Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

7 articles on this Page





REGISTRATION COURTS. MACHYNLLETH. Mr Arthur Elpliinstone Lloyd eat at the Lion Hotel, on Tuesday, to revise the registration lists. Mr Ffoulkes Jones appeared for the Liberals, and Mr C Shuker for the Conservatives.—Mr Shaker ob. jected to the vote of John Jones, Mallwyd, on the ground that the house was in Merionethshire. There was a workshop in Montgomeryshire, but he lived in the adjoining house, which was in Merionethshire. Ttie Assistant Overseer said that he had lived for 25 years in Mallwyd, and paid rates for the county. He had also been objected to for many years.—Mr David Evans said he knew ,tbat Jones had a house and workshop, which were situated in Montgomeryshire. He rented and occupied the house. He knew because he held premises close by, and the boundary line of the county was between his shop and Jones s smithy. —In reply to the Barrister, the AssistaJit Overseer paid the man was on the lists as a voter in Merioneth- shire.—Mr Ffoulkes Jonea said the man was not pr. sent to prove his claim, as for many years he had been objected to. but the objection could not be sus- tained. He had a large family, and he knew thattbe man lived some, imes at one of his houies, at least, some of his chil di on did, and sometimes at the other house in Merionethshire.—Mr Shuker: But he can't have a vote in two counties.—The Barrister: Ob, yes, he can -Mr F. Jones said it was not neoessary for a man to live in a house altogether in order to qualify himself for a vote. The house was properly furnished, and he exercised rights over it. The Barrister 1 he question is does he ever sleep there ? —The Assistant overseer said that he did sometim-Fe when at his work.—The Barrieter said he thought he must transfer him to Division 3 (County Couneil voters list.)—Mr Shuker: Do you think he is entitled to a vote for Division 3 ? —Ttte Barrister Oh yes, certainly.—While going through the Cemmes list, the name of a woman appeared as claiming for a vote in division 3, and it was stated that she claimed as being the successor to her late husband's property In her own name she had not held the tenancy for 12 months -Mr Shuker said it had been the practice of Mr Marshall (late revising barrister) to allow such claims.—The Barrister expressed his doubt as to whether the woman was properly qualifed, and said he would give his ruling.—Mr Ffoulkes Jones said whatever his decision was the agents would accept it. —The Barrister: I don't see how the claim can be allowed. The law clearly does not give me tie power, and I cannot allow it.—Mr Shuker objected t(1 the claim for a vote made by Thomas Jones, Voel, Cann Office, on the ground that he was nut tenant. Claim disallowed -Mr Shuker objected to the vote of Hugh Parry because he resided with Arthur Davies, his father-in law, at Cemmes.—The vote wa"; allowed nn the ground that he paid the rates, but. Arthur Divies's vote was disallowed.—The vote ot Ann Kvane was objected to by Mr Sbuker on the ground that she was not 21.—Mr Evans said he knew Ann Fvaus was 24 Vote allowed. -Evan Roberts wai obj -cted to ou the ownership vote by Mr Shuker on the ground that he had not been owner long enough. The vote was allowed. Mr Lloyd afterward* sat to revise the borough lists, when Mr Ffoulkes Jones appeared for the Liberals, and Mr T. J. Pugh for the Conservatives. LLANBRfNMAIR. On Wednesday the Court met at the Wynnstay Arms Hotel, Llanbrynmair. The Liberals were re- presented by Mr Cecil Taylor, Newcown, and Mr C. Shuker again appeared for the Conservative party. Mr Tdylor made an important application to the Barrister with respect to the supplying of the lists of the different parishes to the party agents. He thought the Revising Barrister would agree with him that the agents rendered very great and material assistance to the work of the Court and to the over- seers in securing a perfect register. The applic.iiion he made was that the li-ts should be supplied free of cost, and that the cost should be included in the overseers' certificate of expenses. In support of his applicattd he cited a similar application which had been made and granted in the Sleatord Division of Lincolnshire. Mr Shuker heartily supported the application. The Barrister remarked that be was donbtful1 whether he had the power tc accede to the request which had been made to him. If he possessed the power, he would do so willingly. as he fully recognised the assistance which be received from the party agents He would give the matter farther consider- ation, and make his decision at a future Court. An objection to Mr Evan Evans, Blaenyowm, on the part of the Conservatives fell to the ground.—A technical point arose with regard to the admission of the name of Martha Swancott. Mr Shuker said that the lady was allowed to live rent free, in considera- tion of which she acted the part of caretaker of a. I chapel. A man tinder similar circumstances would be placed on division two, but it was not permissbile to place a woman on that list. As she did not pay rates, he argued that she was not entitled to a voto. —The Barrister said it was a technical point, find he held she was not entitled to a vote.- rho Liberals nude two lodger claims, one of which was sustained, and the Consoi vatives put forward one claim which was considered good.—The lists for the parish of Carno were next examined, but nothing of interest transpired. LLANIDLOES. The Court was held at the Town Hall, Llanidloes, on Thursday. Mr Shuker and Mr Pugh appeared tor the Tory party, and Mr Richard Morgan for the Liberals.—Mr Morgan object d to the name of Mr T. E. Knsey being placed on the owner's list for Llan. dinam, on the ground that he was not an owner.—Mr Shuker objected to the validity of the objection, and said that it did not reach Mr Kinaey until Juiy 21st, whereas it should have be-n served on July 20th, which was on a Sunday.—Mr Morgan produce I a certificate to show that the objection was placed in the bauds of the post office officials on the 19th July. —The Barrister: Sunday does not count. Subse- quently on referring to the Act he said that the ob- jection must be delivered in the ordinary cost of post on July 20th, and as there was no Sunday de. livery at Llandinam, the ordinary course of post would be on Monday morning. He must therefore disallow the objection.-IA the parish of Litngurig, an objection to Mr David Jones, an outvoter, by Mr Morgan fell through on the same grounds as that of Air Kinsey.—A claim was made by Thotnas Morri", C vmbellan, as owner.—Mr Shuker called the appli- cant, who said when his father died be left him the house, which be claimed for.—Mr Morgan asked for the production of the probate, and on looking thr ngii it disco-, ered that the claimant's father had left his wife his property for her life, and that he only had a reversionary interest, and the Barrister at once struck off the name.-William Beadnell, Cefn Farm, claimed as a joint tenant with his father in holding the farm. Evan Griffiths and David Hughes, made similar claims. In each instance the names were erased from the register, the Barrister stating that it was only a way of manufacturing votes.-William jonee, Hafonfedgar, claimed as the occupier of his larm, but the claim was not permitted to pass, as the "vidence given did not satittfy tho Barrister that the tenancy was of the necessary period. A similar fate hefel the claim of Mr Pryce George. Thomas Edwaid Hamer, Pompenpren, claimed as a joint tenant with his father, and Mr Morgan sustained the claim. Be- yond that Mr John Jones, Penrhiew, WAS struck off, and the name of Mr David Roberts, DrlraeseIJdm, was put on, nothing of interest occurred in going through the list of the parish of Trefeglwys.—At the conclusion the Barrister complimented the Overseers of the parishes of Llangurig, Llandinam and Trefeg- lwys ou the care which they bad exercised in prepar- ing the lit,Mr Shuker said that Mr Marshall had noticed the same thing when he acted as revising barrister. On the resumption of the sitting after lunch, the lists for Llanidloes parish were examined. The claim of William Henry Williams was objected to by Mr Shuker. Mr Morgan argued that the objection was not valid, iuasmuch as the notice of objection never reached him.—Mr Shuker admitted having received the letter oontaing the objection back through the dead letter office, but contended that he had carried out the law. He had been informed that the pro- perty was not Mr Williams, and that it was mort. gaged.—Mr Thomas Jerman (Town Clerk's office) said he knew the claimant had property worth JJ100 a year, out of which he had to pay X40 to his brother. He was unaware that the property was mortgaged, and asked who was the mortgagee?—Mr Shuker replied that he was unable to supply the in- formation.—The objection was not sustained.—Mr Owen L!oyd Evans, Crowlwm, claimed to have his name inserted on the list of voters as joint tenant with his brothers, and to which the Liberals objected on the ground that he had not been joiot tenant a sufficient length of tiine.-Mr Evans skid he and hi. brothers were in joint partnership in the farm, and had been since July last, his mother's death occur- I rlD in June. He and his mother were in partner- ship at the time of her death.-The Barrister said the claim was good, but he must take off the names of claimant's brothers. A Conservative objection to David Jervis failed. The borough list was then gone into. The first ob- jec ion was by Mr Morgan to the name of Mr E D. Davies (London and Proviucial Bank) on the lodgers list, but the claim was deemed good and allowed. A contrary fate befel the claim of David Rich, which wax supported by the Tories, the Barrister not being stti-fied that the roonti were of the requisite value. —The Conservatives made an objection to Mr Thus. George, of election petition fame, and by mutual con- sent his name was removed from divis.on 1 todivioion 2.-Mr Pugh urged onjfeotiuns against Measi.s KdwA Hamer, Mount Srreet, and William Baxter Franc s, Penvcraig, but in both instances tue cleiins were allowed. NEWTOWN. The Court was held at the Public Booms, New. town, on Friday. Mr Richard Williams appeared for the Liberal party, and Mr Charles Shuker, for th- Conservatives. While going through the Aber bafesp lists, the name of Mr Richard Jones, of Rhiewbai k, appeared on the occupiers list.—Mr Shuker asked tithe claimant had occupied the farm for the qualifying period.—Mr Williams said be had been sole tenant since March, but up to that time had been joint tenant with his father.—The Barrister doubted whether the claim was good, but said he could not cross off the name as no objection had been made (laughter.) On the assistant overseer presenting his bill for printing the lists, Mr Williams rose and said he understood an appli- cation had been made at other Courts with respect to the allowance of the oots of the copies of the ii,ts of voters supplied to the party agents. It was a very rea-onabie application, and the agants assisted the Court in getting through the work. Taka for in- stance the lodger list of Newtown and Llantlwchaiarn. There were a great many c aims, and the party agents had gone into them thoroughly, with the re- sult that very few would be contested before the Court. The Barrister said he quite appreciated the assist- ance which the agents rendered to ihe Court, but unless they could show some section of the Registra- tion Act which empowered him to make the allow- ance, he could not do so. The section expressly stated that the expense- to be allowed were those of the overseers, and they could not well state that the fur wishing of the lists to the agents came within the ineani,-g of the Act. Mr Williams replied that the overseers supplied lists to the Clerk of the Peace and as the agent facilitated the business of the Court their costs might be included also. The Barrister The law says that the Clerk of the Peace shall be supplied with lifrts. I would mike an ordr if I had any Statutory power to do so, but I am utterly unable to do it. I should merely be going round a corner to eff ct something which I have not the power to do. I know some of toy colleagues do m ike such orders as that asked for, but I am at a loss to understand upon what grounds they do it. The Act. says that any expense incurred is to by for the carrying out of the provisions of the Act I dec ine to accede to the application, because I have no power to do so, but 1 have no doubt befo-e next year the revising barristers will meet and decide upon what course they will take in the future.—la the parish of Llanmerewig, Messrs Samuel Owen 0.0,1 Charles Miller, sous of Mr Samuel I Miller, The Court, claimed to have their name in A rted all occupiers, being joint tenants with th ir fathers—Mr Williams objec ed.—Mr S. O. Miller said that his father's farm was very extensive and he and his brother ^ad part mmigement. Tney were join tenants with the r father, and bad bet • ecosinis«d as such bv th" landlady. The a^reemeut was produced, show ng date June, 1S92.—Th-) B ir- rister said th, objectlOn had tailed and allowed the caim. The same persons al«> claimed for th-* b rough of Newtown, and objected to by Mr Williams, who, however, withdrew his objecion, and thi names were passed—Mr Williams objected t Edwin Lewis, whe-l-rigiit, for the parish of Mouh- dre, but the Barrister disallowed the objection for wintof suffi cient evideTice.-An objection mane t » Mr Richard L. Pryoe, Kings Head Inn, Newtown, by Mr Williams on the grouud of insufficient value was sustained. After an a-ijour m^nt for lunch, the Court reas- sembled. when the borough lists were taken. Mr Williams objected t > the insertion of the nimn of Thomas V. Morris, Park Street, on the occupiers' li-t. "If he was not, th" tenant.—Morris statpd that ht had been tenant of the home from 1st May, 1892.— Mr Ct-cil Taylor said that Mrs Morrill had told him that Rbrt was tenant until August, 1892, and Mr Goodwin (assistant overseer) said that the cisimant. asked him to put him on the rate book in September, and he mmplied with thi request.—Mi-s Worthington of Market Street, stated that Mr Morris entered into the tenancy on August 1st, 1892, when his mithr-r gave up the tenaucy. The Btrrister disallowed the claim. Mr Pugh said that when he asked Miss Worthing. ton if Morris was tenant on August 2nd, the date of a rent reoeipt. she would not swear that he was not. He thought there should be better evidence than that before a claim was disallowed. The Barrister: I am here, sir, to determine the evidence, and 1 disallow the claim (laughter.) Mr Williams objected to the claim of James Pryce, Albion Ya-d, that the place where he lived was not a dwelling house. Pryoe said he hired the house which was furnished, and to which there was a sepa- rate entrance. The landlord was John Weaver,' of the Albion Inn. The objection was disallowed On leaving the room Pryce gavp an exhibition of his ability and intelligence to exercise the frÚcise, by t iving utterance t. a long string of iucoherent drivel, which canred Mr Williams to remark that, he was not thei. responsible for what ne said.- Air Williams also objected to Mr W. H. Swettenham being on the occu- piers' list; tii- objection faile i, and the vote was a, lowed.-i%lr Pugh objected to Mr William Jones, Canal Basin, alleging that he htd not occupied the house for the qualifying period.—Mr Jones sa d he took the house in May, 18^2, when he commenced to place furniture in it, preparatory to taking unto him- self a wife. He got mai ried in September, but before theo he frequently slept on the premises. The ob- jection fell through.-Air Williams obj-cted to the claim of Arthur Jones, Qaeeti's Head t'ourt, on the grounds that it was not a tenement aDd that he had not been in occupation for 12 months.—A brother of claimant said that the place was an outbuilding. Mr Pugh said that people lived next door to it. The Barrister: A thousand people may live next dour to an outbuilding, and that will not make it a Louse. Claimant's brother said that he only slept there nboiio six months ago. The Barrister: Borough franchise! (laughter.) Your last witness has put you out of court. An objection was lodged against John Tooker, Marston Terrace, which was (sustained.—Mr Pagil objected to Mr George Lewis, Turiiei's Lane. Mr Cl-ment Jones proved he tenancy, and xaid that the man had left the h JUSJ aoout a month ago.—The ob- jecti n fell through Mr Jojies a-ked for expenses, and the Barrister said that Mr Pugh havii.g lost tha day should pay s ôJ (laughter.) Mr Paxh No. Mr Williams called him. The Barrister Hut you lost the objec ion. Mr Pugh (to Mr Jones): That's airight. I'll see you. Mr .Tones: I would rather have it now (roars cf laughter.) Ultimately Mr Williams lent Mr Pugh the requisite sum. A Conservative objection was lodged against Mr Albert Edward Bright for an incomplete t-nuncy. I'he rent book was produced and showed that Bright ceased his tenancy of the house on July 22nd. Mr Pugh eliciied from the witness that the house wis tne property of Mr R chard Lloyd, after which he sug- gested to witness that he (witness) put d -wii the sig- uature to the rent book as having received the money instead of the landlord. Witness replied that it was not so, and Mr Williams said that Mr PugH had no right to make unfair insinuations. Tne objection was disallowed, and Bright asked for expenses (laughter.) The Barrister Oh, yes, you are entitled to half-a- crown. {, Mr Pugh: He only works over the way, and I don't think tie should have any allowed him. The Barrister It is not for you to say that. Mr Pugh: He has lost no time, and has got no claim. The B-irrister: I must request you to be quiet, sir. Amidai unrestrained merriment Mr Jugu forked out of his pocket the half-crown, and reluctantly handed it to Bright, who was app ir-ntly well catisded. The next objection by Mr Williams was that handed it to Bright, who was app ir-ntly well eatistied. The next objection by Mr Williams was that agiinst Thomas Morgan, of Foundry Terrace, who, on his name being caileJ, entered into a confabula- tion with Mr Pusrh, who afterwaida stated that Morgan told him that he gave notice to the agent to give up the tenancy on the 17th July, but he, being a s roug Liberal, altered it to the 10th July. Mr Clayton (the agent): I must protest against that, sir. Mr Williams: You have no right to say that. Mr Pugh He says he gave notice to give up the tenancy on the 17th July, and that the agent's clerk has altered the date to the 10th July. Mr Williams Are you prepared to swear that ? Mr Clayton May 1 ask one question, with your permission ? The Barrister t Certainly not, but you may give evidence if you like. Thomas Morgan, sworn, said that he gave Clayton II otice to quit, which would end on ttie 17th July. He pro luc- d his father's rent book to sho-v that, but on cXLtnination the rent boo* showed t-iat the incoming tenant paid rent from the 10th July. He said it was a done up job." The Barrister: You cannot prove that.. Mr Clayton denied the allegations which had been ma 'e, and said that on the 26 h June, Morgan gave him notice to quit, which be accepted. On 30th June he kisked witness if he could stay in the house another week, and he gave bi m permission. Mr Pugh commenced to cross-examine the witness, aud ma, e an allegation. Mr Williams: I mut protest against that. You a e not, justified in making that remark. Mr Pugh I am not speaking to you, I am asking the witness a question. 1(r Williams I must protest against it, sir. I.te,Barris,.er. What w.,ts it, r did not hear itr Mr Williams Mr Pugh was making untruthful al- legations against the witness, and I protested against them. ( The Barrister: Let him make what insinuations he likes, it won't influence me (loud laughter). I shall not be prejudiced by what he says. I shall de- termine upon the weight of the evidence put before me. Mr Williams Yon should not make these insinua- tions. Ultimately the objection proved good. Mr Williams, amid great laughter, asked for the allowance of Clayton's expenses. The Barrister said he would allow half-a-crown (renewed laughter.) Mr Pu^h purely, I am not to be called on to pay for these witnesses (laughter.) Clayton: Thank you, sir, 1 will not have anything. Mr Pugh objected to Fred Pryce Jones, and the objection was suetained.-The Court then rose. MONTGOMERY. The Revising Barrister f Ir this district opened his court at the Town Hall, Montgomery, on Saturday forenoon. The county lists wre taken first, and Mr E Powell represented the Liberals; Mr C. Shuker appeLLred for the Conservatives. Thyre were ro cases of interest, and the final result was as follows: L'beral objections m'!iJe-5, sustained—2; Conserva- tive claim-i made-22, sustained 17 Conservative objections—5, -ustaip-d 2. In the revision of the borough lists Mr Martin Woosnam acted for the Liberals, and Mr T. J. Pugh for the Conservatives. In division one of the occupiers' list two objections had been submitted, to the names of Robert Beddoes and John Rowlands, but both were withdrawn. For the freemen's list two objections h:id been made by the Liberals. The name of Thomas Davies, POOl. road, was struck out; and regarding the case of F. H. Lloyd, Mr Pugh call-d Mr Watkin, proprietor of the Dragon hotel.— Witness said that Mr Lloyd had the us-3 of a sitting room at the Dragon, and also rented a bedroom, for which he paid ten shillings weakly.—Cross-examined by Mr Wootnam-He was not sure as to the number of the bedroom, but he could show him the window of it (laughter). Other people had slept iu the room, but it was always ready for init Lloyd when he came; amongst other things he kept a cise of birds' eggs in it (laughter). The claim was allowed, and this concluded the business.