View report page

34
and that of fat fresh from the butcher's only persisted
in—not being, in the opinion of the Vestry, abated, the
proprietor was summoned before the magistrate and
fined two pounds. Subsequently he was again summoned,
and the magistrate then gave him three
weeks, within which to get rid of the nuisance, with
the understanding that if at the end of that time there
should still be a nuisance he would be fined five
pounds. Mr. Stansfield did not think it worth his
while, with the risk of failure, to go to any great expense
iu carrying out structural works, and therefore
before the expiry of the three weeks closed his factory.
The second case was one of much greater importance,
beoause it established the efficacy of an Act
(which had been supposed to be practically inoperative)
to restrict the establishment of certain trades' nuisances,
and in oertain cases to get rid of nuisances
against which the Nuisances Removal Acts are almost
powerless. The case was that of Mr. To wnsend, of Rosecottage,
also in Hatcham. This person had established
a bone-boiling business there on a small scale, in the
immediate neighbourhood of two other similar but
much larger establishments. The two larger ones had
been in existence three or four years, and their proprietors
had, under the Nuisances Removal Act been
required to carry out structural works by which