Skip to main content
Hide Articles List

18 articles on this Page

[No title]

NOT-LS AND COkltfiENTS.'

SHORTHAND SUCCESS.

THE DOCKYARD,

PEMBROKE HUNT STEEPLECHASE.

TENBY.'.

NEYLAND

Advertising

iRV"&8{.'1t-PEMBROKE DOCK.…

News
Cite
Share

iRV"&8{.'1t- PEMBROKE DOCK. COUNTY COURT. Wednesday: Before liu Honour Judge Bishop. A I,'OXTRACTOR'S CLAIM. Valentine Gibby, of Pembroke Dock, sued Messrs. Lloyd and Co., builders of Milford, for P-3 16s. for ashes sold. Two pounds had been paid in court- Mr. W. Wymne appeared for plaintiff. Valentine Gibby, contractor and haulier, said that he had a contract for buying and remov- ing ashes from the dockyard. In 1906 he sold a quantity of ashes to the defendants at 2s. per ton, the ashless to have been screened through a jin. screen. Thirty-eight tons were sent by a vessel to Milford. He arrived at the weight by weighing each of the crurts used once, and keep.^g a score of the loads put on board by each cart. The ashes were all pro- perly sifted as recuiTed. William Picton, -t haulier in the employ of the plaintiff gave evidence as to seeing the ashes screened with a -in. screen. In reply to Mr. Fred Lloyd, witness said that some of the wires in the screen were out of place. Defendant said that there were only 24 loads of ashes in the vessel when it was discharged. He should not think there was any more than twelve tons. Alexander Chugg, architect and surveyor, of Milford, said that he had examined the ashes in question, and found that about 33 per cent. would not pass through a iin. screen. He also measured the heap of ashes and found that there was about 14 tons. Ten loads had gone. In reply to Mr. Wynne, witness said that he had only been practising as an architect for two years. He obtained his qualification in Germany in 1870. He had estimated the weight of the ashes at 40 lbs. per cubic foot. He, however, had had no experience as to the weight of dockyard ashes. His Honour said that the ashes were not satisfactorily screened and weighed, so he should give a verdict for the defendant, but without costs. A PAIR OF WHEEELS. Joshua Evms, a faimer, sued Thomas Kenni- ford, wheelwright, of Pembroke Dock for 30s. value of a pair of wheels. Mr. W. Wynne appeared for plaintiff and Mr. R. D. Lowless defended. Plaintiff said that he lived at Newton, near Pembroke, and was a farmer. About twelve months ago he took a spring trap to the de- fendant to be repaired. Mr. Kenniford said that he had better have a new pair of wheels, and witness agreed and ordered new ones. It was not arranged that the old ones should be returned, but he expected to have them back. Mr. Wynne said that that this was contrary to his instructions. He understood that there was a definite arrangement made. Plaintiff continuing said that it was arranged that he should have the wheels back. The value of the wheels was 25s. When plaintiff went to fetch the wheels, defendant declined to return them. Defendant had also abused him and on one occasion he struck him when he inquired. In reply to Mr. Lowless, plaintiff admitted that he had been sued by Mr. Kenniford for the new wheels. He denied that the wheels were only worth 6d. to be used for old fire. wood. Defendant on oath said that when plaintiff brought the cart to be repaired, the old wheels were not worth repairing. No arrangement was made for the return of the old wheels. It was not the custom to return the old wheels in such cases as that. His Honour gave judgment for the defendant with costs. WHC WAS RESPONSIBLE? Jajmes Beddoe, ironmonger, of Pembroke, sued Messrs. Eastman's, Limited, for 18s. lOd. for good.s supplied. Mr. F. S Reed appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. W. J. Jones, of Haverfordwest, defended. John Henry Evans, manager of the plaintiff, said that the defendant company owed his firm the sum of 18s. lOd. for goods sold and delivered. The goods were sold in the ordinary way to the manager of Messrs. Eastman's, Pembroke branch. The goods were not yet paid for. In reply to Mr. Jones, the witness said that the goods were booked to Messrs. Eastman's, Limited. The goods were for use in the shop. His Honour: What do they want emery- paper for? Rubbing on the meat? And gold paint too? Witness: That was for painting the shop. His Honour: Not the meat. (Laughter). Mr. Jones cross-examined the witness about some of the other articles, and said that he did not know what all the articles were re- quired for. All he knew about the manager, Mr. Lawrence, was that he lived at the shop. He did not know what were the terms of his employment. Frederick Lawrence, who had until lately been manager of Messrs. Eastman's, Pembroke branch, said that when he opened the shop he was instructed to get all that was necessary. He therefore got the articles mentioned in the bill from Mr. Beddoe. None of the articles were for his private use. His Honour said that he did not think the witness painted himself with the gold paint. Witness said that he used the gold paint to brighten up the gas brackets. He added that a brush that he had was for the purpose of scrubbing the block. Cross-examined by Mr. Jones, witness said that he was engaged at a salary of 35s. a week. showed that the witness was employed as a Mr. Jones handed in an agreement which shopman at a salary of 30s. a week. Witness admitted! that he signed the agree- ment and denied that he had been forbidden to pledge the company's credit. Mr. Jones said that this was a test case, be- ing one of a number of similar cases which might be brought against the company. The defence was that Lawrence was only a shop- man, and was not empowered to pledge the credit of the firm. He had perhaps exceeded his authority, and although he might personal- ly be liable, the defendant company would not be. William Lawson, of Swansea district, mana- ger for Messrs. Eastman's, Limited, said that Lawrence was employed as a shopman, and when engaged, he was told that he was never to buy anything for the firm without paying for it at once. He knew nothing of this debt until the shopman was discharged. Lawrence had never been authorised to get the articles mentioned in the claim, and the shop was painted before Lawrence was engaged. In reply to Mr. Reed, witness said that Lawrence was supposed to pay for such articles as were necessary out of the till. He did not have to account for the money so used. His Honour: Then he was a lucky man. (Laughter). Further questioned, witness said that, emery- cloth would be used to polish the cleaners, and the monkey soap also, Mr. Reed remark- ing that they knew it wouldn't wash clothes. (Laughter). Witness further said that Lawrence was dis- missed on January 9th. Mr. Reed: He was illegally dismissed. That is a matter for another court. Mr. Jones: He was brought before the mag- istrates. His Honour said that the case seemed very clear. If Lawrence had paid for them at the time the company would have been willing to pay. He should give judgment for the plaintiff.

+ A MILFORD TRAWLER'S EXPERIENCE.

f) THE PEMBROKESHIRE HOUNDS.

FOOTBALL.

RUCBY

THE PROPOSED NEW SCHOOL AT…

"" COUNTY COUNCIL ELECTIONS.

Family Notices

- ISERVANTS GOMPENSATIO;1…

» HAVERFORDWEST COUNTY COURT.