The Rhyl Advertiser

TORY MEETING AT RHUDDLAN. WITHIN a hundred yards of the old building in which EDWARD I. held a Parliament in the good old town of Rhuddlan, a motley group might have been seen sitting on a platform in the National School of that town on Tuesday evening last. The occasion, to the minds of most of the members of that group, was an important one, it beibg for no less a purpose than to support the candidature of the Tory candidates for the county and boroughs of Flint. The meeting was neither numerous nor influential, neither manly nor intellectual, for the majority at its earlier stages consisted principally of women and children. The meeting was presided over by Capt. CONWY, who in 1874 contested the boroughs, and was defeated, although the Liberal interest was at that time divided by there being two Liberal candidates-Sir ROBT. CUNLIFFE and Mr ELLIS EYTON. He failed to creep in how- ever, and so the Tory party has considered him to be too poor a candidate to be set up again. Accordingly, in 1878 and in 1880 Capt. PENNANT was the Tory nominee, and in both cases failed to win the seat. He was defeated in 1878 by a majority of 125, and in 1880 by a majority of 571. Mr PENNANT was on the platform on Tuesday evening. There were also the two selected candidates, and so in immediate contiguity and under the influence of cognate motives, were the four who either have been or are aspirants for the honour of representing the men of Flintshire in Parliament, Mr ABSALOM HUMPHREYS also was present. This gentleman is always ready to attack Liberalism, no matter where he may be, or in whose company he may be. He is earnest and loyal, and even sanguine, in his advocacy of Toryism. He is a man of many contrivances and a wide experience, and he can assume the part and play the r le of any expositor of the principles of Toryism from a member of Parliament to a working- man. Nevertheless, all the gentlemen to whom we have alluded, as having been active participators in the proceedings of the meet- ing at Rhuddlan on Tuesday last, are earnest advocates of their cause. We wish that as much energy and a like zeal could be mani- fested by the Liberal leaders in our neigh- bourhood. But they seem to be supine, and they act as if the party did uot need to be stimulated and refreshed and kept np to the pitch ol enthusiasm, which is so essential to success. Oar County and Borough Members might each bestow a little more attention upon their constituents with advantage to them- selves and credit to the cause which they represent. But this is digressing, and so back we go to our Rhuddlan meeting. The CHAIRMAN, in his opening address, postulated advantages to the two candidates, from the honour in which the names of the families from whence they came, were held in Flintshire. We grant readily, and with fleasure, that the name of MOSTYN was once a word to swear by, and that the House of Bodelwyddan was second to none in honour, in credit and uprightness. But it would re- quire a certain amount of mental blindness and a considerable quantity of assurance to make the same assertion to day. Neverthe- less, the CHAIRMAN did it. He then referred to the foreign action of the Govei nment, and unhesitatingly and unscrupulously made it responsible for every unfortunate circumstance that had ocaurred in the East. He said He condemned the Government for not saying at once that Russia must retire from Affghanistan." Why, has not the Govern- ment said so ? Is not this the strongest point in the justice of England's action? Why, the Government has gone still further. It has said that Russia must not move a step forward on the debatable soil, or if Russia does then it is war. This quotation may be taken as a type of the accuracy of tho CHAIR- MAN'S statements, and of the style of logic which he makes use of. Mr MOSTYN, the candidate for the county, was the next speaker. He commenced with a correct assertion, viz., That with regard to the policy of the present Government he really had no new ideas to present to the audience." He might with safety, and even without fear of contradiction, have gone still further and stated that he had no new ideas on any political subject whatever. He seemed, but only seemed, to contradict this himself in nearly his next sentence but then he is not a politician, when he said-" In the days of Lord BEACONSFiELDEngland was the terror of all other nations, now England was laughed at by them." We have a rlively recollection of the main political events that took place under Lord BBACONSFIELD'S Administration, but we have yet to learn that England was ever a terror to any nation. The course pur- sued by England during tho past fifty years at least has been such as to win for her the 1 esteem and respect of most nations. She has been the pioneer of civilization, the declarer of freedom to the oppressed, and the crusher of tyranny and despotism. With such a character no nation can be looked on with terror or be greeted with a contemptuous laugh. On domestic legislation he was still less happy, for in speaking of the Franchise Rill, he insulted his bearers by telling them That he thought what they most cared for was not to have a vote, but for more work and bettor wages." To the labourer and artizan more work and better wages are inestimable blessings, but the comparison is a mean and grovelling one and utterly unbe- coming in a would-be statesman. Mr Mos- TYN's faltering accents and defective utter- ances and lack of words,are serious hindrances to the progress of his candidature, and augur badly for his success. In a more cordial manner, and with a livelier flow of words, Mr ROBT. Ap HUGH; WILLIAMS, the candidate for the Flintshire i boroughs, next addressed the meeting. But 1 despite his manner, his words only were I ] words, end words too which previous speakers had used. He followed in tho same ( track, abused the Government in a similar manner, and bestowed a like amount of praise and adulation on the Tory Government of Lord BEACONSFIELD. If by the operation of some strange and unknown mental law the memory of Lord BEACONSFIELD and his Gov- ernment was swept away, a strange phenom- enon would present itself—Tory speakers would cease to speak and the melancholy spectacle would be perceived—Mr ABSALOM HUMPHREYS waiting at the railway station and speaking to no one. The occasion was not improved by the utterances of Mr PENNANT. His comparison of the Government to a great advertising firm was not calculated to impress a reflective hearer with exalted notions of the speaker's wisdom and patriotism. If he under- stood himself what he said with regard tc the passing ef the Reform Bills it was more than any of his hearers did, and more we think than any of our readers will. What could be his meaning when he said that at the present moment the British Constitution was actually not in existence ?" It is true that if the Tory party in general, and the House of Lords in particular, had persevered in the evil course upon which they entered last autumn the British Constitution might not now have been in existence. But that evil course was abandoned, and we think, and indeed assert and maintain that the constitu- tion is in a much healthier state. The meeting at Rhuddlan was an ig- nominious failure, and as any meeting convened under such auspices is sure to be. The sturdy burghers of Rhudd- lan require politicians of a sterner na- ture, and speeches of more stirring interest than the milk and water addresses to which they were compelled to listen on Tuesday night. Not in vain does it3 old castle frown on the placid waters of the Clwyd, for it keeps up the spirit that lived and breathed in days long gone by, when freedom was fought for and liberty was won on Morfa Rhuddlan.

CHARGE OF LIBELLING SIR GRENVILLE WILLIAMS. EXTRAORDINARY LETTER. "No. ACCUSATIONS. PROCEEDINGS IN THE LONDON POLICE COURT. At the Marylebone Police Court, last Friday week Marianne Tfiylor, of 6, New Chesterfield street, Marylebone, appeared before Mr Cooke to answer three summonses charging her with libelling Sir William Grenville Williams, Bart., and his wife Lady Ellinor Harriet Williams, of Pengwern, Flintshire, In the form of letters and postcards posted in London on divers days, certain of which letters and postcards being addressed to the said Sir William Grenville Williams, others to Mrs Willoughby H. Sit well (his wife's mother) and Lady Ellinor Harriet Williams." In some of the letters the defendant it was alleged, had used threats, and it was believed that she would continue to write and publish more libels, and the complain- ant prayed that she might be required to find good and substantial sureties for her good behaviour. Mr Poland, barrister, appeared in support of the prosecution, and the defendant conducted her own case. In opening the case Mr Poland said that not- withstanding the issue of the summonses against the defendant she had continued to write other libellous postcards. There was one dated 31st March, addressed to Sir William G. Williams, Bart., who is cohabiting with Mrs Harriett Sit- well (No. S woman), Bodelwyddan, St. Asaph, Wales." On that card was written th.3 following —" Sir W. G. Williams,—My dear husband,— From what I have received to-day you may be sure that I shall be there on the 10th of April as stated, and I hope, dear, that you will bring Sit- well with you.—Your affectionate Wife." There was another bearing date 4th April written in the same offensive form, in which she referred to the complainant as my dear husband," and went on to say which place does flash Harriett like best ? One in Denbigh or Bodlewyddan ? Lovely darling, shall you bring the well-kept hag with you on Friday r It did me good to see you in a cab on Saturday last in Oxford-street. Ducky, did you go to the boat race with that stinking brute?—Your affectionate Wife (No. 1)." Mr Poland said he thought the defendant could not be in her right mind, for the complainant was not in town on that day. There was a still more serious charge against the defendant, for on the oth of April she wrote another letter threatening tho com- plainant that she would visit him with vitriol. Mr Cooke reminded the learned counsel that if the charge of using threats was to be brought for- ward against the defendant it should be entered on the charge sheet. This was accordingly done, and the defendant gave her age as 40, aud described herself as of no occupation." The charge formulated against the defendant was for" threatening to throw vitriol on the person of Sir William Grenville Williams." Mr Poland, continuing, said that considering the nature of the case he did not think it would be sufficient for the defendant to be called upon to find sureties to keep the peace, for if that course were taken, these libels would undoubtedly continue and more trouble ensue. He must ask the magistrate to send the case for trial. While Sir William was a youth of 18 or 19 he was at a tutor's with other young men at a house at Barnes, and there he made the acquaintance of the defendant, who was a servant in the house. No doubt an intimacy did exist between Mr Williams, as he was thet, and the defendant, and he saw her after that from time to time. Although she had no legal claim on his client, Sir William in the June of 1S74, on her promising not to annoy him, paid her the sum of £60. From that time until now, however, he had not, to h's knowledge, seen her, and when he married in the autumn of last year the lady whose name was mentioned in these letters was published in the newspapers, and when the defendant saw it, it would seem that she was annoyed at it. Soon afterwards these letters and postcards began to reach his client who at first took no notice of them, but when he found they were being sent to his wife's mother and also to Lady Williams, who have no part in this matter, he felt that the time had come when he should put a stop to them and effectually prevent the continuance of the annoyance These cards were of the most foul and filthy description, and were no doubt read by the servants and others. Reference had been made in the letters to something about a promise being made of an allowance of 12s. a week, but there was no truth in it, and after these libels it would have been foolish of Sir William to have paid her anything. Acting under his (Mr Poland's) advice he had abstained from doing so. After the threat to throw vitriol over his client he was sure the magistrate would agree with him that the finding of sureties would not meet the case. He therefore asked that the defendant should be put on her trial. Sir William Grenville Williams, examined by Mr Poland, said he resided at Pengwern, Flintshire. On the 16th September last he was married in London to Ellinor Harriett Hart Sitwell, a young lady between 19 and 20 years of age, Ferney-hall, Salop. He first knew the defendant when he was 18 or 19 years of age, and a pupil with about seven others, at the establishment of Mr Inchbold's at Barnes. After leaving there ho saw the defen- nant from time to time, and on the 26th of June, 1874, a deed was drawn up between himself and the defendant, and a sum of MO paid her on condition that she was not to annoy or molest him. From that time until now he had never seen her to his knowledge. Mr Poland then handed the letters and postcards complained of, some addressed to Mrs Willoughby Hart Sitwcll (Lady Williams' mother) and to himself which boro the London postmark and dates between the September of last year and the present month. All of Sir William's were in the defendant's handwriting. The following letter complainant said, addressed to 0 Sir William Grenville Williams, Bart., who is cohabiting with Harriet Sitwell, Bodelwyddan, St Asaph, Wales," and bearing date April 5th, 1885, was received by him. The letter ran as follows Sir William Granville Williams—My dear husband; it is the best thing you can do to settle with me in the police court. You did not think of my character when you got in at the window at Inchbold's, □ or when you went to Lewis's in Ely-place. Ever since you went there I have been insulted by men, and the trick I have had served on me would not have been if you had not been at the bottom of tt. It is a good job you have got the money to buy everybody. In tho beginning of G!) when I lived in The Acre,' (Longacre) you promised to illow me 10s a week. If you had kept your word hel1 I should not have had the bother I have. On JUC occasion you told me yju thought you should give 12s a week. Dear Billy that was not an insult to me. Was it, darling ? You have not told Sitwell that yet, have you ? If you had told me that in '69, darling, I do not think I should have cared so much for you, but Sitwell has got plenty of money. That makes a difference, does it not ? Dear Billy, you told me about your women yourself. I am No 1, the young woman in Manchester No 2, whom you said was dead the milliner No 3, from the City; the young lady at Griemond'a No. 4 the married woman in South Kensington, whom you told me had £400 a year and was ready to fall into your arms at any moment; No ó-the cook you told me of is No 6—two barmaids makes 8, and the actress; so you see, dear Billy, Sitwell comes up to a much higher number than 8. So darling if you will tell me how many actresses you really had, then I will give you her proper number. It would be very bad to call her No 8 if she was No 14. My dear Billy, will SitweU be present at drawing room this season ? You know, darling, she ought to have the proper number before then, or how will the footman manage about calling No 10 carriage or No 14 carriage as the case may be. My dear husband it is your own fault about me sending you letters QIld postcards. You did not care how much you annoyed me when you told me about your women at Lewis's inEly- place so we are one as bad as the other. You should not do dirty tricks if you don't expect to have it returned. It is all right and good for Kllinor Harriett Sitwell, but you did not make it right for me. She can go to court, she can go to fox hunting, she can have horses to ride on, but No. 1 can go to the devil, for you. Sitwell can have dressing-rooms, bed-rooms, and sitting-rooms, in fact a castle to live in, and I can put up with one little smokey room. Don't forget that I am No. 1 and Sitwell more than No. 8. She can dress in her best of everything, and you think anything good enough for me. Flash-diamond Sitwell is lucky in being more than 8. It would have looked better if you had sent me the money to compromise in '69 than to have sent the summons. But I don't care what you do to me, nothing worse can happen than already has been done through you. You did not think of my peace of mind when you went to Lewis's in Ely-place, and why should I mind of yours ? You did not mind then how much you wounded my feelings at that time. My Dear Sir William, I am glad to see that I have touched your feelings a little. If I had not you would not have gone to the police-court. I hope you will be at the police-court at two o'clock, and do not forget. You see, darling, I must remind you for you are so apt to forget. Dear Will, you told me you loved me you have proved your love. Do you love Sitwell or her money best, darling ? Did you think that I would think Sitwell an angel of divinity ?— the btinkingcat—the well-kept hag of Bodelwyddan. You know what I promised you. Well, you see, I have kept my word if you did not.—Your dear Marianne Taylor, 6, Chesterfield-street.—It is the fashion now in Paris to throw vitriol in people's faces, but I have not done that to you and Sitwell. I thought it was best to call you names, but if you would prefer vitriol I'll do it. Write and let me know before Friday. You once told me that if anyone offended me to take the red-hot poker to them. Would Sitwell and you like a red-hot poker ? If so I will give you both it, if you wiil bring her to me." In reply to the magistrate the defendant said she had nothing to ask the complainant, but afterwards she inquired of Sir William if she ever annoyed him prior to their visit to the office of Mr Lewis, and the complainant answered in the affirmative. The Defendant.—In what way have I annoyed you ? The Complainant.—By writing other libellous letters and postcards. The Defendant.—I wrote none of them until after we went to lawyer Lewis's. Complainant.—You have. Mr. Poland said that was his case, and he should ask h;s worship in view of threats of throwing vitriol to send the defendant for trial. Mr. Cooke told the defendant that the charges against her were of a serious nature, for not only would she have to go for trial for publishing libels concerning the complainant, but also for attempt- ing to extort money by means of threats, and he asked if sho had anything to say in her defence. The defendant said she had never uttered an unkind word to Captain Williams before they went to the office of Mr. Lewis. Before that time Captain Williams had promised to allow her 10s. a week if she would leave her situation in the Strand, the arrangement being that she was to increase her income by doing a little dressmaking. After receiving the £60 she told him that she would pay him out for playing with her for ten years and a half, and she added, I am playing with him for ten years in the same way as he did me, and I have six months yet to :10 it, but unfortunately these proceedings will stop me." She went on to say that had he made a regular allowance she would not have troubled him. At the time she weut to Mr Lewis's oflice she was very ill, and often had four or live fits a day. She had no means of paying him out but by writing, for he always ran away when she met him in the street. She ha.d been annoyed by other gentlemen, as she believed, at the instance of Captain Williams (the complaina t). Mr. Cooke then formally committed the defendant to take her trial at the next Central Criminal Court, offering to admit her to bail in two securities of £100 eich.

RHYL EAST MR VESTRY. The above vestry was held according to notice at the Boy's National Schoolroom, at 12 o'clock noon on Thursday last. The Rev. T. Richardson, MA., vicar, presided, and there were also present the Rev. H. J. Cooke, Major Wright, Dr. Girdlestone, Messrs S. Roose, Charles Roebuck, J. Asher. Wm. Wynne, W. J. Kent, D. J. Davies, J. Bayliss, and — Thomas (Church-street). The notice calling the vestry having been read, and the minutes of the previous vestry having been confirmed, the Chairman read the statement of accounts for the year. The total expenditure (including balance of debt from last year of £168 12s. amounted to £772 4s. Ii-d. to meet which there was a deficit in the receipts of ,£238. The Chairman remarked that the offertories last year were jg50 or JE60 less than the previous year. On the motion of Mr Roose, seconded by Major Wright, the statement of accounts was unanimously adopted. — Several matters were then discussed.—The Vicar stated that many complaints had reached him from resi- dents and visitors respecting the practice of tolling the bell, and some visitors in consequence of the tolling had gone away under the impression that the mortality of Rhyl was very much greater thau it really was. It was for the vestry to say whether anything should be done to abate the unpleasant- ness, if it was considered so. After some discus. sion it was agreed, on the motion of Mr Asher, seconded by Dr. Girdlestone, that the bell be tolled, on requisition, and that a charge of 10s. be made. It was considered advisable not to discontinue the tolling altogether, and that a small charge, as above, would bring in a little towards the outlay of £10 a year for the bellringers, who, the Vicar remarked, had after much hard practice now attained a very respectable state of efficiency.—A long and warm discussion took place as to the advisability of substituting plates for bags for collecting the offertories in St. Thomas's Church. MajorWr'ght made a proposition to that effect, and it was seconded by Mr Asher. Mr Roose moved, and Mr Kent seconded, an amendment, in favour of continuing the bags as at present. The am- endment on being put to the meeting was lost, and the original motion carried. But the Vicar and Mr Roose pressed hard on Major Wright and his supporters not to press the change at present. The Vicar thought it would be hardly fair to the con- gregation, and particularly to the pew-holders in St. Thomas's, to introduce the innovation without consulting them. The discussion again became very warm but ultimately it was understood that a meeting of the pew-holders in St. Thomas's be called in order to discuss the question.—Dr. Gir- dlestone called attention to the church clock, and asked who was responsible for regulating the time by it. The Vicar said it was entirely in the hands of the clo°.k-winder. The vestry were unanimous- ly of opinion that something ought to be done to have tho public clocks in the town properly regul- ated together, and the churchwardens were reques- ted to see to the matter.—Messrs Roebuck and Parry were unanimously re-elected people's war- dens for the ensuing year. The sidesmen for St. Thomas's were also re-elected and two or three other gentlemen added to them.—A vote of thanks to the Vicar for presiding terminated the pro- oeedings..

RHUDDLAN. STOCK SALES.—Messrs Clough & Co. held the second of their monthly sales at the Marsh Inn, on Thursday last. The weather was unfortunately wretchedly wet and cold, which doubtless kept many persons away, but nevertheless a good num- ber of the principal farmers and butchers of the neighbourhood were present. About 20 head of cattle and somo fat lambs and pigs were brought under tho hammer, and realized fair prices, con- sidering the dulness of trade and business generally. The next sale is on the 21st May.

+ DEATH. PAKEY-JONES.—On the 13th inst at the Golden Glove, Wellington Road, Hugh Evan, the second son of Mr. J. Parry-Jones, agep 3 years and 6 mouths.

SHOCKING AND FATAL ACCIDENT ON THE RAILWAY. About mid-day or Monday last a sad and fata accident oc uirred on the railway, near the Warren Road level crossing. A man named Miohael Farrel, a hawker by trade, and about 65 years of age, while walking along the line, was knocked down by the Irish mail and killed instantaneously. The report was spread that his body was frightfully mutilated, but this was not the case, although the body showed signs that it received a terrible blow, being doubled in a frightful manner, with a large out in the head. The train, which was travelling at the rate of 46 miles an hour, threw the with such force against the telegraph pole wire- stays near the spot that they were actually broken through. The body was conveyed on a stretcher to the lamp-room at the Railway station. The unfortunate man was an entire stranger in Rhyl, although he had been coming here off and on for some years. He was a native of Ireland, and it is not known that he had any relations whatever in this neighbourhood or in this country. When examined, 4s 6d in silver and a few coppers were found upon him. He was a steady man, but quite an invalid to all appearance. Fuller par- ticulars of the sad occurrence will be found in the report b6low of THE INQUEST. An inquest was held on the afternoon of the same day, at the Board-room, Town Hall, before W. Davies, Esq. (coroner.) The following were sworn as jury Messrs W. James Kent, Tottenham Buildings (foreman) Robert Lloyd, Mostya Hotel; James Rippon, 5, Wellington Road; Joseph Williams, 43, High Street J. F. Griffiths, Free Trade Hall; Thomas Parry. White Lion Hotel; William Jones, 21, High Street: John Robertson, Crown Vaults; E. Slinn, 4, High Street; Harry Mudd, Bodfor Street; John Roberts, Queen Street; John Smith, Wellington Road; Richard Simcox, Water Street; A. G. Stroyan, George Hoi el; Robert Jones, Elwy.St. The jury having viewed the body, the following evidence was given — Ann Williams, wife of William Williams, joiner, 59, Vale Road, deposed that she kept a lodging house. She had seen the body laying in the lamp- room at the Railway Station, and recognised it as that of Michael Farrel, who left her house between ten and eleven o'clock that morning. Deceased had lodged with her about 10 or 11 months. He was a hawker and rag-gatherer, and was in receipt of 2s a week parish relief. She believed him to be about 65 years of age. When deceased left her house that morning he was in his usual health. Deceased was a very steady man, but helpless in his limbs. By the foreman Deceased was not very slow of hearing, and he could see as well as many men of his age. John Pugh, engine driver, in the employ of the L. and N. W. Railway Company, deposed that on the day in question he was driving the doi™ Irish Mail, leaving Crewe at 10.55 a.m. They I stopped at Chester, left there at 11 33 a.m. passed Rhyl station about 12.10 p.m. When about 150 yards from the level crossing No. 2—the one near Warren Road, he saw a man crossing the line. Witness sounded the engine whistle, shut off steam and applied the brake, as he saw the man did not take any notice of the train. The engine buffer caught him, knocking him down, clear of the rails altogether. Witness then stopped the train and told the fireman to go back, and the guard went with him, they were informed by the people at the level crossing that the man was killed. The people at the crossing said they would let the officials at the staion know, and witness then pro- ceeded on his journey to Holyhead. The train was travelling at about 46 miles an hour. By the jury By means of the brake they would be able to pull up in about 250 or 300 yards. Francis Lloyd Hughes, publican, Sun Inn, Wellington Road, said he saw Miohael Farrel crossing the railway from Warren Road about ten minutes past twelve that morning. The train oame up and struck him in the back. Witness then ran through fhe gate, and shouted to the people in the lodge that a film had been killed. In company with the lodge-keeper he went to the man and found him to be quite dead. Witness was standing four or five yards from the gate on the Rhuddlan side when he saw the deceased crossing the line. Witnsss heard the train coming and saw it striking the man. Witness did not hear the whistle of the train. The train stopped some 300 or 400 yards further on—after passing the other crossing. By the jury The lodge-keeper was in the house at the time. He was sure he never heard the whistle. He could not swear to the distance from the place where the body lay to the place where the engine stopped. The large crossing gates were closed, but the wicket gates were open as usual. Joseph Jones said he was a platelayer on the railway, and lived at No 2 crossing. He was working that morning at the Rhyl station, and left there at 12 o'clock for dinner. When he got near the house, he did not notioe anyone about. Soon after he had sat down to his meal, he heard the last witness shouting that a man had been killed. Witness went out as soon as possible to the body, which he found dead. Witness then left the last witness with the body, and went to meet the guard of the train which had just passed, and informed him that a man had been killed. Witness then went back to the body, and having removed it as gently as possible a few yards further from the rails, he went to the station to report the case. By the jury He was in charge at the crossing, but his wife looked after the crossing during his absence. His instructions were to see that no cattle, &c., crossed the line during the time that trains were expected to pass—co open and close the gates for that kind of traffic. Inspector Tinsley stated that the last witness and his wife had printed instructions as so the duties which were required of them. Ha also produced a copy, and referred the Coroner to a clause bearing upon the matter. In that clause nothing whatever was add as to protecting foot-passengers. The Coroner then reviewed the evidence and re- marked that it was a very unfortunate case,especially to the poor man who had met with his death. The evidence, however, was very simple, and it was for the jury to decide whether they thought any blame attached to any one in connection with the accident, and if so to put their finger upon the negligent party. The crossing in question was a very un- fortunate one, especially in a town like Rhyl. But be was informed that the Company had bought some land in the neighbourhood, and had obtained powers to enable them to build a bridge there. When that was done, the crossing will be done away with. Probably this sad accident might have the effect of stimulating the company to put those powerll into effect. It was very often the case that railway companies delayed making such improve- ments until serious accidents had occurred, or a life was lost. However, that was a matter for the railway company to consider—for their own benefit as well as tho safety of the public. The jury, ar he had before stated, had but one thing to considet —whether the deceased had met with his death by foul or by fair means. Considerable discussion then ensued, as to the duty of the railway company in respect to foot- passengers who made use of the crossing, and ona of the jury (Mr Rippon) expressed his opinion that there was an act of Parliament binding the company to protect foot-passengers, and he believed that if there had been anyone at the crossing |at the time of this accident the poor man would not have been killed. In his opinion the company ought to ba severely censured. The Coroner contended that Mr Rippon was wrong. The Company under the Act of Parlia- ment by which they obtained their powers were not bound in respect to all crossings, but in other cases—where the traffic was large at the time the Act was passed—they were expected to do so. In reply to a juror, Inspector Tinsley stated that it was not customary in this district for a man to stand outside at the crossings with a flag as a sig- nal to the drivers of passing trains that the line was clear. In reply to Mr Joseph Williams, the Inspector explained that the wicket gates at the Prestatyn crossing were locked on the approach of a train by means of a telegraph wire from the signal box. But that could not be done on the crossing where the accident occurred, on account of the distance from the nearest signal box. In reference to some of the witnesses not hearing the engine whistle, the Coroner stated that Mr Robert Hughes (town surveyor) had informed him that he had that murning legistered the direction of tue wind, which was from the east, and it would therefore carry the sound away from the witnesses. The room was then cleared, and the jury con- sulted in private for about half an hour. When the public were re-admitted, The Foreman (addressing the Coroner), said that the jury were unanimously of opinion, after the clear evidence which they had heard, that no blame could be attached to the driver of the train, but that at present they could not come to any final decision, and they wished to be informed whether there was any rule in force by which the person or persons in charge of a level crossing; over which there is a public highway are expected to be oa guard, so as to warn foot-passengers of the ap" proach of trains of which they have received notice by signal. They wished to have the opinion of some professional gentleman representing the company on that point, and suggested that the in- quiry should be adjourned until the following Thursday for that purpose. Thursday being an inconvenient day for tha Coroner, it was ultimately agreed that the inquiry be adjourned until Saturday, 25th inst., at 11 a.m.