The Sun.
London, England, 1855-02-12 00:00:00

MONDAY EVENING,_ FEBRUARY 12, 1855.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.---Feb. 10.

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE OF PRIVY COUNCIL.
(Before Lord Chief Justice Jervis, Sir John Dodson,
Mr. Pemberton Leigh, and Sir Edward Ryan.)
PORTER'S PATENT ANCHOR-JUDGMENT.
In this case a patent had been granted on the 15th of
August, 1838, to Mr. Porter, for the improved manu-
facture of anchors. It expired on the 15th August,
1852, and on the 18th Feb., 1853, was prolonged for
six years, the condition being that it was to be void if it
were not a new inventiest. An action having been
brought for its infringement, ii was decided that it was
not a new invention, and the case came subsequently on
petition before the Council. '
The Right Hon. T. Pemberton Leigh now delivered
an elaborate judgement, reviewing the facts of the case,
aid deciding that the invention was not new. They
would, therefore, advise her Majesty to grant the peti-
tion against the prolongation, but as they were not
satisfied with the manner in which this opposition had
been conducted, without costs.—Petition allowed.

INSTITUTION OF CIVIL ENGINEERS.

At the last meeting the discussion was renewed on Mr.
Reanis's " Description of the Aqueduct of Roquefavour,
and the Canal of Marseilles." It was stated that, being
struck with the magnitude of the general design and the
execution of the works, the author had sought fur some
description of them, but not finding any, he had taken
such measurements and made such observations as a
limited visit permitted, and on offering them to the insti-
tution the secretary had obtained from other sources the
large plans and snore detailed information which had been
1, laid befora the meeting, R$ well as the elevations of the
1 other ancient and modern aqueducts which were exhibited.
The celebrated Pout-du-Gard has also been visited, on
the same occasion, for the purpose of comparison with the
mere modern structure. It would appear that the ancients
were not ignorant of the use of pipes for conducting water,
as tubes, both of lead and earthenware, had been found in
the oldest remains; but as they had not any knowledge of
the use of cast-iron, they could only use pipes of small
dimensions, and subject only to moderate pressure. It
might, however, be conceived that the use of channels
and lofty aqueducts, preserving nearly a regular and
very gradual fall, had been adopted, because it was found
necessary to afford an opportunity for the water deposit-
iag the impurities held in mechanical or chemical sus-
pension ; accordingly, on the sides and in the bottom of
the water channel of the Pont-du-Gard, there was a de-
posit of nearly a foot in thickness of carbonate of lime,
and beneath the soffit of some of the upper arches there
were suspended several large stalactites, formed by the per-
colation of the water through cracks in the masonry. The
same reason had probably, in some degree, induced the
adoption of se expensive a construction as the aqueduct of
Requefavour, in preference to using metal pipes, lest the
deposit should become so considerable as to eventually stop
them up. This had actually occurred in the lead pipes,
originally five inches in diameter, found in connection
with the Alcantara, near Lisbon, and through which,
although only about a century old, scarcely any aperture
remained.
At Lyons there was an ancient aqueduct, composed of
pipes carried down one side of a valley and up the oppo-
site bank, which was another proof of the knowledge
among the ancients of the use of pipes under pressure.
Attention was directed to the discrepancies in the seve-
ral statements of the dimensions, quantities, and cost
given in the documents that heel 'been read, and it was
suggested how desirable it would be, that the secretary
should collate and collect them, from information to be
deriVed from Mr. Montricher, the engineer of the work,
before publishing the paper in the minute of proceedings.
It should be remembered that the great works of the an-
cients were national undertakings, executed without re-
gard to expense ; whereas, public works were now gene-
rally the result of the enterprise of associated individuals,
and however an engineer of the present day might be inclined
to exercise his taste and skill, in designing and executing
monumental structures, he was restricted by the modern
inventions of " estimate of cost" and " dividend," which
were generally received as the standard of his genius and
skill.
It was shown that public works required to be designed
in accordance with the country or district in which they
were situated ; for instance, in Norway, where, although
the line of railway traversed a difficult country, the esti-
mated total cost was limited to about 10,0001. per mile, in-
cluding stations, plant, ttc. There were several tunnels,
and some high viaducts, and it would have been impossible,
within the stipulated limit of expense, to have constructs 1
the latter of masonry ; therefore, red pine timber, the in-
digenous and cheap produce of the country, was adopted
and used without squaring, and with only just that amount
of preparation and of labour as enabled the timbers to be
framed together. The cost was about Is. per square foot
of superficial area of elevation, as compared with 255., the
stated cost of the Roquefavour aqueduct. The timber was
not presumed to last beyond 15 years, and a fund would be
taken by the company from revenue, to enable a more
permanent structure to be erected or an embankment to be
formed.
It was contended that the cracks observed in the upper
arches of the Roquefavour aqueduct resulted rather from
insufficient weighting of the haunches than from expan
mien.
In corroboration of the view previously expressed, i'
was mentioned, on the authority of the Architectural
Dictionary, published by the Architectural Publication
Society, article " Aqueduct," that " To cross the Man-
hattan Valley, an aqueduct bridge, 105 feet high, and
4,180 feet long, would have been required ; this would
have preserved three feet of head-pressure for the conduit
water, but at an expense of about '240,0001., while the pas-
sage by four pipes of 36 inches each was calculated to cost
one-fifth of that amount; the latter was therefore
adopted."
It was contended that the design of the aqueduct of Ro-
quefavour conveyed the impression of unnecessary timidity
on the part of the architect, as it was merely a copy of the
ancient structures ; the three tiers of arches were not at
all necessary for strength, nor did they conduce to the
beauty of the building ; in fact, it was probable the an-
cients only adopted that system because it facilitated the
construction by affording a secure footing for the scaffold-
ing. The modern viaducts constructed for supporting rail-
way trains, weighing 300 or 400 tons, travelling at the rate
of 40 to 50 miles an hour, were all upon piers with one tier
I of arches; and when the building of isolated furnace chim-
neys as much as 350 feet in height was no infrequent oc-
currence, there could not be any difficulty in raising a
series of such shafts, and connecting them at the top by

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
CROFT T. LUMLEY. -HER MAJESTY'S THEATRE.
The Attorney• General, Mr. H. Hill, and Mr. Willes
were counsel for the plaintiff ; and Sir F. Thesiger, Sir
F. Kelly, Mr. Bramwell, Mr. Ellis, and Mr. Wells for
the defendants, Lumley, Lord Ward, and others.
This was an action of ejectment, brought to recover
possession of her Majesty's Theatre and property adjoin-

oc.
Tke Attorney-General said this was an action of eject-

went, brought by Mr. Croft, the plaintiff, who was
trust-e and executor of Mr. Thomas golloway, to re-
cover the property known as her Majesty's Theatre. Mr.
Holloway, the grandfather of the gentleman now inte-
rested, was the lessee under the Crown, so far back as
1792 ; but in 1845 Mr. Lumley because lessee to Mr.
Holloway, and under that lease Mr. Lumley now claimed
to hold the theatre. Mr. Lumley was entitled to let 45
boxes and 55 stalls, but he was not entitled to let them
bat from season to season. He was tied down by the
strictest covenants not to encumber the theatre in any
way, and not to convert the theatre to any other use, nor
be behind in payment of the rent, or the lease would be
forfeited. The plaintiff alleged that Mr. Lumley had
broken his covenant in every way. Ho had given war-
rants of attorney, and judgments were entered up against
him to the extent of 54,6181., and they were, it was con-
tended, encumbrances upon the property. Mr. Lumley
bad also let several boxes and stalls for more than a sea-
son, to a gentleman of the name of Hughes. This was
a violation of the egovenant. By these means Mr. Lum-
ley had absolutely ruined the theatre.
Lord Campbell said that it appeared to him that the
whole matter would involve itself into a question of law,

and perhaps, if the facts were admitted, the better way
would be at once to turn it into a special case, so that it
might go to a court of error.
The Attorney-General said thernweild only be one
question of fact. It was alleged, on the other side, that
there had been a waiver of the forfeiture by the plaintiff
having received rent in October last, but he should show
that the money bad not been-received as rent.
It was ultimately arranged that the facts should be
turned into a special case, but that the eridence as to the
waiver should be left to the jury.
C. H. A. Martelli--I am a member of the bar, and am
the brother of Mr, Holloway, the owner of the Opera-
house. I have the entire management of my hrother's
property in the Haymarket, the Opera-arcade' (to. The
Opera has been shut for two years, which has been a
great injury to the other property. I have received the
rent of the Opera-house for years. I first became
acquainted with the warrants of attorney given by Mr.
Lumley to Mr. Hughes iu June last. I have discovered
others within the last fortnight. I did not previously
know of any warrants of attorney having been given by
Lumley to any one. I directed a search to be made in
June. I bad a correspondence with Mr. Barnes. In
January last I found, by accident, that some boxes and
stalls had been disposed of for a longer period than a
season, other than the excepted boxes. On the 2d of
July, 1850, Lumley gave us a notice defining the boxes
he should retain under the lease. I became acquainted
of the fact from an affidavit that had been filed by
' lughes. Oa October 27 I went to Lyon, Barnes, and
Ellis, solititors for many of the parties interested in
boxes. I took this letter with me, and read it to Mr.
Barnes, who declined to take the letter. The rent was
tendered, and I said I took it without prejudice to the
right cf re-entry, and not as rent, but as compensation
for occupation,
Cross-examined—l had one or two interviews with Mr.
Barnes after I received the money. Mr. Barnes uni-
formly declared that he tendered the money as rent, and
unconditionally. I as uniformly said I should receive
it merely as compensation for the occupation, and not
as rent under an unforfeited lease, as I considered the
lease forfeited. I went to hie office on the 27th of Oc-
tober, by previous appointment, for the payment of the
money. Upon that occasion I mentioned to him that
I bad a letter I wished to read to him. I think he did
not say that if I read it, it might prevent his paying the
money. He said he could not take the letter. He re-
jected the letter. When I first saw Barnes, his clerk
came in with the money, 9671. 75., which was the amount
of half a year's rent, which was due at Michaelmas.
Mr. Barnes said, " I tender you this without any condi-
tion er reservation attached to it." I said I will ac•
oept it without prejudice to the right of re-entry. I
shall take it as compensation for the occupation merely,
and not as rent under an unforfeiteel lease. Mr. Barnes
then said, "I do not assent to any such condition. I
ten* it as the rent due, and you must take it as such."
I don't think he added, "or leave it." I said, I per-
fectly understand what you mean, and I then took up
the money. The theatre has not been opened since 1852.
We seized the "properties" in Dec., 1851, which were
afterwards sold in April, 1853. We remained in pos-
session all the time, but the theatre was opened while
we were in possession. Noblemen and gentlemen inte-
rested purchased the properties. I heard in June last
of the warrants of attorney. In January I found he
had let 15 boxes and 50 stalls. In 1852 and 1853 I
knew of judgments against Lumley.
Re-examined—l did not know of the warrants of at-
torney till June last. The seizure was for arrears of rent
and an advance, making together 10,000/. Several exe-
cution creditors then came forward. There were twelve
interpleader suits. We only put a man in to protect
ourselves. The properties are now Lord Ward's, and
are at the theatre. In consequence of a correspondence,
Mr. Benbow and Mr. Barnes called on me shortly before
the 26th October, and it was arranged that Mr. Barnes
should bring the rent, and on the 25th of October I told
Barnes he had not made the tender he spoke of. He said
he was ready to do so, and the next day I called upon
him. I Never assented to take the money as rent.
Sir F. Kelly said there was a question as to the pre-
cise words used at the meeting with Mr. Barnes when
the money was paid, and the opinion of the jury must,
therefore, decide as to which party was giving the cor-
rect account of the conversation, and then the matter
might be turned into a special account.
Lord Campbell said that might be done.
Sir F. Kelly then briefly addressed the jury, saying
that it was essential that the point should be clearly un-
derstood and decided. Mr. Lumley had purchased this
valuable property at a sum of 100,0001. There was a
covenant for a forfeiture in case of the rent not being
paid, and it therefore became of the greatest importance
that the rent should be punctually paid, and those who
were interested in the theatre, therefore, wore anxious
to take care that the rent should be paid, and Mr.
Barnes, a respectable solicitor, tendered the money as
rent, and would not pay it on any other terms, and he
should call Mr. Barnes, who would tell them exactly
what passed.
Mr. Barnes—l am a partner with Lyon, Barnes, and
Ellis. I recollect the interview on the 20th of October
at Martelli's chambers. He said he was going to bring
an ejectment. I asked what were the breaches on which
he founded it. He said two covenants, the encum-
brances and not opening the theatre. He said he thought
I should have tendered the rent. I replied that I did
not think he would have accepted it if it had been ten-
dered. I then consulted counsel on the effect of pay-
ment of rent. • On the 27th October, Martelli called
upon me and produced a letter, which he proposed to
read. I told him that in all probability if he read it, it
would prevent me from making the tender. He made
a motion as if to read it, but I told him I wished to
make the tender pure and simple, and to rub out all
that had passed between us before on the subject, and
my clerk would be in directly with the money. Theft
Mr. Martelli put the letter into his pocket again. I never
heard it read, there was no act of reading. My clerk
came in wits the 9671. 75., and it was placed upon the
table, and I said, "I, on behalf of Lumley, the lessee,
tender to you the half-years rent due at Michaelmas, for
her Majesty's Theatre, and I do sc.) without any condi-
tion or reservation. Mr. Martell.' said, " I am ready
to accept it without prejudice to the right of re-entry."
I replied, " I accepted of no such condition, that as rent
I had tendered it, and as rent he must take it or leave
it." He then said, "I understand what you mean," and
he took the money without further observation. He did
not say, "I take this as compensation for occupation
only, and not as rent I or an unforfeited lease," or any-
ad no other object in paying the
thing to that effect•
h
rent than to waive the forfeiture.
Cross-examined—l was acting for a client, Mr. Hop-
Iwas
table. t clerlkla to
idtthheem laston weyanoe n witness.
the
kinson. I have no pemorandum of whatersonal interest in the matter. I
t
n
did not make any m passed.
present en this r
occasion. Mr. Martelli said "I will accept it without prejudice to
the right of re-entry for breach of Covenant." Mr.
Mr. Wertne
Barnes said, " I do not consent to any condition what-
ever—take it, or leave it." Martelli said, "I quite under-
stand what you mean," and took up the money. He said
nothing else. I made a memorandum either the game
—g
or the next day—" Mr. Barnes paid Mr. Martelli the
rent." Mr. Barnes said he did not pay it under any
condition whatever, and he took the rent without any
receipt being asked for ur given.
The Attorney-General then addressed the jury, and
said there were three questions—was there a breach
was there a waiver of it t and whether subsequently
any fresh forfeiture had occurred ? But the question
of waiver was the only question for the jury, and that
depended upon the conversation which took place
when this money was taken up. Mr. Barnes was de-
sirous of inducing Mr. Martelli to take the money as
rent ; but Mr. Martelli, being in the law himself, was
aware of the effect of doing so, and in addition he had
the opinion of counsel, and a long correspondence had
taken place between them, in which Mr. Martelli always
declined to accept the money as rent. Mr. Barnes had
endeavoured to induce Mr. Martelli to accept the rent,
but without success, and then came the interview in
question. Mr. Martelli had but ono object, and that
was to prevent the waiver of the forfeiture, and he took
with him a letter to read to Mr. Barnes, in order that
there might be no dispute about the language used upon
that occasion, and be communism* the contents to Air,

arches.
The water conducted from the springs near Belles to
Lisbon, passed by the aqueduct of .Alcantai a, 2,600 feet
long, over a -valley, at such an elevation that the soffit of the
centre arch, of 98 feet 4 inches span, was 229 feet above the
ground level. That structure consisted of one tier of pointed
arches, of a kind of grey marble ; it was completed some
time before the year 1752.
It was contended that, for merely conducting a large
quantity of water, the bridge aqueduct of Requefavour was
unnecessarily substantial and expensive, and the example
of the Bristol Waterworks was quoted as a case in point.
The water was there derived from the Mendip-hills, sixteen
miles distant; an ample channel conducted it along the
comparatively level country, the bills were traversed by
tunnels, ono of them being one and a quarter miles
in
length, through magnesian conglomerate rock ; several
deep ravines were crossed by aqueducts, and in the undu-
lating, or, it might be called, hilly part of the line, pipes
were laid with culminating points, crowned by obelisks,
concealing air-pipes, by means of which the ventilation of
the entire line was achieved. Three of the aqueducts were
each composed of an oval tube, 4 foot 8 inches by 3 feet 6
inches of wrought-iron plates, 3-Bthe inch t 3 7-16ths inch
in thickness, riveted together; two of them being 834 feet,
and the other 400 in length ; there was also another of cast
iron pipes. Each wrought-iron tube was supported in the
centre on an equilibrium pier, and so placed on balls as
that, whilst longitudinal motion was not entirely prohi-
bited, it was not encouraged, but lateral action was pro-
vided for. Each end worked in a length of ton feet of
clay puddle to allow for expansion and contraction ; and
on the top of all the piers, which were 50 feet apart from
centre to centre, the tube rested in cradles containing balls,
acting as rollers for aiding the motion. The loftiest pier
was about 60 feet high above the ground level, and the gra-
dient over the aqueducts were about five feet per mile. The
cost of these aqueducts wasl6l. 10s. per lineal yard, includ-
ing all expenses, and they were capable of discharging five
millions of gallons of water per diem. It had been found
the simplest mode of avoiding deposit from the limestone
water to have a falling gradient of five feet per mile for the
aqueducts and 10 feet per mile for the pipes. Not to have
any stop sluices along the line, but, when it was considered
necessary, to open the large side sluices from the tanks,
which were placed at intervals of about a mile, and to let
all the contents run freely away. This system had been
found perfectly successful ; in fact, by adopting three con-
ditions :-Ist, affording opportunity for the primary sub•
sidence and deposit of the matters held, in suspension ; 2d,
giving velocity by gradient through the aqueducts and
pipes ' • and 3d, cleansing the aqueducts and pipes at stated
intervals, all detrimental deposit had been prevented.
Large sections of these interesting works, which had been
designed by the president, were contributed by himfor the
meeting.
Further details and calculations were given, showing
the immense velocity required to deliver, through the Mar-
seilles canal, the quantity of water stated to be supplied ;
these were ordered to be examined previous to publication,
and all the members were requested to supply any infor-
mation in their power.
The paper read was "On the construction of the Sea
Embankments across the Estuaries Keut and Leven, in.
Morecambe Bay, for the Ulverstone and Lancaster Rail-
way," by Mr. James Brunlees, M. Inst. C.E.
The early projects of the late Mr. George Stephenson
and Mr. J. Hague, for embanking and reclaiming More-
cambe Bay, were first noticed; other railway and embank-
lug works originally projected by M. J. R. M'Clean were
also alluded to; those which formed the subject of the paper
and were now being executed by the author for a company,
though very different in direction and in system to the two
first designs, were nearly identical with those of Mr.
M'Clean, and all had for object to carry a line of railway
across part of the bay, and by its means eventually to re-
claim large tracts of land for agricultural purposes. The
lines to be connected were the Furness and West Coast
Railways with Lancaster and the South. The principal
works were on the estuaries of the Kent and the Leven,
with the view of fixing the hitherto unstable fresh-water
channels of those streams, so as to facilitate the eventual
reclaiming of a considerable portion of the bay. •
The works were commenced in May, 1g53, and in spite
of great difficulties had made considerable progress. The
embankments were formed of the calcareous sands as heart-
ing, covered on the sea slopes by a layer of well-prepared
clay puddle, upon which was deposited a depth of 18 inches
of small quarry rubbish, locally termed " quarry rid," and
then faced with pitching composed of lime-stones 15 inches
deep, varying from 8 inches to 16 inches in width ; the
slopes thus formed stood well at 1} to 1, and 2 to 1, and
after a time, when the material became consolidated, no
water mild pass through the embankments. The height
varied considerably, being in some portions as much as 15
feet 6 inches above high water of ordinary spring tides,
and 4 feet 3 inches above the highest tide ever remembered
on that part of the coast.
In consequence of the high price of labour, carte with
two wheels were substituted for wheelbarrows in fornaing
the embankments, taking care to carry on only such lengths
as could be raised to a safe height, puddled and pitched be-
tween spring tides, the open end of each length being laid
to a fiat inclination, up which the material for topping off
could be carted, that end being protected during spring
tides by clay and stones; about 10 or 11 lineal yards could
thus ba formed per day, or at the rate of a mile in six
Eoliths, from one face.
Details were a!so given of the construction of the low
stone weirs, formed for the purpose of preventing the
" bracking" or shifting of the channel of the streams, under
which as much as 60,000 tons of sand bad been moved in
the course of end tide.
Although it was not probable that the force exerted by
the waters in Morecambe Bay would ever equal that of the
waves of the German Ocean which had been shown by the
experimental marine dynamometer of Mr. D. Stevenson to he
equal to 13 ton per square foot, the author asssumed that as
a standard, and constructed the embankments to withstand
double that force ; at the same time, he adopted regular
slopes of 14 to 1, aid of 2 to 1, in preference to the eon-
, tjaVe farm, as he had in various localities seen- prejudicial
efleots mist hOzg, 0191240 of Oat seat= at, tho W4T911 W9/4

Barnes. Both parties were anxious that the money , forced up the flat part of the slope with great velocity,
should be paid and received acoording to their own ideas ; then accumulating on the more abrupt part they curled
one believing that if he Fail he would only pav it as over; and is the recoil fell with such force on the pi:;chirig
rent that would be sufficient, and the other thinking as tothe loosen the atones
or retreat of the wav and allow them to be drawn out
by undere.
that if he raid he should not receive it, he would be
Numerous experiments were tried for determining the
protected. force required to draw bricks out of slopes 4 feet high,
Lord Campbell read over the evidence which bad built at various angles. The following were the average
been given to the jury, and pointed out the discrepan7 results :
cies, and then left it to the jury to decide as to whose
evidence they believed.'
The jury retired, and, on their return,
Lord Campbell said—Gentlemen, do you believe Mar-
telli's statement or Barnes's statement ?
The jury returned a verdict in favour of Martelli's
statement.

Weight in lbs. required to

Height of Slope.
4 feet.

Ratio of Slope. extract the centre brick.
1 to 1
2 „ 1
3 „ 1
4,, 1
The weight Wll9 applied direct to the brick, by a chain
passing over a pulley, and increased gradually.
The vi•tducts over the river channels were intended to be
built of timber, founded upon Mitchell's screw piles; each
structure consisting of 50 spans of 30 feet each, with a
drawbridge at the channel with an opening of 36 feet span,
a model of which was exhiibted.

FALL OF A DOUSE AND DREADUL LOSS
OF LIFE AT ISLISGTON.

Last night (Sunday), a few inirCes after nine o'cloa-,
the inhabitants of the Lover-road, is!iogton, were
alarmed at hearing an unusual noise and loud cries for
help, and at the same time they perceived what appeared
to be a dense co!uniu of smoke ariting from the pr, mites
No 2in that thoroughfare. The smoke having been
perceived and the cries heard by Doug the conductor
of the Royal Society's fire e,c ape stationed on Islington-
green, lie immediately proceeded to the spot, when he
found a man, his wife, and his two children at the second
floor front window, whose escape had been cut off by
the falling of the staircase and centre of the building. He
instantly ascended the fire escape, and brought down in
safety the whole of the four persons whoSe lives were so
muck jeopardised. As other portions of the buildings
kept falling, Douglas removed his machine from the
building when the front fell with a fearful crash into the
road. The conductor, assisted by some police.constables,
hearing groans-Proceeding tram the lower part of the
premises, proceeded thither, and found the legs. of a
female projecting from the cUbris of the Arst-All. An
attempt was made to extricate the unfOrttineitil person,
but whilst doing so another part of the walls fell, and

those engaged had to make a precipitate retreat, whit
was effected in safety by all engaged in the hazardous
undertaking except police-censtatile Stoker, No. 2C2,
of the N division, who, it is to be regretted, wa,,
buried in a mass of rubbish. The other persons
received some slight contusions and were nearly
suffocated in dust. From the fact of a great number
of workmen engaged in building trades residing in the
locality, a strong foree was soon collected of able and
willing hands. and the work of exhumation commenced,
notwithstanding the perilous position of the remaining
portions of the building, which threatened every moment
to fall upon them. Nearly two hours elapsed before any
discovery was made of the bodies buried in the ruins, and
at a quarter before 11 o'clock the body of police-con;
,table Stoker was found, and on being got out life was
found to be extinct. The work was continued, and a
lad, named Hodges, a son of thu parties above rescued,
was next extricated, and great efforts were made by
several medical gentlemen in attendance to restore sus-
pended animation, but without avail. The next body
recovered was that of a male lodger, a shoemaker by
trade, but whose name is at present unknown. In this
case life, having been found to be so recently extinct,
attempts were made to resuscitate the body, but also
without effect. After the laps of some time, a younger
son of the Hodges was extricated, but lifeless. A strong
police force, under Mr. Superintenrent Walker and In-
spector Brennand, were quickly on the sp,,t, and supplied
with links to facilitate in every possible way the extri-
cation of the unfortunate persons. Mr. Baddeley, the
inspector of the Royal Society for the Protection of Life
from Fire, was present from the first, actively aiding
and assisting the parties engaged. The building in ques-
tion was a very old one, consisting of a double house,
one half of which was over a shop, the other half was
over a gateway forming an entrance to some stables at
the rear. Whether from an accumulation of snow on
the roof, or from some other cause not known, the roof
and central portion of the building over the gateway fell
first, and buried all the unfortunate sufferers except the
police constable, who perished in attempting their
rescue. Stoker had been for many years in the force ;
he was an excellent constable, and was much respected
by all who knew him. A widow and four children have
to deplore his untimely end.