Martha Draper, Appellant; John Sperring, Respondent
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 22 April 1861 |
| Date | 22 April 1861 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 142 E.R. 392
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND IN THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 30 L. J. M. C. 225; 4 L. T. 365; 9 W. R. 656.
mab.tha drapek, Appellant; john hperking, Respondent. April 22nd, 1861. [S. C. 30 L. J. M. C. 2:45 ; 4 L. T. 3(i5 ; 9 W. R. 65G.] The owner of a market, by her agent, placed hurdles in the public street for the purpose of penning sheep on market-days, for which she received certain tolls. 10 C. B. (N. S.) 114. DRAPER V. SPERRING 393 The droppings of the sheep created a nuisance on the pavement, which the justices, on summons under the Nuisances Removal Act, 1805, 18 & 19 Viet. c. 121, held to have been created by the " act, default, permission, or suft'eraiioe " of the owner of the market, within the meaning of the I 2th section of the act, and made an order upon her to remove the same :-Held, that the decision of the justices was correct. The following case was stated pursuant to s. 2 of the 'JO & 21 Viet. c. 43, for the opinion of this court: At a petty sessions holden at Crewkerne, in and for the division of Crewkerne, in the county of Somerset, on the 16th of June, I860, before two justices of the peace in and for the said county, the following complaint was heard and determined :-The complaint was preferred by John Sparring, the inspector of nuisances appointed by the nuisance removal committee for the tything of Crewkerne (hereinafter called the respondent), against Martha Draper (hereinafter called the appellant), under s. 12 of the 18 & 19 Viet. c. 121, being the Nuisances -Removal Act for England, 1855, and charged that, on the 3rd of April, L8(iO, there was, on a certain pavement or causeway, situate in Sheep-Market Street, in Crewkerne aforesaid, in front of a messuage or dwelling-house in the possession of Sydney Morris Cornelius, an accumulation or deposit of dung or filth caused by the penning and standing of sheep on the said pavement on Saturday, the 31st of March previously, being a market-day at Crewkerne aforesaid ; and that the same, not being [114] cleared or washed away after the removal of the said sheep, was a nuisance or injurious to health ; and that the said nuisance was caused by the act or default of the appellant, by reason that the appellant used or occupied the said pavement or causeway for letting pens for the standing of sheep thereon for hire and reward, and had, on the said 31st of March, allowed sheep to stand and be penned for a long space of time on the said pavement or causeway, and had received tolls and profits in respect thereof ; and that, in consequence of such standing or penning, the said dung or tilth was deposited and left, and the appellant had neglected to cleanse or wash away the same, and to remove the said nuisance so thereby created ; and that, although the said nuisance had since the said 3rd day of April been removed or discontinued, there was reasonable ground for believing that the same or the like nuisance was likely to recur on the same premises. And upon such hearing, the justices, considering that the cause of nuisance complained of did exist on the said pavement on the said 3rd of April, and was caused by the act, permission, or default of the said Martha Draper, and that, though the same had since been removed, a similar nuisance would be likely to recur on the said premises, did by their order in writing, bearing date the said 16th of June, prohibit the appellant from allowing to remain on the said premises after the ship were removed therefrom, any dung or tilth which should he deposited or left on the said premises by reason of the penning or standing of such sheep thereon, such penning or standing of sheep thereon being by the act or sufferance and for the profit of the said Martha Draper: And, if the said order of prohibition should be infringed, then they did authorize and require the said nuisance removal committee for the tything of Crewkerue aforesaid from time to time to enter uppn the said premises and to do all such [115] works, matters, and tilings as should be necessary for carrying the said order into full execution according to the said Nuisances Removal Act for England, 1855. The appellant being dissatisfied with this determination upon the hearing of the said complaint as being erroneous in point of law, applied to the justices to state and sign a case setting forth the facts and the grounds of their determination for the opinion...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brackenborough v Spalding Urban District Council
...578, will be found an instance of a market held in a public street in which there were no stalls or pens at all. In ( Draper v. Sperring 10 C.B.N.S. 113), where the owner of a market held in the street placed hurdles for the purpose of penning sheep on market days, Willes J. observed at pa......