View report page

29
your Clerk; and two technical objections were raised at the
hearing by Mr. Coleridge (who appeared for the Gas Company);
1st—That your Honourable Court had no power to
institute these proceedings in the name of their Clerk; 2nd
—That the Commissioners of Sewers were not the "Local
Authority" under the Metropolis Gas Act, and had not,
therefore, the power to take any proceedings against the Gas
Companies, I need hardly say that both these points were
rather technical, and altogether evaded the real merits of
the case, which I had been lead to believe the Companv were
anxious to meet, as they had previously alleged that thev
had a triumphant answer to the charge of supplying impure
gas to the citizens.
The Alderman rided that the 1st objection raised by the
Company was fatal, a decision to which, however erroneous
it may be, there was no alternative but to submit; and no
decision was given to the second point. Thus the Company
have for the moment, on a mere question of form, stifled
what was in effect a public inquiry into the quality of their
gas, and they leave the charge of your Honourable Court
still hanging, without even attempting an answer.
The Metropolis Gas Act, 1860, Section 25.
The quality of the common gas supplied by any Gas Company
shall be, with respect to its illuminating power, at a
distance as near as may be of one thousand yards from the
Works, such as to produce from an Argand burner having
fifteen holes and a seven-inch chimney, consuming live cubic
feet of gas an hour, a light equal in intensity to the light
produced by not less than twelve sperm candles of six to the
pound, each burning one hundred and twenty grains an hour;
and the quality of cannel gas supplied by any Gas Company
shall, with respect to its illuminating power at the distance
aforesaid, be such as to produce from a batswing or fishtail
burner, consuming five feet of gas per hour, a light equal in