18th January 1924 - Buntingford Rural District Council

Original image on Facebook

Note: The last column of the article seems to be one that actually belongs in the middle, before the column that starts "Cottered". I have transcribed this with the text in the correct place to prevent any confusion with screen readers.

Buntingford Rural District Council

The monthly meeting of the Buntingford Rural District Council was held in the Board Room on Thursday of last week.

The Chairman (Mr H.C. Marshall) presided, others present being Messrs. E.T. Morris, F.B. Cannon, C. Fraser, G.C. Wilson, H.H. Williams, C. Hummerstone, W.J. May, F. Prime, J. Bygrave and G. Graves, Mrs C.R. Dimsdale, the Clerk (Mr E.C. Clarke) and the Surveyor (Mr E.G. Thody).

Isolation Hospital

The Surveyor reported that no cases of infectious disease had been notified during the past month, and that the Hospital was closed.

Waterworks

The consumption of water during the past month was reported as follows:

1st week 207,000 gallons

2nd week 214,000 gallons

3rd week 190,000 gallons

4th week 208,000 gallons

The water level has risen a further two feet and the rest level is now 33 feet, being 2ft. 6ins. higher than in January 1923.

A supply of 400 gallons of paraffin had recently been procured.

Buckland House Scheme

The Surveyor reported that a sample of water taken from the bore hole had been submitted for analyst [sic].

The report stated that the water was distinctly hard, but in all respects it was quite good.

It was considered a wholesome water, and the turbidity would disappear with use.

Electric Light Discussed

It was notified that the North Metropolitan Electric Company proposed applying for powers to supply energy to include the Rural Districts of Buntingford, Ashwell, Hadham and Hitchin.

The Chairman explained the purport of the Bill, and said that he thought the Board would approved of it, but at the same time he thought that a public meeting should be called to discuss the matter.

He hoped that the proposed charge of 10d. per unit would be revised as early as possible.

The Chairman then made the following observations on Clauses 7 and 8 of the Bill:

Clause 7. Under this clause as drawn, the Company can exercise their powers without the consent of the Local Authority where such authority were not authorised distributors at the time of pass the Act. Should the Company obtain the consent of the Council before exercising their powers in the district?

Clause 8. The maximum charge of 10d. per unit, which is to remain in force for a period of three years from the passing of the Act. Under this clause as drawn, a revision of prices cannot take place until after a period of three years. A revision of prices should be permitted to take place any time after the passing of the Act.

It is suggested that Clause 7 should be amended so that the Council would be protected in regard to the Company exercising their powers in the District, and the County Council should consult those Councillors representing the district and ascertain their views before giving their consent.

The following resolution was then unanimously carried:

"That this Council having examined and considered the North Metropolitan Electric Power Supply Bill 1924 are of opinion that Clause 7 should be amended to the effect that the Company shall not exercise their powers to supply in the District except without the previous consent under seal of the County Council, after consultation with representatives of the Local Authorities.

That Clause 8 should be amended so as to permit a revision of charges taking place at any time after the passing of the Act, and not post-poned for a period of three years."

The Chairman, who said that the Hertfordshire Council had the matter in hand, said he would be seeing Sir James Devonshire on the 23rd of January, and that no doubt if the public were willing, and could guarantee a certain number of consumers, the Company would expedite facilities.

Captain E.T. Morris asked if the service would pass through Buckland, and the Chairman said he understood it would.

The Clerk was instructed to write to the Clerk of the Hertfordshire County Council respecting the points raised.

Cottered

The Surveyor stated that owing to carelessness on the part of those drawing water, the elevator was broken on the 8th. The cost of repairs would be £2.

Ardeley

It was reported that the contractor was proceeding with the well-boring, and was down 210 feet. There was 50 feet head of water, and testing was being commenced that day.

A Nuisance at Cromer

The Surveyor reported that a considerable quantity of sewage matter discharged into an open ditch running through the village street. It appeared that the sewage flowed from several properties.

The Surveyor was instructed to interview the owners of the properties with a view to devising a scheme whereby the sewage could be dealt with.

Condemned Cottages

Four cottages situate in Little Lane, which had previously been condemned as unfit for human habitation, were reported to be vacated and closed.

Westmill Cottages

One of the tenants of the Council Cottages at Westmill reported that the mantel shelf in the parlour collapsed, and that his clock and sundry ornaments were thrown to the floor and broken. The tenant had estimated the damage to be about £5.

One of the Councillors caused laughter by saying that he thought mantel shelves should have a notice similar to that on brides, showing what weight they could take.

11th February 1927 - Buntingford Petty Sessions

Original image on Facebook

Buntingford Petty Sessions

Friday last, before Sir Charles Heaton-Ellis, C.B.E., and Claud Fraser, Esq.

Licensing

Inspector Herbert presented the annual report respecting licensed premises in the Division.

There were, he said, 33 fully licensed premises, 8 licensed for consumption "on the premises," four "off" licenses, and one grocer's licence, making a total of 46.

During the year, four licenses had been transferred. No licensee had been proceeded against, and there had only been one male convicted of drunkenness.

The Inspector then stated the times of the licensed hours in force in the Division.

The Chairman said the Bench were very satisfied with the report. It was satisfactory to the Bench, the Police and the Public, and the Bench wished to express their appreciation.

The application for the full transfer of the licence fo "The White Hart" Public House, Buntingford, from Harry Woodley to Mary Jane Woodley was granted.

A Cottered Theft Charge

Victor John Ginn (21), of Broadfield, Buntingford, appeared on a charge of stealing middlings and meal at Cromer, Stevenage, on 24th January, 1927. The defendant pleaded "Guilty."

Mr W.H. Kittow, farmer, of Bancroft, Cottered, said he sent the defendant with six bags of meal and five bags of middlings from Bancroft to Luffenhall Farm.

He was passing through Cromer between 3 and 4 p.m. on the day in question, when he saw the defendant turn his horse and cart into "The Chequers" yard. He (the witness) thought it strange, so he approached the defendant, who told him that he was taking some potatoes for Mr Gray to a Mr Paul. 

The witness then looked in a shed at "The Chequers" and saw four sacks of meal. He opened the bags and found that the meal was quite warm, having just come from the mill.

The defendant, who at first denied leaving the meal there, later admitted that he left one bag. He saw him again later, when he admitted leaving one bag of meal and three of middlings. The defendant, who had been in his employ for some time was receiving 34/6 per week.

P.C. Hill, of Chipping, said on receiving information from Mr Kittow he visited "The Chequers" yard, Cromer, in company with Sergt. Dean.

He later saw the defendant and conveyed him to Buntingford Police Station, where he made a statement to the effect that on 24th January he was ordered to take six bags of meal and five bags of dan to Luffenhall. He left three bags of dan and one of meal at Cromer for Mr M. Gray, who had asked him to bring him some.

Montague Grey, of Cottered, a farmer and dealer, was then charged with receiving the stolen middlings and meal. He pleaded "Not guilty."

Mr W.H. Kittow repeated his former evidence, and added that on the evening of the day of the offence Gray came up to see him.

The defendant Gray told witness that he was very sorry for what had happened, but said that he was not there when the meal was delivered at his building, and that he did not know anything about it. Mr Kittow added that he had known Gray for many years, and if he had known that he was short of meal he would willingly have sent him some.

P.C. Hill said he saw the defendant Gray in company with Mr Kittow on 25th January, when Gray made a statement to the effect that he saw Ginn two or three days previous to the offence and asked him to bring him some meal from Walkern Mill or Kitchener's.

He visited his premises at Cromer on Monday, 24th January, and found four bags of meal in a cart shed. He later saw Mr Kittow and told that the meal was not his (defendant's). He had never bought any stuff off of Ginn in his life, and he did not want other people's stuff in his shed.

In a statement to the Bench, the defendant said that Ginn had previously bought meal for him from Walkern Mill and from Cromer Mill. As the roads were in such a bad state, he could not get out with his own horse, so he asked Ginn to [word erased] him some meal from Cromer [or?] Walkern Mill or Mr Kitchen[er's] at Walkern.

He was not at "The Chequers" when the meal was left there by Ginn, and he was very sorry that Ginn had left it there on that occasion.

Inspector Herbert said that the defendant was a man of good character.

After consultation, the Chairman addressing Ginn said he had pleaded guilty to a very serious charge. The Bench, however, had decided to take a lenient view of the case, and instead of sending the defendant to prison he would be fined £2 and 15/- costs, and would be placed under probation for a period of two years.

With reference to Gray's case, the Chairman said the Bench did not consider that there was sufficient evidence to convict, and the case would be dismissed.

A Housing Tangle

Robert H. Clark, of High Street, Royston, made application for an ejectment order against Mrs Fox, for the possession of a cottage occupied by her at Buntingford.

Mr R. Clark, jun., said he father had been served with a notice by the Buntingford Rural District Council to put the property into habitable repair. His father was willing to do this provided he could get possession of the cottage. At present there were seven persons living in two rooms.

The Clerk: Is the rent in arrear?

Mr Clark: No.

The Clerk: Then the Bench cannot grant an ejectment order.

Mr Clark: Then what am I to do? The Council have served us with a statutory notice, signed by the Medical Officer of Health, and we cannot do the repairs necessary till the place is unoccupied.

The Clerk: The Council must take action themselves.

Mr Clark: It comes back on the owner every time. I had a similar case at Melbourn some years ago, and the Bench issued an ejectment order.

The Clerk: Yes, that was before the Rent Restriction Act come into force.

Mr Clark: I don't want to press for an ejectment, but you see our position. We are being pressed by the District Council, and yet we cannot get possession of the house. It is impossible to do the necessary repairs while the people are living there.

The Chairman: If the Council have condemned the property then they must close it.

Mr Clark: They have not condemned it, but have served us with a notice to put it in habitable repair.

The Clerk: The Council must take action under Section 11 of the Housing Act, 1925. This Bench has no power to issue an ejectment order under the circumstances of the case.