The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1839-05-10 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE,

TUESDAY.
THE CHYMICAL NUISANCES.
Friday last was appointed for hearing four informations,
preferred by Mr. Superintendent Tyrrell and Inspector Cot-
tam, against Mr. William Hill, manufacturing chymist, for
committing a common nuisance within tuis borough, by
making, generating, sending forth and dispensing, and by
causing to be so made, &c., in and through the said borough,
and in and through one of the public streets of and in the said
borough, being a common highway, called Eaton-street, and
through diMers shops and dwelling-houses, certain noxious,
offensive and injurious gases and vapours, being destructive
and prejudicial to the health and comfort of the liege subjects
of the realm, and injurious to the goods, wares and merchan-
dise, and furniture of the inhabitants of the said borough.
The offences were laid under the by-law whereby each offence
is punishable on conviction by a penalty of £5. The parties
did not appear on Friday. Without any representation on
the behalf of the defendants, indulgence was shown, and the
case adjourned till Tuesday, at one o'clock.
At one o'clock on Tuesday, accordingly, the case was called;
Mr. Hall and Mr. Houghton on the bench.
Mr. Lawrence said he had a commission of.bankruvtcy to
attend to, which would detain him till half past two o clock.
However, he had a proposal to make which, in all probabi-
lity, would have the effect of settling the matter. His clients
were but little inclined to fight the cases under so great dis-
advantages. They had tried their utmost to do away with
the nuisance, and now the escape, though there was an es-
cape, he believed, from one of their chambers, was very little.
In fact, there were but very few complaints of nuisance from
their works, and many persons averred that they experien-
ced no inconvenience whatever. The proposal they had to
make was this : they were willing to plead guilty—to pay all
the expenses of the indictment, including fees to counsel,
&c. ; and they wished judgment to be respited for six weeks,
so as to give an opportunity to try certain experiments,
whereby they were in expectation of being able to put an end
entirely to the escape of the vapour. Dr. Reynolds had, in
Cheshire, informed him that he had succeeded in a method
of obviating the effluvia, which he could carry into effect in a
few weeks ; he had been over to the Chester sessions, and
had there succeeded in obtaining a respite. He now appealed
to the liberality of the parties, who were aware that by trying
under the by-laws they had their cakes decided under great
disadvantages, much greater than they would be if tried be-
fore a jury, and he (Mr. Lawrence) was persuaded that the
other party would be unwilling to adopt a course that would
entirely drive a profitable business from Liverpool, and end
in the ruin of the party. If this proposition were not agreed
to he should request that the case might be adjourned till
half-past two o'clock. He repeated the proposal ; it was to
plead guilty, and pay all expenses. He understood that their
non-appearance on Friday had given some offence, and he
was instructed to say—
Mr. Hall—lt did not give the slightest offence to me, I
assure you.

Mr. Venables said he gave himself great credit for not going
on on Friday last, as Mr. Carter (the defendant's solicitor)
was not prepared with witnesses at that time, though he per-
haps might have procured them since.

Mr. Hall asked what Mr. Venables said to the proposal
offered by Mr. Lawrence ? Six weeks he (Mr. Hall) thought
was not an unreasonable time.

Mr. Venables said Mr. Crooke (the Deputy Town-clerk)
was placed in a very unpleasant situation. He was called
upon by the neighbours and inhabitants generally to suppress
what was to them a nuisance, and he was expected.to do so.
He was blamed by all parties.
Mr. Lawrence said, his clients pledged themselves to re-
move the nuisance at the end of the six weeks, if that time
were accorded to them.

Mr. Hall (to Mr. Venables.)—Would you not make a
better bargain for the public if you were to accede to this
proposal?
Mr. Venables said, the nuisance had existed a considerable
time, and the defendant had made promises repeatedly, which
he had not kept. He had even been convicted of the offence
before.

Mr. Lawrence said, Mr. Hill had expended £5OO in his en-
deavours to keep the works from annoying the public.
Mr. Hall sad, the defendants did not ask that the matter
should be quashed. They only required time ; the complain-
ants would be not less in a condition to enforce the penalty.
Mr. Venables.—Will Mr. Hill enter into a rule of court
that the nuisance shall be removed ?

Mr. Lawrence.—No ; for that would prevent us from try-
ing our experiments. We must have afvolute forbearance for
six weeks.

Mr. Venables.—But we cannot suffer you to go on creating
a nuisance.

Mr. Hall.—They must, of necessity, try experiments for
the purpose of arriving at the result desired ; and it is possi-
ble that, in doing so, they will create some little nuisance.
Mr. Venables.—lt would be improper for us to allow them
to go on creating a nuisance.

Mr. Hall.—lf they should unfortunately create some nui-
sance, they undertake that, at the end of six weeks, they will
cease making a nuisance.

Mr. Venables, (to Mr. Lawrence.)—Will you undertake to
plead guilty at the sessions to the fact of having made a nui-
sance, if you do make one at the end of a month?
Mr. Lawrence.—We have no objection to try the matter at
the sessions. We wish you would leave it to a jury.
Mr. Venables.—Will you plead guilty, and throw yourself
on our mercy? We cannot leave the case without something
definite.

Mr. Hall.—lf this were a solitary nuisance there would be
something in what you say ; but they are in every street.
You should first have suppressed those against which you had
indictments. You have not done so. While you permit
others to go on creating nuisances, who have been convicted,
I do not see—(some noise in the court prevented us from
hearing the conclusion of the sentence.)
Mr. Crooke.-1 don't know of any that are still carried on.
There are not any permitted to carry on their works, or to
make a nuisance. Is it not so?
As the proposition of Mr. Lawrence was not acceded to,
the case was at his request adjourned till half-past two
o'clock.

At half-past two o'clock the parties again took their places
in the court.
Mr. Lawrence said he would renew his offer—and he had
42 witnesses to call.

Mr. 'enables said, he had already communicated to his
friend what terms he could accede to. There was an indict-
ment hanging over Mr. Hill for the next assizes ; let Mr.
Hill withdraw his plea of not guilty to that indictment and
plead guilty, and undertake not to commit any further
nuisance.

Mr. Lawrence said the case might proceed.
The defendant was called upon for his plea. He pleaded
not guilty.
Mr. Venables said, this was an information against Mr.
Hill for a nuisance in Eaton-street, which he created by car-
rying on certain chymical works. He would show that it was
a nuisance, in what manner it affected the people in the
vicinity. He did not know what defence his learned friend
could possibly offer.
The by-law, service of notice, &c., were admitted.

Mr. Thorns's Forrest was called and sworn. He stated that
he was a shoemaker, and resided in Eaton-street. He knew
Mr. Hill's works which were carried on in that street. He
recollected that on Monday, the 22d April, he observed Mr.
Hill's chambers from which issued a vapour, which had a
very suffocating sulphurous smell. He had opened the door
of his house, and the vapour was so intolerable that it caused
him to shut it. The smell from the vapour was very bad.
It annoyed him exceedingly, and he had a wife and family
who were equally annoyed.
Cross-examined by Mr. Lawrence.—He was sure it was
Monday the 22d of April. The smell from the vapour was
a very sulphurous, suffocating smell. He shut the door in
consequence of it, and then opened it again, and went to see
where the vapour came from. He was at the court before,
and was examined. He' was anxious to make a complaint,
and his landlord, Mr. Carson, came to him and asked him
if the nuisance were not continued-, notwithstanding the
conviction which had taken place. He (witness) had ob-
served it several times since.

John Miller, Eaton-street, stated that he lived near Mr.
Hill's works. On the 22d of April he got up in the morn-
ing and found his house full of a suffocating vapour, which
caused his eyes to smart and made him cough. He had fre-
quently seen a similar vapour come from Mr. Hill's works.
His wife was equally annoyed.
Cross-examined.—He was sure it was the 22d of the
month. No person made application to him to come and
give evidence. He (witness) made application to the police-
officer, because he was so much annoyed. He had com-
plained repeatedly.
James Pughy stated that he resided in Eaton-street, near
Mr. Hill's works. On the 22d April he observed a white
vapour issuing therefrom. It had a most disagreeable smell,
and he saw plainly that it came from Mr. Hill's chambers.
There were no other works near.
Cross-examined.—He took a note of the time.
William Jopson, turpentine-distiller, Carruthers-street,
stated, that his works were about 150 yards from those of
Mr. Hill. He never experienced any nuisance in the neigh-
bourhood.

Cross-examined.—He thought the manufacture of alkali
could be carried on very well without creating a nuisance, if
the vapour were carried up a large chimney. If the cham-
bers suffered the vapour to escape, it would be a nuisance ;
it would cause coughing, and such sensations as had been
described.
James Holmes knew Mr. Hill's works. Had known them
during the last eight years. He never found any nuisance
from them but once. He had formerly works of the same
sort. It was not exactly of the same sort, it was muriatic.
It was complained against.
Cross-examined.—He pleaded guilty. He did not sell his
works. He wished he had them yet. He pulled them down
and sold the materials.
Richard Armistead stated that he was a coal-merchant,
and had resided next door to Mr. Beckwith for the last ten
months. He often went up and down Elton-street, and
had never felt any nuisance nor seen any white vapour.
Mr. Venables.—l am glad to see you here, Mr. Armistead.
So you are a coal-merchant, are you?
Witness (laughing).—Yes, sir.
Mr. Venables.—Formerly a straw bonnet-maker, and ma-
nager of a theatrical company in Liverpool, Manchester,
Birmingham, Leeds, and Lancaster?
Witness.—Yes—no, not at Lancaster.
Mr. Venables.—No ?—what !—l'm sure I've seen you act
at Lancaster, have I not? (Laughter.)
Mr. Lawrence.—Did you ever see any other gentleman
round this table on thes!age at Lancaster?

Witness (looking archly at Mr. Venables).—Yes.
Mr. Lawrence.—l need not ask who that is.

The evidence of several other witnesses having been taken,
Mr. Hall said, at present he would merely make one or
two observations, because himself and his brother magis-
trate, seeing that there was such a mass of evidence, and
much of it of a most conflicting character, would let the case
stand over till morning, that they might have an opportunity
of weighing their testimony before they gave a decision. He
had before convicted Mr. Hill, and he must therefore endea-
vour to divest himself of whatever had occurred on a former
occasion. They would also have to use the utmost care in
endeavouring to divest themselves of any impressions that
might be created by the attempts at compromise. There-
fore, whatever had been said before, or said that day, must
be thrown out of consideration. They had merely to consi-
der the facts as they were put before them, and so they
should, to the best of their power, consider them. It was a
matter of great importance to the community, and it was of
great importance to the proprietors. They would carefully
consider the evidence, and give judgment on the following
day.
It was agreed that the other three cases should be decided
by the result of this.