case banns against baker Dec see Vernon v vestry of saint James Ch d  metropolitan asylum District v hill App Cas Cooper Essex v local board for  Acton App Cas Att gentleman v Manchester corporation Ch injunction refuse to  stay building inoculation hospital in cold bath field S c anon atk bill for a  injunction to stay building a hospital for people infect with the smallpox in  cold bath field very near the house of several tenant of the plaintiff and it  be this day move for a injunction and the infectiousness of the distemper the  terror it occasion in the neighbourhood be insist on also that the lessee for  year under who the defendant claim hold the estate of the plaintiff and in the  ambler er p lease be a express covenant against the house be turn to a  brewhouse which will annoy the neighbour ambler hood it be say a affidavit be  file that several tenant of plaintiff have give he notice to quit but Lord  chancellor do not let it be read but take it up upon hear the counsel for the  motion Ro Abr Lut hawk pi c S be cite Lord chancellor I can make any order in  this matter be of opinion it be a charity like to prove of great advantage to  mankind such a hospital must not be far from a town because those that be  attack with that disorder in a natural way may not be in a condition to be  carry far two thing be to be consider first whether it be a nuisance at  commonlaw second if it be whether a public or a private nuisance as to the  covenant in the lease there be no foundation for the motion on that for it be  not a general covenant against all nuisance but particular against a brewhouse  it come to the general question case be as cite there be late a indictment at  the summer assize in Sussex against Frewen for such a hospital defendant be  acquit can call this a private nuisance if any it be a public one the former  be to one person only as building against light nuisance ad vicinetum be a  public nuisance bill of this sort be find on be nuisance at commonlaw if a  public nuisance it shall be a information in the name of the attorneygeneral  and then it will be for his consideration whether he will file such a  information or not and that be the case for stop a way behind the exchange in  the city Lord king recommend ambler ed it to the attorneygeneral to prefer a  information in the king bench to try whether it be a nuisance or not if the  case cite be law query how far they will extend to all the hospital in this  town motion deny the editor have not be able to meet with any entry of this  case in the register book or in the minute book that the court will interfere  by injunction in case of private nuisance see Coulsony white atk  attorneygeneral v doughty Ves corporation of London v Bott Ves stop light  rider v Bentham dick S c Ves senr morris v Lord Berkeley ib attorneygeneral v  Nichol Ves east India company v Vincent atk fishmonger company v east India  house dick but general it be necessary that the right of the party shall be  first ascertain at law Lord Redes treatise on plead attorneygeneral v cleaver  Ves Willer v Smeaton Cox anon Ves bush v western Prec in Ch as to what be a  private nuisance see per Lord Eldon in attorneygeneral v cleaver Ves with  respect to the burn of brick the follow note of the case of duke of Grafton v  Hilliard cite by Lord Eldon Ves be take from a ms in the possession of Mr c  bind of Lincoln inn that June defendant have take a building lease of some  ground behind new bind street and the soil there be proper for that purpose he  have make a very large quantity of brick and be go to burn they upon the spot  and now the plaintiff bring a bill suggest it will be a very great nuisance  that the smoke will make the air very unwholesome and will spoil the house and  furniture of plaintiff who be near neighbour and upon the come in of defendant  answer they move upon the merit for a injunction to hinder the defendant from  burn the brick so near the plaintiff house defendant come to show cause insist  that as he have a property in the soil he may make use of it to what purpose  he please that by the term of his agreement he be oblige to burn the brick  before such a particular day which if a injunction be grant the time will be  elapse before the cause can be hear and so the defendant will quite lose the  opportunity of burn the brick he have already make to the value of at least  and interest and insist that this be no nuisance but if it be the party injure  have their remedy by action after their damage sustain the Lord chancellor  recommend it to they to try it immediate in a feign action whether it will be  a nuisance or not but defendant will not come into that and therefore the Lord  chancellor declare that it be too much for he to determine upon a motion  whether this will be a public nuisance or not especial see how many brickkiln  be now stand in all part and in some place almost in the heart of some of the  principal ambler er p street that if he shall grant a injunction and it shall  come out on the hear that it be no nuisance he can not possible make the  defendant amends for his time for burn will be expire and if it be a nuisance  defendant will be sufficient punish by action which may be bring against he by  ever one of the party that suffer any damage and this be not like the case of  cut down avenue or the like which if do no possible amends or satisfaction can  be make to the party but here if the furniture or good be hurt by the smoke  the sufferer will have a remedy at law and if brickkiln be general nuisance it  seem strange that so many of they shall be permit to stand in the several  quarter of this town