View report page

52
Claims
for compensation
continued.
water meter box, which by wear had become smooth. The Plaintiff
alleged that allowing it to become smooth is negligence, which
rendered the Vestry liable. The Vestry contended that it is not
negligence, and that even if it were, the Vestry put it in its place
and owned it in their capacity as Surveyors of Highways, and
that therefore they were not liable upon the well-established law,
that Surveyors of Highways are not liable for non-feasance, but
only for mis-feasance.
The jury found that the state of facts showed negligence, and
gave a verdict for £154 damages, and the judge allowed costs.
The Vestry hoped upon the law of the case, to get the verdict
set aside; applied for and obtained a rule nisi before the Divisional
Court to set aside the verdict and to enter judgment for the defendants
on the point of law.
Upon the argument of the rule the judges decided against the
Vestry.
The consequences of the result of the case seemed so very
serious to the Vestry as opening the door to all sorts of fictitious
claims that the Vestry determined to go to the Court of Appeal,
but that Court came to the same conclusion as the Courts
below. Having regard to the immense expense of an Appeal to
the House of Lords, the Vestry did not feel justified, under the
circumstances, in incurring it, but they still feel that the judgment
is open to question.
Sewers.
The subject of the Sewers in the Hamlet was one of the very
first things which engaged the attention of the Vestry, as will be
seen by a reference to the following chronological statement.
The expense of at once doing the whole work was found to be
so enormous, that the Vestry could not well entertain it, and they
have therefore adopted the principle of, from time to time, executing
works as the exigencies of the time required.
The Vestry also determined to stop all tampering with the
sewers, and kept a sharp look out on persons offending.
The following statement may be found useful for reference,
but the subject-matter of this heading is essentially one for the
other Officers, and I have therefore not gone deeply into the
question.
The subjects, which cannot well be put in a tabulated form,
I purpose putting in order of date.