we have ventured to suggest. This plate is made direct out of plain lead strip, previously oxidised on the surface by the ingenious method of passing it through an electric arc; the strips are roughly tacked together, forming a plate capable of being knocked about without fear of breaking, or overdischarged without fear of buckling. The plate is therefore a simple Planté cell, manufactured and formed with the smallest cost for labour. We have seen plates which have been worked for eighteen months and are still in good condition. Mr. Reckenzaun has been zealously working upon this question for some years, and we certainly think he has made a distinct advance towards the proper treatment of storage cells as a rough, electrical engineering and not a delicate, electrican's question. Without saying that the grand problem of a cheap and efficient accumulator is definitely solved, it seems as if a light were shining from the point we desire to see it, and we hope it is true, as we hear, that the manufacture of these lead strip accumulators will be taken up in a commercial spirit—and that they will prove successful. Accumulator traction will receive the impetus for which we have all been so long waiting, when, as we have said, the plates can be used up as fuel rather than tended as delicate machinery.

CURRENT "FROM THE MAIN."

This is the title of an article in the Lancet of December 19th, by W. S. Hedley, M.D. We reprint it elsewhere, inasmuch as the object of every electric light supply company is to pay a dividend, and in order to do this it must sell current whenever and wherever possible. The idea so many electrical engineers take, that in the first place undivided attention must be given to the distribution of current for light, is so much lost opportunity. It is not only light, it is use in every direction that is wanted. Once get the terminals inside a house, and then prove to the inmates that it is not light only, but-well, whatever else is wanted in the house. Electrical apparatus is the most suitable of all, and for almost everything. Let us take one example. Hitherto bars and bolts have been the grand means of keeping our houses safe from depredation. Burglar alarms have been fixed, but in our opinion all such alarms have erred on the side of complexity. A burglar must walk, and two or three "tread" alarms would be far more effectual than apparatus at each door and each window. The alarms could be made part and parcel of the bell system of the house, could by the turn of a handle be put into or out of circuit-that is, could at a fixed time at night come into play, and be cut out in the morning. No doubt an inmate of the house might avoid the various "treads," but with such a restricted area for police work detection would be comparatively easy. It might be found advisable to have the safety devices separate from the bell system, and to put the appa

ratus in a circuit direct from the house terminals. There would be no difficulty in such an arrangement. It requires, however, some energetic men from America, or some patentees of a foreign nationality, to come over here and promote a company to float apparatus of this character upon a market that is ready to be exploited. A patented article-patent valid or invalid matters not-is the only article that will go down with business men. Few will be found to say: "Make my house or office safe," but will buy any nostrum that is presented to them in the form of a patent. However, this suggestion is only introduced for the purpose of hinting at a huge undeveloped field of business which someone will have to explore. Dr. Hedley refers to another field-the use of current for surgical and medical purposes. The simple question for the doctor is, Can the current be kept under control? In the majority of cases where current is used the answer may be unmistakably in the affirmative. In other cases the variations of resistance are excessive, and here lies the difficulty. It may be remembered that some years ago electric cautery was pronounced in some quarters to be the grandest discovery of the age for surgical operations. But we hear little or nothing of electric cautery now. You may easily render and keep a platinum wire white hot, but on bringing that wire into contact with moist flesh the resistance of the circuit is altered, and the wire with the same cells may not even reach a red heata heat altogether too low for the purpose for which it is wanted. Assuming, however, that in most cases where the electric current is required, and a continuous current is available, will a better method be found than by taking the current required from a secondary battery? Whatever we may come to later, we do not yet charge such batteries from alternate-current mains, so that when these are installed other apparatus is necessary. While, then, it may be profitable to instal hundreds of lamps, a few shillings may be picked up by supplying the wants of doctors and of dentists. Anything that helps to bulk out that load curve ought to be

welcome.

SAVORY v. LONDON ELECTRIC. The judgment of Mr. Justice Kekewich in this case will be read with considerable interest. It is almost needless to say we cannot quite agree with it. One sentence in the judgment is exceedingly strong. It reads: "That there is now no imminent danger against which the plaintiffs are entitled to protection is clear beyond dispute." If this means anything, it means that the defendants have taken every precaution to obviate the danger; and the adverse judgment cannot be taken as against the work of the defendants as it now stands, but is based upon the position of affairs at the time the action was commenced, and the lack of knowledge we have of the unknown. The latter cannot well be remedied, nor can industrial

developments be expected to wait till scientific men are in a position to make a "positive statement respecting possible results under hypothetical circumstances." The position of new enterprises is bad enough in any case. Vested interests seem to be touched on every hand, the general outcry being that of mother to child-" don't" and "musn't." Mr. Justice Kekewich took a certain view as regards the plaintiffs' action, but time has shown they might have waited the completion of the permanent work, or at any rate, that portion in which the previous disaster commenced, and then they would have seen the precautions taken against the recurrence of such accidents. The remainder of the building, we take it, will not be subjected to similar dangers. A good deal of the importance depends upon the terms of the undertaking the plaintiffs are willing to take, and we trust the full text of this document will be made public, as it will serve as a guide to what may and what may not be done by supply companies.

shows the currents corresponding to the curve a b, while gh represents those corresponding to cd. It will be seen that the curve a b increases very rapidly, especially at first, showing how very much the capacity varies with the rate of discharge; if the capacity were independent of the rate of discharge this curve would of course be a horizontal line, and, therefore, the nearer this curve comes to a horizontal line the better will be the accumulator for rapid discharges. It will be seen from this curve that at a 10-hour rate the current is 4.2 amperes and the capacity is 42 ampere-hours. At double the rate of discharge that is to say, a discharge in half the time-the curve shows the current to have been 6.5 amperes and the capacity 32.5 ampere-hours, which is 23 per cent. (or about a quarter) less than the other. At a three-hour rate, which about eight amperes, which is only about double that at a is exceptionally rapid for accumulators. the current is only 10-hour discharge; the capacity is 24 ampere-hours, or 43 per cent, less than that of a 10-hour discharge. It will be usual 10-hour rate the capacity is reduced to nearly half, seen from the latter that in a discharge of one-third of the while the current is only about twice as great. These curves, of course, will be different for different makes of accumulators. The thinner the layer of active material, the more nearly horizontal the curve will become. The curves shown here are those exhibited by the Cologne Accumulator Works-these accumulators are known as the "Hagen."

40

ACTU

interest. In this figure the vertical distances for the upper curves represent ampere-hours, and for the lower ones amperes, while the horizontal distances in both cases represent hours. The curve a b shows the actual capacity as obtained from measurements of a pair of plates after they had been in use some time. The curve cd represents that which is guaranteed by the company. The curve ef

A. Capacity in ampere-hours. B. Capacity in ampere-hours per pound of plates. C. Capacity in ampere-hours per pound of cell complete. D Rate of discharge in amperes per pound of plates. E. Rate of discharge in amperes per pound of cell (without acid). F. Rapidity of discharge in hours. G. List price in cents per ampere-hour capacity. H. Nature of cell.

Owing to the fact that the figures given by the Accumulator Company do not agree with each other, we have taken them as they are on the printed slip and have assumed that the weight given means complete without acid." + For an assumed weight of retaining cell.

In order to give a general idea of the rates of discharge, prices, etc., of the accumulators at this exhibition, we prepared the accompanying table, in which the data published for the various accumulators has been reduced to common figures. In the first column of Table I. are given the capacities as published in the respective catalogues. It may not be quite fair to compare the capacities in this way, because some of the makers may tell the truth and others may be too generous, but they are the best figures which could be obtained, and allowances must be made in interpreting them. In this column the accumulators are divided into three sets of about 100, 500, and 1,500 ampere-hours capacity, and those values were selected which corresponded most nearly to these three numbers.

In the second column will be found the capacity per pound of plates, and it will be seen from this column that three ampere-hours per pound of plates is above the average of those at the exhibition. As some of the makers did not give th, whict of the plates alone, we compiled a

third column also, in order to be able to make comparisons. It will be seen from this column that the Tudor accumulator, which is practically a Planté cell, is one of the heaviest that is, having the least ampere-hours per pound, but it is, however, not much heavier than the "Hagen type. The next column gives the discharge in amperes per pound of plates, which, it will be seen, varies between about one-third of an ampere and one ampere, and is very high for the Julien cell, which is due chiefly to the high capacity per pound of these cells, as shown in the second column. The fifth column corresponds to the fourth, but is reduced to amperes per pound of cell, because some of the makers did not state the weight of their plates. Here, again, it will be seen that the figures for the Tudor accumulator are low, but compare very favourably with those of Hagen. Those of the Julien are again high, and those of the Oerlikon Company are also very high, notwithstanding the fact that they have a solid electrolyte.

These four columns, in which the figures depend on the weight of the cell, are of interest only when the weight of the cell is an important feature, as, for instance, for traction purposes, or for portable cells, but for stationary cells, such as those used for lighting buildings and at central stations, the weight of the cells is of absolutely no importance. In fact, it may almost be said that the heavier the cell is the less likely it will be to go to pieces, provided the material is placed where it is most needed. Great capacity per pound is therefore of little importance for stationary work.

The sixth column gives the rapidity of the discharge in hours. It will be seen from this that a discharge in three to three and a half hours, which used to be considered abnormally rapid, is now quite common in Germany. With such heavy discharges, the capacity is, of course, diminished, as we saw in the curves above referred to, but the capacities given in the first column are those which correspond to the discharges given in the sixth column.

In this connection it may be of interest to compare these figures with those of a similar table compiled for the accumulators at the Paris Exposition of 1889. As a matter of interest we have added here the figures for the original Planté cell of 1860 which was exhibited at this exhibition, and it will be seen, strange to say, that the capacity per pound is higher than any of the others, of either the Faure or Planté types. It is likely, however, that this figureviz., 7.25-represents a discharge which was carried considerably farther than is usual in practice, and that therefore it is not quite fair to compare it directly with the others; but even if it were corrected it would probably still remain among the highest.

The accumulators in this table were either of the Planté

or the Faure type, except the one exhibited by Elwell and Co., which is a copper-zinc accumulator, otherwise known as the Lalande and Chaperon alkaline, or in this country as the Waddell-Entz. It has an E.M.F. only about one-third that of the lead accumulators, and the figures for it have therefore been reduced, as shown, to two-volt cells. Even then their capacity per pound appears very great, but it is a question whether the published data were as reliable as those of the other companies.-Electrical World (New York).

THE MEASUREMENT OF THE RESISTANCE OF CONDUCTORS CONTAINING DISTURBING E.M.F.'S.*

BY ROLLO APPLEYARD.

(Concluded from page 564.)

In this case the value of E was practically one volt. The table shows the values of e in the above experiments, calculated from (9), for different days.

x + y Y+z 2 + x x + y y + z

2 + x

TABLE II.

x + y

340

491

1,241

2,974

-222-5/6/91

2,655

x + y

255 *035

2376/6/91

*269

The galvanometer employed was the same as that used in the previous experiments with the bridge, a long-coil Siemens reflecting instrument of India service pattern. The key is made with broad surfaces of contact. The ordinary B.A. bridge key can be readily adapted to the purpose by the addition of an extra spring between the upper contacts.

An inspection of Table III shows fairly well that the E. M.F. of an earth-plate, and its resistance, does not vary appreciably within the limits of time required, by this method, to carry out a test. We may call these values the "initial E M.F.," and the "initial resistance," respectively. By the tangent galvanometer method the change in the E.M.F. is very considerable. In order to compare these an independent measure was taken, using a galvanometer of about 6,000 ohms resistance as a voltmeter. When connected through 100,000 ohms between the plates x and 2, the change in E.M.F. was found to be nil. To reproduce the tangent galvanometer arrangement, the reflecting galvanometer was shunted so that its resistance was about equal to the tangent galvanometer, the 100,000 ohms being removed. The deflection, of course, diminished rapidly, losing about one-sixth its initial value after one minute, one-fourth its initial value after 21⁄2 minutes, one-third its initial value after 10 minutes.

If we use the method of instantaneous taps with a sensitive galvanometer and a multiplying ratio, we can make a close examination of the plates at any time. When balance is very nearly obtained, we can watch the polarisation effects, if we please, by keeping the key down; we can also note how soon the polarisation effects vanish after the causes that produced them are removed, and how soon the "initial resistance" is regained.

For practical work with earth-plates we do not want to spend time in speculations of this kind. The galvanometer need not be very sensitive, nor the multiplying ratio very high. We want the truth, but not to the "fifth decimal."

It is otherwise, however, when there is an electrolytic resistance to be measured; or when using the method for comparing the E. M.F.'s of easily polarisable cells by formula (9); or again, when, Paper read before the City and Guilds Old Students' Associa

#

tion.

for very high resistances, a dividing ratio has to be used at the arms a b.

There is uncertainty with liquid resistances, arising from changes in density, composition, and purity, and a doubt also regarding the nature of contact between the liquid and the electrodes. I believe, however, that the method of taps will be found of great use in these determinations. If the nature of the conductor or electrolyte is such that the disturbing E.M.F. is variable, it is necessary to arrange the bridge so that d and d1 may be obtained, as nearly as possible, simultaneously. For this purpose I have used two boxes of resistance coils in the variable arm, each provided with a shortcircuiting plug, so that one can be cut out when the other is in. The resistance of one of the boxes is approximated to for two trial taps. This box is now plugged up, and the second box unplugged, the testing battery being reversed. The second box is now adjusted as nearly as possible for two trial taps. This has to be repeated until d and d1 are obtained.

If the electrolyte, or resistance under test, is very easily polarised, even by the instantaneous current, a difficulty appears in judging the right values of d and d1. Consider what happens when the circuit is completed, the variable arm, d, being a little too much. When the key is depressed and kept down, there will be a momentary deflection in the direction indicating "d too much," followed immediately by a motion in the reverse direction, making d apparently "too little." We can evidently find a value for d at which the first effect will just vanish. This is to be taken as the proper reading. It is important to observe that the same order of deflections occurs whatever be the direction of the testing battery. The secondary deflection, which is, of course, due to polarisation in the x branch of the bridge, always acting in a direction indicating "d too little."

g'

E = Ff+Ww + S s'

s'g' S' + g'

.

(12)

and (12) becomes

૧ FIG. 10.

The explanation is simple. Referring to Fig. 5, we see at once that it is E, and not e, which determines the directions of the currents in the various arms of the bridge. So that E, and not e, defines also the directions of the polarisation currents in the arm

x.

" As

We may assume e, the initial E.M.F., to act as an added or subtracted resistance according to its direction with respect to E. Polarisation effects will always act in a direction indicating "d not enough " for opposing E.M.F.'s are equivalent to added resistances. If, then, d is adjusted to the value corresponding to the initial resistance of x, any depression of the key long enough to cause polarisation will increase the apparent resistance of the unknown arm, and will make the variable arm "not enough. long as d is greater than the value corresponding to the initial resistance of x, there will be, on depressing the key, a momentary deflection in the direction indicating "d too much," followed by the reverse deflection if the key is kept down long enough to cause the polarisation currents to start in the x arm. Consequently the only correct value for the variable arm is the value at which the first motion, indicating "d too much," just vanishes.

Now, I want to put before you the difficult combination of an inductive resistance in circuit with a polarisable one. This arose on one occasion when a line test was being made; the relay at the distant station had considerable inductance, being magnetically polarised, and the earth-plates had polarisation of the kind represented by another meaning of that ill-used term. If the tap was made very suddenly, there was a sudden deflection arising from the inductance at the relay. It was scarcely to be mistaken for an electrolytic polarisation effect, being more rapid than those which earth-plates generally produce. The obvious way of removing the difficulties is to tap deliberately rather than suddenly. It may be well to observe that with an ordinary Wheatstone bridge, with the best of B.A. keys, the key does not remove the effects of inductance for very sudden taps. At the present price of platinum, another factor comes in here also-the wear and tear of contacts, caused by taps too sudden and energetic.

Applying the detaching principle to the differential galvanometer, we obtain an alternative method, which it is possible might be of service in a special case. Fig. 9 shows the way in which the three branch circuits are separated out. In this instance a key with three contacts would be employed. Here we are not dealing with steady currents through the galvanometer, and consequently only approximate results are to be expected, unless we can ensure that each coil of the galvanometer, together with its shunt, has the same induction coefficient. As this will seldom be the case, I

In England the earth-plate is scarce. You will enquire for them in vain at the G.P.O. in Aldersgate-street. The gas and water companies, in a truly generous spirit, provide us, in the pipes which they lay at our feet, with a substitute excellent in efficiency, and, what is perhaps more important, costless to maintain, at least from our point of view.

But abroad, as in India or Persia, their importance is extremely great, and the earth-plate test is a regular part of the telegraphist's routine.

It has been suggested that a series of careful tests of the resistance of plates of the same dimensions, and planted in the same way, at fixed depths and distances, in strata of different geological character, would be of service in indicating the nature of the intervening rock. And it would appear that some such method as this offers the only means of investigating the direction and duration of earth currents proper, of which at present scarcely anything definite is known.

LEGAL INTELLIGENCE.

SAVORY AND MOORE v. THE LONDON ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION, LIMITED.

Action to Restrain.

This case illustrated the great danger arising from the erection of electric light supply works in the heart of a city or town, or in contiguity with other buildings. The action was by Messrs. Savory and Moore, the well-known chemists and druggists, of 143, New Bond-street, to restrain the defendants, who have been using certain adjoining buildings as an electric light distributing station, from so carrying on their business as to be a nuisance to the plaintiffs. At the rear of their shop in New Bond-street the plaintiffs have extensive premises, which are used as a laboratory and store for large quantities of chemicals and other valuable goods of an inflammable character, including spirit tinctures and other spirituous preparations. In 1887 the defendants, who carry on the business of electric lighting, took certain premises adjacent to the plaintiffs' warerooms, and they were also in occupation of the cellars under the Grosvenor Gallery, which lay near the plaintiffs' premises, and they fitted up their buildings and cellars with engine, boilers, and other machinery for the production of electricity and the general purposes of their business. The plaintiffs alleged that in 1890, owing to their remonstrances, the defendants ceased to generate alternating electric currents as they had previously done in their buildings and cellars, and removed the boilers, engines, and machinery. In lieu thereof, they, without the plaintiffs' knowledge and sanction, proceeded to adapt and use their buildings and cellars as a converting and distributing station at which electric currents received from their generating station at Deptford at extra high pressure were transformed by intermediate or step-down transformers to moderate pressure, and then distributed to their customers in the district. The plaintiffs complained that the use by the defendants of their buildings and cellars for that purpose, and in particular the collection and user there of a large number of electric cables and step-down transformers, which were of a highly inflammatory and combustible nature, even with the greatest precaution both in the construction of the buildings and the mode of carrying on the business, was and must be attended with very great risk of fire, and was highly dangerous to the plaintiffs' premises. The plaintiffs further stated that already, on the 17th of October and the 15th of November, fires broke out on the defendants' premises, both of which occasioned great risk to the plaintiffs' premises. By the second of those fires the defendants' premises were practically gutted, and damage was caused to the plaintiffs' by the dirt, water, and smoke that came into their premises. As the defendants were proceeding to reinstate their premises with the view of using them for the same purposes as before, the plaintiffs commenced this action on the 20th of November, 1890, claiming an injunc tion to restrain the defendants from using their buildings and cellars for the purposes above mentioned, and from otherwise using their premises so as to occasion a nuisance to the plaintiffs. The defendants denied that their business was attended with risk from fire or would be dangerous to the plaintiffs' premises, and stated that they had proposed to the plaintiffs to make certain precautions against accident. They also stated that they had obtained the approval of the Board of Trade to the supply of the the electric current from their premises, and they insisted that the storage of highly inflammable and explosive materials in the plaintiffs' own premises created considerable danger to the defendants' premises. At the conclusion of the evidence and arguments on the 18th inst., his Lordship reserved judgment, which he now delivered.

Mr. Warmington, Q.C., and Mr. Vernon R. Smith appeared for the plaintiffs; and Mr. Moulton, Q.C., and Mr. W. F. Hamilton for the defendants.

Mr. Justice Kekewich said: This is an action quia timet. I have not been careful again to study or expound the law applicable to cases of this class. That was fully done in M'Murray v. Caldwell, and from counsel's statement and the short note with which I have been furnished, my judgment appears to have been affirmed or at least not disapproved by the Court of Appeal. What was there stated is, at any rate, binding on me, and being accessible to those whom it concerns there is no occasion to repeat it. I proceed, therefore, to examine the facts before me on that basis. That there is now no imminent danger against which the plaintiffs are entitled to protection is clear beyond dispute. That if the defendants' plans are perfected in their entirety there will be no such danger is not equally clear, only because the defendants' plans above the basement are wanting in precision, and a disposition to be guided by circumstances and the exigencies of trade form an awkward factor in the sum of possible results into which, of course, inexperience and carelessness largely enter. The powers and therefore the dangers of electricity cannot be regarded as known, even by scientific men, with sufficient accuracy to justify a positive statement respecting possible results under hypothetical circumstances, especially when the locality is in the heart of a crowded city. That the caution and delay of the defendants in the construction of their building and its contents, and the present incomplete state of the same, are to some extent due to the action of the plaintiffs may reasonably be inferred from the proved facts; and moved by this consideration and by the absence of now imminent danger already mentioned, it occurred to me that a reliefless and costless end of the litigation would satisfy both parties. But the plaintiffs have required, as they are entitled to

Óne was

con

do, a decision on the merits, and for that purpose I must regard not the present but the past, not, except by way of explanation or comment, the incomplete building now existing, but the shell which met the eyes of the plaintiffs in November, 1890, and the facts to which that shell was due. To the claim of the plaintiffs thus treated the defence is simply that the action was premature. "If," says the defendants, "you had waited only a little while, if you had given only slight consideration to our reasonable assurances you would have been satisfied that what had happened before would not and could not recur, and that any shortcomings of the past would be avoided in the future." The evidence conclusively proves that the operations of the defendants, as conducted prior to the 15th of November, 1890, were of imminent danger to the plaintiffs, and that this was due to two causes singly or in combination-first, the inherent, if latent, danger of the works; and secondly, the neglect of precautions. It follows that any injury to the plaintiffs' house resulting from a fire on the defendants' premises would have been actionable, and seeing that the injury, if it happened at all, was likely enough to be serious, alarm was natural and justifiable. That it was still natural after the defendants' premises had been gutted on the 15th of November, 1890, is sufficiently clear; but was it justifiable? And if justifiable before the plaintiffs communicated with the defendants, did it remain so after that communication? The first question is concluded by what has been already said. Within a short period there had occurred on the defendants' premises two fires traceable to the causes above indicated. soon extinguished and, so far as the plaintiffs were cerned, did no harm. The other on the 15th of November, 1890, was of a more serious character, more alarming, and more destructive. It destroyed the contents of the defendants' building, and the injury extended to the plaintiffs' premises. The injury to them was not great, but it is easy to picture the scene and to see how readily results, happily rendered trifling, might have been converted into a serious calamity. Who can blame the plaintiffs for thinking that this incident was likely to be repeated with disastrous consequences, and that it behoved them to take measures for the protection of their property? Giving them credit for such acquaintance with the defendants' operations and their conduct of business as may reasonably be presumed, they would expect that, with as little delay as circumstances permitted, they would again make the building available for supply to their customers, and that, although they would probably adopt such improvements as haste allowed and additional precautions, yet the restored building and its contents would not substantially differ from those just destroyed. The experienced past and the anticipated future, therefore, combined to make the plaintiffs apprehend danger, and to urge them to take active measures for prevention. This they did promptly and prudently. They sought advice, and on that advice issued a writ. They might, of course, before issuing the writ have put themselves in communication with the defendants or their advisers; but there was at least this advantage in the course adopted, that, while preparing themselves for the next step, they were able to state precisely what that step would be and to formulate their complaint, and the terms which they were prepared to accept, beyond possibility of cavil or dispute. Then they communicated with the defendants' solicitors, and they did so in a temperate letter deserving commendation. In that letter they asked for an undertaking in the terms of the injunction which they claimed by their writ, and which they now claim at the trial of the action. I hold that they were right in asking for that undertaking, and if it had been given there would have been no further trouble. It was not given. After reasonable and brief delay there came the reply of the 15th of December. The first part so fully admits the case made by the plaintiffs as regards the facts of the past and the grounds of apprehension for the future, that one might have ventured to rely on it without further evidence; and there follows, as might be expected, a recognition of the necessity of additional precautions and assurances that they would be taken. The letter so narrowly approached to a sufficient undertaking that the plaintiffs were well advised in not simply rejecting it as insufficient. Yet it was not what the plaintiffs had asked. Apart from other criticisms, it is to be observed that it expressed only the intention of the defendants, and offered no obligation to fulfil that intention, either by undertaking in the action or otherwise. The plaintiffs again demanded an undertaking, but failed to obtain more than a repetition, in a letter of the 12th of January, of the statement of the defendants' intention and a reference to the Board of Trade rules, which apparently had been before neglected, and could not be taken as the measure of liability to the plaintiffs. The action, therefore, proceeded. There, having regard to the point falling for decision, I might properly pause; but it is convenient in this connection to mention that neither in April last, when the action came on for trial and was adjourned because the defendants' buildings were not complete, nor in the present month of December, 1891, when it was restored to the paper, did it appear what use will be made of the different parts of the building other than the basement, or that the elements of danger from fire have been or will be completely removed. The plaintiffs now ask for an injunction in the terms in which they were willing to accept an undertaking. In my opinion they are entitled to it, and the defendants must pay the costs of the action.-The Times.

London County Council.-The Offices Committee having con. sidered the tenders sent in for electric lighting at the offices, as given last week, recommended that that of Messrs. J. D. F. Andrews and Co., at £1,490, being the lowest, be accepted.