ALLEGED RIVER POLLUTION AT LLANRWST.|1910-11-10|The Welsh Coast Pioneer and Review for North Cambria

ALLEGED RIVER POLLUTION AT…

News

Cite

Share

ALLEGED RIVER POLLU- TION AT LLANRWST. ISGOED JONES v. THE URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL. CASE IN THE CHANCERY DIVISION. YESTERDAY'S PROCEEDINGS. (From Our London Correspondent.) In the Chancery Division, Mr Justice Parker, had opened beforo him to-day week this action, by which the plaintiff sought to restrain an alleg-4 pollution of the River Conway. Mr Romer, K.C., and Mr E. P. Sh.ewi}ii. appeared for th-o plaintiff, end Mr Macmoiran, K.C., ami Mr Tamil 11 for the defendant. j In opening the case Mr Romer eaid that the plaintiff was the owner oi a freehold house known as Piasyndre', formerly cabled i'tn- as-adre', which was within the urban district of La-anrwst. It was bounded om the West side by the River Conway which then flowed from the south to the north. defendants were the District Council of Lta.ru-west, and the object of the act ion was to re-strain them from discharging into the. River Can way, a.t a point opposite the plain- tiff's property, the sewage iroia the district without. fi,rst freeing it from all foul and noxious matter to the deterioration of the property aud the quality of the watiar of the river. it was a little startling to learn at this time' of day, that there was to be found a sanitary authority winch was discharging, as this sanitary authority was discharging, crude sewage into a river like the river Conway. They were pro- hibited from doing any such tiling by the Public Health Act, and they were forbidden by the Rivers Pollution Act, and yet they were going to say they had a right to do it. There were about 2J00 or 2700 inhabitants residing in the district, and there were some 500 VV.C.'s whicn discharged daily into the river. But the more extraordinary circumstances in the caso was that if the defendants found themselves in difficulties it was their own doing. There were numerous cases where sanitary authorities had become tho owners of sewers laid out by their predecessors, and not in acoordanco with sanitary science as was known now; and those authorities had found themselves conlronted by problems of great difiiculty in getting rid of sewage according to modern science. They had taken steps to get rid of sewago without giving offence, but in this case the defendants seemed to be absolutely satisfied with tha present condition ot tilings, and they intended to make no alterations, and unless they were re- strained by an injunction of the court they intend 2d to go on with th-eir disgusting habits and discharge C'rudJe sewage into the river Con- way. The portion of river into which these sewers were being discharged wore being turned into NOTHING MORE THAN AN OPEN CESSPOOL. The history of the case could be put quite shortly. The property of the plaintiff consisted of a house and about 16 acres of land. It was bounded n the west by tho river Gonway, and had a frontage to the river of about 550 yards. It was bounded on the south by a small stream called the E.flbach, but with that his Lordship would have little or nothing to do. Tho pro- perty being bounded on tho West by the river Conway, it naturally followed that the plaintiff also entitled to halt the bed of the r.ver. The defendants had in their defence raised every point that was opem to them, and they wished 0 deny that tho plaintiff was entitled to any •part of the bed of the river. They alleged that at tins point the river Conway was a tidal river, but h.s Lordship would see from the photo- E'raphs that at this point it was a series of stones and pools, though he understood that in soa.3 of the pools there were fish. It was a |?lac3 that was v,ted by a number of people an the summer months, but if these people would take his advice they wou.d not go near the river, or at any rate that portion of it that passed the plaintiff's pr-p_ity. The plaintiff bought tho projterty quite recently, the conveyance to him being dated January 14fch, 1905. It was, of course, JD- nied by the defendants that lie was the owner; that he ever was in possession, and that re vas :u i'o&sos&»on but counsel thought ,I¡ilt pat. of the case was not seriously relied ')n by the defendants. The plaintiff subsequently took a conveyance of land at the S.W. corner of his property, but counsel did not think that any- thing would turit upon whether he was entitled to that portion of the property or not. The oonveyance, however, was effected on March 19th, 1910. lIo did not (Uiink anything would turn upon the ownership, but the contention of tho defendants apparently was that there was this piece of land between the land conveyed to Mr Jones and the r,yer. With regard to the sewers which the District Council drained into the river they were two in number, and could be called conveniently No. 1 and No. 2. So far as could be gathered, before 1874 there as no sewage scheme in existence in Llanrwst; at all events there were no sewers that discharged into the river Conway. In the year 1874 there was constructed a sewer for the dischargo of 6ewago into the river, which, for at least part of its course, passed through land that now belonged to the plaintifF. It was stated as being created in 1879, though it appeared to have been constructed in 1874. The then sanitary authority, however, did not seem to have thought it neces- sary to obtain any consent from tho owner of tho land on which they placed the sewer, and .when he protested, as he seemed to have done, they entered into an agreement, dated lltli of October, 1879, and it was because of that agree- ment that it is referred to as the sewer of 1879. That agreement was made between John Robert Griffiths, the then owner in the one part, and the sanitary authority of the other part, and it was an agreement to which apparently the de- fendants attached some importance. In the year 18-32 it was found by the Corporation that it was not convenient to discharge the whole of its Sewage through sewer No. 1, and they, accord ingly, entered into negotiations with the then tenant for life of the plaintiff's property with a view to obtain an casement for laying a sewer in tho position shown of what is now sewer No. 2. It would be found from that agreement that it Was contemplated that No. 2 should be brought across the plaintiff's land and be connected with Bower No. 1. After the agreement, sewer No. 2 Was laid to a point where it connected with the tewcr of 1879, and from the point, of connection down to the point of of the 1879 seive-r, the one sewer carried the discharge from both the sewers so that there was still only one discharge into the rivers. That want on until 1891, when the defendants made soma altera- tjons. They extended sewer No. 2, which now discharged right into the river. At the time the sewers were originally made there were not nianv houses that had any connection with •ewers, and from that time down to a much more recent date rot much sewage came down to this part. In 1891 it was discovered that THE SEWER IIEAl) BECAME CLOGGED. It had not been laid with sufficient fall or something of that kind, and in the year 1891, this same Sanitary Authority cut off part of the sewer and substitu ted for it at the river another sewer indicated on the plan by dotted lines and mark- ed sewer No. 1. That sewer as at present, did not go over tho land belonging- to the plaintiff. It was not, therefore, contained in the plaintiff's conveyance, but it was sufficient for ks case that sewer No. 1 was discharging on to his land. The fact was that sewage solid matter and other objectionable thing's were discharged aJong the plaintiff's banks. In the year 1897 the then parish of Llanrwst v.-as divided into two, and it was a matter of !j()1IJe import.anoo to show that the District Council had done something them- lves, and had not merely taken over these sewers. The plaintiff would show that at that tbte they were applying to the Local Government Board for powers to borrow £ 300 far the purpose of making sewers. In inuncrous e.a&es they had passed plans of pro- posed new houses, which plans showed con- nections with the exis-ting sewers. These showed active proceedings on the part of the defendants. Pheio wore 580 waiter closets besides public conveniences a.nd elaugbter- h001303 now dra.,ned into these sewers. The ¡ flow of the river was considerably faster on thQ west "e--the Fidn opposite the. plain- tiff's -ppupeirty, and the water on the side of the piairS-iff's propexty was altway-s more or liens stagnant. From that his Lordship 4-oic. see that in 1891 the outfall w.as placed I 'in the worst possible position that it could I be placed. The open, jug of the sewer was brought diagonally a-cr'srs the worst part -=- -=- of the stream. ni -o result was that the 11 sewage and other matter discharged into the stream came down past the plaintiff's r TO- perty into a part w.h.cr.o thert was formed a. kind of a branch eddy, which wrought it. lJack and deposited on the boilk at the plain- tiff's side. At any rata the defendants could prevent the solid matter, such as paper, from coming out. His witnesses would show that they could rc-me-dy the matter at a very slight expanse.. During the winter months there was a considerable flow of water, and the river was apparently visited bv floods. When there was a flood the nuisance wai to same extent removed. but. what nua-io it so serious for the plaintiff was that this stuff re- mained there for a considerable time. it got dejKxsited ou the bottom and along the sides of tee banks, and that the-Hoods fated to remove.* The floods did not carry Rway ail tliis filthy oiuif; aji that happened was that tila stuff was carried up j-ust a little higher. The plaintiff was de- sirous of developing has land, which was now ripe fcr development, but ai it was it was im- possible to dispose o! any part that was anywhere e -o near the river, while the present condition of things continued. The piainiiff based his ease up-on trespass, and if the defendants sought to justify their act; by the Public Health Act, then • reJed upon section 17 of that Act, and said tibay created a public aiuiswnoe. They had no do- l'. ,(\ ui:dc-r licence; there was this nuisance, a.nd lre did no see how ior. could be justified. At prezent they were discharging into the river. so us to trespass upon th& plaintiff's land, and so !<• cause a nuisance Tho oourt then adjourned before tho learned counsel had concluded his speech. <s>

FRIDAY'S HEARING.

News

Cite

Share

FRIDAY'S HEARING. PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL RESUMES HIS SPEECH. EXPERT EVIDENCE. At the resumed bearing, on Friday, Mr Ro.mce il-ha-t before calling his evidence he proposed to doai shortly with the sfca-uutaa and authorities boar in# on the ma tier, but taers was one matter lie snouvd like to clear up at cmco. He had staood tho pievitms day, through in advertence, iter, ait the aii-egratiooB in the sta-teniem't of ctiim had' not Mr Tomlin eeemed to bo much xrurt on that score, and on reading over the pi-eachingi agaiu ho found in the defenioe that it dk-ii led. Mi' Maeinorran said there was one matder he aejiri^d to have made elloax. It would S'oetn from Air Romer's opetning that tho trespass wast,ho al- lowing of fifth to find its way on the plaintiff's iand, but he had rather understood that the tros- I>a,s was che preeence of the pipes on the plaintiff's iand. The ptoadaings roiated to both, biri it was not properly clear. Mr Roaner sacd that his friend might lake it that he was not now campjainimg of toe pcxutaoai of ths pipo No. 1. Mr Maemorran said that cloarcd the matter up. Mr Romer said ho was net qnite .sire if he had made "it ckar the previous day, aiiii there- lore wouod mism'jjou the fa&t again, that rull the s^vvago from the defondamt's district was dis- charg: d through one or the other of these two lowers with uhe exception of the workhouse, which had a s&;>arate sewer of its own. Defiling with the Public IleaLth Act, he said that though section 14 gavo local authorities power toO purchase, acquire and iiioke sewers, section 15 impcc-ed Uiron them the duty of keeping in order (the sewers, aard in carrying that out they had such power as was neoeesary foT effectively draining thair land, d-cotion 17, which was the one with which they wore more direct.y concerned in this case, pro- vided that nothing in the Act authorised a lbeal authority to a'.ech&rge yewage or filiiiy watter into any natural watClC course, jxj'iid, or taho wi'tihout reocing it all extra nuiitrous and noxious matter, ijaeiion 17 provided for the cleaning and the kec'ping in proper repair the sewens, but tbd p ainfiff was not. complaining of any broach of ch-o ooiition. Section 20 merely defi-ned a natural waOOr course which ineiuded portions of the sea to be diefined by the Local Government Board, and all streams and tidal waters that flow di- reotly into the sea. DelaJing- with the aiuthoriitaos, counseii said i, had1 been laid down in one case before the Court of Appeal thait in carrying out their statutory diuiies a local authority had no rigiht to causc a nuisauoc to the pladntfifF. In two cases where the plaintiff had failed he sug- get?ted that thE:f0 tho oourl was uieiely oolt.i<kr- ing Scction 17, and it seemed to have been &.5,u re dIn bolh these cases that what was being done would have IJCIOn lawful if it was not- for tho proviso of Section 17. All tha.t was held in tho?c\, the local aAithorities were not. using the powers within the meaning of Section 17. There seomod to bo no doubt in the prcsejat oa;e if it was a private owner he would be liable. The defendants had got fLthy inat-ter undier their con- trol, mtd were discharging it <m to the plaintiff's land. If a private individual would be liable, what wa» the exouise of a iocai .auth-oriLj in the position of the defendants in thij cswe? They relied upon the Act. of 1875, 'burt there was no- thing in that Act so far as counsel could see that excused a local authority from the liability that everyone else was under, not to create a nuis- ance. Counsel thoirght it was very doubtful whether .anyone could have a presorirycive right to discharge such rewage into a rratiujsd stream. He submitted that it had been laid down in a oa.,o before the House of ILordi that the faot that a cewor was vested art a locaJ autliority as dis- (Cinot from a private indtividua-L ffia>ch no differ- ence as to the liability for nuisance, unless you found that the local authority was acting undpr ataitulo.y jjowore tliat expressly gave them powers to commit a -nuisance. In the course of dealing with the authorities, counsel remarked that when the 1882 sewdr was made it ran into the 1879 sewer, and it. w.as net until a labor date that tho second sewer had a separate outfall. Mr Maomorran saod that he was instructed that that was not so. lie did not. know that it mattered, but. as a matter of factt the 1882 sewer had aiways dreehiarjyed into the river. Mr Romer thougirt it was clear from the plan that the whole outfall wi. froi.,i sewer No 1, ex- cept for a smalii portion that had been re-laid by the local authority. However, sewer No. 2 was not of muo'i importance, though a portion Œ k was relaid in 1896. It was euflkaent for the plaintiff's ease that there was this of sew- agx> into the river. At this stage lie did not think it necessary to refer to any further authorities though, it avay be neoesiary to do 00 later on, but Mr Tomlin, in the pieadings, raised the case of prescriptive rights, and it would bo ruc- ces.sa.ry to deal with that. Ho could not imagine that the COourt would say to the person who was the owner of Land upon which a Coloration was discharging sewage,- or the porion who ha.d pres- criptive righta under him that it would not grant an injunction agauist the Corporation because such injunction might inborfaro with the rights of (third parties His lordship would seo that this had been going on for 19 years; this sewor had' had been going on for 19 years; this sewor had' boon in existence sinioo 1891, and I' if something wa> net done at once, ■ the twenty years that was recjuired under the Presr.ription Aot would expire. Ho had cited authorities to show that the defend- ants had; 1110 prescrijitive rights, but they had set up tile case of prescriptive right, and he asked Cli,a.t aji injunction should bei granted that would prevent anytiliing ripeming into a prescriptive right that wasi not a prosjxxstive right, now. Mr Tomlin said things were is thev always had boon since 1871 or 1882. Mr Romer said that was not so. The old: sewer did not discharge in place where the discharge was now and so form a cesspool PLAINTIFF'S EVIDENCE. Counsel then proceeded to call the evidence in support of tho plaintiff's case.' Dr. Meredith Young, Dootor of Medicine of rsl in the University of Edinburgh, and, holding seve- ral sanitary qualifications, examined by Mr Hewitt, said he was Medical Officer to the County Council of Cheshire. He bad held that appointment for about 18 months, and had pre- viously Held similar positions under other local CWJ ih-orities. It was part, of HID duty as Tkjedioal Oliioer of Health to inspect the various (streams in the district, and he had made a careful in- spection of the ouitfalls by the plaintiff's pro- perty. Ho bad visited tfem fiveJ tlmæ." In his opjhion as. Medical Officer of Ijealth t)ie da- charge of ,this crde. sewijjge into thai stagnant part of the river in close proximity as it was to a dwelling-houses was likely to, asd in f £ ct. did cause a serious nuisance and constituted a dan- ger to the ilieaith of those people who resided in the neighbourhood. The No. 1 sewer went about twOuhirds or three-fourths of the way across the river. It was an iron pipe bolted down to the bed of the river. The effect of it running into tho river in that way was to throw the water back on to the plaintiff's side. He had tested it by throwing empty bottles and dyeing the river above the sewer. The bank on the plaintiff's sidle was low-lying with a gentle slope towards the river. On the opposite side was a wall. The current naturally clang to tho side where there was the Least resistance— the wail sidet, so that on tho plaintiff's side the water was stagnant. When he first visited the spot he fotwid a.n accumulation of orgainio matters and a distinct indication of sewage on tho pla.in- tiff's property. The water in tlie river between &ewer No. 1 and sewer No. 2 was not so foul a.s he had expected to find it, bu.t the bed of the RIVER WAS UNDOUBTEDLY VERY FOUL. Thiat oxtc,-idod all along triO plaintiff's estate. It was only half the bed of the river that was foul. Tho Ancaster side, as it was called, was fairly free. As the sewage came out. of the pipe at sewer No. 1, some of it went down. t2» river, but some of it workedi bade on to the plaintiff's property. He thought the outlct. oi sewer No. 2 was also a 12-iniah pipe, but there was consider- ably less s,.va.ge coming out of there than there was out of No. 1. Tiuat pipe went, practically right across the river and'd adharged under the ba.nk, and contrary to what would be expected soma of the sewage seemed:' to go up the river, where there was practically no currant. The eoil of 'the state of tilings he found, in his opinion, certainly constituted! a mrsaneei, a,nd a danger to health. Altogether, he had paid fivo visits. When he first went there on April i&bh, the river was .slightly above dts XL-oriaal level. It rose and fieri! vcrj' raprldiiy. was igoi-ng 0".1, and 'tfer-o was a very ve. sumall from No. 2 &3wcir. llueiie lal'wia-yB was a. anueM from No. 2. Tlicro was a. slight sm-cfil fwam No. J. briG No. 2 was more out of it he water. On Iks £ r«ilt vlaifc No. 2 was On his s'eoonil vifdt ltdbct •wa-fcea.* wars hiigllit'ir than on the previous visit, and tho banks wtexia a ii'fctlo vo doubt, owing to thsr- flooirl. A itocd cowLid not possibly W£I(::J1 the Wih.oTe of -the offrmaivc dos-t. On his third visit mattrir was coaniing from No 2, ifc mias for CO yattde aibcyve asd 60 yards bcijow. Part of ifc undiOtu-btcidlly atuck to the bank. On has fourth visit the river was in flood, but No. 2 sewer was About two intfticis out of v.iateu-. His last visit was on 8elpteimb&r 13th. Then about halif No. I sewer was icorarcd. Thetro on (the low-lying' banktj were numerous evid'cnocs of £ .o\ragz. H.a had neve-}' seen the when there 1110'0 ia gtcod. of sewagie d>e;posit on tiie plaiinitaff's bant#, and floating matt-bar in the wait nr. He Ihtad s&rm fctwag'O fun.gus thcire, esd ithat was newtr found untk&s the-xe was a. ooa-s'dcTa.hTjo a,cooiraimod«.tion of eewage. Cbttile imo,ght drinlc the waibeir oppoeate the plaintiff's land without suffering any harm, but ,a.t othcir times it migiht give ttaom gas- triitiis. He did not think that drinki.ng the water would affect the milk unless the cattfe get g,:((1tlitis. bed of tliq river was very and if the ctaibtle sifceprpcd jaifco the irlver for tlhe purpoes of drinking they would dtir ilt un. MEDICAL EXPERT CROSS-EXAMINED. Cro=s-exa.Hiineid by Mr M;r^mornan, he -aid he had seed oatfclja thfLre. The town, lie was i'nuor'iiDod, had a. popu^a.tiion of 2600, and he knew that it had a goorJ wati.ir supply. He csitimated fthat tho quantity 'tJl;¡:¡,t wouild pass ifnio. the sewens vstas about 25 g-et'ons per head I of tho population. That would work out at about 75,000 gaClon,? for the 24 hours. Tlie ilivet VIICot u.p amd down v-eay rapidiiy tn- deed as the waibareibjd was a very paroeptible one. His notes as tio the oondiitioai of the rivea* iajt the time of his visits made iih caniauiitatioai i,.vith others who knew thJ2' river better than he did. This pipe of No. 1 disdharged abouJt three qua.rt-eu\s of the way aorc.33 the river and iTtto a rapid attr>:Jam. Couatscd: I euggc-c-it to you that the dis- charge go?s straa-g^it down the rivetr. ■Witness: It eicxtaiiniy does not. Contieiu- ling, he said that the normal d^pth of the riv,-x at No. 2 seiweir was about four or fiw fce)t. It wouid be imposvsihr.e for any- one going to the pflaoe not to sice the state of things thtat he had described, and if a num- ber of experts forward arid eadd that they had been th.-em1, and had mot it lie sih-on'd f,1\V that they cetiHd see nothimg. He did not think (tlhait a flood would atoessa-riiily ocxmr the irivetr. There might be fietroa floods ther>?. He did not know tlie river wall. Tlh'Clre vms no tcneli on the strclam to his knowledge, tillough therm migilut boo He ahau'jd ttay- it wouid be quite ^ompoeuijialo for anyone fto go aiioorg the bank iand mot soe that it waft, poiliulbed im thie wt.,y he lyad dieetCiTiibfd. 131é) jhjad "taken tia-rqples from the inivcr bed bfilow the water, and had handled theim to Mr Thompson. Tlh-e nivee wais, q-,a dioulbt, acotaet id to. seane extrtrtfc, but he Bucfc thicuk^thia.t oven in times of flcod t!b? bed af tllw rivctr "would be wcouu.d to any gnea:t ex'wirlt. He wias not, howiever, a a ex. petrifc iti siudh matb-frs. Tlhore ycii a tip on Mir J-cKfaV land, but it did rot look as if it had beem .xieoenti'jy used. There wne cradetrs, brok;a wiare, and tJM like tiiit-re. Re-exajniliued He found no ofkmniva matter there, -aand tihe surface was ooveired wt'lth fane. When he sazd hie :di'¡d not a;gree tbat No. 2 eawer diiseharged into a rapid stnetam, and evorythirig was earnied away, ho was ;gpe;ik- in-g frocn what he kacw tad from ti.ists he had made. BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION BY SIR RUBERT BOYCE. Sir Rubert Boyce, in answer to Mr Romer, enumerated his numerous qualifications, and said that he had sent an assistant to obtain samples from the river Conway. They were so far as he knew. taken in the neighbourhood of the sewage out)!all. They were samples of the water of tho river mixed with the sewage as it flowed pn.st Mr Jones's house. In his opinion the water of the river Conway was polluted by those sewers, and he had absolute evidence of it there in court. Witness produced a chart and photographs which he said placed the matter beyond doubt. He had noticed polluted matter along the banks of the plaintiff's property—black, ordinary sewago sludge. He thought it was only common-sense that this pollution must be dangerous to health. The depositing of sewage in the neighbourhood of a. house must be dangerous to the health of the residence. He would not take such a hous The drinking of tho water by cattle ho should certainly say was a very substantial test to people drinking the milk. Everyone was now ooming to the opinion that milk was affected by cattle drink- ing co-it-aininatea water. Cross-examinod: His examination was purely bacteriological. He took no notice <\f the quan- tity of sewage ooming down tho pipe. He formed a very strong conclusion that two sewer outlets in this river Conway near the plaintiff's house was out of all proportion to the volume of the water of the river. Ho also formed a very strong conclusion that the amount of pollution was immense. He could not say how much sewage came out of the pipes. He based his con- clusion on his own observations. Asked whether he would hazard a guess rt tho amount which came down the pipes, witness emphatically answered no. It was not a question of quantity ho said, but a question of quality (laughter). DR. RICHARD JONES. FESTINIOG. Dr. Richard Jones, medical officer of heiltli :.t Festiniog, and formerly consulting medi nl om- cer for tho county of Denbigh, Said that his practice was largely in the'Conway district. He had examined the river by the plaintiff's pro- perty. The water distinctly showed signs of se v- agcl an4y ho fovnd sewago r on the plaintiff's bank. If crude sewago was to be turned into the river. he thought a very bad place had been selected. Ho found some yards of stagnant water-ivater that was absolutely still. He stood and witched a distinct back flow. He should say that any per.-on residing near this 'frontage would Le in- juriously affected. There was something fit the bottom by the outfall of No. 2 sewer, but he could not see what it was, as the water was so discoloured. He had considered what would be a proper and convenient method for this sanitary authority to do to deal with this method. The best thing would be perculating filters, which could be put either side of the river. Cross-examined: He had only visited the spot once. At this stage the further hearing was adjourned

* WED-NESDAY'S HEARING. -,

News

Cite

Share

WEDNESDAY'S HEARING. Mr Justice Parker, in the Chancery Division, yesterday (Wednesday) continued the hearing of this action, by which the plaintiff, as owner of property in the river Conway, sought to restrain the defendants committing an alleged nuisance by discharging crude sewage into the river. Mr Mark Romer, K.C and Mr Hewitt appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Macmorran, K.C., and Mr Tomlin for the defendants On a question arising on the pleadings, his lordship said that it appeared to him that tho case ho had to try was two-fold. The fust point | was were the defendants doing anything in the nature of a nuisance, and secondly if they were did statutory authority make any difference. Mr Romer said that then there was a case of trespass. His Lordship said he did not see any neces- sity for aipendment. Mr Romer said that their case was simply that this wa,5 a great nuisance. Supposing a person wished to develop his land for building pur- poses, as was the case here, he could not do it while this was going on. It would be a differ- ent thing if tho defendants admitted that they were doing a wrong, but here they claimed a right to do what they were doing. The plaintiff wanted a declarelion that the defendants were not entitled to dischargo this sewage into the river without first purl'lying it. Mr Macmorran said ho should reiy upon want of title of the plaintiff so far as the case of j trespass was concerned. Mr Romer said then their case was that they were doing this with leave and licence. Mr Mf.cmorron said they did not plead leave and licence. Mr Justice Parker said it seemed to him that the question was rather whether there oould be a trespass when the plaintiff was not the owner of the property. Mr Romer pointed out that the plaintiff had pleaded that he was the owner of the property, and he said that he was suffering damage in re- version. He (counsel) had opened trespass as part of his case, and it was not until this late stage that any objection had been taken to the pleadings. The question was clearly raised by the plaintiff's reply. If, however, there was any question about it he should ask for leave to amend by stating in plain terms that the dis- charge of this sewage was a trespass on the plaintiff's banks, and upon his moiety of the river bed. Mr Macmorran said that if the plaintiff had leave to amend, the defendants must have leave to amend too. Mr Romer said that ho did rot see how an owner's rights could be negatived by the grant- ing of a leaso. Mr Macmorran said that. the tenant here, he understood, had been in possession for twelve years. Mr Romer saidl it was a yearly tenancy only. The plaintiff wanted to dispose, of the land for buildin,g purposes. The tenancy could bo de- termined by twelve months' notice. They did not determine the tenancy and then put their land up for building purposes. They first tried to soli their land for building purposes and tihm gave notice to determine the tenancy. That could not be done while this nuisance existed, •and, there/ore, there was damage to the-plain- tiff's reversion. Ho had in no way acquiesced. Mr Macmorran pointed out that it was plead- ed in tho defonoe tiliat the sewer was oanstrueted with lite knowledigeand acquiescence of the plain- tiff. It was aJso pleadedi tha.t the seoonct sewer was only laid with the aoq-uioscenoe of the then tenant for life of the planniff's property. Mr Romer said that if the defendants were 00- ing to discontinue the discharge of this S-Nvage direatly the tenancy was determined' then the action, was at, an end. In fact, if that had; been. their attitude the matter would never have been brough forward. Mr Macmorran sa.id that waa not the defend- ants' atttude at all. Mr Romer submitted that leave and licence was not pleaded in the defence. His Lordship asked why he should consider the point until it aiose? Mr R-omer suggested) tha.t it would be merely postponing the action for a. year. At tho end of the tenancy, when the -ilaantiff would un- doubtedly ba in possession, it would have to be renewed. His Lordship said he would go on with the hearing tliat day, and no doubt by the next day amendment could be that would show- exactly what the position was. Ha could then consider whether the aation should go on or not. Mr Romer .pointed out that the plaintiff was not asking any retilit" rn respect of the position of the tower, but wViat waa claimed waa relief against the dischargee of the sewage. The plaintiffsued as owner of Penygadair" which meant the property and not merely the 1;.014<12>. His Lordship said foe thought the question oI amendment had better be considered. Mr Charles Henry Faming ton was then called for the plaintiff, and stated that he was an engineer praofcising afc Lland/udnio, and was a member of the firm of T. B. Farrington and Sons. He had had considerable oxpericnoe of sewage in connection with water courses. He was intimately acquamtedi with North Wales. In faot, the whole of his experience had beeii acquired in that district. Ho was very intimate- ly ac-quainted with the river Conway. He had inspected the sewers in question in the action. Ho proved the plan of the sewers produced, lie had also prO'dfuced to hem a plan supplied by tlie defendants show ..iiig the alterations made to the s'ewora in 1889. IIo had made in- quiries as to population, the number of houses, etc. in Llanrwst. t: He estimated the present population at 3,500. In number one sewer was drained 453 water closets, 27 urinals^ 296 stable-stalls, 24 pig pens, 23 slaughter- houses. Into tho No. 2 sower was drained 132 water closets, 3 urinals, 32 stable-stalk, 7 oow- houses, a.nd 2 pig pens. lie first inspected the plaintiff's property on October 29th, 1909. He had seen sewage on the plaintiff's property. 1-t was lyings right the way down the plaintiff's bank. He had seen it in practically all weathers, though he had never seen it at the time of an extraordinary flood. The stuff that he saw on the bank was both above and below the water, on the banks and on the bed of the river, both in the water and cut of the water. Ho ha-d seen the property at all states of the tide. He had seen it. when it was high tide at uanoucmo, even at extritordinary high spring tides. Ho had eeen the sewage on the banks on these occasions. He had seen it between sewer No. 1 and sewer No. 2, but had not seen it below sewer No. 2. He had seen paper below No. 2. Between sewer No. 1 and sewer No. 2 sewage was lying practically all tho way along. With regard to the water itself wherever it was eta-grant you got ecum. The water was statgaiant on the plaintiff's side, but on the west side there was a strong- current, which di.ed away a,s you got further along. The result wa.s that you got ba-ok Sewer -ha,r No. 1 discharged imto the back watili, and did toot get into the stream. The pipe of sewer No. 1 had the effect of considerably increasing the baok wash. It oreated a groin; in fact it was a groin pure and simple. He had made abatervations for th.e pwlpow of ascertaining whieth-er the river at spot in qtsestion w as or was not a tidal river, and from 12io tests he had he was satisfied that it wa.8 not tidal at that spot. He had tested for sait, and found am cibsemee it. He had also tested tihe height of the water. Mr Macmorxaai d-e&ared to know from what I source witness got his tide tables, upon which he baaed his calcrcdAtiiona. Wrbntess said it wae from a standard work in the district; the tide tables for 1910. Mr Mjojcmorrau •. And you made your caloaLatkma in 1909?-A. prediction. Mr Ikaaer pointed out that aJl tide tables were a. prediction inasmu-ch as they wer.e baaed upon 'what had before. Witness, said that from all his tests it was absolutely certain that tie water at the spot in question was fresh wit.v. Cro.eci-ee: amiixd, Witness said he know nothing aflxrat the tide of "the river Thames, and did not know how far down fresh water could bo found. He had no information cm that subject with regard to the river Dee. His Lordship pointed out that fresh water had been found three miles out at -a, when there was a huge volume coming down. Further eroaB-^cxamined, Witness said he could not say whether or not om the day that he made his observations the tide went' rigiht up to the bridge, which was above the spot in question. He was there when the water was running down. His calculations were based upon actual measurements. When he saw the sewers he formed no estimate as to the quantity of sewage that was coming out of the pipes. It W'OlLd be necessarily small as compared with the flow of the water. He was lUi-ab.V, however, to form any estimate. Mr Maomorran.: I suggest to you that quantity of sewage coming from th? pipes compared with the -flov,- of the water was in- finitesimal ? Witness would not agree with that. The stream, he said, was running water ail the way down, but there were stagnant places on the site of the pQaintiff s property. W itness himself was not re-sponsible for the figures with regard to the various things that drained into the sewers. He Isad compilod his taKes from figures that had been given him. He knew that one or two farms were drained into the sevo&rs, and could mot say how ma.ny stable stalls each had. He had not counted them. He had acoepted the figures that had been given him. Th-a pro- perties cu .[l21 draining into No. 1 sewer were G,í,7 and 110 drained into No. 2. Be-examined i Mr Farrirngton said that after the sewa-gis came into the river, accord- ing to his observation, it was collected by tbo back-wash, as-id therefore the ratio of sewago to the quant itv of water coming- down was of no importance whatever. Thonrgh the amount of sewage compared with tb-.o amount of water roming down was infinitessimaJ th-a amount of se-wa^ge was large as compared with til i/o amount of w<ater in the bark-waeh. Mr Jceopli H. arohitectji surveyor and land agent, practising at Liani-wsfc, e-a-d that he had inspected the river with refereiK-e to the plainiifTs complaint. He bad practically iji- .ipeeted river from March 29th until Monday last. Ho had noticed that the dischargo of No. 1 sewer as distinct from No. 2 caused a conidBr- ab.e amount cif ccsntamination, and the water on thia piairstiff -» si-ie of t,li.- river wa.) practically stagnant. The riSF-ulfc was that sewage was de- txjtited which was a positive menace. He should say that some of the sewage mLLit oatuTally go on to tlie plaintiff a had. He had prepared a plan showing by dotted lines the Lewa,ge brcu-ght- back into tho plaintiff s land from sewer 1. If it extended for 51 feet., and was of a depth of from 20 feet, to six feet, that was to say that it lay on the surface of the gravel bank at a width varying from 20 feoc. to six feet. It was quite on the surface, and vvtiS perfectly visible to the eye. At times jj-art of the land lii-eilca-tod by the doited line was covered by water. Thero was a large qtiant-ey of sewage there in varying trtajTco of decomposition. That was not" the only part of tho bank on which found this depceiit. Furtiier along towards No. 2 sewer, where the trees came down, he also found it; some w&; on the bank, but some was floating in tho water. On the bank where it WP.-S worn away there wenj indications of rubbish. He found indications of rubbish having been deited all the way along. By iuhbwh he meant, .such things as people who were too lazy to ehttck into the diiat-bln bat throw into the river. 'l.he water was undoubt- edly stagnant, and had an oily appearance. No matter whether the wind was blowing from the North, South, or West, c jectrrsi to have very littJ) affect the water. It did not ssern Co disturb it very much. 1-t always flowed back in the du«i'on of sewer No. 1. There was a very unpleasant smell there, which he found was greater about- 10 o'clock in the morning. You oould oc-e the sewa.ge being carried up, and under sewer No. 2 there was an aoeuuraiation of sewage. Floods did not seem to touch )V, for he had ae-en it there both before and after floods. He did not v;sit tihe piaoe daily, but weaut down there a.s often aj he could. It would pcgsdhly be two, and might bo three finiesa week. The by No. 1 was i-or -v thick, and acemed es if it had a on. You could see the bottom in places, but only very dimly. He had taken cteps to ascertain (the number of the various things tha.t drained into these sewers. His ill- eitruieti-ons were to take in all-build-in--s and es- timate everything. He divided a plan given him into oceticm. He visited the sections and counted the hoitses, and when he could he went in. Mr Romer: And where you could not go in? Witness: I was turned out (laughter). Con- tinidng. he said in that way he -had made the boat, estimate ho could of the various' things that drained into these sewers. Fairs and markets were held at Llanrwst. The markets were held once a wcteJc, when a good many peol)16 came into ILlanrwsi. They were not cattle markets. A large -nuiaber of people came into the town, on fair days. So far as he knew, the surface water drained into No. 2 sewer. From his ob- servations, and (inquiries, he had made, he estimated that 128 water closets, four con- veniences, arJi two stables of ten stalls drained into No. 2 sewer, and into there drained 427 water closets, 24 conven- iences, stables (for the accommodation of 296 horses, 28 pig-styes, thr.ee slaughter-houses, and six chemical sinks. He knew the river Conway well, and should say at the spot in questiou it was non-tidal. He had tested it for the purpose of ascertaining whether it Was or was not from the 13th to the 28th of October, this year. He had come to the con- clusion from the lists he had. made that the river then? was mot tidal. He found that from October 13th to October 18th there was no rise in tlie river at all. There was a rise of one inch on the 19th, but it was for a very short period. On 20th there was supposed to be a high tide. There was a 22 foot tide at Conway, but the river where he was making his observations fell four inches. On the 21st, with a 21 foot tide at

Advertising

LLANDUDNO.

News

Cite

Share

LLANDUDNO. CHURCH LADS' BRIGADE.-The parades of the Church Lads' Brigade have now been resumed, and are :held each Monday evening- at the Church House. Several new members have becai enrolled. CHCHCH COLLECTIONS.—The offertories at the Llandudno Churchps during the past month were as foUows :-Holy Trinity Church, S65 Is 8jd St. George's Church, JE18 175 7d; Bod- afon. S2 10s 5jd, making a total of E86 9s 9d. EXCHANGE OF PULPITS.—On Sunday the Rev Evan Hughes, of Bethania C.M. Chapel, ex- changed pulpits with the Rev W. R. Roberts, of Ebenezer Welsh Wesleyan Chapel. MOTHERS' MEETINGS. These weekly meetings will be held at Holy Trinity Church House each Monday afternoon during the winter months. The meeting last week, which in the absence of Mrs Hughes was conducted by Mrs Roberts, Huyton. was exceedingly well attended. DOG FANCIERS' ASSOCIATION.-Welsh Northern Counties' Dog, Fur and Feather Fan- ciers' Association, of which Lady Naylor-Leviand is president, have decided to hold their next show at Llandudno towards the end of next mopth. ST. GEORGE'S CHARITY GUILD.-This guild has commenced its winter work with re- newed zeal and energy. The Guild meets every Thurs&y at St. George's Vestry, where an enjoy- able tea is provided each week by one of the members. BOATMEN REWARDED.—Among the grants made by the executive committee of the Royal Na-tional Lifeboat Institution at their last meet- ing was one of £1 5s to five men for promptly putting off in a boat, and saving two visitors and a boatman, whose boat was caught in a severe squall and was in danger of foundering in Llan- dudno Bay on the 21st July. JUVENILE OPERETTA.—Under the conduc- torship of Me Alec Taylor, rehearsals of a chil- dren's operetta, entitled ''Cinderella and the Pr mce," were held at Christ Church schoolroom j 0 on Friday and Tuesday evening. It is proposed to give a performance of the < towards the end of next month or early in s w year. SACRED STUDY.—The Rector i: nds to commence his winter course of instruction in St. George's Church the first week in Advent. The course of lectures this year is being eagerly looked .forward to. The Rector, after his visit to the Holy Land, will doubtless have much to sav in connection with Bible subjects. CHURCHMEN'S SOCIETY.—It has been de. cided to form a Church of England Men's Society 1 at Llandudno. CoL Reilly has been appointed secretary of the movement. An application signed by the Rector and P secretary has been forwarded to the headqas.iters at Westminster. The admission service will shortly be held at Holy Trinitv Church. KING EDWARD MEMO' Rll L.-Tlie Lord Lieutenant of the county has s immoncd a repre- sentative meeting to be held at Carnarvon on the 19th inat, to consider the steps to be taken in connection with a memorial to King Edward VII. All the members of the Carnarvonshire County Council have been invited to attend the meeting, and the Llandedno Urban District Coun. cil have appointed their chairman (Councillor E., E. Bone, J.P.) to represent th. at the meeting. SUDDEN DEATH.—The death occurred sud. denly, on Friday morning, of William Tey-y Bowen, photographer, 56, Mostyn-street. It ap- pears that deoecee-d, who was 34 years of oge, had been suffering from rbeoimatism for ecnie weeks. Wlbil&t in bed on Friday morning his wife noticed that a sudden change liad ock-ne over him. Medical aid was summoned, but oollth occurred before the doctor's arrival. The inter- mentr took place at St. Tudno's Church on Moci, day. PRESENTATION TO A PIER OFFICIAL. —Ar, a member 01 the Llandudno Pier Stuff, Mr J. S. Atkins, has made himself exceedingly popu- lar amongst visitors and residents alike daring tfM past season. Upon the occasion of ills forth- coming- marriage his many friends at Llandudno have recognised his services and geniality by present:ng him with a handsome aecanter and stand, snitablv engraved, and a walking stick. ST. GEORGE'S LITERARY SOCIETY.-At a meeting of this Society to-day week an in- terestmg paper on tlie subject of "Heat and Life" was read bv Mr Morris Barnett. Mr George Evans presided over a good attendance of members. A diaeua?ian took place in which tlie following took p.a.rt :-Miss Bamiord, Rev. R. C. Jon'is, Messrs Roger Dawson, W. R. Brookes, J. E. llomsby, E. Ffouikcs Griffiths, aud R. Ro- berts. CAUGHT IN THE ACT.—At the Polioo Court on Friday, before- Dr. Dalton and Mr Ro- bert Roberts, Henry Williams, Llysfaeai View, Penrhyneidle, wa-I charged "ifh stealing" a quan- tity of vegetables from tho gardens of Gloddaeth Ilall. Evidence was gven by P.C. Williams (41) who said that he secreted himself behind a fenoo and watched the gardens tllie previous might. About ha!f-i>asi. fiïJ3 in tlie morning he oaught the def-emdant in the act of digging up some car- rots, and arrested him. Defendant pleaded guilty and said that he ihad been out: of work for some time. He was sentenced to tvPo months imprisonmnent with hard labour. SUNSHINE AND RAIN.—The ejaoncit of bright sn.rri.f-13 roeccded ait ILlenduiltino for tho ending Novcoriiber 6itb was 17 hours aind 36 minuter. 1 iuj rairrfa-li for the week ysim 1.080 inches. PRINCE'S THEATRE .—The (animated pkv tunas, exhibited at the Prince's this weak, are a,tt^a.etj'n,g grod audietaoes tily. T2re seni.es injeludo two very idtcfestin^dm- moitiljc eubjeats, oiitiiiod, "Awakening of B'css'' and "Victjma of Jealousy." A moat arnupiig pldtire is the me enitiiavd "Where is Mul- oatyr" aind the oae depi:<sting "Hutaiisng' in CEtiim." is a very instruct live subject. For the future tilrero wilil bo a change off pLctures twice -weekly. A TILLL -OHDRCIITLL COINCIDENCE. —Mir W. J. QhurchiiGl amd MII03 Vesta Tilley, ail-tor a. Siajpse of imiainy years, ap- pea'red on eanne blil at the Empire Theatre of Varieties, Bradford, ia&t week. At the sge of four years, MT Clirjirchiril fip"(t, appeared Mia3 Vesta TJiley in a skeitch, cn/titCed, "The Coilier's Dying Cliuiild,"J deacribcd as a great novetlty and produacd by Mr Chutzvhilil's faither c,t NçMi. MaisB Voetta Tilley played the part of the dyitig dhad, wihi'l: "Mr Qiturcftiill took the part oif an amgetl. After aN these years, the names of tha JO popular f a-vo unites ta.ppeared om t.ihJ3 sam-e biufi. again at Bradford. "lihiJi wv>ek, Mr Churchim is appearing- with (great sucac!3s at the Palace Thd1., Huil. LLANDUDNO ART follow- ing- is a list of SUOOSS93S obtained by students at these classes during" the last session —Board of Education Examinations: Drawing in. light and shade, Nor. Netherwood. 2nd class. Free- hand drawing in outline, Sebina Nevitt, Annie Myfanwy Jones. Emma May Cooper, Jennie Williams, Ethel Josephine Smith, 2nd class. Machine drawing and construction, Carl Pater Parkinson, 1st class in first stage. Geometrical drawing*, Margaret Ellen Nevett, 2nd olaa. Building construction and drawing, Robert Wil. liam Roberts, 1st class in first, stage. Mod.el drawing, Norman Netherwood, Williairi4 2nd class. Board of Examinations for Educa- tional handwork Clay modelling, teacher's oc-rtj. ficates, Kate A. Edwards passed with distinction; Annie H. Owen, T. M. Sculthorpe, Eleanor Bebb, Mary Hilton, Maggie G. Jones passed Teacher's Higher Certificate; Margaret Ellen Nevitt passed. Brush-drawing (Teacher's Cer- tificate), Sara.h M. Griffith, Jas. Hy. S. Steveme^ Kate A. Edwards, Maggie G. Jones, Rosa Helsliip, Wm. Williams passed.

[No title]

Advertising

Cite

Share

ppp J|j^M"'I TERRIBLE PLiGHT OF A BAD LEG VICTIM. 1 I Ooetera Watch Spleadimf Zam-Buk Healing. B rif: ^HANCING to caU at, a home in a most, respectable neighbourhood of Batley, H Yorkshire woollen town, a newspaper reporter heard the recital of another H ftlDarkaltle success. The case was that of Miss Emma Fitzgerald, aged 23, livinj at 71. Taylor Street, Batley, B II u OSu «atd to the reporter When Emma was 14, she was kicked on the right lee Ml I 1?' T klr Hs the guiders of the leg, and so crippled the girl that we took h»r fl| to the Dewsbury Infirmary. She stayed at the Infirmary twelve months, and was operated 8 ooiUd'ia^'her Wewer* nothing but amputation of th« leg above the knee H could .3. ve her. I J^keeM^i^CJrtheh^teOn^ d B for r can see no hope at aU: a ''Emma continued like this until she was nearly 21. Then Zam-Buk bei?an to he talked f I 1 /wssisix Z l U?.0Ur tomJLaLld we.dec^ed af kst to Bee if it would do any good. Zam-Buk glad- B an T h.f IP by Emma's pun and taking theinflammafioS from h^W. We M bTtl^J per«evered with this magic balm and found that the sores had stopped festering and running f Then we felt a hard substance comuig to the surface I saw a doctor, who told me it was a I 1 1 s. piece of loose bone. Oi bis advice I took Emma to the Leeds Infirmary, to see about having ft j 1 N. the piece of bone extracted. They didn't touch the le? at the Infirmary. All they told ml R 1 was to go on bathing and dressing it, and the bone would work out Ki I ^Jd'»oon of dc^ycd 12 Months' "nplw Treatment vvas U9W6"- In return for this coupon /mB&r H ■ B Bgfl t B V r 1&IH Id. stomp Zaui-Buk Co, B B B .BBB B B H — Leedt, will tend you fre« B> ■ ■ B ^BHrA 1 I B H B B B^^B w B a. Tl B A B BAmple and fletaiU of £ 200 IB B k ■ B ^9L B W B ^^B B wBB^B^^B t scienCO'S Now Disc over November 10, 1910. -CU RE WA's

* WED-NESDAY'S HEARING. -,

News

Cite

Share

Conway, there was a rise of over ore inch at the eewers. The distance by river from lilan- rwst to Conway was about 13 miles. On the 22nd there was a rise of half-r-y.-ineh both above .2,nd below the te wee. He always made ibis observations about the tiime of high water .at Conway. Prom October 23rd to October 28th there was no dhange in the river. Crops-examined: Witness said that the board used for making his tests was always put on the Ancaster side of the river. He did not put it ou the other side, because the other side was affected by current, and more- over, on making these tests you always took the outside of the xiv,c,- You put it on the outside because of the back-wash ? I never mentioned back-wash. Well, \V itness said that, was a totally different thing. Ho put Iris boavd on the. ouLride bec-auoc it war, more convenient for him to get at it there. He denied that his tests were made when tho river waa high, though an October 18th it was four foot above tho normal summer level. Mr Macmorran sug-gestod that it was a good deal more than fourteen miles from Lianrwst to Cociway by river, but with that witness would not agree. He thought it was a-bou. fourteen., but could not say within half a mile or eo. He did pot live at Llanrwa: now, but bo used to. lie left in November, 1905, and now resided about ten zruias away. Ho had never seen the tide zieo to the bridge; it was a physical impossi- bility. That you pledge yourself to?—Absolutely. CVxitinuimg, witnecs scid of course he could nob ewaar that it never had- but he had certainly j never seen. it. do nor had he ever been, todd of it doing so. If he had beem told so he wouid not have believed it. Witness had no doubt that the sewage had been there tsome considerable time. L: wa$tber for all the world -to actx The sewage deposit was on the stones stretched over 51 feet. It was spread a'll over, and net merely in one place here and there. The width was from 20 feet to six feet. The stuff was the same ca the b-eaik as was on the bed of tho river. The bed of tho river im- mediately adjoining the sevrere had a slimy ap- pearance. Taken in detail, through his estimate of the boiidingn draining into itJie sewers, he oaii he visited the stable,, and counted the stalls. He was very particular upon that point, When he saw the pile of stuff under sower No. 2 the river Nvzi low, and the matter was covered •to a depth of about four inches. That was to sav the matter came up to within about four inches from the surface. Th3 smell he noticed canie from both sewers, both from No. i and No. 2. It was, however, worse from No. 2. He could sme.n it 175 yards from No. 2 sewer. Re-examined: The smell was most offensive. The further hearing was adjourned until to- day (Tburaday).

Welsh Newspapers

The Welsh Coast Pioneer and Review for North Cambria

8 articles on this Page