Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

14 articles on this Page




PIGS AND POTATOES. A Lively County Court Case. A most entertaining case was heard at Welshpool County Court on Wednesday, before His Honour Judge,, William Evans and the Registrar (Mr G. D. Harrison). The original source of the litigation was a kitchen garden belonging to Mr Percival White, landlord of the Navigation Inn, Guilsfield, and he sought the remedy of the law against his nearest neighbour, Elizabeth Jones, a widow, and her daugther, Harriet Jones, of Tyddyn Wharf. The claim was for wilful damage done by the defendants' pigs trespassing on the plaintiff's garden from New Year's Day, 1909, up to February 7th, and doing damage to the potatoes, fences, and garden. There was an addi- tional claim from February 7tli to February 13th made by plaintiff for keeping the pigs between those dates, the plaintiff having impounded them, and they having been released for and on behalf of the defendants. As a sett-off, the defendant counter-claimed 12s for damage to a -wlleel-barrow Mr Martin Woosnam, for the plaintiff, said that the defendants kept a large num- ber of pigs. His Honour would probably know that as they had been before his Honour before, Mr White kept a garden in which he took a pride, but the pigs, which were continually on the road, were breaking through into his garden Among other things, they had eaten up TWO WHOLE TUMPS of potatoes, and repeated warnings had had no effect. In February, Mr White wrote to defendant sending an account of the damage, and saying that now he had had his garden put in order he hoped it would not be necessary for him to again complain. Apart from the damage done, the pigs were an insufferable nuisance. He also informed them in the letter that lie had the pigs in his stable, and was feeding them at a cost of 2s a day. He would liberate them on payment of the sum. One day after the letter was sent the plaintiff discovered the pigs had flown, and the pigs were traced down his orchard, and there was the foot- print of a narrow toe leading towards de- fendant's house. Percival White, on being sworn, said that from the 1st of January to the 7th of Feb- ruary he kept a strict account of the times the pigs were in his place. On February 7th he impounded three pigs, and kept them there till the 13th. On the evening of the 13th lie fed them and went' away at seven o'clock for his tea; lie was away a few minutes, but when lie got back the pigs were gone. He immediately went down to the defendant's, where lie saw defendant's servant, who informed him that Miss Jones had gone to Guilsfield, and that she was there WHEN THE PIGS CAME HOME. The document produced was a list of the number of times the pigs had been in his garden. He stored his potatoes in tumps, and those had been demolished by the pigs. There were 12 sacks of potatoes in one tump, eight sacks apiece in two others, and six sacks in another. The value of potatoes eaten by the pigs he estimated at v-5 11s- 37 cwt at 3s per cwt. He gave warning to Mrs Jones repeatedly, but it was no use. His letter to her did not bring a reply, and on the 15th of February he instructed his solicitor to write to the defendants. There was a counter-claim on the part of the de- fendants for a wheelbarrow. As neighbours' they were in the habit of borrowing from one another, and the wheelbarrow, which belonged to defendants, was put in his stable. A few days following a man working on the canal came and asked witness to lend him one. He said he had not got one, but Miss Jones had one. The man went away, and it appeared that betook the barrow, and witness believed that he had taken a piece of board off the front of it. The value of the wheelbarrow when new would be abort 12s. Cross-examined by Mr J. E. Tomley, who appeared for the defendants: Can vou tell me where you can buy a wheelbarrow for 12s ?—Plaintiff did not reply. Plaintiff said that he did not dig the pota- toes from the one garden at all he dug them up as he used them. The garden con- tained other vegetables in addition, so that it would only leave a small portion of the garden for potatoes. He had been using these potatoes up to the time the pigs were going at them, and he took one ba out of a tump into the house. The PIGS PAID 151 VISITS to his garden from January 1st to early in February, and they had been there as many as 21 times in one day. There were 17 pigs visiting the garden during the first three weeks afterwards seven of them were sold. He has scores of times com- plained to Miss Jones about them. He kept no pigs now, but at one time he did keep some, and when he did keep them they were never off his ground. He had never asked defendant for 10s to cover the damage done by the pigs. His fences were not in a dilapidated state. He drove the pigs out of his garden into the stable, and not off the road. When Miss Jones's servant came to ask for the pigs after he had locked them up he did not tell her that the pigs had gone down the road. Elijah Jones, of the Celyn, Guilsfield, said that on the 4th of February he noticed the state of the fences around White's garden. The pigs had torn them up to pieces, so that he had a man to repair them. The gar- den was in a terrible fttate; it was like a high road. He reckoned that 196 yards of potato rows had been rooted up, and in one garden they had been taken clean out of the tump. He valued the 37 cwt. of pota- toes at 3s. per cwt, the damage done to the fence at 5s, and the damage to the garden at 15s. Cross-examined: He was quite an impar- tial witness in this matter, but he had had trouble with defendants before. He had never had to pay for damage he had done in this way. HE BROKE A LOCK ONCE to let out two of his own pigs, but his pigs had not done any damage. Mr Tomley: You say 190 yards of potato rows were rooted up by the pigs?—Yes. Where were the potatoes?—In the garden. Not in the pigs then?—No, not by that time I should expect (laughter). He would not say himself that 37 cwt. had been eaten. Mr White had told him ^Joim Richards, of the Varchoel, said he helped the last witness to value the damage. The pigs had eaten nearly all the potatoes in the tumps, and had ploughed up the rows. The fences were in a shocking state. Cross-examined: He had had some trouble with Miss Jones before about trespass. 196 yards of potatoes had been uprooted, and he measured the distance with a tape. He reckoned that he could grow 3 tons of pota- toes to the acre, and that would not be a particularly heavy crop. They measured the potatoes the same way in the Celyn garden. The pigs had taken the potatoes from three tumps. The other garden was the largest. About lewt. of potatoes would go in a sack. There was no glat in the hedge before the pigs went there. Re-examined: Mr White was very careful with his fences; they estimated the amount of potatoes taken by the pigs by measuring Mr Jones, of Celyn's, potatoes. Miss Jones's pigs were a source of general complaint in the neighbourhood. Thomas Jones, a. labourer on the canal, said he was working near the inavigatioii Inn from Christmas, 1908, up to February. They (the defendants) kept 11 a lot of pigs more or less." He had seen the pigs in plaintiff's garden, and had turned them out and told 'him. He had opened the gate for them to go out, but they PREFERRED TO GO THROUGH THE HEDGE. I He often saw them in the plaintiff's garden and on the road. White's hedges were done up very tidy. He had noticed the garden and the turnips, there was a fearful mess made in both of them. Charles Griffiths, also of the Varchoel, remembered assisting the plaintiff on the 13th of February to feed three pigs in the stables. He had put the catch on the door and the lock through it. The garden was in a scandalous state. This ended the plaintiff's case. Harriet Jones then gave evidence in the witness box, and said that her mother was tenant at Tynydd Wharf. At the time when these damages were said to have been com- mitted she was keeping seven pigs .and she had never kept more during that time. If there had been 17 pigs about them they could not have been her's. Mr White had told her that the pigs had been in his place, and he asked for 10s. compensation. She said that they could not have done that amount of damage, and reminded him of the wheel barrow, of which he had promised to mend the board He had borrowed the barrow and kept it for some time He had then lent it to another man to take a load of fuln, it, and when he had finished with it the barrow was in pieces. He had afterwards told her that he would get some boards and mend the barrow. She had been to plaintiff's garden and seen the ground, There were no tumps there, but ONLY WHAT HAD BEEN TUMPS. That was after he complained the first time. She thoue-ht there wight be three bucketfuls of potatoes taken altogether. It was not usual for potatoes to be in the ground on the first of January. When she met the plaintiff the next time she told nn there were no tumps iR his garden, but only what had been tumps. It was untrue that the pigs htd been in his grounds 151 times. A part of plaintiff's garden adjoined the road, and the fences ere m a very bad state oefore the date mentioned. Whenever she saw her pigs going into his garden she followed them immediately and drove then back. They were never able to do any damage before she brought them back. Wlilst on her way to catch the pigs on the 7h of February, and SoaT l +i piaiPtlff and his wife come out ( vr, ti p!lgS" She llld seut the girl Y + At r after the P1^' and the girl told her that Mr Wlrte said the pigs had gone down the road. She knew nothing about the pigs until she SEW them at home W P1?i5 Were not, releasc<l b~v anyone for liei they came back or their own Lross-examined: She 10 seen Mr White driving the pigs from the highway into his ^ye, but. she did not go to him and ask him what he was doing driving her pies into his stye. He denial that he ha/go them at first, and then sait afterwards that HE WOULD NOT KEiEASE THEM until she had paid £ 5 Us She had had trouole beiore before his I.onour about her pigs trespassing. His Honour: Yes, I Iii-Pw she was at the last court. Anne Jones said she a servant with' Mrs Jones. She had noti.ed a glat at the bottom of the hedge by the wicket She remembered Miss Jones sealing her for the P|g?> and the plaintiff tJd her that the pigs were down the road, md the next dav he said they were locked ip and she could not have them. The pig3 came back on their own account. She }ad only seen the pigs three times in the pontiff's garden. Cross-examined: She dd not go to live at Miss Jones s until the 3rd of February. His Honour said he wuld like to have some evidence as to the condition of the tumps. Mr Woosnam explain that his cleirt now miormed him that he whole of the potatoes were not grown ii the garden, but in the fields. and stored it the tumps. His Honour said he coud not admit into evidence at that st2f. Mr Tomley said that a lumber of potatoes had been taken into the plaintiff's house, and yet they continued togo on using potn- ,gardl\ and were toid ihdt 196 } i-ds had been ploughed up. If those potatoes were left n the ground so long, then he contended tiev would not be the slightest use for domepc purposes after the hea^v fronts. Miss J lies happened to have seen the plaintiff, ^o asked for 10- as compensation for damges done bv the pigs, but she considered hat claim to be excessive, and the plain.ff owed her as much for the wheelbarrg^Avhieh had been damaged, and no attempuTmade to repair it. I :IIr \Y oosnam said that he only question P°*aj«es consumed by nbnnt ff"' There COllld ]je no difficulty Of f m™ber Fin and the number of times. He would life to inform b^ a"TVLr that .f«»toes kept jmt hi, ow" r,ows a? 11 the tumps. All his client wanted was to iut ct t tl j business. As regards P THE RESCUE FROM THE POUND it was quite clear that t]le ^Prv.irit a'irl knew nothing about the %uer ancf i was not lively that the pies t T' ? f after they had bee/ffd His Honour: I don't *he+ thing to minimize the ot £ ± tof 8a>' any" Pigs to stray, for it is a v, ".f a]1/'winS There is no doubt that th,m- pass, and no doubt Miss T has heen tre.s- I am not satisfied mvself+wefi 1S hable; payable by her is the'amoi. |ie a.mo+1ft?t claim. I think, on lookin] inf and giving everything .np • ,e -afc i awarded the plaintiff 30s +1 ? ? counter-claim it would m cIaim and "t- tlie CciS6»

Were They Skghted ?


The Teachers Knew.

Newtown Result.


Why the Mistress Resigned.

Moving the " Cambriari."

The Borough Member.

. Hint to Secondary Head Tea.chers


Are Doctors Up-to-date ?