Papurau Newydd Cymru

Chwiliwch 15 miliwn o erthyglau papurau newydd Cymru

Towyn-on-Sea and Merioneth County Times

Nid yw statws neu berchnogaeth hawlfraint yr adnodd hwn yn hysbys.
Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

6 erthygl ar y dudalen hon

I MERIONETHSHIRE ASSIZES.

Newyddion
Dyfynnu
Rhannu

MERIONETHSHIRE ASSIZES. COUNTY FREE FROM CRIME. The Winter Assizes for the county of Merioneth, were held at Dolgelley on Wednesday, before Mr Justice Walton. The following were sworn on the Grand Jury :— The Hon C H Wynn, Messrs C E Munro Edwards (Dolserau), C E J Owen (Hengwrtucha), Edward Griffith (Springfield), H J Lloyd (Tynycoed), R E LI Richards (Caerynwch), E 0 Vaughan Lloyd, J Hughes-Jones (Aberdovey), J Chidlaw Roberts (Towyn), Marmaduke Lewis (Aberdovey). J Leigh Taylor (Penmaenucha), H E Walker, WmJ Morris, R Wynne Williams (Dolgelley), Robert Jones Morris, (Tycerrig), H J Robinson (Towyn), and E F Scott (Penmaen). In his charge to the Grand Jury the Judge observed that, although he had been many times in the county, this was the first time for him to be there as a justice of assize; and he was much gratified on his initial visit to find that the county enjoyed a total immunity from crime. He well knew that this was characteristic of the Welsh people, and it was without doubt a matter of gratification. Addressing the petty jury, his Lordship said he was not responsible for the arrangements which had brought them there to no purpose, but he would like to express his thanks to them. CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURY A DOLGELLEY CASE. Mr Samuel Moss, M.P., instructed by Mr T E Morris (Portmadoc), opened this case for the plain- tiff, Mrs Kate Clarke. Mr Moss stated that the facts disclosed that Mrs Clarke, who was the widow of the late Vicar of Caerdon (near Barmouth), was in somewhat straightened circumstances and had four children, three sons and one daughter. Since the death of her husband, she had maintained her- self by taking in boarders from the Connty School. The defendant, Dr J E Jones, Brynffynon, Dol- gelley, was a retired medical practitioner, and a justice of the peaoe, and deputy lieutenant of the county. About two years ago, on January 18th, 1900, *,su ixwuuB, mrs urimtn ma Miss MI J Jar. They came in with the train due at Dolgelley at 6-25 p.m. They came along the bridge leading to the town. Mrs Griffith was on the right and Miss Millar on the left. They heard some noise behind them, and Mrs Griffith stepped on the parapet, while Miss Millar stepped behind. A carriage came along and Mrs Clarke was knocked down, the wheel going over her right foot. She was conveyed home and it was there found that she had sustained serious injury. She bad made a remarkable recovery, but she was still in a very weak state of health. De- renaant s horse, which was in the shafts, was of a vicious disposition and unsafe on the public streets. The chief points of the defence would be that, if Mrs Clarke had only taken ordinary precaution, the accident would not have happened. He would call several witnesses to prove that she was in no way to blame, but that the accident had been caused through the negligence of the driver, who, of course, was in the employ of the defendant. It would be alleged for the defenoe that the horse had bolted through being frightened by a puff of smoke and a whistle from a train i u wcu call the signal- man at the station, who would prove that this was not the case. Continuing, Mr Moss said that a long time after the accident, the daughter of Dr Jones called on plaintiff and had left a letter which con. tained £5, with a few words to the effect that he did not hold himself responsible for the damage. Plaintiff wrote back that she could not by any means consider £ 5 enough to compensate her for the injury. Some correspondence ensued and she received a visit from the Rector of Dolgelley, a son- in-law of the defendant, who asked her if they could not settle the matter amicably with XIOJ which he would endeavour to persuade Dr Jones to give her. She told him, however, that that would not cover but a very small part of her expenses and refused to do anything except throng her solicitors. Mrs Clarke was then called and stated that she was at present living at Corwen. When she was at Dolgelley she was able to keep herself by taking in boarders and the National Schoolmaster also lodged with her. After the accident however, she was unable to keep lodgers and had to be looked after herseir. With regard to the accident she stated that she was returning from Fairbourne with the two ladies mentioned. While descending the bridge she was knocked down her foot was badly crushed, and she had a severe shock. She had been in great pain, had kept to her bed for seven months, and had been attended to regularly by the district nurse, and Dr Hugh Jones, who had also called into consultation the late Dr Charles Williams and Dr Robert Jones, a specialist from Liverpool. She made a show recovery and was able to just move about on crutches up to Easter, 1901. Afterwards she went to Epsom, where she was wheeled about in a bath chair. Then she went to Tenbury and Lancaster where she stayed with friends and relations. Ultimately she re- turned to Dolgelley, but her health had gone and she was unable to carry on her former work and had removed to Corwen. She corroborated counsel's statement as to the passage with Dr Jones with reference to her claim. An estimate of the total amount of loss incurred, which had been prepared by Mrs Clarke and her sister, (and was read by her counsel) came to about nOl. The defence was entrusted by Mr Ellis Jones Griffith, M.P., who was assisted by Mr Graham Wilkin. Mr Griffith, in cross-examination, asked Mrs Clarke why she had not instituted proceedings immediately after the accident, instead of allowing 12 months to elapse. Mrs Clarke replied that she thought the matter could be settled and she had decided to await negotiations before doing any- thing. She certainly would not now be able to do the work she had been aocustomed to do before the accident. the accident. Dr Hugh Jones said he was called in immediately after the accident and found the plaintiff in very great pain, suffering from bruises and abrasions from the toes to the hip. He afterwards came to the conclusion that she was suffering from a fracture of an internal bone, and matters then assumed a very serious aspect, although it was a difficult matter to state accurately from what she was suffering. He had called into consultation the late Dr Charles Williams and Dr Robert Jones, Liverpool. Dr Jones, who was then called gave expert evidence as to the injuiy and stated that it was a matter of impossibility to know for certain, what it had been, but she was now undoubtedly recover, ing steadily, although still suffering from the effects of the shock and general break-down. He thought she might possibly get well again. Mrs Griffiths, Bodlondeb, Dolgelley, who was with Mrs Clarke when the accident occurred, generally corroborated the statement of plaintiff's counsel. Miss Millar also gave similar evidence. Cross- examined, she said that there was ample room for Mrs Clarke to step on the pavement, but none of them thought it was a runaway horse. Witness had no recollection of seeing any lights on the vehicle. Mr Guthrie Jones, solicitor, Dolgelley, said that on the day in question he travelled in the same train and came out on to the same bridge as plaintiff. The carriage of Dr Jones came along, driven by Visor, the coachman. Witness thought the horse seemed in high spirits, and Visor appeared to have a good deal of difficulty-in keeping it under control. The carriage swerved a good deal from side to side. There was no shunting, and he did not think there was anything to frighten the animal. When he got down, he found Mrs Clarke sitting on the pavement, and he assisted in helping her into an omnibus. Cross-examined She was not a client of his. He had been asked to take up the case, but, being a personal friend, he did not care to do so. The carriage was a four-wheeled phaeton. Mr J F Walton, surveyor, was then called and explained some plans of the bridge, &c., which he had prepared. Mr Harvey Jones, brother of Mr Guthrie Jones, corroborated that witness's evidence. A written deposition was here read by Mr Wilkin, in which John Davies, Church street, Dol- gelley, said he knew the horse which knocked plaintiff down. If, was a bit fresh now and then, and required careful handling. Dd Davies, butcher, said he saw the accident. When Mrs Clarke was knocked down, Visor, the coachman, jumped down, leaving the ladies, who were the two daughters of the defendant, in the carriage. The horse kept straight on and put his head through the window of Mr J C Hughes's office. phaeton home.— Cross-examined He would not swear to Visor jumping off. James Eastick, signalman, at the railway station, produced the day book showing ithe times of the arrival of the trains on January 18th, 1900. This proved that there was no engine near the bridge at the time in question.-In a cross-examination, how- ever, witness admitted that engines might go under the bridge without his knowledge. Evidence as to the temper of the horse was given by Mr E Wynne Williams, veterinary surgeon, and John Francis, groom. Mr Ellis Griffith, opening for the defenca, said their chief points were that there was no negligence on the part of the driver and that the horse was of a vicious disposition. There was no doubt but that Mrs Clarke had met with a serious accident, but they bad to decide the case on its legal merits irrespective of any sympathy. If Mrs Clarke had taken ordinary precautions the accident would not have happened. The fact was that a puff of smoke came over the bridge and startled the horse, which bolted. He submitted that the affair was a pure accident. The coachman Visor was called and snid he was at the station on this particular ev" to meet defendant's two daughters. After t 3 train had arrived he drove over the bridge i;, to the town, when the horse bolted, being frightened by the smoke. He did not see Mrs Clarke being knocked down, nor did he jump from the carriage until it was stopped by the horse going into the window. It was a restless horse. He had a lot of experience. A written statement by the defendant was read in which he stated that he had found Visor a good driver and that the horse was of a quiet and steady disposition. Mrs Lloyd, wife of the Rector of Dolgelley, said she was in the carriage on this day. She was then uii arried. She generally corroborated Visor, and vi ed positively that he did not jump off until the i Cd., iage came to a standstill.-Cross-examined: She, of course, was frightened, but had a clear re- collection of what happened. Mrs D Griffith, defendant's other daughter, cor- roborated. The horse was of a very quiet disposi- tion and was now with her at Portmadoc, where she lived. William Lloyd, solicitor's clerk, Dolgelley, also gave evidence regarding the accident of which he was an eye witness. Dr Griffith, Portmadoc, stated that he knew the horse in queston, which was all right but a little frightened of the trains. Mr Williams, Barmouth, a driver at the Lion Hotel in the town, stated that he was in charge of the horse at one time, and always found him to be very quiet. Had had no trouble at all with him. After the speeches of the Counsel and the sum- ming up, the jury retired and having been absent For a short time gave a yerdict for plaintiff for £250. ♦

A LINK WITH THE PAST.

[No title]

MARKETS ..-

FISHERY BOARD MEETING.

Advertising