View report page

160
the bricks. The "dust" is sifted to remove matter of an organic
nature, animal and vegetable, but no amount of sifting will prevent
putrid emanations when the refuse is burnt. In the Hampstead
case the Vestry officials compelled the removal of all "soft core"
from the fields, and it was admitted that the defendants conducted
their business with due care, sifting the refuse repeatedly, &c.
Still the nuisance continued. Dustbin refuse, it may be mentioned,
is left a year to "mellow," exposed to wind and rain, and the
ashes become saturated with organic matter. The clay of which
the brick is moulded is usually incorporated with dustbin ashes.
The bricks are burned in "clamps" or layers of green bricks
separated by layers of "breeze," i.e., cinder sittings from dust
heaps. "Kilns" for burning bricks have to be constructed and
coal dust is used in them, so that the difference in cost of production
is considerable. At the rear of the Fleet brickfields at
Hampstead, there are others in which bricks are burnt in kilns, and
from these it is stated that there arise no putrid fumes, but plenty of
smoke. The Hampstead defendants contended that they must use
the sort of material they did use to produce the common stock brick.
Prior to the hearing of the cause (Attorney General v. Ellt)
another action (Dunston v. Neal and Seely v. Neal) had been tried.
The brick burning in this case was carried on at Streatham,
in what might be called the open country, and the plaintiffs
were a farmer and a private gentleman respectively. This cause
was tried before Mr. Justice Cave; the Hampstead case before
Mr. Justice Wills. In both cases the plaintiffs succeeded in
proving nuisance, and the Judges severally granted injunctions
restraining the defendants from carrying on their businesses so
as to create a nuisance.
In the Streatham case both of the plaintiffs complained
that the noxious smells arising from the brickfield seriously
interfered with them in the enjoyment of their premises—so
much so that in certain states of the wind, (although they lived
about 400 and 800 yards, respectively, from the source of the
nuisance), they were unable to open their windows. The cause of
nuisance, as proved, arose from the use of dustbin refuse in the