Flintshire Observer Mining Journal and General Advertiser for the Counties of Flint Denbigh

CLAIM FOR RETURN OF A HORSE. John Price, builder, The Cross, Buckley, claimed from John Hughes, car proprietor, Main street, Buckley, the return of a horse which plaintiff stated belonged to him and had been unlawfully detained by the de- fendant after a demand made by the plain- tiff; or in the alternative a sum of C40, the value of the horse. In addition, the plain- tiff claimed V.10 as damages for unlawful detention of the horse. Mr. F. Llewellyn- Jones, Mold, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. T. W. Hughes, Flint, represented the defendant. Mr. Llewellyn-Jones stated that on May 15th, the plaintiff was working at a shop in Main street, Buckley, when the defend- ant came to him and suggested an exchange of horses. In the first instance he sugges- ted an exchange for the afternoon, with a view, if the exchange proved satisfactory, that it should be made a permanent one. Later on the defendant came to the plain- tiff's yard. In the meantime the plaintiff had heard that the defendants horse was lame. They again discussed the matter. Plaintiff said he was not prepared to agree to the exchange if it was a fact that the home was lame. In reply the defendant said, "He is sound. If you find any blemish I will give him you for nothing." oil the strength of that the plaintiff said, "All right." Defendant then took away the plaintiff's horse and left his own there. Plaintiff took the defendants horse and placed it in a cart and took one load of stuff to Prenbrigog. He found the horse was very lame, and returned it to the de- fendant. The latter, however, refused to take it. He sent it back and retained the plaintiff's horse. Mr. Jones said lie thought that when his Honour had heard the evi- dence lie would be satisfied that the ar- rangement come to between the parties was based entirely upon a condition. The condi- tion was that if the horse was lame the plaintiff would be allowed to return it. De- fendant had absolutely refused to turn the plaintiff's horse. If his Honour was satis- fied on that point he contended that his client was entitled to return of the horse, or a sum of £40, which was the value of the horse; in addition, the plaintiff had had to hire a horse to do his work, and the dam- age he claimed was not an unreasonable sum. John Price, builder, The Cross, Buckley, the plaintiff, giving evidence in support of his solicitor's statement, said that on Fri- day, May 15th, the defendant came to him and said he had heard that lie had a good fast horse. He told Hughes that he was busy carting. Hughes replied that he could have the loan of his horse. Witness said "I would like to see your horse," and also told him that he could borrow his horse to try, but he (plaintiff) must have a horse during that time, being very busy. De- fendant brought his own horse up to the yard in the afternoon. In consequence of what he had heard in the meantime, wit- ness told him that he had been given to understand that his horse was lame. De- fendant replied "If there is anything wrong with my horse bring it back, but I warrant my horse to be without a blemish." Wit- ness said, "If you will guarantee the horse is sound I don't mind you Hying mine." Defendant swore that it was sound, and then took away witness' horse and left his own. No money passed. They tried the defendant's horse, but as soon as they tried it out with a load they found that it was lame on one foot. He told the boy, Arrow- smith, to take the horse back to the defen- dant and bring his horse from there. Hughes refused to give it to the boy. He (witness) and Arrowsmith then went with the horse to the defendant. Hughes said, "Oh, you can't get your horse back." Witness left defendant's horse on the premises. "A PROPER SWOP. The Judge: Did he tell you why he would not let you have the horse back?—Yes. He told me that it was "a proper swop." I said it was nothing of the sort, and that I had witnesses to prove it. Witness further stated that the defendant sent his (Hughes') horse back, but he re- fused to take it. Ultimately the police took charge of it, and it was put in a field. Witness said he bought his horse a few days previously for C40. In consequence ¡ of the defendant declining to return the horse, he had been put to the expense of hiring a horse ever since, at 7s. 6d. a day. Mr. T. W. Hughes: Was anything said about the soundness of your horse? I told him I had a written warranty from the "vet." The Judge: Why were you making the "swop," if there was one?—I did not make any swop with him. You were willing to do so if his horse had been sound?—All he asked me was if I would mind letting him try mine. Mr. T. W. Hughes: Was not the sum of £ 5 mentioned?—It was not mentioned at all. You said to him that it was too much?— No. No money was mentioned at all. Did you shake hands?—Not likely. Arthur Arrowsmith said oil the day in question he tried the defendant's horse, and noticed that it was lame 011 the right fore leg. He told Mr. Price about it, and the latter told him to return the horse. Wit- ness took the horse back, and told Hughes that it was lame, and that he had to have the other horse back. Defendant replied, "Nothing of the sort. The horse was all right." Afterwards Mr. Price saw Mr. Hughes and told him that the horse was lame. Mr. Hughes would not return the horee. Cross-examined by Mr. Hughes, witness said he had told the plaintiff prior to this occasion that John Hughes' horse would suit him better than the one he had got. Re-examined by Mr. Llewellyn-Jones, witness said that it was Hughes who first suggested to him to ask his master whether he would change. Edward Charles Molyneux spoke to seeing the defendant's horse and noticing that it was lame OIl the front right foot. Mr. Hughes wanted to make all exchange with Mr. Price's horse. Mr. Price wanted to know whether the horse was in good con- dition, and Mr. Hughes replied that it was. Replying to Mr. Hughes, witness said the defendant wanted money. He asked for Y-5. Eventually they got down to 2s. 6d., and Price said lie was prepared to give him that, but he had no change then. Daniel Price, 52, Mill Lane, Buckley, brother of the plaintiff, said the defendant promised the plaintiff that he would return [lie horse if his own was not sound. No money passed between the parties. Samuel Hughes, Church road, Buckley, wheelwright and carting agent, aloo gave evidence. He spoke to having seen Hughes' horse, which, he said, was a bit lame. Griffith Humphreys and William Stanley, Buckley, spoke to having driven in the defendant's brake to Mold. Both stated that there were two horses, one of which was a little lame. This closed the plaintiff's case. D E FE X DA X T' S F. VI DEN C E. John Hughes, the defendant, then gave evidence. He said that lie went to see 31 r. Price on May 15th. He told him that Arrowsmith had said that lie had a gland horse which would suit him. Plaintiff said, "1 can't go down now. 1 am very busy." Afterwards lie went with Price to the latter's stable, and saw the L_,r-se he had heard so much talk about. He foti t lump on the back hock, and told plainu.i that the horse had been fired. Plaintiif replied that it had not, and that it was guaranteed. They then went together to 6table. His (the defendant's) horse was brought out and trotted five or six times. After examining the horse, the plaintiff said, "Hughes, this horse will suit me a lot bet- ter than it will suit you, and my horse will suit you better than it suits me "W itness told him, "If you will give me £ 5 to boot I will swop you." "Indeed I won't," said tile plaintiff. Witness then said, "V> ill you give me three?" Price replied, "No, it is too much." He (defendant) said, "What will you give me? You are a neighbour. You have given me work, and I suppose you will give me more. Will you give me half a crown?" Plaintiff struck the bargain there and then, and said, "I will call after my dinner." Price came afterwards and again examined the horse. He said, "Hughes, do you think the horse is lallle" Witness said that if he thought it was lame he would have it brought out, and it was trotted five or six times down the yard. Witness hit the horse with a blackthorn stick. Price shouted, "That will do." As he was bringing it in, witness asked him "Is the horse lame, Mr. Price?" Plaintiff replied "No." Afterwards he gave witness a collar and bridle. When he asked him for the half-crown, plaintiff said, "I don't think I have half a crown," and gave him a shilling, telling him that he would owe him Is. 6d. They wished each other luck. Subsequently Arrowsmith came to see him and said, "Mr. Price is not satisfied with this horse and wants you to return his." He told him that he had got it in a swop. Arrowsmith then took the horse back. Mr. Price afterwards brought the horse, and asked him to return the other one. Wit- ness said, "What do you take me for? Why didn't you give ine a guarantee with the horse as I asked you?" His Honour: Did you ask him for a guarantee?—I had asked him for a guar- antee and told him that 1 would give him a guarantee. Witness further said that he told the j plaintiff that if a guarantee had been given he would have taken it back. He gave IZ34 for the horse. It was not lame, but it had sustained a sprain the day before. It was hardly noticeable. Mr. Llewellyn-Jones You are quite satis- fied with your bargain, aren't you?—Not al- together now. It has upset me a great deal. You got the better of the bargain?—I don't say so. I took it for better or worse. James Henry Dtxld, Mrs Hannah Hughes, 5, Hope View, Buckley, and Patrick Kind- ling, Nine Houses, Shotton, also gave evi- dence. THE SUMMING-UP. In summing-up, his Honour said it seem- ed the plaintiff had a horse which was more of a hackney than a carthorse, and tije defendant had a horso which was more of a carthorse than a hackney. Defendant thought the plaintiff's would suit him to run as one of a pair. He took it that the plaintiff relied upon that part of the conversation in which, he stated, the defen- dant had guaranteed that lils horse was not lame. Of course, if that were so the plain- tiff was entitled to recover. Defendant, on his part, ,said there was a question raised about the horse being lame, and that he got the horse to run about the yard and broke a stick on its back. According to his evidence, he asked the plaintiff if liit3

LOOKERS T"ZT° — LTD. 134, Foregate St., CHESTER. For High-class CARS ON HIRE. BODY WORK. yy 77 REPAIRS (Ford Experts). Agents for- LANCIA, HISPANO SUIZA, STRAKER SQUIRE, SWIFT and FORD CARS. Stocks held of TYRES, GREASE, SPARES, OIL, PETROL. Delivered Free within Five Mile radius. Speciality-Maintenance of FORD Delivery Vans. I

Profitable Poultry Culture. BY RALPH R. ALLEN, Lecturer to the Herts County Council Editoi of Monthly Hints oil Poultry," &c. (All rights reserved.) A SUCCESSFUL BREEDING SEASON. (Continued.) (Readers are particularly requested tc note that this series of articles commenced with the first issue in January. In order to obtain their full value, the earlier ar ticles should be read in conjunction with the current one.) We have now arrived at a stage when our young chicks are hatched either by the natural manner under hens or by artificial methods. A warning note has already been sound- ed not to interfere with either the machine or the hen during the twenty-first day; it- is their privilege to hatch out the eggs, and they will do it far better without interfer- ence on the part of the operator or attend- ant. The last thiJlg the embryo chick performs before leaving the shell is to absorb the balance of the yolk of the egg. This is a special provision of nature and is for the bird's sustenance during its first hours in its new sphere. Scientists disagree as to how long its natural feed will last, but all are agreed that it is ample for the first thirty-six hours, though some aver that it will last them for seventy-two hours, and that feeding before the expiration of that period it; not only unnecessary but absolute- ly harmful. My own practice is to feed at the end of thirty-six hours; should that time expire at dark, then forty-eight hours would elapse before they were fed. Warmth is what they require during the first day or two; food is positively harmful; it causes indigestion with its sequence, diarrhoea, & condition in young chicks from which they rarely recover. During this period it is not necessary to remove the little horny growth oii the beak; this will disappear during the course of a few days. Neither is it necessary to force a peppercorn down their throat; fortunate- ly, this custom is dying a rapid death, and bids fair in a short time to become obso- lete. Remember also that young chicks can learn to drink without their beaks being forced into a saucer of milk or water. The less handling you give them the better they will thrive. Again I repeat it, remember in the first couple of days of their existence warmth is essential to their well being, so that the hen should be confined in a roomy, warm coop, and the incubator should be adjusted to a convenient temperature. In the early season this should be at least 85de, though as the warmer weather comes on it may be lessened. Every poultry-keeper has his own pet theory regarding the feeding of young chicks. Some arc keen advocates of the dry teed system entirely; others oppose this system, and go to the other extreme; but in my own opinion, a medium course is the better one. Certain it is that a high quali- ty dry chick feed, providing a constant sup- ply of flilit grit is given, is more easily digested and less liable to cause bowel trouble during the first week of the chick's existence. My own rule, however, is to feed alnnist entirely on a high-class dry chick feed during the first few days. Here you must learn a new rule; the secret of success in chicken raising is to feed a little at a time, but often; never allow them to eat to re- pletion excepting at the last meal before bed-time. A word of warning may here with advan- tage be given regarding dry chick feed. A mere mixture of seeds does not meet a chicken's requirements. The manufacture of a dry chick feed is absolutely the labour of an expert, one who has devoted many years to acquiring experience in chicken- feeding. It must be composed of sound ingredients, scientific-ally blended and in the right proportions. Just a mere mixture does not in any sense answer the require- ments. Such a feed as I have referred to is Spratt's "L'hikko,which can be obtain- ed in shilling sealed bags in almost e\ery village throughout the United Kingdom, or in lc%t. or cwt. bags, direct from the manu- facturers (vide their advertisement in this column). Avoid cheap and nasty prepara- tions. A little and often I have remarked, during the first week of their existence— every two hours is not too frequent; do not forget that sharp flint grit must always be present, as well as a supply of pure drink- ing water. This can with advantage be changed two or three times a day. (Any enquiries concerning poultry-keep- ing addressed to our expert, Ralph R. Allen, Sawbridgeworth, Herts, will be answered through these columns free, but those requiring a postal answer direct, or sending birds for post-mortem examination, must. remit half-crown postal order.)

A deputation of South African farmers, who are going to make a motor car tour of England and Scotland primarily to study the agricultural ceditions, arrived at; Southampton on Tut^'lay morning. They were officially received and welcomed, and looked well.

UNION- CASTLE LINE. South & East It Africa ROYAL MAIL ROUTE. Frcna London and Southampton, WEEKLY for SOUTH AFRICA, via Madeira and Canaries, MONTHLY for EAST AFRICA, r'I.l VJa vtW,¡aJ. For further information apply to the Company's Head Offices, 3, Feachuroh Street, London; or to I local &rents. & I j local arents. 9 „

"LIFE OF DUPLICITY AND LIES." Mr. J. B. Marston says that Whalley was "Lying from Beginning to End." STRIKING SPEECH FOR THE DEFENCE. Contends that Gamekeeper Poisoned the Food Himself. Mr. J. B. Marston then addressed the Bench 011 behalf of the prisoner. At the out-set he paid a warm tribute to the abso- lutely fair way in which the police ana Mr. Llewellyn-J ones had conducted the prosecu- tion, and also said that the police had been extremely kind to the accused in her hour of trouble. "I am about to submit," he proceeded, "that it is your duty, and that it will be your privilege and pleasure, to let this poor woman go free this morning. In taking this question into consideration, you must remember that the prosecution have to make out a prima-facie case upon which it can reasonably be expected, if you sent her for trial, that a jury would convict. In going into that matter it will be necessary for you to look at the evidence before the court. "The evidence, to begin with, is unsatis- factory, because it is evidence of a purely circumstantial nature. We commence with the prime mover in these proceedings—this man Whaliey—and I ask you to show by your decision that you look upon him as a discredited liar. He has lived, according to his own confession, a life of duplicity and lies. He has posed before the world as a married man—he has even deceived his own mother. He said that he had forgotten liii marriage, where it took place, when it took place, and so forth. He said he had for- gotten that because lie had been drinking brandy for neuralgia. He did not know lie had been married—said his wife told him the next day. Can you believe one single, solitary word of the man's evidence! He started off by saying that he had great love and affection for his wife, and that she had great love and affection for him, and that they both loved their children. Then, by this prosecution, he says that the woman he loved and the woman who loved him was prepared to murder him. He said yester- day, 'I find it hard to believe that she would attempt to do me any harm. I don't want to punish her'—although he gives her into the hands of the police. '1 want her to go free. I want her to come back to me.' She will never go back to him whatever may happen." "TO HIDE HER SHAME." The prisoner, said Mr. Marston, was brought up among honest and respectable people. She was a decent, respectable woman, and had some training in a hospi- tal and was a district nurse. She went to attend halley's sieter-in-l.uv, and it was then that she met him. He seduced her, and, according to his own confession, he hud also eeduecd another woman, for whose illegitimate child sometimes lie paid and sometimes his mother paid. The prisoner had never been his wife—never been mar ried to him. Why did she go and live with him? Why did he bring her with him to Mold? She went to live with him because she wanted to hide her shame. Her people were very much against her having anything to do with the man. This woman had been practically starved by Whaliey. Mr. Marston contended that if the B'lIcJ¡ could not believe a single word that Whaliey had said—if he were a liar—the whole ease for the prosecution fell to the ground. It was said that Whalley bought strychnine from Mr. Williams on the Saturday. He admitted that. Mr. Williams sold him what was practically a full bottle of strych- nine. Whaliey only returned half of the bottle to Mr. Hemniings, the head keeper. What became of the rest? What did Whalley do with it? Whaliey said he buried it. He suggested that the wicked and odious man who had brought this pro- secution put some of the poison which he retained in the bottle on the bread and poisoned li it; own dog with it, so as to bring this charge against the innocent woman with whom he was cohabiting, and thus get rid of her. If he only gave a por- tion of the bread and cheese to the dog— because, as he said, that was sufficient to give his favourite dog—why did he not give the other portion of the bread and cheese to the other dog, the spaniel? He said that he took that into the house, and that subsequently the bread and cheese was thrown into the hedge. Careful search was made by the officers, and it was not found, except a small portion discovered by Super- intendent Davies. On making an analysis Mr. Lowe found that there was no prison in that small portion. lie (Air. Marston) suggested that there was 110 poison oil the bread and cheese at all, except the poison which the man Whaliey put 011 the piece which he gave to the retriever. He invited the Bench to ask themselves the question: What became of the bread and cheese that was thrown into the hedge' He suggested that Whalley himself got rid of it. There was 110 evidence that anything was done to it by Mrs. Whaliey, because she had gone away. She was not near the place, she had gone to Miss Sparkes'—and therefore it was not she who took it out of the liedge. "A STUAXGE THIXG." Was it not strange that the man did not take the bread and cheese with him, know- ing that he was going to the Sun Inn, j Uhydynnvyn, to have sc-i no beer? Mr. Marston asked. Knowing ihat he was go- ing there, would he not take his own bread and cheese with him? He said thnt he left it in the hut, and bought some bread and cheese. Strange to say that he should buy the very same nrtiele of food that he had in his handkerchief. It was strange also, if the theory of the prosecution that the bread and cheese was poisoned were true, that it did not poison the cake. There was nothing to keep the cake from coming in contact with some of that strychnine. The man ate the whole of the cake and nothing happened until the piece of the bread and cheese was given to the dog. Again, with regard to the bottle, did the Bench believe a single word that Whaliey said about that? He said he received the bottle from Mrs. Jones, and took it into the wood and smashed it. A similar bottle to the one that Whaliey said lie broke was smashed there, and the pieces were found within a radius of four yards. The police searched diligently and he did not help them. Why didn't lie help them to search for the bottle which lie himself said lie had broken? Why, because it was not there He knew it was not there, and knew that he had not broken it. He was lying from beginning to end. With regard to the prisoner's statements to the neighbours, Mr. Marston said that C, at the very lirst blush one would think those appeared most damning against the prison- er. He put it to them, however, that she was in such a state of mental aberration and ill-health that she was not at the mo- ment responsible, did not know what she said, and could not speak or answer cohe- rently and that was borne out by wit- nesses. The Superintendent was in doubt as to whether she was in such a condition that she could answer and understand the warrant, and commenced by asking whether she knew where she was. Mrs. Weaver ¡' said the prisoner led her to believe that she was all along declaring her innocence. Mrs. Jones 6aid, "Hardly any of the three of U6 knew what we were talking about. I gathered all the way through that the pri- soner was declaring she was iiinoceiit." Miss Sparkes said in cross-examination that the prisoner was delirious. In conclusion, Mr. Marston drew attention to the evidence of Dr. Griffiths as to the prisoner's state. He asked the Bench to draw the conclusion from the evidence that no jury would convict the prisoner, and if they came to that conclusion they ought to allow her to go free and go back to her friend,s-hoile.t, respectable, kindly people -who would take the greatest care of her. He hoped they would find it their bounden duty to let her go free. WHALLEY RECALLED. The Bench recalled Whaliey into the witness-box and asked him a number of questions. The Chairman questioned him as to why lie went to the Sun Inn to get supper, and left the food which he had brought with him from home. Whaliey replied that he had left the food in the hut. He went to the rearing field, and subsequently walked down to Rhydy- riiwyn. The Chairman When did you go to the Sun Inn last for your supper?—On the Monday night. Before that?—I could not say. When do you think was the last occasion? Probably a week before. The Magistrates' Clerk (Major T. ill. Keene): Was the supper given or did you pay for ft?—It was given to me. The Chairman: If you thought something was wrong with that bread and cheese why did you give it to the dog?—I did not know anything was the matter. Why did you spit it out?—Because it tasted nasty. Then you must have suspected something was the matter with it?—I did not suspect anything was wrong with it in that way. In reply to Mr. Robert Jones, Whaliey said he used the other strychnine to poison rats with. BENCH'S DECISION CHEERED. The Bench retired at 11 o'clock to con- sider the case. When they returned into court at a quarter past eleven, the an- nounccment of their decision was awaited in tense silence. The Chairman said: The Bench have gone very carefully into the case, an3 are going to dismiss it. The crowd instantly burst into deafening applause, which lasted for a minute or two. When quietness was restored, the Chair- man added: We consider the evacuee of John Whaliey was very unsatisfactory, and that there was no end of lies in it. In reply to an inquiry from the Bench, -\J r, Marston said arrangements had been made with Supt. Davies that the prisoner should remain in the house of Sergeant Whitehead until Monday morning, when her brother would come and take her and her children home to Wolverhampton.

Twenty-two separate firms arc affected by a fire which caused much damage early 011 Tuesday to a large building in Eyre street, Hill, London E.C.

Mold County Court. Plaintiff Deprived of Costs For Not Telling the Truth." THE JUDGE'S COMMENTS. Advises Plaintiffs Not to Cook Their Own Cases. A BUCKLEY MAN'S CLAIM. Monday.—Before his Honour Judge Mess. MOLD COLLIER'S DEATH. Mrs. Costello, Mold, applied for the ap- portionment of a sum of £:250 paid into court as compensation in respect of the death of her husband, Patrick Costello, a collier, who was accidentally killed at the Bromfield Colliery. The Judge ordered that k20 be paid out at once, and that the rest of the sum should be paid out at the rate of £:2 per month. He observed to the applicant that he hoped she would not spend klO 011 a gravestone, because it was not necessary. She could pay respect to her husband without spend- ing all that money.

Cbicfc^L 0 a g i PromisingYoangater'% is*" ihe natural result of ■ S i H /Snrd* 1 14- LJ V CHICKEN f MEAL f AND"CHIKK0Mry^J| nl If %ant plurnp stur(ly.,tnd vigor"Z' « birds. :>rder Spr.it t 's Foo.ls (10 Scaled Bag* and Oritfin.il Packets), not just "Chicken Meal or "Chick Feed." Send *anlPW 3d. for Samples and Boole on Chicken Sprttt Pateat Ld.?< Fcnehurch St.. FINAL REDUCTION FOR SITTINGS 41 There U still Um« to i*t ecc* from light breedi. M I j ■ Eittlsffa of T.ftt from mi ruaranteed Strains fl I m of Winter ttfin 15 Eggi to the (lttlnr. bo ■ repUcwnenti, carefully packed, carriage forward. White. Black and Brown Leghorn*, Child and 811 rer Camplnee. PwbTsd Say-old Chicka of above breeds, 121- doiea. RALPH R. ALLEN, SAWBRIDGEWORTH. HERTS. ALLEN'. CHOLERA CUBE. Price 2/1, post paid. A positive Cure for Cholera, Bowel Trouble, Indigestion, Diarrhoea, Dysentery, Ac. (J Used occasionally in the drinking-water the year round it will effectuaJly prevent diseases of the LT digestive organs. ALLEN'S GAilE CUBE. Price 2/1, post paid. Will surely rid your birds of this dangerous disease if used as directed. Full instruction* with every Box. imLEN ,5 TONIC CAPSULES. Price 1/6 per Box of 36, post paid. The Fancier's Friend. Immediately a bird is noticed off-colour a capsale (iron, quinine, and cod-tiver oii) night and morning will speedily put it right. For a day or two before &nd after shows they are invaluable. ALLEN'S VEBMIN DESTROYER. Price 1/3 per Large Tin, post paid. a The whole flock should be dusted occasionally; every Broody Hen before entrusting her with a setting of eggs. till BALFH A, ALLIMN. Sawbridgeworth, Kertili.

THE POISON SENSATION. I (Continued from page 3). (witness) was able to find practically the whole of the bottle within a space of four yards. « Cross-examined by Mr. Marston: When prisoner was arrested she was in a very poor condition?—She was in a frightful condi- tion—very weak. Do vou think she was in a state to fol- low and appreciate what was being said ?— I don't think she did. Did you take her remark, "I did not," .-as a denial of the charge?—Yes. In reply to a further question, Sergt. Whitehead said that Whalley did not help them to find the broken bottle. SUPERINTENDENT S EVIDENCE. Superintendent R. Yarnell Davics, Mold, Etated that OIl Tuesday week Whalley came to the Police Station at ten minutes past 11 at night. He gathered from a message that Whalley had left that he had made a certain complaint, and he directed inquiries to be made, and instructed an officer to keep Tyddyn Ucha under observation. On the Wednesday morning he and Sergt. White- head went to Black Brook and saw Whal- lev, and in consequence of certain state- ments which the latter made they instituted a search. In the hedge they found some apparently fresh potato peelings, but there was no sign of bread and cheese or of the paper in which it was eaid to have been wrapped. They then went into the wood. He asked Whalley to indicate the spot where he had broken the bottle, and he did so. They made a search there, but did not find a trace of broken glass of any descrip- tion. Afterwards he went back to Mold. He returned to the cottage at half-past two, accompanied by Mr. Edwards, veterinary surgeon, and assisted him in taking away the body of the black retriever bitch. Whilst there he made another search round the back of the house, and found under some straw a piec-o of bread, which it oc- curred to him might have been a portion of what they had already been searching for. It was saturated with moisture, and he could not pick it up without it falling to pieces. He dug under the bread with a spade, and lifted it up bodily with the soil. He also found a portion of what appeared to be fresh vomit. Later in the afternoon he conveyed the contents of the dag's sto- mach, the bread, etc., to the county analyst at Chester. "I IIA YE BEEN STARVED." Proceeding, the Superintendent stated that when lie took the accused into custody she was very weak and ill. While she was in the office at the Police Station he asked her if she knew where she was, and she replied that she did. He told her that he was about to charge her with a very ser- ious offence, and asked her if she felt strong enough to hear it, or whether she would care for him to send for a doctor before doing so. She said, "I, will bear anything you have to say. I have been starved." After cautioning her he read over the war- rant to her, and in reply she said, "I did not." She then commenced to make a state- ment, which he wrote carefully down in his pocket-book (produced). The statement was as follows :— ACCUSED WOMAN'S STATEMENT. I had no intention of killing the man nor putting it 011 his food. O11 mending his coat a bottle of strychnine poison fell to my feet on the ground, which I took outside my house and buried in stones for the sake of my little child getting it and myself. My husband told me that he had lost a bottle of strychnine poison, which he would have to pay back or re- turn to his employer, or else get another bottle, which he did on Saturday. He accused me of putting it in his food —bread and cheese. I gave him the bottle and in his possession he has two bottles of strychnine. I was so afraid of my life that I left home with my little -ones. The little girl always takes sweets .out of his pocket—the pocket out of which the bottle fell—the coat that I was mend- ing. During the week of the missing bottle my husband brought me two tiny bottles to wash to put poison in. He -wanted to take it from the other bottle which he brought, and which he did so on the Monday, because of returning the larger bottle to the employer. On returning home OIl the Tuesday from the night work he gave some bread and cheese to the employer's dog. After doing so the pour anin.al was dead at his feet. He came in the cottage and accused me of murdering him. After telling me not to touch the bread and cheese which he brought home, nor give it to the dogs, he did so himself. He gave it the poor ani- mal himself, and she died in a few min- utes. I There is nothing more. Mr. Llewtllvn-Jones said that concluded the case for the prosecution, and he sub- mitted that there was sufficient evidence for mitted that there was sufficient evidence for a prima-facie case. He asked them to com- mit the prisoner for trial at the next As- sizes.

horse was lame, and he said not, and then the bargain was closed. There Wfi8 a ser- ious conflict of evidence, and he was sorry I' to say that he did not believe half of what the plaintiff said or half of what the plain- tiff's brother said. One fact was clearly defined, and that was that 011 May 9th the defendant's horse was lame. He could not put aside the evidence of the two men whom the defendant drove to Mold, nor the evidence of the defendant that the horse "favoured one foot more than the other"- and therefore was lame on that foot. An- other witness, Samuel Hughes, also said he had seen the horse limping. The fact that the horse was lame was brought to the notice of the defendant, and then, accord- ing to the plaintiff's story, he said "It is not lame." Price told Hughes that lie (the plaintiff) had a warranty for hie horse. His Honour said he disbelieved Hughes' story that he alSked Price for a warranty. Price bought a horse with a warranty. On his view of the facts he did not think that Hughes was in a position to warrant his horse. Under those circumstances, the pro- babilities were that Price, when he was getting a horse which would only fetch 1:34 in the market as compared with C40 for his own, would take precautions. He thought that instead of Hughes asking for a war- ranty, the plaintiff asked for a warranty. His trouble was increased in deciding upon this case because, as lie said, he did not believe the plaintiff in toto. lie found that there was an undertaking on the part of the defendant that the horse which he was exchanging was a sound animal, and that if it was not sound it was to be re- turned. Under those circumstances there must be judgment for the plaintiff, and an order for the return of the horse within 24 hours. He thought that the plaintiff had suffered damage, and that 7s. 6d. a day was not excessive. £10 was a reasonable sum for damages. There would be judgment a1.0 for £10 for damages. In the alterna- tive there would be judgment for C.-)O. His Honour added that he had said that lie did not believe all the plaintiff's evi- dence. The plaintiff was asked if there was any talk of money-five pounds or three pounds—and he said money was not men- tioned at all. He denied that lie said he would give Hughes 2s. 6d., and that he said he would give him a collar and bridle. He also said that the horse was not trotted in the yard. All these were matters which were not really essential to this case, but the plaintiff denied them. He did not know why the plaintiff said these things; he could only say that he did not believe him. Plaintiff's brother's evidence was just the same, as if they had put their heads to- gether to deny that part of the ease. Molyneux, one of the plaintiff's witnesses, said that Hughes did ask for five pounds and ultimately for 2s. 6d., and that plaintiff had no change and did not give him anything. "I should like to impress upon plaintiffs," said his Honour in conclusion, "that they don't do themselves much good by trying to cook their own case, and that it is much better to make an honest statement of the whole facts rather than try to make the facts suit their case. I must express my disapproval of his conduct by depriving him of his costs. I think he deserves to be pun- ished for not telllllg the truth."