View report page

162
Act, but it had always been used by the Public as a Public
Road. The Company in their negotiation with the London,
Chatham, and Dover Railway Company, in 1862, had
treated the Road as their own private property. The
Crystal Palace Company had always repaired it, and it
was proved at a yearly cost of about £2)0, so that the
Company on payment of the contribution will be relieved
from the future repairs of this Road.
The Vestry having passed the Resolution to pave this
Road under the 105th Section of the Act, the Surveyor
estimated the expenses of paving, with asphalte and
kerbing, and channelling the roadway at £5925 0s. 10d.
The Crystal Palace Company refused payment of the
amount apportioned upon them, upon the grounds that it
was not a "New Street," being part of an old highway, and
also by the 4th Section of the statute that it was dedicated
to the Parish; but the Vestry contended that the Parade
had become a "New Street" by reason of the erection
of the Crystal Palace and the other buildings abutting
such road, and had never been dedicated to the Parish
under the General Highway Act.
The refusal to pay compelled the Vestry to take
proceedings against the Company to recover the amount,
and the case was tried in the Court of Queen's Bench before
Mr. Justice Day on January 11th, 1892.
The Solicitor General, Sir Edward Clarke, Q.C., and
Mr. Macmorran were retained for the Vestry; Mr. R. T.
Reid, Q.C., and Mr. G. M. Freeman for the Company.