The Express.
London, England, 1860-08-10 00:00:00

FRIDAY • EVENING; AEGIENE lit 1880. •

act of parliament. From the year 1825 up to ihe pre-
sent time Stockport has been supplied with water taken
from the river Mersey, sad it been taken mainly from
a piece called Nadd's-pools, through tunnels. In 1825,
when Stockport began to be supplied with water from
the Mersey, it was a ecenparatively pure stream, and
was remertablvoad for trout and salmon fishing,
which is a sign of L water being pure. It was not, how.
ever, in 18515, absolutely pure—but was at that time com-
paratively pure--era at that time there were some calico
printing works on its banks, and some of them were there
earlier than the present century ; but at that time the
process of printing calico was very different to that in use
at the present time. The refuse of print works, under the
old process, were mere of an agricultural kind than at pre-
sent, so that the water was quite available for the purpose
of supplying Stockport • at all events, it was not so muddy
that the impurity could not be got rid of by filtration.
Since 1895 up to the present time, • period of 35 years, it
has been from that river that the main supply of enter
was taken, and the water was very much liked by the in-
habitants of Steckport. Of late years the directors had bad
reason to complain of the serious pollution of the stream.
Their attention was first called to the matter within the last
three years, sad it is about three years since the works el
Messrs. Turner were erected. From the time their atten-
tion was first called to the river, it was oh.
served that • sort of slime rose to the surface of
the water in the reservoir, and complaints were often made
to the company by their customers that the water
was not so good as it had been ; that it was not clear, and
became perturbed, and in hot weather it became putrefied
much sooner. It was also found that the pipes and reser-
voirs became fouler, and required cleaning oftener. In the
year 1858 the company sent Mr. Mather, their secretary, up
the dream to discover, if he could, what was the cause of
the change in the water, He proceeded up the stream
about • mile awl three quarters until he got to the works
of the defendants, the stream being turpld all the way, and
presenting an appearance very much like blood. The stream
te • rapid one, and there can be no doubt that any matter
thrown into the river by the defendants would find its way
downwards. When he went above the works, be found
that the water was comparatively clear and fit for drinking.
mil being the state of matters, the directors thought it
necessary to make some further •inquiries into the came of
the discoloration, and y professor (advert, of
Maschoster, came and took sampler in order to analy le them.
This was done. Samples of mud and water were both taken
out of the river, and on examination were found to contain
arsenic in considerable quantities. The directors were very
much astonished on learning this fact, as they never dreamt
that any one would think of puttingaresaic into the river, the
waters of which were to be drunk by the inhabitants of Stock-
port The next thing they set about was to ascertain whether
the arsenic had come down to their works. They got some of
the mud from their reservoirs above the Stockport Water-
works, and had it analysed, and it also contained ar-
senic. The directors gave notice to the defendants that
they must not continue to pollute the water, but no
notice has been taken of it, and consequently it be-
came absolutely necessary to take proceedings. For some
time, however, there wan no arsenic found in the water
supplied to the customers, as it had taken a solid
form in the reservoirs ; but they had serious misgivings as to
dispensing water amongst their customers which might, any
day, contain • considerable quantity of arsenic if, by any
chance, sulphuric acid should come in. Under all the cir-
cumstances, the directors thou it necessary to get the
best possible scientific him on the subject, and
accordingly Professor Mayfair, Edinburgh, was applied
to, and he, after examining some of the samples of mud and
water, found arsenic. &unpin of water were taken from
the top of the George Inn, Stockport, as supplied from
these waterworks. One or two samples were taken
and analysed by Professor Mayfair, and Dr. Miller,
of Leaden, and these gentlemen found arsenic in it,
as well as in samples of the mud taken from the river.
There had been no sickness, or symptoms of poisoning
exhibited in the town, but the directors thought it better
to bring their action before than after. Experiments were
going on from time to time in order to be sure, but the people
in Messrs. Turner's employ dill not like to see them going to
take samples so frequently, and on one occasion they broke
out upot them, smashed their bottles, and ducked one of
them in the water. Under these circumstances, the direc-
tors applied to the Court of Chancery for an injunction to
restrain Messrs. Turner from so polluting the river ; and
beset, the present action, with a view to get nominal
damages, so as to. restrain them. Of late the condition of
the water had improved, because Messrs. Turner had been
more careful, but what was wanted was to get some secu-
rity that they would not injure the water again.
Evidence having been given in support of the plaintiffs'
case, as above et.ited,
Mr. Groves raised some technical objections as to the
plaintiffs right whereupon to found the present action. The
plaintiffs claimed a right under the grant from Sir Edward
Warren, but that grant was limited to • company of certain
C:hwe_riger's'hwt hoficthhewerleedVirs to litmhitredrif.tt'l/2 Ho
watewrarbtrLy a
teener over oegain land, and to the use of Strine
tunnel. The grant, however, did not empower the plain-
tiffs to supply the town of Stockport with water, much
less with any particular kind of water; and the other
privileges it conferred the defendants did not seek
to disturb. Then did the plaintiffs rely upon the
act of parliament? That gave them power to raw water
from certain spring', and to divert water from the river
below New Bridge. They are taking the water above New
Bridge, therefore they could not rely on the act Subse-
quently they got a conveyance from Mareland, but that was
limited to powere with certain exceptions, so that they
were not acting according to that conveyance. Ilan, had
they shown • title by user? Not at all, for the user had
varied considerably.
The learned Judge said there might be • doubt whether
the right was correctly laid by the plaintiffs to draw water
to supply the town of Stockport, but there could be no
doubt, if they bad the right to divert the water, they had
the right to nee it as they pleased ; and with rapid to
those above them, they had the right to have the water Wl-
polluted. AL lordship overruled the learned counsel's
objections, with power to move, and the court have power
of amendment If they should think fit to exercise it.
Mr. Groves then addressed the jury for the defence, own-
tending that no injure had been done to the plaintiffs byany
action of the defendants. lie further argued that the
plaintiffs had no right to demand the water pure, and that
they took the water from the river not by legal right, the
act having been obtained to raise water for the supply of
the town from springs.
Evidence was then adduced on behalf of the defence, and
the ease was proceeding when our panel was despatched.