Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

12 articles on this Page

w SITE OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE…

Advertising

Correspondence. I --

Detailed Lists, Results and Guides
Cite
Share

Correspondence. I -1 I ? .? ? I ? -? "LIZA" ON CHURCH MATTERS. J I ?'?? enclosin my card I may say as I dont think as I've ever 'ad 'cuion to 'rite to you before so Ve-nul1I"se^ t^is ere complaint in your next impreshun «.i V tho I onla 'ouse-maid I sj Mj L ■ 'pinions. I am in the 'abit on my weekly Sunday-cuts to tend devine servis at St. Mark Church, I dontwant to say nothink agin the choir there, so dont think as I do, which is a ?ry nice good lookin set of young men, tho' its I as says it as ought nt to no nothink of si'ch like. I've no comply wiSth L^the tho' they is that short as the te?.s ave tobe made longer in consequence. » 4. u Twantlto call attention to (which I've erd master say the werry same), is that there orginist, as oughter be shamed of hisself, and I wishes I ad him e?re Uf to tell "° ? ? as ??? a tremulant on hts orgm as he never uses, likewise solo stops as he never pulls out to liven up the Littiny, and as to the choruses and glorias, he do play 'em that screechun- like as makes it werry tryin to the nerves (what little in consequence now remains of 'em) of your dootiful. LIZA. I POLICE CONSTABLE AUSTIN'S CASE. Sill,A.Ilow me through the medium of your journal to correct a false statement now in circulation as to the cause of this oiffcer's removal to another County Division. It is reported that I pressed the charge that has led to the same. This is incorrect. I simply informed Inspector Lindsay that I saw Austin when conveying a prisoner to Shrewsbury allow him to have a bottle of spirits, and that they both "? together in the carriage to the annoyance of lady passenger, who begged that the prisoner if he would smoke also might be removed to a smoking compartment. I told Lindsay I thought it would be well to caution Austin against a repetition of such an inconsistency, when he said that before mentioning it to Austin or anyone he would think the matter over and see me again. Instead of this, he wentimmediately to the chief of police, and told what I had stated, when 1 was forthwith requested to appear before Major Leadbetter and restate the facts. As soon as I heard that Austin was to be removed I wrote to the Major asking him to allow Austin, even for my sake, to retain his position. Civilians will I am sure be slow to discharge even a public duty, if they are to be rewarded with insults and annoyance as I have been. The least the chief of police and the inspector can do is to publicly state the real facts that have led to this officer's removal.—I am, &c., H. MARGETTS. Bourne House, Feb. 7th, 1883. WREXHAM AND THE COLLEGE. SiR,—Might I be permitted to add an item to the discussion of a question which is fraught with so much importance to North Wales in general, and Wrexham m particular, as the selection of the site for the North Wales College. From whatever point the question may be looked at, it seems to me Wroxham presents greater advantages than any other competing town. As was pointed out in the last issue of your paper, it is situated on an important artery of a great railway, in the centre of immense mineral wealth, whilst it possesses a great advantage in being what might be called an English town, and consequently the students would be able to obtain a considerable and useful knowledge of English. Assuming that Wrexham be selected, allow me to point out several sites which are eligible for the erection of the college. The first is in the direction of Erddig. That most beautiful end of the town presents a site of singular eligibility, for it might be placed on some of the pro- perty near Coedyglyn and The Court. The second is in the direction of Pias Power, the property of Mr T. xii. FitzHugli, where it would be within easy distance of the town and in a very healthy locality. The third is on the Hope road, on the property of Sir Watkin Williams Wynn, near Plasgoch Gate, where it would be near the railway station, from which the students could easily reach the institution, whilst the town would be within a short distance. To my mind, however, the best site for it would be on a large field belonging to Sir Robert Cunliffe, upon the Chester road, just where Grove road joins that thoroughfare. Here it would be almost in the heart of the town, on one of the pleasantest roads, and at the same time removed from the noise of traffic and the busy bustle of every day life. From this it will be seen that the town has a multiplicity of suitable sites which might be selected, and should it be Wrexham's good fortune to be selected as the favored town, the inhabitants of the good old town and its vicinity will do their best to make a success the North Wales College.—I am, &c., BARKIS. THE RECENT INTERNATIONAL FOOTBALL I MATCH. SIR,—As a Welshman and supporter of Association Football in Wales, I must beg of you to allow me a little space in your columns, to express the dissatisfac- tion of myself and many others with the decidedly non-representative team that the Association Commit- tee selected to do battle for the Principality against such a formidable foe as England" on Saturday last. Such men as Adams, Powell, Morgan, Hughes, Vaughan, and Owen and John Roberts, are tried and worthy men but can the same be honestly said ot such players as W. H. Roberts, Burke, Roberts (Rhyl) and J. P. Davies (Druids) ? Can it be denied that there are in the Association better and more ex- ferienced players than the last mentioned ? No. R. Roberts, or Williams (Druids) or J. Jones (Berwyn Rangers), would have been far more worthy substitutes for Bowen at half-back than Burke, and H. Edwards (of Wrexham) would have certainly been a better backer up" than J. P. D.tvies (Druids). As John Roberts (Corwen) was selected to play with Vaughan, that fine young player, R. A. Jones (Druids), would, I am sure, have done famously with Owen. To say the least, he was more worthy of selec- tion than W. xi. Roberts, who performed so wretchedly against England and against Scotland last year. As to W. Roberts of Rhyl, he may play fairly well for his own club, but can it be said he was anything like a success on Saturday. Crosse of the Druids, al- though rather out of form of late, would I think have been a much better substitute for Brittain. The men I would have liked to have seen on the field against England are :—Adams (Druids), goal; J. Powell (Druids) and Morgan (Swansea), ba-ks R. Roberts (Druids), E. Bowen (Druids), and F. W. Hughes (Northwich), half-backs Owen (Ruthin) and R. A. Jones (Druids), right wing Vaughan (Druids) and John Roberts (Corwen), left wing; and Brittain, centre. And as reserves :-A. Powell (Druids) back W. Williams (Druids) and H. Edwards (Wrexham), half-backs; Crosse (Druids), centre Farmer (White Star) and J. E. Jones (Berwyn Rangers), forwards. Some of your readers may argue that there are too many Druids" in the team. Allow me to remind them that Scotland, last year, played as many as eight Queen's Park men against Wales, and. if I remember aright, seven against England, passing over the claims of such clubs as Dumbarton, Vale of Leven" &c. The Leven, thing is to pick the best men, come they all from one club what matter. What all true Welshmen want is for Wales to win, or at least not to be dis- graced as she undoubtedly was on Saturday last. Nex*- month Wales will have to meet Scotland and Ireland. Allow me to remind the committee that the honor of Wales, as far as football is concerned, is in their hands, and that patriotic Welshmen expact them to sink all partiality for the members of their own particular clubs, and to pick a team that will do them and their country honor.—I am, &c., 7th Feb., 1883. TAFFY. HAWARDEN AND DISTRICT WATER- I WORKS. SIR,—I have been away from home for some weeks, and my attention has only just been called to certain statements made by Mr Bateman before the Hawar- den Board of Guardians, and in letters to the] public papers, and although no name was mentioned, it was well-known to whom he alluded, and I feel it due to myself to reply to his remarks. In the first place, Mr Bateman is not the originator of the scheme to provide water from the Moel Fammau range. I wrote on the subject several years ago in your paper and as is very well known to many about Mold, I have never ceased to press my views on those most interested (one of whom was the gentle- man from whom Mr Bateman got his idea), and early last year. long before Mr Bateman or his scheme wre ever heard of, I had meetings with Mr H. E. Taylor on the subject, and when Mr Bateman appeared on the scene I was quite ready to co-operate with him, I until I found that his scheme was an ill-considered, one-horse concern. When Mr Bateman called on me, I asking for my support, be produced a map and pointed out.tlie site he had selected, which he believed belonged to me. I told him he was mistaken; that the site in question was not mine: that he had gone to the wrong valley, and I should be glad to show him a far better site for a large reservoir with a much greater catch- ment area. I drove with him there; he at once acknowledged that it was far superior and wished he had known of it before he had brought his London friends down, but he was committed to the Cwm site and could not alter, there being no time to get up the larger scheme that if I would aid him with the "Cwm" scheme, he would get up another next session to taketheGarth water to Chester or elsewhere. I urged upon him that it would be a fatal error to spoil one good scltcmcbydividiug it into two bad ones, when very little more cost would carry out the whole. He appeared to listen to my arguments and asked me to tell him in confidence the cost of the site, including the removal of farm house, cottage, and buildings above. I named a sum, which he said was beyond their means, as they would only have from 910,000 to 1:12,000 capital. He had a further conversation with me in my room. I pointed out that they would be taking the bottom land of a mountain stock farm, the severance of which would depreciate the value of the whole and the removal of house and buildings would be a costly affair, that if he would make me an offer in writing I would con- sider it, and he left promising to send me by that night's post. Three days passed, no letter came. Mr Bateman and his assistants continued surveying for the Cwm site. I met him by the Loggerheads, and he cooly informed me that he did not understand that I was to have heard from him. This and other circumstances which came to my notice, convinced me that Mr Bateman was not acting in a straight- forward manner, but was trying to gam time and prevent the possibility of a counter scheme being presented to Parliament this session. I at once informed him he would be opposed, and put myself in communication with Mr Taylor and the promoters of the Hawarden District Company Bill, pointing out that unless he could get in this session the district would be blocked by a bad and inefficient scheme. When Mr Bateman says the exorbitant price asked by the owner of the land decided me some months before the Hawarden scheme was heard of to take our supply from the source I now propose," he is trying to trail a dead herring across the scent, and in doing so states that which is not true, for within a week from the time Mr Bateman firatsawthe site where the Hawarden District Company reservoir will be, steps had been taken to form the Hawarden company, and a little later surveyors were at work on both schemes simultaneously. Is Mr Bateman so ignorant of ms profession and of Acts of Parliament as not to know that the price of all lands and easements taken, is fixed by arbitration, when it cannot be otherwise agreed on, the exorbi- tant price idea will not wash. With the Hawarden District Company I have no agreement. I am fully protected by the Act, if we do not come to an amicable settlement it will co to arbitration. Mr Bateman asserts that there are six farms whose drainage will go into the Hawarden Company's reservoir. Mr Bate- man knows, or ought to know, that is not correct. Mr Bateman keeps reiterating the words domestic requirements, domestic purposes, &c., no doubt advisedly so, for the supply he proposes to give will certainly be inadequate for other purposes, such as railways, works, manufactories, and watering of live stock. Mr Bateman proposes a three-acre reservoir; Mr Taylor twenty acres. Mr Bateman's will be a hand-to-mouth supply depending on every shower. Mr Taylor will have bottled up the floods of winter in his spacious cellar, and will have many months' supply in hand. Without such provision what would become of the district in a year like 1870, when during some eu/ht months not a shower fell sufficient to run off the ground, and the brook Mr Bateman relies on was absolutely dry. Mr Bateman talks of the Hawarden scheme as being got up fi-ompterely private niotites. Pray what brings him and London speculators into the district except the motive power of private gain, in the shape of salaries and dividends, as the higher rates in the Flintshire Company Act clearly indicate, I could add much more, but fear I have already taken up too much of your space.—I am, sir, your obedhnt servant, B. G. DAiius COOKE. Colomendy, Mold, Feb. 6tb, 1883. I THE RHOS BURIAL BOARD AND ITS FEES. To the Editor of the Wrexham Advertiser. -91R, -As the Vestry meeting to consider the above is to be held on Monday, the 12th inst., I trust you will allow me space in your next issue to refer to a few points worthy of consideration. As to the propriety of making charges Nos. 8 to 17 in column of fees payable to officiating ministers," the fact that they are charges made though no ser-, vices are rendered is sufficient to show their unfair- ness, but I hope to be able to shew that the Boaid by retaining them and a few others will be going against its own interests. If the scale of fees is passed, the following tables will show the total expenses payable £ s. d. I For exclusive right of burial (No. 18) 1 1 0* For entry of grant (No. 19). 2 6 For certificate of grant (No. 20) 1 o For excavating for brick grave, ten feet deep (Nos. 25 and 26), 13 0 For interment- to Board (No. 2 and 3) 7 6 I For interment—to Minister (do.) 2 0 For every brick grave—to Board (No. 8). 10 0 For every brick grave—to Minister (do.). 10 0 For erecting headstone—to Board (No. J2) 5 0 For erecting headstone-to Minister (do.) 5 0 Constructing brick grave, including material and labour, say 6 0 Total 4 3 0 Without fets 8 and 12 to Minister, would amount to 3 8 0 The above refers to charges when burial takes place in a bricked grave, a style in which a large number of the inhabitants at present bury. Of the above, 17s will be paid to the officiating minister. As at least one-third of those now burying in the bricked grave style could not pay the above, the effect would be to make them bury under the lower fees or, much more likely, cause them to seek a burial place elsewhere, though they are bound to pay ratea. Again, the lower fees would be :— 9 s. d. For exclusive right of burial (No. 18). 110 For entry of grant (No. 19) 2 6 For certificate of do. (No. 20) 1 0 For digging grave 10 feet deep (Nos. 21 and 22) 9 6 For interment—to Board (No. 2) 2 6 For interment—to Minister (do.) 2 0 For erecting headstone-to Board (No. 12) 5 0 For erecting headstone-to Minister (do.) 5 0 Total. 2 8 6 Or withoutfee No. 12 to Minister 2 3 6 This large total, again, would place burial in the new cemetery out of the question as far as the ordinary class of the people are concerned. Certainly, as Mr W. C. Hughes remarked at the last meeting of the Board, people could bury without having to pay these high fees, but then it would be at the expense of the parish, the thought of which is revolting. As to Mr Gomer Roberts' suggestion that the fees Nos. 8—17, second column, be only charged when Church of England ministers officiate, we are sur- prised, disappointed, and even indignant that such a leading Nonconformist should even hint at such a compromise, for it is utterly out of character, as Mr Roberts well knows, with the equality as to rights," which Nonconformists hold their ministers to stand in with the ministers of any other religious communion. Again, it is true that the above totals would be pay- able only once in the case of each grave space but then the difference between the new fees and those charged at ether burial grounds in the neighbourhood, not excluding the churchyard itself, is so great that. considering that a Burial Board rate is collected. I I have no hesitation in saying that the majority of the inhabitants will have to seek burial space else- where. In order to bring the matter to a more decidable point. I would suggest that, (1) of course, fees Nos. 8 to 17, in columns of fees payable to ministers, be entirely struck out. (2) That the following fees be altered as sug- gested No. IS-For exclusive right of burial, in a space 10 + 4, and pa) me-it over and above all other fees and payments, £ I Is 0d be altered to 103 6J for parishioners and rate- payers, but that the 21 Is Od be charged for non- parishioners. No. 8—For brick grave 10s, be altered to 5s for parishioners and ratepayers, but 10s for non- parishioners. No. 10, same as No. 8. As no particulars of the discussion upon the table appeared in any of the papers, I venture to ask that the following points be explained at the forthcoming vestry meeting :— (a) Is not the labor paid for under Nos. 21 and 22 (3s 6d for 6 feet and Is 6d for each additional foot) the same as that charged under Nos. 25 and 26 (5a for 6 feet and 2s each additional foot for excavating for brick grave) ? (b) Why make charge No. 8 for every br'ck grave when an additional charge of 5s is made under No. 3 for the same kind of grave ? I honestly say, too much! too much I, however, can see no objection, but rather I am strongly favorable, to charging No. 8 from non- parishioners. (c) I see that the fee for exclusive right of burial in grave space above 10 + 4 is not mentioned. After a careful consideration of the table of fees since they first appeared, I am strongly of opinion that the rights and claims of the parishioners and ratepayers would be more fully and fairly met, and the burial ground more generally used, if all the fees No. 8 to 18 (inclusive) were halved for parishioners and ratepayers, but retained in their entirety as far as non-parishioners are concerned.—I am, &c.. A KATEPAVER. ) I Feb. 6th, 1883. A ltATEPAYEB. I

Advertising

[No title]

f NOTES ON NEWS. -;-

[No title]

ISOCIETY GOSSIP.

[No title]

General News. ! 1 """'-'-.""-,-r"../_"'......r'j-'./-...-,'"_-,-","-"-"---.-....r-…

iGENERAL FOREIGN NEWS.

I - - - - THE MAYORS BANQUET.