Original image on Facebook
Buntingford Petty Sessions
A Lengthy Agenda
A number of cases were down for hearing at the Buntingford Petty Sessions, held on Friday last. The proceedings lasted until nearly 5 p.m. Sir Charles Heaton-Ellis, C.B.E, presided, other magistrates present being Mrs Dimsdale, Capt. H.H. Williams, Mr Claud Fraser, and Mr G.W. Pepper.
LICENSING
An application for sanction to alterations at "The White Hart," Puckeridge, was granted. Mr Claud Fraser was appointed representative on the Hertfordshire County Probation Committee, and the Bench fixed Friday, February 3rd, for the annual licensing meeting.
The licence of "The George and Dragon" Hotel, Buntingford, was temporarily transferred to Fredk. S. Brigham, the Chairman commending the late tenant, Mr J.E. Holmes, on the satisfactory way the house had been managed.
Application for the temporary transfer of the licence of a beer house at Westmill from David Rayment to Albert Coxall was granted.
NON-PAYMENT OF RATES
Frank Brand, of Harestreet [sic], Buntingford, was summoned for non-payment of poor rate, amounting to £5 18s. 1d.
An order for payment was made.
A STRAY DOG
Wilfrid Bentley, of Harestreet, Buntingford, was summoned for allowing a dog to stray at Little Hormead.
P.C. Gillett, who proved the case, said that when he spoke to defedant about the offence defendant remarked "I shall have to put up with it, I can get off with paying."
Defendant, who did not appear, was fined 10/- including costs.
ANOTHER DOG CASE
Henry Pigg, of Biggin, Buntingford, was summoned for allowing a dog to stray at Harestreet, and for failing to have name and address on the dog's collar.
The defendant told the Bench that he did not know it was necessary to have one's name and address on a dog's collar.
The Chairman said he was afraid that it was not generally known.
Supt. Wright: I will see that notice to the effect that the owner's name and address must be inscribed on a dog's collar, are posted in the district.
The Chairman: You will be fined 5/- including costs in each case, Mr Pigg, and in future you and I must read the posters. (Laughter).
GAME TRESPASS
Fred Warner, of Council Cottages, Ardeley, Stevenage, was charged with game trespass at Ardeley.
Thos. Hugh Sale, of Coates Manor, Ardeley, gave evidence of seeing the defendant in a field at 7.30 a.m. on 14th October. The witness saw defendant shoot at a pheasant. When witness spoke to him about it the defendant replied "Tell your father I will sting his pheasants up when the moon shines."
Alfred Carter, game-keeper, of Westmill, gave evidence, and after consultation the Chairman said it was quite clear the defendant was trespassing in search of game. The first witness had said that defendant put the barrels of his gun into his pocket when he left the field; this was not a proper action. There would be a fine of 15/- including costs.
SEQUEL TO A BUCKLAND DANCE
Horace Dearman, of Back Lane, Rushden, was charged with stealing a gent's overcoat, &c, at Buckland, on 21st October.
Thos. William Lawrence said he attended a dance at Buckland on the date in question. He had an overcoat, which he out on a chair in the lobby. He put his cap in the pocket of the overcoat. When he went for his coat after the dance it was missing.
George W. Andrews, of Cottered, said he attended the dance mentioned. When he came out into the lobby after the dance the defendant Dearman handed him a cap, saying "Here's your cap." The witness later found that it was not his cap, so it put it on his bicycle.
P.C. Hill gave evidence of interviewing defendant, who made a statement on the following Sunday morning.
Mr G.H. Maughan, of Messrs. Chalmers-Hunt & Co., represented defendant. The whole affair, he said, was a mistake. The defendant went to a dance at Buckland and put his coat on a chair in a very small and badly lit lobby. When he left the dance he picked up what he thought was his own overcoat and went home in it. He (Mr Maughan) agreed that the defendant should have reported the mistake to the police the next morning.
The defendant, in the witness box, told the Bench that he did not know he had the wrong coat until he was nearly home, when he heard something rattle in the pocket. In the pocket he found a tin of carbide, a scarf, belt and clips. He admitted to the Bench that his own coat differed a great deal from the one he took and also that his own coat pockets were torn.
After consultation, the Bench dismissed the case.
INTERESTING POSSESSION CASE
A case in which a Mrs Page, a London schoolmistress, applied for possession of a cottage at Sandon Lane, owned by her and occupied by Jonah Brown, was dismissed because the solicitors acting for the applicant had failed to read over a statutory notice at the time it was served to the defendant Brown.
Mr H.G. Woolfe, barrister, appeared for Mrs Page, and stated that the cottage was purchased in 1926, as Mrs Page, who was in ill health, wished to live in the country. The rent was 2/- per week. Defendant had been offered alternative accommodation. He was a thatcher by trade and the cottage offered him was quite suitable. The applicant had been paying rent for some time in respect of the cottage who had been offered Brown, in the hope that he would accept it.
The question of the notice to quit was discussed by the Bench. The notice was served through the post, but Brown, who was not respresented, although warned by the Chairman that he need not answer the question, admitted that he had received the notice to quit.
The question which led to the case being dismissed was one which the clerk put to the solicitor's clerk, Mr L. Hutchinson: "Did you serve the notice to appear at this Court, on Brown?" asked Mr Gisby. "Yes," replied the clerk. "Did you read it over and explain it to him?" "No."
The Chairman said he was in sympathy with Mr Woolfe, but the law had not been complied with. The statutory notice must be served personally, read over and explained.
The solicitor's clerk explained that defendant had used bad language to him and that he could not read the notice over to him.
Mr Woolfe said it seemed ridiculus to have to adjourn the case just to enable him to go through the formal business of reading over a statutory notice which Brown admitted having received.
The Chairman said they had no other course but to dismiss the application.
AFFILIATION CASE
A Buntingford woman applied for an affiliation order against Leonard Ward, of Wakeley Cottages, Buntingford. When the case came before the Bench in September last it was dismissed.
The applicant was represented by Mr H. Lathom, the defendant being represented by Mr R. Hartley, of Royston.
The hearing lasted over two hours and at the close the Chairman said the Bench had come to the undoubted conclusion that Ward was the father of the child. An order would be made for the defendant to pay 7/6 per week till the child reached the age of 16 years.
Defendant would also have to pay the cost of the day's proceedings and £1 1s. towards the cost of the confinement.
APPLICATION FOR POSSESSION
Hugh W. Sale, of Coates Manor, Ardeley, made application for the possession of a cottage owned by him and in the occupation of A. Culver. The man had received a week's notice to quit.
Mr G.H. Maughan, of Messrs. Chalmers-Hunt & Co., represented defendant, and told the Bench that the tenancy was a yearly one. When Calvert paid his rent, which he did by cheque, Mr Sale entered the rent in thr rent book as though it had been paid weekly.
Mr Sale submitted a certificate from the Agricultural Committee. He particularly wanted the cottage for a stockman. Alternate accommodation had been offered Calvert.
The Chairman said that in the eyes of the law Calvert was a yearly tenant and would have to be served with a year's notice for the application to be in order. The case would have to be dismissed.
