Welsh Journals

The Trial Jurors The twelve jurors impanelled to try the two brothers, amongst others, were selected from a list of twenty five.4 There were no challenges to the jurors, but three jurors challenged being selected and were stood down. The impanelled jurors were: David ap Jenkin ap Morris gent (foreman), Edward ap David of Deuddwr, leuan ap Meredydd, David ap David, Thomas ap Rees Goch, David Llewelyn Bady, Morris ap David, Thomas ap Rees ap Hugh, John ap Cadwalader, Richard ap Guttyn ap David, David ap Howell Bedo of Guilsfield and Robert ap David ap Mathew. Unfortunately the file for the February 1572 Great Sessions is incomplete, so it is not known how many suspects were tried by them. The jurors were "chardged for tryall and delyverie of the sayd persons according to their evidences to be given to them on the Quenes majestys behalf' The Trial Morris ap John who had prosecuted his bill before the Grand Jury and was successful in indicting the two brothers was not in court when their trial commenced. His examination5 which had been taken by and before Sir John Throckmorton "upon his othe in wryting was redde" to the defendants Robert ap Morris ap David and his brother, Thomas. The prosecution alleged that "yt fell out aswell by the examinacons aswell of the said Robert ap Morris and diverse other examinacons taken touchinge the said matter which were redde in open Sessions before the said Jurie as also by the othe of one John Vaughan esquier", Justice of the Peace, that the sheep were the property of Morris ap John. The jurors "for the better tryall of the property of the sheep" desired that Morris ap John, who was present in the town be called to the bar to justify his examination. Morris ap John was brought to the bar where he was demanded, in Welsh, whether he would justify his examination to be true and depose viva voce in open Session to that effect. He replied in Welsh, in the hearing of Robert Puleston the sheriff, and other Justices of the Peace that the sheep in question had his mark but "he wold not take it upon his oth and concience that the same were his proper goods". Sir John Throckmorton, on hearing this asked him if his examination and confession which he had previously made was not true, to which he answered "it was". Afterwards, in Welsh, he said that he would not take it upon "his sole" that they were his sheep "but as he thought", and then left the bar. The question of the ownership of the sheep was to be decided by the jury "upon viewe of the said iiie shepe togeather with iiior other shipe of the said Morris ap John which were broughte to the same Sessions" °. One of the prosecution witnesses, the wife of one Savage, viewed the sheep which were brought into the court and declared that the ewe was one of the lambs that her husband had sold to David, the brother of the two suspects. She also stated that John Vaughan Esquire J.P. who took her examination "did cause her examinacon to be written further and otherwise than she dyd say and depose unto him". The jurors considered the above evidence to be insufficient and therefore acquitted the two brothers which they claimed "was lawfull for them to do". 4NLW Wales 4/127/2A, m.44. The examinations are lost. The substance of the allegations is contained in the Information and Answer. The bringing of livestock to be viewed by a trial jury was apparently a common feature of trials in the Courts of Great Sessions. In a letter from the Council in the Marches in Wales, dated 24 August 1575, to Thomas Revell JP of co. Pembroke he was ordered to bind Ieuan ygo and Thomas Peter of co. Pembroke to appear at the next great sessions of co. Montgomery to answer for stealing a mare and to bring the mare in question to that session. Wales 4/128/1, m.48.