The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-12-30 00:00:00

there, and tiinekiins. lie never noticed any potteries. There
were no brick-kilns near. He did not know-.that there were
any glass-houses. He had not examined the premises very cor-
rectly. He would swear that this chiinneV itself had produced
the•effects he spoke of.
Be-examined.—The vapour was particularly disagreeable on
the sth of December.
Isaac Needham examined.—ls a groCer. in Scotland-road.
He knew Mr. Holmes's premises. On the sth of December he
made an observation of his works at ten minutes past twelve in
the day. He saw a white vapour issuing from the chimney. It
affected his eves, and mouth, and chest.
Cross-examined,—He did not remember how the wind was
that day. He had seen a great quantity of smoke arise on other
necasions, and had been similarly aff,.cted by it. He was cer-
tain this effect was produ-ced by Mr. Holmes's chimney.
By Mr. HA t.L.—He was directly in a line with the vapour.
It passed right over him.
Mr. James Davies examined.—He lived at No. 32, Scotland-
road, anti was a silk-dyer. He knew Mr. Holmes's premises.
On the sth of December he observed something issuing from
his works. He saw a white vapour coming from his works.
He had been accustomed to the effects of this vapour for so
long a time that he could hardly describe its effects on himself.
It was far front pleasant, and would affect the eyes and breathing.
By Mr. HALL—He could not say that it affected him as it
affected other persons.
By Mr. VENABLas.--He did feel its effects.
Cross-examined.,--He would positively swear that the smoke
of Mr. Holmes's chimney had that effect on him. There were
other manufactories in the neighbourhood of his premises mak-
ing the same white vapour. He could tell the effect of each
particular chimney, for it had not taken his eyesight away. He
could not tell what the vapour was composed of. There was no
other chimney than Mr. Holmes's emitting vapour on the sth
of December. He did not observe how the wind was. It af-
fected hint most when it blew from the westward.
John Lloyd examined.—ls a draper, and lives at No. 165,
Scotland-road. He had observed the white vapour coming
from Mr. Hainies's premises. It injured his goods by taking
away the colour froni.thent. It tarnished his brass articles, and
rusted his-fire-irons.
Cross-examined.fle did not'kuow any thing of the effect of
the vapour on the sth. December, but he had noticed it on the
10th. It affected'his' breathing and eyes. He was speaking of
the 10th of December.
By Mr../I A L. was much annoyed by the vapour on the
sth.

George Bowes Taylor examined.—He resided at No. 35,
Byrom-street, and was a linen-draper. He knew Mr. Hohnes's
premises, and otserved on the sth December a white vapour
issuing from the:chimney. It took the colour from his goods,
and affeatted, tsis eyeikand breathing. It affected the eves p4rti•
cularly when small.rain was, falling: it was then like the prick-
ing of.- a Pin or a nee'ilre.
Grass examined.—That was the general effect. There were
a great number of similar manufactories near Mr. Holmes's.
He world speak to Mr. Holmes's chimney partly producing
that effect. It mi4ht arise from Mr. Ayres's or Mr. Muspratt's,
in. others. It affected him most at his premises when the wind
blew north-northwest.
James Logan examined.—Was a veneer-sawyer in Naylor-
street. He knew Mr. Holmes's alkali works, and had seem the
vapour issuing from his chimney. It rusted his veneer-saws in
five minutes. He had seen the vapour issuing from the chim-
ney as plain as he saw the nose on Mr. Venables' face.
Cross-examined.—He had known these premises for 5 or 6
years. Land was selling cheaper there, than it was some years
ago. . _

Re-examined.—Land was decreased about one third in value
n consequence of these works, and people left their houses in
consequence of the nuisance.
Mr. H A RDEN did not object to its being add:nitted that Mr.
Holmes was the occupier of the premises.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. HARDEN apprehended that in a case of this sort, the
magistrates would want a very clear case indeed. Questions of
nuisance were, of all others, peculiar questions for a jury. For
there was in every case such a number of conflicting circum-
stances, whether they were or not public nuisances, or what the
law called common nuisances. The evidence that had been
brought before them that day had not completely substantiated
that. It had merely shown that when the wind was in a parti-
cular direction' the eye-sight of persons was affected; which
must he the effect of certain manutacturies, be they where they
will. In the case of King and Russell—a very important
case—and the cases which had since been decided on, on that
point did not go against that decision—it still kept sound law—
the effect of that decision was this, that if the public derives a
greater benefit, or that the benefit derived by the public gene-
rally counteracts
.the prejudice and disadvantage that is sus-
tained by individuals—that the benefit sanctions the nuisance,
and that in point of law it is not a nuisance. In addressing
gentlemen who must be perfectly familiar with the extreme short-
ness of the notice, which had only been served on .Saturday,
they must be aware that no time had been allowed for en-
deavours to be taken to neutralise the effect of the gas as far as
it was possible. It was imposible for him to bring evidence to
contradict that which was brought tor-wards. It was quite
useless. These manufactories were most important. Thousands
derived their livelihood from them; and the workmen employed
by them amounted -to several hundreds, and he might say thou-
sands; and the produce of these manufactures were used in the
making of soap, and of glass, in bleaching, and in various other
manufactures. The shipping, and the kingdom at large was
benefitted by them. On the other and, the temporary annoy-
ance of these few individuals was set up against the extensive
interests which he had endeavoured to point out to them.—
Again, supposing that it were a nuisance, they must be perfectly
aware that there had been two opposite decisions relating to
these manufactories. The first was an indictment against Mr.
Muspratt, which failed : the other was against Mr. Lutwyche,
which succeeded. With such difference existing, it was not
too much to expect that the magistrates would postpone their
decision. The effect of such a decision as this was to establish
an absolute court or star-chamber in Liverpool. It had been
so speedily brought before them, and, before many hours were
over after it had been so brought, it was to be decided on. Many
thousands a-year were involved in the decision. He thought it
was too mach to expect that any bench of magistrates, without
the intervention of a jury, should be called upon to undertake
such an overwhelming responsibility. This bye-law was an
extreme hardship. fiktrusted it +aqua! not .be..,eoissaretest aftrietlya
if there was any doubt about the formalities of that- law.. if
there was any possibility of error, they should scrutinise most
strictly to find out if there was. any hiatus.with respect to this
bye-law : and if so, he
_trusted they would give his client the
benefit. He was also instructed to state, that since the 29th
of September, the manufacturers were anxious to do away with
the nuisance. They did not deny but that there was some in-
jurious effect connected with it. In every manufacturing
county such must he the case. They could not drive theM hack
and back until they drove them into the ocean; for, till a pre-
scriptive right was obtained of 20 years occupancy, they might
be so driven off. No longer ago than Monday last, a patent
had been taken out for the consumption of this smoke. There
were various other plans in operation. But it was too much to
expect that parties should lay out immense sums in the adoption
of plans for the pieveution of the nuisance, until they observed
that some successful expedient had been found out. Ruin
stared at them on the one hand; and all they wished for was
time to try the expedients which might be thought of. He was
not going too far when lie pledged their word that they were
most anxious to remove every possible objection to their manu-
factories. When they recollected the inaccuracy there had
been in tending the copy of the bye-law to the Secretary of
State—the extreme hardship of the enactment—and, above all,
when they considered the case of the King and Russell, that a
great benefit to the community purges and destroys the effect of
a similar annoyance, he would confidently leave his case in
their hands. He was satisfied to rest his case on the case of
King and Russell. • 1f that should leave any doubt ou their
minds, he hoped they would leave the decision to a jury.
hl
been r.
put ,id as the case of King and Russell had
bee
r inN A B
evidence,aa a p i
he had a right to reply. He could show
to the magistrates that the case of King and Russell was no
more like the present case than black and white. The nuisance
complained of in that case was for the public convenience.
Was this for the public convenience ? Was it not for the pri-
vate benefit of individuals ? Could any one suppose by the
greatest stretch of imagination, that the public were to be bene-
fitted by the work of Mr. Holmes ? They were benefitted by
the work for paying for it when it was made. In the case of
the King and Russell it was quite different.
Mr. H A is not necessary to go into it. The case of
King and Russell does not apply to this case at all.
Mr. HALT, inquired what was the nature of the vapour?
Mr. Varvaar.as.—lt is au alkali, I believe.
Mr. Crook.—Mariatic acid gas, formed from the decomposi-
tion of salt.
After a short consultation with the other magistrates,
Mr. HALT. said, I quite agree with Mr. Harden that we ought
toirse very great caution jai a caee of this sort. In speaking of
myself, the power given to ins is one that I wish had never been
given to me, •It is it'power I did not seek. I am exceedingly
sorry that it was ever submitted to the magistrates. I
know. a
jury of the country is a much better tribunal; and the nuisance
can be much better put a stop to, because then the court would
have powers that I cannot possess. This sort of contest may
be interminable—a sort of perpetual warfare may be carried on,
and, after all, no comparatively great good result, because I
cannot put an end to the nuisance. Where it is a mixed case
of law and fact, ajury would be governed by their judgments
as to the facts, and as to theta* by the presiding judges. It
would be much snore eatisfactory. to me to have the opinion of
twelve men than to dispoae of this case. However, the quest ion
is submitted to tae, and' we must dispose of it one- way or
another. The evidence here' is all One way'. There was no at-
tempt to answer the case., Wherber'it was in the poises of the
party to do so or not we cannot say:, But- the. fact is there is no
evidence at all to alter our opinion on the evidence in the case:
and, therefore, we insist take all those facts sworn to, as facts
that could not be contradicted. With respect to the cases re-
ferred to of Muspratt and Lutwyche, they prove nothing at all;
for each case must stand on its own merits- I acted as counsel
for Mr. Muspratt some time ago, and the jury acquitted him.
With respect to the case of King and Russell, which kitis been
quoted, there is considerable doubt. Lord,Tenterden certainly
differed from the other judges. and I believe he entertained the
opinion which he expressed- to the very last moments of his
days. 'However, supposing you are intitled to inquire if the
public benefit countervails the annoyance which arises from the
nuisance; there is no evidence of any public benefit. There
has 'been some statement made that it will be a public be-
nefit; but I cannot act on that. It is not sin ilar in
the case of King and Russell. That case is not at all
applicable, supposing we are to he governed by its principle
and consider that case as sound law. Tire evidence that has
been produced sat isfiesour 'minds that this may he called a com-
mon nuisance, inasmuch as various individuals have given evi-
dence to state that it affects. their eve-sight, and others their
breathing; some speak also of the effect it has had on their
property—damaging and rusting their saws. It is not neces-
sary in all cases that the health should be affected. A nuisance
is created in consequence of injury to health. In others, a
man's comfort is affected. And supposing the health is not af-
fected, but that a man's life is rendered lincomfortabie--,that is
a nuisance. According to this evidence, it must be exceed-
ingly uncomfortable to persons, if, when they walk about they
are affected in their breathing and in their sight, and their
eyes are, as one witness desciibed, as if pricked by so many
pins, when the rain is falling. Considering that there is no
evidence against it, we consider it our duty to convict, subject
to an opinion as to the copy of the bye-law sent up,to the Se-
cretary of state—if that copy ought have been a copy of the
original. We inflict the penalty of £5.
Mr. 7-I A RDEN.--:-Thert is a discretion.
Mr. HALL—Whether the penalty be inflicted immediately
or time he given. There is no wish on the part of the magis-
trates to act harshly to individuals.
Mr. H A RDEN.—Perhaps you will postpone the infliction. of
the penalty

Mr. A.ll..—Are ion goi4o, to make any experiments with a
,view to ahatit g the nuisancn.
Mr. II ARMIN (after a short consultation with ais clients.) -
I must leave the nintter in your hands.
Mr. HA pa'vkil:s are in good circumstances, and,
therefore, there is no occasion to give time. Therefare,'sub-
ject to that decision, and the penalty ought 10 be paid.
An information was laid against the same defendant, for the
same offence, on the 9th of December.
The preliminary prooft in this case being the same as the
last, the evidence was admitted by Mr. Harden.
kir. HARDEN took an objection to the information, that the