View report page

12
The jury found that the state of facts showed negligence, and
gave a verdict for £154 damages, and the judge allowed costs.
The Vestry hope, upon the law of the case, to get the verdict
set aside. If they are not able to do so, the consequences will
be very serious to the ratepayers of London and other large
towns where similar coverings are in use, as there is little doubt
but that many fictitious claims will be made which it will be
most difficult if not impossible to disprove.
Communications
over
Thames
East of
London
Bridge.
The very important question of further means of communication
between the north and south of the Thames, below London
Bridge, has again been gone into by the Vestry, and they have
arrived at the conclusion that some such communication is
absolutely necessary.
The Vestry fully appreciate the fact that the carrying out of
the scheme may affect some particular class or classes, but at
the same time they consider that what is the most beneficial for
the general public must prevail over merely personal interests.
The Vestry do not urge any particular form of communication'
but they have communicated to the Metropolitan Board of
Works their opinions, and have urged that body to take steps
to procure Parliamentary powers to carry out the work in such
way as may deemed most advantageous to all.
Sanitary
work.
There have not been any sewer or drainage works of very
great magnitude executed during the year, but at the same time
many smaller but most useful ones, in a sanitary point of view,
have received attention.
Line of
Frontage
in Commercl.-rd,
The Vestry had brought to their notice the fact that Mr.
Sullivan, of Commercial Road, is in the habit of enclosing the
pent-house in front of his house with shutters, and so practically
making it a building, and they accordingly requested the certificate
of the Superintending Architect of the Metropolitan Board
of Works as to whether it was in advance of the general line
of buildings .
He certified that it was, and the Vestry thereupon summoned
Mr. Sullivan for erecting a building in advance of the general
line without the consent of the Metropolitan Board of Works.
After a lengthy hearing, the magistrate, in giving his decision,
stated in effect that, as regarded the pent-house, it had existed
so long, that the certificate of the Superintending Architect
would not affect that, and therefore that the whole question was,
Does the putting up of shutters at night make it become a building
In his opinion it did not, and therefore he dismissed the