The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1880-12-11 00:00:00

BBIERLEY HILL.

OLD HILL.

PERNITTIN GAMING.—At the Police Court Oa
LOCAL BOARD.—An ordinary monthly meeting
-.
of this Board was held on -Monday afternooe at toe We n dee. b.lfori= M's rs. W. Basano, C. Hol-
eJ. arson. Jane Stanley, landlady of the
Town Hall. Mr. M. Rollinson preeided, and there '
were ilso present Mesrs T. Fercalay, 1. Fieeth, JO. to• 1111,1 was summoned for permit
W. Waldron, B. Browning, G. Grithtl s, W. Mac- ti'ig g,eidieta 11 ,ere licensett iTemises
milltn, R. Thomp,on, and R. B. Guest. The Wright appal ed to pi osecute and Mr. Stokes des
Medical Officer of Health (Dr. A-hmead) a ported
fen ed.—lt app aied that on toe night ef tee 29th
13 deaths during the month, the death-rate being uq. there was a disturbance in the neighbourhood
of .defendant'e house, and from something a woman
13-2 per thousand per annum, as compared with 8 4
in the corresponding week of last year. Two of the told a police-ollicer. who went to quell it, he west
deaths wore from zymotic diseases. The existence into the house, and found the woman's husband
of a veral nuisances in different parts of the and three other men playing at dominoes for, it was
district were called attention to. The Surveyor alleged, ale and money.—The defence was that the
(Mr. Beckley) read a report containing particulars men were only playing for pastime.—The Bench
of his visit to Aylesbury for the purpose of inspect- tined defendant Rat. and costs. Mr. Bassano re-
jug the sewage filter beds of the town, and obtain marking that a heavi;r fine would have been ii -
lag information with a view to the adoption of flicted but that the magistrates believed defendant
some sitnila,r scheme for Brierley HilL Mr. did not wilfully allow the gaming to be carried on.
Beckley, in reply to Mr. Waldron, said the works Dituenesrerress.—flarry Cooke and John Nelson,
he in-peee ed might have cost £2,000. an 1 their
both of Tividale, were each fined 20s and costs, or,
annu ti cost to the town, which hail a pepulatian of in default, 28 days' imprisonment, for being drunk
and disorderly there on the 20th ult. Defendatils
about 8,000 inhabitaws was £2oo.—The report was
L
referred to the General Purposes Cornmittee.—The had both een previeusly couvicted,
Finance Committee's report recommended for pay-
ment accounts amounting on the main road account
to £29 Ss 6d.; other roads a count, £l4 19s. 4d ;
. sundry expenses, £55 19s. 100. ; sanitary account,
£63 Os. 61. ; i iiprovement account, 16s. 7d. The
collector's statement ehowed. that during the ,
inomh le had received £2BO Os. Bd. of the general
district rate. The balance in the, hands of tha
treasurer amounted to £1,651 12s. 4d.—The report
was adopted.
A Boy KILLED.—On Sunday afternoon, a bot•
n tmed William H tines, aged ni ie years, the son of
John Haiues, Forge-row, Brettell Lane, was sent
to a Sunday school. On his journey thither he
amused himself by swinging on a door in the
b mndary wall of the Brierley forge. Suddenly a
portion of the wall gave way, carrying the do ,r
with it in its fall, and the whole mass fell upon the
boy, kid ng him upon the spot.
TRANSFERS.—At the Police Court, 011 MOn lay,
before Messrs. F. Evers and G K. Harrison, the
following transfers were allowed :—Samson and
Lion, Brockmoor, from Henry Gallowmore to
Samuel Hill ; Three Furnaces Inn, Level Street,
from Laureeuce Jackson to B tsy R wley ;IRA Lion
Inn, ‘Vonibourne, from John Franeis Hiddings to
William Jones ; Shingler's Arms, Pensn tt, from
Bostock to Henry Male.
GAME TRESPASS.—John Ashton and William
Shaw, both of Kinver, were charged with trespasq.
ing upon land. and killing and taking away two
par ridges from the land, which is in the occupation
of Ge mge Dudley. James Warr, keeper, said that
on the 18th ult. he was:at Kinver arid SAN' the two
defendants (together with a man named Jones, who
did not appear). They were loitering about the
cross roaus near the Pigeoa House Farm, A farm
bailiff was going past and Jones and Shaw got out
of his sight After the bailiff had passed by, the
three defendant's went down to a stile. fishten
took a gun from his pocket and crouched down
under the wall within 15 yards from where a
number of partridges were. One partridge was
killed and another was not qui 3 killed. Shaw
picked up the birds and gave theta to Jones. He
(witness) was about 18 yards from eshton when he
tired off the gun.—Mr. Waldron oil beh tlf of the
defendant Shaw called three wit neese,s who pr tve,d,
that at the time stated by the keeper. lie was
near the pigeon house farm. he Wit 3 at work at a
coal wharf at Kinver.—John Bishop, puddler of
Potter's Cross, Kinver, was called for Ashton, and
said that at the time the keeper stated that he saw
liii ne ir the above farm he was at Cookley.—The
Bench dismissed the summons against S haw ; but
adjournea the ease of Ashton to hear further
evidenc
NEGLECTING T) SUPTO:IT A FATHER. Alfred
ISloce.e wet; summoned to show cause why he should
not maintain his father.—Defendant now agreed to
take him into his own home.—The Bench made an
order on defendant to pay 2s. per week for his
further maintenance.
OBSTRUCTION —William Radford, Samuel Green,
and Daniel Pearson were summoned for obstruct-
ing the footpath on the 21st ult.—Nlr. Waldron
Defended after hearing the evidence the inagis-
trates had a d LIU in their minds and gave the
dyfendamts the benefit and dismissed the sum-
monses.

A WAGES CLAINI. Isaiah Badis-in, gat& ner,
Wombourn, sued Mr. Edwin Steer, re,.ilent at that
place, and carrying on business as a bacon and
cheese factir at Wolv-erhampton, to recover the
sum of £2 4s, alleged to be due as wages in lieu of
a fortnight's notice.—Mr. W. 0. C. Addi-on appeared
fur the plain if, and Mr. B. Willcock (Queen-street,
Wolverhampton) as for the defendant.—Plaintiff's
ulde was that he was engaged by the defendant as
a gardener, it tying understood that a fortnight's
notice was to be given or takcn on either side be-
fore terminating the engagement. He alleged that
because he ai.d his wife would not s:gn an agree-
ment to forego a claim for wages which his wife hail
earned in defendant's employ, defendant discharged
him without notice, He had been at work under
the agreement. The effect of the agreement as read
was that plaintiff's wife should forego her claim,
and he (plaintiff) was then to be received into de-
tendan 's employ.—Defendant's case was that he
had given the ploilitiff a fortnight's notice, which
had expired. He agreed to re-engage him if he
and his wife would sign the agreement. Plaintiff
signed it, but the wife ref used to do so, and then
he (defendant) ordered plaintiff to leave the pre-
mises. No work was done under the agreement.—
Plaintiff, however, said he worked an hour after his
wife refused to sign -the agreement. —The Bench
ordered defendant to lay .22 45., the amount
claimed.