The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-09-01 00:00:00

pratt t
then en

hood, whose property 1
at all by this vapcur

roceeded to remark
upon the estimate of damage produced, which, he con-
tended, was most loosely framed. They had had no evi
deuce—no joiner who had used the timb:.r—
the timber was rotten. He contended that there were a
number of ways in which the injury complained of might
have been caused; and commented upon the fact that the
,landed proprietors around, none of whom could be said to
be poor, had not come forward:to bring an act,on against,
or to indict Mr. Muspratt. Ile should call before them
those en.inent chemists, Professor Kane, of King's Col-
lege, and Professor Miller, who would skew, from
chemical analyses made, that the gas emitted from Mr.
Muspratt's chimney was rendered innoxious by the means
taken to condense it; and the injury charged against Mr.
Muspratt was to be accounted for by a variety of other
regate, are sufficient to

to bb'cv

cause:, %shich, taken in the ag
cause it.

Mr. Thomas Teebay, steward and agent to Mr. Mer-
rick Bankes,examined by Mr. BRANDT, deposed that Mr.
Bankes had a; large estate next Sir John Gerrard. Matte
an accurate surrey of Sir John Gerrard's. woods in
August last. Went through Smithy Wood, which he
considered to he healthy 'and well managed. The trees
on the west side were injured from exposure to the winds
and the effects of a wet soil. On the whole, the planta-
tion was a healthy one. (The witness here handed in his
report of the plantations, which he described as generally
healthy, and, where otherwise, attributed their poor op-
prarance and condition to great age, exposure to the
weather, or to wet soil and want of drainage. Some of
the young wood was throwing up sprouts, and the under-
wood and hedges were flourishing. The sickly trees, he
deposed, had been recently transplanted from other plan-
tations to a wet soil. Found Elayd•:ck Lodge, the resi-
,dence of Legh, Esq., and nearer to Muspratt's, with
the park, gardens, hedges, &c., in the most flourishing
state, and equal to any demesne in the midland counties.
Cross-examined by Mr. MARTIN.—Made this ex uri-
nation a fortnight ago. Four other gentlemen were with
him—Messrs. Smith. Shaw. Lowndes, and Henderson.
Went there by direction of Mr. Johnson. They did not all
sign the document put in. Drew it up himself, and does
not know that the others have teen it. The trees on the
opposite side of the estate are not quite so healthy as
those on the Ashton and Ashton Cross side. Those that

are not healthy are on a liad, wet soil. Did not see any
moss or lichen upon them. Mx. Bankes has an estate
near Newton. Concurred in a resolution, some twelve
or fourteen years ago, with some other landowners, in
complaint against Mr. Muspratt., Thinks the tall chim-
ney was nct built then. Is not confident that the tall
chimney was not built. Concurred in joining in the
expense of indicting Mr. Muspratt. Did not know at
the time whether the works were a nuisance or not.
Went there to represent Mr. Bankes. Mr. Legh's far-
mers complained of
.the nuisance. Was paid for the re-
port put in..

Re.examined by Mr. Sergeant MURPHY.—Was sen
for as the agent of Mr. Bankes. Did not take any step
on bit own account.

By the UDOE.—Agreed to join, although none of Mr.
Bankcs's tsnants complained, because he was told that
t .e nuisance would spread.
Jona.han Binns, examined by Mr. PAsnerar.—/s an
estate and wood valuer. Was present in the present
month of August, with other Gentlemen, inspecting the
woods of Sir John Gerrard. Ilse seen the woods occa-
sionally from 1840 to the present time. A report by this
witness was handed in and tead by the clerk. This re-
port was generally of the same character as that of the
prce ding witness, attributing the injury to wet, cart-less
transplanting, and ir•sects. The woods, he states cenfi
dently, have been gradually improving since 180. Two
great faults have been committed in the management of
this wood, first want of early thinning, and then too much
thinning and bad drainage. •
Cross•examined by Mr. MARTIN.—A great number are
dead, principally those which have been transplanted,
which are generally unhealthy. Only run over the ground
in a very hurried manner, as stated in the report, on the
second day, when it came on raining. In some parrs the
trees are healthy, in some looking rather sickly. Gene-
rally, they are not unhealthy. (Witness had his own re-
port handed to him), and stated afterwards that they are
not generally unhealthy. (Report handed to witness
again, who read it aloud.) Meant the injury.to apply to
the woods partially, and the neglect generally. Only a
part of the woods was neglected. Has examined the
woods for these alWi gentlemen sometimes once, some-
times twice a year. Went over the property in 1840, by
desire of Cameron and Crossfield, Sir J.,bn Gerrard hav-
ing made a complaint of damage. Thought then the
woods were principally damaged by the storm of 1839 ;
could not say that the damage was done by the alkali.
Examination then was confined to the Garswold property.
Mr. Crossfield paid for the damage done by'the alkali ;
did not advise the payment. Very likely the payment
miabt arise from his valuation, which was £727. Believes
agreatpartef
wast forhed the alkaliamagewa k.swforroms the storm in 1839;
his valuation
tioinleWeaxs mined
nbfivneMd tro. tlteergwroaondtsM.osterrY.—llis value-
By the COURT.—" Would the storm hurt the farms ?"
It would hurt the hedges. There are not nlore dead
trees in those woods than might be expected, or are to be
found in any part of Lancashire, from Lancashire to
Liverpool,
and
trees are exposure
more to
wes
luxu-
riant the side next to the works.
By the JUDGE.—Attributes JUDG.
• Attributes the state of Sir Jahn
winds.
On takingtiie x ietc,tto-haaeleloun propertyt sail
Gerrard's woods to natural causes.
John Shaw, evamined by Mr. Sergeant MinnPriv.—
Is a manager of Mr. Forrester's nursery. Attributes
the condition of the ash and the oaks to damp soil, and
in some parts to bad thinning. The evidence of this
witness was substantially the same as the two preceding.
Cress-examined by Mr. Martin.—Did not see any
lichen er moss. Does not consider the p esence of moss
an indicatiori of injnry arising from a wet soil. If a tree
was injured by being in a wet soil, there would be moss.
Was out two days and a half._ It was very wet the morn.