The Llanelly Mercury and South Wales Advertiser

0 RANDELL & SONS' JUBILEE Clearance SALE. STOCK MUST BE CLEARED. SWEEPING REDUCTIONS. SALE BEGINS TO-DAY (THURSDAY) STRICTLY CASH. NO CREDIT GIVEN. WE QUOTE A FEW PRICES ONLY. SEE WINDOWS. I Good Lines in B'I,ac k -Nl er i Good Lines in Black Merlnoes at Is 3?d, Is 4?d, Is 6d Very Special do. Is 9d, 2s, 28 3d a Dress Tweeds, double widtli, from 6fd per yard Yery Special Line in Amazon Cloth, Is 2|d per yard Do. 47-in. Tweed, Is 9d per yard Hats, Wings, Ornaments, &-c., from Id each Mob Caps, from Id. each Servants' Aprons, from 4!c1 each Striped Skirts, from Is 6d each Woollen Vests, from 7 d each Corsets, from lltd each Woollen Cappets, from 3d each Cloth Bonnets and Caps, from 3d each Heal Seal Caps, from Is lid each Children's Paletots and Overalls, from Is 6d Ladies' Jackets, from Is each Mantles and Capes, from Is 6d each Imperial Mackintoshes, from Is lid each Squirrel Ties, from 2s lid each Brown Twill Shirtings, 6fd, 7fd, 8d, lOfd per yard 4 4 4 Do. Sheets, 2s 6d per pair Damask Table L i neTis, 4 Damask Table Linens, 6fd, 8fd, 10d. Is per yard Very Special Lines of Oxford Shirtings) at 4 Good Lines of Oxford Shirtings, at 4fd, 4 7|d 3:"d an d 44-I d Paisley Prints for Quilting, 3d and 4:îd Brown Linen Ticks, from Is Very Low Lines in Blankets, Quilts, Counterpanes, Bed- dings, Dimities, &c. Lace Curtains, at 10id a pair Job Lot of Crochet Antis, to clear Tapestry Carpets, It yard wide, at 2s lid Felt Carpets, from 103cl Tapestry and Felt Squares, very cheap Best Quality 2 yards wide Oilcloth, Is 8(l per yard Good do. do. Is 4Jd „ Best Quality 11 yards do., Is Itd „ Do. 1 yard do. 91d" 4;3d M Do. J- yard do. 4 Good Line do., l yard do. 3:£d" Gents' Suits to measure from 35s. 6d. I In fact, anything you may want in the Drapery way. RANDELL & SONS, London House, 1 & 3, Thomas Street, LLANELLY.

PROGRESS OF HUMANITY:— WHITHER DOES IT TEND? [COMMUNICATED.] There are some times in our history (personal and national) when nothing is more profitable than to review the road over which we have progressed, and to forecast—when possible-the tendency of the future as read in the records of the past. As a rule we cannot tell what future will grow out of the present, or what value is to be attached to our actions or endeavours for improvement, because we aro so near to the actions themselves that a proper perspective is impossible. We can only judge of the height of a mountain by being far enough away from it to be able to compare it with another near by. The Oxford movement, the Tractarian move- ment, Scientific Criticism of religion by Huxley, Tyndall, and others, the Socialist movement inaugur- ated by Robert Oweu, and the Christian Socialist movement of Maurice and Kingsley, can only be partly judged, for as yet their complete influence and effect is not nearly attained. But our view from our observatory of critical history enables us to look back farther, and to obtain a more comprehensive grasp of the value of the past and the probabilities of the future. Let us assume that progress has been obtained, even if its value for the moment be assumed as doubtful. We shall see that the five chief roads over which we have travelled are the roads of economic, social, ethical, and religious progress. The economic progress, though really of the greatest importance, is not of snch importance to some people as others, and we can therefore afford to give it a scant notice. Indeed, we need not mention it, save for the fact that we cannot under- stand the present position' of society without knowing a little of the increased faciliities now afforded over those of ancient civilizations and of existing backward count,ries-for the production of wealth. Almost any simple text-book of Political Economy will give a good explanation of this advance. Its chief features are Whereas in olden times very little machinery existed, and it was not customary to provide food for future use, and again, very little co-operation existed between men for the production of wealth (save when men were forced as slaves to work together, aiding one another), now workmen aid each other, and one man does one especial task, and another, a different but just as important work, and capital is saved, and food is provided for future occasions through foresight and thrift, only acquired through many, many, times, seasons of adversity, and want. Thus there is not in history a record of a country as wealthy as England, or France, or the United States of America. Even during this century, the production of wealth per head has enormously increased. That we have made great economic progress would not be for one moment denied by anyone who has studied the Economic History of the World. This is a point we are not concerned to prove.—It is already proven. What of our social progress ? This necessarily follows on our progress in the art of production. More wealth being produced, more is available for the general use, though sad to say, the wealth produced does most benefit to the idler, not the worker. But in social politics there has undoubt- edly been an advance. There is now a freedom of speech and opinion, and action, which compares more than favourably with any hitherto known. To take a common and well understood illustration —the administration of justice. No record is to be found of a society in which all were absolutely equal in the eyes of the law. No trial of jury was known. In past times the general rule prevailing was the law for the rich, the prison for the poor. Now, allbeit, a little expensive, and out of the range of the common man, justice in no matter what case, is obtainable. At least it is justice that is administered. Even Lord Bacon sullied his great intellect by receiving bribes now our judges are inaccessible by any form of bribery. The utmost morality is observed in our law courts. Otherpoints will no doubt occur to the minds of the many of the great advance we have made in social equality. We were at one time under a system known as the Feudal system. This system made the mass of the people serfs, their liberty was absolutely taken from them, and though they were not slaves, they were the next thing to it, for if the land on whiei they lived was sold, they were sold, as serfs, witi it, as they could not leave it. If they wanted ,0 become Freemen they had to purchase thtir freedom by paying a tribute that wonld take nearly a lifetime to save. Both of these previous points have a bearing on our moral progress. This is really the most important of all our ad- vances. If in this we have kept a proper pace, then we may well be satisfied-and may well look Jor- ward for a further future advance. Have the morals of mankind progressed in proportion to their wealth producing capabilities ? It is a question we nay well ask, for it is a severe indictment of religious teaching and practice, if it cannot be satisfactorily answered. But we need have no fear, it is here we find the most satisfactory progress. Let us take an instance: it is decidedly immoral, as we view i;, to hold another person's life and liberty at your absolute command-to make him your slave. If we look at the history of slavery, we shall look at one Tiew-a typical one-of the history of morals. So great an institution was slavery, even in the days of the advanced civilisation of Greece and Roue, that Plato, Socrates, and the other great philosophers of thoae days thought it bound to be permanent. That it could be abolished never once came into their minds. To them it was permanent, became it was right. Plato wrote of an ideal community, but in his Republic, slavery was still to be found. What has occurred since his days ? Slavery his been almost abolished, and the wealthiest nation in the world spent wealth and lives to free slaves belonging to other people. They saw the horror and immorality of the institution, and they abolished it. Now it is only in a backward country, that slavery is an institution, and only savages take their prisoners of war and make them slaves, at the present time. A well-known writer on scientific and ethical subjects, E. Clodd has said, "Man by himself is not so much immoral as unmoral. For where there is no society, there is no sin, and society is not possible where a man is not true to his fel- lows." There were no bonds between .men in olden times binding them together. Each for himself and the devil take the hindmost, was then the order. We know what England was like under the rule of the Norman Barons, plunder, robbery, rape, seduc- tion and murder, was the order of the day, as that has been in Italy and the other countries in the South of Europe until a very recent time. Ceesar, the Roman poet and historian, says speaking of the Germany of his time, "Robberies beyond the bounds of each community have no infamy, but are commended as a means of exercis- ing youth and lessening sloth." We have better means of teaching our young men to be industrious and manly. But, perhaps, the best way of showing how far has been the advance of morals, is by a comparison between a backward state and England of to-day. Let us take India, though any Eastern nation would do as well. We have most of us read Lord Macaulay's essay on the statesman Warren Hastings. In that essay he tells how Hastings had become disliked by his fellow-members of the Council which was there represented the East India Company. He then says An Indian Government has only to let it be known that it wishes a particu- lar man to be ruined, and in twenty-four hours it will be furnished with grave charges, supported by depositions so full and circumstantial that any person unaccustomed to Asiatic mendacity would regard them as decisive." One of the chief offen- ders against morality in this respect was Nuncomar, a rapacious Brahmin. Tried by their low standard of morality he was a bad man. He forged hundreds of documents bearing Warren Hastings' name. He made a bold bid for the governor's ruin. His offences were, in the eyes of the English law, applicable to India, such as would commit him to death many times over. He was tried by Sir Elijah Impeyand sentenced to death. The natives were in great distress, for by them his crimes were regarded as a Yorkshire jockey would regard the selling of an unsound horse for a sound price." This is not overdrawn, as thousnds of records attest. Yet this is the state through which all civilized countries have passed at one time. Those of us who can look at little beneath the surface can easily see that we have made a great progress on such a low state of public morality. From the progress of morals to the progress of religious thought and sentiment is a natural transition. For men must be moral befoie they can have any conception of the high ideals of a great religion. I need not go over the steps from Paganism to the great teachings of Christ. We all know how the first inklings of God, arose in the savage mind by seeing the sun, and how he journeyed from sun worship to other rites and mysteries until there arose the great thought of I God, governing all things, and guiding all. After the death of Christ and the institution of the Roman church, we had not only the pure gold of religious thought, but the dross of superstition and mummery. Gradually, but surely, the dross was purged away, and, bit by bit, there arose the Church of England, revolting against the supersti- tion of transnbstantiation. Then arose Noncon- formity in her mighty strength, and then, numerous divisions and sub-divisions, all eminently religious, but each getting simpler in its creea. Neither is the end yet reached. Let us now, in concluding, attempt a forecast of the probable outcome of all these journeyings. What will the next great stages be 1 Only a clear understanding of past developments will allow of our clearly comprehending what to expect in the future. But, happily, progress is slow, and snre, and the reign of law allows a forecast, where the reign of fortuitious circumstances would only give us chaos. Taking first the probable devclopmentof economic conditions, I think we may say that the future seems to promise us a greater abundance of wealth and comfort than the men of the past ever conceived to be possible. It is not in the nroducing but the dividing of the wealth that the future problem lies. We can produce sufficiently; can we so divide our wealth as to give a fair share of the results of the produce of labour to each who aids in producing it ? In other words, just as the conditions of production promise greater efficiency, can we not forecast a good and wise Socialism ? instead of the Individualism of the past. A rise in the standard of comfort is the one thing to aim at, in the social status of this country, and anyone who knows the history of past legislation will .admit that a fairer distribution of the wealth of the country is promised us in the near future. This will aid in a desirable consummation of our hopes in the moral world. The fairer distribution of wealth means a rise in th 3 standard of comfort, and this reflects itself on everybody concerned. Brotherhood, charity, love, are promised us in the near future. International arbitration instead of war, the aiding of a backward nation in developing its industries for itself, instead of stealing its land by a raid-all these are in the future. We have realised them at times in the past few years, and no doubt the efforts of great and good men will be more successful than ever. There is every ground for satisfaction in the promise of the future as seen in the past. Men also will find more time for the higher things of life. A true religious feeling will arise, as the bitter carking care for the morrow is gone and a peaceful security obtains in its stead. I do not think religious observances will be so much of account as religious thought and feeling. A nobler, truer, simpler religion seems to promise to grow out of all the theological wrangles of the past. We have had enough of sects, and creeds, and dogmas, and the world is finding this out. In their place a simple religion, with a wide tolerance of opinion, and a trust in the unerring divine instincts of all men when they go nature's way, will arise with God-like strength and glory, to gladden the hearts of men, and to give them noble impulses to do good, and live rightly in the future. Then will commence anew the reign of "Peace on Earth, good-will towards men."

HOMOCEA TOUCHES THE SPOT." and soothes the aching part. Use for Chaps and Chilblains, Sore Throat, Face Ache, all Aches and Pains, I Piles and Eczema.

I LOCAL FOOTBALL MATCHES. SWANSEA V. LLANEIXY —This match was played at Llanelly on Saturday. The teams were identical with the published names, being thus made up :— Llanelly: Back, JoeDavies; three-qnarter backs, Owen Badger, Evan Lloyd, Morgan Williams and Morgan Beavan; half-backs, Ben Davies and Dai Davies; forwards, W. Morris, D. J. Daniell, Steve Thomas, D. Thomas, P. J. Davies, B. James, W. J. Thomas, and J. Jones. Swansea Back, Bancroft; three-quarter backs, G Davies, D. Davies, Morgan, and J. Davies; half-backs, D. and E. Davies for- wards, Rice, Jackson, J. H. Williams, DevonWilliams, Grey, Bob Thomas, Hopkin Davies and Smith. Referee, Mr. Percy Phillips, Newport. The game was a very disappointing one and ended in a pointless draw.

IMPORTANT TO LADIES.—Valuable and never- failing REMEDIES for all Irregularities of the female system. Thousands of unsolicited testimonials (guaranteed genuine, under a Penalty of 11,000). Send stamped addressed envelope to A. DASMAIL, Box 839, Langdale House, Walthamstow, London. J Established nearly h",If a century.

SYSTEMS OF VOTING. INTERESTING LETTER FROM MR. I G. BLAKE. TO THE EDITOR. SIR,-I have just read an article in this week's South Wales Press on the subject of voting as practised at the School Board. As a member ef this body, I do not admit that the writer of the article has proved his statement that a result of our system of voting" ould be the rejection of the favourite candidate. Certainly, his figures do not prove it for him. In his illustration he gives A 10 votes; B, 8, and C, 4, thus disposing Of 22 votes, while 18 only are available. This is an extraordinary blunder. As he failed to make clear his case, and your readers are interested in the matter, I shall be glad if you will allow me to put the case from another point of view. I wish to make clear the proposition :-By our system of voting, if A commands 5 out of 9 voters, he can, by a hostile combination, lose, A's own supporters unwittingly contributing to this result: A's supporters Lave 10 votes to give between any two candidates, 5 are given to A, 3 to B, and 2 to C. B's supporters have 4 votes, giving 2 to B and C. C's supporters have 4 votes, giving 2 to B and C. Here is the result of a combination between B and C's supporters against A:— ILLUSTRATION OF COMBINATION. A's SUPPORTERS. A's OPPONENTS. j D j H 11 | W W B | E | TTH] A" 1 1 1 I 1 1 T~ T=5 Bill 1 I 1 ? 1 I 1 I =7 EAc ? l l ? ? I l? ? I .1. -1 J i 38 18 votes by 9 members have the result of ousting A each member having voted for 2 out of 3 candidates: and this result is brought about by A's supporters not appreciating the effect of splitting their 10 votes between 3 persons instead of giving them to two. Obviously, the policy of A's supporters should be to give their votes to the same two persons then it is a certainty that the third can only get 4 votes, and he is consequently out of the round. If this policy is pursued by A's supporters, the result would be:— A 5 5 B 4 or 9 C 9 or 4 18 18 B or C has got his 9 votes, thanks to A's supporters giving 5. By this method A may not necessarily be at the top, but he cannot be at the bottom of the round. The 5 votes available for A ensures his election in the final round, if A's supporters ohoose to have more than one round. I do not agree with the writer that the views of the members can be ascertained before the voting. It is just this 11 It is ji-jgt, thi-;i difficulty which probably led to the adoption of the system of voting he condemns. To meet this difficulty a fair way of voting would be to draw the candidates in pairs. When the pairs have been drawn, the candidates would then be reduced from, say 8 to 4, then from 4 to 2; every candidate will have been before the Board, and by the consistent voting of A's supporters, his election is assured.—Yours truly, G. BLAKE, Stradey Estate Office, Llanelly, March 4th, 1897.

SAINT CLEAR'S BUTTER FACTORY. The shareholders of the St. Clear's Butter Factory Company, Limited, held their half- yearly meeting at the registered offices St. Clear's, on Saturday, Mr. John Williams, Llan- ginning (director), presiding.—The Chairman proposed the adoption of the directors' report. A meeting had been held at Mydrim on Thurs- day evening, at which steps were taken. to found a creamery in that parish. It had also been suggested that one be opened at Letters- ton in Pembrokeshire. (Hear, hear.) The directors' proposed to pay only o per cent. dividend, because at the present rate of money they thought that was quite enough, and any profit over and above that limit would go to the farmers who suprlied the milk, for without them the factory could not be carried on irear hear.) The more profit that was made, the more would be the benefit to the customers and their workmen. The accounts showed that during the half-year the company sold cream to the amount of £ 1,844 12s, an butter £ 1,323 3s 6d.-Mr. Nathaniel Thomas, Furnace House, Carmarthen, seconded, and the report was adopted unanimously.—Mr. John Williams, Mr. T. S. Morse, and Mr. James Evans, Morfa- bach, were elected directors, the latter in place of Mr. John Davies, late of the Bank St. Clears.

SOME. FACTS ABOUT WELSH VOLUNTEERS. In the early days of Volunteering, Wales raised its full share, but after a time its martial spirit seemed to lapse, and county after county bad the whole or the greater part of its Volunteers dis- banded. Recently, however, a better tone has been shown, and we now learn that the War Office have provided for the raising of a battalion of four companies in Montgomeryshire, the same to be called the 5th V.B. of the South Wales Borderers. In 1860-61. Montgomeryshire raised the following corps :— lst-Newtown 1 Company 2nd.c-Welshpool 1 I I 3rd-Welshpool 2 Companies 4th-!vlachyDlletli i Company loth-Llanidloes 4 „ and these formed the 1st Administrative Battalion of the County. In 1864 the 4th corps was dis- banded, in 1871 the 1st and 3rd followed, and in 1876 the last corps (the 2nd) also went, and during the last 20 years Montgomeryshire has had no Volunteers at all. Carmarthenshire also recently applied for authority to re-raise a battalion, but the applica- tion was not granted. The county had seven companies at one time, but the Llandovery, Llan- sawel, and one of the Llanelly were disbanded in 1869 and 1875, and the four remaining were then united to the Pembroke battalion. Cardigan had in I 860 the following corps :— ist-Talyboiit. 2nd-Aberbank. 3rd—Aberystwyth. 4th Cardigan. The first three were all disbanded in 1861 and 1864, and none have been since raised, so that Cardigan- shire with a population of about 70,000 has only one company to represent it. Aberystwyth recently decided to raise Volunteers, but no company has yet been formed. Pembroke, Flint, Denbigh, and Glamorgan have always had a fair proportion of their population enrolled as Volunteers, and Brecon has of recent years had a very large number indeed. The latest returns give the following statistics :— Enrolled 887 I Efficients 843 and this out of a population of 57,000. Brecon í has a higher percentage than any other county in England or Wales, and is only beaten by a few in Scotland may other counties follow its example.—- Vohmtecr Service Gazette.

I MAGISTRATES' COURT. I 1 TOWN HALL, WEDNESDAY, before Messrs. J. I BmVÁN PHILLIPS (ill the chair), J, MAYBBUY, and S. BKVAN. I DliUNK. T. Edwards, 14, Swansea-road, was charged with being drunk iu William-street on the 1st. inst. P.O. R)blill gave evidence an,1 the defeudaut was fined 5s. and costs. W. Hughes, 30. Penyfou-street, was charged with being drunk in Bridge-street on the 27th ult. P.S E. Hopkins proved the case and defendant was fined 8s. 6d. including costs. J. Morris, Peutrepoeth, was charged with being drunk on the 3rd. inst. in Thomas-street. P.C. J. W. John gave evidence and the defendant was fined 12s. including costs. J. Thomas, Nythydrew, Dafen, was charged with being drunk on the 3rd. inst. in Stepney-street. P.C. Joi-iti proved the case aud the defendant was fined 12s. 6d. including costs. W. Jones, Pantteg, Felinfoel, was charged with being drunk and refusing to quit the King's Head Inn 0.11 tbe3rd inst. P.C. J. Thomas gave evidence and the defendant was tined 10s. including costs. I HARBOUHING UNCUSTOMED GOODS. Daniel Davies, grocer, Burry Port, was charged with harbouring uncustomed goods at Burry Port. Mr. W. Howell appeared for the defence. Mr T. H. Fielding said that in consequence of informa- tion received he visited the premises of the defendant one day last week and asked him to produce the goods on which duty had not been paid. He told him to produce all he had in his possession. He did bring forth fome goods which were allowed to pass. He did not produce and the goods, therefore the house was searched and some uncustomed goods seized. R. Hayman said that he was present during the search of the premises. He heard Mr. Fielding ask him to produce all goods be had not paid duty on. He searched behind the counter and found six packets of 11 Rising Hope" tobacco and five boxes of cigars. The defeudaut said that the goods had been procured from firms in the regular way. The defendant was then asked to produce proof as to the tobacco and cigars. Proof was not forthcoming and the defendant was informed that the goods would be seized and that he would be charged betore the magistrates. He then searched the house and premises, but nothing further %vas found. During tho searcb he noticed 13 empty spirit bottles The value of the tobacco was 6s. 9d. and the value of the cigars 7s. 6d. The duty ou the tobacoo was 15s. 2d. and on the cigars 3s. 8d. Cross-examined by Mr. Howell: Four were on this perilous expedition in the house and two outside. Everything that he produced was allowed to pass. Proof could not be produced that is why proceedings were taken. Rising Hope is a prohibited tobacco. Mr. Howell tor the defence said what was done was performed unawares. The goods were not worth much. The contingent of officers that went down to Burry Port fairly frightened the inhabitants who.thought there was an invasion there from a foreign port. He hoped they would deal leuientty with Mr. Davies. Mr. Fielding: Mr. Howell attaches a great deal of importance to the number of men down at Mr. Davies' shop, will you allow me- Mr. Howell objected to this statement. The Bench Oh it's only Mr. Howell's little way. The Bench fiaed the defendant £ 1 13s. 2d. and costs. ON LICENSED PREMISES DURING ILLEGAL HOWRS. D. Williams, 20. Old Castle Road, and Albert Toft, 6, Upper lukerman Street, were charged with being illegally present at the Union Hall, Hall Street,on the 7th ult. Mr. T. R. Ludford appeared for the defence. P.C. VV. Thomas said that about 9.35 p.m. on the 7th of last mouth, he visited the Union Hall Inn. When he approached the place be heard somebody talking in the kitchen. Immediately afterwards he heard a match struck in an out house. He went there and found D. Williams and the servant girl sitting down in the dark. He asked Williams what he was doing there, he replied, There is nothing wrong, I am courting this girl He then went into the kitchen and found Toft sitting with the landlady. There were two glass pints on the table, each about half full of beer. He asked to whom the beer belonged, Toft replied, one is mine, and I don't know who the other belongs to." The landlady thev informed witness that it belonged to the raau out in the book. He said that that man told him he had no beer. She said they were visitors and were there for tea, and that she gave them a pint of beer each. He asked Toft what he was doing there when be said he was courting the servant. He searched the house and found no one there. Williams was under the influence of drink. Cross-examined by Mr. Ludford; He got to the house through the back. He entered the side door. He would not think there was anything wrong because the door was open. He watched the house only a few minutes before be went in. This was the first time he watched the house. He did not know whether she carried the house Oil for pleasure. He did not know at the time that Williams was a married man. He did not know that Toft was courting the servaut. He was in a doubt when they gave their names and addresses whether they were correct. Mrs. Brazell told him that she invited them there. D. Williams, one of the defendants,said that he was a married man. He went to the Union Hall by the invitation of the landlady. When the policeman came into the house, he had gone out to the back of the house for a reason. He was in the out-house leaning against the table and the girl sitting on the chair opposite him. He did not tell him he was courting the servant girl. There was some gruel in the pint in the out-house. Mrs. Brazell offered him a pint of beer, which he drank. He did not pay for the beer. Albert Toft, the other defendant, said he knew Miss Evans, the servant at the Union Hall. He had been friendly with her tor about eight months. Before leaving Saturday night he asked his girl if she could come out on Sunday night,-but Mrs. Brazell said she would invite witness and his friend, in preference to his going out with Miss Evans. Beth went there and had tea. They only had a pint of beer each. They did not pay for it. They had been there from 5 o'clock to 9.30. Miss Evans, a servant at the Union Hall, said that Toft was in the haobit of visiting the Union Hall, and rather fond of seeing her. He wanted her to go out for a walk on Sunday. She bad the face ache and couldn't go. Mrs Brazell told her it would be better for Toft to bring his friend there to tea on Sunday. Mrs. Brazell, landlady of the Union Hall, said she knew the two defendants. They were in the habit of visiting her house. They were there on the Saturday, before the 17th of February. She had a conversation with one of them. She heard Toft asking the girl to go out. Then she said that the girl was ill, and that he had better bring his friend to her house on the Sunday to tea. They turned upon Sunday a little beforeS p m. They stopped there until 9-30 p.m. The policeman inquired after her name. She told him that the defen- dants were her guests. The policeman searched all the house and found nothing. She gave the defen- dants gratis a pint of beer each. She used the back kitchen for cooking purposes. The police brok in on a Sunday in September and found nothing. They had repeated the offence on two occasions. The bench said there was a doubt about the case in the case of Toft, and they would dismiss the summons but Williams must pay 10s. including costs. SEPARATION ORDER. I Esther Jenkins, Stafford-street, applied for a separa." tion order against her husband T. Jenkins, Stafford- street. Mr. W, Howell appeared for the complaiuant, and Mr. T. R. Ludford defended. Mrs. Jenkins, the complainant, said that she had been married six years and that defendant had treated her very badly. The last time he illtreated her wasou Saturday, when P. S. Jones interfered and saw all that j proceeded. He aimed a blow at her, but struck the j sergeant. He was a mason on the G,W.R. earning 33s. a week. She did not like to say how he treated jj the child that died. Cross-examined by Mr. Ludford: He had been beating her, for the last three years, every Saturday night. They were then living with her tather. They had been living in a house of their own for five months. Her father bad paid for part of the furniture. j About jell 3s. worth of the furniture was in his name, ■ but he did not pay for it. She paid for it with money given her by her father. She cleared the furniture that belonged to her out of the house. She nevef knocked him with a shovel. She sas fond of bet husband now. T. Rogers, New Dock, said that the defeudaut was married to his daughter, and that defendant had bee" in the habit of ill-treating her for the last eight months. This was the seventh time for him to leave her, and he (witness) had to maintain her. Cross-examined by Mr. Ludford He had only seel: the defendant strike her three times during the lag j three years. They had been living at times very unhappily. P.S. Jones, W. J. Evans, and E. Jones also gave < evirlence, t The defendant gave evidence and denied mOs" of the charges brought against him. The Bench said that it would be better for them to adjourn the absolute decision for three months, a arranged between the parties. i