The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-06-19 00:00:00

.filll)6E Oi-Skill,43.Vii7._.

COUNTY COURT.

Hyde v. Turney.—At the County Court, on Satur-
day, before Mr. Rupert Kettle, judge, this was an
action in which the plaintiff, who was a gardener,
sought to recover £1 wages, which had not been paid
him. It appears that the defendant, Mr. Turney,
leather and parchment manufacturer, of this town,
engaged plaintiff at a salary of £1 a week, with a
promise of half:a pig at Christmas, if his services were
satisfactoi y. After plaintiff was with defendant a
short time, the latter only paid him 16s per week,
alleging as his reason for doing so that plaintiff was
much slower in his work than he should have been.
Plaintifl stayed on for a few weeks, and the action
was to recover the four shillings per week which had
been deducted;from hi,§ wages. His Honour gave a
verdict for plaintiff, for whom Mr. Prescott appeared.
"Immins v. Gogzell. This was an action to re-
cover £5 Gs 6d, for goods sold and delivered. Mr.
Prescott appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Perry for the
defendant.—Plaintiff is a fish dealer and fruiterer,
and defendant is also a fruiterer. There had been
several transactions between them, and defendant
now admitted all the items with the exception of £2
is, which was for four baskets of potatoes which
plaintiff alleged he sold to defendant on the 7th of
June, 1874.—Plaintiff having stated his case, John
Squires was called to corroborate. Defendant and
his son both stoutly denied that any such transac-
tion as the one alleged ever took place between him-
self and plaintiff. Plaintiff's book, in which the
various transactions were entered, was :here handed
in to his Honour, and after the latter had carefully
inspected it for some time, he gave a verdict for the
defendant, grounding his judgement on the evidence
afforded by the book.

Ford and Addison v. .Rollinson. This was an
action to recover 17s 441 for inserting an advertise-
ment in the " Brierley Hill Advertiser." The ad-
vertisement was that of an application for a license
by defendant. Defendant seemed to think the charge
excessive, as he had only been charged five shillings
for the same advertisement in the" County Express.'
His Honour, however, held that the plaintiffs had a
perfect right to make their own charges, and accord-
ingly gave a verdict for the full amount claimed, to-
gether with five shillings to Mr. Ford for his expen-
ses in attending the Court.
Reeves v. Croiy. This was an action in which
plaintiff, who had been cook at the Talbot Hotel,
sought to recover a month's wages in lieu of notice.
Plaintiff said she was engaged by Mrs. Croly at a
salary of £lB per year, as cook, and she was either
to give or take a month. After she had been there
a fortnight, however, she found the work much
heavier than she expected, and told defendant that
she could not stay. Defendant expressed he rself
anxious to keeplher, and:offered to raise her wages to
£22. a year if she would stay. Shortly afterwards
defendant discharged her without giving her notice.—
Mr. Collis cross .examined plaintiff to show that she
gave way to excessive drinking, which she denied, but
admitted that Mrs. Croly hadeften complained about
the quantity of beer and spirits that was consumed
in the kitchen. Defendant was called and stated
that she engaged defendant at Worcester. She
engaged her for one month on trial. A week or ten
days after-she had been there, she (defendant) told
plaintift that up to then she had done very well, and
that if she continued to give such satisfaction, she
would raise her wages to .222. a year. Towards the
end of the month, however, she had frequently to
complain to plaintiff about brandy and beer going
into the kitchen. She had an interview with plain-
tiff towards the end of the month, and the latter said
she would not stay after Saturday to be a "school-
mistress." She then told plaintiff she would pay her
at once if she would go, and the latter did so, de-
fendant paying her wages up to the end of the month.
His Honour gave a verdict for defendant.
Parker v. King.—ln this case, Mr. Wyndham,
from the office of Messrs. Curser and Walker, solici-
tors, made an application for .2150, which had been
paid into that Court by Messrs. Kin.. and Co., on
the occasion of an action having been brought against
them by Mr. Parker, for an alleged breach of contract
The case had been taken to a superior court, and.
tried at Gloucester assizes, and was afterwards re-
ferred to Mr. Young, barrister, as arbitiator, who
had made al, award for Messrs. King and Co., Mr.
Parker being ordered to pay thew hole of the costs
of the arbitration, and also those incurred in prepara-
tion for the trial at Gloucester Assizes. His Honour
said he could not do anything in the case without
evidence, and to get that the applicant must make
an affidavit, and then he (the Judge) would be em-
powered to act upon it.
ACTION FOR EJECTMENT.—RoIIinson v. StUrMarl.—
This was an action in which plaintiff sought to reco-
ver possession of a house belonging to him, which
was now tfnanted by defendant.—Mr. Prescott was
for the latter.—Plaintiff stated that the, house be-
longed to him, and that he had served defendant
with notice to quit, one the latter refused to do so.
In cross-examination, plaintiff admitted that he had
mortgaged the property to the Haiesowen Building
Society. Mr. Prescott submitted that according to
the 223rd rule it was necessary for the real owner to
serve a tenant with notice to quit, and that in this
case the real owners of the property were the Hales-
owen Building Society, to whom it was mortgagee,
who had not moved in the matter, and therefore, the
notice was not legal. His Honour, however, held
that the rule quoted did not apply and made an order
for defendant to leave in 14 days.
Budge v. Mills.—This was an action to recover.2l2.
6s 6d, balance of account. Mr. Clulow was for
plaintiff, and Mr. Homer for defendant.—Plaintiff
said his name was Henry Rudge, and he was a "nail
logger," living at Halesowen. He had supplied de-
fendant with a quantity of nails, amounting altogether
to 47 pounds' worth, and had received various sums
of money from him, leaving a balance due of -212 Os
6d. On the the 10th of November last he went to
defendant's warehouse, and he (defendant) said he
had been to Birmingham; and had got no money, but
he would pay him double the usual amount on the
following Saturday. Defendant did not pay him the
money, as promised. On being cross-examined
plaintiff said defendant did not pay him £5 on the
10th of November, on the 28th of the same month,
or on the 12th December.—Defendant, on being
called, alleged that he did pay plaintiff £5 on each
of the •above dates, and handed in a book to his Hon-
our in which he had made memoranda of the various
transactions he had had with plaintiff. His Honour
scrutinised this long and carefully. It seems that
no receipts had ever been given on either side, and
that defendant trusted to his memory in the matter.
—His Honour, after having inspected the book
handed in by defendant, confessed his inability to
decide the case. As the great difficulty he lay under
was that plaintiff and defendant were apparently
honest men, and it was simply a question of memory
between them. Under these circumstances, he should
not like to decide a case upon his own responsibility,
involving £l5, and should recommend them to have
it tried by a jury.—Both Mr. Clulow and Mr. Homer
however, said they should prefer having it tried by
his Honour, and, eventually, it was adjourned for a
month, to enable either party to bring any further
evidence that might throw additional light on the
case.

ANNUAL MEETING OF COMMISSIONERS.

The annual meeting of Commissioners for the elec-
tion of a chairman and the appointment of auditors,
was held in the Corn Exchange, on Wednesday after-
noon last. Mr. W. J. Turney presided; and there
were also present Messrs. Billingham, Stringer,
Hughes, Woolley, Griffin, Perkin, Kelly, Allehurch,
Packwood. _ - -

The Clerk read the minutes of the last annual
meeting.
The Chairman then said it was now his duty to
inform them that his year of office had now expired,
and it was now their business to appoint a chairman
in his place.
Mr. Hughes said he rose with great pleasure to
propose a gentleman as chairman for the ensuing
year, who from his general business habits in his own
business—and he thought when a man attended well
to his own he might safely be entrusted with the
buitmess of others—he did not think they could have
a better chairman than Mr. Laban Packwood. He
had now become an old tradesmen in this town; in
fact had become a grandfather. It made him (the
speaker) feel the lapse of time to think of his nephew
being a :grandfather. Independent of his relation
ship, however, he thought they could not do better
than have a man—certainly they might have one with
more show, but he liked a plodding business man—
who:was possessed of thorough business habits, and
had some stake.in the town.
This was seconded by Mr. Bfflingham, and carried
unanimously. Mr. Packwood then took the chair
which had been just left by Mr. Turney.
Mr. Billingham proposed that a vote of thanks he
accorded to the esteemed gentleman who had just
retired from the chair. As their friend Mr. Hughes
had said when mentioning their present chairman, it
was desirable that they should have gentlemen of
business Waits in that position. In parting with
their late chairman they were parting with a gentle-
man of great business tact, and one who was largely
engaged in btrsiness in the town. He wished there
were more gentlemen of a like stamp to Mr. Turney
in this town, as they would add to its wealth and
give greater stability to the place. The manner in
which he had discharged his duties in that chair dur-
ing the past year he need not touch upon. Consider-
ing the number and variety of his business engage-
ments he thought he had devoted a large portion of
his time to the direction of the business of the town;
and he would propose a vote of thanks to Mr. Turney
for the efficient way in which he had discharged his
duties during the past year—(applause).
Mr. Huges seconded the proposition, and in doing
so said that although the eulogium passed upon Mr.
Turney was! a very high one, it was not in reality
as high as he deserved. He, therefore, had great
pleasure in seconding the vote of thanks.
It was then put to the meeting, and carried unani-
papugly.

Mr. Turney said he begged to thank them very
sincerely for their kindness in proposing him a vote
of:thanks for being their chairman during the past
year. He was sorry he could not assist the Board
asLmuch asjle should have liked to have done, but
having so much business on his hands he found it
impossible to do so. At the same time, he had the
interest of that Board and the town at large at heart,
and he should at all times esteem it a pleasure to
do whatever he could to assist the deliberations of
that Board. He begged to thank the gentlemen of
that Board for the courtesy he had experienced from
them whilst in office, during the past year.
Mr. Packwood then briefly returned thanks to them
for appointing him chairman for the ensuing year,
and said he would endeavour to carry out the business
as well as it lay in his power to do FO.
The Clerk next handed in the accounts for thepast
year; and on the proposition of Mr. Billingham sec-
onded by Mr. Stringer they were passed.
Although it was the, annual meeting, and it is
ustomary for the ratepayers to attend in large num-
bers to elect the auditors, for the first time since
the Board was formed there was not a single rate-
payer present with the exception of the clerk andthe
members of the Board. The duty of electing them
therefore devolved upon the chairman; and the names
of Messrs. D. Bottomley, W. H. Moore, D. Skidmore,
and Henry James were selected by the Board, and
recommended to the notice of the chairman, and the
latter gentleman selected Messrs. Bettomley and
Moore for the office.

It will be recollected that last year the Board had
some controversy with Mr. Knott, who claimed to
have the sole right to audit the books of the com-
missioners, and

Mr. Woolley now asked whether there was any
Legal objection to having the accounts audited on
;he present occassiou.
Mr. Hughes remarked that Mr. Woolley had now

touched upon a very sore point. They ha7d tried to
get information upon the subject but had not been
able to do so, and they were, therefore, obliged to go
on in the usual way.

A discussion then ensued as to the payment of the
auditors, and eventually it was resolved to give them
three guineas. _ _

There was no other business.

APPOINTMENT.—Mr. F. Simms, son of Mr. Hy.
Simms, of this town, late pupil and assistant of
Dr. Arnold, of Winchester Cathedral, has been ap-
pointed organist of the parish church (All Saints),
Ryde. There were thirty-two applications for the
post, of which number, eight being selected to
play in public competition. The umpire on the
occasion was Mr. Richardson, organist of Salisbury
Cathedral.

HIGHWAY OFFENCE.-At the Police Court, yes-
terday, before Messrs. C. P. Noel and i. L. Freer,
Abraham Davenport was charged with allowing a
cow to stray on the highway, at Belbroughton, on
the 9th inst. Police-constable Payne proved the
case. Ordered to pay the costs.

OFFENCE AGAINST THE RAILWAY COMPANY.—
Arthur Clarke, of Oldbury, was charged with tra-
velling on the Great Western Railway, on the 29th
May, he not having previously paid his fare. De-
fendant was further charged with entering a car-
riage whilst in motion. William Woodward, por-
ter, said that the defendant came by the 12.49 train
from Birmingham. Defendant had no ticket, and
he attempted to get into a first-class carriage,
whilst the train was in motion. The train was
going at a good pace, and he had to push the de-
fendant into the carriage, or he would have been
under the wheels. Defendant had no tickets.—
James Hume Phillips, station-master, said that
his attention was called to the defendant, who, he
found, was in a first-class carriage, smoking. Mr.
Brooks complained of the defendant's conduct,
and he (witness) had to fetch him out. Mr. Led-.
brooke, Inspector, produced the bye-laws. The
Bench considered it a very bad case. If defendant
did not value his own life, the company must pro-
tect the lives of the public. They fined defend-
ant 20s in each case, and costs.

CHARGE OF THREATS.—Anne Hill, Mary Arnie
Hill, and Squire Hill, were charged with using
threatening language to Fanny Hill, on the 11th
inst. Mr. Collis appeared for • the complainant.
The threat complained of was that Anne Hill
said she would pull ;complainant's heart out. A
witness gave corroborative evidence. Mary Anne
and Squire Hill were discharged, and Annie was
was bound over in £lO to keep the peace for six
months.
AGGRAVATED ASSAULT UPON A WIFE.— Samuel
Tonks, or the Lye, was charged with an aggrava-
ted assault upon his wife, Phoebe Tonks, on the
29th May.—Mr. Perry defended.—Complainant, an
old woman, was accommodated with a chair as she
was lame. She said that she had been married to
the defendant seven weeks before the last assault
took place. On the night in question she had
share of two pints of ale with her husband, at
Ba,shford's. Her husband went home first. When
she got there her husband caught hold of her by
the bright arm, and threw her out of the house.
After being out of the house for some time, she
went into the house to fetch her goods out of it.
She found that her husband had burnt her bonnet
and other things. Her husband then threw her
across the road. She went in again, when the de-
fendant caught hold of a rollinc, pin, and beat her
about the head, arms, back, and legs, until she was
covered with bruises. He told her that he would
finish her before he had done. She was still lame
from the blows. Cross-examined: I had not been
married but seven weeks before it took place. I
was at the Cross with my husband, and had a pint
of ale. Left Bashford's at half-past ten o'clock.
Was not drunk. Did not talk filthy things about
my husband. Was locked out of the house four
hours. I did take a clock out of the house, and
my clothes, because my husband had burnt my
bonnet, handkerchief, and other goods. I did not
throw stones at the window for four hours, but the
defendant was beating me from three o'clock until
half-past five o'clock.—ltobert Luther Bayley, sur-
geon, said he was called to attend the complainant.
He found her with two black eyes, and she was one
mass of bruises from head to foot.—Mr. Perry ad-
dressed the Bench in mitigation of punishment,
and called witnessesito prove that complainant was
drunk, and aggravated her husband.—The Bench
committed defendant to Worcester for 14 days, and
they should have inflicted more severe punishment
but he had already been in prison some time.

CAUTION TO OWNERS OF -DOGS.—Willian; Dut-
ton, watchmaker, residing in Coventry-street, was
summoned by Alfred Green, for allowing a fero-
cious dog to be at large. Complainant proved that
dog in question had bitten his son, William Green,
on the leg sand finger, and several other persons.
He did not wish to press the case against the de-
fendant, but thought the dog should be destroyed.
Defendant's wife appeared, and said she was from
home at the time, and denied that the dog was a
ferocious one. Defendant was ordered to keep the
dog chained up, and when loose to have it under
proper control, and pay costs,_

- CRUELTY TO A DONKEY.—Henry Hodgkiss was
charged with cruelty to a donkey, at Cradley, on
the 25th inst. Police-constable Roe proved that
he saw the defendant kick the donkey several
times. Fined 5s and costs.

DRUNK AND REFUSING TO QUIT. - Benjamin
Billingham, of emdley, was charged with being
drunk and refusing to quit the Bridge Inn, Crad-
ley, on the 15th instant. George Bailey, landlord,
proved the offence. Found guilty. Fined 5s and
costs.—Bridget Brannan, a well-known character,
was fined is and costs for using obscene language
in the street, on the 13th inst. Police-constable
Dunn proved the case.