Hide Articles List

13 articles on this Page

---«i)lviu g ob d1t.








NEWTOWN. LOCAL BOARD, Feb. 4th.-Present: Mr E. Chapman (in the chair), Mr R. Hughes, Mr R. Benbow, Mr Geo. Woosnam, Mr Pryce Jones, Mr T. E. Issard, Mr J. C. Davies, Mr R. Morgan; Mr W. Cooke, clerk, Mr Rees Griffiths, inspector. Financial.-The clerk reported that the balance in the hands of the treasurer on the previous Saturday was £107 19s. 6J>d., and that the payments made in the month of January amounted to £ 108 9s. 7d. The Inspector's -Report.-The Inspector reported that the lamps on the canal were complete, and that a lamp had to be erected in the Back Lane. The cutting for the laying down of the pipes had cost by day labour £4 7s. 6d., effecting a saving of nearly 23, according to the estimates which had been sent in by contractors. The work in Kerry-road was in progress, but had been delayed by the weather. The slaughter houses in use were clean, and the experience of a tri-weekly visit to the several lodging houses convinced the Inspector that they were in a clean state, and not overcrowded.—In answer to a question put by Mr J. C. Dalies, the Inspector said that by the instruc- tions of the Lighting Committee he kept a careful check upon the accounts of the Gas Company. The Sknday Closing of Public Houses.-The Clerk re- ported that since the last meeting, he had received a letter from Mr Thos. B. Jones, the secretary to the Sunday Closing of Public Houses Association, enclosing a list of those public bodies by whom the resolution in favour of Sunday closing had been adopted. The subject was dis- cussed at the previous meeting of the Board, the resolu- tion in favour of Sunday closing being proposed by Mr R. Lloyd, jun. An amendment, that the matter be deferred until this meeting, was proposed by Mr R. Benbow, and carried. Mr Issard, now moved, as an amendment upon the original resolution, that the question be left to the discretion of the Government, and that the Board take no action in the matter. This was seconded by Mr Ben- bow, and supported by Mr Woosnam, Mr Pryce Jones, and Mr Morgan. Mr Chapman declared himself strongly in favour of the adoption of the resolution. The amend- ment was carried, the only dissentient being Mr Chap- man, Mr Hughes being neutral. Applications. -Mr Wm. Parry applied for permission to convert one of his existing lights into a circular window, and upon the motion of Mr Woosnam, the application was unanimously agreed to.—Mr Wm. Richards, Peny- gloddfa, requested the Street Committee to devote their attention to the condition of the pavement in front of his shop, and the Clerk was instructed to reply to the letter, telling Mr Richards that the Street Committee had their eye upon the evil of which complaint was made.—Mr Poundley, jun., Kerry, laid before the Board the plans of a new shop to be erected by Mr John Green, in High- street, and asked for certain privileges in connection with the building. The matter was referred to the Street Committee. The Condition oj the Foo'waijs.—Mr Pryce Jones gave notice that at the next meeting he should bring for- ward a motion relating to the necessity of having the footpaths in High-street, Broad-street, and portions of Severn-street and the Horse Market, put into a proper state of repair. The Board and the County Bridges. -The Clerk said that he had received a letter from Mr Poundley enquiring whether the Board would undertake the charge of the County Bridges within their district upon the same terms as the Turnpike Trust. As the Board were not aware of the terms, the Clerk was instructed to communicate with Mr Poundley, and ascertain upon what terms the work had been done by the Turnpike Trust. COUNTY COURT, Feb. 4th.-Before A. J. Johnes, Esq., Judge. The cause list was made up of four plaints and six judg- ment summonses, and of these the following came under the notice of the judge James v. Nuttall.-The defendant, a woolsorter, was sued by the plaintiff, a tailor and draper carrying on busi- ness in Newtown, to recover 23 lls. lid., the value of a suit of clothes. The plaintiff said that the defendant called at his shop and selected cloth for a suit of clothes, which were made according to instructions then given by the defendant. Some slight alterations were suggested, and carried out by the plaintiff, who left the clothes at the defendant's house. Much to his surprise the defendant declined to accept the clothes, and wanted plaintiff to take them back.—Defendant complained that the" cut" of the clothes was not in accordance with the instructions he had given the plaintiff, and made a long statement explanatory of certain defects in the quality of the cloth and in the workmanship of the garments. He grumbled also about the fit, and his Honour cut the knot by the suggestion that defendant should go home, and, attiring himself in the suit of clothes about which the present dispute had arisen, present practical proof as to the adaptability of the suit.—A long case intervening, judgment was deferred in this dispute until the next court. Bridgewater v. Ha,-rison.-This was a case which occu- pied the court for nearly five hours, the claim being for 29 13s. 9d., made by the plaintiff, Thomas Bridgewater, blacksmith, Montgomery, against John Harrison, builder, Newtown. 22 14s. was paid into court.—Mr Wilding appeared for the plaintiff, and the defendant was repre- sented by Mr John Jones.—The defendant is the con- tractor for the works which are in course of completion at the county gaol, and the present claim was for iron work alleged to have been supplied by the orders of the defend- ant. The plaintiff, in support of his case, said that the first order was given by Mr Pryce, the clerk of the works. When the defendant was asked for payment, he said that David Edwards, the sub-contractor, would have to meet the account. Plaintiff declined a settlement of the ac- count in this way, reminding Mr Harrison that it was he, and not Edwards, who gave the orders, whereupon Mr Harrison said he would pay the account, and deduct it out of Edwards's wages. Mrs Bridgewater, Mr Pryce, and Mr David Edwards were called in support of the plaintiff's case. The defence set up was that the defendant was not the responsible party, and that he had given no orders for the supply -of this material. For th defence the de- fendant, John Evans, and Thomas Johnson were called as witnesses, and judgment was given for the defendant, with costs. Davies v. the Cambrian Railway Company. -In this case Mr John Jones appeared for the plaintiff, John Davies, a farmer living under Lord Sudeley, at the Red House, Penstrowed, who .claimed from the Cambrian Railway Company damages to the amount of 30s., in consequence of the overflow of water upon the land occupied by the plaintiff, owing to the defective construction of the de- fendant's works. Mr C. E. Howell appeared for the railway company.—Mr John Jones said that so far back as April 23rd he -had been in communication with Mr Elias upon this subject. He received a reply dated April 27th, from Mr George Owen, who stated that he had given instructions for the necessary work to be done as soon as the-present plaintiff should have altered a drain. [Mr Howell stated that this was an unauthorized communication.]—The plaintiff, a farmer living at the Red House, said he occu- pied the farm at the lime the railway was made. Before the. making of the railway he had easy access for cattle and Sheep on the south side of the line, there being no water to prevent his enjoyment of the land. For his convenience the company had erected a cattle arch, which at present was useless, being filled with water and mud, the road being perfectly impassable. On wet days the water was nine inches deep, and in floods it was nearly 4ft. deep. The company had made a water-course, 2ft. in depth, and this his sheep had to cross before they could get to his pasture. The drain had been made for the purpose of carrying off the water, and from this drain the earth had been got for the construction of the embankment. There was no other outlet for about two miles, and owing to this drain being in an imperfect state the water backed into the arch and rendered it impassable.—Mr Halford, Mr John Pryce, Tymawr, Mr Edward Thompson, and Mr Charles Stephens were called to speak as to the con- dition of the arch.—Mr Hewell contended that the water- course was on Lord Sudeley's property, and outside the fences df the railway company. He called Mr Tanner, the inspector of permanent ways, who said that some five or six years ago a complaint was made about this -water- course. He saw Mr Howell, and received instructions that he TWas not to clean itiout. Mr HoweU aaked,for an adjournment in order to calliother witnesses, and the ease stands over until the next court. Jones f. Trow. -fAr J. U. Jones, ale and porter mer- chant, sued R. Trow for 7£1 16s., for two barrels of ale- —The defendant appeared, and admitted that he had received three barrels of ale, for two of which he had paid. When asked for his receipt, he produced one in which credit was only given for the payment for one barrel, and judgment was therefore given for the plaintiff. Harding v. Williams.—Edward Williams, a farmer living at Llanbadarn, was sued by Emma Harding to recover 13s. 4d., balance of account for wages due. The plaintiff said that in May, 1868, she was engaged by the defendant's son, and after his death she continued the hiring with, the father, at the rate of £ 3 10s. per annum.— The defendant complained that the plaintiff had taken away three cockerels, a goose, and a pound of yarn, and that she had: broken a lock.-Plaintiff said she had given the defendant credit for the fowls and the goose, and denied all knowledge of the yarn. -Judgment was given for the plaintiff for the amount claimed. Be Elisabeth Hanter.-This bankrupt passed her last examination, and received her order of discharge. The application was supported by Mr John Jones.






[No title]