The Welsh Coast Pioneer and Review for North Cambria

DENBIGH COUNTY COUNCIL BYE ELECTION. The election of a member of the Denbigh County Council, in the place of the la-to Mr J. D. Jonoa, took place on Saturday, and resulted as follows: Thorny Ellis.. 1.50; Colonol S. Parr L.y 72. Mr E-Uis ia a Liberal and Noncoju- fornoitt.

■ Aaron Davies, a UnpZaAe worker, w«s killed ai, LkuwAiy while sharpening a obieei. The grindstone burst, And a piece struct jtwm on tl*o head-. Nunwnous siugg^stioas are being received jut Simla for f<^e .erection of a awimurial to King Mwiini Contributions are expected from all Simla for 41bet .erection of a awimurial to King Mwiini Contributions are expected from all over India.

NEW BARDIC GRADUATES SUCCESSFUL WOMEN CAND!DATES. Eifionyoo, the Gorsedd Recorder, this is- Sued, the ofheaal list 01 new bardic graduates have successfully paasad the axwoal Goraadd examination. It will be not.jd that three of new gftiduatas are The following is the full list of t,}Je sucoessful oa..i,d idatcs: Gorsed'd Baxd: Owen Robert. O'.vr-n (Calod- ffi wd). 7, Green-betrraoe, Efcenezer, Carnarvon; Tom Evans (Obeli), 274b, St. Paul's Rf>ad„ High- bury. London; E. Mylyr Evanis (Mytjrr). Tlieo- ktgioal Oolktges Aberystwyth; R. R. Parry (Brynala), Bryn Ala., G wakixiiiai; John Chariea Jo net; (Glan OuiiynJ, 4, Eifion Terrace, TaJjsam, Nantlle. Ovate: Rev. T. E. Gravell (Erasmus GraveL), Cold Inn, IVegoily, Pembi-ok.^hiif Miss Maggie Richards (Meg'jjL Dwyfor). Tir Bach I, Llany- stuindwy; Muss Emily Thomas (Iafryn,), Hendy, Ponta,rdd. Mtxsio Degrees.—Chief Musician: Miss Gwladys Pri-baixai-d (Poiio^rddes Llwyfo), O, Anfield Road, Anlioki. Liverpool; Davd Evans, (Penoerdd Eifidar), Ty Oooh. Dinorwig, Lkui- beria.. Musician. Cadwaladr Williams (Alaw eifion), 17. ChapeJ^-sitreot, Portmadoc. M'ustioal Ovate: Robert HugW Roberts (Alaw M,ijo;on), 60, Tennyson Street, Liverpool; Cara- dfoo Jcowse (Aljw Bfi'rwrn), 3, lierwyw Stneet. Carrog, Corweax; Sapixu»ei Roberta (Alaw Alltud), 83, Brooae Hiil, Walton- Li John Ivor Jonos (Aiawydd Fferws), College Grc-e>:i, Hend H. PantyiyylulorL Tb- auooesaful candikiate^ will b;) invested in opeai iGoraedd at the Colwyxi Ba.y National Eæted.dfodl on Thuradiay, Sejiteimber 15.

Tale blucjaokois to wiiom fell tie 'honour o-f drajvixxg the gunoarraa^e bearing ^be coffin of King Edward fivjxn Windsor Station George's Chiapel wore recoi v.od by the King at Marlborough House on Monday, and we- halr dod various HuycLaAs and cis", wi(cii« the officers received decorations.

w T'" <■ v.' ^• x. .I .¡.. A .;e WAS4 v RL i^^ No Volume ca exh ausf irs uses., It is better to see the pleasing results of Monkey Brand than to read about them. TRY IT IN YOUR HOME. TWI ON KEY BRAND cleans house from rcof to cellar —polishes Brass and Bright work—scours Pots and Pans-makes Paint work look like new-adds a lustre to China and Glassware Won't Wash Clothes., MAKES COPPER LIKE GOLD-TIN LIKE SILVER PAINT LIKE NEW. Benjamin Brooke & Co., Ltd. M20 THE stanume rbig fEMTW TABLE 1 41's nott. nott T la Slrck II/ peltebatf may With On* Clmr w *~ti' 1JW Tabi* nlaar. Ii Oik ■ 6/ Wataat -9' Oak [hreurhMt (so Ar cr Mirttil «> »li« irNA«(N7i«/*>M< Nb*rWM4udjlViit c-pp- -it OL 69. notl FZ THE over^NTEL H oR uEuIT SEND FOR OCR SPECIAL ) '0 6e"ei Cl8¡8 nett. CMIT TERMS 0.'1. 341- nott. -WHICH AH-UlilQUE Tbo 7M a-fti.b plw P.b w IF a C.,n- 131H .j. wi.b B== LCk' LAgb& 44 life. Od. iE4 17*. Gd. DELIVERED FREE -OS t W- 4 r A J. DICKEN & SONS, House Furnishers, Furniture Removers and Storers, &c. CHEAPEST HOUSE IN THE DISTRICT. LARGEST SELECTION — LINOLEUMS, CORK, ENGLISH AND FOREIGN CARPIRTS. BEDROOM SUITE A SPECIALITY. YAUGHAN ST., LLANDUDNO. STATION nOAh. COf.M'VX HAy w j: TKL- 175. UNDERTAKERS- ALL GOODS DELIVERED FREE

USEIBREAKING AT LLAN- ÐUDNO AND DOLBENMAEN. A FESTINIOG APPRENTICE'S CLAIM. LLANFAIRFECHAN HOTEL TENANCY DISPUTE. SETTLED: ALLEGATIONS WITHDRAWN. (From Our Reporter.) ) s.ummr Assizer for the County of Carnar- Lei opeDJOd lo-dav weok at Carnarvon, AT c Mr Justice Jelf, who in the morning at- Divine service at Christ Church, attended Ily tho High Sheriff, Mr D. P. Williams, who court dress, the Under Sheriff (Mr A. is iiobertsj, and1 the Sheriff's Gluiplum, the •j^ • J. Ji iiUgl.Cti, CaivittLSLlC Methodise mitos- is pwoawon, who, however, <iiid inot take ,1:I1 too service. 'He offfcist-ing clergyman. tile Rery. Richard Hughes, Curate. GRAND J UILY, tr.he following constituted the Grand Jury: I.fA-L. (Mr J. E. Greaves), fore- t' Mcasiy, Knaeelhaw, U. J. Roberts, Ro- Ruber Us, J. Evan itobei'ua, J. istsaiiu uaVjas, Jonass RoL>ciLtt, Messrs iiios. Roix?ru», A. to-TjV^'uue Wuiiauis, Rou^t iiugn-oa, A. »V. i5. S^T^n^, i-uriy Dr. L«oytl VvilliauiS, Wii^rc> -iNoe.e, liios. iiug-nes, G. it. iiunx- Ej?^- 1. E. Roberts, W. Li. 'J/nomas, R. B. aild R. jNormuxi Da vies. JUDGE AND THE LATE KING. Judge, in his charge to tho Grand Jury, j««led to uie death ox R-ng Edward. He felt kj that the inhabitants 01 Carnarvon, like thOoo whole Empire, felt profound grief at tne U,ath of the Kmg. They had hoard on ali and had every reason to believe, that he beloved by everyone, for he threw himself III ^ha interests of the people. In tneir feeling jj&rief and profound pity ior the Royal Faxiniy, must remember that there waa a sliver ijj to the darkest cloud, and they must coar how f-ortuuaw and happy they were in hav- tho present King, who, iney beiievod, would the traj.iL.011s of las lather and grand- Ill "k ahd who wouid give that same devotion loJ^art, mind and body to the service of his to high, low. rich andl poor, as wad, by his father. Hj.-he Grand Jury parsed a vote of sympathy the Royal Family on the death of King c. ard. and also praying that the reign, of King may be both k>n# and prosperous, ^^ts! associate inyscif with your eenti-

LLANDUDNO SHOP-BREAK- ING CASE. "A WORTHLESS FELLOW." diaries Duvies (23), collier, Stafford, Uj~rded guilty to shop-breaking at Llandudno, nj stealing £ 26 17s 8d, the monies of Joseph Mr T. H. Parx-y (instructed by Messrs and Marks. Llandudno) prosecuted, v yetective-Sergeant Brooks, Stafford, said the » 'Used followed no regular employment, and in r,„Was a worthless fellow. U e Judge said that the convictions against J^cused started in 1901, when he was charged jj. stealing pigeons, and there had been y^ro.ug convictions against him since, n-,n a statement, the accuser! declared that be not como into the town with the intention of remitting the crime, but he got into a publio- L^136, artd come out quite intoxicated, hardly 5^>wiiig what he was doing. He remained S^'nstairs in his lodgings all night, and some- r*'1^ told him that lie must break into the shop, r?d he oould not shako off the temptation. He he had a bad character, but "it was never ,at,- to mend." k ■Uie Judge: It is nonsense for you to ask U8 to R?h«ve that it is drink which led you to this. L^ur crimes have been carefully planned, and C?w you set up a plea of drunkenness. You « £ ve boen giy^n «ver>- chance, and you must no»' Penal servitude for live year*.

HOUSEBREAKING AT DOLBEN- MAEN. lbobert Owffl Davies (32), labourer, pleaded £ to houBebreaking at D(A^nm<,en a™l E^g 3s, the property of JennaR Grifhbhe. Clement Davles' (insructod by Messra Lloyd ^ge George) prosecuted,. ei_3^e Juck^o, said he was afraid the aoouaed was ^■nninod to become a regular thief. By only Fencing him to nine months' lmpmonmeiat Awa8 giving hiin another

BLAENAU FESTINIOG GIRL'S CLAIM. SEQUEL TO AN OIL STOVE ACCIDENT. through her mother, BLodwen Thomas, Cross- Blaenan Fostiniog, seventeen yearn of age, MISB Bryrner, draper. Biaenau teatuuog, t?T daxnages for pei-sonal lnjni-ies to heT, caused ^Kh an alleged defective oil stove. Montgomery and Mr Austin Jorxe, (icu S^ted by Mr R- O. Jones) <M>|>oa«*l for t«he ^tiff, aI1<i Mr Artemus Jones and Mr Clement (instructed by Meisisr,i Lloyd Geoige a ^fae) wae for tlw defence. *rom counsel's opening statement, it appeared tlJat the plaintiff wa& in the defendants employ ia dressmaker, and had to attend to an ou which went on fir*1 and she suffered injuries. The defendant denied negii- jalaintiff, in her evidence, said ehe was bv the head dressmaker that she was sup- to do everything like the other apprentice, was aooustomed to look after the lamp, had an objection to the lamp, but she at- ed to it because she was obliged to. When SS wp^> putting oil into the lamp «t flared, aiid 4ovvrn stairs to give the alarm, and she jJj^veToa that she was on fire herself. The Wrapped a mackintosh around her. She fcj:ei"<xl terribly, and though the accident hap- MÍo"'16(t eighteen months ago she had not yet re- f6r«d. Questioned by Mr Artemus Jones, plaint.iff said °ther apprentice always put oil into the >' when it was all right. jv 'd anyone ever tell you not to put the oil tiie lamp was all right?—No. you try to put out the flames with your l''ls ■—No I ran downstairs. Wt VOu remember Miss Pearson ooming in •v tho accident and taking the funnel out of w«lamp?_N0. jn further evidence, said she was tola *f/Vas the duty of the last apprentice to look tho lamp. By looking through the top of ),ie laniv) it could be seen whether it was all Her objection was not confined to the Ijj '*■ but to the other work euch as pick- 1'¡Qt: pins, as she went there to learn sewing. 11tït¡ff had been working at Llandudno re- .v, SILLY TO DO DIRTY WORK." xa.mined. plaintiff said that before the ify she had a conversation With Miss n' who told her she was very silly to do 'dirty work. Thomas. Crosskeys Inn, Blaenau Fes- the mother of the plaintiff, stated that tw Medical charges in regard to the accident to daughter amounted to £42. <lre*raoe Morris, Trefenna, Blaenau Fcstiniog, a ^1,^Siliaker, formerly in the employ of Mius tr- ^ave evidence, and aiso Dr. Richard .^aenau Festiniog, who said that the ba girl was severely burnt about the lower IJ body, and slie was for fomc time in recariouo condition. Slio wae still very A Ua" Thomas, sister of the plaintiff, stated aQ employee of tlie defendant nauwjd Miss "'ol.1ld tho told her that a better arrangement Ii, ^x> made for heating the irons. She also tbav€ her eister was under wages filie would ft received coxnix?nsation, but as she was only Probationer she would not be entitled to Judge That is an accurate description of ■* aw. Mi w Sovo s Rvan«. the apprentice, looked after the » *nd there was supposed to be a card in regarding its use. Witless vras ex- with regard to the card, which, she ftjjj waa hung up on the wail by means of A" >itn<5car<* was produced, and it wa3 shown the vur>S,S" said she believed it was the one Mr M room- k»4-,| Montgomery: There is no pin-hole in that '1'he J^udge; No, there is no pinhole, and I admit it. *Vid r^°ef^ing, witness, referring to the "atx^f ''ll6 plaintiff was trying to put out the CIA! stove with her hands. The -rove 0onoo a week. So far as witness knew this was the first occasion on which the plaintiff handled the lamp. Witness had not heard of any trouble with the lamp before it ar- rived at the defendant's establishment. Rhoda Williams, also in Miss Brymer's ser- vice, described what occurred when the stove caught fire. Further evidence was given by Kate Ellen Hughes, employed by the defendant, who said that she had never seen tho plaintiff handling, tbo lamp bafore the aocidbii't. The lamp was always out when witness fed it with oil. Cross-examined: Until that day the plaintiff had never touched the lamp, to attend to which was witness's duty. No one had complained of the lamp smoking. THE DEFENCE. Mr Artemus Jones, for the dolence, contended there was no evidence connecting the accident with any defect in the lamp or with any specific act of uiis'.gVigenoc on the pa:rt of the ctefendant. The Judge: I am against you there. Mr Artemus Jones said the other point for the defence was that if there was any ncgligcnoo of any kind, it wa3 the unauthorised negligence of the plaintiff's fellow servant. n Annie Williams, a dressmaker at Miss Brymer's shop, gave evidence that at the time of the accident there were five working in the room, and at the time Miss Roberto, tho head di-essmakcr, was away on her hoi id aye, witness being in charge. By the Judge: There was no dispute between the plaintiff and ifer.-eif as to whose duty it was to attend to tho lamp. Mary Elizabeth Roberts, head dressmaker at the establishment of tho defendant, stated ,par the plaintiff never attended to the stove. She pajd a premium, and was not asked to do anything iike that. After the accident witness went to tee the plaintiff, who sa.d that she wan pouring oil into the stove when it blazed. Asked why she poured oil into the stove when it was lit, plaintiff suid she thought it was ;o out. There was no previous accident in connec- tion with the stove. The Judge: You did not eay to the girl, 'Why did you touch the stove?'—No. Summing up, the Judge s:1,d the real ques- tion an the case was whether the plaintiff ha,d been ordered by the head dressmaker to attend to the stove along with the other apprentice. There was a great conflict om that point. Of the plaintiff's statement there was no eonfirin.jtion, whereas for the defence on that point there wiare four or five wit- nesses, who said that the plaintiff was wrong in what she said about the order to attend to the lamp. The plaintiff declared that she attended to the lamp whon it smoked, which took place-, it was ata-ted, rather often, and she must have done it with the know- ledge of the rest of the employees itn the room. If the jury forund that the pla.ntiff was not oridered to attend to the latinp thare was an end of the. case. The jury would have to consider, if they found an affirmative answer to tho first case, whether the head- 111 is tineas was negligent i'11 not instructing the plaintiff to attend to the lamp. Another question was whether the plaintiff was negli- gent in filling the lamp when alight P The jury found as follows-: — Had Blodwon Thomas bcan ordered to at- tealJd to the lamp?-—Yes, Was Miss Roberts negligent in not in- structing Blodwen Thomas to attend to the p Was Blodw-eu Thomas negligent in filling tho lamp when it was aJight?—No. If damages, how much?—Bled wen Thomas X25, and hor mother X45, The Judge. I postpone delivering judg- ment on the question of law. There is the difficult point about the f('!llow-E):xvallt, but still something might be done by the par- ties. Tho jury wore excuscd for' four years, as they ha.d been in attendance in ooœ:1 for three days.

LLANFAIRFECHAN HOTEL TENANCY DISPUTE. THE CASE AMICABLY SETTLED. J. 0. Knight, formeiCy liosnaee of the Angle- sey Arms Hotel, Menai Bxvd'gie, brought an aation against the Riev. Lewis Jen- kins, r-ieotor of blanbctis, and Wiliisajn Dyson, formerly a brewer's manager, for damages for alleged fnaudruLlØTht rrriaxiapreaesntataon on the part of the defendant upon the letting of tho Queen's Iiolel, Llanfairfechan, to tine pladntai. Mr Austin Jones and Mr Clement Daviets (instructed by MT Thornton. Jones, Ba:a,gor) ap- pearied for thts piatintiff, aaid Mr Artemus Jone-s (uniiruoWii y M-, Carter, Vincent axd Co.) was for the diefenrfamtie. Mi? Ausbiin Jones, jin opeoiir^g, sitated that the plaintiff asserted, that in two letters ahd on two oooaakaiB the detfendafii'te' made a. rmfbijr of lwprtasontations and warranties as to the hobal, which he alleged were untrue, flis the dterfeindants well knew. deferndanrtis denm soino of the allegations, and admitted others, and they eounter-olaimtsd the sum af E1007, which the plaintiff resisted. The plaintiff from J893 to 1908 was "the tenant and lioansee of die Angle- sey Arms Hotel, Mortal Bridge. De- fendants were trustees under the will of the late Mr J. P. Williams, wlto was tho liceuieoe end owner of the hotel for some yeiara. During the negotiations Mr Jeai-kmn had taken a more pror nine rut, part than Mr Dyson, but tlhcre was a a'.io.:e cotnnieot'ion between tho two during tfrie whole time-, and ail'bhooxgh Mr JenikuiiS inteir- viewedi the plaintiff, he had invariably, just be- inter vie WH, soen Mr Dyson relying no doubt upon his superior judgment in the.se matters. During the progress of these negotia- tions, Mr Dyson did! not display any ^particular willingnCBB to cfecuas the matter with 1ihe plain- tiff. Up to 1890 the hotel was occupied by Mr J. P. Williams, and when, ho rctiro lie let the hotel to Mr Ay land for seven, at a rent of 2150 a year, with an option to renew. Miss Ayland, his sister, than became tenant- One ropressffitajtaon of whidh the plain-Liff complained waa rmadie by Mr JcnJcims in a letter to tho ciffect that Miiss Aylaxid's takings avera,goo about B2000 a year, wihiilst she was at the. h-otol Then a Mr Tarr wxmt. into the 'hotel urror an agreement to pay £ 180 a year, and dujixiig his tenancy furrÚtoufle was supplisidi to the hotel by the defendants. Thon a Mr Smith wont into the hotel, but, did not manage it ImnsaW, talcing a Mr Buttei'field êlB inanager, When Mr Srrtiitlh gave up the houso in May, 1908, the <fo!o.cki.nte took up Mr Butt«:field, and he aoted a.-i manager until Sep- tember, 1908, when a Miss Hugthes went in, and she coci'duoted the btx«iniei33 until February, 1909. At that date th» p:'aiiitiff went into the hotel. The negotiations hotween the parties commenced iin December, 1908. when the plain- tiff wrote, to Mr Jenkins inquiring into t:h.e rent and outgoing and saying ho understood that the hotel had a first class trade for summer visitors. In hits mply Mr Jenkl-n;i (and oouiae.) wished to dilract tibo jury'a attention to the stabament 00- cause the plaintiff roliled particularly upon it) stated, "I may say we were rather unforfcuriatc in our last tenant, and wo as trustees diecided at the end of last mummer to put. in a mana- geress to work the hotel ifor the owners, and are anxious to give her a fair trial, but we are at the same time open to negotiations. One ten- ant 'hold the hotel on a ltoaie for 14 years at a xyrntaJ of J6150 a year for tftie first sovon years with an option of continuing the tenancy for an- other seven yoans ait. a ivait of £ 160. This ten- ant remained the full period of fourt,3e,n years. A later tenant offeyed, a rental of £ 180, but he did not do so well, but it, was not, however, the fauiit of too hotnl. "It was a first class hotel to all tenants who knew their work and looked after it. Some are now retired living upon what thev mGodle at the hotel." Counsel, commenting upon this letter, conten- ded that it would be difficult for defendants to point out a single tesnant who had been able to retire on the hotel tahings since 1904. "I agroe that th* hotel has gone down through indifferent tenants," wroto the plaintiff in a letter. Later on, Mr Jeankims wrote to the plain- tiff stating "tihat wheta Mias Ayliuid toft the takiaigs wore found to average a.t)out 1;200,9 per annum." which atatement, said Counsel, meant that 'he had' examined the books, and ho would prove that only on oino oocasiion did the. takings touch L2000, and that was iviim L214 was re- üBjveodf from posting- Tlio average takings were £ lY54. In another letter it was stated that Mr Tarr's takings ivere goodI. On January 8th, Mr Jenkins intiiwated tliaut they were willing to let tho hotel, and an interview was arranged at Chester, the plaintiff ecvninig up specially fjxxm BrOiuiitaire. Mr Jemkina mot- the plantiiff on tfic, platform at Chester, and the f>laiBtiff iaq-uirod where the co-trusteo was? Mr Jeniins replied that, he had gono away, and had letf-t all particulars with him, During that intearriew a iiaxmber of rflr utati- were made by Mr Jenkins, with, said coun&el, the co-operation of Mr Dyson, which induced the plaintiff to take the hotel. It was important that a man who wished to enter an hoW should know what the takings wera. The representations made at the interview were that the businoas at the end of Miss Ayland's tenancy was about X2400. The plaintiff, on hearing that, Thaturally asked for books, and he was told that during Messrs Tarrs and Butter field's time thtere were no books. On Janu- ary 14th. the plaintiff intimated by letter that he would agt-oo to the rental of X150, and on January 25th the plaintiff, accompanied by Mr Wyatt, his brother-in- law, inspected the hotel along with Mr Je-n- kins, who reputed the representations as to the takings during Miss Ayland's t-eiia-ney. Perhaps it might be said that the plains tiff was negligent in not making further inquiries. But wh^t was the truth as to the taking's P An ex aimi nation of the books showed that only once had the takings touched X2000, and that in 1898, when they reached < £ 2011, In 1900, the takings were £1879, in 1901 X1617, and in 1902, X1720. The plaintiff was possibly deceived with ro- gaoxl to the position of the hotel, but he (counsel) did not wish to suggest that Mr Jenk100 absolutely and wilfully misrepre- sented these things, but it must be clear that MtT Dyson, if not Mx Jenkins, knew e-very- thing about 'the hotel, and knew that it was in a bad way. It was eaiid tha.t Mr Tarr's takings were very good, but the plaintiff' would be able to produce figures to the contrary. In 1904, the takings were £1406, an 1905 X184,7, and in 1906 £ 1585. Mr Buttorfieild was tenant of the de- fendants for some time, and they knew all about him, and a brisk correspondence- woent on between Mr Dyson with Mr Butterfield, which show-ed ho evinced a great interest in tho hotel, and know exactly what was going on there. Counsel read lengthy correspond- ence with the view of showing that both d-efclldant3, during 1908, took a keen interest in the house. Another mis- representation alleged was that soxno tenants had retired, -arid were living on what they made at the hotel. Mr Williams cer- tainly retired in 1890, but his career was hardly material. Miss Ay land left in 1904, and her takings during the last year were pooreir than in the previous years. Since then theire had been Mr Tarr and Mr Smith, who could not be sa.:d to have retired on the profits of the hotel. As to the Furniture there had been an amendment in tho defence, arid it was conkem-ded that the defendants not rely upon that representation, but sure- ly the ag-, of the furniture was a matter cf some seriousness. JUDGE'S SUGGESTION. At this stage the Judge asked whether the parties could not be brought together, but Mr Artcmus Jones pointed, out it was only fair that the other side of the story should be h-eaxd. Mr Austin Jones proceeded to state that the plaintiff wrote to the defendants com- plaining he did not take as much at Llan- i&irfechan during Easter as he did at Menai Brbdge. In another letter to Mr Jen- kins, the piaintift described the business as a "frost bifce." Subsequently plaintiff had an interview with the defendants solicitor, and as the result of that certain agree- ments were drafted. On February 9th the licence was transferred to Mr Knight, who entered into possession On March 13th plaintiff and his wile had. an int-erview with Mr Dyson in Manchester, and he (plaintiff) subsequently wrote to Mr Jon- kins acquainting him of the fact. The per- man-exit transfer was granted on lAaTeh loth, and on that day plaintiff saw Mr T. W. Trevor (a partner in the firm of Messrs Carter, Vincent and Co.), and refused to aign the agreement becauso of the state of affairs at the house. On March 27th plaintiff wrote to defenJa its' solicitor, stating that he would not sign tic agreement, as he considered tint the busi- ness had boon grossly misrepresented to him, a.nd 'T shall take the earliest possible op.portunity to get out of it," he concluded. During the time plaintiff was at the hotel, which he loft in February, 1910, he kept books which showed that there was a loss on the year of 363 19s 2d. THE PLAINTIFF'S EVIDENCE. Tho plaintiff, who now reside, in Brighton, said ho had an interview with Mr Jenkins at Chester. Mr Dyson had pieMcuoiy left. Mr Jenkins said that, his oo-trustee had left ail particulars with him. lie roid the last few years Miss Ayland was tilolo the business av eragei about L20W. No settlement would be kjoepfeed except a B1000 for i-.o.np: and £ 150 a year rent. Air Jenkins said that iiis co-trustee, who was, a thorough busineso man, would not accept any other terms. It was worth it, and rather than let it go at one penny less he would take it over hiinselt. As to books, of TaTr and Butterfield had not been seen, but from Miss Ay land's books figures oouid be pxoduoed 1 ain- tilf objected to the £ 100 in going. Mr Jenkins sa;d thev had no means of knowing what, busi- ness was being done then. He could form no idea with regard to at. The plumt^ff evA he went down to tlxe Queen s Hotel wiih his brotlver-in-law. The next morning plaintxff and a friend named Wyatt met Mr Jenkins at, Llan- fairfeohan. Thev examined the hotel and tran- sacted business. They discussed the s;tuat.on for hours, and M? Jenkins related that Mi>s Ay^nd^ takings, according to his co-trustee, weie £ 2n00 for the last few years.. He (Mr not give tho exact, taking,, but he cmiW^c hs word that thf were not less than £ 1500 per an- num. On tlif undertaking it was finally agreed to TJay EIC,00 in-going and B150 a yoaj nent Mr Jenkins said he had no boob or papers of any description to show. Plaintiff h>aid he would like to see the spxrit permit b^ok, which was pro- duoed. Plaintiff commented that very little en trade was done in spirits, and Mr Jenki.ns said a large trade was done in beer. Counsel: Did you accept his word? Plaintiff: Pkintiff Because of Mr Jenkins' position as a clergyman. Proceeding:, Plaintiff said he had objected to the terms of the agreement bccause they wanted half a year's rent paid in advance, which ho thought he had i>a:d. They also wanted £ 200 off for the first year in respect of the furniture balance account. Plaintiff said from wnat he oould see then he could nevr pay E200 off in addition to the rent Ab'>ut the begirmmg o March plaintiff told Mr Jenkins that he had found certain books belonging to Messrs Tarr and Butterfield in the hotel Speaking gene- rally plaintiff said he found the house in a very poor'condition. He saw Mr Dyson in Manches- ter, and asked him: f he was agreeable to cer- tain alterations, and he xepliod that he was. Havino- examined the books referred to, plain- tiff found he had a hopeless task to tackle. He declined to sign the agreement. In August he gave notice to quit, and in November the writ was iMwed. He eetihna,to:t has total loss at £383. Ho had! oonducboo the Anglesey Arms Hotel for 15 yean;, and he never haa suoii a busixieis as that at Llanfairfechan in his Hfe. Cross-examined: Since he left the Queen s Hotel, he had not taken over any other house. He left the Anglesey Arms in May, 1908 and his next house was one at Rainsgate, The Trafalgar Hotel. He would swear that he never signed an agreement there. The justices gave him a temporary trans- fer in October. He might have signed some papers with the brewers. After that agreement was signed, did you turn round on the brewery oompany and accuse them of misrepresentation as to trade?—I was deceived by a London agBllt as to the business done at the house. I accused the brewery company of assisting in keeping facts from me, and they paid me out. I was in about 28 days. They gave me a lump sum to clear outr-betwecn £350 and .£360. Thev did not pay me the money until I had refused to take the licence, for fear the place should be closed. I paid E500 in-going and dropped B300 with expenses there. n Proceeding, Plaintiff said he wrote in Decem- her, 1908, to Mr Jenkins with resi>ect to the Queen's Hotel. He knew about the h-:mse but he knew nothing of the business done there. Counsel: You were on friendly terms with Miss Ay land and Mr Tarr? Yes; but I had never seen Mr Butterfield.. I knew that the hotel had gone down owing to indifferent tenants. Moreover, a policeman had t,d him that it was one of the worst conducted houses in the place. Did he tell you that his position as clergyman prevented him from being much in oontact with the house?—He was giving the views of his co- trustee. He did not tell me he had only been trustee for about six years. Do you suggest that Mr Jenkins and Mr Dyson knew about, the books referred to, and withheld them from you?—I cannot say. I must pre3S for "Yes" or "No." I do not suggest that, they were dishonest, He always looked! upon the hotel as a ft rat-daws hotel when Mies A yland had it With nagiand' to the rertQ- tion made respecting the takings, it was not pos- sible that he (plaintiff) had made a mistake. He did not now eay that defendants had kept back from him the fact that £ he stables had been a good source of income. Mr Artemus Jones: You have now abandoned your allegations regarding the furniture and the stable, and now we come to the beer. Do you suggest that a hotel like the Queen's should have ve a large beer trade?—Yes. It was the case with many hotels. At this sta^e his Lordship a?ked whether it was worth whxic, for the parties to consider whether they must fight out this case to the bitter end. He knew it 'Was an important thing to gentlemen like Mr Jenkim and Mr Dyson that there should be SOllle kind of withdrawals of the chargos which affected their moral character. Mr Arbemxis Jones said there -must be a oom- plete withdrawal. The Judge consulted with counsel in camera. WITHDRAWAL OF ALLEGATIONS. At tho close of the interview, Mr Artexnus Jones announced that he was sorry that the case must go on. HJS Lordship said he desired to say, in the presence of the de- fendants, that if a settlement was ar- rived at. it must be thoroughly understood that all imputations -against the defendants were com- pletely withdrawn. If the case went on they would have to be back there on Wednesday, and probably some part of Thurcday, and the-result even then might lead to an appearance in the Court of Appeal and a prolonged controversy. He suggested, under the circumstanoes, that l'o there should b3 a Little give and take on both sides. A further consultation ensued between the parties. at the olose of which Mr Artemus Jones said that the parties had agreed to cry quits provided there was an absolute and unequivocal withdrawal on the part of the plaintiff of any imputations made against defendants, with a clear expression of regret that they should have been. made. Mr Autjn Jones said plaintiff, though he had suffered considerable kx.3 at the hotel, was prepared to absolutely and unequivocally with- draw the charges made. and to state that Mr Jenkins was perfectly honest in the statements whieh ho made. His Lord-hip expressed his gratification at the result, adding that he would not for one moment countenance a settlement if it did net dispose absolutely of the. charges made against defendants.

ABERGELE ADVERTISING ASSOCIATION. THE QUESTION OF ORGANISATION. Mr BlwarJ WilUatns (Moramxkl) presided at a moct- ing of the Gviteral Committee of the Aberyele T.A.A. on Fiiow)- evening. The S-vrKMary (Air H. E. Thomas) reported Ncl the spirts held on VV-hit-Monday, hati left a balance ui hand of ill 1.3s &id. The Seiipaairy also reported that the County Coun- cil had jivc-ii permfekm to erect notice posts on Llaufair rood poiirlcug the, way to tlie Dingle. Tlie St. Asaiiii Rural District Council wrote expresB- iiig their inability t'Ü comply with the request legard to 11acir4 scefas along the roods in the rurai area, but agreeing to the A £ s>eialkin dc.ing so at their own expenac, provided the seats caused 110 uhstruc- tion to the public, acid -be soiisiaetory to the Council s, surveyor. Too matter was left in ahcyanoe for the present. Mr W. Fierce Morris moved that tile annual carnival Lw abandoned this v*car. I11 moving an annejidmenit Mr Alexandre said the car- nival, even tilioukl it jiot turn out a financial suooess, wa3 an excel Sent a»ivertising modium. was an exœ]J<è.nt a>dvcrtjsillg modium. By a large inajarity, the meeting decided in favour of the amendment. THE ASSOCIATION CONSTITUTED. Mr fierce Morris suggested that the Association he constituted into an oz,ni",0d body. Mr l'-ieroe said h quite agreed with the suggestion, and moved that they do so. If thaft was 111/t done he feared that tho Association would dwindle away. In seconding, Mr W. Humiphineys Ja-leo aaid he liioked forward to the Assix-iatioin beeomimg in the naar future a very influential tody, and a powerful factor iœ: goud in Aboi^ele and p<.Jill>.ll.n. The mot-ion was unanimously agr.aed to. Replying to a qucslioni, tilie Secretary said the Gene- ral Committee liuinSxa-ed at piescuit ferty-six member's. Atr Pieircx; was strongly in fiavour of weJiioaning all residents members of the Association, but Mr EdwarcVs favourod Uw exclwaon of thtxso who had k«j>t aloof when the Association was "in the txi'!arw>e. Mr Pierce. Morri3 said it was moat important that they should elicit the sympathy and co-operation of every ratepayer in the district. Mr Ciabl>a agreed with Mr Morris, and added that the AssfCtaJijai sliou'd lian-,e one geneaal meeting in each jear, at which cycry UK-rnbar wouid be untitled t" attend, wi'h a working committee to he elected at that general n>eet ing. If all constituted a working oomiut- tee, it would become absolutely tinworl-tbl e- Mr Pmkil16 also agretvi. Mr Pierce and Mr Edwards having spokon to the same effect, the motion was a.i-c4xi w. The Sfmnetarj' reported that standing orders far the Association had boen drafted by Mr E. A. Crabte, soli- citor, and thanks wero passed to tliat gentleman for his kindness. A siib-conanwttee, oansisting of Messrs E. Vf illiajnj!, John Mwainis, E. W. Harrop, John Pierce, G. 1'er- kins, E. Worrall, and W. Pierce Morris, was appointed to consider them. THE SUBSCRIPTION. Mr Cnabbe moved that one abil'.itvg h?. the limit of subsoription for xneniberahip, with a maximum of one guinea. This was s «' nd:>l by Mr W. Pierce Morris. On the motion of Mr Pierce, it was resolveid that the subscrifition fee bo two shillings and sixpenoe, and it was further d-seiled to circularise the district, noti- fving the public of tlie amount, and inviting mecn^-s.

CONWAY RURAL DISTRICT COUNCIL LLY&FAEN RATEPAYERS' COMPLAINTS. A REPLY TO CRITICS. Mr Hugh Owen presided over the monthly meeting of this Council on Friday. There were also presant: Rev. W. Phillips, MeHsra J. W. Raynes, Robert Ellis, Ed. Will jams, Davad Jones, E. H. R. Robc'rus, W. Davies, Thomas Witliairus, with the Clerk (Mr T. E. Parry), and tho Surveyors (Mr Levi John and Jolrn Davias). A ILK-PLY Tû LLYSFAEN CRITICS. Before the oidiiLary busimses began' Mr Raynes, by the couseait of the Chairman, made a statement bearing upon assertions made at the inquiry recently held at Uysiajan cojioarnan^ sancÍAlOn for a loan of £ 1960 for parish improvement work. lie saad. there was some opposition by ratepayers who com- plained of the hig-h rates, and buamed the Rural District Council for the infliction of them. He wanted to put matters right. In January, 1905, a oommuttoe was appointed to inspect plans, specifications, etc., at Mr Fax- ringtoll's office m LLandudoio of works to be dono in Llysfaen. The plans wene approved, and it would be remembered that theae was no favouritism shown in extending tlie water maims (hear, hear). Tbey simply wanted tc help the pairish as far as possible. The Chairman That was the only object we had in view. Mr Ray-rues prooaeded that whilst the work of Laying the maims wes proceeding properly was being erected at the OÄ Co-iwyn csd of the paj-ish, and they called upon the Rural Di.ntuict Council to sewer and water those houses. There was a balance of loan of .£'{)O() odd in respect of the sewerage works and the ck\rk informed the Coxinc.il that they might uso that sum, and arrange with the Local (xove-tiLinent Board afterwards, "I Iie co's- si&q-uottQo was that when tha CounuiJ asked tlio Board to transfer that amount th^v objected and requested to be suppled wtit*i plaas, and apply for the money already .spent. C&rtain ra;tepayer-s at the inquiry tiie otlter day strongly objected to the new extensions, and said tlie water was not from Ty Doha' to GiJall and Broailan and Ty'ny- coed. The chairman (Mr Huafh Owen) could support him that what they did was for tho be-i-oiit of the whole parish, and not for the ) partdcuLar bane fit of certain people. One gentLeman a2.so said, it was most outragi-ous, and hlajiiiid the Council for it, adding that the rabes last year had increased to lis. He (the spüa.]r.c¡l') was sorry to say the rates had increased. Mr Ravines gave figures showing that the blame for the anercceo should not bo p^iaced on the Council's shoulders. The rate made by the ovecaeere for the year ending March 31st, 1911, was 5s in the X, whereae for March 3let, 1910, it was 4e in the X. The special sanitary r3.te niado by the overseers for the year end- ing March 31st, 1911, was 63 inthe whilst last year it was only 5s 6d in the £ ■ Ta District Coameil and Cuaidiaais' precepts for the ensuing year was 4s 2d in the æ, and the oversaers' rate to mocit it was 5s in the £ The special sanitary rate levied by the RunaJ. District Council was 5s 6d an the X, a.nd the ove-i^e.oi's' rate to mieet it wee 6s in the X, making a.n incrc-ao; of Is 4d in tho £ or a total of .£007 12s, for which neither the Rurad District Council nor the Guardiaais were to blame; it was probably due to the fact that the parish itself had got into debt. Ii the Local Govemmecnt Board re- fused to grant the loan just applied for, the moiuey would have to be provided for out of the rates, and as they were aware the Council were everlastingly calle-d upon by the owners of property to supply them with water and provide for tlie sewerage. If the parish wished to go ahead they must spend money. The Chairman added that the Council had diome nothing except what they considered was absolutely, necessary for the panifft. It was not- surprising to hear of what Mr Raynes had referred to, it was often the case that when people wore called upon to pay for a. thing they had previously' ordered, they grumbled. Mr Ed. Williams remarked that the rate- able value of the parish for poor rate pur- poses was xqooo, as against El)ooo for county purposes, a difference- in rating wb.-ioh was very unfair (hear, hear). Mr Thomas Williams tucd that with refer- enoo to the compiainrtS at the inquiry, the. work mostly objected to was that on the- road between Ty Uoha' and G ilim, which, xt mcis contended., had bocm unnee-assarily done- Mr Rayn.as expladn-ed. t.hat t.lie -whole expeoi- ditoxre on that and otbjor portions of the rocd was only .£175. Mr T. Williams added that a seetaon of the ratepayers complained that the work lie had referred to had been done before the Local Government Board sanctioned the loan for ^Th-e Chairman-. They must remember that they had aJwa.ys Ixun com plain 111 g tbat we do not go fast enough here. Mr T. WiLLiams said a complaint had aueo been made that the notices of the inquiry had mot boon adeepaately pos.te-d. The Chairman replied that the billpo&tex had received instruct ions to post the not-iocis from Llysfaen down to Old Colwyn, includ- ing the boards outside the various places of worship. AH the bill-s sent by the Local Governmiont Board, exaept lour, had bôè.ll for- waixkyi for posting, and if the supply ran short, the Oounoil could not be held rea}X>n- sible. Mr T. Williams said that specific men tion had been made of the boards outside the Wos- Leyan and Baptist churches. Mr Raynt3S remarked that the Clerk to the Parish Council was the person authorised to soe "to s.uch work in the par\h, and he moved that all such ret iees be in the futuxre sent to that gentleman for posting. Mr T. Williams seconded, and this was agreed to. OFFENDING GIPSIES. Mr Ed. Wi-iiams calVd -attention to the practice of gipsies wlio leave their vans at certain paints of the Council's roods for un- reasonable periods, and it wa's roi-olved to call the attsintion of the police to the mat- tier ter. FINANCIAL. Tlie Finano-5 Ck>.nimitts>& reported a debit balance at the hank of £588 5s 4d on the Conway rural district account, and a credit balance of .£133 5s Id for the Glan Conway district.