may deem unnecessary, so that it be done as not to create a nuisance, and that any person deprived of the use of any sewer be provided with some other as effectual for his use (s. 45). The powers of the Towns Improvement Clauses Act with respect to precautions during the construction, &c., of sewers, &c., are incorporated (21 & 22 Vict. c. 98, s. 44); under which Act the Board is to guard against accident during the construction or repair of sewers, &c., by shoring up houses and fencing and lighting at night any excavations, &c., for the purpose (10 & 11 Vict. c. 34, s. 79). The Board may cause a map to be prepared exhibiting a system of sewerage for draining their District, to be kept at their office, and open to inspection (11 & 12 Vict. c. 63, s. 41). The expense of all maps, surveys, plans, &c., is to be paid out of the General District Rates (s. 42). Such Local Board may, with the consent of the Authorities in any adjoining District, execute such works therein as they may within their own District, upon such terms as to payment as may be agreed upon, out of the rates authorised to be raised by such Authority (21 & 22 Vict. c. 98, s. 28). Such Board may exercise such powers also without their District, for the purpose of outfall or distribution of sewage, upon making compensation; but are not to convey any sewage into any natural watercourse or stream until such sewage be freed from all foul matter as would affect the water in such stream (a), &c. (24 & 25 Vict. c. 61, s. 4).

(a) The Board have no power to construct sewers so as to cause the water of a canal to be fouled (Manchester, &c., Railway v. Worksop L. B., 26 L. J. Ch. 245; 23 Beav. 198).

In all cases where a stream has been injuriously affected by the works of a Local Board under the Public Health Act, executed without the consent of the riparian proprietor, his remedy is by action and not by proceedings for compensation. Blackburn, J.-"The Local Board have made some sewers, under the Public Health and Local Government Acts, and have thereby caused more or less affection to a water-stream on which the plaintiff has a mill, to which (though not an ancient one) he had a right as riparian owner to have the water flow without being interfered with. And the question is, whether that interference by the defendants is a matter for which he is entitled to compensation under the Acts, because, if so, the mandamus ordering the defendants

Provided that three months' notice of the intended work must be given before its commencement, by advertisement in the newspapers usually circulated where the work is to be made, and served upon all owners, lessees, and occupiers of lands affected, and on overseers, &c., trustees and surveyors of roads, &c., with full description thereof, and a plan is to be open to inspection (s. 5). In case of objection served on the Board within the three months, such work is not to be commenced without the sanction of the Secretary of State (s. 6), who may appoint an Inspector to make inquiry and report thereon (s. 7). A drain may be made from premises near the District, to communicate with any sewer of the Board, upon terms to be agreed on, or to be settled in case of dispute by arbitration (11 & 12 Vict. c. 63, s. 48). Where premises without the District of the Board have a drain communicating with a sewer within such District, to the use of which the owner is not entitled, a yearly sum is to be paid, to be agreed on or determined by two Justices, such sum to be charged as Private Improvement Expenses, as if the premises were within the District, so long as the connection continue (24 & 25 Vict. c. 61, s. 8.) If any premises be sufficiently drained before any new sewer be laid down, the Board may deduct such sum as they deem just from the rates otherwise chargeable thereon (21 & 22 Vict. c. 98, s. 29). The Board are to cause the sewers vested in them

to make compensation would be right enough. If, however, it is not a matter for compensation, but for which the remedy, if any, is by action at Common Law, then the mandamus ought not to go. The general rule is, that where something is done which interferes with the rights of an individual, and would therefore be actionable at Common Law, but which has been authorised by the Legislature, there, though it is a damnum to the party affected, it is no longer an injuria, and the loss must fall on him. To prevent that injustice the Legislature has said in most of the Acts authorising interference with private rights, that the parties affected shall be compensated whenever they are injured by the exercise of the powers given by the statute, and where the thing done is authorised by the statute, the action at Common Law is taken away, and it is the object of compensation only. Where, however, the act done is not authorised by the statute, the action at Common Law remains. Our judgment must be for the defendants. (Taylor v. Darlington L. B., 4 New Reports, 394.)

to be constructed, covered, and kept, so as not to be a nuisance or injurious to health, and to be properly cleansed, and may construct reservoirs, &c., and other works for the purpose, and cause such sewers to be emptied as may be fit, or the sewage to be sold, but so as not to create a nuisance (a) (11 & 12 Vict. c. 63, s. 46). Such powers may also be exercised without their District, for the purpose of outfall and distribution of sewage, upon making compensation (b), and the Board may contract for the sale or distribution of sewage, and purchase or lease any lands, &c., or apparatus, for storing, disinfecting, or distributing sewage (21 & 22 Vict. c. 98, s. 30). In case any foul ditch, &c., lie near so as injuriously to affect the District, the Board may apply to any Justice to summon the Authorities of the place, under the Nuisances Act, 1855, before the Justices of the county or borough, who may order the execution of any necessary works, by whom to be executed, or the proportion of costs to be borne, and the time of payment, to be a charge upon the poor-rates of such adjoining place, and leviable in default on the goods of the Overseers (s. 31). No person is to cause any drain to be emptied into any sewer of the Board, nor build over any such sewer, nor build any cellar under the carriage-way of any street without the written consent of the Board, under penalty of £5, and £2 for every day during continuance of the offence after notice; and the Board may alter, pull down, or deal with the same as they may think fit, at the expense of the offender (11 & 12 Vict. c. 63, s. 47). The Board may make Bye-Laws with respect to sewerage for new streets (c), &c., with such provisions as

(a) Where a Local Board had improperly executed works of sewerage under the provisions of the Public Health Act in that behalf, so as to cause a nuisance, it was held that an action against the Board might be maintained (Itchin Co. v. Southampton L. B., 28 L. J. Q. B. 41). See also Att.-Gen. v. Luton L. B., 2 Jur. N. S. 180; Oldaker v. Hunt, 6 De G. M. & G. 376, 1 Jur. N.S. 785.

(b) In the case of Haywood v. Lowndes, 4 Dr. 454, 28 L. J. Ch. 400, it was held that the Board had no power compulsorily to construct a sewer beyond their district.

(c) See suggested forms for Bye-Laws, p. 612.

they think necessary as to the deposit of plans, &c., by persons laying out streets, or as to the execution of works (21 & 22 Vict. c. 98, s. 34). The Board, after notice, may obtain authority from two Justices to enter or open any lands for surveying, taking levels, &c. (11 & 12 Vict. c. 63, s. 143), making compensation for any damage (s. 144). The Board are not to interfere with sewers or other works under any Commissioners, nor any rivers, canals, &c., to injure the navigation, &c., nor any watercourses or bridges, &c., or execute any works therein without consent of the Authorities (21 & 22 Vict. c. 98, ss. 68 and 71). But in certain cases disputes may be referred to arbitration (ss. 69 and 74). Companies in certain cases may divert sewers of the Board (s. 72).

In any Parish or Place containing less than 2000 inhabitants on the then last census, to which the Public Health and Local Government Acts have not been applied, not less than threefifths of the ratepayers, at a public meeting called after fourteen days' notice by the Churchwardens and Overseers (such notice to be given by advertisement in the newspapers, and at the churches and chapels, and to contain a statement of the proposed works to be submitted for approval), may resolve that any pond, ditch, sewer, place, &c., containing drainage, filth, or offensive matter likely to be prejudicial to health, shall be drained, cleansed, covered, or filled up, or that a sewer shall be made or improved, a well dug, or a pump provided for public use; and the Churchwardens and Overseers are thereupon to procure a plan and estimate of such works, and lay the same before another such meeting called after like notice, and, if approved by a majority then present, they are to cause such works to be executed, and pay the cost out of the poorrates of the parish (11 & 12 Vict. c. 63, s. 50).

NUISANCES REMOVAL ACTS.

All such wells, pumps, &c., provided under sect. 50 of the Public Health Act, 1848, or otherwise, not being vested in. any person or corporation other than officers of the place, are

vested in the Local Authority under the Nuisances Acts, who are to keep all pumps, &c., in repair, &c. (23 & 24 Viet. c. 77, 8. 7). Penalty for damaging or fouling any such pump, well, &c., not exceeding 57., and not exceeding 208. a day during continuance of offence (s. 8).

All Surveyors may cleanse ditches, &c., through any lands adjoining any highway (a), paying the owner for any damage (18 & 19 Vict. c. 121, s. 21). The Local Authority are to lay down sewers and repair the same in case they deem such necessary for the removal of filth or sewage, and may assess the owners for the expense as for highway rate not exceeding 1s. in the pound (s. 22) (b).

(a) By the Common Law, the owner of lands adjoining the highway is bound to keep the ditches cleansed and free from obstruction; 13 Rep. 33, 4 Inst. 261; R. v. Dickenson, 1 Saunders, 135; R. v. Cross, 2 C. & P. 483; 3 Campbell, 227. Under the Highway Act, 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 50, the surveyor may make clean and keep open all ditches, and also make all necessary tunnels, bridges, &c., through any land adjoining the highway, paying for any damage (s. 67). Penalties for interfering with, or obstructing any such works (s. 68). Amount to be ascertained by the Justices (Peters v. Clarson, 7 Man. & G. 548).

(b) The Local Authority, however, have no power to assess property beyond the limits of their jurisdiction. As where drainage from a house in one parish runs into an open ditch in another parish, such house cannot be assessed by the authority in the latter parish covering in the ditch (R. v. Tatham & Warner, 8 E. & B. 915; 27 L. J. M. C. 144; 22 Jur. 609). See R. v. Bodkin, 30 L. J. M. C. 38; also, R. v. Gosse, 30 L. J. M. C. 41, where it was held that the highway rate could not be resorted to for sewerage works until the funds raised under s. 22, 18 & 19 Vict. c. 121, had been exhausted.

The limit of a shilling annually will not prevent a large work being distributed over a series of years (R. v. Middleton Committee, 28 L. J. M. C. 41; 5 Jur. N. S. 622). This rate need not be allowed or published as in the case of highway rates, and a composition of the rate is allowable (R. v. Warner, 6 E. & B. 395).

Where a sewer, which had become a nuisance, had been originally constructed of insufficient dimensions and at an improper level, it was held that the local authority could not, under a mandamus to repair, be compelled to construct a new sewer. Per Curiam: "The prosecutor is here really asking us to hold, that 'repair' means 'construction.' Repair does not, it is true, mean a mere restoration to exactly the same condition of things as existed originally; but the repairs which the prosecutor is here seeking to enforce, involve the construction of an entirely new set of works" (R. v. Epsom Guardians, 2 New Reports, 62).