Symud i'r prif gynnwys
Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

12 erthygl ar y dudalen hon

Family Notices






[No title]



DENBIGH. ,r"-..../...../"'-""""""""""""""""""''-'''-




BOROUGH POLICE COURT. FRIDAY.—Before Mr. J. Harrison Jones (in the chair) and Mr. William Mellard. LICENSING PROSECUTION. Robert Williams and William Williams, of Henllan, were summoned by P.C. John Evans, for being on licensed premises during prohi- bited hours. Mr. A. O. Evans appeared on behalf of the defendants, and pleaded not guilty. P.C. Evans said that about 11 30 p.m. on Saturday the 4th inst., he visited the Cross Keys, Henllan, and found the landlady, and a young woman named Mary Harriet Williams, standing by the bar. The landlady had a half gallon jug full of beer in her hand. In the small kitchen he found the defendants with a half pint glass half full of beer on the table. He told them they had no business to be there, when the landlady said they were relations. He saw them leaving the premises at 1 a.m. on the following morning. Cross-examined by Mr. Evans, witness said he was not aware that the sister of the defen- dants was an occasional servant of the licensee, but he could not deny that that was a fact. He saw no money pass in the house. He did not see a man creating a disturbance outside. He saw a person of the name of John Jonas, but he was not creating the disturbance referred to. This being the case for the prosecution, Mr. Evans then addressed the bench for the defence. He said that the case might appear a little sus- picious on the face of it, but he could prove that the men had a perfect right to be on the premises. They were there as guests of the landlady, and it was quite competent for the licensee to have friends in the house, even after 11 o'clock, if they were there for bona fide pur- poses, and ib would be a very great hardship in- deed,'if publicans were nob allowed to entertain friends in their houses like other people. Pro- ceeding, Mr. Evans quoted from Stone's Jus- tice Manual and Pattison on the Licensing Laws in support of his contention, and pointed out that it had not even been suggested by the policeman that he saw any money pass. It was for the defendauts to prove that they were in the house on bona fide purposes, and that they could do conclusively. It was no doubt a proper case for the policeman to bring forward, but in view of the evidence which he would produce, he submitted that it was a case which the bench should dismiss. Briefly the facts were as follows—Mary Harriet Williams was a sister to the defendants, and was in the habit of assisting the landlady of the Cross Keys, almost constantly, and especially so on Satur- day nights. On the night in question, the men were proceeding to leave the house at 11 o'clock, when they were asked by the landlady to wait their sister, and to remain for supper. Wil- liam Williams had only arrived in the house about five minutes to eleven, and called for a glass of beer. Owing to a little disturbance, he had no opportunity to drink it, and it was this glass partly filled with beer that the policeman saw when he came into the house. There was a very close connection between the parties, and under the circumstances, it was but natural that the landlady should nave asked them to remain. Independent witnesses would be called to prove that the landlady had asked the men to remain for supper, and escort their lister home, and as no sale took place, and no money passed, he submitted that the case should lie dismissed. The•>'>' Clerk poirined out for being Oll LC:lbe,j prull¡e ,;uring problbl ted bours Mr. Evans replied that the same law pplied to both. The men were t-tiuitled to friends, and for bona fide purposes. Mrs. Evans, the licensee ot the Cross Key8' was then called and corroborated the made by Mr. Evans. She denied that drinks had been supplied to the men 11 o'clock, and no money whatever had They were there simply at her invitation wait their sister home, and to partake of sUP' per. The evidence of the constable as to the half gallon jug was not true, as she had not 6 jug of that measure in the house. To Mr. Mellaril I received no money at all after 11 o'clock. Mary Harriet Williams said she was in the constant habit of assisting the landlady on Saturday nights, but she received no pay frool the landlady. She was in the employ of her brother who sent her to assis6 at the Cross Keys. The two defendants were also called, and gae evidence to the same effect. Isaac Jones and Robert Parry said they werl in the house up to 11 o'clock on the night 111 question, and heard the landlady asking bbe two defendants to remain for supper, and for their sister. The Court was then cleared, and on the reo admission ot the public, the chairman said the bench had given very careful consideration to the case, and had decided that there had been no breach of the law. The case would there' fore be dismissed. At the same time, they wished to say that the police were justified taking proceedings. As the defendants so near, to remain on the premises even as guests, was nearly tantamount to a breach f the law. Publicans should not encourage their customers to remain on their premises at so late an hour, as that was conducive to repeated proceedings being taken on the part of police, whilst the publicans themselves their licenses in jeopardy. He hoped cases of this kind would not come before thelo again. DISPUTE BETWEEN COUSINS. Edward Moses Jones, Portland Place, ap plied to the court for an order to bind over Ed. ward Jones, of Abram'j Lane, Denbigh, to' keep the peace towards him. On the case being called, the Clerk asked the parties whether they could not settle the matter. E. M. Jones: No, sir, we cannot. The Clerk said that the complaint was, on the 30th of January, Edward Jones did lawfully threaten to assault E. M. Jones, that the latter being afraid that such an sault would be committed, asked that the d0* fendanb be bound over to keep the peace. Defendant, who was rather excited, pointing to complainant, If he will come throngh his life without-- The Chairman That is not the question, have nothing to do with that. Defendant: I only said a few words, an that is all the threat. The Chairman said he did not know whether the parties wished to proceed in the matter, but he should like to know whether they were not disposed to come to some terms. The magistrates were quite prepared to judge the question according to law. At the same tilget he understood that there was some misi*nde'' standing between the parties and it would well if they could come voluntarily to settlement. The Magistrates' Clerk: They came to W office yesterday, and I did my very best to set- tle the case, but without success. Complainant: I should like to give evidellOO I sir. I offered to shake hands with him yestef day, but he refused. Defendant: Yes, I will never shake haJls with you. Complainant then made a statement t0, > effect that on the 30th of January, defendan came to his shop, and knocked the door his fist. He asked whether he should ha* permission to see his (complainant's) brothel. In reply to that he (complainant) said that the only thing he would do in the matter was, ask defendant to go home quietly, or he send for the police. Defendant then said to him, You have scandalised me by putting JIIe in the County Court.' Defendant: That's immaterial. Complainant proceeding, said the defendallt then made use of these words, I shall go to the court, and tell the Judge that you are a regain scamp, a rogue, and a thief.' I asked again whether he was willing to go home, he said, 'I don't care a d-for the police- Witness proceeding said, The only thing, worships, he has against me is, because I Pu him in the County Court. I have done *°y best for him all these years. The Chairman Has he threatened you? Complainant: Yes, he threatened to me to pieces last Monday in Panton Ha"* When he is sober, he is all right, but when In drink I am afraid of him. Even yesterday be put his fist in my mouth and said, 'You halo done what you could for me, do more if YOO ¡ can, and I shall pay you.' r Defendant: Shame, shame.' At this junctare» Mr. Rutter who was in the body of the called defendant to him, and spoke to him. conversation between them was not audible a the reporters' table, but defendant came back saying, 'Yes, it is false.' Defendant to Complainant On Monday night, did I say anything to you but thIS: You deserve the same thing as your brother* Complainant: Yes, you said you would pul: me to pieces, and you then went to your pocke" as if searching for 5 our knife. < Defendant, excitedly It's a lie, and morei x said nothing to you when we were leaving fjf, Parry Jones's office. Complainant Yes, you said to me, have done what you can for me, do more if can, and I shall pay you,' and then you ptlt your fist in my mouth. I Defendant: It is not true, and more, did not say on Monday night only this much, I yø1J deserve having a clout the same as yout brother.' Compiainant: No. Defendant Well it's useless for me to 8os any more questions. Complainant said he had t^?o witnesses, bat he did not intend to call them. Defendant then made a statement to the i°K lowing effect, that the complainant him of calling him a scamp, and a thief, that he did nothing of the kind. On previous day they went to Mr. Parry JoPs office, so that he could use a wise discretion settling the matter besween them. As far 8,9 1 he was concerned, he did all that he could | bring about that settlement. As for hands with complainant, he did not feel to do it, as it would be simply hypocrisy 00 his part. He did not want anything to do Wibb the fLan. He did tell him that he had done W very worst for him. After being at Mr. Parry Jones' office, he went first of all to his and then went home, and actually found to complainant at his mother's house aggravation the old lady. If it had not been for his mouber who ordered complainant out, he would hS". bundled him into the street himself. CoJII plainant and his brother would have to stop aggravating him in this manner. U •• The Chairman to Complainant: Are yO ? afraid of him ? Complainant: I am. Mr. ivlellard to Defendant: Are you afraid of him? Defendant: No, 1 am not. 1 The Chairman: You will have to be boUn f over mutually to keep the peace in the sum 0 £10 for a period of six months, each one to pa.1 costs. Defendant I don't think it would be# for me to mention the cause of this &isPu here, but I sha.ll bring it before another eoXl^t' { It was then pointed out that as defendan was not'i of the complainant, that » » latt<-r bhiiul.i ti'M, be bound over to keep peace, ami aiter a brief discussion the hen decided to bind the defendant only over, in sum of £ 10, and ordered him to pay to the plainant the sum of 5a. which the latter n deposited in court. 4: