II. _Those, where, by the_ ACTION OF FIRE, _various principles are evolved, and diffused in the form of vapour, or gas; the inhalation of which is not only disagreeable to the senses, but injurious to the health_; as the process of brewing (5); the formation of various acids (6); the incineration of animal substances, as practised by the manufacturers of hartshorn; Prussian blue (7) makers; roasters of horn for lanthorns (8); glue manufacturers; varnish makers (9); soap boilers(10), and renderers of tallow (11); smelting houses (12); gasworks; brick kilns; turpentine distillers, and rosin makers, &c. &c. III. _Those, which are capable of yielding waste liquids, that poison the neighbouring springs and streams_, as gas works (13); starch manufactories; dying-houses, &c. &c. IV. _Those trades, whose pursuit is necessarily accompanied with great noises_, as those of copper-smiths; anchor-makers; gold-beaters; tin-men; trunk-makers; proof-houses, (where cannons are proved); the tilting of steel; forging bar iron; flatting-mills;[543] &c. &c. Against these nuisances there are various remedies: by action or indictment at law, by injunction in equity, and sometimes by the summary abatement of the party injured. If the injury be general (_ad commune nocumentum omnium ligeorum_) the proper remedy is by indictment, 1 _Inst._ 56, 3 _Bl. Com._ 219, 4 _Bl. Com._ 167; and an indictment will lie even though there be another remedy or punishment by act of parliament, as for keeping swine in London, 2 _Will. and Ma. Sess._ 2, _c._ 8, § 20; _Regina v. Wigg_; 2 _Salk._ 460; _Ld. Raym._ 1163. But it is otherwise of an _offence created_ by statute, then the remedy must be in the form prescribed by the statute. Though indictment is a suit of the crown, and a general pardon will excuse the fine inflicted on conviction for a nuisance, it will not prevent the abatement of it. _Rex et Regina_ v. _Wilcox_, 2 _Salk._ 458; see also _Dewell_ v. _Sanders_, cited 16 _Vin. Abr._ 42, 45. But if the nuisance be not general, but particular, then an indictment will not lie; yet the individual aggrieved may have his action on the case, 3 _Bl. Com._ 220; _Bull. N.P._ 26; _Esp. N.P._ 635. Individuals also are in some cases permitted of themselves to abate a nuisance, 3 _Bl. Com._ 5; _Lodie_ v. _Arnold_; 2 _Salk._ 458; 16 _Vin._ 40. In _Rex_ v. _Rosewell_, only a small fine was set upon the defendant convicted on indictment of a riot, committed while pulling down some part of a house, it being a nuisance to his lights; see case 2 _Salk._ 459, and authorities there cited; also _Rosewell_ v. _Prior_, _ib._ 460; but contra, see cases where they may not; _Lord Mansfield’s_ judgment in _Cooper_ v. _Marshall_, 1 _Bur._ 259. The old writs, the assize of nuisance, F. N. B. 183, and _Quod permittat prosternare_, F. N. B. 124, _Palmer_ v. _Poultney_, 2 _Salk._ 458, are now out of use, but might be resorted to on an extreme occasion, 3 _Bl. Com._ 220.