Hawkins Genealogy Site
Taunton Courier. Bristol and Exeter Journal, and Western Advertiser Wednesday 05 Dec 1917
Page 5 Column 3
WEDNESDAY. - Before Colonel V. U. LANGWORTHY and other magistrates.
SUMMARY DISMISSAL JUSTIFIED. - A FITTER'S PATRIOTISM. - Arthur E. HARVEY, fitter, of Ilminster, claimed from the Chard Lace Company, Ltd., Rose-hill, Ilminster, the sum of £2 2s, in lieu of a week's notice. - Mr. C. F. SAUNDERS, Crewkerne, appeared for the Lace Company. - Plaintiff stated that on November 15th he was summarily dismissed without notice. The terms were that the employees should give or take a week's notice. He was a munition volunteer and could have refused the job offered him had he so desired, but he did not do so. He was asked to do some chucks for making munitions, and he asked the foreman if it was feasible that he would set up work on a lathe that had been worked by drapers, blacksmiths, and all kinds of people. Subsequently he had an interview with Mr. PRENTICE, who “wrung” his fist in his face, and he then asked him if he called himself a master to treat a working man like that, and that if he “wrung” his fist in his face again he would put him through the window. Subsequently he was paid off up to the time he left. - By Mr. SAUNDERS: He had been working there eleven years, and was engaged as a turner. The foreman asked him to make two chucks for making shell tops. He knew they were wanted for the purpose of completing a Government order. He raised difficulties in setting up the lathe, as drapers had been working it. He did not refuse to make the chucks. BEASLEY (the foreman) told Mr. PRENTICE that he (witness) had refused the work. He got another job next day from the first man he asked. - Mr. SAUNDERS, in defence, said that in the state of things now existing masters did not discharge workmen without good cause, as they were wanted too badly, and unfortunately they knew it and took advantage of it. The man admitted that he was told to make the chucks which manifestly came within his duties, and he also admitted that he knew it was for the completion of a Government order. It was perfectly obvious that the man had a feeling of resentment against some one else working his lathe. The man had not suffered a farthing damages, but came there to annoy Mr. PRENTICE. - Andrew BEASLEY, foreman at Rose Mills, stated that when he asked HARVEY to make the chucks he refused to do so, although he had made one a few days previously. - John Samuel PRENTICE, director and manager of the defendant company, said he gave instructions for the chucks to be made, and subsequently the foreman reported that HARVEY had refused to make them. Witness told HARVEY to come to the office and he replied that he was not going to go on war plugs. As he refused to do his work he was discharged. There was no truth in the suggestion that witness wrung his fist in the man's face. HARVEY was very insolent. - The Bench dismissed the claim and ordered HARVEY to pay the costs, 21s.
“A BAG OF BONES.” - A HAULIER'S CRUELTY. - George POOLE, haulier, of Ilminster, pleaded not guilty to having, on September 29th, worked a pony whilst in an unfit state. - P.S. HORLER met defendant's son Stanley, aged 13, with a bay pony in West-street, attached to a cart laden with house refuse. The pony, said the Sergeant, was very weak and appeared to have lost the use of its hind quarters. He examined the animal and found sores on the hind quarters. It was nothing but a bag of bones. - Charles HOWARD, inspector R.S.P.C.A., Wells, who saw the animal on October 1st, it being then dead, having been killed, corroborated the evidence of the previous witness as to the condition of the animal. - Defendant pleaded not guilty to a similar offence on October 1st in respect of another animal. - Inspector HOWARD met defendant's son with a horse and coal cart in Station-road. The horse was so weak that it was swaying about like a drunken man. Under the saddle was a sore three inches by two inches. Defendant came up and witness drew his attention to the sore. - P.S. HORLER gave corroborative evidence to the animal's condition. The sore was an old one and had been covered with some black stuff to hide it. - Defendant said the horse was all right when it left the stable. The boy let the horse fall down and that caused the saddle to rub. - Supt. BARTLEET said defendant had previously been fined for a similar offence, and he had also been repeatedly warned. - The Bench considered both cases bad ones, and fined defendant £1 in each case.
ILLEGAL USE OF PETROL. - William BECK, of Sea Mill, Ilminster, was summoned for having at Ilton committed a breach of the Petrol Restriction Order No. 2, 1917. - Defendant, on the advice of his father, refused to plead. - Supt. BARTLETT drew attention to the Order issued on November 1st and said that the purpose for which defendant was using his motor-cycle was illegal. - P.C. MUNDY stated that on Sunday, November 11th, at 4 p.m., he saw defendant driving a motor-cycle to which was attached a side car containing his sister. He asked defendant his business, and he said he was going to visit his grandmother and then to divine service. A fortnight previously he warned defendant that it would be the last occasion on which he could use the cycle for that purpose. - Defendant's father desired to defend his son, and was so persistent in his endeavours to address the Bench that he was ordered to leave the Court. - Defendant was fined £1.
SUMMONED BY HIS MOTHER. - Charles MALE, labourer, of Barrington, did not answer a summons issued by his mother, Sarah Ann MALE, for having committed wilful damage to a window and china ware to the value of 10s. - Complainant said her son, who was 43 years of age, lived with her and his father. He threw a stone through the window, committing the damage complained of. - Fined 10s and ordered to pay the damages.
LIGHTING OFFENCES. - FINES TO BE DOUBLED IN FUTURE. - Douglas SEATON, an engineer, of Taunton, pleaded guilty to having, at Ilminster, failed to shade the electric headlamps of his motor-car. - P.S. HORLER stated that defendant had a card-board disc in the lamps, but there was a hole in the centre. - Fined 10s. - Mildred CHURCHILL, of Ilton, for having ridden a bicycle without lights, was fined 10s. - Harold ARLIDGE, of Broadway, was fined a similar amount for having failed to properly shade the glass of his acetylene gas lamp at Ilminster, P.S. HORLER stating that there was a hole in the centre. - The following were each fined 10s for having ridden bicycles without a rear light:- William CHURCHILL, butcher, of Ilminster; Charles POND, Seavington; Hilda EDMUNDS and Dorothy CAPEL, Lopen; and Edward GUMMER, farmer of Stocklinch. - Harold WHITE, a farmer, of South Petherton, was fined 10s for having driven a horse attached to a float without a rear light. - In practically every the <sic> case the defence was that the lamp had gone out just prior to meeting the police officer. - The Bench requested the Press to state that the fine for such cases had recently been increased to 10s, and that if this did not have the desired effect of stopping the offences it would be increased to £1.
Back to Miscellaneous Page
Back to Home Page