Papurau Newydd Cymru

Chwiliwch 15 miliwn o erthyglau papurau newydd Cymru

Cuddio Rhestr Erthyglau

3 erthygl ar y dudalen hon

[No title]

Newyddion
Dyfynnu
Rhannu

MOLD. I THE Rev. JAMES HIXD, of Derby, but late ot Mold, preached a. most excellent sermon ill the English Wesleyan Chapel 011 Wednesday even- in" There was a large congregation, and sit the close of the services a collection was made in aid of the Sunday School fund, and we believe realised a good sum. THE CorxTV EXPENDITURE.—We believe thatj the attention of the Board of (luardians at Holy- well is to be called at an early date to the heavy i debt lying on the county for gaols, &c. The amount is nearly double that of any other county in North Wales, as will be seen by a return pub- lished in our last issue. THE REV. OWEX THOMAS, one of the most j popular of Welsh preachers is announced to preach in the Welsh Cahinistic Methodist | Chapel to-morrow at ten in the morning and six in the evening. The abilities of the preacher are sufficient to draw a large congregation, and no doubt a large number will be present. THE (TWEKNVMYNYDD NATIONAL School was examined by Mr T. Morgan Owen and Mr Jones, her hjûsty's Inspectors of Schools, on the 17th and 18th of April last. The report, which has just come to hand, is as follows:—" ri he work of the infants was almost good the grammar throughout was good; the geography of the second standard was moderately fair, of the third standard pretty good. in the standard work a decidedly good examination was passed. The sewing and knitting were about good. The singing was very good. The order was ex- cellent." THE LOCAL BOAIID.-Tbe iiiiiiiql dinner given by the new members came off at the Royal Oak Hotel on Tuesday evening, Mr A. J..Rrereton, chairman of the Board, presiding, and Mr J. Corbett in the vice-chair. There was a large attendance of members, officials, and friends, and the catering of Miss Jackson gave the greatest satisfaction to all. These re-unions are never reported, but we may state that several conversations took place on iiiallter., to the Board, and the conversations were inter- woven with songs, which were capitally rendered. The evening passed off satisfactorily in every respect. THE PROPOSED WELSH CHURCH.—We under- stand that after mature consideration the site of the proposed newWelsh Church lias been changed. It was intended that it should he built on land be- longing to Miss Howard in Chester-street, a site which, owing to the traffic on week days to and from the railway station, could not but be incon- venient. That site has now, we believe, been abandoned in favor of one at the northern end of the National School, belonging to Mr T. W. j Eyfcon, and forming part of the Vicarage Field. We should imagine there can bo no question as to the decided superiority of the King-street over the Chester-street site. HEADS I WIN TAILS YOU LosE,It is no secret that when it was announced that the Duke of Westminster had consented to lay the memorial stone of the school in connection with the English Congregational Church, a large nnm- her of people were very incredulous. With some the wish, no doubt, was father to the thought, ?nd one of these gentlemen went so far as to Let 25 with another gentleman that Ins (?:-ace would not come. The bet was regularly made and en- tered, and on Monday evening the gentleman who had won went to the gentleman who latd lost and claimed the money. To his surprise, the other repudiated it altogether, saying the bet was not a "genuine-' one. No matter what. arguments were used he refused point blank to pay the money, whereupon the other said it was the man really who was not genuine," and not i the bet. THE LOCAL GI'ARDIAXS met on Wednesday, tlio.-e present being Messrs E. P. Jones (chair- man), A. F. Jones, J. Corbett, and E..Tones, j The list of applications was short and of but little interest. After the formal business was over, a lad 10 years of age was brought to the Guardians, who were asked to grant him ollt,li)ol.! relief, on the ground that he had been deserted by his mother, and his present destitution. It I appeared that his father had been a pauper for years, and when the lad was of school age lie could never attend because he was at work. The relief was stopped owing to the dissipated and dirty habits of the parents, who, a few months ago, parted, the wife taking the children. She kept a very suspicious house, little better in fact than a brothel, and had been summoned to appear before the justices, but on receipt of the sum- mons had decamped, and was fined 40s and costs in her absence the other day. The Guardians could do nothing with the case, and referred it to Holywell. It was said that the father cohabited with another woman in the town. PETTY SESSIONS, MONDAY—Before J. Scott Bankes, A. F. Jones, and E. Thompson, Esqrs. Assault at Buckley.—John Humphreys, for assaulting Mrs E. Saunders, fined 7s Gd and costs. Drunkenness.—J ames Pritchard, collier, fined I S.i.-Bridget Phillipson, 15s and costs, or ten days at Chester. Excise Offeitces.-E. F. Bartlett, keeping a dog without license, fined 25s; Thomas Foulkes, 23s; David Jones, 25s Evan Roberts, 25s George Owen, Buckley, 25s Thomas Hancock, Buckley, 25s; Isaac Conway, Buckley, 25s. Employer and Workmen.—The Oak Pits Colliery Company, for whom Mr Cartwright appeared, were summoned by Samuel Byestock for wrongful dismissal. On the 2!)th of April he went to the manager and said he wanted to go to a wedding, and also leave for a day or two. The manager said he might go, a.nd his brother said he would go in his place.—Mr Pitton said the complainant asked for the day only. He did not think he said a day or two, but he did not come back until Thursday.—The complainant said Mr Pitton had told him he was sorry that he was obliged to discharge him, and Mr Pitton said, in reply, that he might have expressed his sorrow. but he had no discretion in the matter.—The Chairman asked what had been the character of the complainant, and Mr Pitton said it had been very good. The Chairman hereupon said there was no doubt the complainant could not recover, at the same time he must say the case wa.s a hard one, and if a word from him could be of any avail he would strongly advise Mr Forrest to take the complainant back. If the man had been of good character, had worked overtime as had been stated, and stayed rather longer than leave had been given, a reprimand would have met the case.—Mr Thomson did not act in this case. Maliciom Injn rif>\—Thomas Morris was sum- moned by P.C. H. Williams for having, on Sun- day, the 12th of May, stripped, and ran at the cop of a wall several times, and loosened the stones seven in number for a distance of two yards, one of the stones being thrown into the field.Nir Manley said the wall was all right in the morning.—The defendant denied that he did it wilfully, and said lie only leaned against the wall.—The Chairman said he would be fined 40s, Is damage, and 8s costs, or three weeks' in de- fault. Mischievous 110.1/8: Parental Justice.—J oseph Thornton and Richard McGowan, two boys, were summoned by Mr Campbell, butcher, Buckley, for doing damage to a field belonging to him to the extent of Gd.—Complainant stated he found the boys in his grass field at Bistre, trampling it down, and they were chasing a pony and mare and colt, and throwing stones at them. —The Chairman said it was a pity he had not had a switch with him and given them it across their backs. He then asked the parents of the boys if they were willing that the lads should be taken to the police station and each receive two smart strokes with a cane on the hand. The parents assented, and the lads were so chastised when the court rose. Charge of Tampering with a Voting Paper.- Michael Lanergan, pensioner, Mold, was sum- moned for tampering with a voting paper In there- Cent Mold Local Board election.—Mr Roper prose- cuted on behalf of the Local Board, and Mr J. Tatlock. Chester, appeared for the detence.-In stating the case, Mr Roper said the proceedings were taken in consequence of certain circum- stances which took place during the last election in which there was reason to suppose that voting papers were tampered with to a considerable ex- tent, and in one instance a voting paper came before the returning officer which had attached to it a certificate to the effect that it had not been filled up by the person by whom it pur- ported to be signed, and that he knew nothing whatever about it. The returning officer accord- ingly felt it his duty to take notice of the matter and the person who was purported to sign the voting paper was sent for and it then appeared that it had not been filled up by him in the way represented. The Local Board accordingly, at the last meeting, directed proceedings to be taken. They did not act vindictively, but they pro- ceeded for the benefit of the public.—The Chair- man I don't suppose so, and you, Mr Tatlock, are going to say this is not an offence.—Mr Tat- lock I am going to say it is not an offence.— Mr Roper went on to say that proceedings were taken under Rule 59, which imposed a penalty of £20 or imprisonment for breach. The defen- dant appeared to have gone to the house of Peter Jones, shoemaker, Maesydre, who was entitled to vote and he filled up the voting paper in the form in which it was handed in, without Jones's knowledge or consent.—Isaac Jones, Mold, stated, in answer to Mr Roper, that he had been deputed by the Local Board to deliver the voting papers in connection with the election. He de- livered a voting paper at the house of Peter Jones on the 2nd April, and collected it amongst others on the (5th.—In cross-examination he said he could not recollect who handed him the paper at Jone's house. (2 A great many .t 'I A Y of these people cant write ?—A: Yes — Do you know whether Mr Lanergan filled up the papers for other tenants besides Mr Jones?-- Yes, I believe he did.—And in all cases lie did not fill them up for the same callditlates ?-Yes, I believe that is so.—Catherine Walk in, daugh- ter of Peter Jones, said she lived with him. The votirw paper was delivered at the house, and her father kept it. On the 4th April Mr Lanergan came when her father was out, and asked if he had filled up and signed the paper. She replied that he hadn't, and he then asked her for it. She fetched it, and he said he supposed her father would put in the names of Griffith ./ones and Edward Weldon. She said she didn't know. He then asked if her father could write. She replied that he couldn't, and he then filled it Up and signed it. The defendant collected the rents of her father's and other houses. When her father came in she gave him the paper, and he made a remark that he had not given the defend- ant authority to sign his paper.—Cross-examined: She gave the paper to Isaac Jones on the (ith.— The Chairman, addressing Mr Roper, said if the man handed back the paper with his signature attached to it there was an end to the case.—Mr Tatlock said the voters were not hound to vote or obliged to return the papers.—Mr Roper said the man iiiade declaration at once that he did not sign the paper.—Mr Tatlock The paper was not taken away by Lanergan, and it was not delivered by him. All he did was to assist these poor people who could not write for them- selves.—Mr Roper He is not charged with In- terfering with the delivery, but with assuming to write the name of Peter Jones to a voting paper.—The Chairman: Well, jKirliaps in the interests of all parties we had better hear the evidence, but there is nothing against you yet, Mr Tatlock, upon which you need cross-examine.—Peter Jones was then called. He said lie could not write. He recollected his daughter calling his ,ttte: ion to the voting paper, He afterwards met Mr Oliver Jones and told him that Mr Lanergan had signed his paper, and subsequently he made a declar- ation that he had not authorised him to do so.- The Chairman Who did you mean to vote for ? Witness I meant to have voted for Oliver Jones, Corbett, and Griffith Jones.—Mr Tat- lock And Weldon '/—The Chairman Did you mean to give him a ,te Witness (hesi- tatingly) I don't know.—The Chairman Did you or did yon not intend to give him a vote Witness Yes.—The Chairman And Griffith •Tones ?—Witness Yes.—The Chairman (to Mr Roper) Weil, now where are you —Mr Roper I submit that has nothing to do with the case. The defendant is charged with falsely assuming to write the name of Mr Jones. (To Jones) Did you authorise him to put your name there ?—Jones No.—The Chairman But you knew you were not obliged to give the paper to the returning officer ?—Jones He asked for it back.—The chairman Now, Mr Roper, use your discretion, but I advise you to withdraw.— Mr Roper: Well, after that expression of opin- ion from the Beiici-The ('Iiiirni.-tii Well, it is perhaps rather a strong expression, but I can- not hell) it. This is one of those cases which I (I(in't say should have been brought forward, and Mr Lanergan acted rather in a way in which he should not have acted. But if you took the case to all the courts I don't think you would get a convicion. You are quite right in bringing it i forward, and I should advise Mr Lanergan in future to look after his own affairs.—Mr Tat- lock His only object was to fill up those papers as the people, who could not themselves write, wished.—The summons was then withdrawn.

I THE ENGLISH CONGREGATIONAL…

[No title]