630 
ARMY APPOINTMENTS. 
crops, but that in fact Mr. Howard Bankhart, who was the real de¬ 
fendant, had proved the damage of which the plaintiff complained. 
The learned judge summed up the case in a lucid manner, without 
reading the evidence, and presented to them the bearing of Hole v. 
Barlow, the brick case relied on by the learned counsel for the de¬ 
fendant, as showing the correct principle of law, as applicable to the 
cause now to be decided. The learned judge gave a very strong 
opinion as to the enormously exaggerated claim of the plaintiff, and 
after going through the several points which had been proved in 
evidence, and commented upon by the learned counsel for their re¬ 
spective clients, he left these points to the jury—Do you find that a 
nuisance has been committed by the defendant upon the plaintiff’s 
premises; that is to say, do you find that it is a real and substantial 
nuisance, productive of sensible damage, since the time when this action 
was commenced? If you are of that opinion, then I ask you to say what 
damage the plaintiff has sustained ; and I will further ask you in that 
case to say whether you are of opinion the defendant has carried on his 
business in a reasonable and proper manner, and in a reasonable and 
proper place, according to the rule laid down in Hole v. Barlow. 
The jury retired at ten minutes past six, and were absent about three 
quarters of an hour. On their return, 
The jury said they found a verdict for the plaintiff. Damages, £150. 
His Lords/iip .—Do you find that the work was erected in a conve¬ 
nient and proper place, and that the business was carried on in a rea¬ 
sonable and proper manner, so that if a person had been injured by it 
he had no right to complain of its being a nuisance? 
The jury .—We think it is a nuisance. 
His Lordship .—But upon the supposition that the person has not 
been compensated for injury sustained, is it then a convenient place for 
the work to be carried on, and has it been carried on in a reasonable 
way ? 
The jury .—We consider our verdict involves that. We do not con¬ 
sider it is a convenient place for the works. 
Verdict for the plaintiff, £150 damages. 
The court then rose. 
ARMY APPOINTMENTS. 
War Office, Pall Mall, Sept. 11,1860. 
VETERINARY DEPARTMENT. 
Walter Burt, Gent., to be Acting Veterinary Surgeon. 
MILITARY TRAIN. 
Acting Veterinary Surgeon John Marshall Wilson to 
be Veterinary Surgeon. 
Acting Veterinary Surgeon William Appleton to be 
Veterinary Surgeon. 
Acting Veterinary Surgeon Robert Marshall to be A ete- 
rinary Surgeon. 
