Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
and often unreliable to run, at this time many industrialists and most householders
chose to ignore calls to burn fuel more ef
ciently. Anti-smoke activists often spoke
of the
. Although the educational approach had reduced the
amount of smoke in some places, air pollution remained a serious cause for concern
in most industrial towns and cities.
25
By the turn of the twentieth century, frustrated
reformers
'
curse of cheap coal
'
believed that tougher anti-
smoke legislation needed to be introduced by national governments if the move-
ment for clean air was to be successful.
Despite economic and cultural differences, a number of detailed studies have
clearly shown that the British, American and German legislatures all embarked on a
'
—
especially those campaigning in Britain
—
with the Industrial Revolution so as not to unduly hinder
urban-industrial growth. As the
process of compromise
'
rst industrial nation, Britain was a pioneer where
legislation to control smoke pollution was concerned. Up until the end of the
eighteenth century, its Common Law courts had accepted that there was a natural
right for an individual to enjoy clean air (and pure water) on their own property. It
was no defence for a businessman causing nuisances to claim that his operations
brought jobs and prosperity. Thereafter, a growing reliance on coal-fuelled steam
power in new industrial towns provided the impetus for a shift in the focus of
traditional nuisance law. As smoke and other forms of industrial pollution worsened
in the manufacturing districts of Britain, the dilemma faced by nuisance law judges
was,
'
How best to reconcile the often conicting goals of environmental quality and
economic development
?
26
The increasing use of the doctrine of
'
'
social-cost bal-
ancing
s right to pro-
tection, and a rigid interpretation of liability was abandoned in industrial areas.
Indeed, Victorian judges often stated that
'
by early nineteenth century judges weakened the plaintiff
'
'
life in factory towns required more
.
27
The utilitarian concept of
forbearance than life elsewhere
'
allowed the courts to weigh the costs of imposing sanctions on a polluter against the
bene
'
'
social-cost balancing
ts
of abating smoke were thought to be more than outweighed by the possible negative
repercussions for the economy of obtaining injunctions to stop polluting businesses.
Thus, traditional restrictions on economic enterprise that had previously shielded
people and the environment from the injurious emissions of industry were relaxed.
The Common Law became ineffectual because the new industrial society had made
a pragmatic trade-off: dirty air in return for economic success, employment, and
consumer goods. As the number of smoking chimneys rapidly multiplied in Brit-
ain
ts of abating the pollution. In new factory towns like Manchester the bene
s industrial towns, relatively few air pollution cases were brought before the
Common Law courts. In the 90-year period after 1770 there were, on average, only
one or two actions in England every 10 years.
28
'
25
Gugliotta (
2000
), Stradling (
1999
), Stradling and Thorsheim (
1999
), Mosley (
2008
) and
Thorsheim (
2006
).
26
Rosen (
1993
).
27
Brenner (
1974
).
28
Rosen (
1993
), Brenner (
1974
) and McLaren (
1983
).
