The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1874-06-27 00:00:00

COUNTY COURT.

ACTION FOR A HORSE. —At the County Court
held on Thursday, before Mr. Loxdale Warren,
Deputy Judge, this was an scion brought by
Daniel Parsons, of Spring Hill, Halesowen,
against John Samuel Dawes, of the Mound Pits,
for £l4, the value of a horse sold to the defend-
ant, on the 18th day of April. Mr. Holberton
appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Perry for the de-
fendant.—Plaintiff said that he sold the defend-
aot a horse for £l4. Defendant was to have the
horse on trial for a day to work down the pits,
and if it did not suit he was ta send it back next
d iy, together with the tackle. The tackle was
•.nt back next day; but the horse was not sent
back for three weeks and a d iy. When the
irse was sent beck and put into the stable the
hock of the left leg was very much swollen, and
the skin and hair knocked off both the hips of
the horse, and it was in very bad condition, lie
told the man who I rought the horse back he
✓ould nut keep it, ems turned it out of th stable
into the road. Ile man refused to take the
horse back, and it was ultimately pounded, and
died in a few dap,. The horse was in good con-
dition when sold, and worth the money. On
cross-examination witness said that he gave nine
pounds for it, but the person he bought it off
offered him a profit for it.—George Smith (police
officer) and Charles Parrish gave evidence as to
the condition of the horse previous to its being
Bold, and after it was pounded. Charles Hackett
els gave evidence as to the good condition the
horse was in when in the possession of plaintiff.
—Mr. Perry addressed his Honour for the de.
fence, and contended that the he' si was ineiely
lent on trial, not bought; and that if the plain-
tiff wanted the horse he might have had it by
applying for it.—George Dawes said that the
plaintiff brought the horse to him, and be did
not hear anything said about ..£ll having to be
paid fur it. The manager was present duriug
the interview. Be recollected the horse going
down the pit. It was in a very poor condition.
Plaintiff lent him the horse to go to work down
the pit to get it in good condition.—John TOW -
kins, manager, said that the plaintiff asked him
to bay a horse. Witness told him he would buy
it if it suieed him. He arranged with the de-
fendant to Sell fur it he wanted to try
him. and he did send for it. Witness was to
have him as long as he liked, and if the horse
did not suit he was to send it back. He sent
Josel,l2 Andrews for the horse, and put it down
the pit to work. After the horse had been at
I work some time be saw the plaintiff and told
him it would not gait, and In throe or four days

sent it back. On cross-eKamination witness said
there was no bremish on the horse when it was
sent back, and that the plaiutifftvht,d
The pit is a good place in which to get a bors,
in condition.—William Brooks, doggy at Messrs.
Dawes' pits. He saw plaintiff, who told him that
he had a horse that was no good to him, as he
had no work for ft to do. Witness told him that
his (witness's i master wanted a horse or two, and
if it suited the manager would buy it. The
horse was sent up the pit all right, and as good
as when it we'll. down. This being the case, his
Honour said that Davis and Toinkiu's evidence
was contradictory. If he believed one he most
' disbelieve the other, and gave a verdict for plain-
tiff for £ll, and costs.

ACTION FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF A WIFE.—
'Wakeman v. Yeommis.—This was a ease heard in
private at the last Court, before Mr. Loxtlide War-
ren (deputy-judge), and was an action in which
i Mr. Yeomans, a pawnbroker, of Oldbury, was sued
by his father-in-law, for the maintenance of his
wife.—Mr. Perry represented plaintiff, and Mr. 1
Shakespeare, of Oldbury, was for defendant.—As
the matter was heard in private, we are unable to
give any of the facts of the ease. On Thursday,
the deputy-judge delivered his verdict publicly.
He said the two questions for him to decide were—
what was the real net income of defendant, and
what share of that ought he to pay for the main- I
tenanee of his wife, they having separated by
mutual consent? In the evidence before him, he
found the defendant's net income to be £176 per
annum; and upon a review of the principle recog-
nised by the Divorce Court in appointing perman-
ent alimony, and cases upon the subject, he found
the usual allowance when the wife had no property
was one-third of her husband's income. He found
also there was usually an increase or decrease of
such allowance, depending upon which of the par-
ties had charge of the children. Also, that the
Court had power to take into consideration the fact
I as to which of the parties was the cause of the
separation. As there was no defence to the action
on any of the usual grounds, he inferred that at
any rate the wife was not to blame. Under these
circutusta,nces, and considering that the husband
had four children to keep and educate, he should
award plaintiff one-fourth of her husband's income.
His verdict would therefore be lis a week for the
period claimed. It was arranged that the amount
fixed upon by the Judge should be the amount of
permanent alimony.

The maniag,e already announo,ed a,;_arranged

between Thomas Eades Walker, Esq., M.P., and
All will takr 'on Tuesday, the

Miss E. S..s.ilsopp, will take place ....esday, t.
7t of July, at St. George's Church, Hanover
Square.
FREEMASONRY.—TIie Provincial Grand Lodge
meeting, which was held in the Corn Exchange,
Stourbridge, on Tuesday, at twelve o'clock when
the ordinary annual business was transacted.
After the closing of the Ledge, the brethren, who
mustered in strong force, walked in procession
to St. Thomas's Church, where an excellent pan•
sage on Freemasonry was delivered by Dr. Omens
of Dudley, chaplain to the lodge. The church
was well filled, and a collection Was made for
charitable purposes. The brethren afterwards
dined together at the Talbot Hotel.

OF Woha.—At the Petty Sessions
held yesterday, before Colonel Fletcher, Messrs.
B. Littlewood, C. P. Noel, and C. Cochrane,
Biatha Haucocks was charged with neglecting
toe work of Benjamin Hadley, on the lith lust;
and complainant claimed It as compensation.
Krotn the evidence of the latter it appeared that
he engaged the defendant to make bricks, and
on the above date defendant left his work. The
defence was that there was no water to make the
bricks, The Bench did not consider the case
proved, and dismissed the summons.
CAUTION TO LOG OWNER'. - The following
persons, were summoned by Superintendent
Freeman for allowing their dogs to be at large,
and ordered to pay do each, costs :—Enitua (Lin-
den. John Hobbs, Joseph Taylor, James Wood,
and Isaac t)tew.

COAL STF.ALING.—CaroIine Hart (13), Sarah
Pearson (12), Rosanna Robinson (14), and Eliza-
beth Pearson were charged with stealing a
quantity of coal, on the 23rd inst, the property
of Messrs. Harper and Moores, of Gradley.
James Brought&ll proved the case. Hart who
had been previously convicted, was fined 5s and
coats; the other defendants 2s each ; in default
seven days.
STEALING FLOWERS. Edward Jarratt was
chaged with stealing nine geraniums and six
roses on the 20th instant, the property of Pidlip
Walker. Mr. Perry appeared to prosecute, and
said as defendant pleaded guilty, lie should leave
the Bench to deal with it as leniently as they
thought proper. The defendant and his father
had hitherto borne good characters. Defendant
expressed his regret, and said he had taken them
whilst under the influence of drink. The 13: nch
said it was a bad case, and fined defendant 20s
and costs.

ASSAULTING TIIE POLICE.— John Edge end
Henry Smith were charged with assaulting Pm
lice-constable Charles Smith, whilst in the exe-
claw' of his duty, on the 22nd inst. Mr. Wall
defencieti, and ti,ked that Edge be hilowarl to
give evidence on belialf of Smith, be having
been served with a subpaina. The application
was granted.—A 111:1x1 named Brettle, who was
also ',barged with assaulting the police, pleaded
guilly.—Complainant soil that there was a dis-
turbance at the Star inn, Coventry-street.
was called in, and the landlord add he had been
Biettle was wrestling wi:h another man,
when he (Brettlid struck witness on the ii outh,
and pulled his hair, and Smith kicked hint seve-
ral nines. Well addressed the Bench far
and admitted t,,at the police wereatimul-
Ltd, but not by his- client; and he should call

A itnesses to prove that. Eliza Cartwright, Mary
Watkins, and Anne Urn gave elidence, and
said they did not see Smith kirk the policeman,
Out saw others kica birth—John Edge was then
teen charged with assaulting Poliee.consmble
Smith. The latter Siid that Edge kicked him
our times, and that when he did he said, You
, I will give you something now for
making we pay 5s last week. Several witnesses

were untied io; the defendant, who said they did
not see Edge kick the police-officer. Previous
convictions were proved against Edge and Smith
and the Bench fined them lOs each and costs.
REFUhING TO QUIT.—John Woodhouse and

Edward Brettle Were charged wiii-;;:eiZni-o
quit the Star Inn, Coventry-street, on the 22nd
thst, and for assaulting John Cox. Complainant
said that the defendants came into his house at
ten minutes to eleven o'clock. Woodhouse was
sick, when he ordered hint out of the house. He
refused to go, and the two defendants caught
hold of him, got hitu down, tore hi o waistcoat off,
and his two shirts; and Brettle pulled a lot of
his beard out. Woodhouse, in defence, said he
was drunk, and did not recollect what occurred

Brettle gala that Cox struck him first with a life
preserver. Brettle was Clued 10s, for assaulting
the police-5s in each case, awl costs; and
Woodhouse was fined 2s Gil in earth case, and
costs.

CHARGE OF TIIREATENIYO.—Martha Knowles
and James Hart were charged with using threat-
ening language to William Robins, on the 19th.

Mr. Perri: appeared for complainant, and -31;:.
Prescott for the defendants. From the evidence
of complainant it appeared that he gave evidence
against the defendants on the previous Friday.
When at the Lye the female defendant caught
lio.d of him and threatened to cut his heart out,
and was very violent. Hart also threatennd him
and he was afraid they would ao him some in-
A uituess gate corroborative evidence. The
Case was withdrawn on defendants paying costs,
and promising not to offend again.
ASSAULT CASE.—Henry }Nihonld and James

Miaward were charged with assaulting John H.
Bloomer, on the 22ud im-t. Complainant said
he was going towards home when he met defend-
ants and a mob of persons. 'rho called him a
tory . Robinson tore his coat in pieces,
and Millward struck him. Defendants denied
the assault, and complainant struck them first.
Several v.itnesses were ealied- Defendants were
fined 2s 6d each and costs.
ANOTHER CASE.—Rebreca Hazledine was fined

10;aud coats, fur assaulting Ann
on the ltith inst. Mr. Wall appeared fur com-
plainant. It appears that the parties are neigh-
bours, and on the above date defendant, who was
drunk, went into complainant's house and beat
her in a shameful manner.