The Welsh Coast Pioneer and Review for North Cambria

Colwyn Bay Slander Action. Clearing a Lady's Character. Plaintiff Wins Her Case. (BY OUR OWN REPORTER.) THE last case heard at the Carnarvon Assizes before Justice Jelf and a common jury on Satur- day was one of con/siderable interest to residents of Colwyn Bay. Miss Annie Collier, manageress of the Hotel Metropole, Colwyn Bay, was the. plaintiff, and she brought an action for slander against Mr Frank Simpson, partner in the firm of Messrs Rowlands and Simpson, coal merchants, Colwyn Bay. Mr J. Bryn Roberts, M.P., who was instructed by Messrs Porter and Amphlett, Colwyn Bay (represented by Mr James Amphlett), appeared for the plaintiff, while Mr Ellis Tones Griffith, M.P. (instructed by Messrs F. Nunn and Co., Colwyn Bay, represented by Mr Bernard Lowe), was the counsel for defendant. Mr Trevor Lloyd (instructed by Mr Pugh Evans) watched a brief on behalf of the relatives of the deceased (Mr John Roberts). Counsel's Opening Statement. In his opening statement Mr J. Bryn Roberts said the action was for slander-a slander which he could not but think was a most serious one, —one affecting the chasity and morality of a lady. He had no occasion to address his lord- ship and the jury at any great length, but he would remind them that the shortness of his address did not correspond with the gravity of the case. As a matter of fact the particulars of the case were extremely simple. Mr E. Henry Davies, whose wife was related to the plaintiff (Miss Collier), met the defendant Simpson casu- ally, and they proceeded, at the defendant's invitation, to the goods yard at the Colwyn Bay Railway Station to see some coal which the de- fendant had just received. After looking at the coal for some time and admiring its loveliness- (laulghter)-they commenced their return to the town. On the way defendant said to Davies "Have you heard about old John Roberts?" He (counsel) should have previously observed that Mr John Roberts-the gentleman referred to—was the owner of the Hotel Metropole, of which Miss Cdllier was the manageress, and' was at that time dead. Mr Roberts, who was a mar- ried man, did not reside at the hotel, but lived with his wife and family. His married son and his daughter-in-law resided with 'Miss Collier at the hotel. Mr Roberts was a leading man in Colwyn Bay, and he was at the time of his death a member of the Colwyn Bay Urban District Council, of which body he had also- been chair- man for many years. He had been chairman! of the Conway Board of Guardians for many years, and also a member of the Conway and Colwyn Bay Joint Water Board, whilst he had also acted as county councillor for some years. Moreover, he was a deacon in a Methodist Church. In fact, he was a man honoured and respected throughout the district in which he' had been bred and born. The Hotel Metropole was an extensive place of business with accommodation for 100 beds. To proceed with the incident on the day in question-Mr Davies, to whom the question had been put, turned round and asked what defendant meant. Defendant replied: "Old John Roberts and the manageress of the Hotel Metropoife used to meet one another at a hotel at Chester once a month." Then Mr Davies said "That is a very serious accusation, and I shall call somebody to witness this." Defendant ridiculed the idea that the statement was wrong, and could not see that it was harm- ful. Mr Pryce Williams, a most respectable tradesman of the' town happened to be passing at the time, and Mr Davies asked defendant to repeat the statement in Mr Williams' hearing. Defendant did so, and added that there had been a great row at the chapel about it. In the presence of Mr Williams, Mr Davies then said: "I shall go to Miss Collier about this," and he and Williams went to the Metropole with a view to seeing Miss Collier. Though. Mr Davies made that threat defendant never remon. strated nor attempted to withdraw his statement, and plenty of opportunity was given him to do so if he desired to avail himself of it. The two men went to the Hotel ■Mi'etroptole together, leaving defendant behind; but they failed to see Miss Collier. Mr Roberts, son' of the deceased gentleman, was, however, informed, and he forthwith consulted his solicitor. He (counsel) gathered that "for the defence the statements al- leged by Williams and Davies would be alto- gether denied. But he had never seen a slander action in which the same defence had not been offered. He also believed Mr Simpson contend- ed that he never mentioned Miss Collier's name, but that he had referred to "some woman." Finally it was held, he believed, that the words used were incapable of the meaning of immorality. He (Mr Roberts) asked what could be meant by the meeting of a married man with an unmarried woman once a month, but an insinuation of a meeting for improper purposes. The parties met every day at Colwyn Bay for business pur- poses. There was no doubt but that the impu- tation referred to was one of immorality. The two gentlemen whom he (counsel) would call were utterly disinterested'. It might be said that the fact that Davies' wife was a distant rela- tion to Miss Collier had had some influence over the case but, he held, that that would not have been sufficient for him to invent that tale against Simpson. Granting that no mention had been made of Miss Collier's name, nobody would doubt for a moment who was meant by the "manageress of the Hotel Metropole." He would also like to point out that Mr Pryce Williams, his client's second witness, was a per- fectly independent witness. He was a man who was engaged in a similar way of business to Mr Davies, and, of course', in that sense an oppo- nent. Mr Bryn Roberts concluded his address by observing that the imputation made against Miss Collier was grave, and one which would, under other circumstances, have been decidedly injurious to her in her livelihood', while he could not help thinking that it was also one which she as a woman naturally dreaded most, especially when, 'there was no trace nor sugges- tion that the imputation was justified upon any ground whatever. The latter fact was admitted in the pleadings. He might also add at that point that as Mr John Roberts was dead, no ac. tion could be brought forward on his behalf, the law making that impossible. Mis3 Annie Collier was then called. She said she had acted as manageress of the Hotel Metro- pole, Colwyn Bay, for the last two years. It was a temperance hotel with accommodation] for 100 beds. The late Mr John Roberts was the owner of the house, and used to carry on the business until his death. Mr Roberts did not live in the' hotel, but, as a married man, lived at home with his family. His son1 and daughter- in-law lived at the hotel, the son to some ex- tent assisting ini the management. She had had naturally many business transactions with the late Mr Roberts. Mr Bryn Roberts: And has there been the slightest impropriety between you at any time? Witness: Not the slightest. He was always a perfect gentleman in his dealings with me. Have you ever met him at any hotel in Ches- ter? iNü, never. Mr Ellis Jones Griffith said there was no need for any Teferenc.e to that allegation as the defen- dant did not impute anything in that direction. His Lordship said it was a proper examina- tion, inasmuch as they could have that point clear. Mr Bryn Roberts (continuing) Neither at Chester nor elsewhere? Witness Never anywhere. Did you ever receive any letters from him? I never received a letter from him in my life but I believe there was a letter Mr Roberts: Never mind that; you never re- ceived one? Witness: Never. Continuing, she added that she remembered hearing of Mr Pryce Williams and Mr Davies calling for her at the hotel in January; but she did not see them. -Cross-examined by ME. Jones Griffith, wit- ness said she still acted as manageress of the hotel. She first consulted a solicitor on the matter about the first week in February. She first heard that defendant was denying the state- ment referred to "about three' days ago." It was some days after the occurrence complained of that she consulted her solicitors she was 'absolutely sure of that. She had never known defendant; and only by sight two months ago. Re-examined by Mr Bryn Roberts Simpson had been to the hotel to play billiards, but she had not made his acquaintance. He was well- known in Colwyn Bay as a partner in a respect- able firm of coal merchants. Edward Henry Davies said he carried on the business of provision merchant in Colwyn Bay, and had been living in the district for the past 18 years. He fully corroborated the counsel's statement as to Mr Roberts's public position; and added that he (witness) was a Churchman and Conservative, while the deceased gentleman was a Noncoinformist and a Liberal. On the 29th January last he met Simpson in the goods yard at the Colwyn Bay Railway Station. They .inspected some coal together. On the way from the yard Simpson said, "Have you heard about old John Roberts?" Witness asked what about. Defendant seemed jocular, and replied, "About old John Roberts and the; manageress of the Hotel Metropole." Witness asked what it was, and defendant said, "They were in the habit of meeting at Chester, 'in some hotel, about once a month." Witness told him that was a serious charge to make, and said, "You have only come to the town but a very short time ago, or else you would not say such a thing about Mr John Roberts here in the town where he has lived so long." Defendant did not -seem to look upon the matter iin a serious light, and witness re- marked that he would like to have a witness to the statement. Upon looking round he saw a carter named David Parry, and he intended call- ing him as a witness, but just at that moment Mr Pryce Williams came into view. He called Mr Williams, and asked him to listen to a state- ment made by Mr Simpson. Defendant then repeated his statement. Mr Williams and him- self went to the hotel with the intention of see. ing Miss Collier, but they only saw Mr Roberts, to whom they gave information. Mr Bryn Roberts: Can you remember any. thing defendant said when Mr Williams came up except what you have told us? Witness: I can't. Oh, yes, he said some- thing about there being a row about the chapel, a statement which he qualified by saying, "I always thought John, Roberts was a good man." After that, when I had come from the Metropole, he came to my shop and 'said, "I didn't think you would have done that. I will have nothing more to do with you. Give me. my bill." Wit- ness gave him his bill, which defendant paid by cheque, and observed that that was not a mat- ter of business, but a matter of principle. Cross-examined by Mr E. Jones Griffith, wit- ness said he did not think he was very much excited on the morning in question. Mr Griffith: You knew Mr John Roberts well? Witness I did. You 'associated with him in public offices? No, never. When did you first see Miss Collier after the morning in question? As soon as she came back. Have you been helping Miss Collier in bring- ing up this action? Decidedly not; not in any way—financially or otherwise. Have you, -as a matter of fact, had any con- versation with her concerning the case since the 29th January? Very little. Was it you who personally gave instructions to the solicitor in this action? Certainly not. Do you know who did? I can't tell you. Did you know before now that a solicitor's letter came to the defendant within an hour of the time the slander was alleged to have been uttered? No. Up to this day you had known Mr Simpson in a casual way? Yes; in fact, I used to be fairly friendly with him. I had business dealings with him. Did you use strong language to the defend- ant I should be very much surprised to hear that I did. (Laughter.) Did you say to the defendant, "If I were a son of Mr Roberts I would punch your eyes out?" Witness appeared somewhat excited at this, and replied, "Oh; decidedly not," amidst much laughter, in which his lordship heartily joined. Counsel: What did you say then? Witness I might have said "My word alive." (Renewed laughter.) Do yoft remember Simpson telling you you were like a madman? No. Were you like a madman? (Laughter.) No, I should think not. (Laughter.) Did you say to him when- he came to your shop, "I will make you pay for this?" No, never. Did you say, "We have been sending lawyers' letters about to stop this report, and you are carrying it about from one public-house to an. other?" I never said such a thing. Did you hear anything about Mr John Roberts before that day? Certainly, I did. Did you know that a solicitor's letter had been sent concerning something said? Yes. His Lordship You know the learned counsel is referring to a time before this Simpson occa- sion? Witness: That is so, my lord. Counsel: Ana this something else was in re- ference to some rumours concerning Mr Rob- erts? It was about a letter, I believe. What do you mean by "a letter"? The letter Simpson referred to. Had you heard some rumour before this, did you say? Yes. Whom did you hear the rumour from? I could not lay it down to anybody. His Lordship: Come, come; you must re- member who told you. Don't waste time, please. Witness: My lord, can I mention names of those who told me? His Lordship Why, yes, certainly. Witness (after some hesitation) Well, there was a builder named Mr J. Berth Jones. Mr Griffith Give us the whole list. I could not give you the whole list. What do you mean? People are too cautious to make statements without being able to justify them. Can't you remember ainy other names? Witness hesitated, but, on being further pressed by the judge, mentioned the names of (Mr Bethel and Mr Hughes. Did your wife tell you? Yes. (Laughter.) Did your wife and servants tell you? We had some conversation about it, of course. (Laughter.) But my wife did not exactly tell me. Did you tell her? I might have told her. (Renewed loud laughter). Re-examined by Mr Bryn Roberts, witness said he had never heard any rumours specify- ing such remarks as those mentioned by Mr Simpson. His Lordship Had Miss Collier's name been mentioned? Witness Yes, her name had been mentioned. Mr Pryce Williams, general provision mer- chant, of Colwyn Bay, gave corroborative evi- dence. Cross-examined: I can't say that I wrote any- thing down after this interview, but I dictated what I remembered to somebody else a week or two afterwards. Mr Griffith Did you hear any rumours before the day in question I heard a rumour from one particular quar- ter. Was that the same quarter as Mr Davies re- ferred to? No; another quarter. Mr Rowlands, the defendant's partner, was present at this interview, I believe? Witness He was not very far away. Was Miss Collier's name mentioned from start to finish? I don't think it was; but I knew to whom Mr Simpson referred when he named the manager- ess of the Hotel Metropole. Did Mr Davies say, "If I were John Roberts's son, I would knock your eyes out"? 'Nofhiin'g like that was said in my presence. Mr James Amphlett, of the firm of Messrs Por. ter and Amphlett, solicitors, Conway and Col- wyn Bay, spoke to being instructed to take pro- ceedings. He had personal instructions from Miss Collier before the writ was issued, and he had taken the statements of the witnesses him. self as 'he was aware of the importance of it in connection with an action for slander. The Defence. Mr Ellis Jones Griffith, in opening the case for the defence, said that from the evidence al. ready given there was a rumour of some sort circulated concerning the deceased gentleman, Mr John Roberts, and he contended that when the defendant made what he must acknowledge was a foolish remark, Mr Davies-of whose ex- citable temperament they had all that day seen a very tolerable display—(laughter)—at once jumped to conclusions and determined that the remark made was the slanderous accusation which he alleged had been made. Mr Davies evidently had the names of the parties- concern- ed in his mind all the time, and in his excitement misconstrued what had been said. He (the learned' counsel) would call evidence io the effect that no mention had been made either of a lady'3 name nor of the name of the hotel. Simpson never knew that there was a manageress at the Hotel Metropole, far less knowing her name. In fact he emphatically denied making use of the words alleged by the plaintiff's witnesses. What Simpson had done was to ask Davies the question "Have you heard anything about the late Mr John Roberts meeting a lady at Chester." No mention was made of a hotel, of the state- ment "once a month," or the name of a lady. As he had said before, it was very foolish of the defendant to put such a question to another man; but he thought in view of the evidence addue.ed by the plaintiff's own witnesses that there was a sort of an atmosphere of rumour going on in Colwyn Bay, and that the defendant had injudiciously fallen into an error. There was not the slightest intention on the part of the defendant to slander a lady whom he did not know nor probably ever seen, and he submitted with confidence that there was no, case against the defendant, for whom he asked the jury to give their verdict. Defendant's Story. Frank Simpson, said he was a member of the firm of Rowlands and Simpson, coal merchants, Colwyn Bay. He had known the witness Davies for some time, and, previous to the day in question, he 'had considered him to be a friend of his. On the day referred to he took Davies down to the firm's yard at the railway station, and showed him some coal. On the way back he (witness) very foolishly asked whether Davies had heard any conversation re- specting the late Mr John Roberts—not "old John Roberts," as had been alleged, because he held the deceased gentleman in much respect- as he had heard a rumour to the effect that he used to "meet a lady at Chester." Mr Davies got into "a most awful temper," and asked, "What? What?" Witness replied that he had heard that Mr John Roberts used to go to see a lady at Chester. There was a little pause at that point ——. The Judge: Go on, sir. Never mind the Witness (continuing) said that Davies then mentioned the name of one of the carters who were walking down the road a little distance away. At that moment Mr Pryce Williams came in view from the weighing office. Calling Mr 0 Williams to him, 'Davies said: what you said before Mr Willi-anis th,at t said "I have overheard a conversa^ jgd)' late Mr John Roberts used to go to ^e.n, atj, Chester." Davies got up very an yWOU said: "If I were John Roberts son punch your eyes out." r Then there was another pause. Give f The Judge Don't be silly, man- thiet evidence like a man..bout- Witness proceeded to say that m .fl at P quarters of an hour he saw Davies paSSll shop. Davies had called him as he 0 by. At the outset Davies said: tjjat you pay for that." Witness reP jjjji, would have nothing more to dl0 .wl„ajd: asked him for his account. Davies ^ttef not a matter of business, but it s H1 principle that I loo'k at it." WiW'e faaVe be* account, and Davies added: tfris> tc. sending lawyers' letters about to s pub'1 you get hold of it and carry it f-rom he ni house to another." Up to that believe be.1 never knew Miss Collier, and did n had ever seen her. In fact, he di gay. that there was a Miss Collier at C°iwy j Jcfle Cross-examined by Mr vyn W" there was a Metropole Hotel in Co eIe? Mr Roberts Have you ever feen -0n. Witness I went there on one occ Did you ever play billiards there* Only on that one occasion. 1Uanageres You didn't know there was a there? ¡) No; I did not.. at It is the largest temperance hote Bay, is it not? the I believe so. there for 5 And you have been a tradesman there w. past eighteen months without kno^i e a manageress -at the biggest tempera the place? :5 Yes. n place. Colwyn Bay is a comparatively sltl it not? Well, not very snj-a'll, either. the-re ° 1 What number of people would winter time—1,500? 5 at Between 4,000 and 5,000. You were a personal friend of i the time of this occurrence? Ag. that I had known him for eighteen too ^urjjjg But a friendship can 'be forme time, surely? out a And it will take that time to fin .{lj sometimes. (Laughter). ;mess &Mo- In further cross-examination w of "M mentioning the words "manageress vjes- p pole" during the conversation e, Edward Denham Rowland said' He defendant's partner in business. gS 0. sent at the interview between jje c (jji defendant on the day in question, a^efen^a borated what had been said by the s the witness-box. ts; Cross-examined by Mr Bryn ence t0 said he never heard any ie*eI manageress of the -Metropole.. Mr Bryn Roberts You know tlla 0f and the late Mr John Roberts "V'ere! beta" Vr political views—Mr Roberts was a 1 Mr Davies is a Conservative? Witness I believe that is so. fk^Lpel' And Mr Davies is -a staunc while Mr John Roberts was a proffl man-?$ I believe that is correct. i,nids c° t$■' Is it usual for a man who _'« a political views to another to get sia»° when he hears his political opponen (Laughter). Jp I don't know, indeed. (Lau'ghte Is a man not more disposed to 8 A such circumstances? (Laughter)- There may be something in tl>6 laughter). 1 Mr Ellis Jones Griffith then jury, -contending that whether it ^gjr P0 'A1 some people to giggle at bearing. opponents slandered or -not was <J U tlr in a case of so serious a C'hara' 'p,e ve, that all the jury had to consider b jjp question as to which party they pavieS' and he argued that the witness, .aternerl excitement, had magnified the s by the defendant. the t a' Mr Bryn Roberts also address ^jd and in conclusion said the plal11 t viI\ cK for heavy damages. She was be All she sought was a redemp'10 acter, which was of such value to.d ba profession.. oCcUp1' The Judge's address to the an-hour. f(}i c'* The Verdict.. f tbe ptf The jury then retired to c0"sl 0^^ f0^ On their return, some wards, the loreman announced C<J, for the plaintiff, with 65 darria.&es, ít thil t5 Mr Bryn Roberts said he too* would be allowed' in the usua h(, Mr Griffith held that the S ,efeji^ ujd would be a great hardship to t ere s& His Lordship replied that there o lati, 15 costs in that case, and poin the. ^\o& Jt such a case was to a lady inL v position, and the difficulty P'eJ0ti^ iy such slanders to one parti pi d was absolutely necessary tha established her character, an tfre comse open to her. He awa £5 damages and costs.

SUN BU^ MADE fboM Best Brown Cao lh per Square^ BEADY FOR ROLLERS. TltU — oS TENTS For Fetes, Galas, 0^e Shows, Wedding HOWARD' 35, Redcross liverpo°u felegr^' Telephone: 2339. M