View report page

34
Wards 1 and 3, St. John.
Bye-Laws as to Cleansing and Covering Cisterns used for Storage
of Drinking Water.
It was found necessary to take legal proceedings in three
cases under this Bye-Law, fines and costs amounting to
£7 16s. 6d. being imposed.
Attorney-General v. Brownrigg.
A letter was received by the Vestry dated February 24th
from Mr. Warrington Rogers, as follows:—
re Appeal against so much of Judgment of Mr. Justice Kekewich
as related to Insanitary Nuisance.
I beg to inform you that this matter came before the Court on
Thursday last, when the appeal was allowed, the Judges finding
by way of declaration in favour of the Vestry, that Sir H.
Brownrigg was legally bound to prevent the land in question from
continuing to be a public nuisance, and that the Attorney-General
was entitled to the injunction to enforce the performance by him
of such duty, liberty to the Attorney-General to apply to the
Judge for such injunction, if necessary, the Defendant to pay the
cost of the action, so far as it was dismissed against the Defendant
without costs, and also to pay the costs of the appeal.
Bye-laws with respect to house drainage.
The Works Committee received a letter from the London
County Council, dated 18th December, 1896, forwarding draft
of bye-laws with respect to house drainage, proposed to be
made under section 202 of the Metropolis Management Act,
1855, and intimating that any observations which the Vestry,
with whom the enforcement of the bye-laws within the parish
would rest, may wish to make, should be forwarded by the 16th
January, but adding that the draft had been the subject of
very careful consideration and of long correspondence with the
Local Government Board, and that the Council would probably
not be able to make numerous and material alterations at that
time.
In connection therewith, the Committee received a letter
from the Islington Vestry, dated 12th January, transmitting
copy of a letter addressed to the County Council, urging the
necessity of further time for consideration; and a letter
from the Kensington Vestry, dated 14th January, with copy
of a letter addressed by them to the Local Government
Board, requesting that confirmation of the proposed bye-laws
should be withheld until the local authorities have had