The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1872-12-28 00:00:00

TTIE STOURBVIDGE OMER/MR.

ma made use of by you ou that oetaalon, the con-
rut SHOEING SMITHS.—WANTED, s elusions drawn therefrom being incorrect, and
1. ()
tilusely 00(81 MAN, 1-" 11.* has iug been inserted in various newspapers likely
hiskeway, Veterinary Surgeon, Stoarlindge. to do the Order a serious injury. You are re-
ported in the MPS 88 having said that during
AAT ANTED AGENT to SELL BIRMING- the six years.froin 1865 to 1870 inclusive, the
V GAM' GOODS. Wholesale Illustrated List. Order's payments had amounted to £66,445 in
Stalu ti uvel,p for rrply. -Apply, Joh!,Vell, excess of its receipts. This I beg most respect-
fully to deny, and further to shew that instead
of there being a deficiency of the suns of £60,4.15
WANTED, a COVLAUE, with Three Bed- the Society had in that period a surplus of
Booms and Garden. in the neighbourhood l £519,019. The error has evidently been caused
3%oarbridge.—Addresi, W. W.," Post Odiee, Brierley by you mixing up and adding to tho Sick and
Hill. Funeral Fund payments the following items
Court Management Expenses, £282,543; Medi-
cal Attendance upon the Members, £211,618;
District Management Expenses, £28,521; and
for the relief of Widows and Orphans, £61,782,
amounting to £584,464, whereas these items did
not come out of the Sick and Funeral Fund re-
ceipts but were over and above met by additional
contributions of the members paid into these
funds.
I may here state that our General Laws (of
which I enclose a copy marked for your perusal),
make it imperative that the Court Sick and Fun-
eral Fund, Court Management Fund, Widows'
and Orphans' Fund, and District Management
Fund shall be kept separate and distinct, each
Fund being supported and sustained by a sepa-
rate contribution of the members. In the
"Summary" from which you quoted your figures
the receipts of only one of the above Funds (the
Court Sick and Funeral) are given, amounting
to £2,‘.269,223, from which the payments of that
Fund only should have been deducted amount-
ing to £1,750,204, leaving a surplus of £519,019
instead of which you also deduct the payments
of four other funds.
As these funds were of a minor nature to the
Court Sick and Funeral (or vital) fund of the
Order the contributions to such funds were not
returned for compiling, yet I cannot but think
and oilmen my opinion that had you given to
the " Summary " a little thought and enquiry it
would have occurred to you there must have
been other receipts than those given ander the
beading of Sick and Funeral Funds, and espe-
cially as you must have seen that the same
" Summary " contains the worth of five instead
of one fund. I herewith enclose a copy of the
" Summary " referred to, showing from the same
figures from which you quoted, the surplus in
the benefit fund to be £519,019 as previously
stated.
I have felt it my duty as Secretary to the So-
ciety to write to the Times and Daily News cor-
recting the mis-statement, and also to send a
copy of the same and of this letter to those
gentlemen and brethren who were present at the
banquet, with a view to remove any misappre-
hension that may exist in their minds upon the
subject.
I trust this explanation may prove that you
have (unintentionally I believe) given pnblicity
to an incorrect report which cannot but be de-
plored, and 1 can only regret I was not able to
accept the invitation to be present at the banquet
to have contradicted the statement Imade. Per-
mit me, in conclusion, to obsere that I think it
would have shown a kinder spirit, if you, as a
member of the Order, had made enquiry from
some one comp3tent to have explained what
;night not appear clear or explicit, before the
banquet took place, instead of creating a preju-
dice against the society by a wrong rendering
of the statistics ,nd waiting for an explanation
afterwards. It appears to me that the former
course would have been more just to to the so.
ciety, and not derogatory to any gentleman de-
sirens of ascertaining the truth of statistics
which he intended to quote as Chairman of a
Foresters' gathering.
I am, Respected Sir,
Yours obediently,
SAMUEL SHAWCROSS,
Permanent Secretary.
MR. WALTER, M.P., AT READING.

bottle

courage the fallacy of the amountof funds being
any criterion et safety 2 The solvency of no in-
stitution can be measured by a consideration of
the assets alone. This is well e,emplitled by tho
financial condition of our largest county friendly
society. The realized assets are nearly £BO,OOO,
the excess of liabilities about tlOO,OOO.
As, perhsp6, not quite out of the scope of this
1,-tf yr, I woo 1.1 Fin v, ilether t 1,,, Militeutial county
gentlemen who lately held a meeting at Read-
ing quite understand the nature of the deposit
system of society then advocated? It is, in but
a latent form, the same as the yearly societies so
much condemned. Moreover, the principle is
illegal by the strict interpretation of the Frieudy
Societies Act.
The affiliated Orders have, as their best-in-
funned members freely acknowledge, many
flaws, which in time they hope to remove, but
that raised by Mr. Walter is not one.
I remain, Sir, yours obediently,
F. G. P. NEISON.
6, Gt. Jamest-street, Bedford-row,
London,W., Dec. 11th, 1872.

up. 1
when

liiLLBSOWBN.
On Chrietmea-eve an interesting proceediN look place
Iv the National School-room in this town. More than
' 195 had been collected by the Misses Hayes, Trewolla,
and Moore,4l,t)r the purpose of giving a Christmas treat
to the poor Teople who are in receipt of parochial relief,
and other objects of charity, numbering nearly 200 fans
lies. Money, bread, tea, sugar, and ticliets for moat se,r,
, Jlistrilezied by the ladies, who so kicdly attended, aid
j who were some of the principal subscribers to the fund ;
1 whilst many gentlemen, including the Rev. Mr. Ryder,
1 the ohurchivardene, Messrs. Burr and Trewolla, Messrs.
' Granger, Phillips, Bloxham, Dunn, Hayee, Chapman,
' Moore, Sze., were present. Mr. Moore made a few re-
marks to the recipients, and regretted the indisposition
' of their respected rector, the Van. Archdeacon Hone,
which prevented his attendance, and he (Mr. Moore) was
authorised to say that hie uuavoidable absence was a
source of equal regret to himself. .
CHARM; 00 FORORRY. —At the Public Office, on Fri•
day, before Major Lea Smith, William Knight, a labourer,
of Romsley, was charged with, for that he did, by means
of a forged order, obtain by fraudulent means on the
9th inst, a pair of leggings, a pair of gloves, and a whip,
the property of John Hay, saddler. Prisoner was further
charged with attempting to obtain, on the same date, a
pair of boots, the property of Stephen Holgkiss. Priso-
ner was further charged with attempting to obtain a pair
of boots, on the 9th inst, the property of John Blaze.
Each of the cases was proved, and prisoner was commit.
ted to take his trial at the next Worcester Assizes.
ASSAULTING • COUNTY COURT BAILIFF.--At the Petty
Sessions on Tuesday last, before Major F. L. Smith and
James Watson, Req., William Robinson, Ben., and Wile
liars Robinson, jun., butchers, were charged with assault.
lug James Fawkes, a County Court Bailiff, whilst in the
execution of hie duty on the 27th ultimo. Mr. Perry, of
Stourbridge, appeared to prosecute, and, in opening the
ease, said the charge preferred satinet the defendants
i was that of assaulting a County Court Bailiff on the 27th
1 ult. It was well known that persons occupying the office
' of complainant had a very onerous duty to perform, and
if they were allowed to be insulted whilst performing
1 their duty, they would be unable to fulfil the duties of
, the County Court. The information was laid under the
9th and 10th Vie., chapter 95, which enacted that if per.
sons interfered with the liberty of County Court Bailiffs
while in the execution of their duty, the person so offend-
ing was liable to a Sue of £5. He should prove that on
the day in question James Fawkes, and another bailiff,
went to levy an execution on the goods of Richard Row.
Icy. He saw the elder Robinson, who said that the goods
belonged to him, and interfered with him in performing
his duty. The younger Robinson came up at the time,
, and the two began to push him about, and pushed him
against a screen, and ultimately brindled him out of the
house. If he proved this, he should ask the Bench to
fine the defendant', and so show them that they could
not interfere with County Court Bailiffs while in the exe-
cution of their duty.—Joseph Brearley, Assistant-bailiff,
said: I was in company with Fawkes on the above day,
and went to levy an execution on some goods belonging
to Richard Rowley. I first went tojthe defendant's house,
who said that the goods were not Rowley's, and defied
me to take a single chair, or else he would have me locked
i was instructed to levy, and took hold of a chair,
..en the younger Robinson shut the door. The police
were then sent for. Complainant then stood in the road.
—James Fawkes said: On the 27th I went with the last
witness to levy an execution. Went to Robinson's house
first because they both said the goods belonged to them.
Robinson, the elder, opened a book and said that Rowley
owed him £3 10s. I told the defendants I must levy, as
they had no claim. Defendants then closed the door and
said I should not touch a thing. Whilst talking
the younger defendant came in, end said the goods be-
longed to his father, and that I should not take them
away. I then told him I should be sure to take then)
unless the money was paid. I then began to seize, and
Brearley went into the room, and the younger defendant
closed the door; but Brearley put his stick between the
door. I told him to resist, and sent for the police. The
father then came into the house, and the son told him I
had sent for the police. The father then said I should
not have a thing, and if I did not go out of the house
he would soon put me out. He then laid hold of me and
threw me against a partition. The son also laid hold of
me, opened the door, and the two put me out of the
house, and the door was fastened, and we were prevented
from making the levy.—The defence was that Rowley
owed the elder Robinson money, and at Christmas it
would amount to £7.—The Bench considered the case
proved, and that defendants had no right to interfere with
the bailiffs whilst in the execution of their duty, and fined
them 10a each and coats, 18s 6.1.
Toe Lars CHARGE AGAINST Tun Pomo:. Police.
constable Lampett was charged with assaulting Ann
Wragg, of Warley, on the 16th of August last.—Mr.
Shakespeare defended.—Our readers will recollect that
there was a charge brought against Police•constables
Lampett and Rider for an assault, and that the case was
adjourned for the attendance of complainant's husband.
Mr. Shakespeare proposed to go on with his eroBB43lltMi-
nation from the point at which he left off. Cross-exam-
ined : When the police knocked at the door we were all
asleep in bed, undressed, and the lights were out. I
sleep on the ground floor, and there was no light until the
police rapped twice. I went to bed at nine o'clock, and
my daughter just before me. My husband does read the
newspaper for about an hour after he has gone to bed.
He reads to himself. My daughter is not present to-day.
She was here on the last trial day, and name again last
Court day, because I sent for her. She is now a servant
at Old Hill, and has been so stare a fortnight after the ILI
unit took place.—Mr. Shakespeare here remarked that
he was surprised that complainant's daughter wee not
present, and be wished to cross-examine her. All wit.
noses were ordered to attend, and the case was adjourned
for the attendance of the husband of complainant. Had
she been present he should have proved that she was no-
thing better than a --Witness: Mind what you
are saying —Mr. Shakespeare: I do mind what I am
saying—George Wraggs, who was aecommodated with a
chair, said: On the 16th August two knocks came against
my door, and, being • cripple, I sleep on the ground
floor. My daughter slept upstairs. Beard her get up
and ask who was at the door. She then came down
stairs. I struck • light and she opened the door. When
the policeman came in the house he said, "Put the light
out; we don't want the light." I then put it out. The
next I heard my daughter say, "Father, you get up; I
am going upstairs to bed." My wife then struck another
light, and I got up and went into the house—that is into
the next room, out of my room. I asked Lampett what
he wanted, lie said, "To see your daughter, and I must
see her:" I then laid myself down on the sots. He
again asked to see my daughter, and said he must archer
that night particularly, and asked me to call her down.
My wife said, " Father, call her down." I then called
out, " LIMA, I insist upon your coming down, as he wants
to see you particular." The mother also called her down.
My daughter came down and sat beside me. Lampett
came across to her and whispered in her ear. She re-
plied, " If you want to say anything to me, come in
proper hours. Here is my father, say it openly. He is
minter of the house." Lampett then said, "Since you
have bees so nasty, I will one who you have in bed with
you. He then took a candle oft' the table and went up-
stairs. the went to my grand-daughter, a little girl, and
asked her who she had in bed with her. She replied,
"No one bat my aunty." Defendant then went through
a bit of a performance, and peranibalated the rooms, and
then came down stairs with the candle in his hand and
called out," Sergeant Bennett," who, he said, was his
euperior officer. Rider, whom he called " Bennett," then
came into the house and propped himself against the
door, and in the meantime my wife lighted another candle
in her room. Lampett cried out," Who's there?" My
daughter got up, caught hold of Lampett. and said to
him, " Don't enter there; it is my mother's bedroom."
Rider then said to my daughter, .. You mnat not obstruct
the police while in the execution of their duty." Lam.
pett then asked my wife who she had got in bed with her.
She replied," Do you think an old woman like me wants
any one in bed with them. Lampett then began to look
for a trap door, and asked where the backdoor was, and
insisted upon going out of the back door; but instead of
going out of the back door he made a mistake, being
drunk, and went into the dairy. As he was moving about
he fell over some bass brooms, and, catching hold of
them, began to make an onslaught upon them with his
stick, saying "I have got him; I have got him." The
defendant then began to poke the pots and kettles with
his stick. I could not help admiring defendant's style.
Defendant then Upped his stick against the wall. The
wall sounded hollow, because there was formerly • coal
hole. Defendant cried out, "I've found it; I've found
it," meaning the trap door, and he began to poke the
wall. Defendant then turned to me and said, "Is this
your daughter ?" I said, "It ii." Lampett was then
stooping over my daughter, talking to her, and in rearing
himself up he fall against the dining table. With that
o Sergeant Bennett" laid hold of Lampett by the scruff
of the neck, and said, " GO out: you are not flt, or cap-
able of talking," and pot him out of the house. " Ben-
nett " stayed behind for a short time, and asked if any
one in the house could talk sensibly. My wife said,
"Yes, I can." Bennett then said he would talk to her;
but he left. Cross-examined : My wife did tell me what
had taken place at the last meeting. lam fond of read-
ing. Have been a newspaper agent for!? years. Do not
read out aloud, but to myself. My wife CAM reed, and
reads ont.—Sarah Fisher also gave evidence as to the
conduct of the defendant and Police-constable Rider, who,
she said, were both drank ; but she did not see any se.
"atilt committed,—This was the case for complainants.—
Mr. Shakespeare addressed the Bench for the defence,
and contended that it was a tramped up case to injure
the defendant's character, who had been in the force for
some years as a respectable man. He should prove beyond
all doubt that the house of the complainant was nothing
bettet than a brothel. The simple facts were, a short
time previous to this charge some fowls were stolen, and
the defendant, knowing that complainant's house was a
resort for thieves and bad characters, and passing by at
night saw a light in the bedroom, and went and rapped at
the door. As soon aa he had done so the light Was put
out, and the officer thinking it looked suspicious, rapped
again at the door, and obtained admittance. It was true
they had not a search-warrant; but they saw a man loit-
ering about the front of the house, and that was why they
demanded admittance. According to the witnesses for
complainant. Lampett walked about in the various rooms,
and if he had been so drunk as described by complainant,
be could not have done that, and after the Bench had
heard the evidence of his witnesses he should ask them
to dismiss the charge. He also spoke strongly of the fact
that complainant's daughter was not present to give her
evidence, and so give him an opportunity of erose-exam-
ining her. He called Police•constable Rider, who swore
positively that defendant did not assault complainant,
and that they were both perfectly sober ; and the Bench
dismissed the sunimona.—The case agairuit Rider use
withdrawn.

Woo tiles, farmer, of V.uvillr, was
summoned by Joseph Smith for ft Ss wages alleged to
be due. Mr. Addison appeared for somplainant. From
the evidence it appeared that the complainant agreed to
work for the defendant at the rate of £1.2 per year. One •
day he was late in getting home, when the defendant •
ordered him off the premises, and he went, and there was
due to him £9 Ss. The defendant, having been sworn,
said that he sent the complainant to Stonrbridge with •
team of horses and he did not come home until late;
and witness heard that he had been stopping on the road
and keeping the horses out, and he gave him a month's
notice to leave. The agreement was to give and take a
month's notice. There was • crowsuramons by Giles
against Smith for neglect of work. After hearing the
evidence, Giles was ordered to pay the amount claimed
and costs, and Smith to forfeit a month's wages and pay

COSI.
SCHOOL BOARD PROSECUTIONS.—John Timmins and
Samuel Stevens were summoned by H. V. Breton, Inspec-
tor, for neglecting to send their chileren to school. The
inspector proved that Timmins's child had missed attend-
ing school nine times in a fortnight, and Stevens's child
had not attended at all. Timmins was fined ss. including
costs, and the case of Stevens was adjourned for her to
appear before the School Board.
CHARGE AGAINST A Pi:Toucan. —James Henry Lotley,
landlord of the Bose and Crown, was charged with keep-
ing his house open during prohibited hours, on the 19th
inst. Mr. Waldron appeared for defense, and said the
defendant was too unwell to attend. Police•sergeant
Walters said about half-past eleven o'clook on the night
in question he visited defendant's house, and saw the
front door open and * woman came out. She had two
bottles with her which contained drink. He had since
heard that defendant FAS taken ill in the night. Mr.
Waldron pleaded guilty on behalf of defendant, and said
he was taken ill on the night in question, and his wife
was put about a great deal, and was not aware that it was
6o late. Defendant was ordered to pay the costa.
CRAWS OF ASSAOLT.—Josepb and William Smith
were charged with assaulting Benjasahi Smith on the
Ifitli inst. Hr. Addison appeared for the Menlo. The
complainant said on the above date he was at Dooley's,
the Woodman Inn. Defendants were there. and they had
some words together. He was put out of the holies by
the landlord, and when he got octal& defendant* followed
and struck hini, knocked him down, and kiched him
severely. He had been unable to work since. Yr. Addi-
son, in defence, contended that a regular fight took place
between Joseph Smith and complainant, and that the
other defendant did not interfere stall. Witneues were
called who supported this statement. After hearing the
evidence the Bench were of opinion that complainant
had brought the injurias he received on himself, and dis-
missed' the case.
ALLEGED HORSE STK!, LlNG.—Charles Clarke, a vag-
rant, was committed to the Sessions for trial, on the
charge of stealing a horse (valued at £25), belonging to
Mr. Firkins. Prisoner was found offering the horse for

sale at £l7.
INTENT TO COMMIT A FELONT.—At the Police Court,
on Thursday, before Mr. I. Spooner, Stipendiary, James
Nicholls, of Round Oak, was charged with being on pee'
miles at Dudley-street, Ronnk Oak, on the 24th instant,
with intent to commit a felony. Mr. Homer appeared
for the aefence.—Plimbe Beckley, wife of Daniel Beck-
ley, fruiterer, Round Oak, said on the above date she
locked a store-room up, and took the key away with her.
There were eggs and apples in the room. About an hour
afterwards she went into the brewhouse and she heard the
noise of a door. She went to the store-room and found
the door was open. She saw a man who looked very
much like prisoner, but she could not swear to him, She
saw a man named Thomas James in the entry. Cross-
examined: The man was like the prisoner. He had •
light overcoat on. There are houses adjoining the ware-
house on either side.—Thomas James, railway wagon in-
spector, said he lived next door to prosecutor, and knew
the store house in question. On the above date, about
five o'clock, Mrs. Beckley called out " Who's there." He
looked round and saw the prisoner near the bottpm of
the place, about 10 feet from the warehouse. He was
going in the direction of the street. He had known the
prisoner for 12 months.—Poliee-constable Goodfellow
said he apprehended the prisoner on the 24th, about half
-
past six o'clock at his own house, and charged him with
breaking into a store.room belonging to Mr. Beckley, in
the Dudley Road. He said he had never been near it.—
Francis James, son of Thomas James, said he was with
his father on the above date. He saw the door open, and
on pushing it to, it went against a man.—Mr. Superinten-
dent Mills said prisoner bore a very bad character, and
had been previously convicted.—After Mr. Homer had
addressed the Bench for the defence, Mr. Spooner gen.
tenced the prisoner to three months' hard labour, as a
rogue and a vagabond.
DRUNK AND RlOTOUS.—krthur Webb was charged with
being drunk and riotous, on the 14th lust, at Brockmoor.
Mr. Benjamin Wood proved the case, and defendant was
fined 10s and costs, or 14 days.
ASSAULTING • WOMAN. Charles lAttlewood was
charged with assaulting Mary Leese, at Pensnett, on the
15th hat. Complainant said on the above date, about 10
o'clock she was to the street, when defendant met her.
lie used abusive and insulting language towards her, and
drubber twice on the face, maluag her mouth bleed.
Defendant denied the offence. Aline of 1016 d mad coats

Z;;117414.---
A Was Biatunt.—Georp Vale wee charged with ea-
mulling tun Vale, his wile, on the 26th alt. Complain.
at asked the Bench to allow her to withdraw it.—Kr.
Spooner ordered defendant to Ind two sureties to keep
the peace.