Swansea and Glamorgan Herald, and South Wales Free Press. — 1854-08-16 (Swansea, West Glamorgan, Wales)

NEATLI COUNTY COURT. This Court was held on Saturday last, before T. Fol. center, Esq., Judge. The amount of business was rather less than the average, there being aliont IWO plaints entered ; the majority of them involved small amounts only. The following were the principal plaints heard. William Morgan v. David Morgan. In this case the plaintiff wen a grocer at Ystrad, and sued the defendant for the sum of £3 Its for shop goods. The amount was not disputed and his honor made an order upon the defendant for the payment of 145 a month. William Jenkins v. John Thomas. Th. plaintiff was a grocer at Cwmavon and sued the defendant, who was now resident at Stockton-upon-Tees, but at the time the debt was contracted, lived in the neighbourhood of Cwrnavon, to recover the sum of LI ISt lOal for goods sold. The debt was not disputed and an order was made for the payment of ton a month. David Morgan v. John Thomas, sued no executor of Richard Penrose, Esq. In this case which had been referred to arbitration at the lad Court, the period for making the award was enlarged. Daniel Smith v. Nathaniel Williams. The plaintiff, in this ease wns a grocer at Abcravon, and he sued the defendant for recovery of the sum of LI is lid. It appeared that there had been a variety of small payments made on account of a large hill, hut the defendant maintained that he had paid a considerable portion of the present claim. After hearing the evidence on both sides, his honor made an order for £2 Is thl, being :Ms let than the amount of the claim. Emanuel Chileott v. Charles Swath. In this case the plaintiff' viao a leather merchant at Bristol; the defendant a boot and shoemaker at Neath, and brought the action to recover the sum of Li 9s lid for goods in the trade. lien defendant admitted the debt, hut applied for time to pay. After ht•aring the other side leis honor made an order for immediate payment. John Thomas v. Lewis Lewis, mason. In this case Mr Simons appeared for the plaintiff. Mr. Howard for the defendant. The former was a grocer residing at Ystalyfera, and sued the defendant for the sum of .C./ St tSd for goods sold awl delivered. The defendant pleaded a set off, and also payment. The transactions between the parties ran over a eon aide period, and involved matters of some intrieacy. His honor eventually found a balance due to the plaintiff of Its. Mr Simons applied for costs, as against the defendant, but the learned judge mid that, taking into consideration all the circumstamcs, lie thought he would make the plaintiff pay the defendant's cows. Verdict accordingly. Waliam Reran. William Pearce and Margaret Watkins. The plaintiff was a tarmer and he sought to recover the sum of £2 'ds from the defendants, butchers, for sheep sold them. An order wan made for immediate  payment. Thomas Evans v. Edward Edwards. Plaintiff was • grocer at Briton Ferry and nought to recover the sum of £2 9s Pd from the defendant, u workman in the same plat, 'the account was not disputed and an order was pasted, for the payment of 118 a month. Same v. David Jenkins. An action to recover £2 14s 'ld for shop goods. To pay lOs per month. Mary Davies v. David Jones. Plaintiff, a grocer at Skeven, sought to recover from the defendant, a copperman, the mm of £8 28 Bd, for shop goods. There was no denee, and his honor made an order. in favor of the plaintiff for it a month. Thomas Williams v. David Evans. In this ease, wldch occupied considerable time, Mr Howard appeared for the plaintiff, Mr Simons, for the defendant. The plaintiff and detlaulant were farmers residing in the parish ,if Llangaike. The defendant occupied a field belonging to the potiotiff as it tenant for one year only, and this action was brought to recover the sum of inb lry novel damages and compensation for an alleged breach of contract on the part of the defendant. The plaintiff and his witnesses, I some farmers from the neighbourhood, were culled. The former swore that it had been distinctly agreed that the defendant should not breast-plough the field, without the consent of the plaintiff, and tome of his witnmses valued the damage sustained by this net at £8 and upwards. The defendant nu the other hand positively denied that any such agreement had been entered into, while Mr. Strick and other witue,es gale evideuce showing that the land, no far front being injured, Was benefitted, by the ploughing. His honor gave judgment in favor of the defendant, whom costs he ordered plaintiff to pay. Barney. Same. 'lbis was a case arising out of the same transaction, being for the recovery of £3 Os, the amount of a year's mat due for the field in question. The &Gave in this case was that the defendant had not had a beneficial occupation, as he had been compelled to give it up, owing to being prevented by the plaintiff judgment for the defendant. ! Evan Hopkins v. David Davies. Plaintiff Want smith at Swansea, and the defendant, a contractor at Eeath, and the action was brought for the recovery of the sura of .1:9 19, Ild, for work done. An order wanmade for payanent in a week. David Hopkins was committed to prison for 35 data, at the suit of i lamas Thomas. David Thomas for 10 days, at the suit of David Evms. In other cases the orders were varied.  -SUSPECTED SuiCIDE.—An inquest was held on the evening of Friday hot, at the Green Dragon Inn, Cademon, before Mr. Nlotgan, of Merthyr, in the about. of Mr. Cuthlkertsou, on the body of u young woman nkinall Catherme Jenkins, who resided with her father, alahourer, in the employment of Messrs. Tennant, Sc Cadovton. 'lke ease was one of a very melancholy character. About Ilios o'clock on the morning of Tuesday, the deceased, who was about 92 years ot age, visited Neath, for the porposc of making purclisees of bread and other articles At about eleven o'clock, she was eheerved he a man named Jenkins, walking on the bank of the canal walk. buket on her head. At ainolt twt let, lielOek