Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

8 articles on this Page



LLANBADARN FAWR. NEW CHURCHYARD.—The entrance gate to the new parish church yard is now almost completed and is a very creditable piece of work. MINISTERIAL.—The Rev. Griffith Parry preached at Utica a few Sundays ago. He will spend a few weeks in the States, and has commenced his journey in Pensylvania. PETTY SESSIONS, THURSDAY, June 29th.— Before J. G. W. Bonsall, in the chair; Captain Hughes Bonsall, Captain Nicholas Bray, Dr. Morgan, B. Ellis Morgan, and David Thomas, Esqrs. CHARGE OF ASSAULT. Mr. W. R. Jones, on behalf of Mr. W. P. Owen, solicitor, Aberystwyth, applied for the withdrawal of the case in which James Michael, Royal Oak, Goginan, was charged by Margaret Jones, miner's wife, with assault. It was stated that the case would be taken to the County Court, as a question of title was involved. The Bench consented to withdrawal on payment of costs. DRUNK AND DISORDERLY. David Evans, Pontrhydybeddau, blacksmith, was charged by Superintendant Phillips with having been drunk and disorderly at Goginan on the 27th. —P.C. Evan Powell said defendant was turned out of the Miner's Arms about half-past nine in the evening, Defendant was very drunk.—Defen- dant did not appear, and, having been previously convicted, was fined P.2 and costs. DRUNKENNESS. David Matthew, Penllwyn, weaver, was charged by Superintendant Phillips with having been drunk at Penllwyn on June 12th.-Defendant appeared and admitted the offence.-Fined 5s. and costs. FURIOUS DRIVING. Lewis Thomas Davies, Poplar-row, Aberystwyth, bottler, was charged with having furiously driven a carriage drawn by one horse at Llanbadarn.— Fined kZ and costs. CHARGE OF STEALING: CASE DISMISSED. Evan Davies, Tymelin, Cwmrheidol, miner, was charged by Superintendent Phillips with having stolen a wooden plank of the value of 2s 2d from Caegynon Mine, Cwmrheidol, property of the Caegynon Mining Company, on May 20th.—Mr. A. J. Hughes, solicitor, appeared for defendant.— John Jones, Caegynon Farm, farmer, said he was caretaker of the mine and he had an inventory of all the articles and machinery in the mine. He missed a wooden plank from the mine on May 20th. Later on he found that the plank had been utilised in making a door to a shed belonging to defendant. The door was produced, and witness indentified the timber by nail marks and knots,—In cross-examina- tion, defendant said he knew the marks of every article in the mine.—Mr. Hughes (perusing the inventory which defendant had produced) said: There are landers outside. What are the marks on them ?—Witness: I cannot say now.—In continued cross-xamination, he said the plank had been lying attached to pieces of wood on the ground for fifteen months. Trams run over it and there was water underneath.—Mr. Hughes produced the plank and asked whether there were marks on the timber in- dicating that it had been on the ground for fifteen months. It was quite rough and there were no in- dications that persons had been walking over it for a few days let alone fifteen months.—Witness But the plank was not used for weeks at a time.- Replying to the Bench, defendant said he had lost things from the mine before.—In further reply to Mr. Hughes, witness said as far as he knew defen- dant was of good character, he had heard nothing against him. He never examined the door before going to the police. Immediately he saw the door he came to the conclusion that it was made of the stolen timber. He would have to suffer the loss if the person who had taken the timber was not dis- covered.—P,C. Thomas Davies said in company of P.C. Evan Powell he went to the mine and measured the place where the missing plank had lain. They next proceeded to Tymelyn and searched the premises and ultimately found the door attached to a shed. Witness said the nail marks on the wood correspond in distance with those on the plank. In cross-examination, witness said he had shown the marks to Jones who had not told wit- ness of marks on the plank.—Mr. "Hughes said this was more of a Sherlock Holmes case than anything else. There was really no evidence. Defendant had bought a lot of timber some years ago. It was therefore nothing strange to have nail marks on timber bought second hand, as the defendant had done. He pointed out that the timber consisting the door wore a fresh appearance compared with the pieces of wood on which the missing plank rested. The pieces of wood were worn out and soiled. Defendant then gave evidence as to having bought a lot of timber some years ago from Mr. Evan Williams. The timber consisting the door was a portion of that bought from Mr. Evan Williams. Mr. Williams purchased the timber from Gwaithcoch Mine. He had planks similiar to the one comprising the door at home at the .present time.—Supt. Phillips: Why did you not produce such planks ?—Defendant: I did not think it necessary.—David Powell. Ffrwd-ddu, farmer, said he built the shed to which the door was at- tached to defendant. The timber comprising the shed was bought from Mr. Evan Williams who' had purchased it from Gwaithcoch. The timber in the door (produced) was similar to the timber comprising the shed.—Mr. Hughes said the charge was based on certain nail marks. He asked them not only to dismiss the case, but to say there was not a stain on defendant's character.—The Bench deliberated for about a minute and dismissed the case, the Chairman saying that the defendant left the Court without a stain on his character.