monstrated when the pipes were commenced to be laid in February, 1860, but took no further proceedings. On behalf of the Local Board it was contended that plaintiff had by his delay debarred his right to an interlocutory decree. The Vice-Chancellor refused an immediate injunction on the ground that plaintiff had in some degree prejudiced his case for an interlocutory mandate. He could do no more than let the case stand until plaintiff took further steps.
Clark’s Waterworks Bill. In addition to Mr. Clark’s application for an injunction to restrain the Local Board from extending their water mains, he had a “Western Waterworks Bill in Parliament, but which was not allowed to proceed because the Standing Orders had not been complied. He then filed a petition to be allowed to introduce Waterworks Bill No 2, which left out the parts in which he had been opposed. But here, again he was to be opposed by the Local Board, who instructed their Clerk to take measures to prevent Mr. Clark obtaining further legislative powers. Leave, however, was given to Mr. Clark to introduce an amended Bill. Instructions were given to the Town Clerk to oppose this second Bill, also, as well as the application to restrain the Board from laying down water mains. There was a good deal of what might be called bluff on the part of the Local Board; for, although they made a pretence of being able to supply the western as well as the eastern districts with water, no one knew better than themselves that it would be impossible to do so unless they could acquire by purchase the Eversfield works. On the other hand, terms were too unapproachable, and himself so unreliable that negotiations seemed always to end in failure.
The Water Question Settled. At length, however, Mr. Clark withdrew his Bill from Parliament and consented to accept the terms that had been offered to him by the Local Board in the purchase of his works. The offer was the object of a special meeting of the Town Council on the 28th of May, and a resolution passed which brought the matter extending over many months, to a satisfactory conclusion. The terms were to pay £9,000 for the works, free of all incumbrances, and Mr. Clark to retain four acres of land near the Tivoli at the same rental as paid to Mr. Eversfield, namely, £20 per annum. It was further satisfactory to know that the Government Inspector had examined the reservoirs and other things connected with the works, permission was given to the Local Board to borrow £9,500 to complete the purchase.
The Transfer. Possession of the Eversfield Waterworks was taken on the first of August, and on Monday evening, Aug. 4th, the members of the Local Board paid a visit of inspection. They ordered a side ditch to be cut parallel with the Old Roar reservoir to take the overflow storm-water, which had before caused a bursting of the embankment. They afterwards accepted Mr. Clark’s invitation to take refreshments in a tent erected near Newgate Wood.
