View report page

19
"Ann Meed said she had lived with her husband in Peel Grove for three years. She
complained that the smoke entered her dwelling day and night, and was, she considered,
injurious to their health.
"Robert Gurnell was next sworn. He said—I reside at 17, Peel Grove, and am a
letter carrier. The distance from my house to the wall separating defendant's premises
from my yard is exactly 36 feet 5 inches. I have lived there for ten years. The smoke
has had the effect upon me of producing sickness and headache, and I have been under
medical treatment for the same. The curing-house has seemed as if it was on fire ; and
the quantity of smoke emitted therefrom at night has been so great that our bedroom has
frequently been filled with it. The smoking usually commences at five or six in the
evening, and continues till the hour of four or five in the morning, every day in the week,
Sunday included.
"Dr. Tripe, medical officer of health for Hackney.—The substance of his evidence was,
that the symptoms complained of by previous witnesses were identical with what he had
met with in persons in his own district who lived close to places where haddocks were
cured. But the process of preparing haddocks for market was much more offensive than
anything that could arise from the premises now in question.
"In addressing his worship for the defence, Mr. Williams intimated that these proceedings
had mainly arisen from the circumstance that a lodger had left the prosecutor and
gone to live with the defendant. The sufferings described by Mr. Paterson were quite
likely, owing to the excitability of his temperament, of which he had given proof in
Court, for he seemed fit to jump out of the witness box. This witness had applied to the
local authorities, who, after fully investigating his complaint, did not consider it deserved
to be entertained. Mr. Paterson and his friends then collected a number of old ladies,
and put them in the witness box to say that they suffered with sickness and headache,
and some of them said they were in a consumption. Yet only one of the females had been
accompanied by her husband. Mr. Williams then said that he would at once call upon
Dr. Letheby, who was a great authority upon matters of this kind, and whose evidence
alone would suffice to show that complainant had no ground whatever for the proceediugs
he had instituted.
"Dr. Henry Letheby was then sworn. He deposed—I am medical officer of health for
the City of London, and have had great experience in manufacturing processes generally.
I have seen the premises of Mr. Cushway in full working operation. With respect to
the effect produced by the business conducted there, I would observe, that in fish-curing
there are two distinct operations—one is smoking, the other is drying. In the former
sulphur is largely employed; but no sulphur is used by the defendant at these premises,
for the operation carried on is simply that of drying. On visiting the place I was
astonished that it should have been the subject of any complaint. If litigation in cases
like this were to be encouraged, the whole business of the country would be brought to a
standstill. The complaint is a most trifling one. I noticed particularly, that although the
process has been carried on so long, yet the quantity of smoke generated has been only
sufficient to barely stain the woodwork. The fumes evolved do not, I am satisfied, contain
anything noxious or likely to injure health.