September 4. Mr. Justice Bourye's award in the controversy between the Shanghai Gas Company and the Municipal Council regarding the permission given to the Tramway Company to lay rails over the Gas Company's main in the Canton Road brings to a conclusion a dispute that has already lasted too long. Tt was towards the end of December 1906 when the Gas Company wrote to the Council to protest against the grant of a permit for the laying of a tramway track over one of its yus mains, and as the outcome of this communication a meeting of the three—parties concerned was held a week later. Tt was then decided that the Gas Company should submit proposals fora solution of the difficulty, and in response to this invitation the Company pointed out that at a cost of £450 it would be possible to remove the main from the south to the north side of Canton Road, where it would not be interfered with by the proposed tramway track. At this point the Council suddenly decided to repudiate any responsibility or concern in the controversy and announced its into: of allowing the Gas Company and the Tramway Company to fight the matter out between themselves, while as if to render its alo.fness still more complete it issued the necessary permit to the Tramway Company to proceed with the laying of the track in the Canton Road. Undera clause of an agreement between the Gas Company and the Council providing for the submission of differences ofa certain nuture to arbitration the former applied to have the dispute settled by an arbitrator. The Council, however, refused to accede to this proposal, and. the Gas Company was forced to appeal to the Court of Consols to compel the Council to submit to arbitration.
This appeal was successful, and
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.