§ MR. W. M. TORRENSasked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether he will by acquiescence sanction the renewal of litigation by the Metropolitan Asylums Board, with the owners of property and residents of Hampstead, respecting the use of the hospital there for fever or small-pox patients?
§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKESir, the Lord Chancellor, in delivering judgment, said—
I think that there ought to be a new trial in this case, because the verdict of the jury upon the main issue does appear to me to have been founded upon a state of evidence which is not to my mind satisfactory, having regard to the nature and importance of the question to be determined.The heavy expense which the litigation involves is much to be regretted. The Board have reason to believe that an endeavour has been made to arrive at a compromise, but that the offer has not been entertained by the plaintiffs. In the event of the case proceeding, no sanction on the part of the Board is necessary to enable the managers to defend the action brought against them, and the matter is not one in which the Board have any authority to interfere.