The Sun.
London, England, 1823-12-18 00:00:00

Plact STIVENRITSCE.

SCHEME for PAYING the METROPOLIS;

Yesterday a respectable Meeting was held tit
the City of Louden Tavern, for the purpose ofinvestie.ating the
merits of a project for making sulaterrataanis roads reha,luthlii:3.
the Roman Cleacre Maxima:, beneath the broad streets of !lot
Aletrapolis, for the arrangement of the gas and water pipes, to
which constant communication should be provided by inems
of side doors. The great object proposed by this massive
arrangement is the avoiding the frequent inconvenience t
breaking up the pavement for the repair of the pipes. To effect
this object it was proposed to apply to Parliament for leave to
form a Comptuty,, whose profits were to be derived from the
payment of pert of the sayings to be made by the Pavement
Trust, and the Water and Gas Companies. A number of en-
gineer* and other scientific men attendedi
Mr. Alderman Ga Mt AT T took the ehair, and stated the 'pur-
pose of the Meeting, which was chiefly to receive the Report eV
the. Committee appointed to investigate the predictability and
the expedieney.of the plan, lie wished it to be untieretmd
that in taking the Chair he by no means committed himself AS
u supporter or encourager a m
the plan, brit that he erely pre-
sided for the purpose or giving to the Patentee an opportnnity
of submitting the merits of his plan to open discussion. Ile con.
sidered that any plan for the prevention of the enormous ex-
pence of breaking up the streets to repair pipes was deserving
of attention.
Mr. WlLLta.ats (tlte Patentee) rose to state the extent of the
progress made, towards the adoption of tbe plan blow the last
meaing. The report stated that the (:!onintittee were of opi-
nion that the plan was practicable at the expence of about
20004 per mile, and that the saving to ;the Pavement.Truat
and the utility to the Public would be immense. The ex-
pence of the sewers and pavemetit in the City alone was MOM.
per annum, and of this sum the proposed Company, by erect-
mg subways, anti creating a great enving, would entitle them,
selves, in their opinion, to one-sixth, besides what they would
entitle themselves to by the savings they would occasion to the
(ids and Water Companies. The adoption of the plan would,
in fact, form the most remarkable event in the reign of George,
the Fourth.
Mr. REEVESLY was then pointed out as the Civil Engineer
who had matured the plan and would readily answer all ques-
dome respecting it.
Mr. STEVENSON (an Engineer, we understand) asked Air.
Reevesly a number of questions, which he answered ,upon the
principle of the Report.
Air. STEVI3ISON, after some other observation*, tubs, that
one point deserved attention—that in digging in narrow titreete
deeply as they must necessarily do, they did not endanger all
the houses on each side of the way.
Mr. REEvEnv denied that the formation of the eub-mads •
would endanger the foundatione ot' the houses.
Air. H. Jilximrs, a.surveyor, moved the first resolution,
that the pavements were in a disgraceful state and: in want ':of
improvement to diminish the expence of repair. In Some
places he considered the Subways would be practicable and, be-
neficial to the extent muted. In Cornhill,- Cheapsidei Aut, where sewers did not interfere. In other atreenethe thing was
. quite impossible. He considered that many of the cieutilx and
amongst them that winch deceribed the manner in which the
service pipes were to be carried into•the Houses-had been by no
means matured. This motion. was with a struggle carried.. /s Resolution was then put, expressive of the approval of
the plan by the Meeting, It was strenuously opposed, and
Mr. iteevesiey was again qnesiioned, when he eel:mm.l4od
that the' intersection of the sewers was a difficulty whiehiniAt
not always be au/Mountable, rind the road must of ontime.stop,
anti the pipes be carried over the sewers in the ordinary. Ivey..
An amendment was moved that the plan was not etrilicitntly
matured or satisfactory to the 3leeting.
Mr. De BERIVELIGII approved of the Oen gerterefiy, hut
not of the details.
Alderman Giutivrr said lie bed' advised Air. AVilliama to
get his plans matured befbre he thought of a meeting.
Air. IV' LLIAms contended that tile plan wet* full y matured,
and exhorted the meeting to pause before they would r, ty that
the testimony of so many respectable Gentlemen was vett I
t for •
nothing.
The amendment was tarried, and'the Meeting adjourned for
three months.

Mn. HUNT AND HIS SERYANTe—Cliaribbroitl/4/4
,Street.)-...Yesterday Mr. HuN the tad; ea t,
tended before Sir Geottux T,
FAttn.twr, and
Moira. DYEIt and ROE, as the Advocate
of Mary Bishop, an elderly woman, who
has the care of one of his " beverage" shops.
No. 18, Pall.tnall, and ipho was charged by
MARIA JIALty, another old woman, with an
assault. It appeared from 114talv's statemeet
that she is servant to Colonel THORNTON of r, ,
Mall, and the other day while she was shaking
a Carpet, the prisoner awd utioWer %venial re-
quested her to desist, but not attending to them,
they committed the assault oornplaintM Of. Air.
iIuNT went bail for his servant.
EXECHTION.--40101 AnderSoD and boiu'il Wen,
who were convicted before the High Court et
Justiciary, of the murder of JOHN M'eLtAtc,
have been executed at Ayr. The day being tery,
stormy, the crowd was far from being large
The bodies were dispatched to Edinburgh the
next morning for dissection.--(GlosgozeChreN.)

meat Wit 4 not made. The Corporation had also recovered the.
rent attic ground from the plaintiff; :for ten years, Without ever'
complaining of the said embankment.
The Vic c-Cusselit.r.on inquired of what number the Cl'o_
poratiort of Queetiborough comilived ? • ,
It WAii ansivered, on the part of the plaintiff/ that the Corpo-
ration consisted of seven periont—the Ilayort tero ItailitU, and
four Jurists; but, on the part of the defendants,
.111 r. TREsat. ovt said, the Corporation consisted of several
itundreds--.oth all ilia Burguessecwere Members of the Corpo-
,ration.
lir. SUODE:si said, the Burgesses had nothing to do with
granting leases to which •
Mr. TnEasLovit assented.
The VreE-Citaxema.tin asked, was thereany evidence
that the Mayor and other Members of the Corporation, Whe had
given the licence to the plaintiffio make the:embankmenti•thul
subsequently made a communication on the.sultject ton autile-
quent Court; its. in that case, lie might, probably from avilie-
rity, and more certainly front priticiple;• epirsider tlie;:tiequies,
tenet of the
.('crperation as• bintlitig`dit tffinC It itppeared,that there Wit 3 nttevidc net, that any suet! epturnitt-
nication had been made to the Court of the Vtgporatiun.
WAnittx; who Ins With Itri.l;tr'd MM.; libiAllitta the Corporation having seen the plaintiff ti.tperid his money err the embankfnent, and at:T.OO%IM its it, wire bound-bY chat 4•" •
quiescence.
Mr. l'oEssrmvE, on behalf defentlant,, Said. there Was
ninth contradictory evidence in Are cause ;• it wai in:eviderce
on the part of thellefcndants, thatso fur front acquiescence cm
their pan, they cautioned the plaint:l' not to injure the nel of the creel; ; and that the Corpti%ition lutd never giV yt •
their mutant to any grant of the grounamr which the embank-
tnent was made to the plaintiff: The Ltarned tiendentan, ar
gued at considerable length, that the plaintiff's claim Was it tic subject for the deefsitin of a Court of Law, I) which, therefore, •
it ahould be referred, anti that the channel of the creek on whieli • , • the embankment was made being navipble, :here was a itrkt
ride of law to prevent ant encroachment, Mulct any au thoiitA
without a previous iniptiry into the effect that would be pro-
duced on the navigation by the intended embankment.
Arr. PEInnERTON followed on the Name Nide.
The lien-CirawcE Limn, in pronottneingjudgment staid it
wits quite clear that a Corporation could only be legally bound
to a contract by their Corporation Seal, which Was their liftal
representative ; but if a Court of Equity saw that a Corpttratner
hail so far prceeeded in the execution of a eonnitet as to make
it the duty of their proper officer to affix their seal to it, in tlett
ease the Court would supply the want of the seal, and fOl'r
legal title; but; in' the present case; the plaintiff wholly failed
in producing evidence to that effect. The plaintiff's Bill must
therefore be dismissed with costs.
[For the l'roceedings in the Courts of King's Bench 01:4.1
Common Pleas, see the Fourth Page.]