1843.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



1!' 



of chambers to the body of both houses, extending to the Royal Gallery and 

 the main and entire portions of the buildings. After passing through the 

 various apartments the air will be received by means of perforated ceilings 

 into chambers to be fitted above the roofs, and will be carried off up the 

 central tower. 



The works that are already in progress on the eastern or river front are in 

 a great state of forwardness, and will, when completed, extend to 870 feet 

 in length. The ground floor embraces repositories and offices, and the prin- 

 cipal one, the Lords' and Commons' libraries, corumittee-rooms, the con- 

 ference-hall, and the public and private corridors. The south front will he 

 340 feet long, that portion next the river being appropriated as the residence 

 of Sir Augustus Clifford, the Usher of the Black Rod. The opposite front, 

 on the northern wing, will comprise the residence of the Speaker of the 

 House of Commons, the Sergeant-at-arms, and other officers. 



The external works of the first and principal stories on the river front, in- 

 cluding the Lords' and Commons' river entrances, are nearly completed, and 

 the decorations are of the most extensive character. The northern and 

 southern fronts are ornamented with elaborately-sculptured niches in which 

 are placed statues of the various kings who reigned in England prior to the 

 Conquest. 



Along the whole eastern front, immediately under the principal floor win- 

 dows is an ornamented band, on which is displayed in strong relief, in old 

 English characters, the names of every sovereign who has reigned in Eng- 

 land since the Conquest, commencing in chronological order with William 

 the Conqueror, and terminating with that of William IV.. and above each 

 are the Royal arms of England richly sculptured. — Standard. 



LAW PROCEEDINGS. 



HOARD NUISANCE. 



In the Court of Queen's Bench, Friday, December 2nd. (Sittings at Xisi 

 Prius at Westminster, before Mr. Justice Coleridge and a Special Jury.) 



MURRAY V. ELGAR. 



The Solicitor-General. Mr. Piatt, and Mr. M. Smith, conducted the case 

 for the plaintiff; and Mr. Thesiger, Mr. Dundas, and Mr. Watson, that of 

 the defendant. 



This was an action brought by a gentleman residing at No. 16, George- 

 street, Hanover-square, to recover compensation for the injury which he had 

 sustained by reason of the defendant having erected a " hoard," for which 

 some open boarding had been afterwards substituted. 



It appeared that the premises occupied by the plaintiff abutted on those 

 occupied by the defendant, who, in 1839, had erected the hoard in question, 

 for which the open boarding had been substituted, within 10 feet of the 

 ilining-room windows of the plaintiff. The object was not to recover 

 damages, but to get rid of the nuisance. The servants who had lived in the 

 plaintiff's family before and after the erection of this obstruction, stated that 

 the light in the lower rooms of the house had been considerably diminished, 

 that the walls had become damp in consequence of the free circulation of air 

 beingimpeded, and that the provisions in the larder had frequently been 

 spoiled from the same cause. Several architects and surveyors gave it as their 

 opinion that the value of the house was diminished by one-third, and Dr. 

 Ure stated that he had performed several experiments which convinced him 

 that the light in the plaintiff's dining-room had undergone a diminution of 

 six degrees by the erection of the hoard, and three degrees by the open 

 boards. Mr. Facey corroborated Dr. l T re's evidence, and the medical at- 

 tendant of the family deposed that Mrs. Murray's health had suffered ma- 

 terially in consequence. 



Mr. Thesiger contended that the plaintiff had no right to recover for any 

 loss of prospect or comfort, and that the evidence as to the obstruction of 

 light and air was most unsatisfactory. 



Mr. Justice Coleridge having summed up, 



The Jury found for the plaintiff, with nominal damages. 



PROFESSIONAL CHARGES. 



In the Court of Queen's Bench, Friday, December 2nd. (Sittings at Nisi 

 Prius at Westminster, before Mr. Justice Coleridge and a Common Jury.) 



DOBSON V. CROZIER. 



Mr. Piatt and Mr. C. Clark were counsel for the plaintiff; and Miv 

 Whateley and Mr. Petersdorff for the defendant. 



This was an action to recover .-£54 5s. Crf., for work and labour done by 

 the plaintiff, who is an architect. 



It appeared that the plaintiff had drawn up certain plans and specifica- 

 tions for the erection of a house for the defendant, for which tenders had 

 been offered by builders, but which plan had not been carried into effect. 

 He had subsequently drawn other plans and specifications, from which the 

 house had been erected. The defendant had paid .£35 into court, being 5 

 per cent, on the money expended in carrying into execution the accepted 

 plans. The plaintiff claimed in addition .£10 for Ids trouble in drawing the 



rejected plans, and some other items, making together the sum of .£53, for 

 which the action was brought. 



Several surveyors were called for the defendant, who stated it was the 

 custom of the profession tc charge 2\ per cent for rejected plans, but they 

 disallowed all items but that charge. 



For the defendant it was contended that the plaintiff had not proved that 

 the plans had been rejected through the caprice of the defendant, and there- 

 fore it must be taken that the plans were inapplicable, 



The learned Judge having summed up, the jury returned a verdict for the 

 plaintiff for 9/. 10s., in addition to the money paid into court. 



BLACKWALL RAILWAY.— INFRINGEMENT OF PATENT. 



//( the Court of Queen's Bench, Monday, December I9(h, Before a 



Special Jury. 



CURTIS V. THE DIRECTORS. 



This was an action for the alleged infringement of a patent which had 

 been taken out by the plaintiff, for connecting and disconnecting the draught 

 or ground rope of a railway, with railway carriages, when the rope was in 

 motion. The plan was specially applicable to railways where the carriages 

 were drawn, as on the Blackwall Railway, by means of a rope moved by an 

 engine placed at the spot, towards which the carriages were desired to be 

 drawn. The defendants had adopted a plan for effecting this purpose, which 

 it was alleged was essentially the same as that invented by the plaintiff. 

 The defence was, that the plans were not the same, and that that which was 

 in use on the Blackwall Railway had been suggested to the directors some 

 time before the specification of the plaintiff was published. There was a 

 good deal of evidence given as to the practicability of ever attaching a rope 

 to a railway carriage when the rope was in motion, and much doubt was 

 thrown upon the possibility of such a performance ; but a person, named 

 Barn, stated that he had twice done it when in the service of the Blackwall 

 Railway Company ; once when, in coming up to London, the rope acciden- 

 tally got detached, and once at the Limehouse station, when no passengers 

 were in the carriage, for the purpose of an experiment. He, however, said, 

 that it required a " good man " to do it, and the appearance of the witness 

 showed that he came within this expression, in the particular meaning he 

 attached to it. Witnesses having been examined on both sides, the cause, 

 which had occupied the whole of the day, was terminated by the jury inter- 

 fering, and stating that they were of opinion the powers used by the two 

 parties were not the same, when the plaintiff consented to be non-suited. 



ROYAL EXCHANGE. 



We hope it may not turn out that there was more of hurry than good speed 

 manifested in the competition for the sculpture that is to adorn the pediment 

 of the portico. Quick work it certainly was, when after being sent in on 

 the evening of the preceding clay, the designs were " examined " ? on the 

 25th November, and the ballot-box brought into play instanter ; the majo- 

 rity of votes being in favour of Mr. Westmacott — whom rumour had pre- 

 viously marked out as likely to lie the fortunate competitor. After so 

 much has been said relative to the manner in which competitions are 

 managed and mismanaged, it might have been thought that at any rate a 

 little more tact and adroitness would have been employed on tins occasion. 

 Whether such was really the case or not, it certainly now looks as if it had 

 been a preconcerted affair; for hardly is it possible to suppose that the 

 committee could competently judge off-hand of the merits of the designs as 

 works of art — unless indeed the one chosen was so evidently superior to the 

 two others, as to have no room for doubt or question — which is not very 

 probable. We ourselves saw one of the rejected designs, or rather two 

 different designs by Mr. Watson, the artist who has lateiy given such public 

 proof of his ability in the bas-relief of the new Commercial Hall in Thread- 

 needle Street; and having seen them, we certainly doubt very much at 

 present if the one "selected" be— we will not say of greater, but of equal 

 merit. Upon Hamlet's principle of " Assume a virtue, if you have it not," 

 there might have been the appearance of a little deliberation : there might 

 have been an interval of three or four weeks, during which, artists and those 

 known to be judges of art should have been allowed to inspect the designs, 

 and public opinion in regard to them, so far taken, and taken also into con- 

 sideration. Possibly the one which is to be executed is the best design, and 

 so too, might the best design have been the winner, had the matter been 

 decided by lottery. If it be worth while to bestow so considerable a 

 Three Thousand Guineas or Pounds on the decoration of the pediment, it 

 was surely worth while to bestow far more scrupulous attention upon I 

 sign itself, beforehand than now appears to have been done. However, tin 

 Gresham Committee have, in this instance, shown themselves u, I 

 of business and dispatch, who can make up their minds very qt 

 without any nonsensical ■• shilly-shallying." Still, with all our misgivings, 

 we are willing to hope for the best; though as poor Mr-. Nicklebj says, 

 " we ought never to be over and above sanguinary in our expectation- ! " 



