The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1887-12-10 00:00:00

Nocti ant 91;:arift 14'036

Arens Deeeterecie BOARD. - Mr. P. Pargetet
presided at the monthl3 meeting of this Board at
the c:erk's offices, on Tuesday night. The Sur-
reyor. reported that e 17,039,000 gallons of sewaee
had been pumped in the last month, and average
of 563,000 gallons per day. The consumption of
slack in the last three m Atha had been 185 tons, or
an average of 751 cwt. per million, gallena pumped,
being the same ratio as the last record. The sewage
had been utilised on the farm for part of the month
and for the remaining part on adjoining land. It
was le solved to discontinue the use of the mechani-
cal siokers at the pumping station.—The propos-d
draft contract with the Stourbridge Commissioners
as to the construction of :a relief sewer in Lower
High Street was read over and approved. It was
decided to insure against employers' liability with
the Employers' Liability Company of Birmingham.
—Some correspondence was read vrltich had pessed
between the surveyor and Messrs. W. J. Turney
and Co. as to the discharge from their leather
works into the main sewers. The Chairman B'Ate-1
that an enormous quantity of the material known
ae sumach was discharged from the works. and
when punt/ ed upon the sewsge farm, it caked on
the surface. tnd the sewage passed over it and did
not sink intu the land. There were also pieces of
skins which it into the sewers, and the glutinous
part some iire adhered to the valves of the pumps.
The Boar i , established to deal with sewage, and
not with the e a 3te products of manufactories Mr.
Stringer ' 'ie believed Messrs. Turney were
putting do, I, ;ratings to preveet material from
the works g ilg* into the sewers. Mr. Worthing
too said it Ea,. Ired from the order forming the
Board that 11 :( wore not bound to take manufac-
turers' refuse. ['he Clerk said if they should get
any of the gait :isei.. in the di- trct connected with
the sewers, the:. ,nould have to do something as to
the diseharge.fre.e ele.ir works, or there would be
complaints fro‘rn the tenant of the sewage farm.
Ultimately, oft the motion of Mr RI inger, steconded
by Mr. We thineton, it was tesolved.'to invite
Messre. Tereey to a f ieudly conference with the
Board as to the diachege from their works into the
emers.

ACTION AS TO A BALANCE OF Accoux.r..-.At the
County Court, on Wednesday—before Sir Rupert
Kettle—a case of Rufford and Co. v Coekin and Son,
build or, Oil Eill, was called on, in which plaintiffs
sued for Si 10s )1. a balance of account. Mr.
Perry waA for 11 intiffs, and Mr. Cooksey for the
defendants.—lt appeartA that defendants had pur-
chased a number of baths from Messrs. Ru:ord,
the price agreed upon being .1107 10s. -V .en
plaintiff's traveller called for the account, he set.ied
it for £lOO, t.nder a misimpression, and he after-
wards called for the £7 10s.—Defendants' case was
that the £7 10s was allownd in respect to the
baths not being best baths, and not for their
reason mentioned in the course of the case. -- His
Honour, after hearing evidence on both sides, gave
a verdict for plaintiffs, wib costs.
CLAIM FOE A Dc.—At the same Court, a Clakie
of Henry Cook v. Geor,e• Edwards was called on, in
which plaintiff claimed £2 5s for the value of a dog
which had been left in his care. Mr. Hinds was
for plaintiff, and Mr. Higgs defended.—The dog.
it was stated, was left laith defendant, cud lie wai
to keep it till the plaintiff wanted it. Plairtiff raid
he wont and asked for dog, and was told it was
lost, but he afterwards .lund it in poshession of a
man, who said he hal it from defendant. He
denied he gave defendant tne dog. -- 11::4 Honour
said before plaintiff got the dog he must tender
the cost of its keep. Mr. Higgs submitted there
was no ea-.o made out, arad-saLl that plaintiff never
denitnded the dog. He could have ,it now it he
liked.--The case ended ia-0-)4P11i4