The North Wales Chronicle and Advertiser for the Principality

CAENARYONSJIIRE ASSIZES. A BANK CLERK'S EXTRAVA- I G!_CE. BANGOR BREACH OF PROMISE I ACTION. (From Our Reporter.) j Mr Justice A. T. Lawrence opened the Car- narvonshire Assizes, on Monday, at the County Hall, Carnarvon. His lordship was accompanied on the Bench by the High-Sheriff, Mr T. Rowland Hughes, formerly of Liverpool, and now of Conway; the Under-Sheriff, Mr Gwyneddon Davies; and the Chaplain. Canon Fairchild, Principal of the North Wales Training College. Sir Charles Asshefcon-Smith, Bart., and Lady Assheton- Smith were also on the Bench during part of the Assizes. GRAND JURY. I The following were empannelled on the Grand Jury :—Mr J. E. Greaves (foreman), Sir Henry Lewis, Messrs D. P. Williams, G. J. Roberts, J. Evan Roberts, E. Wood, J. Iesard Davies. Dr. H. Jones Roberts, (kilonel T. E. J. Llovd, Dr. Robert Parry, Messrs Thomas Hughes, M. K. Burton, II. W. Fox, W. D. Hobson (Bangor), Robert Williams, Robert Newton, D. T. Lake, D. T. Edwards (Mayor of Carnarvon), and R. J. Williams (Mayor of Bangor). The Judge, in charging the Grand Jury, said he hoped their attendance at the Assizes had not caused them any considerable inconvenience, but it was deeirable in the interests of the administra- tion of justice. It gave the assurance to all prisoners that their cases would be dealt with carefully and according to the law, and it was desirable that that c.onfidenoe should be com- municated to the whole county. A BANK CLERK'S EXTRAVAGANCE. I William Roberts, a bank clerk, aged 26 years, was charged with obtaining, by false pretences, a diamond ring, a gold watch, bracelet, and 10s in money, all of the value of JE12, from Eleanor Hughes Rees, jeweller, Portmadoc, on April 9th; with obtaining 30s from Mary Jones, Sportsman Hotel, Portmadoc, and with obtaining in a similar manner a sum of £ 3 from Elias David Jones, Saracen's Head Hotel, Beddgelert. The accused pleaded guilty. Mr '1'. E. Morris (iina rut-ted by Miesssfra Lloyd George and George), who prosecuted, said that in the first case the accused gave to Mrs Rees a sheet of paper on the Bank of South Africa. In the other oases he gave cheques on the Portmadoc and Newport branches of the Metropolitan Bank. In none of the banks mentioned had he an aooount. Mr R. A. Griffith (instructed by Mr J. W. Hughes), who appeared for the accused, described him as a young man of very respectable connec- tions, hailing from Oolwyn Bay. He served as a clerk at the Newport, Portmadoc, and Con- way branches of the Metropolitan Bank, and subsequently in the National Bank of South Africa. Upon his return to this country he obtained an appointment at the London branch of the same bank. During those years he en- joyed the full confidence of his employers. Be- fore he was 21 years of age he had the mis- fortune to lose his parents, and later had the still greater misfortune of succeeding to a legacy of JS1500. When he came to this money he un- fortunately lost his head, and was for a time like a ship without a rudder, eventually finding himself on the rocks. He also acquired a cer- tain habit of signing cheques in an otthand way. He remained in a bank for three years after he came to the legacy, and left volun- tarily. His Lordship considered that the acoount of the life of the accused was a very sad one, for instead of establishing himself in a respectable way as he might have done, he seemc-d to have spent his money like an idiot, and induced people to entrust him with money on false cheques. Ho (his lordship), however, felt that he was not an ordinary criminal, and that it was undesirable to convert him into such. He was then bound over in tne sum ol S50 to be of good behaviour. THE LLANDEGAI MOTOR TRAGEDY. I NO TRUE BILL. I The Grand Jury iound no true bill against Thomas Ellis (22), a chauffeur, whose name ap- peared on the calendar as being charged with the manslaughter of Alfred Cecil Jones, the son of the Vicar of Llandegai, by running him down with a motor car. Mr Ralph Sutton and Mr Ellis W. Roberts (instructed by Mr Marks) were retained for the prosecution; Mr R. A. Griffith (instructed by Mr S. R. Dew) for the defence, while Mr Austin Jones (instructed by Messrs Carter, Vincent and Co.) held a watching brief. BANGOR BREACH OF PROMISE ACTION. I PLAINTIFF AWARDED C30. 1 Margaret Parry, a domestic servant, Beth, claimed damages from Robert Daniel Owen, plae- terer, Victoria-street, Upper Bangor, for alleged breach of promise of marriage. Mr Trevor Lloyd (instructed by Mr Thornton Jones, Bangor) appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr R. A. Griffith (instructed by Mr S. R. Dew) defended. Mr Trevor Lloyd, in opening the case, stated that tho plaintiff was formerly employed as a domestic servant in Bangor, and in February, last year, she first met the defendant, and they began to go out together. In April he suggested they should walk out with a view of marriage, and they met every night, and twice a week they strolled out with a view of becoming better acquainted. The defendant first of all denied that he promised to marry the plaintiff, and secondly, if he did promise to marry her, that he heard she was not a chaste woman and had given birth to an illegitimate child. The jury would hear from the plaintiff, and the letters wot,.tld also disclose that the defendant practically from the beginning of the courtship, knew she had an illegitimate child. She had a stepfather, from whom she was anxious to keep that un- fortunate circumstance, but her mother knew of it. When sh e told the defendant of the incident he said he thought more of her for telling him at once. lie began buying furniture for the house, and gave her an engagement ring, which he personally placed upon her finger., Within one week his ardour cooled off, and a change occurred in the tone of his letters. Subsequent- ly he wrote to her for a ring, he had given her, as he was going to a supper by the Liberals." Counsel said he was not aware, not being a politician, whether it was necessary to wear rings at Liberal suppers—(laughter)—or whether it was a ruse to get the ring hack. Counsel said that only a few letters passed, and he had no intention of putting in more than two or three of them. In July, last year, the defendant wrote stating that he had been to Bethesda to paper a house which he had taken for them there, and he subscribed himself, "Your own loving Bob." On August 10th he concluded his letter with Yours for ever," and Counsel asked the jury to remember those words when considering the next letter, written only eight days later, when he addressed the plaintiff as "Dear Miss Parry." In the letter of the 18th he complained of the damp &tate of the house, and said that he had come to the conclusion not to live there. He also said that the plaintiff had insulted him very much by offering to send him money for cement, as if he were spent up. "I cannot fix the date now," lie added, "as I do not see my way clearly now. Would you mind sending my ring back?" On the 22nd August, in a letter which did not ^egin with a "Dear" at all, the defendant said that he had come to the conclusion not to marry, as he had thought over the things she had told him. and he had never been happy since. Ho moreover charged her with having deceived him as to her age, and it was too much for a young fellow, who was only 27, to marry her. His parting words were, "I shall never be happy with you. Your secret will never go any further." Upon that the usual solicitors' letters fo llowed. I PLAINTIFF'S EVIDENCE. I The Plaintiff, who is now in service near Prescot, said that two or three weeks after she met the defendant he asked her whether she had any objection to be married. Plaintiff said No; if I meet a man I can get on with, I would have no objection then." Plaintiff pro- mised to walk out with the defendant with the intention of getting married. It is a fact that you had a child who is now about nine years of age?—Yes. When vou spoke to the defendant about the child what did he say?—He said he was sorry for me, but stated it would make no difference in his affection for me. W-ba,t does defendant earn?—5s 6d a day and overtime, and he said he had S52 in the Post Office. Proceeding, Plaintiff said that after being in chapel she went for a walk, in the course of which defendant said, "You mean to stick to me, and she replied, "Yes, have I not promised you He then took a ring out of his pocket, and asked whether she would like it. She said, "You silly boy, what did you want to buy it for" (laughter). He explained that he had showed it to his mother, and she said it was only right that he should give her a ring. Counsel: Did you have a conversation about ages?—Yes, he asked me my age, and I said, "I am old enough to be your mother." I asked him his age, and he said it was 27. I then told him my age was 32. Counsel: Was that correct?—Yes. Did he buy anything for the bouse?—Yos, he showed me receipts for things he had bought. Do you remember his mother buying things for the house?—Yes, a sideboard and different things, rugs, stair carpets, pictures-that is if he told the truth. I saw receipts for some of the things. You were undecided where to live?—We epofco about where we should live, and I said I did not know. Bangor would have been better as far as his work was concerned, but in Beth- esda there was a house where I had been liv- ing, which belonged to my mother. It was empty, a.nd there was a good garden there. He said he liked it, and could keep fowls there. Wo were to live rent free the first year oa conditiou he did the repairs. Did you mention your child to him?—Yes, I said, "What will people say," and ho re- plied.. "If I don't mind what does it matter. It's wo who will have to live together." He said he was willing t-o sign any paper. I said "That is not neceaeajy," and he stated that he would look after the child as if it were b.i.s own. Was anything discussed about the dato of the marriage?—The first Wednesday in Aug- ust. I told him when he mentioned marriage, "Are you reaMfiing what you a.re talking aboutrllo" He then remarked, "You axe talking to me as iif I were a boy. I know my own nJnd." It waa arranged for the marriage to take place in August, the first Wednesday. How much did you spend, in preparation for the marriage?—About X20. Counsel!1: Did anything happen between August lOt.h and August 18th to alter his attitude towards you?—Nothing I knew of. The Judge: Did you have any quarrel?—No, and therefore it was more of a shock to me. Counsel: In a letter of Auguist 22nd, start- ing "Miss Parry," he practically breaks off the engagement, and he eaya you deceived him with your age. Plaintiff: I did not, but someone told him I was nearer 40. Mr R. A. Griffith opened his cross-examina- tion by asking questions with regard to the p- ohiLjl. She said she had not ccmo there to bo croes-examined about her child. I told him about it," she declared. Mr Griffith: Please don't deliver a sermon. We did not bring you here; you brought us here. You did your utmost to keep this child secret ? Plaintiff: I did not want to trouble any- body. Counsel. Has the father ever paid a penny towards its maimtenance?—Not a penny. Why did you not tell him, when it was ar- ranged to walk out, about the child?—I did rot think it was neeensary. The Judge Before you agreed to be married veu told him?—Yes. Counsel: I put it to you that you did not tell him until many weeks after he becamc? en- gaged to you?— That is LmpoesiMe. I told him 9=,e wœks before that. Why did you tell him about the child?—Because I did net want to deceive any man. If you were a woman would you tell a man like that?—It is rothing to boast of. Counsel: Not having had experience I don't know what I should do (Laughter). Where were you when you told him about the child? —In Memai Woods. TEST OF LOVE. -1 How did you feitt him?-Ue said how fond he was of me, and I said I can prove t-haf," so I told him about the child. Up to then he had not promised to marry vo.u?-W said, "I am very sorry, but I will stick to you." Can you suggest any reason for his conduct except the knowled-ge of the childP-No, we had no quarrel whatever. In one of your letters you say you objected to any interference on the part of his family? —Yes. Don't you think the family should have any say in a matter of this kind?-He wrote and tf,?d me that according to a statement made to his mother he could not find his way clear, and that he must do what his parents said-a man of 27 saying that! He should be ashamed of himself. You say your prowpects have been spoilt— had you any prospects except those?—We were going to be married. g Have you refused other offers?—I never went with anyone but him, and I had uo time, even if I wanted to. Elizabeth Evaois, Bethesda, the plaintiff's mother, gave evidence that about August 18th her daughter received a letter from the de- fendant in consequence of which she went to see him and his mother. She asked why he had broken his promise, and he made no re- ply. His mother asked him to speak, but he still kept silent. The defendant's mother said, "It is the girl," whereupon witness re- marked "He is doing a terrible turn to her." Defendant's mother then said, "He is not the first, and defendant added, A great many have done the same thing." The Judge: That is, breaking off engage- ments ? Witness Yes, and he said the trick had been done at Bangor, end in that case the breakfast had been prepared. The Judge: So he was relying upon the Bangor case for a precedent (laughter). Witness: Then he said she had told him an untruth about her age. Proceeding, witness said she offered to give them a house in Bethesda rent free for twelve months. While at witness's house in Bethesda, defendant spoke to plaintiff's little girl, and said she was to live with them when he was married. Cross-examined, witneas denied she told the defendant sh.) was not aware her daughter had an illegitimate child, nor did she say that unless the defendant stuck to her daughter, her daughter would go to an asylum. Elizabeth Lewis, Bethesda, who accom- panied the last witness, corroborated her statement, and added that until that day in Bangor she was not aware the plaintiff had a child. THE DEFENCE. J The defendant, giving evidence, said lIe be. came acquainted with the plaintiff in March, 1913, and the subject of marriage was men- tioned in May that year. He asked if she would be his wife, and she agreed. Mr R. A. Griffith: Did you know at that time that she had had a misfortune before you met her?—No. When did she first mention that to you?- At the end of July. What did she say?—She said, "I wanted to teH you months ago about this child. I have come to an end, and I will tell you at last. I am sorry to have kept you so Long without telling you." What did she tell you?—She told me that during the strike at Bethesda a The Judge (interposing): I do not see what bearing these details have on the case, Counsel What did you tell her?—I told her I would not-keep an illoeitimate child, but. I would keep a child without a father or mother. I did not know where I was standing when she told me about it, but I lot the mat- ter drop. I toid her she ought to bave told me sooner, and I said my family would not like to know about the child, as there was nothing hidden in our family like that. Did you say that you felt aoorry for her, and that it would make no differemoo in your affec- tion towards her?—.No. And that it would make no difference to your family?—That is a lie. She said «he would bring a oaoe if I did a dirty trick with her. I gavo her to understand I did not like to marry her." Proceeding, defendant said that when the plaintiff's mother calfed upon him he told her about the child, and she replied that she was not awaro her daughter had an illegitimate child. Defendant said he would not be happy with the plaintiff, knowing sthe had that child. Mr TrevoT Lloyd (cross-examining): There is no doubt that you promised to marry her? -¥oo. And you fait you were in the position to keep a wife. No, I wrote her a letter that I did not find my way to marry her. Why?—On account of the child. Did you tell her you had saved £ 52?—No; she has made that up. I only told hecr my weakly wages. When did she tell you about the child?— At the end of July. Wheoi you went to her mother's house in Bethisda and saw the ohild, didn't you in- quire whoso it was. You took the little girl on your, knees?—That is a lie. I did not know who the mother was. Did you not aak "Maggie, whose child is this? '—No, that is a lie. What's a lie?—That's a lie. I am only asking you whether you asked that question? (laughter). The Judge: At the time you had made up your mind that you did not want to live with this woman. Counsel: And still you wri-to to her "I was going through Siliwen Woods tOO other night and I saw the seat vacant." Before writing that letter did you make up your mind to have nothing to do with her?—Yen. Counsel: Then I shan't trouble you long (laugjhtKr). In that latter you say, "My dearest Maggie,—I am sorry to keep you ao long without writing." That is what you write to a girl you have thrown over! Then ,-ain "the house is damp;" "I think I shall leave it to your j udgment. "That is to a girl you have thrown over! And you end the let- ter, "I wish you were here to aeo things for yourself." Did you wish she was there, or were you writing her a lot of lies?—No. MIXED UP. 1 I hen you add, I remain yours for ever." Did you mean that?—I was mixed up. I did not know what I was doimi-m (laughter). Now what happened between August 10th and August 18th to make you alter your let- ters from "My dearest Maggie" and "Youra for ever" to "Y OUTS respectfully" and 11 Dear Misa Parry?"—(No answer.) Re-examined: Did you have any particular reason for not breaking it off at once?—I was mixed up. She threatened to put me in court. Mr R. A. Griffith, addressing the jury, said brccuch of promiæ actions were, in the opinion of asme j?eopLe, the a".nest and most CIP ?id of actions, but e=etines they brought i i a touch of rcsmanoe to those who had left this follies of the past and gave them a glimpse of love's young dream (laughter). Mr Trevor Lloyd: Talk for yourself (laugh- ter). Mr Griffith: I am anticipating, my friend. Proceeding, counsel said there was no touch of romance about this action. Tho plaintiff had had a serious misfortune in her lif-e which she had kept a secret from everyone except her mother. The deffndant was naturally mixed up by what had happeryed, and he would have been more mixed up had he mar- ried her. No doubt lie was fond of her, and when told of her child lie was torn between two impiilw--f--his affection for her and his disgust at what he had learnt. Not being a brutal ma,n, he did not break off the engage- ment at onoo, but he brood,ed over it and con- sulted his relations, and eventually decided to take a c-ort-ain course. It was when mar- riage was suggested that she should have told him about the child, and not after. Would any man of recpeotab'io associations promise to marry a woman, the very night she told him c,f an illegitimate child? If he had mar- ried her he would have been liable for the maintenance of her child until it atta-ined the age of 16 years. a, The Judge in summing up mid it maght be said that the plaintiff still had the articles of attire she bought for the wedding, but a woman had very little pleasure in walking I})(,ut in a wcdlling dress tihat reminded hT every moment of the man who promised to marry her and had thrown her over. £:31) DAMAGES. The jury found foT the plaintiff, awarding her < £ 15 wpecial damages, and .£15 general damages. ACTION AGAINST THE CARNARVONSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL. SEQUEL TO UjANDUDNO JUNCTION j SCHOOL ACCIDENT. Mervyn Davies son of Mr E. Davies, COJJl- mticiai traveller, St. Agiww-road., Coftway, sued the Carnarvonshire County Council for £ 500 for the low of his right eye, due to the alleged negligence of the defendants' servant. Mr T. R. Parry, M.P. (instructed by Mr J. W. Hughes, Conway) appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Artamns Jones and Mr Austin Jonea (ir?tTueted by M Carter, Vinoemt and Co.) rc'?eae?ted the defendants. Mr Parry, in opening, otated that for five  yoajs plaintiff had been a pupil at the Con- ?a?y Church of England Saool, and in Octo- ber last yoOOor he was requested by the autho- rities to attend onoe a week the laandadn-o Junction Council School, to receive lesrsons in ^rood-oarving. He had been there three times, and it was on October 23rd, the fourth time he atter.died the clasB, that he received the injury to his eye. The instructor in woodwork, Mr Wm. Williams, was paid by the County (JoUD- cii, and he conducted the class in a room where there were two rows of benches, and twenty boys could receive instructions there at one time. On that particular day the in- structor called up all the boys to the plain- tiff's bench, because it was the nearest bench to the black board. He taught them the way they were to use tools for wood-caxving- a chisel on this particular occasion. Aftex- wards all the boys went back to the various benches, and they were given a chisel and a pi-ece. of wood to carry out the instructions given them. On that day the instructor men- tioned that he was feeling well, and he sat by the fireplace. The plaintiff's case was that during the remainder of the afternoon, after giving the I?saon, the instructor sat by the fimpl-wo reading a c?wapa'per, am wiIt his back to the plaintiff. Two of the boys in the class—Henry 1 lowlands a,nd John Jones, who had been attending the classes for twelve months, and were more expert than the rest in this particular work, were asked to super- vise the work of the other bovs at the various benches. Up to that day the plaintiff had n-ever received any instruction in handling a cltisel. It was true lie received three lessons previous to that day, but it was only with re- gard to drawings preparatory to tho use of piaotical tools. Naturally a boy like the plaintiff would not be very expert at the use of this particular tool, a,nd 1. found the wood -Ara,mioan wood—very tough. Whilst he was working on the wood with the chisel, the ri;ght hand on the handle and the left on the blade, with an upward movement, the chisel Blipped and struck him in the eye, seriously ir.jurin>g him. The plaintiff was taken to a Liverpool infirmary, where his eye was re- movod. MONOGLOT WELSH JURYMEN. At this stage a juryman witImated that there were two jurynwn unable to understand English. The Judge: Why did they not teU us before? The Juror: They have only just informed us. The two jurymen were daaoharged from the box, but ordered to remain in ooirrt, "where," added the Judge, "you might learn a little English." Two new jurors were sworn, and hen one was asked whether he understood English, he emphatically replied, "Rather, siT" (laughter). Plans were produced by Mr A. Delamotte, Dnwy. HOW THE ACCIDENT HAPPENED. The plaintiff, who is twelvo years of age, described how the accident occurred. The instructor, he sada, shofwod the class how to use the ohisel, and how to put the wood into the vice, afterwards 8roldimg them to their benches. After seeing them all start, he went to the fire, where he sat down reading a.news- paper. He sent two boys who had been in the class some time, to look afteT the ckuss. The instructor had told them to hold the chisel with the right hand on tho handle, and the left on the blade, the tool to be worked up- waros: Plaintiff had done one groove, ard was doing another, having finished one half, when the chisel slipped into his eye. Cross-examined, plaintiff adihitted the in- stiu-ctor told the olasa the chisel was very dangerous, and that the laft hand Should be placed on the blade to prevent tiro tool get- ting up. At the request of the instructor, plaintiff used the chisel in the presence of the othf,-r boyb. Dr. H* Edward Jones, Rodney-street. Liver- pool, gave ovideinoo as to the removal of the plaittiff e eye. In answer to the Judge, witness said the plaintiff's left eye, was perfectly sound. Vernon Roberts, a boy HYing in Golenfryn, Cadnant Park, Conway, who was in the class- room at the time of the accident, said the two boys who were asked to supervise the other boys were monitors. Further evidence was given by boys named David Harker, Cadnant Park, Conway, and Henry Rowlands, Upper Gate-street Conway, who in cross-examination said the instructor warned too boyu against leaning over the wood to see the guage line when clriBeolling Evan Davies, the plaintiff's fathef, said he met the instructor on the day of the accident, and he asked witness whether he was the father of the boy, M. Davies. He added, "There is nothing serious. There is only a scratch on the eye. I have been to the doc- tom, but they are both out." Witoees said, "If there is nothing more th-am a scratch, I don't see any reaaon why you should go and see both d/ooions." Mr \ViBiams then said, "Don't think too muoh about it, beeaujg(,- we pay all expenses. We have had such oases before, so you need not tro-dbl-e." Witness stated, "It looks to me as if iit were rather striicus. Remember I shall hold you rcapom- siWo or your masters,, because ray boy is under ycjur care." Mr Williams then remarked, "1 put two boys to look after them; I have not been very well for some time, and I was sitting by the fire when it happened." "Oh," said witness, "so you were neglecting your duty?" "What wil you do when a man is not wry well." Witness said, "You should dify- rrnas the boys, because you are piayisg with tools. In fact, I hide tools from my children, and 116 is only a child." I THE DEFENCE. .1 -1 Mr Arteunns Jones oootanded that he had no case to answer. On the evidence of the pl&infbiff hmxeu the ohange of contributory negligence had been made out. Counsel sub- mitted that the alleged negligence of which the iietruetofr sat nea;r'- the ftpe- £ -w»s an action which did not directly or indirectly contribute to the cause of the accident. The Judge: That is so, but the point that is not dcamojistrated in this evidence is as to whether it was any omission to keep his left hand on the blade which caused the chisel to roach the eye. It is a mystery to me bow, if he had done that, the chisel reached the eye. Mr Artemtis Jones: The boys agree that Mr Williams explained to them th.ú they must not lea.n over to see where tho. guage line was. The Judge It is for the jury to say whether it waa by ignoring the instructions the chisel reached the eye. Mr Artemus Jones: As to Mr Williams going near the fire-plaoe, that had no connection with the oause of the accident. My friend must prove that it was the duty of Mr Williams to attend personally to each pupil, which, of course, is physically impossible. The Judge: No, Le cannot be in 20 places at ODOO. Mr .Artemus Jonee: The boy has admitted he was warned not to lean over, and yet he did so, and that was how the chisel reached the eye. Tho Judge: I don't see how the chisel reached the eye. It muet have been a sort of acrobatio feat. (To Mr T. H. Parry): The reading of the newspaper does not appear to have been the oause of the accident. Mr Parry: I submit that in a case where you have young children handling tools, dangerous for the first timo, it is insufficient for an in- structor to give one lesson and then eit down. The Judge: But this boy had demonstrated the correct method of handling the chisel? Mr Parry: It was the first time he handled tho cii w 1. The Judge: How did the reading of the news- paper cause the accident? The instructor did go onoe round the room and put two monitor boys to supervise. Mr Parry But I contend that was not sufficient in the case of a boy handling a dangerous tool for the first time. I claim that it was negligent for the instructor to eit by the fire. The Judge But there were 20 boys, and accord- ing to your argument every boy, at every lTJoroent, should have the personal supervision of the tt-acher. Mr Parry: I don't put it so high as that. I submit he should have gone round more than onoe. The Judge: But it does not take one thousandth part of a second for a chisel to fly up. If, by his non-supervision, the boys had been up to some tom-foolery with these took, I Can under- stand your case, but this boy is a good boy, attending to his work when suddenly lie gets a hard bit of wood and the chisel flies up. How could the teacheT prevent that? Mr Parry I submit it was his duty to have gone round the class several times. The Judge: This is not an action against t.he teacher for any neglect of his oontract. You must prove that his negligence was the cause of the accident. Mr Parry: I say it is insufficient supervision. The Judge: I don't see how that follows at all. If you can tell me how the teacher could I have prevented the chisel slipping I would be with you. Supposing Mr Williams was behind the boy at the moment, what could he have done? He could only have told the boy not to lean over, and he had already told him that. Mr Parry: Supposing the instructor left the room altogether? The Judge: It may be negligence on the part of the instructor without it being negligence causing or tending to cause the accident. Nowadays no accident can happen without some- one else being blamed for it, and damages claimed. If you only get a County Council, or someone else with funds, they immediately bring an action. I don't think there is any evidence of any negligence by Mr Williams, which caused this accident or tended to cauee it. He gave proper instructions, and had two boys to euper- viae. It was a pure aocident, due possibly to the hardness of that particular piece of wood. The plaintiff is rcon-suited. Mr Artemus Jones: It is likely that we shall not W for costs, but we apply for an order. The order was granted, and on the application of Mr Parry a stay was granted. I CARMEL SLANDER ACTION. I Cadvvaladr F. Jones. quarryman, residing at Bryn Meurig, Carmel, and Griffith H. Roberta, a farmer's son, living at Glyn Meibion Farm, Groeskm, sued R. G. Hughes, Ilarp Inn, Llan- dwrog, for alleged slander. Mr Trevor LloYd and Mr Hamlet Roberts (instructed by Messrs S. R. Dew and Hughes) appeared for the plaintiffs, and Messrs Artemus Jones and T. H. Parry, M.P. (instructed by Messrs L!oyd George and George), for the de- fendant. It was stated that the defendant alleged that the plaintiff (Cadwaladr F. Jones) had been to his field and taken a sheep away. It was also alleged that the defendant said that the other plaintiff (G. H. Roberts) had been in his field stealing a sheep. Mr Trevor Lloyd said that the plaintiff Jones heard that one of his sheep had wandered, and he found it on some land belonging to the de- fendant. It was captured and fettered, but it again strayed to the defendant's land and both plaintiffs went. for it, and brought it back along the high road at dusk in an open way. It wae eventually sold to a butcher. The suggestion was made that the sheep belonged to the de- fendant. Evidence was given by the plaintiff, Cadwaladr Jones, who said the sheep was his. It bore his ear marks. In cross-examination plaintiff said he did not mention to the defendant that he was removing the sheep from the defendant's land. It was not customary to do so. The other plaintiff, Griffith Henry Roberts, said tho defendant accused him of stealing the sheep. Defendant asked him to pay for the animaL By Mr Artemus Jones: It was customary in that district for farmers to go for their sheep, which might have strayed to another flock, with- out telling the owner of the flock. The Judge: Then the sooner the custom changes the better. j After the plaintiffs' 'rose had closed Mr Ar- temus Jones submitted a plea of privilege. Mr Trevor Lloyd contended there was ample evidence of malice. The Judge said there was no evidence that the defendant had been making reckless charges. "I think," proceeded the Judge, "that these words were spoken upon privileged occasions, and that there is no evidence that would influence any sane man that this man was malicious, and was not acting-in what he believed to be the de- fence of his own Tights. I have seldom met a case of slander in which the plaintiffs themselves bv their own aibuurd oomduot have brought the matter on their own heads. The plaintiff's pretence that there is a custom to go and take sheep away without (saying a word about it, I refuse to give credit to, and if there is any such custom it should be stamped out. I believe they were careless in taking the sheep away. but no doubt they did not believe they were doing anything wrong though they naturally brought upon themselves the suspicions of the defendant. There must be judgment for the defendant with costs.

An excellent Pood. adminbly  Rd m r I 'y adapted to the wM)t* of !nhmt9. "—  SirChai. A.C«man».GJLMJX øalôOd Useful Booklet N Rtata about Baby" free. I Sample for 3d. postage. Mention this paper. JOSIAH R. NEAVE A CO.. Fordimbridga. FLQRILIHE I FOR THE I TEETH. 1 Beautifies the teeth and the gums. Renders the teeth pe-axly white. Arrests the decay of tho teeth. Acts as a detergent after smoking. Ren ders the gums hard and healthy. Is the beet Liquid Dentifrice. The favourite over 35 years. Sold everywhere, 2s 6d per bottle. In a EX GwWo,-inch atitUMATISPI SCT^TICA &AD -SORE H&ASO & &ACAS CnAPffA TVANDS' YJox. '7 For InjurieR and Skin q SQOCAlriz Zim -Btik hai3 no equal. Refuse all substitutes I _<.

CARNARVONSHIRE POLICE I COMMITTER TOLICE WEEKLY I:EST DAY ACT. I (From Our Reporter.) j A special meeting of the Carnarvonshire Police Committee was held yesterday at Car- narvon. The Chaii-man (Mr W. H. Rhodes) presided, and t.he other mecnbnrs present weie Dr. Dalton, Dr. Jonets Roberts, Ni(-.FL;rs Lsward Davies, Wynn Willi,<mI;, J..M. Greave. C. A. Jones. E. Wocd, J. R. Pritehard, II. Parry, J. Joneu Morris, W. J. Parry, R. Muir, D. P. Williams, Lsgocd Jones, O. Rowland (Comway), with the Cierk (Mr A. Bodvol Roberts), and tho Chief Constable (Mr J. Griffith). LLANDUDNO POLICE STATION. I The report of the &ub-com.miitee regarding the suggestion that ciak should bo used in place of pitch pine i.n the Court RcC!m at the new Llandudno Police Sta,tion was presented. Several membeoca objected to the proposal on the ground of the expend. Mr Owen Kowland urged the committee to decide upon oak in preference to pitchpine. He noticed that the objection to oak came fiom the South Carnarvonshire representa- tives, who Lived on Llandudno, where most of the rates came from. Mr Muir: Mr Rowland lives at Conway, a low-rated town. Dr. Daltan said it was no uee for the T;isn. dudaw end of the county to ask for anything. By a large majority it was decided to utilise pitchpine instead of oak. SUFFRAGETTES AT CRICOTETH. f Mr J. R. Pritchard said -be noticed that "the furious women" had como down to Car- narvonshire, and had committed acTious damage to the windows of tradesmen. Who was responsible for paying the ecot of the damage, the ratepayers or private indi- vida..i Several members: Private individuals. Mr Iaoard Davies: Are we responsible for giving- legal advice in this matter. Mr J. ti. Pritchard: Yro, if we can get it free. i POLICE WEEKLY REST DAY ACT. I The sub-committee, Which met to o:msidet what action should be taken to meet with the requirements of the Police Weekly Rest Day Act, 1910, which comes inta operation in July next, presented their report. The Chief (hn- stable stated that the Act provides tha.t every county hal1 make such arrangements aa to the houra cf duty of constable} that every constable (not being above the rank of in- spector) ehall be allowed at least 52 days in a year on which he is not required to perform police duties save on* occasions of emergency and for such days being distributed through- out the year with the object of securing as far as practicable to every constable one day's rest in every seven. He stated that the offi- cers affeoted by the Act wmv now permitted 40 days in a year on which they do not per- form polioc duty, and that to comply with the Act he recommended that they in addi- tion be allowed to be off duty on one other day in every calendar month, which would give each iuan 52 days a year off duty. Tho 52 days wouLd be made up aa follows:—An- rual leave, 14 days; one da.y in every fort- 144ght, 2G; and in addition one day every caOjendar month, 12. making a total of 52 days. It was stated that- although the proposal was not fullv in compliance with the Act it was gathered t-hat it woujd fulfil the require- ments <xf the Home Office. To aibove scheme to be carried out the Chief Constable stated that it would be necessary to increase the police by five additional constables. The Chief Constable said ho was prepared to attempt to carry out the proposal by only adding four offioeirs dur- ing the summer months—oy retaining one of the extra summer constables for the winter months. This would mean an increase of five from the lcA October on the present number— and tha.t in future only t.wo extra summer constables be ongaged (aiftar this summer) fotr Llandudno. The suisrerestion was adopted. TELEPHONE FOR CHIEF CONSTABLE. I The Chief Constable stared. that liD was re- moving to a new dwelling-homse in which there rwas now iinqtaVv3d a teleplhone; be pointeki out that a tekiph ono at the Chief CanstabLe'.s residence would be as much con- venience to the police force and public gene- rally as to himself, and that lie submitted the question of wbstbeir it would be the wish that the teAeipibone be retained. It was decided to retain it. an the cast, would be more, than own. peneated bv the public convenience.

The Exchequer returns from April 1st to May 30th are as follows:—Receipts, £ 28,761,012; ex- penditure, £ 28,829,726. For the corresponding od of !a?t year the rpoeipt? wero L27,%9,737 a.nd the expenditure ;c26.7 M4.

I YACHTING. I KINGSTOWN TO HOLYHEAD RACE. The fifth race from Kingstown to Holyhead under the auspices of the Royal Alfred Vacht Club was sailed on Saturday. The race was to all the club's yachts of ten tons and over. The officer of the day was; Dr. Wright. Nine yachts crossed the starting-line, tho first to leave at 8.35 a.m. being the Kismet, closely followed by the other yachts. There was a liiOderate breeze at the start, but it died away v hen halif the distance had been covered, the t-)M. being as calm iN a mill pond. The following was the rebuilt:—- H. M. S. 1 Hera (J. H. Gibbons), 15 min., 27 tone 4 53 60 2 Palmcsa (Arthur Davies), scr., 50 tOM. 5 5 33 3 Alineda (E. D. M'Laughlin), 21 min.. 24 tons 5 43 34 4 Kitnnet (F. St. J. Worrall), 34 min., 1G tons 6 46 31 5 Tigris (J. T. Stowell), 26 min., 21 tons 7 14 42 6 Coamis (J. M. R(M6 T&ddJ, 30 min., 34? bMM ••• 7 33 18 7 Iollaire (Henrv Tweedy), 40 min., 17 tonis 8 33 46 8 Espanola (H. W. Wright), 55 mim., 15 tons 9 49 9 9 Breeze (C. W. Boydell). 30 ( nian., 41 toins (gave up, but finished tOO oourse).

THE CAUSE OF INDIGES- TION. Much valuable information may be g:œnecl from a somewhat lengthy medical report just published. For instance, it is made clear that more than 90 per cent, of all cases of mdigefh tion, dyspepsia, etc., are due to the pre of acid in tlt-a stomach, and physicians agree tfaat when this fact Ï6 realised by the public they will be call-ed upon to treat very few oases of stomaCT trouble, and the oa-uise of the trouble—tho aowi I in tJhe etomach-may readily be overcome with- out tho;,r aid. Tho most effective preparation I 1-1 for tihis purpose is said to be pure nisuraiea magnesia, 11>00 they advise thoee who are troubled with any form of digestive trouble to obtain a small quantity of this product from their chomist, and take half-a-teaifipoonful in α little water after meala, as tthis will prevent for. mentation and neutralise any acid which may be formed, thiis rondering the food easy of diges- tion. Certainly this plan seems preforablo to dos'ing the stomach with drugs. Our roaders will have no d.ffioultv in obtain- in supplies of this valuable product as genuine bistirated magnesia is now stocked in the various forms by Meshach Roberts and Co.. of 301, High Street, J. Bowen. of 157, Higli Street, and R. A. Evans, The Pharmacy, Porfr dinorwio.

A LIVERPOOL ENTERPRISE. Much interest ia attached to tihe news that Mr Walter Owen has severed hie connection with the firm of Owen Owen, Ltd., where ho hasfoe many years proved himself of great value, end a worth-y asset of the firm. Thia gentleman, it may be remarked, it the only resident in Liverpool of the family which has met with such great success through- out the Kimgdom. Mr Owen has bougsht out- right the old established business of Meesra lluseey's, of Bold Street, Liverpool, from Miei Davies, who has 'carried on the concern with sucih marked suooess for some considerable time, and who is now about to enter a life of retire- manto on the Con.tinent. Extensive alteration* are being carried out on the premises, which when completed will make room for an unique aiyd enterprising effort in the world of ladicri French millinery.

FREE OFFER TO LADIES. To prove the superiority of ELLIS'S PILLS FOR FEMALES, I will eend a free trial packet, post paid. Prepa-ed from the original recipe of a celebrafted Nurse, they never fail in restoring regularity and correcting all disorders. Safe, certain, and speedy pill that never disappoints. Thousands of lett-ers of thanks testifying to their speedy effieacy, aftcc all other things had been tried in vain. Eaci purchaser sends bade testi- monial, as they afford relief in every instance. There is nothing to equal them. Is 3d per box. Special extra strong pills (recommended) 4s 6d, poet paid, in plain wrapper, with full direotioni and advice. Supplied through the poet only by MRS ELLIS, 27, Surrey Lane, Batteroea, London. °

Mr David Evans. Machynlleth, one of tht oldest practising solicitors in Mid-Wales, died on Wednesday, aged eevcmty-throe years. He v/iis admitted in 1887, and was formerly a partner in the firm of Howell, Evans and GiBart. He beld several public appointment^

worrT SHRINK WOOLLEN3 Ifua  J???Jt??T J I ?T ? ??? a unique prepara. I <C\ ..?St\.? form ?ta? /F\ of flakes or wafers, which I excels in the washing of flannels, woollens and all loosely woven and dainty fabrics which are a liable to shrink if washed by ordinary methods. 11 '????%??????tt It is a pleasure to wash such things 1 Bt? \< ?????????t ?thLUX. It yields a beautiful K$f 1  B cream-like lather. It is more I ■m i l l than pleasure to view or to wear B the fabrics washed with it. They are a delight. V, 1"4AAq everywhere. In Id., 2d., 3d. and 4d. packets ON SOAP IS A LEVE BROTHERS LIMITED, PORT SUNLIGHT. CEI.LE" Lx W-31  RITY

41    WT  GUARANH?     Sj  ???. .?!'??? THE tax-i rt atico (!Dtjroitfrtc -tioo FREP,' OltiiNCE undertaken ^IQ0 FREE IXyLtl4AlviCE undertaken rHE OCEAN ACCIDENT AND GUARANTEE CORPORATION, LIMITED (Empowered by Special Act of Parliament) Principal Office- 36 to 44, Moore-ate St., London, E.C. This Coupon Insurance Ticket must not be Detached. *f»lIUOJ l WILL be paid by THE OCEAN ACCI- uexx AND GUARAiYiEE COR- PORATION, LIMIïElJ, Principal Ottioe, Nos. 36 to 44, MOOKGATK-S1 1', LONDON, E.C., to tile legal personal representative ot the porta fide holder ot this Coupon irisuraiioe-Ticket the holder shall be killed or lauulv injured by an accident within the United Kinguviii to any Hallway Company's passenger-train in which the holder is travelling as a ticket-bearing or tare- t>*ying passenger. [rovlded that the above undertaking is sub- ject to the following special conditions. which are of the essence of the contract, That death result within thirty days after the accident; (b) that the holder 'shall, prior the accident, have written his (or her) usual signature in ink in the space provided under- Acath; vC) that notice of the accident be given to the Corporation at its Principal Ofhoe in Lonaon within fourteen days alter its ocour- ■ (d) that medical certificates and other information be furnished by the person claim- ?g upon request for the same by the CorpoM- *?a; and (e) that this insurance applies <miy *? persons over twelve and under seventy ,yar3 i Si *??' is limited to one Coupon-Ln&Lft??e- ? ek?,t ??c'*ted with this pubhoation leu  holder, and hold good for the current ???t ^ttsue nly.. ?S??'ua ine surance entitles the holdeT to the benefi jet, "d m subject to, the conditions oi t-,3 ?tKf\L< -N ACCIDENT AND GUARANTY ;?????Y. LIMITED, ACT, 1890." except *o ??? the same are altered by the terms and ,?'??' oondlhons above stated. Sa  ^H*scseion of this Coupon-lurwanoe-Ticket h -d 'T'??? to ? the payment of a premdum /?d?. "'??? 33 of the Act. A Print of the Aot seen at tho Principal Office of the Cor- Ration ?aature of holder Week ending June 5, 1914. V -the actual makers A B I Children's Frocks ^■8 ■ kl VI B| B from 1/0. Y«ung i from 414L Ladies' Frocks from 5,11 mlstit JLT 13? CATALOGUE, c??ninfM p*e? about *? 1..t"?'?% post free. Wme to day. j«■ glNOBlE SrAtj.*Tj CLARKE'S B 41 PILLS upon to cure. in either <ex. tth '??'?red or conetitutton&l DMe?u-?ea t'?' ?'? Urintry Or?aim. Grav& and ? I? In ?? '?<?- "? from Men:ury. fco, Wished upwa?de of 50 Y" In each, of &U ChemistA and ipatkat v e.d,>r throughout the World, or rt for dxty gta-pe, by the =jaers. The ?r '?oc.m and Midi?nd CountMx Drus ?C?'?, P?ay. r.^ooin. 1 ^—Free to Ladies.^— ?En CLARITIES, ctc., removed by an l:()-te Md certain method WITHOUT 1>.  oc  It is speedy and ?' .n" a sc:entt6o eyetem which hM ren practised with wonderful results; Oes DØt int(>rfere with household duties. C ?PICAL SCIENCE knows no better OllRr f have rece,vcd letters of thanks < daily t ifying dmt they have derived the grtest -u?St. I guarantee every oase. Send at once lor FREE particulars and ?I'mon?s guaraj?teed genuino under a felt? of ?5?. ItS .STARMAN MORRIS (81 D?pt.). 6:, Stoke Ne\\ ington-road, London, N. j 1 l^L+Tkbi lia? liod Z0 years ? IsJmgton. 4tablializd -D year's I'n IslingtoiL Blanchard's Pills WaE ITIL IRF, ,41led for all Irregular:tles'eto. they ialie,,iat7z"y afford relief, andnevar faA to J'o.YIL1, Pi! uffering. They supersede Peany- ,k w?. ter Apple, ow. !?lyaLA.Nt:li ARF)'S ABE THE JUE3T OF ALL ftnij ? PLLL?, FOR WOMEN." ;ftlb4o la lid. by f001^ Br?ch? >vmVb Bra?ch?, and all Chem- IIII{IS I Or ??'RT.T? Y??.?me price, from LESLIE .'??'' Fr'? ? Ch<?? 34. D?cn L<? Tfre;. ,i, ree 8&rnple ? v??h? BooJdet. post N 5?' ? MtewMtonzhmttdbT DAKYRZ v?t???? N SS.?''?  '?"?' W ?  H TuiS 5' Azi=&IL single Tabp 4,ti B  (fox }t ■ -?7t:4=8= London. and of .11 _.n-izkum EATitING9S

CAAN PACIFIC RAILWAY. I I, W. ■■ 1 X?'?timt ?'' ?°?"' Eujopo&n Manager of the ?y }1iIl ?ac?c Railway, states that the com- U% L' OOIllleted arrangements by which tho • r11 Jjn°. ?'Ple screw, turbine steamer "Vir- will take the aaiiLn?a which had b?n ? ?nL ? ''? Empro$ of Ireland" during 6638011 ?? Virgim&n" ?.U u'Vl hp "?t sailmg from Li?,.Ipwl to Qu Ooeo Jib.&r';t{)n.tl'oal on Friday June 12 and reguArIy -kr.

I Are your Roots I Set out ? I If so, NOW IS THE TIME I to help them away with "ITRA TE of SODA for pa-w?, ?.?;'? R? I I io ?-M A?? ? gpja," .fM?.?.? I gratis a.r,c pbsi free, by 1 NfIRATE COIKsVJrrrEK, itroat. London, E.C. I