The Sun.
London, England, 1859-08-27 00:00:00

AUGUST 27, 1859,

provisions of the Smoke llnisance. Abatement Act
relating to steam-vessels above London-bridge."
Inspector Cox stated that on the 10th of June
last he saw the Tam o'Shanter steam tug, and the
defendant in charge of her, upon the river. She
was towing the Kentish Knock, Trinity light-ship,
from Blackwall•reach up to Barking Creek, and she
returned to the Folly-house, Blackwall, where she
anchored and let off her steam. The time occupied
was 70 minutes. There was a good deal of smoke
issuing from the funnel of the steamer. Sometimes
it was black and sometimes of a dirty yellowish

hue.
In cross-examination by Mr. Sleigh, the witness
said the Tam o'Shanter was simply a steam towing
vessel, and used for no other purpose. She did not
carry passengers, like the Greenwich, Woolwich,
Gravesend, Margate, and Ramsgate steamers. He
had seen the. Tam o'Shanter in all parts of the river
as low as Gravesend. He could not say of his own
knowledge that the Tam o'Shanter ever went
beyond the Nore Light, and as far as the Downs
and Deal.
By Mr. Hosack—The Tam o'Shanter was cer-
tainly engaged in the river Thames below London-
bridge, and between London-bridge and the bore
Light.
Inspector King, of the Thames Police, gave
similar evidence ; and
Mr. William Sandison, Government inspector
and civil engineer, said he had examined the fur-
naces of the Tam o'Shanter. No apparatus had
ever been applied to the furnaces to consume or
burn the smoke.
Mr. Sleigh contended that the information must
fail, and that it would be against the letter and
spirit of the act to convict in such a case as this.
The Tam o'Shanter did not ordinarily " ply to
and fro between London-bridge and any place on
the river Thames to the westward of the Nore
Light." The act of Parliament was intended to
apply only to the steamboats conveying passengers
between London-bridge and Greenwich, Woolwich,
and Gravesend. Tho Tam o'Shanter was used for
mercantile purposes only, and often proceeded east-
ward of the Nore Light. The information was so
utterly at variance with the letter and spirit of the
act that he was surprised the case was ever brought
into court. There was another case upon all points
with this, and heard before Mr. Burcham at the
Southwark Police-court, when he decided that the
steamer did not come within the meaning of the
act. He was aware that his worship was not
bound by any decision of another magistrate, but
Mr. Burcham 's decision, given after mature deli-
beration, might be a guide to the magistrate he
had now the honour of addressing. If the act was
to be applied to all sea-going vessels coming.into
the river Thames, it would interfere materially
with the operations of commerce, and entail an
enormous expense on steamboat companies.
Inspector Cox was recalled, and said that he had
repeatedly seen the Tam o'Shanter towing ships
and vessels between Blackwall and Limehouse up
and down the river.
Mr. Sleigh—Don't you know that she tows ves-
sels out to sea ?
Cox—l do not, sir.
Mr. Sleigh—She has been as far as the Isle of
Wight.
Mr. Hosack—Yes, that may be, but she plies on
the river.
Mr. Sleigh was satisfied that the act was only
intended to be applied to steamers running up and
down the river. Steamships from all parts of the
world were continually coming into the London
river and going -out again, and it was never in-
tended they should be interfered with. He would
appeal to Mr., Sandison himself, whether the power
of marine engines was not decreased, and the speed
of the vessels lessened by the application of an ap-
paratus to consume or burn the smoke. The Tam
o'Shanter towed ships eastward of the Nore, as well
as westward of the Nore. Steam navigation at sea
was very different to steam navigation in our
rivers. If towing vessels in the practice of going
to sea were compelled to apply apparatus to their
furnaces, the Rotterdam steamers, the Irish and
Scotch steamers, and the fleet of the General Steam
Navigation Company must all come within the ope-
ration of the act, and the expense and triuble would
be incalculable. If any person applied his plain
common sense to the act he would be convinced it
was only intended to apply it to vessels ordinarily
engaged in the passenger traffic, and the passenger
traffic only, between London-bridge and the Nore,
and that it was never intended to apply the Smoke
Consuming Act to towing vessels which proceeded
eastward of the Nore.
Mr. Thomas Forsyth Watson, manager of the
Caledonian Steam Towing Company, said their ves-
sels towed vessels as far as the Downs, and some-
times only as far as the Nore.
In cross-examination by Mr. Hosack, the witness
said the Tam o'Shanter went as far as the Nore
within two days of the summons being taken out.
The Nore was 23 miles from Gravesend.
Mr. Selfe asked if there had not been convictions
before under the amended act, as regards vessels
plying between London-bridge, and the answer was
two ; one was the Victoria, a passenger boat, and
the other the Magnet, a towing vessel.
Mr. Sleigh said the question was never raised
before in that court.
Mr. Hosack maintained that all steamers navi-
gating the river, whether they proceeded to sea or
not, ought to burn or consume their own smoke.
Mr. Selfe admitted the great importance of the
case, and thou gat the question raised ought to be
settled by a higher tribunal. He believed it would
be the mast convenient course to convict, and then a
case could be stated for the opinion of the Court of
Queen's Bench. If he was to dismiss the case, it
could only be on the ground that he had no juris-
diction,' and then the onlp remedy would bo an ap-
plication for a mandamus, which was a most expen-
sive course to adopt. His own impression was that
the act did apply to a ship circumstanced like the
Tam o'Shanter. As to the remark of the learned
counsel, that the steam tug was only used for com-
mercial purposes, there was nothing in that, be-
cause the Smoke Nuisance Act for factories on land
related only to the furnaces of manufacturers, sugar
refiners, alkali works, glass works, chemical works,
and other trades, and was not applicable to private
houses at all. The object of the Legislature, in his
opinion, was to purify the Thames, and prevent
th" people living in houses, cottages, and farms on
either bank from the annoyance of dense volumes
ef smoke continually issuing from the funnels of
the numerous steamers navigating the stream.
There was no question about the facts of the case,
and -he should formally convict the defendant.
Mr. Sleigh then asked the magistrate to state a
case for the opinion of a superior court.
After some discussion between the learned coun-
sel, Mr. Selfe, and Mr. Forsyth, who said a nomi-
nal penalty would suffice, if the magistrate was
determined to convict, a penalty of ss. only, and
costs, was inflicted.
Mr. Selfe then agreed to state a case for the
opinion of the Court of Queen's Bench.
The recognisances usual in cases of this nature
were then ordered, and the parties retired.
Mr. Forsyth said there were ten vessels belong-
ing to the Caledonian Company, and an apparatus
must be applied to each if the decision of the Court
above was adverse.