Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1872-04-24

SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT - CHAPMAN C.
J.~Tuesday april 23.-The case of William T.
Merrfeld VS.. the city of Worcester was taken
up at the opening of the morning session. The
claim of the plaintiff is for compensation for the
contamination of the waters of Mill Brook by
city sewerage. In opening the case for the
plaintiff Mr.. Aldrich stated that the action was
one of tort, the plaintiff claiming $4,000 dam
ages The plaintiff s declaration states that
the water of Mill Brook has been so fouled and
corrupted by the city, by their emptying into it
of refuse and sewage, as to materially damage
the successful carrying on of his machine shop
and works, not only hindering the action of his
boiler aud engine, but rendering it difficult TO
obtain employees to work upon his premises by
reason of its offensiveuess.
The defendants answer denies in general the
charges of the complaint, and claims that they
have for a long time used this stream as the
natural, necessary, and only outlet of their
sewage, and that they have right so to use it
by legislative and municipal acts.
Mr.. Aldrich proceeded to state the grounds of
the suit He urged the importance of the stream
as an aid TO the manufactures of the city, and
the Importance of his clients mandatory to
the mechanical wealth and industry of the CITY,
as buildings occupied by some fifty tenants, en-
poying from 300 to 800 workmen, and repre-
senting capital of S500,OOO, are owned upon
its banks by the plaintiff in the case.
To the water of the stream in pure and clean
condition, each owner along its banks has a
right but by the claimed unlawful and un-
authorized action of the city, the waters have
been so defied as to have become offensive to
both sight and smell, and to have been rendered
unfit for use in the mandatory Of the plaintiff,
causing by incrustations upon his boilers, dam
ger and difficulty in the generation of steam to
run his machinery.
The action of the city, in entering sewers upon
Mill brook, was shown by maps of the sewerage
system, and it was claimed that for this defIe-
ment of the stream the city were responsible,
their acts being unauthorized by legislative enact
ments, or their strict compliance with those
enactmentS.
Mr. Hoar here interrupted the counsel for the
plaintiff, and a general discussion of the points
in the case, between the court and the various
SouuSClj lCsullCu III lhc tApltsstu dllOWduCeJ ny
the defendants, of most of what had been
claimed, and the statement that as the only ac-
ton of the city of great moment in the case had
been under an act of 1867, they were willing to
eliminate all points of the case, based on actions
before that date, and refer them to a decision by
some DISTINGUISHED party.
The court stated that the case seemed to ha We
1oJ ;pt
act, and under the authority of the act, and ad-
vised the giving of the matter of damages into
the hands of referees, and trial of the points
Of law only. Without final decision regard
ing the method of trial, the conrt dismissed the
jury, and the case will go before the full bench
for final decision. Bacon and Aldrich for the
plaintiff; L. Il. Hoar and 7. L. Nelson for the
dpfpnd1ntS