Birtijss. At Llansantffraeè, Monmouthshire, August 5, the wife of Edmund Herbert, Esq., of a son. IftarnaQes. At Newchurch, July 30, by the Rev. J. C. Prosser, Mr. John Morris, agent to His Grace the Duke of Beaufort, to Miss Ann Kilby, both of the parish of Newchurch. At the Independent Chapel, Chepstow, by the Rev. John Thomas, Mr. Edmond Jones, of Llanvihangel Torymynydd, to Matilda, youngest daughter of Mr. Reece, tailor, Llansoy.
USE. THB PAHTTGOTTEE CAsE, the intelligence arriving at Usk by telegram, on Thursday evening, of the success of Mr. Nicholl, at the assizes, in the above case, the inha- bitants commenced preparations to welcome the return of Mr. Nioboli to the town. Flags were suspended from many of the houses in Bridge-street, and in the evening a bonfire was lighted and firinu kept up within the ruins of the Castle until a late hour, whilst the volunteer band paraded the town. On the following (Friday) morning the firing was resumed, and the band marched to the rail- way station at nine o'clock to meet Mr. Waddington, the solicitor, and at one to meet Mr. Nicholl, but the latter gentleman did not arrive until the evening, when he was met by the band, and vociferously cheered by the towns- people as he passed along the streets. LIAHBOT.—CIXB ANSIYERSABY. —The members of the "Pride of the Valley" lodge of Oddfellows held their anniversary at the Cross Keys Inn, in this parish, on the Slat ultimo, when, alter walking in procession to the parish church, an excellent sermon was preached to them by the Rev. E. J. Gosling, chaplain to the county gaol, from the words, Behold how good it is for brethren to dwell in unity together." At the close of the service the procession was re-formed, with the Chepstow Rifle Corps Band at its head, and with numerous flags and banners flying, they marched past the vicarage, and from thence, by the Cross Keys where the road was spanned by arches of evergreens and flowers, on to the Great Bouse, where each of the members were, by the liberality of Mr. John Lewis, regaled with cider. Upon returning to their lodge-room the members sat down to an excellent spread," and after discussing the good things set before them they adjourned to an adjacent field, and rustic sports became the "order of the day," and afforded much amusement until the time arrived for retiring in-doors again. After enjoying a very pleasant meeting, the members separated at an early hour. The lodge is, we understand, in a satisfactory condition.
NEWCHTJRCBL ODDJEIAQ'WSHIP. —The sixth anniversary of the Loyal "Glen Vale" Lodge (No. 4,801) of the 1. O. of O. F. of the M.U. was celebrated at the house of Host William James, Trout Inn, Newcburcb, on Monday, July 30th. The members attended their lodge-room in due order about two o'clock p.m., and at four o'clock the brethren and friends proceeded to an adjoining field, where they sat down to a bountiful and excellent dinner, which reflected much credit on the host and hostess. The chair was ably filled by Mr. King, surgeon of the lodge, supported by Mr. Cadle, of Howick, and Mr. Stephens, ironmonger, of Chepstow. The vice-chair was taken by Bro. William Haggett, of the Pride of the Valley" Lodge, supported by E rot her Philip Ranbury and Mr. James N ichols. The Shirenewton Band was in attendance, and by its harmonious strains considerably enlivened the proceedings. The dining-place, as well as the club-room, was decorated for the occasion with the choicest evergreens, flowers, &c. The usual loyal and patriotic toasts were proposed, followed by those connected with the order, viz: ''The Queen," "the Royal Family," "the Army and Navy," the N.G. and Officers and Members of the Lodge," with a number of others, after which the Secretary of the Lodge was called upon to give a statement of the lodge friends, which showed that the society was progressing favourably, not- withstanding that a very large amount of sick gifts had been paid out to members during the past year. The increase during the half-year ending June was stated to be dE16 12s. 6id., and the total worth of the society, 985 4s. 6. besides lodge property. Shortly afterwards the officers, members, and visiting friends resorted to the lodge-room, and the evening was spent amid toasts, songs, and speeches, together with the lively performances of the band, after which the company separated, well pleased with their entertainment.
ABERSYCHAN. CLUB FEASTS." Monday, the order of Foresters meeting at Host Richards, White Hart Hotel, held their meeting at Host Richards, White Hart Hotel, held their annual dinner. The Ebbw Vale brass band was engaged, and the members purported walking in procession, but the weather was so wet and windy that they wisely kept in- doors. A capital dinner was provided, and the band played a choice selection of music, and, with song and toast, a merry evening was spent.- -On the same day, the members of the "Flower of South Wales" Lodge of the Ancient Order of Foresters meeting at the Crown Inn, Varteg Hill, held their annual" feast." Headed by the Blaenavon brass band, the members, numbering about 140, with 20 junior members, walked a short way, but the unpropitious weather caused a speedy return. The mem- bers sat down to an abundant supply of good things, and did justice to the catering of host and hostess Pugii. After dinner several speeches and songs were given, and, in- spirited by the merry strains of the band, the members and their fair partners danced so vigorously that the club-room floor gave way. Fortunately, however, no one was hurt seriously.
CHEPSTOW. THE LOCAL BOARD. meeting of this Board was held at the office on Friday last, when there were present: Mr. Thomas Perkins (chairman), and Messrs. Thomas King, John Hall, John Sharp, John Morgan, Walter P. Thomas, and Thomas Sargent. The minutes of the last meeting hiving been first read arid signed, the Inspector of Nuisances reported that, in obedience to the order of the tsst meeting, be had called upon Mr. Chllo, who bad taken down his pig-sty and dug up the ground upon which it stood, thereby removing the nuisance complained of. The contracts between the Board and Messrs. John Thorn and William Sheppard were signed and sealed in duo course. A tender from Mr. John Hobbs, for raising and breaking 300 yards of stone, was read and accepted. An estimate for the amount required for the purposes of a general district rate was approved, and the Clerk ordered to give the necessary notices of the intention to make a general district rate of Is. in the £ and that he affix the h e seal of the Board thereto, and afterwards duly publish the rate. The Inspector of Nuisances, in his report, suggested that placards, embodying the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Bye-laws of the Board for the prevention of nuisances should be printed and circulated as widely as possible to prepare the householders of the district for a call from him, with a view to enforcing strict cleanliness and adopting even precaution for the pievention of disease. It was accord- ingly ordered that bills be so printed and circulated. The accounts of the surveyor and collector were examined and allowed. The Clerk was instructed to contract with Messrs. Finch and Heath, of this town, ironfouuders, for cast iron works to be placed over the gutters at the haul- ing-ways into the Greyhound Inn, the Police-station, the Queen's Head, The Swan and Green Dragon inns, accord. ing to a pattern to be furnished by the surveyor at a cost not exceedin" £ 6. The Surveyor laid before the Board an estimate of The cost of the proposed tar footpath in the churchyard walk, amounting to £16 13s., exclusive of labour, and it was ordered that the work be done under his supervision. POLICE COURT, AUGUST 2, before HENRY CLAY, jun., Esquire. DRUNK A>D HIOTOl's. Bennett was charged with being drunk and riotous. P.C. Parker deposed to finding prisoner very drunk and knocking at peopte s doors. Witness cautioned him, but as he would n»t desist he took him into custody. Fined 5s. and costs, bs. 6d., cr, 10 defauli, seven days' imprisonment.
ABERGAVENNY. WEATHER DURING JULY. weather through- out this month, with the exception of a few clays at the commencement, was splendidly fine, and for several day a the temperature was extremely high. 83° m the shade being registered on the 12th, whilst the minimum marked by a self-registering ther- mometer, vras 40°, giving a monthly range of 43°; greatest daily range, 34c; maximum in sun, 113". The rainfall amounted to 1.27 inches, of which the greatest fall in 24 hours was 0.40 in. on the 28th. The number ot days registered as fine (without ram) was 21. The barometer was rather high during July, with no extraordinary variations. Highest reading, 30.406 in.; lowest, 29 670 in. monthly range, .736 in. greatest range in the 24 hours, .396 in. Direc- tion of wind as follows: W. on 5 days; N.W. 11; S.W. 2; S. 1; N. 4 N.E. 5; E. 2; uncertain 1.— GOBANNIEXSIS. ?■ PETTY SESSION'S, WEDNESDAY, before the Rev. J. FARQë- IIAR (chairman), and T. DAVIKS, Esq. I ASSAULT. —Ann ASSAULT. Roberts was charged with having assaulted Mary Watkins on the 29th of July. Defendant was fined Is. and costs. DRUNKENNESS. —Thomas DRUNKENNESS. Brice was brought up on a charge of this nature. He was let off upon paying the costs. "WAGES < ASE. —James ASE. Gittins, miller, (ovilon, appeared to answer a summons, at the instance of George Williams, for re- fusing to pay the sum of £ 3 3s. 8d. alleged to be due for wages. Mr. Baker, who appeared for the defendant, contended that defendant had settled with complainant, as his books would show. The books were inspected by the Bench, who, finding them to have been badly kept, decided the case in favour of complainant. CHARGE OF EMBEZZLEMENT. George Williams (the com- plainant in the preceding case), was charged by his master, James Gittins, with embezzling the sum of 35s. Prosecutor deposed that the defendant occasionally received money for goods he delivered, and it was his duty when he returned to account for it; on the 20th of June defendant was sent to Mrs. Lewis, of Llanelly, with flour, having with him a bill for the sum of 35s. due from Mrs. Lewis to prosecutor; Mrs. Lewis paid the amount, and defendant gave her a receipt, but on his return he did not inform prosecutor that he had received the money; consequently Mrs. Lewis's account remained unsettled. In proof of this statement, prosecutor produced his day-hook and ledger, and the Bench, after a close inspection of them, re- primanded prosecutor for the manner in which they were kept, and dismissed the case. ASSAULT. —James ASSAULT. Davits and Joshua, Davies, farmers, were eharged with having assaulted Thomas Jones, farmer, Castle Pryddeth, on the 4th of August. It seemed that a quarrel arose between the parties, who are neighbouring farmers, about com- plainants' sheep straying on to defendant's land, which resulted, after a deal of foul language, in defendants' striking com- plainant in the face with their hats. Defendants were fined Is. each and costs. A BOADSIDK ROBBERY. George Williams, Mary Williams (husband and wife), and Mary Williams, their daughter, were charged with stealing several articles of clothing from a hedge, the property of Michael Jasper, farmer, Llwyncellin. The prisoners were seen in the neighbourhood on the evening of the robbery, and were subsequently overtaken in the neighbourhood of Ross, by P.C. Nicholls, with the property in the possession of the father and daughter. The two latter pleaded guilty, and were committed to the house of correction, the father for four and the daughter for two months' hard labor. The wife was discharged.
Monmouthshire Assizes. The Summer Assizes for this county were opened at the Shire Hall, Monmouth, on Saturday last. The judges were the Honorable Sir Henry Singer Keating, Knight, one of Her Majesty's justices of the Court of Common Pleas, and the Honorable Sir William Shee, Knight, one of the justices of the Court of Queen's Bench, the former presiding over the Crown Court, and the latter over the Nisi Prius Court. The commission was opened by Mr. Justice Keating on Saturday. On Sunday his Lordship attended divine service at St. Mary's Church, accompanied by Frederick Cotton Finch, Esq., High Sheriff of the county, E. B. Edwards, Esq., Under-sheriff, and the other usual officials. The assize sermon was preached by the Rev. John Jones, sheriff's chaplain, incumbent of Blaenavon, who selected his text from 2nd Samuel, 12th chap. 13th verse. On Monday the Court was opened shortly after ten o'clock, and after the Queen's proclamation against vice and immorality had been read, the following gentlemen were sworn on the GBAKD JDKT: — Hon. J. F. Clifford Butler, foreman. Charles O. Morgan, Esq., M.P., R. W. Kennard, Esq., M.P., Henry Martyn Kennard, Esq., Col. P. Somerset, M.P., S. Courthope Bosanquet, Esq., F. Fortescue Brickdale, Esq., George Cave, Esq., John Bannerman, Esq., Colonel Clifford, Sir "Willoughby S. Rooke, James Davies, Esq., John Maurice Herbert, Esq., Edward Lister, Esq., Frederick J. Mitchell, Esq., Major Pearce King, Wakeman Long, Esq., Hume Nicholl, Esq. Major Pearce King, I Wakeman Long, Esq., Frederick J. Mitchell, Esq., Major Pearce King, Wakeman Long, Esq., Hume Nicholl, Esq. His Lordship delivered his CHA.KGE TO THE GEAND JURY. He said: Gentlemen of the grand inquest of the county of Monmoutb, I am glad to inform you that your labours on the present occasion will be light. The calendar, tor this season of the year, and even taking into account the session that has lately been held, certainly cannot be said to be otherwise than a light calendar. There are but 21 prisoners for trial, and no very serious offence among them. There are but one or two cases that I shall think it necessary to detain you by making any observation upon; for, generally speaking, they are cases that you will, with your experience, be able to deal with very easily indeed without any remark from me. I observe that there is one case of manslaughter, and it is the only case in which human life has been lost. That is a case in which a man seems to have been killed at Newport in consequence of an engine passing over a railway which, as I conclude. i from the depositions, goes over a part of the town of New- port. The man who is charged with the manslaughter is so charged in consequence ot an alleged breach of duty which is said to have caused the death of the deceased person. The deceased, who appears to have been a foreigner, was seen at a tolerably late hour at night in liquor at a public house, and to leave that house with three other persons. That was the last time be was seen alive. An engine was passing down the line, going to the engine- shed and according to the testimony of the fireman and his assistant, who were upon the engine, they saw some- thing dark lying upon the line, and the engine was irnme- diately checked. Tiiey said they felt no jar such as would have been occasioned if the engine had passed over the man s body; but certain it is, upon getting on the engine they found the deceased man quite dead, though warm. It would rather seem from the evidence that the engine had n. t passed over his body; but there is no medical testimony taken upon the q lIestion-an omission that rather strikes one as remarkable. The only evidence given of a medical character is that of a policeman, who seems to suggest that it was not the wheel going over the man's body that caused his death, but the guard in front of the wheel, which opened his bowels, and thereby caused his death. But that upon the deposition is left somewhat in obscurity. They did find something which they con- cluded was a portion of a man's dress upon the wheel of the engine; and there seems little doubt the engine in some shape, by touching or passing over him, was the im- mediate cause of death. The way in which the person who is accused stands charged is that he was what is called the pilot of the engine. Being such, it was his duty, an is stated, to have had the gates closed on every level crossing across the railway, instead of which, in breach of that duty, he bad the gates closed against the road, so as to give free passage to the engine. How that breach of duty immediately caused the death of the de- ceased does not very clearly appear upon the deposition; and my only object in mentioning the case is this, that I think you should take care-for you have that opportu- nity which I have not—namely, by inquiry of the wit- nesses—to ascertain that the alleged breach of duty on the part of the pilot did cause or accelerate the death of the deceased man. If it did, why then, of course, he is chargeable with the crime of manslaughter. Gentlemen, there is, I regret to say, one of a class of offences to which I shall not allude further than to say this: that unless you see upon the evidence that there is a reasonable pros- pect of conviction. I think you ought not to find a bill, because the punishment of the criminal in such a case scarcely counterbalances the evil of trial in open court. If you do see a reasonable ground for conviction. of course it will be your duty to find a bill. Gentlemen, those are the only cases I think it necessary to refer to on the present occasion. Should any difficulty unexpectedly arise, which is not probable, I need not say I shall have great pleasure in endeavouring to assist you to remove the difficulty. His Lordship then dismissed the Grand Jury, requesting them to return a bill as soon as possible. As soon as a true bill had been returned, the Court proceeded with the TRIALS OF PRISONERS. „77 TKEVETIUN. — STEALING A PUKSE. Allen Murphy^(20), furnace attendant, was indicted for feloniously scaling from the person of Maria Gobey a purse containing 18. the property of John Gobey, at irevethin, on the 20th of July. Mr. Pritchard prose- cutes. Ihe prisoner was sentenced to seven jears' penal servitude. SEWPOHT.—THE KNIPE. Ilenry Mansfield (28), seaman, wa« indicted for feloni. ously and maliciously stabbing, cutting, and wounding James Burns, a sailor, in the thigh, with a knife, with in- tent to do him grievous bodily harm, at Newport, on the 5th of July last. Mr. augha): Richards prosecuted. It appeared that the parties, with several other sailors, were at a boarding house, when a quarrel arose, and, it was alleged, prisoner stabbed prosecutor, and then threw down the knife with which he had done it and ran awav. The prisoner, who was undefended, contended that he had u S d ) the knife in self-defence. The jury ultimately found him guilty of unlawfully wounding, with a recommendation to mercy, and he was sentenced to four months' hard labor. RHIM5ET,—CHA.EG-E OB FORGERY. John Pi, a collier, was indicted for feloniously forging and uttering an order or cheque purporting to be an order on the Rhymney Iron Company, for the payment of 18s., with intent thereby to defraud Edward John Hutchings and others (the Rhymney Iron Company),.on the 2nd of June last, Mr. Hill prosecuted; prisoner was undefended. It was proved that the prisoner had received from Mr. Cartneil, a clerk in the employment of the company, a cheque for the payment of 8s., which, it was alleged, he had altered to 18s., by prefixing a figure 1;" upon the cheque being presented to Mr. Wal kins, the cashier; however, he immediately detected the alteration, as the figure bad been very clumsily inserted. In summing up, his Lordship said the jury must be satisfied that the prisoner had altered the cheque himself, but as far as the evidence went there was nothing to prove that the cheque had not passed through half a dozen hands before it was presented to the cashier for payment. The jury, after a long consultation, acquitted the prisoner. CHEISTCHURCH.—BOBBING AN EMPLOYER. George Russell (30), a carpenter, was indicted for feloniously stealing £7, the money of his master, Richard Webber, at Maindee, on the 2nd of June. Mr. Hill pro. secuted, and the prisoner conducted his own case. It seemed that prisoner was given the sum named by pro- secutor for his (prisoner's) wife to pay his workmen their wages; but instt'ad of handing the money to his wife, prisoner decamped, and was ultimately apprehended by Inspector Sheppard at Barnstaple, when he had only a straw hat to shew for the money. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and the prisoner was sentenced to four months' hard labor. NEWPORT.—A MALICIOUS ACT. Ann Musgrove (19), servant, was indicted for feloniously and maliciously casting and throwing upon her mother, Martha Phillips, a certain corrosive fluid called nitric acid, with intent thereby to harm her, at Newport, on the 8th of June. Mr. Harrington prosecuted. It seemed that prose- cutrix, who, with her husband, keeps the Ship Inn, Cardiff, visited her daughter (the prisoner) as Newport, when, after they had had a quarrel, the latter followed her to the rail- way station, as she was about to return home, and threw the noxious fluid upon her, which burned her clothes through to her stays, and also her face until it formed into a scab. The jury found the prisoner not guilty. ST. MELLONS.—THROWING STONES AT A RAILWAY TRAIN. John Barrett (16), Thomas James (12), and William Webb (14), farm servants (all on bail), were indicted for unlawfully throwing stones at an engine and carriages on the Great Western Railway, thereby endangering the safety of Henry Gardener, on the 13th of May last, at St. Mellons. Mr. Boughey prosecuted on behalf of the Great Western Company, and Mr. Srnythies defended James and Webb. The prisoners were detected in the act imputed to them by a man who had been put to watch for the purpose, and two of them (Barrett and Webb) were overtaken with stones in their hands. The two last named prisoners were found guilty, and, after being kindly admonished by the Judge, they were sentenced to 14 days' hard labour each. MACHEN.—MALICIOUSLY WOUNDING HORSES. William Knight (20), collier, was indicted tor feloniously and wilfully shooting a mare and wounding a colt, the property of William Jones, gamekeeper, at Machen, on the 23rd of June, 1866. Mr. Hill and Mr. Harrington prosecuted, and Mr. Smvthies defended the prisoner. Prosecutor said he was a gamekeeper residing at Machen, and had a mare and foal on Coed Moeth Common; saw them all right on the 23rd June: know prisoner; had. him in custody for poaching in the March previous, when he threatened to settle him (prosecutor) and his buity, on the hill side or elsewhere, if he did not give up a powder flask and shot pouch he had in his possession. A female witness named Clifford and her son, who live on the hill in question, proved to hearing gun shots fired on the Satur- day night in question. Llewellin Nicholas, farmer, Machen, had seen the mare and colt on the Saturday evening, when they were all right; heard two shots fired in the direc- tion of Pontymister on the Saturday night, and on the Tuesday following saw the mare dead and the colt wounded, John Beecham, collier, Machen, saw a quan- tity of blood near the gate of the common where the horses were on the morning of the 23rd June; the mare was about six yards off on the mountain side of the gate. John Phillips, farm bailiff to Mr. David Morris Machen, proved to seeing the prisoner in the neighbour- hood of Coed Moeth on the Saturday afternoon; witness told him to leave off going in that direction, and upon feeling in his pocket he felt something like a gun there; he had also seen him the day before with a gun in his hand. David Nurse and John Thomas deposed to seeing the prisoner in the vicinity of Coedmoeth on the even- ing of the 23rd of June, about 8 o'clock. Maria Evans, who lived in the house where prisoner lodged, at Risca, said the prisoner came home about 11 o'clock on the Saturday night in question. Sergeant Hale said he had the mare skinned, and extracted 87 sbots from one wound and 16 from another; he also found, near the spot, some pieces of paper that had been used as gun wadding, and also some other pieces that had been torn off, which corresponded with some papers found in prisoner's pocket and at his lodgings; they all formed part of a number of the London Journal; the shot taken from the wounds al so corresponded with some found on the pri- soner and in his clothes at his lodgings. Mr. Smythies made an able address on behalf of the prisoner, and after his Lordship had summed up, the jury found the prisoner guilty, and he was sentenced to 5 years' penal servitude. NEWPORT. RINGING THE CHANGES. Mary Jones (19), charwoman, was indicted for stealing 10s., the property of Henry Roper, at Newport, on the 14th of July, 1866. Mr. Prothero prosecuted. Prisoner went to the shop of prosecutor on Stow-hill, and asked tor change of half-a-sovereign, having obtained which she ran off without giving the hall-sovereign. She was found guilty, and sentenced to two months' hard labor. BEDWELLTY.—BREAKING OUT OF DWELLING HOUSE. William O'regson (27), moulder, pleaded guilty to a charge ot breaking out of the dwelling house of Robert Rowers, and stealing a waistcoat and some bread, cheese, and tobacco, at Bedwellty, on the 29th July. -Ho was sentenced to three months' hard labour. TUESDAY. BEDWELLTY.—LAUCESY. Julia Mahomy (23) pleaded guilty to stealing a pair of boots and two odd boots, the property of William Hurst, at Bedwellty, on the 29th of June, and was sentenced to 18 months' hard labour. TREVETHIN.—PQRGERY. John Keefe (23), roller, was indicted for feloniusly forging and uttering a note for the payment of £1 3s. lid., with intent thereby to defraud the Ebbw Vale Company Limited, at Trevethin, on the 9th of May last. The prisoner pleaded guilty, and expressed his contritiou- urging that he was induced to commit the offence because his foreman had cheated him. Sentence 2 months' hard labour. BEDWELLTY.—INDECENT ASSAULT. William Pugh (37), collier, was indicted for indecently assaulting Jane Jones, tbe wi'e of Thomas Jone*, at Bed- welity, on the 4th of July last. Mr. Brown prosecuted, and Mr. Smythies defended the prisoner. The jury found the prisoner guilty of the lesser crime of assaulting prose- cutrix with intent to do her grievous bodily harm, aud he was sentenced to 6 months' hard labour. DINGESTOW.—CHARGE OF UNNATURAL CRIME, John Davies (18), labourer, was indicted for feloniously committing an abominable crime against the order of nature, at Dingestow, on the 12th of May last. Mr. Gil- more .Evans prosecuted. The evidence, which was of a disgusting character, failed to substantiate the charge, and the jury therefore returned a verdict of not guilty. DINGESTOW.—STEALING A CASK. William Evans (58), gardener, was indicted for feloni- ously stealing a cask, the property of Charles Davies, at Dingestow, in Juiy last. Mr. Gilmore Evans prosecut d, and Mr. Smythies defended the prisoner. Prosecutor missed the tub, now produced, on the day in question from a brook where he had put- it to soak; it was worth about Is. 2d. Sergf. Mc.Evoy proved aopreheruling prisoner with the tub in his possession. Mr, Smythies, in ad- dressing the jury, contended that a respect ible man like the prisoner would never have stolen such n cask as that produced. The jury found the prisoner not guilty. NEWPORT.—BIGAMY. 1 John Davies (46), blacksmith, was indicted for felo- niously intermarrying with Susaunao Hup", at Now. church, Radnorshire, on the 27h of February, 1859, his former wife, Esther Davies, to his knowledge, being then alive. Mr. Smythies prosecuted, and Mr. Henry James defended the prisoner. Detective Curtis proved the ap- prehension of the prisoner, and also to finding in his possession some letters, which, together with the evi- I deuce of Margaret Davies and John Goodwin, conclu- sively proved the case. Mr. James declined to address the jury, and his Lordship directed them to return a verdict of guilty. Susannah Hope recommended the prisoner to mercy: He was sentenced to six months' hard labor. TREDEGAR.—EMBEZZLEMENT. John Jones (51), haulier, was indicted for embezzling the sum of 7s. Gel., the moneys of his master, Edwiu Blackborow, a collector of goods under the Sirhowy Railway Company, at Bedwellty, on the 13th of July last. Dr. Staveley Hill prosecuted, and Mr. Brown defended the prisoner. The prisoner was found guilty, and sentenceo to one month's hard labour. ABERCARNE.—STEALING BEDDING. George Millington (26), labourer, was indicted for stealing two beds, six blankets, eighteen sheets, two pillows, a counterpane, and numerous other articles, th property of William Davies, at Abercarne, on the 30th 01 June last. NEWPORT.—CHARGE OF MANSLAUGHTER. Edward Thomas (on bail), was indicted for feloniously killing and slaying Short Laisen, at Newport. This case came on for trial at the March assizes, when several im- portant witnesses, as now, failed to appear, and their re- cognizances were therefore now estreated, and the case, the facts of which are detailed in the charge to the Grand Jury, Was proceeded with. Mr. Cleave prosecuted, and the prisoner was undefended. The evidence adduced was insufficient to support the charge, and the prisoner was therefore acquitted. The criminal business was brought to a close at six o'clock this day (Tuesday.) NISI PRIUS COURT.—MONDAY. Before Mr. Justice SHEE. GRAHAM V. JONES. —This was an undefended action for the recovery of X20 15s., principal and interest upon three promissory notes. Mr. Henry James and Mr. Pritchard (instructed by Mr. R. Graham) appeared for the plaintiff. Verdict for plaintiff. LEWIS AND ANOTHER v. WILLIAMS. —This was also an undefended action brought, for the recovery of £ lo 19s. 4d., by plaintiffs, as executors of the late Mr. G. Kerr. Mr. Smythies appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. James for defen- dant, and the latter gentleman withdrew his defence Verdict for plaintiffs for the amount claimed. DAVIES v. COPE. —Mr. H. James and Mr. G. Evans (instructed by Messrs. Walford and Gabb) appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., and Mr. J. O. Griffiths (instructed by Mr. Graham) for the defendant.— This action was brought to recover damages for the non- delivery of a quantity of malt bought by plaintiff 01 defendant, at 36s. per sack, in the transfer of a malting business at Caerleon. For the defence it was contended that plaintiff had broken the contract by not keeping his appointments to meet the defendant, and by not being prepared to pay for each load of malt upon delivery,—The jury ultimately returned a verdict for plaintiff for £ 15, the estimated difference in the value of tbe malt at the time the contrai-t was made and on the 3rd of May. LEWIS V. DANIEL. —Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., and Mr. Dowdeswell (instructed by Mr. J. G. Price) appeared for the plaintiff; Mr. U. James (instructed by Mr. Farquhar) for the defendant.-The declaration stated that the de- fendant, who is a cattle-dealer, ha l assaulted the plaintiff, the landlady of the King David Inn, Abergavenny; that he broke and damaged some of her furniture; and that he f committed a trespass by entering her bed-room. The defendant pleaded generally that he was not guilty, and said that the plaintiff first assaulted him, and that he committed the acts complained of in his own defence; he also pleaded that before the alleged trespass plaintiff was about to destroy some bank-notes belonging to him, and that he committed the wrongful acts for the purpose ot getting possession of the notes. Alter evidence had been given as to the assault, from the effects of which it was stated that the plaintiff had been confined to her bed for a fortnight, and to her room for a month, and the amoun of damage to the furniture having been estimated at £10 Mr. James, in replying, admitted that a blow had been struck, but submitted that defendant, at the time, was suffering from the most intense aggravation, consequent j upon the jealous anger of plaintiff-they having lived together as man and wife—and that he was, moreover, under the influence of drink. The case (he said) would have been more suitably dealt with had the defendant been bound over by the local magistrates to keep the peace, rather than by being made the means of a rich harvest for itlie lawyers, through being converted into a cause ol action in an Assize Court. He dwelt upon the relations which for four years subsisted between the plaintiff and de- fendant, and forcibly appealed to the jury for mitigation of damages. His lordship in summing up said the only question was as to the amount ot damages, as the only plea that had been discussed was the one of not guilty, and that had been admitted by the learned counsel. Having reviewed the evidence, the Judge said it was unquestionably an inexcusable thing for a man to strike a woman such a blow as had been deposed to; for though no doubt people living as man and wife might occasionady quarrel, and trifling assaults be committed, yet an assault of this kind could not be justified by any aggravation caused by words nor did it, indeed, appear in this case that the plaintiff had used any seriously offensive language towards the defendant. They must also bear in mind that drunken- ness was no excuse for a blow of this kind; nor was it said that such was the influence of drink over the defen- dant that he did not know what he was doing. On the other hand, in assessing the damages they must remember that, though plaintiff had suffered considerable pain for a time, yet she did nut appear to have sustained permanent injury. They could not, of course, but feel indignant at such conduct towards a woman; still they must restrain their natural feelings, and not give excessive damages; neither were they to consider what they might suppose from what they had h-ard were defendant's means of pay ins. Their best way would be simply to consider what would be a fair compensation, so far as money could com- pensate the plaintiff, for the injury she hud sustained from the outrage and violence of the defendant. The jury, after a few minutes deliberation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff-damages 915. TUESDAY. THE PANTYGOYTRE CASE. ISAAC MORGAN ILTYD NICHOLL. Tiie Court was much crowded this morning by a large number of witnesses, and other persons who evinced con- siderable interest in this case—no less, probably, on account of the large amount of property concerned than in conse- quence of the eminont counsel engaged "n the ease. The following gentlemen were, after several objections had been mad", sworn a special jury to try the cause, viz.: Messrs. G. H. Banks, J. S. Edwards, F. G. Grice, G. Harrhy, R. Johnson, J. Reed, Alfred A. Williams, and J. Theophilus Wilson. Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., Mr. Powell, Q.O., Mr. J. O. Grif- fits, and Mr. H. James (instructed by Messrs. Rookesand Co., London), were for the plaintili; and Sir W. Bovill, Q. C., solicitor-general, Mr. Gray, Q. C., and Mr. H. Matthews (instructed by Mr. Waddington, Usk), for the defendant. Mr. James, in opening the pleadings, said this was an action on a writ of ejectment under which the plaintiff claimed possession ot certain lands in Mamhilad, to which writ defendant had entered an appearance and defended. Mr. Huddleston then proceeded to state the case. He said the action was brought, to recover certain property situate in the parishes of Mamhilad and Llangibhy, and also some land in an adjoining parIsh-all in this county. The plaintiff was a person in humble circumstances; but the defendant, independently of this property, was a gen- tlemen of wealth and station, and the matter was one of considerable importance to both of those persons, inasmuch as the value of the property sought to be recovered in the action was insignificant as compared with the rest of the property at stake,—the value of the whole that depended upon the verdict being very great-as much, he might say, independently of mean profits, as something like £60,000 or £ 70,000. The plaintiff was assisted in bringing thil, action by a gentleman who had formerly been his master and who had great confidence in his (plaintiff's) title to the estate, and by that gentleman the case had been placed in the hands of the very respectable gentlemen from whom he (Mr. Huddleston) and his colleagues re- ceived their instructions whilst the defendant had on the other the advantage of the services of the feolicitoi- General, whom they all welcomed with much pleasure on this circuit, aud who briogs to bear on behalf of his c^ those high abilities which had secured him the e UVl1 position he occupied. The plaintili lvid for ■a'lLilom in the service of a gentleman named Ijompson, °' hQj| he had worked as a sawyer, at ClerkenweU. £ gon was the defendant, was a magistrate ot the coun j3oti|, (]ie a-clergyman of the Church of Englanj i tion8 which father and son were defendants in orcjer of the had originally. been brought, !i(jated, and Iltyd Judge the actions had been jefenHant. Nicholl the father, was, nojv ye„ im Now, the property in qu~- n the possession of a lady of the name of Rachel Morgan, who in the pedigree he would put in was described as bap. tiserl in 1786 at Llangibhy, and as having died a spinster on the 29ch of September, 1851, and that lady was in the pos- session of the property up to the time of her death, her principal place of residence was Pantygoitre House, and she died without a will at Clifton, where she had gone in consequence of the state of her health, Mr. Nicholl, the defendant, seemed to have ha I considerable information as to the movements of Miss Rachel Morgan during the last years of her life. He seemed to have entertained the belief that he, through a very distant family connection, was the next heir of the property; and he also seemed to have been determined to take the iniative in any proceed- ings, and to gain for himself that which no doubt was a very great vantage ground in disputed property, viz., possession; nor did he seem to have been very scrupulous as to the means ty which he acquired that possession, because the moment that the breath left the body of Hachel Morgan, at Clifton, it was telegraphed to the neighbourhood of the defendant.'s dwelling; and although the hour o!' the night was somewhat late—twelve o'clock, he believed-defendant proceeded to the Paotygoitre House; aud even at that hour Pantygoitre House was in the possession of one of defendant's principal friends and advisers—Mr. Waddington, of Usk-who was a gentleman of very great respectability in the county; and who hacl, with considerable foresight, placed on the premises a man armed with pistols to take possession of the pre- mises, and to deliver them over to Mr. Nicholl; and at 12 o'clock at night-he was going to say a few minutes- hut certainly not hours after the death of Rachel Morgan, Mr. Nicholl fortified himself by claiming and taking possession of that property; and, of course, where the title was disputed, possession, as was said, was "nine points of the law;" and, having got possession, there he remained prepared against all comers. He (the speaker) was bound to mention these facts, because he believed when they came to investigate the matter they would find that Mr. Nicholl's principal title to this property was the somewhat arbitrary possession which be took immeditealy upon the death of Rachel Morgan. But holding it, as he did, on sufferance, with all the advantage possession gave him, he had one disadvantage, that was—he could not appeal to the jury with such confidence as a person could in a case where 'he property had been in their possession undisputed for many years. Now, the way in which the plaintiff, Isaac Morgan, claimed to be heir-at- law to Rachel, the intestate, was briefly as follows: Rachel survived a brother and sister, William and Anu Morgan, both of whom died unmarried, and the property was therefore left in her possession. The father of Rachel Morgan was one John Morgan, who was married to Rachel Evans, and this John Morgan was the eldest son of William Morgan, who was married to Rachel Jones, and that William Morgan was the eldest son of the William whose name appeared at the head of the pedigree, and who was married to a person of the name of Eleanor. It would therefore be seen that Rachel Morgan was the great grand- child of old William, whom they would call William the first, or the common ancestor. William Morgan the first was the father of William Morgan the second, who was father of John Morgan, who was lather of another William Morgan, whom they would call William the fourth. No,, William the first had two Bons- William the second and John; and itwas through John that the plaintif fclaimed. William the first had also three daughters, through one of whom,he believed, the defendant claimed. But he would con- fine himself to the pedigree downwards from John, because undoubtedly he being the son of old William his successors would tike precedence of tiny of the descendants in th e female line. John married one Diana, and their eldest son was one Edmund Morgan, who married a woman named Ann. Edmund Morgan's eldest son was William, and William's eldest son was Isaac Morgan, the plaintiff, who was, therefore, the great great grandson to the common ancestor, of whom Rachel was great grand-child. The pedigree then ran thus: Isaac son of William, William son of Edmund, Edmund son of John, John son of William; therefore Isaac, tracing through John to the common an- cestor, came down to Rachel the intestate; and he (the speaker) would prove that the plaintiff was the heir at law; and in order to do so he would have to go a little into the family history of the different claimants. Now, William the first was married to one Eleanor, on the 14th October, 1697, and he lived on the property at Mamhilad, but which was not then of the importance which it had since become; nor was that William Morgan, though a man of substance, the man of importance that his great grand- son, William tha fourth WQP. William tho firoi, an al- ready stated, had two SODS- William the second, and John. Two or three years before his father's death, in 1743, Wil- liam the second became engaged to and ultimately married one Rachel Jones, the eldest of three daughters of a Mr. Jones, of Graigwitli, who was also his co-heiress-the names of the other two daughters being, he believed, Eliza- beth and Ann. The engagement was very favourably rc- ceived by the father, William the first; so much so, indeed, that he not only gave up much of his property to his sou William, but also made a will in his favour. William the second and Rachel Jones were married on the 10th October, 1741; and it appeared that the marriage produced two cbildren-one son John, and another William-the latter of whom they would call William the third. William the second died in 1772, and his widow Rachel survived him about ten years, and—together with her sisters Elizabeth and Ann, who remained unmalTied-held possession of the Graigwitli property. About or after the time of the death of William. the second, his second son (William the third) took possession of the Mamhilad property, and resided there with his mother Rachel. John, the eldest son, lived at this time at Graigwith with his two aunts-the co- heiresses, and sisters of his mother Rachel. The aunts died-Ann in 1779, and Elizabeth in 1780; and soon after that John married—and this would be important as ex- plaining the conduct of some of his relations towards him —a servant in the house of the name of Rachel, with whom he had formed an illicit connection during his aunts' life- time, the result of which was that she became with child, and he had her si cretly removed to Bristol. But, after the death of his aunts, in the year 1784, he married her; and from that time he continued to live at Graigwith, and to manage that property until his death, which occurred in 1805,—while his brother, William the third, who died a batchelor, lived ut Mamhilad, his mother remaining with him until her death in 1782. William continued to in- crease the property very much by his careful habits until, in 1823, he died, and the whole of it passed into the hands of his nephew and two nieces—the children of his brother John namely "William, Rachel, and Ann. The property was by this time so vastly increased that William the fourth, brother of Rachel the intestate, was enabled to purchase the large estate ol Pantygoitre House, and he became him- self a man of such importance that he was selected to serve the honourable office of high-sheriff of the county. vVilliam the fourth remained in possession of the property, his two sisters, Rachel and Ann, residing with him, until his death in 1843, when Hachel became the principal owner of the property, and her sister Ann dying in 1851, she continued in sule possession of the property up to the time of her death, when it was seized by the defendant. The learned counsel said he had now given them the history of that side of the pedigree so far as it was known to him; and he would now proceed to the other side of the pedigree, and trace the history of the family from the common ancestor through John, his son, down to plaintiff, as he had traced it from William the first through the eldest son, William the second to Rachel the intestate. John Morgan was the second Son of old and he was baptised on the 29th of March, 170G; and this John seemed to have married in a manner which displeased his father as much as the marriage of his eldest son gratified him. The person he married belonged to a fit,nily of wood- burners. who about that time came into this part of the country', of the name of Roth, and it ia< ecn suggested that tliey bore that, name because of the colour of the hair; at all events, Diana Roth, whom this John married, had red hair. This marriage appe-ared to have been viewed with disfavour by the Morgan seemed that soon after it had taken place Joht and his wile went to live at Abergavenny, where John Mo an remained until his death, and he was buned ut Abcigavenny on the 2nd of June, 1739. There seemed to be I no doubt but that old William ignored the exist. ot Ins son John from the time of his marriage, and paced his son William at the head ot the family, it would be important to remember jhat John was boin oi baptised about the ve.ir 1706, and died 1739. His w,f« Dtana, who 8ui.vivt;d llRn six or seven yeai s, ,up''1 J s :l u''u,'ned to the neighbourhood °f Mamhilarf,«heie she died, and was buried, in Mav, f .hlet'>m X ',in- cI,aPel at which place was a t memory, on which was inscribed— il L.Ioi*G liet'I the bonv ot Di-M-I u T c T w j :»r km -UMn.i, the wife of John Morgan, wllO fllvd jVl-flY 17, J1 fVorl A "7 mi t* T f' 47 years. The son ot Jonn (Continued in Supplement.) -d. J""™ t uMished, lie Proprietor, by JAMES HSNAY at his Offices, hriOye Streei!, Usk, in the County IJ I Mmimouth, Augv./st ll, IdG6.