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

Drc. 30• 1836

LIVEIZPOOL POLICE.

. AGAtNST THE %ACXHALL-floso COEMicAt,
NUIsANCE.S.—On Wednesday, at the Police-ea-ice, a number
Of informations were laid against. the proprietUrs of the vitriol
works in- Vauxhall-road, under the new by-law, for-creating a
nuisance by' the generation of muriatic acid gas, to the discion-
fort,
injury,' and annoyance of the inhabitants.
Messrs. Hall, Birch, Logan, Hardman Earle. Heywood, and
ltathbone appeared as magistrates on the bench.
Mr. VENABLEs appeared in support of the informations, and
Mr. HARDEN on behalf of the defendants.
JUr.. Shuttleworth. the magistrates' clerk, then proceeded. to
,read the first intormation, which purported to he exhibited on
the 27th of December, against Mr. John Nathan Holmes, for
the breach of a by law of the town of Liverpool, by making,
, generating sending forth; and dispersing, through the meets,
through Bevington-hnsh, &c., a certain noxious and destructive
Yiipnitr, being prejudicial to the health and comfort of the liege
subjects of the realm.
VENAni,Es then said, " I appear here on behalf of this
..,information, and it is the first You have been called on to try
Under the by-law relating to aim."
Mr. HARDEN here rose. I take a preliminary objection. I
Ktsh to know under what authority you assume jurisdiction un•
44 this case. The by-law gives no power to the magistrates.
Mr. Ilm.L.—You have not seen it.
. Mr. VENABLES.—I am afraid Mr. Harden has not read the
Mimicipal reform act with the attention-which he ought to have
done; because I think before the cud of this case he will be
himself convinced that lam right in this appeal. I appear, as
I said before, for the defence of this information. You are
aware, under the municipal act, that a power, by the 90th sec-
tion, is given to the different councils to make by-laws for the
'prevention of such nuisances in the boroughs. Now I assume,
44 a matter of fact, that there is an act of such a community in
farce in this borough which gives to the magistrates that power
to prevent these nuisances, and therefore that I properly corn-
Vain, under the reform act, Achich was the substratum for the
authority which I call on you to exercise. The 90th section of
the municipal reform act empowers two-thirds of the council
assembled to make a by-law for the prevention of such nuisances.
Ir shall show sort that on the Bth of August last the council met,
of whom two-thirds were present, including the aldermen, and
that that by-law was passed. This by-law imposed a penalty on
Sty nuisances within the borough, like the present. On the Bth
",f August the by law passed, and by the powers of this act it
was not to come into operation. until it had been laid before one
of.his Majesty's principal secretaries of state; and if at the end
cif that time, in which it wag to be laid, it were suffered to pass,
that by-law came in force. That occurred on the 23d of Sep-
tember, whert it wotild lie in force. I shall show you that these
informations were laid within„iliree months of that time. This
hyslaWitepoSes a penalty,--7Which is the utmost penalty the
council were-enabled to iniligt—it imposes a penalty of £5, for
Which I alit suing. On the sth of December I will show you
that Mr. J. N. Holmes, who keeps a manufactory of some kind,
orother Worki";*created a nuisance by peoniting to come from
his chitnney a white vapour, which was prejudicial to the health
or the comfort of the inhabitants. I will state to you the words
of the act,. "anything which causes any prejudice to the health
individuals, or disturbs their cam' &et ;" and therefore I need
hardly enter into the Trestion whether this is prejudicial to the
health of individuals or not, if I can show that it is prejudicial
to the comfort individuals. I will show you this was ex-
tremely disagreeable to the persons who felt it, and that it
caused a, hard cough and injured the eyes; and I shall show
that it injured the furnitur.3 in the neighbourhood. These are
the facts of the casa; and due notice has been given to the de-
fendant. I will then prove the by-late in the usual way, by
showing a copy of it, tinder the usual seal or the borough; and
then, when I have done taat, I will show tile drift of the by-
law, and then show that ;he defendant has offneded against it.
Th es e are the,short facts of the case. I will prove the nuisance,
and will then call on the court to inflict the penalty of £5. They
!stye na power to mitigate, bitt-a power of suspending the fine.
When i t3ve done that I 'shall feel I have done my duty, and
thvcoar- I am sere will do theirs.
Maaindales proved serving a summons on the defendant on
Saturday night, to answer the information.
Charles Aaron was then cslled. He deposed to being in the
'Rice of the.. Town-clerk, ill Liverpool, and that he had been
there coins time. He was acquainted with the seal of the cor-
poration of the horonO. He had seen it on various occasions
used, was
.aequai,nted with its character. He produced a copy
fesfil tiro CatitOration books cf the bye-law exhibitted. It was
a copy cf -the bye-law he held in his hand. He had compared
all w'a-rOmil entry in the corporation hooks. It was affixed
to the books. It was..ati exact copy. Ile sent a copy of the
bye-law to the post to go to London, on the 31st of August. He
compaiel that copy which was so sent, with the one which he
compared with the hook.- The copy- which he sent to London
Was a fair copy of the bye-law. It was under the seal, and was
(liiieted to the Right Hon, .Lord John Russel, Secretary of
Stati for Cho Hoots Department, London. •
Cross-examined.-11e did not compare that copy he sent with
the original of the book. •
Mr. Ha aDEN.—II,ave you seen that copy that was sent ex-
posed anywhere ?
Mr. VENABLEs.—I have got another witness.
Mr.-Hati..—With what (lid you compare it ?
Withes4.---With that hung at the Town-hall, and this copy.
Mc. HALL.—And the one sent was precisely similar to the
one at the Town-hall? Witness. —Yes Sir.
Mr. HA'RDEN.,—Did you examine it with that?
Witness.—Yes Sir.
Thomas Drutiunnnd deposed to being employed at the Town-
ball, at the latter end of August last.' He fixed up a copy of
the bye-law on the Town-hall. The paper produced was the
one he affixed. It -continued there from the 13th of August till
aUth of September. He had not comparechit with any paper.
Mr. William Crook deposed-that he compared the paper pro-
(laced with the original bye-law. It was an exact copy.
111 r. Elattouts.-TDid you compare the one sent to the Secre-
tary of State with the original in the book?
Witness.—No, I did not.
Me. H A RDEN.-.-7..Then it has not been compared with that one
in the book?

_
Witness,--No, it has not. It has been compared with that
Paper hUng up, 4tni that is an exact copy of that in the book.
Mr. Vkisaist.m,s7llave I anything to do further to prove that
it haS pissed the vuuucil?
wawa the bve-liavo.
Mr. Shattleworth then rend the bye:lirwl'i)r the• suppression
of the chemical nuisances, passed by the council,on the 4th day
of August last, together with the preamble „taken from the 90th
section of the municipal reform act, empowering the council to
isake bye-laws.
Mr. Ha RDEN.—I object to the jurisdiction.
Mr. VENAOLEs.—i have only to refer you to the 91st section
of the act, which gives power to the magistrates to deal with
offences in a summary way. " And be it enacted, that all
the provisions hereinafter contained, relative to offences against
this act, punishable on summary conviction, shall be taken to
apply to all offences committed in breach of any bye-law or m-
fr.-dation made by virtue of this act." And then the 127th sec-
tion goeS onto state, in what mode the penalty shall be levied,
and the 128th section gives a power to any rate-payer to be-
Toine a ,couinetentwitness ; though the penalty may go for the
Use of the'borough fund.
Mr. HARDEN.—A• jurisdiction of this sort must be clearly
ttiven, arid not by implication. I take the 91st clause to be this,
that all the, provisions hereinafter contained "relative to of-
fences ;iv/Lich are' against this act, &c.," that is, all the offences
"numerated in the act, which the 9lst section relates to; and
the offences and clauSes which come after section 126, and after
section 128, are made to apply to convictions for any breach of
regulatiens made in this act. But there is nothing in the
91st section, or in any other, which says, the council shall have
Power to convict summarily. It merely extends the provisions.
ihese provisions apply to the application of penalties to he re-
overeile in ,a
.summary manner. The 12th section gives a
Power to summon witnesses, and inflicts penalties for disobe-
dience of summons. NOW, sir, the 91st section applies, accord-
'4l; to.the grammatical construction of the section, to giving a
Power to punish any breach of law contained in the act, but it
9°es not give any summary conviction for any breach of a bye-
vr

t Mr. L—
r. He r.. The 90th section, it is quite clear, only applied,
;`,) ("z:•es which were punishable in a summary manner, because
begins by stating, '`that it shall be lawful for the council of
4,4 Y haroueli to matte such bye-laws as to them shall deem meet
'or the good.rule and government of the borough, and for the
Preventiert and auppression of all such nuisances as are not al-
tr..."aclypanishahle in a summary manner by virtue of any act in
ice in such l
s t," which shost early tliat the e-
bvM contethrlated inorough; this section areowsm only applicable to subym-
inary convirt ions. Then the 9lst section states, "shall be taken
apply to al: offencea committed in or any bye-law."
, Mr. ti Ait sir ; that is applicable by summary con-
-It!tion
Mr. HA f.T..—No. no ; the 128th section contains provisions
,
to the surainanitig of witnesses, arid then goes on to state, ,
that if a•ly person, so. siramoned, shall neglect or refuse to
KkPear in disobedience, Shall forfeit a sure of i's; and then the
,l,?th seeti,:g gees on to say; that. the jestices of the peace may
Kudge stieti convicted to pay penalties. Now, under
bye iv that.plased, itis considered as part of the act ;.'that
on"au occasion that was clearly•applicable
ilutnin,'''-iY".entiViction. There is no other mode of enforcing a
but Sunimary conVictiom The 91st section ex-:
14:ssly states' that. • •
‘ alr• Eiaelt.The 91st Seetion gives no such power. This
on in~ime alise Np--ower Without any jury. It is of so
-d extensive
turen that unless it was made as clear as noonay that 'the
werwas to,be givier it ought notao be ‘
assumed.
I,lMe. Vcelialy.s'.--This is as clear as. day. What would be
phis
of a. bye-iaiv if there could not be summary conviction.
is is verb clear and intelligible—those who run ntay.Vead it.
h Ilit:rL-'l:tiere,are certain offences that can.bi.punished
hY the act;'iliia • ,-,rt,iin.ether offences. only ..punishable by the
,le-laws. Vith,e,we.see,the.9lst. clause,-it appears4hat ihe
ittot he bed, e•laa' itvisiens shallZln inahße,r,-selate to the bye.laws. Now
gives the magistrates the power to convict in
orts.
wi„• 4r latinr.i —B fo-e we go ou I think the informations
• p ,
tnegl regard.re.thls ye,lavy do not bring it under the act. About
se,,,exareined,eOpy the:same act states- that a copy should be
ilto the seretary. of state., , „ •
VI% licye eureil that.
te*".r• liAte...-41'is objection is that you have •proved that the
Was sent,butthat it. was not compared with the. original,
byg"c with,this,copv here, which was compared with the
'• ' ' •
*N4I4 VeNmitui.7.4 apprehend, strictly speaking, that it is an
Witial elt copy. There is no direction that it should be compared
or. .
den 1.• theoriginal
HA r.r..-7-It would have been certaitiry nauc.h More pro-
to have compared it vrith the original. •
the r• VErganres.—This is the copy which was exhibited on
Nbfront of the ToWn7hall, and was, in fact, promulgated to the
tviti!le: and the copy sent to Lord John Russell was compared
" this.• •
oti . • HARDEE.—A. copy of a copy is not like a copy of the
riiihal
•-' _
Nc,;r aCt directs that a copy shall be sent to the
tla,,,ttary of State of the original bye-law itself. There is. no
`on that the'doentnent is 'perfectly good, because it is
vain to be, enmpaned with the original. The only question
441p,.e" is. how far the copy sent up to Lord John Russell is a
-Jr
cf the
Tr
bye-law.v
v ExAnins.—Perhaps you will consider that.
seetir.its en.nN,—From the ambiguity of the wording of this
the l‘n it is by no means Clear that the copy itself exhibited at •
iAtrown-hall -sheaf' not have been sent.: . .
Nitlt. • ilsi,L.—There is nothing in that. A copy should be
thee t
g at,li a copy affixed. The only debateable point is that in
rsnstance—how far it may be deemed to be a copy of
f'iai
a •
leD • creancEs then called Mr. Henry Boswell Leigh.—He
Oe,: -led to residing at 21, St. James's-street North, and being
).ttet-Zllet-Tnaker. He knew where Mr. Holmes' alkali menu-
jsill;)°,,vas. • On the sth of December he saw a white vapour
lrmn his chimney at ten minutes past twelve o'clock. ,
4.. fat?, •
unt a n,rth-easterly direction. Ihe wind was blowing
`", et.."t• The vapour affected his breathing and sight. The
,)ntei"c which the.vapour was taking would pass over rather a
lqhhel,?tt's Part of the town—over houses and streets where the
ants ieerf. passing. The eeneral effect of the valour at
r lite
r` • " "U"1 !lint to coegii, and made a twinkling. seusa-
P h;s •
t \es A I,ich was very disagreeable.
exaleire:l ile could not swear that this iejtirious
ahnßtProditeed.liy•Me. Mimes' manufactory on the day in.
415 s'i,",ll4;‘Lit mitlit•ll:eer been' Mr. AA-res. chim- •
r,wtited to that effect. '1 here were soap manufactories