Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

21 articles on this Page








The Weather and the Crops.





SEQUEL TO A GILFACH ARREST. j ♦- SHOP .MANAGER AWARDED £ 35 ( DAMAGES. FALSE IMPRISONMENT. At Pontypridd County-court oi. January 9th (before his Honour Judge Bryn. Roberts J and a special jury), William Lawrence Jones, I grocers' assistant, Pentre, fonnerly of Gilfach Go eh, sought to recover zElOO from Boll's- Stores (Limited) for adeged1 false imprisoii- mem and malicious piosccution. 3lr Harold Lloyd Cardiff, appeared for the plaintiff, and Raymond Allen (instructed by Mr. D. W'. James) d'e-feiidod. Mr. Ll in opening the case, explained I I _fll I that plaintiff was 4e at Gilfach Goch, where was situated one of tlie 32 branch establishments belonging to Bell's Stores, whoso headquarters AVOIO at Liverpool. In August last defendant was engaged as manager by Mr. Alfred Husband, of Tony- pandy, who was- a gentleman- in whom was vested a good deal of authority, and who acted^ as inspector over the South W7«ks branches, and was reahy the manager of the whole of those shops. As- manager, amongst other things, plaintiff was responsible for the-cash, a return of which he weekly sent to the. head office1, and for six or seven- weeks plaintiff seemed to have given, every satis- faction. On Monday, Sept. 23rd. however, plaintiff was strncK down with illness, and Oiii that day Mr. Husband, It) pursuance, of his duties, paid a surprise visit to the branch, and, in consequence cf plaintiff's ulnesis, TIn. aavangeinent was arrived at wnereby another assistant was temporarily M'nt tf) the. branch to relieve tlie plaintiff, in tho shop were another assistant, vannd Hughes, and a lady assistant, who was s':gy- s^^ •(i l-o be< ^ris.nOiiest-. am.] -,n c-orso- qin.'C(\i):f 3ir. Husband in-sti-nct<>d plaint-ifr to dismiss the girl. On the Friday of the same week Mr. Husband- arrived -it t-'o snop before the plaintiff, and. having opened tin- safe, pointed out that there was" a. DEFICIENCY OF ;3 12: ::(1.. s!uc':i plaintiff to account for. iTanit'ifr replied tiiat he could- not do so, as he. had, owing to illness. be<»ji. absent from hns61:.cSS that week. Mr. Husband then seated that if plaintiff did not explain the c.-elicit or make it good the police would be sent tor. Pi'aintifi. being unabie- to account to;- tiro dvficipiicy, aiul h;ivin^ refused to agree to the nayment of £ 3 18s. 3d., ^ir. Hus- band sent for Police-Sergeant George, who took plaintiff into custody and charged him with stealing the amount referred: to. He detained in custody until after nine un the evening, 110 was let out OJ] baiJ, and on the following Monday piaintiff was proceeded against at the l-stnad. J ohce-eourt on tho charge referred to, without caliing npen the plaintiff to make an answer to The charge preferred cfs^o' hjm, the niagistrates, dismissed the Ca-S t,. Plaintiff be re cut. nt considerable.. lenctli the statement made by the learned advo- that '11e M as dismissed bv the dWenxtants with out a character, :111.1 owin- to die prosecution lie had great ddfi- cult. I- obtaminsr another situ -rion had ^CiXamir:ecK ^t'fendant denied that he had WAY TO DniXiC the week IKMVSS dismissed. Mi. D. W James, solicitor, gavo erklenice or having acted for the- defendants on in- structions revived' fro:.i Mr. Husband in the Police-court procec'ding, takoa against the pLuntiff and hat-.r.g had' his bill of costs paid by L-ne defendsint comi-.any. M'r. Allen then argued thai" there was no to go too the jury, as it was incumbent uponi the plaintiff to show reasonable and piooablo cause for the malice aiiezed, and that, inasmuch as the agent—Mr. Husband m this case—had' acted as he had in the absence and at that time without tho know- t WM r pnV'ipaJs' thp latt*r oe hekl r-esponsible. His Honour, however, over-ruled these objections, pointing out that the question was whether Mr. Husband had acted out of the scope of h,e authority, and then there was the fact that Messrs. Bell had made ceitain payments m respect of tlie prosecu- tion;, w-hicn showed that they were cognisant of Mr. Husband then gave evident, statinr that he came to the shop with tlie relief at /Pniidy. as lie witness) had rw-.ved a letter rrom the other aseinart Wt)n*M ■ ilt Mr; d0!US (Thfi plaintiff) had! been drinking about' and wasiiot attend^ c^ i'lt^r- i IVK'U checked the fl ilaS,f!mK!Jat ^as a shortace n-?^ ft'4' TV l,tJK's-s toW Plaintiff that 1 iict-si the. raster could account for the deficit the police won id be sent for. Plaintiff then m^dea. request that he- should bo alWd to telephone to I^wynypia to get the money ^Sr<lmn/inrd'^r:'tnes? adn^tted tlrat. c he had afTenvards ascertained the fact lie did not find out then that otlwr people might haw access to the keys. He admitted that he. had given- piauiriff hi as the money to cover the defic't was not forthcoming. st-*t-d'111^+• a" at- the shop. tllat during tiie week nlaintiff wae PARALYTIC DR(1}; p,irt icula.iiy on the Wednesday nigh* Ir raot, added the witness, "1 carried him home t- night. (Laughter.) Plaintiff was not ie^ponsible for his actions at the time and was spending money recklessiv. Mr Allen, addressing the jui7, contended ki + Husband had acted quite reason- ably m the matter, hearing in mind the fact that he had been advised of plaintiff i^Vllg 7 at ['VT ^vec.k given- way to drink and neglected Ins business, and that he was unable to account for the shortage of money in the safe. J Mr. Harold Lloyd 5Hldre.ssetl the ut. length, and ivmarkoil that if the story given to tho court as to plaintiff being drunk wore true, this would net iustin- ciofeno-ants in apprehending him and' brand- nig lum as a. criminal. He argued that Mr. Husband had not taken the precautions which a reasonable man would tc find out whether plaintiff coukl really he. suspected of tlie theft be tore Ire- put tlie criminal law in motion. The1 Judgo remarked that it was a. serious matter to put the criminal law iu--notion and should never be done on. flimsy grounds for the purpose, of getting missing money tiit oiii:v cating public justice. The fact that a man got drunk was not sufficient, ground for his Ultimately, after a hearing last in** prac- tieaily all day, tho jury awarded the' plain- tiff the sum off:35, with costs, the Foreman (Councillor T. B. Evans* stating that, the jury were unanimously of opinion, that there was "no reasonable cause for the prosiecn- tiou." Judgment was* entered accordingly.

Elder Dempster Liner Lost.



Colliery Accident Rescues.