The Merthyr Express

Rhymney Valley Echoes. IBi ''flECOBDEB.'T Immense interest and concem has been manifested during the week in the proceeding opened at Caerphilly, on Tuesday, in connection with the Gellygaer Parish Council affairs, and by the rate of progress made on Tuesday and Wednesday it looks as if this matter may be before the public for some time to come. » The intimation given by Mr. Ivor Bowen at the close of Wednesday's hearing, as to further serious consideration being given to the case, seems also to lend colour to the idea, generally prevalent, that the inquiry will be of a prolonged nature. ° This matter has also dwarfed the interest in many other events during the week, in regard to the election of chairmen and vice-chairmen of the various councils. But the particular honour in this matter seems to be rather a dreamy one, seeing that most of the councils make it a mere matter of rotation, so that everybody will get the honour if they wait long enough. The making of chairmen is thus re- duced to a mechanical process. Whether it makes for the best efficiency in every case is open to question. I predict, so far as Gellygaer is concerned, that Mr. W. B. Lloyd will make a good chair- j man. Indeed, since he has become associated with public affairs in local government matters ne has developed splendidly, and has the stuff in him for making a capital speaker. Mr. B. Hughes has succeeded Mr. Lloyd in the vice-chair, as he has also in the chariman- shij> of the Overseers. So that, next year, the chairmanship of the District Council will once more fall to Pontlottyn, and after that to Fochnw, and then to Bedlinog, until, by degrees, all the talent of the parish comes to the surpeme place of dignity and honour." And wha,t juster and better eourse could be adopted than this mechanical rotatory on I each in turn-since all are great, and none is greater or less than another ? The (only difference would appear to be that some can admire and see the greatness apart from any I external mark, device, badge, or name, or office and some cannot. Some can discern the man I without the help of a tailor, and some cannot. < Nelson has on the same principle obtained the seat of honour at Caerphilly, in the person of Mr. Mathias, and everyone will also recognise the claim by ability of the selection of Mr. Hubert Jenkins to the vice-chair of that greatest of Rhymney Valley councils.

SANFOfctfs RAT> '| 11 ■ POISONI There's never a nt existing that can resist SARFORD'S RAT POTSOH. They enjoy it and it kills quickly. For brewery, farm, factory or home it is equally effective. Obtain a supply to-day. Your Chemist stocks It, or .you may obtain it direct from SAWTORD & SON, Sandy, Beds. In boxes, 6d. to SI. Users say It is the Best. KSanford's Mole and Mice Exterminator just as good. No pain; q^ick and affective. No more rats when

-? THE BROTHERS JONES, CHARGED WITH STEALING RATEPAYERS' MONEY ALLEGED FALSE ENTRIES IN MINUTE BOOKS. GELLYGAER REVELATIONS Another .jraptGf'' frt the history of t,h« G<!ily- ,^cr ParL # Council xuacltila was opened oft, Tue,oa-y:, à. thø,CphiHy. "poli,çe. Court, when. *chh Jones. 42, ex-6Jerk~. of the. Parish Gownr,. c,1 rvv and collector, under the same authority, were .<larged with (1) Jointly stealing tho sum of .3300, (2) with stealing £1.50 each on the 31st March, 1905; (3) with making false entries in sh<^ minute book on the 16th January, 1905, and he 20th March, 1905; (4) with conspiring1 to obtain divers large sums or money in January, 1905, and June, 1907. Mr. D. W Jones, of ?\Jorthyr, was solicitor in charge of the defence, ,viti) whom was Mr. Loyat Fracr, barrister. Mr. Ivor Bowen (instructed by Messrs. Lewis, Morgan and Box, Cardiff) was for the Public Prosecutor. Mr. A. D. Propert, district audi- I tor, was also present. The magistrates on the jeucb were, Dr. Leigh (in the chair), Messrs. K W. M. Corbett. C. H. James, and E. Ed- wards. The two prisoners were brought to Caerphilly from Cardiff hand-cuffed, and this oxeited much sympathetic feeling on the part of ;-iany-ind,ced, everywhere one heard unfav- ourable com.ment.s on this course being taken. In opening the proceedings, Mr. Ivor Bowen aid The prosecution is one of such public im- portance that the director of public prosecutions 3 undertaken it, and I am glad to see that i Lovat Fraser lias to look C after the inter- of the,p two men. The inquiry in which I Bench are to take part, is a very serious one, because it involves very grave charges \2airu; the men. They were arrested on war- rants on information laid by a Local Govern- ment Board oRcia-1. which concerned an at- tempt to defraud tba inhabitants of Gellygaer from 1905 to 1907. There is also another charge of conspiring to make false entries in the books; and of committing larceny, and ] am afraid that, at the end of this case it v, ill be the duty of the prosecutim to formulate some grave charges asvainst both these men. A?, your wor- ships are aware. Parish Councils not exist m this countrj- until the Loe" '.••overnment Act brought fhjm into existence 1.7 a- statutory body to govern the affairs of the parish in 1894. Up to 1901 the Council was served, and faith fully, I understand, by the father of these two men. The population of the parish consists of coal miners chiefly, and the members of the Parish Council from 1894 to its abolition in 1908 was chiefly composed of thn class of men-- miners. They were to a large extent in the hands of men who were better educated than themselves. The population in 1901 was about 17,000; now it is nearly 30.000. It is difficult to open this case quite concisely, but the total expenditure of the Parish Council is very re- markable In 1895 it was about £44, and in J.902 it was .6411,- 1903, £818.; 1904. £ 1,490; 1905, £2.581: 19G6. £ 3,735; 1907, £ 6.-83. and 1908—when John Jones oeaed to have dealings with the Council, it dropped to f811. The Local Go/ernment Act of 1894, called the Parish Council Act, in section 11. stated that the sum which could be received by such authority must not be more than 6d. and fixed the nominal amount at 3d. 17, sub-section 2, stated that the Parish Council could appoint one of i's members to act as clerk without remunerx- tion, and if any outside person were appointed And be was an overseer his duties should be ) taken into consideration when his salary was considered. John Jones was appointed assist- ant overseer and clerk in the year 1901, on the death of his father, at a salary of £ 220. In addition to that he had £ 25 for collecting the sanitary rate, j31 for publishing notices, besides payments for preparing voters and jury' lists, a.nd 5s. for every journey. On May 25th of the same year Albert Jones was appointed assist- ant overseer for a limited period to the 8th July of that, year. In June ha was appointed collector for the Pa.rish, whilst John's position was changed, and he becr.mc assistant overseer and clerk to (he Prtrish Council. It was signifi- cant that he had nothing to do with the col- lection of rates, and his salary was reduced to £ 110. S A LA RIES ADVANCED. In the following year the salary of each W3:s advanced to J3160. and on the 11th April, 1904, the salary of each was advanoed as from the 3Qth September, 1903, by £ 50 to £ 210, and £ 25 tot collecting the sanitary rate. On the 22nd August, 1904, the salary of each is said to jhave" been advanced by £ 75 extra for collecting the sjtnitary rate, making-a sum of £ 285 per1 anntrm in ait. On the 10th November, 1904, the' parisb meeting was asked to pass a. resolution. to. exceed the limit of a 3d. rate, and make it up to 6d. And now we come to. a very impor- tant matter in connection with this business. There was, it is alleged, a, meeting on the 28th February, 1905, when a remarkable minute was passed by the Parish Council. Tbis minute ap- pears in the minute book, the first part of which is in the hAnd-writing of Albert Jones, and the second part in that or John Jones, and is, there- fore, in the writing of both these men. By this minute the Council purport to have assigned a salary of 2960 10s. to John Jones and to have increased it, from a back period to cover from the 20th February, 1904, to the 31st March, 1905, and siter that the salary was to be E350 per annum exclusive of allowance for making the special sanitary rate. In addition there were extras for jury and voters' lists, and in- spection of colliery books and premiums on a bond. By the same minute, Albert Jones was assigned a salary of 2605 for the period between 12th February, 1905, and 31st March, 1905, aDd B575 for the "half year ending 30th September, and after that 2350 and an cefa commission as detailed in the minute. It will be my duty tc ) prove that minute to have been forged, and never passed by the Council in that form, with that huge salary allowance. Towards the end of 1906 ;>ublic attention was called to the huge I sums being paid to the two brothers, and there was a kind of informal committee of investiga- ) tion. In March, 1907. a new Council was elect- i ed, and on the 27th May John Jones was sus- I pended from office, and. on the same date, Al- bert Jones was directed to take up the offices I which John had ceased to hold. On the 16th March, 1908. Albert was dismissed as from the end of March. The Parish Council cme to an end in Sept-ember, 1908, and an Urban. District Council was formed. When John Jones ceased to hold offioe he was in arrears on his rates on his own property to the extent of 935, and that amount has not yet been paid. From the reports of the Local Government Board Inspector, it was shown why the great increases which had taken place sines 1905 arose. John Jones re- ceived in salary in 1902. LIS5; in 1903, £ 176; in 1904, L211 -1 in 1 £ 896; in 1906, £825; in 1907, JB763. Albert's salary and commission in 1902 was 2120; in 1903, £ 167; in, 1904, £ 293; in 1905, £ 1,522; in 1906, £ 997; in 1907, £ 1,952. The total amount received- tained improperly most of it-by Albert Jones in 1906 was Z997 by John Jone £1.111. Another bro- fher got £ 2,058 He is now dead. For most of the mbnigy they could find no vouchers nor could anything be found in the minutes. The total amount received by the three brothers wae over £ 4,000. For the following year there are no details. In the year ending March, 1907. John Jones received 21,382 from the Council alone, and Albert £ 1,251 besrido3 receiving an- other Sum of £ 1,800 from the overseers, and the total received by the two brothers from the overseers and the Parish Council in the year 1907 was £ 4,908 15s. 4d. INVESTIGATIONS. Attention was first drawn to the finances of this Parish in consequence of statements which < [appeared in the public prints during the year ,1906. 'Sortie invesiigaifen was made, whtGlf Ve- ^Jj'J'tcd in the matter being forced into the at- '<jnti#i" of fhe^Local Goviirnn^nt B6ard, auftfi^ ;J<|r, Mr! 6orf !it ^t&Vorc'ed <m:h?S'htt«'ntt6n ifT "Juiie, 190?, Jftid' shbriiy after Mr. Cox had to open the inquiry he died, and another—I think, I fortunately, for the interests of the public— Mr. Propert was appointed. to take charge of this district. From the documents and investi- gations made by him it was clear that things were in a dreadful state. He conducted and carried out a searciiing and very able investi- gation, which was completed in May, 1908, and the result of his critical examination led to the surcharging according to law thfese two men and several of their friends with huge sums of money. It was with the greatest difficulty that vouchers were dragged out of people credited with these improper, fraudulent payments; the persons were almost forced to lay their ap- peals before the Local Government Board. As soon as the appeals were lodged, the Local Government Board instituted an inquiry which was held before Mr. Willis, a barrister. He commenced the inquiry in December last vear. and in January adjourned it because he had found cut- sufficient to make out this report (produced), and it was upon this report and the evidence of Mr. Emlyn Jones, a clerk in the Local GoerrimetltBoard, that the Local Gov- ¡ ernment Board submitted the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Some of these matters I do not propose to prove, but the only year which Mr. Propert audited these accounts he surcharged £ 1.486- in the Parish Council ac- counts, £ 3,386 on the overseers' accounts, and £ 1.536 in connection with the special sanitary £ 1.536 in connection with the special sanitary rate account. Many of the men WlO were sur- charged are Hot and never wIn be in a'position to pay a penny piece. The finances of the Parish Council were- grossly neglected by the members as a body, no doubt, and it was be- cause they were neglected by the body that these offences were committed—I mean that it was more easy to commit them. There was no cheeking or control of orders for goods or of the calls' rnade' by the overseers or the monevs in I' the hands of the treasurer. There is no evidence in the minute books that any calls had been authorised 'by the Parish Council or any pre- cepts shown. John Jones used to go about with cheque books in bis pockets, and get cheques I signed whe^e^er he wished. More than one ] cheque was in use at the ( Cheque wern signed in public house", and there ¡ appears to have been no examination of a' counts for which any cheques wert., ar-d there is no record in the minute book of 19.07 relating to certain cheques which were drawn. The rateable value of the parish in 1906 was ¡ £116;0000. and it is extraordinary to think the public did not find out what was going on. The I moneys collected by these two men ;'P to March 1907. instead of being 3d. in the £ amounted approximately to lid.. brmoring in between two and three thou-and pounds more than by sta- tutory limit they were permited to levy on the people. BLANK PAGES IN MINUTE BOOK. The minute books were disgracefully kept; there are blank and blank lines in them and not a single reference to cheques—nothing to lead to identification, and nothing to show that the Council had authorised their payment. About hre of the Councillors received cheques. About th-eof the Councillors received cheques. They deserve to be named—whatever else may happen to them. The five were parties t6 the signing of these cheques and regularly assisted both these men in the drawing of cheques. They were E-oes Thonias—who was chairman a good deal of the time—Joseph Cooper (another one who is dead), John Roberts, and Thomas Thomas.. These men signed nearly all the cheques during the time, without whose co-oper- ation these moneys could not have been receiv- ed. Some of these members were paid for loss of time when they attended to their public duties. In the inquiry it was admitted by John Jones that he spent money in deputations—some of which he took to London on frivolous pre- texts one instance of which was to copy reg- ulations for open spaces in the London County Council's ,gardcns.two members receiving £ 10 each. In consequence of the report made by the LpcaJ Government, Board Inspector it was determined" to proceed against both men with reference to the three principal charges, and I propose to deal first of all with the three sums of money which are the main part of the case as reported by the Local Government Board Inspector—but one could find a large number of other items during these three years. But I think it will be batter to establish our case on tb§ three items.at present because they show a l^b'refully devised_and long-persisted in' scheme by both men, assisted, other people, to defraud iM inhabitanta of Gellygaer of large sum? of money. J rnust return to the question of the minute of 20th February, 1965. These men were receiving £ 285 for salary, and the 'items of thle minute were that one was to get £ 960 10s. £ nd the other £ 605 Is., and extras, from the Parish Council. The history get JB960 10s. ilnd the other JB605 Is., and extras, from the Parish Council. The history of that minute ia a most extraordinary one, and I shall call before you, members of the Coun- cil who will. prove to you that that minute is a forged and fraudulent one, inserted in the minute bmlt without the real knowledge of some of the members of the Parish Council. What happened was that John Jones, for the purpose of the Scheme for increasing his salary, prepared a type-written document, a copy of which was handed to the members of the Parisi) Council. There are, fortunately, three of these documents still in existence, which were produced at the inquiry. Mr. Ivor Bowen produced the three copies, and pointed out that the business on this agenda in regard to the payments to the Joneses were quite differ- ent from the minute which increased John Jones's salary from £ 60 as clerk to the Coun- cil to L960 10s. The minutes were, of course, confirmed, but no one remembered their being read out, and the suggestion is they never I came to the knowledge of some of the members of the Council. BIG CHEQUES. Four day after that minute had been pass- ed, 20th February, 1905, a cheque for J6790 3s. 4d. was paid to John Jones, who passed it thrcfugh his banking account in respect to salary and on the same datp £ 689 3s. 4d. was paid into Albert Jones's account.. In the overseers' ac- counts these .sums are charged as J3605 Is. as Albert Jones's salary, and Jb681 as. that of John Jones In the following September, there was a book in the handwriting of Albert Jones which showed that ia September. 1S05, jE585 for salary was paid out in cash to John Jones, and £ 539 as salary to Albert Jones, and they are charg- ed with these sums so far as they exceed- the faulty and fraudulent resolutions of 1905—an amount in excess of £ 285. On the 31st March, 1905, there were two other sums of LISO each got .by each of these two men out of the sani- tary account. In the overseers' account—re- ceipt and payment book—it is shown that they both took out £ 181 5s. for that half-year, and there was no law or any fact which gave sup- port to their right to take this money from the parish. The next item is a cheque of £ 300 obtained by Albert Jones on the 2nd June, 1906, for. commission. This cheque was signed by Rees Thomas, .overseer, and John Jones drew the cheque. This .goes to show that the two brothers were working together, for the cheque was partly in the hand-writing of Albert and partly in that of John Jones. It relates to 21 per cent, commission on new sites and plans for a cemetery, which does not exist. This L300 we shall prove went into tho private banking account of Albert Jones on the 7th June, 1906. They did not know oxactly_ what to do with this cheque. It was entered in the overseers' ac- count, but the amount, was made to agree in the nut, half-year l>y. falsif^jng the account. They .1 _oc. ¡, drew a cheque in September for J6300 in favour of. the Parish Council. The Parish Council never received it because on the same day the said cheque was cancelled by a contra entry, and the entry in the parish account was crossed out The account of the overseers was £ 300 to the bad, and it was to the good of Mr. Albert Jones in his banking account. I have now dealt with the three items and propose very shortly to deal with some other items which we must take into consideration. When Mr Tropert went into these he found this huge claim for com- mission was made by Mr Albert Jones for work as a surveyor. He received that ap- pointment before he became collector He had a great deal of local influence at his back, and became surveyor and Architect to the Parish Council, although there were many other appli- cations from well qualified men connected with firms, of high standing v OEMETERY PLANb. John was assistant overseer in 1902. For the f'purpose of disposing of the surplus population, j' vvheh^ftee«g=ai-y they had to look out for a site for & "<!em £ 1jftty, "which led to great disasters so far as the parish is concerned. There is hardly any evidence in regard to the oemetery to be found; but in 1902, having found a plot on the top of a desolate mountain, some plans were drawn out, and then Albert claimed commis- sion for site No. 1, C522. That site would not do, and then they went down to Capel Gwladys and plans were made for No. 2 site. He made plans taking in the old remains of the chape], and objections were made by the owners of the land. The claim for commission on this was £ 646 lls. Id.; No. 2 site of about 20 acres was objected to by the lord of the manor, and the same plan was then adapted to No. 3 site, and the claim for commission was £ 843. All these schemes proved abortive. Men were brought from every part of the parish by train for whom no time sheets were ever shown, but such as Mr. Propert examined were more or less' fraudulent. The claims for commission amounted to £ 2,019. Mr. Propert allowed L725 and sur-charged and disallowed £1,293 odd. There is no record of any authority for doing this work. In a conspiracy case you can prove conspiracy by showing the acts of the various parties to the conspiracy. I now will give you an insignificant amount for which a cheque was signed by Recs Thomas, and was countersigned by John Jones as assistant overseer to Messrs. Cross Bros. for Eg 12s. 6d. That amount has been disallowed, and was taken from the over- seers' account, and you will be surprised to know that that amount is for personal items supplied to John Jones, which include one Clarke's food-warmer; an egg-beater; six packets Clarke's night lights, iron kettle, a steamer, a Queen's pudding basin. This is from a book prepared by John Jones and signed by him as being correct. On the 29th October, 1906, he got £ 50 as clerk to the Burial Board. He is not entitled to it. There is no minute or authority for it at all. The prosecution say he has appropriated it. He has got it without law- ful excuse. On the 22nd December, 1906, the two men got two sums of 260 each. Reas Thomas signs as overseer. On the 22nd June, 1906, John i, another LIO for valuation, but it is a fact that | he did no real work for the money. There was a resolution in the books that he was entitled to I some fee for preparing a valuation list, but no valuation 'jst was prepared. One was prepared ."vbsequontJy by Mr. Harris, the new overseer, and for that wo'k he (Jones) gets two sums of £ 60 'each, and later on, 25th March, 1907, an- other sum of £ 70. A CURIOUS CIRCUMSTANCE. I referred earlier to the fact that public at- tention was called to these large salaries and a very curious circumstance arose in connec- tion with it. A corn/ri'tlee of investigation was 1 appointed to go into the matter. There were 'I some members of the Council who were begin- ning to get cogn^ant of what was going on. A meeting was called at the parochiai office on the 13th April, two days before the old Parish Council went out of office, and they passed a resolution that the committee is satisfied with the minute respecting the salaries paiad to Mr. John Jones and Mr A. K Jones for the period ending 31st March, 1905, and the 30th Septem- ber. This was properly read out and passed at the meeting, and signed by tbe chairman, Mr. Thomas Davies. This committee meeting had been appointee! some day3 before, but the meet- ing was held before the time for which it was called, and one or two persons who went there found that the meeting was over, and that this resolution had been passed before the time of the meeting. Four men attended: Rees Thomas, John Roberts, James Davies, and one who is dead, after passing that resolution it is interesting to know that those men got a guinea each from the funds of the parish for at- tending. But the new Council did not seem to take it, and have marked across it, "Re- jected." (folio 53.) I think I have opened this case sufficiently for present purposes. There are questions of time- sheets and wages which it is not requisite to enter into vta the present moment. We will endeavour to press the case withiii as reason- able limits as the importance of it permits. I am afraid it will be necessary to ask for a further adjournment after this week. We shall strive to be entirely fair to these two men, but it will be our duty to put as much evidence as completely as it is possible to do, and ask you to commit them on the charges thus form- ally givi*. THE" EVIDENCE; >. Mr-. David Errilyn Jones, clerk under the Lo- cal Government Board, was then sworn, and said he lived at 128, Dore-road, Wimbledon- Park, Wimbledon, and had assisted Mr F. J. Willis in his inquiry into the affairs of the Gellygaer parish. Albert Edward Jones was called on 27th June, 1910, and sworn, but his examination was not proceeded with. The wit- ness Droduced a number of minute books, books of receipts and payments, overseers' poor rate receipts and payments book; bank pass book, etc. The pass books were sent by Mr. D. W. Jones. Witness also produced bank pass book of Mr. John Jones; also the bank pass book of Albert Edward Jones. Witness also produc- ed the three type-written documents; also copy of agenda handed in by Mr. D. Roberts at tne inquiry on the 28th January, 191". Mr. Lovat Fraser: Were they described as agenda at the inquiry 1- Witness: No. Proceeding, witness also produced similar agenda handed in at the same inquiry by Mr. W. Hammonds; also a wages' account and a general cash account, two separate accounts in the same covers and both accounts signed Jno. Jones, clerk. Witness identified the writ ing. Jno. Jones gave evidence in his hand- writing, and comparing his hand-writing in the minute book witness felt he could say the handwriting was identical. Witness also pro- duced a commission account. On page 224 of ¡ minute book No. 1 there was a minute concern- ing the salary of John Jones passed on the 20th February, 1905, which was in the handwrit- ing of Albert Jones in the first part, whilst the latter part is in the handwriting of John Jones. By that minute John Jones was assign- ed a salary of J6960 10s. in respect of the peri- od between th 20th February, 1905, and 31st March, 1905. Witness produced & cheque for £ 709 3s. 4d. dated 24th February, in favour of John Jones. Witness had examined their ac- counts, and could not find an entry in any books of the parish overseers' accounts of the pay- ment of such a sum, nor was there any minute showing authority to pay this amount. Turning to the overseers' poor rate book there was no entry of this cheque, but the entry for John Jones was £ 560 10s. for the half-year ended 31st March, 1905. Witness next produced a cheque for JB689 3s. 4d., dated 24th February, 1905, payable to Mr. A. E. Jones out of the poor rate account, signed by John Jones, as- sistant overseer, endorsed A. E. Jones. The name was in the handwriting of John Jones, but the figures were in the handwriting of Albert Ed. Jones. There was no minute autho- rising this payment. The overseers' account book for that half year had no such entry, but there was in it a payment ol 605 Is. This was also in the handwriting of Albert Ed. Jones. In the overseers' book for the follow- ing half-yoar-r-ending 30th September—he found £ 575 was paid as assistant overseer's salary in the handwriting of A. E. Jones; he also found aa private entry, collector's salary, for L573 15s. 9d., in the handwriting of A. E. Jones, but no authority for such payment in the min- ute book. Taking the sanitary rate account end- ing 31st March, 1905, there were two entries: Assistant overseer's salary, £ 181 5s.; collec-

Kownfree's Elect Cocoa captivates the sense of taste. Its IliTPSS delicate and delicious aroma is irresist- ible. The Rowntree Flavour is distinctive < iBt of S and the test of taste will teach you this. H Judge its merits impartially against other cocoas. Thousands have done and are doing H this, and thousands admit Rowntree's marked superiority. Test it with your eyes open or m your eyes shut. Test it at breakfast or supper time. Test it under all conditions and M wdtSt circumstances, for the Rowntree Flavour is a perpetual 'source of delight and satisfaction. B f N omr9mir- "ROWNTREE L, R I I

Second Day. hi Wednesday the examination in chief of t. Emlyn Jo ies was continued by Mr. Ivor Bowen before Mr C H. James (in the chair), -and Mr. E. W. M. Corbett. Mr. Davd Emlyn Jones, clerk at the Local Government, Board, resumed his evidence. lie produced a dheque,dawd June 1st, 1906, in favour of A. E. Jones for £300. It was signed •I>y Rees Thomas, overseer, anad John Jones;, assistant overseer. The writing in the body of the cheque, excepting the name, "Mr A. E. Jones," was in the handwriting of Albert Ed- ward Jones, and the name of the payee was in the handwriting of John Jones. The cheque purported to be for 2i per cent, on a new set of plans of the, cemetery. It was endorsed by A. E. Jones and paid on June 2nd. Assuming it was a valid payment, it was not drawn on the right account, and there was no authority anywhere in the minute book for the payment of the cheque. Mr. Bowen mentioned that a judge's order would be applied for for a certified copy of the private banking account of A. E. Jones, and that would be put, in later. Mr. Emlyn Jones stated that he had traced the JE300 into the private account of A. E. Jones. The overseers' account book did not show the cheque, but there wM another cheque drawn and cross entries made in the Burial Board and Parish- Council books which conceal- ed the payment, and the result was that the overseers lost £300 without any authority or consideration. Mr "Emlyn Jones also produced a cheque for JE9 12s. 6d. paid to Cross Bros., on February 26th, 1907. Ijfe was signed by Rees Thomas as overseer, and John Jones as assist- ant overseer, and paid at the London and Provincial Bank, Merthyr Tydfil. There was no authority for the payment. Tb" witness next, gave particulars of a number of cheques, no authority for the payment of which, he said, he had been able to find. REVOKED APPOINTMENTS. Mr. Emlyn Jones then gave evidence as to the appointment and growth of the salaries of the defendants. He said that John Jones was appointed clerk to the Parish Council and assistant overseer on March 5th, 1901, at a salary of £220. On the first June, 1901, John Jones, having expressed a desire to reliaquish one-half of his salary of £220, Albert Jones was appointed additional assistant overseer at £110 per annum, his duties being the collection of the poor and special rates. On June 2nd, 1902, the salary of both men was increased by J650 per annum, and on October 19th, 1903, there was a minute that they be repaid the amount of their bond premiums. On April 11th, 1904, both men received a further increase of salary as from September 30th, 1903—John Jones to receive £ 25 for preparing the sanitary rate and Albert £25 for collecting it. On the 22nd August. 1904, this sum was increased to £37 10s. each for each half-year for preparing and collecting the sanitary rate. On May 27th, 1907, John Jones was suspended, and on June 8th, 1907, the new Parish Council revoked his appointment, and on the 16th March, 1908, the appointment of Albert Jones was revofcW. Mr. Emlyn Jones, replying to the Bench, stated that up to the 20th February, 1905, the minutes showed that resolutions were passed. After that sometimes merely the numbers of the cheques were put in. In one instance 20 names of people to be paid appeared and no amounts on numbers of cheques. In another instance there were 24 names, including pay- ments to "John Jones" and to "James Jones." Witness porduced three cheques, 13th April, 1907, one signed Rees Thomas and David Lewis, for £1 Is., payable to Rees Thomas, in respect to the special meeting; also one to "John Roberts, Esq. signed by the same two members, for the same special meeting: the third was payable to "James Davies, for the same amount and for the same pur- pose. No authority had been found anywhere for making theisfe payments. Chairman: What special meeting was that? Mr. I. Bowen: The meeting respecting the investigation of salaries, dealing with the fraudu- lent minute. Witness: In the Parish Council pass book the cheques appeared as paid out. ASSISTANT OVERSEER'S EVIDENCE. Wm. Harries, assistant overseer, produced the valuation lists partly prepared by John Jones, and sa;id that no list was prepared on the ill- formation contained in the books produced. Taking the first book as Mr. Jones left it, it would not enable him to make a list from it; neither was the second book complete enough for that purpose. There were about 5,000 houses in the parish in 1906-7 that had to be valued. Witness confunenced to prepare an independent list himself, and produced these two books also. The work commenoed on the 2nd November, 1907, and finished on the 28tb March, 1908. Witness had to get information of about 5,000 houses, and it was on this that the subsequent rates were levied. Mr. Lovat Fraser: Before you were appoint- ed clerk you were engaged in Mr. Albert Jones's office?—Yes. How long?—Five or six yea&i And took part in the work he did!?—I did a lot of clerical work whilst engaged as relieving officer-and vaccination officer. Mr. Albert Jones was a pretty hard work- ing official was he not?—Yes. In reply to further questions witness said he had not assisted John Jones, but he knew that both Albert arid John Jónes had done sottle canvassing over the district in connection with the valuation lists. Mr. Fraser: And if John and Albert Jones were paid certain sums of money for prepar- ing the valuation lists, they did at least earn something, to put it no higher ?—Witness Yes. Mr. Ivor Bowen: Did you know anything im- proper was going on?—-Witness: No, air. Mr. Bowen: Look ii the cheque for £300; did you not know of that transaction?—Wit- ness I have never seen it, sir. Mr Bowen: In whose hand-writing is that cheque?—Witness: Some of It is in Mr. Albert Jones's writing and some of it in that of John Jones. Mr Bowen: Look at. that minute of the 20th February, 1905, in whose handwriting is that? —Witness: Down to the word "circumstances" it is in the writing of Mr. Albert Jones, and the rest apparently in the writing of John Jones. Witness said he had no doubt as to the handwriting. In the sanitary acount he saw £525 for salary for John Jones, and JE543 13s. 9d. for the collector, the whole of this was in the writing of Albert Jones. Witness said he was engaged in spare time at Mr. Albert Jones's, and was at the time relieving officer and vaccination officer. The parochial offioas were occupied by both John and Albert Jones. Mr. Bowen; Look at those entries! Do you see those two sums of JB181 5s. ?—Yes. Did you know Albert Jones was, getting that sum out of the sanitary rate account for salary ? -No. In whose handwriting are those two entries? —Mr. Albert Jones's. In reply to further question witness said that John and Albert Jones had canvassed for the valuation list. Mr. Bowen: When you made yout valuation list what was the sum paid to you? Mr Lovat Fraser: How does this arise? Mr. Bowen: Out of your cross-examination. Mr. Lovat Eraser: I emphatically protest against my friend cross-examining his own wit- ness. I have got certain statements in my fav- our, and he is cross-examining in order to de- stroy the effect of those statements. He is not entitled to do that. The Bench ruled in favour of the question. Mr. Bowen: You told Mr Fraser you think they earned some money. After you prepared the valuation list what were you paid 1- Wit. ness: £101 10s.. Mr. Bowen: When you prepared your valua- tion list did you make any use of thai informa- tion in those two books. Mr. Fraser; I object to this. The Chairman: The: witness has already said. Mr. Bowen: Was the information derived from the Jones's books, or was it your own?— Witness My own entirely, Mr. Bowen said that Mr. Fraser would now be at liberty to again cross-examine. — Mr. Fraser declined in sitence. A MERTHYR BANK CLERK. John Henry Davies, chief clerk at the Lon- don and Provincial Bank, Merthyr, said he had been at the Bank some years. Mr. Ed. Jones was t manager, and had been for some years the treasurer of the Gellygaer Parish Council. Witness produced certified oopies of the banking accounts of the Parish Council of Gellygaer for 1905, 1906, and 1907. He believed these to be correct. Witness identified a cheque for .£709 3s. 4d. as a cheque being endorsed by John Jones, but declined to sa.y that it was paid to him. It was an open cheque. Mr. Bowen tried to elioit the fact whether John Jones received the money, but witness could not say without Ilé inspected the bank- boob. Mr. Fraser: You; have undertaken to produce the books under a judge's order, and I must hold you to that. My. Bowen: You must bring all your books down.—Witness: That is a tall order. Mr. Bowen: I cant help that; you must bring them, and we must have an adjourn- ment. Further questkaied, witness said the cheque w from the overse«ro' accounts. Another cheque for £689 3s. 4d. was also identified by witness as being from the overseers' accounts and endorsed by A. E. Jones. From the eame account lie identified a. cheque for £9 12s. 6d. for Cross. BroeM of Cardiff, on the 26th Febru- ary1, 1907. Two other cheques for £60 each, dated 22nd December, 1906, and 26th January, 1907, were identified as being paid bv the Bank from the accounts, and endorsed by John Jûne. Another cheque, for JB120, dated 25th March, 1907, was dealt with similarly, and said to be for salary for John Jones .out l o. C&unfijJi jWsguB^ IMjM———————jglg————Mi i Mr Bowen said this was as far as he could now go, having regard to the position taken by his learned friend for a judge's order con- cerning the books. Mr. Fraser was quite right in taking tha course; he would himself take the same course if he were in Mr Fraser's plaoe. He would have, therefore, to ask for a remand of eight days to consider the whole position, and he had definite instructions from the Director of Prosecutions to ask for sucb remand. The Bench granted the application. BAIL REFUSED Mr. Lovat Fraser then repeated his applica. tion for bail, pointing out how extremely diffi- cult it would be to prepare the defence unless the defendants were liberated aa»ist^ anoe. In support of this, Mr. ¥ra<»r^'SrthrfrSf contended that had the defendants wished. to run away, they, could have done so long ago. Mr. John Jones had even been to New Zea- land and had returned. It would materiailj, assist matters if the men were released on bail, so that they could have access to sources of in*. formation. ? Mr. James (the chairman) said the Bench were of the same opinion as before, and could not entertain the idea of bail. Mr. Bowen said that all he could say was that the whole jnatter was receiving further .serious consideration which m'ght alter the position of all parties concerned. Mr. Fraser: That does not affect the two men. Upon bail being refused, Mr. Fraser said that the defendants had been taken about the 5treets handcuffed, and he did not at all think that this was necessary in the interests of jus- tice to send them through the streets with other prisoners, as was done the previous day. He had spoken to his learned friend, Mr., Bowen, who, he was glad to say, shaded his views. He would, therefore, ask for an ex- pression of opinion from the Bench to guide the police in this matter The Chairman said he did not think it desir- able, but it remained with the police. The Clerk (to the Inspector): You have heard what has been said, and you will use your own discretion. The hearing was then adjourned.

DARRAN PIT EXPLOSION. INSPECTOR'S REPORT AS TO CAUSE OF FATALITY DANGEROUS RESCUE EFFORTS. The report presented by Mr W H. Atkin- son and Mr Fred A Gray Inspectors of Mines, to the Home Secretary on the circum- stances attending the explosion of coal dust stances attending the explosion of coal dust at Darran Colliery, Deri, on October 29th last, vehen 27 persons were killed, including five who lost their lives during the rescue operas tions, was issued last week-end. The inspectors refer to the use of explosives, stating that there appeared to have been "con-: siderable laxity in connection with the ex- plosives supplied by the company." Allusion is made to the explosion and to the rescue oper- ations, and with regard to the latter the re- port states; "Those rescue operations add an- other to the many previous examples of tha great danger of advancing into air contamin- ated with after-damp. Such hasty procedure' not only endangers the lives of the explorers, but may delay and derange the course of pro-' perly conducted rescue operations, and is gen- erally more likely to result in the loss of the rescurers than in any saving of life. This danger should be especially guarded against by persons responsible for exploration and res. cue operations after explosions and fires "Persons exploring after explosions showbiz also remember that the effect of carbon mon- oxide is cumulative, and that if they advance until only slightly affected the difficulty in re- tracing their steps to pure air may be very great, and that in some cases disablement comes on suddenly. In this explosion, when it was seen that the men at the top of the drift we're killed, and the air bridge destroyed, no further advance should have been made until the ventilation "vaa restored The danger from tha Gilfaeh side was increased by the restora* tion of the ventilation, at Darran, carrying tha after-damp in that direction. It is proba- ble that if trained men with rescue appara- tus had been early in attendance, the loss of th five rescurers would have been prevented, and it is possible that a few more of the vie-1 tims mig,ht have been brought out alive, al- though it is doubtful whether they would have survived. The rescue station was too far away, and the call for them too late to enable the Brigade to be of any service." From their observations in the pit,' and a; consideration of all the circumstances, and in the absence of any other probable means of ignition, the inspectors believe that the explo- sion was caused in the way described by one of the survivors, and confirmed to some extent, by two others, which was that four balls of powder had been fired on a stone to break it up, and that this had fired the dust. "It was a direct breach of the Explosives Order," add the inspectors, "to fire an explosive not in a properly drilled shot hole, or to fire any shot at that place, exoept after watering or with- drawal of the workmen. "The explosion also shows that neither tf very groat amount of coal dust nor extreme dryness are required to render a disastrous ex. pltion' ssible. There seems to be a wide- spread opinion in South Wales that the so* called "house coal' collieries, which are gener- ally shallow and damp, and often verv wet, are entirely free from the danger of coal dust, and that the precautions taken in the dry and dusty steam-ooal pits are, therefore, unneces- sary."

PENGAM WZLSR BAPTISTS.—The anniversary services of the Welsh Baptist (Bont) Chapel were held otf Monday and Tuesday, and were attended by large congregations. The Rev. E. Edwards, of Swansea (secretary of the Welsh Baptist Union)* and the Rev. J. Lee Davies, of Brynaman, Car.' maithenshire, officiated, and encouraging com- ments were made on the thriving condition ofthe church.

II J Terrified Children Readily Develop St. Vitus' Dance. A Case that was promptly cured fey Dr. Williams' Pink Pills. Boys and girls who are delicate or nervoni suffer acutely from sudden frights or shocks, the result often being that St. Vitus' Dance develapsj ThO Sight of a vicious dog or an accident is some- times sufficient to start the mischief. One Bir. mingham girl, Miss Mary Webb, of 35, Clarendon. Street, Aston, Birmingham, suffered from a dis- tressing attack of St. Vitus' Dance through frightj as her father explained recently. "About three years ago," Mr. Webb said, "my daughter, Mary, witnessed a terrible street acci- dent and was brought home almost helpless through fright. We sent for a doctor, who looked grave when he saw Mary's state, and said that she would have to be kept in bed for many days. She took medicine, but seemed to become worse. My daughter had always been inclined to be Auwmip. and her nerves were not °+roos £ -1.1 Miss MARY WEBB (from a photo). Well, St. Vitus' Dance developed, antf"" never saw anything so distressing. Her seemed hopeless. We had to carry her to and from her bed, feed her with a spoon, and dress and undress her. She had no use in her limbly and could scarecly utter a word. All the muscled and nerves kept twitching and her flesh wasted away. At length she was taken to the hospital, ill the ambulance. They gav« her every attentions but her stomach became so weak that she could not take food or medicine, and soon lost pdwer of speech. After long treatment wa brought her home so ill that we feared we should lose her. One day, after reading a book of cures by Dr. Williams' Pink Pills, left at the door, I sent for a supply of the pills for Mary. My wife gavfl her the pills regularly, and within a fortnight w6 saw an encouraging change. She began to retail her food better. Then every day she looked brighter, and in time could lift herself in bedi Later on she could move t6 the couch, and sd her limbs grew stronger she began to walk about the house. It was a pleasure to see how het food nourished her. Her nerves and muscles sooll ceased quivering all twitchings left her, a.nd sh became our bright and bonny little girl again. "Mary lost all traces of Anaemia and the S cr- vous Disorders, and she has been perfectly well ever since. My wife never tires of praising Dr; Williams' Pink Pills for curing Mary of St. Vitus Dance and all her other troubles." St. Vitus' Dance is one of the various Nervott* Disorders arising from ill-nourished nerves tai need Good, Red Blood. Dr. Williams' Pink fily create Rich, New Blood, and in this way also cured Neuralgia, General Nervous Weakness* An«mia, Indigestion, Skin Disorders, tism, and ladies' ailments. Sold by most deale^9 (don't be persuaded into trying worthless snbsti" tutes); or send 2s. 9d. foij one box, or 13s. 9d. i° six boxes, to Dr. Williams' Medicine Co.8 Holbern Viaduct, Lwdoto;

tor's salary, £18153., both of which were in the writing of Albert Jones. According to the minutes the sum authorised to each one in re- spect to sanitary rate services was £6 5s. per month, and in the case of each of them it appeared that a sum aof JE150 was overpaaid to each of the men. There was no trace of any authority for such excess of payment, nor was there any record in the minute book of such payments being made. At this stage the case was adjourned until Wednesday.