, and he was instructed to take proceedings, but before he did so thev both signed the pledge. They went to Birkenhead, and soon afterwards returned to Colwyn Bay, but in November of last year he found that they were at Llanrwst, .where they remained until the latter part of re tP,I)ril. During the time they were in Llanrwst tie paid several visits to the house, and usually found no bread there, and that the children were dirty and poorly clad. The father was working at Dolgarrog, and he received 5d per hour when he worked. They stayed in the same place until the male prisoner got work at Colwyn Bay on the light railway. While the family were at Llanrwst the mother complained that they had no food, and he told her that if she would ab- stain from drink he would get Supt, Woollam to give them relief from a fund he had. i, The female prisoner interposing said that was jiot so. What she was told was that things would improve as the weather got better. Inspector James added that at times the chil- dren were fairly clean, but they always appeared o be half-starved. The Father: I always provided the children with food, but I could not always get it when we .Were off work at Dolgarrog. Inspector James said he had warned the te- male prisoner several times, but he did not often eee the father. The family was helped by Supt. ^Woollam and the Rev. Mr Davies. After the family removed to Colwyn Bay on May 1st, he received a communication, and went to see them on May 8th. He found them at Moorlands, where they were lodging. They had three rooms, !but the bedroom in which the father, mother, and five children slept was only lift, by 6ft. 3in. There was an old dirty mattress on the floor and a dirty Down quilt as a covering. It was unfit for young children to sleep on. The children were poorly nourished, dirty, and their clothing ;was pinned about them: He did not find any food in the house excepting a 3d loaf, lb. of margarine, and lb. of sugar. There was neither fuel nor fire. The Wife: There w-ae a gas stova. Inspector James (continuing) said the only titensils i.n the place were two cups. There was no furniture, and in the room he found a woodon clothes-box, which served for a ohair, and a small tables 18 inches acroas. The baby was crying for food, and he went out and etched a quart qt milk, the bottle being cleansed. He spoke to tihe wife about the con- d tic.n of the children, and she as usual blamed tihe husband. He went to fetch tho doctor, and afterwards saw the mother and the children in the street. He asked her to accompany him to house, but for a time she g'avo him "t1, slip." They all ran away, and it was rome time .before lie got hold of them again. He had a conversation with the father, who eaid that he earned 4s 7d per day when in full employment; that lie had taken home 3s on tho previous Sat- u urday night, and had instructed his wife to buy fcod with It for the children. On May 13th witbne obtained an order for the removal of the children to Conway Workhouse, where they fcud been since that date. He had difficulty in getting the children away, as the mother was under the influence of drink. Cross-examined by Mr Austin Jones: He had kept, a sharp look out. on the family for some time. It was true that the husband while at Llanrwst had to walk between three or four milej each day to and from his work. "NO USE TRYING." The Father: It was seven miles. Cross-examined: Tho father would have to fetart very early, and witness did not know that 1J\S waives varied from 6s to 20." per woek, which certainly would not leave much for the support of the famlly if the wtfe drank to any extent.. He had not seen the father intoxicated, and it knight be that he was a respectable labouring man wilili a bad wife. He had never seen the father at Llanrwst, only at Colwyn Bay. It never occurred to him that he should have sug- gested to the mother that she should have ap- plied for parish- relief. His object in watching tho family was not to get the parents convicted, but to try and reform iaiem so that the children ftvould bi well looked after. Bv the Vioe-Chairman: He had hoard that work was alack at Dolgarrog when the weather rwaa vat, and that at times the men made no- thing at all during the week. The Vioe-Chairman said that was a matter of ôOrnnnn knowledge. Cros5;6xaminatian continued: He called on the family in Colwyn Bay because of the complaints, and be agroed that with a man who had nothing iat his back it would take him some time to get iL homo together. He called on him four or five Jdavs after he reached Colwvn Bay. There was *K> improvement, in the homa when he called jUiere on May 13th. It was no trying to im- eore thom; he had tried it far three years. It true that the man had told him that he ubbod" b wages oaoh day, and that out of 4s 7d he had given his wife 3s for food. The father had admitted to him that he kept away from the family from tho Tuesday until the Friday night, and that he did not intend to re- turn to his wife aga:.n. lie d-d not say that tho. father had done his best to keep a home for his children, but he believed that he would have done better had he had a better wife. By Mr Dowson: Tho fact that there was no furniture in the house after the family had only been in Colwyn Bay for four days had nothing to do with the filthy condition of tho children. The mother could have used water, as that was chean enough. Dr, E. P. A. Harriett. Colwyn Bay, gave evi- dence as to the condition of tho children, and bare out Inspector James- statement as to their be in? poorly nourished, badly clad, verminous and dirty. He did not thi: k there was much to ahoose between the children, as to their CAndi- ion. He advised their removal to the work- house. Cross-examined: I only made one examination of the children. I did not find any food in the house, neither did I see the husband, as he was at work. P.S. ROM said he gave information to Inspec- tor James, and also acoompanied that officer to the house. He corroborated what had been said Cs to the condition of the children, the state of the house, and the absence of food. He saw a quart jug in the place, which was the only do- mestic utensil there. He had known the family for about 18 months, a.nd had seen the woman under the influence of drink, but he had act seei the husband. Crcx=s-examined: Ho did nrt know that the father was a very hard working man, as for about 12 months he did not appear to do much work. It was true that many men were out of work for weeks together. AN EMPTY CUPBOARD. Edward Bitthell, school attendance officer, Col- wyn Bay, said that he had known the family for some 18 montlu, and while he had seen the mother under the influence of drink he had not seen the father in that condition. On May 5tili he called ot the house, and spoke to the mother about sending the children to school, telling her to make them clean and tidy. He saw the baby in the father's arms, and as it was crying ;he asked if there was any food in the house. The father said there was. He asked what the baby had in its bottle, as it looked the colour of lemon, and the father replied that it was "browse." Although the father said there waa food in the house he could not see any in the cupboard. He oommunicated with Inspector James. At nine o'clock next evening be saw! the mother and the children, in Sea View-road. Some of the children were cry\ng, and otlhem were carrying them. Ho spoke to the mother about keeping the children out so late at night. and ivlii-ii she got home he asked if there/ wal any food in the house. She replied that there waa, but two of the children said there was none. He then said that if she had none he would get it fot- her, whereupon she said, "I have .not a d- thing." She opened the cupboard door, but there was nothing inside excepting d;rt and half-bricks. He went out for a 2-lb. loaf and Some m:lk, and when he came back two of the children had fallen asleep on the floor. The mother told him that her husband had given her a black eye; that she meant to summon h'm. The mot.-r;r never appea.ed to be scLer. The Rev. D. C. Davies, of Llanrwst, said he had been told about tihe condition of the family, and he had visited them four or five times. He could bear out Inspector James' statement as to their general condition. Tho mother used to make the excuse that they were in want owing to the irregular work of the father, but he thought that that would only partially ac- count for the existing condition of things. He relieved the family with food half-a-dozen times. In cross-examination, the witness admitted that there had been families in Llanrwst suffer- ing from the want of food, but he considered that this family was the worst, they had. P.C. Holgate, Llanrwst, said that he was ask- ed by the Rev. D. C. Davies if he knew of any families in Llanrwst who really wanted food to let him know, and he mentioned the prisoners' family. He knew thev were relieved, and on the very night that the rev. gentleman had given the mother food he saw the mother in tho Coach and Hoarses with a glass of beer in front of her. She was under the influence of drink, and he spoke to her. He told her that she ought to be a-shamed of herself to be in a puulio house drink after accepting food from the curate. She replied that she was given the glass of beer by the landlord for doing some work, but the land- lord denied that that was so. Witness then told her it was a shame that she should be spending money on drink when her family wanted food. On a Saturday night he visited the house and found that the woman was in drink, and she was bulying the husband because he would not give her money on account of her condition, but he went out and bought food himself for the fami- ly. He told her he would report the matter. The children got into a very bad state, and were always dirty. He had told her that she was not in a fit state to take charge of the baby, and he asked the eldest girl to look after it. He had not seen the husband in drink, and be- lieved that he would treat his family all right if he had a decent wife to assist him. Cross-examined by Mr artemus Jones: He believed that the father would mate a good husband, and be a very mspectablo man if his wife was better. It was true that while at Lian- rwst the man had to walk 14 miles eaoh day to his work. THE FATHER'S STORY. For the defence, the father gave evidence. He said he had told the police that he had given his wife money to buy food, but she spent it in drink. He had never had a complaint made against him whilst he was at Llanrwst, and he wished to say that both Supt. h aoUam and the Vioar had helped him with food when he was out of work. He used to get all the money he oould, and he bought what food was wanted, and gave his wife his money. 11 he only work- ed an hour he was able to "sub," but he had not worked many weeks more than a few hours at a time owing to the wet weather. He waa taken up as soon as he started at Oolwyn Bay. Cross-examined: He had never known his children to be dirty, as they always seemed to be in a decent condition when he left in the morning, and they were all right when he re- turned at night. He had asked for food of the parson and Supt. Woollam as he could not see his children starving, and when he had to work it was his wife who went without if there was no food, but the children and himself had what was thero. He had asked for relief once. He had never been warned at Llanrwst. The wife, who was then called, said she had never spent 2d of her husband's money on drink. He had only worked half a day the previous week, and this week he had not earned a cop- per. She looked after the children, and the witnesses had told great untruths about her. In addressing the jury, Mr Dowson said that the male prisoner seemed a man of a very ex- citable temperament, but while it was not alk that he was given to drink he wa3 responsible for the condition of his children. He contended that there was evidence of neg- lect, and that both father and mother were guilty. A FIELD FOR SUFFRAGETTES. Mr Axtemus Jones submitted that there was no evidence of neglect against the father, and that he had in reality acted as best he could under very trying circumstances. It was one ot those sad cases where tho father had to go away to hi3 work while the wife spent tho money he earned in drink, and did not look after the children. Personally, he thought that cases of this kind afforded1 the suffragettes a fine field, and it would be better for the country were they to devote their time to trying to make such homes as these more comfortable than in spending their time as they did at pro- sent. The Vice-Chairman, in summing up, asked the jury to dismiss from their minds what had hap- pened to the male prisoner when he was ro- moved from court for a time, as he seemed to bo a man of very excitable temperament. The jury must not take excitement for evidence of drink, as there was clear testimony tht the man was not a drunkard. In many respecte the evidence was in the man's favour, as he had tried to do h.is best, but had a wifo who drank. As to her conduct the evidence was equally clear against her, and ho did not think that the jury would have much difficulty in dealing with the case. The jury, without leaving the box, returned a verdict of "Not guilty" against tho father, and found the female prisoner "guilty." The mother said that she had only had 4a for two weeks. Evidence was given that she had been fined 10s and oosts for being drunk and disorderly on June 13th. J The Vioe-Chairman said he agreed with the verdiot of the jury, and the sentence, of the court was that she would go to prison for three months with hard labaur, THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT. Thomas James Matthews (20), a collier, was charged with assaulting Mrs Ellen Lloyd at Acre- fair on June 20th. Mr Artemus Jones prose- cuted, and Mr Owen Roberts defended. The prosecutrix's case was that she had lived close to the prisoner for some time, and on the night in question she went to fetch a pint of beer for her husband, who was away at the time I but was expected home that night. At the publio- house she met the prisoner, but she denied that k° 10 prison for THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT. Thomas James Matthews (20), a collier, was charged with assaulting Mrs Ellen Lloyd at Acre- fair on June 20th. Mr Artemus Jones prose- cuted, and Mr Owen Roberts defended. The prosecutrix's case was that she had IivBd clo3e to the prisoner for some time, and on tie night in question she went to fetch a pint of beer for her husband, who was away at the time but was expected home that night. At the public^ house she met the prisoner, bnt she denied that she had drink with him, although she believed he ordered 2d worth of whiskey for her. When she left she was followed by the prisoner, who. ) she alleged, attempted to assault her, but her I screams attracted her little boy, who was in the house 170 yards away. Prisoner left her on seeing the boy coming, and when the boy said he would tell his father what he had seen prisoner offered him Is. L Prisoner denied the charge, and said that prose- cutrix had a faint in the public-house after having 2d worth of whiskey with him and after quarrelling with a man about his wife. She asked him to go home with her to tell her hus- band, and on the way she fainted. When he was lifting her up her little boy arrived on the scene, and lie left her with her son. The jury said they would give the prisoner the benefit of the doubt, and lie. was discharged. ALLEGED SHOPBREAKING AT RliOS-CN- SEA. John Cox (43), a labourer living at Penrhyn Bay, near Rhos-on-Sea, was indicted for break- ing and entering the shop of Mr Jos. Arundale at Rhos on-Sea, on April 5th. Mr T. H. Parry (instructed by Messrs 'Porter, Amphlett, and Jones) prosecuted, and Mr T. Artemus Jones (in- structed by Mr T. H. Morgan) defended. Abel Jones, Penrhos, Elwy-road, Rhos-on-Sea, said he was employed with Mr Arundale at his fishmonger's shop at Rhos-on-Sea. On the day in question when coming in the direction of the tram terminus, near the shop, he noticed that the window of his employer's shop was broken. He shouted if there was anyone there, whereupon a man ran out, and made off. Witness at once telephoned for his .master, and afterwards waited the arrival of P.C. Pendlebury. He saw the prisoner the next day, and picked him out from among other men as the man he saw leaving the shop. Cross-examined: It was about 9.30 p.m., as near as he could say. He noticed that the lower sash of the window was out as though something had happened. Joseph Jackson, a grocer's assistant, said he was employed at Brereton's, Rhos-on-Sea. As he was coming out of the shop and going around I the corner ha met the last witness. He also saw a man come out of the shop, and he was touched by the man as he passed. He had also identified the prisoner as the man. James Andrews, water inspector for the Col- wyn Bay Urban District Council, said he started the prisoner to work on excavating at five p.m. on the day in question, and he missed him about nine o'clock. William Arundale said he left the shop at about 8.45 after locking it up and securing all the windows. He returned to Rhos from Colwyn Bay, after being called on the telephone. That was about a few minutes after eleven o'clock. He found the window opened, and he. unlocked the door. The window proved to be broken and raised, the catch being pushed back. He saw a quantity of glass broken. Cross-examined: The room had not been dis- turbed or anything taken away. P.S. Rees said he went to the place after receiving information, and found a portion of the lower pane of glass broken out of the sash. There were several large pieces of glass under-. neath the window. There also seemed to be marks of boot nails across the window sill. At 7.30 the next morning, in company with P.C. Pendlebury in plain clothes, he saw the prisoner, and told him that he had come with reference to the breaking into a shop. Prisoner, in reply, said "I don't remember." After the prisoner was identified by the other witnesses prisoner said "I don't remember anything about it. I may have tumbled against it (the window). I was a little boozed." Prisoner had fof some years lived at Penvhvn Rav. Cross-examined: He saw no reason to disbelieve the statement of the prisoner that he might have been boozed. P.C. Pendlebury corroborated. The Prisoner was then called for his own de- fence, and said he was a labourer with six children. He had lived at Penrhyn Bay for ten years. He had worked in limestone quarries for about nine years. He used to slip for drinks several times into the Cayley Arms. He had been seven or eight times on the day in question. He worked for Mr Andrew, and after finding the leakage he went back to the Cayley Arms. Ho left there to catch the tram, and the place w. get on the tram was near the window of Mr Arundale's shop. He was drunk, and he, having missed one tram, eat on the window sill of the shop to wait for another tramcar. The sill was about two feet from the ground, and he must have fallen asleep. With his weight against the window he must have fallen through. He scrambled out again, but did not remember having knocked against the boj'. He was coming over the next morning totlfxplain to the police how ttv thing happened. He did not go there to steal, and he did not get his living by thieving. A very amusing cross-examination took place between the prisoner, and Mr Parry. The Prisoner said he had sat on this particular window sill on many nights previous to that on which the window was broken. Mr Parry: Have you sat there when you have been drunk before? Prisoner: I have very often been drunk and sat there; every night, not Saturdays only (laughter). But you have never broken the window be- fore ?.I have broken many windows. Between five and 8.15 p.m. you had about seven or eight drinks?- Yes. One for every half-hour?—Yes, but I had 14 or 15 that day, never mind eight. So you were sitting on this window sill drunk, went to sleep, and fell in?—I fell into the win- dow. Did you get right into the room?—I don't re- member where I got. Who took you home?—I don't know. You say you fell through the window?- Partly, not right through. I stated distinctly I broke the window, but I was not in the house. Where were you?—Well, I was half in and half out (laughter). Did your head get through the window?-Well, it was bound to be. You don't think my feet would get through first (laughter). Your face was not hurt ?--D, no, not a little bit. I took care of that. Mr Artemus Jones: The window was cracked before that?—Yes. Some amusement was caused by the jury wish- ing to return their verdict in Welsh, and after some arguing one said: We give the prisoner the benefit of the doubt." The Clerk: You find the prisoner not guilty" then ? 8". 'r'Y" A Juror: INot guilty, lie went into the shop, but did not steal anything (laughter). The prisoner was then discharged.