Papurau Newydd Cymru

Chwiliwch 15 miliwn o erthyglau papurau newydd Cymru

Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

20 erthygl ar y dudalen hon

----------THE PONTYPRIDD SEWERAGE…

Newyddion
Dyfynnu
Rhannu

THE PONTYPRIDD SEWERAGE CASE. THOMAS AND EDWARDS V. THE YSTUADYFODWG AND PONTYPRIDD MAIN SEWERAGE BOARD.— This was an action brought before Mr Justice Romer, which lasted six days, in which about 50 local witnesses were in attendance on both sides. The plaintiffs alleged that the contractor of the Board had laid a sewer under their boundary wall, which, subject to the title to the wall being proved, was admitted to the extent of 18 inches m depth at tho widest point. Secondly, the plaintiffs alleged that the Board had for a con- siderable distance made excavations under their land and houses, which they had abandoned, and afterwards filled up, and for this they claimed an injunction and heavy damages. In order to prove the plaintiffs' claim they had sunk a pit on their own land, and at great expense had made excavations under their own houses, following, ::1.3 they alleged, in loose ground the abandoned headings of the defendants. They brought wit- nesses to say that two pieces of timber and several pieces of stone and brick which could not have got there by natural means had been discovered in this heading of tho plaintiffs. In support of the plaintiffs' case, Mr Arthur Evans, architect, of Pontypridd, Mr David Jones, of Cardiff, and a large number of witnesses were called, including the plaintiffs themselves. The defendants admitred that the sewer had been constructed under the boundary wall to the extent of 18 inches, and had tendered £25 and costs in satis- faction of any damage that might arise, assuming the wall to be the plaintiffs'. With respect to the alleged excavations under tho land and houses, which was the main issue in the case, aud the trial of which lasted six days, the Board alleged that no such excavations had ever been made, and that no timber, or stones, or bricks had ever been placed there by them or their men, and that if found there they must have been placed by the plaintiffs themselves, and that if any cracks existed in the plaintiffs' buildings they must have been caused by old disused colliery workings, and existed bofore the .sewer was made. Thwy called Mr Chatterton, of Westminster, Mr Hellins, Mr Barnes, and Messrs Bowen, Mainwaring, and Nicholas, the engineers and clerks of works, who all proved, and were supported by their books, thtt th9 Board's excavations lad not gone under the plaintiffs' land and houses, and Mr Win. Thomas, J.P., of Brynawel, and others proved that the heading driven by the plaintiffs was in folid ground, and was not. a re-opening of old excavations, and Mr J. W. Brewer, engineer to the Taff Vale Rail- way Company, and Mr David Thomas, colliery manager, of Pontardulais, and others also gave evidence to the effect that the cracks which existed were very nnal1, and were caused by disused colliery workings. Mr Robert Rees, of Glandare, was also present to support this view. 1\It- Alderman Mathias, of Porth, represented the Board at the trial, and Mr George Thomas, architect, of Cardiff, and ML* Gibson, of Ponty- pridd, gave evidence in support of the defend- ants' claim. The Judge, after a hearing of six days which involved conRiderabl expense, gave judgment, for the defendants on the main issue, to the effect that the defendants' sewer or excava- tions had not been made under the plaintiffs' houses, and directed the plaintiffs to pay the defendants' costs of this issue. He gave judg- ment for the plaintiffs for £ 20 for the tpclmical trespass of going under the wall, being £5 less than the amount tendered, but refused the in- junction. Mr Neville, Q.C., and Mr Coote, instructed by Messrs Sulekett and Sons, ap- peared for ihe plaintiffs and 1\Tr Chadwick Healy, Q,C, Mr Abel Thomas, Q.C., M.P.. and Mr Edward Ford, instructed by Messrs Walter H. Morgan and Rhys, appeared for the defend- ants,

----------------A FOOLHARDY…

Advertising

— ^ INEWS IN BRIEF."-1

Advertising

Family Notices

. RAMPANT TORY OBSTRUCTION.

---------HOME RULE AND THE…

[No title]

[No title]

[No title]

---__-THE CARDIFF SAVINGS'…

-------|THE DE WALDEN DIVORCE…

[No title]

QUESTION OF ORGANISATION.

POSITION OF MR ISAAC EVANS.

DISPUTE IN THE RHONDDA.

THE OCEAlFCOLLIERIES.

----COLLISION OFF THE WOLF.

RHONDDA AND SWANSEA BAY RAILWAY…