The Brecon County Times Neath Gazette and General Advertiser for the Counties of Brecon Carmarthen Radnor Monmouth Glamorgan Cardigan Montgomery Hereford

BRECON .COUNTY COURT. FRIDAY.—Before THOMAS FALCONER, Esq., Judge. Owing to no court having been held for two months there was an unusually large number of causes for decision at this court. As many as 180 new plaints had been entered, in addition to which there were 9 adjourned cases, 2 not served last court, 4 judgment summonses, and 1 case referred from the superior court. A great many of these were settled before coming into court, and the undefended causes were adjudicated upon by Mr. S. B. Evans, the regis- trar, previous to the arrival of His Honour, who had been detainedatMerthyr,and did not make his appear- ance till 12 o'clock. The following were the only cases that call for special notice THE LATE RAILWAY ACCIDENT AT PONT. STICILL. ACTION FOR DAMAGES. JORDAN v. THE BRECON AND MERTHYR RAILWAY COMPANY.—In this case the plaintiff is a haulier, living at Pantyscallog, near Merthyr, and he sought to recover X50 damages for injuries sustained by him on the occasion of an accident near Pontsticill, which occurred towards the close of last year through a Brecon and Merthyr train coming in col- lison with some trucks. Mr. Lewis, of the firm of Smith, Lewis, and Jones, of Merthyr, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. J. R. Cobb represented the Company. Mr. Lewis having stated the circumstances under which the action was brought, called the following witnesses: John Jordan depossd I am a haulier, and live at Pantyscallog I lived there in November, 1867 I entered into an engagement in September, 1867, with the overman at the Torpantau tunnel for the hire of my horse at 7s. a day-payments fortnightly, six days a week I was to provide a driver my son drove the horse for the first three weeks, and I drove it myself afterwards on Thursday, '.he 13th of November, we worked night we began at a quarter to seven; I started from Pant by the 1.30 train to go to Torpantau I didn't take a ticket because they didn't give tickets for Torpantau, but I paid the guard I used often to go like that; they wouldn't give tickets, and I always paid the guard at Torpantau on this day I didn't get to Torpan- tau I was stopped between Dolygaer and Torpan- tau there was a collision, and I was thrown against the other seat; my nose had a hole cut in it, and my cheek bone was broken; my left knee-cap was cut across, and my right knee was hurt; I got off the carriage, and sat on the rails I went home by train I could scarcely move I was laid up for a fortnight, and then went back to work, but was again laid up for three weeks I haven't worked since I can't, because my back is too sore if I work much my knee swells very much my eye was inflamed, and I can't see as well now with it as I used to; I have only one eye I had some ointment from Mr. Hewitson, and he saw me after Mr. Jas. Williams, of Brecon, saw me at the tunnel; he said I must go home, as it was too cold; Mr. Miles also saw me. The Judge What did you intend doing between 1.30 and 7 o'clock ? Witness I was going to look after my horse I lodged at Torpantau, and my wife lived at Panty- scallog; I had come down that morning, and was going back to my lodgings. Cross-examined: I was but a workman I had not a pass I applied for one because the other workmen had one, but I never got it. Mr. Rees Miles, surgeon, of Merthyr, said he knew the plaintiff, Mr. Jordan, and saw him pro- fessionally in December he was then suffering from a cut across the left knee it was nearly closed when he saw it, which was some time after the accident; there was also an injury to the right knee, and there were bruises on the arms and right cheek the injuries would disable a man for a time he saw plaintiff a week ago, and he was then suffer- ing from a swelling about the right knee, which would interfere with him in some way, he being a stout man. His Honour Is it a permanent injury ? Witness No, your honour. By Mr. Lewis I cannot form an opinion as to how long it will disable him. By Mr. Cobb I think it will disable him for some months. Mr. Cobb Were you aware that the plaintiff returned to work in a fortnight? Witness I was not aware of it. Mr. Cobb If you had been informed that he was only laid up for a fortnight, would you still be of opinion that it would lay him up for a month ? Witness Yes, I should. His Honour reminded Mr. Cobb that although the plaintiff went to work after a fortnight there had been a relapse and he had not worked since. Mr. Cobb (to Mr. Miles) You attach more impor- tance to your professional opinion than to facts ? Witness In railway accidents it is impossible to say. A person may have an injury and not suffer much at the time, but he might suffer a good deal afterwards. a Mr' £ °b £ That is n°t the question. Do you, I ask, attach more importance to your professional opinion than to facts ? Witness I attach more importance to my pro- fessional opinion than to the actual injuries he received. Mr. Cobb Your opinion still is that he could not work for several months ? Witness I es, not safely. Mr. Cobb I suppose his being a heavy man is not the fault of the railway company. (Laughter ) Witness That is a matter which has to do with his health. The plaintiff, on being asked his age, said he was 58 years. This was the case for the plaintiff, and Mr. Cobb proceeded to address the Court for the defence. He said it seemed to him that the thing lay in a nutshell, and rested upon the point of law whether as a servant of the company the plaintiff could sue for damages. They had heard nothing as to the cause of the accident. For aught they had been told to the contrary Mr. Jordan himself might have been the cause of the accident, or the son with the horse. Assuming however, for the sake of argument, that there had been negligence on the part of the company, and that the accident was caused through their default, the rule applied that one servant could not claim damages against the employer for any grievance arising out of the neglect of his fellow servant-neither one nor more of them. A case had arisen in that locality, and been decided in the superior court, with which His Honour was no doubt familiar—that of Morgan v, The Vale of Neath Railway Company. It was argued before six judges, and the law, as stated by him, most clearly laid down. Mr. Cobb then read the case alluded to. His Honour said he had been looking for some evidence as to how the accident happened. Mr. Lewis I have not offered any evidence upon that point, as I understood that the accident was admitted. Mr. Cobb I have admitted the accident, but I have not admitted neglect. Mr. Lewis: If you wish to have it proved how the accident happened, and that it was by the com- pany's neglect, I must ask for an adjournment. Last summer we were the attorneys in a case at the Assizes, arising out of the same accident, and we wrote to Mr. Cobb asking him whether he would not admit the accident in the same way as on that occasion. Mr. Cobb's answer was that he admitted the accident, and we understood that negligence was admitted also. His Honour Unless you tell me the facts, how am I to know ? Mr. Cobb I will not split straws, but admit that the accident occurred through the neglect of the Railway Company's servants-that is to say, it was an accident which might possibly have been prevented by greater caution. Some conversation then took place in reference to the case cited, and another of a similar character, Mr. Cobb contending that the plaintiff was a servant of the company, and could not, according to the decisions quoted, bring the action and Mr. Lewis arguing that the plaintiff was not engaged in any duty, and that upon the occasion in question he was an ordinary traveller, and would have paid his fare at Torpantau. His Honour Do you admit the facts ? Mr. Cobb I am afraid I cannot deny them; but I cannot admit them. (Laughter.) His Honour observed that if he decided at once he should do so in favour of the plaintiff but he would take time to consider the case and the decisions in the cases quoted. READY v. THE BRECON AND MERTHYR RAILWAY COMPANY.—This was a claim for 32s. for damage done to goods. Mr. Cobb appeared for the com- pany, and said he did not dispute that the things were damaged, but the contract was with the Lon- don and North Western Company, who ought to have been sued. There was no doubt that the plain- tiff would get what was right from that company. It was only a question of time. A nonsuit was then entered. VOIGT v. BRACE. This was a claim for E6, brought by the plaintiff, a pianoforte manufacturer of Cheltenham, 'against the defendant, for the deten- tion of a harmonium.—Mr. B. Bishop appeared for the plaintiff.-From the evidence of the plaintiff it appeared that some time ago, while staying in the town, he lodged at Mr. Williams's, maltster, Wheat- street, and a Mr. Gowenlock engaged him'to repair a harmonium, which he did at his own (plaintiff's) -lodgings, the cost for which was f,2 12s. The bill not being paid, the harmoninm was detained by the plaintiff. Mr. Gowenlock had been lodging with Miss Brace, and owed her a considerable sum, but had since left the town. Mr. Voigt's lodgings were taken by some one else, and he removed to Miss Brace's, taking the harmonium with him. On leaving there he was about to take the harmonium, but Miss Brace said he should not take it unless he paid her what Mr. Gowenlock owed her. Applica- tion had since been made for it, but Miss Brace refused to give it up unless an indemnity were given her. These facts were admitted by defendant, who produced a letter from Mr. Gowenlock, stating that she was quite right in refusing to give up the har- monium.—His Honour explained to the defendant that the plaintiff, having done work to the har- monium, had a lien upon it, and that she had no right to detain it. He then ordered immediate possession to be given to the plaintiff. DAVID DAVIES V. JOHN POWELL WILLIAMs.-Tliis was an action brought to recover X2 3s. 6d., the value of some hay, alleged to have been sold by the plaintiff to the defendant, a gentleman farmer of Danyrallt.—Mr. Bishop was for the plaintiff, and Mr. Games for the defendant.—Mr. Bishop said the defendant had admitted the debt, and promised to pay; and he put in a letter written by himself to Mr. Williams, and the reply of the latter, to the effect that he would call iu a few days and settle the matter. The defendant admitted writing this letter but in explanation thereof he said he had not bought the hay of the plaintiff, but of a man named Lewis, the son-in-law of the plaintiff. There was a running account between himself and Lewis, the latter owing him money when he bought the hay, and did so still. In the accounts he had settled with Lewis for the hay. Some time before this he bought some hay of Mr. Thomas, the auctioneer, which belonged to the plaintiff, and he paid the auctioneer for it. The plaintiff himself not being present, Mr. Bishop asked His Honour to permit the case to stand over, as he thought the plaintiff had made a mistake in the day. Mr. Games said he was instructed that the plaintiff was a bankrupt, and had not a penny to bless himself with. His Honour refused to adjourn the case, and ordered a nonsuit to be entered. HUGHES V. PROBERT.-This was a jury case.- Mr. Games was for the plaintiff, and Mr. Bishop for the defence. Mr. Games said that was a case in which he appeared for the plaintiff, Mr. Charles Hughes, who formerly lived at the Sun Inn, in that town, and who had lost his reason under painful circumstances well known to some of them. Mrs. Hughes had acted as his agent in the common discharge of all necessary duties required by her husband. That case had been brought for trial from the superior courts, and His Honour had kindly consented to take the trial, with the view of saving the great expense which would be incurred by the trial at the assizes. The parties had been great friends for a number of years, and from the extraordinary circum- stances of the whole case, they would agree with him that it was a painful thing that the case should be brought into court at all. The facts were these. In the year 1863 Mr Hughes was living at Pencelly, near Brecon, having retired from his public life as an innkeeper. While there he thought it would be more convenient to return to Brecon he did so, and lived in Llanfaes. Having more furniture than was necessary, Mr. Probert was engaged to sell it, and he was to manage the sale and to receive the moneys and hand them over to Mrs. Hughes. Properly the action should have been brought against Mr. Probert for the whole amount of the sale, deducting from that the commission generally paid to auctioneers but such had not been done upon the present occasion. The first bit of darkness that met them was the fact that there were no conditions of sale. The entries in the sale book shewed that the amount sold was Y.92 6s. 9d., and at the close of the sale, which was in February, 1865, Mr. Probert handed over to the plaintiff ze36 3s., leaving a balance of Y,56 3s. 9d. That balance, however, had not been realised till that day. This action should have been for £56, but being in the dark for want of information, he was obliged to get the books made up, and had engaged a person concerned in the sale. He had returned to him the amount of the sale, so far as he could ascer- tain, at Y,88 2s. 7d. The amount actually traced to Mr. Probert's hands was 260 15s. 3d. Take f,36 out of that, and there was a balance of X24 15s. 3d. That left 226 13s. 6d. uncollected, as they supposed. The action was brought to recover the sum of X24 15s. 3d., which they traced into his hands, and which had not been paid. Promises had been made from time to time to do so, but as this had not been done there had been no other alternative but to resort to legal proceedings. In answer to the claim it was pleaded that they were not indebted except to the extent of £1 10s., which had been paid into court; and that defendant had a set-off which covered the amount of the plaintiff's claim. This had taken them very much by surprise, as that was the first they had heard during all these years of any such claim. Mr. Games then called the following witnesses in support of. his case Mrs. Margaret Hughes, wife of Mr. Chas. Hughes, stated that her husband was unable to be present; she managed her husband's affairs, assisted by Mr. Walton, her brother-in-law; she understood that Mr. Probert had the entire management of the sale in 1865 at Pencelly and received the money on the second day of the sale he handed a book to her husband, and paid £36, leaving a balance of ze56 8s. 9d. unpaid; she made repeated application to Mr. Probert for the amount, and he promised to pay he also fixed a day for the settlement, but there was none; he did not say he had any account against her she endeavoured therefore to get some of the money herseF. By Mr. Bishop I don't recollect the amount of the sale altogether Mr. Hughes did not buy any- thing in that I know of the things were not, to my knowledge-, the property of the late Mr?. Sarah Hughps I cannot say whether my brother-in-law, John Price, tock an active part in the sale he was on the premi.-es he bought £ 2 6s. lOd. worth of goods, and has paid for them on the day of the sale I did not receive from Mr. Probert X,5 16s. 61., which I did not give credit for Mr. Probert did not tell me that the people would net pay because Mr. Hughes was ill I and Mr. Price had had the books from Mr. Probert I do not know that John Price attempted to collect the money my brother-in-law paid for the goods he had after he had paid it my husband did not sue him for the money again-only for the balance; Mr. Games will tell you what is due Mr. Probert was often at my house in Pen- celly Mr. Probert had nothing to do with the letting of the Clarence. Re-examined I do not know that Mr. Probert was employed as my husband's agent, except for this sale. Mr. A. A. Walton, brother-in-law of the plaintiff, deposed I have taken the plaintiff and his wife under my roof, and the plaintiff is much better, as well as Mrs. Hughes by direction of Mrs. Hughes I called on Mr. Probert for payment of the account; he said he was sorry there had been such delay, but he would be sure to call in a week or ten days and pay the balance that was in 1866; he did not come, and after the matter bad stood over I called again for payment in 1867; Mr. Probert said he would be sure to call next week and pay himself I applied at that time for X56 3s. 9d. he did not tell me he had a set-off that would out-top" it; 1 afterwards saw him again, and he said he had seen Mr. Games about the matter, and again promised to pay by direction of Mrs. Hughes I took proceedings. By Mr. Bishop: It was £56 odd that I claimed, and he said he would pay it; he said he would go into the accounts, and pay the balance the sum of 256 wai mentioned in express tt rms I cannot say whether Mr. Games wrote to Mr. Probert. Mr. John Probert, the defendant, was then called by Mr. Games. He said I had the conduct of the sale of the furniture of Mr. Charles Hughes at Pencelly Mr. David Williams and Mr. John Morgan were the clerks of the sale on the occasion Mr. Wheeler was not; I cannot say whether the books produced are the books of the sale there are con- ditions to all sales there ought to be conditions in these books, and there were conditions in the sale books on the day of the sale I handed over 936 to plaintiff; I took upon myself the receiving of the moneys when I could not get the money I gave up the books to Mr. Hughes; I am not prepared to shew you an account of the moneys received because I gave up the books to Mr. Hughes I had the books in my hands about twelve months all the money received was on the posting book I believe Mr. Wheeler was at the sale, but I do not know that he was acting for Mr. Hughes to the best of my knowledge I have received no application from you for the money do not remember Galling on you about the matter. Mr. Games then read letters he had written to Mr. Probert, which the latter said he did not recol- lect; he recollected nothing but the writ. (Laughter.) Examination continued: Recollect making ap- pointments with Mrs. Hughes and Mr. Walton. By Mr. Bishop I do not know the books put into my hands; I would not be bound by them; I gave up to the plaintiff my own book and my clerk's book; my cwn book was the one kept by Morgan I delivered that to Mr. Hughes I believe there were conditions of sale in that book I have not tampered with it in any way they were the usual conditions after the writ was served notice was given for trial at the Assizes, and the case was then brought to the County Court; Mr. Walton asked for Y,56, and I told him I did not owe it; I have been ready to render any assistance I could I have made a claim on the plaintiff, and said it would be a toss up whether it would be a pound one way or the other a part of the money was collected by Mr. John Hughes. The witness was then examined upon the items of his set-off, Mr. Games endeavouring to show that they were unreasonably high. The details have no public interest. Mr. David Williams, printer, deposed: I attended at Pencelly sale for Mr. Hughes Mr. Wheeler was Mr. Probert's clerk. Witness was shown a book, but could not tell which was his own handwriting and which was the other clerk's, owing to the similarity of handwriting. Mr. John Morgan was then called, and said he attended the sale, and kept an account of some of the lots for Mr. Hughes while Mr. Wheeler was outside. Mr. John Wheeler said he was at the sale, and Mr. Probert engaged him as a clerk he thought Mr. Probert paid him 7s 6d. the whole of the items were entered by him in the sale-book produced, which he handed back to Mr. Probert at the end of the day he did not recollect whether there were any conditions of sale at the beginning of the book. By Mr. Bishop John Morgan acted as clerk for me for a few minutes while I was outside. John Morgan was again called, and said, at the request of Mr. Games, he posted the sale-book in the usual way, making a debtor and creditor account; he made the receipts to be JE51 16s. 2^d., and the amount unpaid £ 36. By Mr. Bishop Mr. Probert paid some money after the sale to Mrs. Hughes; I saw him do it; Mrs. Hughes was on the settle at the time I saw the money pass, but do not know how much it was Mr. Probert told me he had paid £ 5 16s. 6d. Mrs. Mary Jayne said she had the Clarence in her possession in 1863, after the death of her husband; a man named Griffiths came to rent it of her Mr. Probert went down to Pencelly at her request, and it was agreed that Mr. Griffiths should be the incoming tenant; Mr. Probert afterwards valued for her, and charged her 92, which she paid. Mrs. Hughes, recalled, stated she had received no money from Mr. Probert. Mr. William Hughes, of the Sun, nephew of the plaintiff, stated he was at the sale his aunt asked him to rent a house for them in Brecon, and be did so the rent was about £ 9 per year believed it was rented the first time there were only a few journeys about it. By Mr. Bishop Mr. Probert might have gone to Pencelly several times without seeing either Mr. or Mrs. Hughes there were some repairs to be done to the house; cannot say whether Mr. Probert went to see that the house was in repair. By Mr. Games Never knew that Mr. Probert acted as my uncle's agent. Miss Margaret Jones deposed to the house spoken of being rented by Mr. W. Hughes for Mr. Charles Hughes. Mr. Hughes and Mr. Probert came to see that the house was ready for them. Mr. David Williams, recalled by Mr. Bishop, stated he printed for this sale, and advertised; he charged I I 7s. for bills, and lis. for advertising; it was settled by Mr. Games. Mr. Games having summed up the case, Mr. Bishop addressed the jury on behalf of the defendant. He remarked that it had been stated that the sum of X30 was due from Mr. Probert. The case had been taken into the superior courts, and an application having been made for particulars the claim was reduced to ze26. Mr. Games had put Mr. Probert in the witness box in order to show that X24 was due, but failing to prove this he had called his own clerk, who had proved that the whole of the money received by Mr. Probert was £ 51. It was admitted that he had paid 936, and that reduced the amount due to plaintiff to X15. Then John Morgan, one of their own witnesses, had shown that Mr. Probert had paid Y,5 16s. 6d., and, with the £1 10s. paid into court, there was therefore only a sum of about X8 due from Mr. Probert. But the defendant claimed a set-off of X24 due from the plaintiff, and even if the jury thought any of the plaintiff's charges too high they had it in their power to tax them, and if there was more due to him than 28 they should give a verdict for the defendant. Mr. Games had insinuated—if not rather more than insinuated—that the conditions of sale had been torn out of the sale-book by Mr. Probert but there was no object in his doing so, as they would not have shown upon what terms the goods were to have been sold. The books had also been in the possession of Mr. Hughes and Mr. Games for nearly two years, and therefore if anyone had torn them out it was the plaintiff. They could not charge Mr. Probert with having done so unless the book had come direct out of his hands. His Honour having gene through the principal portions of the evidence, The jury returned a nrdict for the def-i dant. They reduced the set-off to £ 12 8, and after deducting an item of £ 1 18s. for advertising, which bad been charged in the set-off, hut allowed by Mr. Games, and the sum of £3, considered due from Mr. Probert to Mr. Hughes, a balance of' £ 2 10s. was left, which they considered due to Mr. Probert from Mr. Charles Hughe?.

-——- BRECON POLICE INTELLIGENCE. COUNTY PETTY SESSIONS, SATURDAY, before THOMAS WILLIAMS, Esq., and the Rev. BEES PRICR. STEALING APPLES.—Two lads, named Howell Price and Howell James, were charged with stealing a quantity of apples, the property of Henry Ximenes, Esq,—A lad named Charles Pitts proved the case, Esq.-A lad named Charles Pitts proved the case, having seen the prisoners in the orchard, one in the tree, and both of them with apples in their pg-session. -Tlit-v were each fined Is. and 6s. 3d. costs, or, in default, 14 days' imprisonment. THEFT OF TRAPS,-David Jones was charged with stealing six steel traps, the property of Major Conway Lloyd, on the 29th of October. Mr. Games defended the accused.—Sergeant Thomas stated-. On the 30th of October I had a search watrant to search the prisoner's farm for rabbit traps stolen from Dinas; in a bay loft I found seven rabbit traps, two rabbits, a partridge, a gun, a powder flask, and a shot bag from information received I went after the prisoner, and apprehended him, and charged him with stealing six traps, the property of Major Conway Lloyd he said he knew nothing at all about it I asked him if that was his gun in the hay lofr, and he said it was on the road down to Dinas he said he was very sorry he took them; he would not have taken them if he had known they were put there by Dance he said he had the rabbits in the traps, and the partridge he found witness produced two of the traps, also two rabbits and the partridge.—George Dance, gamekeeper to Major Conway Lloyd and Henry de Winton, Esq., said 1 laid a quantity of traps, far the purpose of catf'bing rabbits, on lands the property of John Lloyd, Esq., ot Dinas on t be morning of the 30th I went to look for my traps, and found that about a dozen had been taken away something caused me to think that the servant boy at the Groes had taken the traps I informed Major Lloyd of v. hat had taken place, and he said I had better procure a search warrant to search at the Groes I went there in company with Sergeant Thomas, and I sat down while Sergeant Thomas made a search he found nothing in the house, and he went outside and came back in a few minutts I went out with him, and he took me to a stable, and showed me seven traps, two rabbits, and a partridge I looked at the traps, and discovered that six of them belonged to Major Lloyd the other trap did not belong to him the value of the traps was 15s.-Cross-examined I last saw the traps about six o'clock on the 29th I had 15 traps set there in the hedge I have nearly 100 traps, but not all of the same class or make this sort is an ordinary trap I have a private mark upon all of them.—Mr. Games Where are the other traps?—Witness That is what we want to know. (Laughter.)—Mr. Games submitted that there was no evidence at all against the prisoner for stealing the traps. The Groes farm was in the occupation of Mr. Davies, and he could not see why Mr. Davies should not be brought there as much as the prisoner, as it had not been shown that they were in his possession at all. Mr. Games then remarked upon the fact of the prisoner not having been cautioned by Sergeant Thomas, and interpreted prisoner's statement to mean that if he had known it was Dance, and not a poacher, that had put them there, he would not have moved them. But thinking it was a poacher who had placed them there, he did do so.-In reply to the Bench, Mr. Dance said the land of Mr. Lloyd was not close to prisoner's master's, and that he would have to trespass in order to get there. The usual caution was given to the prisoner, who pleaded not guilty. He was then committed to take his trial at the next Quarter Sessions. Bail was accepted, himself in £30, and two sureties in X15. AFFILIATION CASE.—Thomas Amos was summoned by Dinah Thomas as being the father of her illegiti- mate child. Mr. Games appeared to defend. It was stated that the child died last Tuesday. The parties were allowed to retire and settle matters between themselves. ALLEGED STEALING OF A NECKLACE. -Sa?-ali Jones, a girl late in the employ of Mr. Handley, was charged with stealing a necklace, the property of her master. Mr. Games said he appeared for the defence of the prisoner. She was given in charge under the impression that she had stolen a necklace, the property of Mrs. Handley. He did not com- plain of that, because at the time she was given in charge there was every reason to believe that she had stolen the property but he thought, from further inquiries, which had since been made, that the prosecutor was satisfied that this was not the case. He had in his hand a letter from the late Miss Handley—now married-who had desired the prisoner to take possession of all property of hers in her father's house. He thought Mr. and Mrs. Handley were satisfied that the prisoner had authority so to act, and with the consent of their worships the case would be withdrawn. Mr. Handley having signified that this was his wish, the prisoner was discharged. INFRINGEMENT OF THE DOG LAWS.—About thirty persons were summoned for keeping dogs without a license. Various excuses were given by the defen- dants, who were in each ease fined XI 5s., including costs. BOROUGH PETTY SESSIONS, TUESDAY, before P. BRIGHT, Esq. Mayor, and JOHN DAVIES, Esq., ex-Mayor. LICENSE TRANSFERS.— The license of the Sun Inn was transferred from Mr. Thomas Hughes to Mr. Wm. Edwards, and the Old Greyhouud Inn from Mr. John Bridgwater to Mr. Wm. Jones. AFFILIATION CASES.—Two cases of this character were settled by the parties concerned, in one a matrimonial alliance promising to supersede an order of the magistrates.

STATISTICS OF CRIME IN THE BOROUGH OF BRECON. The subjoined particulars in reference to the number of crimes &c., committed during the past year within the borough will probably prove inter- esting to many of our readers, and they are gathered from the usual annual return made by the Superin- tendent Table 1 gives the police establishments and the charges for the year ended the 29th September, from which it appears that 1 chief constable and 3 con- stables are employed, whose salaries amount to £ 195; clothing and accoutrements, X31 9s. 6d. station-house charges, printing, stationery, &c., £ 11 5s.; total, X237 14s. 6d. The population last census is given at 5,355. Table 2 shows the class of persons apprehended or proceeded against in the year. By indictment 1 male tramp and 2 males of previous good character had been proceeded against; and summarily, 17 males and 2 female tramps, 37 males and 4 females of previous good character, and 63 males and 17 females whose character was unknown. Total, 117 males and 23 females. Table 3 gives the number of depredators, offenders, and suspected persons at large, within the district of the police, in the month of April, 1868. These included 2 females under 16, and 5 males and 1 female above 16, known thieves prostitutes above 16 years of age, 7 vagrants and tramps, 2 males and 1 female under 16 years of age, and 4 males and 3 females above that age; total, 2 males and 3 females under 16, and 16 males and 4 females above that age. Number of houses of bad character, 4 tramps' lodging-houses. Table 4 shows the indictable offences committed, so far as known to the police within the past year. The larcenies by servants have been 2, both males, who were committed for tria', and only 1 ease of arson, the person charged being also committed for trial; a total of only 3 indictable offences in the year. Table 5 is for offences determined summarily, and included assaults on police officers, 4, all males, fines being imposed in each instance 5 common assaults, all males, 1 being discharged, and the other 4 fined; drunkenness, 63 males and 16 females, of which number 16 males and 9 females were dis- charged, and 47 males and 7 females convicted, I for a period of more than a month, 3 for a month, and 9 for 14 days and under, and 41 fined. For illegally selling game 2 persons were charged, and both convicted and fined. There were 3 offences by licensed victualbrs, who were each fined; malicious damage, I offences against Public Healths' Act, 2 males and 1 female, 1 of whom was discharged, and the other fined disorderly conduct in workhouses, 2, in one case the sentence being 3 months or above 2 months, and in the other 1 month. The number of larcenies above the value of 5s. was 10, 9 males and I female; 7 males and I female were discharged, and the other 2 males convicted. Offences against the Vagrant Act, 19, 16 males and 3 females 7 maus and 3 female were discharged, and the other 11 convicted, 1 having six months or above three months' imprisonmont, and 10 fourteen days or under. Offences against the Highway Act, 2, and against the Weights and Measures' Act, 3, all of whom were fined. Offences against the Waterman's Act, 1, who was discharged. Total, 117 males and 23 females, 35 males and 11 females of whom were discharged, and the remainder convicted. This return does not include proceedings of a civil character, such as the non-payment of rates, affilia- tion cases, &c.

DEVYNOCK. PETTY SESSIONS, THURSDAY, OCTOBER 29, before Captain DAVID JONES and JAMES POWELL, Esq. DOG CASES.—Twenty-seven farmers in the neigh- bourhood were summoned by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue for keeping dogs without a license. Most of the defendants, in reply to the charge, stated that they had seen no notices on the church doors; but it appeared from the statement of the officers that notices had been placed on the church doors, and also at blacksmith's shops and public houses. The defendants, with four or five excep- tions, were fined £1 5s. including casts. ALLEGED ASSAULT.—Mr. Llewelyn Rees, of Cefn Maescar, was summoned by Mr. William Jones, timber merchant, of Devynock, for an assault, on the 21st October.—Mr. Games was for the plaintiff, and Mr. Bishop for the defence.—The complainant stated that on the evening cf the day named he was at the Bull Inn, and Sergeant Gabriel was also pre- sent the defendant began to accuse witness of running him down, and witness denied having done so defendant then called witness a liar, and com- plainant replied by calling defendant an infernal liar defendant then aimed a tremendous blow at him, and in trying to save himself he fell on the edge of the settle and fractured one of his ribs it it had not been forjSergeant Gabriel's inter- ference he expected he would have been nearly killed the defendant struck him on 1 he head, and as he was going out said, Come here, oi l boy as soon as I meet you I'll settle you witness was obliged to secure the assistance of Sergeant Gabriel to take him home.-Cross-examined 1 have not challenged a man at Llandovery did not bay any- thing to Mr. Morgan Rees against Mr. Farr or against the defendant I said I would try against Rees to be a guardian next year.—Samuel Seaborn, landlord of the Buli Inn, corroborated complainant's statement as to the conversation with defendant then Rees got up and made a rush at Jones, saying, "If you say that again I'll knock your head off;" Sergeant Gabriel then got. behind Rees, pinioned his arms, and pulled him back witness did not see what happened then, as he was removing the tables and glasses, which he was afraid would get broken when he turned round again he saw Jones against the settle; did not see Rees strike Jones.—Cross- examined I do not think Bees could have struck Jones from where he was; Jones did not complain to me when he went out.—Mr. Thomas Williams, surgeon, said that on the morning of the 22nd Oct. Jones came to him and complained that he had hurt his ribs he examined him, and found one of thefloat- ing ribs was fractured; he did what he could for him a fall against a settle would have produced such a fracture Jones told him how it had hap- pened.—David James, a servant with Mr. Jones, stated that he saw Rees on his way to Senny on Monday last, and Rees asked him if his master had issued a warrant witness said he heard he had, and Rees replied that there was not much damage done, but that if defendant took out a warrant against him he would break some of his bones yet.- Mr. Bishop then addressed the Bench for the defence of the accused, aad called Sergeant Gabriel, who deposed to the conversation between the parties; Rees said, Say that again, and I will knock your head off j" witness then got up and laid hold of Rees, so that he could not strike Jones if Jones bad been struck witness must have seen it if wit- ness had not been there the defendant would have struck Jones.—The magistrates decided to dismiss the charge of assault, but owing to the threats they bound the defendant over in the sum of S50 to keep the peace for six months.

YSTRADGYNLAIS. HIGHWAY BOARD.-On Monday last a meeting o this Board was held, when W. Price, Esq., and tha Rev. Thos. Walters were present, witha number of elected guardians. There was not much business before the meeting, which lasted only a very short time. The accounts were, however, presented and passed. It was expected that the subject of making a road to the Penwyllt station would have been brought forward, but it did not come before the Board. To make this road an expenditure of perhaps £ 200 or £ 300 would be required. The convenience, however, to the public would be very great, and the money would be well laid out. PETTY SESSIONS, MONDAY, before WM. PRICE, Esq., and Rev. THOMAS WALTERS. AFFILIATION. Henry Jones was summoned by Ann Howeils to show cause why he should not con- tribute towards the support of her illegitimate child, he being the reputed father.—The defendant denied the paternity, but upon the requisite proofs being adduced by the applicant, an order was made on the defendant for payment of 2s. 6d. per week and costs.

BUILTH. THE EARTHQUAKE.—On Friday, the 30th ult., the shock of an earthquake was distinctly felt in this town. The time at which it occurred, as nearly as can be ascertained, was 10.55 p.m. The wave appeared to have passed from pouth to north. A loud noise preceded the shock-or shocks, as some say they distinctly felt two. As to the severeness of the shock a great difference ot opinion seems to pre- vail. Some say that it actually shook their beds from one side of the room to the other that every- thing shook in their rooms, including fenders and other heavy pieces of furniture that bells were rung, and doors were thrown violently open. Others say that they heard a loud noise, but felt no shock; that they saw the tops of their houses shaking but felt nothing themselves. Again, there are numbers who neither felt the shock nor heard the noise, although they were situated in such positions as it would seem impossible for them not to have experi- enced ir. One party was sitting writing in a room, which is only separated from the adjoining bouse by a thin wall; he felt nothing, neither did he hear any sound, although the inmates of the other house experienced a most severe shock. There is no doubt, notwithstanding what may be said to the contrary that the shock of Friday night was a most severe one. It is a question, worthy of the most serious attention of scientific men, whether these shocks are not more severe and more frequent in this country than at any former period, as it is only just five years since we experienced one if anything more severe than that of Friday night, and especially as such sad calamities have so recently occurred in other parts cf the globe, which to some extent were formerly considered comparatively free from such frightful visitations.

TALGARTH. "WELCOME HOME.Colonel Bridgwater and his bride returned to Coitymawr on Friday last, and met with a hearty welcome home" from the villagers as they passed through Talybont. THE EARTHQUAKE.—A slight shock of earthquake was felt in this locality on Friday night last, at about a quarter to eleven o'clock.

BEAUFORT. TEA PARTY AND CONCEltT.-Th, Primitive Metho- dists held their annual tea meeting and concert on Monday last, which was attended by a great many, and both concert and tea gave entire satisfactjon to those who were present. [Continuation of District Intelligence in page 8. j

pressed it so strongly upon him, he thought he could not resrst. He then called upon Mr. Hugh Powel Price to address the meeting, who upon rising was greeted with loud and prolonged cheers. He drew attention to the failure and short- comings of the Irish church both as an establishment and as a missionary church, and his conclusion therefore was that it should be disestablished. (Cheers.) He alluded to the charge brought against Mr. Gladstone of attempting and still aiming at com- mitting an act of great spoliation in disestablishing the Irish church, but in his (Mr. Price's) opinion Mr. Gladstone was scrupulously protecting private property. (Cheers.) Again, he shewed that Ireland in its present confused state pressed heavily upon the tax-paying community, on account of the large number of-not less than 30,000--disciplined and armed men being kept there, while 4,000 is deemed sufficient to keep the peace in Scotland. He then touched upon the landed property question, and proceeded to give his opinion on the placards which have been widely distributed over Brecon and Tre- castle, exhibiting the economy of the Conservatives and the extravagance of the Liberals, but upon a careful examination he was happy to say that he found them to be most incorrect. (Great cheering.) He concluded by remarking that there was one great difference between Conservatives and Liberals—the motto of the former was "Monopoly and love of exclusion," while that of the latter was to legislate for the benefit of the whole community. Mr. Price resumed his seat amidst great cheering. During the first part of Mr. Price's speech, a person in the body of the room greatly interrupted the proceedings, and was eventually ejected. The Rev. Mr. Williams, of the Plough, Brecon, was then called upon, and delivered a capital speech in Welsh. He drew attention to the wretched condition of Ireland, as shewn by the necessity for the suspen- sion of the Habeas Corpus Act during the last three years, and in consequence of which over 100 Irishmen had been convicted of offences against the State and sent to penal establishments. Professor Roberts next addressed the meeting in an argumentative Welsh speech, in which he traced tithes from a very early period down to the present day, and contended that they belonged neither to the church, nor to the clergy (because not a Corpo- ration), nor to patrons, but that they have been considered and dealt with by this and other Govern- ments as belonging to the State. To strengthen his arguments he read passages from the speeches and letters of Dean Milman, Lord Brougham, Mr. Disraeli, Lord Cairns, and several eminent bishops. Professor Morrid, in a lengthy speech, dwelt, upon the evil done and injury caused by the iniquitous laws" passed in Ireland, such as the corporation and Test Acts, which utterly excluded Nonconform- its from receiving public offices under the Crown. Before resuming his seat, he moved the following resolution :—" That this meeting desires to renew the expression of its confidence in Mr. Hugh Powel Price, as a candidate for the representation of the borough of Brecon and the town of Llywel, and pledges itself to employ all legitimate means to secure his return to the ensuing Parliament." The Rev. H. Griffiths, in a well-delivered speech, touched upon the questions of education and expen- diture, and while dealing with the latter subject, as shewing how expensive the army and navy was, he stated that out of every Is. of tax, 9Jd. went towards 2 the support of the army and navy, and only 2!-d. towards the other expenses of the nation. He then seconded the resolution, which, upon its being put to the meeting by the Chairman, was carried without dissent. On the motion of Mr. H. P. Price, seconded by Mr. D. Williams, a hearty vote of thanks was accorded the chairman for presiding, which the latter gentleman briefly acknowledged.