Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

20 articles on this Page

Pembrokeshire Summer Assizes.

News
Cite
Share

Pembrokeshire Summer Assizes. THE HAKIN ELOPEMENT. THE PEMBROKE DOCK SHOOTING CASE. His Lordship Mr Justice Channell opened the Com- mission for the Summer Assize in the Shire Hall at 11 o'clock on Thursday morning. He was accompanied on the bench by the High Sheriff for the county of Pem- brokeshire, Mr George Powell Roch the Sheriff's Chap- lain, Yen. Archdeacon Williams; and the High Sheriff of Haverfordwest, Mr John A. Bland. The Under Sheriff, Mr W. G. Eaton Evans, and the Clerk of Arraigns, Hon. Stephen Coleridge, were also present. His Lordship attended Divine Service at St. Mary's Church at 10 o'clock in the morning. THE COUNTY GRAND JURY. The following gentlemen were sworn on the County Grand Jury :—Mr Richard Carrow (foreman), Mr C. H. Allen, Col. Francis Edwardes, Dr. G. Griffith, Mr G. D. Harries, Mr Henry John H. Lawrence, Mr E. A. Laws, Col. Leach, Mr Charles Mathias, Mr Morris Owen, Mr T. Rule Owen, Mr Godfrey P. Beynon, Colonel W. R. Roberts, Capt. Stewart Reid, Major James Reynolds, Mr Henry Robert Shiel, Mr Joseph Thomas, Mr Owen H. S. Williams, Mr W. H. Walters, and Mr J. C. Yorke. In addressing the Jury, his Lordship said he had the usual duty of a judge in Wales—except in one county- to congratulate the Grand Jury upon a light calendar. Although the business to be done that day had been more than doubled yesterday, it was still very light. Before proceeding to say a few words on the cases, which were to come before them, he might say something in reference to the provision which had been made since he was there last for the disposal of the heavier business, which might have to be discharged in time to come. One could not tell whether the alteration was an improvement until it Was tried, but it certainly seemed to be so, and his Lord- ship thought he might congratulate the county upon it. That hall was a place which, considering the weather they had got at the present time, seemed fairly cool and airy. As to the business there was only one case in the calendar. It was an instance of a foolish kind of practical joking, in which men sometimes indulged, and which often led, as in this case, to fatal results. A young soldier Was charged with manslaughter, for using his rifle in a Joking kind of way with the result that there was a fatal accident. His Lordship dared say that the Grand Jury Blight consider it necessary to return a true bill, and let the petty jury decide if there had been culpable negli- gence. The other case, which was not on the calendar, Was one in which a youug girl ran away from her father's house with a man and carried off a considerable sum of money belonging to her father. The only question that could arise in the matter would be as to the complicity of the man, and that would be a question to he considered by the Petty Jury. The man must have known that the property the. girl carried off was not her own. The Grand Jury then retired to consider the bills presented to them. THE COUNTY OF HAVERFORDWEST. Turning to the box in which the Grand Jury for the town and county of Haverfordwest were seated, his Lordship said there was nothing for them to do. Some judges swore the Grand Jurors whether there was any business or not, but the Clerk (Hon. Stephen Coleridge) advised him that the usual practice was not to swear them when there was nothing for them to be done. He considered it would be a farce to swear the jurors, if there was nothing to be done, and he did not propose to swear them unless any presentment was to be brought forward, when all the usual formalities would be observed. The Mayor (Mr T. L. James) said there was no pr3sentment. The Grand and Petty Jurors for Haverfordwest were therefore discharged. THE HAKIN ELOPEMENT. A true bill was returned against Lettice Jenkins (19) > and Robert Tethers, engineer (28), who were charged with stealing a fur cape, value X3 a gold ring, value 12; apiece of silk, value 10s and £ 12 in money, the property of John Jenkins, of Hakin, Milford Haven. The prisoners had been returned for trial at Milford petty sessions the previous day. Tethers was charged with receiving the Roods knowing them to be stolen. Lettice Jenkins denied stealing the cape and the silk, and Tethers pleaded "not guilty to both counts of the indictment against him. Mr Marlay Samson (instructed by Mr W. J. Jones, solicitor) prosecuted, and the prisoners were undefended. Mr Samson said the facts of the case were of a some- what painful character. The female prisoner was the daughter of the prosecutor, and the male prisoner had formerly been a lodger in the house. She took the clothes and money during the absence of her parents in Pembroke Dock the male prisoner assisted her in Packing them up, and then they went off to Hull where they were apprehended. Mary Jenkins swore that, on the 4th July, she and her husband went to Pembroke Dock. She left about 140 in a chest, t22 10s in a purse, ell 10s in a Paper bag, and about £4 in silver. She left her daughter In care of the house while she went away. The male Prisoner had been a lodger in her house for about three Weeks before he went to sea. Witness returned about 9.15 p.m. from Pembroke Dock. She noticed her bedroom in a state of disorder, all ransacked, and she missedtl2 In gold and silver her fur cape, a ring and a piece of 8ilk. (The witness here began to cry.) She identified the articles produced as those, which had been stolen from her bedroom. Lettice Jenkins said her mother always let her wear the fur cape, and she always thought it was her own. Witness That's the thief alongside of you, that's the black-a married man with six children. It's out in South Africa you should be. You received the things. P.C. David Griffiths swore that, on Monday, 8th July, he went with P.C. Nicholas to Hull, and received the prisoners in custody from the Hull police. He received 23s 3d and X2 2s 2M in money, and four rings from the police. The female prisoner gave him the fur cape and a piece of the silk, stating that the cape was hers but the silk belonged to her mother. A woman came to the Hull railway station in Hull to see the prisoners off and commenced blackguarding the man about not sending any money to her. Witness asked her who she was, and she told him that she was Tethers' wife. She said that she had six children and that Tethers did not send her anything to support them. Tethers asked her if he should go back, adding that he would be better in future. Amy Pugsley swore that, on the morning of the 4th July, she carried a message from Tethers to Lettice Jenkins that he wanted to see her. Lettice came over to witness's house about an hour later, and Tethers asked her to come away. Lettice replied that she would because her father had leathered her. About 5 p.m. Witness assisted Lettice in bringing clothes over from the latter's house to witness's, Tethers assisted Lettice Jenkins in packing her box, which was carried to the station by witness and her brother. The two prisoners Went away together by train to Hull. In reply to Lettice Jenkins, witness said that Bob Tethers used a great deal of persuasion to make Lettice Accompany him. P.S. Brinn swore that, on Tuesday, the prisoners were given to him in charge. Mrs Butts and Mrs Thomas (aunt to Lettice Jenkins) came to see the female prisoner, and the latter admitted stealing t7. About mid-day on Wednesday, witness heard Tethers say, Cheer up Lettice, we'll go to Carmarthen together." (Laughter.) In reply to Tethers, witness said that on Tuesday wight in the charge-room Lettice Jenkins said that Tethers had nothing to do with the case. Lettice Jenkins gave evidence on oath. She said the man sent for her to go away at once. She was given the key to open the box. Tethers said to her I have so much money, better get a couple of quid and come too." Tethers: Didn't you tell me they had been knocking you about in the house Jenkins Yes. His Lordship found a difficulty in hearing the remarks made, and said I don't know what this building was like before the improvements, but it is certainly the Worst place-for hearing I have been in." Jenkins continued that Tethers gave her a small key to open her mother's box. She opened the box and took some of her father's money. Tethers made a statement, but not on oath. He said he considered he was doing the young woman a kindness by taking her away from a place in which she was knocked about and ill-treated. A tooth had been knocked down her throat and she had been otherwise ill-treated. He thought all the articles in the box belonged to the girl and he did not want any money, as he had nine day's Wages coming to him. The articles were brought across to Pugsley's in a bag and he did not know what they were. He had X,3 of his own and the police had taken 23s of it. It he had any bad intention he would not have brought the girl to Hull where he lived. Amy Pugsley, recalled, said in reply to the Judge that she was not certain whether the prisoners took their tickets separately, or whether one paid for them. This concluded the case. His Lordship said the case would require a care- ful consideration of the Jury. The girl admitted that she took X7, which was a good sum, and she could not by any possibulity imagine she had a right to take such a sum as that. Her only excuse was that she was persuaded to do it. That might affect the question of punishment, but it was difficult to see any other view of the case than that she stole the money. The man's case Was more difficult for the jury to deal with. Before the girl gave her evidence, the case against the man was simply that he had gone away with her, but she swore that the man gave her the key to open her mother's box. If that were true, it made the man equally guilty. That was the evidence of an accomplice, but if, the jury considered it corroborated by other facts of the case, they could act upon it notwithstanding that fact. The jury, after a half-hour's consultation, returned a verdict of guilty against both prisoners for stealing, but fouid the man not guilty of receiving. His Lordship was somewhat perplexed at this, and said that, surely if the man stole he also received. He had not thought that anyone in the world would have needed to have been told that if they found the man guilty of stealing, it was not necessary to find him guilty of receiving. Mrs Jenkins, mother of Lettice Jenkins, re-called, said she had a row with Lettice about Tethers, and told her that he was a married man with six children. John Jenkins, the father, said he gave his daughter a few slaps on one occasion when he found that Tethers had been fetching whisky to her and made her drunk. His Lordship said that Tethers certainly tempted the girl to run away from home and the jury had found that he tempted her to run away with her father's money. He would treat Tethers as a first offender. He was not punishing Tethers for any immorality there might have been, as that was not his business, and the sentence of the court would be four calendar months' imprisonment with hard labour. As for Lettice Jenkins, she would be treated as a first offeuder and allowed out on her own recognizances. THE PEMBROKE DOCK SHOOTING CASE. Private John Wood (32) Royal Northern Reserve Regiment, was charged with the manslaughter of Owen John Tucker, on the (ah March last. The prisoner pleaded not guilty." Mr Arthur Lewis (instructed by Mr H. A. Jones- Lloyd, solicitor, Pembroke Dock) defended. Mr Lewis opened the case. He did not think there would be any great conflict regarding the facts of the case. It would be admitted that Tucker met his death through the act of the prisoner, and it would be for the jury to say was the prisoner guilty of such negligence as would make him criminally responsible for the death of the unfortunate man, Tucker. The prisoner was a soldier in the Royal Northern Reserve Regiment and, on the fJth March, he and some other soldiers were going to Penally for shooting practice. The prisoner went into the parcels office where young Tucker was working, and there was some jocular conversation between him and the deceased and a man named Jarrett. The latter took a Lee-Metford cartridge out his pocket and showed it to the prisoner, who asked had it been made into a knife or any sort of curio. Jarrett told the prisoner that the cartridge was alive, but the defence was that the remark had not been made. The deceased said in a joke I'll stand for you." The prisoner said "will you," and thereupon Tucker stood up within a short distance. The prisoner put the cartridge in the rifle, and, whether he closed the breech or not, the rifle was discharged, the bullet entered Tucker's breast, and the unfortunate young man died almost instantaneously. The prosecution did not suggest that the prisoner had deliberately fired at the deceased, but he submitted that the prisoner had been guilty of such negligence as to amount to reckless- ness. The evidence was a repetition of that published in our report of the inquest on Tucker, and briefly the circumstances were as stated by Mr Lewis. Mr H. J. E. Price, coroner, gave evidence as to statements made at the inquest. Wm. George Jarrett, booking clerk, was next called. He described the occurrence and stated that he told the prisoner that the cartridge was a. live one. He did not think that the prisoner could have put his finger on the trigger, as witness noticed that he had his hand up too high on the muzzle. Witness believed that the deceased made some remark about the bullet not being able to kill a cow. Mr Samson handed in several specimens of Lee-Metford cartridges, which had been converted into knives and pencil cases. Dr. Saunders, a porter named Morris, and Supt. Evans also gave evidence. The latter said he had frequently seen about 18 months ago cartridges converted into curios. Mr Samson addressed the jury for the defence and submitted there had been no gross negligence on the part of the prisoner. The latter had simply been mistaken as to the cartridge and, deceived by the extraordinary resemblance, between live cartridges and those which have been converted into curios, thought it was a dummy. Counsel believed that the unfortunate deceased was under the impression that the cartridge he gave Jarrett was a dummy. It was possible that Jarrett was mistaken in thinking that he made the remark that the cartridge was alive, or the prisoner might have thought he said "It's a knife." The whole actions of the deceased that day supported the theory that he considered the cartridge a dummy, and counsel asked the jury to accept the view that the prisoner acted under that im- pression and was not guilty of criminal negligence. His Lordship said this was not a serious charge of man- slaughter by any means. It was one of these cases, which were almost an accident, and which occurred so frequently through a propensity for playing with fire arms. The only question for the jury to decide was if there was criminal negligence. The toys which foolish people had been making recently—when people were more interested unhappily in matters pertaining to war than they used to be-were real cartridges with the powder taken out, and they could not understand this transaction at all unless the prisoner thought the cartridge handed to him was a toy. The prisoner was joking, and it was a dangerous thing to joke with fire- arms, but was he guilty of criminal negligence in putting the cartridge into the rifle ? The jury, after a short retirement, returned to court with a verdict of not guilty." The verdict was received with slight applause, which was immediately suppressed. This closed the business of the Assize.

Haverfordwest Petty Sessions.

NEYLAND. I

Advertising

I Pembrokeshire Joint Standing…

Main Roads Committee.

A LEGEND OF HIGGON'S WELL…

APPROACHING EVENTSI

Advertising

"BETWEEN YOU AND ME."

I TO OUR READERS. - - -

[No title]

Family Notices

I VISITING, WEDDING & MOURNING…

Do You Know ? -- Yo-u-I

I Presentation to Miss Coome.…

---I CORRESPONDENCE. I

I MILFORD HAVEN.

Dates to be Remembered at…

Fatality at Milford Docks.